-
687
CC 04-03-2024
687 of 1277
E-8 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTI-I GROUP
1.2 SCOPE OF WORK
As presented in our Agreement, the scope of work performed for this Phase I ESA included the following:
• A reconnaissance of the Site to note readily observable indications of significant releases of hazardous materials to structures, soil, soil vapor or groundwater. • Drive-by observation of adjoining properties to note readily apparent activities involving hazardous materials that have or could significantly impact the Site. • Acquisition and review of a regulatory agency database report of public records for the general area of the Site to evaluate potential impacts to the Site from reported contamination incidents on-Site or at nearby facilities. • Review of readily available information on file at selected governmental agencies to help evaluate past and current Site use and hazardous materials management practices. • Historical research including review of readily available maps and aerial photographs to help evaluate past and current Site uses.
• Interviews with persons reportedly knowledgeable of current and/or prior Site uses, including the current Site owner and occupant(s).
• Preparation of a written report summarizing our findings and recommendations.
The limitations for the Phase I ESA are presented in Section 10.
1.3 ASSUMPTIONS
In preparing this Phase I ESA, Cornerstone can neither warrant nor guarantee that records obtained from or prepared by other parties, such as, but not limited to, regulatory agency records, interview responses, maps, related documents, and environmental reports prepared by others are accurate or complete. Cornerstone relied on the information obtained during this study unless we had actual knowledge that the information was incorrect or unless it was obvious that the information was incorrect based on other information obtained. We also assumed that the boundaries of the Site, based on information provided by David J. Powers & Associates, are as shown on Figure 2. We have not independently verified the accuracy or completeness of any data received.
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL
This Phase I ESA was performed by Stason I. Foster, P.E. and Ron L. Helm, C.E.G. We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in§ 312.10 of 40 C.F.R. Part 312. We have the specific qualifications based on education, training and experience to assess a property of the nature, history and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed the All Appropriate Inquiries in general conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.
Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
11 8-139-1
Page2
688
CC 04-03-2024
688 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-9
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
SECTION 2: SITE DESCRIPTION
This section describes the Site as of the date of this Phase I ESA. The location of the Site is shown on Figures 1 and 2. Tables 1 through 3 summarize general characteristics of the Site and adjoining properties. The Site is described in more detail in Section 7, based on our on-Site observations.
2.1 LOCATION AND OWNERSHIP
Table 1 describes the physical location, and ownership of the Site, based on information provided by David J. Powers & Associates.
Table 1. Location and Ownership
Assessor's Approximate
Parcel No. (APN) Reported Address/Location Owner Lot Size 326-29-006 21251 Steven Creek Boulevard* Citv of Cupertino 14.5 acres 326-54-041 10185 North Stelling Road City of Cupertino 7.2 acres 326-27-033 N/A Citv of Cupertino 0.4 acres
* 21121 Steven Creek Boulevard also was identified as an address associated with the Site and was researched during this Phase I ESA.
2.2 CURRENT/PROPOSED USE OF THE SITE
The current and proposed uses of the Site are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Current and Proposed Uses
Current Use Cupertino Memorial Park, Quinlan Community Center and Cupertino Senior Center
Proposed Use Public Park and Open Space, Public Facilities, Transportation, etc.
2.3 SITE SETTING AND ADJOINING PROPERTY USE
Land use in the general Site vicinity appears to be primarily residential. During the Site visit, adjoining properties were observed from the Site and from adjacent public thoroughfares.
Based on our Site vicinity reconnaissance, adjoining property uses are summarized below in Table 3. No features, activities, uses or conditions on the adjoining properties were observed that are considered indicative of Recognized Environmental Conditions at the Site.
Table 3. Adjoining Property Uses
North Residential
South De Anza Colleqe (across Stevens Creek Boulevard)
East Residential and Cupertino Sports Complex
West Residential
SECTION 3: USER PROVIDED INFORMATION
The ASTM standard defines the User as the party seeking to use a Phase I ESA to evaluate the presence of Recognized Environmental Conditions associated with a property. For the purpose of this Phase I ESA, the User is David J. Powers & Associates. The "All Appropriate Inquiries" Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
118-139-1
-
689
CC 04-03-2024
689 of 1277
E-10 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTI-I GROUP
Final Rule (40 CFR Part 312) requires specific tasks be performed by or on behalf of the party seeking to qualify for Landowner Liability Protection under CERCLA (i.e., the User).
Per the ASTM standard, if the User has information that is material to Recognized Environmental Conditions in connection with the Site, such information should be provided to the Environmental Professional. This information includes: 1) specialized knowledge or experience of the User, 2) commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information within the local community, and 3) knowledge that the purchase price of the Site is lower than the fair market value due to contamination. A search of title records for environmental liens and activity and use limitations also is required.
3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS OR ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS An environmental lien is a financial instrument that may be used to recover past environmental cleanup costs. Activity and use limitations (AULs) include other environmental encumbrances, such as institutional and engineering controls. Institutional controls (ICs) are legal or regulatory restrictions on a property's use, while engineering controls (ECs) are physical mechanisms that restrict property access or use.
The regulatory agency database report described in Section 4.1 did not identify the Site as being in 1) US EPA databases that list properties subject to land use restrictions (i.e., engineering and institutional controls) or Federal Superfund Liens or 2) lists maintained by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) of properties that are subject to AULs or environmental liens where the DTSC is a lien holder.
ASTM E1527-21 categorizes the requirement to conduct a search for Environmental Liens and AULs as a User responsibility. A search of land title records for environmental liens and AULs was not within the scope of the current Phase I ESA and the User did not provide such search results to Cornerstone.
3.2 SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE AND COMMONLY KNOWN OR REASONABLY
ASCERTAINABLE INFORMATION
Based on information provided by or discussions with David J. Powers & Associates, we understand that David J. Powers & Associates does not have specialized knowledge or experience, commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information regarding the Site, or other information that is material to Recognized Environmental Conditions.
SECTION 4: RECORDS REVIEW
4.1 STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SOURCES
Cornerstone conducted a review of federal, state and local regulatory agency database records provided by Environmental Data Resources (EDR) to evaluate the likelihood of contamination incidents at and near the Site. The database sources and the search distances are in general accordance with the requirements of ASTM E1527-21 . A list of the database sources reviewed, a description of the sources, and a radius map showing the location of reported facilities relative to the project Site are attached in Appendix A.
Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
11 8-139-1
Page4
690
CC 04-03-2024
690 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-11
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
The purpose of the records review was to obtain reasonably available information to help identify Recognized Environmental Conditions. Accuracy and completeness of record information varies among information sources, including government sources. Record information is often inaccurate or incomplete. The Environmental Professional is not obligated to identify mistakes or insufficiencies or review every possible record that might exist with respect to the Site. The customary practice is to review information from standard sources that is reasonably ascertainable within reasonable time and cost constraints.
4.1.1 On-Site Database Listings
Memorial Park Ponds Repurposing was identified at the Site address on the California Integrated Water Quality System (CIWQS) database, a computer system used by the State and Regional Water Quality Control Boards to track information about places of environmental interest, manage permits and other orders, track inspections, and manage violations and enforcement activities. This listing appears to be associated recent construction activities involving the removal of decorative, concrete lined ponds at the park.
4.1.2 Adjoining Property Database Listings and Nearby Spill Incidents Based on the information presented in the agency database report, no off-Site spill incidents were reported that appear likely to significantly impact soil, soil vapor or groundwater beneath the Site. The potential for impact was based on our interpretation of the types of incidents, the locations of the reported incidents in relation to the Site and the assumed groundwater flow direction. A few businesses on adjoining properties were identified on regulatory agency databases relating primarily to regulatory filings associated with hazardous material use/storage, and generation or disposal of hazardous wastes. Such listings are common for commercial facilities in urban settings and are not indicative of hazardous material releases; thus, further review of records associated with these listings does not appear warranted.
4.2 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SOURCES
The following additional sources of readily ascertainable public information for the Site also were reviewed during this Phase I ESA.
4.2.1 City and County Agency File Review
Cornerstone obtained available files pertaining to the Site at the following public agencies: the Cupertino Building Department (BD), Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD), and the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health (DEH).
The DEH and SCCFD indicated that they had no files pertaining to hazardous materials use at the Site.
Building Department files for 21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard contained permit records dated between 1999 and 2017 for construction of the existing Senior Center building and subsequent repairs and alterations. Permits dated between 2010 and 2016 were for cellular telephone antenna equipment installation. A 2022 permit was for the in-progress pond repurposing project at Memorial Park. The files additionally contained a 1980 Certificate of Occupancy for a former "Senor Citizen Building."
Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
118-139-1
-
691
CC 04-03-2024
691 of 1277
E-12 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTI-I GROUP
Building Department files for 10185 North Stelling Road contained permit records dated between 1988 and 2021 associated with construction of the Quinlan Community Center and various subsequent alterations and repairs.
4.2.2 Geologic Energy Management Division Maps
To evaluate the presence of oil or gas wells on-Site and in the immediate Site vicinity, maps available on-line at the California Department of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) website were reviewed. Review of the available map for the Site area did not show oil or gas wells on-Site or on the adjacent properties.
SECTION 5: PHYSICAL SETTING
We reviewed readily available geologic and hydrogeologic information to evaluate the likelihood that chemicals of concern released on a nearby property could pose a significant threat to the Site and/or its intended use.
5.1 RECENT USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
A 2018 USGS 7.5 minute topographic map was reviewed to evaluate the physical setting of the Site. The Site's elevation is approximately 280 feet above mean sea level; topography in the vicinity of the Site slopes downward gently to the northeast towards the San Francisco Bay.
5.2 HYDROGEOLOGY
Based on our experience and information presented in the California Geotracker database pertaining to nearby properties, groundwater beneath the Site is likely present at depths of greater than 100 feet. Groundwater likely flows toward the northeast.
SECTION 6: HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION
The objective of the review of historical use information is to develop a history of the previous uses of the Site and adjoining properties in order to help identify the likelihood of past uses having led to Recognized Environmental Conditions at the Site. The ASTM standard requires the identification of all obvious uses of the Site from the present back to the Site's first developed use, or back to 1940, whichever is earlier, using reasonably ascertainable standard historical sources. The identification of obvious uses of adjoining properties also is required.
6.1 HISTORICAL SUMMARY
The historical sources reviewed are summarized below. The results of our review of these sources are summarized in Table 4.
■ Historical Aerial Photographs: We reviewed aerial photographs dated between 1939 and 2016 obtained from EDR of Shelton, Connecticut; copies of aerial photographs reviewed are presented in Appendix B.
■ Historical Topographic Maps: We reviewed USGS 15-minute and 7.5-minute historic topographic maps dated 1897, 1899, 1902, 1943, 1947, 1948, 1953, 1961 , 1968, 1973, Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
118-139-1
Page6
692
CC 04-03-2024
692 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-13
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
1980, 2012, 2015 and 2018; copies of historic topographic maps reviewed are presented in Appendix B.
• Historical Fire Insurance Maps: EDR reported that the Site was not within the coverage area of fire insurance maps.
Table 4. Summary of Historical Source Information
Date Source Comments
1897, 1899, Topographic Site: Several small structures typical of residences and associated 1902, 1943, maps outbuildings are depicted on-Site. Orchards also are depicted on-Site 1947, 1948, on the maps dated from 1948 to 1968.
1953, 1961 ,
1968, 1973 Adjoining Properties: Small structures typical of residences are and 1980 depicted on some of the adjoining parcels. Orchards also are depicted on adjoining properties on the maps dated from 1943 to 1968. What appear to be residential developments are shown to the north and east by 1953 and to the west by 1973. De Anza College is shown to the south bv 1968.
1995 to Topographic Site: The Quinlan Community Center is shown to have been 2018 maps constructed on the eastern portion of the Site by 1995.
Adjoining Properties: De Anza College is shown to the south and other adjoining properties are shown within the urban developed area of Cuoertino.
1939 to Aerial Site: Shown to be occupied by orchards and what appear to be 1968 photographs several residences and associated outbuildings.
Adjoining Properties: Shown to be occupied mainly by orchards and what appear to be several residences and associated outbuildings. An increase in residential development is shown to the east by the 1950s.
De Anza College is shown to have been constructed to the south by 1968.
1974 Aerial Site: Grading and construction associated with Memorial Park facilities photograph (e.g., tennis courts and baseball field) is shown to be in progress on the northwestern portion of the Site. Residences and associated outbuildings, along with orchards are shown to remain on other portions of the Site.
Adjoining Properties: Orchards remain to the north and southeast.
De Anza College is shown to the south. Residential developments are shown to the east and west.
1982 to Aerial Site: A former building at the Cupertino Senior Center location is 2016 photographs shown to have been constructed by 1982 and Memorial Park facilities are shown on the western portion of the Site. Orchards are shown to remain on the eastern portion of the Site on the 1982 photograph; by 1991, the Quinlan Community Center is shown to have been constructed on the eastern portion of the Site. By 2006, the existing Cupertino Senior Center building is shown to have been constructed, replacing a former building.
Adjoining Properties: Development on adjoining properties appears generally similar to the existing conditions.
Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
118-139-1
-
693
CC 04-03-2024
693 of 1277
E-14 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTI-I GROUP
6.1.1 City Directory Review
To obtain additional information regarding past uses of the Site and adjoining properties, business directories including city, cross reference and telephone directories were reviewed, if available, at approximately five year intervals for the years spanning 1968 through 2017. A summary of the city directory listings for Site occupants is presented in Table 6. The listed business names at adjoining properties are not indicative of businesses that are typically associated with the use or storage of significant quantities of hazardous materials (e.g., gasoline stations, dry cleaners, manufacturing facilities, etc.). The acquired city directory report is presented in Appendix C.
Table 5. On-Site City Directory Listings
Date Occupant
10185 North Stellina Road
1992 Cupertino Community Services and Robert W. Quinlan Center 1995 Cupertino Community Services and Cupertino Historical Museum, Cupertino Recreation Department and Salvation Army
2000 Cuoertino Communitv Services and Cuoertino Historical Societv & Museum 2005 and 2010 Cupertino Historical Society, Cupertino Parks & Recreation and Quinlan Community Center
2014 and 2017 Cupertino Historical Society & Museum
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard
1985 Cupertino Senior Center
1992 Cupertino Senior Community Center
1995 Cupertino Senior Citizen Center
2000 City of Cupertino City / Recreation
2005, 2010 and 2014 Cuoertino Senior Center
2017 City of Cupertino
SECTION 7: SITE RECONNAISSANCE
We performed a Site reconnaissance to evaluate current Site conditions and to attempt to identify Site Recognized Environmental Conditions. The results of the reconnaissance are discussed below. Additional Site observations are summarized in Table 6. Photographs of the Site are presented in Section 7.2.1.
7.1 METHODOLOGY AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
To observe current Site conditions (readily observable environmental conditions indicative of a significant release of hazardous materials), Cornerstone staff Stason I. Foster, P.E. visited the Site on September 26, 2022. The Site reconnaissance was conducted by walking representative areas of the Site, including the interiors of the on-Site structures, the periphery of the structures and the Site periphery. The Site also was observed from adjacent public thoroughfares. Cornerstone staff only observed those areas that were reasonably accessible, safe, and did not require movement of equipment, materials or other objects. Physical obstructions that limited our ability to view the ground surface at the Site included the existing buildings and associated paved vehicle drives and parking areas (typical of developed properties).
Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
118-139-1
Page8
694
CC 04-03-2024
694 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-15
Is! CORNERSTONE EART H GROUP
7.2 OBSERVATIONS
At the time of our visit, the Site was developed with Cupertino Memorial Park, the Cupertino Senior Center, and the Quinlan Community Center.
The Cupertino Senior Center and Quinlan Community Center buildings were observed to consist of various rooms used for events, classes and activities, as well as general office space and kitchen facilities. Cupertino Historical Museum and a preschool facility also operated within the community center building.
Memorial Park was observed to consist of open space, tennis courts, athletic fields, and picnic and playground areas. Grading associated with a project to remove former concrete lined decorative ponds was observed to be in progress. A cellular telephone antenna tower and fenced equipment enclosure also were present.
Two wood-framed sheds with concrete floor slabs were observed within the park that contained grounds maintenance equipment. Hazardous materials observed within the sheds consisted primarily of gasoline that was stored in safety cans within a flammable materials storage cabinet, weed killer (Roundup®) contained in portable backpack pump sprayers and marking paint for sports fields.
Facility maintenance rooms were observed in both the Cupertino Senior Center and Quinlan Community Center buildings that contained paints and other common building maintenance supplies. General housekeeping within the facility maintenance rooms, as well as the grounds maintenance sheds, appeared orderly and no evidence of significant chemical spills was readily apparent.
Electricity and/or natural gas fuel sources appeared to be used for building heating/cooling purposes. Potable water appeared to be supplied by the local water service provider. The buildings presumably are connected to the publicly owned sanitary sewer system; no on-Site septic systems were obvious. On-Site storm water catch basins appeared to discharge via below ground piping to the City's storm water drainage system. Electrical transformer owned by PG&E were observed on concrete pads within the park and near the community center and senior center buildings. No evidence of transformer oil leaks was observed.
Table 6. Summary of Readily Observable Site Features
General Observation
Aboveground Storage Tanks
Aqricultural Wells
Air Emission Control Svstems
Boilers
Burnin!l Areas (waste burn pits or ash disposal areas)
Chemical Mixing Areas
Chemical Storaqe Areas
Draina!le Ditches
Drums, Totes, and Intermediate Bulk Containers
Elevators
Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
11 8-1 39-1
Comments
Not Observed
Not Observed
Not Observed
Not Observed
Not Observed
Not Observed
Observed as described above
Not Observed
Not Observed
Not Observed
Page9
-
695
CC 04-03-2024
695 of 1277
E-16 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
Is! CORNERSTONE EART I-I GROUP
Table 6 (Continued). Summary of Readily Observable Site Features General Observation Comments
Emeraency Generators Not Observed
Equipment Maintenance Areas Not Observed
Fill Placement (i.e., fill used to build up the site elevations) Not Observed Groundwater Monitorina Wells Not Observed
Hoods and Ducting (associated with chemical use) Not Observed Hydraulic Vehicle or Eauipment Lifts Not Observed
Incinerators Not Observed
Petroleum Pipelines or Wells Not Observed
Pits, Ponds, or Laaoons. Not Observed
Railroad Lines Not Observed
Row Crops or Orchards Not Observed
Septic Systems or Cesspools Not Observed
Solid Waste Disposal Areas (other than municipal trash containers) Not Observed Stained Soil or Pavement Not Observed
Stains or Corrosion on Floors, Walls, or Ceilinas Not Observed Standing Surface Water or Pools Not Observed
Stockpiles of Soil or Debris Not Observed
Stressed Veaetation (unrelated to the lack of water) Not Observed Strong, Pungent, or Noxious Odors Not Observed
Sumps, Clarifiers, Oil-Water Separators, or similar structures Below grade grease interceptors were observed
near kitchen facilities
Transformers Observed as described above
Underground Storage Tanks Not Observed
Unidentified Substance Containers Not Observed
Vehicle Maintenance Areas Not Observed
Vehicle Wash Areas Not Observed
Wastewater Neutralization Systems Not Observed
The comment "Not Observed" does not warrant that these features are not present on-Site; 11 only mdIcates that these features were not readily observed during the Site visit.
7.2.1 Site Photographs
Photograph 1. View of the Quinlan Community Center
building.
Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
118-139-1
Photograph 2. Interior of Quinlan Community
Center.
696
CC 04-03-2024
696 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-17
Is! CORNERSTONE EART H GROUP
Photograph 3. Interior of Quinlan Community Center.
Photograph 5. Interior of the Cupertino Senior Center.
Photograph 7. Memorial Park playground area.
Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
11 8-1 39-1
Photograph 4. View of the Cupertino Senior Center
building.
Photograph 6. Memorial Park picnic area.
Photograph 8. Memorial Park (former pond area).
-
697
CC 04-03-2024
697 of 1277
E-18 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
Is! CORNERSTONE EART I-I GROUP
Photograph 9. One of two grounds maintenance sheds at Photograph 10. Interior of grounds maintenance Memorial Park. shed.
SECTION 8: ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE AND INTERVIEWS
8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE/ CURRENT OWNER AND OCCUPANT
INTERVIEW
To help obtain information on current and historical Site use and use/storage of hazardous materials on-Site, we provided an environmental questionnaire for completion by the Site owner (City of Cupertino). The completed questionnaire is attached in Appendix D. The information provided on the questionnaire appears generally consistent with our on-Site observations and information obtained from other data sources. No information indicative of Recognized Environmental Conditions was reported on the questionnaire.
8.2 INTERVIEWS WITH PREVIOUS OWNERS AND OCCUPANTS
Contact information for previous Site owners and occupants was not provided to us. Therefore, interviews with previous Site owners and occupants could not be performed.
8.3 INTERVIEWS WITH STATE AND/OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS Per the ASTM Standard, a reasonable attempt should be made to interview at least one staff member of any one of the following types of state and/or local government agencies: fire department, health department, building department, or other agency having jurisdiction over hazardous waste disposal or other environmental matters in the area.
The Cupertino Building Department, Santa Clara County Fire Department, and the Santa Clara County DEH were contacted during this study. The DEH is the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) responsible for implementing California's Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management regulatory program for properties within Cupertino; the Fire Department also is a Participating Agency (PA). Files pertaining to the Site were requested from each of these agencies; a summary of the information obtained was discussed in Section
4.2.1. Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and 21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
11 8-139-1
698
CC 04-03-2024
698 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-19
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
SECTION 9: FINDINGS, OPINIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS (WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS)
Cornerstone performed this Phase I ESA in general conformance with ASTM E1527-21 to support David J. Powers & Associates in evaluation of Recognized Environmental Conditions.
Our findings, opinions and conclusions are summarized below.
9.1 HISTORICAL SITE USAGE
Based on the information obtained during this study, the Site historically was occupied by orchards, along with what appear to have been several residences and associated outbuildings.
During the mid-1970s, Memorial Park facilities (e.g., tennis courts and baseball field) were constructed on the western portion of the Site. A former senior center building was constructed at the southwest corner of the Site during the early 1980s. The existing Quinlan Community Center was constructed on the eastern portion of the Site during the late 1980s. The existing Cupertino Senior Center building was constructed in approximately 2000, replacing the former senior center building.
9.2 CHEMICAL STORAGE AND USE
Paints and other common building maintenance supplies were observed within facility maintenance rooms in both the Cupertino Senior Center and Quinlan Community Center buildings. Grounds maintenance sheds within Memorial Park were observed to contain gasoline that was stored in safety cans within a flammable materials storage cabinet, weed killer (Roundup®) contained in portable backpack pump sprayers and marking paint for sports fields.
General housekeeping within the facility maintenance rooms and the grounds maintenance sheds appeared orderly and no evidence of significant chemical spills was readily apparent.
9.3 AGRICULTURAL USE
The Site historically was used for agricultural purposes for several decades. Pesticides may have been applied to crops in the normal course of farming operations. Residual pesticide concentrations may remain in on-Site soil. If elevated concentrations of agricultural chemicals are present, mitigation or soil management measures may be required. We recommend performing soil sampling to evaluate if agricultural chemicals are present at concentrations that may pose a risk to human health. At agricultural properties, pesticides often were stored within structures such as barns or sheds. The recommended sampling should include an evaluation of these former structures, along with the agricultural field areas.
9.4 LEAD-BASED PAINT AND TERMITE CONTROL PESTICIDES
In 1978, the Consumer Product Safety Commission banned lead-containing paints and coatings sold for consumer use. Some lead-containing products, such as industrial coatings, however, are still allowed. Based on the age of the existing Cupertino Senior Center and Quinlan Community Center buildings, lead-containing paint is not likely to be present. Some of the Memorial Park structures (such a restrooms) appear to have been constructed during the 1970s and have greater potential for the presence of lead-containing paint. If demolition is planned, the removal of lead-containing paint is not required if it is bonded to the building materials.
However, if the lead-containing paint is flaking, peeling, or blistering, it should be removed prior to demolition. In either case, applicable OSHA regulations must be followed; these include Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
118-139-1
-
699
CC 04-03-2024
699 of 1277
E-20 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTI-I GROUP
requirements for worker training, air monitoring and dust control, among others. Any debris or soil containing lead must be disposed appropriately.
Soil adjacent to structures, if painted with lead-containing paint, can become impacted with lead as a result of the weathering and/or peeling of painted surfaces. Soil near wood framed structures also can be impacted by pesticides historically used to control termites. No information was identified during this study documenting the use of lead based paint or termite control pesticides on-Site; however, if previously used, residual pesticide and lead concentrations may remain in on-Site soil. Lead and/or pesticides often are identified in soil near old residences and outbuildings, such as those historically located on-Site. We recommend that shallow soil at the former structure locations be evaluated for the possible presence of lead and pesticides.
9.5 ASBESTOS CONTAINING BUILDING MATERIALS (ACBMS)
Based on the age of the existing Cupertino Senior Center and Quinlan Community Center buildings, it is unlikely that these building materials contain asbestos. Some of the Memorial Park structures ( such a restrooms) appear to have been constructed during the 1970s and have greater potential for the presence of asbestos. If demolition, renovation, or re-roofing of the buildings is planned, an asbestos survey may be required by local authorities or National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) guidelines. NESHAP guidelines require the removal of potentially friable ACBMs prior to building demolition or renovation that may disturb the ACBM.
9.6 IMPORTED SOIL
If the planned development will require importing soil for Site grading, we recommend documenting the source and quality of imported soil. The DTSC's October 2001 Clean Fill Advisory provides useful guidance on evaluating imported fill.
9.7 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS WITHIN THE SITE VICINITY Based on the information obtained during this study, no hazardous material spill incidents have been reported in the Site vicinity that would be likely to significantly impact the Site.
9.8 DATA GAPS
ASTM Standard E1527-21 requires the Environmental Professional to comment on significant data gaps that affect our ability to identify Recognized Environmental Conditions. A data gap is a lack of or inability to obtain information required by the ASTM Standard despite good faith efforts by the Environmental Professional to gather such information. A data gap by itself is not inherently significant; it only becomes significant if it raises reasonable concerns. No significant data gaps were identified during this Phase I ESA.
9.9 DATA FAILURES
As described by ASTM Standard E1527-21 , a data failure occurs when all of the standard historical sources that are reasonably ascertainable and likely to be useful have been reviewed and yet the historical research objectives have not been met. Data failures are not uncommon when attempting to identify the use of a Site at five year intervals back to the first use or to 1940 Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
118-139-1
700
CC 04-03-2024
700 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-21
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
(whichever is earlier). The ASTM Standard requires the Environmental Professional to comment on the significance of data failures and whether the data failure affects our ability to identify Recognized Environmental Conditions. A data failure by itself is not inherently significant; it only becomes significant if it raises reasonable concerns. No significant data failures were identified during this Phase I ESA.
9.10 RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Cornerstone has performed a Phase I ESA in general conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM E1527-21 . This assessment identified the following Recognized Environmental Conditions2.
• The Site historically was used for agricultural purposes. There is a potential that residual pesticides could remain in Site soil. If present, this soil may require appropriate management.
• Soil adjacent to structures that are painted with lead-containing paint can become impacted with lead as a result of the weathering and/or peeling of painted surfaces. Soil near wood-framed structures also can be impacted by pesticides historically used to control termites. There is a potential that residual lead and pesticide concentrations could remain in on-Site soil resulting from prior on-Site structures.
This assessment did not identify any Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions 3 or Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions4 associated with the Site.
SECTION 10: LIMITATIONS
Cornerstone performed this Phase I ESA to support David J. Powers & Associates in evaluation of Recognized Environmental Conditions associated with the Site. David J. Powers & Associates understands that no Phase I ESA can wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the potential for Recognized Environmental Conditions to be present at the Site. This Phase I ESA is intended to reduce, but not eliminate, uncertainty regarding the potential for Recognized Environmental Conditions. David J. Powers & Associates understands that the extent of information obtained is based on the reasonable limits of time and budgetary constraints.
Findings, opinions, conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on readily available information, conditions readily observed at the time of the Site visit, and/or information readily identified by the interviews and/or the records review process. Phase I ESAs are inherently limited because findings are developed based on information obtained from a non-intrusive Site evaluation. Cornerstone does not accept liability for deficiencies, errors, or 2 Recognized Environmental Condition means 1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release to the environment; 2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release or likely release to the environment; or 3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.
3 A Recognized Environmental Condition that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory agency with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls. 4 A previous release of hazardous substances or petroleum products affecting the Site that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory agency and meeting unrestricted use criteria established by the applicable regulatory agency without subjecting the Site to any controls.
Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
118-139-1
-
701
CC 04-03-2024
701 of 1277
E-22 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
Is! CORNERSTONE EART I-I GROUP
misstatements that have resulted from inaccuracies in the publicly available information or from interviews of persons knowledgeable of Site use. In addition, publicly available information and field observations often cannot affirm the presence of Recognized Environmental Conditions; there is a possibility that such conditions exist. If a greater degree of confidence is desired, soil, groundwater, soil vapor and/or air samples should be collected by Cornerstone and analyzed by a state-certified laboratory to establish a more reliable assessment of environmental conditions.
Cornerstone acquired an environmental database of selected publicly available information for the general area of the Site. Cornerstone cannot verify the accuracy or completeness of the database report, nor is Cornerstone obligated to identify mistakes or insufficiencies in the information provided (ASTM E1527-21, Section 8.1.3). Due to inadequate address information, the environmental database may have mapped several facilities inaccurately or could not map the facilities. Releases from these facilities, if nearby, could impact the Site.
David J. Powers & Associates may have provided Cornerstone environmental documents prepared by others. David J. Powers & Associates understands that Cornerstone reviewed and relied on the information presented in these reports and cannot be responsible for their accuracy.
This report, an instrument of professional service, was prepared for the sole use of David J.
Powers & Associates and may not be reproduced or distributed without written authorization from Cornerstone. Cornerstone makes no warranty, expressed or implied, except that our services have been performed in accordance with the environmental principles generally accepted at this time and location.
10.1 REPORT VIABILITY
Per ASTM E1527-21 and 40 CFR Part 312, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment report is presumed to be viable when it is conducted within one year prior to the date of acquisition of the subject property (or, for transactions not involving an acquisition such as a lease or refinance, the date of the intended transaction), provided that the following components of the inquiries were conducted or updated within 180 days prior to the date of purchase or the date of the intended transaction:
Task
Interview with current owner and occupant
Review of standard government environmental record sources Visual observation of the Site and of adjoining properties Declaration by the Environmental Professional
Searches for recorded environmental cleanup liens
Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California
11 8-139-1
Date Competed
September 21 , 2022
September 19, 2022
September 26, 2022
October 13, 2022
User responsibility
702
CC 04-03-2024
702 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment
I E-23
WOOOLAIID
ACRES THE
HIGHLANDS
-r .:irler Jne'. s 9 Homrsleatl iilgh School 9
I!!!
Jumpe'°;;;~
llill Ga.te o(Hea~en T ca1"rnc CEme!E;y z
[§!
\
i
...
:,,
ii;
"
Biaci<!Jerr, farm B
Golf course Y Sf.i,~r.1-.:IJl,d
ft8ldckberry f3rm T R~eatlon and Poo1
9 Moma
oe.p Cliff Gol! cc,urse9
?J
11.fCC/i:'.r.:a.;:
. Ranch -'
Pre><'r«~
/
l "'
,--PP.d
CORNERSTONE
EARTH GROUP
i
!f.
Cruocn Fnness ft
- S1111nr,,ale T
l'/.
£ HIY'1 .... 1111Rd
Norl/'\pOml HOA'
99 Qancn Ma!l<e1 q C.HOfftNIMtl Ao
BIRDL
NEIOHB
.•pplePa•k Q
'D' - -.!UfllPNos fUt,af"'i
z
i
~pple ln'in.teLoop Q
z
"'
l
ra,ge1.Q I,
i
M !'lr.11J11.CrN .. Bl¥d Cupertino 9f\.""'Mi1CrNIIS&d
..
[
.Ii
"
YcCJelllll~
... .
V -f
i i ·'"'
1 D - R~lill'l9',lf'•·"~
Tri!d'l: 1 Jte's
The Home Depot Q 9
"' !i'
Vicinity Map
Paoraor
Cupertino Memorial Park
10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Cupterino, CA
J
z
if \l~'ICOA""'Y
I
.,
I
i Gupetioof<,gh &.i o,! 9
Cr ,tide Pa•
N
TT-TEA u~rr
.
'< f
Project Number
118-139-1
Figure Number
Figure 1
Date
October 2022 Drawn By RRN
703
CC 04-03-2024
703 of 1277
E-24 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
,, >
,,
:0
0 >< i
~ "' (/)
n
>
r "' -:;;
"' .::j "'
0 "' 0
0 I!! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
Cupertino Memorial Park
10185 North Stelling Road and
21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Cupterino, CA °""
118-139-1
Figure 2
OdnMt10?1 Orii.nD, RRN
704
CC 04-03-2024
704 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-25
Appendix A - Database Search Report
omitted from published Site Assessment
and Outreach Summary Appendix
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
APPENDIX A - DATABASE SEARCH REPORT
-
705
CC 04-03-2024
705 of 1277
E-26 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTI-I GROUP
APPENDIX B - HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS AND MAPS
706
CC 04-03-2024
706 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-27
The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package
Phase I ESA
21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Cupertino, CA 95014
Inquiry Number:
September 19, 2022
7122847.8
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
-
707
CC 04-03-2024
707 of 1277
E-28 Memorial Park Specific Plan
2016 1"=500' Flight Year: 2016 USDA/NAIP
2012 1"=500' Flight Year: 2012 USDA/NAIP
2009 1"=500' Flight Year: 2009 USDA/NAIP
2006 1"=500' Flight Year: 2006 USDA/NAIP
1998 1"=500' Flight Date: August 27, 1998 USDA
1991 1"=500' Acquisition Date: January 01, 1991 USGS/DOQQ 1982 1"=500' Flight Date: July 05, 1982 USDA
1974 1"=500' Flight Date: June 26, 1974 USGS
1968 1"=500' Flight Date: June 14, 1968 USGS
1963 1"=500' Flight Date: June 24, 1963 EDR Proprietary Aerial Viewpoint 1956 1"=500' Flight Date: June 09, 1956 USDA
1950 1"=500' Flight Date: April 01, 1950 USDA
1948 1"=500' Acquisition Date: September 26, 1948 USGS/DOQQ 1939 1"=500' Flight Date: August 01, 1939 USDA
EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package 09/19/22
Phase I ESA
Site Name: Client Name:
Cornerstone Earth Group
21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard 1259 Oakmead Parkway
Cupertino, CA 95014 Sunnyvale, CA 94085
EDR Inquiry # 7122847.8 Contact: Stason Foster
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) Aerial Photo Decade Package is a screening tool designed to assist environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDR’s professional researchers provide digitally reproduced historical aerial photographs, and when available, provide one photo per decade.
Search Results:
Year Scale Details Source
When delivered electronically by EDR, the aerial photo images included with this report are for ONE TIME USE ONLY. Further reproduction of these aerial photo images is prohibited without permission from EDR. For more information contact your EDR Account Executive.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY
DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE,
WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property.
Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2022 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
7122847 8 - page 2
-
~EDR"
708
CC 04-03-2024
708 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-29
7122847.8
2016
= 500'
-
YEAR: _____ _
709
CC 04-03-2024
709 of 1277
E-30 Memorial Park Specific Plan
7122847.8
2012
= 500'
-
710
CC 04-03-2024
710 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-31
7122847.8
2009
= 500'
-
711
CC 04-03-2024
711 of 1277
E-32 Memorial Park Specific Plan
7122847.8
2006
= 500'
-
712
CC 04-03-2024
712 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-33
7122847.8
1998
= 500'
-
YEAR: _____ _
713
CC 04-03-2024
713 of 1277
E-34 Memorial Park Specific Plan
7122847.8
1991
= 500'
-
714
CC 04-03-2024
714 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-35
7122847.8
1982
= 500'
-
715
CC 04-03-2024
715 of 1277
E-36 Memorial Park Specific Plan
7122847.8
1974
= 500'
-
YEAR: _____ _
716
CC 04-03-2024
716 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-37
7122847.8
1968
= 500'
..... , ...... . ................ ••••••••••••••• ·-············· •·•••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••• ·::::i:::;::::;::::::::::• =--= ~~. ;:; • :-:·•·::::::::::;::::::;::. ....;;--....:..z=:..:. :.:
£:S :;::=:::~::::!:::~:: -:=:;?, ~:=;:. stl ···:· ·····•·····•·•· _ .... _,_ ... ,, ... :i!! ·::~::::Hf:!!!H::;: --:;--.. ==-·===' i. .. :: -~:·:~::~t~~:!~:~: - .-.:.-:--__.:..:= •• ::::: •:::::::::::: • t~=-= ::::::1. :t::::: ~-~:::_;.:- .. ·····-··· ••••••••••••••••••• ..................... ····· ..
. . ... .. ,.
................... ........... •-·········· , .. ... . ...... ········••··•••• ................. ._......... . ..... ····· ••• ::::::::::::::::::::::::
. ................ ................ ·············-· ..... . .............. - ·: . ...
INQUIRY#:
-------
YEAR: _____ _
-
717
CC 04-03-2024
717 of 1277
E-38 Memorial Park Specific Plan
7122847.8
1963
= 500'
-
718
CC 04-03-2024
718 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-39
7122847.8
1956
= 500'
-
YEAR:
---------
719
CC 04-03-2024
719 of 1277
E-40 Memorial Park Specific Plan
7122847.8
1950
= 500'
-
720
CC 04-03-2024
720 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-41
7122847.8
1948
= 500'
-
YEAR: __ _
721
CC 04-03-2024
721 of 1277
E-42 Memorial Park Specific Plan
7122847.8
1939
= 500'
-
.... ....
...
....
.. . ....
YEAR: _____ _
722
CC 04-03-2024
722 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-43
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
APPENDIX C - LOCAL STREET DIRECTORY SEARCH RESULTS
-
723
CC 04-03-2024
723 of 1277
E-44 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Phase I ESA
21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Cupertino, CA 95014
Inquiry Number: 7122847.5
September 22, 2022
The EDR-City Directory Image Report
6 Armstrong Road
Shelton, CT 06484
800.352.0050
Environmental Data Resources Inc www.edrnet.com
-
724
CC 04-03-2024
724 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-45
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
Executive Summary
Findings
City Directory Images
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING
OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC.
BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER
CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction orforecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2020 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates.
All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. -
725
CC 04-03-2024
725 of 1277
E-46 Memorial Park Specific Plan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION
Environmental Data Resources, Inc.’s (EDR) City Directory Report is a screening tool designed to assist environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities.
EDR’s City Directory Report includes a search of available city directory data at 5 year intervals.
RECORD SOURCES
EDR's Digital Archive combines historical directory listings from sources such as Cole Information and Dun & Bradstreet. These standard sources of property information complement and enhance each other to provide a more comprehensive report.
EDR is licensed to reproduce certain City Directory works by the copyright holders of those works. The purchaser of this EDR City Directory Report may include it in report(s) delivered to a customer. Reproduction of City Directories without permission of the publisher or licensed vendor may be a violation of copyright.
RESEARCH SUMMARY
The following research sources were consulted in the preparation of this report. A check mark indicates where information was identified in the source and provided in this report.
Year Target Street Cross Street Source
2017 þ þ EDR Digital Archive
2014 þ þ EDR Digital Archive
2010 þ þ EDR Digital Archive
2005 þ þ EDR Digital Archive
2000 þ þ EDR Digital Archive
1995 þ þ EDR Digital Archive
1992 þ þ EDR Digital Archive
1985 þ þ Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1981 þ þ Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1976 þ þ Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1971 þ þ Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1968 þ ¨ Polk's City Directory
7122847- 5 Page 1
-
Data by
infoUSA
Copyright©2008
All Riqhts Reserved
726
CC 04-03-2024
726 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-47
FINDINGS
TARGET PROPERTY STREET
21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Cupertino, CA 95014
Year CD Image Source
N STELLING RD
2017 pg A2 EDR Digital Archive
2014 pg A5 EDR Digital Archive
2010 pg A8 EDR Digital Archive
2005 pg A11 EDR Digital Archive
2000 pg A15 EDR Digital Archive
1995 pg A19 EDR Digital Archive
1992 pg A22 EDR Digital Archive
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
2017 pg A3 EDR Digital Archive
2014 pg A6 EDR Digital Archive
2010 pg A9 EDR Digital Archive
2005 pg A12 EDR Digital Archive
2000 pg A16 EDR Digital Archive
1995 pg A20 EDR Digital Archive
1992 pg A23 EDR Digital Archive
1985 pg A26 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1985 pg A27 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1981 pg A30 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1981 pg A31 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1976 pg A33 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1971 pg A35 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1968 pg A36 Polk's City Directory
7122847- 5 Page 2
-
727
CC 04-03-2024
727 of 1277
E-48 Memorial Park Specific Plan
FINDINGS
CROSS STREETS
Year CD Image Source
CHRISTENSEN DR
2017 pg. A1 EDR Digital Archive
2014 pg. A4 EDR Digital Archive
2010 pg. A7 EDR Digital Archive
2005 pg. A10 EDR Digital Archive
2000 pg. A14 EDR Digital Archive
1995 pg. A18 EDR Digital Archive
1992 pg. A21 EDR Digital Archive
1985 pg. A24 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1981 pg. A28 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1976 - Haines Criss-Cross Directory Street not listed in Source 1971 - Haines Criss-Cross Directory Street not listed in Source 1968 - Polk's City Directory Street not listed in Source
N STELLING RD
1985 pg. A25 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1981 pg. A29 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1976 pg. A32 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1971 pg. A34 Haines Criss-Cross Directory
1968 - Polk's City Directory Street not listed in Source 7122847- 5 Page 3
-
728
CC 04-03-2024
728 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-49
City Directory Images
-
729
CC 04-03-2024
729 of 1277
E-50 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
CHRISTENSEN DR
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A1
Target Street Cross Street Source
2017
21023 BAL, GURJEET S
21033 KOKENY, FELIX J
21053 SOUGOUMARANE, SUGU
21063 PEARLMAN, DALE
21113 KUNG, FENG C
21123 NARAYANAN, RAJESH
21143 CHANG, DAVID M
21153 VIJAYKUMAR, VIJAYABHUVANA
-
730
CC 04-03-2024
730 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-51
-
N STELLING RD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A2
Target Street Cross Street Source
2017
10100 VILLAGE LITTLE PRESCHOOL
10185 CUPERTINO HISTORICAL SOCIETY & MUSEU
10200 TATE, RANJEET S
10218 HE, DAVID Q
10228 WU, TENG
10242 KUMAR, MAHENDRA J
10308 KLOSTERMAN, KELBY J
10322 MERCHIA, AMBIKESWAR R
10336 ESPANOL, RODY F
10352 KINDERLAND CHILD DEVELOPMNT CNTR
10394 GUO, NINGNING
JAMAL, HEMIDAN
LOPEZ, ANTONIO C
10395 ALVES, JAMES
-
731
CC 04-03-2024
731 of 1277
E-52 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A3
Target Street Cross Street Source
2017
21111 CITY OF CUPERTINO
21250 CALIF COMMUNITY COLLEGES HIGH TECH C
CALIFORNIA HISTORY CENTER
DE ANZA COLLEGE
21251 CITY OF CUPERTINO
21255 SHANE CO
SHANE COMPANY DIRECT DIAMOND IMPORTE
21265 A PLUS TEA HOUSE
COFFEE SOCIETY
CRITTER CARE
GUARDIAN MORTGAGE DOCUMENTS INC
JAMBA JUICE
KARA KARA INC
LUDLOW CREATION LUDLOW LLC
QUICKLY CORP
TOGOS
21267 ORANGE TREE FROZEN YOGURT
SIMPLY THAI RESTAURANT
SITAR INDIAN CUISINE
21269 DANCE ACADEMY USA
ELS EDUCATIONAL CENTERS
FABULOUS NAILS
OAKS CENTER
PREMIER OF CAMPUS TEXTBOOKS
SPRINGS WELLS SPA
21271 190 WEST SAINT JAMES LLC
24 HOUR FITNESS
LEAPSTART AFTER SCHOOL
PHOLICIOUS
21275 09 SLIDERS
BLUELIGHT CINEMAS 5
RETAIL ENTERPRISES LLC
-
732
CC 04-03-2024
732 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-53
-
CHRISTENSEN DR
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A4
Target Street Cross Street Source
2014
21023 UPPAL, HARMINDER P
21033 KOKENY, FELIX J
21043 BAO, SANDRA
21053 SOUGOUMARANE, SHANMUGANANDAM
21063 PEARLMAN, DALE L
21073 TURNER, ROBERT C
21123 FENG, EUNICE
21133 FERNANDEZ, OSVALDO A
21143 CHANG, C
21153 VIJAYKUMAR, NARAYANAN J
-
733
CC 04-03-2024
733 of 1277
E-54 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
N STELLING RD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A5
Target Street Cross Street Source
2014
10100 VILLAGE LITTLE PRESCHOOL
10185 CITY OF CUPERTINO
CUPERTINO HISTORICAL SOCIETY & MUSEU
10200 RANJEET, ISABEL E
10218 HE, DAVID Q
10242 KUMAR, MAHENDRA J
10308 LITVINYUK, YURIY Y
10322 MERCHIA, AMBIKESWAR R
10336 ESPANOL, RODY F
10352 KINDERLAND CHILD DEVELOPMNT CNTR
10394 DELAO, MARCELO
-
734
CC 04-03-2024
734 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-55
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A6
Target Street Cross Street Source
2014
21111 CITY OF CUPERTINO
CUPERTINO SPORTS CENTER
21250 CALIF COMMUNITY COLLEGES HIGH TECH
CALIFORNIA HISTORY CENTER
DE ANZA COLLEGE
FLINT CENTER
UNA MAS MEXICAN GRILL
21251 CITY OF CUPERTINO
CUPERTINO SENIOR CENTER
21255 SHANE CO
SHANE COMPANY DIRECT DIAMOND IMPORTE
21265 COFFEESOCIETY
GUARDIAN MORTGAGE DOCUMENTS INC
JAMBA JUICE
KANG, YUNG H
KARA KARA INC
LEVY, MITCHELL A
MARSEILLES, ED O
QUICKLY CORP
TOGOS OAKS SHOPPING CENTER
21267 HOBEES CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT
ORANGE TREE FROZEN YOGURT CUPERTINO
SITAR INDIAN CUISINE
THAI SQUARE
21269 DANCE ACADEMY USA
ELS EDUCATIONAL CENTERS
FABULOUS NAILS
OAKS CENTER
PREMIER OF CAMPUS TEXTBOOKS
SPRINGS WELLS SPA
21271 24 HOUR FITNESS
LEAPSTART AFTER SCHOOL
PHOLICIOUS
21275 BLUELIGHT CINEMAS 5
-
735
CC 04-03-2024
735 of 1277
E-56 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
CHRISTENSEN DR
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A7
Target Street Cross Street Source
2010
21023 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN,
21033 SCHAKOW, TIMOTHY G
21043 BAO, DAVID H
21053 SOUGOUMARANE, SHANMUGANANDAM
21063 PEARLMAN, DALE L
21073 TURNER, ROBERT C
21113 HSIA, WEI
21123 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN,
21133 FERNANDEZ, OSVALDO A
21143 CHANG, DAVID M
21153 VIJAYKUMAR, NARAYANAN J
-
736
CC 04-03-2024
736 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-57
-
N STELLING RD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A8
Target Street Cross Street Source
2010
10100 ABUNDANT LIFE ASSEMBLY OF GOD
VILLAGE LITTLE PRESCHOOL CTR
10185 CUPERTINO HISTORICAL SOCIETY
CUPERTINO PARKS & RECREATION
QUINLAN COMMUNITY CTR
10200 LIAO, RICHARD G
10218 HE, DAVID Q
10228 LIN, JASON
10242 KUMAR, MAHENDRA J
10256 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN,
10308 LITVINYUK, YURIY Y
10322 LEE, ROBERT H
10336 ESPANOL, RICARDO F
10352 KINDERLAND CHILD DEVMNT CTR
10394 LOPEZ, ANTONIO C
RUIZ, MARIA
-
737
CC 04-03-2024
737 of 1277
E-58 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A9
Target Street Cross Street Source
2010
21111 CUPERTINO SPORTS CTR
CUPERTINO TEEN CTR
LIFETIME TENNIS
21250 CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES
CALIFORNIA HISTORY CTR
CENTER FOR APPLIED CMPTV TCHNL
DE ANZA COLLEGE
EUPHRAT MUSEUM OF ART
FLINT CENTER
KONICA MINOLTA PLANETARIUM
MEDITERRANEAN CAFE
UNAMAS MEXICAN GRILL
21251 CUPERTINO SENIOR CITIZEN CTR
21255 SHANE CO DIRECT DIAMOND IMPRTR
21265 ANONUEVO, ALEXANDER
COFFEE SOCIETY
CRITTER CARE
GOOD, JAMES L
JAMBA JUICE
KANG, YUNG H
LEVY, MITCHELL A
MARSEILLES ASSOCIATES
MARSEILLES, ED O
MORENO, MARIANA B
QUICKLYS
STUCKEY, STEPHEN R
SUSHI YA RESTAURANT
21267 HOBEES RESTAURANT
ORANGE TREE
SIMPLY THAI RESTAURANT
TOGOS
21269 COLDWELL BANKER
DANCE ACADEMY USA
FARAS HAIR SALON
MALLI HAIR DESIGN
PEAK PHYSICAL THERAPY
PREMIER OFF CAMPUS BOOKSTORE
PREMIER OFF CAMPUS TEXT BOOKS
PRIME CARE
YU, CINDY
21271 24 HOUR FITNESS
PHO LINH
21289 SCHULZ, ROLAND
-
738
CC 04-03-2024
738 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-59
-
CHRISTENSEN DR
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A10
Target Street Cross Street Source
2005
21023 BAL, RUBINDER R
21033 SCHAKOW, ROBERT A
21043 BAO, DAVID H
21053 HIROYUKI, NISHIO
21063 PEARLMAN, DALE L
21073 TURNER, ROBERT C
21113 WANG, CHIH H
21123 KING, HUEI
21133 FERNANDEZ, OSVALDO A
21143 CHANG, DAVID M
21153 VIJAYKUMAR, NARAYANAN J
-
739
CC 04-03-2024
739 of 1277
E-60 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
N STELLING RD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A11
Target Street Cross Street Source
2005
10100 ABUNDANT LIFE ASSEMBLY F GD
VILLAGE LITTLE
10185 CITY OF CUPERTINO PARKS
CUPERTINO HISTORICAL SOCIETY & MUSEU
QUINLAN COMMUNITY CENTER
10200 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN,
10218 HE, QIANSHAN S
10228 WU, TENG
10242 RUIZ, MANUEL F
10256 WALIULLAH, MOHAMMED T
10308 CHEN, LINDA
10322 LEE, BAUMIN
10336 ESPANOL, RODY F
10352 KINDERLAND CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER
10375 CHERIAN, RACHANA
10394 DELAO, MARCELO
LI, HONG
OCCUPANT UNKNOWN,
-
740
CC 04-03-2024
740 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-61
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A12
Target Street Cross Street Source
2005
21111 DACA SWIM SCHOOL
LIFE TIME TENNIS INC
THE CUPERTINO TENNIS CLUB
TRENNER JIM TENNIS
21250 CALIFORNIA PLUS ENGINEERING
REFLECTIONS
THE FLINT CENTER
21251 CUPERTINO SENIOR CENTER
21255 SHANE CO
WESTERN STONE & MTL CORP
21263 TOGOS
21265 ADAMS GLOBAL CONSTRUCTION
ANO NUEVO INVESTMENT
BOHANNON, C L
CEONETWORKING PRESS
COFFEESOCIETYCOM
DIANE HILTON
DICK, R K
DOUGLAS, FELICIDAD A
DUNN PRODUCTS CORP
EDBROOKE INTERNATIONAL
ESQ BUSINESS SERVICES INC
ESQ LTD
GOOD, JAMES L
GOODELL, MONICA M
HO KEE JEWELRY
JAMBA JUICE
JUDD, PABLO L
KAHL, BRETT R
LEVY, MITCHELL
LUI, CECILY W
LYNN, AMANDA
MANI PROPERTIES
META MEHLING & ASSOCIATES
MY STATIONERS INC
NIBERT, VALARI J
POSTAL ANNEX PLUS SERVICE
PRAKASH SARMA
PRESTIGIOUS FUNDI
PRESTIGIOUS FUNDING
REYNIA, TIMOTHY J
SCHWEGLER, WILLIAM C
SIDDIQUI, AHMED M
SIERRAS, RUDY
STUCKEY, STEPHEN R
WEBSCOPE
WILLIAMS, ANTOINETTE M
21267 COLD STONE CREAMERY
HOBEES RESTAURANT
21269 AIDAS UNIVERSITY BOOK EXCHANGE INC
-
741
CC 04-03-2024
741 of 1277
E-62 Memorial Park Specific Plan
(Cont'd)
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A13
Target Street Cross Street Source
2005
21269 BOSSABELLA INC
BRIGGS, GARY S
CELTIC SHOPPE
COLDWELL BANKER RESIDENTIAL REAL EST
DANCE ACADEMY USA
OAKS TRAVEL GALAX SEA CRUISES
PEAK PHYSICAL THERAPY
PHAM, SANH
SCHOOL HOUSE DANCE
SERRATO, JAVIER
21271 24 HOUR FITNESS
24 HOUR FITNESS EXPRESS
KWON, JENNIFER
ROYAL TOFU HO
ROYAL TOFU HOUSE
TSUNAMI SUSHI
WOMENS WRKOUT WEIGHTLOSS CTRS
-
742
CC 04-03-2024
742 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-63
-
CHRISTENSEN DR
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A14
Target Street Cross Street Source
2000
21033 SCHAKOW, ROBERT A
21043 BAO, DAVID H
21053 NAMBA, KOTARO
21063 PEARLMAN, DALE
21073 TURNER, ROBERT C
21113 WANG, HSIA I
21123 LEAL, MILFORD M
21133 FERNANDEZ, OSVALD A
21153 VIJAYKUMAR, N
-
743
CC 04-03-2024
743 of 1277
E-64 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
N STELLING RD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A15
Target Street Cross Street Source
2000
10100 ABUNDANT LIFE ASSEMBLY OF GOD
VILLAGE LITTLE PRESCHOOL AND DAY CARE CENTER
10135 FERNANDEZ, R
10185 CUPERTINO COMMUNITY SERVICES
CUPERTINO HISTORICAL SOCIETY & MUSEUM
10200 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN,
10214 RANCE, GRAHAME
10228 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN,
SUPERSITE
10242 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN,
10256 RAMIREZ, HEBER
10308 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN,
10322 FLORES, EMILIO
10336 ESPANOL, P
10351 OCCUPANT UNKNOWN,
10352 KINDERLAND CHILD DEVELOPMNT CNTR
10395 ALVES, ANTHONY D
-
744
CC 04-03-2024
744 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-65
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A16
Target Street Cross Street Source
2000
21111 ACCELARATION CUPERTINO NOVA CARE SPORTS PERFORMANCE & PHYSI
CUPERTINO CITY OF RECREATION CITY OF CUPERTINO
DACA SWIM SCHOOL
21250 CALIF COMMUNITY COLLEGES HIGH TECHNOLOGY CENTER TRAINING UNI
CALIFORNIA HISTORY CENTER
DEANZA COLLEGE
DEANZA COLLEGE FAX
FLINT CENTER ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
NATURAL EDGE JUICE BAR
21251 CUPERTINO CITY OF RECREATION CITY OF CUPERTINO
21255 SHANE COMPANY DIRECT DIAMOND IMPORTERS
21265 ASULIN, SHIMON O
BARAJAS, TONY
DRUCKER, URI L
ENLOW, ANGELA D
GONZALEZ, J
GORREPATI, KRISHNA
JAMBA JUICE
KIM, HOIL
LEIGLAND, RYAN J
LOHSE, DOLORES F
MIR, SHAFIA Z
MORROW, DON T
OHAYON, SIMON
POSTAL ANNEX 189
RACIMO, DANIEL
ROSEN, G W
SHAHNA, MEILI
SHARIF, HAMEED
21267 HOBEES RESTAURANT DEANZA
METROSPORT
MOMS ICE CREAMERY & GRILL
21269 AMERICAN SPIRIT ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED
AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
BERGMAN DAVID
CAFE QUINN
CELTIC SHOPPE
CENTURY 21 CONTEMPO REALTY
COLLECTION THE
CONTEMPO REALTY INCORPORATED
FABULOUS NAILS
FLOR FRANKIE CMT
IDAS GEMS & DESIGNS
MARK BURNS REALTOR
OAKS CENTER ASTORIA CLEANERS
OAKS CENTER CELTIC SHOPPE
OAKS CENTER FABULOUS NAIL
OAKS CENTER HOBEES RESTAURANT DEANZA
OAKS CENTER OAKS HAIR SALON
OAKS CENTER OAKS TRAVEL
-
745
CC 04-03-2024
745 of 1277
E-66 Memorial Park Specific Plan
(Cont'd)
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A17
Target Street Cross Street Source
2000
21269 UHRI CHERYL L DC
21271 LINDA EVANS FITNESS CENTER
21275 OAKS THEATRE
-
746
CC 04-03-2024
746 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-67
-
CHRISTENSEN DR
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A18
Target Street Cross Street Source
1995
21023 UPPAL, R K
21033 SCHAKOW, ROBERT A
21043 BAO, DAVID H
21053 NAPIER, NANCY
21063 OCCUPANT UNKNOWNN
21073 TURNER, ROBERT C
21113 HSIA, TOM W
21123 LEAL, MILFORD A
21133 FERNANDEZ, OSWALD
21143 C P TECHNOLOGY INC
-
747
CC 04-03-2024
747 of 1277
E-68 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
N STELLING RD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A19
Target Street Cross Street Source
1995
10100 DE ANZA BIBLE CHURCH
VILLAGE LITTLE
WENDSCHLAG, GREG
10185 CUPERTINO COMMUNITY SVC
CUPERTINO HISTORIAL MUSEUM
CUPERTINO RECREATION DEPT
SALVATION ARMY
10228 CHANG LABORATORIES INC
10308 SINGH, GURDEEP
10322 OCCUPANT UNKNOWNN
10336 ESPANOL, P
10352 PARTY AMERICA
10380 AZIZEH MOHAJER
BRANDY HULL HAIR STYLIST
HAIR DESIGNS BY SHARON
LAURA RENEE
MODERN REFLECTIONS
NAILS BY PATTI
RENEE, L
ROBIN MOSHER
10395 ALVES, ANTHONY D
-
748
CC 04-03-2024
748 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-69
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A20
Target Street Cross Street Source
1995
21111 CUPERTINO SPORTS CTR
CUPERTINO SPORTS CTR & PRO SHP
21250 CALIFORNIA HISTORY CTR
DE ANZA COLLEGE
F W SPENCER & SON INC
21251 CUPERTINO SENIOR CITIZEN CTR
21255 PACIFIC BREEZE
21265 CITY NIGHTS
COFFEE SOCIETY
HENDRIKAS LARGE SIZE FASHION
21267 FLEET FEET
HOBEES RESTAURANT DE ANZA
MOMS ICE CREAMERY & GRILL
SWEET ENDINGS
SWEET ENDINGS BONNE PATISSERIE
21269 A CLEAN WELL LIGHTED PLACE
ASTORIA CLEANERS
CAFE QUINN
CELTIC SHOPPE
COMPUTER GENERATION
FABULOUS NAILS
OAKS HAIR SALON
PERSPECTIVE PUBLISHING INC
RUNNING THREAD
U S TRAVEL
UHRI, CHERYL
21271 BLUE CHIP COOKIES
LOTUS INN
SOPHIAS FASHIONS
VOGUE ALLEY
21275 OAKS THEATRE
-
749
CC 04-03-2024
749 of 1277
E-70 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
CHRISTENSEN DR
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A21
Target Street Cross Street Source
1992
21023 LODES, TOM
21033 SCHAKOW, ROBERT A
21043 BAO, DAVID H
21063 PEARLMAN, DALE
21123 LEAL, MILFORD A
21133 FERNANDEZ, OSWALD
21143 C P TECHNOLOGY INC
-
750
CC 04-03-2024
750 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-71
-
N STELLING RD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A22
Target Street Cross Street Source
1992
10100 DE ANZA BIBLE CH
VILLAGE LTTL PRESCH
10185 CUPERTNO CMNTY SERV
ROBERT W QUINLAN CT
10200 LITTMANN, VINCENT P II
10308 SINGH, GURDEEP
10322 ZHU, QING L
10336 ESPANOL, P
10351 ELRASHIDI, M
10352 PAPER FACTORY OUTLT
10380 HULL B HAIR STYLIST
SPENCER VICKY HAIR
-
751
CC 04-03-2024
751 of 1277
E-72 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
EDR Digital Archive
7122847.5 Page: A23
Target Street Cross Street Source
1992
21111 CUPERTNO SPORTS CTR
21250 C E S D A C
CA COMMUNITY CLGS
CA HISTORY CENTER
DE ANZA CLG ACTIVTY
21251 CUPERTNO SR CMTY CT
21255 PAC FRESH
21265 CITY NIGHTS
HENDRIKAS FASHION
VOGUE ALLEY
21267 BRITISH MARKET
FLEET FEET SPORTS
FOR SOMEONE SPECIAL
G K W H INC
HOBEES REST DE ANZA
MOMS ICE CREAMERY
RUNNING THREAD THE
SWEET ENDINGS
21269 ASTORIA CLEANERS
BAGEL WORKS THE
BONNE, P
C G 2
CAFE QUINN
CELTIC SHOPPE
COMPUTER GENERATION
FABULOUS NAILS
OAKS CENTER
21271 BLUE CHIP COOKIES
CLEAN WELL LIGHTED
LOTUS INN
RACQUET SPORTS LTD
SHIZEN NUTRITN STR
SOPHIAS FASHIONS
21275 OAKS THEATRE
SENOR PEPES
-
752
CC 04-03-2024
752 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-73
-
CHRISTENSEN DR
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A24
Target Street Cross Street Source
1985
-
CHRISTENS.EN 0R 95014·
CUPERTINO '
2102-3 LODES ro:M 255-5948 +5
21033 SCHAKOW R ~ 725--0245 0
210~3 BAO DAVID H 725-8135 0
21053 BRADING GENE 257-7493
BRADI.NG HANNELORE 257-7493 0
21063 PEARLMAN DALE 996-1459 ...
PEARLMAN DARA 996-1459
21113 MATTINGLY RANDY. ·257-8741 2
21123 LEAL M~LFOR0 A •6·0381 0
21133 FERNANDEZ ELVA 725-0-585 0 1, FE~NAN0EZ OSWAt0 725-0585 21,4.3 C P TECHNOLOGY INC i91-8069" + 5
211S3 WIL·SON ~OBEA.T E 257-7331 2 ... 1 a.us 12 fiES 2 NEW 753
CC 04-03-2024
753 of 1277
E-74 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
N STELLING RD
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A25
Target Street Cross Street Source
1985
-
STELLING RD N 95014
CUPERTINO
10100 COUCHMAN LEONARD 255-0441 1
DEANZA BIBLE CHURCH 252-2668 • VILLAGE Lm PAESCH 252-20SO 8 10111 xxxx 00
10200 xxxx 00
1021• GREEN RONALD A 253-3906 9
10228 xxxx 00
10242 xxxx 00
10256 WOLFGRAM TRINA 252-5143 1
10271 xxxx 00
10308 xxxx 00
10322 CAVIN C STEVEN 257-3541 +S
10333 xxxx 00
10336 ESPANOL PRUDENCIO 253-1493
10351 xxxx 00
10352 xxxx 00
10360 xxxx 00
10380 HEADSHAPES 996-0397 2
LUSSIER DAVID 996-0387 +5
10394 xxxx 00
754
CC 04-03-2024
754 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-75
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A26
Target Street Cross Street Source
1985
21000 OEANZA MOBIL 2S7-1S16
DUNZA M081l. SERV 2S7-1S91 7
21080 xxxx 00
211 11 OEANZA RACQUET CLUB 25S-OSS 1
OUNZA RACOUET CLUB 257-~67 0
211 21 xxxx 00
211 S1 XXXX 00
21 250 BUILDING
C E S 0 A C 252- 8050 I
OEANZA CLG H8-4760
OUNZA CLG ACTIVITY 98&-47S8
DEANZA CLG ACTIYfTY 9915-4602 I
DEANZA CLG ACTIVITY 986-47S6 I
DEANZA CLG ADAPTIVE 996-4873 4
DEANZA CLG AOMISSHS 998-4 720 1
DUNZA CLG ADULT ED 748-2752 3
DUNZA CL.G ADULT SV 998-4884 3
DEANZA ClG AHNCMNT 9915-4502
OEANZA CLG ASC STD 998--4895 4
OEANZA CLG ATHLETIC 99&-4751
DEANZA CLG BLGCL SC 998-4773
DUNZA CLG BOOKSTOR 996-4701
OEANZA CLG BOOKSTRE 9915-4701 I
DUNZA CLG 8SNS SYS H8-47915
DEANZA CLG BUS tNO H0-4110 4
DUNZA CLG BUSICMPT 990-4790
OEANZA CLG BUSINES-C. 998-4710
OUNZA CLG CA HIST HfS-4712
OEANZA CLG CA HSTRY iH-4712 1
DUNZA CLG CAREER 9915-4~ 1
DEANZA CLG CHLO DEV Hl5-4822
OUNZA CLG CMNTY SY 9911-41574
OUHZA CLG COM SV 9"-41574 1
OUNZA CLG COOP ED HfS-4~ 1
DUNZA CLG COUNSLNG 998-4649
OUNZA CLG COURSES 998-4989
OUNZA CLG OEVLP 998-4822 1
OEANZA CLG DtAG CL 9915-4838
OUNZA CLG OtAGHSTC 998-4838
DEANZA CLG EMPLY 9915-4M1
OUNZA CLG ENG nCH 9915-4772
OUNZA CLG ENGRG H&-4172
OEANZA CLG ENYAMNTl Hl5-4525
OUHZA CLG ENVRNMNT 99&-4525 1
OUNZA CLG F1NE ART 998-4832 1
DEANZA CLG FLEA MKT 99&-4940 1
OUNZA CLG FLINT CT HfJ-4818 1
DEANZA CLG FLINT CT 998-4820 1
OEANZA CLG FNCL AIO 998-4718 1
DUNZA CLG FOOD SY 99&-4515 2
OUNZA CLG GALLERY ff&-4839 4
OUNZA CLG HLTH SAY 998-4732 I
OUNZA CLG tNOEP 990-4989 I
OEANZA CLG INFO 990-,0eo 1
OEANZA CLG 1NPO CT 998-4790
DEANZA CLG IHnRN 9H-4M1
OEANZA CLG INnRNSP 99&-'M 1
DEANZA CLG1NTACLTA 996-4709
HAINES & CO. INC INFORMATION ON TiilS PAGE Ml
-
755
CC 04-03-2024
755 of 1277
E-76 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A27
Target Street Cross Street Source
1985
- STEVENS CRK 8LVO 9501' CONT -
21250
21251
21255
21265
21267
21269
21269
21211
21215
DEANZA ClQ JUSTICE 119&-0Sl 1
DfANZA ClO LANOUAGE ll99·4S47
DEANZA CLO LAVOZ 1198-4785
DEANZA CLO LAVOZ 998-4761
DEANZA CLO L181URY IIII0-4761
DEANZA CLG Ill TCL TRL 1190-4828 1
DEANZA CLO Ill TICL Tll IIII0-41128
DfANZA ClG HUR$1NO 11911-4175
DEANZA CLO OCCUPTNL 998-0611 I
DEANZA CLO PHYS ED 1196-4751
DEANZA CLG PffTS £0 11116-4673
OEANZA CLG PHYS LTO 11119- TSJ
OEANZA CLG PHYS SC 11116•4 77'
DEANZA ClG PHYS(LLT 1196-4927
DEANZA CLO PMYSCLLT 119t-47SJ 1
OEANZA ClG PUNITRIII 11119-4814
DUNZA CLO P!.NTIIII 1191-4614
DUNZA CLO POOL 119&-47110
OEANZA CLO POOL INF 1199-41IIO
DEANZA CLO PRINT SY 1199.4191
DUNZA CLO PRNTG SV 1199-4981
DEANZA CLG RENEW 1199-47)7 1
DEANU CLG RESOURCE 1199-4841
DUNU CLO SCIIIIATH 1199-4774
DEA NZA CLG SCIENCE 1199•'773
OUHZA CLO SECURITY 11119-4148 1
DEANZA CLG SOC SCI ff9•4770
DUNZA CLG SOCL SC 1198-4770
DUNZA CLG STAFF 1199•411311 •
OUNZA CLG STO EIIIPL 1199•U41
DEAHZA ClG STOY :RS IIH-•11911 I
DEAHZA ClG STf DYLP 1199•'748
DEANZA CLG STVOT tlle-411I2 1
DUNZA CLO T V CRS 1196-49811
DUNZA CLO TEST OFC 11119-4761
DEANZA CLG TtsT OFC i,98-4711
DEANZA CLG TESTING 11119-4111
DEAHZA CLG TEXTBKS 11119-4455
OEAHZA CLG TVTOR CT 11911-4&112 1
DUHZA CLG TVTORlAL 9116-4882
DEAHZA CLG TV CNTII IIH-4196 4
DEANZA CLO VAN OSPT 11118-41121
DEAHZA CI.G VET AFfR 1196-45115
OEANZA CLG VETS AfF 11116-45115 1
DEANZA COLLEGE 11118•111155•5
FLINT CENTER eox CT 257-1555
CUPERTllO SENIOR 253-2098
CUPRTNO CTT SR CNTII 2SJ-2098
SANO PIPER 2S5-8060
01ns UNIOVE 11119-1122 9
VOGUE ALLEY 2S3-11680•5
AUIIO CIIIPTII CENTER 252-3830 ♦S
AUIIO EL TRHC CIIPHTS 252·3830 +5
FEA THEA YOUR NEST 1196•11230 •
UTARANTELU 257-5945 I
OPTICALLY SPEAKING 251·51115 0
IIUHNING THREAO THE 2S7•2720 3
SWEET COIIIPANT 1173•0922 3
SWEHSENSICECREAII 25~1811 7
.~~i~'~cORKS Tl4E u6-2m I BIIASS NAl. SHOE RPR 252-7742 l CfL TIC SHOPl'E 252·3048 •S
COUNTIIY HOIIE 725-0901 +&
N Y K 1NT£RIO!l 1111P 257-~34 •S
HfR&Allfl DISTI 445-0100•5
HYCENA ORY CLEANING 2SJ•UU 3
IIIDNIGHT SUN 448-0100 4
OAKS CENTER 15.3-1440 2
OAKS HAIR SALON 255-MOD +S
OAKS HYGENA ORY CLO 2S3•444' 3
OAKS TIIAVEL 2SJ-8200 7
SHIRE THE 11118-8787 9 UVA TAN 446-0100 (
VIP PRINTING 1173-1811 (
A CLEAN WELL LIGHTO 25~ 7100 6
BLUE CHIP COOlllES 257-1849 5
CLEAN PLACE FOR BK$ 255-7600 6
LOTVS INN 8116-8886 4
RAC OU ET SPORTS L TO 255-eseo 9
SHIZEN NUTll!Tll S1'11 255-3068 0
SOPHIAS FASHIONS 448-31100 8
ACORN fLOIISTSUCCNT 255-0380 8
OAKS THEATRE 448-1134
PEPES SENOR ue-1000 9
SENOR PEPES 4'8- 1 000 8
756
CC 04-03-2024
756 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-77
-
CHRISTENSEN DR
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A28
Target Street Cross Street Source
1981
-
'•-- CHRISTENSEN DR 95014
CUPERTINO
21023 SPELIOPOULOS NICK 446-0821 0
21033 SCHAKOW RA 725-0245 0
210,.3 BAO OAVfD H 725-813$ 0
21053 BRADING GENE 257•7493 0
21063 KIM E0WARD Y 725.--0-464 0
21113 xxxx 00
21123 LEAL MILFOR0 A 446-0381 0
21133 FERNANOEZ OSWALD 725-0585 0
21153 TYSON BENNETT J 725--0455 0
• 0 BUS 9 RES 0 NEW
757
CC 04-03-2024
757 of 1277
E-78 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
N STELLING RD
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A29
Target Street Cross Street Source
1981
-
STELLING RD N 95014
CUPEFiTINO
10100 COUCHMAN LEONARD 255-04~ 1 + 1
DEANZA BIBLE CHURCH 252-2050 7
VILLAGE L TTL PRESCH 252-2050 8
10111 xxxx 00
10200 xxxx oo
1021 _. GREEN RONALD A 253-3906 9
10228 DAVIS ROY F 255-8•32 6
10242 SAPIE~ ELISA 257-5528 9
10256 WOLFGRAM TRINA 252- 5 14'3 + 1
10271 xxxx 00
1030P xxxx 00
10322 UUL TITECH ELEC INC 252-•212 + 1
10333 xxxx 00
10336 ESPANOL PRUDENCIO 253-1493
1035t STARR NM 252~5309
10352 OEA"4ZA LOUNGE 25s-,22, 6
10360 STELLING RO BARBER 255-0874 0
10360 HOUSE OF HAIR (46-2005 0
STELLING HS OF HAIR (46-2005 7
10394 GUDENKEUF RICHARD 255- 7828 + 1
PLANT CRAFTER THE 996-0605 6 -
758
CC 04-03-2024
758 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-79
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A30
Target Street Cross Street Source
1981 ll I I
2, 2
' s 1 ac
11161
~UNlA ftACOUEf Cl.VI H~ ,sss • 1
CtEUU> R.1.COIJET CI.UU t$7•S.C67
llll 00
tuPEtn•O ClY SR CT2 Hl-lOIII a: .. ~
CfSO•C IS1•80SO•I
0Ulrt1A CLG &CTl\tiTY 996••.UIOf • t
OElM>A cu; AOWSSHS 098-4710 •I
O[AMIA ClG ASC SlOT 9'l"-461S •I
O(Ak!A C.G ASC STI)T IS!·BO~ • I
OUMI& ClC &111.ETIC l!Ql-4151 • I
DUNZA CI.C liLINCiJL 738 t611 1
O.E.AHZA ClC 8 OLOGCl llf>...'77l •'
O~O(;!A, ClC 800k$TR 9"-4101-1
00N2A CLCi 81.iSAl)Ara °"'fi .. ,e 7ii • I
DfAti.ilA CLC. Ca "Sflll' ~6-"' 2 • t
OU1otl.A CLG CARf[R OUS-,081 • I
Of'ANZA ClC t•Rf£A 09~ .. ,~~2 • 1
Dri\NU CLC C&AE:!R H&-•~l•1
OEANZ& CLC CN!W 1tl H~-,084 •
OHNZ.1 Cf.C C"4.C O'il 88£i-41:U • 1
or.1J,ilJ,CLCCllJwTYS¥ ae&--,674•1
DfAlriiZA CIC CW!"!. ACT 89&-,11756•1
OEANZ&C CiC1tSlAFT ii6•4f.iA,8.,
DE.l"'U. CLG C"'6SL CTA H&- OlO • I DEANl& CLC COPY COR 916--4~0.J • 1 OUNZA CI.G CO\INSL._C 986 4.b4'1 • I
DUHU ClC CAS r, UH-ObU • I
DEIN.U C C (0 OCiltST H~ ~a.u • 1
DEAN2& Cl.C 1:,-.c:. T((H &;6· ◄ 7'1 • I
DE,OUJI CLG EHVRfrlMn et6-4SH • I
DE.1NU CLC. [Y£ HE 2S~-)3J) • t
ou~z., Cl C. F Hf AAT HIS-0,31 • I
ou~u CLC ,.tA .,!( ... ffl••9•&•1
DE.UtlA (LO FL NT IO&• '820 • I
DF&N11 ClG FLINT H6••&16•1
Ofl.lrifU ClC FNCJ,. AID H&-Ot!•t
DUH?A ClG ,OOl) $RV h6•016 • 1
OUN!A tu; NfALTH !H•OJJ • !
ou,za CLC •OP! 198 4673 •
0[.lNlA CLG ~D VIOL 9'U 4!i1 • I
OElHZA at N0Pt~ 'i91-•9bV• 1
Ot:.A'1ZA CLV "CFO tN-C1f,O • 1
OOhU C C 1 .. -.:0 Q-06•067 • I
·,upr.z,t, C Ci lilS P'SCL vt~-'7". I
ou.,,.z.• CLC •!TltC'Lff tt6•06i•I
CIE•NU CLG JUSTIC[ to4••Ul • I
DU11rrtZA CLC l.lN~UJ.Gf att.-•s..tl • I
OEliN?l CtC uvoz 801.• nu• I
cr .. z• ClG lt••· Cl &al-•Uo • I OU•ZI ClG LC&R• CT 9'16 .,., •I 0£A'-ZA cu; uro ASST 996-07!:i•I
DUfrtZA CLGl,IL.TICLTR 8'96•4821•1
Ol-""llA LC "t,.,"Sla.C IIS6-•4111 • OtANlJ. CLCi fri\.ift!»O~<i M\ , 11~ • I DEAMlA cu:; OLD AOLT 996-4871 I
Df.&tdA CLC PHYS EO M•-47SI • I
OEAH,tA C.LG JIJlfY$ ,c;w "6-4Q-27 • I
OUfrl:U CLC PMYS •cw H~•~ Sl.
Of,lhJ;,t. (LC Pflff$ fkP 81~~• 71! •
DUHll Cl C PLAHT1Uit M~-•fll 4 • I
DhHlA CLf, PLCW~l 196••44• • I
DfAH?A ClG POOl 11,,r 99'•0&1 • 1
Or&llfU C tl(GS''lUR 996-,no 1
DU"'ZA cu; A("""' aiS.•7H or•NZA CLG R:•r U'6-•7H • I
or ANZA cu; $[C\JAn ff6-4 •e •, DE&•Z• CLC SOCL SCH 896 < no D£,l1r,jlJ, Cl,(; STtl [WP W6•0,H • I D(llitZA cic S1D'f S«L "i-491,l •'
OEANZA cu; $T F 01ft 09g .. 4e,t • ou~z• CL(, T[STIN'O O-OG-416J • 1 l)[,11111?• C C T(STH,C "6-•J t 7 • I
DEA Jill A, LG l()IIUL "'•4M1 • I
DfllNZA ClC VEftllA1r,jS aa6-4St'!I • 1 DHNZA (L(; VOl lOiG N6-•8c2 •1 or srr THE UG•I 1Sl•llll • t ,. ,. cr,1• 801 Of'C 211-USIS .... OJ
S&hOPIPEf' 25!. t,060
,,ns UH'()U£ "' 71 Z2 •
Sm>OOU ffl-JO!O •O~D!IOF *'LO I'! •U-94~•1
o••P!.-S HOIIE Fttti!SHC 25,J-023(1 • I
lJ.T&IUifilflU 151 .. Y:•~ • I
0.US TMl HA!tNG Of'C 1~-l•UO 7
OPllC'uU SP(tMIHG u1.~;,~
'"'£-S.•r•s Ill lOCI I $W[NSl'1SIC[ C -.u 2i$•1811
B O•C
a-.Tl'l WOR"LO
OHi DEWAQCO
JU'Sl llf CASE
UT'MtS • 0 J'ilRUtt
I jffi[ 0£0"-F IIIE'W llilPRfUIONS
O&ICS •JUVEL
R'1 .. h ~G TW=oo n.E
!it-AE I t
'lS-1 ·~-· .,,-1111 a 255-!.9l'l•I
441-4-373•1
1ss..•&00
1SI-SAOO
1Sl·B200
H7•1710 I
9'16•1'~1
-
759
CC 04-03-2024
759 of 1277
E-80 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A31
Target Street Cross Street Source
1981
-
STEVENS C K BL \ID 9501, CONT
YT LtWrTID 257-6195 +1
21269
21271 A CLEAN PtC FR 800t( 2ss .. 1eoo 6
CLEAN WL UGMTO PlC 255-7600 6
POTATO PATCH THE 255--0700 8
RACOOET SPOfn'S LTO 255-6880 9
SHIZ'EN NUTR'ITH sn 255-3066 0
SOPHIAS FASNIONS U6-JQOO 13
21275 ACORN F L0A1STS 255-0360 8
OAKS THE.&mf •46-113• 5
PE F'E S SE NOR M6-1000 8
SEN~ PEPS (46-1000 8
760
CC 04-03-2024
760 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-81
-
N STELLING RD
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A32
Target Street Cross Street Source
1976
-
STELL I NG RD N 95014 CUPE RT HJO
l0100•ASSEM8LY GOO CPRTN0252-2050
•SUNNYMONT CHRSTN SC252-2053 5
10111 xxxx 00
10214 xxxx 00
10228 OAVIS ROY F 255-8432+6
10242 LOFTY BRIAN 446-4072+6
10256 WALSH G G 252-0490 3
10271 xxxx 00
1030B WHITE LA 996-7805 5
10322 JACOB OONALD L 255-1B33 5
10333 xxxx 00
10336 ESPANOL PRUOENCIO 253-1493
10351 STARR TT 252-5309
10352*0EANZA LOUNGE 255-4224+6
10360 xxxx 00
10380*ALMA&CINOY HSE HAIR446-2005 5
SLOCUM EUGENIA 255-7616+6
10394*PLANT CRAFTER THE 996-0605+6
761
CC 04-03-2024
761 of 1277
E-82 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A33
Target Street Cross Street Source
1976
- - - --- . Zllll*OEANZA RACQUET CLU8255-4555+6
2112l•CUPERTNO CTY SR CTZ253-2098 5
21250•8AY AREA COLLEGE TV446-2121 5
•OEANZA CLG 800KSTRE257-5122 3
•OEANZA CLG HSTRY CT446-1007 5
•OEANZA CLG STUOENTS255-9544 3
•OEANZA COLLEGE 257-5550 3
•FLINT CENTR BOX OFC257-9555 3
21255•SANOPIPER 255-6060 5
21269*CASUAL AIRE 257-6195+6
•OALE JOHNSON TRAVEL255-5100+6
•JOHNSON O TRAVEL SV255-5100+6
•RACQUET SPORTS LTO 255-6880+6
2127l•A CLEAN PLACE 800KS255-7600+6
•CLEAN WL LIGHTO PLC255-7600+6
21275•0AKS THEATRE 446-1134 5
•STONESON OVLP CORP 253-1440+6
762
CC 04-03-2024
762 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-83
-
N STELLING RD
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A34
Target Street Cross Street Source
1971
STELLING RD N 95014 CUPERTINO
10l00•ASSEM8LY GOO CPRTN0252-2050
•ASSEMBLY OF GOO 255-04~1+1
10111 SAlCH ROBT J 252-Q~30+1
10214 PETE G L JR 253-~741
10228 CROW LAWRENCE E 252-0290+1
102~2 xxxx 00
10256 GRAINGER JACK T 257-647Q+l
1027l•CHURCH JESUS CHRJST252-633b
•CHURCH JESUS CHRIST252-7477
•CHURCH JESUS CHRIST252-9723
10322 COOPER HENRY W 25J-~3q5+l
10333 XXXX DD
~0336 ESPANOL PRUDENCIO 253-1493
~0351 STARR TT 252-SJ0Q
10352•FRIEN0LY FOX 225-088q+l
•FRIENDLY FOX THE 252-Q63q+l
•GARDEN GATE 8R8R SH257-5270
10380 REY RAMON 252-716q+l
103q4 FARGO R 755-3357+1
-
763
CC 04-03-2024
763 of 1277
E-84 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
Haines Criss-Cross Directory
7122847.5 Page: A35
Target Street Cross Street Source
1971
-
STEVENS CRK BLVD 95128 SAN JOSE
2200*MARCHICK HERBERT H 286-6565
•MIOAS MUFFLER SHOPS294-74DO+l
22Il•STANOARO OIL CO CAL295-9695+1
2221 •••• AUTO CENTER WEST
•EAST BAY GLASS 287-4400
•EXECUTIVE AUTO SOOY287-5855
•KAY SEAT COVERS 293-5191
•KEELEY JOE AUTO SLS2q2-6351
•LARRY5 AUTO WAXING 2q3-9914
*LITTLE MAN MFFLRt8R294-1402
•LITTLE MAN RACE PRT294-9782
•SERVICE RENT A CAR 292-4441
•SOUTH BAY GLASS 287-4400
•TIRE OUTLET STORES 297-7667
•TRANSMISSION SV CTR298-3350
•WALKER LARRY 2q3-9914
2233*COURT BARBER STYLNG293-5bl7
•ROFFLER CALIF INC 287-5436+1
2257•MIRACLE MILE CAR wszq7-zq3q
2265•WINOWARO SAILBOATS 289-8126+1
2281•CAR PROBE 2q7-7200
*CENTRAL TIRE SERVCE294-4245
•FRANKS SERVICE CNTR297-7200+1
764
CC 04-03-2024
764 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-85
-
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
Polk's City Directory
7122847.5 Page: A36
Target Street Cross Street Source
1968
21050 DE ANZA COLLEGE 257-5550
21340 LAWRENCE L 252-1366
21519 HENARD & CO REAL EST
253-2881
MONTA VISTA SHOE REPAIR
-
765
CC 04-03-2024
765 of 1277
E-86 Memorial Park Specific Plan -
Is! CORNERSTONE EARTI-I GROUP
APPENDIX D - QUESTIONNAIRE
766
CC 04-03-2024
766 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-87
User Questionnaire Page 1
Environmental Questionnaire
(User Questionnaire)
The ASTM Standard E1527-21 defines the User as the party seeking to use a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment to evaluate the presence of Recognized Environmental Conditions associated with a property. Per the ASTM Standard, the User should provide certain information to the environmental professional. Please provide the following information. Responses should be provided in good faith and to the extent of your knowledge. Enter “unknown” if the requested information is not known.
PROJECT DETAILS
1) Describe the reason for performing the requested Phase I ESA. For example, property acquisition/lender requirement, evaluation of business environmental risks, seeking to qualify for Landowner Liability Protections under CERCLA, etc.
2) Please describe your intended use of the property. For example, commercial office space, residential, mixed-use, etc. If the property is planned to be redeveloped, briefly describe the development plans. 3) Will the development plans include excavation and off-site soil removal or the import of soil? If yes, please briefly describe. Yes No
SITE DETAILS
4) Please list all current and former addresses, along with each assessor’s parcel number (APN). Some sites have multiple addresses; all are needed, even if they are not in current use.
Address(es) APN Number(s) Lot Size (acres)
5) Please provide/attach a site plan that accurately shows the property boundaries. 6) Please list current site tenant(s), site use, and years of occupancy:
Years of Occupancy
Tenant Site Use (e.g., From 1995 to 2007)
7) Please list prior site tenant(s), site use, and years of occupancy:
Years of Occupancy
Tenant Site Use (e.g., From 1975 to 1983)
Quinlan Community Center Park Recreations offices unkown Senior Center Senior Center offices unkown
Evaluation of environmental risks for Public Park and Public Facility improvements.
Public Park and Open Space, Public Facilities, Transportation 10185 N Stelling Rd. Cupertino, CA 95014 / 326 54 041 / 7.2 acres 21251 Stevens Creek Blvd. Cupertino, CA 95014 / 326 29 006 / 14.5 acres N/A / 326 27 033 / 0.4 acres
Unknown
Ii! CORNERSTONE
EARTH GROUP
□
-
□
767
CC 04-03-2024
767 of 1277
E-88 Memorial Park Specific Plan
User Questionnaire Page 2
8) Please indicate if you are aware of any of the following features currently or formerly at the site.
Structure/Feature Select All
Yes No
Do Not
Know
Aboveground Storage Tanks
Agricultural Wells
Air Emission Control Systems
Boilers
Burning Areas (waste burn pits or ash disposal areas)
Chemical Mixing Areas
Chemical Storage Areas
Drainage Ditches
Drums, Totes, and Intermediate Bulk Containers
Elevators
Emergency Generators
Equipment Maintenance Areas
Fill Placement (i.e., fill used to build up the site elevations) Groundwater Monitoring Wells
Hoods and Ducting (associated with chemical use)
Hydraulic Vehicle or Equipment Lifts
Incinerators
Petroleum Pipelines or Wells
Pits, Ponds, or Lagoons.
Railroad Lines
Row Crops or Orchards
Septic Systems or Cesspools
Solid Waste Disposal Areas (other than municipal trash containers) Stained Soil or Pavement
Stains or Corrosion on Floors, Walls, or Ceilings
Standing Surface Water or Pools
Stockpiles of Soil or Debris
Stressed Vegetation (unrelated to the lack of water)
Strong, Pungent, or Noxious Odors
Sumps, Clarifiers, Oil-Water Separators, or similar structures Transformers
Underground Storage Tanks
Unidentified Substance Containers
Vehicle Maintenance Areas
Vehicle Wash Areas
Wastewater Neutralization Systems
If you checked yes to any of the above, please provide a brief additional description here:
HVAC boiler in QCC and grease traps in both kitchens
-
CORNERSTONE
EARTH GROUP
c::>
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
768
CC 04-03-2024
768 of 1277
Appendix E Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment E-89
User Questionnaire Page 3
9) Please indicate if, to your knowledge, any of the following documents exist:
Document Yes No
Do Not
Know
Environmental site assessments
Environmental permits or violation notices
Underground or above ground storage tank documents/permits Geotechnical reports or hydrogeologic studies
Risk assessments
Hazardous materials management plans or chemical inventories Safety/emergency response plans or spill prevention plans Compliance audits or community right-to-know plans
Asbestos or lead based paint surveys
If you checked yes to any of the above, please indicate the location of the documents.
Can copies be provided? Yes No
10) Have significant quantities of hazardous materials been used, stored, or generated on-site? Yes No
If so, please describe the types and quantities and where these materials are or were located. 11) Environmental Liens and AULs: To meet the requirements of 40 CFR § 312.25, a search for the existence of Environmental Liens and Activity and Use Limitations (AULs) (such as engineering controls, land use restrictions, or institutional controls) must be performed by or on behalf of the party seeking to qualify for Landowner Liability Protection under CERCLA (i.e., the User). Users may rely on transactionrelated title insurance documentation such as Preliminary Title Reports and Title Commitments. ASTM E 1527-21 categorizes the requirement to conduct a search for Environmental Liens and AULs as a User responsibility.
Did a search of land title records identify any environmental liens or AULs that are in place or filed or recorded against the subject property under federal, tribal, state, or local law? Yes No Search not yet completed
Is a Preliminary Title Report or Title Commitment available? If yes, please attach a copy.
Yes No
✔
r:, CORNERSTONE
C : EARTH GROUP
□
□
□
□ □
□
□
□
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
□
769
CC 04-03-2024
769 of 1277
E-90 Memorial Park Specific Plan
User Questionnaire Page 4
12) Are you aware of commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the site or adjoining properties that would help the environmental professional to identify conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases? For example, do you know of 1) past uses involving hazardous materials at the site or adjoining properties, 2) specific chemicals that were or are present at the site or adjoining properties, 3) spills or other chemical releases at the site or adjoining properties, or 4) any environmental cleanups at the site or adjoining properties? Yes No
If so, please briefly describe below, including whether reports documenting the activities are available for review by Cornerstone Earth Group.
13) Are you aware of 1) any pending, threatened or past litigation, or administrative proceedings relevant to hazardous substances or petroleum products at the site, or 2) any notices from any governmental entity regarding possible violations of environmental laws or possible liability related to hazardous substances or petroleum products?
Yes No
If so, please briefly describe below.
14) Do you have any specialized knowledge or experience related to the site or nearby properties that is material to environmental conditions at the site? For example, are you involved in the same line of business as the current or former occupants of the site or an adjoining property so that you would have specialized knowledge of the chemicals and processes used by this type of business? Yes No
If so, please briefly describe below.
15) In a transaction involving the purchase of commercial real estate, the User must consider the relationship of the purchase price of the property to the fair market value of the property if the property were not affected by hazardous substances. Do you believe that the purchase price of the subject property is lower than the fair market value due to contamination? Yes No Not Applicable (no purchase involved)
16) Completed by:
Name (print) Company Signature Date
Rudy Lomas City of Cupertino 09/21/2022
✔
✔
✔
✔
-
r:, CORNERSTONE
C : EARTH GROUP
□ □
□ □
□ □
□ □ □
770
CC 04-03-2024
770 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan F-1
Geotechnical Evaluation
Appendix F
-
771
CC 04-03-2024
771 of 1277
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
772
CC 04-03-2024
772 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-3
Geotechnical Evaluation
Memorial Park
21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Cupertino, California
Gates + Associates
1655 N. Main Street, Suite 365 | Walnut Creek, California 94596 November 3, 2022 | Project No. 404269001
Geotechnical | Environmental | Construction Inspection & Testing | Forensic Engineering & Expert Witness Geophysics | Engineering Geology | Laboratory Testing | Industrial Hygiene | Occupational Safety | Air Quality | GIS -
G11ofethnlc:tl & EnvkOr'lmOntal ScitJncBS Consullants
773
CC 04-03-2024
773 of 1277
F-4 Memorial Park Specific Plan
2149 O’Toole Avenue, Suite 30 | San Jose, California 95131 | p. 408.435.9000 | www.ninyoandmoore.com Geotechnical Evaluation
Memorial Park
21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Cupertino, California
Mr. Michael Freitag
Gates + Associates
1655 N. Main Street, Suite 365 | Walnut Creek, California 94596 November 3, 2022 | Project No. 404269001
Ransom H. Hennefer, PE, GE
Principal Engineer
TBG/RHgvr
November 3, 2022
-
Geotechnlcal & Environmental Sciences Consultants
774
CC 04-03-2024
774 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-5
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 i
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 SCOPE OF SERVICES 1
3 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND 1
4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2
5 SUBSURFACE EVALUATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 2
6 GEOLOGIC AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3
6.1 Regional Geologic Setting 3
6.2 Site Geology 3
6.3 Subsurface Conditions 3
6.3.1 Alluvium 3
6.4 Groundwater 4
7 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS 4
7.1 Seismic Hazards 4
7.1.1 Historical Seismicity 4
7.1.2 Faulting and Ground Surface Rupture 4
7.1.3 Strong Ground Motion 5
7.1.4 Liquefaction and Strain Softening 5
7.1.5 Ground Subsidence 6
7.1.6 Lateral Spread 6
7.1.7 Seismic Slope Stability 6
7.2 Expansive Soil 6
7.3 Static Settlement 6
7.4 Excavation Characteristics 7
7.5 Corrosive/Deleterious Soil 7
8 CONCLUSIONS 7
9 RECOMMENDATIONS 8
9.1 Seismic Design Criteria 8
9.2 Earthwork Recommendations 9
9.2.1 Pre-Construction Conference 9
9.2.2 Site Preparation 9
-
775
CC 04-03-2024
775 of 1277
F-6 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 ii
9.2.3 Observation and Removals 10
9.2.4 Material Recommendations 10
9.2.5 Subgrade Preparation 11
9.2.6 Fill Placement and Compaction 12
9.2.7 Temporary Excavations and Shoring 13
9.2.8 Utility Trenches 14
9.3 Foundations 15
9.3.1 Spread Footings 15
9.3.2 Slabs-on-Grade 16
9.3.3 Drilled Piers for Minor Structures 16
9.4 Pavements and Flatwork 17
9.4.1 Asphalt Pavement 17
9.5 Concrete Placement 18
9.6 Review of Construction Plans 18
9.7 Construction Observation and Testing 19
10 LIMITATIONS 19
11 REFERENCES 21
TABLES
1 – California Building Code Seismic Design Criteria 9
2 – Recommended Material Requirements 11
3 – Subgrade Preparation Recommendations 11
4– Fill Placement and Compaction Recommendations 12
5– OSHA Material Classifications and Allowable Slopes 13 6– Recommended Bearing Design Parameters for Footings 15 7– Asphalt Concrete Pavement Sections 18
FIGURES
1 – Site Location
2 – Boring and Test Locations
3 – Fault Locations and Earthquake Epicenters
4 – Regional Geology
5 – Seismic Hazard Zone
-
776
CC 04-03-2024
776 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-7
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 iii
APPENDICES
A – Boring Logs
B – Laboratory Testing
C – Corrosivity Testing (CERCO Analytical)
-
777
CC 04-03-2024
777 of 1277
F-8 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 1 1 INTRODUCTION
In accordance with your request and authorization, we have performed a geotechnical evaluation for the Memorial Park Project located at 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard in Cupertino, California (Figure 1). The purpose of our study was to assess the geotechnical conditions at the site and provide recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed improvements. 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES
The services we performed included the following:
• Review of pertinent background data, including aerial photographs and published geologic, seismic, and soils maps and literature.
• A site reconnaissance to observe the general site conditions and to mark the proposed locations for subsurface exploration.
• Coordination with Underground Service Alert (USA) to locate and mark underground utilities in the vicinity of the subsurface exploration locations. • Subcontract a private underground utility survey to further check the exploration locations for underground utility conflicts.
• Procurement of an encroachment permit from the City of Cupertino’s Department of Public Works.
• Subsurface exploration consisting of seventeen (17) exploratory borings advanced up to 15 feet below existing grade. A representative of Ninyo & Moore logged the subsurface conditions exposed in the borings and collected bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples for laboratory tests. The borings were backfilled with cement grout, in compliance with the Santa Clara Valley Water District regulations. Drill cuttings were off hauled from the site. • Laboratory testing of selected soil samples to evaluate the geotechnical properties of the subsurface materials including in-situ soil moisture content and density, soil gradation, Atterberg limits, expansion index, R-value, and soil corrosivity. • Data compilation and engineering analysis of the information obtained from our background review, subsurface evaluation, and laboratory testing.
• Preparation of this geotechnical report presenting our findings and conclusions regarding the subsurface conditions encountered at the project site, and our geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed improvements. 3 SITE DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The project site is located at 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard in Cupertino, California (Figure 1).
The site is an “L” shaped lot that is bounded to the north by Christensen Drive, to the east by North Stelling Road and Anton Way, to the west by residential properties, and to the south Stevens Creek Boulevard and Alves Drive. Memorial Park is the largest and most well-used park in Cupertino. The 22-acre site includes lawns, a gazebo, an amphitheater, a lighted softball field, -
778
CC 04-03-2024
778 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-9
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 2 and six lighted tennis courts. Memorial Park houses the Cupertino Veterans Memorial which honors local veterans, and is adjacent to the Cupertino Senior Center, Quinlan Community Center, and Cupertino Sports Center. The site is relatively flat and lies at elevations of approximately between 286 to 296 feet above mean sea level (Google Earth, 2022). 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Based on documents provided by the city (City of Cupertino, 2022), the plan for the park is the following. The ponds at the site are in the process of being removed. The City has also identified improvements required for the amphitheater. The Memorial Park Specific Plan will determine how to best meet the future recreation, community gathering, event, and green space needs of citizens through enhancement of the park, following the findings and recommendations of the City’s Parks and Recreation System Master Plan. The Master Plan’s vision for the park highlights expansion of the civic event space and community hub experiences by providing a unifying focus to the surrounding existing City facilities, and by enhancing natural site features. 5 SUBSURFACE EVALUATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Our field exploration included a site reconnaissance and subsurface exploration of the project site. The subsurface exploration was conducted on August 24 and September 19, 2022 and consisted of seventeen (17) exploratory borings. The locations of the borings are presented on Figure 2. Prior to commencing the subsurface investigation, USA was notified for field marking of existing utilities and a private utility survey was conducted to further assess and locate any utilities that may conflict with the exploration locations.
The borings were advanced to depths of up to approximately 15 feet below the existing grade with a truck-mounted drill rig equipped with hollow-stem augers. A representative of Ninyo & Moore logged the subsurface conditions exposed in the borings and collected bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples from the borings. The materials encountered in the borings were classified and logged in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The samples were then transported to our geotechnical laboratory for testing. The borings were backfilled with cement grout and capped off with soil cuttings in accordance with Santa Clara Valley Water District requirements. Detailed logs of the borings are presented in Appendix A.
Laboratory testing of soil samples recovered from the borings included in-situ soil moisture content and density, soil gradation, Atterberg limits, expansion index, R-value, and soil corrosivity.
The results of the in-place moisture content and dry density tests are shown on the boring logs in Appendix A. The results of the other laboratory tests, excluding the corrosivity testing, are -
779
CC 04-03-2024
779 of 1277
F-10 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 3 presented in Appendix B. The results and findings of the corrosivity evaluation are provided in Appendix C.
6 GEOLOGIC AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
6.1 Regional Geologic Setting
The site is located in the southwestern portion of Santa Clara Valley, which is part of the Coast Ranges geomorphic province of California. The Coast Ranges are comprised of several mountain ranges and structural valleys formed by tectonic processes commonly found around the CircumPacific belt. Basement rocks have been sheared, faulted, metamorphosed, and uplifted, and are separated by thick blankets of Cretaceous and Cenozoic sediments that fill structural valleys and line continental margins. The San Francisco Bay Area has several mountain ranges that trend northwest, parallel to major strike-slip faults such as the San Andreas, Hayward, and Calaveras (Figure 3). Major tectonic activity associated with these and other faults within this regional tectonic framework consists primarily of right-lateral, strike-slip movement.
6.2 Site Geology
A regional geologic map by Dibblee and Minch (2007) indicates that the site is underlain by Holocene age surficial sediments. Dibblee and Minch describe this unit as alluvial sand, silt, and gravel deposited in the upper part of the alluvial fans formed along the foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains. A map of the regional geology is presented as Figure 4.
6.3 Subsurface Conditions
The following section provides a generalized description of the materials encountered during our subsurface evaluation at the project site. More detailed descriptions are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A.
6.3.1 Alluvium
Alluvium was encountered in all of the borings to the depths explored. The alluvium encountered in the borings generally consisted of light brown to dark brown, dry to wet, loose to very dense, poorly graded gravel, well-graded gravel with clay and sand, clayey gravel, clayey sand; and dark brown to reddish brown, moist, very stiff to hard, lean clay and silty clay.
-
780
CC 04-03-2024
780 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-11
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 4
6.4 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered during our subsurface exploration. However, groundwater may rise to a higher level due to the relatively low seepage rate in clay and the limited time for observation. Fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur due to seasonal precipitation, variations in topography or subsurface hydrogeologic conditions, or as a result of changes to nearby irrigation practices or groundwater pumping. In addition, seeps may be encountered at elevations above the historic high groundwater levels due to perched groundwater conditions, leaking pipes, preferential drainage, or other factors not evident at the time of our exploration.
Regional studies by the California Geological Survey (CGS, 2002a) indicate that the depth to historic high groundwater is approximately 50 feet below the ground surface. 7 GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
This study considered a number of potential issues relevant to the proposed construction on the subject site, including seismic hazards, expansive soils, static settlement, excavation characteristics, and soil corrosivity. These issues are discussed in the following subsections.
7.1 Seismic Hazards
The seismic hazards considered in this study include the potential for ground rupture due to faulting, seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, and seismic slope stability. These potential hazards are discussed in the following subsections.
7.1.1 Historical Seismicity
The site is located in a seismically active region. Figure 3 presents the location of the site relative to the epicenters of historic earthquakes with magnitudes of 5.0 or more from 1800 to 2000. Records of historic ground effects related to seismic activity (e.g. liquefaction, sand boils, lateral spreading, ground cracking) compiled by Knudsen et al. (2000), indicate that ground effects related to historic seismic activity have not been reported for the site.
7.1.2 Faulting and Ground Surface Rupture
In response to hazards associated with ground rupture, or surface displacement, the State of California enacted the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (AP Act) in 1972, which regulates development of structures for human occupancy in areas within active fault zones.
The AP Act requires that the State Geologist delineate zones along active faults where evaluation of the potential for ground rupture is required. As defined by the California -
781
CC 04-03-2024
781 of 1277
F-12 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 5 Geological Survey (CGS, 2018), active faults are faults that have caused surface displacement within Holocene time, or within approximately the last 11,700 years.
The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone established by the State Geologist (CGS, 2018). The closest active fault and rupture hazard zone is the Monte Vista Shannon 2011 CFM located about 1.5 miles northwest of the site.
Based on our review of the referenced geologic maps, known active faults are not mapped on the site and the site is not located within a fault-rupture hazard zone. Therefore, the probability of damage from surface fault rupture is considered to be low.
7.1.3 Strong Ground Motion
Based on historic activity, the potential for future strong ground motion at the site is considered significant. Seismic design criteria to address ground shaking are provided in Section 9.1. The peak ground acceleration (PGA) associated with the Maximum Considered Earthquake Geometric Mean (MCEG) was calculated in accordance with the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-16 Standard and the 2019 California Building Code (CBC). The MCEG peak ground acceleration with adjustment for site class effects (PGAM) was calculated as 1.018g using the USGS seismic design tool (SEAOCC & OSHPD, 2020) that yielded a mapped MCEG peak ground acceleration of 0.848g for the site and a site coefficient (FPGA) of 1.2 for Site Class D – Default and Risk Category II.
7.1.4 Liquefaction and Strain Softening
The site is not located within a liquefaction hazard zone (Figure 5) as established by the California Geological Survey (CGS, 2002b). In addition, regional studies of liquefaction susceptibility by the U.S. Geological Survey (Knudsen et al., 2000; and Witter et al., 2006) indicate that the site has a low susceptibility to liquefaction during a moderate to large magnitude earthquake on a nearby fault. Additionally, we did not encounter groundwater to the depths explored, which also indicates that the site has a low susceptibility to liquefaction.
As such, we do not regard seismically induced strain softening, liquefaction induced reduction in bearing capacity, sand-boil-induced ground subsidence, or lateral spreading as design considerations for the project.
-
782
CC 04-03-2024
782 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-13
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 6
7.1.5 Ground Subsidence
Sand boils that occur when liquefied, near-surface soil escapes to the ground surface, can result in ground subsidence due to a loss of material that is in addition to dynamic settlement.
We do not anticipate liquefaction at the site and as such, we do not anticipate sand boils and related ground subsidence at the site.
7.1.6 Lateral Spread
In addition to vertical displacements, seismic ground shaking can induce horizontal displacements as surficial soil deposits spread laterally by floating atop liquefied subsurface layers. Lateral spread can occur on sloping ground or on flat ground adjacent to an exposed face. The nearest exposed face slope is Stevens Creek, located approximately 1 mile from the western portion of the site. Based on the site location and our liquefaction analysis, we do not anticipate that lateral spreading will occur near the proposed improvements following a significant seismic event.
7.1.7 Seismic Slope Stability
The site and surrounding area are relatively flat and the site in not within a seismic hazard zone for earthquake-induced landslides as mapped by the state geologist (CGS, 2002b).
7.2 Expansive Soil
Some clay minerals undergo volume changes upon wetting or drying. Unsaturated soil containing those minerals will shrink/swell with the removal/addition of water. The heaving pressures associated with this expansion can damage structures and flatwork. Laboratory testing was performed on a sample of the near-surface soil to evaluate the expansion index. The tests were performed in accordance with American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard D 4829 (Expansion Index). The results of our laboratory test indicate that the expansion indices of the samples tested were between 6 to 25. These results are indicative of a very low to low expansion characteristic.
7.3 Static Settlement
Based on documents provided, we understand that the sustained loads for the proposed structures are expected to be relatively light. We anticipate, therefore, that the total static settlement of drilled pier foundations due to sustained loads will be less than ½ inch, provided the recommendations presented in this report are followed.
-
783
CC 04-03-2024
783 of 1277
F-14 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 7
7.4 Excavation Characteristics
We anticipate that the proposed project will involve excavations of up to 15 feet in depth for installation of drilled pier foundations for light poles, shad structures, and play equipment. The soil encountered during our subsurface exploration over this interval generally consisted of firm to stiff clay and medium dense to dense sand and gravel with cobbles. We anticipate that heavy earthmoving equipment in good working condition should be able to make the proposed excavations. Near-vertical cuts or drilled shafts in these materials should not be considered stable. Recommendations for excavation stabilization are presented in Section 9.2.8. Excavations are not anticipated to extend below or near historic groundwater levels.
7.5 Corrosive/Deleterious Soil
Corrosivity analysis was performed by CERCO Analytical, Inc. of Concord, California on samples of the near-surface soil from boring B-6a. As reported by CERCO Analytical, the samples were determined to be corrosive based on resistivity test results. CERCO Analytical’s report (see Appendix C) included the following recommendation: “All buried iron, steel, cast iron, ductile iron, galvanized steel and dielectric coated steel or iron should be properly protected against corrosion depending upon the critical nature of the structure. All buried metallic pressure piping such as ductile iron firewater pipelines should be protected against corrosion.” Please refer to the CERCO Analytical report included in Appendix C for more information regarding their test results and brief evaluation.
8 CONCLUSIONS
Based on our review of the referenced background data, site reconnaissance, subsurface evaluation, and laboratory testing, it is our opinion that the proposed construction is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Geotechnical considerations include the following:
• The subsurface conditions encountered during our exploration generally consisted of light brown to dark brown, dry to wet, loose to very dense, poorly graded gravel, well-graded gravel with clay and sand, clayey gravel, clayey sand; and dark brown to reddish brown, moist, very stiff to hard, lean clay and silty clay.
• Groundwater was not encountered during our subsurface exploration. Variations in the groundwater level across the site and over time should be anticipated. Regional mapping indicates that the historic high groundwater level is approximately 50 feet below the existing grade.
• We anticipate that the proposed project will involve excavations of up to 15 feet below the existing grade for installation of drilled pier foundations. Stability of excavations will be a concern, particularly where excavation sidewalls are disturbed by construction operations, or -
784
CC 04-03-2024
784 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-15
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 8 where excavations encounter relatively cohesionless soil or are exposed to water.
Recommendations for excavation stabilization are provided. • Static settlement should be tolerable for the proposed improvements provided that the proposed structures are supported on foundations that conform with our recommendations and fill placement to raise grades is less than 2 feet in height. • Our laboratory test results indicate that the near-surface soil has a very low to low expansion characteristic.
• Based on the results of the soil corrosivity tests during this study, the soils are considered to be corrosive (Appendix C) to buried ferrous metals as is typical for the area. Buried metals, such as play equipment, should be properly protected against corrosion. Corrosion protection measures should be discussed with the equipment manufacturer and may include corrosion resistant paint or other coatings.
9 RECOMMENDATIONS
The following sections present our geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed improvements. The project improvements should be designed and constructed in accordance with these recommendations, applicable codes, and appropriate construction practices.
9.1 Seismic Design Criteria
Seismic Site Class D-default was selected. Table 1 presents the Risk-Targeted, Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) spectral response accelerations consistent with the 2019 California Building Code and corresponding site-adjusted and design level spectral response accelerations based on the USGS seismic design maps using the ASCE 7 Hazard Tool (ASCE, 2021). The values provided in the table may be used for structures with a fundamental period of
0.5 seconds or less presuming that the seismic response coefficient is calculated from equation
12.8-2 of ASCE Standard 7-16 in accordance with Exception 2 in Section 11.4.8 of ASCE Standard 7-16.
-
785
CC 04-03-2024
785 of 1277
F-16 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 9 Table 1 – California Building Code Seismic Design Criteria Seismic Design Parameter Section 11.4 ASCE 7-16
Site Class D - Default
Site Coefficient, Fa 1.2
Site Coefficient, Fv -
Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second period, SS 2.056 Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second period, S1 0.735 Site-Adjusted Spectral Acceleration at 0.2-second period, SMS 2.467 g Site-Adjusted Spectral Acceleration at 1.0-second period, SM1 - Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2-second Period, SDS 1.644 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1.0-second Period, SD1 - Seismic Design Category for Risk Category I, II, or III -
9.2 Earthwork Recommendations
Earthwork should be performed in accordance with the requirements of applicable governing agencies and the recommendations presented below. The geotechnical consultant should observe foundation excavations and earthwork operations. Evaluations performed by the geotechnical consultant during the course of operations may result in new recommendations, which could supersede the recommendations in this section.
9.2.1 Pre-Construction Conference
We recommend that a pre-construction conference be held to discuss the recommendations presented in the report. Representatives of the District, the design engineer, Ninyo & Moore, and the contractor should be in attendance to discuss project schedule and earthwork requirements.
9.2.2 Site Preparation
Site preparation should begin with the removal of existing vegetation, utility lines, debris and other deleterious materials from areas to be graded. Tree stumps and roots should be removed to such a depth that organic material is generally not present. Clearing and grubbing should extend beyond the proposed excavation and fill areas. Rubble and excavated materials that do not meet criteria for use as fill should be disposed of in an appropriate landfill. Existing utilities in the work area should be relocated away from the proposed structures. Existing utilities to be abandoned should be removed, crushed in place, or backfilled with grout.
-
786
CC 04-03-2024
786 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-17
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 10 Excavations resulting from removal of buried utilities, tree stumps, or obstructions should be backfilled with compacted fill in accordance with the recommendations in the following sections.
9.2.3 Observation and Removals
Prior to placement of fill, or the placement of forms or reinforcement for foundations, the client should request an evaluation of the exposed subgrade by Ninyo & Moore. Materials that are considered unsuitable shall be excavated under the observation of Ninyo & Moore in accordance with the recommendations in this section or supplemental recommendations by the geotechnical engineer.
Unsuitable materials include, but may not be limited to dry, loose, soft, wet, expansive, organic, or compressible natural soil, and undocumented or otherwise deleterious fill materials. Unsuitable materials should be removed from trench bottoms and below bearing surfaces to a depth at which suitable foundation subgrade is exposed, as evaluated in the field by Ninyo & Moore.
9.2.4 Material Recommendations
Materials used during earthwork, grading, and paving operations should comply with the requirements listed in Table 2. Materials should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer for suitability prior to use. The contractor should notify the geotechnical consultant prior to import of materials or use of on-site materials to permit time for sampling, testing, and evaluation of the proposed materials. On-site materials may need to be dried out before reuse as fill. The contractor should be responsible for the uniformity of import material brought to the site.
-
787
CC 04-03-2024
787 of 1277
F-18 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 11 Table 2 – Recommended Material Requirements
Material and Use Source Requirements1,2,3
General Fill Import or Onsite Borrow
Close-graded with 35 percent or more
passing No. 4 sieve and either:
Expansion Index of 50 or less,
Plasticity Index of 12 or less,
or less than 10 percent, by dry weight,
passing No. 200 sieve
Pipe/Conduit Bedding and Pipe Zone
Material
-material below conduit invert to 12
inches above conduit
Import 90 to 100 percent (by mass) should pass No.
4 sieve, and 5 percent or less should pass
No. 200 sieve
Trench Backfill
- above bedding material
Import or Onsite BorrowAs per general fill and excluding rock/lumps retained on 4-inch sieve or 2-inch sieve in top
12 inches
Controlled Low Strength
Material (CLSM)
Import CSS5 Section 19-3.02G
Notes:
1 In general, fill should be free of rocks or lumps in excess of 6 inches in diameter, trash, debris, roots, vegetation or other deleterious material. 2 In general, import fill should be tested or documented to be non-corrosive4 and free from hazardous materials in concentrations above levels of concern. 3 The specification of utility owner or local agency may supersede the indicated requirements in this table. 4 Non-corrosive as defined by the Corrosion Guidelines (Caltrans, 2021). 5 CSS is California Standard Specifications (Caltrans, 2018).
9.2.5 Subgrade Preparation
Subgrade below slabs or fill should be prepared as per the recommendations in Table 3.
Prepared subgrade should be maintained in a moist (but not saturated) condition by the periodic sprinkling of water prior to placement of additional overlying fill. Subgrade that has been permitted to dry out and loosen or develop desiccation cracking, should be scarified, moisture-conditioned, and recompacted as per the requirements above.
Table 3 – Subgrade Preparation Recommendations
Subgrade Location Source
Below Slabs,
Pavement, and General
Fill
• After clearing per Section 9.2.2, check for unsuitable materials as per Section 9.2.4.
• Scarify 8 inches then moisture condition and compact as per Section 9.2.7.
• Keep in moist condition by sprinkling water.
-
788
CC 04-03-2024
788 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-19
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 12
9.2.6 Fill Placement and Compaction
Fill and backfill should be compacted in horizontal lifts in conformance with the recommendations presented in Table 4. The allowable uncompacted thickness of each lift of fill depends on the type of compaction equipment utilized, but generally should not exceed 8 inches in loose thickness.
Table 4– Fill Placement and Compaction Recommendations
Fill Type Location Compacted
Density1
Moisture
Content2
Subgrade
Below pavement (within 12 inches of
finished subgrade) 95 percent + 2 percent or
above
Below slabs or fill and in locations not
already specified 90 percent + 2 percent or
above
General Fill
Below pavement (within 12 inches of
finished subgrade) 95 percent + 2 percent or above
In locations not already specified 90 percent + 2 percent or above
Bedding and
Pipe Zone Fill
Material below invert to 12 inches above
pipe or conduit 90 percent Within +/- 2
Optimum
Trench Backfill
Top 12 inches below finish subgrade for
areas subject to vehicular loading 95 percent + 2 percent or above In locations not already specified 90 percent + 2 percent or above
Aggregate Base Below slabs or pavement 95 percent Near Optimum Notes:
1 Expressed as percent relative compaction or ratio of field density to reference density (typically on a dry density basis for soil and aggregate). The reference density of soil and aggregate should be evaluated by ASTM D 1557. 2 Target moisture content at compaction relative to the optimum as evaluated by ASTM D 1557 Compacted fill should be maintained in a moist (but not saturated) condition by the periodic sprinkling of water prior to placement of additional overlying fill. Fill that has been permitted to dry out and loosen or develop desiccation cracking, should be scarified, moistureconditioned, and recompacted as per the requirements above. -
789
CC 04-03-2024
789 of 1277
F-20 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 13
9.2.7 Temporary Excavations and Shoring
Trench excavations shall be stabilized in accordance with the Excavation Rules and Regulations (29 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR], Part 1926) stipulated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Stabilization shall consist of shoring sidewalls or laying slopes back.
Dewatering pits or sumps should be used to depress the groundwater level (if encountered) below the bottom of the excavation. Table 5 lists the OSHA material type classifications and corresponding allowable temporary slope layback inclinations for soil deposits that may be encountered on site. We encountered granular soils that consisted of loose to very dense, silty sand during our subsurface investigation, which corresponds to OSHA Type C soil. If materials other than those anticipated are encountered, Ninyo & Moore should be provided an opportunity to review subsurface conditions. Alternatively, an internally-braced shoring system or trench shield conforming to the OSHA Excavation Rules and Regulations (29 CFR, Part 1926) may be used to stabilize excavation sidewalls during construction. The lateral earth pressures listed in Table 6 may be used to design or select the internally-braced shoring system or trench shield. The recommendations listed in Table 6 are based upon the limited subsurface data provided by our subsurface exploration and reflect the influence of the environmental conditions that existed at the time of our exploration. Excavation stability, material classifications, allowable slopes, and shoring pressures should be re-evaluated and revised, as-needed, during construction. Excavations, shoring systems and the surrounding areas should be evaluated daily by a competent person for indications of possible instability or collapse.
Table 5– OSHA Material Classifications and Allowable Slopes Formation OSHA
Classification
Allowable
Temporary Slope1,2,3
Lateral Earth
Pressure on
Shoring4 (psf)
Alluvium
(above groundwater) Type C 1½ h:1v (34°) 80×D + 72
Notes:
1 Allowable slope for excavations less than 20 feet deep. Excavation sidewalls in cohesive soil may be benched to meet the allowable slope criteria (measured from the bottom edge of the excavation). The allowable bench height is 4 feet. The bench at the bottom of the excavation may protrude above the allowable slope criteria. 2 In layered soil, layers shall not be sloped steeper than the layer below. 3 Temporary excavations less than 5 feet deep may be made with vertical side slopes and remain unshored if judged to be stable by a competent person (29 CFR, Part 1926.650). 4 ‘D’ is depth of excavation for excavations up to 20 feet deep. Includes a surface surcharge equivalent to two feet of soil. -
790
CC 04-03-2024
790 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-21
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 14 The shoring system should be designed or selected by a suitably qualified individual or specialty subcontractor. The shoring parameters presented in this report are preliminary design criteria, and the designer should evaluate the adequacy of these parameters and make appropriate modifications for their design. We recommend that the contractor take appropriate measures to protect workers. OSHA requirements pertaining to worker safety should be observed.
Excavations made in close proximity to existing structures may undermine the foundation of those structures and/or cause soil movement related distress to the existing structures.
Stabilization techniques for excavations in close proximity to existing structures will need to account for the additional loads imposed on the shoring system and appropriate setback distances for temporary slopes. The contractor should be solely responsible for protection of existing site improvements and provide shoring and/or underpinning as needed.
The excavation bottoms may encounter wet, loose material which may be subject to pumping under heavy equipment loads. The contractor should be prepared to stabilize the bottom of the excavations. In general, unstable bottom conditions may be mitigated by using a stabilizing geogrid, overexcavating the excavation bottom to suitable depths and replacing with compacted fill, or other suitable method. Additionally, aeration of wet soils should be anticipated.
9.2.8 Utility Trenches
Trenches constructed for the installation of underground utilities should be stabilized in accordance with our recommendations in Section 9.2.9. Utility trenches should be backfilled with materials that conform to our recommendations in Section 9.2.5. Trench backfill, bedding, and pipe zone fill should be compacted in accordance with Section 9.2.7 of this report. Bedding and pipe zone fill should be shoveled under pipe haunches and compacted by manual or mechanical, hand-held tampers. Trench backfill should be compacted by mechanical means. Densification of trench backfill by flooding or jetting should not be permitted.
Trenches should not be excavated adjacent to footings. If trenches are to be excavated near a continuous footing, the bottom of the trench should be located above a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) plane projected downward from the bottom of the footing. Utility lines that cross beneath footings should be encased in concrete or CLSM below the footing for a distance equivalent to the depth of the excavation.
-
791
CC 04-03-2024
791 of 1277
F-22 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 15
9.3 Foundations
Foundations should be designed in accordance with structural considerations and our geotechnical recommendations. In addition, requirements of the governing jurisdictions, practices of the Structural Engineers Association of California, and applicable building codes should be considered in the design of the structures. Maximum static settlement due to building loads is anticipated to be on the order of ½ inch.
9.3.1 Spread Footings
Footings bearing on subgrade prepared as per the recommendations in Section 9.2.6. The footings may be designed using the criteria listed in Table 6. The geotechnical engineer should observe the footing excavations to evaluate bearing materials and subgrade condition before the exposed subgrade is covered.
Table 6– Recommended Bearing Design Parameters for Footings Footing Sustained
Loads
Footing
Widths
Bearing
Depth1
Allowable
Bearing
Capacity2
Static
Settlement
Wall Footing 3 kips/foot or
less
12 inches
or more
2 feet
or more 3,000 psf ½ -inch total
Column Footing 12 kips
or less
24 inches
or more
2 feet
or more 3,000 psf ½ -inch total
Notes:
1 Below the adjacent finish grade and the existing grade. 2 Net allowable bearing capacity in pounds per square foot with Safety Factor of 2 or more. Allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third for wind or seismic load combinations.
Structures supported on footings consistent with these recommendations should be designed for the total and differential settlements listed in Table 6 for sustained loads.
The spread footings should be reinforced with deformed steel bars as detailed by the project structural engineer. Where footings are located adjacent to utility trenches or other excavations, the footing bearing surfaces should bear below an imaginary plane extending upward from the bottom edge of the adjacent trench/excavation at a 1½:1 (horizontal to vertical) angle above the bottom edge of the footing. Footings should be deepened or excavation depths reduced as-needed. Footing bottoms should not be sloped more than 1- unit vertical to 10 units horizontal. Wall footings may be stepped provided that the bearing grade differential between adjacent steps does not exceed 18 inches and the slope of a series of such steps does not exceed 1-unit vertical to 2 units horizontal. -
792
CC 04-03-2024
792 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-23
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 16 A lateral bearing pressure of 300 psf per foot of depth up to 3,000 psf may be used to evaluate the resistance of footings to lateral loads. The recommended lateral bearing pressure is for level and gently sloping ground conditions where the ground slope adjacent to the foundation is 5 percent or less. The lateral bearing pressure should be neglected to a depth of 12 inches where the ground adjacent to the foundation is not covered by a slab or pavement. The lateral bearing pressure may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration such as wind or seismic forces. A friction coefficient of 0.35 may be assumed for evaluating frictional resistance to lateral loads. A dry unit weight of 90 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) for soil, 120 pcf for aggregate and 150 pcf for normal weight concrete may be assumed for this evaluation.
9.3.2 Slabs-on-Grade
Building floor slabs should be designed by the project structural engineer based on the anticipated loading conditions. The subgrade should be prepared in accordance with Section
9.2.6. Where a vapor retarding system is not used, slabs should be constructed on 6 inches, or more, of aggregate base conforming to Section 9.2.5 and placed in accordance with Section 9.2.7. The slab should be reinforced with deformed steel bars. We recommend that masonry briquettes or plastic chairs be used to aid in the correct placement of slab reinforcement in the upper half of the slab. Refer to Section 9.5 for the recommended concrete cover over reinforcing steel. A vapor retarder is recommended in areas where moisture-sensitive floor coverings or conditioned environments are anticipated. Joints consistent with ACI guidelines (ACI, 2020) may be constructed at periodic intervals to reduce the potential for random cracking of the slab.
9.3.3 Drilled Piers for Minor Structures
Drilled piers for minor structures such as fences and light poles embedded 5 to 25 feet below grade may be designed for an allowable side friction of 300 psf to evaluate resistance to downward axial loads and 200 psf per foot depth for upward axial loads. The allowable skin friction includes a factor of safety of 2 for downward loading and 3 for upward loading. The allowable side friction may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration such as wind or seismic loads. The spacing between adjacent piers should be equivalent to eight pier diameters, or more to mitigate reduction due to group effects.
A lateral bearing pressure of 300 pounds per square foot (psf) per foot depth up to 3,000 psf may be used to evaluate resistance to lateral loads and overturning moments in accordance with Section 1806 of the 2019 CBC. The allowable lateral bearing pressure may be increased -
793
CC 04-03-2024
793 of 1277
F-24 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 17 by one-third for wind or seismic load combinations and by an additional factor of two for structures that can accommodate ½ inch of lateral deflection of the top of the pier foundation.
Drilled pier excavations should be cleaned of loose material prior to pouring concrete. Drilled pier excavations that encounter groundwater or cohesionless soil may be unstable and may need to be stabilized by temporary casing or use of drilling mud. Standing water should be removed from the pier excavation or the concrete should be delivered to the bottom of the excavation, below the water surface, by tremie pipe. Casing should be removed from the excavation as the concrete is placed. Concrete should be placed in the piers in a manner that reduces the potential for segregation of the components. Piers should be completed with concrete the same day as the excavation is completed.
9.4 Pavements and Flatwork
Recommendations for pavement and exterior flatwork are presented in the following sections. A design R-value of 20 was selected based on subsurface soil encountered. The pavement subgrade should be observed by the geotechnical engineer during grading to check the finish subgrade for consistency with the assumed condition. Recommendations for preparation of subgrade are presented in Section 9.2.6.
9.4.1 Asphalt Pavement
Based on the damage observed along the pedestrian pathways, we recommend complete removal of the existing pavement sections and reconstruction with a new section of aggregate base and asphalt concrete. The existing aggregate base and asphalt concrete may be processed to meet Caltrans Class 2 Aggregate Base specifications for re-use.
Ninyo & Moore conducted an analysis to evaluate appropriate asphalt pavement structural sections following the methodology presented in the Highway Design Manual (Caltrans, 2020). Alternative sections were evaluated for pedestrian and vehicular loading. The pavement sections were designed for a 20-year service life presuming that periodic maintenance, including crack sealing and resurfacing will be performed during the service life of the pavement. Premature deterioration may occur without periodic maintenance. Our recommendations for the pavement sections are presented in Table 7. -
794
CC 04-03-2024
794 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-25
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 18 Table 7– Asphalt Concrete Pavement Sections
Traffic Index R-Value Alternative 1 Alternative 2
3 (Light Vehicular Traffic) 20 3½ inches AC 2 inches AC 4½ inches AB
6 (Fire Lanes) 20 8 inches AC 3½ inches AC
9½ inches AB
Notes:
1 AC is Type A, Dense-Graded Hot Mix Asphalt complying with Caltrans Standard Specification 39-2 (2018). 2 AB is Class 2 Aggregate Base complying with Caltrans Standard Specification 26-1.02 (2018).
Aggregate base for pavement should be placed in lifts of no more than 8 inches in loose thickness and compacted per Section 9.2.7. Asphalt concrete should be placed and compacted in accordance with Caltrans Standard Specification and Construction Manual; asphalt concrete should be compacted to between 92 and 96 percent of the theoretical maximum specific gravity and density (Rice gravity – ASTM D 2041) of the material.
Pavements should be sloped so that runoff is diverted to an appropriate collector (concrete gutter, swale, or area drain) to reduce the potential for ponding of water on the pavement.
Concentration of runoff over asphalt pavement should be discouraged.
9.5 Concrete Placement
Concrete in contact with soil or water that contains high concentrations of soluble sulfates can be subject to chemical and/or physical deterioration. The sulfate ion concentration was measured 49 mg/kg and is determined to be insufficient to damage reinforced concrete structures, however due to the potential variability in soil conditions across the site, we recommend that Type V cement with a water/cement ratio of 0.45 or less be considered for the project.
9.6 Review of Construction Plans
The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information for the proposed construction. We recommend that a copy of the plans be provided to Ninyo & Moore for review before bidding to check the interpretation of our recommendations and that the designed improvements are consistent with our assumptions. It should be noted that, upon review of these documents, some recommendations presented in this report might be revised or modified to meet the project requirements.
-
795
CC 04-03-2024
795 of 1277
F-26 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 19
9.7 Construction Observation and Testing
The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface conditions encountered in discrete exploratory borings. During construction, the geotechnical engineer or his representative in the field should be allowed to check the exposed subsurface conditions. During construction, the geotechnical engineer or his representative should be allowed to:
• Check for unsuitable materials and observe foundation excavations. • Observe preparation and compaction of subgrade.
• Check and test imported materials prior to import to the project site. • Observe placement and compaction of fill.
• Perform field density tests to evaluate fill and subgrade compaction. • Observe placement of reinforcing steel and concrete in drilled piers and slabs.
The recommendations provided in this report assume that Ninyo & Moore will be retained as the geotechnical consultant during the construction phase of the project. If another geotechnical consultant is selected, we request that the selected consultant provide a letter to the architect and the owner (with a copy to Ninyo & Moore) indicating that they fully understand Ninyo & Moore’s recommendations, and that they are in full agreement with the recommendations contained in this report. Ninyo & Moore cannot assume responsibility for aspects of construction for which we have not been given an opportunity to observe/test.
10 LIMITATIONS
The field evaluation, laboratory testing, geotechnical analyses, and assessment of geologic hazards presented in this report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care exercised by geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions presented in this report. There is no evaluation detailed enough to reveal every subsurface condition. Variations may exist, and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction.
Uncertainties relative to subsurface conditions can be reduced through additional subsurface exploration. Additional subsurface evaluation will be performed upon request. Please also note that our evaluation was limited to assessment of the geotechnical aspects of the project, and did not include evaluation of structural issues, environmental concerns, or the presence of hazardous materials.
-
796
CC 04-03-2024
796 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-27
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 20 This document is intended to be used only in its entirety. No portion of the document, by itself, is designed to completely represent any aspect of the project described herein. Ninyo & Moore should be contacted if the reader requires additional information or has questions regarding the content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document.
This report is intended for design purposes only. It does not provide sufficient data to prepare an accurate bid by contractors. It is suggested that the bidders and their geotechnical consultant perform an independent evaluation of the subsurface conditions in the project areas. The independent evaluations may include, but not be limited to, review of other geotechnical reports prepared for the adjacent areas, site reconnaissance, and additional exploration and laboratory testing.
Our conclusions, recommendations, and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site conditions. If geotechnical conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified and additional recommendations will be provided, as appropriate. It should be understood that the conditions of a site could change with time as a result of natural processes or the activities of man at the subject site or nearby sites. In addition, changes to the applicable laws, regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur due to government action or the broadening of knowledge. The findings of this report may, therefore, be invalidated over time, in part or in whole, by changes over which Ninyo & Moore has no control.
This report is intended exclusively for use by the client. Any use or reuse of the findings, conclusions, and/or recommendations of this report by parties other than the client is undertaken at said parties’ sole risk.
-
797
CC 04-03-2024
797 of 1277
F-28 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 21 11 REFERENCES
American Concrete Institute, 2021, ACI Manual of Concrete Practice.
American Concrete Institute, 2014, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318- 14) - Commentary on Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318R-14).
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2016, Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Building and Other Structures, ASCE Standard 7-16.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2021, ASCE 7 Hazard Tool, https://asce7hazardtool.online/
California Building Standards Commission (CBSC), 2019, California Building Code (CBC), Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2018, Standard Specifications.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2020, Highway Design Manual, https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/manual-highway-design-manual-hdm.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2021, Corrosion Guidelines, Version 3.2, Division of Engineering Services, Materials Engineering and Testing Services, Corrosion Branch: dated May.
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2002a, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Cupertino 7.5- Minute Quadrangle, Santa Clara Valley, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 068.
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2007, Special Publication 42 - Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps, by Bryant, W.A. and Hart, E.W.
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners/Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California: California Geologic Survey Special Publication 42.
City of Cupertino, 2022, Memorial Park Specific Plan, EngageCupertino_Draft content, https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o7fSGt_Mt641L-z0oc5RVIlbFFlLzXJoACdY43Ds hYY/edit
Dibblee, T.W., Jr. and Minch, J.A., 2007, Geologic Map of the Cupertino and San Jose West Quadrangles, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties, California: Dibblee Geological Foundation, Dibblee Foundation Map DF-351, scale 1:24,000 Google Earth, 2022, Google Earth Pro 7.3.3.7699, http://earth.google.com/.
Knudsen, K.L., Sowers, J.M., Witter, R.C., Wentworth, C.M., Helley, E.J., Nicholson, R.S., Wright, H.M., and Brown, K.H., 2000, Preliminary Maps of Quaternary Deposits and Liquefaction Susceptibility, Nine-County San Francisco Bay Region, California: a digital database: U.S.
Geological Survey, Open-File Report OF-2000-444, Scale 1:275,000.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), 1989, Occupational Safety and Health Standards – Excavations, Department of Labor, Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 1926, dated October 31.
Witter, R.C., Knudsen, K.L, Sowers, J.M., Wentworth, C.M., Koehler, R.D., and Randolph, C.E., 2006, Maps of Quaternary Deposits and Liquefaction Susceptibility in the Central San Francisco Bay Region, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006-1037, Scale 1:200,000 (http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1037/).
-
798
CC 04-03-2024
798 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-29
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022 Appendix A
Photographic Documentation
FIGURES
-
799
CC 04-03-2024
799 of 1277
F-30 Memorial Park Specific Plan
SITE
MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
SITE LOCATION
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
FIGURE 1
NOTE: DIMENSIONS, DIRECTIONS, AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE I REFERENCE: USGS, 2018 0
SCALE (FEET)
2,000 4,000
N
404269001 I 11/22
404269001.dwg 11/02/2022 AEK
,
S·
1 51
Cl'
I
1-d '
\I.
800
CC 04-03-2024
800 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-31 N STELLING RD
MARY AVE
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
PATRIOT WAY
B-1a
(1.5')
B-1
(15.0')
B-3a
(1.7')
B-3
(6.5')
B-6a
(1.2')
B-6
(6.5')
B-10a
(1.0')
B-10
(15.0')
B-11a
(1.3')
B-11
(11.5')
B-4
(11.5')
B-2
(11.5')
B-5
(6.5')
B-10
(10.5')
B-9
(15.0')
B-8
(6.5')
CHRISTENSEN DR
ALVES DR
ANTON WAY
EXPLORATION LOCATIONS
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
FIGURE 2
NOTE: DIMENSIONS, DIRECTIONS, AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE I REFERENCE: GOOGLE EARTH, 2022 0
SCALE (FEET)
200 400
N
404269001.dwg 11/02/2022 AEK
LEGEND
BORING LOCATION (09/19/2022)
(TOTAL DEPTH, IN FEET)
PROJECT BOUNDARY
B-1
(15.0')
MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
404269001 I 11/22
B-1a
(1.5')
BORING LOCATION (08/24/2022)
(TOTAL DEPTH, IN FEET)
-
801
CC 04-03-2024
801 of 1277
F-32 Memorial Park Specific Plan
P a c i fic
O c e an
San
P a b lo
Bay
San
F r a n c isco
Bay
S u i sun
Bay
S A N
A N D R E A S
FA U LT
Z O N E
H AY WA R D
F A U LT
Z O N E
C A L AV E R A S
G R E E N V I L L E
FA U LT
Z O N E
G R E E N
VA
L
L E Y F A
U LT
Z
O
N
E
R O D G E R S
C R E E K
F A U LT
Z O N E
C H A B O T FA U L
W E S T N A P A FA
U LT
Z O N
E
P O I N T
R E Y E S
F A U LT
C O N C O R D
F A U LT
F R A N K L I N
FA U LT
L A K E V I E W
F A U LT
C A LV E R A S
F A U
LT
Z O N E
S E R R A
F A U LT
Z O N E
Oakland
S I LV
T
E R
C R E E K
F A U LT
Z
M I S S I O N FA U LT
O N E
M O N T E V IS TA - S H A N N O N
C A S C A D E
FA U LT
Z O N E
S TA N F O R D F A U LT
P I L A R C I T O S
FA U LT
S A N
G R E G O R I O
F A U
LT
Z O N
E
B U TA N O
FA U LT
Z AYA N T E - V E R G E L E S FA U LT Z O N E
FA U LT Z O N E
B E R R O C A L F A U LT Z O N E
P I E R C Y
FA U LT
S A N
A N D R E A S
F A U LT
Z O N E
Solano
County
Marin
County
Contra Costa
County
Alameda
County
San Francisco
County
San Mateo
County
Sacramento
County
Colma
Novato Vallejo
Concord
Hayward
Rio Vista
Fairfield
San Mateo
Brentwood
Livermore
San
Francisco
San Jose
18980331
6.4 19060418
7.8 18681021
7.0 18380600
7.4 Morgan
Hill
CALIFORNIA
LEGEND
HOLOCENE ACTIVE
CALIFORNIA FAULT ACTIVITY
HISTORICALLY ACTIVE
LATE QUATERNARY
QUATERNARY
STATE/COUNTY BOUNDARY
MAGNITUDE 5.0 - 5.9
MAGNITUDE 6.0 - 6.9
MAGNITUDE 7.0 - 7.9
EARTHQUAKE EPICENTERS
(DATE/MAGNITUDE)
404269001-Fig3-FL.pdf 10/02/2022 AEK
NOTE: DIRECTIONS, DIMENSIONS, AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE FIGURE 3
0 10 20
SCALE (MILES)
SOURCES: CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, 2010, FAULT ACTIVITY MAP OF CALIFORNIA; CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, 2000, MAP SHEET 49
SITE
FAULT LOCATIONS AND EARTHQUAKE EPICENTERS
MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
4042696001 | 11/22
S A N
J O S E
FA U LT
-
•
• •
JVin90& J\'\OOt'e
Geotechnic:al & Env1r·onme ntal Sclen"e5 Con5ullint1
•
802
CC 04-03-2024
802 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-33
SITE
REGIONAL GEOLOGY
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
FIGURE 4
0 SCALE (FEET)
2,000 4,000
N
404269001.dwg 11/02/2022 AEK
LEGEND
NOTE: DIMENSIONS, DIRECTIONS, AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE I REFERENCE: DIBBLEE, 2007 Qa ALLUVIAL GRAVEL, SAND,
SILT, & CLAY(HOLOCENE)
STRIKE AND DIP
OF BEDDING
GEOLOGIC CONTACT
FAULT
OLDER ALLUVIAL TERRACE THRUST FAULT GRAVEL, SAND, & CLAY,
UNDEFORMED (PLEISTOCENE)
Qa.1 ALLUVIAL SAND, SILT,
& GRAVEL (HOLOCENE)
Qoa/
Qt
Qa.2 ALLUVIAL GRAVEL, SAND,
SILT, & CLAY (HOLOCENE)
SANTA CLARA FORMATION/
NONMARINE SEDIMENTARY ROCKS
(PLEISTOCENE/PLIOCENE)
Qsc/
QTs
MONTEREY FORMATION;
SILICEOUS SHALE (MIOCENE) Tm
MATADERO
SANDSTONE
(MIOCENE) Tms
MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
404269001 I 11/22
D
D
D
U..J ~ t- , ' ,,,. ) r1
1 _ .,~ r "'"N• >If
-~ • \. ~ ' ' I
D
D
D
i -·
• ti
- ' H
A~ • -
D
r'"" 227
\
L- '
:r
h
! /-
• • So ~ •• ,~1-y\Jll
- !;~ ~rl !&\·~-~
1· 1r ~ ..i. rort l..' ., Sch
- l -
_l_
-
803
CC 04-03-2024
803 of 1277
F-34 Memorial Park Specific Plan
SITE
SEISMIC HAZARD ZONES
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
FIGURE 5
0 SCALE (FEET)
2,000 4,000
N
404269001.dwg 11/02/2022 AEK
NOTE: DIMENSIONS, DIRECTIONS, AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE REFERENCE: CGS, 1974, 2002
LEGEND
EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED LANDSLIDE ZONES:
Areas where previous occurrence of landslide movement, or local topographic, geological, geotechnical, and subsurface water conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required.
LIQUEFACTION ZONES:
Areas where historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, geotechnical, and groundwater conditions
indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required.
MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
404269001 I 11/22
-
804
CC 04-03-2024
804 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-35
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022
APPENDIX A
Boring Logs
-
805
CC 04-03-2024
805 of 1277
F-36 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022
APPENDIX A
BORING LOGS
Field Procedure for the Collection of Disturbed Samples Disturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following method.
Bulk Samples
Bulk samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the exploratory borings. The samples were bagged and transported to the laboratory for testing.
Field Procedure for the Collection of Relatively Undisturbed Samples Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following method.
The Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler
The sampler, with an external diameter of 3.0 inches, was lined with 6-inch long, thin brass liners with inside diameters of approximately 2.4 inches. The sample barrel was driven into the ground with the weight of a hammer in general accordance with ASTM D 3550. The driving weight was permitted to fall freely. The approximate length of the fall, the weight of the hammer, and the number of blows per foot of driving are presented on the boring log as an index to the relative resistance of the materials sampled. The samples were removed from the sample barrel in the brass liners, sealed, and transported to the laboratory for testing.
-
806
CC 04-03-2024
806 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-37
0 �
�0
��
20 �����
SM
CL
������������
������������������������������������
�����������������������������������������������������
��������������������������
��������������������������������
�����������������������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������
�����������������������
��������
�����������������������������������������
������������������������������������
���������������������������
�������������������������������
������������������������������������
���������������������
����������
����������
��������
�����������
��������
�������������
��������
������������������������
������������������
��������������
��������������������������
������������������������������������������������������������������������������� DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
BORING LOG EXPLANATION SHEET
BORING LOG
20 -
!BORING lOG IEXPlANAl!ON S~IEIEl
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
807
CC 04-03-2024
807 of 1277
F-38 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Soil Classification Chart Per ASTM D 2488
Primary Divisions Secondary Divisions
Group Symbol Group Name
COARSEGRAINED
SOILS
more than
50% retained
on No. 200
sieve
GRAVEL
more than
50% of
coarse
fraction
retained on
No. 4 sieve
CLEAN GRAVEL
less than 5% fines
GW well-graded GRAVEL
GP poorly graded GRAVEL
GRAVEL with
DUAL
CLASSIFICATIONS
5% to 12% fines
GW-GM well-graded GRAVEL with silt
GP-GM poorly graded GRAVEL with silt
GW-GC well-graded GRAVEL with clay
GP-GC poorly graded GRAVEL with
GRAVEL with
FINES
more than
12% fines
GM silty GRAVEL
GC clayey GRAVEL
GC-GM silty, clayey GRAVEL
SAND
50% or more
of coarse
fraction
passes
No. 4 sieve
CLEAN SAND
less than 5% fines
SW well-graded SAND
SP poorly graded SAND
SAND with
DUAL
CLASSIFICATIONS
5% to 12% fines
SW-SM well-graded SAND with silt
SP-SM poorly graded SAND with silt
SW-SC well-graded SAND with clay
SP-SC poorly graded SAND with clay
SAND with FINES
more than
12% fines
SM silty SAND
SC clayey SAND
SC-SM silty, clayey SAND
FINEGRAINED
SOILS
50% or
more passes
No. 200 sieve
SILT and
CLAY
liquid limit
less than 50%
INORGANIC
CL lean CLAY
ML SILT
CL-ML silty CLAY
ORGANIC
OL (PI > 4) organic CLAY
OL (PI < 4) organic SILT
SILT and
CLAY
liquid limit
50% or more
INORGANIC
CH fat CLAY
MH elastic SILT
ORGANIC
OH (plots on or
above “A”-line) organic CLAY
OH (plots
below “A”-line) organic SILT
Highly Organic Soils PT Peat
USCS METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION
Apparent Density - Coarse-Grained Soil
Apparent
Density
Spooling Cable or Cathead Automatic Trip Hammer
SPT
(blows/foot)
Modified
Split Barrel
(blows/foot)
SPT
(blows/foot)
Modified
Split Barrel
(blows/foot)
Very Loose < 4 < 8 < 3 < 5
Loose 5 - 10 9 - 21 4 - 7 6 - 14
Medium
Dense 11 - 30 22 - 63 8 - 20 15 - 42
Dense 31 - 50 64 - 105 21 - 33 43 - 70
Very Dense > 50 > 105 > 33 > 70
Consistency - Fine-Grained Soil
Consis- tency
Spooling Cable or Cathead Automatic Trip Hammer
SPT
(blows/foot)
Modified
Split Barrel
(blows/foot)
SPT
(blows/foot)
Modified
Split Barrel
(blows/foot)
Very Soft < 2 < 3 < 1 < 2
Soft 2 - 4 3 - 5 1 - 3 2 - 3
Firm 5 - 8 6 - 10 4 - 5 4 - 6
Stiff 9 - 15 11 - 20 6 - 10 7 - 13
Very Stiff 16 - 30 21 - 39 11 - 20 14 - 26
Hard > 30 > 39 > 20 > 26
LIQUID LIMIT (LL), %
PLASTICITY INDEX (PI), %
0 10
10 7
4 20
30 40
50 60
70 0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
MH or OH
CL - ML ML or OL
Plasticity Chart
Grain Size
Description Sieve
Size Grain Size Approximate Size
Boulders > 12” > 12” Larger than
basketball-sized
Cobbles 3 - 12” 3 - 12” Fist-sized to
basketball-sized
Gravel
Coarse 3/4 - 3” 3/4 - 3” Thumb-sized to
fist-sized
Fine #4 - 3/4” 0.19 - 0.75” Pea-sized to
thumb-sized
Sand
Coarse #10 - #4 0.079 - 0.19” Rock-salt-sized to
pea-sized
Medium #40 - #10 0.017 - 0.079” Sugar-sized to
rock-salt-sized
Fine #200 - #40 0.0029 -
0.017”
Flour-sized to
sugar-sized
Fines Passing
#200 < 0.0029” Flour-sized and smaller
CH or OH
CL or OL
-
V
V /
V /
./
I/ I/,
V V
V .....-r '/ /
Geotechnlcal & Environmental Sciences Consultants
808
CC 04-03-2024
808 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-39
0 5
10 15
20 20
53 67
50/6"
50/3"
7.1 114.0
GC
SC
ALLUVIUM:
Dark brown, wet, loose, clayey GRAVEL. Gravel up to 2.5 inches in diameter, subangular.
Medium dense, moist.
Dense.
Light brown, dry, very dense, clayey SAND.
Gray, very dense.
Total Depth: 15 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 1
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DATE DRILLED 9/19/22 BORING NO. B-1
GROUND ELEVATION 265' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 IN
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
1 -
Gae>1eeflnlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Coosul~t,
809
CC 04-03-2024
809 of 1277
F-40 Memorial Park Specific Plan
0 5
10 15
20 GC Brown, dry, dense, clayey GRAVEL with sand.
Total Depth: 1.5 feet stopped on refusal.
Backfilled with soil shortly after boring on 8/24/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of augering. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents(Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 2
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 8/24/2022 BORING NO. B-1a
GROUND ELEVATION 265' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING Hand Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT DROP
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1ecf1nlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Consult.it,
810
CC 04-03-2024
810 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-41
0 5
10 15
20 37
30 34
75 6.7 110.4
GW-GC ALLUVIUM:
Brown, moist, medium dense, well-graded GRAVEL with clay and sand. Gravel up to 0.5" in diameter, subrounded.
Dense.
Total Depth: 11.5 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil and cement immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 3
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 9/19/2022 BORING NO. B-2
GROUND ELEVATION 270' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 LBS (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 INCHES
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1eeflnlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Coosul~t,
811
CC 04-03-2024
811 of 1277
F-42 Memorial Park Specific Plan
0 5
10 15
20 35
59 11.0 116.1
CL
GP
ALLUVIUM:
Dark brown, moist, very stiff, gravelly LEAN CLAY with trace sand.
Brown, dry, medium dense, poorly graded GRAVEL with sand and clay.
Total Depth: 6.5 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 4
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 9/19/2022 BORING NO. B-3
GROUND ELEVATION 276' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 LBS (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 IN
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1ecf1nlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Consult.it,
812
CC 04-03-2024
812 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-43
0 5
10 15
20 CL Brown, dry to moist, firm, sandy CLAY with gravel. Gravel up to 2" in diameter, subangular.
Very hard.
Total Depth: 1.7 feet stopped on refusal.
Backfilled with soil shortly after boring on 8/24/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of augering. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 5
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 8/24/2022 BORING NO. B-3a
GROUND ELEVATION 276' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING Hand Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT DROP
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1eeflnlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Coosul~t,
813
CC 04-03-2024
813 of 1277
F-44 Memorial Park Specific Plan
0 5
10 15
20 32
64 41
72 14.4 119.7
GC
CL
GC
ALLUVIUM:
Brown, moist, medium dense, clayey GRAVEL with sand.
Dense.
Brown, moist, hard, LEAN CLAY with gravel.
Brown, moist, dense, clayey GRAVEL with SAND.
Total Depth: 11.5 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 6
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 9/19 BORING NO. B-4
GROUND ELEVATION 277' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 LBS (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 IN
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1ecf1nlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Consult.it,
814
CC 04-03-2024
814 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-45
0 5
10 15
20 27
37 7.3 115.3
GC ALLUVIUM:
Dark browm, moist, medium dense, clayey GRAVEL with sand.
Total Depth: 6.5 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 7
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 9/19/2022 BORING NO. B-5
GROUND ELEVATION 273' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 LBS (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 IN
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1eeflnlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Coosul~t,
815
CC 04-03-2024
815 of 1277
F-46 Memorial Park Specific Plan
0 5
10 15
20 36
22 10.9 119.2
GC ALLUVIUM:
Dark brown, moist, medium dense, clayey GRAVEL with sand.
Total Depth: 6.5 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 8
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 9/19/22 BORING NO. B-6
GROUND ELEVATION 280' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 LBS (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 IN
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 404269001 | 11/22
-
Gae>1ecf1nlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Consult.it,
816
CC 04-03-2024
816 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-47
0 5
10 15
20 GC Brown, dry to moist, dense to very dense, clayey GRAVEL with sand.
Total Depth: 1.2 feet stopped on refusal.
Backfilled with soil shortly after boring on 8/24/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of augering. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents(Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 9
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 |11/2022
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 8/24/2022 BORING NO. B-6a
GROUND ELEVATION 280' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING Hand Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT DROP
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1eeflnlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Coosul~t,
817
CC 04-03-2024
817 of 1277
F-48 Memorial Park Specific Plan
0 5
10 15
20 75
46 88
73 11.4 125.3
CL-ML
GC
GP
ALLUVIUM:
Reddidh brown, moist, hard, silty CLAY with trace sand and gravel.
Brown.
Brown, moist, very dense, clayey GRAVEL with sand.
Brown, moist, very dense, GRAVEL with sand and gravel.
Total Depth: 10.5 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 10
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 9/19/22 BORING NO. B-7
GROUND ELEVATION 272' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 LBS (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 IN
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1ecf1nlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Consult.it,
818
CC 04-03-2024
818 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-49
0 5
10 15
20 70
72 4.2 113.1
GP ALLUVIUM:
Brown, dry, dense, poorly graded GRAVEL with clay and sand.
Total Depth: 6.5 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 11
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 9/19/22 BORING NO. B-8
GROUND ELEVATION 278' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 LBS (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 IN
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 Gae>1eeflnlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Coosul~t,
...
, ....
. :
-
819
CC 04-03-2024
819 of 1277
F-50 Memorial Park Specific Plan
0 5
10 15
20 23
76 78
88 86
3.7 106.0
GP
SC
ALLUVIUM:
Brown, moist, medium dense, poorly graded GRAVEL with sand. Gravel up to 1/ 2" inches, subrounded. Fine- to medium-grained sand.
Dry.
Very dense, cobbles.
Brown, moist, very dense, clayey SAND.
Total Depth: 15 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 12
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 9/19/22 BORING NO. B-9
GROUND ELEVATION 277' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 LBS (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 IN
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1ecf1nlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Consult.it,
820
CC 04-03-2024
820 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-51
0 5
10 15
20 70
65 82
80 100
5.1 3.9
124.2
113.4
GP ALLUVIUM:
Brown, moist, dense, poorly graded GRAVEL with clay and sand. Clast supported.
Increasing sand content. Very dense.
Total Depth: 15 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 13
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 9/19/22 BORING NO. B-10
GROUND ELEVATION 286' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 LBS (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 IN
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 Gae>1eeflnlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Coosul~t,
.... , .. -~--·
... . . . .
:~:
..
-
821
CC 04-03-2024
821 of 1277
F-52 Memorial Park Specific Plan
0 5
10 15
20 GC Brown, dry, dense, clayey GRAVEL with sand.
Total Depth: 1.0 feet stopped on refusal.
Backfilled with soil shortly after boring on 8/24/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of augering. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents(Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 14
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 8/24/2022 BORING NO. B-10a
GROUND ELEVATION 286' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING Hand Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT DROP
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1ecf1nlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Consult.it,
822
CC 04-03-2024
822 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-53
0 5
10 15
20 55
38 81
64 4.0 112.3
GC ALLUVIUM:
Dark brown, moist, medium dense, clayey GRAVEL with sand.
Brown, moist, medium dense, GRAVEL with sand and clay
Dense. Rock.
Total Depth: 11.5 feet stopped at planned depth.
Backfilled with soil immediately after boring on 9/19/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of borings. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents (Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 15
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 9/19/22 BORING NO. B-11
GROUND ELEVATION 286' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING HOLLOW STEM AUGER
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 LBS (SPOOLING CABLE) DROP 30 IN
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1eeflnlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Coosul~t,
823
CC 04-03-2024
823 of 1277
F-54 Memorial Park Specific Plan
0 5
10 15
20 CL Brown, dry to moist, firm to stiff, sandy lean CLAY with gravel.
Total Depth: 1.3 feet stopped on refusal.
Backfilled with soil shortly after boring on 8/24/2022.
Notes: Groundwater was not encountered in boring at time of augering. It may rise higher due to relatively slow rate of seepage in clay and several other factors, as discussed in the report. Ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretation of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing constuction bids and design documents(Google, 2022).
FIGURE A- 16
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLES Driven
BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)
DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL
CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 8/24/2022 BORING NO. B-11a
GROUND ELEVATION 286' (MSL) SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING Hand Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT DROP
SAMPLED BY CDS LOGGED BY CDS REVIEWED BY RH
1 -
Gae>1ecf1nlcal l Envtronmantal Scl,ncea Consult.it,
824
CC 04-03-2024
824 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-55
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022
3. Description
3. Description
APPENDIX B
Laboratory Testing
-
825
CC 04-03-2024
825 of 1277
F-56 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Classification
Soils were visually and texturally classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) in accordance with ASTM D 2488. Soil classifications are indicated on the logs of the exploratory borings in Appendix A.
In-Place Moisture and Density
The moisture content and dry density of relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the exploratory borings were evaluated in accordance with ASTM D 2937. The test results are presented on the logs of the exploratory borings in Appendix A.
Gradation Analysis
Gradation analysis tests were performed on selected representative soil samples in accordance with ASTM D 422. The grain-size distribution curves are shown on Figures B-1 through B-4. These test results were utilized in evaluating the soil classifications in accordance with the USCS.
Atterberg Limits
Tests were performed on selected representative fine-grained soil samples to evaluate the liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index in accordance with ASTM D 4318. These test results were utilized to evaluate the soil classification in accordance with the USCS. The test results and classifications are shown on Figure B-5.
Expansion Index
The expansion index of a selected material was evaluated in accordance with ASTM D 4829. The specimen was molded under a specified compactive energy at approximately 50 percent saturation (plus or minus 1 percent). The prepared 1 inch thick by 4 inch diameter specimen was loaded with a surcharge of 144 pounds per square foot and inundated with tap water. Readings of volumetric swell were made for a period of 24 hours. The test results are presented on Figure B-6.
-
826
CC 04-03-2024
826 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-57
Coarse
3" 2" 1-1/2" 1" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 30 50 200
PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422 / D6913 Group Name: Clayey SAND Soak Time: 2.0 % Gravel
% Sand
% Fines 13
FINES
Fine
Passing
No. 200
(percent)
SILT CLAY
-- -- 13 SC
Medium
14 73
GRAVEL SAND
Coarse Fine
16 100
-- --
Sample
Location
Depth
(ft)
Liquid
Limit
Plastic
Limit
B-1 10.0-10.5 -- -- 0.72
404269001 | 11/22
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
Plasticity
Index USCS
0.23 Symbol D10 D30 D60 Cu Cc
FIGURE B-1
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
-
I
------ ~
I I I I I
I I I
ii I I
""i', I I I I
I I
', I I
"'1 I !I I
I
'I
i ~
I ii ' ~ I
I \ ~, !
!
\ I
I I\ I
I
I l!I I I I I I\ I
~I I I ,
ii
I I
I I I I I \l I I I I
I I --..... I I I I
I ii I
~I I , I I
I I I I I I
I Ill I I
11111
Geotethnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
827
CC 04-03-2024
827 of 1277
F-58 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Coarse
3" 2" 1-1/2" 1" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 30 50 200
PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422 / D6913 Group Name: Well-graded GRAVEL with clay and sand Soak Time: 2.0 % Gravel
% Sand
% Fines
GRAVEL SAND FINES
Coarse Fine Medium Fine SILT CLAY
16 100
Symbol Sample
Location
Depth
(ft)
Liquid
Limit
Plastic
Limit
Plasticity
Index USCS
B-2 10.0-10.5 -- -- -- 0.13 1.10
D10 D30 D60 Cu Cc
Passing
No. 200
(percent)
404269001 | 11/22
8.04 62.1 1.2 7 GW-GC
FIGURE B-2
49 44
7 GRADATION TEST RESULTS
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
-
i\ I I
: ~ : I
I
!\! I
I
I
I
1\ I
I
I
I
\
i I ~
' I
I i\11. ~, !
! I
I I', I " I
I N I
~I ,
I I
I I
I I ~~,__ I I 1--,...___ I I
I I
~I I N ,
I
I
I
I ~
I I
11111
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
828
CC 04-03-2024
828 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-59
Coarse
3" 2" 1-1/2" 1" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 30 50 200
PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422 / D6913 Group Name: Clayey GRAVEL with sand Soak Time: 2.0 % Gravel
% Sand
% Fines
GRAVEL SAND FINES
Coarse Fine Medium Fine SILT CLAY
16 100
Symbol Sample
Location
Depth
(ft)
Liquid
Limit
Plastic
Limit
Plasticity
Index USCS
B-5 6.0-6.5 -- -- -- -- 0.45
D10 D30 D60 Cu Cc
Passing
No. 200
(percent)
404269001 | 11/22
6.86 -- -- 15 GC
FIGURE B-3
44 41
15 GRADATION TEST RESULTS
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
-
\i I I I I I I I Ill I I
I I ii I
·~
I I I : I I I
'l's i
I
~ I !I I
I
"~ ~ i I ii ~r---. ' I
I ~, !
" "! I
I
I
I
I l!I ~ I I I ~I'- I
~I I I ,
ii
I
i"ii'--- I I I I I I I I I ..... I
I I :'-,. I I I I ii I
~I I I , I I I I I I I I I Il l I I
11111
Geotechnlcal & Environmental Sciences Consultants
829
CC 04-03-2024
829 of 1277
F-60 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Coarse
3" 2" 1-1/2" 1" 3/4" 3/8" 4 10 30 50 200
PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422 / D6913 Group Name: Clayey SAND Soak Time: 2.0 % Gravel
% Sand
% Fines
GRAVEL SAND FINES
Coarse Fine Medium Fine SILT CLAY
16 100
Symbol Sample
Location
Depth
(ft)
Liquid
Limit
Plastic
Limit
Plasticity
Index USCS
B-9 10.5-11.0 -- -- -- -- 0.09
D10 D30 D60 Cu Cc
Passing
No. 200
(percent)
404269001 | 11/22
0.57 -- -- 28 SC
FIGURE B-4
13 59
28 GRADATION TEST RESULTS
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
-
I .....___ I I
I I I
I I I
~I',. I
I
I
I
I
"'N
f I
' r---1\ I
I ~, !
! '\ I
I
I
I 1'.
I I
~,
I
I
I
I ~ I I ~ I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
~I I ,
I I
I I
I I
11111
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
830
CC 04-03-2024
830 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-61
404269001 - Cupertino - Master Labs CDS
PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 4318
FIGURE B-5
ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST RESULTS
SYMBOL LOCATION DEPTH (ft) LIQUID
LIMIT
PLASTIC
LIMIT
PLASTICITY
INDEX
USCS
USCS CLASSIFICATION
(Fraction Finer Than
No. 40 Sieve)
B-7 3.5-4.0 19 15 4 CL-ML CL-ML
404269001 | 11/22
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
CH or OH
CL or OL MH or OH
CL - ML ML or OL
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
PLASTICITY INDEX, PI
LIQUID LIMIT, LL
-
/ V
/ / V
/ /
/
/ ~
/
/ / V ,, , ,, ,, I/ I
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
831
CC 04-03-2024
831 of 1277
F-62 Memorial Park Specific Plan
PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 4829
FIGURE B-6
EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS
CUPERTINO MEMORIAL PARK
21121 STEVENS BLVD, CUPERTINO, CA
404269001 | 11/22
B-11a 0.0-1.3 11.9 102.5 23.1 0.025 25 Low
B-7 2.5-3.0 8.9 114.2 15.2 0.008 8 Very Low
B-3 2.5-3.0 9.4 111.8 17.9 0.006 6 Very Low
SAMPLE
LOCATION
SAMPLE
DEPTH (ft)
INITIAL
MOISTURE
(percent)
COMPACTED DRY
DENSITY (pcf)
FINAL
MOISTURE
(percent)
VOLUMETRIC
SWELL (in)
EXPANSION
INDEX
POTENTIAL
EXPANSION
-
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
832
CC 04-03-2024
832 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-63
Ninyo & Moore | 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California | 404269001 | November 3, 2022
APPENDIX C
Corrosivity Testing (CERCO Analytical)
-
833
CC 04-03-2024
833 of 1277
F-64 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
7 September, 2022
Ms. Tatiana Gospe
Ninyo & Moore
2149 O'Toole Avenue, Suite 30
San Jose, CA 95131
Subject: Project No.: 404269001
Job No. 2208054
Cust. No.13270
CERCO
analytical
1100 Willow Pass Court, Suite A
Concord, CA 94520-1006
925 462 2771 Fax. 925 462 2775
www.cercoanalytical.com
Project Name: Memorial Park, 21121 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino, CA Corrosivity Analysis - ASTM Test Methods
Dear Ms. Gospe:
Pursuant to your request, CERCO Analytical has analyzed the soil sample submitted on August 29, 2022.
Based on the analytical results, this brief corrosivity evaluation is enclosed for your consideration.
Based upon the resistivity measurement, this sample is classified as "corrosive". All buried iron, steel, cast iron, ductile iron, galvanized steel and dielectric coated steel or iron should be properly protected against corrosion depending upon the critical nature of the structure. All buried metallic pressure piping such as ductile iron firewater pipelines should be protected against corrosion.
The chloride ion concentration is 78 mg/kg and is determined to be insufficient to attack steel embedded in a concrete mo1iar coating.
The sulfate ion concentration is 49 mg/kg and is determined to be insufficient to damage reinforced concrete structures and cement mortar-coated steel at this location.
The pH of the soil is 7.32, which docs not present corrosion problems for buried iron, steel, mortar-coated steel and reinforced concrete structures.
The red ox potential is 200-m V and is indicative of potentially "moderately corrosive" soils resulting from anaerobic soil conditions.
This corrosivity evaluation is based on general corrosion engineering standards and is non-specific in nature. For specific long-term corrosion control design recommendations or consultation, please call JDH Corrosion Consultants, Inc. at (925) 927-6630.
We appreciate the oppottunity of working with you on this project. If you have any questions, or if you require fmther information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours,
CERCO ANALYTICAL, INC.
J.
~~Darby Howard, Jr., P.E.
President
JDH/jdl
Enclosure
834
CC 04-03-2024
834 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-65
Client:
Client's Project No.:
Ninyo & Moore
404269001
Client's Project Name: Memorial Park, 211 21 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino, CA Date Sampled: 24-Aug-22
Date Received:
Matrix:
Authorization:
Job/Sample No
2208054--001
Method:
Reporting Limit:
Date Analyzed:
Sherri Moore
Chemist
29-Aug-22
Soil
Signed Chain of Custody
Sample I D
B-6/0.0-1.2'
Redox
(mV)
200
ASTM D1498
-
2-Sep-2022
pH
7.32 ASTM D4972
-
2-Sep-2022
Conductivity
(umhos/cm)*
-
ASTMD1125M
IO
-
• Results Reported on ~ As Received" Basis
N.D. - None Detected
Qualitv Control Summarv -- AIHaboratoryquality control parameters were found to be within established limits Resistivity
(I 00% Saturation)
(ohms-cm)
1,800
ASTMG57
-
2-Sep-2022
Sulfide
(mg/kg)*
-
ASTMD4658M
50 -
-
-~n~l~tfc?i
1100 Willow Pass Court, Suite A
Concord, CA 94520-1006
925 462 2771 Fax. 925 462 2775
www.cercoanalytical.com
Date of Report:
Chloride
(mg/kg)*
78 ASTMD4327
15 2-Sep-2022
7-Sep-2022
Sulfate
(mg/kg)*
49 ASTMD4327
15 2-Sep-2022
Page No. 1
835
CC 04-03-2024
835 of 1277
F-66 Memorial Park Specific Plan
-
Chain of Custody
11 Job No. CU# Client Project I.D.
404269001 l~I I Full Name Phone 4084359000 X 15319
Tatiana Gospe Fax
Company and/or Mailing Address Cell
Ninyo & Moore 2149 O'Toole Avenue Suite 30 San Jose CA [8J .; "fi
Sample Source 0
0.. Memorial Park, 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, CA ~ .g
Lab No. Sample 1.D. 1 Date Time Matrix Contain. Size Preserv. Qtv. ~ B-6/0.0-1.2' ~h--rl ;J)/1 s I I. ! .
i I !
!
l
! i
i
I
I i
I i
Schedule I
Anal•~.I II
MALYSIS
~
g
.£'-o .g
,la:
.!l ·5 -~ ~
~ ! j ;; :;:;
"' u
X X X X X
I
' I
' i '
'
I
'
1100WlllowPassCourt •
Concord, CA 94520-1006
925 4622771 CERCO Fax: 92S 462 2775 ~ 9. a n a l ytical ii Date Sarrpled
I
Date Due
II 8/24/22
ASTM
C
0 ~ ~
.;
>
i
<ii
X
i
I
'
'
i I
I
.
I DW - Drinking Water
I
"' HB -Hosebib I § CJ Relinquished By :
I 2 Totlil l No. of Containers
~ d Date GW 8/26/22 Time - Ground Water 0 PV - Petcock Va1ve 12:30 SW - Surface Water 1': PT- Pressure Tank " Rec'd Good Cond/Cold D , 'w'W - Waste Water < PH - Pump House la D Received By:
~ UJj I} ~!iL'tfte f;,
1 j/J4 / Time .J_ I > " Water Conforms to Record RR -Restroom '"' 11 :J.._ "'1-- IO o I
"' .., =i SL. Sludge '" GL- Glass ~ Temp. 2 t Lab -•c
(/ I) "' Relinquished By: Date I ' Time S • Soil "' PL-Plastic Product -< ST iii Sampler I - Sterile
Comments: Rece ived By: Date Time THERE IS ~'i ADDITIONAL C!L<\RGE FOR EXTRUDING SOIL FROM METAL TUBES Relinquished By : Date Time Email Addasms [email protected] Received By: Date Time 836
CC 04-03-2024
836 of 1277
Appendix F Geotechnical Evaluation F-67
2149 O’Toole Avenue, Suite 30 | San Jose, California 95131 | p. 408.435.9000 ARIZONA | CALIFORNIA | COLORADO | NEVADA | TEXAS | UTAH ninyoandmoore.com
-
Geotechnlc:il & Enviro11m0n~I Scil!mcH Con-sullanls
837
CC 04-03-2024
837 of 1277
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
838
CC 04-03-2024
838 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan G-1
Planning Context
Appendix G
-
839
CC 04-03-2024
839 of 1277
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
840
CC 04-03-2024
840 of 1277
Appendix C Planning Context G-3
Planning Context
The Memorial Park Specific Plan is a forward-looking
document that aims to preserve the current character
of the park while also providing new active and
passive recreational opportunities for residents and
visitors. Multiple City-wide planning efforts apply
to Memorial Park and have guided its vision to be a
place that embraces Cupertino’s diverse community.
• City of Cupertino General Plan (2014)
• Heart of the City Specific Plan (2014)
• ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan (2015)
• Bicycle Transportation Plan (2016)
• Pedestrian Transportation Plan (2018)
• Green Storm Water Infrastructure Plan (2019)
• Parks and Recreation System Master Plan (2020)
• Climate Action Plan 2.0 (2022)
City of Cupertino General Plan (2014)
The City adopted the 2015-2040 General Plan in
2014 with the aspiration to have a vibrant, mixeduse “Heart of the City” with exemplary parks and accessible open space areas. The General Plan
presents the City’s vision to be safe, friendly, healthy, connected, walkable, bike-able, and inclusive for all
residents and workers.
The General Plan follows 12 guiding principles to
attain Cupertino’s desired future.
• Develop cohesive neighborhoods: Ensure that
all neighborhoods are safe, attractive and include
convenient pedestrian and bicycle access to a “fullservice” of local amenities such as parks, schools, community activity centers, trails, bicycle paths ,
and shopping.
• Improve public health and safety: Promote public
health by increasing community-wide access to
healthy foods; ensure an adequate amount of
safe, well-designed parks, open space, trails, and
pathways; and improve safety by ensuring all
areas of the community are protected from natural
hazards and fully served by disaster planning
and neighborhood watch programs, police, fire,
paramedic, and health services.
• Improve connectivity: Create a well-connected
and safe system of trails, pedestrian and bicycle
paths, sidewalks and streets with traffic calming
measures that weave the community together,
enhance neighborhood pride and identity, and
create access to interesting routes to different
destinations.
• Enhance mobility: Ensure the efficient and safe
movement of cars, trucks, transit, pedestrians,
bicyclists, and disabled persons throughout
Cupertino in order to fully accommodate
Cupertino’s residents, workers, visitors and
students of all ages and abilities. Streets, pedestrian paths, and bike paths should comprise an integrated
system of fully connected and interesting routes to
all destinations.
-
841
CC 04-03-2024
841 of 1277
G-4 Memorial Park Specific Plan
• Ensure a balanced community: Offer residents
a full range of housing choices necessary
to accommodate the changing needs of a
demographically and economically diverse
population, while also providing a full range
of support uses including regional and local
shopping, education, employment, entertainment,
recreation, and daily needs that are within easy
walking distance.
• Support vibrant and mixed-use businesses:
Ensure that Cupertino’s major mixed-use corridors
and commercial nodes are vibrant, successful,
attractive, friendly, and comfortable with inviting
active pedestrian spaces and services that meet the
daily needs of residents and workers.
• Ensure attractive community design: Ensure
that buildings, landscapes, streets and parks are
attractively designed and well maintained so they
can complement the overall community fabric by
framing streets and offering a variety of active,
relaxing and intimate pedestrian spaces.
• Embrace diversity: Celebrate Cupertino’s diversity
by offering a range of housing, shopping and
community programs that meet the needs of the
full spectrum of the community, while ensuring
equal opportunities for all residents and workers
regardless of age, cultural or physical differences.
• Support education: Preserve and support quality
community education by partnering with local
school districts, community colleges, libraries,
and other organizations to improve facilities
and programs that enhance learning and expand
community- wide access.
• Preserve the environment: Preserve Cupertino’s
environment by enhancing or restoring creeks
and hillsides to their natural state, limiting urban
uses to existing urbanized areas, encouraging
environmental protection, promoting sustainable
design concepts, improving sustainable municipal
operations, adapting to climate change, conserving
energy resources, and minimizing waste.
• Ensure fiscal self-reliance: Maintain fiscal selfreliance in order to protect the City’ s ability to deliver essential, high-quality municipal services
and facilities to the community.
• Ensure a responsive government: Continue to
be a regional leader in accessible and transparent
municipal government; promote community
leadership and local partnerships with local
and regional agencies; and remain flexible and
responsive to changing community needs.
Memorial Park follows several of these principles
and supports the City’s mission in providing a safe
and inclusive space that is diverse, attractive, and
pedestrian friendly. The Land Use (LU), Mobility
(M), Environmental Resources and Sustainability
(ES), and Recreation, Parks, and Community Services
(RPC) Elements of the General Plan outline goals,
policies, and actions to guide the City of Cupertino in future park-related projects.
The General Plan called for a Parks and Recreation
System Master Plan, which was subsequently
adopted in 2020 and provides recommendations
specific to Memorial Park. The General Plan also
recommended pedestrian and bicycle improvements
on Stelling Road in order to enhance connections to
the park.
Figure G-1: General Plan Vision
-
842
CC 04-03-2024
842 of 1277
Appendix C Planning Context G-5
Heart of the City Specific Plan (2014)
The Heart of the City Specific Plan acts as a guide
for future development and redevelopment projects
along Stevens Creek Boulevard to ensure Cupertino
embodies a greater sense of place and community
identity. The Specific Plan covers approximately 635
acres along 2.5 miles of Stevens Creek Boulevard,
including Memorial Park.
Being one of the most important corridors and streets
within the city, the goal of this plan is to develop a
collection of pedestrian-inclusive gathering spaces
along the boulevard that bring a sense of place and
community to residents and visitors alike. Included
in this plan are guidelines on streetscape, design
and development standards, design concepts,
related zoning ordinances, infrastructure and
implementation plans, and estimated costs of the
project.
Memorial Park falls into the West Stevens Creek
Boulevard area, of which the primary use is quasipublic and public facilities that support mixed commercial and residential uses. The planting theme
in this area is “Oak Grove.” It features an informal
arrangement of Live Oaks (Quercus agrifolia) and
native wildflowers in curbside planting strips along
the frontage of Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Memorial Park and its immediate area are zoned
under the Heart of the City Specific Plan. The park
is a Park and Recreation (PR) zone and is mostly
surrounded by residential uses.
The park is adjacent to Multi-Family Residential (R-3)
zones to the west and Single-Family Residential (R-1)
zones to the north and northeast. To the far northeast
of the park is a Quasi-Public Building (BQ) zone that
contains a day care and child development center.
The neighborhood directly south of the Quinlan
Community Center is a Planned Development (P)
zone for residential uses only, which consists of
condominiums and townhouses. There are two
nearby Planned Development (P) zones that allow
for General Commercial (CG) and residential uses—
one of which is directly east of the Cupertino Sports
Center while the other is on the opposite site of Mary
Avenue along the southwest corner of the park. A
large Public Building (BA) zone borders the southern
edge of the park, which contains De Anza College
and Faria Elementary School.
Figure G-2: Cupertino Zoning
Memorial Park
0 rib. Or
s
!---l __ " __ __!B
R1-1CI
________ _,
-- -- -- --... I -••••• ...
I BQ "'
,
□
R3
-
P(CG)
P(CG, OA)
~ r---
•
YnS U P(CG. ML. RN •10)
: P(RHJ
I
•:--.r- 1
r--------....1:!!...!-~ • • • .,~ ______ _pteYt:ns Cre ~ a vd .,
PfCG, RH)
R:1-tG
843
CC 04-03-2024
843 of 1277
G-6 Memorial Park Specific Plan
ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan
(2015)
The ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition Plan
identifies policy, program, and physical barriers
to accessibility to help develop barrier removal
solutions that improve access for all individuals. This self-evaluation report is an assessment of the City’s
current policies, practices, and procedures in relation to the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). The
report goes into further detail of each department’s
current accessibility and additional recommendations
to improve user experiences. A transition plan
then outlines a strategy to transition inaccessible
facilities into environments that are accessible to and functional for individuals with disabilities.
In terms of parks and recreation, it was recommended
to adjust policies relating to allowing service animals, regardless of disability, to be acceptable in all parks and City buildings. The plan also recommends
that more meetings and public events to be made
accessible in American Sign Language (ASL).
Additionally, recreation and community services
should provide accommodations for people upon
request, training for staff addressing services for
people with disabilities, transportation services for
camps and the Cupertino Senior Center, and more.
Bicycle Transportation Plan (2016)
The City adopted the Bicycle Transportation Plan in
2016 that identifies a prioritized list of projects that support and promote bicycling in Cupertino. The
vision statement of the plan is “the City of Cupertino
envisions an exceptional bicycling environment that
supports active living and healthy transportation
choices, provides for safer bicycling, and enables
people of all ages and abilities to access jobs, schools, recreation, shopping, and transit on a bicycle as a
part of daily life.” The plan has three stated goals:
• Goal 1: Increase awareness and value of bicycling
through encouragement, education, enforcement,
and evaluation programs.
• Goal 2: Improve bicyclist safety through the design
and maintenance of roadway improvements.
• Goal 3: Increase and improve bicycle access
to community destinations across the City of
Cupertino for all ages and abilities.
The plan recommends improvements to the extensive
bicycle network that will establish safe connections
to key destinations. The proposed bikeway projects
include bike paths, separated and buffered lanes,
boulevards, routes, and spot improvements.
The plan proposes multiple projects that relate to
Memorial Park, such as a Class IV separated bikeway
along both sides of North Stelling Road and Stevens
Creek Boulevard. The plan also proposed a Class
II buffered bike lane along Mary Avenue, which is
now complete, and a bike route through the park
that would connect Alves Drive to Mary Avenue as
part of a larger Class III bike route project. Lastly, the plan recommended spot improvements for safety in
the southeast corner of Quinlan Community Center
at the intersection of Alves Drive and North Stelling
Avenue.
-
844
CC 04-03-2024
844 of 1277
Appendix C Planning Context G-7
Pedestrian Transportation Plan (2018)
The City adopted the Pedestrian Transportation Plan
in 2018 with the goal to create an inviting and safe
walkable environment that promotes active living and
healthy transportation choices, enhances the quality
of life for all community members and visitors, and
creates a seamless and integral connected, multimodal transportation network. The plan recommends an integrated network of walking paths that provide
a wide range of access to various nodes of activity,
including parks. The following goals inspired the
recommendations and implementation strategy
incorporated into this plan:
• Goal 1: Safety – Improve pedestrian safety and
reduce the number and severity of pedestrianrelated collisions, injuries, and fatalities. • Goal 2: Access – Increase and improve pedestrian
access to community destinations across the City
of Cupertino for people of all ages and abilities.
• Goal 3: Connectivity – Continue to develop a
connected pedestrian network that fosters an
enjoyable walking experience.
The plan recommends a sidewalk buffer from the
State Route 85 northbound on-ramp to North Stelling
Road, which covers the park’s southern frontage. The
plan also recommends a shared-use path and bike/
pedestrian bridge over State Route 85 that would
improve pedestrian access to the park from the
west. Additional recommendations include adjusted
median curblines to provide a clear, accessible path
of travel for pedestrians across the intersection of
Stevens Creek Boulevard and Mary Avenue, as well
as a new high-visibility crosswalk on the west leg
of this intersection. Lastly, the plan identifies the
intersection of North Stelling Road and Alves Drive,
at the southeast corner of Quinlan Community
Center, as a priority project location for pedestrian
improvements. At the time of this document, these
recommendations and improvements have not been
realized.
Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan (2019)
In 2019, the City produced and adopted a Green
Stormwater Infrastructure Plan (GSI) to commit to a
sustainable drainage system that is environmentally
efficient. The GSI guides the City in the identification, implementation, tracking, and reporting of green
stormwater infrastructure projects within its
jurisdiction and coordinated with the General Plan,
the Climate Action Plan, the Bicycle Transportation
Plan, the Pedestrian Transportation Plan, and other
specific and master plans to provide a pleasant urban
environment for residents, workers, and visitors.
Specific goals of the GSI are:
• Goal 1: Align the City’s goals, policies, and
implementation strategies for GSI with the General
Plan and other related planning documents
• Goal 2: Identify and prioritize GSI opportunities
throughout the City
• Goal 3: Establish targets for the extent of City area to be addressed by GSI over certain timeframes
• Goal 4: Provide a workplan and legal and funding
mechanisms to implement prioritized projects
• Goal 5: Establish a process for tracking, mapping,
and reporting completed projects
The GSI identifies green stormwater infrastructure
opportunities on public parcels and street segments.
The GSI generally recommends that all parks
incorporate green stormwater infrastructure with
enhanced educational signage explaining the
function and purpose of the improvements. Nearby
portions of Stevens Creek Boulevard, Mary Avenue,
and North Stelling Road are designated as a street
segments with green stormwater infrastructure
opportunity.
Memorial Park was specifically identified as an
opportunity site to construct an infiltration basin to
treat runoff from Stevens Creek Boulevard.
-
845
CC 04-03-2024
845 of 1277
G-8 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Parks and Recreation System Master Plan
(2020)
On February 18, 2020, the City adopted the Parks
and Recreation System Master Plan. This plan
provides a cohesive vision and strategy to guide
future development, renovation, management, and
programming of the City’s parks and recreation
facilities through the year 2040.
Between 2015 and 2018, more than an estimated 2,000
community members provided input and feedback
on the Master Plan. Various online and in-person
activities were held to invite residents, stakeholders, partners, businesses, elected officials, staff, youth,
and people of diverse cultural backgrounds to share
their aspirations for the parks and recreation system.
The planning process identified broad community
support to preserve and enhance recreation,
walkability, access to open spaces, and Cupertino’s
sense of place and quality of life.
The community preferences, priorities, and
expectations revealed 12 themes:
• Park and Facility Access: Residents want
easy, enhanced access to parks and recreation
opportunities.
• The Arts: Cupertino should support the arts
by offering a diverse set of arts and culture
programming.
• Uniquely Cupertino: Parks and recreation
opportunities should reflect Cupertino’s character,
heritage and diverse community.
• Cultural Diversity: Recreation facilities and
programs should celebrate Cupertino’s cultural
diversity.
• Nature Experience: Community members want
more opportunities to connect to nature.
• Partnerships: Strong partnerships can help create
unique and diverse parks and recreation programs.
• Extraordinary Play: Cupertino desires a variety of
play experiences for all ages and abilities.
• Recreation Variety: Residents and visitors desire a
wide range of recreation options.
• Trail and Connectivity: Residents value trails and
desire more opportunities for walking and biking
in Cupertino.
• Social Gathering and Celebration: Residents
appreciate community events and would like to
see more spaces in Cupertino for bringing people
together.
• Welcoming Places and Services: Residents expect
outstanding customer service and quality facilities
that are responsive to community needs.
• Youth and Teen Empowerment: Special attention
is needed to engage and empower Cupertino
youth and teens.
Figure G-3: Parks and Recreation System Master
Plan Key Themes from Community Outreach
PARK & FACILITY
ACCESS
THE ARTS UNIQUELY
CUPERTINO
PARTNERSHIPS
TRAILS &
CONNECTIVITY
YOUTH & TEEN
EMPOWERMENT
NATURE
EXPERIENCE
RECREATION
VARIETY
WELCOMING
PLACES & SERVICES
CULTURAL
DIVERSITY
EXTRAORDINARY
PLAY
SOCIAL GATHERING
& CELEBRATION
-
.... : II ll
II ~ II
- - ~
, m o
846
CC 04-03-2024
846 of 1277
Appendix C Planning Context G-9
The Parks and Recreation System Master Plan has
seven goals:
• MP1. Conservation: Protect nature, trees and
natural areas in parks and throughout the city
to support wildlife, ecological functions and
a stronger connection to Cupertino’s natural
environment.
• MP2. Connection: Provide an interconnected
network of multiuse trails, walkways and
bikeways, close-to-home parks, and community
destinations.
• MP3. Equitable Access: Distribute parks and
facilities throughout the community for easy and
equitable access.
• MP4. Enhancement: Reinvigorate and revitalize
parks and recreation facilities to support broad
and inclusive recreation interests.
• MP5. Activity: Provide programs, events and
services that foster social cohesiveness and lively,
diverse activities for people of all ages, abilities,
cultures, and interests.
• MP6. Quality: Create high quality recreation
experiences, places and services that are
welcoming, safe, responsive, comfortable and
reflective of Cupertino’s unique character.
• MP7. Sustainability: Provide, manage and
maintain parks, facilities, programs and services
through sound management and stewardship,
sustainable choices and the wise use of resources.
Memorial Park was identified as an ideal location for
several general improvements proposed in the plan,
including expanded senior services as well as nature
play and all-inclusive play opportunities.
There are specific recommendations in the Parks and
Recreation System Master Plan for Memorial Park.
Recommendations include improvements to facilities
and infrastructure to accommodate communitywide civic or social events and festivals, additional recreation space for older adults, maintaining the
lighted softball field, repurposing the inactive ponds, developing at least two dual-striped pickleball
courts, and enhancing natural vegetation. Actions
identified for the short term were improvements
specifically to the ponds and amphitheater, as well
as the enhancement of pathways, seating, shade,
and accessibility elements. The overall vision for
Memorial Park included an expansion of the civic
event space and enhancement of the natural site
features, as well as a focus on integrating the park
with the surrounding City facilities.
The Parks and Recreation System Master Plan called
for a site master plan and initial site improvements
for Memorial Park as an immediate opportunity that
supports the Enhancement, Activity, and Quality
goals. The Memorial Park Specific Plan fulfills this
recommendation.
Parks and Recreation System Master Plan Vision
“We aspire to create an inspiring, lively, healthy, diverse and sustainable community by connecting our residents
to outstanding parks, nature and one another.”
-
847
CC 04-03-2024
847 of 1277
G-10 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Climate Action Plan (2022)
The Climate Action Plan 2.0 (CAP) updated the
previous 2015 CAP. The CAP 2.0 intends to improve
the wellbeing of the community by developing a
summary of existing and projected greenhouse gas
(GHG) emission levels, establishing GHG emissions
targets, and committing to GHG reduction and
climate adaptation measures. The guiding principles
of the CAP 2.0 are equity, innovation, urgency and
flexibility, and resilience and adaptation.
The City’s goal is to achieve carbon neutrality by
2040. The climate adaptation measures presented
in the CAP 2.0 are a suite of actions to achieve
this goal which were designed in consideration of
partnerships, equity, financing, structural change,
and engagement. In addition to reducing GHG
emissions, the climate adaptation measures are
intended to help the City adapt to impacts of climate
change that may be unavoidable.
Specific actions in the CAP 2.0 are studying
opportunities for carbon sequestration, providing
ecologically-responsible recreation opportunities
in parks, and improving public transit and micromobility infrastructure while reducing vehicle parking where feasible.
-
848
CC 04-03-2024
848 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan H-1
Site Assessment
Appendix H
-
849
CC 04-03-2024
849 of 1277
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
850
CC 04-03-2024
850 of 1277
Appendix H Site Assessment H-3
1 Amphitheater
2a Picnic (Drop-in)
2b Picnic (Reservable)
3 Multi-Use Lawn
4a Playground (2-5)
4b Playground (5-12)
5 Softball Field
6 Tennis Courts
7 Spectator Seating
8 Restrooms
9 Maintenance/Storage
10 Cell Tower
2b 3
4a
4b
9 6
7 5
9 9
10 2a 3
2a
2a
3 1
8 3
3 7
8 Anton Way
Mary Avenue
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Alves Drive
North Stelling Road
Christensen Drive
Cupertino
Senior Center
Quinlan
Community
Center
100’0 200’
Figure H-1: Existing Amenities 0
0 0
0 \
\
0 0
0 0
0 I
I
-- - -- - __ .J
0 0
0 0
-
851
CC 04-03-2024
851 of 1277
H-4 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Existing Amenities
Memorial Park is a heavily utilized and amenitized
park (Figure H-1). There are two community facilities
at opposite ends of the site, an amphitheater, picnic
areas, multi-use lawn spaces, playgrounds, a softball
field, tennis courts, and other amenities to support
the function of the park.
Quinlan Community Center
The Quinlan Community Center is a 27,000-squarefoot recreation facility located in the southeastern portion of Memorial Park. The Quinlan Community
Center, opened in 1990, is home to the City’s Parks
and Recreation Department and the Cupertino
Historical Society and Museum. The facility is named
after Robert W. Quinlan, Cupertino’s second City
Manager who served from 1971 to 1989. The building
is multi-use, offering classrooms and a variety of
other rooms available to rent for business or personal
needs. This includes a banquet room, known as the
Cupertino Room, that features a full catering kitchen
and attached patio that can accommodate over 200
guests. The Quinlan Community Center also hosts
classes for preschool, crafting, and dance and has a
small shaded play area attached to a rentable room in
the northern wing.
The Quinlan Community Center hosts the annual
Community Tree Lighting in December. This
indoor/outdoor event utilizes the building’s lobby,
courtyard, and adjacent event lawn for local choir
performances, a food pantry collection, photos with
Santa, craft tables, and the lighting ceremony.
The Quinlan courtyard on the western side of the
building was dedicated on August 17, 2010. It features
a small shade structure that is bracketed by the
wings of the building. The Quinlan event lawn lies
immediately west of the courtyard. The courtyard
is well-connected with the park’s pathway network,
with walkways from both the north and south ends
of the courtyard wrapping around the Quinlan event
lawn leading into the park. The lobby can be accessed
from both the western and eastern entrances and is
open from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm on weekdays.
Image H-1: Quinlan Community Center, Street Frontage
Image H-2: Quinlan Community Center, Courtyard
Image H-3: Quinlan Community Center, Cupertino Room
-
852
CC 04-03-2024
852 of 1277
Appendix H Site Assessment H-5
Cupertino Senior Center
The Cupertino Senior Center, a membership-based
recreation facility, is a 15,500-square-foot building
located in the southern portion of Memorial Park
along Stevens Creek Boulevard. It was originally
built in the early 1980s but was replaced around the
year 2000. The Cupertino Senior Center strives to
provide a welcoming and friendly environment for
adults over 50 years old, promoting a healthy lifestyle through quality education, recreation, travel, social,
and volunteer opportunities.
The main entrance to the building is on the north side, served by a parking lot accessed via Mary Avenue.
The main entrance features a memorial bench
and low seat wall with engraved tile dedications
bordering a paved plaza with shaded circular picnic
tables and a decorative pergola. There is a small deck
facing the park on the east side of the building that is undersized for its current usage.
The Cupertino Senior Center is not well connected to
Memorial Park in terms of pedestrian circulation and
programmed uses. There is a grade change from the
back of the building into the park that does not have
an accessible or direct pedestrian connection to the
existing internal pathway network.
Amphitheater
Memorial Park is home to the only public
amphitheater in Cupertino. It hosts the Summer
Concert Series and Shakespeare in the Park,
which both run during the summer months. The
amphitheater is highly valued by the community.
Terraced concrete seat walls are built into a small
hillside area to provide formal seating. The seat walls are surrounded by lawn and are backed by a grove
of trees. There are no ramps, stairs, or handrails and
therefore limited accessibility.
The previous Ponds Repurposing Project removed
the pond area between the stage and the pedestrian
path in front of the seating area. The park’s main
pathway runs between the stage and the seating
area, but the recent City-funded Amphitheater
Improvement Project added an alternative pathway
behind the seating area to detour pedestrians during
a performance.
Image H-4: Cupertino Senior Center, Park Frontage
Image H-5: Amphitheater Seating
Image H-6: Cupertino Senior Center, Street Frontage
-
853
CC 04-03-2024
853 of 1277
H-6 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Picnic Areas
In addition to large festivals and events, Memorial
Park offers spaces for smaller gatherings, such as
birthday parties, lunch meetups, and play dates.
The park has multiple picnic areas for drop-in use,
as well as a large reservable picnic area, which
accommodates social gatherings of all sizes. These
areas are largely without shade, which inhibit their
use on hot and sunny days.
The reservable picnic area is located west of the
Quinlan event lawn on a slightly raised platform
area. This picnic area has a capacity of 113 people
with 16 picnic tables, 2 serving tables, 3 barbeques,
and a counter area with a sink. Trees surround the
area but there is minimal shade directly over the
space. Electricity is available with a reservation to
further enhance the usability of this key amenity.
There are two smaller general use picnic areas around
the softball outfield, each with two picnic tables and
two barbeques.
Lastly, there is a large general use picnic area near
the 5-12 year old playground with space for multiple
groups and barbeques. However, there is a lack
of separation between the tables to create clear
groupings.
Image H-7: Reservable Picnic Area
Image H-9: Picnic Area near Softball Outfield Image H-8: Picnic Area near 5-12 Playground Image H-10: Reservable Picnic Area
-
854
CC 04-03-2024
854 of 1277
Appendix H Site Assessment H-7
Multi-Use Lawn Spaces
There are several areas of unobstructed multi-use
lawn in Memorial Park. The northern portion of
the park contains the largest multi-use lawn. It is
rectangular, largely flat, and sits between the Quinlan Community Center and the reservable picnic area.
The lawn is bounded on the remaining sides by a
walking path within an alley of trees. The park also
has smaller lawn spaces serving passive use activities.
Playgrounds
There are two playgrounds at Memorial Park. A
playground appropriate for 2-5 year old children is
located on the north end of the site, situated between
the softball field and tennis courts. A playground
appropriate for 5-12 year old children is located on the southern end of the site adjacent to Anton Way and
the amphitheater. Both playgrounds are connected
by pathways, within walking distance of restrooms,
and have unshaded seating areas. Playgrounds are
buffered from vehicle traffic by other park amenities.
Both playgrounds provide composite play structures
focusing on play elements of brachiating, climbing,
sliding, and swinging. Balancing, spinning, and
sensory development are lacking in both structures.
Additionally, the composite play structures lack clear
paths of travel and accessible ramps. The playground
surfacing is composed of wood fiber surfacing
bounded by concrete curbs, which does not provide
an accessible transition.
Image H-11: Multi-use Lawn near Quinlan Community Center Image H-12: Playground, 2-5
Image H-14: Playground, 5-12 Image H-13: Playground, 5-12 -
855
CC 04-03-2024
855 of 1277
H-8 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Softball Field
Memorial Park features the only lighted softball field
in the City. The softball field is primarily used by
Cupertino Parks and Recreation sponsored leagues
and local teams, but is also available for drop-ins and reservations during the weekends and off-season.
This field attracts players and spectators from around
the entire South Bay region given the high quality of
this amenity.
Tennis Courts
There are six lighted first come, first served tennis
courts, one of which is dual-striped for pickleball.
The tennis courts are oriented north/south and are
divided by a low fence with gaps to allow movement
between courts. The tennis court area is protected by
a high fence with privacy and wind screens.
Spectator Seating
The tennis courts and softball field both feature
spectator seating consisting of concrete and brick
terraced seat walls embedded into a bermed area.
The spectator seating wraps around the softball
field’s home base, protected by sports netting and
partially shaded by trees. For the tennis courts, the
spectator seating runs along the western edge and
perpendicular to the sport’s direction of movement,
providing an optimized viewing experience for
games happening in the westernmost court. The
spectator seating directly connects to the adjacent
court via a gate in the low fencing. Both seating areas are reached by concrete stairs and do not feature
handrails or ramps.
Restrooms
There are two public restrooms in Memorial Park.
One restroom is located under the spectator seating
berm west of the tennis courts, and the other is behind the amphitheater’s audience seating area facing the
playground. These two restrooms are not sufficient
for the quantity of park visitors during heavyuse times, and organizers often need to provide additional portable toilets for events. Furthermore,
the restrooms are somewhat hidden away from the
more commonly used areas of the park, making the
public less aware of their availability.
Image H-15: Softball Field
Image H-16: Tennis Courts
Image H-17: Restrooms, West of Tennis Courts
-
856
CC 04-03-2024
856 of 1277
Appendix H Site Assessment H-9
Maintenance and Storage Areas
There are three maintenance and storage areas in
the park. The primary maintenance storage area is
located in the northwest corner of the park behind the
softball field backstop. It has vehicle access from the Mary Avenue parking lot and the end of Christensen
Drive. The space is used by grounds maintenance
staff. The storage container located between the
softball field and the reservable picnic area is used
by the City’s Emergency Services to support the park
as an evacuation center and Quinlan Community
Center as an emergency shelter. The storage shed
located north of the softball field on the third base
line is used for softball equipment.
Cell Tower
The cell tower, located behind the softball outfield,
has an active lease through 2040. The cell tower and
the associated transformers cannot be relocated.
Seating
Scattered throughout the park are seating
opportunities. Most seating is arranged around
another park amenity, such as benches oriented
towards a playground or the amphitheater seating
facing the stage. Picnic tables are arranged organically throughout the park. There are several benches
and seat walls found along paths, such as near the
Cupertino Senior Center, the Veterans Memorial, and
the Quinlan courtyard area.
Drinking Fountains
There are drinking fountains north of the multi-use
lawn by the Quinlan Community Center, adjacent to
the restroom behind the amphitheater, and near the
softball field.
Trash Receptacles
There are trash and recycling receptacles throughout
Memorial Park, specifically near all picnic areas, with a compost container at the reservable picnic area.
Trash receptacle styles vary throughout the park.
Image H-18: Benches in Quinlan Courtyard
Image H-19: Seating Ledge in Veterans Memorial
Image H-20: Maintenance and Storage Area
-
857
CC 04-03-2024
857 of 1277
H-10 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Trees and Landscaping
Memorial Park has several types of trees and
landscaping zones as shown in Figure H-2.
Trees
The Tree Inventory Report (Appendix B) studied
almost 500 trees within Memorial Park’s 22-acre area.
Most trees in the park are ornamental species or nonnative species that are commonly observed in the region. A total of 28 species were identified, most of
which were Coast Redwood, Callery Pear, Coast Live
Oak, and Japanese Flowering Cherry.
Of the trees that were studied, approximately 80%
were identified as moderate to high suitability for
preservation. There are approximately 80 trees that
were assessed as low suitability and are recommended
for removal. Low suitability trees have poor health
or significant defects that cannot be abated with
treatment. All public trees, regardless of condition,
have protections as outlined in the City Municipal
Code and will require permit for removal.
Cherry trees have significance in the park—in
1983, the City was gifted 200 Japanese Flowering
Cherry trees from the City of Toyokawa, Japan to
commemorate the fifth anniversary of their Sister
City relationship. Memorial Park remains the home
of the annual Cupertino Cherry Blossom Festival
held every last weekend in April. Two of the Sister
City Japanese Flowering Cherry trees have stone
plaques. Although these do not meet the definition of
heritage trees as per the City Municipal Code Section
14.18, they will be preserved as part of the Memorial
Park Specific Plan.
Veterans Memorial is surrounded by a peaceful grove
of Red Maple trees. There is a Chinese Pistache tree
planted in memory of a City staff member adjacent to
the amphitheater.
Landscape Zones
The majority of Memorial Park’s landscape is
composed of lawn with little to no ornamental or
habitat planting. Planting or mulch areas occur near
the Quinlan Community Center, Cupertino Senior
Center, parking lots, and park edges.
The lawn areas require significant quantities of water
to support the park’s current programming and
require maintenance after large community events.
Image H-21: Japanese Flowering Cherry Trees
Image H-22: Coast Redwood
-
858
CC 04-03-2024
858 of 1277
Appendix H Site Assessment H-11
Tree (High-Moderate)
Tree (Low)
Cherry Tree (High-Moderate)
Tree (In Memoriam or Sister City)
Lawn
Planting or Mulch
Suitability for Preservation
Anton Way
Mary Avenue
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Alves Drive
North Stelling Road
Christensen Drive
Quinlan
Community
Center
Cupertino
Senior Center 100’0 200’
Figure H-2: Trees and Landscape Zones
-
0 -
-
■
859
CC 04-03-2024
859 of 1277
H-12 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Cultural Elements
Memorial Park has several important cultural
elements, shown on Figure H-3.
Historic Gazebo
The original construction of the park included the
installation of the gazebo, now identified as a historic site in the General Plan. The wood trim was salvaged
from one of the Enoch Jasper Parrish homes, a local
architect and builder responsible for many of the
early homes in Cupertino. The Parrish family owned
the orchard that Memorial Park presently sits on—
their home was located where the Cupertino Senior
Center is today. In 1994, the Rotary Club of Cupertino
renovated the gazebo, now using it as a logo and
recognizing its contributors with the "Gazebo
Award."
Veterans Memorial
The Veterans Memorial was dedicated on November
11, 2007. The Veterans Memorial features a statue
titled “The Guardians,” which depicts Matthew
Axelson and James Suh, two Navy SEALs from
Cupertino who died in battle. The Veterans Memorial
also features a flagpole, a wall of honor with names
of other Cupertino residents who gave their lives in
the line of duty, and many engraved pavers.
Stone Lanterns
There are two stone lanterns in Memorial Park.
One was located in the center of the now-removed
pond. Both stone lanterns were gifted to the City of
Cupertino by the City of Toyokawa, Japan in 1988 to
commemorate the tenth anniversary of the Sister City
relationship. Both statues have engraved dedication
plaques.
Public Art
A lightpole for the softball field has a metal figure
of a player reaching for a catch. The painted bench
in front of the Cupertino Senior Center on Stevens
Creek Boulevard depicts two women collecting
cherry blossoms and reads “Cupertino-Toyokawa
Sister Cities Inc / Connecting Globally Since 1978.”
Image H-23: Historic Gazebo
Image H-24: Veterans Memorial Entrance and Engraved Pavers Image H-25: Sister City Stone Lantern and Monument
-
860
CC 04-03-2024
860 of 1277
Appendix H Site Assessment H-13
1 Historic Gazebo
2 Veterans Memorial
3 Stone Lantern (Sister City)
4 Public Art
5 Memorial Bench
2 1
3 4
3 5
4 Anton Way
Mary Avenue
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Alves Drive
North Stelling Road
Christensen Drive
Cupertino
Senior Center
Quinlan
Community
Center
100’0 200’
Figure H-3: Cultural Elements 0
0 0
0 0
-
861
CC 04-03-2024
861 of 1277
H-14 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Signage and Wayfinding
The main park sign is located to the east of the
Cupertino Senior Center and can be seen from
Stevens Creek Boulevard. Both the Cupertino Senior
Center and the Quinlan Community Center have
signage along their street frontage (Figure H-6).
To advertise upcoming events and festivals at
Memorial Park, temporary event signage is commonly
installed in two locations: at the corner of Stevens
Creek Boulevard and Anton Way, and the corner of
North Stelling Road and Alves Drive.
There are informational signs posted around the
park. Signs near the softball field and tennis courts
list the hours and rules of use. There is a scoreboard in the softball outfield. The large reservable picnic area opposite Quinlan Community Center includes a sign
about reservations. Additional informational signage
throughout the park includes signs discouraging
feeding of the geese, promoting smoke-free parks,
instructing dog owners to clean up after their pets
accompanied by bag dispensers, and designating
non-vehicular areas. There is also signage related to
the parking lots, memorials, and monuments, but
there is no wayfinding signage in the park.
Image H-26: Park Sign
Image H-27: Temporary Event Signage
Image H-28: Informational Signage
-
OVERl'Of'IILJ..HON ~
POOR HEALTH or Bl!ltlS
Ah UNHU.LTiiY C0~ClNTR.ITIO~ Of fltES
AGtRESSIVE BEH/,i'IQR lk G£ESl
862
CC 04-03-2024
862 of 1277
Appendix H Site Assessment H-15
Figure H-4: Signage and Wayfinding
1 Main Park Sign
2 Temporary Event Signage
3 Cupertino Senior Center Sign
4 Quinlan Community Center Sign
3 1 2
2 4
Anton Way
Mary Avenue
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Alves Drive
North Stelling Road
Christensen Drive
Cupertino
Senior Center
Quinlan
Community
Center
100’0 200’
0 0
0 0
I
I
___ .J
-
863
CC 04-03-2024
863 of 1277
H-16 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Lighting
Site lighting is provided throughout the park along
the majority of pathways, near amenities, on the
recreational buildings, and within the parking lots
(Figure H-7).
Light fixture styles are uniform throughout the park
but vary within the tennis courts and softball field
to support evening use. Additional light fixtures
occur around seat walls and in the shade structure
in the Quinlan courtyard. Supplemental lighting is
provided during community events. The existing
distribution of lighting does not present significant
safety concerns.
Image H-29: Court Lighting
Image H-30: Park Lighting
Image H-31: Quinlan Courtyard Shade Structure
-
864
CC 04-03-2024
864 of 1277
Appendix H Site Assessment H-17
Figure H-5: Lighting
Park Light
Sport Light
Street Light
Parking Lot Light
Anton Way
Mary Avenue
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Alves Drive
North Stelling Road
Christensen Drive
Quinlan
Community
Center
Cupertino
Senior Center 100’0 200’
-
865
CC 04-03-2024
865 of 1277
H-18 Memorial Park Specific Plan
Topography
The park gently slopes from the west at Mary Avenue
towards the east along North Stelling Road. Figure
H-8 shows the park’s topography and denotes the
high points and low points.
Relatively flat areas occur in high-activity zones such as the Quinlan event lawn. The remainder to the site
varies in slope and provides shallow berms in various
locations. The north side of the park provides steeper
sloped berms as visual protection from the adjacent
neighborhood along Christensen Drive. Significant
sloped berms occur at the tennis courts, softball
field, and amphitheater to accommodate seating.
These small hillsides also mitigate visual and noise
concerns to the adjacent residences.
Image H-32: Amphitheater Hillside
Image H-33: Shallow Berms
Image H-34: Tennis Court Hillside
-
866
CC 04-03-2024
866 of 1277
Appendix H Site Assessment H-19
Figure H-6: Topography
High Point
Low Point
Anton Way
Mary Avenue
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Alves Drive
North Stelling Road
Christensen Drive
Cupertino
Senior Center
Quinlan
Community
Center
100’0 200’
-
867
CC 04-03-2024
867 of 1277
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
868
CC 04-03-2024
868 of 1277
IniƟal Study/Addendum
Memorial Park Specific Plan
January 2024
Prepared by
In ConsultaƟon with
Prepared by
• ATTACHMENT C •
CUPERTINO
Ill DAVID J. POWERS
Elm~ & ASSOCIATES INC
Attachment C
869
CC 04-03-2024
869 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan i Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Table of Contents
Section 1.0 Introduction and Purpose............................................................................................. 1 Section 2.0 Project Information ...................................................................................................... 3 Project Title.......................................................................................................................... 3 Applicant/Lead Agency Contact ........................................................................................... 3 Project Location ................................................................................................................... 3 Assessor’s Parcel Numbers................................................................................................... 7 General Plan Designation and Zoning District ...................................................................... 7 Project-Related Approvals, Agreements, and Permits.......................................................... 7 Section 3.0 Background Information............................................................................................... 8 Overview.............................................................................................................................. 8 Cupertino Parks and Recreation System Master Plan .......................................................... 9 Section 4.0 Project Description ..................................................................................................... 10 Primary Project Components ............................................................................................. 10 Hours of Operation and Park Programming ....................................................................... 13 Site Access, Parking, and Circulation .................................................................................. 13 Landscaping........................................................................................................................ 14 Stormwater Treatment ...................................................................................................... 15 Construction....................................................................................................................... 15 Section 5.0 Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Impact Discussion........................................... 17 Aesthetics ........................................................................................................................... 18 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................................................... 27 Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 31 Biological Resources........................................................................................................... 40 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................. 52 Energy ................................................................................................................................ 60 Geology and Soils............................................................................................................... 67 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................ 78 Hazards and Hazardous Materials...................................................................................... 85 Hydrology and Water Quality............................................................................................. 97 Land Use and Planning ..................................................................................................... 109 Mineral Resources............................................................................................................ 113
2.1 2.2
2.3 2.4
2.5 2.6
3.1 3.2
4.1 4.2
4.3 4.4
4.5 4.6
5.1 5.2
5.3 5.4
5.5 5.6
5.7 5.8
5.9 5.10
5.11 5.12
870
CC 04-03-2024
870 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan ii Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Noise ................................................................................................................................ 115 Population and Housing ................................................................................................... 128 Public Services.................................................................................................................. 130 Recreation........................................................................................................................ 136 Transportation ................................................................................................................. 140 Tribal Cultural Resources.................................................................................................. 149 Utilities and Service Systems............................................................................................ 153 Wildfire ............................................................................................................................ 161 Section 6.0 References................................................................................................................ 163 Section 7.0 Lead Agency and Consultants................................................................................... 168 Lead Agency ..................................................................................................................... 168 Consultants ...................................................................................................................... 168 Section 8.0 Acronyms and Abbreviations.................................................................................... 169 Figures
Figure 2.3-1: Regional Map ................................................................................................................. 4 Figure 2.3-2: Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 2.3-3: Aerial Photograph and Surrounding Land Uses.............................................................. 6 Figure 4.1-1: Proposed Site Plan........................................................................................................ 12 Figure 4.6-1: Proposed Phasing Plan ................................................................................................. 16 Figure 5.13-1: Noise Measurement Locations................................................................................. 121 Photos
Photos 1 & 2 .................................................................................................................................... 21 Photos 3 & 4 .................................................................................................................................... 22 Photos 5 & 6 .................................................................................................................................... 23
5.13 5.14
5.15 5.16
5.17 5.18
5.19 5.20
7.1 7.2
871
CC 04-03-2024
871 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan iii Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Tables
Table 4.1-1: Summary of Existing Conditions and Proposed Changes............................................... 13 Table 5.3-1: Health Effects of Air Pollutants...................................................................................... 31 Table 5.4-1: City Tree Replacement Ratios........................................................................................ 43 Table 5.13-1: Groundborne Vibration Impact Criteria..................................................................... 116 Table 5.13-2: Summary of Long-Term Noise Measurement Data (dBA).......................................... 120 Table 5.13-3: Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurement Data (dBA)......................................... 120 Table 5.13-4: Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment............................................................ 126 Appendices
Appendix A: Memorial Park Specific Plan
Appendix B: Tree Inventory Report
Appendix C: Geotechnical Investigation
Appendix D: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Appendix E: Noise and Vibration Assessment
Appendix F: Trip Generation Technical Memorandum
All appendices are incorporated herein by reference.
872
CC 04-03-2024
872 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 1 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Section 1.0 Introduction and Purpose
The City of Cupertino, as the Lead Agency, has prepared this Initial Study/Addendum for the Memorial Park Specific Plan in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations §15000 et. seq.) and the regulations and policies of the City of Cupertino, California.
The project proposes to implement a Specific Plan for Memorial Park that outlines improvements planned for the park. This Initial Study/Addendum evaluates the environmental impacts that might reasonably be anticipated to result from implementation of the proposed project.
This Initial Study/Addendum tiers from the adopted October 2019 City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation System Master Plan Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (2019 IS/MND, State Clearinghouse [SCH] #2019109066). The primary purpose of the Parks and Recreation System Master Plan (Master Plan) was to align the City’s park and recreation services with community expectations, identify key projects that could be added to the recreation system, and ensure the City has the resources needed to create a park system that embodies Cupertino’s desires.
The CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a) states that when an EIR has been certified or a Negative Declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration shall be prepared for that project unless the Lead Agency determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(C) 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 proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
873
CC 04-03-2024
873 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 2 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(b) states that an addendum may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162(a) (see above) calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration have occurred. Based on the analysis completed in this document, the City has determined that the project would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts than previously disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND. Therefore, the standard for requiring a subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration has not been met, and an Addendum has been prepared consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.
If the project is approved, the City of Cupertino will file a Notice of Determination (NOD), which will be available for public inspection and posted within 24 hours of receipt at the County Clerk’s Office for 30 days. The filing of the NOD starts a 30-day statute of limitations on court challenges to the approval under CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15075(g)). 874
CC 04-03-2024
874 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 3 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Section 2.0 Project Information
Project Title
Memorial Park Specific Plan
Applicant/Lead Agency Contact
Susan Michael
City of Cupertino
Public Works Department
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-1328
[email protected]
Project Location
The approximately 22.5-acre project site is located on the northeast corner of Mary Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard at 21121 Stevens Creek Boulevard in the City of Cupertino. The surrounding land uses include residential uses to the north and west, educational facility uses to the south, and residential and recreational uses to the east. Regional and vicinity maps are shown on Figure 2.3-1 and Figure 2.3-2 on the following pages. An aerial photograph of the project site and surrounding land uses is shown on Figure 2.3-3.
2.1 2.2
2.3 875
CC 04-03-2024
875 of 1277
Base Map: ESRI, ArcGIS.
San José
Santa Clara
Campbell
Saratoga
CuperƟno
Los Gatos
Milpitas
Mountain
View Los Altos
Palo Alto
Woodside
Menlo Park
East Palo
Alto
Redwood
City
Sunnyvale
San José
Santa Clara
Campbell
Saratoga
CuperƟno
Los Gatos
Milpitas
Mountain
View Los Altos
Palo Alto
Woodside
Menlo Park
East Palo
Alto
Redwood
City
Sunnyvale
9 9
17 17
85 85
35 84
84 85
87 237
101
101
101
280
280
280
680
680
880
880
Project Site
Pacific Ocean
Monterey Bay
San José
Sunnyvale
San Mateo Fremont
Redwood City
Livermore
Oakland
San Francisco
Santa Cruz
Mountain View
Morgan Hill
Project Site
CuperƟno
0246 1 8 Miles
REGIONAL MAP FIGURE 2.3-1
,
,
I
I
'
', ,-
I
I
I '
\
I
I
,
,
0 -
•
0 \
•
876
CC 04-03-2024
876 of 1277
Christensen Drive
Alves Drive
North Stelling Road
Beardon Drive
North De Anza Boulevard South De Anza Boulevard
South Stelling Road
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Stevens Creek Boulevard
McClellan
McClellan Road Road Orange Avenue
Bubb Road
Mann Drive
Ma dera Drive
Scenic Boulevar d
Creston Drive
Parkwoo d Drive
Glen Place
Rodrigues Avenue Vista Drive
Shelly Drive
CasƟne Avenue
Regnart Creek
Stevens Cree k
Stevens Creek
U.P.R.R.
U.P.R.R.
Christensen Drive
AlvesDrive
North Stelling Road
Beardon Drive
North De Anza Boulevard South De Anza Boulevard
South Stelling Road
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Stevens Creek Boulevard
McClellan
McClellan Road Road Orange Avenue
Bubb Road
Mann Drive
Ma deraDrive
Scenic Boulevar d
Creston
Drive
Parkwoo d Drive
Glen Place
Rodrigues Avenue Vista Drive
Shelly Drive
CasƟne Avenue
Regnart Creek
Stevens Cree k
Stevens Creek
U.P.R.R.
U.P.R.R.
85 85
280 280
Base Map: ESRI, ArcGIS
0 250 1,000 1,500 2,500 Feet
Project Site
VICINITY MAP FIGURE 2.3-2
p-----,
-
..........
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
~
-------==-==.....;..aa=-----==........,_,;,,,.-----=----~-----::- ,,....----..!....._ i_::,__.;;:_ _____ - _________ ---=-'_~---.....,,..• -~------ I
877
CC 04-03-2024
877 of 1277
CuperƟno
Sports
Center
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
Commercial
Church &
Preschool
Planned ResidenƟal/Commercial
(Under ConstrucƟon)
De Anza
College
South Stelling Road North Stelling Road
Alves Drive Alves Drive
Stevens Creek Boulevard Stevens Creek Boulevard
Campus Drive
Mary Avenue
Anton Way
Garden Gate Drive
Hanford Drive
Elenda Drive
Christensen Drive
LaureƩa Drive
Place
Parkwood Drive
Parkwood Drive
Alves Drive
Alves Drive
Stevens Creek Boulevard Stevens Creek Boulevard
Campus Drive
Mary Avenue
Anton Way
Garden Gate Drive
Hanford Drive
Elenda Drive
Christensen Drive
LaureƩa Drive
Glen Place
Parkwood Drive
Parkwood Drive
85 1
2 4
4 4
4 8
6 5
3 3
7 len
Photo Date: Mar. 2022*
0 50 300 400 600 Feet
Project Boundary
Tennis Courts
SoŌball Field
Playground Areas
Picnic Areas
Amphitheater
Quinlan Community Center
CuperƟno Senior Center
Gazebo
Aerial Source: Google Earth Pro, Sep. 6, 2023.
*This aerial photograph was taken prior to the compleƟon of the pond replacement project in August 2023.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH AND SURROUNDING LAND USES FIGURE 2.3-3 \ e-------
\.
878
CC 04-03-2024
878 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 7 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers
326-27-033, 326-29-006, and 326-54-041
General Plan Designation and Zoning District
The project site is within the boundaries of the Heart of the City Special Area and has General Plan designations of Transportation, Parks and Open Space, and Public Facilities. The Heart of the City Special Area is a key mixed-use, commercial corridor in Cupertino and includes five specific subareas: West Stevens Creek Boulevard, Crossroads, Central Stevens Creek Boulevard, City Center, and East Stevens Creek Boulevard. The project site is within the West Stevens Creek Boulevard subarea and Community Recreation Node, which consists of Memorial Park, the Senior Center, Sports Center, and Quinlan Community Center.
The site is within the Heart of the City Specific Plan Area zoning district, and has a zoning designation of Open Space/Public Park/Recreational Zone. The Heart of the City Specific Plan provides specific development guidance for the Stevens Creek Boulevard commercial corridor and is meant to guide the future development and redevelopment of the Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor in a manner that creates a greater sense of place and community identity in Cupertino.
Project-Related Approvals, Agreements, and Permits
The project requires the following discretionary approvals:
• Adoption of the Specific Plan
The project would also require the following ministerial approvals:
• Encroachment permit
• Tree Removal permit
• Demolition permit
• Grading permit
• Construction permit
2.4 2.5
2.6 879
CC 04-03-2024
879 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 8 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Section 3.0 Background Information
Overview
The approximately 22.5-acre (or 980,000 square feet) project site is generally referred to collectively as “Memorial Park” and contains Memorial Park, Quinlan Community Center, and Cupertino Senior Center. The current hours of operation are daylight hours to 10:00 PM.
Within Memorial Park, there are six tennis courts (including one court that is dual-lined to provide four pickleball courts), a softball field, an amphitheater, the Cupertino Veterans Memorial, playground areas, picnic areas, and the Memorial Park Gazebo. Until 2013, Memorial Park also contained a concrete-lined, artificial pond in the central portion of the park south of the softball field. It was drained in 2013 in response to the ongoing drought and proposed for removal under the City’s 2021-2022 Capital Improvement Program. In 2022, construction began to remove the concrete liner, backfill and grade the area, install landscaping and sodded turf, and pedestrian pathways. Since the commencement of this environmental analysis, construction of the project to replace the former pond area was completed in August 2023, and the area is currently open to the public.
Memorial Park currently hosts major events between May and November each year, including the following:
• Bhubaneswar Sister City Celebration
• Cherry Blossom Festival
• Diwali Festival
• Easter Egg Hunt
• Field Day
• Holi Celebration
• Independence Day Celebration
• Relay for Life: Silicon Valley North
• Rotary Fall Festival
• Veteran’s Day Memorial Ceremony
• YAB Summer Kick-Off
These events typically range in size from as low as 100 to 150 attendees for minor events to as high as 4,000 to 5,000 attendees for major events like the annual Cherry Blossom Festival. Spillover parking for larger events is accommodated in the surface parking areas at De Anza College, which is located across the street on the south side of Stevens Creek Boulevard.
3.1 880
CC 04-03-2024
880 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 9 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Cupertino Parks and Recreation System Master Plan
As discussed under Section 1.1, the primary purpose of the City’s 2020 Master Plan (Master Plan) was to align the City’s park and recreation services with community expectations, identify key projects that could be added to the recreation system, and ensure the City has the resources needed to create a park system that embodies Cupertino’s desires.
The Master Plan identified enhancement opportunities for Memorial Park that were separated into immediate, short-term, and longer-term timeframes. The immediate item for Memorial Park was to develop a site master plan for the park, which is the purpose of the proposed project. In the shortterm, the Master Plan identified nature integration, shade creation, improvement of ADA accessibility, pathway and seating improvements, amphitheater improvements, additional sporting opportunities (e.g., pickleball), and the re-purposing of the empty pond as priorities for the park.
Throughout the Master Plan, Memorial Park was identified as a potential site for additional largescale recreation opportunities such as an aquatic park, multi-use recreation center and gymnasium complex, and a performing and fine arts center.
3.2 881
CC 04-03-2024
881 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 10 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Section 4.0 Project Description
The project proposes to implement a Specific Plan for Memorial Park that outlines improvements for the park. Although no improvements are proposed for the Quinlan Community Center or Cupertino Senior Center buildings, the project would upgrade the courtyards outside these two buildings with new landscaping and seating areas. A draft of the proposed Specific Plan is included in Appendix A. The primary project components of the Specific Plan (also referred to as the “project”) are described below and shown on Figure 4.1-1. The changes to existing conditions proposed by the project are summarized in Table 4.1-1.
Primary Project Components
4.1.1 Softball Field
The existing softball field would continue to be used for programmed adult softball leagues, senior softball activities, and public rentals throughout the year under the Specific Plan as well as serve as a dog off-leash area (DOLA) when the softball field is not in use. Operation of the DOLA would be limited to several hours in the afternoon during normal park operating hours.
4.1.2 Sports Courts
The six existing tennis courts on the northwest corner of the project site would remain in the same location, and the only proposed change under the Master Plan would be to remove the pickleball dual-striping on one of the tennis courts. The project would add a new basketball court with lighting adjacent to the eastern side of the softball field, and the existing landscaped berms would be utilized as seating areas around the new basketball court. The project would also add eight pickleball courts on the southeast corner of the site, adjacent to the intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Anton Way. A low fence and landscape screening would be installed around the perimeter of the new pickleball courts. Additional lighting would be installed for the pickleball courts, and the courts would be open during normal park operating hours. A bocce ball court would also be installed adjacent to the Senior Center, and would be programmed for Senior Center socials, classes, and public rentals. No new lights are proposed for the bocce ball court.
4.1.3 Playground Areas
Currently, the park contains two playground areas, one south of the tennis courts and one south of the amphitheater. The project would relocate and replace these playground areas with an AllAbilities Playground area and a Nature Playground area, both of which would be centrally located within the park between the Senior Center and softball field. A passive garden walk featuring a variety of native plants would be constructed south of the Nature Playground area. A new publicly accessible restroom would be constructed adjacent to the All-Abilities Playground area.
4.1 882
CC 04-03-2024
882 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 11 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
4.1.4 Picnic Areas
The existing reservable picnic area east of the softball field would be renovated and three new, drop-in picnic areas would be added on-site. Renovation of the existing reservable picnic area would include replacing the decomposed granite surfacing with concrete surfacing, installing new shade structures, installing new landscaping and trees, and providing barbeques, sinks, and drinking fountains. The new picnic areas would be constructed adjacent to the All-Abilities Playground area, Nature Playground area, and Memorial Park Gazebo. All new picnic areas would include picnic tables and shade structures.
4.1.5 Amphitheater
The existing amphitheater has seats for approximately 140 people. Currently, the programming for the amphitheater includes concerts and theater productions that occur during the summer months (June through September). These events generally occur between 10:30 AM and 8:00 PM depending on the type of performance. The adjacent lawn areas act as additional seating areas for the attendees that cannot be accommodated by the seats. Performances at the amphitheater have drawn as many as 300 to 500 attendees.
The project would upgrade the existing amphitheater to provide additional designated seats, provide Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant improvements such as reinforced stairs and pathways, and install a shade structure. In addition, the existing stage infrastructure would be improved through the installation of a new shade structure, new surfacing, and telecommunication and fiber optic equipment. The project would not create a larger stage. The types of performances and programming held at the amphitheater would remain the same as under existing conditions. 883
CC 04-03-2024
883 of 1277
1 New Site Arrival
2 New Parking Stalls
3 Upgraded Restroom
4 Passive Garden Walk
5 Pickleball Courts
6 Expanded Senior Center Deck / Plaza
7 Fitness Station
8 Bocce Court
9 Reservable Picnic Area
10 Nature Playground
11 Enhanced Pedestrian / Bicycle Access
12 Veterans Memorial
13 Upgraded Amphitheater and Stage
14 Historic Gazebo
15 Event Lawns
16 Event Plaza
17 All-Abilities Playground
18 New Restrooms
19 Basketball Court
20 Existing Softball Field / DOLA
21 Dedicated Tennis Courts
22 Upgraded Quinlan Courtyard
23 Upgraded Parking Lots
Cupertino
Senior Center
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Anton Way
Mary Avenue
Alves Drive
North Stelling Road
Christensen Drive
Quinlan
Community
Center
16 11
18 18
17 15
15 14
13 2
5 4
6 7
8 10
12 11
1 1
20 3 21
15 23
23 23
23 9 22
19 0 50 200 400 Feet
PROPOSED SITE PLAN FIGURE 4.1-1
p-----, -
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1, 0
884
CC 04-03-2024
884 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 13 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Table 4.1-1: Summary of Existing Conditions and Proposed Changes Existing Conditions Proposed Changes
Softball Field • Programmed softball leagues
• Unsanctioned DOLA
• Sanctioned DOLA at posted times
(TBD)
Sports Courts • Five dedicated tennis courts
• One tennis court with dual striping
to provide four pickleball courts
• Restripe to provide six dedicated
tennis courts
• Eight dedicated pickleball courts
• New full-size basketball court
• New bocce ball court
Playground Areas • Two playground areas • Relocate both playground areas with upgraded equipment to new
locations within Memorial Park
Picnic Areas • One large, reservable picnic area
• Three smaller, drop-in picnic areas
• Upgrade existing large, reservable
picnic area
• Three new drop-in picnic areas
Amphitheater • Approximately 140 designated seats
• Live performances throughout the
year
• Upgrade seating area to be ADA
compliant
• Additional designated seats
• New shade structure over stage and
amphitheater seating area
• New electrical equipment for stage
Hours of Operation • Daytime to 10:00 PM • None
Park Programming • Events throughout the year with
crowd sizes ranging from 100 to
5,000 attendees
• None
Hours of Operation and Park Programming
The project would not change the hours of operation for Memorial Park, Quinlan Community Center, or Cupertino Senior Center. The project would not alter the type or scale of the current events held at the park; however, if some of the currently scheduled events are no longer held in the future, alternative equivalent events may be scheduled to take their place. In addition to the existing event lawn area located west of the Quinlan Community Center, the project would reconfigure a smaller (i.e., approximately 70,000 square feet) area comprised of lawn and hardscaping south of the softball field where the concrete-lined pond was previously located.
Site Access, Parking, and Circulation
Vehicular access to the project site for the public is currently provided by three separate driveways.
There is a two-way driveway on North Sterling Road leading to the Quinlan Community Center, a two-way driveway on Alves Drive, and a two-way driveway on Mary Avenue adjacent to the Senior
4.2 4.3
885
CC 04-03-2024
885 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 14 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Center. There are additional access points for maintenance and emergency vehicles located on Anton Way and within the Mary Avenue parking lot.
The project would reconfigure the parking lot accessed via Alves Drive. The existing two-way driveway located in the center of the parking lot would be removed and two, one-way driveways would be constructed at each end of the parking lot. These driveways would be approximately 24 feet wide. Currently, the parking lot has 50 parking stalls (two ADA accessible stalls and 48 standard stalls). For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the project would maintain the same number of stalls; however, the lot would be restriped to provide additional ADA accessible stalls. In addition, the project would reconfigure the westernmost parking lot accessed via Mary Avenue to reduce the size of several planter islands to accommodate enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
The project would add approximately nine, inset parallel parking stalls along Anton Way adjacent to the new pickleball courts.
Pedestrian access to the park is currently provided by several walking paths accessed via entry points on Christensen Drive, Alves Drive, Anton Way, Stevens Creek Boulevard, and Mary Avenue.
The project would maintain these pedestrian pathways; however, several would be realigned to accommodate proposed improvements. In addition, these pedestrian pathways would be resurfaced to ensure ADA compliance throughout the park and access points at the parking lots onsite would be updated with ADA compliant curb ramps.
Bicyclists currently utilize the pathways in the park; there are no official bicycle lanes on-site. The project would add Class I bicycle routes on-site that would connect Alves Drive, Mary Avenue, and Christensen Drive, allowing cyclists a designated pathway through the site. In addition, the project would install short- and long-term bicycle parking throughout the site and at key entry points.
Landscaping
The project site currently contains approximately 500 on-site trees, all of which have a protected status as public trees (pursuant to Chapter 14.12 of the City Code). The project would remove a total of approximately 140 existing trees on-site due to the proposed improvements and/or low tree preservation suitability. The remaining trees on-site would not conflict with the proposed improvements, are in good health, and would be preserved. Over the course of project buildout, approximately 150 replacement trees would be planted throughout the park in accordance with the Tree Succession Plan prepared for the site. In addition to the replacement trees, the project would plant new landscaping, including new shrubs and groundcover, throughout the site. The new landscaping would incorporate low to moderate water use plants and California native species.
4.4 886
CC 04-03-2024
886 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 15 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Stormwater Treatment
Currently, the project site contains approximately 350,000 square feet (or 36 percent) of impervious surfaces and 630,000 square feet (or 64 percent) of pervious surfaces. The proposed project would increase on-site impervious surfaces by approximately 72,000 square feet (or seven percent) compared to existing conditions. The increase in impervious surfaces results from the addition of new concrete pedestrian walkways, bicycle paths, and the paved asphalt surface parking stalls adjacent to the proposed pickleball courts. To manage stormwater runoff on-site, the project would construct landscaped bioretention areas and install pervious paving materials in select areas throughout the site to capture stormwater runoff and promote on-site infiltration.
Construction
For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that project construction would begin in 2028 and would be completed over the course of approximately 15 years as funding is made available for individual improvements. Construction activities would include demolition, site preparation, grading, site structures, paving, and landscaping. Although the timing of project implementation depends on the availability of funding, it is anticipated the first five years of construction would include improvements such as the upgrades to the existing parking lot accessed via Mary Avenue and construction of the All-Abilities Playground, Nature Playground, bocce court, pickleball courts, and new parallel parking stalls along Anton Way. The second five-year period would include improvements such as the upgrades to the existing amphitheater, renovation of the parking lot accessed via Alves Drive, construction of the basketball court, and renovation of the existing picnic area. Construction activities during the final five-year period are anticipated to consist of landscaping improvements in the parking lot areas adjacent to the Quinlan Community Center and Senior Center. For a map showing the recommended project phasing, see Figure 4.6-1.
4.5 4.6
887
CC 04-03-2024
887 of 1277
Phase 1A
Phase 1B
Phase 2A
Phase 3
Phase 3
Phase 2B Phase 2C
North Stelling Road
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Campus Drive
Christensen Drive
LaureƩa Drive
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Campus Drive
Christensen Drive
LaureƩa Drive
Alves Drive
Anton Way
Mary AvenueMary Avenue Parkwood
D rive
Parkwood Drive
0 100 200 Feet
PROPOSED PHASING PLAN FIGURE 4.6-1
888
CC 04-03-2024
888 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 17 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Section 5.0 Environmental Setting, Checklist,
and Impact Discussion
This section presents the discussion of impacts related to the following environmental subjects in their respective subsections:
5.1 Aesthetics
5.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
5.3 Air Quality
5.4 Biological Resources
5.5 Cultural Resources
5.6 Energy
5.7 Geology and Soils
5.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
5.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
5.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
5.11 Land Use and Planning
5.12 Mineral Resources
5.13 Noise
5.14 Population and Housing
5.15 Public Services
5.16 Recreation
5.17 Transportation
5.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
5.19 Utilities and Service Systems
5.20 Wildfire
The discussion for each environmental subject includes the following subsections:
• Environmental Setting – This subsection 1) provides a brief overview of relevant plans, policies, and regulations that compose the regulatory framework for the project and 2) describes the existing, physical environmental conditions at the project site and in the surrounding area, as relevant.
• Impact Discussion – This subsection 1) includes the recommended checklist questions from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines to assess impacts and 2) discusses the project’s impact on the environmental subject as related to the checklist questions. For significant impacts, feasible mitigation measures are identified. “Mitigation measures” are measures that will minimize, avoid, or eliminate a significant impact (CEQA Guidelines Section 15370). Each impact is labeled to correspond to the checklist question being answered. For example, the discussion under checklist question a) answers the first checklist question in the Biological Resources section. Mitigation measures are also numbered to correspond to the impact they address. For example, MM BIO-1.3 refers to the third mitigation measure for the first impact in the Biological Resources section.
889
CC 04-03-2024
889 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 18 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Aesthetics
5.1.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
State
Streets and Highway Code Sections 260 through 263
The California Scenic Highway Program (Streets and Highway Code, Sections 260 through 263) is managed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The program is intended to protect and enhance the natural scenic beauty of California highways and adjacent corridors through special conservation treatment.
Local
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
Community Vision 2040 is the City’s General Plan, which describes the community’s overall philosophy regarding the character and accessibility of existing and new neighborhoods and mixeduse corridors, and contains goals, policies, and strategies for implementing the community’s vision.
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies and strategies including, but not limited to, the policies listed below pertaining to aesthetics.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy LU-4.1 Ensure that the design of streets, sidewalks and pedestrian and bicycle amenities are consistent with the vision for each Planning Area and Complete Streets policies.
Policy LU-12.4 The Montebello foothills at the south and west boundary of the valley floor provide a scenic backdrop, adding to the City’s scale and variety. While it is not possible to guarantee an unobstructed view of the hills from every vantage point, an attempt should be made to preserve views of the foothills.
Policy LU-27.8 Protect residential neighborhoods from noise, traffic, light, glare, odors and visually intrusive effects from more intense development with landscape buffers, site and building design, setbacks and other appropriate measures.
Heart of the City Specific Plan
The Heart of the City Specific Plan describes the different areas and special centers within the Specific Plan area and provides development standards, design guidelines, and landscaping guidelines for sites within the Specific Plan area. These standards include tree species that should
5.1 5.1.1.1
890
CC 04-03-2024
890 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 19 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
be planted on the Stevens Creek Boulevard corridor, the preferred location for on-site parking, and paving materials that should be utilized by developments.
Cupertino 2020 Parks and Recreation System Master Plan
The City’s Master Plan was adopted in February 2020, and outlines the City’s comprehensive plan for parks and recreational facilities in the City through the year 2040. The Master Plan is organized around seven goals, which include conservation, connection, equitable access, enhancement, activity, quality, and sustainability. Each of the seven goals has associated objectives that reflect the City’s desired outcomes and actions that provide ideas or strategies that help achieve the broader goals.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
The City’s Zoning Ordinance (Title 19 of the City’s Municipal Code) sets forth the standards requiring architectural and site review and stipulating aesthetic criteria for new development. Under Chapter
19.168, the City is responsible for the review of architectural and site designs of buildings, structures, signs, lighting, and landscaping within the City to promote and ensure compliance with the goals and objectives identified in the General Plan.
Title 14 of the City’s Municipal Code (Street, Sidewalks and Landscaping) contains development standards related to street improvements, encroachments, landscaping, and undergrounding of utilities.
Existing Conditions
Scenic Vistas
Scenic corridors are considered a defined area of landscape, viewed as a single entity that includes the total field of vision visible from a specific point, or series of points along a linear transportation route. Public view corridors are areas in which short-range, medium-range and long-range views are available from publicly accessible viewpoints, such as from city streets. However, scenic vistas are generally interpreted as long-range views of a specific scenic feature (e.g., open space lands, mountain ridges, bay, or ocean views).
1 Although the City has not designated any major roadways or any other streets/areas in Cupertino as scenic corridors or as being part of a scenic vista, the General Plan recognizes views of the foothills and Santa Cruz Mountains as important resources.2 The project site is located in a highly developed area of the City. It is located on relatively flat land which limits the amount of expansive views from the project site. Obstructed views of the Santa 1 City of Cupertino. Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning Project (SCH# 2014032007). December 4, 2014. Page 4.1-21. 2 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Page 48.
5.1.1.2 891
CC 04-03-2024
891 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 20 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Cruz Mountains and foothills are provided in the project area, and a clearer view of the Santa Cruz Mountains can be seen looking west on Stevens Creek Boulevard.
There are no state-designated scenic highways in Cupertino. There is only one state-designated scenic highway in Santa Clara County: SR 9 from the Santa Cruz County line to the Los Gatos City limit. Eligible state scenic highways (not officially designated) include: SR 17 from the Santa Cruz County line to SR 9, SR 35 from Santa Cruz County line to SR 9, I-280 from the San Mateo County line to SR 17, and the entire length of SR 152 within the County. The nearest officially designated scenic highway is the segment of SR 9 approximately 4.5 miles south of the project site.3 The project site is not visible from a designated state scenic highway.
Visual Character and Quality
The project site is located in a developed area of the Cupertino and currently contains Memorial Park, the Quinlan Community Center, and the Cupertino Senior Center. Memorial Park includes tennis courts, a softball field, an amphitheater, the Cupertino Veterans Memorial, playground areas, picnic areas, and the Memorial Park Gazebo. It is landscaped with large grass areas, trees, and landscaped areas with small shrubs.
The Quinlan Community Center is a single-story, u-shaped building with ceramic roof tiles. The central portion of the building over the lobby is elevated above the surrounding roofline, and the building is surrounded by landscaped areas and trees. The Cupertino Senior Center is a single-story structure with ceramic roof tiles on a gable roof, a pergola in the front courtyard area, and a wooden deck on the east side of the building. The central portion of the park was previously a concrete-lined, artificial pond that has since been drained and redeveloped to provide additional landscaped area and walking paths under a separate project.
The surrounding area in the immediate vicinity of the project site consists primarily of one- to twostory single-family and multi-family residential properties. The Cupertino Sports Center is located to the east of the project site, and consists primarily of tennis courts. De Anza College is directly south of the site, and contains a variety of classroom buildings, administrative buildings, and surface parking areas. Most of the campus is shielded from view at the project site by landscaped areas in the median of Stevens Creek Boulevard and trees between Stevens Creek Boulevard and Campus Drive.
3 Caltrans. “California State Scenic Highway System Map.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. 892
CC 04-03-2024
892 of 1277
Photo 1: View from the southeast corner of the project site looking north towards Anton Way.
Photo 2: View from the southeast corner of the project site looking east on Stevens Creek Boulevard.
PHOTOS 1 & 2
893
CC 04-03-2024
893 of 1277
Photo 3: View from the southern boundary of the project site looking west on Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Photo 4: View from the central porƟon of the project site looking east towards Alves Drive.
PHOTOS 3 & 4
894
CC 04-03-2024
894 of 1277
Photo 5: View from the northwest corner of the project site looking north towards Christensen Drive.
Photo 6: View from the western boundary of the project site looking west towards adjacent residenƟal development.
PHOTOS 5 & 6
895
CC 04-03-2024
895 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 24 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
5.1.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section
21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings? 4 If the
project is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The 2019 IS/MND determined that although views of the foothills (i.e., Montebello) and Santa Cruz Mountains are important resources, there are no designated scenic vistas within the City limits.
Therefore, projects carried out under the Master Plan that could potentially block views of the foothills from within individual parks would not result in an impact on scenic vistas.5
The project would implement a variety of improvements throughout Memorial Park, including the construction of playground areas, sports courts, and the planting of new landscaping. These improvements are consistent with the improvements evaluated in the 2019 IS/MND and, as disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND, they could potentially further obstruct views of the foothills and Santa Cruz Mountains on-site. However, there are no scenic vistas within the City. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in impacts to any scenic vistas, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 4 Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points. 5 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Page 67.
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
896
CC 04-03-2024
896 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 25 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that since there are no state-designated scenic highways or locally designated scenic corridors located within the City of Cupertino, implementation of the Master Plan would not impact a state designated Scenic Highway.6
The circumstances under which the project is being undertaken have not changed since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. As discussed in Section 5.1.1.2 Existing Conditions, there are no state-designated scenic highways in Cupertino. The closest state-designated scenic highway is a segment of SR 9 which is approximately 4.5 miles south of the project site. Since the project site is not visible from a designated state scenic highway, implementation of the project would not result in any impacts to scenic resources within a state scenic highway, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects under the Master Plan would be designed, constructed, and maintained consistent with all adopted City policies and regulations, including those focused on visual quality of the urban environment. Therefore, implementation of the Master Plan would cause a less than significant impact to the visual character of the project areas and their surroundings.7
The project is consistent with the General Plan, Heart of the City Specific Plan, and Parks and Recreation Master Plan policies governing scenic quality by complying with applicable design guidelines in the Specific Plan, preventing light/glare from adversely affecting surrounding residential areas, and replacing trees consistent with the Municipal Code. In addition, as noted in Section 5.1.1.1 Regulatory Framework, Chapter 19.168 of the City’s zoning ordinance requires that the City review the site designs of any proposed buildings, structures, signs, lighting, and/or landscaping within the City to ensure compliance with the goals and objectives identified in the General Plan regarding visual quality. For these reasons, the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 6 Ibid. Page 67. 7 Ibid. Page 67.
897
CC 04-03-2024
897 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 26 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that implementation of the Master Plan would result in the addition of new lighting fixtures or extended nighttime lighting in various parks in the City. In order to reduce the potential for new night lighting associated with park and recreation activities to cause light and glare impacts to adjacent sensitive land uses, the 2019 IS/MND identified Mitigation Measure AES-1 which would require that a lighting plan be prepared for projects with new exterior lighting near adjacent properties to be and that those new lights be shielded as necessary. With implementation of this mitigation measure, the impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.8
In order to reduce any potential impacts, the project would implement 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure AES-1, which is described below.
2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure AES-1: New exterior lighting in proximity to adjacent property will be shielded as necessary to ensure that exterior light sources do not create a significant light or glare impact on an adjacent land use. A lighting plan that addresses potential light and glare impacts shall be prepared for projects that include new night lighting in proximity to adjacent private properties.
The project would add new light fixtures at the basketball court and pickleball courts. New exterior lighting would be designed to direct light downwards and would be shielded to avoid creating unnecessary glare at adjacent properties. In addition, consistent with the requirements of 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure AES-1, the project would prepare a lighting plan to evaluate and reduce any potential light and glare impacts to a less than significant level. With implementation of 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure AES-1, the project would not create any new or substantially more severe significant sources of light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area, which is consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
8 Ibid. Page 68.
898
CC 04-03-2024
898 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 27 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
5.2.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
State
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
The California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) assesses the location, quality, and quantity of agricultural land and conversion of these lands over time. Agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and irrigation status. The best quality land is identified as Prime Farmland. In CEQA analyses, the FMMP classifications and published county maps are used, in part, to identify whether agricultural resources that could be affected are present on-site or in the project area.9
California Land Conservation Act
The California Land Conservation Act (Williamson Act) enables local governments to enter into contracts with private landowners to restrict parcels of land to agricultural or related open space uses. In return, landowners receive lower property tax assessments. In CEQA analyses, identification of properties that are under a Williamson Act contract is used to also identify sites that may contain agricultural resources or are zoned for agricultural uses.10 Fire and Resource Assessment Program
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) identifies forest land, timberland, and lands zoned for timberland production that can (or do) support forestry resources.11 Programs such as CAL FIRE’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program and are used to 9 California Department of Conservation. “Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program.” Accessed February 17, 2023. http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Index.aspx. 10 California Department of Conservation. “Williamson Act.” Accessed February 17, 2023. http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/lca. 11 Forest Land is land that can support 10 percent native tree cover and allows for management of forest resources (California Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)); Timberland is land not owned by the federal government or designated as experimental forest land that is available for, and capable of, growing trees to produce lumber and other products, including Christmas trees (California Public Resources Code Section 4526); and Timberland Production is land used for growing and harvesting timber and compatible uses (Government Code Section 51104(g)).
5.2 5.2.1.1
899
CC 04-03-2024
899 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 28 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
identify whether forest land, timberland, or timberland production areas that could be affected are located on or adjacent to a project site.12
Existing Conditions
According to the Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2018 map, the project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land, meaning the land is occupied by structures with a building density of at least one unit to 1.5 acres, or approximately six structures to a 10-acre parcel. Common examples include residential, industrial, commercial, institutional facilities, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, and water control structures. 13 No lands adjacent to the
project site are used for agricultural production, forest land, or timberland. Surrounding properties are designated, zoned, and used for urban uses. There are no Williamson Act parcels on or in the vicinity of the project site.14
The project site is within the boundaries of the Heart of the City Special Area of the General Plan and has General Plan designations of Transportation, Parks and Open Space, and Public Facilities.
The site is within the Heart of the City Specific Plan Area zoning district, and has a zoning designation of Open Space/Public Park/Recreational Zone.
The project site is currently developed with a park, amphitheater, recreational facilities, the Cupertino Senior Center, and the Quinlan Community Center. The site is surrounded primarily by residential uses, with De Anza College located south of the project site south of Stevens Creek Boulevard.
5.2.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? 12 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. “Fire and Resource Assessment Program.” Accessed February 17, 2023. http://frap.fire.ca.gov/. 13 California Department of Conservation. “California Important Farmland Finder.” Accessed March 6, 2023. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/
14 County of Santa Clara. “Williamson Act and Open Space Easement.” September 17, 2018. Accessed March 6, 2023. https://www.sccgov.org/sites/dpd/programs/wa/pages/wa.aspx.
5.2.1.2 □ □ □
900
CC 04-03-2024
900 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 29 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland
(as defined by Public Resources Code Section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code
Section 51104(g))?
d) Result in a loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? The 2019 IS/MND determined that the City’s existing parks were not located within prime or other agricultural lands as mapped by the State, and were located within areas designated as “Urban and Built-up Land,” therefore, implementation of the Master Plan would not impact any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. 15 These conditions have not
changed since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use. (Same Impact as Approved Project) b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
The project site is not used or zoned for agricultural use, nor is the project site subject to a Williamson Act contract. For these reasons, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for 15 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Page 70.
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
[8J
[8J
[8J
[8J
901
CC 04-03-2024
901 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 30 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. This is the same impact as disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production?
The project site is zoned Open Space/Public Park/Recreational Zone. Therefore, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. (Same Impact as Approved Project) d) Would the project result in a loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that implementation of the Master Plan would not result in projects that would convert any forest land to a non-forest use because no forest lands lie within the City boundaries.16 The lack of forest land on and adjacent to the project site has not changed since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Therefore, the project would not result in a loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. (Same Impact as Approved Project) e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that implementation of the Master Plan would not result in conversion of any farmland or forest land to a non-agricultural/non-forest use because no farmland or forest lands lie within the City boundaries.17 As described in Section 5.2.1.2, these conditions have not changed, therefore, the project would not impact any farmland. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
16 Ibid. Page 70. 17 Ibid. Page 70.
902
CC 04-03-2024
902 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 31 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Air Quality
5.3.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND, with the exception of BAAQMD updating their CEQA Guidelines in 2022. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Background Information
Criteria Pollutants
Air quality in the Bay Area is assessed related to six common air pollutants (referred to as criteria pollutants), including ground-level ozone (O3), nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur oxides (SOx), and lead.18 Criteria pollutants are regulated because they result in health effects. An overview of the sources of criteria pollutants and their associated health are summarized in Table 5.3-1. The most commonly regulated criteria pollutants in the Bay Area are discussed further below.
Table 5.3-1: Health Effects of Air Pollutants
Pollutants Sources Primary Effects
Ozone (O3)
Atmospheric reaction of organic
gases with nitrogen oxides in
sunlight
• Aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular diseases
• Irritation of eyes
• Cardiopulmonary function impairment
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
Motor vehicle exhaust, high
temperature stationary combustion, atmospheric reactions • Aggravation of respiratory illness
• Reduced visibility
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
and Coarse
Particulate
Matter (PM10)
Stationary combustion of solid
fuels, construction activities,
industrial processes,
atmospheric chemical reactions
• Reduced lung function, especially in
children
• Aggravation of respiratory and
cardiorespiratory diseases
• Increased cough and chest discomfort
• Reduced visibility
18 The area has attained both state and federal ambient air quality standards for CO. The project does not include substantial new emissions of sulfur dioxide or lead. These criteria pollutants are not discussed further.
5.3 5.3.1.1
903
CC 04-03-2024
903 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 32 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Table 5.3-1: Health Effects of Air Pollutants
Pollutants Sources Primary Effects
Toxic Air
Contaminants
(TACs)
Cars and trucks, especially
diesel-fueled; industrial sources,
such as chrome platers; dry
cleaners and service stations;
building materials and products
• Cancer
• Chronic eye, lung, or skin irritation
• Neurological and reproductive
disorders
High O3 levels are caused by the cumulative emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG) and NOX.
These precursor pollutants react under certain meteorological conditions to form high O3 levels.
Controlling the emissions of these precursor pollutants is the focus of the Bay Area’s attempts to reduce O3 levels. The highest O3 levels in the Bay Area occur in the eastern and southern inland valleys that are downwind of air pollutant sources.
PM is a problematic air pollutant of the Bay Area. PM is assessed and measured in terms of respirable particulate matter or particles that have a diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM10) and fine particulate matter where particles have a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5). Elevated concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 are the result of both region-wide emissions and localized emissions.
Toxic Air Contaminants
TACs are a broad class of compounds known to have health effects. They include, but are not limited to, criteria pollutants. TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, diesel fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). TACs are typically found in low concentrations, even near their source (e.g., diesel particulate matter [DPM] near a freeway).
Diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about threequarters of the cancer risk from TACs. Diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of gases, vapors, and fine particles. Medium- and heavy-duty diesel trucks represent the bulk of DPM emissions from California highways. The majority of DPM is small enough to be inhaled into the lungs. Most inhaled particles are subsequently exhaled, but some deposit on the lung surface or are deposited in the deepest regions of the lungs (most susceptible to injury).19 Chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, have been previously identified as TACs by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
19 California Air Resources Board. “Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-and-health. 904
CC 04-03-2024
904 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 33 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Sensitive Receptors
Some groups of people are more affected by air pollution than others. CARB has identified the following persons who are most likely to be affected by air pollution: children under 16, the elderly over 65, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. These groups are classified as sensitive receptors. Locations that may contain a high concentration of these sensitive population groups include residential areas, hospitals, daycare facilities, elder care facilities, and elementary schools.
Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
Clean Air Act
At the federal level, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for overseeing implementation of the Clean Air Act and its subsequent amendments. The federal Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set national ambient air quality standards for the six common criteria pollutants (discussed previously), including PM, O3, CO, SOx, NOx, and lead.
CARB is the state agency that regulates mobile sources throughout the state and oversees implementation of the state air quality laws and regulations, including the California Clean Air Act.
The EPA and the CARB have adopted ambient air quality standards establishing permissible levels of these pollutants to protect public health and the climate. Violations of ambient air quality standards are based on air pollutant monitoring data and are determined for each air pollutant. Attainment status for a pollutant means that a given air district meets the standard set by the EPA and/or CARB.
Risk Reduction Plan
To address the issue of diesel emissions in the state, CARB developed the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles. In addition to requiring more stringent emission standards for new on-road and off-road mobile sources and stationary diesel-fueled engines to reduce particulate matter emissions by 90 percent, the plan involves application of emission control strategies to existing diesel vehicles and equipment to reduce DPM (in additional to other pollutants). Implementation of this plan, in conjunction with stringent federal and CARB-adopted emission limits for diesel fueled vehicles and equipment (including off-road equipment), will significantly reduce emissions of DPM and NOX.
Regional
2017 Clean Air Plan
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is the agency primarily responsible for assuring that the federal and state ambient air quality standards are maintained in the San Francisco Bay Area. Regional air quality management districts, such as BAAQMD, must prepare air quality plans specifying how state and federal air quality standards will be met. BAAQMD’s most
5.3.1.2 905
CC 04-03-2024
905 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 34 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
recently adopted plan is the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan (2017 CAP). The 2017 CAP focuses on two related BAAQMD goals: protecting public health and protecting the climate. To protect public health, the 2017 CAP describes how BAAQMD will continue its progress toward attaining state and federal air quality standards and eliminating health risk disparities from exposure to air pollution among Bay Area communities. To protect the climate, the 2017 CAP includes control measures designed to reduce emissions of methane and other super-greenhouse gases (GHGs) that are potent climate pollutants in the near-term, and to decrease emissions of carbon dioxide by reducing fossil fuel combustion.20
CEQA Air Quality Guidelines
The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines are intended to serve as a guide for those who prepare or evaluate air quality impact analyses for projects and plans in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Jurisdictions in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin utilize the thresholds and methodology for assessing air quality impacts developed by BAAQMD within their CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. The guidelines include information on legal requirements, BAAQMD rules, methods of analyzing impacts, and recommended mitigation measures.
The current BAAQMD Guidelines were adopted in 2022, subsequent to the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND, and included updated screening thresholds and screening criteria for construction and operational criteria air pollutants. These changes are outlined in Chapter 4 of BAAQMD’s 2022 CEQA Guidelines. The current screening size for “City Park” projects is 10 acres for construction screening and 175 acres for operational screening.
Local
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies and strategies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to air quality.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy ES-4.1 Minimize the air quality impacts of new development projects and air quality impacts that affect new development.
Policy M-2.3 Promote pedestrian and bicycle improvements that improve connectivity between planning areas, neighborhoods and services, and foster a sense of community.
Strategy ES-4.1.1 Continue to review projects for potential generation of toxic air contaminants at the time of approval and confer with Bay Area Air Quality Management District on controls needed if impacts are uncertain
20 BAAQMD. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 19, 2017. http://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/air-qualityplans/current-plans. 906
CC 04-03-2024
906 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 35 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Policy/Strategy Description
Strategy ES-4.1.2 Continue to require water application to non-polluting dust control measures during demolition and the duration of the construction period.
Strategy LU-13.7.1 Provide active uses along the street frontage, bike lanes, sidewalks that support pedestrian-oriented activity, improved pedestrian crossings at street intersections, and attractive transit facilities (e.g., bus stops, benches, etc.).
Existing Conditions
The Bay Area is considered a non-attainment area for ground-level O3 and PM2.5 under both the federal Clean Air Act and state Clean Air Act. The area is also considered nonattainment for PM10 under the state act, but not the federal act. The area has attained both state and federal ambient air quality standards for CO. As part of an effort to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards for O3 and PM10, BAAQMD has established thresholds of significance for these air pollutants and their precursors. These thresholds are for O3 precursor pollutants (ROG and NOX), PM10, and PM2.5, and apply to both construction period and operational period impacts.
5.3.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a substantial
number of people?
Note: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the determinations. a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that implementation of the Master Plan would not conflict with the 2017 Clean Air Plan because the Master Plan would incorporate policies and actions consistent with
5.3.1.3 □
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
907
CC 04-03-2024
907 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 36 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
the 2017 Clean Air Plan control measures and implementation mechanisms, including mitigating urban heat island effects, decreasing energy use, implementing construction BMPs, and reducing water consumption. Because the improvements recommended in the Master Plan would not surpass the BAAQMD screening threshold size for park projects and the improvements would not significantly increase VMT, the 2019 IS/MND concluded that there would be no conflict with the 2017 Clean Air Plan.
21 As described in Section 4.6 Construction, for the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed the project would be constructed over the course of approximately 15 years as funding is made available for individual improvements. It is assumed that these improvements would be divided between three main phases, which would be approximately five years each. Although the project site is approximately 22.5-acres, each of the three main phases of project implementation would cover less than 10-acres of the site. Therefore, each phase of the project would be below the screening level for construction and operational criteria air pollutant emissions. In addition, because the project would not involve the construction of any large structures requiring substantial earthwork, all the required construction activities from all phases would not generate any significant pollutant emissions. Also, Section 17.04.050 of the City’s Municipal Code requires that all projects implement BAAQMD Basic Control Measures to control fugitive dust (i.e., particulate matter PM2.5 and PM10) during demolition, ground disturbing activities, and/or construction. Any projects that disturb more than one acre and have a construction period longer than two months in duration, are required to implement the following measures pursuant to the Municipal Code:
• Utilize off-road diesel-powered construction equipment that is rated by the U.S. EPA as Tier 4 or higher for equipment more than 25 horsepower. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Tier 4 interim emissions standard for a similarly sized engine, as defined by CARB regulations. Applicable construction documents shall clearly show the selected emission reduction strategy for construction equipment over 25 horsepower. • Ensure that the construction contractor shall maintain a list of all operating equipment in use on the project site for verification by the City. 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.
Implementation of the measures required under Section 17.04.050 of the City’s Municipal Code would further reduce potential air quality impacts resulting from project implementation by requiring the use of Tier 4 equipment with advanced emission control technologies. Therefore, 21 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 75 to 80.
908
CC 04-03-2024
908 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 37 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
based on the above discussion, the project would not generate emissions that could interfere with attainment of ambient air quality standards.
The 2017 Clean Air Plan includes 85 control measures that are designed to reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants and toxic air contaminants, reduce emissions of GHGs, decrease demand for fossil fuels, and decarbonize the energy system. Consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND, the project would implement measures consistent with applicable control measures by complying with General Plan policies and Master Plan standards/requirements. The project would comply with 2017 Clean Air Plan control measures BL4, NW2, SS38, TR9, and WR2 by planting additional trees on-site to contribute to a reduction in the urban heat island effect, implementing BAAQMD Basic Control Measures to control fugitive dust during construction activities, expanding bicycle infrastructure in the City, utilizing high-efficiency irrigation equipment, and planting droughttolerant and low-water use landscaping. Based on this discussion, the project would support the primary goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan by implementing actions consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan’s control measures, and would not hinder the implementation of any 2017 Clean Air Plan control measure.
As discussed in Section 5.17 Transportation, the project would be consistent with existing land use patterns and would not conflict with any adopted City transportation or multi-modal planning policies. The project would add enhanced pedestrian and bicycle facilities on-site to improve connectivity and encourage biking and walking which, in turn, would reduce VMT. In addition, local park projects generate local-serving trips, which would limit any significant increases in VMT resulting from the project. In addition, based on the project’s location adjacent to a high-quality transit corridor, the project would not be required to prepare a VMT analysis, pursuant to Section
17.08.030 of the Municipal Code, and would be assumed to have a less than significant VMT impact.
Therefore, the project would not increase VMT or population within the City, and would not conflict with the 2017 Clean Air Plan.
Based on this discussion, the project would not generate emissions that could interfere with attainment of ambient air quality standards, would implement actions consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan’s control measures, and would not result in a significant increase of VMT in the City.
Therefore, the project would result in the same impact as the approved project of not conflicting or obstructing implementation of the 2017 Clean Air Plan. (Same Impact as Approved Project) b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that future development under the Master Plan would be unlikely to generate significant short- or long-term emissions and the City would reevaluate individual projects once project-level details were available. The 2019 IS/MND concluded that if future projects met BAAQMD’s screening thresholds and implemented the recommended basic construction measures provided by BAAQMD, the Master Plan would result in less than significant air quality impacts at the 909
CC 04-03-2024
909 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 38 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
project-level. Since the Master Plan would not conflict with the 2017 Clean Air Plan and future projects would not result in significant construction or operational emissions, the Master Plan would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional air quality impacts.22 As discussed under checklist question a) above, the project would result in less than significant criteria air pollutants because the implementation of each phase of improvements would be below the BAAQMD screening level for construction and operational criteria air pollutant emissions. The project would not involve the construction of any large structures requiring substantial earthwork, and construction activities would implement BAAQMD Basic Control Measures to control fugitive dust (i.e., particulate matter PM2.5 and PM10) and would utilize Tier 4 construction equipment to further reduce emissions. In addition, the project would not conflict with the 2017 Clean Air Plan because it would not generate emissions that could interfere with attainment of ambient air quality standards, would implement actions consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan’s control measures, and would not significantly increase VMT in the City. For these reasons, the project would result in the same impact disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects under the Master Plan would not emit substantial levels of diesel particulate matter or other TACs for prolonged periods of time and criteria and hazardous air pollutant emissions resulting from construction would not exceed BAAQMD screening criteria. In addition, future projects would not exceed BAAQMD screening levels and would comply with the City’s construction and design standards which would control and reduce construction dust and exhaust emissions. The 2019 IS/MND, therefore, concluded that implementation of the Master Plan would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.23
As discussed under checklist questions a) and b) above, the three phases of project implementation would be below BAAQMD screening levels and construction activities would implement BAAQMD Basic Control Measures to control fugitive dust (i.e., particulate matter PM2.5 and PM10) and utilize Tier 4 equipment to reduce TAC emissions. Based on this discussion, the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
22 Ibid. Pages 80 to 83. 23 Ibid. Page 84.
910
CC 04-03-2024
910 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 39 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that although construction activities would produce localized, temporary odors, the Master Plan would not result in long-term odors that would adversely affect a substantial number of people.24
According to BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines, an odor source with five or more confirmed complaints per year averaged over three years is considered to have a significant impact. Future project construction activities could result in odorous emissions from diesel exhaust associated with construction equipment. Because of the temporary nature of these emissions and highly diffusive properties of diesel exhaust, odorous exposure of sensitive receptors to these emissions would be limited. The project and temporary construction odors are consistent with the assumptions in the 2019 IS/MND. Therefore, the project would result in the same impact as disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND.
In addition, BAAQMD has identified a variety of land uses and types of operations that would produce emissions that may lead to odors. Land uses identified include wastewater treatment plants, sanitary landfills, food processing facilities, coffee roasters, composting facilities, and confined animal facility/feed lot/dairy facility. The project proposes the continuation of an existing park and public facilities use, which does not fall under any of the land uses identified by BAAQMD to cause objectionable odors. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 24 Ibid. Page 84.
911
CC 04-03-2024
911 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 40 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Biological Resources
The discussion in this section is based in part on a Tree Inventory Report prepared by HortScience | Bartlett Consulting dated November 2022. This report is attached to this Initial Study/Addendum as Appendix B.
5.4.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
Endangered Species Act
Individual plant and animal species listed as rare, threatened, or endangered under state and federal Endangered Species Acts are considered special-status species. Federal and state endangered species legislation has provided the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) with a mechanism for conserving and protecting plant and animal species of limited distribution and/or low or declining populations.
Permits may be required from both the USFWS and CDFW if activities associated with a proposed project would result in the take of a species listed as threatened or endangered. To “take” a listed species, as defined by the State of California, is “to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill” these species. Take is more broadly defined by the federal Endangered Species Act to include harm of a listed species.
In addition to species listed under state and federal Endangered Species Acts, Sections 15380(b) and (c) of the CEQA Guidelines provide that all potential rare or sensitive species, or habitats capable of supporting rare species, must be considered as part of the environmental review process. These may include plant species listed by the California Native Plant Society and CDFW-listed Species of Special Concern.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits killing, capture, possession, or trade of migratory birds except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior.
Hunting and poaching are also prohibited. This includes direct and indirect acts, except for harassment and habitat modification, which are not included unless they result in direct loss of birds, nests, or eggs. The CDFW also protects migratory and nesting birds under California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800. The CDFW defines taking as causing abandonment and/or loss of reproductive efforts through disturbance.
5.4 5.4.1.1
912
CC 04-03-2024
912 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 41 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Sensitive Habitat Regulations
Wetland and riparian habitats are considered sensitive habitats under CEQA. They are also afforded protection under applicable federal, state, and local regulations, and are generally subject to regulation by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), CDFW, and/or the USFWS under provisions of the federal Clean Water Act (e.g., Sections 303, 304, 404) and State of California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act.
Fish and Game Code Section 1602
Streambeds and banks, as well as associated riparian habitat, are regulated by the CDFW per Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Work within the bed or banks of a stream or the adjacent riparian habitat requires a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW.
Regional and Local
Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan The Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (SCVHP) covers approximately 520,000 acres, or approximately 62 percent of Santa Clara County. It was developed and adopted through a partnership between Santa Clara County, the cities of San José, Morgan Hill, and Gilroy, Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water), Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), USFWS, and CDFW. The SCVHP is intended to promote the recovery of endangered species and enhance ecological diversity and function, while accommodating planned growth in southern Santa Clara County. The Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency is responsible for implementing the plan.
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to biological resources.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy ES-5.1 Manage the public and private development to ensure the protection and enhancement of its urban ecosystem.
Policy ES-5.2 Encourage the clustering of new development away from sensitive areas such as riparian corridors, wildlife habitat and corridors, public open space preserves and ridgelines. New developments in these areas must have a harmonious landscaping plan approved prior to development.
Policy ES-7.1 In public and private development, use Low Impact Development (LID) principles to manage stormwater by mimicking natural hydrology, minimizing grading and protecting or restoring natural drainage systems.
Strategy ES-5.1.1 Ensure that the City’s tree planting, landscaping and open space policies enhance the urban ecosystem by encouraging medians, pedestrian crossing curb-extensions, planting that is native, drought-tolerant, treats stormwater and enhances urban plant, aquatic and animal resources in both, private and public development. 913
CC 04-03-2024
913 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 42 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Policy/Strategy Description
Strategy ES-5.1.2 Ensure that sustainable landscaping design is incorporated in the development of City facilities, parks and private projects with the inclusion of measures such as tree protection, stormwater treatment and planting of native, drought tolerant landscaping that is beneficial to the environment.
Strategy ES-5.3.1 Continue to emphasize the planting of native, drought tolerant, pest resistant, noninvasive, climate appropriate plants and ground covers, particularly for erosion control and to prevent disturbance of the natural terrain.
Strategy ES-7.1.1 Continue to require topographical information; identification of creeks, streams and drainage areas; and grading plans for both public and private development proposals to ensure protection and efficient use of water resources.
Strategy LU-6.7.1 Establish and periodically revise a heritage tree list that includes trees of importance to the community.
Cupertino 2020 Parks and Recreation System Master Plan
The City’s Master Plan was adopted in February 2020, and outlines the City’s comprehensive plan for parks and recreational facilities in the City through the year 2040. The Master Plan is organized around seven goals, which include conservation, connection, equitable access, enhancement, activity, quality, and sustainability. Each of the seven goals has associated objectives that reflect the City’s desired outcomes and actions that provide ideas or strategies that help achieve the broader goals. The Master Plan has several goals and objectives that aim to protect natural resources and ensure that they are properly maintained and stewarded, including:
• Objective 1.C, which calls for the maintenance of natural areas in parks to control invasive species and preparation of a maintenance management plan to identify the tasks, frequencies, staffing, and resources needed to manage, maintain, and steward natural resources.
• Objective 1.D, which calls for the incorporation and enhancement of existing natural features when renovating parks or building new ones and the preservation of existing native or large canopy trees in parks.
• Objective 7.B, which calls for consideration of adding permeable surfacing to at least 75 percent of new paved trails and 50 percent of new parking lots, installing water-efficient, climate-controlled irrigation systems, water efficient fixtures in all new restrooms and water fountains, and integration of native and/or climate appropriate plants where possible.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
The City of Cupertino recognizes the substantial economic, environmental, and aesthetic importance of its tree population. The City finds that the preservation of “protected trees” on private and public property, and the protection of all trees during construction, is necessary for the best interests of the City and of the citizens and public (Municipal Code Chapter 14.18).
The City’s Municipal Code calls for protection of “protected” trees and requires a permit prior to their removal. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 14.18.050, protected trees include:
914
CC 04-03-2024
914 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 43 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
• Heritage trees in all zoning districts. Heritage trees are defined by the City any tree or grove of trees which, because of factors including, but not limited to, its historic value, unique quality, girth, height, or species, has been found by the Planning Commission to have a special significance to the community;
• All mature specimen trees of the following species on private property:
(1) 1. Quercus (native oak tree species), including:
(a) Quercus agrifolia (Coast Live Oak);
(b) Quercus lobata (Valley Oak);
(c) Quercus kelloggii (Black Oak);
(d) Quercus douglasii (Blue Oak);
(e) Quercus wislizeni (Interior Live Oak);
(2) Aesculus californica (California Buckeye);
(3) Acer macrophyllum (Big Leaf Maple);
(4) Cedrus deodara (Deodar Cedar);
(5) Cedrus atlantica 'Glauca' (Blue Atlas Cedar);
(6) Umbellularia californica (Bay Laurel or California Bay); and (7) Platanus racemosa (Western Sycamore).
• Any development tree(s); and
• Approved privacy protection planting in R-1 zoning districts.
Any protected tree in any zoning district shall not be removed without first obtaining a tree removal permit. Replacement trees, of a species and size as designated by the approval authority and consistent with the replacement value of each tree to be removed, shall be planted on the subject property on which the tree(s) are to be removed. The City’s replacement tree ratios, as identified in Municipal Code Section 14.18.190, are listed below.
Table 5.4-1: City Tree Replacement Ratios
Trunk Size of Removed Tree Corresponding Replacement Tree Up to 12 inches One 24-inch box tree
Over 12 inches and up to 18 inches Two 24-inch box trees or one 36-inch box tree Over 18 inches and up to 36 inches Two 24-inch box trees or one 36-inch box tree Over 36 inches One 36-inch box tree
Heritage Tree of any size One 48-inch box tree
If a replacement tree for the removal of a non-heritage tree or tree with trunk size equal to or less than 36-inches cannot be reasonably planted on the subject property, an in-lieu tree replacement fee shall be paid to the City’s tree fund to add or replace trees on public property in the vicinity of 915
CC 04-03-2024
915 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 44 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
the subject property or add trees or landscaping on City property (Municipal Code Section
14.18.160).
Existing Conditions
The project site is within an urban area and currently developed with an operational park, senior center, and community center. The site provides habitat and foraging opportunities for urbanadapted birds. Habitats primarily associated with Bay Area special-status species, such as riparian, wetland, salt marsh, freshwater marsh, and serpentine grassland habitats, are not present on or adjacent to the site. The nearest waterway is Stevens Creek, which is located approximately 0.8- mile to the west of the project site. Although these habitats are not located on-site, there are several special status species that have been recorded in the region, including, the California Clapper Rail, California Condor, California Least Tern, Marbled Murrelet, California Red-legged Frog, California Tiger Salamander, Foothill Yellow-legged Frog, and Monarch Butterfly.25 The primary biological resources on-site are trees. The project site currently contains approximately 500 on-site trees, none of which are designated as Heritage trees under Section 14.18.090 of the City Code. Although there are no officially designated Heritage trees, all of the trees within the park have a protected status as public trees (pursuant to Chapter 14.12 of the City Code).
A tree inventory report evaluated the health of the trees on-site and found approximately 64 percent of the trees were in good condition, 26 percent were in fair condition, nine percent were in poor condition, and less than one percent were dead. The predominant tree species on-site are coast redwoods and callery pears, which comprise approximately 34 percent and 10 percent of the trees within the project site, respectively. The largest tree identified is a coast redwood tree located adjacent to the southwest corner of the softball field, which has a trunk diameter of approximately 60 inches and is in excellent health.
The tree inventory report also evaluated the suitability for preservation for each tree on-site. Of the approximately 500 trees on-site, 52 percent had high suitability for preservation, 31 percent had moderate suitability for preservation, and 17 percent had low suitability for preservation. For additional information regarding the trees on-site, see Appendix B. 25 United Stated Fish and Wildlife Service. “Information for Planning and Consultation.” Accessed October 24, 2023. https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/KZATYFQTTRG3DAC6FSNN2QSDOI/resources.
5.4.1.2 916
CC 04-03-2024
916 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 45 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
5.4.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or United States Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS)?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS? The 2019 IS/MND determined that some Master Plan projects could impact special-status species, sensitive natural communities, wetlands, wildlife corridors, and/or wildlife nursery sites. To mitigate □
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
917
CC 04-03-2024
917 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 46 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
that potential impact to a less than significant level, the 2019 IS/MND identified 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which is described below.26
2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: The Capital Improvement Program (“CIP”) for Parks and Recreation improvements shall be reviewed annually by staff to identify projects that could potentially affect special-status species, sensitive natural communities, wetlands, wildlife corridors, and/or native wildlife nursery sites. Any such projects shall be reviewed by a professional in field biology. The biological professional shall:
a) Research the potential occurrence of special-status species and sensitive communities in the areas affected by CIP projects by reviewing the California Natural Diversity Database, California Native Plant Society Inventory, IPaC, or other appropriate databases, by contacting resource agencies such as the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and/or NOAA Fisheries Service, or other appropriate methods.
b) For each CIP project approved for funding that could impact special-status species, sensitive natural communities, wetlands, wildlife corridors, and/or nursery sites during construction or as a result of the proposed use, including maintenance, prior to the start of construction identify all resource agency permits required for the project and ensure that the project is modified as necessary to minimize effects on biological resources and avoid impacts.
c) For each CIP project that could have a significant impact on special-status species, sensitive natural communities, wetlands, wildlife corridors, and/or native wildlife nursery sites, specify measures to avoid impacts or to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level that will be implemented as part of the project. Indicate the timing of when the measures would be implemented (e.g., prior to construction activities, during construction, postconstruction etc.). These measures may include actions such as the following currently accepted measures:
1. Pre-construction surveys for special-status plant and animal species, nesting birds, and roosting bats in the correct season and using CNPS, CDFW and/or other accepted protocols, as appropriate, to identify if the species are present and would be impacted by the project;
2. Wildlife exclusion fencing to prevent species, such as protected amphibians and reptiles, from entering the work site. Regular fence 26 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 104 to 105.
918
CC 04-03-2024
918 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 47 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
inspections, to assure that species are not trapped and to maintain the integrity of the fence.
3. Clear delineation of the work area and/or protected areas in the field to prevent construction activities from extending beyond required work areas and into nearby natural areas that contain sensitive species habitat or sensitive natural communities or wetlands.
Environmentally sensitive areas may also be delineated on construction drawings for certain projects.
4. Silt fencing or other erosion control measures to protect water quality downstream of the project and the biological resources that rely on suitable water quality.
5. Worker environmental awareness training provided by a qualified professional (typically a biologist) prior to the start of any project activities that affect the physical environment to educate workers about the presence of environmentally sensitive areas, what species may be present, what laws protect the species, and what to do if a special-status species is encountered.
6. Construction site sanitation to dispose of food and beverage waste and associated wrappers or containers to minimize site
attractiveness to wildlife during construction.
7. Wildlife protection measures, such as minimizing the use of monofilament netting which can ensnare reptiles and amphibians, covering trenches near suitable habitat so that species are not trapped and unable to hide from a predator, and/or daily preconstruction sweeps to verify special-status species are not present in the work area.
8. Actions to take if special-status species are discovered, such as establishment of buffer zones or other measures acceptable to resource agencies to protect the individual species.
As discussed in Section 5.4.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site is within an urban area and is currently developed. The site provides habitat and foraging opportunities for urban-adapted birds and does not contain sensitive habitat that supports special-status species. Of the approximately 500 on-site trees, a total of approximately 140 trees would be removed under the project. These trees could provide nesting habitat for birds, including migratory birds and raptors. Nesting birds are protected under provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 2800.
Construction of the project during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. Disturbance that causes abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered a taking by the CDFW. Any loss of fertile eggs, nesting raptors, or any activities resulting in nest abandonment would constitute an impact.
Construction activities such as tree removal and site grading that disturb a nesting bird or raptor onsite or immediately adjacent to the construction zone would also constitute an impact. 919
CC 04-03-2024
919 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 48 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
In compliance with the MBTA, CDFW code, and 2019 IS/MND measure C1 in Mitigation Measure BIO-1, the project would conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting birds if construction activities occur during the bird nesting season (between February 1 and August 31) to reduce impacts to nesting birds to a less than significant level by completing preconstruction surveys to ensure no nesting birds or nests are located on-site during construction, and if they are, establishing buffer zones around nests during construction. (Same Impact as Approved Project) b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would reduce any potential impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities from projects proposed under the Master Plan a less than significant level.27 As discussed in Section 5.4.1.2 Existing Conditions, there are no sensitive habitats on-site. The nearest waterway is Stevens Creek, which is located approximately 0.8-mile west of the project site and is separated from the site by existing development and SR 85. Although construction activities on-site would not present a direct risk to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, the project would still implement measure C4 from 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which requires installation of silt fencing or other erosion control measures to prevent polluted runoff.
This would reduce the risk of indirect impacts to riparian habitats.
Therefore, the project would not have an impact on state or federally protected riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans and policies, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would reduce any potential impacts to state or federally protected wetlands from projects proposed under the Master Plan a less than significant level.28
As discussed in Section 5.4.1.2 Existing Conditions, there are no state or federally protected wetlands on or adjacent to the site. The nearest waterway is Stevens Creek, which is located 27 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 104 to 105. 28 Ibid. Pages 104 to 105. 920
CC 04-03-2024
920 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 49 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
approximately 0.8-mile west of the project site and is separated from the site by existing development and SR 85. Although construction activities on-site would not present a direct risk to any wetlands, the project would still implement measure C4 from 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure BIO-1 which requires installation of silt fencing or other erosion control measures to prevent polluted runoff thereby reducing the risk of indirect impacts.
Therefore, the project would not have an impact on state or federally protected wetlands, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would reduce any potential impacts to native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species and established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors from projects under the Master Plan a less than significant level.29
Because the project site is surrounded by urban development, the site provides minimal dispersal habitat for native wildlife and does not function as a wildlife movement corridor. As discussed above, there are no riparian or wetland habitats on or adjacent to the site. The project would implement measures C1 and C4 from 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure BIO-1 to protect nesting birds, if present during construction, and reduce the risk of polluted stormwater runoff from the site. The project would, therefore, not substantially interfere with the movement of fish or wildlife species, nor interfere with established corridors or wildlife nursery sites, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects would be consistent with the City’s General Plan policies, Municipal Code Chapter 14.18, and the biology-related Master Plan goals, objectives, and actions.
30 General Plan Policies
The General Plan contains policies and strategies (Policies ES-5.1 and ES-7.1, Strategies ES-5.1.2 and ES-5.2.1) that protect the urban ecosystem, enhance natural vegetation and sustainable 29 Ibid. Pages 104 to 105. 30 Ibid. Page 106.
921
CC 04-03-2024
921 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 50 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
landscaping, preserve natural hydrology, and protect riparian corridors. The project would be consistent with these policies and strategies by:
• As discussed under checklist question a), the project would comply with 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure BIO-1 by conducting a pre-construction nesting bird survey if construction activities would take place during nesting season. This would protect any potential nesting birds by establishing a protective buffer around the nests. The project would install new, climate appropriate landscaping throughout the project site, including a variety of California native plant species and drought-tolerant species that are low-water use.
• The project would result in the removal of approximately 140 trees. The proposed project would replace the removed trees by planting approximately 150 climate appropriate replacement trees throughout the project area. In addition, construction activities would implement appropriate measures to prevent polluted runoff, consistent with the requirements of 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure BIO-1.
For these reasons, the project would be consistent with General Plan policies related to protecting biological resources. (Same Impact as Approved Project) Municipal Code Chapter 14.18
Chapter 14.18 of the Municipal Code includes regulations regarding the City’s Protected Tree Ordinance, Standards for the Protection of Trees during Grading and Construction, and Replacement Tree Guidelines. As discussed in Section 5.4.1.2 Existing Conditions, none of the trees on-site are designated Heritage Trees, but they are classified as Protected Trees because they are in a City park. Replacement tree ratios for Protected Trees are not explicitly stated in the Municipal Code and the City has determined that a 1:1 replacement ratio is appropriate for this project. The project would remove approximately 140 trees and plant approximately 150 replacement trees, which exceeds the 1:1 replacement ratio. In addition, the project would comply with Section
14.18.200 of the Municipal Code which outlines requirements for protecting trees during demolition, grading, and construction operations. Based on this discussion, the project would be consistent with Municipal Code regulations related to protecting biological resources. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
Parks and Recreation System Master Plan
The Master Plan has several goals and objectives that aim to protect natural resources and ensure that they are properly maintained and stewarded (Objectives 1C, 1D, and 7B). Consistent with these objectives, the project would prioritize native plants in the area and maintain the park to limit the proliferation of invasive species, preserve existing native canopy trees, and incorporate green infrastructure elements such as bioswales and permeable pavers throughout the site. In addition, the new passive garden walk in the southern portion of the site would replace under-used areas of lawn with native plant species, consistent with Objective 7B. Based on this discussion, the project would be consistent with Master Plan goals and objectives related to protecting biological resources. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
922
CC 04-03-2024
922 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 51 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of the Master Plan would not conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan because the City is not a participating local partner in the SCVHP and the SCVHP does not include any locations within the City boundary. 31 Therefore, there would
be no impact to Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
31 Ibid. Page 106.
923
CC 04-03-2024
923 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 52 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Cultural Resources
The discussion in this section is based in part on a Phase I Cultural Resource Inventory prepared by Albion Environmental, Inc., dated October 2022 and revised in October 2023. A copy of the Phase I Cultural Resource Inventory, which contains confidential information related to archaeological resources, is on file at the City.
5.5.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
National Historic Preservation Act
Federal protection is legislated by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) and the Archaeological Resource Protection Act of 1979. These laws maintain processes for determination of the effects on historical properties eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Section 106 of the NHPA and related regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 800) constitute the primary federal regulatory framework guiding cultural resources investigations and require consideration of effects on properties that are listed or eligible for listing in the NRHP.
Impacts to properties listed in the NRHP must be evaluated under CEQA.
California Register of Historical Resources
The California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) is administered by the State Office of Historic Preservation and encourages protection of resources of architectural, historical, archeological, and cultural significance. The CRHR identifies historic resources for state and local planning purposes and affords protections under CEQA. Under Public Resources Code Section 5024.1(c), a resource may be eligible for listing in the CRHR if it meets any of the NRHP criteria.
Historical resources eligible for listing in the CRHR must meet the significance criteria described previously and retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. A resource that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the CRHR if it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical information or specific data.
The concept of integrity is essential to identifying the important physical characteristics of historical resources and, therefore, in evaluating adverse changes to them. Integrity is defined as “the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance.” The processes of determining integrity are similar for both the CRHR and NRHP and use the same seven variables or aspects to define integrity
5.5 5.5.1.1
924
CC 04-03-2024
924 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 53 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
that are used to evaluate a resource's eligibility for listing. These seven characteristics include 1) location, 2) design, 3) setting, 4) materials, 5) workmanship, 6) feeling, and 7) association.
California Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act The California Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act applies to both state and private lands. The act requires that upon discovery of human remains, construction or excavation activity must cease and the county coroner be notified.
Public Resources Code Sections 5097 and 5097.98
Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines specifies procedures to be used in the event of an unexpected discovery of Native American human remains on non-federal land. These procedures are outlined in Public Resources Code Sections 5097 and 5097.98. These codes protect such remains from disturbance, vandalism, and inadvertent destruction, establish procedures to be implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered during construction of a project, and establish the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) as the authority to resolve disputes regarding disposition of such remains.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, in the event of human remains discovery, no further disturbance is allowed until the county coroner has made the necessary findings regarding the origin and disposition of the remains. If the remains are of a Native American, the county coroner must notify the NAHC. The NAHC then notifies those persons most likely to be related to the Native American remains. The code section also stipulates the procedures that the descendants may follow for treating or disposing of the remains and associated grave goods.
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
Memorial Park, the Community Center, and the Sports Complex adjacent to the project site are all considered Community Landmarks in the City’s General Plan. The Gazebo Trim within Memorial Park is identified as a Historic Site in the City’s General Plan and the Community Center Sports Complex adjacent to the site is a designated Community Landmark. The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies including, but not limited to, the policies listed below pertaining to cultural resources.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy LU-6.2 Projects on Historic Sites shall meet the Secretary of Interior Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties.
Policy LU-6.3 Projects on Historic Sites, Commemorative Sites and Community Landmarks shall provide a plaque, reader board and/or other educational tools on the site to explain the historic significance of the resource. The plaque shall include the city seal, name of resource, date it was built, a written description, and photograph. The plaque shall be placed in a location where the public can view the information.
Policy LU-6.8 Promote education related to the city’s history through public art in public and private development.
925
CC 04-03-2024
925 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 54 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy RPC-6.3 Utilize parks as locations of art and culture and to educate the community about the City’s history, and explore the potential to use art in facilities and utilities when located in parks.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
Section 17.04.050 of the City’s Municipal Code outlines standard environmental protection permit submittal requirements that apply to development projects within the City. Projects in areas with known cultural resources, as identified in the 2015 General Plan EIR prepared by the City, are required to implement additional measures prior to ground disturbing activities. These include conducting a subsurface investigation of the project site to determine the potential extent of any buried archaeological materials, evaluating the materials (if discovered), and identifying ways to minimize negative impacts from development on the discovered materials.
Cupertino General Conditions
The City of Cupertino maintains a list of general conditions that contractors must implement or comply with while working on municipal projects. The following General Condition relates to cultural resources.
General Condition 7.18: Historic or Archeological Items. (A) Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor must ensure that all persons performing Work at the Project site are required to immediately notify the Project Manager, upon discovery of any potential historic or archeological items, including historic or prehistoric ruins, a burial ground, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints or other archeological, paleontological or historical feature on the Project site (collectively, “Historic or Archeological Items”).
(B) Discovery; Cessation of Work. Upon discovery of any potential Historic or Archeological Items, Work must be stopped within an 85-foot radius of the find and may not resume until authorized in writing by the City. If required by City, Contractor must assist in protecting or recovering the Historic or Archeological Items, with any such assistance to be compensated as Extra Work on a time and materials basis under Article 6, Contract Modification. At the City’s discretion, a suspension of Work required due to discovery of Historic or Archeological Items may be treated as Excusable Delay pursuant to Article 5, or as a suspension for convenience under Article 13.
Existing Conditions
Historic Resources
The City of Cupertino was historically known for fruit agriculture and was dominated by prune, plum, apricot, and cherry orchards. Up until the late 1800s, Cupertino also had a variety of grape vineyards and wineries. In the early- to mid- 1900s, Cupertino began to develop more housing, and by the mid- to late-1900s more commercial and industrial uses were constructed in the City.
5.5.1.2 926
CC 04-03-2024
926 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 55 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
The project site contained orchards during the 1800s and early- to mid-1900s, and up until approximately 1965, a farmstead was located in the southernmost portion of the site. In addition, a second farmstead was located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site. Given the historic agricultural use of the property and the historic farmsteads that were located on and adjacent to the site, a pedestrian survey of the project site was completed in September 2022. The survey located two historic-era resource clusters, which consisted of three historical ceramic fragments per cluster. One cluster was observed inside the central area of the site, and the other was on the east perimeter of the park parallel to Anton Way. Although ceramic materials were found on-site, these materials were located in areas that were consistently disturbed by construction activity and do not represent intact archaeological deposits. No other cultural resources were noted on-site. Based on this discussion, the central and southern portion of the project site where the historic farmsteads were located have a moderate potential to contain historic-era archaeological deposits.
To be considered a historic resource, a site must meet certain sets of criteria including relevance to local and regional history, its association with historic figures, and the distinctiveness of its architecture. Memorial Park contains one of the City’s Historic Sites, which is the trim of the gazebo located in the central portion of the park adjacent to Anton Way. The Community Center Sports Complex, which is adjacent to the eastern park boundary, is also designated as a Community Landmark.32 There are no resources on-site that are listed on or eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHP.
Prehistoric Resources
A records search at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) was conducted to identify all recorded archaeological sites on and within one-quarter mile of the project site. The record search found a single Native American resource within one-quarter mile of the project site and no known resources on-site.
The soils mapped at the project site are from the Holocene era, which typically have a moderate sensitivity for buried archaeological sites. Sites with prehistoric resources are typically located in relatively flat areas in proximity to sources of fresh water. The nearest freshwater source is Stevens Creek, located approximately 0.8-mile west of the site. Based on soil composition under the site and these geographic factors, the project site has a moderate sensitivity to contain buried prehistoric resources.
32 City of Cupertino. Cupertino General Plan Community Vision 2040. October 15, 2015. Figure LU-3. 927
CC 04-03-2024
927 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 56 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
5.5.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource as
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that although most existing City parks do not contain historic resources, there are several historic resources in or adjacent to parks and recreational facilities (including within and adjacent to Memorial Park) that could be affected by implementation of the Master Plan. The 2019 IS/MND concluded that, since future projects would be designed and developed consistent with adopted City policies regarding protection of cultural/historic resources and would be analyzed in separate CEQA documents once project plans are developed, implementation of the Master Plan would have a less than significant impact on historic resources.33
The site and adjacent sites do not contain any resources listed on or eligible for listing on the NRHP or the CRHP. As discussed in Section 5.5.1.2 Existing Conditions, Memorial Park contains a designated Historic Site, which is the trim of the gazebo. The Community Center Sports Complex adjacent to the eastern park boundary is designated as a Community Landmark. None of the proposed improvements would cause a substantial adverse change to the Community Center Sports Complex because the improvements would only occur on the project site, no physical changes would be made to the Community Center Sports Complex.
The gazebo was previously located on an artificial island in the pond that was located within the park. During the recent construction to remove the concrete lining and install new landscaping, the gazebo was fenced off and protected from demolition activities. The project would not include any 33 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 113 to 114.
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
928
CC 04-03-2024
928 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 57 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
changes to the gazebo or its location, and it would continue to be protected during any future construction activities under the project. With implementation of the project, the gazebo would be surrounded by lawn area and a new pedestrian walkway would provide access to the gazebo for pedestrians. Because there would be no changes to the gazebo on-site or the Community Center Sports Complex on the adjacent property, impacts to these historic resources would be less than significant, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? The 2019 IS/MND determined that although many of the improvements proposed by the Master Plan would be projects with minimal ground disturbing components, any ground disturbing work would have the potential to disturb unknown archaeological resources. To mitigate these potential impacts to a less than significant level, future projects would be required to implement standard City General Conditions related to historic or archaeological items and 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure CULT-1, which is described below.34
2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure CULT-1: Upon discovery of possible buried prehistoric or historic cultural materials, work within 25 feet of the find must be halted and the City must be notified. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist who meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications and Standards to review and evaluate the find. Construction work shall not begin again until the archaeological or cultural resources consultant has been allowed to examine the cultural materials, assess their significance, and offer proposals for any additional exploratory measures deemed necessary for the further evaluation of, and/or mitigation of adverse impacts to, any potential prehistorical or historical resources or unique archaeological resources that have been exposed.
If the discovery is determined to be a unique archaeological or historical resource, and if avoidance of the resource is not possible, the archaeologist shall inform the City of the necessary plans for treatment of the find(s) and mitigation of impacts.
The City shall insure that the treatment program is completed. The work shall be performed by the archaeologist and shall result in a detailed technical report that must be filed with the Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University.
Construction in the immediate vicinity of the find must not recommence until treatment has been completed.
34 Ibid. 114 to 116.
929
CC 04-03-2024
929 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 58 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code of the State of California, in the event of the discovery of human remains during construction, there will be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains. The County Medical Examiner/Coroner will be notified and will determine whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American and are not subject to his or her authority, he or she will notify the California Native American Heritage Commission, which will attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native American(s).
In anticipation of additional discoveries during construction, Archaeological Sensitivity Training shall be carried out by a qualified archaeologist for all personnel who will engage in ground moving activities on the site prior to resuming construction.
If a newly discovered resource is, or is suspected to be, Native American in origin, the resource shall be treated as a significant Tribal Cultural Resource, pursuant to Public Resource Code 21074, until the County has determined otherwise with the consultation of a qualified archaeologist.
The City shall coordinate with the archaeologist to develop an appropriate treatment plan for any resources that are discovered. The plan may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to address treatment of the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. If appropriate, the archaeologist may introduce archaeological monitoring on all or part of the site. An archaeological report shall be written detailing all archaeological finds and submitted to the City and the Northwest Information Center.
The City shall ensure that appropriate construction conditions are included in any contract that has the potential for ground disturbing operations. All excavation contracts for the project shall contain provisions for stopping work in the vicinity of a find exposing archaeological resources during subsurface construction.
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure CULT-1 and City General Conditions related to historic or archaeological items would mitigate impacts to archaeological resources to a less than significant level.
During a survey of the project site, historic-era resource clusters consisting of historical ceramic fragments were found in the central area of the site. Although these ceramic materials were found on-site, they were located in areas that were consistently disturbed by construction activity and do not represent intact archaeological deposits. As discussed in Section 5.5.1.2 Existing Conditions, the site has a moderate sensitivity for pre-historic archaeological resources based on the soil profile and topography and a moderate sensitivity for historic-era archaeological resources based on the historic presence of farmsteads on and adjacent to the site. The sensitivity for historic-era 930
CC 04-03-2024
930 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 59 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
archaeological resources on-site is concentrated in the southern and central areas of the site.
Implementation of the project would involve ground-disturbing activities during construction in these sensitive areas that could potentially uncover historic-era archaeological resources.
Consistent with Municipal Code Section 17.04.050, the project shall conduct a subsurface investigation (Extended Phase I Study) prior to the start of ground disturbing activities. Specifically, once design-level plans are available for the proposed improvements in the areas of the park with historic-era sensitivity and the extent of required ground disturbance is determined, an Extended Phase I Study shall be performed to confirm the presence/absence of unknown historical archaeological resources. Depending on the depth of ground disturbance required for individual improvements, the Extended Phase I Study could include either hand excavation or mechanical trenching in the park to test for historical archaeological resources. If any improvements under the project require ground-disturbing activities that reach a depth below four feet, an Extended Phase I Study shall be performed in the vicinity of those improvements to confirm the presence/absence of pre-colonial archaeological resources.
Should any archaeological resources be discovered during the subsurface testing, the project would comply with the requirements of 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure CULT-1 and City General Condition 7.18 to ensure that appropriate treatment plans are prepared under consultation with a qualified archaeologist. Based on this discussion, impacts to archaeological resources would be less than significant, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that adherence to Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.9 of the Public Resources Code (as required by 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure CULT-1) would reduce the risk of disturbing human remains to a less than significant level.35 As discussed above in checklist question b), the project site has moderate sensitivity for pre-historic resources and ground-disturbing activities during project construction could impact unknown underground resources, including human remains. With implementation of the City General Condition 7.18 and 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measure CULT-1 and compliance with Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and PRC Section 5097.9, the project would reduce impacts to human remains to a less than significant level by pausing work and contacting the Santa Clara County Coroner to determine if the remains are Native American. Based on this discussion, the project would result in the same impact as disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
35 Ibid. Page 116.
931
CC 04-03-2024
931 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 60 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Energy
5.6.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND, with the exception of the adoption of the City’s Climate Action Plan
2.0 in 2022. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
Energy Star and Fuel Efficiency
At the federal level, energy standards set by the EPA apply to numerous consumer products and appliances (e.g., the EnergyStar™ program). The EPA also sets fuel efficiency standards for automobiles and other modes of transportation.
Renewables Portfolio Standard Program
In 2002, California established its Renewables Portfolio Standard Program, with the goal of increasing the percentage of renewable energy in the state's electricity mix to 20 percent of retail sales by 2010. Governor Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, requiring statewide emissions reductions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. In 2008, EO S-14-08 was signed into law, requiring retail sellers of electricity serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by 2020. In October 2015, Governor Brown signed SB 350 to codify California’s climate and clean energy goals. A key provision of SB 350 requires retail sellers and publicly owned utilities to procure 50 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2030. SB 100, passed in 2018, requires 100 percent of electricity in California to be provided by 100 percent renewable and carbon-free sources by 2045.
Executive Order B-55-18 To Achieve Carbon Neutrality
In September 2018, Governor Brown issued an executive order, EO-B-55-18 To Achieve Carbon Neutrality, setting a statewide goal “to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter.” The executive order requires CARB to “ensure future Scoping Plans identify and recommend measures to achieve the carbon neutrality goal.” EO-B-55-18 supplements EO S-3-05 by requiring not only emissions reductions, but also that, by no later than 2045, the remaining emissions be offset by equivalent net removals of CO2 from the atmosphere through sequestration.
California Building Standards Code
The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, as specified in Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations (Title 24), was established in 1978 in response to a
5.6 5.6.1.1
932
CC 04-03-2024
932 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 61 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. Title 24 is updated approximately every three years.36 Compliance with Title 24 is mandatory at the time new building permits are issued by city and county governments.37
California Green Building Standards Code
CALGreen establishes mandatory green building standards for buildings in California. CALGreen was developed to reduce GHG emissions from buildings, promote environmentally responsible and healthier places to live and work, reduce energy and water consumption, and respond to state environmental directives. CALGreen covers five categories: planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material and resource efficiency, and indoor environmental quality.
Advanced Clean Cars Program
CARB adopted the Advanced Clean Cars II program in 2022 in coordination with the EPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The program combines the control of smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated set of requirements for vehicle model years 2026 through 2035. The program promotes development of environmentally superior passenger cars and other vehicles, as well as saving the consumer money through fuel savings.38 Regional and Local
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies and strategies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to energy resources.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy ES-2.1 Encourage the maximum feasible conservation and efficient use of electrical power and natural gas resources for new and existing residences, businesses, industrial and public uses.
Strategy ES-2.1.2 Prepare and implement a comprehensive energy management plan for all applicable municipal facilities and equipment to achieve the energy goals established in the City’s Climate Action Plan. Track the City’s energy use and report findings as part of the Climate Action Plan reporting schedule. Embed this plan into the City’s Environmentally Preferable 36 California Building Standards Commission. “California Building Standards Code.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes#@ViewBag.JumpTo. 37 California Energy Commission (CEC). “2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2019-buildingenergy-efficiency. 38 California Air Resources Board. “Advanced Clean Cars II.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/advanced-clean-cars-ii 933
CC 04-03-2024
933 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 62 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Policy/Strategy Description
Procurement Policy to ensure measures are achieved through all future procurement and construction practices.
Strategy ES-2.1.5 Encourage the inclusion of additional shade trees, vegetated stormwater treatment and landscaping to reduce the “heat island effect” in development projects.
Strategy ES-2.1.9 Continue to encourage fuel-efficient transportation modes such as alternative fuel vehicles, driverless vehicles, public transit, car and vanpooling, community and regional shuttle systems, car and bike sharing programs, safe routes to schools, commuter benefits, and pedestrian and bicycle paths through infrastructure investment, development incentives, and community education.
City of Cupertino Climate Action Plan 2.0
Cupertino’s Climate Action Plan 2.0 was adopted by City Council on August 16, 2022, and contains a series of measures and actions meant to reduce GHG emissions and meet established community goals. The Climate Action Plan 2.0 includes actions in Measure TR-1 that encourage the City to develop facilities to support active modes of transportation, actions under Measure TR-5 that encourage the decarbonization of off-road equipment, including landscaping equipment, and actions under Measure CS-1 that would increase carbon sequestration through tree planting.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
Chapter 16.58 of the City’s Municipal Code outlines the Green Building Standards applicable to development within the City. The provisions of this chapter apply to the planning, design, operation, construction, use, and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure, unless otherwise indicated. This chapter also requires that development comply with the City’s local water-efficient landscape ordinance, which is further detailed in Chapter 14.15 of the Municipal Code. Chapter 17.04 outlines the standard environmental protection requirements that projects in the City must follow. These include requirements for air quality permits, GHG emissions, and energy consumption.
Cupertino General Conditions
The City of Cupertino maintains a list of general conditions that contractors must implement or comply with while working on municipal projects. The following General Condition relates to solid waste management and reducing energy use.
General Condition 7.19 Recycling and Waste Disposal
(C) Recyclable Materials. Contractor must recycle at least 65 percent of all materials at an approved recycling facility.
934
CC 04-03-2024
934 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 63 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Existing Conditions
Total energy usage in California was approximately 6,278.7 trillion British thermal units (Btu) in the year 2021, the most recent year for which this data was available.39 Out of the 50 states, California is ranked second in total energy consumption and 49th in energy consumption per capita. The breakdown by sector was approximately 20 percent (14,732.2 trillion Btu) for residential uses, 19 percent (1,396.7 trillion Btu) for commercial uses, 23.2 percent (1,704.4 trillion Btu) for industrial uses, and 37.8 percent (2,785 trillion Btu) for transportation.40 This energy is primarily supplied in the form of natural gas, petroleum, nuclear electric power, and hydroelectric power.
Electricity
Electricity in Santa Clara County in 2021 was consumed primarily by the non-residential sector (74 percent), followed by the residential sector consuming 23 percent. In 2021, a total of approximately 16,904 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity was consumed in Santa Clara County.41 The community-owned Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE) is the electricity provider for the City of Cupertino.42 SVCE sources the electricity, and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) delivers it to customers over their existing utility lines. Customers are automatically enrolled in the GreenStart plan and can upgrade to the GreenPrime plan. Both options are considered 100 percent GHG-emission free.
Demand for electricity on-site is generated by the senior center, community center, lighting, sound equipment, and irrigation equipment.
Natural Gas
PG&E provides natural gas services within the City of Cupertino. In 2022, California’s natural gas supply came from a combination of in-state production and imported supplies from other western states and Canada.43 In 2021 residential and commercial customers in California used 33 percent of the state’s natural gas, power plants used 0.01 percent, the industrial sector used 33 percent.44 In 39 United States Energy Information Administration. “State Profile and Energy Estimates, 2020.” Accessed August 4, 2023. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2. 40 United States Energy Information Administration. “State Profile and Energy Estimates, 2020.” Accessed August 4, 2023. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2. 41 California Energy Commission. Energy Consumption Data Management System. “Electricity Consumption by County.” Accessed August 16, 2023. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx. 42 Silicon Valley Clean Energy. “Frequently Asked Questions.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.svcleanenergy.org/faqs. 43 California Gas and Electric Utilities. 2022 California Gas Report. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.socalgas.com/sites/default/files/Joint_Utility_Biennial_Comprehensive_California_Gas_Report_2022 .pdf. 44 United States Energy Information Administration. “Natural Gas Consumption by End Use. 2021.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2.
5.6.1.2 935
CC 04-03-2024
935 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 64 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
2021, Santa Clara County used less than one percent of the state’s total consumption of natural gas.45 There is no natural gas use with the park, but the community center and senior center both contain appliances that utilize natural gas.
Fuel for Motor Vehicles
In 2022, California produced 124 million barrels of crude oil and in 2019, 15.4 billion gallons of gasoline were sold in California.46, 47 The average fuel economy for light-duty vehicles (autos, pickups, vans, and sport utility vehicles) in the United States has steadily increased from about 13.1 miles per gallon (mpg) in the mid-1970s to 25.4 mpg in 2021.48 Federal fuel economy standards have changed substantially since the Energy Independence and Security Act was passed in 2007.
That standard, which originally mandated a national fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by the year 2020, was updated in April 2022 to require all cars and light duty trucks achieve an overall industry average fuel economy of 49 mpg by model year 2026. 49, 50 Visitors to the park and staff on-site use fuel for transportation to and from the site. Fuel is also used in landscaping and maintenance equipment on-site.
5.6.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
a) Result in a potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
45 California Energy Commission. “Natural Gas Consumption by County.” Accessed August 16, 2023. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx. 46 U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Petroleum & Other Liquids, California Field Production of Crude Oil.” February 28, 2023. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrfpca1&f=a 47 California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. “Net Taxable Gasoline Gallons.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/dataportal/dataset.htm?url=VehicleTaxableFuelDist. 48 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “The 2022 EPA Automotive Trends Report: Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Fuel Economy, and Technology since 1975.” December 2022. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P1010U68.pdf 49 United States Department of Energy. Energy Independence & Security Act of 2007. Accessed August 16, 2023. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/eisa. 50 United States Department of Transportation. USDOT Announces New Vehicle Fuel Economy Standards for Model Year 2024-2026.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/usdot-announces-newvehicle-fuel-economy-standards-model-year-2024-2026 □ □ □
□ □ □
936
CC 04-03-2024
936 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 65 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
a) Would the project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that projects implemented under the Master Plan would utilize green building design techniques, water efficient systems, and climate appropriate landscaping. Future projects would also be subject to the City’s General Plan and Climate Action Plan policies pertaining to the efficient use of energy, and would support non-vehicular travel within the City by providing facilities that encourage biking and walking to City park and recreation facilities. Based on those factors, implementation of the Master Plan was concluded to reduce fuel use in the City long-term and result in less than significant impacts due to inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.51
Construction
Construction of the project would require energy for the manufacture and transportation of materials, preparation of the project site (e.g., demolition and grading), and the construction of the various structures proposed under the project. Construction processes are generally designed to be efficient in order to avoid excess monetary costs. As required in Section 17.04.050 of the Municipal Code, the project would implement BAAQMD basic control measures, which include restricting equipment idling times and require contractors to post signs on the project site reminding workers to shut off idle equipment, thus reducing energy waste. The project would also comply with CALGreen and City General Condition 7.19 to divert a minimum of 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste from landfills for recycling, thus minimizing energy impacts from the creation of excessive waste.
For these reasons, the project would not use fuel or energy in a wasteful manner during construction activities, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
Operation
Operation of the project site would be similar to existing conditions. Energy is consumed for multiple purposes, including the lighting and irrigation operating on-site and fuel consumption from vehicles traveling to and from the project site. The new lighting installed on-site would comply with CBC regulations for energy efficient lighting. In addition, the project would install new drought tolerant landscaping and high-efficiency irrigation which would also reduce energy consumption during project operation. The project would construct new bicycle parking infrastructure, a new dedicated bicycle lane, and pedestrian walkways which would promote alternative modes of 51 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 120 to 121.
937
CC 04-03-2024
937 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 66 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
transportation and reduce the use of gasoline. Based on the project’s adherence to current building codes and promotion of alternative modes of transportation, the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy during project operation, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of the Master Plan would not conflict with or obstruct any state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency because future projects would comply with the City’s General Plan and Climate Action Plan, and the proposed facilities would not interfere with the installation of any renewable energy system.52 The project site would continue to obtain electricity from SVCE, which is 100 percent GHG-emission free energy from renewable and hydroelectric sources, consistent with the state’s Renewables Portfolio Standard program and SB 350. The project would be consistent with General Plan Strategies ES-2.1.5 and ES-2.1.9 and Climate Action Plan 2.0 Measures TR-1 and CS-1 by replacing trees to be removed and planting additional trees to provide shade within the park, constructing vegetated bioswales to capture stormwater on-site, and constructing bicycle and pedestrian paths to promote alternative modes of transportation. Based on this discussion, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 52 Ibid. Page 121.
938
CC 04-03-2024
938 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 67 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Geology and Soils
The following discussion is based on a Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants, dated November 3, 2022. A copy of this report is included in Appendix C of this Initial Study/Addendum.
5.7.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
State
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was passed following the 1971 San Fernando earthquake. The act regulates development in California near known active faults due to hazards associated with surface fault ruptures. Alquist-Priolo maps are distributed to affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning and controlling new construction. Areas within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone require special studies to evaluate the potential for surface rupture to ensure that no structures intended for human occupancy are constructed across an active fault.
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA) was passed in 1990 following the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. The SHMA directs the California Geological Survey (CGS) to identify and map areas prone to liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslides, and amplified ground shaking. CGS has completed seismic hazard mapping for the portions of California most susceptible to liquefaction, landslides, and ground shaking, including the central San Francisco Bay Area. The SHMA requires that agencies only approve projects in seismic hazard zones following site-specific geotechnical investigations to determine if the seismic hazard is present and identify measures to reduce earthquake-related hazards.
California Building Standards Code
The CBC prescribes standards for constructing safe buildings. The CBC contains provisions for earthquake safety based on factors including occupancy type, soil and rock profile, ground strength, and distance to seismic sources. The CBC requires that a site-specific geotechnical investigation report be prepared for most development projects to evaluate seismic and geologic conditions such as surface fault ruptures, ground shaking, liquefaction, differential settlement, lateral spreading, expansive soils, and slope stability. The CBC is updated every three years.
5.7 5.7.1.1
939
CC 04-03-2024
939 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 68 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
California Division of Occupational Safety and Health Regulations Excavation, shoring, and trenching activities during construction are subject to occupational safety standards for stabilization by the California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) under Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and Excavation Rules. These regulations minimize the potential for instability and collapse that could injure construction workers on the site.
Public Resources Code Section 5097.5
Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of organisms from prehistoric environments found in geologic strata. They range from mammoth and dinosaur bones to impressions of ancient animals and plants, trace remains, and microfossils. These materials are valued for the information they yield about the history of the earth and its past ecological settings. California Public Resources Code Section 5097.5 specifies that unauthorized removal of a paleontological resource is a misdemeanor. Under the CEQA Guidelines, a project would have a significant impact on paleontological resources if it would disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies and strategies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to geology and soils.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy HS-5.1 Evaluate new development proposals within mapped potential hazard zones using a formal seismic/geologic review process.
Strategy HS-5.1.3 Continue to implement and update geologic review procedures for Geologic Reports required by the Municipal Code through the development review process.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
Section 16.08.120 of the City’s Municipal Code outlines the requirements for development projects to conduct engineering geological investigations prior to receiving grading permits. Section
16.08.130 provides the City’s requirements for soils engineering investigations, which would include data regarding the nature, distribution, erodibility of existing soil, strength of existing soils on a project site.
Cupertino General Conditions
The City of Cupertino maintains a list of general conditions that contractors must implement or comply with while working on municipal projects. The following General Condition relates to paleontological resources.
940
CC 04-03-2024
940 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 69 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
General Condition 7.18: Historic or Archeological Items. (A) Contractor’s Obligations. Contractor must ensure that all persons performing Work at the Project site are required to immediately notify the Project Manager, upon discovery of any potential historic or archeological items, including historic or prehistoric ruins, a burial ground, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints or other archeological, paleontological or historical feature on the Project site (collectively, “Historic or Archeological Items”).
(B) Discovery; Cessation of Work. Upon discovery of any potential Historic or Archeological Items, Work must be stopped within an 85-foot radius of the find and may not resume until authorized in writing by the City. If required by City, Contractor must assist in protecting or recovering the Historic or Archeological Items, with any such assistance to be compensated as Extra Work on a time and materials basis under Article 6, Contract Modification. At the City’s discretion, a suspension of Work required due to discovery of Historic or Archeological Items may be treated as Excusable Delay pursuant to Article 5, or as a suspension for convenience under Article 13.
Existing Conditions
Regional Geology
The project site is located in the Santa Clara Valley, an alluvial basin bounded by the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west, the Diablo Range to the east, and the San Francisco Bay to the north. The Valley was formed when sediments derived from both mountain ranges were exposed by tectonic uplift and regression of the inland sea which previously inundated the area. The Upper Quaternary sediments that comprise most of this basin consist of up to 1,000 feet of poorly sorted gravel, sand, and clay which were deposited in alluvial fan and deltaic depositional environments.
On-Site Geology
Soils
The site is underlain by Holocene age surficial sediments. The mapped soil profiles for the site indicate the underlying soil as being comprised of alluvial sand, silt, and gravel deposited in the upper part of the alluvial fans formed along the foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Near-surface soil sampling conducted on-site found that the alluvium encountered in the soil borings generally consists of loose to very dense, poorly graded gravel, well-graded gravel with clay and sand, clayey gravel, clayey sand; and very stiff to hard, lean clay and silty clay.
Expansive soils shrink and swell as a result of moisture changes. These changes can cause heaving and cracking of slabs-on-grade, pavements, and structures founded on shallow foundations. The soils collected in the borings on-site had plasticity index scores ranging from six to 25, indicating a very low to low expansion potential that varies depending on the depth of the soil.
5.7.1.2 941
CC 04-03-2024
941 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 70 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Site Topography
The project site is relatively flat with some areas graded slightly for draining and landscaping, as a result, the risk of erosion or landslide is low. There are no hillsides or steep embankments on-site and the elevation throughout the site ranges from 286 to 296 feet above mean sea level (amsl). No unique geologic features, such as serpentine rock outcrops and boulders, pinnacles, or sandstone are located on-site.
Groundwater
The City of Cupertino overlies the Santa Clara Subbasin (DWR Basin 2-9.02), a groundwater subbasin that is 297 square miles in area. Valley Water is responsible for managing groundwater in Santa Clara County, which includes conducting an artificial groundwater recharge program that involves releasing locally conserved or imported water to in-stream and off-stream facilities to augment groundwater supplies in the Santa Clara groundwater basin.
Soil borings were performed at depths of approximately 15 feet below ground surface (bgs) throughout the project site. No groundwater was encountered during the subsurface investigation, but it is estimated that historic high groundwater under the site is approximately 50 feet bgs. Water levels on-site may vary depending on seasonal precipitation, irrigation practices, and other climate conditions.
Seismic and Seismic-Related Hazards
Earthquake Faults
As the San Francisco Bay Area contains numerous active and potentially active faults, there is a high potential for seismic events such as fault surface ruptures and ground shaking, which can cause ground failure (landslides), settlement, erosion, liquefaction, lateral spreading, and soil expansion.
Faults in the region are capable of generating earthquakes of magnitude 6.7 or higher.
During a major earthquake on a segment of one of the nearby faults, strong ground shaking is expected to occur at the project site. The ground shaking intensity felt at the project site would depend on the size of the earthquake (magnitude), the distance from the site to the fault source, the directivity (focusing of earthquake energy along the fault in the direction of the rupture), and the site-specific soil conditions. While no faults cross the project site, there are several major faults nearby including the Monte Vista-Shannon fault, San Andreas Fault, Hayward Fault, and Calaveras Fault. The project site is not located within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or a Santa Clara County Fault Hazard Zone.53, 54
53 CA Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone. Webmap. Accessed August 15, 2023. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. 54 Santa Clara County. Geologic Hazards Zones. Maps 2 and 10. Map. October 2012. 942
CC 04-03-2024
942 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 71 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Liquefaction
Soil liquefaction can be defined as a complete loss of strength that causes otherwise solid soil to take on the characteristics of a liquid. The types of soil most susceptible to this hazard are loose, saturated, uniformly graded, fine-grain sands that comprise the soil layer within approximately 45 to 50 feet of the ground surface. Liquefaction mostly frequently occurs under vibratory conditions, such as those created by seismic events. The project site is not located within a State of California liquefaction hazard zone or a County Liquefaction Hazard Zone.55 Based on this, the site has a low potential of liquefaction during moderate to large magnitude earthquakes on a nearby faults.
Lateral spreading typically occurs as a form of horizontal displacement of relatively flat-lying soil toward an open or “free” face such as an open body of water, channel, or excavation. This movement is often associated with liquefaction and commonly occurs on gentle slopes in seismically active regions. Lateral spread presents a significant hazard to the integrity of buildings and other structures. There are no adjacent bodies of water, channels, or excavations in the vicinity of the site; therefore, there is a very low potential for lateral spreading on-site.
Other Geologic Hazards
The project site is not located within a Santa Clara County Geologic Hazard Zone for compressible soil, landslides, or fault rupture.56
Paleontological Resources
Most of Cupertino, including the project site, is located within a Holocene-age landform. Geologic units of Holocene age are generally not considered sensitive for paleontological resources, because biological remains younger than 10,000 years are not usually considered fossils. These sediments have low potential to yield fossil resources or to contain significant nonrenewable paleontological resources.57 No paleontological resources have been identified within the project site. 58 55 Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants. Geotechnical Evaluation. November 3, 2022. Page 5. 56 Santa Clara County. Geologic Hazards Zones. Maps 2 and 10. Map. October 2012. 57 United States Department of the Interior. Potential Fossil Yield Classification System. July 2016. Accessed August 15, 2023. https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/uploads/IM2016-124_att1.pdf 58 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Page 131.
943
CC 04-03-2024
943 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 72 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
5.7.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving:
- Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for
the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault (refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42)?
- Strong seismic ground shaking?
- Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
- Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that will become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in
on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in the
current California Building Code, creating
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or
property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers are
not available for the disposal of wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
944
CC 04-03-2024
944 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 73 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault; strong seismic ground shaking; seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or landslides? The 2019 IS/MND determined that implementation of the Master Plan would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects from the rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, or landslides because future projects would not be located on active faults, would adhere to recommendations in site-specific geotechnical reports, and would comply with the CBC.
59 Fault Rupture
The project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no known faults cross the site. While existing faults that are currently considered active are located within 20 miles of the site (i.e., the Monte Vista-Shannon fault, San Andreas Fault, Hayward Fault, and Calaveras Fault), the proposed project is located outside of their fault rupture zones. For these reasons, the project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects from rupture of a known earthquake fault, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
Seismic Ground Shaking
There are several major fault lines within approximately 20 miles of the project site that have the potential to produce a major earthquake during the lifespan of this project. During a major earthquake, this site is expected to experience strong ground shaking. The level of intensity of this ground shaking at the project site would depend on a variety of factors such as the magnitude, distance from the site to the fault source, and the site-specific soil conditions. The ground shaking could potentially damage structures and threaten the safety of occupants.
The project would construct all structures according to the standards listed in the current CBC and would implement the recommendations in the site-specific geotechnical report prepared for the project (as required in Municipal Code Sections 16.08.120 and Section 16.08.130) to reduce seismic and seismic-related hazards (including ground shaking, liquefaction, and expansive soils) to a less than significant level. Because the project would be properly designed, engineered, and constructed, the existing seismic hazards on-site would not be exacerbated by the project in a manner that would impact (or worsen) off-site conditions. Therefore, the project would result in a 59 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 128 to 129.
945
CC 04-03-2024
945 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 74 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
less than significant impact, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading
As discussed in Section 5.7.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site is not located within a state- or county-designated liquefaction hazard zone and the site has a low potential of liquefaction during moderate to large magnitude earthquakes. In addition, there is a very low potential for lateral spreading on-site due to the lack of adjacent bodies of water, channels, or excavations in the vicinity of the site. The project would construct all structures according to the standards listed in the current CBC and would implement the recommendations in the site-specific geotechnical report prepared for the project, therefore, the project would not cause potential substantial adverse effects related to liquefaction and lateral spreading consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
Landslides
As discussed in Section 5.7.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site is not located in a designated landslide hazard zone. The project site is relatively flat and is not located in the vicinity of steep embankments that could increase the risk of landslides affecting the site. Construction of the project would not include substantial earthwork that would create unstable slopes that would exacerbate any existing landslide risks. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that although future projects under the Master Plan would include grading or create new impervious surface area that could result in soil disturbance, alter drainage patterns, and/or cause erosion, these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level because the project would be subject to Waste Discharge Requirements, Municipal Code Sections
16.08.120 and Section 16.08.130, and would implement BMPs to protect water quality during specific project construction activities.
60 Ground disturbance related to the demolition of the improvements on-site, removal of landscaping, and construction of the proposed improvements would occur on-site. Transportation of construction materials and equipment to and from the project site could also result in disturbance of the soils. These activities would increase exposure of soil to wind and water erosion and increase sedimentation.
60 Ibid. Pages 129 to 130.
946
CC 04-03-2024
946 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 75 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
As discussed further in Section 5.10 Hydrology and Water Quality, the project would comply with current CBC regulations regarding erosion control and would implement BMPs to reduce runoff from the project site. In addition, the project would prepare an interim erosion and sediment control plan consistent with the requirements of Municipal Code Section 16.08.110 that would detail the location of erosion control measures and erosion control planting. By implementing best management practices and the recommendations of the site-specific geotechnical report, erosion and sedimentation impacts would be less than significant, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that future projects would reduce impacts to unstable soils to a less than significant level through compliance with current CBC regulations, Municipal Code Sections
16.08.120 and 16.08.130, and recommended mitigation or avoidance measures from site-specific geotechnical reports.61
As discussed under checklist question a), the project site location, topography, and adherence to the current CBC and recommendations in the site-specific geotechnical report (as required in Municipal Code Sections 16.08.120 and Section 16.08.130) regarding ground improvements and construction methods would reduce the risk of liquefaction at the project site to a less than significant level.
Valley Water actively monitors for land subsidence through surveying, groundwater elevation monitoring, and data from compaction wells. Valley Water reduces the potential for land subsidence throughout the Santa Clara Valley by recharging groundwater basins with local and imported surface water. The project would be connected to the City’s water system and would not require permanent groundwater extraction wells on-site. No construction dewatering would be required; therefore, the project would not contribute to significant subsidence risks.
Based on this discussion, the project would result in the same less than significant impact as disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 61 Ibid. Page 130.
947
CC 04-03-2024
947 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 76 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in the current California Building Code, creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? The 2019 IS/MND was unable to describe soil conditions at every park facility in the City, but the 2019 IS/MND concluded that compliance with current CBC regulations, Municipal Code Sections
16.08.120 and 16.08.130, and recommended mitigation or avoidance measures from site-specific geotechnical reports, would reduce potential impacts related to expansive soils to a less than significant level.62
Expansive soils possess a “shrink-swell” characteristic. Shrink-swell is the cyclic change in volume (expansion and contraction) that occurs in fine-grained clay sediments from the process of wetting and drying. Structural damage may result over a long period of time, usually the result of inadequate soil and foundation engineering or the placement of structures directly on expansive soils. Based on the site-specific geotechnical report prepared for the project, the soils on-site have a very low to low expansion potential that varies depending on the depth of the soil.
The project would adhere to the standard engineering and building practices and techniques specified in the CBC and implement the design recommendations in the site-specific geotechnical report, which would further reduce potential impacts from expansive soils on-site. Based on this discussion, the project would not create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property due to expansive soils, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that there would be no impact because there would not be any alternative wastewater disposal or septic tank systems installed during implementation of the Master Plan.63
The project would connect to the City’s existing sanitary sewer system. Therefore, the project would not need to support septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems on-site, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 62 Ibid. Page 130. 63 Ibid. Page 130.
948
CC 04-03-2024
948 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 77 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that implementation of the Master Plan would be unlikely to result in impacts to unique paleontological resources or geological features given the age of the soil throughout most of the City and the absence of known paleontological resources in Cupertino.
However, the 2019 IS/MND concluded that future projects would be further evaluated when design-level plans are available to determine whether the project would have the potential to encounter bedrock and unknown paleontological resources. This evaluation and implementation of any potential mitigation measures identified as necessary would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
64 As discussed in Section 5.7.1.2 Existing Conditions and the 2019 IS/MND, most of the City, including the project site, is located within a Holocene-age landform which has low potential to yield fossil resources or significant nonrenewable paleontological resources due to the age of the soil. The project would implement City General Condition 7.18 to reduce impacts to unknown paleontological resources. by halting work if paleontological resources are discovered, and protecting and recovering the resource if feasible. This is consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
64 Ibid. Pages 130 to 131.
949
CC 04-03-2024
949 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 78 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
5.8.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND, with the exception of BAAQMD updating their CEQA Guidelines and the City adopting their Climate Action Plan 2.0 in 2022. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Background Information
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere, GHGs, regulate the earth’s temperature. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate.
In GHG emission inventories, the weight of each gas is multiplied by its global warming potential (GWP) and is measured in units of CO2 equivalents (CO2e). The most common GHGs are carbon dioxide (CO2) and water vapor but there are also several others, most importantly methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These are released into the earth’s atmosphere through a variety of natural processes and human activities. Sources of GHGs are generally as follows:
• CO2 and N2O are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. • N2O is associated with agricultural operations such as fertilization of crops. • CH4 is commonly created by off-gassing from agricultural practices (e.g., keeping livestock) and landfill operations.
• Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were widely used as refrigerants, propellants, and cleaning solvents, but their production has been stopped by international treaty. • HFCs are now used as a substitute for CFCs in refrigeration and cooling. • PFCs and SF6 emissions are commonly created by industries such as aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing.
An expanding body of scientific research supports the theory that global climate change is currently causing changes in weather patterns, average sea level, ocean acidification, chemical reaction rates, and precipitation rates, and that it will increasingly do so in the future. The climate and several naturally occurring resources within California are adversely affected by the global warming trend.
Increased precipitation and sea level rise will increase coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion, and degradation of wetlands. Mass migration and/or loss of plant and animal species could also occur.
Potential effects of global climate change that could adversely affect human health include more extreme heat waves and heat-related stress; an increase in climate-sensitive diseases; more frequent and intense natural disasters such as flooding, hurricanes, and drought; and increased levels of air pollution.
5.8 5.8.1.1
950
CC 04-03-2024
950 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 79 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Regulatory Framework
State
Assembly Bill 32
Under the California Global Warming Solutions Act, also known as AB 32, CARB established a statewide GHG emissions cap for 2020, adopted mandatory reporting rules for significant sources of GHGs, and adopted a comprehensive plan, known as the Climate Change Scoping Plan, identifying how emission reductions would be achieved from significant GHG sources.
In 2016, SB 32 was signed into law, amending the California Global Warming Solution Act. SB 32, and accompanying Executive Order B-30-15, require CARB to ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to 40 percent below the 1990 level by 2030. CARB updated its Climate Change Scoping Plan in December of 2017 to express the 2030 statewide target in terms of million metric tons of CO2e (MMTCO2e). Based on the emissions reductions directed by SB 32, the annual 2030 statewide target emissions level for California is 260 MMTCO2e.
Senate Bill 375
SB 375, known as the Sustainable Communities Strategy and Climate Protection Act, was signed into law in September 2008. SB 375 builds upon AB 32 by requiring CARB to develop regional GHG reduction targets for automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. The per capita GHG emissions reduction targets for passenger vehicles in the San Francisco Bay Area include a seven percent reduction by 2020 and a 15 percent reduction by 2035.
Consistent with the requirements of SB 375, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) partnered with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), BAAQMD, and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission to prepare the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as part of the Regional Transportation Plan process. The SCS is referred to as Plan Bay Area 2050. Plan Bay Area 2050 establishes a course for reducing per capita GHG emissions through the promotion of compact, high-density, mixed-use neighborhoods near transit, particularly within identified Priority Development Areas (PDAs).
CARB Scoping Plan
CARB adopted the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan) in December 2022 to outline goals and actions for various sectors to help California achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier. The 2022 Scoping Plan outlines cost-effective solutions that consider equity and affordability in addition to larger scale solutions that will transform the state’s energy infrastructure to generate less GHG emissions.
5.8.1.2 951
CC 04-03-2024
951 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 80 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Regional and Local
2017 Clean Air Plan
To protect the climate, the 2017 CAP (prepared by BAAQMD) includes control measures designed to reduce emissions of methane and other super-GHGs that are potent climate pollutants in the nearterm, and to decrease emissions of carbon dioxide by reducing fossil fuel combustion.
CEQA Air Quality Guidelines
The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines are intended to serve as a guide for those who prepare or evaluate air quality impact analyses for projects and plans in the San Francisco Bay Area. The jurisdictions in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin utilize the thresholds and methodology for assessing GHG impacts developed by BAAQMD within the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. The guidelines include information on legal requirements, BAAQMD rules, methods of analyzing impacts, and recommended mitigation measures.
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies and strategies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to GHG emissions.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy ES-1.1 Incorporate the principles of sustainability into Cupertino’s planning, infrastructure, and development process in order to achieve improvement, reduce GHG emissions, and meet the needs of the community without compromising the needs of future generations.
Policy ES-2.1 Encourage the maximum feasible conservation and efficient use of electrical power and natural gas resources for new and existing residences, businesses, industrial and public uses.
Strategy ES-1.1.1 Adopt, implement, and maintain a Climate Action Plan to attain greenhouse gas emission targets consistent with state law and regional requirements.
City of Cupertino Climate Action Plan 2.0
Cupertino's Climate Action Plan 2.0 was adopted by City Council on August 16, 2022, and contains a series of measures and actions meant to reduce GHG emissions and meet established community goals. The Climate Action Plan 2.0 includes actions in Measure TR-1 that encourage the City to develop facilities to support active modes of transportation, actions under Measure TR-5 that encourage the decarbonization of off-road equipment, including landscaping equipment, and actions under Measure CS-1 that would increase carbon sequestration through tree planting.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
The following parts of the Municipal Code contain directives pertaining to building green and conserving water and energy.
952
CC 04-03-2024
952 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 81 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
• Chapter 14.15, Landscape Ordinance, the intent of this chapter is to reduce water waste in landscaping by promoting the use of region-appropriate plants that require minimal supplemental irrigation and by establishing standards for irrigation efficiency. New development projects that include landscape areas of 500 square feet or more are subject to the Ordinance.
• Chapter 16.58, Green Building Standards, the provisions of this chapter apply to the planning, design, operation, construction, use, and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure, unless otherwise indicated.
Existing Conditions
Unlike emissions of criteria and toxic air pollutants, which have regional and local impacts, emissions of GHGs have a broader, global impact. Global warming is a process whereby GHGs accumulating in the upper atmosphere contribute to an increase in the temperature of the earth and changes in weather patterns.
GHG emissions associated with the project site are primarily generated by visitors and staff vehicle trips to the site and operation of landscaping and maintenance equipment. The community center and senior center also utilize natural gas appliances that generate GHG emissions.
5.8.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of GHGs?
a) Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects would be relatively small in scale and would screen out of BAAQMD’s GHG screening size for City park land uses. In addition, the 2019 IS/MND concluded that future projects would be likely to reduce overall visitor and maintenance VMT GHGemissions by providing a connected and accessible network of parks, improving access including for those with disabilities, and creating additional parks and recreational spaces in areas that are
5.8.1.3 □
□
□
□
□
□
953
CC 04-03-2024
953 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 82 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
currently underserved. Therefore, implementation of the Master Plan would result in less than significant GHG emissions.65
The project size (22.5-acres) is below the GHG screening size identified by BAAQMD of 600 acres that was in place at the time 2019 IS/MND was adopted. In addition, the project includes improvements to the existing park and enhancements to bicycle and pedestrian access to the park.
The project, therefore, would result in the same impact as disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
Since the certification of the IS/MND, BAAQMD has updated its CEQA Air Quality Guidelines with new GHG thresholds. Pursuant to the current BAAQMD Air Quality Guidelines, for land use projects to result in a less than significant GHG emissions impact, the land use project would need to comply with threshold A or B below.
A. Projects must include, at a minimum, the following project design elements:
1. Buildings
a. The project will not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential and nonresidential development).
b. The project will not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage as determined by the analysis required under CEQA Section 21100(b)(3) and Section 15126.2(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
2. Transportation
a. Achieve a reduction in project-generated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) below the regional average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan (currently 15 percent) or meet a locally adopted Senate Bill 743 VMT target, reflecting the recommendations provided in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research's Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA:
i. Residential projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per capita ii. Office projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per employee iii. Retail projects: no net increase in existing VMT
a. Achieve compliance with off-street electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2.
B. Be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b).
The City’s 2022 Climate Action Plan 2.0 is considered a qualified GHG reduction plan, and consistency with this plan can be demonstrated in a two-part process. The first part of the process is to determine whether the project is consistent with the established General Plan land use and 65 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 136 to 137.
954
CC 04-03-2024
954 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 83 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
zoning designation, and the second part is illustrating the project’s compliance with applicable measures from the City’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist. 66 As discussed in Section 5.11 Land Use and Planning, the project is consistent with the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations, and does not propose any changes in the allowed land uses on-site. The project would be consistent with the City’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist by complying with all minimum requirements of CALGreen Code and the City Reach Code during design and construction, not using natural gas appliances or infrastructure, installing energy efficient lighting, sourcing energy from SVCE, expanding bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure to increase connectivity and encourage alternative modes of transportation, installing native and drought-tolerant species as part of the landscaping, installing low-flow fixtures, planting climate-adaptive trees, and installing bioswales and permeable pavement on-site.
In addition, the project would comply with Measure TR-1 and Measure CS-1 of the 2022 Climate Action Plan 2.0 by implementing the development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities to support active modes of transportation and planting additional trees to increase carbon sequestration and reduce the urban heat island effect.
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that implementation of the Master Plan would not result in any impacts due to conflicts with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs because future projects would comply with the CARB Scoping Plan, 2017 CAP, and the City’s Climate Action Plan.67
CARB Scoping Plan
As discussed in the 2019 IS/MND, the CARB Scoping Plan is primarily meant to recommend programs at the state-level to help California achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier. The City’s 2022 Climate Action Plan 2.0 is designed to help the City achieve their goal of carbon neutrality by the year 2040, which exceeds the goals set in the CARB Scoping Plan. Therefore, because the project is consistent with the City’s 2022 Climate Action Plan 2.0 as discussed in checklist question a) above and later on in this discussion, it would not conflict with the CARB Scoping Plan. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
66 City of Cupertino. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Thresholds and Guidance. April 29, 2022. Page 19. 67 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 137 to 138.
955
CC 04-03-2024
955 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 84 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
2017 Clean Air Plan
The BAAQMD 2017 CAP focuses on two goals: protecting public health and protecting the climate.
The 2017 CAP includes air quality standards and control measures designed to reduce emissions of methane, carbon dioxide, and other super-GHGs. As discussed in Section 5.3 Air Quality under checklist question a), the project is consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan because it would not generate emissions that could interfere with attainment of ambient air quality standards, would implement actions consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan’s control measures, and would not significantly increase VMT in the City. (Same Impact as Approved Project) General Plan
The proposed project would be consistent with General Plan Policies ES-1.1 and ES-3.1, and Strategy ES-1.1.1 by minimizing energy use and waste disposed of at a landfill during construction activities, installing high-efficiency lighting and irrigation equipment, promoting alternative modes of transportation by constructing bicycle parking infrastructure, new bicycle lanes, and pedestrian walkways, and implementing design features consistent with the City’s 2022 Climate Action Plan
2.0. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
2022 Climate Action Plan 2.0
As discussed under checklist question a) above, the project would comply with Measure TR-1 and Measure CS-1 from the 2022 Climate Action Plan 2.0. In addition, because the project is consistent with the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations, would not propose any changes in the allowed land uses on-site, and complies with the applicable measures from the City’s CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist, it would be considered consistent with the City’s 2022 Climate Action Plan 2.0. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 956
CC 04-03-2024
956 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 85 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The following discussion is based on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) completed by Cornerstone Earth Group, Inc. dated October 13, 2022. A copy of the report is included in Appendix D of this Initial Study/Addendum.
5.9.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
The storage, use, generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials and waste are highly regulated under federal and state laws. In California, the EPA has granted most enforcement authority over federal hazardous materials regulations to the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). In turn, local agencies have been granted responsibility for implementation and enforcement of many hazardous materials regulations under the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) program.
Worker health and safety and public safety are key issues when dealing with hazardous materials.
Proper handling and disposal of hazardous material is vital if it is disturbed during project construction. Cal/OSHA enforces state worker health and safety regulations related to construction activities. Regulations include exposure limits, requirements for protective clothing, and training requirements to prevent exposure to hazardous materials. Cal/OSHA also enforces occupational health and safety regulations specific to lead and asbestos investigations and abatement.
Federal and State
Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77
Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 77 Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace (FAR Part 77) sets forth standards and review requirements for protecting the airspace for safe aircraft operation, particularly by restricting the height of potential structures and minimizing other potential hazards (such as reflective surfaces, flashing lights, and electronic interference) to aircraft in flight. These regulations require that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) be notified of certain proposed construction projects located within an extended zone defined by an imaginary slope radiating outward for several miles from an airport’s runways, or which would otherwise stand at least 200 feet in height above the ground.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, was enacted by Congress on December 11, 1980. This law created a tax on the chemical and petroleum industries and provided broad federal authority to respond directly to
5.9 5.9.1.1
957
CC 04-03-2024
957 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 86 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. Over five years, $1.6 billion was collected and the tax went to a trust fund for cleaning up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. CERCLA accomplished the following objectives:
• Established prohibitions and requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites;
• Provided for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites; and
• Established a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party could be identified.
The law authorizes two kinds of response actions:
• Short-term removals, where actions may be taken to address releases or threatened releases requiring prompt response; and
• Long-term remedial response actions that permanently and significantly reduce the dangers associated with releases or threats of releases of hazardous substances that are serious, but not immediately life-threatening. These actions can be completed only at sites listed on the EPA’s National Priorities List.
CERCLA also enabled the revision of the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The NCP provided the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. The NCP also established the National Priorities List.
CERCLA was amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act on October 17, 1986.68
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), enacted in 1976, is the principal federal law in the United States governing the disposal of solid waste and hazardous waste. RCRA gives the EPA the authority to control hazardous waste from the “cradle to the grave.” This includes the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA also sets forth a framework for the management of non-hazardous solid wastes.
The Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) are the 1984 amendments to RCRA that focused on waste minimization, phasing out land disposal of hazardous waste, and corrective action for releases. Some of the other mandates of this law include increased enforcement 68 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Superfund: CERCLA Overview.” Accessed May 11, 2020. https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-cercla-overview. 958
CC 04-03-2024
958 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 87 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
authority for the EPA, more stringent hazardous waste management standards, and a comprehensive underground storage tank program.69
Government Code Section 65962.5
Section 65962.5 of the Government Code requires CalEPA to develop and update a list of hazardous waste and substances sites, known as the Cortese List. The Cortese List is used by state and local agencies and developers to comply with CEQA requirements. The Cortese List includes hazardous substance release sites identified by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).70
Toxic Substances Control Act
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 provides the EPA with authority to require reporting, record-keeping and testing requirements, and restrictions relating to chemical substances and/or mixtures. Certain substances are generally excluded from TSCA, including, among others, food, drugs, cosmetics, and pesticides. The TSCA addresses the production, importation, use, and disposal of specific chemicals including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), asbestos, radon, and lead-based paint.
California Accidental Release Prevention Program
The California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Program aims to prevent accidental releases of regulated hazardous materials that represent a potential hazard beyond the boundaries of a property. Facilities that are required to participate in the CalARP Program use or store specified quantities of toxic and flammable substances (hazardous materials) that can have off-site consequences if accidentally released. The Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health reviews CalARP risk management plans as the CUPA.
Asbestos-Containing Materials
Friable asbestos is any asbestos-containing material (ACM) that, when dry, can easily be crumbled or pulverized to a powder by hand, allowing the asbestos particles to become airborne. Common examples of products that have been found to contain friable asbestos include acoustical ceilings, plaster, wallboard, and thermal insulation for water heaters and pipes. Common examples of nonfriable ACMs are asphalt roofing shingles, vinyl floor tiles, and transite siding made with cement.
The EPA began phasing out use of friable asbestos products in 1973 and issued a ban in 1978 on manufacture, import, processing, and distribution of some asbestos-containing products and new 69 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Summary of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.” Accessed October 16, 2023. https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-resource-conservation-andrecovery-act. 70 California Environmental Protection Agency. “Cortese List Data Resources.” Accessed October 16, 2023. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.
959
CC 04-03-2024
959 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 88 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
uses of asbestos products.71 The EPA is currently considering a proposed ban on on-going use of asbestos.72 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) guidelines require that potentially friable ACMs be removed prior to building demolition or remodeling that may disturb the ACMs.
CCR Title 8, Section 1532.1
The United States Consumer Product Safety Commission banned the use of lead-based paint in 1978. Removal of older structures with lead-based paint is subject to requirements outlined by the Cal/OSHA Lead in Construction Standard, CCR Title 8, Section 1532.1 during demolition activities.
Requirements include employee training, employee air monitoring, and dust control. If lead-based paint is peeling, flaking, or blistered, it is required to be removed prior to demolition.
Regional and Local
Municipal Regional Permit Provision C.12.f
PCBs were produced in the United States between 1955 and 1978 and used in hundreds of industrial and commercial applications, including building and structure materials such as plasticizers, paints, sealants, caulk, and wood floor finishes. In 1979, the EPA banned the production and use of PCBs due to their potential harmful health effects and persistence in the environment.
PCBs can still be released to the environment today during demolition of buildings that contain legacy caulks, sealants, or other PCB-containing materials.
With the adoption of the San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit (MRP) by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board on November 19, 2015, Provision C.12.f requires that permittees develop an assessment methodology for applicable structures planned for demolition to ensure PCBs do not enter municipal storm drain systems.73 Municipalities throughout the Bay Area are currently modifying demolition permit processes and implementing PCB screening protocols to comply with Provision C.12.f. Buildings constructed between 1950 and 1980 that are proposed for demolition must be screened for the presence of PCBs prior to the issuance of a demolition permit.
Single family homes and wood-frame structures are exempt from these requirements.
Santa Clara County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Santa Clara County’s 2017 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) performs a full risk assessment on the nine hazards that present the greatest concern in Santa Clara County. The nine hazards focused 71 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “EPA Actions to Protect the Public from Exposure to Asbestos.” Accessed April 19, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/epa-actions-protect-public-exposure-asbestos 72Ibid. 73 California Regional Water Quality Control Board. San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit. November 2015.
960
CC 04-03-2024
960 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 89 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
on for this mitigation plan are climate change/sea-level rise, dam and levee failure, drought, earthquakes, floods, landslides, severe weather, tsunamis, and wildfires.
The City’s annex, Chapter 3 of the document, provides a detailed overview of the City’s response capabilities, the organizational structure of local authorities, risk rating scores that determine which hazards present the greatest risk to Cupertino, and a priority schedule for mitigation actions planned by local and regional agencies. These mitigation actions include requiring all new construction, including public facilities, to be built in accordance with the most recent Building and Fire Code standards, integrating the LHMP into other plans, ordinances and programs that dictate land use decisions within the community, maintaining good standing and compliance under the National Flood Insurance Program, and maintaining a storm drain master plan in order to develop and prioritize capital projects.
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies and strategies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to hazards and hazardous materials.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy HS-1.1 Coordinate with Santa Clara County and local agencies to implement the MultiJurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) for Santa Clara County.
Policy HS-3.2 Involve the Fire Department in the early design stage of all projects requiring public review to assure Fire Department input and modifications as needed.
Policy HS-6.1 Require the proper storage and disposal of hazardous materials to prevent leakage, potential explosions, fire, or the release of harmful fumes. Maintain information channels to the residential and business communities about the illegality and danger of dumping hazardous material and waste in the storm drain system or in creeks.
Strategy HS-1.1.2 Ensure that mitigation actions identified in the LHMP are being incorporated into upcoming City sponsored projects, where appropriate.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
Chapter 9.12 of the City’s Municipal Code contains the standards for the protection of health, life, resources, and property through prevention and control of unauthorized discharges of hazardous materials in the City of Cupertino. The Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance regulates the storage, handling, and dispensing requirements for hazardous materials and other regulated materials in the City. Under Section 9.12.012, any person, firm, or corporation which stores any material regulated by the City is required to have a current Hazardous Materials Storage Permit.
Chapter 16.40 of the Municipal Code contains regulations based on the 2022 California Fire Code, which govern conditions hazardous to life and property from fire or explosion. Section 17.04.050 of the City’s Municipal Code outlines standard environmental protection permit submittal requirements that apply to development projects within the City. Pursuant to this section, development projects are required to prepare a Phase I ESA to evaluate site history, existing observable conditions, current site use, and current and former uses of surrounding properties to 961
CC 04-03-2024
961 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 90 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
identify the potential presence of Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs). If the Phase I ESA identifies RECs, then a Phase II ESA is required for the site.
Cupertino Emergency Operations Plan
The Cupertino Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) establishes policy direction for emergency planning, mitigation, response, and recovery activities within the City. The Cupertino EOP uses the Standardized Emergency Management System as required by California Government Code Section 8607(a) for managing responses to multi-agency and multi-jurisdiction emergencies in California, including those related to hazardous materials.
Existing Conditions
Site History
The project site has historically been used as agricultural land. As late as 1968, the site and adjacent parcels were developed with orchards and small structures typical of residences and associated outbuildings. The park was gradually built during the 1970s and 1980s, and the Quinlan Community Center was constructed on-site by 1991. There was a previous Senior Center building constructed on the southwest corner of the site by 1982; however, that was demolished and replaced by the current Senior Center in 2000.
On-Site Contamination
Based on the historic agricultural use of the site prior to development of the park and structures onsite, there is potential for residual agricultural chemicals in the soil (i.e., pesticides and fertilizers).
The Cupertino Senior Center and Quinlan Community Center have maintenance rooms that contain paints and other common building maintenance supplies. There are several maintenance sheds within Memorial Park that contain materials such as fuel and pesticides. These materials are stored properly and there is no evidence of significant chemical spills. Based on the age of the existing Cupertino Senior Center and Quinlan Community Center buildings, it is unlikely that either building contains lead-based paint and/or ACMs. However, there are several structures within Memorial Park (i.e., restrooms, maintenance sheds, and storage sheds) that were constructed during the 1970s. These structures have a greater potential to contain lead-based paint and/or ACMs. The project site is not on the Cortese List74 and there are no recorded hazardous materials releases on the project site.
74 California Environmental Protection Agency. “Cortese List Data Resources.” Accessed August 14, 2023. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist.
5.9.1.2 962
CC 04-03-2024
962 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 91 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Off-Site Sources of Contamination
Land uses surrounding the site include residential, recreational, and educational facility uses. There are no reported hazardous material spill incidents within the site vicinity that would be likely to significantly impact the site.75
Airport Safety
The nearest airport to the project site is Moffett Federal Airfield, which is located approximately 5.3 miles north of the project site. The site is not located within the airfield’s Airport Influence Area, 65 dBA noise contour area, FAR Part 77 horizontal surface zone, or airport safety zones.
Wildland Fire Hazards
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), the project site is not located in a very high, high, or moderate fire hazard zone.76
5.9.2 Impact Discussion
New Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, will it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
75 Cornerstone Earth Group, Inc. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment - Cupertino Memorial Park, 10185 North Stelling Road, and 21251 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino. October 13, 2022. Page 14. 76 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. “FHSZ Viewer.” Webmap. Accessed August 15, 2023. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/.
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
963
CC 04-03-2024
963 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 92 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
New Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or working in
the project area?
f) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere
with, an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects constructed under the Master Plan would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and would only include small amounts of fuels, oils, lubricants, pesticides, paints, and cleaning agents are currently used within City facilities for routine maintenance. The 2019 IS/MND concluded that because future projects would be subject to state and local regulations regarding the proper handling and storage of hazardous materials and would be reviewed by the City once project-level plans were available, implementation of the Master Plan would result in a less than significant impact.77 The project does not propose any land uses that would result in hazardous materials being routinely transported, used, or disposed of in quantities that would pose a significant health hazard to the public. After construction is completed, the project site would continue to use and store small amounts of standard fuels, oils, lubricants, pesticides, paints, and cleaning agents for routine maintenance. These small quantities of common hazardous materials would not pose a risk to site users or adjacent land uses as they would be properly stored and disposed of, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 77 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 147 to 148.
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
964
CC 04-03-2024
964 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 93 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
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?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that because future projects would be subject to state and local regulations regarding the proper handling and storage of hazardous materials and would be reviewed by the City once project-level plans were available, implementation of the Master Plan would not involve the use of hazardous materials in amounts that would pose a significant hazard to the environment through foreseeable upset and release conditions.78 Historic Pesticide Use On-Site
Given the historic agricultural use in the project area, soils on-site may contain levels of pesticides exceeding applicable screening thresholds. The Phase I ESA prepared for the project identified this as a REC that should be evaluated further. The project would comply with Municipal Code Section
17.04.040 by preparing a Phase II ESA that would sample and analyze soil on-site to determine whether there are any elevated levels of soil contamination and identify proper remediation of that contamination (if found) under regulatory agency oversight.
Asbestos-Containing Materials and Lead-Based Paint
The Phase I ESA prepared for the project identified several structures within Memorial Park (i.e., restrooms, maintenance sheds, and storage sheds) that were likely constructed during the 1970s.
Based on the construction date, it is possible that these structures contain lead-based paint and/or ACMs. In addition, it is possible that the soil near these wood-framed structures could be impacted by pesticides historically used to control termites. There is a potential that residual lead and pesticide concentrations could remain in soil on-site, which was identified as a REC in the Phase I ESA. Consistent with local and state regulations, an asbestos survey would be completed for existing buildings on-site prior to demolition in accordance with the NESHAP guidelines. Soil sampling and analysis for residual lead and pesticide concentrations would be completed as part of the previously mentioned Phase II ESA, consistent with the requirements of Municipal Code Section
17.04.040.
The proposed project would reduce impacts from historic agricultural use on-site, ACMs, and LBP to a less than significant level by requiring a survey for asbestos and its removal in accordance with NESHAP guidelines to control asbestos emissions, soil sampling to determine whether elevated levels of lead or pesticides are present in the soils, and removal and disposal of LBP in accordance with OSHA regulations to protect worker health and safety. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 78 Ibid. Pages 147 to 148.
965
CC 04-03-2024
965 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 94 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? The 2019 IS/MND determined that although several parks and recreational facilities are near or immediately adjacent to schools, the small quantities and types of chemicals used in the parks for routine maintenance would not pose a hazard to the school populations. Compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulation and the City’s policies and regulations contained in the General Plan and Municipal Code would reduce potential impacts from hazardous materials to schools would to a less than significant level.79
There are two schools within one-quarter mile of the project site: William Faria Elementary School at 10155 Barbara Lane 0.20-mile southeast of the site and Village Little Preschool Center at 10100 North Stelling Road 0.10-mile southeast of the site. As discussed under checklist question a) above, the project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous (or acutely hazardous) materials, substances, or waste. During project construction, the project would comply with CalARP, NESHAP guidelines, and MRP Provision C.12.f to properly screen, handle, transport, and dispose hazardous materials. In addition, as discussed in Section 5.3 Air Quality, the project would implement BAAQMD best management practices and using efficient construction equipment to reduce emissions of air pollutants.
The project site would continue to use and store small amounts of standard fuels, oils, lubricants, pesticides, paints, and cleaning agents for routine maintenance. These materials would continue to be stored consistent with City regulations, and would not create a hazard for on-site visitors or neighboring properties. Therefore, the project would not significantly emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. (Same Impact as Approved Project) d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that none of the existing City parks or facilities in the Master Plan are listed on the Cortese List pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, therefore, there would be no impact.80
The project site continues not to be included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5; therefore, it would result in the same impact as disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 79 Ibid. Page 148. 80 Ibid. Page 148.
966
CC 04-03-2024
966 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 95 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
e) If located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that since Cupertino is not within two miles of a public airport or within any airport land use plan defined by the Santa Clara County ALUC, implementation of the Master Plan would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.
Therefore, there would be no impact.81
Moffett Federal Airfield, which is located approximately 5.3 miles north of the project site, is the nearest airport to the project site. The site is not located within the airfield’s Airport Influence Area, 65 dBA noise contour area, FAR Part 77 horizontal surface zone, or airport safety zones. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that future projects under the Master Plan would be reviewed in advance by the Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD) and would be designed to be consistent with all applicable General Plan and Master Plan policies. Therefore, implementation of the Master Plan would not result in any impacts to an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.82
Consistent with General Plan Policy HS-3.2, the SCCFD would review the proposed project during the design review process for each phase to ensure fire protection design features are incorporated and adequate emergency access is provided, and that none of the proposed improvements interfere with the City’s EOP. The project would be designed in compliance with all City regulations pertaining to emergency access, and would comply with the County’s LHMP by being built in accordance with the most recent Building and Fire Code, consistent with General Plan Strategy HS1.1.2. Based on this discussion, the proposed project would not impair or physically interfere with the implementation of any adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 81 Ibid. Page 148. 82 Ibid. Pages 148 and 149.
967
CC 04-03-2024
967 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 96 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
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 2019 IS/MND disclosed that Memorial Park is not located in a Very High Fire Severity Zone (VHFSZ) or a High Fire Severity Zone (HFSZ).83 This condition has not changed since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND.
The project site is in a developed, urban area and is not located near wildland areas that would be susceptible to wildland fires. For these reasons, implementation of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to wildland fires, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
83 Ibid. Page 149.
968
CC 04-03-2024
968 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 97 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Hydrology and Water Quality
5.10.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
The federal Clean Water Act and California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act are the primary laws related to water quality in California. Regulations set forth by the EPA and the SWRCB have been developed to fulfill the requirements of this legislation. EPA regulations include the NPDES permit program, which controls sources that discharge pollutants into the waters of the United States (e.g., streams, lakes, bays, etc.). These regulations are implemented at the regional level by the RWQCBs. The project site is within the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay RWQCB.
Under Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act, the SWRCB and RWQCBs are required to identify impaired surface water bodies that do not meet water quality standards and develop total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for contaminants of concern. The list of the state’s identified impaired surface water bodies, known as the “303(d) list” can be found on the on the SWRCB’s website.84
National Flood Insurance Program
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) established the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to reduce impacts of flooding on private and public properties. The program provides subsidized flood insurance to communities that comply with FEMA regulations protecting development in floodplains. As part of the program, FEMA publishes Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that identify Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). An SFHA is an area that would be inundated by the one-percent annual chance flood, which is also referred to as the base flood or 100-year flood.
Statewide Construction General Permit
The SWRCB has implemented an NPDES General Construction Permit for the State of California (Construction General Permit). For projects disturbing one acre or more of soil, a Notice of Intent (NOI) must be filed with the RWQCB by the project sponsor, and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) must be prepared by a qualified professional prior to commencement of 84 California State Water Resources Control Board. 2020-2022 California Integrated Report (Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List and 305(b) Report). May 11, 2022.
5.10 5.10.1.1
969
CC 04-03-2024
969 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 98 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
construction and filed with the RWQCB by the project sponsor. The Construction General Permit includes requirements for training, inspections, record keeping, and, for projects of certain risk levels, monitoring. The general purpose of the requirements is to minimize the discharge of pollutants and to protect beneficial uses and receiving waters from the adverse effects of construction-related storm water discharges.
Regional and Local
San Francisco Bay Basin Plan
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB regulates water quality in accordance with the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin (Basin Plan). The Basin Plan lists the beneficial uses that the San Francisco Bay RWQCB has identified for local aquifers, streams, marshes, rivers, and the San Francisco Bay, as well as the water quality objectives and criteria that must be met to protect these uses. The San Francisco Bay RWQCB implements the Basin Plan by issuing and enforcing waste discharge requirements, including permits for nonpoint sources such as the urban runoff discharged by a City’s stormwater drainage system. The Basin Plan also describes watershed management programs and water quality attainment strategies.
Municipal Regional Permit Provision C.3
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB re-issued the MRP in May 2022 to regulate stormwater discharges from municipalities and local agencies (co-permittees) in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Counties, and the cities of Fairfield, Suisun City, and Vallejo.85 Under Provision C.3 of the MRP, new and redevelopment projects that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area are required to implement site design, source control, and LID-based stormwater treatment controls to treat post-construction stormwater runoff. LID-based treatment controls are intended to maintain or restore the site’s natural hydrologic functions, maximizing opportunities for infiltration and evapotranspiration, and using stormwater as a resource (e.g., rainwater harvesting for non-potable uses). The MRP also requires that stormwater treatment measures are properly installed, operated, and maintained.
In addition to water quality controls, the MRP requires new development and redevelopment projects that create or replace one acre or more of impervious surface to manage developmentrelated increases in peak runoff flow, volume, and duration, where such hydromodification is likely to cause increased erosion, silt pollutant generation, or other impacts to local rivers, streams, and creeks. Projects may be deemed exempt from these requirements if: (1) the post-project impervious surface area is less than, or the same as, the pre-project impervious surface area; (2) the project is located in a catchment that drains to a hardened (e.g., continuously lined with concrete) engineered channel or channels or enclosed pipes, which extend continuously to the Bay, Delta, or 85 California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Region. Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2-2022-0018, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008. May 11, 2022 970
CC 04-03-2024
970 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 99 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
flow controlled reservoir, or, in a catchment that drains to channels that are tidally influenced; or (3) the project is located in a catchment or subwatershed that is highly developed (i.e., that is 70 percent or more impervious).86
Municipal Regional Permit Provision C.12.f
Provision C.12.f of the MRP requires co-permittee agencies to implement a control program for PCBs that reduces PCB loads by a specified amount during the term of the permit, thereby making substantial progress toward achieving the urban runoff PCBs wasteload allocation in the Basin Plan by March 2030.87 Programs must include focused implementation of PCB control measures, such as source control, treatment control, and pollution prevention strategies. Municipalities throughout the Bay Area are updating their demolition permit processes to incorporate the management of PCBs in demolition building materials to ensure PCBs are not discharged to storm drains during demolition. Buildings constructed between 1950 and 1980 that are proposed for demolition must be screened for the presence of PCBs prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. Single-family residential and wood frame structures are exempt.
Water Resources Protection Ordinance and District Well Ordinance Valley Water operates as the flood control agency for Santa Clara County. Valley Water also provides stream stewardship and is the wholesale water supplier throughout the county, which includes the groundwater recharge program. Well construction and deconstruction permits, including borings 45 feet or deeper, are required under Valley Water’s Well Ordinance 90-1. Under Valley Water’s Water Resources Protection Ordinance, projects within Valley Water property or easements are required to obtain encroachment permits.
2021 Groundwater Management Plan
The 2021 Groundwater Management Plan (GWMP) describes Valley Water’s comprehensive groundwater management framework, including existing and potential actions to achieve basin sustainability goals and ensure continued sustainable groundwater management. The GWMP covers the Santa Clara and Llagas subbasins, which are located entirely in Santa Clara County. Valley Water manages a diverse water supply portfolio, with sources including groundwater, local surface water, imported water, and recycled water. About half of the county’s water supply comes from local sources and the other half comes from imported sources. Imported water includes the District’s State Water Project and Central Valley contract supplies and supplies delivered by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) to cities in northern Santa Clara County. Local sources 86 The Hydromodification Applicability Maps developed the permittees under Order No. R2-2009-0074 were prepared using this standard, adjusted to 65 percent imperviousness to account for the presence of vegetation on the photographic references used to determine imperviousness. Thus, the maps for Order No. R2-2009-0074 are accepted as meeting the 70 percent requirement.
87 California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Region. Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2-2022-0018, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008. May 11, 2022 971
CC 04-03-2024
971 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 100 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
include natural groundwater recharge and surface water supplies. A small portion of the county’s water supply is recycled water.
Local groundwater resources make up the foundation of the county’s water supply, but they need to be augmented by the District’s comprehensive water supply management activities to reliably meet the county’s needs. These include the managed recharge of imported and local surface water and in‐lieu groundwater recharge through the provision of treated surface water and raw water, acquisition of supplemental water supplies, and water conservation and recycling.88 Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies and strategies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to hydrology and water quality.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy ES-7.1 In public and private development, use low impact development (LID) principles to mimic natural hydrology, minimize grading and protect or restore natural drainage systems.
Policy ES-7.2 Minimize stormwater runoff and erosion impacts resulting from development and use LID designs to treat stormwater or recharge groundwater.
Policy ES-7.3 Ensure that surface and groundwater quality impacts are reduced through development review and volunteer efforts.
Policy ES-7.11 Water Conservation and Demand Reduction Measures. Promote efficient use of water throughout the City in order to meet State and regional water use reduction targets.
Strategy INF-4.1.1 Reduce the demand on storm drain capacity through implementation of programs that meet and even exceed on-site drainage requirements.
Strategy ES-5.3.1 Continue to emphasize the planting of native, drought tolerant, pest resistant, noninvasive, climate appropriate plants and ground covers, particularly for erosion control and to prevent disturbance of the natural terrain.
Strategy ES-7.1.1 Continue to require topographical information; identification of creeks, streams, and drainage areas; and grading plans for both public and private development proposals to ensure protection and efficient use of water resources.
Strategy ES-7.2.3 Minimize impervious surface areas, and maximize on-site filtration and the use of on-site retention facilities.
Strategy ES-7.3.1 Require LID designs such as vegetated stormwater treatment systems and green infrastructure to mitigate pollutant loads and flows.
Strategy ES-7.4.3 Review development plans to ensure that projects are examined in the context of impacts on the entire watershed, in order to comply with the City’s non-point source Municipal Regional Permit.
88 Valley Water. 2021 Groundwater Management Plan, Santa Clara and Llagas Subbasins .November 2021. 972
CC 04-03-2024
972 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 101 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Cupertino 2020 Parks and Recreation System Master Plan
The City’s Master Plan was adopted in February 2020, and outlines the City’s comprehensive plan for parks and recreational facilities in the City through the year 2040. The Master Plan is organized around seven goals, which include conservation, connection, equitable access, enhancement, activity, quality, and sustainability. Each of the seven goals has associated objectives that reflect the City’s desired outcomes and actions that provide ideas or strategies that help achieve the broader goals. The primary goal and objective in the Master Plan regarding hydrology is:
• Objective 1.D, which encourages projects to embrace storm water management by incorporating green infrastructure elements such as rain gardens, bioswales, permeable pavers and detention ponds to help reduce flooding, filter pollutants, and replenish groundwater during storm events.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
In addition to the General Plan, the City’s Municipal Code guides development in the City. Chapter
9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, outlines the City’s minimum requirements designed to control the discharge of pollutants into the City of Cupertino’s storm drain system and to assure that discharges from the City’s storm drain system comply with applicable provisions of the federal Clean Water Act and NPDES Permit. Section 16.08.110, Interim Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, requires preparation of an Interim Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. Consistent with this section of the Municipal Code, the plan shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works, calculate the maximum runoff from the site for a 10-year storm event, describe measures to be undertaken to retain sediment on the site, provide a brief description of the surface runoff and erosion control measures to be implemented, and detail vegetative measures to be undertaken.
Cupertino General Conditions
The City of Cupertino maintains a list of general conditions that contractors must implement or comply with while working on municipal projects. General Condition 7.20 – Storm Water Pollution control outlines a variety of requirements that projects must comply with. These include requirements to implement stormwater BMPs during construction, obtain all necessary permits, prepare a SWPPP is necessary, and prevent contaminated runoff from construction equipment.
Existing Conditions
Water Quality
The water quality of streams, creeks, ponds, and other surface water bodies can be greatly affected by pollution carried in contaminated surface runoff. Pollutants from unidentified sources, known as nonpoint source pollutants, are washed from streets, construction sites, parking lots, and other exposed surfaces into storm drains. Urban stormwater runoff often contains contaminants such as oil and grease, plant and animal debris (e.g., leaves, dust, animal feces, etc.), pesticides, litter, and
5.10.1.2 973
CC 04-03-2024
973 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 102 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
heavy metals. In sufficient concentration, these pollutants have been found to adversely affect the aquatic habitats to which they drain.
While there are no streams, creeks, ponds, or other surface water bodies located within the project site, Stevens Creek is located approximately 0.8-mile west of the project site. Stevens Creek is on the 2006 Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list due to diazinon pollution, total toxicity levels, the water temperature in the creek, and solid waste pollution.
Groundwater
The City of Cupertino overlies the Santa Clara Subbasin (DWR Basin 2-9.02), a groundwater subbasin that is 297 square miles in area. Valley Water is responsible for managing groundwater in Santa Clara County, which includes conducting an artificial groundwater recharge program that involves releasing locally conserved or imported water to in-stream and off-stream facilities to augment groundwater supplies in the Santa Clara groundwater basin. Most of Cupertino, including the project site, is located within the recharge area of the Santa Clara Subbasin. 89 Valley Water owns
and manages the only recharge facility within Cupertino, which is the McClellan Road Ponds recharge facility located 0.55-mile southwest of the project site. 90 As discussed in Section 5.7.1.2 Existing Conditions, no groundwater was encountered during the subsurface investigation on-site, and it is estimated that historic high groundwater under the site is approximately 50 feet bgs. Water levels on-site may vary depending on seasonal precipitation, irrigation practices, and other climate conditions.
Stormwater Drainage
The project site is developed with two existing buildings, large, landscaped areas, surface parking lots, walking paths, sports courts, and a softball field. The project site consists of eight acres (or approximately 35 percent) of percent impervious surfaces and 14.5 acres (or approximately 65 percent) of pervious surfaces. Stormwater runoff from the project site enters the City’s main storm drain system and eventually flows to the San Francisco Bay.
Flooding
The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. According to the FEMA, the project site is in Zone X with 0.2 percent annual chance of flood. 91 89 Santa Clara Valley Water District. 2021 Groundwater Management Plan. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.valleywater.org/2021_GWMP_web_version.pdf. 90 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Page 151. 91 Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 06085C0208H.
Effective Date May 17, 2009.
974
CC 04-03-2024
974 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 103 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Other Inundation Hazards
A seiche is a standing wave oscillating in a body of water that can produce flooding along the shoreline under certain natural conditions.92 There are no bodies of water such as lakes, harbors, or reservoirs near the project site that would affect the site in the event of a seiche. The project site is not close enough to San Francisco Bay to be affected in the event of a tsunami.93
5.10.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
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?
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:
- result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site;
- substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding 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?
92 National Ocean Service. What is a Seiche? Accessed August 16, 2023. https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/seiche.html. 93 Association of Bay Area Governments. Tsunami & Additional Hazards. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://abag.ca.gov/our-work/resilience/data-research/tsunami-additional-hazards. □
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
975
CC 04-03-2024
975 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 104 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects under the Master Plan would result in minor site disturbances that could potentially increase the amount of sediment runoff into the City’s storm drains or natural drainage channels, which could impact runoff water quality. Consistent with the vision of the Master Plan, future projects would incorporate green infrastructure to capture runoff and would comply with applicable state and local ordinances such as the SWRCB Construction General Permit and Municipal Code Chapters 9.18, 9.19, and 16.08. The 2019 IS/MND found that, in combination with implementation of City General Conditions, adherence to these regulations would reduce impacts to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements to a less than significant level.94
Construction
Implementation of the proposed project would require demolition, excavation, grading, and paving of the project site, which could result in temporary impacts to surface water quality. These construction activities could increase erosion and sedimentation once the disturbed soil is exposed to water and wind. This would increase the potential for soil, sediment, and pollutants to be carried by runoff into local waterways and the San Francisco Bay.
Since the proposed project would disturb more than one acre, it is required to comply with the State of California General Construction Permit and submit a SWPPP and NOI to the SWRCB.
Compliance with the General Construction Permit would ensure that all BMPs related to stormwater pollution prevention for construction projects are implemented. In addition, the project would comply with City General Condition 7.20 which outlines specific measures and practices that are required to control stormwater pollution during construction activities. The project would also comply with Municipal Code Chapters 9.18, 9.19, and 16.18 which outline requirements for 94 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 157 to 158.
□
□
□
□
□
□
976
CC 04-03-2024
976 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 105 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
stormwater pollution prevention and watershed protection, water resource protection, and Interim Erosion and Sediment Control Plans, respectively. For these reasons, project construction would not result in significant water quality impacts, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
Post-Construction
The project would replace more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface at the project site; therefore, it is required to comply with Provision C.3 of the MRP which requires implementation of site design, source control, and LID-based stormwater treatment controls to reduce the pollutant loads of runoff from the project. The project would reduce and treat surface runoff on-site by constructing landscaped bioretention areas and installing pervious paving materials in select areas throughout the site to promote on-site infiltration. Development of the proposed project, in compliance with existing regulations and best management practices (including the MRP), would not result in significant water quality impacts, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
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 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects under the Master Plan would be consistent with the design requirements in the Master Plan which encourage installation of permeable surfaces. In addition, projects would comply with state and local requirements, such as incorporating LID treatment measures consistent with NPDES permit requirements. Based on these factors, the 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of the Master Plan would not substantially decrease water supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, and the impact would be considered less than significant.95
Groundwater recharge occurs when surface water percolates through the soil to recharge groundwater aquifers. As discussed in Section 5.10.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site is located within the recharge area of the Santa Clara Subbasin. The proposed project would increase on-site impervious surfaces by approximately 1.6 acres (or seven percent) compared to existing conditions. However, the project would construct landscaped bioretention areas and install pervious paving materials on-site to promote on-site infiltration, in compliance with Provision C.3 of the MRP. In addition, the project would plant drought-tolerant landscaping and install highefficiency irrigation equipment, which would reduce the amount of water use on-site, consistent with Master Plan Objective 7B, the City’s Landscape Ordinance, and the Green Building Code.
Implementation of the project would not require pumping of groundwater underneath the project 95 Ibid. Page 158.
977
CC 04-03-2024
977 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 106 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
site, nor would it interfere with the operation of the nearby McClellan Road Ponds recharge facility, which is located 0.55-mile southwest of the project site.
Based on this discussion, the project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
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 or siltation on- or off-site; substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding 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 2019 IS/MND determined that improvements identified in the Master Plan would not result in the alteration of the course of a stream or river, and compliance with existing regulations such as NPDES permit requirements, Municipal Code Chapters 9.18 and 16.08, and City General Conditions would prevent substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. In addition, projects implemented under the Master Plan would incorporate LID treatment measures consistent with NPDES permit requirements and comply with Master Plan Objective 1.D which is meant to reduce flooding, filter pollutants, and replenish groundwater. Projects under the Master Plan would not significantly change the amount of impervious surfaces within parks, and compliance with existing regulations in the City and the MRP would prevent the exceedance of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems.96
There are no streams or rivers on-site, therefore, the proposed project would not affect the existing drainage pattern of any streams or rivers. As discussed under checklist question a) and checklist question b) above, although the proposed project would increase the amount of impervious surfaces on-site, it would also construct landscaped bioretention areas and install pervious paving materials on-site and comply with NPDES permit requirements, MRP, and Municipal Code Chapters
9.18 and 16.08. This would reduce the amount of stormwater runoff from the site and prevent the exceedance of capacity in the adjacent stormwater drainage systems serving the site.
Based on this discussion, the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or create or contribute runoff which would exceed existing stormwater drainage capacity or result in flooding on- or off-site, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
96 Ibid. Pages 158 to 160.
978
CC 04-03-2024
978 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 107 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
d) Would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that Memorial Park was not at risk of inundation from seiches or tsunamis, and future projects would not involve use of hazardous materials in large amounts. Based on this discussion, the 2019 IS/MND concluded that the risk of release of pollutants due to project inundation would be considered less than significant.97 Consistent with the assumptions in the 2019 IS/MND, the project would not use or store substantial quantities of hazardous materials on-site. As discussed in Section 5.10.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. The project site is in Zone X with a
0.2 percent annual chance of flooding.
San Francisco Bay presents an inundation risk to sections of the coastline during a tsunami. The project site is not located near enough to San Francisco Bay to be affected in the event of a tsunami. As discussed previously, there are no bodies of water such as lakes, harbors, or reservoirs near the project site that would affect the site in the event of a seiche.
Based on the above discussion, implementation of the proposed project would not risk release of pollutants due to inundation in flood hazard, tsunami or seiche zones, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects under the Master Plan would not conflict or obstruct the Basin Plan or Valley Water GWMP because future ground disturbing activities would implement BMPs and LID treatment measures. Therefore, the 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of the Master Plan would result in less than significant impacts to water quality control plans and sustainable groundwater management plans.98 The San Francisco Basin Plan provides a framework for state and local governments to meet water quality objectives and criteria to protect the beneficial uses of local aquifers, streams, marshes, and San Francisco Bay. Consistent with the San Francisco Basin Plan, the proposed project would comply with the MRP requirement to install LID treatment controls to treat stormwater runoff. In addition, the project would not require any dewatering during excavation, would be designed to promote onsite water infiltration, and would include drought-tolerant landscaping and high-efficiency irrigation 97 Ibid. Page 160. 98 Ibid. Page 160.
979
CC 04-03-2024
979 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 108 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
to limit water use. Therefore, the project would not interfere with implementation of the 2021 Groundwater Management Plan.
For these reasons, the project would not conflict with water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
980
CC 04-03-2024
980 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 109 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Land Use and Planning
5.11.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
Local
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to land use.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy LU-27.8 Protect residential neighborhoods from noise, traffic, light, glare, odors and visually intrusive effects from more intense development with landscape buffers, site and building design, setbacks and other appropriate measures.
Policy RPC-2.5 Provide parks and recreational facilities for a variety of recreational activities.
Policy RPC-4.1 Design parks appropriately to address the facility and recreational programming required by each special area and neighborhood based on current and future plans for the areas.
Heart of the City Specific Plan
The Heart of the City Specific Plan (Specific Plan) provides specific development guidance for the Stevens Creek Boulevard commercial corridor and is meant to guide the future development and redevelopment of the corridor. The Specific Plan provides standards and design guidelines for the properties within the Specific Plan area and outlines the appropriate development process for necessary improvements.
Cupertino 2020 Parks and Recreation System Master Plan
The City’s 2020 Master Plan was adopted in February 2020, and outlines the City’s comprehensive plan for parks and recreational facilities in the City through the year 2040. The Master Plan is organized around seven goals, which include conservation, connection, equitable access, enhancement, activity, quality, and sustainability. Each of the seven goals has associated objectives that reflect the City’s desired outcomes and actions that provide ideas or strategies that help achieve the broader goals.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
The Municipal Code contains all ordinances for the City and identifies land use categories, site development regulations, and other general provisions that ensure consistency between the
5.11 5.11.1.1
981
CC 04-03-2024
981 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 110 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
General Plan and proposed development projects. Title 19 of the Municipal Code establishes the City’s Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance describes the zoning designations and contains the zoning map and development standards for each zoning designation. Zoning Ordinance Chapters
19.88 and 19.92 regulate Open Space and Parks and Recreation zones, respectively.
Existing Conditions
The project site is within the boundaries of the Heart of the City Special Area of the General Plan and has General Plan designations of Transportation, Parks and Open Space, and Public Facilities.
The project site is within the West Stevens Creek Boulevard subarea of the Special Area and is in the Community Recreation Node which consists of Memorial Park, the Senior Center, Sports Center, and Quinlan Community Center. The site is within the Heart of the City Specific Plan Area zoning district, and has a zoning designation of Open Space/Public Park/Recreational Zone.
The project site is currently developed with an operational park which includes an amphitheater and various recreational facilities, the Cupertino Senior Center, and the Quinlan Community Center.
The site is surrounded primarily by residential uses, and De Anza College is located south of the project site (south of Stevens Creek Boulevard).
5.11.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
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?
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that the Master Plan would not include any recommended projects that would physically divide an established community; therefore, there would be no impact.99 The proposed project would implement various improvements to an existing City park and does not include improvements outside the existing park boundaries. This project would not involve the construction of substantial infrastructure, such as highways, freeways, or major arterial streets that 99 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Page 165.
5.11.1.2 □
□
□
□
□
□
982
CC 04-03-2024
982 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 111 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
would physically divide the existing community surrounding the project site. The bicycle and pedestrian improvements included in the project would improve access to the park; therefore, the project would have no impact, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
b) Would the project 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?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects under the Master Plan would occur at existing park and recreation facilities designated as park or public facilities and would comply with the City’s adopted plans and policies and be designed to be consistent with Cupertino land use and zoning designations. Therefore, the 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of the Master Plan would result in less than significant impacts to land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. 100
General Plan
The project site has General Plan designations of Transportation, Parks and Open Space, and Public Facilities, and is within the boundaries of the Heart of the City Special Area. The Transportation designation applies to streets, highways, and rail corridors and covers a small portion of the site east of the Senior Center which includes a segment of the Mary Avenue driveway entrance and the associated right-of-way. The Parks and Open Space designation applies to land that is owned by the public and used for recreation, and covers the central portion of the Park which currently includes the tennis courts, softball field, amphitheater, Veterans Memorial, and Senior Center. The Public Facilities designation applies to land used by a governmental entity for a public purpose, and covers the Quinlan Community Center and the main reservable picnic area on-site. The proposed project would include a series of improvements within the park that would provide upgraded recreational facilities to the public, which is consistent with the intent of the General Plan designations. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
Heart of the City Specific Plan
The project site is within the Heart of the City Specific Plan Area zoning district and has a zoning designation of Open Space/Public Park/Recreational Zone. Within the Specific Plan, the park is meant to be an area focused on commerce and community that supports walking, biking, and transit through the provision of pedestrian and bicycle links such as bikeways and pedestrian pathways. The project would be consistent with the zoning designation of the site by maintaining the current land uses and constructing improvements consistent with the Specific Plan’s vision for the area. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
100 Ibid. Page 165.
983
CC 04-03-2024
983 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 112 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Cupertino 2020 Parks and Recreation System Master Plan
The Master Plan is organized around seven goals and their related objectives, which include conservation, connection, equitable access, enhancement, activity, quality, and sustainability. The project would be consistent with the assumptions in the 2019 IS/MND by maintaining the existing use on-site and implementing small-scale improvements to on-site amenities. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
984
CC 04-03-2024
984 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 113 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Mineral Resources
5.12.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
State
Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) was enacted by the California legislature in 1975 to address the need for a continuing supply of mineral resources, and to prevent or minimize the negative impacts of surface mining to public health, property, and the environment. As mandated under SMARA, the State Geologist has designated mineral land classifications in order to help identify and protect mineral resources in areas within the state subject to urban expansion or other irreversible land uses which would preclude mineral extraction. SMARA also allowed the State Mining and Geology Board (SMGB), after receiving classification information from the State Geologist, to designate lands containing mineral deposits of regional or statewide significance.
Existing Conditions
The project site is not identified as a natural resource area containing mineral resources in the City’s General Plan, the land type of the site is classified as Urban/Suburban Developed – Unsuitable for Extraction.
101 The project site is currently developed as a park and there are no known mineral resources on-site.
101 City of Cupertino. Cupertino General Plan Community Vision 2040. October 15, 2015. Page ES-10.
5.12 5.12.1.1
5.12.1.2 985
CC 04-03-2024
985 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 114 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
5.12.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that will be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the state?
The 2019 IS/MND determined the implementation of the Master Plan would not create any loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region and residents of the State, as no parks other than Linda Vista Park include known mineral resources.102 This condition has not changed, therefore, implementation of the project would result in the same impact as disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? As discussed in Section 5.12.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site is not identified as a natural resource area containing mineral resources in the City’s General Plan. 103 Therefore, implementation
of the project would not result in an impact to mineral resources delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
102 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Page 167. 103 Ibid. Page 167. □
□
□
□
□
□
986
CC 04-03-2024
986 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 115 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Noise
The following discussion is based on the Noise and Vibration Assessment completed by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. dated December 2023. A copy of the report is included in Appendix E of this Initial Study/Addendum.
5.13.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Background Information
Noise
Factors that influence sound as it is perceived by the human ear, include the actual level of sound, period of exposure, frequencies involved, and fluctuation in the noise level during exposure. Noise is measured on a decibel scale, which serves as an index of loudness. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness. Because the human ear cannot hear all pitches or frequencies, sound levels are frequently adjusted or weighted to correspond to human hearing. This adjusted unit is known as the A-weighted decibel, or dBA.
Since excessive noise levels can adversely affect human activities and human health, federal, state, and local governmental agencies have set forth criteria or planning goals to minimize or avoid these effects. Noise guidelines are generally expressed using one of several noise averaging methods, including Leq, DNL, or CNEL.104 These descriptors are used to measure a location’s overall noise exposure, given that there are times when noise levels are higher (e.g., when a jet is taking off from an airport or when a leaf blower is operating) and times when noise levels are lower (e.g., during lulls in traffic flows on freeways or in the middle of the night). Lmax is the maximum A-weighted noise level during a measurement period.
Vibration
Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average motion of zero.
Vibration amplitude can be quantified using Peak Particle Velocity (PPV), which is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave. PPV has been routinely 104 Leq is a measurement of average energy level intensity of noise over a given period of time. Day-Night Level (DNL) is a 24-hour average of noise levels, with a 10 dB penalty applied to noise occurring between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) includes an additional five dB applied to noise occurring between 7:00 PM and 10:00 PM. Where traffic noise predominates, the CNEL and DNL are typically within two dBA of the peak-hour Leq.
5.13 5.13.1.1
987
CC 04-03-2024
987 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 116 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
used to measure and assess ground-borne construction vibration. Studies have shown that the threshold of perception for average persons is in the range of 0.008 to 0.012 inches/second (in/sec) PPV.
Regulatory Framework
Federal
Federal Transit Administration Vibration Limits
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has developed vibration impact assessment criteria for evaluating vibration impacts associated with transit projects. The FTA has proposed vibration impact criteria based on maximum overall levels for a single event. The impact criteria for groundborne vibration are shown in Table 5.13-1 below. These criteria can be applied to development projects in jurisdictions that lack vibration impact standards.
Table 5.13-1: Groundborne Vibration Impact Criteria
Land Use Category
Groundborne Vibration Impact Levels (VdB inch/sec)
Frequent Event Occasional Events Infrequent Events
Category 1: Buildings where vibration
would interfere with interior operations 65 65 65
Category 2: Residences and buildings
where people normally sleep 72 75 80
Category 3: Institutional land uses with
primarily daytime use 75 78 83
Source: Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment Manual. September 2018.
State and Local
California Green Building Standards Code
For commercial uses, CalGreen (Section 5.507.4.1 and 5.507.4.2) requires that wall and roof-ceiling assemblies exposed to the adjacent roadways have a composite STC rating of at least 50 or a composite OITC rating of no less than 40, with exterior windows of a minimum STC of 40 or OITC of 30 when the commercial property falls within the 65 dBA DNL or greater noise contour for a freeway or expressway, railroad, or industrial or stationary noise source. The state requires interior noise levels to be maintained at 50 dBA Leq(1-hr) or less during hours of operation at a proposed commercial use.
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to noise and vibration.
5.13.1.2 988
CC 04-03-2024
988 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 117 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy HS-8.1 Use the General Plan Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments chart, the Future Noise Contour Map and the City Municipal Code to evaluate land use decisions.
Policy HS-8.2 Minimize noise impacts through appropriate building and site design.
Policy HS-8.3 Regulate construction and maintenance activities. Establish and enforce reasonable allowable periods of the day, during weekdays, weekends and holidays for construction activities. Require construction contractors to use the best available technology to minimize excessive noise and vibration from construction equipment such as pile drivers, jack hammers, and vibratory rollers.
Strategy HS-8.2.3 Exercise discretion in requiring sound walls to be sure that all other measures of noise control have been explored and that the sound wall blends with the neighborhood. Sound walls should be designed and landscaped to fit into the environment.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
The City of Cupertino Municipal Code contains a Zoning Ordinance that limits noise levels at adjacent properties. Municipal Code Section 10.48.010 defines daytime as the period from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM weekdays, and the period from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM on weekends. Nighttime is defined as periods of weekdays from 8:00 PM to midnight, and from midnight to 7:00 AM, and periods on weekends from 6:00 PM to midnight and from midnight to 9:00 AM. The following sections establish the applicable limits:
10.48.040 Daytime and Nighttime Maximum Noise Levels – Individual noise sources, or the combination of a group of noise sources located on the same property, shall not produce a noise level exceeding those specified on property zoned as follows, unless specifically provided in another section of this chapter in the Municipal Code:
Land Use at Point of Origin
Maximum Noise Level at Complaint Site of Receiving Property Nighttime Daytime
Residential 50 dBA 60 dBA
Nonresidential 55 dBA 65 dBA
• 10.48.050 Brief Daytime Incidents.
o During the daytime period only, brief noise incidents exceeding limits in other sections of this chapter are allowed; providing the sum of the noise duration in minutes plus the excess noise level does not exceed twenty in a two-hour period.
Noise Increment Above
Normal Standard
Noise Duration in
Two-Hour Period
5 dBA 15 minutes
10 dBA 10 minutes
989
CC 04-03-2024
989 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 118 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
o For multifamily dwelling interior noise, Section 10.48.054, the sum of excess noise level and duration in minutes of a brief daytime incident shall not exceed 10 in any two-hour period, measured at the receiving location.
o Section 10.48.050A does not apply to Section 10.48.055 (Motor Vehicle Idling). • Section 10.48.051 Landscape Maintenance Activities
o This section states that the use of motorized equipment for landscape maintenance activities for public schools, public and private golf courses, and public facilities is limited to the hours of 7 AM to 8 PM on weekdays and 7 AM to 6 PM on weekends and holidays. The section also states that the use of motorized equipment for landscape maintenance activities is exempt from the noise limits set forth in Section
10.48.040 provided reasonable efforts are made by the user to minimize disturbances to nearby residents by, for example, installation of appropriate mufflers or noise baffles, running equipment only the minimal period necessary, and locating equipment so as to generate minimum noise levels on adjoining properties. • 10.48.052 Outdoor Public Events
o A: Outdoor events open to the general public on nonresidential property, such as parades, rallies, fairs, concerts and special sales and promotional events, involving generation of noise levels higher than would normally occur, by use of the human voice, public address systems, musical instruments, electronic amplification systems, and similar sound producing activities, are allowed upon obtaining an appropriate permit from the city, and subject to the following general limitations:
1. The event shall not produce noise levels above seventy dBA on any residential property for a period longer than three hours during daytime. 2. The event shall not produce noise levels above sixty dBA on any residential property during the period from eight p.m. to eleven p.m., and above fifty-five dBA for any other nighttime period.
3. Continuous or repeated peak noise levels above ninety-five dBA shall not be produced at any location where persons may be continuously exposed. o B: The conditions imposed upon the event or activity in the permit issued by the City, regarding maximum noise level, location of noise sources, or duration of activity, for example, may be more limiting than this section, to protect certain individuals, areas or nearby activities which would otherwise be disturbed, and these permit conditions, when in conflict with this section, are overriding.
Noise Increment Above
Normal Standard
Noise Duration in
Two-Hour Period
15 dBA 5 minutes
19 dBA 1 minutes
990
CC 04-03-2024
990 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 119 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
• 10.48.053 Grading, Construction and Demolition
o Grading, construction, and demolition activities shall be allowed to exceed the noise limits of Section 10.48.040 during daytime hours; provided, that the equipment utilized has high-quality noise muffler and abatement devices installed and in good condition, and the activity meets one of the following two criteria:
No individual device produces a noise level more than 87 dBA at a distance of 25 feet; or
The noise level on any nearby property does not exceed 80 dBA. o Notwithstanding Section 10.48.053A, it is a violation of this chapter to engage in any grading, street construction, demolition, or underground utility work within 750 feet of a residential area on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, and during the nighttime period, except as provided in Section 10.48.030.
o Construction, other than street construction, is prohibited on holidays, except as provided in Sections 10.48.029 and 10.48.030.
o Construction, other than street construction, is prohibited during nighttime periods unless it meets the nighttime standards of Section 10.48.040. o The use of helicopters as a part of a construction and/or demolition activity shall be restricted to between the hours of 9:00 AM and 6:30 PM Monday through Friday only, and prohibited on the weekends and holidays. The notice shall be given at least 24 hours in advance of said usage. In cases of emergency, the 24-hour notice period may be waived.
• 13.04 Parks
o Section 13.04.190, Closing Hours – Prohibitions, states that no person shall remain, stay, or loiter in any public park between the hours of 10 PM and 6 AM, unless otherwise posted at the public park.
Existing Conditions
The existing noise environment on-site is dominated by traffic noise from Stevens Creek Boulevard, Stelling Road, Mary Avenue, Anton Way, Christensen Drive, and Alves Drive. In addition to the local traffic noise, noise is generated on-site by park visitors utilizing the softball field, tennis courts (including one court that is dual-lined to provide four pickleball courts), amphitheater, Cupertino Veterans Memorial, two playground areas, BBQ and picnic areas, Cupertino Senior Center, Quinlan Community Center, and parking lots. Visitors also use the softball field as an unsanctioned DOLA when the softball field is not in use. There are also events hosted in the park throughout the year, as detailed in Section 4.2 Park Programming, which draw up to 5,000 attendees for major events like the annual Cherry Blossom Festival. The average ambient noise at the park is 56 to 58 dBA CNEL. A summary of the long- and short-term noise levels measured on-site are included in Table
5.13-2 and Table 5.13-3 below. The noise measurement locations are shown on Figure 5.13-1 below.
5.13.1.3 991
CC 04-03-2024
991 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 120 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Table 5.13-2: Summary of Long-Term Noise Measurement Data (dBA) Noise Measurement Location Daytime Leq
Range
Nighttime Leq
Range
Average Noise Level
(CNEL)
LT-1: Memorial Park - West of Anton Way 49 to 60 34 to 55 58 LT-2: Memorial Park – Western Parking Lot 47 to 65 37 to 53 56 to 57 Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Memorial Park Specific Plan Noise and Vibration Assessment. October 16, 2023.
Table 5.13-3: Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurement Data (dBA) Noise Measurement Location Lmax L(1) L(10) L(50) L(90) Leq ST-1: Memorial Park - Picnic Area 64 62 58 53 48 55
ST-2: Memorial Park - Event Lawn and Tennis Courts 60 53 49 46 45 47 ST-3: Memorial Park - Playground 68 62 59 56 55 57
ST-4: Memorial Park - Softball Field 71 69 68 65 54 65
ST-5 Memorial Park - Pickleball Courts 68 65 61 56 53 58 ST-6 Memorial Park - Tennis Courts 70 64 59 57 56 58
Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Memorial Park Specific Plan Noise and Vibration Assessment. October 16, 2023. 992
CC 04-03-2024
992 of 1277
North Stelling Road
Alves Drive
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Campus Drive
Mary Avenue
Anton Way
Christensen Drive
Glen Place
Parkwood Drive
Parkwood Drive
Parkwood Drive
Alves Drive
Stevens Creek Boulevard
Campus Drive
Mary Avenue
Anton Way
Christensen Drive
Glen Place
Parkwood Drive
Parkwood Drive
Parkwood Drive
85 ST-5 ST-6 ST-2
LT-2
LT-1
ST-1
ST-3
ST-4
Aerial Source: Google Earth Pro, Sep. 6, 2023. Photo Date: Mar. 2022 Project Boundary
LT-# Long-Term Noise Measurement LocaƟon
ST-# Short-Term Noise Measurement LocaƟon
0 50 400 500 800 Feet
NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS FIGURE 5.13-1
-------- ------
993
CC 04-03-2024
993 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 122 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
5.13.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project result in:
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 applicable standards of other
agencies?
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?
The CEQA Guidelines state that a project would normally be considered to have a significant impact if noise levels conflict with adopted environmental standards or plans, or if noise levels generated by the project will substantially increase existing noise levels at noise-sensitive receivers on a permanent or temporary basis. CEQA does not define what noise level increase would be substantial. As discussed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b), the determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for judgment on the part of the lead agency and must be based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data. a) Would the project result in 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 applicable standards of other agencies? Construction Noise
The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects under the Master Plan could require the use of heavy-duty construction equipment that could temporarily increase noise levels at adjacent property lines near construction areas. However, the 2019 IS/MND concluded that these projects would be subject to City General Conditions and the noise regulations within the Municipal Code, which would reduce temporary construction noise impacts to a less than significant level.105 105 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 176 to 180.
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
[8J
[8J
994
CC 04-03-2024
994 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 123 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
As discussed in Section 4.6 Construction, for the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that construction of the project would be completed over a period of approximately 15 years as funding is made available for individual improvements, and would be split into three main construction phases. Section 10.48.053 of the City’s Municipal Code exempts construction noise from the noise limits defined in Section 10.48.040 if activities occur on weekdays during daytime hours, provided that the equipment utilized has high-quality noise muffler and abatement devices installed and are in good condition. The construction activities also need to meet the following two criteria: 1) no individual device shall produce noise levels exceeding 87 dBA at a distance of 25 feet; and 2) the noise level measured at any nearby property shall not exceed 80 dBA. Construction activities are prohibited on weekends, holidays, or during nighttime hours at sites within 750 feet of residential land uses.
As described in additional detail in Appendix E, there are existing residences surrounding the project site that would be exposed to varying levels of construction noise over the buildout of the project.
106 The project-specific analysis determined that construction noise levels would potentially reach 75 dBA Leq on occasion at the nearest residential land use during the first five year phase, 74 dBA Leq during the second five-year phase, and 75 dBA Leq during the third five-year phase, as calculated from the center of the project site phases. The potential highest noise levels for the nearest residences during each phase would occur in the demolition and grading and excavation phases of construction. These construction noise levels would not exceed the exterior threshold of 80 dBA Leq at the nearby land uses. While specific construction activities would at times exceed these thresholds when work is conducted near shared property lines, construction would move throughout the project site during the planned period and would not constitute a significant temporary increase.
Consistent with the requirements in Section 17.04.050 of the Municipal Code, residents in the surrounding area would be notified prior to the beginning of construction activities and a sign would be posted with information regarding how to file a complaint for excessive noise generation during project construction. In addition, the project would prepare a Construction Noise Control Plan that would be reviewed by the City prior to the issuance of permits. This plan would outline the appropriate noise reduction measures to be implemented during construction activities, designate haul routes that would be designed to avoid sensitive receptors to the extent feasible, and detail the steps that contractors would take to limit unnecessary engine idling. With implementation of these measures and adherence to the City’s noise standards, the project would result in less than significant construction noise impacts, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
106 Similar to the air quality analysis, the noise assessment conservatively assumed that the former residential building east of the project site, currently occupied by a roofing company, is the closest residence. 995
CC 04-03-2024
995 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 124 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Operational Noise
The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects under the Master Plan could generate noise from expanded, modified, or new recreational activities and operations. However, the 2019 IS/MND concluded that these projects would not be likely to result in a significant permanent increase in ambient noise as the City would review the proposed project designs to be consistent with General Plan Goal HS-8 and Policy HS-8.2, as well as Municipal Code Section 10.40.010. Therefore, operational noise impacts would be less than significant.107 Park Operations
The improvements under the project would include relocated playground areas, new/renovated picnic areas, upgraded amphitheater seating and infrastructure, a new basketball court, and eight new pickleball courts. As part of the project, the City would also officially allow limited use of the softball field as a DOLA. The park hours would not change under the project, and operating hours would continue to be from sunrise to 10:00 PM, seven days a week. The project would not include any changes to the type or scale of events hosted at the park. The primary noise generating improvements under the project would be the new/relocated playground areas, basketball court, and pickleball courts. The other improvements listed above would not generate substantial noise above existing conditions.
As described in additional detail in Appendix E, the hourly average noise levels are not expected to exceed the Municipal Code Section 10.48.040 65 dBA threshold at the property lines of any adjacent residential land uses while each of the individual improvements are in use. The Municipal Code Section 10.48.050 maximum noise level threshold of 84 dBA is not expected to be exceeded at any of the receptors, even in the combined worst hour scenario where it is assumed that the basketball court, all eight pickleball courts, the All-Abilities playground, and the Nature playground are being used simultaneously. Maximum noise levels could reach 71 dBA Lmax at the adjacent residential land uses, which does not exceed the established maximum noise level threshold of 84 dBA.
Based on a review of the future roadway noise contours identified in the City’s General Plan, future noise levels at the surrounding residences would range from 58 dBA CNEL to 61 dBA CNEL. Because future exterior noise levels are expected to be greater than 60 dBA CNEL, a three dBA CNEL increase as a result of the project would be considered significant. Assuming worst-case conditions where the basketball court and pickleball courts are in use from 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM and the playgrounds are assumed in use from 9:00 AM until 7:00 PM, the permanent noise level increases were estimated to range from zero to two dBA CNEL. Therefore, the proposed improvements within the park would not result in a significant increase in ambient noise level. 107 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 176 to 180.
996
CC 04-03-2024
996 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 125 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Parking Activities and Project Traffic
The project would add approximately nine new parallel parking stalls along Anton Way adjacent to the pickleball courts. The noise associated with these parking stalls would primarily be generated by engines, door slams, and human voices. The ambient noise level at the nearest residential receptor would not be expected to increase due to the addition of these stalls because the noise levels generated would be similar to the existing conditions. These stalls would generate additional vehicle trips along Anton Way; however, the number of trips generated by each stall (1.7 trips per parking space on weekdays and 1.16 trips per parking space on weekends) 108 would not be
significant compared to the existing number of trips along Anton Way and Stevens Creek (hourly traffic volumes of 32 and 1,492, respectively).109 Because the project would not generate a significant number of additional trips, there would be a zero dBA CNEL increase associated with the improvements.
As discussed above, the project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the City’s General Plan or noise ordinance, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that implementation of the Master Plan would not result in the operation of equipment or activities that would generate substantial groundborne vibration levels once operational. However, the 2019 IS/MND disclosed that groundborne vibration could be perceptible for surrounding residential properties during construction of proposed projects.
Although the short-term, intermittent construction equipment vibration would be perceptible, it was concluded that it would not be at excessive levels that could cause structural damage and would result in a less than significant impact.110
The construction of the project may generate vibration when heavy equipment or impact tools (e.g., hoe rams) are used in close proximity to existing buildings. Construction activities would include demolition, site preparation, grading, and excavation, building exterior, building interior, and paving. Pile driving, which can cause excessive vibration, is not expected to be required.
Table 5.13-4 shows the estimated vibration levels at nearby structures resulting from operation of construction equipment at the project site.
108 TJKM. Trip Generation for New Parking Lot at Cupertino Memorial Park in Cupertino, CA. August 2, 2023. Page 2. 109 Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Memorial Park Specific Plan Noise and Vibration Assessment. October 16, 2023. Page
30. 110 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Pages 180 to 181.
997
CC 04-03-2024
997 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 126 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Table 5.13-4: Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment
PPV at
25 ft.
(in/sec)
Vibration Levels at Nearest Buildings (in/sec PPV)
Multi-Family
Residential West
(30 ft)
Single-Family
Residential East
(55 ft)
Single-Family
Residential North
(60 ft)
Future Mix-Use
West
(250 feet)
Clam shovel drop 0.202 0.165 0.085 0.077 0.016
Hydromill
(slurry
wall)
In soil 0.007 0.010 0.003 0.003 0.001
In rock
0.014 0.022 0.007 0.006 0.001
Vibratory Roller 0.21 0.172 0.088 0.080 0.017
Hoe Ram 0.089 0.073 0.037 0.034 0.007
Large bulldozer 0.089 0.073 0.037 0.034 0.007
Caisson drilling 0.089 0.073 0.037 0.034 0.007
Loaded trucks 0.076 0.062 0.032 0.029 0.006
Jackhammer 0.035 0.029 0.015 0.013 0.003
Small bulldozer 0.003 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.0002
Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Memorial Park Specific Plan Noise and Vibration Assessment. October 16, 2023.
As shown in Table 5.13-4, the project-generated vibration levels would fall below the recommended threshold of 0.3 in/sec PPV at surrounding buildings; therefore, vibration from construction activities would not be expected to cause structural damage at these locations. However, vibration levels may still be perceptible to adjacent residents. Given the temporary nature and short duration of the construction phases that would have the highest potential to produce perceptible vibration, this would not be considered significant, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. Based on this discussion, the project would not result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
998
CC 04-03-2024
998 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 127 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
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 2019 IS/MND concluded that since the City is not located in a noise-impacted area for any airport, no impacts would occur as a result of Master Plan implementation.111 The nearest airport to the project site is Moffett Federal Airfield, which is approximately 5.3 miles north of the site. According to the CLUP, the project site is not located within its AIA, nor is it located within the 65 dB noise contour of Moffett Federal Airfield.112 These conditions have not changed; therefore, implementation of the project would result in the same impact as disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
111 Ibid. Page 181. 112 Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission. Moffett Federal Airfield Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
December 2018.
999
CC 04-03-2024
999 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 128 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Population and Housing
5.14.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Project site conditions are described below.
Existing Conditions
As of January 2023, the City of Cupertino had an approximate population of 59,154 with an average of 2.7 persons per household.113 The project site is currently developed with Memorial Park, the Cupertino Senior Center, and the Quinlan Community Center. There are no housing units on-site.
5.14.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of the Master Plan would not induce substantial population growth either directly or indirectly since no residential development would be proposed under the Master Plan.114
113 California Department of Finance. “Estimate E-1: Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State — January 1, 2022 and 2023.” May 2023. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates-e1/. 114 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Page 182.
5.14 5.14.1.1
□ □ □
□ □ □
1000
CC 04-03-2024
1000 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 129 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
The proposed project would implement various improvements to an existing City park consistent with the assumptions in the 2019 IS/MND. No housing or commercial space would be constructed as a part of the project. In addition, the project would not involve the extension of infrastructure that could induce unplanned population growth. The project would construct pedestrian pathways and new bicycle lanes on-site to improve on-site movement of park users and improve access from the existing residential neighborhoods surrounding the project site. Based on this discussion, the project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that implementation of the Master Plan would not displace existing people or housing such that the construction of replacement housing would be necessary since future projects would be limited to improvements within existing park facilities.115 This condition has not changed. There are no existing housing units or residents on-site; therefore, the project would result in the same impact disclosed in the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project) 115 Ibid. Page 182.
1001
CC 04-03-2024
1001 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 130 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Public Services
5.15.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
Local
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies and strategies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to public services.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy HS-3.2 Involve the Fire Department in the early design stage of all projects requiring public review to assure Fire Department input and modifications as needed.
Policy HS-4.2 Consider appropriate design techniques to reduce crime and vandalism when designing public spaces and reviewing development proposals.
Policy RPC-4.1 Design parks appropriately to address the facility and recreational programming required by each special area and neighborhood based on current and future plans for the areas.
Policy RPC-4.2 Design parks to enhance public safety by providing visibility to the street and access for public safety responders.
Policy RPC-6.1 Ensure that the City continues to offer a wide range of programs to serve diverse populations of all ages and abilities.
Cupertino 2020 Parks and Recreation System Master Plan
The City’s 2020 Master Plan was adopted in February 2020, and outlines the City’s comprehensive plan for parks and recreational facilities in the City through the year 2040. The Master Plan is organized around seven goals, which include conservation, connection, equitable access, enhancement, activity, quality, and sustainability. Each of the seven goals has associated objectives that reflect the City’s desired outcomes and actions that provide ideas or strategies that help achieve the broader goals.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
The City of Cupertino Municipal Code contains directives pertaining to public services. Title 13 of the Municipal Code provides regulations and standards for parks and recreation buildings in the City. Title 13 also regulates any activities that may occur at parks and recreation building, including sanitation requirements, vehicle requirements, picnic area requirements, advertising and sale restrictions, administrative and enforcement authority, and violation penalties.
5.15 5.15.1.1
1002
CC 04-03-2024
1002 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 131 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Existing Conditions
Fire Protection Services
Fire protection for the project site is provided by the SCCFD, which currently operates 15 fire stations, three of which are in the City of Cupertino. Cupertino Fire Station 1 is closest to the project site at 20215 Stevens Creek Boulevard, approximately 0.9-mile east of the project site. There are five divisions within the SCCFD. The Fire Prevention Division is responsible for building plan review, construction inspections, hazardous materials regulation, and fire safety inspections of commercial businesses, multi-family residential buildings and schools.116 The fire suppression (emergency response) force is contained within the Operations Division.
Police Protection Services
Police protection in Cupertino is provided by the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office, West Valley Division (SCCSO).117 The SCCSO West Valley Division headquarters are located at 1601 South De Anza Boulevard, which is approximately two miles southeast of the project site.
Schools
The project site is within the district boundaries for Cupertino Union School District (CUSD) and Fremont Union High School District (FUHSD).
118
Parks
The City of Cupertino has approximately 224 acres of park, trails, and sports fields.119 The project site contains Memorial Park, which is the largest park in the City, and contains tennis courts, a softball field, an amphitheater, the Cupertino Veterans Memorial, playground areas, picnic areas, and the Memorial Park Gazebo. The Cupertino Sports Center, which includes tennis courts, basketball courts, and other recreational facilities, is located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site.
116 City of Cupertino. “Fire Department.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.cupertino.org/ourcity/departments/public-safety-programs/fire-department. 117 City of Cupertino. “Sheriff’s Office.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/publicsafety-programs/sheriff-s-office. 118 City of Cupertino. “Schools.” Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/schools. 119 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Page 184.
5.15.1.2 1003
CC 04-03-2024
1003 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 132 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
5.15.2 Impact Discussion
New
Potentially
Significant
Impact
New Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
New Less than
Significant
Impact
Same Impact
as Approved
Project
Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
need for 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:
a) Fire Protection?
b) Police Protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other Public Facilities?
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for 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 fire protection services? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that the Master Plan would primarily involve minor projects that would not substantially alter the accessibility or response time of emergency personnel to park facilities; therefore, the Master Plan would have no impact on police services.120 The project proposes improvements to an existing park consistent with the assumptions in the 2019 IS/MND. The improvements would not substantially change or increase the use of the park. The park would continue to host the same or similar events at the park as it does under current conditions. The project would not result in the any additional programming, nor is it meant to accommodate larger crowds for the events that are currently held in the park. Therefore, these improvements would not substantially alter the accessibility or response time for fire protection services compared to existing conditions.
120 City of Cupertino. Parks and Recreation System Master Plan – Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH # 2019109066. October 2019. Page 188.
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
1004
CC 04-03-2024
1004 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 133 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
In addition, the Fire Prevention Division of the SCCFD would continue to conduct their building plan reviews, construction inspections, hazardous materials reviews, and fire safety inspections as individual projects are implemented on-site. For those reasons, development of the proposed project would not result in a significant impact to fire protection services in the City or require the construction of new or expanded fire protection facilities, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
b) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for 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 police protection services? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that the Master Plan would primarily involve minor projects that would not substantially alter the accessibility or response time of emergency personnel to park facilities; therefore, the Master Plan would have no impact on fire protection services.121 As discussed under checklist question a) above, the project would implement improvements consistent with the assumptions in the 2019 IS/MND. The improvements would not result in any additional event programming, nor would it allow for larger crowds for the events that are currently held in the park. Therefore, these improvements would not substantially alter the accessibility or response time for police protection services compared to existing conditions. In addition, each phase implemented under the project would be reviewed to ensure that appropriate design techniques to reduce crime and vandalism are incorporated, consistent with General Plan Policy HS4.2. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not result in a significant impact to police protection services in the City or require the construction of new or expanded police protection facilities, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
c) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for 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 schools?
The 2019 IS/MND concluded that none of the recommended projects in the Master Plan would require the provision of new or physically altered school facilities, and that future projects on joint121 Ibid. Page 188. 1005
CC 04-03-2024
1005 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 134 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
use fields with school campuses would be reviewed by the City and school districts at the time project-level details were available. 122
The proposed project does not include any residential units; therefore, it would not generate any new students that could increase demand on public schools in the project area. In addition, Memorial Park is not a joint-use facility. Therefore, the project would not impact existing school services or result in the need for new schools in the project area, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
d) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for 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 parks?
The 2019 IS/MND determined that future projects under the Master Plan would be reviewed again once project-level information become available for specific projects, and that programmatic mitigation measures in the IS/MND would mitigate potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels.123
The project would implement improvements within an existing park facility, and the potential environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of those improvements are discussed throughout this Initial Study/Addendum. As documented in this Initial Study/Addendum, the project would implement all programmatic mitigation measures identified in the 2019 IS/MND (including, 2019 IS/MND Mitigation Measures AES-1, BIO-1, CULT-1), consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
e) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for 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 other public facilities? The 2019 IS/MND concluded that the Master Plan would primarily involve minor projects within park facilities; therefore, the Master Plan would have no impact on other governmental facilities, such as libraries.124
122 Ibid. Page 188. 123 Ibid. Pages 188 to 189. 124 Ibid. Page 189. 1006
CC 04-03-2024
1006 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 135 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
As discussed in checklist questions a) through d) above, the project would implement improvements consistent with the 2019 IS/MND, and would not include any residential development that would increase the number of residents and their associated demand on public facilities in the area. Therefore, the proposed project would not increase demand on other public facilities such as libraries, consistent with the findings of the 2019 IS/MND. (Same Impact as Approved Project)
1007
CC 04-03-2024
1007 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 136 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Recreation
5.16.1 Environmental Setting
The regulatory framework and existing conditions have not changed substantially since the adoption of the 2019 IS/MND. Key regulations and project site conditions are described below.
Regulatory Framework
Local
Cupertino General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040
The proposed project is subject to General Plan policies and strategies including, but not limited to, the policies and strategies listed below pertaining to recreation.
Policy/Strategy Description
Policy RPC-3.1 Design parks to utilize natural features and the topography of the site in order to protect natural features and keep maintenance costs low.
Policy RPC-4.1 Design parks appropriately to address the facility and recreational programming required by each special area and neighborhood based on current and future plans for the areas.
Policy RPC-6.1 Ensure that the City continues to offer a wide range of programs to serve diverse populations of all ages and abilities.
Policy RPC-7.2 Design facilities to be flexible to address changing community needs.
Policy RPC-7.3 Design facilities to reduce maintenance, and ensure that facilities are maintained and upgraded adequately.
City of Cupertino Municipal Code
The City of Cupertino Municipal Code contains directives pertaining to public services. Title 13 of the Municipal Code sets regulations and standards for parks and recreation buildings in the City. In addition, Title 13 regulates any activities that may occur at parks and recreation buildings, including sanitation requirements, vehicle requirements, picnic area requirements, advertising and sale restrictions, administrative and enforcement authority, and violation penalties.
Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan
The City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan was adopted in June 2016 and includes an assessment of the bicycle environment in Cupertino by mapping existing bicycle facilities, bicycle-related collisions between 2009 and 2014, and bicycle network stress assessments. It also includes recommended improvements, including a loop trail.
5.16 5.16.1.1
1008
CC 04-03-2024
1008 of 1277
Memorial Park Specific Plan 137 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Cupertino January 2024
Cupertino Pedestrian Transportation Plan
The City of Cupertino Pedestrian Transportation Plan was adopted in February 2018 and is the blueprint for the City to achieve its vision of an inviting, safe, and connected pedestrian network that enhances the quality of life for all community members and visitors.
Cupertino 2020 Parks and Recreation System Master Plan
The City’s Master Plan was adopted in February 2020, and outlines the City’s comprehensive plan for parks and recreational facilities in the City through the year 2040. The Master Plan is organized around seven goals, which include conservation, connection, equitable access, enhancement, activity, quality, and sustainability. Each of the seven goals has associated objectives that reflect the City’s desired outcomes and actions that provide ideas or strategies that help achieve the broader goals. The Master Plan has several goals and objectives regarding recreation, including:
• Objective 1.C, which calls for the maintenance of natural areas in parks to control invasive species and preparation of a maintenance management plan to identify the tasks, frequencies, staffing, and resources needed to manage, maintain, and steward natural resources.
• Objective 7.C, which calls for the stewardship of resources and maintenance of assets to ensure high quality park facilities through the provision of funding, training, and additional maintenance activities where needed.