CC 07-02-2024 Searchable Packet.pdf — Cupertino City Council, July 2, 2024 (part 6 of 6)

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” the IS/MND, this project is found to have a less than significant VMT impact, therefore working towards meeting the State’s VMT reduction goals.

Construction-Related Impacts
Project work that requires movement of oversized or excessive load vehicles on State roadways requires a transportation permit that is issued by Caltrans. To apply, please visit Caltrans Transportation Permits (link). Prior to construction, coordination may be required with Caltrans to develop a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to reduce construction traffic impacts to the State Transportation Network (STN).

Equitable Access
If any Caltrans facilities are impacted by the project, those facilities must meet American Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards after project completion. As well, the project must maintain bicycle and pedestrian access during construction. These access considerations support Caltrans’ equity mission to provide a safe, sustainable, and equitable transportation network for all users.

Encroachment Permit
Please be advised that any permanent work or temporary traffic control that encroaches onto Caltrans’ Right-of-Way (ROW) requires a Caltrans-issued encroachment permit. As part of the encroachment permit submittal process, you may be asked by the Office of Encroachment Permits to submit a completed encroachment permit application package, digital set of plans clearly delineating Caltrans’ ROW, digital copy of signed, dated and stamped (include stamp expiration date) traffic control plans, this comment letter, your response to the comment letter, and where applicable, the following items: new or amended Maintenance Agreement (MA), approved Design Standard Decision Document (DSDD), approved encroachment exception request, and/or airspace lease agreement.

The checklist TR-0416 (link) is used to determine the appropriate Caltrans review process for encroachment projects. The Office of Encroachment Permit requires 100% complete design plans and supporting documents to review and circulate the permit application package. To obtain more information and download the permit application, please visit Caltrans Encroachment Permits (link). Your application package may be emailed to [email protected].

Thank you again for including Caltrans in the environmental review process. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Marley Mathews, Transportation Planner, via [email protected]. For future early coordination opportunities or project referrals, please contact [email protected]. 1-1 1-2
1-3 1-4
1176
CC 07-02-2024
1176 of 1296
Susan Michael, Capital Improvement Programs Manager
March 12, 2024

Page 3 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” Sincerely,

YUNSHENG LUO
Branch Chief, Local Development Review
Office of Regional and Community Planning
c: State Clearinghouse
1177
CC 07-02-2024
1177 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 6
Responses to Comment Letter 1: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
Response to Comment 1-1: Comment noted.

Response to Comment 1-2: Comment noted. The City will coordinate with Caltrans to secure any permits needed for oversize or overweight vehicles that might be used during construction. Please see the following Errata section.

Response to Comment 1-3: Comment noted. No Caltrans facilities will be impacted by the project.

Response to Comment 1-4: Comment noted. The City shall apply for an encroachment permit for any permanent work or temporary traffic control that will encroach onto Caltrans’ Right-of-Way.
1178
CC 07-02-2024
1178 of 1296
From: Shree Dharasker <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 4:58 PM
To: Susan Michael <[email protected]>
Cc: Josh Weinik <[email protected]>; Sarah Gidre <[email protected]> Subject: RE: draft CEQA for Lawrence-Mitty
Hi Susan,
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) has reviewed the draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail project (Project) and has the following comments:
1) The Project appears within the Valley Habitat Plan (VHP) according to Valley Water GIS files. The VHP is not discussed in the report and the Project may require VHP permits. 2) The list of special status species that were removed from consideration are not provided.

Species-specific reasoning for removal should be included. 3) Existing understory habitats are comprised of mostly non-native and invasive species, which should be added to the understory habitat descriptions. 4) Page 4 of the Biological Constraints Analysis (BCA, page 36 of the pdf) states that candidate species under CESA in the biological resources considered section, were not included. This report was finalized in 2022, however there are now several CA candidate species that should be considered as the Project moves forward with permitting. 5) Very few wildlife species were analyzed in the BCA. Species included were CCC steelhead, California red-legged frog, yellow warbler, southwestern pond turtle, and SF dusky-footed woodrat. Nesting birds and bat roosts were also considered. Numerous additional special status species and candidate species for CA listing should have been analyzed even if they were then determined to be unlikely or absent (e.g. additional special status birds, special status bats such as western red bat, and special status fish such as southern coastal roach). Several additional species listed in the US Fish and Wildlife Service IPac should be considered. Additionally, this report is 2 years old and candidate species such as Monarch butterfly and Crotch’s bumble bee should be analyzed in future permitting.
6) Valley Water has detected western pond turtle (WPT) along Saratoga Creek upstream of this project site. Under the WPT section it states that the nearest WPT detections were

6.5 and 9 miles north of the project area on San Tomas Aquino Creek. Valley Water biologists observed WPT basking along stream banks of Saratoga Creek about 1.9 miles south of the project area in January 2024. The report states “It is highly unlikely that pond turtles would disperse into the study area due to the greater than 6-mile distance separating the site from the nearest recorded occurrence… Nonetheless, this species may occur elsewhere in Saratoga Creek (e.g. upstream), thus; it is possible that an individual could occasionally disperse into the study area.” This language addresses the potential for WPT to occur upstream, but it would be best to share Valley Water’s known WPT upstream occurrence with the project team.

Comment Letter 2: Valley Water, March 13, 2024 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 2-6
1179
CC 07-02-2024
1179 of 1296
7) Valley Water has no right of way or facilities in this parcel. The project is in FEMA Flood Zone D which include areas where there are possible but undetermined flood hazards or unstudied areas.
8) The Project is adjacent to Saratoga Creek where Valley Water has a flood control easement. Project development should follow the design guides in Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams, adopted by the City of Cupertino.

Please contact me if there are any questions,
Shree Dharasker
Associate Engineer Civil
Community Projects Review Unit
(408)630-3037
2-7
2-8
1180
CC 07-02-2024
1180 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 9
Responses to Comment Letter 2: Valley Water
Response to Comment 2-1: Comment noted. The project would not be covered under the Valley Habitat Plan (VHP) because the City of Cupertino has annexed the site from the City of San Jose, and the City of Cupertino is not a participating agency in the VHP. Only participating agencies are covered under the VHP.

Additionally, even though Valley Water is a participating agency in the VHP, we do not believe that there would be a nexus for participation because there is no Valley Water right-of-way on the project site. Thus, no revisions to the IS/MND related to this comment are warranted.

Response to Comment 2-2: Comment noted. A brief discussion of special-status plant species considered in the Biological Constraints Report (BCR) was included on page 54 of the IS/MND.

The discussion in the BCR with the reasoning used to discount special-status animals has been added to the IS/MND. Please see the following Errata section.

Response to Comment 2-3: Comment noted. Discussions of the existing habitats (Mixed Oak Forest and Woodland Alliance, Coast Love Oak Woodland and Forest Alliance, and Developed) list several non-native and invasive species that are present in each of these habitats but does not call them out as such. See pages 44 – 46 of the IS/MND. We have added sentences at the end of the Mixed Oak Forest and Woodland Alliance and Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest Alliance discussions in the Errata stating that most of the understory species are non-native and invasive species. Please see the following Errata section.

Response to Comment 2-4: Comment noted. Candidate species under CESA and FESA were considered in the BCR; however, a bullet item stating that they were considered was erroneously left out of the “Biological resources that were considered for this analysis“ section, which starts on page 3 of the BCR.

We agree that the status of some of the species that were considered in the IS/MND have changed. The species that was addressed in the IS/MND, based on the BCR and whose status has changed since the BCR was prepared is the southwestern pond turtle. The southwestern pond had no federal status when the BCR was prepared. We recognize that the turtle is now a federal candidate for listing under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) and it is still a California species of special concern. We agree that this newly-petitioned candidate species and potentially other new candidate species should be considered as the project moves 1181
CC 07-02-2024
1181 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 10
forward with permitting. An updated Biological Resources Report will be prepared to support the permit applications.

Response to Comment 2-5: Comment noted. As stated in Response to Comment 2-4, the BCR will be revised to include additional species whose status has changed prior to filing the permit applications. Regarding other species mentioned by the commentor, the analysis contained in Chapter 3.4 Biological Resources correctly focused on impacts and mitigation for the species that were most likely to occur on the site and/or be impacted by the project, based on our research and corroborated by our field investigation. An updated Biological Resources Report will be prepared to support the permit applications.

Response to Comment 2-6: Comment noted. We agree that Valley Water’s recent observations of the western pond turtle should be included in the language that addresses the western pond turtle. We have added that information and a new reference. Please see the following Errata section.

Response to Comment 2-7: Comment noted. Section 3.10.1 of the Initial Study/MND describes the project site as being located outside the limits of the 100-year flood plain, and designated as being within Zone D (Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard). References to Valley Water’s ownership of property or facilities have been deleted. Please see the following Errata section.

Response to Comment 2-8: Comment noted. Chapter 3.4.3 Impact Discussion of the Initial Study/MND has been revised to include a discussion of Valley Water’s Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams. Please see the following Errata section.
1182
CC 07-02-2024
1182 of 1296
March 12, 2024
City of Cupertino, Public Works Department
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
ATTN: Susan Michael, Capital Improvement Programs Manager Re: Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail project
Dear Susan:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft MND for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project. I have reviewed the draft and would like to submit comment regarding existing multimodal access and pedestrian safety (Section 3.17.1 Environmental Setting). Archbishop Mitty High School opened at the 5000 Mitty Way site in the Fall of 1964 to 164 boys. We now educate over 1700 young men and women daily in the tradition of Catholic education and have built a robust campus environment that services students and their families all day on every day of the week.

The addition of the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project is exciting for the neighborhood and we are in great support of the goals set forth in the project. As part of our own campus master planning activities, we are continuing to evaluate bicycle and pedestrian safety for our students and would be open to discussing increased mitigation efforts for the crosswalks, particularly at Lawrence Expressway and Mitty Way, as well as, Lawrence Expressway and Moorpark Avenue/Bollinger Road. With more proposed commercial and residential developments in the area, we anticipate increased car traffic on Lawrence Expressway, and have concern about bicycle and pedestrian safety for those families and residents who wish to access the trail park from the East side of Lawrence Expressway.

Please do not hesitate to engage us to discuss opportunities for partnership or advocacy. We are interested in working together to ensure the safest bicycle and pedestrian access routes for our students, families, and local neighborhood residents.

Sincerely,
Latanya Hilton
President
Comment Letter 3: Archbishop Mitty High School 3-1
1183
CC 07-02-2024
1183 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 12
Responses to Comment Letter 3: Archbishop Mitty High School Response to Comment 3-1: Comment Noted. The Initial Study/MND does not identify any potentially significant impacts requiring mitigation related to bicycle and pedestrian safety that would result from implementation of the proposed park and trail project. Any modifications to the existing crosswalks at the intersections of Lawrence Expressway and Mitty Way or Lawrence Expressway and Moorpark Avenue/Bollinger Road to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety would need to be facilitated by the Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Division and City of San Jose, who are responsible for the maintenance and improvement of these roads. 1184
CC 07-02-2024
1184 of 1296
February 20, 2024
Ms. Susan Michael (CIP) Manager
City of Cupertinoz Public Works Dept.
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertinoi Calif. 95014
RE:Lawrence Mitty Park & Trail Project
Dear Ms. Michael,
I am writing to detail 3 points that concern me about the above-mentioned project. My family has lived on Sterling Blvd @ Barnhart, since 1954. (Original Rancho Rinconada buyer) The proposed project would be just across the creeki from the family home. My Two Brothers live in that residence(10510 Sterling Blvd and I am the Trustee of the Dorothy M. Danielson Trust, and control the property.

My Three areas of concern are:
l) The Highway & Aiirports Dept. has parked and operated heavy equipment on this site for many years.Anyone who has ever looked where tractors and heavy trucks parky has seen the ground discoloration and evidence of fluid leakages.
seen many potentially viable projects of this nature
the site ends up being a glorified "Dog Park. " As
concernedi a dog owner better have their animal on a
they can stop by, but then move on - not "take over
wieh canines running wild.
2 ) I have
ruinedi when
far as I'm
leash, and
the area"
30 PARKING ISSUES - As there seems to be only one way to access this proposed development (the Bridge by Sterling Barnhart Park) What plans are being made to mitigate the influx of carsi into an already impacted Sterling Blvd area? I wrote to the City yrs. aqoi when Sterling-Barnhart park was proposed. I inquuired about parking impact. The response was that "everyone" would walk there. (The City then rushed out and ,oainted the curb Red by the park ! )
ReBpeChffullySuOmlM""'{d'
Russ Danielson Trustee 10510 Sterling Blvd Home
4-1 4-2
4-3 Comment Letter 4: Russ Danielson, February 20, 2024 1185
CC 07-02-2024
1185 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 14
Responses to Comment Letter 4: Russ Danielson
Response to Comment 4-1: The Initial Study/MND includes review and analyses of existing hazardous materials conditions at the site, as well analyses of potential impacts based on the findings and recommendations of technical reports prepared for the site by Cornerstone Earth Group (Cornerstone). The reports included a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Update and Phase II Soil Quality Evaluation dated February 25, 2022, which were included in Appendix C. The report updates the Phase I ESA and Preliminary Soil Quality Evaluation that Cornerstone prepared previously for the site, dated April 18, 2016.

Cornerstone collected soil samples from areas of the site containing construction and demolition waste piles, and from an area of the site where a suspected truck wash was located. Analyses of samples of the construction and demolition waste did not detect organochlorine pesticides at concentrations exceeding residential screening levels, and no polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg) were detected. Additionally, the detected metals concentrations appeared to be typical of natural background concentrations. Analyses of a sample collected from sediments within the gravel in the suspected truck wash location detected total petroleum hydrocarbons as oil (TPHo) at 340 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), which does not exceed the RWQCB’s current Environmental Screening Level (ESL) for TPHo of 1,600 mg/kg. The detected metal concentrations in the analysis appeared to be typical of natural background concentrations, and no VOCs were detected. Based on these test results, the Initial Study/MND concluded that the impact was less than significant with regard to significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Response to Comment 4-2: This is a comment on the merits of the proposed Park and trail project and not on the adequacy of the Initial Study/MND, and does not raise any significant environmental issues. No further response is required.

Inclusion of these comments in this Final Initial Study/MND Memo will make the commentor's views available to the City of Cupertino City Council, and other public officials who will make decisions about the proposed project.

Response to Comment 4-3: As described in the document, the project, which is designed as a component of the existing San Tomas Aquino/Saratoga Creek Trail, provides no on-site parking and no direct vehicular access to the proposed park or trail. Visitors accessing the park by vehicle would need to park on the adjacent 1186
CC 07-02-2024
1186 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 15
public streets near Sterling Barnhart Park or in the neighborhood east of Lawrence Expressway across from the site, and use the existing bicycle/pedestrian access paths – the bridge from Sterling Barnhart Park and crosswalk on Lawrence Expressway at Mitty Way - to get to the park and trail.

Per the CEQA Guidelines, the Initial Study/MND is not required to analyze parking, and consequently does not include thresholds of significance for parking. The assessment prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants for the project therefore focused on potential impacts related to the CEQA Guidelines mandated issues of Vehicle Miles Traveled VMT, multimodal access, and pedestrian safety. 1187
CC 07-02-2024
1187 of 1296
From: Kitty Moore <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 12:57 PM
To: Susan Michael <[email protected]>
Cc: Pamela Wu <[email protected]>; Christopher Jensen <[email protected]>; Matt Morley <[email protected]>
Subject: IS/MND Comments Re: CEQA for Lawrence-Mitty
Hi Susan,
If there is an email we should be addressing our comments to, please let us know where to forward comments moving forward.

I have attached pages from the Cornerstone Earth Group Site Plan showing the various soil samples taken, and the tables of the soil sample data provided, but several samples were not included as noted below. I am also concerned about the lead screening level selected given that this is parkland, and I have included the same screening level tables used in the report as an attachment.

1. I have a question on where to locate/please provide the soil sample data for the following soil samples:

SS-2
SS-3
SS-7
SS-8
SS-10
SS-11
SS-14
Theses samples were from 2022.

2. I would like the 2016 referenced SP sample data as well:

SP-1 through SP-6 data were not included in the report.

3. The Cornerstone report uses a lead screening level of 80 mg/kg. See PDF 9 of 16 of the attached ESLs. I would like to understand why such a high level was selected, even higher than the terrestrial screening level which has parkland as an example: 32 mg/kg. Since this is vegetated parkland space, it seems the lower level would be more appropriate. What is the rationale for having such a high lead screening level, or may it be lowered to the Terrestrial level to provide a safer environment? Terrestrial is defined as: “Terrestrial Ecological Impacts: Address potential toxicity to terrestrial flora and fauna. For use in developed urban areas only.” Thank you,
Kitty Moore
Comment Letter 5: Kitty Moore
5-15-2 5-3
1188
CC 07-02-2024
1188 of 1296
Kitty Moore
Councilmember
City Council
[email protected]
(408) 777-1389
1189
CC 07-02-2024
1189 of 1296
Lawrence Expressway
Mitty Way
Highway 280
Approximate
Site Boundary
Base by Google Earth, dated 09/04/2020
0 200 400

APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET)
N
Project Number
Figure Number
Date Drawn By
Figure 2
1340-1-1
RRN
Site Plan
Lawrence Mitty Park
Cupertino, CA
March 2022
APN 375-22-001
APN 375-21-001
Archbishop Mitty
High School
Residential
Residential
Residential
Residential
Approximate location of soil sample (SS)
(Cornerstone, 01/25/2022)
Approximate location of soil sample (SS/SP)
(Cornerstone, 03/02/2016)
Approximate location of soil sample (SP)
(Cornerstone, 10/24/2016)
Legend
SP-4A
SP-4C
SP-4B
SP-4D
SP-5A
SP-5B
SP-5C SP-5D
SP-6ASP-6B
SP-6C
SP-4A SP-6D
SP-4C
SP-4B
SP-4D
SP-5A
SP-5B
SP-5C SP-5D
SP-6A
SP-6B
SP-6C
SP-6D
SS-10
SS-9
SS-8
SS-7
SS-6
SS-5
SS-4 SS-1
SS-3
SP-1A
SP-1B SP-1C
SP-1D
SP-2A
SP-2B SP-2C
SP-2DSP-3A SP-3B
SP-3D SP-3C
SS-11
SS-2
SS-10
SS-9
SS-8
SS-7
SS-6
SS-5
SS-4 SS-1
SS-3
SP-1A
SP-1B SP-1C
SP-1D
SP-2A
SP-2B SP-2C
SP-2DSP-3A SP-3B
SP-3D SP-3C
SS-11
SS-2
SS-19
SS-12 SS-13
SS-14
SS-6A
SS-6B
SS-6C
SS-15
SS-5A SS-5C
SS-5D
SS-5B SS-16
SS-4A SS-4C
SS-4D
SS-4B
SS-17 SS-1B
SS-1A SS-1C
SS-1D
SS-18
SS-19
SS-12 SS-13
SS-14
SS-6A
SS-6B
SS-6C
SS-15
SS-5A SS-5C
SS-5D
SS-5B SS-16
SS-4A SS-4C
SS-4D
SS-4B
SS-17 SS-1B
SS-1A SS-1C
SS-1D
SS-18
SS-13 1/25/2022
Depth (ft)
Lead
STLC Lead
TCLP Lead
2 to 3
19 ---
---
0 to 1
220

7.01 <0.20
4 to 5

10.4 ---
---
SS-6 3/2/2016
Depth (ft)
Lead
0 to ½
93 SS-4 3/2/2016
Depth (ft)
Lead
0 to ½
87 SS-1D 1/25/2022
Depth (ft)
Lead
STLC Lead
TCLP Lead
2 to 3

10.9 ---
---
0 to 1
216

9.14 <0.20
4 to 5

6.5 ---
---
SS-1 3/2/2016
Depth (ft)
Lead
0 to ½
130
SS-18 1/25/2022
Depth (ft)
Lead
STLC Lead
TCLP Lead
2 to 3

7.87 ---
---
0 to 1

9.09 ---
---
4 to 5
113

4.60 <0.20
Screening Level
Residential
Environmental
Screening Criteria1
STLC (California
Hazardous Waste)
Environmental
Screening Criteria2
TCLP (Federal
Hazardous Waste)
Environmental
Screening Criteria3
Lead 80 5
4 5
4 Concentraions measured in mg/kg unless noted otherwise 1 2
3 4 miligrams per liter (mg/L)
< Not detected at or above laboratory reproting limit
BOLD Concentation exceeds Residential Screening Critera Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Residential Screening Level (SL), HERO HHRA Note 3 - April 2019
Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration - California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 11, Article 3.

Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure - California Code of Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 261.
or STLC/TCLP regulatory value
--- Not analyzed
Figure presents analytical data from boring
locations where lead concentrations were greater
than selected environmental screening criteria.

DRAFT

CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP
1190
CC 07-02-2024
1190 of 1296
Lawrence Expressway
Approximate
Site Boundary
Base by Google Earth, dated 09/04/2020
Overlay by Giuliani & Kull - San Jose, Inc., ALTA/NSPS
Land Title Surveys - Sheets 2-4, dated 07/01/2020
Matchline: See Figure 2B
0 50 100

APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET)
N
Project Number
Figure Number
Date Drawn By
Figure 2A
1340-1-1
RRN
Site Plan
Lawrence Mitty Park
Cupertino, CA
March 2022
Approximate location of soil sample (SS)
(Cornerstone, 01/25/2022)
Approximate location of soil sample (SS/SP)
(Cornerstone, 03/02/2016)
Legend
APN 375-22-001 APN 375-21-001
SS-10
SS-9
SS-8
SP-1A
SP-1B
SS-12 SS-13
SS-14
SS-13 1/25/2022
Depth (ft)
Lead
STLC Lead
TCLP Lead
2 to 3
19 ---
---
0 to 1
220

7.01 <0.20
4 to 5

10.4 ---
---
Screening Level
Residential
Environmental
Screening Criteria1
STLC (California
Hazardous Waste)
Environmental
Screening Criteria2
TCLP (Federal
Hazardous Waste)
Environmental
Screening Criteria3
Lead 80 5
4 5
4 Concentraions measured in mg/kg unless noted otherwise 1 2
3 4 miligrams per liter (mg/L)
< Not detected at or above laboratory reproting limit
BOLD Concentation exceeds Residential Screening Critera Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Residential Screening Level (SL), HERO HHRA Note 3 - April 2019
Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration - California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 11, Article 3.

DRAFT
/ /// "
® CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP
,
/
/
_,:r, /
/
/
1/ f 1
PARCEl.3
APN- A PORTION OF 375-21-001
AREA-2.81* AC.
'/ 'ii
/ J ,. ./ ii
.• . I ··'
,. I ' _,
t • \ ~-1
-- ..
1191
CC 07-02-2024
1191 of 1296
Lawrence Expressway
Approximate
Site Boundary
Base by Google Earth, dated 09/04/2020
Overlay by Giuliani & Kull - San Jose, Inc., ALTA/NSPS
Land Title Surveys - Sheets 4-6, dated 07/01/2020
Matchline: See Figure 2C
Matchline: See Figure 2A
0 50 100

APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET)
N
Project Number
Figure Number
Date Drawn By
Figure 2B
1340-1-1
RRN
Site Plan
Lawrence Mitty Park
Cupertino, CA
March 2022
Approximate location of soil sample (SS)
(Cornerstone, 01/25/2022)
Approximate location of soil sample (SS/SP)
(Cornerstone, 03/02/2016)
Legend
SS-7 APN 375-21-001
SS-6
SP-1C
SP-1D
SS-6A SS-6B
SS-6C
SS-15
SS-6 3/2/2016
Depth (ft)
Lead
0 to ½
93 Screening Level
Residential
Environmental
Screening Criteria
1 STLC (California
Hazardous Waste)
Environmental
Screening Criteria
2 TCLP (Federal
Hazardous Waste)
Environmental
Screening Criteria
3 Lead 80 5
4 5
4 Concentraions measured in mg/kg unless noted otherwise 1 2
3 4 miligrams per liter (mg/L)
< Not detected at or above laboratory reproting limit
BOLD Concentation exceeds Residential Screening Critera Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Residential Screening Level (SL), HERO HHRA Note 3 - April 2019
Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration - California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 11, Article 3.

I
. ,· ' ~~~=-=-= ~ =-= ~ ----~ - - I ~. --~ ._ - ____:._~~~~r.~ 2 r :c~ c2:~:-=~~".~c_c __ c ~ C. '' ~:.c_:: :'::2,_c:~:~~:-? ~~ ®
:-=---2~".:~,~~:~";~~:. -~--,,; ~~ -~ . ' ' '-~£_
- - "

CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP
·· --
·.•. -
J.':i;!lfJi,-:;~---- -----
-- ~ ca.- a..r,
-..r; ~:.. -
1192
CC 07-02-2024
1192 of 1296
Lawrence Expressway
Approximate
Site Boundary
Base by Google Earth, dated 09/04/2020
Overlay by Giuliani & Kull - San Jose, Inc., ALTA/NSPS
Land Title Surveys - Sheets 6-9, dated 07/01/2020
Matchline: See Figure 2D
Matchline: See Figure 2B
0 50 100

APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET)
N
Project Number
Figure Number
Date Drawn By
Figure 2C
1340-1-1
RRN
Site Plan
Lawrence Mitty Park
Cupertino, CA
March 2022
Approximate location of soil sample (SS)
(Cornerstone, 01/25/2022)
Approximate location of soil sample (SS/SP)
(Cornerstone, 03/02/2016)
Approximate location of soil sample (SP)
(Cornerstone, 10/24/2016)
Legend
APN 375-21-001
SP-4A SP-4B
SP-4C
SP-4D
SP-5A SP-5B
SP-5C
SP-5D
SP-6A
SS-3
SP-2A
SP-2B
SP-2C
SP-2D SP-3A SP-3B
SP-3D
SP-3C
SS-5 SS-4
SS-1
SS-5A SS-5C
SS-5D
SS-5B
SS-16
SS-4A SS-4C
SS-4D
SS-4B
SS-17
SS-1B
SS-1A SS-1C
SS-1D
SS-4 3/2/2016
Depth (ft)
Lead
0 to ½
87 SS-1D 1/25/2022
Depth (ft)
Lead
STLC Lead
TCLP Lead
2 to 3

10.9 ---
---
0 to 1
216

9.14 <0.20
4 to 5

6.5 ---
---
SS-1 3/2/2016
Depth (ft)
Lead
0 to ½
130
Screening Level
Residential
Environmental
Screening Criteria1
STLC (California
Hazardous Waste)
Environmental
Screening Criteria2
TCLP (Federal
Hazardous Waste)
Environmental
Screening Criteria3
Lead 80 5
4 5
4 Concentraions measured in mg/kg unless noted otherwise 1 2
3 4 miligrams per liter (mg/L)
< Not detected at or above laboratory reproting limit
BOLD Concentation exceeds Residential Screening Critera Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Residential Screening Level (SL), HERO HHRA Note 3 - April 2019
Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration - California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 11, Article 3.

DRAFT
- -------· . ~-- ----- ·-···
-- " _______ :::, ----~:-.--·~ ~--r•- i ·:-~-,i- ~----~ ~ - ·: .,. ·;., I . II ,.,. ' F2 ·~ ~;~~ ~~~~~~ - ---'-'"-'----"''-'--:=_~ ~ -==~~;ll!~~~~~~·---. ~~;_:!'!=;;, , .. ·-;~,.;;·-:=·~=:-. £1~·~ ·~ ~~;: ~~~~ : •.

I • ■
1- =--,.11'·•
I
■
I
■
I
■
I
■
I

CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I L I "
:.;~-2:.~.:3
I I I
PARCEL2
APN-A PORTION OF 375-21-001
AREA:4.56± AC.
\. ..,.--.·--,· ·,-•• _\ -- __ _ . ; !:_a;"'_.;--,,;:'.::-'-3~ := --q .... iELLLIAf~ ■ ~ ~· ~·-,;::~_~:::-.
1193
CC 07-02-2024
1193 of 1296
Lawrence Expressway
Approximate
Site Boundary
Base by Google Earth, dated 09/04/2020
Overlay by Giuliani & Kull - San Jose, Inc., ALTA/NSPS
Land Title Surveys - Sheets 8-11, dated 07/01/2020 Matchline: See Figure 2C 0 50 100

APPROXIMATE SCALE (FEET)
N
Project Number
Figure Number
Date Drawn By
Figure 2D
1340-1-1
RRN
Site Plan
Lawrence Mitty Park
Cupertino, CA
March 2022
Approximate location of soil sample (SS)
(Cornerstone, 01/25/2022)
Approximate location of soil sample (SS/SP)
(Cornerstone, 03/02/2016)
Approximate location of soil sample (SP)
(Cornerstone, 10/24/2016)
Legend
APN 375-21-001
SP-6B
SP-6C
SP-6D
SS-11
SS-2
SS-19
SS-18
SS-18 1/25/2022
Depth (ft)
Lead
STLC Lead
TCLP Lead
2 to 3

7.87 ---
---
0 to 1

9.09 ---
---
4 to 5
113

4.60 <0.20
Screening Level
Residential
Environmental
Screening Criteria
1 STLC (California
Hazardous Waste)
Environmental
Screening Criteria
2 TCLP (Federal
Hazardous Waste)
Environmental
Screening Criteria
3 Lead 80 5
4 5
4 Concentraions measured in mg/kg unless noted otherwise 1 2
3 4 miligrams per liter (mg/L)
< Not detected at or above laboratory reproting limit
BOLD Concentation exceeds Residential Screening Critera Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Residential Screening Level (SL), HERO HHRA Note 3 - April 2019
Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration - California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 11, Article 3.

DRAFT
®
® CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP
1194
CC 07-02-2024
1194 of 1296
Boring ID Sample ID Date Depth (feet) Lead STLC - Lead
(mg/L)
TCLP -
Lead
(mg/L)
SS-1 SS-1 (0-0.5) 3/2/2016 0-½ 130 --- ---
SS-1A (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 26.5 --- ---
SS-1A (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 9.14 --- ---
SS-1A (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 6.55 --- ---
SS-1B (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 10.5 --- ---
SS-1B (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 6.43 --- ---
SS-1B (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 6.32 --- ---
SS-1C (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 20.5 --- ---
SS-1C (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 7.36 --- ---
SS-1C (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 6.38 --- ---
SS-1D (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 216 9.14 <0.20
SS-1D (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 10.9 --- ---
SS-1D (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 6.5 --- ---
SS-4 SS-4 (0-0.5) 3/2/2016 0-½ 87 --- ---
SS-4A (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 13.4 --- ---
SS-4A (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 7.31 --- ---
SS-4A (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 6.78 --- ---
SS-4B (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 3.69 --- ---
SS-4B (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 7.7 --- ---
SS-4B (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 5.67 --- ---
SS-4C (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 25.1 --- ---
SS-4C (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 7.13 --- ---
SS-4C (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 7 --- ---
SS-4D (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 48.3 --- ---
SS-4D (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 10.7 --- ---
SS-4D (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 18.6 --- ---
SS-4A
SS-4B
SS-4C
SS-4D
Table 1. Analytical Results of Soil Samples
(Concentrations in mg/kg; unless otherwise noted)
SS-1A
SS-1B
SS-1C
SS-1D
Mitty Park Ph II Soil Quality Evaluation
1340-1-1 Data Tables Page 1
DRAFT
IE! C01RNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
1195
CC 07-02-2024
1195 of 1296
Boring ID Sample ID Date Depth (feet) Lead STLC - Lead
(mg/L)
TCLP -
Lead
(mg/L)
Table 1 continued. Analytical Results of Soil Samples
(Concentrations in mg/kg; unless otherwise noted)
SS-5 SS-5 (0-0.5) 3/2/2016 0-½ 75 --- ---
SS-5A (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 28.9 --- ---
SS-5A (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 8.92 --- ---
SS-5A (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 9.44 --- ---
SS-5B (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 10.4 --- ---
SS-5B (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 7.63 --- ---
SS-5B (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 8.36 --- ---
SS-5C (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 9.52 --- ---
SS-5C (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 7.85 --- ---
SS-5C (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 8.89 --- ---
SS-5D (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 70.1 <0.20 ---
SS-5D (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 7.66 --- ---
SS-5D (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 9.6 --- ---
SS-6 SS-6 (0-0.5) 3/2/2016 0-½ 93 --- ---
SS-6A (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 26.4 --- ---
SS-6A (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 9.88 --- ---
SS-6A (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 10.2 --- ---
SS-6B (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 11.1 --- ---
SS-6B (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 11.6 --- ---
SS-6B (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 9.52 --- ---
SS-6C (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 14.5 --- ---
SS-6C (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 9.18 --- ---
SS-6C (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 10.6 --- ---
SS-9 SS-9 (0-0.5) 3/2/2016 0-½ 27 --- ---
SS-12 (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 35.3 --- ---
SS-12 (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 8.4 --- ---
SS-12 (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 9.15 --- ---
SS-5C
SS-5D
SS-6A
SS-6B
SS-6C
SS-12
SS-5A
SS-5B
Mitty Park Ph II Soil Quality Evaluation
1340-1-1 Data Tables Page 2
DRAFT
IE! C01RNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
1196
CC 07-02-2024
1196 of 1296
Boring ID Sample ID Date Depth (feet) Lead STLC - Lead
(mg/L)
TCLP -
Lead
(mg/L)
Table 1 continued. Analytical Results of Soil Samples
(Concentrations in mg/kg; unless otherwise noted)
SS-13 (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 220 7.01 <0.20
SS-13 (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 19 --- ---
SS-13 (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 10.4 --- ---
SS-15 (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 12.8 --- ---
SS-15 (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 16.8 --- ---
SS-15 (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 11 --- ---
SS-18 (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 9.09 --- ---
SS-18 (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 7.87 --- ---
SS-18 (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 113 4.60 <0.20
SS-19 (0-1) 1/25/2022 0-1 6.7 --- ---
SS-19 (2-3) 1/25/2022 2-3 8.12 --- ---
SS-19 (4-5) 1/25/2022 4-5 8.55 --- ---
220 9.14 <0.20
80 5 5
DTSC‐SL1
(Residential)
STLC2 TCLP3
1 2
3 ND
<
---
BOLD
Not detected at or above laboratory reporting limit
Not detected at or above laboratory reporting limit
Not analyzed
Concentration exceeds selected Environmental Screening Criteria SS-19
Maiumum Detection
Environmental Screening Criteria
-------------------
Screening Criteria Basis
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Residential Screening Level (SL), HERO HHRA Note 3 - April 2019
Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration (STLC) - California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 11, Article 3.

Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) - California Code of Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 261.

SS-13
SS-15
SS-18
Mitty Park Ph II Soil Quality Evaluation
1340-1-1 Data Tables Page 3
DRAFT
IE! C01RNERSTONE EARTH GROUP
1197
CC 07-02-2024
1197 of 1296
Chemicals CAS No. Groundwater
(µg/L)
Soil
(mg/kg)
Subslab / Soil Gas
(µg/m3
)
Indoor Air
(µg/m3)
Acenaphthene [PAH] 83-32-9 1.5E+01 1.2E+01 1.7E+04 5.1E+02 Acenaphthylene [PAH] 208-96-8 1.5E+01 6.4E+00 -- --
Acetone 67-64-1 1.5E+03 9.2E-01 1.0E+06 3.1E+04
Aldrin 309-00-2 1.4E-04 2.4E-03 1.9E-02 5.7E-04
Anthracene [PAH] 120-12-7 7.3E-01 1.9E+00 -- --
Antimony 7440-36-0 6.0E+00 1.1E+01 -- --
Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.0E+01 6.7E-02 -- --
Barium 7440-39-3 1.0E+03 3.9E+02 -- --
Benzene 71-43-2 4.2E-01 2.5E-02 3.2E+00 9.7E-02
Benzo[a]anthracene [PAH] 56-55-3 1.7E-02 6.3E-01 3.1E-01 9.2E-03 Benzo[b]fluoranthene [PAH] 205-99-2 4.9E-02 1.1E+00 -- -- Benzo[k]fluoranthene [PAH] 207-08-9 4.9E-02 2.8E+00 -- -- Benzo[g,h,i]perylene [PAH] 191-24-2 1.0E-01 2.5E+00 -- -- Benzo[a]pyrene [PAH] 50-32-8 1.4E-02 1.1E-01 -- --
Beryllium 7440-41-7 2.7E+00 5.0E+00 -- --
1,1-Biphenyl 92-52-4 5.0E-01 4.2E-01 1.4E+01 4.2E-01
Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 6.3E-03 3.4E-05 1.3E-01 4.0E-03 Bis(2-chloro-1-methylethyl) ether 108-60-1 3.6E-01 5.1E-03 9.4E+00 2.8E-01 Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 117-81-7 4.0E+00 8.0E-01 -- -- Boron 7440-42-8 1.6E+00 1.2E+02 -- --
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 8.7E-01 1.6E-02 2.5E+00 7.6E-02 Bromoform (Tribromomethane) 75-25-2 8.0E+01 6.9E-01 8.5E+01 2.6E+00 Bromomethane 74-83-9 7.5E+00 3.6E-01 1.7E+02 5.2E+00
Cadmium (soil) 7440-43-9 -- 1.9E+00 -- --
Cadmium (water) 7440-43-9 2.5E-01 -- -- --
Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 4.3E-01 7.6E-02 1.6E+01 4.7E-01 Chlordane 12789-03-6 5.9E-04 8.5E-03 2.8E-01 8.3E-03
p-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 3.6E-01 6.7E-03 -- --
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 2.5E+01 1.4E+00 1.7E+03 5.2E+01
Chloroethane 75-00-3 1.6E+01 1.2E+00 3.5E+05 1.0E+04
Chloroform 67-66-3 8.1E-01 2.3E-02 4.1E+00 1.2E-01
Chloromethane 74-87-3 1.9E+02 1.1E+01 3.1E+03 9.4E+01
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 1.8E-01 1.2E-02 6.3E+02 1.9E+01
Chromium (total) 7440-47-3 5.0E+01 1.6E+02 -- --
Chromium III 16065-83-1 1.8E+02 1.2E+05 -- --
Chromium VI 18540-29-9 2.0E-02 3.0E-01 -- --
Chrysene [PAH] 218-01-9 4.9E-02 2.2E+00 -- --
Cobalt 7440-48-4 3.0E+00 2.3E+01 -- --
Copper 7440-50-8 3.1E+00 1.8E+02 -- --
Cyanide 57-12-5 1.0E+00 3.4E-03 2.8E+01 8.3E-01
Dibenz[a,h]anthracene [PAH] 53-70-3 2.5E-02 1.1E-01 -- -- Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 3.4E+01 3.5E-01 -- --
1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 2.8E-02 5.9E-04 5.6E-03 1.7E-04 1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 5.0E-02 5.3E-04 1.6E-01 4.7E-03 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 1.4E+01 1.0E+00 7.0E+03 2.1E+02 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 6.5E+01 6.0E+00 -- --
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 2.6E+00 2.0E-01 8.5E+00 2.6E-01 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 4.6E-02 2.5E-02 -- --
DDD 72-54-8 8.4E-04 2.7E+00 -- --
DDE 72-55-9 5.9E-04 3.3E-01 9.6E-01 2.9E-02
DDT 50-29-3 5.9E-04 1.1E-03 -- --
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 5.0E+00 2.0E-01 5.8E+01 1.8E+00 1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 5.0E-01 7.0E-03 3.6E+00 1.1E-01 1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 3.2E+00 5.4E-01 2.4E+03 7.3E+01 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 6.0E+00 1.9E-01 2.8E+02 8.3E+00 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 1.0E+01 6.5E-01 2.8E+03 8.3E+01 2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 3.0E-01 7.5E-03 4.7E+04 1.4E+03 Tier 1 ESLs 1
Based on a generic conceptual site model designed for use at most sites2 2019 (Rev. 2)
1 of 3 Tier 1 ESL
1198
CC 07-02-2024
1198 of 1296
Chemicals CAS No. Groundwater
(µg/L)
Soil
(mg/kg)
Subslab / Soil Gas
(µg/m3
)
Indoor Air
(µg/m3)
Tier 1 ESLs 1
Based on a generic conceptual site model designed for use at most sites2 2019 (Rev. 2)
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 2.3E+00 6.5E-02 9.4E+00 2.8E-01 1,3-Dichloropropene 542-75-6 5.0E-01 1.7E-02 5.8E+00 1.8E-01 Dieldrin 60-57-1 1.4E-04 4.6E-04 2.0E-02 6.1E-04
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 1.5E+00 2.5E-02 -- --
Dimethyl phthalate 131-11-3 1.5E+00 3.5E-02 -- --
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 1.0E+02 8.1E+00 3.3E+01 1.0E+00 2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 3.9E+01 3.0E+00 -- --
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 2.4E-01 2.3E-02 -- --
1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 3.8E-01 1.7E-04 1.2E+01 3.6E-01
Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) 1746-01-6 1.4E-08 4.8E-06 2.5E-06 7.4E-08 Endosulfan 115-29-7 8.7E-03 9.8E-03 -- --
Endrin 72-20-8 2.3E-03 1.1E-03 -- --
Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 3.5E+00 4.3E-01 3.7E+01 1.1E+00
Fluoranthene [PAH] 206-44-0 8.0E+00 6.9E-01 -- --
Fluorene [PAH] 86-73-7 3.9E+00 6.0E+00 -- --
Heptachlor 76-44-8 2.1E-04 1.2E-01 7.2E-02 2.2E-03
Heptachlor epoxide 1024-57-3 1.1E-04 1.8E-04 3.6E-02 1.1E-03 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 7.7E-04 8.0E-04 1.8E-01 5.5E-03 Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 1.4E-01 2.8E-02 4.3E+00 1.3E-01 g-Hexachlorocyclohexane (Lindane) 58-89-9 1.6E-02 7.4E-03 -- -- Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 3.3E-01 1.9E-02 8.5E+00 2.6E-01 Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene [PAH] 193-39-5 4.9E-02 4.8E-01 -- -- Lead 7439-92-1 2.5E+00 3.2E+01 -- --
Mercury (elemental) 7439-97-6 2.5E-02 1.3E+01 1.0E+00 3.1E-02 Methoxychlor 72-43-5 3.0E-03 1.3E-02 -- --
Methylene chloride 75-09-2 5.0E+00 1.2E-01 3.4E+01 1.0E+00 Methyl ethyl ketone 78-93-3 5.6E+03 6.1E+00 1.7E+05 5.2E+03 Methyl isobutyl ketone 108-10-1 1.2E+02 3.6E-01 1.4E+04 4.2E+02 Methyl mercury 22967-92-6 3.0E-03 3.4E-02 -- --
2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 2.1E+00 8.8E-01 2.3E+03 6.8E+01 Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) 1634-04-4 5.0E+00 2.8E-02 3.6E+02 1.1E+01 Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.0E+02 6.9E+00 -- --
Naphthalene [PAH] 91-20-3 1.7E-01 4.2E-02 2.8E+00 8.3E-02 Nickel 7440-02-0 8.2E+00 8.6E+01 -- --
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 1.0E+00 1.3E-02 -- --
Perchlorate 7790-98-9 6.0E+00 5.5E+01 -- --
Petroleum - Gasoline -- 1.0E+02 1.0E+02 3.3E+03 1.0E+02 Petroleum - Stoddard Solvent -- 1.0E+02 1.0E+02 1.1E+04 3.3E+02 Petroleum - Jet Fuel -- 1.0E+02 1.0E+02 1.1E+04 3.3E+02 Petroleum - Diesel -- 1.0E+02 2.6E+02 8.9E+03 2.7E+02
Petroleum - HOPs -- 1.0E+02 -- -- --
Petroleum - Motor Oil -- -- 1.6E+03 -- --
Phenanthrene [PAH] 85-01-8 4.6E+00 7.8E+00 1.8E+03 5.5E+01 Phenol 108-95-2 5.0E+00 1.6E-01 5.2E+03 1.6E+02
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) 1336-36-3 1.7E-04 2.3E-01 1.6E-01 4.9E-03 Pyrene [PAH] 129-00-0 2.0E+00 4.5E+01 -- --
Selenium 7782-49-2 5.0E-01 2.4E+00 -- --
Silver 7440-22-4 1.9E-01 2.5E+01 -- --
Styrene 100-42-5 1.0E+01 9.2E-01 3.1E+04 9.4E+02
tert-Butyl alcohol 75-65-0 1.2E+01 7.5E-02 -- --
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6 5.7E-01 1.7E-02 1.3E+01 3.8E-01 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 1.0E+00 1.8E-02 1.6E+00 4.8E-02 Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 6.4E-01 8.0E-02 1.5E+01 4.6E-01 Thallium 7440-28-0 2.0E+00 7.8E-01 -- --
Toluene 108-88-3 4.0E+01 3.2E+00 1.0E+04 3.1E+02
Toxaphene 8001-35-2 2.0E-04 5.1E-01 -- --
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 5.0E+00 1.2E+00 7.0E+01 2.1E+00 2 of 3 Tier 1 ESL
1199
CC 07-02-2024
1199 of 1296
Chemicals CAS No. Groundwater
(µg/L)
Soil
(mg/kg)
Subslab / Soil Gas
(µg/m3
)
Indoor Air
(µg/m3)
Tier 1 ESLs 1
Based on a generic conceptual site model designed for use at most sites2 2019 (Rev. 2)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 6.2E+01 7.0E+00 3.5E+04 1.0E+03 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 5.0E+00 7.6E-02 5.8E+00 1.8E-01 Trichloroethene 79-01-6 1.2E+00 8.5E-02 1.6E+01 4.8E-01 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 1.1E+01 2.9E+00 -- --
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 6.3E-01 4.0E-02 1.0E+01 3.0E-01 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 96-18-4 5.0E-03 1.1E-04 1.0E+01 3.1E-01 Vanadium 7440-62-2 1.9E+01 1.8E+01 -- --
Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 8.6E-03 1.5E-03 3.2E-01 9.5E-03
Xylenes 1330-20-7 2.0E+01 2.1E+00 3.5E+03 1.0E+02
Zinc 7440-66-6 8.1E+01 3.4E+02 -- --
Notes:

Abbreviations:

DDD - Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane
DDE - Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethene
DDT - Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
PAH - Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
TCDD - Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
2 - Generic Conceptual Site Model - See User's Guide Chapter 2. Input settings are:

Land Use = Residential
Groundwater Use = Drinking Water Resource
MCL Priority over Risk-Based Levels = Yes
Discharge to Surface Water = Saltwater & Freshwater
Vegetation Level = Substantial
Soil Exposure Depth = Shallow
1 - ESLs are developed based on methodologies discussed in the User's Guide. Evaluation of laboratory detection limits and naturally occurring background or ambient concentrations should be independently conducted. See User's Guide Chapter 12 (Additional Considerations) for further information.

HOPs - Hydrocarbon Oxidation Products (biodegradation metabolites and photo-oxidation products of petroleum hydrocarbons). See User's Guide Chapter 4 for further information.
3 of 3 Tier 1 ESL
1200
CC 07-02-2024
1200 of 1296
MCL
Priority1
Tapwater
Cancer
Risk
Tapwater
Noncancer
Hazard
Fresh
Water
Ecotox
Saltwater
Ecotox
Seafood
Ingestion
Human
Health
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Drinking
Water
NonDrinking
Water
Acenaphthene [PAH] 83-32-9 5.3E+02 -- 5.3E+02 2.3E+01 1.5E+01 2.7E+03 -- -- -- -- 2.0E+03 2.0E+01 2.0E+02 1.5E+01 Aquatic Habitat Acenaphthylene [PAH] 208-96-8 -- -- -- -- 1.5E+01 -- -- -- -- -- 2.0E+03 -- -- 1.5E+01 Aquatic Habitat Acetone 67-64-1 1.4E+04 -- 1.4E+04 1.5E+03 -- -- -- 2.3E+07 -- 9.7E+07 5.0E+04 2.0E+04 2.0E+05 1.5E+03 Aquatic Habitat Aldrin 309-00-2 9.2E-04 9.2E-04 2.0E-03 3.0E-01 1.3E-01 1.4E-04 3.2E-01 -- 1.4E+00 -- 8.5E+00 1.7E+01 1.7E+02 1.4E-04 Aquatic Habitat Anthracene [PAH] 120-12-7 1.8E+03 -- 1.8E+03 7.3E-01 1.5E+01 1.1E+05 -- -- -- -- 2.2E+01 -- -- 7.3E-01 Aquatic Habitat Antimony 7440-36-0 6.0E+00 -- 1.0E+00 3.0E+01 5.0E+02 4.3E+03 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 6.0E+00 MCL Arsenic 7440-38-2 1.0E+01 4.0E-03 7.0E-02 1.5E+02 3.6E+01 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 1.0E+01 MCL Barium 7440-39-3 1.0E+03 -- 2.0E+03 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 1.0E+03 MCL Benzene 71-43-2 1.0E+00 1.5E-01 5.7E+00 4.6E+01 3.5E+02 7.1E+01 4.2E-01 1.4E+01 1.8E+00 5.7E+01 5.0E+04 1.7E+02 2.0E+04 4.2E-01 Vapor Intrusion Benzo[a]anthracene [PAH] 56-55-3 1.7E-02 1.7E-02 -- 2.7E-02 1.5E+01 4.9E-02 1.9E+01 -- 2.3E+02 -- 4.7E+00 -- -- 1.7E-02 Tap Canc-Risk Benzo[b]fluoranthene [PAH] 205-99-2 2.5E-01 2.5E-01 -- -- 1.5E+01 4.9E-02 -- -- -- -- 7.5E-01 -- -- 4.9E-02 Aquatic Habitat Benzo[k]fluoranthene [PAH] 207-08-9 2.5E+00 2.5E+00 -- 3.7E+00 1.5E+01 4.9E-02 -- -- -- -- 4.0E-01 -- -- 4.9E-02 Aquatic Habitat Benzo[g,h,i]perylene [PAH] 191-24-2 -- -- -- 1.0E-01 1.5E+01 -- -- -- -- -- 1.3E-01 -- -- 1.0E-01 Aquatic Habitat Benzo[a]pyrene [PAH] 50-32-8 2.0E-01 7.0E-03 6.0E+00 1.4E-02 1.5E+01 4.9E-02 -- -- -- -- 8.0E-01 -- -- 1.4E-02 Aquatic Habitat Beryllium 7440-41-7 4.0E+00 -- 1.0E+00 2.7E+00 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 2.7E+00 Aquatic Habitat 1,1-Biphenyl 92-52-4 8.3E-01 3.8E+00 8.3E-01 1.4E+01 -- -- -- 3.2E+01 -- 1.3E+02 3.8E+03 5.0E-01 5.0E+00 5.0E-01 Odor/Nuis Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 6.3E-03 6.3E-03 -- 6.1E+01 -- 1.4E+00 5.6E+00 -- 2.5E+01 -- 5.0E+04 3.6E+02 3.6E+03 6.3E-03 Tap Canc-Risk Bis(2-chloro-1-methylethyl) ether 108-60-1 3.6E-01 3.6E-01 7.1E+02 6.1E+01 -- 1.7E+05 9.4E+01 -- 4.1E+02 -- 5.0E+04 3.2E+02 3.2E+03 3.6E-01 Tap Canc-Risk Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 117-81-7 4.0E+00 5.6E+00 4.0E+02 3.2E+01 -- 5.9E+00 -- -- -- -- 1.4E+02 -- -- 4.0E+00 MCL Boron 7440-42-8 1.0E+03 -- 1.0E+03 1.6E+00 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 1.6E+00 Aquatic Habitat Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 8.0E+01 1.2E-01 3.8E+02 1.1E+03 3.2E+03 -- 8.7E-01 -- 3.8E+00 -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 8.7E-01 Vapor Intrusion Bromoform (Tribromomethane) 75-25-2 8.0E+01 2.9E+00 3.8E+02 1.1E+03 3.2E+03 3.6E+02 1.2E+02 -- 5.1E+02 -- 5.0E+04 5.1E+02 5.1E+03 8.0E+01 MCL Bromomethane 74-83-9 7.5E+00 -- 7.5E+00 1.6E+02 3.2E+03 4.0E+03 -- 1.7E+01 -- 7.3E+01 5.0E+04 -- -- 7.5E+00 Tap NC-Hazard Cadmium (soil) 7440-43-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Cadmium (water) 7440-43-9 5.0E+00 -- 4.0E-02 2.5E-01 9.3E+00 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 2.5E-01 Aquatic Habitat Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 5.0E-01 1.0E-01 3.6E+01 2.4E+02 3.2E+03 4.4E+00 4.3E-01 3.8E+01 1.9E+00 1.6E+02 5.0E+04 5.2E+02 5.2E+03 4.3E-01 Vapor Intrusion Chlordane 12789-03-6 1.0E-01 1.3E-02 1.3E+00 4.3E-03 4.0E-03 5.9E-04 4.1E+00 3.7E+02 1.8E+01 1.5E+03 2.8E+01 2.5E+00 2.5E+01 5.9E-04 Aquatic Habitat p-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 3.6E-01 3.6E-01 7.6E+01 5.0E+00 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 3.6E-01 Tap Canc-Risk Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 7.0E+01 -- 7.0E+01 2.5E+01 6.5E+01 2.1E+04 -- 4.0E+02 -- 1.7E+03 5.0E+04 5.0E+01 5.0E+02 2.5E+01 Aquatic Habitat Chloroethane 75-00-3 2.1E+04 -- 2.1E+04 -- -- -- -- 2.3E+04 -- 9.7E+04 5.0E+04 1.6E+01 1.6E+02 1.6E+01 Odor/Nuis Chloroform 67-66-3 8.0E+01 2.2E-01 9.7E+01 6.2E+02 3.2E+03 -- 8.1E-01 6.8E+02 3.6E+00 2.9E+03 5.0E+04 2.4E+03 2.4E+04 8.1E-01 Vapor Intrusion Chloromethane 74-87-3 1.9E+02 -- 1.9E+02 1.1E+03 3.2E+03 -- -- 2.6E+02 -- 1.1E+03 5.0E+04 -- -- 1.9E+02 Tap NC-Hazard 2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 9.1E+01 -- 9.1E+01 4.4E+02 -- 4.0E+02 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 1.8E-01 1.8E+00 1.8E-01 Odor/Nuis Chromium (total) 7440-47-3 5.0E+01 -- -- 1.8E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 5.0E+01 MCL Chromium III 16065-83-1 2.2E+04 -- 2.2E+04 1.8E+02 1.0E+03 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 1.8E+02 Aquatic Habitat Chromium VI 18540-29-9 2.0E-02 2.0E-02 4.4E+01 1.1E+01 5.0E+01 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 2.0E-02 Tap Canc-Risk Basis
2019 (Rev. 2)
Chemicals CAS No.

Residential
Summary of Groundwater ESLs (µg/L)
Aquatic Habitat Goal Levels
(Table GW-2)
Direct Exposure
Human Health Risk Levels
(Table GW-1)
Odor Nuisance
Levels
Gross (Table GW-5) Contamination
Levels
(GW-4)
Groundwater Vapor Intrusion Human Health
Risk Levels
(Table GW-3)
Commercial/Industrial GW
Tier 1
ESL
Chrysene [PAH] 218-01-9 2.5E+01 2.5E+01 -- 3.5E-01 1.5E+01 4.9E-02 -- -- -- -- 1.0E+00 -- -- 4.9E-02 Aquatic Habitat Cobalt 7440-48-4 6.0E+00 -- 6.0E+00 3.0E+00 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 3.0E+00 Aquatic Habitat Copper 7440-50-8 1.0E+03 -- 3.0E+02 9.0E+00 3.1E+00 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 1.0E+03 -- 3.1E+00 Aquatic Habitat Cyanide 57-12-5 1.5E+02 -- 1.5E+00 5.2E+00 1.0E+00 2.2E+05 -- 2.0E+02 -- 8.3E+02 5.0E+04 1.7E+02 1.7E+03 1.0E+00 Aquatic Habitat Dibenz[a,h]anthracene [PAH] 53-70-3 2.5E-02 2.5E-02 -- 7.5E+00 1.5E+01 4.9E-02 -- -- -- -- 1.3E+00 -- -- 2.5E-02 Tap Canc-Risk Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 8.0E+01 8.7E-01 3.8E+02 1.1E+03 3.2E+03 3.4E+01 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 3.4E+01 Aquatic Habitat 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 2.0E-01 3.0E-04 3.7E-01 -- -- -- 2.8E-02 3.5E+01 3.4E-01 1.5E+02 5.0E+04 1.0E+01 1.0E+02 2.8E-02 Vapor Intrusion 1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 5.0E-02 7.5E-03 1.7E+00 1.4E+03 -- -- 1.7E-01 3.1E+01 7.6E-01 1.3E+02 5.0E+04 -- -- 5.0E-02 MCL 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 1.0E+02 -- 3.0E+02 1.4E+01 6.5E+01 1.7E+04 -- 2.7E+03 -- 1.1E+04 5.0E+04 1.0E+02 1.0E+02 1.4E+01 Aquatic Habitat 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 6.0E+02 -- 6.0E+02 7.1E+01 6.5E+01 2.6E+03 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 6.5E+01 Aquatic Habitat 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 5.0E+00 4.8E-01 5.7E+02 1.5E+01 6.5E+01 2.6E+03 2.6E+00 8.4E+03 1.1E+01 3.5E+04 4.1E+04 5.0E+00 1.1E+02 2.6E+00 Vapor Intrusion 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 -- 2.5E+02 -- 7.7E-02 -- -- -- -- 1.6E+03 -- -- 4.6E-02 Tap Canc-Risk DDD 72-54-8 3.1E-02 3.1E-02 -- 1.0E-03 1.0E-03 8.4E-04 -- -- -- -- 4.5E+01 -- -- 8.4E-04 Aquatic Habitat DDE 72-55-9 4.6E-02 4.6E-02 -- 1.0E-03 1.0E-03 5.9E-04 1.7E+01 -- 7.4E+01 -- 2.0E+01 -- -- 5.9E-04 Aquatic Habitat DDT 50-29-3 2.3E-01 2.3E-01 1.0E+01 1.0E-03 1.0E-03 5.9E-04 -- -- -- -- 2.8E+00 3.5E+02 3.5E+03 5.9E-04 Aquatic Habitat 1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 5.0E+00 2.7E+00 3.8E+03 4.7E+01 -- -- 7.6E+00 -- 3.3E+01 -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 5.0E+00 MCL 1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 5.0E-01 1.7E-01 1.3E+01 1.0E+04 1.1E+04 9.9E+01 2.2E+00 1.5E+02 9.8E+00 6.4E+02 5.0E+04 7.0E+03 2.0E+05 5.0E-01 MCL 1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 6.0E+00 -- 1.0E+01 2.5E+01 2.2E+04 3.2E+00 -- 6.6E+01 -- 2.8E+02 5.0E+04 1.5E+03 1.5E+04 3.2E+00 Aquatic Habitat cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 6.0E+00 -- 1.1E+01 5.9E+02 2.2E+04 -- -- 4.9E+01 -- 2.1E+02 5.0E+04 -- -- 6.0E+00 MCL trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 1.0E+01 -- 5.0E+01 5.9E+02 2.2E+04 1.4E+05 -- 2.2E+02 -- 9.2E+02 5.0E+04 2.6E+02 2.6E+03 1.0E+01 MCL 2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 4.6E+01 -- 4.6E+01 1.8E+02 -- 7.9E+02 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 3.0E-01 3.0E+00 3.0E-01 Odor/Nuis 1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 5.0E+00 4.4E-01 8.3E+00 2.9E+03 1.5E+03 3.9E+01 2.3E+00 3.5E+01 1.0E+01 1.5E+02 5.0E+04 1.0E+01 1.0E+02 2.3E+00 Vapor Intrusion 1,3-Dichloropropene 542-75-6 5.0E-01 2.0E-01 3.9E+01 1.2E+02 7.9E+01 1.7E+03 1.2E+00 1.4E+02 5.1E+00 5.8E+02 5.0E+04 -- -- 5.0E-01 MCL Dieldrin 60-57-1 7.1E-04 7.1E-04 2.0E-03 5.6E-02 1.9E-03 1.4E-04 1.5E+00 -- 6.5E+00 -- 1.0E+02 4.1E+01 4.1E+02 1.4E-04 Aquatic Habitat Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 1.5E+04 -- 1.5E+04 1.5E+00 1.7E+00 1.2E+05 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 1.5E+00 Aquatic Habitat Dimethyl phthalate 131-11-3 -- -- -- 1.5E+00 1.7E+00 2.9E+06 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 1.5E+00 Aquatic Habitat 2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 1.0E+02 -- 1.0E+02 5.3E+02 1.1E+02 2.3E+03 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 4.0E+02 4.0E+03 1.0E+02 Tap NC-Hazard 2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 3.9E+01 -- 3.9E+01 7.5E+01 4.9E+02 1.4E+04 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 3.9E+01 Tap NC-Hazard 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 2.4E-01 2.4E-01 3.8E+01 1.2E+02 1.9E+02 9.1E+00 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 2.4E-01 Tap Canc-Risk 1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 3.8E-01 3.8E-01 5.7E+01 3.4E+05 5.0E+05 -- 1.8E+03 1.6E+05 8.0E+03 6.6E+05 5.0E+04 2.3E+05 -- 3.8E-01 Tap Canc-Risk Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) 1746-01-6 3.0E-05 1.2E-07 1.2E-05 5.0E-06 -- 1.4E-08 3.7E-05 2.1E-02 1.6E-04 8.8E-02 1.0E-01 -- -- 1.4E-08 Aquatic Habitat Endosulfan 115-29-7 1.0E+02 -- 1.0E+02 5.6E-02 8.7E-03 2.4E+02 -- -- -- -- 1.7E+02 -- -- 8.7E-03 Aquatic Habitat Endrin 72-20-8 2.0E+00 -- 3.0E-01 3.6E-02 2.3E-03 8.1E-01 -- -- -- -- 1.3E+02 4.1E+01 4.1E+02 2.3E-03 Aquatic Habitat Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 3.0E+01 1.5E+00 3.0E+02 2.9E+02 4.3E+01 2.9E+04 3.5E+00 3.3E+03 1.5E+01 1.4E+04 5.0E+04 3.0E+01 3.0E+02 3.5E+00 Vapor Intrusion Fluoranthene [PAH] 206-44-0 8.0E+02 -- 8.0E+02 8.1E+00 8.0E+00 3.7E+02 -- -- -- -- 1.3E+02 -- -- 8.0E+00 Aquatic Habitat Fluorene [PAH] 86-73-7 2.9E+02 -- 2.9E+02 3.9E+00 1.5E+01 1.4E+04 -- -- -- -- 8.5E+02 -- -- 3.9E+00 Aquatic Habitat 2 of 4 GW Summary
1202
CC 07-02-2024
1202 of 1296
MCL
Priority1
Tapwater
Cancer
Risk
Tapwater
Noncancer
Hazard
Fresh
Water
Ecotox
Saltwater
Ecotox
Seafood
Ingestion
Human
Health
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Drinking
Water
NonDrinking
Water
Basis
2019 (Rev. 2)
Chemicals CAS No.

Residential
Summary of Groundwater ESLs (µg/L)
Aquatic Habitat Goal Levels
(Table GW-2)
Direct Exposure
Human Health Risk Levels
(Table GW-1)
Odor Nuisance
Levels
Gross (Table GW-5) Contamination
Levels
(GW-4)
Groundwater Vapor Intrusion Human Health
Risk Levels
(Table GW-3)
Commercial/Industrial GW
Tier 1
ESL
Heptachlor 76-44-8 1.0E-02 1.4E-03 1.3E+00 3.8E-03 3.6E-03 2.1E-04 1.8E-01 -- 7.9E-01 -- 9.0E+01 2.0E+01 2.0E+02 2.1E-04 Aquatic Habitat Heptachlor epoxide 1024-57-3 1.0E-02 1.4E-03 1.2E-01 3.8E-03 3.6E-03 1.1E-04 1.3E+00 -- 5.5E+00 -- 1.0E+02 -- -- 1.1E-04 Aquatic Habitat Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 1.0E+00 8.8E-03 1.6E+01 3.7E+00 6.5E+01 7.7E-04 7.9E-02 -- 3.4E-01 -- 3.1E+00 3.0E+03 3.0E+04 7.7E-04 Aquatic Habitat Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 6.5E+00 4.7E+00 3.2E+00 5.0E+01 3.0E-01 -- 1.3E+00 -- 1.6E+03 6.0E+00 6.0E+01 1.4E-01 Tap Canc-Risk g-Hexachlorocyclohexane (Lindane) 58-89-9 2.0E-01 3.2E-02 3.6E+00 8.0E-02 1.6E-02 6.3E-02 -- -- -- -- 3.7E+03 1.2E+04 1.2E+05 1.6E-02 Aquatic Habitat Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 3.3E-01 3.3E-01 6.2E+00 1.2E+01 9.4E+01 8.9E+00 1.6E+00 2.0E+02 7.0E+00 8.2E+02 2.5E+04 1.0E+01 1.0E+02 3.3E-01 Tap Canc-Risk Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene [PAH] 193-39-5 2.5E-01 2.5E-01 -- -- 1.5E+01 4.9E-02 -- -- -- -- 9.5E-02 -- -- 4.9E-02 Aquatic Habitat Lead 7439-92-1 1.5E+01 9.2E+00 2.0E-01 2.5E+00 8.1E+00 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 2.5E+00 Aquatic Habitat Mercury (elemental) 7439-97-6 2.0E+00 -- 6.1E-02 2.5E-02 2.5E-02 5.1E-02 -- 8.9E-02 -- 3.8E-01 3.0E+01 -- -- 2.5E-02 Aquatic Habitat Methoxychlor 72-43-5 3.0E+01 -- 9.0E-02 1.9E-02 3.0E-03 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+01 4.7E+03 4.7E+04 3.0E-03 Aquatic Habitat Methylene chloride 75-09-2 5.0E+00 9.3E-01 1.0E+02 2.2E+03 3.2E+03 1.6E+03 7.8E+00 3.2E+03 9.4E+01 1.3E+04 5.0E+04 9.1E+03 9.1E+04 5.0E+00 MCL Methyl ethyl ketone 78-93-3 5.6E+03 -- 5.6E+03 1.4E+04 -- -- -- 2.3E+06 -- 9.5E+06 5.0E+04 8.4E+03 8.4E+04 5.6E+03 Tap NC-Hazard Methyl isobutyl ketone 108-10-1 1.2E+02 -- 1.2E+02 1.7E+02 -- -- -- 5.6E+05 -- 2.3E+06 5.0E+04 1.3E+03 1.3E+04 1.2E+02 Tap NC-Hazard Methyl mercury 22967-92-6 2.0E+00 -- 2.0E+00 3.0E-03 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 3.0E-03 Aquatic Habitat 2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 3.6E+01 -- 3.6E+01 2.1E+00 3.0E+01 -- -- -- -- -- 1.3E+04 1.0E+01 1.0E+02 2.1E+00 Aquatic Habitat Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) 1634-04-4 5.0E+00 1.3E+01 6.3E+03 6.6E+04 8.0E+03 -- 4.5E+02 1.3E+05 2.0E+03 5.5E+05 5.0E+04 5.0E+00 1.8E+03 5.0E+00 Odor/Nuis Molybdenum 7439-98-7 1.0E+02 -- 1.0E+02 2.4E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 1.0E+02 Tap NC-Hazard Naphthalene [PAH] 91-20-3 1.7E-01 1.7E-01 6.1E+00 2.4E+01 1.5E+01 -- 4.6E+00 1.7E+02 2.0E+01 7.3E+02 1.6E+04 2.1E+01 2.1E+02 1.7E-01 Tap Canc-Risk Nickel 7440-02-0 1.0E+02 1.2E+01 2.2E+02 5.2E+01 8.2E+00 4.6E+03 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 8.2E+00 Aquatic Habitat Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 1.0E+00 4.0E-02 2.3E+01 1.5E+01 7.9E+00 8.2E+00 -- -- -- -- 7.0E+03 3.0E+01 5.9E+03 1.0E+00 MCL Perchlorate 7790-98-9 6.0E+00 -- 1.0E+00 6.0E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 6.0E+00 MCL Petroleum - Gasoline -- 7.6E+02 -- 7.6E+02 4.4E+02 3.7E+03 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 1.0E+02 5.0E+03 1.0E+02 Odor/Nuis Petroleum - Stoddard Solvent -- 2.1E+02 -- 2.1E+02 6.4E+02 6.4E+02 -- -- -- -- -- 2.5E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+03 1.0E+02 Odor/Nuis Petroleum - Jet Fuel -- 2.1E+02 -- 2.1E+02 6.4E+02 6.4E+02 -- -- -- -- -- 2.5E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+03 1.0E+02 Odor/Nuis Petroleum - Diesel -- 2.0E+02 -- 2.0E+02 6.4E+02 6.4E+02 -- -- -- -- -- 2.5E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+03 1.0E+02 Odor/Nuis Petroleum - HOPs -- 4.1E+02 -- 4.1E+02 5.1E+02 5.1E+02 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 1.0E+02 5.0E+03 1.0E+02 Odor/Nuis Petroleum - Motor Oil -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Phenanthrene [PAH] 85-01-8 -- -- -- 6.3E+00 4.6E+00 -- -- -- -- -- 4.1E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+04 4.6E+00 Aquatic Habitat Phenol 108-95-2 4.2E+03 -- 4.2E+03 1.3E+03 5.8E+02 4.6E+06 -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 5.0E+00 7.9E+04 5.0E+00 Odor/Nuis Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) 1336-36-3 5.0E-01 1.9E-03 -- 1.4E-02 3.0E-02 1.7E-04 2.9E-01 -- 1.3E+00 -- 3.5E+02 -- -- 1.7E-04 Aquatic Habitat Pyrene [PAH] 129-00-0 1.2E+02 -- 1.2E+02 2.0E+00 1.5E+01 1.1E+04 -- -- -- -- 7.0E+01 -- -- 2.0E+00 Aquatic Habitat Selenium 7782-49-2 5.0E+01 -- 3.0E+01 5.0E+00 5.0E-01 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 5.0E-01 Aquatic Habitat Silver 7440-22-4 1.0E+02 -- 9.4E+01 3.4E+00 1.9E-01 -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 1.0E+02 -- 1.9E-01 Aquatic Habitat Styrene 100-42-5 1.0E+01 5.0E-01 1.1E+03 -- -- -- -- 8.5E+03 -- 3.6E+04 5.0E+04 1.0E+01 1.1E+02 1.0E+01 Odor/Nuis tert-Butyl alcohol 75-65-0 1.2E+01 1.2E+01 -- 1.8E+04 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 1.2E+01 Tap Canc-Risk 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6 5.7E-01 5.7E-01 4.8E+02 9.3E+02 -- -- 3.8E+00 -- 1.7E+01 -- 5.0E+04 -- -- 5.7E-01 Tap Canc-Risk 3 of 4 GW Summary
1203
CC 07-02-2024
1203 of 1296
MCL
Priority1
Tapwater
Cancer
Risk
Tapwater
Noncancer
Hazard
Fresh
Water
Ecotox
Saltwater
Ecotox
Seafood
Ingestion
Human
Health
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Drinking
Water
NonDrinking
Water
Basis
2019 (Rev. 2)
Chemicals CAS No.

Abbreviations:

Canc - Cancer
Contam - Contamination
DDD - Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane
DDE - Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethene
DDT - Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
HOPs - Hydrocarbon Oxidation Products (biodegradation metabolites and photo-oxidation products of petroleum hydrocarbons). See User's Guide Chapter 4 for further information.

MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level
NC - Noncancer
Odor/Nuis - Odor Nuisance
PAH - Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
Tap - Tapwater
TCDD - Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
- Petroleum Motor Oil is composed of large carbon chain compounds (C24-C36+) having negligible solubility. Detections in water samples typically are Petroleum HOPs, nonaqueous phase liquid (NAPL or free product), contaminated sediment entrained in the water sample, or naturally occurring compounds. Review the chromatograms to help determine the nature of the compounds being detected. See User's Guide Chapter 4. 4 of 4 GW Summary
1204
CC 07-02-2024
1204 of 1296
Significantly
Vegetated Area
Minimally
Vegetated Area
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Examples:

Parkland or
single family
homes
with yards
Examples:

High density
residential or
commercial/
industrial areas
Acenaphthene [PAH] 83-32-9 -- 3.6E+03 -- 4.5E+04 -- 1.0E+04 6.6E+03 4.6E+04 1.2E+01 1.2E+01 1.2E+02 1.0E+03 2.5E+03 2.5E+03 1.2E+01 Leaching Acenaphthylene [PAH] 208-96-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 6.4E+00 6.4E+00 5.9E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 6.4E+00 Leaching Acetone 67-64-1 -- 6.1E+04 -- 6.7E+05 -- 2.7E+05 5.6E+01 5.6E+01 9.2E-01 9.2E-01 1.1E+05 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 9.2E-01 Leaching Aldrin 309-00-2 3.5E-02 2.1E+00 1.5E-01 2.9E+01 1.0E+00 7.4E+00 2.4E-03 1.0E-01 8.4E+00 8.4E+00 8.4E+00 1.0E+03 2.5E+03 2.5E+03 2.4E-03 Terr Habitat Anthracene [PAH] 120-12-7 -- 1.8E+04 -- 2.3E+05 -- 5.0E+04 3.1E+00 4.0E+01 1.9E+00 1.9E+00 4.1E+00 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.9E+00 Leaching Antimony 7440-36-0 -- 1.1E+01 -- 1.6E+02 -- 5.0E+01 2.5E+01 5.0E+01 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.1E+01 NC-Hazard Arsenic 7440-38-2 6.7E-02 2.6E-01 3.1E-01 3.6E+00 2.0E+00 9.8E-01 2.5E+01 5.0E+01 -- -- -- -- -- -- 6.7E-02 Canc-Risk Barium 7440-39-3 -- 1.5E+04 -- 2.2E+05 -- 3.0E+03 3.9E+02 6.7E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 3.9E+02 Terr Habitat Benzene 71-43-2 3.3E-01 1.1E+01 1.4E+00 4.7E+01 3.3E+01 4.5E+01 6.0E+01 3.1E+02 2.5E-02 2.5E-02 1.9E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.5E-02 Leaching Benzo[a]anthracene [PAH] 56-55-3 1.1E+00 -- 2.0E+01 -- 1.1E+02 -- 6.3E-01 1.3E+00 1.0E+01 1.0E+01 1.0E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 6.3E-01 Terr Habitat Benzo[a]pyrene [PAH] 50-32-8 1.1E-01 1.8E+01 2.1E+00 2.2E+02 1.1E+01 1.0E+01 2.5E+01 9.0E+01 5.7E+00 5.7E+00 5.7E+00 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.1E-01 Canc-Risk Benzo[b]fluoranthene [PAH] 205-99-2 1.1E+00 -- 2.1E+01 -- 1.1E+02 -- -- -- 5.4E+00 7.5E+01 5.4E+00 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.1E+00 Canc-Risk Benzo[g,h,i]perylene [PAH] 191-24-2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.3E+00 1.7E+01 2.7E+01 2.7E+01 2.5E+00 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.5E+00 Gross Contam Benzo[k]fluoranthene [PAH] 207-08-9 1.1E+01 -- 2.1E+02 -- 9.1E+02 -- 9.5E+00 1.9E+01 4.8E+00 3.9E+01 2.8E+00 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.8E+00 Gross Contam Beryllium 7440-41-7 1.6E+03 1.6E+01 6.9E+03 2.3E+02 1.8E+02 2.7E+01 5.0E+00 1.0E+01 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.0E+00 Terr Habitat 1,1-Biphenyl 92-52-4 6.8E+01 4.7E+01 2.9E+02 2.0E+02 1.7E+03 1.8E+02 -- -- 4.2E-01 4.2E+00 2.3E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 4.2E-01 Leaching Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 1.0E-01 -- 4.7E-01 -- 6.4E+00 -- -- -- 3.4E-05 3.1E-02 5.0E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 3.4E-05 Leaching Bis(2-chloro-1-methylethyl) ether 108-60-1 5.0E+00 3.1E+03 2.3E+01 4.7E+04 2.7E+02 1.4E+04 -- -- 5.1E-03 8.7E-01 1.0E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 5.1E-03 Leaching Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 117-81-7 3.9E+01 1.3E+03 1.6E+02 1.6E+04 9.5E+02 3.8E+03 8.0E-01 3.5E+01 1.9E+02 6.4E+02 1.9E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 8.0E-01 Terr Habitat Boron 7440-42-8 -- 1.6E+04 -- 2.3E+05 -- 4.5E+04 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.2E+02 Terr Habitat Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 2.9E-01 1.6E+03 1.3E+00 2.3E+04 2.8E+01 7.1E+03 -- -- 1.6E-02 1.6E-02 9.3E+02 1.0E+03 2.5E+03 2.5E+03 1.6E-02 Leaching Bromoform (Tribromomethane) 75-25-2 1.8E+01 1.6E+03 8.0E+01 2.3E+04 1.2E+03 7.1E+03 -- -- 6.9E-01 1.0E+00 9.2E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 6.9E-01 Leaching Bromomethane 74-83-9 -- 6.9E+00 -- 3.0E+01 -- 2.9E+01 -- -- 3.6E-01 8.3E-01 3.5E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 3.6E-01 Leaching Cadmium (soil) 7440-43-9 9.1E+02 7.8E+01 4.0E+03 1.1E+03 1.1E+02 5.1E+01 1.9E+00 1.9E+00 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.9E+00 Terr Habitat Cadmium (water) 7440-43-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 6.2E-01 5.3E+01 2.7E+00 2.5E+02 5.3E+01 2.2E+02 7.3E+00 1.5E+01 7.6E-02 7.6E-02 4.5E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 7.6E-02 Leaching Chlordane 12789-03-6 4.8E-01 3.6E+01 2.2E+00 5.0E+02 1.4E+01 1.3E+02 8.5E-03 8.5E-03 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 2.3E+01 1.0E+03 2.5E+03 2.5E+03 8.5E-03 Terr Habitat p-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 3.5E+00 3.1E+02 1.6E+01 4.7E+03 1.2E+02 1.4E+03 2.5E+01 5.0E+01 6.7E-03 9.1E-02 3.0E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 6.7E-03 Leaching Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 -- 2.7E+02 -- 1.3E+03 -- 1.2E+03 7.5E+00 1.5E+01 1.4E+00 1.4E+00 7.5E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.4E+00 Leaching Chloroethane 75-00-3 -- 1.4E+04 -- 5.9E+04 -- 5.9E+04 -- -- 1.2E+00 1.2E+01 2.1E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.2E+00 Leaching Chloroform 67-66-3 3.2E-01 2.0E+02 1.4E+00 1.0E+03 3.4E+01 8.6E+02 4.3E+01 8.5E+01 2.3E-02 2.3E-02 2.6E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.3E-02 Leaching Chloromethane 74-87-3 -- 1.1E+02 -- 4.7E+02 -- 4.7E+02 -- -- 1.1E+01 1.5E+01 1.3E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 1.1E+01 Leaching 2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 -- 3.9E+02 -- 5.8E+03 -- 1.8E+03 2.0E+00 3.9E+00 1.2E-02 1.2E-01 2.7E+04 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 1.2E-02 Leaching Chromium (total) 7440-47-3 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.6E+02 1.6E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.6E+02 Terr Habitat Chromium III 16065-83-1 -- 1.2E+05 -- 1.8E+06 -- 5.3E+05 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.2E+05 NC-Hazard Chromium VI 18540-29-9 3.0E-01 2.3E+02 6.2E+00 3.5E+03 2.8E+00 4.0E+02 1.0E+01 1.0E+01 -- -- -- -- -- -- 3.0E-01 Canc-Risk Chrysene [PAH] 218-01-9 1.1E+02 -- 2.1E+03 -- 9.1E+03 -- 8.8E+00 1.8E+01 2.2E+00 1.0E+01 2.2E+00 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.2E+00 Leaching Cobalt 7440-48-4 4.2E+02 2.3E+01 1.9E+03 3.5E+02 4.9E+01 2.8E+01 5.0E+01 1.0E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.3E+01 NC-Hazard Copper 7440-50-8 -- 3.1E+03 -- 4.7E+04 -- 1.4E+04 1.8E+02 3.0E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.8E+02 Terr Habitat Cyanide 57-12-5 -- 5.5E+00 -- 2.5E+01 -- 2.2E+01 1.1E-01 1.1E-01 3.4E-03 3.4E-03 1.9E+04 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 3.4E-03 Leaching Dibenz[a,h]anthracene [PAH] 53-70-3 1.1E-01 -- 2.1E+00 -- 1.1E+01 -- -- -- 2.9E+01 3.9E+02 2.9E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.1E-01 Canc-Risk Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 8.3E+00 1.6E+03 3.9E+01 2.3E+04 2.9E+02 7.1E+03 -- -- 3.5E-01 1.1E+01 8.0E+02 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 3.5E-01 Leaching 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 4.4E-03 4.8E+00 5.9E-02 2.6E+01 1.1E+00 2.0E+01 -- -- 5.9E-04 5.9E-04 9.9E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 5.9E-04 Leaching 1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 3.6E-02 7.2E+00 1.6E-01 3.0E+01 3.3E+00 3.0E+01 -- -- 5.3E-04 1.9E-03 1.3E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 5.3E-04 Leaching Nondrinking
Water
Res:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Com/Ind:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Any
Land Use:

Any Soil
Exposure
(CW)
2019 (Rev. 2)
Chemicals CAS No.

Odor Nuisance Levels
(Table S-5)
Summary of Soil ESLs (mg/kg)
Leaching to
Groundwater Levels
(Table S-3)
Soil
Tier 1
ESL
Basis
Gross
Contamination
Levels
(Table S-4)
Residential:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Commerical/
Industrial:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Construction Worker:

Any Land Use/
Any Depth Soil Exposure
Terrestrial Habitat Levels
(Table S-2)
Direct Exposure Human Health
Risk Levels (Table S-1)
Drinking
Water
1 of 4 Soil Summary
1205
CC 07-02-2024
1205 of 1296
Significantly
Vegetated Area
Minimally
Vegetated Area
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Examples:

Parkland or
single family
homes
with yards
Examples:

High density
residential or
commercial/
industrial areas
Nondrinking
Water
Res:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Com/Ind:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Any
Land Use:

Any Soil
Exposure
(CW)
2019 (Rev. 2)
Chemicals CAS No.

Odor Nuisance Levels
(Table S-5)
Summary of Soil ESLs (mg/kg)
Leaching to
Groundwater Levels
(Table S-3)
Soil
Tier 1
ESL
Basis
Gross
Contamination
Levels
(Table S-4)
Residential:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Commerical/
Industrial:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Construction Worker:

Any Land Use/
Any Depth Soil Exposure
Terrestrial Habitat Levels
(Table S-2)
Direct Exposure Human Health
Risk Levels (Table S-1)
Drinking
Water
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 -- 1.8E+03 -- 9.4E+03 -- 7.8E+03 4.3E+00 8.5E+00 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 3.8E+02 1.0E+03 2.5E+03 2.5E+03 1.0E+00 Leaching 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 6.0E+00 1.2E+01 7.4E+00 7.4E+00 6.1E+02 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 6.0E+00 Terr Habitat 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 2.6E+00 3.4E+03 1.2E+01 2.6E+04 2.8E+02 1.5E+04 4.5E+00 9.0E+00 2.0E-01 2.0E-01 1.9E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.0E-01 Leaching 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 5.8E-01 -- 2.7E+00 -- 2.0E+01 -- -- -- 2.5E-02 1.3E+02 6.0E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.5E-02 Leaching DDD 72-54-8 2.7E+00 -- 1.2E+01 -- 8.1E+01 -- 8.5E+00 1.7E+01 6.5E+01 6.5E+01 6.5E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.7E+00 Canc-Risk DDE 72-55-9 1.8E+00 -- 8.3E+00 -- 5.7E+01 -- 3.3E-01 6.5E-01 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 3.3E-01 Terr Habitat DDT 50-29-3 1.9E+00 3.7E+01 8.5E+00 5.2E+02 5.7E+01 1.4E+02 1.1E-03 7.8E+00 5.6E+00 5.6E+00 5.6E+00 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.1E-03 Terr Habitat 1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 3.6E+00 1.6E+04 1.6E+01 2.3E+05 3.7E+02 7.1E+04 1.1E+01 2.1E+01 2.0E-01 3.1E-01 1.7E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.0E-01 Leaching 1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 4.7E-01 3.2E+01 2.1E+00 1.4E+02 4.5E+01 1.3E+02 2.9E+01 2.9E+01 7.0E-03 3.1E-02 3.0E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 7.0E-03 Leaching 1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 -- 8.3E+01 -- 3.5E+02 -- 3.5E+02 4.3E+01 1.3E+02 5.4E-01 4.2E+00 1.2E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 5.4E-01 Leaching cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 -- 1.9E+01 -- 8.5E+01 -- 7.8E+01 8.4E+01 9.4E+02 1.9E-01 1.6E+00 2.4E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 1.9E-01 Leaching trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 -- 1.3E+02 -- 6.0E+02 -- 5.7E+02 8.4E+01 9.4E+02 6.5E-01 1.4E+01 1.9E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 6.5E-01 Leaching 2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 -- 2.3E+02 -- 3.5E+03 -- 1.1E+03 2.1E+00 -- 7.5E-03 7.5E-02 5.6E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 7.5E-03 Leaching 1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 1.0E+00 1.6E+01 4.4E+00 6.6E+01 9.9E+01 6.6E+01 3.1E+01 6.3E+01 6.5E-02 6.5E-02 1.4E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 6.5E-02 Leaching 1,3-Dichloropropene 542-75-6 5.7E-01 7.2E+01 2.5E+00 3.1E+02 5.3E+01 3.0E+02 3.1E+01 6.3E+01 1.7E-02 4.0E-02 1.6E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.7E-02 Leaching Dieldrin 60-57-1 3.7E-02 3.5E+00 1.6E-01 4.8E+01 1.1E+00 1.2E+01 9.6E-04 1.1E-01 4.6E-04 6.3E-03 2.4E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 4.6E-04 Leaching Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 -- 5.1E+04 -- 6.6E+05 -- 1.5E+05 1.3E+01 2.7E+01 2.5E-02 2.5E-02 7.7E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.5E-02 Leaching Dimethyl phthalate 131-11-3 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.1E+01 4.2E+01 3.5E-02 3.5E-02 4.7E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 3.5E-02 Leaching 2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 -- 1.6E+03 -- 2.3E+04 -- 7.1E+03 -- -- 8.1E+00 8.9E+00 2.4E+04 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 8.1E+00 Leaching 2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 -- 1.6E+02 -- 2.3E+03 -- 7.1E+02 -- -- 3.0E+00 5.7E+00 8.0E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 3.0E+00 Leaching 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 2.2E+00 1.6E+02 1.1E+01 2.3E+03 7.9E+01 7.1E+02 -- -- 2.3E-02 1.1E+01 7.2E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.3E-02 Leaching 1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 4.7E+00 8.1E+02 2.2E+01 4.5E+03 2.1E+02 3.4E+03 1.8E+00 1.8E+00 1.7E-04 8.4E-01 1.2E+05 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.7E-04 Leaching Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) 1746-01-6 4.8E-06 5.1E-05 2.2E-05 7.2E-04 1.5E-04 2.0E-04 1.3E-05 9.9E-05 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 4.8E-06 Canc-Risk Endosulfan 115-29-7 -- 4.2E+02 -- 5.8E+03 -- 1.5E+03 2.3E-02 3.8E-01 9.8E-03 9.8E-03 1.3E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 9.8E-03 Leaching Endrin 72-20-8 -- 2.1E+01 -- 2.9E+02 -- 7.4E+01 1.1E-03 1.1E-03 7.6E-03 7.6E-03 3.0E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.1E-03 Terr Habitat Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 5.9E+00 3.4E+03 2.6E+01 2.1E+04 5.4E+02 1.5E+04 9.0E+01 4.3E+02 4.3E-01 4.3E-01 4.9E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 4.3E-01 Leaching Fluoranthene [PAH] 206-44-0 -- 2.4E+03 -- 3.0E+04 -- 6.7E+03 6.9E-01 1.2E+05 8.6E+01 8.6E+01 8.6E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 6.9E-01 Terr Habitat Fluorene [PAH] 86-73-7 -- 2.4E+03 -- 3.0E+04 -- 6.7E+03 -- -- 6.0E+00 6.0E+00 9.4E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 6.0E+00 Leaching Heptachlor 76-44-8 1.2E-01 3.5E+01 5.3E-01 4.8E+02 3.7E+00 1.2E+02 2.5E-01 5.0E-01 4.4E+01 4.4E+01 4.4E+01 1.0E+03 2.5E+03 2.5E+03 1.2E-01 Canc-Risk Heptachlor epoxide 1024-57-3 6.2E-02 9.1E-01 2.8E-01 1.3E+01 1.9E+00 3.2E+00 -- -- 1.8E-04 6.0E-03 1.2E+01 1.0E+03 2.5E+03 2.5E+03 1.8E-04 Leaching Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 1.8E-01 5.6E+01 7.8E-01 7.7E+02 7.7E+00 2.0E+02 1.3E+02 2.5E+02 8.0E-04 8.2E-02 2.3E-01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 8.0E-04 Leaching Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 1.2E+00 7.8E+01 5.3E+00 1.2E+03 1.0E+02 3.5E+02 -- -- 2.8E-02 6.2E-02 1.7E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.8E-02 Leaching g-Hexachlorocyclohexane (Lindane) 58-89-9 5.5E-01 2.1E+01 2.5E+00 2.9E+02 1.6E+01 7.4E+01 7.4E+00 1.5E+01 7.4E-03 7.4E-03 1.2E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 7.4E-03 Leaching Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 1.8E+00 3.8E+01 7.8E+00 3.7E+02 1.3E+02 1.2E+02 -- -- 1.9E-02 9.2E-02 6.7E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.9E-02 Leaching Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene [PAH] 193-39-5 1.1E+00 -- 2.1E+01 -- 1.1E+02 -- 4.8E-01 9.5E-01 1.6E+01 3.2E+01 2.3E+00 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 4.8E-01 Terr Habitat Lead 7439-92-1 8.2E+01 8.0E+01 3.8E+02 3.2E+02 2.7E+03 1.6E+02 3.2E+01 3.2E+01 -- -- -- -- -- -- 3.2E+01 Terr Habitat Mercury (elemental) 7439-97-6 -- 1.3E+01 -- 1.9E+02 -- 4.4E+01 1.5E+01 2.0E+01 -- -- -- 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.3E+01 NC-Hazard Methoxychlor 72-43-5 -- 3.5E+02 -- 4.8E+03 -- 1.2E+03 1.3E-01 4.1E+03 1.3E-02 1.3E-02 1.6E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.3E-02 Leaching Methylene chloride 75-09-2 1.9E+00 3.1E+02 2.5E+01 2.5E+03 4.9E+02 1.4E+03 9.8E-01 2.0E+00 1.2E-01 1.9E-01 3.3E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.2E-01 Leaching Methyl ethyl ketone 78-93-3 -- 2.7E+04 -- 2.0E+05 -- 1.2E+05 4.4E+01 8.8E+01 6.1E+00 1.5E+01 2.8E+04 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 6.1E+00 Leaching Methyl isobutyl ketone 108-10-1 -- 3.4E+04 -- 1.4E+05 -- 1.4E+05 -- -- 3.6E-01 5.1E-01 3.4E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 3.6E-01 Leaching Methyl mercury 22967-92-6 -- 6.3E+00 -- 8.2E+01 -- 1.9E+01 3.4E-02 3.4E-02 -- -- -- 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 3.4E-02 Terr Habitat 2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 -- 2.4E+02 -- 3.0E+03 -- 6.7E+02 -- -- 8.8E-01 8.8E-01 3.8E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 8.8E-01 Leaching Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) 1634-04-4 4.7E+01 1.6E+04 2.1E+02 6.6E+04 4.1E+03 6.5E+04 3.1E+01 6.3E+01 2.8E-02 2.5E+00 9.0E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 2.8E-02 Leaching 2 of 4 Soil Summary
1206
CC 07-02-2024
1206 of 1296
Significantly
Vegetated Area
Minimally
Vegetated Area
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Examples:

Parkland or
single family
homes
with yards
Examples:

High density
residential or
commercial/
industrial areas
Nondrinking
Water
Res:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Com/Ind:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Any
Land Use:

Any Soil
Exposure
(CW)
2019 (Rev. 2)
Chemicals CAS No.

Odor Nuisance Levels
(Table S-5)
Summary of Soil ESLs (mg/kg)
Leaching to
Groundwater Levels
(Table S-3)
Soil
Tier 1
ESL
Basis
Gross
Contamination
Levels
(Table S-4)
Residential:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Commerical/
Industrial:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Construction Worker:

Any Land Use/
Any Depth Soil Exposure
Terrestrial Habitat Levels
(Table S-2)
Direct Exposure Human Health
Risk Levels (Table S-1)
Drinking
Water
Molybdenum 7439-98-7 -- 3.9E+02 -- 5.8E+03 -- 1.8E+03 6.9E+00 4.0E+01 -- -- -- -- -- -- 6.9E+00 Terr Habitat Naphthalene [PAH] 91-20-3 3.8E+00 1.3E+02 1.7E+01 5.8E+02 4.0E+02 5.0E+02 7.5E-01 2.8E+01 4.2E-02 1.2E+00 2.8E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 4.2E-02 Leaching Nickel 7440-02-0 1.5E+04 8.2E+02 6.4E+04 1.1E+04 1.7E+03 8.6E+01 1.3E+02 3.4E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.6E+01 NC-Hazard Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 1.0E+00 2.5E+02 4.0E+00 2.8E+03 2.0E+01 5.6E+02 1.3E-02 3.9E+01 9.8E-02 7.7E-01 5.1E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.3E-02 Terr Habitat Perchlorate 7790-98-9 -- 5.5E+01 -- 8.2E+02 -- 2.5E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.5E+01 NC-Hazard Petroleum - Gasoline -- -- 4.3E+02 -- 2.0E+03 -- 1.8E+03 1.2E+02 1.2E+02 1.1E+03 4.9E+03 1.0E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+02 Odor/Nuis Petroleum - Stoddard Solvent -- -- 2.6E+02 -- 1.4E+03 -- 1.1E+03 2.6E+02 2.6E+02 1.3E+03 8.0E+03 2.3E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+02 Odor/Nuis Petroleum - Jet Fuel -- -- 2.7E+02 -- 1.4E+03 -- 1.1E+03 2.6E+02 2.6E+02 1.3E+03 8.0E+03 2.3E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+02 Odor/Nuis Petroleum - Diesel -- -- 2.6E+02 -- 1.2E+03 -- 1.1E+03 2.6E+02 2.6E+02 1.1E+03 7.3E+03 2.3E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.6E+02 NC-Hazard Petroleum - HOPs -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Petroleum - Motor Oil -- -- 1.2E+04 -- 1.8E+05 -- 5.4E+04 1.6E+03 1.6E+03 -- -- 5.1E+03 -- -- -- 1.6E+03 Terr Habitat Phenanthrene [PAH] 85-01-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- 7.8E+00 1.6E+01 1.1E+01 1.1E+01 6.9E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 7.8E+00 Terr Habitat Phenol 108-95-2 -- 2.3E+04 -- 3.5E+05 -- 9.8E+04 9.4E+00 9.4E+00 1.6E-01 1.8E+01 1.0E+05 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.6E-01 Leaching Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) 1336-36-3 2.3E-01 -- 9.4E-01 -- 5.5E+00 -- 1.1E+00 1.1E+00 3.3E+02 3.3E+02 3.3E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.3E-01 Canc-Risk Pyrene [PAH] 129-00-0 -- 1.8E+03 -- 2.3E+04 -- 5.0E+03 4.7E+03 9.9E+04 4.5E+01 4.5E+01 4.5E+01 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 4.5E+01 Leaching Selenium 7782-49-2 -- 3.9E+02 -- 5.8E+03 -- 1.7E+03 2.4E+00 5.5E+00 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.4E+00 Terr Habitat Silver 7440-22-4 -- 3.9E+02 -- 5.8E+03 -- 1.8E+03 2.5E+01 5.0E+01 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.5E+01 Terr Habitat Styrene 100-42-5 -- 5.7E+03 -- 3.3E+04 -- 2.5E+04 2.2E+01 4.3E+01 9.2E-01 1.0E+01 8.7E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 9.2E-01 Leaching tert-Butyl alcohol 75-65-0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 7.5E-02 1.1E+02 3.2E+05 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 7.5E-02 Leaching 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6 2.0E+00 2.3E+03 8.9E+00 3.5E+04 1.9E+02 1.1E+04 -- -- 1.7E-02 1.1E-01 7.0E+02 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 1.7E-02 Leaching 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 6.1E-01 1.6E+03 2.7E+00 2.3E+04 4.9E+01 7.1E+03 -- -- 1.8E-02 5.8E-02 1.9E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.8E-02 Leaching Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 5.9E-01 8.2E+01 2.7E+00 3.9E+02 3.3E+01 3.5E+02 4.5E+00 4.3E+01 8.0E-02 8.0E-02 1.7E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 8.0E-02 Leaching Thallium 7440-28-0 -- 7.8E-01 -- 1.2E+01 -- 3.5E+00 1.8E+00 4.5E+00 -- -- -- -- -- -- 7.8E-01 NC-Hazard Toluene 108-88-3 -- 1.1E+03 -- 5.3E+03 -- 4.7E+03 1.4E+02 6.6E+02 3.2E+00 1.0E+01 8.1E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 3.2E+00 Leaching Toxaphene 8001-35-2 5.1E-01 -- 2.2E+00 -- 1.4E+01 -- -- -- 2.5E+02 2.5E+02 2.5E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 5.1E-01 Canc-Risk 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 2.4E+01 5.9E+01 1.1E+02 2.6E+02 8.5E+02 2.4E+02 1.6E+01 3.0E+01 1.2E+00 6.0E+00 4.2E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.2E+00 Leaching 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 -- 1.7E+03 -- 7.3E+03 -- 7.2E+03 2.2E+01 4.4E+01 7.0E+00 7.0E+00 6.5E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 7.0E+00 Leaching 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 1.2E+00 1.5E+00 5.1E+00 6.4E+00 1.1E+02 6.3E+00 1.0E+02 2.0E+02 7.6E-02 7.9E-02 2.2E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 7.6E-02 Leaching Trichloroethene 79-01-6 9.5E-01 4.2E+00 6.1E+00 1.9E+01 1.3E+02 1.8E+01 8.1E+00 2.5E+02 8.5E-02 8.5E-02 7.0E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 8.5E-02 Leaching 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 -- 7.8E+03 -- 1.2E+05 -- 3.5E+04 5.5E+00 1.0E+01 2.9E+00 2.9E+00 1.2E+04 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.9E+00 Leaching 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 9.9E+00 7.8E+01 4.7E+01 1.2E+03 3.5E+02 3.5E+02 5.5E+00 1.0E+01 4.0E-02 3.1E+01 1.9E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 4.0E-02 Leaching 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 96-18-4 2.3E-02 4.9E+00 1.1E-01 2.1E+01 8.3E-01 2.0E+01 -- -- 1.1E-04 1.3E-04 1.4E+03 1.0E+02 5.0E+02 5.0E+02 1.1E-04 Leaching Vanadium 7440-62-2 -- 3.9E+02 -- 5.8E+03 -- 4.7E+02 1.8E+01 1.8E+01 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.8E+01 Terr Habitat Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 8.3E-03 7.0E+01 1.5E-01 3.8E+02 3.4E+00 3.0E+02 4.3E+00 8.5E+00 1.5E-03 1.5E-03 3.9E+03 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 1.5E-03 Leaching Xylenes 1330-20-7 -- 5.8E+02 -- 2.5E+03 -- 2.4E+03 5.5E+01 2.1E+02 2.1E+00 1.0E+01 2.7E+02 5.0E+02 1.0E+03 1.0E+03 2.1E+00 Leaching Zinc 7440-66-6 -- 2.3E+04 -- 3.5E+05 -- 1.1E+05 3.4E+02 3.4E+02 -- -- -- -- -- -- 3.4E+02 Terr Habitat Notes:

Abbreviations:

Canc - Cancer
Com/Ind - Commercial/Industrial
Contam - Contamination
CW - Construction Worker
DDD - Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane
- Cadmium (Water): Groundwater levels do not apply to cadmium in soil so no soil level are listed. - Petroleum - HOPs: Soil ESLs have not been developed at this time. 3 of 4 Soil Summary
1207
CC 07-02-2024
1207 of 1296
Significantly
Vegetated Area
Minimally
Vegetated Area
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Examples:

Parkland or
single family
homes
with yards
Examples:

High density
residential or
commercial/
industrial areas
Nondrinking
Water
Res:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Com/Ind:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Any
Land Use:

Any Soil
Exposure
(CW)
2019 (Rev. 2)
Chemicals CAS No.

Odor Nuisance Levels
(Table S-5)
Summary of Soil ESLs (mg/kg)
Leaching to
Groundwater Levels
(Table S-3)
Soil
Tier 1
ESL
Basis
Gross
Contamination
Levels
(Table S-4)
Residential:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Commerical/
Industrial:

Shallow Soil
Exposure
Construction Worker:

Any Land Use/
Any Depth Soil Exposure
Terrestrial Habitat Levels
(Table S-2)
Direct Exposure Human Health
Risk Levels (Table S-1)
Drinking
Water
DDE - Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethene
DDT - Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
Exp - Exposure
HOPs - Hydrocarbon Oxidation Products (biodegradation metabolites and photo-oxidation products of petroleum hydrocarbons). See User's Guide Chapter 4 for further information.

NC - Noncancer
Odor/Nuis - Odor Nuisance
PAH - Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
Res - Residential
TCDD - Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
Terr - Terrestrial
4 of 4 Soil Summary
1208
CC 07-02-2024
1208 of 1296
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Acenaphthene [PAH] 83-32-9 -- -- -- -- 1.7E+04 1.7E+04 Odor/Nuis -- -- -- -- 5.1E+02 5.1E+02 Nuis/Odor Acenaphthylene [PAH] 208-96-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Acetone 67-64-1 -- 1.1E+06 -- 4.5E+06 1.0E+06 1.0E+06 Odor/Nuis -- 3.2E+04 -- 1.4E+05 3.1E+04 3.1E+04 Nuis/Odor Aldrin 309-00-2 1.9E-02 -- 8.3E-02 -- 8.8E+03 1.9E-02 Canc-Risk 5.7E-04 -- 2.5E-03 -- 2.6E+02 5.7E-04 Canc-Risk Anthracene [PAH] 120-12-7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Antimony 7440-36-0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Arsenic 7440-38-2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Barium 7440-39-3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Benzene 71-43-2 3.2E+00 1.0E+02 1.4E+01 4.4E+02 1.6E+05 3.2E+00 Canc-Risk 9.7E-02 3.1E+00 4.2E-01 1.3E+01 4.9E+03 9.7E-02 Canc-Risk Benzo[a]anthracene [PAH] 56-55-3 3.1E-01 -- 3.7E+00 -- -- 3.1E-01 Canc-Risk 9.2E-03 -- 1.1E-01 -- -- 9.2E-03 Canc-Risk Benzo[a]pyrene [PAH] 50-32-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Benzo[b]fluoranthene [PAH] 205-99-2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Benzo[g,h,i]perylene [PAH] 191-24-2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Benzo[k]fluoranthene [PAH] 207-08-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Beryllium 7440-41-7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1,1-Biphenyl 92-52-4 -- 1.4E+01 -- 5.8E+01 2.0E+03 1.4E+01 NC-Hazard -- 4.2E-01 -- 1.8E+00 6.0E+01 4.2E-01 NC-Hazard Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 1.3E-01 -- 5.8E-01 -- 9.6E+03 1.3E-01 Canc-Risk 4.0E-03 -- 1.7E-02 -- 2.9E+02 4.0E-03 Canc-Risk Bis(2-chloro-1-methylethyl) ether 108-60-1 9.4E+00 -- 4.1E+01 -- 7.5E+04 9.4E+00 Canc-Risk 2.8E-01 -- 1.2E+00 -- 2.2E+03 2.8E-01 Canc-Risk Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 117-81-7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Boron 7440-42-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 2.5E+00 -- 1.1E+01 -- 3.7E+08 2.5E+00 Canc-Risk 7.6E-02 -- 3.3E-01 -- 1.1E+07 7.6E-02 Canc-Risk Bromoform (Tribromomethane) 75-25-2 8.5E+01 -- 3.7E+02 -- 4.5E+05 8.5E+01 Canc-Risk 2.6E+00 -- 1.1E+01 -- 1.3E+04 2.6E+00 Canc-Risk Bromomethane 74-83-9 -- 1.7E+02 -- 7.3E+02 2.7E+06 1.7E+02 NC-Hazard -- 5.2E+00 -- 2.2E+01 8.0E+04 5.2E+00 NC-Hazard Cadmium (soil) 7440-43-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Cadmium (water) 7440-43-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 1.6E+01 1.4E+03 6.8E+01 5.8E+03 2.1E+06 1.6E+01 Canc-Risk 4.7E-01 4.2E+01 2.0E+00 1.8E+02 6.3E+04 4.7E-01 Canc-Risk Chlordane 12789-03-6 2.8E-01 2.4E+01 1.2E+00 1.0E+02 2.8E+02 2.8E-01 Canc-Risk 8.3E-03 7.3E-01 3.6E-02 3.1E+00 8.4E+00 8.3E-03 Canc-Risk p-Chloroaniline 106-47-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 -- 1.7E+03 -- 7.3E+03 3.3E+04 1.7E+03 NC-Hazard -- 5.2E+01 -- 2.2E+02 1.0E+03 5.2E+01 NC-Hazard Chloroethane 75-00-3 -- 3.5E+05 -- 1.5E+06 1.3E+07 3.5E+05 NC-Hazard -- 1.0E+04 -- 4.4E+04 3.8E+05 1.0E+04 NC-Hazard Chloroform 67-66-3 4.1E+00 3.4E+03 1.8E+01 1.4E+04 1.4E+07 4.1E+00 Canc-Risk 1.2E-01 1.0E+02 5.3E-01 4.3E+02 4.2E+05 1.2E-01 Canc-Risk Chloromethane 74-87-3 -- 3.1E+03 -- 1.3E+04 -- 3.1E+03 NC-Hazard -- 9.4E+01 -- 3.9E+02 -- 9.4E+01 NC-Hazard 2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 -- -- -- -- 6.3E+02 6.3E+02 Odor/Nuis -- -- -- -- 1.9E+01 1.9E+01 Nuis/Odor Subslab/
Soil Gas
Vapor Intrusion:

Odor Nuisance
Levels
(Table
SG-2)
Subslab/Soil Gas
Vapor Intrusion: Human Health Risk Levels
(Table SG-1)
Residential Commercial/
Industrial Residential Commercial/ Industrial
2019 (Rev. 2)
Chemicals CAS No.

Summary of Vapor ESLs
Subslab/ Soil Gas (µg/m3) Indoor Air (µg/m3
)
Tier 1
ESL Basis Tier 1 ESL Basis
Odor
Nuisance
Levels
(Table IA-2)
Direct Exposure
Human Health Risk
Levels (Table IA-1)
1 of 4 Vapor Summary
1209
CC 07-02-2024
1209 of 1296
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Subslab/
Soil Gas
Vapor Intrusion:

Summary of Vapor ESLs
Subslab/ Soil Gas (µg/m3) Indoor Air (µg/m3
)
Tier 1
ESL Basis Tier 1 ESL Basis
Odor
Nuisance
Levels
(Table IA-2)
Direct Exposure
Human Health Risk
Levels (Table IA-1)
Chromium (total) 7440-47-3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Chromium III 16065-83-1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Chromium VI 18540-29-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Chrysene [PAH] 218-01-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Cobalt 7440-48-4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Copper 7440-50-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Cyanide 57-12-5 -- 2.8E+01 -- 1.2E+02 2.2E+04 2.8E+01 NC-Hazard -- 8.3E-01 -- 3.5E+00 6.5E+02 8.3E-01 NC-Hazard Dibenz[a,h]anthracene [PAH] 53-70-3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 5.6E-03 7.0E+00 6.8E-02 2.9E+01 -- 5.6E-03 Canc-Risk 1.7E-04 2.1E-01 2.0E-03 8.8E-01 -- 1.7E-04 Canc-Risk 1,2-Dibromoethane 106-93-4 1.6E-01 2.8E+01 6.8E-01 1.2E+02 6.7E+06 1.6E-01 Canc-Risk 4.7E-03 8.3E-01 2.0E-02 3.5E+00 2.0E+05 4.7E-03 Canc-Risk 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 -- 7.0E+03 -- 2.9E+04 1.0E+07 7.0E+03 NC-Hazard -- 2.1E+02 -- 8.8E+02 3.1E+05 2.1E+02 NC-Hazard 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 8.5E+00 2.8E+04 3.7E+01 1.2E+05 3.7E+04 8.5E+00 Canc-Risk 2.6E-01 8.3E+02 1.1E+00 3.5E+03 1.1E+03 2.6E-01 Canc-Risk 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- DDD 72-54-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
DDE 72-55-9 9.6E-01 -- 4.2E+00 -- -- 9.6E-01 Canc-Risk 2.9E-02 -- 1.3E-01 -- -- 2.9E-02 Canc-Risk DDT 50-29-3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 5.8E+01 -- 2.6E+02 -- 4.2E+06 5.8E+01 Canc-Risk 1.8E+00 -- 7.7E+00 -- 1.3E+05 1.8E+00 Canc-Risk 1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 3.6E+00 2.4E+02 1.6E+01 1.0E+03 8.1E+04 3.6E+00 Canc-Risk 1.1E-01 7.3E+00 4.7E-01 3.1E+01 2.4E+03 1.1E-01 Canc-Risk 1,1-Dichloroethene 75-35-4 -- 2.4E+03 -- 1.0E+04 6.7E+07 2.4E+03 NC-Hazard -- 7.3E+01 -- 3.1E+02 2.0E+06 7.3E+01 NC-Hazard cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 -- 2.8E+02 -- 1.2E+03 -- 2.8E+02 NC-Hazard -- 8.3E+00 -- 3.5E+01 -- 8.3E+00 NC-Hazard trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-60-5 -- 2.8E+03 -- 1.2E+04 2.2E+06 2.8E+03 NC-Hazard -- 8.3E+01 -- 3.5E+02 6.7E+04 8.3E+01 NC-Hazard 2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 -- -- -- -- 4.7E+04 4.7E+04 Odor/Nuis -- -- -- -- 1.4E+03 1.4E+03 Nuis/Odor 1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 9.4E+00 1.4E+02 4.1E+01 5.8E+02 4.0E+04 9.4E+00 Canc-Risk 2.8E-01 4.2E+00 1.2E+00 1.8E+01 1.2E+03 2.8E-01 Canc-Risk 1,3-Dichloropropene 542-75-6 5.8E+00 7.0E+02 2.6E+01 2.9E+03 1.4E+05 5.8E+00 Canc-Risk 1.8E-01 2.1E+01 7.7E-01 8.8E+01 4.2E+03 1.8E-01 Canc-Risk Dieldrin 60-57-1 2.0E-02 -- 8.9E-02 -- -- 2.0E-02 Canc-Risk 6.1E-04 -- 2.7E-03 -- -- 6.1E-04 Canc-Risk Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Dimethyl phthalate 131-11-3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 -- -- -- -- 3.3E+01 3.3E+01 Odor/Nuis -- -- -- -- 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 Nuis/Odor 2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1,4-Dioxane 123-91-1 1.2E+01 1.0E+03 5.3E+01 4.4E+03 2.0E+07 1.2E+01 Canc-Risk 3.6E-01 3.1E+01 1.6E+00 1.3E+02 6.1E+05 3.6E-01 Canc-Risk 2 of 4 Vapor Summary
1210
CC 07-02-2024
1210 of 1296
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Subslab/
Soil Gas
Vapor Intrusion:

Summary of Vapor ESLs
Subslab/ Soil Gas (µg/m3) Indoor Air (µg/m3
)
Tier 1
ESL Basis Tier 1 ESL Basis
Odor
Nuisance
Levels
(Table IA-2)
Direct Exposure
Human Health Risk
Levels (Table IA-1)
Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) 1746-01-6 2.5E-06 1.4E-03 1.1E-05 5.8E-03 -- 2.5E-06 Canc-Risk 7.4E-08 4.2E-05 3.2E-07 1.8E-04 -- 7.4E-08 Canc-Risk Endosulfan 115-29-7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Endrin 72-20-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 3.7E+01 3.5E+04 1.6E+02 1.5E+05 6.7E+04 3.7E+01 Canc-Risk 1.1E+00 1.0E+03 4.9E+00 4.4E+03 2.0E+03 1.1E+00 Canc-Risk Fluoranthene [PAH] 206-44-0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Fluorene [PAH] 86-73-7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Heptachlor 76-44-8 7.2E-02 -- 3.1E-01 -- 1.0E+04 7.2E-02 Canc-Risk 2.2E-03 -- 9.4E-03 -- 3.0E+02 2.2E-03 Canc-Risk Heptachlor epoxide 1024-57-3 3.6E-02 -- 1.6E-01 -- 1.0E+04 3.6E-02 Canc-Risk 1.1E-03 -- 4.7E-03 -- 3.0E+02 1.1E-03 Canc-Risk Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 1.8E-01 -- 8.0E-01 -- -- 1.8E-01 Canc-Risk 5.5E-03 -- 2.4E-02 -- -- 5.5E-03 Canc-Risk Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 4.3E+00 -- 1.9E+01 -- 4.0E+05 4.3E+00 Canc-Risk 1.3E-01 -- 5.6E-01 -- 1.2E+04 1.3E-01 Canc-Risk g-Hexachlorocyclohexane (Lindane) 58-89-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Hexachloroethane 67-72-1 8.5E+00 1.0E+03 3.7E+01 4.4E+03 -- 8.5E+00 Canc-Risk 2.6E-01 3.1E+01 1.1E+00 1.3E+02 -- 2.6E-01 Canc-Risk Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]pyrene [PAH] 193-39-5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Lead 7439-92-1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Mercury (elemental) 7439-97-6 -- 1.0E+00 -- 4.4E+00 -- 1.0E+00 NC-Hazard -- 3.1E-02 -- 1.3E-01 -- 3.1E-02 NC-Hazard Methoxychlor 72-43-5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Methylene chloride 75-09-2 3.4E+01 1.4E+04 4.1E+02 5.8E+04 1.9E+07 3.4E+01 Canc-Risk 1.0E+00 4.2E+02 1.2E+01 1.8E+03 5.6E+05 1.0E+00 Canc-Risk Methyl ethyl ketone 78-93-3 -- 1.7E+05 -- 7.3E+05 1.1E+06 1.7E+05 NC-Hazard -- 5.2E+03 -- 2.2E+04 3.2E+04 5.2E+03 NC-Hazard Methyl isobutyl ketone 108-10-1 -- 1.0E+05 -- 4.4E+05 1.4E+04 1.4E+04 Odor/Nuis -- 3.1E+03 -- 1.3E+04 4.2E+02 4.2E+02 Nuis/Odor Methyl mercury 22967-92-6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2-Methylnaphthalene 91-57-6 -- -- -- -- 2.3E+03 2.3E+03 Odor/Nuis -- -- -- -- 6.8E+01 6.8E+01 Nuis/Odor Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) 1634-04-4 3.6E+02 1.0E+05 1.6E+03 4.4E+05 1.8E+04 3.6E+02 Canc-Risk 1.1E+01 3.1E+03 4.7E+01 1.3E+04 5.3E+02 1.1E+01 Canc-Risk Molybdenum 7439-98-7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Naphthalene [PAH] 91-20-3 2.8E+00 1.0E+02 1.2E+01 4.4E+02 1.5E+04 2.8E+00 Canc-Risk 8.3E-02 3.1E+00 3.6E-01 1.3E+01 4.4E+02 8.3E-02 Canc-Risk Nickel 7440-02-0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Perchlorate 7790-98-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Petroleum - Gasoline -- -- 2.0E+04 -- 8.3E+04 3.3E+03 3.3E+03 Odor/Nuis -- 6.0E+02 -- 2.5E+03 1.0E+02 1.0E+02 Nuis/Odor Petroleum - Stoddard Solvent -- -- 1.1E+04 -- 4.6E+04 3.3E+04 1.1E+04 NC-Hazard -- 3.3E+02 -- 1.4E+03 1.0E+03 3.3E+02 NC-Hazard Petroleum - Jet Fuel -- -- 1.1E+04 -- 4.6E+04 3.3E+04 1.1E+04 NC-Hazard -- 3.3E+02 -- 1.4E+03 1.0E+03 3.3E+02 NC-Hazard Petroleum - Diesel -- -- 8.9E+03 -- 3.7E+04 3.3E+04 8.9E+03 NC-Hazard -- 2.7E+02 -- 1.1E+03 1.0E+03 2.7E+02 NC-Hazard Petroleum - HOPs -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Petroleum - Motor Oil -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 of 4 Vapor Summary
1211
CC 07-02-2024
1211 of 1296
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Cancer
Risk
Noncancer
Hazard
Subslab/
Soil Gas
Vapor Intrusion:

Summary of Vapor ESLs
Subslab/ Soil Gas (µg/m3) Indoor Air (µg/m3
)
Tier 1
ESL Basis Tier 1 ESL Basis
Odor
Nuisance
Levels
(Table IA-2)
Direct Exposure
Human Health Risk
Levels (Table IA-1)
Phenanthrene [PAH] 85-01-8 -- -- -- -- 1.8E+03 1.8E+03 Odor/Nuis -- -- -- -- 5.5E+01 5.5E+01 Nuis/Odor Phenol 108-95-2 -- -- -- -- 5.2E+03 5.2E+03 Odor/Nuis -- -- -- -- 1.6E+02 1.6E+02 Nuis/Odor Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) 1336-36-3 1.6E-01 -- 7.2E-01 -- -- 1.6E-01 Canc-Risk 4.9E-03 -- 2.2E-02 -- -- 4.9E-03 Canc-Risk Pyrene [PAH] 129-00-0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Selenium 7782-49-2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Silver 7440-22-4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Styrene 100-42-5 -- 3.1E+04 -- 1.3E+05 4.5E+04 3.1E+04 NC-Hazard -- 9.4E+02 -- 3.9E+03 1.4E+03 9.4E+02 NC-Hazard tert-Butyl alcohol 75-65-0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6 1.3E+01 -- 5.5E+01 -- -- 1.3E+01 Canc-Risk 3.8E-01 -- 1.7E+00 -- -- 3.8E-01 Canc-Risk 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 1.6E+00 -- 7.0E+00 -- 3.5E+05 1.6E+00 Canc-Risk 4.8E-02 -- 2.1E-01 -- 1.0E+04 4.8E-02 Canc-Risk Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 1.5E+01 1.4E+03 6.7E+01 5.8E+03 1.1E+06 1.5E+01 Canc-Risk 4.6E-01 4.2E+01 2.0E+00 1.8E+02 3.2E+04 4.6E-01 Canc-Risk Thallium 7440-28-0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Toluene 108-88-3 -- 1.0E+04 -- 4.4E+04 1.0E+06 1.0E+04 NC-Hazard -- 3.1E+02 -- 1.3E+03 3.0E+04 3.1E+02 NC-Hazard Toxaphene 8001-35-2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 -- 7.0E+01 -- 2.9E+02 7.3E+05 7.0E+01 NC-Hazard -- 2.1E+00 -- 8.8E+00 2.2E+04 2.1E+00 NC-Hazard 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71-55-6 -- 3.5E+04 -- 1.5E+05 2.2E+06 3.5E+04 NC-Hazard -- 1.0E+03 -- 4.4E+03 6.5E+04 1.0E+03 NC-Hazard 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 5.8E+00 7.0E+00 2.6E+01 2.9E+01 -- 5.8E+00 Canc-Risk 1.8E-01 2.1E-01 7.7E-01 8.8E-01 -- 1.8E-01 Canc-Risk Trichloroethene 79-01-6 1.6E+01 7.0E+01 1.0E+02 2.9E+02 4.5E+07 1.6E+01 Canc-Risk 4.8E-01 2.1E+00 3.0E+00 8.8E+00 1.4E+06 4.8E-01 Canc-Risk 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 -- -- -- -- 1.0E+01 1.0E+01 Odor/Nuis -- -- -- -- 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 Nuis/Odor 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 96-18-4 -- 1.0E+01 -- 4.4E+01 -- 1.0E+01 NC-Hazard -- 3.1E-01 -- 1.3E+00 -- 3.1E-01 NC-Hazard Vanadium 7440-62-2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 3.2E-01 3.5E+03 5.2E+00 1.5E+04 2.6E+07 3.2E-01 Canc-Risk 9.5E-03 1.0E+02 1.6E-01 4.4E+02 7.7E+05 9.5E-03 Canc-Risk Xylenes 1330-20-7 -- 3.5E+03 -- 1.5E+04 1.5E+04 3.5E+03 NC-Hazard -- 1.0E+02 -- 4.4E+02 4.4E+02 1.0E+02 NC-Hazard Zinc 7440-66-6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Abbreviations:

Canc-Risk - Cancer
DDD - Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane
DDE - Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethene
DDT - Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
HOPs - Hydrocarbon Oxidation Products (biodegradation metabolites and photo-oxidation products of petroleum hydrocarbons). See User's Guide Chapter 4 for further information.

NC - Noncancer
Odor/Nuis - Odor Nuisance
PAH - Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
TCDD - Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin
4 of 4 Vapor Summary
1212
CC 07-02-2024
1212 of 1296
2019 (Rev. 2)
Groundwater Subslab/ Soil Gas Indoor Air Indoor Air
Trigger
Level
Trigger
Level
Accelerated
Response Level
Urgent
Response Level
(µg/L) (µg/m3
) (µg/m3
) (µg/m3)
Residential 5.0E+00 6.7E+01 2.0E+00 6.0E+00
Commercial 2.0E+01 2.7E+02 8.0E+00 2.4E+01
Notes:

User's Guide Chapter 6 presents the basis for the short-term action levels for TCE in groundwater, soil gas, and indoor air. - Commercial: prompt mitigation such as increasing use of HVAC (e.g., increasing outdoor air intake, increasing building pressurization), sealing potential conduits, or treating indoor air - Residential: prompt mitigation such as increasing ventilation, sealing potential conduits, or treating indoor air Short-Term Action Levels for Trichloroethene (TCE)
Land Use
Expedite
Indoor Air
Sampling
Mitigation*
within Weeks
Also see the USEPA Region 9 Memorandum Response Action Levels and Recommendations to Address Near-Term Inhalation Exposures to TCE in Air from Subsurface Vapor Intrusion (USEPA 2014d). *Mitigation - Responses include but are not limited to the following:

Mitigation*
within Days
Trigger Level
Response
Action
Urgent
Response
Action
Accelerated
Response
Action
1213
CC 07-02-2024
1213 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 42
Responses to Comment Letter 5: Kitty Moore
Response to Comment 5-1: The soil sample data for Samples SS2, SS-3, SS-7, SS-8, SS-10, SS-11 and SS-14 were presented in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared for the site by Cornerstone Earth Group (Cornerstone) in 2016, and not the February 25, 2022 Report as noted by the commentor. These samples were found to all be below their respective ESLs for metals, pesticides and PCBs. The 2016 Phase I ESA report was summarized in, but not included in full as an attachment in the Phase I ESA Update and Phase II Soil Quality Evaluation prepared for the project by Cornerstone, dated February 25, 2022, and attached to the IS/MND as Appendix C.

The results of the 2016 Phase I ESA were summarized in the 2022 ESA Update report, but the 2016 ESA report itself was not included. Sample SS-11 was discussed in the summary analysis of soil quality in the 2022 report because the Water Board’s Tier 1 screening ESL for one of the contaminants (TPHo) in the suspected truck wash area had changed since the 2016 report. The ESL had increased from 100 to 1,600 mg/kg, so Cornerstone’s finding had changed form above the threshold to below the threshold. No other samples from the 2016 Phase I ESA were specifically mentioned.

Response to Comment 5-2: As stated in the response to the previous comment, the Phase I ESA prepared for the site by Cornerstone in 2016 was not included in or appended to the 2022 report. However, the summary analysis of soil quality in the 2022 report discusses the results of the sampling from the 2016 report, which included samples collected from the suspected truck wash location and construction and demolition waste piles. These areas of the site are where the SP samples (including SP-1 through SP-6) were taken from. The 2022 report concluded that organochlorine pesticides were not detected in the soil samples at concentrations exceeding residential screening levels, and that no PCBs, volatile organics compounds or total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline were detected.

In addition, the detected metals concentrations in these samples appeared typical of natural background concentrations. Since the focus of the 2022 report was the lead-contaminated soils located closer to the Lawrence Expressway side of the project site, no further analysis of these samples was included in the 2022 report.

Response to Comment 5-3: As described in the 2022 Cornerstone report, no screening levels are published for properties used for park or recreational purposes. The available screening levels are based on potential health risks and exposure assumptions in residential and commercial settings. Exposure 1214
CC 07-02-2024
1214 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 43
assumptions for park users would be different from residential and commercial users. For example, the anticipated length of time that a park visitor would be exposed to impacted soil in a park setting would be less than the duration of exposure in a residential setting. Thus, the residential screening levels may be lower than what is adequate to protect human health in a park setting.

Given the short duration of time that park visitors are expected to be present within the planned park, it is Cornerstone’s opinion that the observed lead concentrations do not pose a significant risk to human health under the planned land use scenario.

The statistical analysis of the lead data, borne out by the sampling, shows that soil quality at the site is not significantly impacted by lead with the exception of a thin strip (less than approximately 20 feet wide) of shallow soil (upper approximate 1 to 2 feet) along the easter property boundary adjacent to Lawrence Expressway.

The project includes the excavation and off-haul of the lead-contaminated soil to a depth of approximately one foot in some portions of the site and disposal at an appropriately permitted facility. Other portions of the site with lead contamination such as the proposed berm areas, are proposed to be capped with a minimum 2- foot layer of clean soil. The City will seek regulatory oversight from an appropriate agency, such as the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health to oversee and approve the satisfactory handling and removal and capping of the lead impacted soil.
1215
CC 07-02-2024
1215 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 44
ERRATA

Page 23 ends

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water), California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, and Caltrans (Oversize/Overweight Vehicle Permit).

Page 44 ends

Mixed Oak Forest and Woodland Alliance
Mixed oak forest and woodland alliance vegetation community occurs along Saratoga Creek. Within the study area, the riparian habitat is composed entirely of this vegetation community as the individual trees are either rooted below the top of bank of Saratoga Creek or just at the top of the creek bank and have a tree canopy that overhangs the stream channel (Appendix B, Photos 1 and 2 of the BCA). This community also overhangs portions of a berm along the east side of the creek, both in the northern portion of the study area (Appendix B Photo 2 and 3 of the BCA) and the southern portion of the study area (Appendix B Photo 4 of the BCA). The berm is sparsely to heavily vegetated with trees and shrubs, and in some areas, it defines the top of bank of the creek. Within this natural community, valley oak (Quercus lobata), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), and California sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) are co-dominant. Other trees present include blue gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulous), elderberry (Sambucus sp.), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), red willow (Salix laevigata), glossy privet (Ligustrum lucidum), and shamel ash (Fraxinus uhdei). These trees form a nearly continuous canopy, except in the southern portion of the creek and the engineered portions of the creek where bank stabilizing structures (e.g., gabions) are present. The understory consists of a combination of shrubs and herbaceous species, including Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), English ivy (Hedera helix), castor bean (Ricinus communis), French broom (Genista monspessulana), periwinkle (Vinca minor), mugwort (Artemesia vulgaris), and horehound (Marrubium vulgare), and grasses including smilo grass (Stipa miliacea). With exception of mugwort, most of the understory species are non-native and some may be classified as invasive species. 1216
CC 07-02-2024
1216 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 45

Page 45 ends

The Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest Alliance
The Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest Alliance vegetation community is located adjacent to most of the riparian community and extends to the eastern edge of the study area. Although this plant community is located adjacent to the riparian community, it is differentiated from the riparian community where there is a break in the tree canopy. Thus, this plant community is not part of the riparian community. The community is dominated by mature coast live oak trees. Other trees present included California buckeye (Aesculus californica), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), and strawberry tree (Arbutus unedo). This community forms a mix of continuous canopy to areas with sparser canopy (Appendix B. Photo 5 of the BCA). The understory is open and sparsely vegetated with a variety of native and non-native shrubs, including holly oak (Quercus ilex) and coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis); and herbaceous vegetation including Himalayan blackberry, French broom, fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), milk thistle (Silybum marianum), wild mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), Spanish broom (Cytisus multiflorus), and Mexican sage (Salvia longistyla); and grasses including smilo grass, and ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus). With exception of coyote bush, most of the understory species are non-native and some may be classified as invasive species.

Page 54 ends

Animals header and before Less than Significant with Mitigation discussion.

Based on a review of the USFWS and CNDDB databases (IPac 2022, CNDDB 2022) and other data sources, and an assessment of the habitats within the study area, several special-status species occur within the study area region. Three of those species, northwestern pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata), yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia), and San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat have some potential to occur within the study area. However, most of the species that were considered in this analysis are not expected to occur within the study area due to the lack of suitable habitat (e.g., grassland, marsh, serpentine, perennial stream), the site is outside the range of the species, and/or it is isolated from the nearest known extant population by development or otherwise unsuitable habitat. Species 1217
CC 07-02-2024
1217 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 46
considered for occurrence, because potentially suitable habitat is present, but determined to have no potential to occur within the study area are the Central California Coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) and California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii). Those species considered for occurrence and the reasons they were determined to occur or not occur are discussed below.

Page 55 ends

Saratoga Creek is an intermittent stream and was dry at the time of the survey. Southwestern pond turtles are not expected to be present in the creek due to the lack of emergent vegetation and lack of upland breeding habitat along the stretch of the creek. However, the creek may provide potential dispersal habitat for turtles in years when water is present for sufficient periods of time. Pond turtles are not known to occur within the study area but have been documented in San TomasAquino Creek, near the confluence with Calabazas Creek, and in San Tomas-Aquino Creek, approximately 6.5 and nine miles north of the study area (CNDDB 2022), and more recently approximately 1.9 miles upstream of the site in 2024 (Valley Water 2024). Even though the study area contains suitable dispersal habitat for western pond turtle, it is highly unlikely that pond turtles would disperse into the study area due to the greater than six-mile distance separating the site from the nearest recorded occurrence, and due to the high levels of disturbance and isolation from natural habitats in the region.

Additionally, barriers to aquatic dispersal of fish further downstream may also block pond turtle movement. Nonetheless, this species may occur elsewhere in Saratoga Creek (e.g., upstream), thus; it is possible that an individual could occasionally disperse into the study area. Although the majority of the Plan would be constructed outside the riparian corridor, minor work within the riparian corridor or creek itself (e.g., stormwater outfall) and work adjacent to the riparian area could result in injury or mortality of turtles due to equipment, vehicle traffic, and foot traffic, a potentially significant impact under CEQA due to the regional rarity of this species.
1218
CC 07-02-2024
1218 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 47

Page 68 ends

paragraph:

The existing Saratoga Creek Trail and Saratoga Creek within the study area may be subject to Valley Water jurisdiction if work encroaches within occurs in or near the existing Valley Water property or easements over Saratoga Creek. The proposed Plan would need to comply with the conditions of the Water Resources Protection Ordinance if any design feature results in the modification of any Valley Water facility including, but not limited to, grading and the removal or installation of vegetation. which requires that Ssuch actions would require an encroachment permit from Valley Water.

Page 68 ends

Valley Water – Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams. The project would comply with the requirements and design guidelines of the Valley Water’s Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams for any activities that would occur within the limits of Valley Water’s property. The manual outlines requirements and recommendations for land use activities in and around Santa Clara County streams, in order to protect stream resources. The City of Cupertino has adopted these guidelines and standards. The concept plan for the proposed project was developed to prioritize and maintain the natural riparian character of Saratoga Creek. The design increases adjacent riparian plantings, increases permeability, and improves water quality. As the detailed project drawings develop, the design guidelines in Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams will continue to be referenced for alignment.related to riparian corridor protection, general landscaping, encroachments between the TOB, stormwater outfalls, site drainage, and trail constructions. Some of these requirements include the planting of native species, locating paved areas outside of riparian corridors, directing nighttime lighting away from riparian corridors, using drought-tolerant landscaping, and avoidance of new outfalls, among other requirements and recommendations. Conformance with these requirements would reduce potential impacts to less than significant.

Page 139 ends

1219
CC 07-02-2024
1219 of 1296
MIG, Inc. 48
No Impact. The project would construct a linear extension of an existing paved multi-use trail and a new public park that includes play areas, creek overlooks, seating areas and landscaping. The geometric design of the trail and park are designed to be ADA-compliant facilitate safe pedestrian and bicycle travel, safe play, and passive recreation. There are no hazardous or dangerous elements of the proposed project design. The project shall secure an
Oversize/Overweight Vehicle permit from Caltrans for this type of truck use on State highway facilities. There are no incompatible uses.

Page 157 ends

Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water). 2024. Western pond turtle observation by Valley Water biologists noted in a March 13, 2024, comment letter from Valley Water regarding the draft CEQA for LawrenceMitty.

ATTACHMENTS:

The following attachments are included for reference:
• Attachment A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) • Attachment B: Notice of Intent County and Filing Receipts 1220
CC 07-02-2024
1220 of 1296
ATTACHMENT C-2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1221
CC 07-02-2024
1221 of 1296
Attachment A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project March 2024
City of Cupertino Page 1
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, which state:
“When adopting a mitigated negative declaration, the lead agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects” (§15074(d)) and;
“The Lead Agency may choose whether its program will monitor mitigation, report on mitigation, or both. “Reporting” generally consists of a written compliance review that is presented to the decision-making body or authorized staff person. A report may be required at various stages during project implementation or upon completion of the mitigation measure. “Monitoring” is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project oversight.

There is often no clear distinction between monitoring and reporting and the program best suited to ensuring compliance in any given instance will usually involve elements of both.” (§15097 (c))
The table beginning on the next page lists the impacts, mitigation measures, and timing of the mitigation measures (when the measures will be implemented) related to the City of Cupertino, Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project. All mitigation measures listed here will be implemented by the City and its contractors.

According to CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4 (a) (2), “Mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally-binding instruments. In the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other public project, mitigation measures can be incorporated into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design.” Therefore, all mitigation measures as listed in this MMRP will be adopted by the City when the project is approved.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1222
CC 07-02-2024
1222 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project March 2024
City of Cupertino
Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation
and Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Impact BIO-1.

Project construction
and project activities
could result in direct
and indirect impacts
to the southwestern
pond turtle.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1a. Conduct Preconstruction Survey. No more than 24 hours prior to the date of initial ground disturbance, a preconstruction survey for southwestern pond turtle will be conducted within the impact area by a qualified biologist. The survey will consist of walking the limits of impact to ascertain the possible presence of the species. The qualified biologist will investigate all potential areas that could be used by southwestern pond turtle for feeding, sheltering, movement, and other essential behaviors.

A qualified biologist is an individual who shall have a degree in biological sciences or related resource management with a minimum of two seasonal years post-degree experience conducting surveys for each amphibian and reptile special-status species that may be present within the project area.

During or following academic training, the qualified biologist shall have achieved a high level of professional experience and knowledge in biological sciences and special-status species identification, ecology, and habitat requirements. Additionally, the qualified biologist must be permitted or authorized to handle and relocate southwestern pond turtle.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1b. Worker Environmental Awareness Program. All construction personnel will participate in a worker environmental awareness program. These personnel will be informed about the possible presence of all special-status species and habitats associated with the species identified here to be potentially present in the parcel and that unlawful take of the animal or destruction of its habitat is a violation of law. Prior to construction activities, a qualified biologist will instruct all construction personnel about (1) the description and status of the species; (2) the importance of their associated habitats; (3) a list of measures being taken to reduce impacts on these species during project construction and implementation; and (4) measures to be followed if special-status species are encountered during construction activities. A fact Implementation:

City of Cupertino
or its contractor
shall implement
this measure with
a qualified
biologist.

Timing:

During
construction
activities.

Monitoring: City
of Cupertino and
a qualified
biologist.

Initials: ________
Date: _________
1223
CC 07-02-2024
1223 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 3
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project March 2024
City of Cupertino
Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation
and Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
sheet conveying this information will be prepared for distribution to the construction crew and anyone else who enters the project site.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1c. Install Wildlife Exclusion Barrier. Prior to any ground disturbance in the work area, a temporary wildlife exclusion barrier will be installed along the limits of disturbance. A qualified biologist will inspect the area prior to installation of the barrier. The barrier will be designed to allow the southwestern pond turtles to leave the work area and prevent them from entering the work area. The fence will remain in place until all development activities have been completed. This barrier will be inspected daily and maintained and repaired as necessary to ensure that it is functional and is not a hazard to southwestern pond turtles on the outer side of the barrier.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1d. Construction Monitoring. A qualified biologist or biological monitor will be onsite during all project activities that may result in the take of any special status species. The qualified biologist will be given the authority to freely communicate verbally, by telephone, electronic mail, or in writing at any time with construction personnel, any other person(s) at the project site, otherwise associated with the project, and regulatory agencies (e.g., USFWS or CDFW). The qualified biologist or biological monitor will have oversight over implementation of all the mitigation measures and will have the authority and responsibility to stop project activities if they determine any of the measures are not being fulfilled.

A biological monitor is an individual who shall have academic and professional experience in biological sciences and related resource management activities as it pertains to this project, experience with construction-level biological monitoring, be able to recognize species that 1224
CC 07-02-2024
1224 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 4
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project March 2024
City of Cupertino
Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation
and Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
may be present within the project area, and be familiar with the habits and behavior of those species.

Impact BIO-2:

Project construction
and project activities
could result in direct
and indirect impacts
to the San Francisco
dusky-footed
woodrat.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2a: Pre-Construction Survey for San Francisco Dusky-Footed woodrats. Within 30 days prior to the start of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall map all San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat houses within a 50-foot buffer around the project footprint. Environmentally sensitive habitat fencing shall be placed to protect the houses with a minimum 50-foot buffer. If a 50-foot buffer is not feasible, a smaller buffer may be allowable based on advice from a qualified biologist with knowledge of woodrat ecology and behavior, or Mitigation Measure BIO-2b may be implemented.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2b: Relocation of Woodrat Houses. In the unlikely event that one or more woodrat houses are determined to be present and physical disturbance or destruction of the houses cannot be avoided, then the woodrats shall be evicted from their houses and the nest material relocated outside of the disturbance area, prior to onset of activities that would disturb the house, to avoid injury or mortality of the woodrats. The reproductive season for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrats typically starts in February or March and breeding activity usually continues to July but can extend into September. Thus, relocation efforts should be completed in the fall to minimize the potential for impacts on young woodrats in the house. Additionally, it is recommended that the period between the completion of the relocation efforts and the start of construction activities be minimized to reduce the potential for woodrats to reconstruct houses in the project footprint prior to the start of construction activities.

Implementation:

City of Cupertino
or its contractor
shall implement
this measure with
a qualified
biologist.

Timing:

During
construction
activities.

Monitoring: City
of Cupertino and
a qualified
biologist.

Initials: ________
Date: _________
1225
CC 07-02-2024
1225 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 5
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project March 2024
City of Cupertino
Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation
and Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Impact BIO-3:

Project construction
activities could
potentially result in
the abandonment of
roosting bat nest
sites.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3a: Pre-Construction Survey for Roosting Bats. A survey of culverts within the project site, including a 50-foot buffer (as feasible) shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist no less than 30 days before the start of construction-related activities (including but not limited to mobilization and staging, clearing, grubbing, tree removal, vegetation removal, fence installation, demolition, and grading). If construction activities are delayed by more than 30 days, an additional bat survey shall be performed. The survey may be conducted at any time of year but should be conducted in such a way to allow sufficient time to determine if special-status bats or maternity colonies are present on the site. The results of the survey shall be documented.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3b: Acoustic Survey. If suitable habitat is present and signs of bat occupancy are detected, a follow-up dusk emergence survey shall be conducted no less than 30 days prior to construction activities. A dusk survey will determine the number of bats present and will also include the use of acoustic equipment to determine the species of bats present. The results of the survey shall be documented.

If an active roost is observed within the project site, Mitigation Measure BIO-3c shall apply.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3c: Roost Buffer. If a day roost or a maternity colony is detected and is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by construction activities, the qualified biologist shall determine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established around the roost in consultation with CDFW. Within the buffer zone, no site Implementation:

City of Cupertino
or its contractor
shall implement
this measure with
a qualified
biologist.

Timing:

Prior to
construction
activities.

Monitoring: City
of Cupertino and
a qualified
biologist.

Initials: ________
Date: _________
1226
CC 07-02-2024
1226 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 6
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project March 2024
City of Cupertino
Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation
and Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
disturbance and mobilization of heavy equipment, including but not limited to equipment staging, fence installation, clearing, grubbing, vegetation removal, demolition, and grading shall be permitted. Monitoring shall be required to ensure compliance with relevant California Fish and Game Code requirements. Monitoring dates and findings shall be documented.

Impact BIO-4:

Construction
disturbance during
the avian breeding
season could cause
the incidental loss of
eggs or nestlings, or
cause the
abandonment of
nests, resulting in
the incidental take of
protected nesting
birds.

Mitigation Measure BIO-4: Pre-Construction/Pre-Disturbance Survey for Nesting Birds.

Avoidance. To the extent feasible, construction activities should be scheduled to avoid the nesting season. If construction activities are scheduled to take place outside the nesting season, all impacts to nesting birds protected under the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code would be avoided. The nesting season for most birds in Santa Clara County extends from February 1 through August 31.

Pre-Construction Surveys. If it is not possible to schedule construction activities between September 1 and January 31, then preconstruction surveys for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project implementation.

These surveys shall be conducted no more than five days prior to the initiation of any site disturbance activities and equipment mobilization, including tree, shrub, or vegetation removal, fence installation, grading, etc.

If project activities are delayed by more than five days, an additional nesting bird survey shall be performed. During this survey, the biologist will inspect all trees and other potential nesting habitats (e.g., trees, shrubs, culverts) in and immediately adjacent to the impact area for nests. Active nesting is present if a bird is building a nest, sitting in a nest, a nest has eggs or chicks in it, or adults are observed carrying food to the nest. The results of the surveys shall be documented.

Implementation:

City of Cupertino
or its contractor
shall implement
this measure with
a qualified
biologist.

Timing:

Prior to and
during
construction
activities.

Monitoring: City
of Cupertino and
a qualified
biologist.

Initials: ________
Date: _________
1227
CC 07-02-2024
1227 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 7
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project March 2024
City of Cupertino
Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation
and Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
If an active nest is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by these activities, the biologist will determine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established around the nest (typically up to 1,000 feet for raptors and up to 250 feet for other species), to ensure that no nests of species protected by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code will be disturbed during project implementation. Within the buffer zone, no site disturbance and mobilization of heavy equipment, including but not limited to equipment staging, fence installation, clearing, grubbing, vegetation removal, demolition, and grading will be permitted until the chicks have fledged. Monitoring shall be required to ensure compliance with MBTA and relevant California Fish and Game Code requirements. Monitoring dates and findings shall be documented.

Impact CUL-1:

Ground disturbing
excavation related to
the project may
expose buried
cultural resources
including prehistoric
Native American
burials.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: The City of Cupertino (City) shall note on any plans that require ground disturbing excavation that there is a potential for exposing buried cultural resources including prehistoric Native American burials. Significant prehistoric cultural resources are defined as human burials, features or other clusterings of finds made, modified or used by Native American peoples in the past. The prehistoric and protohistoric indicators of prior cultural occupation by Native Americans include artifacts and human bone, as well as soil discoloration, shell, animal bone, sandstone cobbles, ashy areas, and baked or vitrified clays. Prehistoric materials may include:
a. Human bone - either isolated or intact burials.
b. Habitation (occupation or ceremonial structures as interpreted from rock rings/features, distinct ground depressions, differences in compaction (e.g., house floors).

Implementation:

The City of
Cupertino shall
implement this
measure with a
qualified
Archaeologist.

Timing: During
construction
activities.

Monitoring:

City of Cupertino.

In the event
archaeological
resources are
discovered, a
qualified
archaeologist
shall write a
report detailing
their findings and
submit it to the
City of Cupertino.

Initials: ________
Date: _________
1228
CC 07-02-2024
1228 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 8
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project March 2024
City of Cupertino
Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation
and Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
c. Artifacts including chipped stone objects such as projectile points and bifaces; groundstone artifacts such as manos, metates, mortars, pestles, grinding stones, pitted hammerstones; and shell and bone artifacts including ornaments and beads.
d. Various features and samples including hearths (fire-cracked rock; baked and vitrified clay), artifact caches, faunal and shellfish remains (which permit dietary reconstruction), distinctive changes in soil stratigraphy indicative of prehistoric activities. e. Isolated artifacts.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2: It is recommended that prior to the start of ground disturbing construction, the City should implement a Worker Awareness Training (WAT) program for cultural resources. Training shall be required for all construction personnel participating in ground disturbing construction to alert them to the archaeological sensitivity of the project area and provide protocols to follow in the event of a discovery of archaeological materials. The training shall be provided by a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA). The RPA shall develop and distribute for job site posting an "ALERT SHEET" summarizing potential archaeological finds that could be exposed and the protocols to be followed as well as points of contact to alert in the event of a discovery.

Mitigation Measure CUL-3: The City shall retain a Professional Archaeologist on an “on-call” basis during ground disturbing construction to review, identify and evaluate any potential cultural resources that may be inadvertently exposed during construction. The archaeologist shall review and evaluate any discoveries to determine if they are historical resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resources under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). If the Professional Archaeologist determines that any cultural resources exposed during construction constitute a historical 1229
CC 07-02-2024
1229 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 9
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project March 2024
City of Cupertino
Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation
and Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
resource and/or unique archaeological resource under CEQA, he/she shall notify the City and other appropriate parties of the evaluation and recommend mitigation measures to mitigate to a less-than significant impact in accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 15064.5. Mitigation measures may include avoidance, preservation inplace, recordation, additional archaeological testing and data recovery among other options. The completion of a formal Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) and/or Archaeological Treatment Plan (ATP) that may include data recovery may be recommended by the Professional Archaeologist if significant archaeological deposits are exposed during ground disturbing construction. Development and implementation of the AMP and ATP and treatment of significant cultural resources will be determined by the City in consultation with any regulatory agencies.
1230
CC 07-02-2024
1230 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 10
Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project March 2024
City of Cupertino
Impact Mitigation Measure Implementation
and Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Impact CUL-2:

Construction of the
project may
inadvertently
uncover unrecorded
human remains.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4: In accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, if potential human remains are found, immediately notify the lead agency (City of Cupertino or Santa Clara County) staff and the Santa Clara County Coroner of the discovery. The coroner would provide a determination regarding the nature of the remains within 48 hours of notification. No further excavation or disturbance of the identified material, or any area reasonably suspected to overlie additional remains, can occur until a determination has been made. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are, or are believed to be, of Native American ancestry, the coroner would notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. In accordance with California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98, the Native American Heritage Commission must immediately notify those persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant from the deceased Native American. Within 48 hours of this notification, the Most Likely Descendant would recommend to the lead agency their preferred treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.

Implementation:

The City of
Cupertino shall
implement this
measure.

Timing:

During
construction
activities.

Monitoring:

City of Cupertino
and a qualified
archaeologist.

Initials: ________
Date: _________
Impact TRIB-1:

Project construction
could disturb or
damage unknown
tribal cultural
resources resulting
in an adverse
change in the
significance of the
tribal resource.

Mitigation Measure TRIB-1: It is possible for a lead agency to determine that an artifact is considered significant to a local tribe, and thus considered a significant resource under CEQA, even if it would not otherwise be considered significant under CEQA. As such, all Native American tribal finds are to be considered significant until the lead agency has enough evidence to make a determination of significance. In the event that Native American archaeological resources are discovered, or suspected to have been discovered, Native American monitoring will be required before further ground disturbance shall be allowed.

Implementation:

The City of
Cupertino or its
contractor shall
implement this
measure.

Timing:

During
construction
activities
Monitoring:

City of Cupertino.

In the event
paleontological
resources are
encountered, a
paleontologist
shall be
contacted to
evaluate the find.

Initials: ________
Date: _________
1231
CC 07-02-2024
1231 of 1296
ATTACHMENT C-3 Santa Clara County - Notice of Intent Filing 1232
CC 07-02-2024
1232 of 1296
SANTA CLARA COUN"[Y CLERK

CEQA FILING COVER SHEET
Santa Clara County - Clerk-Recorder Office
State of California
File Number: ENV24976

ENVIRONMENTAL FILING
No. of Pages:2
Total Fees: $0.00
File Date: 02/12/2024
Expires: 03/1 3/2024
REGINA ALCOMENDRAS, Clerk-Recorder
By: Ronald Nguyen, Deputy Clerk-Recorder
THfS SPACE FOR CLERK'S USE ONLY
Complete and attach this form to each CEQA Notice filed with the County Clerk

TYPE OR PRINT CLEARLY
Check Document being Filed:
0Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
€ Filing Fee (new project)
€ Previously Paid F&W (must attach F&W receipt and project titles must match) € NO Effect Determination (F&W letter must be attached) € Mitiga.ted Negative Declaration (MND) or Negative Declaration (ND) 0Filing Fee (new project)
gPreviously Paid F&W (must attach F&W receipt and project titles must match) []No Effect Determinafion (F&W letter must be attached) 0Notice of Exemption (NOE)
[/Other (Please fill in type):

Notice of Intent
q. LEADAGENCY: C!VofCuPet't!no
z. 1 EAD AGENCY EMA[L: capitalpro)[email protected]
s. PROJECTTITLE4. Lawrence Mi!t7 P ark and Trall proleCt

4. APPL$CANT NAME: susan Michaef PHONE, 408.m.l328
s. APPLICANT erxqii: SusanM@cuperftnoigov
a. APPLICANTADDRESS: 10300 Toffe Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014

7. PROJECTAPPLJCANT IS A: [/ Loca PublicAgency [] School District [1 0ther Specia! District gState Agency 0Private Entity

8. NOTICE TO BE POSTED FOR ao DAYS.

Fiiing fees are due at the time a Notice of Determination/Exemption is fifed with our office. For more information on filing fees and NO Effect Determinations, p)ease refer to California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 753.5, Rev Jf2023
Attachment B: County Notice of Intent Filing
1233
CC 07-02-2024
1233 of 1296

CITY OF

NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECtARATION
Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail project

CITY OF CUPERTTNO - PUB'LIC WORKS
10300 TORRE AVENUE
CUPERTINO, CA 950I4
PHONE: (408) 777-3354
FAX: (408) 777-3333
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Cupertino (City) has prepared a Draft Mitigated Negative DecIaration (MND) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project whicli is available beginning on Monday, February 12, 2024 for review and comment by tlie public and all interested persons, agencies, and organizations for aperiod of 30 days, ending onWednesday, Mardai 13, 2024. All comments onthe DraftMND mustbe received by that date.

Project Location: West Side of Lawrence Expressway, between Calvert Drive axtd Mitty Way.

Project Description: The project consists of the development of a new pubhc park and extension of the existing Saratoga Creek Trail on an approximately 7.8-acre site, Iocated aloi-ig the west side of Lawrence Expressway, soutli of Interstate 280 and adjacent to Saratoga Creek in the City of Cupertino Potentially Significant Enviroentai Effects: Potentially siginficant impacts in the fonowing areas are discussed in the Mitigated Negative Dedaration: Biological Resources, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources.

Each potentially sigificant effect is reduced to a less-than-significant level through mitigation.

The docutnentwill be available forreview at the following Iocations:
o Cupertino City Hall, 20300 Torre Avenue, Cupert!no, CA o Online at: cupertino.gov/lawrencemitty
Comments on the Draft MND may be submitted in writing to:

City of Cupertino, Public Works Department
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95m4
ATTN: Susan A&hael, Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) manager (408-777-2328 or SusanM@cupertino,gov)
Susan Midtael, CIP Manager February 12, 2024
1234
CC 07-02-2024
1234 of 1296
Receipt: 24-21718
Regina Alcomendras
Santa Clara County
Clerk-Recorder
(408) 299-5688
https://www.clerkrecorder.org
Product
CEQA
Total
Change (Cash)
Name

ENVIRONMENT AL FILING
# Pages
Document #
Document Info:

Filing Type

PLEASE KEEP FOR REFERENCE
2/12/24 2:12 PM rnguyen
Extended
$0.00
2 ENV24976
CITY' OF CuPERTINO
F
$0.00
$0.00
1 1235
CC 07-02-2024
1235 of 1296
State of Califomia - Department of Fish and Wildlife
2024 ENVIRONMENT AL DOCUMENT FILING FEE

CASH RECEIPT
DFW 753.5a (REV. 01/01/24) Previously DFG 753.5a
SEEINSTRUCTIONSONREVERSE. TYPEORPRINTCLEARLY.

LEAD AGENCY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

COUNTY/STATE AGENCY OF FIIING

PROJECT TITLE

LAWRENCE MITYY PARK AND TRAIL PROJECT
RECEIPT NUMBER:

ENV24976
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER (lf applicable)

LEADAGENCY EMAIL
[email protected]
DATE
02/1 2/2024

DOCUMENT NUMBER

PROJECT APPLICANT NAME

SUSAN MICHAEL

PROJECT APPLICANT EMAIL
[email protected]

PHONE NUMBER
(408) 777-3 328

PROJECT APPIICANT ADDRESS
10300 TORRE AVENUE

CITY STATE
CuPERTINO CA

ZIP CODE
95014
PROJECT APPLICANT (Check appropriate box)
(pLocal Public Agency 0 School District 00ther Specia) District CHECK APPLICABLE FEES:
0 Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
[] Mitigated/Negative Declaration (MND)(ND)
0 Certified Regulatory Program (CRP) document - payment due directly to c[)FW 0 Exempt from fee
0 Notice of Exemption (attach)
[I CDFW No Effed Determination (attach)
[] Fee previously paid (attach previously issued cash receipt copy) [] Water Right Applmtion or Petitim Fee (State Water Resources Contrd Board only) 0 County documentary handling fee
[] Other
PAYMENT ME'n40D:
0State Agency
$4,051.25 $
$2,916.75 $
$1,377 25 $
$850.00 $
[lPrivate Entity
g Cash [] Credit 0 Chedc Q Other TOTAL RECEIVED $ $0.00

S)GNATURE
x 2. 'O

AGENCY OF FILING PRINTED NAME AND T)TLE
Ronald Nguyen, Deputy County Clerk-Recorder
t -kl I
1236
CC 07-02-2024
1236 of 1296
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-06

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO FINDING THE PROPOSED LAWRENCEMITTY PARK AND TRAIL PROJECT CONCEPTUAL PLAN CONSISTENT

WITH THE CITY OF CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino's Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project is a development that the City has pursued since 2002; and WHEREAS, Cupertino's parks, recreation programs, and community services complement the built and natural environments and enhance the community; and WHEREAS, the City's General Plan seeks the development and maintenance of an exceptional and integrated system of high-quality parks and recreational amenities that support current and future recreational needs of the residents; and
WHEREAS, on May 28, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, and considered evidence presented by the City, city staff, and other interested parties.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino hereby finds, determines, and resolves as follows:

Section 1: The Planning Commission has duly considered the full record before it, including the staff report and presentation, facts, exhibits, public testimony, and other evidence and materials submitted or provided to the Commission.

Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to be true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

Section 2: The Planning Commission finds in accordance with the Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) section 19.92.040 based on the evidence in the public record that the Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project Conceptual Plan conforms to the City's General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040.) PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino this 28th day of May 2024, by the following vote:

Members of the Planning Commission
A YES: Fung, Lindskog, Madhdhipatla, Mistry, Scharf
NOES:

Attachment E
1237
CC 07-02-2024
1237 of 1296
Resolution No. 2024-06
ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Attest:
•
~~Piu Ghosh
Planning Manager
1238
CC 07-02-2024
1238 of 1296
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-07

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION

OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING THAT

THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED

NEGATIVE DECLARATION, MITIGATION MEASURES,

AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING

PROGRAM FOR THE LA WREN CE-MITTY PARK AND

TRAIL PROJECT
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, mitigation measures, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, in substantially similar form to the Draft Resolution attached hereto as Exhibit EA.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino this 28th day of May 2024, by the following vote:

Members of the Planning Commission
A YES: Fung, Lindskog, Madhdhipatla, Mistry, Sharf
NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

A~
Piu Ghosh, Planning Manager
APll/!lf~
David Fung, Chair
Attachment F
1239
CC 07-02-2024
1239 of 1296

EXHIBIT EA
RESOLUTION NO. __

A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL

ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLRA TION, MITIGATION

MEASURES, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING

PROGRAM FOR THE LAWRENCE-MITTY PARK AND TRAIL PROJECT
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all discretionary projects proposed to be carried out or approved by public agencies be subject to a comprehensive environmental review process; and WHEREAS, on February 12, 2024 the City issued a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, on February 12, 2024 the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the project was distributed to responsible agencies and the public for review and comment for a 30-day period that ended March 13, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino has reviewed and considered all comments received from the public, governmental agencies, and other interested parties regarding the IS/MND for the Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project; and WHEREAS, the Final IS/MND for the Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project is comprised of the Draft IS/MND and the Final Memo and Response to Comments dated May 21, 2024; and
WHEREAS, text revisions made after publication of the Draft IS/MND, which are found in the Final Memo and Response to Comments, merely clarify, amplify, or make insignificant modifications to the IS/MND, and recirculation of the IS/MND is not required; and
WHEREAS, environmental analysis conducted by MIG, Inc. pursuant to the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (14 Cal Code. Regs, § 15164), in the services of an Initial Study report, found that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, and the effects can be mitigated to a point where no significant effects would occur.
1240
CC 07-02-2024
1240 of 1296
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino finds that the IS/MND adequately identifies and analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the project and demonstrates that, with implementation of identified mitigation measures, those impacts will be reduced to a level of insignificance; and WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino finds that the IS/MND reflects the City's commitment to environmental stewardship and sustainability while allowing for the responsible development and growth of the community; WHEREAS, on May 28, 2024, the City of Cupertino's Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to receive public testimony reviewed and considered the information contained in the IS/MND, and voted to recommend that the City Council adopt the IS/MND, adopt and incorporate into the Project and implement as conditions of approval all of the mitigation measures for the project that are identified in the IS/MND, and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council has independently reviewed and considered the IS/MND together with the comments and the responses to those comments prior to taking action on the Project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED after careful consideration of the IS/MND, comments on the IS/MND, facts, exhibits, testimony, staff reports, public comments, and other evidence submitted in this matter, that the Cupertino City Council does hereby:

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

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

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

4. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project.

5. Adopt and incorporate into the Project all of the mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND. The City Council further makes the mitigation measures, which are listed below, required conditions of approval of the Project to the extent they are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City:
1241
CC 07-02-2024
1241 of 1296
■ Mitigation Measure BIO-la. Conduct Preconstruction Survey. No more than 24 hours prior to the date of initial ground disturbance, a preconstruction survey for southwestern pond turtle will be conducted within the impact area by a qualified biologist. The survey will consist of walking the limits of impact to ascertain the possible presence of the species. The qualified biologist will investigate all potential areas that could be used by southwestern pond turtle for feeding, sheltering, movement, and other essential behaviors.

All construction personnel will participate in a worker environmental awareness program. These personnel will be informed about the possible presence of all special-status species and habitats associated with the species identified here to be potentially present in the parcel and that unlawful take of the animal or destruction of its habitat is a violation of law.

Prior to construction activities, a qualified biologist will instruct all construction personnel about (1) the description and status of the species; (2) the importance of their associated habitats; (3) a list of measures being taken to reduce impacts on these species during project construction and implementation; and ( 4) measures to be followed if special-status species are encountered during construction activities. A fact sheet conveying this information will be prepared for distribution to the construction crew and anyone else who enters the project site.
■ Mitigation Measure BIO-le. Install Wildlife Exclusion Barrier. Prior to any ground disturbance in the work area, a temporary wildlife exclusion barrier will be installed along the limits of disturbance. A qualified biologist will inspect the area prior to installation of the barrier. The barrier will be designed to allow the southwestern pond turtles to leave the work area and prevent them from entering the work area. The fence will remain in place until all development activities have been completed. This barrier will be 1242
CC 07-02-2024
1242 of 1296
inspected daily and maintained and repaired as necessary to ensure that it is functional and is not a hazard to southwestern pond turtles on the outer side of the barrier.
■ Mitigation Measure B10-ld. Construction Monitoring. A qualified biologist or biological monitor will be onsite during all project activities that may result in the take of any special-status species. The qualified biologist will be given the authority to freely communicate verbally, by telephone, by electronic mail, or in writing at any time with construction personnel, any other person(s) at the project site or otherwise associated with the project, and regulatory agencies (e.g., USFWS or CDFW). The qualified biologist or biological monitor will have oversight over implementation of all the mitigation measures and will have the authority and responsibility to stop project activities if they determine any of the measures are not being fulfilled.

A biological monitor is an individual who shall have academic and professional experience in biological sciences and related resource management activities as it pertains to this project, experience with construction-level biological monitoring, be able to recognize species that may be present within the project area and be familiar with the habits and behavior of those species.
■ Mitigation Measure BI0-2a. Pre-Construction Survey for San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrats. Within 30 days prior to the start of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall map all San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat houses within a SO-foot buffer around the project footprint.

Environmentally sensitive habitat fencing shall be placed to protect the houses with a minimum SO-foot buffer. If a SO-foot buffer is not feasible, a smaller buffer may be allowable based on advice from a qualified biologist with knowledge of woodrat ecology and behavior, or Mitigation Measure BIO-2b may be implemented.
■ Mitigation Measure BI0-2b. Relocation of Woodrat Houses. In the unlikely event that one or more woodrat houses are determined to be present and physical disturbance or destruction of the houses cannot be avoided, then the woodrats shall be evicted from their houses and the nest material relocated outside of the disturbance area, prior to onset of activities that would disturb the house, to avoid injury or mortality of the woodrats.

The reproductive season for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrats typically starts in February or March and breeding activity usually continues to July but can extend into September. Thus, relocation efforts should be 1243
CC 07-02-2024
1243 of 1296
completed in the fall to minimize the potential for impacts on young woodrats in the house. Additionally, it is recommended that the period between the completion of the relocation efforts and the start of construction activities be minimized to reduce the potential for woodrats to reconstruct houses in the project footprint prior to the start of construction activities.

Relocation generally involves first choosing an alternate location for the house material based on the following criteria: 1) proximity to current nest location; 2) safe buffer distance from planned work; 3) availability of food resources; and 4) availability of cover. An alternate house structure will then be built at the chosen location. Subsequently, during the evening hours (i.e., within 1 hour prior to sunset), a qualified biologist will slowly dismantle the existing woodrat house to allow any woodrats to flee and seek cover. All sticks from the nest will be collected and spread over the alternate structure. However, alternative relocation measures can be employed as advised by a qualified wildlife biologist in consultation with CDFW.
■ Mitigation Measure BI0-3a. Pre-Construction Survey for Roosting Bats.

A survey of culverts within the project site, including a 50-foot buffer (as feasible) shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist no less than 30 days before the start of construction-related activities (including but not limited to mobilization and staging, clearing, grubbing, tree removal, vegetation removal, fence installation, demolition, and grading). If construction activities are delayed by more than 30 days, an additional bat survey shall be performed. The survey may be conducted at any time of year but should be conducted in such a way to allow sufficient time to determine if specialstatus bats or maternity colonies are present on the site. The results of the survey shall be documented.

If no habitat or signs of bats are detected during the habitat suitability survey, no further surveys are warranted. If suitable habitat is present and signs of bat occupancy ( e.g., guano pellets or urine staining) are detected, Mitigation Measure BIO-3b shall apply.
■ Mitigation Measure BI0-3b. Acoustic Survey. If suitable habitat is present and signs of bat occupancy are detected, a follow-up dusk emergence survey shall be conducted no less than 30 days prior to construction activities. A dusk survey will determine the number of bats present and will also include the use of acoustic equipment to determine the species of bats 1244
CC 07-02-2024
1244 of 1296
present. The results of the survey shall be documented. If an active roost is observed within the project site, Mitigation Measure BIO-3c shall apply. ■ Mitigation Measure BI0-3c. Roost Buffer. If a day roost or a maternity colony is detected and is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by construction activities, the qualified biologist shall determine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established around the roost in consultation with CDFW. Within the buffer zone, no site disturbance and mobilization of heavy equipment, including but not limited to equipment staging, fence installation, clearing, grubbing, vegetation removal, demolition, and grading shall be permitted.

Monitoring shall be required to ensure compliance with relevant California Fish and Game Code requirements. Monitoring dates and findings shall be documented.
■ Mitigation Measure BI0-4. Pre-Construction/Pre-Disturbance Survey for Nesting Birds.

Avoidance. To the extent feasible, construction activities should be scheduled to avoid the nesting season. If construction activities are scheduled to take place outside the nesting season, all impacts to nesting birds protected under the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code would be avoided.The nesting season for most birds in Santa Clara County extends from February 1 through August 31.

If project activities are delayed by more than five days, an additional nesting bird survey shall be performed. During this survey, the biologist will inspect all trees and other potential nesting habitats ( e.g., trees, shrubs, culverts) in and immediately adjacent to the impact area for nests. Active nesting is present if a bird is building a nest, sitting in a nest, a nest has eggs or chicks in it, or adults are observed carrying food to the nest. The results of the surveys shall be documented.

If an active nest is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by these activities, the biologist will determine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established around the nest (typically up to 1,000 feet for 1245
CC 07-02-2024
1245 of 1296
raptors and up to 250 feet for other species), to ensure that no nests of species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act MBTA and California Fish and Game Code will be disturbed during project implementation.

Within the buffer zone, no site disturbance and mobilization of heavy equipment, including but not limited to equipment staging, fence installation, clearing, grubbing, vegetation removal, demolition, and grading will be permitted until the chicks have fledged. Monitoring shall be required to ensure compliance with MBTA and relevant California Fish and Game Code requirements. Monitoring dates and findings shall be documented.
■ Mitigation Measure CUL-1. The City of Cupertino (City) shall note on any plans that require ground disturbing excavation that there is a potential for exposing buried cultural resources including prehistoric Native American burials. Significant prehistoric cultural resources are defined as human burials, features or other clustering' s of finds made, modified, or used by Native American peoples in the past. The prehistoric and protohistoric indicators of prior cultural occupation by Native Americans include artifacts and human bone, as well as soil discoloration, shell, animal bone, sandstone cobbles, ashy areas, and baked or vitrified clays. Prehistoric materials may include:
a. Human bone - either isolated or intact burials.
b. Habitation (occupation or ceremonial structures as interpreted from rock rings/features, distinct ground depressions, differences in compaction (e.g., house floors).
c. Artifacts including chipped stone objects such as projectile points and bifaces; groundstone artifacts such as manos, metates, mortars, pestles, grinding stones, pitted hammerstones; and, shell and bone artifacts including ornaments and beads.
d. Various features and samples including hearths (fire-cracked rock; baked and vitrified clay), artifact caches, faunal and shellfish remains (which permit dietary reconstruction), distinctive changes in soil stratigraphy indicative of prehistoric activities. e. Isolated artifacts.
■ Mitigation Measure CUL-2. It is recommended that prior to the start of ground disturbing construction, the City should implement a Worker Awareness Training (WAT) program for cultural resources. Training shall be required for all construction personnel participating in ground 1246
CC 07-02-2024
1246 of 1296
disturbing construction to alert them to the archaeological sensitivity of the project area and provide protocols to follow in the event of a discovery of archaeological materials. The training shall be provided by a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RP A).

The RP A shall develop and distribute for job site posting an "ALERT SHEET" summarizing potential archaeological finds that could be exposed and the protocols to be followed as well as points of contact to alert in the event of a discovery.
■ Mitigation Measure CUL-3. The City shall retain a Professional Archaeologist on an "on-call" basis during ground disturbing construction to review, identify and evaluate any potential cultural resources that may be inadvertently exposed during construction. The archaeologist shall review and evaluate any discoveries to determine if they are historical resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resources under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

If the Professional Archaeologist determines that any cultural resources exposed during construction constitute a historical resource and/or unique archaeological resource under CEQA, he/she shall notify the City and other appropriate parties of the evaluation and recommend mitigation measures to mitigate to a less-than significant impact in accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 15064.5. Mitigation measures may include avoidance, preservation in-place, recordation, additional archaeological testing, and data recovery among other options. The completion of a formal Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) and/or Archaeological Treatment Plan (ATP) that may include data recovery may be recommended by the Professional Archaeologist if significant archaeological deposits are exposed during ground disturbing construction. Development and implementation of the AMP and ATP and treatment of significant cultural resources will be determined by the City in consultation with any regulatory agencies.
■ Mitigation Measure CUL-4. In accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, if potential human remains are found, immediately notify the lead agency (City of Cupertino or Santa Clara County) staff and the Santa Clara County Coroner of the discovery. The coroner would provide a determination regarding the nature of the remains within 48 hours of notification. No further excavation or disturbance of the identified material, or any area reasonably suspected to overlie additional remains, can occur until a determination has been made. If the County 1247
CC 07-02-2024
1247 of 1296
Coroner determines that the remains are, or are believed to be, of Native American ancestry, the coroner would notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. In accordance with California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98, the Native American Heritage Commission must immediately notify those persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant from the deceased Native American. Within 48 hours of this notification, the Most Likely Descendant would recommend to the lead agency their preferred treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.
■ Mitigation Measure TRIB-1. It is possible for a lead agency to determine that an artifact is considered significant to a local tribe, and thus considered a significant resource under CEQA, even if it would not otherwise be considered significant under CEQA. As such, all Native American tribal finds are to be considered significant until the lead agency has enough evidence to make a determination of significance. In the event that Native American archaeological resources are discovered, or suspected to have been discovered, Native American monitoring will be required before further ground disturbance shall be allowed.

6. Adopt and incorporate into the Project all of the Conditions of Approval noted in the IS/MND, which are listed below, as required conditions of approval of the Project to the extent they are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City:
• Standard Permit Condition: The following measures shall be applied to development of the project site to reduce and/or avoid impacts to paleontological resources:

If vertebrate fossils or other paleontological resources are discovered during construction, all work on the site shall stop immediately until a qualified professional paleontologist can assess the nature and importance of the find and recommend appropriate treatment. Treatment may include preparation and recovery of fossil materials so that they can be housed in an appropriate museum or university collection and may also include preparation of a report for publication describing the finds. The City of Cupertino's Project Manager or other suitable representative shall be responsible for submitting the paleontologist's report to the Director of Public Works and implementing the recommendations of the qualified professional paleontologist. The representative shall submit a report to the Director of Public Works indicating how the paleontologist' s 1248
CC 07-02-2024
1248 of 1296
recommendations were complied with as soon as all measures have been incorporated into the project.

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

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this __ th day of--~ 2024, by the following vote:

Members of the City Council
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

SIGNED:

Shiela Mohan, Mayor Date
City Council
ATTEST:

Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk Date
1249
CC 07-02-2024
1249 of 1296
EXHIBIT EA-1
EXHIBIT EA-1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, which state:
"When adopting a mitigated negative declaration, the lead agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects" (§15074(d)) and;
"The Lead Agency may choose whether its program will monitor mitigation, report on mitigation, or both. "Reporting" generally consists of a written compliance review that is presented to the decision-making body or authorized staff person. A report may be required at various stages during project implementation or upon completion of the mitigation measure. "Monitoring" is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project oversight.

There is often no clear distinction between monitoring and reporting and the program best suited to ensuring compliance in any given instance will usually involve elements of both." (§15097 (c))
The table beginning on the next page lists the impacts, mitigation measures, and timing of the mitigation measures (when the measures will be implemented) related to the City of Cupertino, Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project. All mitigation measures listed here will be implemented by the City and its contractors.

According to CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4 (a) (2), "Mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally-binding instruments. In the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other public project, mitigation measures can be incorporated into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design." Therefore, all mitigation measures as listed in this MMRP will be adopted by the City when the project is approved.

Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project
City of Cupertino
March 2024

Page 1 ends

1250
CC 07-02-2024
1250 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Mitigation Measure
Impact BI0-1. Mitigation Measure BI0-1a. Conduct Preconstruction Survey. No more Project construction than 24 hours prior to the date of initial ground disturbance, a preand project activities construction survey for southwestern pond turtle will be conducted within could result in direct the impact area by a qualified biologist. The survey will consist of walking and indirect impacts the limits of impact to ascertain the possible presence of the species. The to the southwestern qualified biologist will investigate all potential areas that could be used by pond turtle. southwestern pond turtle for feeding, sheltering, movement, and other essential behaviors.

Mitigation Measure BI0-1b. Worker Environmental Awareness Program. All construction personnel will participate in a worker environmental awareness program. These personnel will be informed about the possible presence of all special-status species and habitats associated with the species identified here to be potentially present in the parcel and that unlawful take of the animal or destruction of its habitat is a violation of law. Prior to construction activities, a qualified biologist will instruct all construction personnel about (1) the description and status of the species; (2) the importance of their associated habitats; (3) a list of measures being taken to reduce impacts on these species during project construction and implementation; and (4) measures to be followed if special-status species are encountered during construction activities. A fact Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project
City of Cupertino
2 Implementation Monitoring
and Timing Responsibility
Implementation: Monitoring: City
City of Cupertino of Cupertino and
or its contractor a qualified
shall implement biologist.
this measure with Initials:
a qualified
biologist.

Timing: Date:

During
construction
activities.

March 2024
1251
CC 07-02-2024
1251 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Mitigation Measure
sheet conveying this information will be prepared for distribution to the construction crew and anyone else who enters the project site.

Mitigation Measure BI0-1c. Install Wildlife Exclusion Barrier. Prior to any ground disturbance in the work area, a temporary wildlife exclusion barrier will be installed along the limits of disturbance. A qualified biologist will inspect the area prior to installation of the barrier. The barrier will be designed to allow the southwestern pond turtles to leave the work area and prevent them from entering the work area. The fence will remain in place until all development activities have been completed. This barrier will be inspected daily and maintained and repaired as necessary to ensure that it is functional and is not a hazard to southwestern pond turtles on the outer side of the barrier.

Mitigation Measure BI0-1 d. Construction Monitoring. A qualified biologist or biological monitor will be onsite during all project activities that may result in the take of any special status species. The qualified biologist will be given the authority to freely communicate verbally, by telephone, electronic mail, or in writing at any time with construction personnel, any other person( s) at the project site, otherwise associated with the project, and regulatory agencies (e.g., USFWS or CDFW). The qualified biologist or biological monitor will have oversight over implementation of all the mitigation measures and will have the authority and responsibility to stop project activities if they determine any of the measures are not being fulfilled.

A biological monitor is an individual who shall have academic and professional experience in biological sciences and related resource management activities as it pertains to this project, experience with construction-level biological monitoring, be able to recognize species that Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project
City of Cupertino
Page3
Implementation Monitoring
and Timing Responsibility
March 2024
1252
CC 07-02-2024
1252 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Mitigation Measure
may be present within the project area, and be familiar with the habits and behavior of those species.

Impact B10-2: Mitigation Measure BI0-2a: Pre-Construction Survey for San Project construction Francisco Dusky-Footed woodrats. Within 30 days prior to the start of and project activities construction activities, a qualified biologist shall map all San Francisco could result in direct dusky-footed woodrat houses within a 50-foot buffer around the project and indirect impacts footprint. Environmentally sensitive habitat fencing shall be placed to to the San Francisco protect the houses with a minimum 50-foot buffer. If a 50-foot buffer is not dusky-footed feasible, a smaller buffer may be allowable based on advice from a woodrat. qualified biologist with knowledge of wood rat ecology and behavior, or Mitigation Measure BIO-2b may be implemented.

Mitigation Measure BI0-2b: Relocation of Woodrat Houses. In the unlikely event that one or more woodrat houses are determined to be present and physical disturbance or destruction of the houses cannot be avoided, then the woodrats shall be evicted from their houses and the nest material relocated outside of the disturbance area, prior to onset of activities that would disturb the house, to avoid injury or mortality of the woodrats. The reproductive season for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrats typically starts in February or March and breeding activity usually continues to July but can extend into September. Thus, relocation efforts should be completed in the fall to minimize the potential for impacts on young woodrats in the house. Additionally, it is recommended that the period between the completion of the relocation efforts and the start of construction activities be minimized to reduce the potential for woodrats to reconstruct houses in the project footprint prior to the start of construction activities.

Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project
City of Cupertino
Page4
Implementation Monitoring
and Timing Responsibility
Implementation: Monitoring: City
City of Cupertino of Cupertino and
or its contractor a qualified
shall implement biologist.
this measure with Initials:
a qualified
biologist.

Timing: Date:

During
construction
activities.

March2024
1253
CC 07-02-2024
1253 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Mitigation Measure
Impact BI0-3: Mitigation Measure BI0-3a: Pre-Construction Survey for Roosting Project construction Bats. A survey of culverts within the project site, including a 50-foot buffer activities could (as feasible) shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist no less than 30 potentially result in days before the start of construction-related activities (including but not the abandonment of limited to mobilization and staging, clearing, grubbing, tree removal, roosting bat nest vegetation removal, fence installation, demolition, and grading). If sites. construction activities are delayed by more than 30 days, an additional bat survey shall be performed. The survey may be conducted at any time of year but should be conducted in such a way to allow sufficient time to determine if special-status bats or maternity colonies are present on the site. The results of the survey shall be documented.

Mitigation Measure BI0-3b: Acoustic Survey. If suitable habitat is present and signs of bat occupancy are detected, a follow-up dusk emergence survey shall be conducted no less than 30 days prior to construction activities. A dusk survey will determine the number of bats present and will also include the use of acoustic equipment to determine the species of bats present. The results of the survey shall be documented.

If an active roost is observed within the project site, Mitigation Measure BIO-3c shall apply.

Mitigation Measure BI0-3c: Roost Buffer. If a day roost or a maternity colony is detected and is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by construction activities, the qualified biologist shall determine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established around the roost in consultation with CDFW. Within the buffer zone, no site Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project
City of Cupertino

Page 5 ends

Implementation Monitoring
and Timing Responsibility
Implementation: Monitoring: City
City of Cupertino of Cupertino and
or its contractor a qualified
shall implement biologist.
this measure with Initials:
a qualified
biologist.

Timing: Date:

Prior to
construction
activities.

March 2024
1254
CC 07-02-2024
1254 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Mitigation Measure
disturbance and mobilization of heavy equipment, including but not limited to equipment staging, fence installation, clearing, grubbing, vegetation removal, demolition, and grading shall be permitted. Monitoring shall be required to ensure compliance with relevant California Fish and Game Code requirements. Monitoring dates and findings shall be documented.

Impact B10-4: Mitigation Measure B10-4: Pre-Construction/Pre-Disturbance Survey Construction for Nesting Birds.
disturbance during Avoidance. To the extent feasible, construction activities should be the avian breeding scheduled to avoid the nesting season. If construction activities are season could cause scheduled to take place outside the nesting season, all impacts to nesting the incidental loss of birds protected under the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code would eggs or nestlings, or be avoided. The nesting season for most birds in Santa Clara County cause the extends from February 1 through August 31 . abandonment of nests, resulting in Pre-Construction Surveys. If it is not possible to schedule construction the incidental take of activities between September 1 and January 31, then preconstruction protected nesting surveys for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to birds. ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project implementation.

Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project
City of Cupertino
Page6
Implementation Monitoring
and Timing Responsibility
Implementation: Monitoring: City
City of Cupertino of Cupertino and
or its contractor a qualified
shall implement biologist.
this measure with Initials:
a qualified
biologist.

Timing: Date:

Prior to and
during
construction
activities.

March 2024
1255
CC 07-02-2024
1255 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Mitigation Measure
If an active nest is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by these activities, the biologist will determine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established around the nest (typically up to 1,000 feet for raptors and up to 250 feet for other species), to ensure that no nests of species protected by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code will be disturbed during project implementation. Within the buffer zone, no site disturbance and mobilization of heavy equipment, including but not limited to equipment staging, fence installation, clearing, grubbing, vegetation removal, demolition, and grading will be permitted until the chicks have fledged. Monitoring shall be required to ensure compliance with MBTA and relevant California Fish and Game Code requirements. Monitoring dates and findings shall be documented.

Impact CUL-1: Mitigation Measure CUL-1: The City of Cupertino (City) shall note on any Ground disturbing plans that require ground disturbing excavation that there is a potential for excavation related to exposing buried cultural resources including prehistoric Native American the project may burials. Significant prehistoric cultural resources are defined as human expose buried burials, features or other clusterings of finds made, modified or used by cultural resources Native American peoples in the past. The prehistoric and protohistoric including prehistoric indicators of prior cultural occupation by Native Americans include artifacts Native American and human bone, as well as soil discoloration, shell, animal bone, burials. sandstone cobbles, ashy areas, and baked or vitrified clays. Prehistoric materials may include:
a. Human bone - either isolated or intact burials.
b. Habitation (occupation or ceremonial structures as interpreted from rock rings/features, distinct ground depressions, differences in compaction (e.g., house floors).

Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project
City of Cupertino

Page 7 ends

Implementation Monitoring
and Timing Responsibility
Implementation: Monitoring:

The City of City of Cupertino. Cupertino shall In the event implement this archaeological
measure with a resources are
qualified discovered, a Archaeologist. qualified
Timing: During archaeologist
construction shall write a
activities. report detailing
their findings and
submit it to the
City of Cupertino.

Initials:

Date:

March 2024
1256
CC 07-02-2024
1256 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Mitigation Measure
c. Artifacts including chipped stone objects such as projectile points and bifaces; groundstone artifacts such as manos, metates, mortars, pestles, grinding stones, pitted hammerstones; and shell and bone artifacts including ornaments and beads.
d. Various features and samples including hearths (fire-cracked rock; baked and vitrified clay), artifact caches, faunal and shellfish remains (which permit dietary reconstruction), distinctive changes in soil stratigraphy indicative of prehistoric activities. e. Isolated artifacts.

Mitigation Measure CUL-3: The City shall retain a Professional Archaeologist on an "on-call" basis during ground disturbing construction to review, identify and evaluate any potential cultural resources that may be inadvertently exposed during construction. The archaeologist shall review and evaluate any discoveries to determine if they are historical resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resources under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). If the Professional Archaeologist determines that any cultural resources exposed during construction constitute a historical Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project
City of Cupertino
PageB
Implementation Monitoring
and Timing Responsibility
March 2024
1257
CC 07-02-2024
1257 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Mitigation Measure
resource and/or unique archaeological resource under CEQA, he/she shall notify the City and other appropriate parties of the evaluation and recommend mitigation measures to mitigate to a less-than significant impact in accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 15064.5. Mitigation measures may include avoidance, preservation inplace, recordation, additional archaeological testing and data recovery among other options. The completion of a formal Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) and/or Archaeological Treatment Plan (ATP) that may include data recovery may be recommended by the Professional Archaeologist if significant archaeological deposits are exposed during ground disturbing construction. Development and implementation of the AMP and ATP and treatment of significant cultural resources will be determined by the City in consultation with any regulatory agencies.

Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project
City of Cupertino
Page9
Implementation Monitoring
and Timing Responsibility
March 2024
1258
CC 07-02-2024
1258 of 1296
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Mitigation Measure
Impact CUL-2: Mitigation Measure CUL-4: In accordance with Section 7050.5 of the Construction of the California Health and Safety Code, if potential human remains are found, project may immediately notify the lead agency (City of Cupertino or Santa Clara inadvertently County) staff and the Santa Clara County Coroner of the discovery. The uncover unrecorded coroner would provide a determination regarding the nature of the remains human remains. within 48 hours of notification. No further excavation or disturbance of the identified material, or any area reasonably suspected to overlie additional remains, can occur until a determination has been made. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are, or are believed to be, of Native American ancestry, the coroner would notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. In accordance with California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98, the Native American Heritage Commission must immediately notify those persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant from the deceased Native American. Within 48 hours of this notification, the Most Likely Descendant would recommend to the lead agency their preferred treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.

Impact TRIB-1: Mitigation Measure TRIB-1: It is possible for a lead agency to determine Project construction that an artifact is considered significant to a local tribe, and thus considered could disturb or a significant resource under CEQA, even if it would not otherwise be damage unknown considered significant under CEQA. As such, all Native American tribal tribal cultural finds are to be considered significant until the lead agency has enough resources resulting evidence to make a determination of significance. In the event that Native in an adverse American archaeological resources are discovered, or suspected to have change in the been discovered, Native American monitoring will be required before significance of the further ground disturbance shall be allowed. tribal resource.

Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail Project
City of Cupertino

Page 10 ends

Implementation Monitoring
and Timing Responsibility
Implementation: Monitoring:

The City of City of Cupertino
Cupertino shall and a qualified
implement this archaeologist.
measure. Initials:

Timing: Date:

During
construction
activities.

Implementation: Monitoring:

The City of City of Cupertino.

Cupertino or its In the event
contractor shall paleontological
implement this resources are
measure. encountered, a
paleontologist Timing: shall be
During contacted to
construction evaluate the find.
activities Initials:

Date:

March2024
1259
CC 07-02-2024
1259 of 1296
June 6, 2024
To: Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commissioners
[email protected]
Re: Support for the Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project (Item 3 on the 6/11 agenda) Dear Chair Shearin and commissioners,
The Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society (SCVAS) was founded in 1926 and is one of the largest National Audubon Society chapters in California. SCVAS’s mission is to promote the enjoyment, understanding, and protection of birds and other wildlife by engaging people of all ages in birding, education, and conservation. Located at McClellan Ranch, we are proud to call Cupertino home.

Our members and volunteers have engaged in the public process during the development of the Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project Conceptual Design, and our staff has reviewed the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and the responses to comments. We thank staff, the commissioners and the consultants for their work on this project, and support Staff recommendation that you recommend to the City Council approval of the Final Conceptual Design and adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.

Thank you,
Shani Kleinhaus, Ph.D.

Environmental Advocate
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
22221 McClellan Rd.

Cupertino, CA 95014

ATTACHMENT G
1260
CC 07-02-2024
1260 of 1296

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: January 17, 2023
Subject
Consider Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project design direction following community outreach results.

Recommended Action
Approve Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project design direction following community outreach results and proceed to Final Concept Design Development.

Summary
The preferred option has been identified as Concept B, “Story Trail” (Attachment A,) with some features from Concept C, “Play It Up.” The project team seeks Council approval of the design direction for the final concept plan, considering the responses from the community in Phases 2 and 3, as well as discussions with the Bicycle Pedestrian and Parks and Recreation commissions. With this approval, the project team will proceed with the Final Concept Design Development phase that is required for the CEQA/Environmental review process.

Background
In 2002, the City of Cupertino began work on acquiring, annexing, and developing a neighborhood park on approximately eight acres of land along the westerly edge of Lawrence Expressway near Mitty Way (Lawrence-Mitty.) Of the eight acres, roughly six acres are suitable for park development. Anticipating the inclusion of the area into Cupertino as a new park, the City pre-zoned the parcels as “Park/Recreation” in 2007.

In July 2020, the City Council passed Resolution 20-092, approving the purchase of the Lawrence-Mitty site from the County of Santa Clara for $2.69 million. The site was situated within the jurisdiction, City limits, and urban service area of the City of San Jose. In April 2022, the Local Area Formation Commission approved annexation of the property into the City. The annexation process was completed in August 2022.

At the City Council Meeting on July 19, 2022, the project team provided an update on the status of the Environmental Summary Report, public outreach process, and next steps in the design process for the Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project.

Attachment H
1261
CC 07-02-2024
1261 of 1296
Council received the update and identified several areas of interest:
• safety and crime prevention
• maintenance of the public and vegetated areas
• landscaping improvements with a focus on using native species • park design options to encourage activity and preserve natural features • sound walls and/or berms
• stormwater management
• examples of other parks
• continuing outreach
Discussion
With nearly six acres of developable land, the Lawrence-Mitty site has the potential to provide open space and park amenities for the public. The open space adjacent to the creek offers residents opportunities to walk, ride, learn, and play, which is critical for a healthy community. The site proximity to Saratoga Creek and Lawrence Expressway offers unique challenges for access and jurisdictional permissions. The park features proposed will need to balance site constraints and the community’s aspirations.

In August 2021, the City released a Request for Qualifications to solicit proposals from qualified professional consultants to develop the Lawrence-Mitty site. In October 2021, MIG, Inc. (MIG) was selected as the consultant for this project and a contract was executed in December 2021. The City worked with MIG to develop a process for implementation of the project. The project has been divided into five phases, which include:
1) Existing Site Condition and Technical Analysis
2) Community Vision
3) Conceptual Design Alternatives
4) Draft and Final Plan
5) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Clearance To date, the project team has completed Phases 1, 2 and 3, and is currently engaged in Phase 4.

Phase 1: Existing Site Condition and Technical Analysis: Environmental Summary Report (ESR) Key considerations discussed in the ESR include site-specific opportunities and constraints associated with the following elements: site access, noise reduction, easements and utilities, soil conditions (including existing construction and demolition waste,) stormwater management, biological resources, and tree inventory. The ESR provides recommendations and design considerations for each of these elements. The report is available for review at the project’s webpage, engagecupertino.org/lawrencemitty.
1262
CC 07-02-2024
1262 of 1296
Phase 2: Community Vision
This phase of the project was one of the initial activities forthe project team and centered on outreach endeavors to solicit feedback from the community regarding what was important to them and how they would like to use the future park. A list of those outreach events is listed below:
• The opportunity to provide comments about the project on the ‘Engage Cupertino’ website at engagecupertino.org/lawrencemitty • Online survey (Open March 30 to May 23, 2022) (563 responses) • Two public Pop-up events
o April 16, 2022, at the Big Bunny 5K (approximately 30 participants) o May 7, 2022, at Creekside Park during youth soccer league (approximately 30 participants)
• Virtual Community Meeting (April 27, 2022) (approximately 15 participants) • Site tour (April 30, 2022) (approximately 60 participants) • Joint Commission Meeting (June 13, 2022)
• City Council meeting (July 19, 2022)
Phase 3: Conceptual Design Alternatives
After gathering initial community input and guidance at the Joint Commission meeting and City Council, the project team moved into Phase 3 - Conceptual Design Alternatives. The consultant developed three design options based on knowledge of the environmental conditions of the site, community input, and priorities gleaned from the Parks and Recreations System Master Plan.

The conceptual design themes focused on different primary uses of the park. The three alternatives were Concept A - “Wheel Fun,” Concept B - “Story Trail,” and Concept C - “Play It Up.” More information on the features in each design option is included in the November 17, 2022, Parks and Recreation Commission Presentation (Attachment A.) The project team conducted additional outreach activities to provide information and solicit feedback on the three conceptual design alternatives. Information about the survey and future events was provided to residents using mailings, social media posts, Items of Interest, the City’s Engage Cupertino website, and at the events themselves.

Those activities were:
• Online community survey (October 3-31, 2022, with 371 responses) • Community input pop-up at the Cupertino Library (October 8, 2022, approximately 70 participants)
• Lawrence-Mitty site visit (October 15, 2022, approximately 73 participants) • Virtual community meeting (October 17, 2022, 7 participants from the public) • Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Meeting Update (November 16, 2022) • Parks and Recreation Commission Update (November 17, 2022) 1263
CC 07-02-2024
1263 of 1296
The preferred option has been identified as Concept B - “Story Trail,” with some features from Concept C - “Play It Up,“ most notably expanded play areas for a wide range of user types and abilities. This hybrid option, based on community input received by the project team, will be the basis for the next phase of design development.

Phase 4: Design Development/Looking Forward
In this (the current) phase, the project team will develop the Final Concept Plan design based on the feedback received to date, and within the context of the approved funding available for the implementation.

We are looking for Council’s confirmation and approval of the design direction for development of the Final Concept Plan. Later, the project team will seek acceptance of the Final Concept Plan by City Council. Design elements included in the Final Concept Plan may be adjusted in consideration of the available project funding for construction.

The plan will then be used to initiate CEQA clearance (Phase 5) as well as provide the basis for the final construction schedule, plans, and budget refinements.

Phase 5: California Environmental Quality Act Clearance Once a Final Conceptual Plan is developed and accepted, the project team will move into Phase 5 - CEQA Clearance. The final outcome of Phase 5 is approval of the required CEQA document for implementation of the final design. The projected timeframe for CEQA clearance is six months after final acceptance of the final concept plan by the City Council. Once CEQA clearance is obtained, the City will pursue further development of the design and construction documentation.

Next Steps:

With Council’s approval of the Concept Design direction, the team will proceed to Final Concept Plan Design Development, and CEQA Clearance phases. Following those phases, the project team will develop construction documentation for permitting and bidding purposes. Construction of the park improvements at the Lawrence-Mitty site are anticipated to begin in 2024. The duration of the construction will be dependent on the requirements of the adopted/final design elements.

If Council does not approve the proposed design direction, the project team will require specific guidance on the revised design direction and clarification on the project team’s next steps.

Sustainability Impact
This project aligns with multiple objectives outlined in Chapter 6, Environmental Resources and Sustainability, of the City’s General Plan, Community Vision 2015-2040.

Development of the Lawrence-Mitty site will emphasize elements of Goal ES-1 to ensure a sustainable future, Goal ES-5 which is to protect the City’s urban and rural ecosystems, and Goal ES-7 to ensure the protection and efficient use of all water resources. 1264
CC 07-02-2024
1264 of 1296
California Environmental Quality Act
As noted in this report, CEQA clearance will occur as design is completed and before the City commits to undertaking a defined project.

Fiscal Impact
The current available balance for the project is $5,952,256 after expenditures for the acquisition and annexation of the property, as well as current design services. No additional funding is required because of this report.

Prepared by: John Raaymakers, Senior Project Manager
Reviewed by: Susan Michael, Capital Improvement Programs Manager Reviewed by: Matt Morley, Director of Public Works
Approved for Submission by: Pamela Wu, City Manager
Attachments:

A – 11-17-22 Parks and Recreation Presentation
1265
CC 07-02-2024
1265 of 1296

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
24-13222 Agenda Date: 7/2/2024
Agenda #: 9.

Subject: Repeal of the existing General Plan Amendment (GPA) Authorization procedure and process Adopt Resolution No. 24-069 (Attachment A) repealing the existing General Plan Amendment Authorization procedure and process and rescinding Resolution 15-078
Presenter: Benjamin Fu, Director of Community Development CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 6/26/2024
powered by Legistar™1266
CC 07-02-2024
1266 of 1296

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: July 2, 2024
Subject
Repeal of the existing General Plan Amendment (GPA) Authorization procedure and process.

Recommended Action
Adopt Resolution No. 24-XXXX (Attachment A) repealing the existing General Plan Amendment Authorization procedure and process and rescinding Resolution 15-078.

Reasons for Recommendation
Since the City adopted the GPA Authorization Procedure in 2015, several concerns about the process have been received and observed:
• There has been misunderstanding of the City Council’s authorization to apply for a GPA and related approvals constitutes final approval of the project. • The procedure has created an additional process and increased the overall project review and process time.
• The community benefits proposed by projects have been inconsistent and have not necessarily provided the intended benefits.
• The procedure does not provide guidance about the process for changing the project after GPA authorization. Therefore, project modifications after the GPA Authorization procedure process would trigger re-authorization.

Background
On September 1, 2015, the City Council adopted Resolution 15-078 (Attachment B) which established the City’s policy for processing GPA Authorization applications. Attachment C illustrates the current process. Since the adoption of the resolution in 2015, there have been nine projects in the last nine years (Attachment D) that were processes with the GPA Authorization procedure. A few cities in the Santa Clara County, greater Bay Area and Southern California have also established GPA screening procedures. Examples of those cities are listed in Attachment E.

Prior to the adoption of the resolution, City staff reviewed applications for proposed development projects concurrently with any proposed GPA application and environmental review for the project. Project review included review to ensure that the proposal was consistent with the General Plan or any proposed amendment to the General Plan and compliance with zoning regulations. If an applicant sought a Development Agreement to protect the project against future changes in land use regulations, negotiation of the agreement would be conduct by City staff, including the community benefits the developer would provide in exchange for 1267
CC 07-02-2024
1267 of 1296
vested rights to proceed with the approved project. Staff involved in the negotiation included the City Manager, City Attorney, Director and Assistant Director of Community Development, Planning Manager, and the assigned project manager. Public input about the project was solicited through neighborhood or citywide noticing, legal notices for meetings, site signage, and neighborhood meetings. Upon completion of environmental and project review and any negotiations for a Development Agreement, the public could provide input on the final decision in public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council.

While State Planning and Zoning Law limits the number of times a City may amend its general plan to four times in one year, the City, when establishing the authorization process, did not limit the number of GPA authorization applications that could be filed and processed in any given year. However, the practice has been to group GPA authorization applications and agendize them for Council consideration twice per year, generally in late-May/early-June and late-November. A GPA authorization application has not been submitted for Council consideration since 2021.

The Council held a study session on June 30, 2015, to review a proposed policy for processing GPA applications. The policy was developed upon consideration of concerns received during the outreach process, such as to provide for more orderly development, to ensure that additional development improved quality of life for the community, to provide opportunity for early community input, to avoid an unnecessarily complex, costly, and time-consuming process, and to provide City Council direction early in the process.

After considering the benefits and disavantages of different approaches to manage development by other cities, input from the public, and the staff’s draft policy, the City Council directed staff to draft a policy for amendments to the General Plan. On September 1, 2015, the City Council adopted Resolution 15-078 which established the City’s standalone policy for processing GPA Authorization applications (see Attachment B).

Conclusion
In the nine years since the 2015 adoption of the GPA Authorization procedures, there have only been nine projects that were processed through the new procedures (see Attachment D). Majority of the cities in Santa Clara County and the Bay Area do not establish a separate GPA screening procedure. Some examples of cities with separate screening procedures are listed in Attachment E. Additionally, several concerns about the procedure have been received and observed, such as misunderstanding of the GPA project approval and modification process, increased overall project review time and resources, inconsistent community benefits received from projects, and the misconception of quid pro quo for private developments. City of Cupertino’s GPA review procedure is consistent with industry standards and state requirements. An additional screening procedure does not necessarily provide early community and Council input since projects typically evolve in the process and the authorization procedure does not indicate specific criteria for reevaluation. The GPA Authorization procedure adds an extra process to an existing review process and may be interpreted as an impediment to development. 1268
CC 07-02-2024
1268 of 1296
Therefore, staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 24-XXXX (Attachment A) repealing the existing General Plan Amendment Authorization procedure and process and rescinding Resolution 15-078.

Sustainability Impact
No sustainability impacts.

Fiscal Impact
No fiscal impact.

California Environmental Quality Act
Not applicable. Individual General Plan amendments would be reviewed under CEQA unless a statutory or categorical exemption were to apply.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Benjamin Fu, Director of Community Development Reviewed by: Pamela Wu, City Manager
Christopher Jensen, City Attorney
Approved for Submission by: Pamela Wu, City Manager
Attachments:

A. City Council Resolution xx-xxx
B. City Council Resolution 15-078
C. Flowchart indicating GPA Authorization Process
D. GPA Authorization projects since 2015
E. List of cities with GPA initiation/screening/authorization procedures 1269
CC 07-02-2024
1269 of 1296
Attachment A
RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL

REPEALING THE AUTHORIZATION PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING OF

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS
________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, on December 4, 2014, the City Council adopted an amended General Plan titled Community Vision 2040, which reflects community input, regulatory changes, best practices, and the desire to achieve community‐building, sustainability, economic, and fiscal objectives; and
WHEREAS, the City has been evaluating various programs to manage development to address development issues in light of concerns about rapid growth and the impacts of such growth overwhelming the City’s ability to accommodate it, as well as the substantial impacts of development on quality of life in the community; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65358(a) provides that:
“If it deems it to be in the public interest, the legislative body may amend all or part of an adopted general plan. An amendment to the general plan shall be initiated in the manner specified by the legislative body . . . .”; and WHEREAS, each mandatory element of the City’s General Plan may be amended no more than four times during any calendar year and, subject to that limitation, “an amendment may be made at any time, as determined by the legislative body “ (Cal. Gov. Code 65358(b)); and
WHEREAS, on September 1, 2015, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 15-078, which established General Plan Amendment Procedures to provide a process for preliminary review of proposed General Plan amendments; and WHEREAS, since the City adopted the GPA Authorization Procedure in 2015, concerns about the process have been received and observed, such as misunderstanding of the GPA project approval and modification process, increased overall project review time and resources, inconsistent community benefits received from projects, and the misconception of quid pro quo for private developments; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered on July 2, 2024, to repeal Resolution 15-078 that adopted the prior General Plan Amendment Authorization procedures.
1270
CC 07-02-2024
1270 of 1296
Resolution No. __________________

Page 2 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby repeals the General Plan Amendment Procedures Resolution 15-078.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 2nd day of July 2024, by the following vote:

Members of the City Council
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

SIGNED:
________
Sheila Mohan, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
1271
CC 07-02-2024
1271 of 1296
RESOLUTION NO. 15-078

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO

ADOPTING PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING OF

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS
WHEREAS, on December 4, 2014, the City Council adopted an amended General Plan titled Community Vision 2040, which reflects community input, regulatory changes, best practices, and the desire to achieve community-building, sustainability, economic, and fiscal objectives; and WHEREAS, the City has been evaluating various programs to manage development to address development issues in light of concerns about rapid growth and the impacts of such growth overwhelming the City's ability to accommodate it, as well as the substantial impacts of development on quality of life in the community; and
WHEREAS, as part of its evaluation process, the City has considered Community Business Incentive Zoning (CBIZ) and Growth Management programs; and WHEREAS, while CBIZ and Growth Management programs can be effective in metering growth and providing for community benefits, they can be difficult to administer, are limited by legal requirements and do not provide the flexibility for managing growth and its substantial impacts on the community; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65358( a) provides that: "If it deems it to be in the public interest, the legislative body may amend all or part of an adopted general plan. An amendment to the general plan shall be initiated in the manner specified by the legislative body ... . "; and
WHEREAS, each mandatory element of the City's General Plan may be amended no more than four times during any calendar year and, subject to that limitation, "an amendment may be made at any time, as determined by the legislative body" (Cal. Gov. Code 65358(b)); and WHEREAS, the City's Municipal Code does not address the timing or initiation of general plan amendments; and
WHEREAS, rather than pursue a CBIZ or Growth Management program, the City desires to set forth an orderly process, in accordance with its legislative discretion, to consider General Plan amendments and ensure that proposals are fairly considered in light of the City's goals and concerns about growth; and
WHEREAS, the City has prepared General Plan Amendment Procedures to provide a process for preliminary review of proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the proposed procedures on May 19, 2015, and the Council directed staff to provide more information and options at a future meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City held an Open House on the General Plan Amendment Process on June 30, 2015, and the City Council held a Study Session after the Open House; and Exhibit B
1272
CC 07-02-2024
1272 of 1296
Resolution No. 15- 078
Page2
WHEREAS, at the Study Session, the Council directed staff to look at options that allowed for applications twice a year and that provided a reevaluation process; and WHEREAS, the procedures include, among other things: ( 1) notice provisions to ensure the public has an opportunity to comment; ( 2) evaluation criteria to ensure general plan amendments that move through the application process are in the public interest and meet the City' s goals for development, including provision of community amenities; and ( 3) requirements for requesting preliminary review of a proposed General Plan amendment; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino hereby adopts the General Plan Amendment Procedures attached hereto, subject to minor revisions as may be made by the City Manager in consultation with the City Attorney. The City Council hereby authorizes City staff to process proposed General Plan amendments in accordance with the General Plan Amendment Procedures and to take any and all other actions necessary to implement the procedures.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino, the 1st day of September, 2015, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

Members of the City Council
Sinks, Chang, Vaidhyanathan
Paul, Wong
None
None
Grace Schmidt, City Clerk
APPROVED:

Rod Sinks, Mayor, City of Cupertino
1273
CC 07-02-2024
1273 of 1296
Resolution No. 15-078
Page3

PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING

OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS

1. Background/Goals
Like many communities throughout the State, Cupertino is concerned about balancing the benefits of economic development with the effects of rapid growth. The impacts of such growth can overwhelm the City's ability to accommodate it and affect the quality of life in the community.

The goal is to create a procedure for the consideration of future General Plan amendments that will encourage orderly development of the City and ensure that facility/service and quality of life standards can be met for the community. These procedures only address amendments requested by private parties. The City may initiate General Plan amendments when it deems necessary, such as, to conform to State law or to ensure consistency within the General Plan.

2. Procedure
a. The Council will consider the timing and processing of General Plan amendments twice a year, approximately every six months.
b. In order to be considered for processing, applicants will be required to apply for authorization to process a General Plan amendment by a designated date. c. In the quarter following the due date (generally), the Council will hold a publicly noticed meeting to preliminarily review the list of proposed General Plan amendments. d. Noticing- City- wide postcard and public meeting requirements. e. Each application will be preliminarily evaluated for the following:
i) General Plan goals achieved by the project including, but not limited to, the following:
1) Site and Architectural design and neighborhood compatibility 2) Brief description of net fiscal impacts ( sales tax, transient occupancy tax or other revenue provided by the project) including a diverse economic base 3) The provision of affordable housing
4) Environmental Sustainability
ii) General Plan amendments ( and any other zoning amendments or variances) requested. iii) Proposed voluntary community amenities, as defined in Section 3, if any. iv) Staff time and resources required to process the project. f. Based on the above evaluation the Council will consider which projects, if any, will be authorized to proceed with a General Plan amendment application. The decision does not in any way presume approval of the amendment or project. It only authorizes staff to process the application, but the City retains its discretion to consider the application in accordance with all applicable laws, including the California Environmental Quality Act 1274
CC 07-02-2024
1274 of 1296
Resolution No. 15-078
Page4
CEQA") and the City's zoning laws and ordinances. Consideration of the application will be in accordance with the City's Municipal Code and regulations. g. Staff will begin processing the General Plan amendment applications per Council direction.

A project that applies for processing should be in substantial compliance with the project authorized by Council.
h. Proposals not authorized by the Council at the first meeting ( per 2.c. above) may be resubmitted with minor amendments within 30 days. Such projects will be considered by the Council at a future public meeting, noticed per the Cupertino Municipal Code, after staff review.

3. Voluntary Community Amenities
a. For purposes of this policy, voluntary community amenities are defined as facilities, land and/ or funding contributions to ensure that any development with a General Plan amendment application enhances the quality of life in the City, including enhancements of the following:
i) School resources
ii) Public open space, such as parks and trails
iii) Public facilities and utilities, such as library, community center or utility systems iv) Transportation facilities with an emphasis on city-wide bicycle, pedestrian and transit improvements, such as community shuttles, pedestrian and bicycle bridges, and transit centers/ stations

4. Preliminary Review Requirements
a. Preliminary documents that would be typically required for the type of application that is requested, such as site plans, preliminary landscape plans, elevations, cross sections, preliminary grading plans and proposed materials.
b. A description, including graphics, of the General Plan amendment( s) and land use approvals required, if any. The description should include diagrammatic information as necessary to clearly explain the request.
c. An explanation of how the proposed project meets the overall goals of the General Plan and the benefits/ impacts of the project to the community and its quality of life. d. A brief summary ofnet fiscal impacts.
e. In order to provide the public with early notice and opportunity to provide input, to the extent the proposed project includes voluntary community amenities, as defined in Section 3 above, of a type typically memorialized in a development agreement, the applicant should include a Term Sheet explaining the proposed terms. The Term Sheet will be memorialized in a Development Agreement as part of the project, if approved. 1275
CC 07-02-2024
1275 of 1296
GPA Authorization
Requested

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT

AUTHORIZATION WORKFLOW
Authorized to Apply for GPA Not Authorized
Resubmit with minor
amendments
in 30 days
Submit application for GPA
City Reviews Application Materials
Reapply
(Practice 1 year)
Authorized Not Authorized
Hearings
• Environmental Review
Committee (ERC)
• Planning Commission (PC)
• City Council (CC)
City Council Hearing
If approved,
submit for a building permit
such as:
• CEQA
• Technical Reports
• Design/Project Review
• Department Review
City Council Hearing
Attachment C
1276
CC 07-02-2024
1276 of 1296

ATTACHMENT C

Page 1 of 4 ends

Project Description Community Amenities Offered Date
Submitted
Date of
Decision Outcome
Goodyear Tire (De Anza Hotel)
10931 N De Anza Blvd
(GPAAuth-2015-01)
Nine-story (~105’), 270-room hotel
with ~5,727 s.f. of conference and
restaurant facilities
• Conf. facilities at no cost to residents on weekends
when available
• Shuttle services for hotel employees and guests
11/16/2015 2/2/2016 Not
Authorized
Oaks
21255-21755 Stevens Creek Blvd
(GPAAuth-2015-02)
280,000 s.f. office (88'), 200-room
hotel with conference and meeting
space (70'), 270 residential units (60')
and 47,660 s.f. of retail/commercial
uses
• $1.0mn for construction of permanent school
facilities to CUSD
• $250,000 for Veterans’ Memorial at Memorial Park
• $50,000 for restroom improv. at Memorial Park
• $1.1mn toward Cupertino Civic Center
• $150,000 above City maximum for Public Art
• $1.15mn for Mary Avenue street improvements (in
excess of frontage improvements)
• $400,000 for future senior shuttle program
• Parcel tax paid for all units
• Future contribution toward safe routes to school to
De Anza College
• 72 parking passes to De Anza College for 5 years
• $500,000 to create a City incubator program
11/16/2015 2/2/2016 Not
Authorized
Scandinavian Designs
19900 Stevens Creek Blvd
(GPAAuth-2016-01)
16,000 SF office allocation
None 11/14/2016 2/21/2017 Not
Authorized
1277
CC 07-02-2024
1277 of 1296

Page 2 of 4 ends

Project Description Community Amenities Offered Date
Submitted
Date of
Decision Outcome
Goodyear Tire (De Anza Hotel)
10931 N De Anza Blvd
(GPAAuth-2017-01)
Five-story, 156-room hotel with
underground parking, lounge, and
conf. space
• Free use of conference facilities for CUSD, City
and Cupertino non-profits for up to 12 days per
year
• Free rooms for use of CUSD for visiting speakers,
scholars, and school business activities
• Reduced rate shuttle for residents to airport
• Complimentary shuttle for hotel guests to SFO
• Participate in citywide shuttle service pending
participation of other hotels and businesses
• One-time payment of $10,000 per room
• Rooftop deck with full food and beverage service
5/15/2017 8/1/2017 Authorized
Oaks
21267 Stevens Creek Blvd
(GPAAuth-2017-02)
Two alternatives:

Alternative 1:
69,500 s.f. commercial; 605
residential units (35-75’)
Alternative 2:
280,000 s.f. office (88'); 69,500 s.f.
commercial; 170 room hotel (70');
270 residential units (35-60')
• $1.0 million to CUSD for permanent school
facilities
• $300,000 to public open space
• $250,000 above City requirement for Public Art
• 4,000 sq. ft. community center in project (no
details)
• $3.0 million for Mary Ave road improvements and
safe routes to school
• $3.5 million construction of on-site transit center
• $250,000 construction of bike trail on western edge
of property
• $400,000 toward future city-wide shuttle program
like Marina and Hamptons
5/15/2017 8/1/2017
Withdrawn
before
hearing
1278
CC 07-02-2024
1278 of 1296

Page 3 of 4 ends

Project Description Community Amenities Offered Date
Submitted
Date of
Decision Outcome
Cupertino Village
10773 N. Wolfe Road
(GPAAUTH-2017-03)
185 room hotel with conference
space and rooftop deck/restaurant
• Unpaid internships
• Free use of conference facilities to City, nonprofits, schools, and other community serving groups
• Extended shuttle service to guests and public
• One-time payment of $10,000 per room
• $10,000 to local Transportation Management
Agency (TMA)
• $250,000 toward any amenity near their site
• Preferential treatment to Cupertino residents for
employment
• Local negotiated rates for dignitaries visiting
Cupertino for governmental or cultural business,
subject to availability.
5/12/2017 8/1/2017 Authorized
Goodyear Tire (De Anza Hotel)
10931 N De Anza Blvd
(GPAAUTH-2018-01)
Six-story, 155-room hotel with
underground parking, lounge, and
conference space
• Complementary use of conference facilities for
Cupertino public schools and City of Cupertino
for up to 12 days per year;
• Cupertino residents are entitled to reduced rate for
hotel shuttle to airports and other major
destination.
• Payment of $500,000 primarily for transportation
programs.
• A rooftop amenity, (deck, bar, or restaurant), with
public access, not to exceed the height of any
rooftop mechanical equipment enclosure.
11/13/2018 1/15/2019 Authorized
1279
CC 07-02-2024
1279 of 1296

Page 4 of 4 ends

Project Description Community Amenities Offered Date
Submitted
Date of
Decision Outcome
Canyon View
APN: 356-27-026, 356-05-007, 356-05-
008
(GPAAUTH-2019-01)
25 residential lots where 4 lots are
currently allowed on property with
Very-low density slope density (5-
20) GP designation and RHS zoning
• Build and/or provide trail linkage from Linda
Vista Park to public open space (sidewalk/street)
• Provide six (6) townhomes on two (2) parcels that
range in size from 1,000 sq. ft. to 1,100 sq. ft. (Four (4) single-family home BMR units would
otherwise be required).
5/10/2019 11/5/2019 Not
Authorized
Homestead Homes
19280 Homestead Rd. (APN: 316-04-
064)
(GPA Auth 2020-001)
Development of four two-story
single-family residential units with
two additional attached Accessory
Dwelling Units
• Affordable Housing Mitigation Fee of $30 a square
foot. 11/09/2020 6/15/2021 Authorized
1280
CC 07-02-2024
1280 of 1296
Attachment E
Sunnyvale:
https://www.sunnyvale.ca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/1384/63782067589920000 0 Mountain View:
https://www.mountainview.gov/our-city/departments/communitydevelopment/planning/regulations/gatekeeper Campbell:
https://www.campbellca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/15110/Preliminary-Applications Santa Clara:
https://www.santaclaraca.gov/home/showdocument?id=53010 Walnut Creek:
https://www.walnutcreekca.gov/government/community-developmentdepartment/planning-entitlements/general-plan-amendments Fremont:
https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/community-development/planningbuilding-permit-services/plans-maps-guidelines/general-plan/general-plan-amendmentscreening-request Camarillo:
https://cms7files.revize.com/camarilloca/Departments/Community%20Development/Appli cations/GPA%20Application%20UD%209.2021.pdf
Redwood City:
https://www.redwoodcity.org/departments/community-development-andtransportation/planning-services/gatekeeper-process 1281
CC 07-02-2024
1281 of 1296

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
23-12678 Agenda Date: 7/2/2024
Agenda #: 10.

Subject: Councilmember Reports
CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 6/26/2024
powered by Legistar™1282
CC 07-02-2024
1282 of 1296
CITY COUNCILMEMBER REPORT*
Meeting: Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024
+for the “Councilmember Reports” agenda item under the “COUNCIL REPORTS” section Reporting Councilmember: Councilmember Liang Chao
Report Dates: 4/30/24 to 6/25/24
Section 1: Activities by Date (Date, Title, and Description):

NOTE:
● This list does not include internal meetings with staff only, such as prep sessions or meetings with the City Manager.
● This list includes activities to “represent the community I am elected to serve”, “to respond to community needs and complaints,” and “to communicate policies and programs to residents,” among other responsibilities of a City Councilmember.
● Due to my work schedule, I have cut down on the event attendance for ceremonial purposes, especially those I have attended almost every year in the past. Instead, I focus more of my time on constituent services.
2024-05-02 Constituents propose to designate the Mary Avenue Bike/Ped Bridge Area as a Park so Muni Code for parks apply to the area.
- A group of residents, representingHealth and Safety Advocates for the HHS Neighborhood (HSAHN), wrote to the Council with a detailed account of a public safety concern near Homestead High and Mary Ave. Bike/Ped Bridge.
- They hope the rules for parks in Muni Code 13.04.130 applies to the area around Mary Ave.

Bike/Ped Bridge.
1 1283
CC 07-02-2024
1283 of 1296
- I thought the request merits serious consideration and asked some followup questions to the staff.

If applicable, this could strengthen public safety for other bike paths, such as Regnart Creek Trail and Linda Visa Trail.
2024-06-18 Follow up to a public concerns on why the city has $50M sitting in a cash account not earning any interest
- The Feb. 27 response from the City Manager confirmed that the City does have around $50M in checking account for operational expenses for most of 2023. - The Treasurer’s Quarterly Investment Reports have the balance in checking account, LAIF (interest-earning cash-equivalent account for government agency) or other investment. - I did some research and here are my findings:
- I looked at the Q2 reports, ending December 31 of each year and found that Cupertino typically keeps around 15-20% of the total portfolio in the checking account, since 2016.

Before that, we kept around 2% in checking.
- I sampled a few cities around us for their FY 2023-24 Q2 reports, I found that other cities keep about $2-7M (0.25% to 2% of the entire portfolio) in the checking account. - Upcoming: At the June 18 Council meeting, the city staff confirmed that they are reviewing our Investment Policy with Chandler Asset Management and they will bring an update to the Council later this year.
2024-06-19 Follow-up to public comment on remote attendance of commissioners from the 6/18 Council meeting.
- The March 2023 memo from the City outlines the legal requirement under the Brown Act for teleconferencing.
- There have been three Commissioners who attend meetings remotely and they have followed the legal requirements as stated.
2024-06-19 Follow-up to public comment on video-on/off during teleconferencing from the 6/18 Council meeting.
- The City Staff confirmed that the video camera of a remote participant has to be turned on 2 1284
CC 07-02-2024
1284 of 1296
when a member of the Brown Act body participates due to emergency. See the March 2023 memo for more details.
2024-06-20 Follow-up to a public inquiry whether it is reasonable to sell the Bryne Ave. property with only one offer after less than one week.
- Comparative analysis provided from staff after the Council meeting. 2024-06-21 Follow-up to a constituent who had wished that Cupertino could work with Bay Area Housing Corporation (BAHC) to develop much-needed memory care units for developmentally disabled individuals who tend to develop Alseimers at a much younger age. - She pointed out that they were able to get about $3.5M funding with San Andreas Regional Center for the construction of the 4 memory care units at the Bryne Ave Property with a one-dollar 99-year lease, so the City still retains the ownership of the property. But the funding might not be available after this year.
- She feels the city sends out an RFP and nonprofits like Bay Area Housing Corporation (BAHC) spent quite a lot of time to put together a proposal. But the city did not give the proposal a fair chance for consideration.
- Unfortunately, to date, the Council has not received the said proposal from BAHC. We have only received staff recommendations based on their oral description of these proposals for the Bryne Ave. property.
2022-06-21 Follow up to a constituent’s concern from 2024-04-06 questioning why Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) has been filed many months late. - I have verified with staff that Gov. Code 40804 requires “the annual report”, which is ACFR, to be filed within seven months of the close of the fiscal year, which is June 30. Thus, ACFR should have been finished before Jan. 31 at the latest.
- Cupertino has been filing ACFR around March since 2016. For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023, all cities around us, except Los Altos, filed their ACFRs by December 2023. - Update: The ACFR for FY 2022-23 (year ending June 30, 2023) is on the Audit Committee agenda on June 26 and will be on the Council agenda early July. The new auditor is getting up to speed.

They will likely be able to finish the ACFR for FY 2024-25 within 7 months.

Section 2: Committee Assignment
No meeting during the period
Section 3: Other Information of Interest to My Constituents:

1. Recordings of Commission Meetings: Starting in June, commission meetings will be recorded for viewing later, although no teleconferencing to allow remote participation. - Find the recordings here under each commission.
-
3 1285
CC 07-02-2024
1285 of 1296

2. Housing Element Update:
- Highlights: 4,588 units are required for the HE, but the current HE has planned 6,226 units, about 36% more than required.
- By not counting 1,500 units in already approved projects and underestimating the realistic capacity for mixed use projects, Cupertino will upzone more properties than required to meet the RHNA requirements.
- The density (units/acre) of many sites will increase from 20 units/acre to 50-65 units/acre and some will increase to 65-80 units/acre.
- R1 corner lots will be allowed to develop with R2 standards to allow duplex, triplex or quadruplex. (Every R1 lot already allows up to 3 ADUs due to state laws)
- Current Progress:
- The final draft of the Housing Element and the General Plan amendment are approved by the majority of the Council on May 14. Unfortunately, the environmental impact analysis has minimal information, even though we are looking at an unprecedented growth rate with over 6,200 units to be permitted in 8 years.
- Although this is the first Council meeting where the draft Housing Element is on the agenda for discussion, there were no written answers provided from the staff, as normally provided for other items on the Council agenda. Given the time constraints, only a few questions were covered on the dais. Thus, many questions from the community and the council members still left unanswered:
- Here are some questions submitted and some with answers: 15 more questions without answers, questions are corner lots with answers, additional questions from the community without answers. - Next Step: The zoning ordinance to rezone properties will likely be on the City Council agenda on July 2nd or a subsequent meeting in July.

After that, there will be design standard updates, such as R2 standards for the corner lots. and other ordinances to implement the policies outlined in the Housing Element.

3. Information Memo posted on the City website:

City Council Informational Memos are now available on the City website. The information can be accessed from the City website at cupertino.org/memos and the City Councilmembers page. You can also find the page via the “Our City” banner and by entering search terms in the “Search the Site” box at the top of the website. Anyone may use the eNotification signup to receive informational memo updates by email.

4. How to Search an agenda item:

A community member showed me a way to search for items on the past city meetings:
● Go to this page: https://cupertino.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx ○ Make sure that “Calendar” is selected from the top row of tabs and the “List View” is selected from the bottom row of tabs.
○ Enter the search term, such as “investment report”. Choose the year or select “All Years”
4 1286
CC 07-02-2024
1286 of 1296
(Last Activity Report in the May 7, 2024 Council Meeting Agenda.) 5 1287
CC 07-02-2024
1287 of 1296
1 CITY COUNCIL ACTIVITY REPORT
Meeting: July 2, 2024
Reporting Councilmember: Vice Mayor J.R. Fruen
Report Activity Dates: 6/11/24 to 6/24/24
Event Date, Title, and Description:

Event 1. June 13, 2024 – Cupertino for All Potluck – Mayor Mohan and I attended this annual board transition meeting and celebration in honor of the work performed by this communitybased organization.

Event 2. June 14, 2024 – Meeting with the City Manager – I attended my regular weekly meeting with the City Manager to go over upcoming council agendas and to discuss ongoing issues, including constituent matters.

Event 3. June 14, 2024 – Briefing and Preparation Session with Community Development Department (CDD) – I received a helpful briefing on CDD’s proposed changes to the Municipal Code to implement the Housing Element in satisfaction of our stipulated judgment, as well as updates to our fence regulations.

Event 4. June 18, 2024 – Meeting with City Manager re Farmer’s Market – I met with the City Manager to discuss background and options for the De Anza Farmer’s Market and its potential need for interim relocation.

Event 5. June 19, 2024 – Meeting with Reed Moulds – I met with Reed Moulds of Sand Hill Property Company to discuss Vallco development timelines and related items.

Event 6. June 21, 2024 – Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) General Assembly Meeting – I attended this annual regional meeting in my capacity as Cupertino’s delegate to the ABAG General Assembly. We passed an operating budget and work plan for the coming fiscal year. Agenda documents are available here.
1288
CC 07-02-2024
1288 of 1296
City Council Councilmember Activity Report
2 Event 7. June 21, 2024 – Foothill College Lavendar Graduation – At the invitation of Foothill faculty, I attended this celebration in honor of LGBTQ+ graduates of the Class of 2024.

Event 8. June 23, 2024 – Walk-Bike Cupertino Annual Barbeque – I attended WBC’s annual barbeque in celebration of the organization’s work to popularize safe walking and biking in Cupertino.
1289
CC 07-02-2024
1289 of 1296
1 CITY COUNCILMEMBER REPORT
Meeting: July 2, 2024
Reporting Councilmember: Mayor Sheila Mohan
Report Dates: 6/11/24 to 6/24/24
Item Date, Title, and Description:
6/12/24: In my capacity as Board member, I attended the monthly meeting of Silicon Valley Clean Energy Board of Directors. The Board voted to maintain a 4% electricity generation discount relative to PG&E rates, allocated additional funding for technical support to cities, and leveraged its status with California Community Choice Funding Authority to issue bonds so that SVCE customers could benefit from substantial savings. 6/13/24: Along with City Manager Wu, I attended the Quarterly Mayor and City Manager meeting along with mayors and city managers of Mountain View, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale.

We updated the group on issues such as budget, housing element and upcoming ballot measures. The just published Grand Jury report was briefly discussed by Mayor Gillmor of Santa Clara.
6/13/24: Attended a follow-up meeting with organizers of Dilli Haat who had comments about traffic and parking during their festival at Memorial Park and offered suggestions for improvement for the next year. Deputy City Manager Kapoor assured them of the City’s assistance.
6/13/24: Welcomed new leadership of Cupertino for All at a gathering of community members, supporters and leaders, and celebrated progress of the Housing Element.
6/14/24: Attended a prep session conducted by Community Development Department staff on General Plan Amendment, Builders Remedy application (only one), fences, and rezoning priority sites in the Housing Element. 1290
CC 07-02-2024
1290 of 1296
City Council Councilmember Report
2 6/17/24: Participated in a Zoom meeting with San Jose Vice Mayor Kamei to update her on issues concerning the West Valley Mayors and Managers group which is scheduled to meet this week. Vice Mayor Kamei will be the special guest at the group’s meeting and will address matters of mutual interest. 6/17/24: Together with previous mayors, school district board members and sponsors, I was honored to attend the year-end celebration of the Cupertino Cricket Academy and award prizes to the young champions. The enthusiasm and energy displayed by the players was fun to observe. Parks and Recreations Commissioner Hemant Buch was the force behind the event. 6/19/24: Along with Councilmember Wei, I had the pleasure of attending the 60th anniversary celebration of the Sunny View Retirement Community. I presented a Certificate of Appreciation on behalf of the City, and made a few remarks honoring the senior community.
6/20/24: I had the pleasure of attending the Sheriff’s Teen Academy Graduation, and honoring the young graduates who had demonstrated a high level of physical and mental acumen during their weeks of intensive training. Many of the teens were from Cupertino high schools and it was heartwarming to see the pride reflected in them and their families. Tom Chin, Emergency Services Manager coordinated the event with Sheriff’s deputies.
6/22/24: At the CARES Field Day, I was given a demonstration of how our Amateur Radio Emergency Services operates its emergency communications capabilities. Display tables were set up for the public and the entire event was hosted by volunteers. Councilmember Wei also attended.
6/22/24: Councilmember Wei and I were honored to attend the Troop 2466 Eagle Court of Honor at which three girls attending Cupertino high schools received the prestigious Eagle Award. Elected officials from Sunnyvale and school districts were also present.
6/24/24: Attended a Special Meeting of the Audit Committee to review the City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and Internal Audit’s work plan.

Both items will come before the Council next week.
6/24/24: On behalf of the City, I presented a Certificate of Appreciation to Alyssa Sakkas, outgoing president of the Cupertino Rotary, and thanked her for her 1291
CC 07-02-2024
1291 of 1296
City Council Councilmember Report
3 leadership and partnership with the City at various events. This event, held at the Senior Center, was a joyous, well-attended evening of fun, musical performances and exotic food.
1292
CC 07-02-2024
1292 of 1296
1 CITY COUNCIL ACTIVITY REPORT
Meeting: July 2, 2024
Reporting Councilmember: Councilmember Kitty Moore
Report Activity Dates: 6/10/24 to 7/2/24
Event Date, Title, and Description:

June 14, 2024. CDD prep. session.

June 17, 2024. 2:1 session with City Manager and City Attorney.

June 18, 2024. City Council Meeting.

June 19, 2024. Closed Session Special City Council Meeting.

June 20, 2024. New Taipei Friendship City visit. Welcomed the student delegation from New Taipei on their tour of City Hall, Library, and Community Hall.

June 21, 2024. Finance prep. session.

June 21, 2024. Attended the CalCities Environmental Quality Policy Committee meeting1
. This is the 4th year I have been appointed by a CalCities entity to serve on this state-wide committee to represent the Peninsula Division. After a review of general legislation, the committee received reports on the California Climate Action Corps2 which has internships available which can lead to funding for college; the Cleanup in Vulnerable Communities Initiative3 which is providing $500M for environmental cleanups in vulnerable communities and educational opportunities; Draft Climate 1 https://www.calcities.org/docs/default-source/advocacy/environmental-quality/environmental-qualitypolicy-committee-june-agenda80fbeaaa-761a-4114-bb5c-61cf90828817.pdf?sfvrsn=fab52c83_3 2 https://www.californiavolunteers.ca.gov/climateactioncorps/ 3 https://dtsc.ca.gov/cleanup-in-vulnerable-communities-initiative-cvci/ 1293
CC 07-02-2024
1293 of 1296
City Council Councilmember Activity Report
2 Adaptation Strategy Overview4 which is
open for public comment through July 12;
Federal funding updates from the Water
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act5
which has grant funding available and the
Energy Efficiency and conservation Block
Grant Funding Program6; followed by a
legislative and regulatory update of
highest priority bills7, priority bills8, and
tracked bills9
. Of note is the support for a
Climate Bond10 which would prioritize
waste/recycling, energy retrofits and
infrastructure, water resources investment
for groundwater recharge, desalination
and water recycling, coastal resilience, and
wildfire resilience.

June 21, 2024. Disco at Dusk. Attended this very fun Barbie themed city event which included crafts, games, and dancing in the transformed Community Hall. 4 https://climateresilience.ca.gov/
5 https://www.epa.gov/wifia
6 https://energy.gov/scep/energy-efficiency-and-conservation-block-grant-program 7 https://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publish.aspx?session=23&id=16b09327-3400-4e1e-baccd074b8cc560d 8 https://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publish.aspx?session=23&id=bc647837-aff8-4e39-82eeb723fe7988d0 9 https://ctweb.capitoltrack.com/public/publish.aspx?session=23&id=b69906ac-76c8-4237-809c6f84648e5825 10 https://ct3.blob.core.windows.net/23blobs/09f4d6f3-68c9-4d0a-813e-bc26c2f31e6f 1294
CC 07-02-2024
1294 of 1296
1 CITY COUNCILMEMBER REPORT
Meeting:  July 2, 2024
Reporting Councilmember:  Councilmember Hung Wei
Report Dates:  6/11/24 to 6/23/24
Item Date, Title, and Description
Event 1.  Tuesday June 11, 2024 @ 6:45pm, Planning Commission Meeting Online

Listening to the Planning Commission Meeting live to learn the discussions, directions, and recommendations of the Planning Commissioners.

Event 2. Thursday June 13, 2024 @ 9:30am, Silicon Valley Clean Energy Staff Retreat @ Cupertino Quinlan Center

Attended the Silicon Valley Clean Energy Staff Retreat and spoke about the important work SVCE has done in the past and moving forward.

Event 3. Thursday June 13, 2024 @ 6:30pm, Cities Association of Santa Clara County Membership Meeting @ Los Altos Community Center
Attended the Cities Association Membership Meeting with a focus on Mental Health as well as Celebrating the formation of JPA. This event featured a panel of mental health professionals and was sponsored by El Camino Health.

Event 4. Friday June 14, 2024 @ 1:30pm, Staff Prep Session on Community Development Attended a Staff Prep Session, received briefing on Community Cevelopment projects with Q&A.

Event 5. Wednesday June 19, 2024 @ 2:00pm, Sunny View Retirement Community 60th 1295
CC 07-02-2024
1295 of 1296
City Council Councilmember Report
2 Anniversary Celebration
Attended the 60th Anniversary of Sunny View Retirement Community with Mayor Sheila Mohan. Sunny View has served the Cupertino community for 60 years of excellent service for seniors with both independent & assistant living needs as well as memory care facilities.

Event 6. Thursday June 20, 2024 @ 11:00am, Congressman Ro Khanna’s Town Hall @ the Visual & Performing Arts Center @ De Anza College
Attended Congressman Ro Khanna’s Town Hall featuring an Education Forum with Foothill De‐Anza Board Member Patrick Ahrens with Q&A from the audience.

Event 7. Thursday June 20, 2024 @ 1:45pm, Students Visit from Cupertino Friendship City New Taipei City
Welcomed students and accompanying adults from New Taipei City, one of Cupertino’s Friendship Cities in Taiwan, for a tour of the City Hall and Cupertino Library. City staff made a presentation of the City of Cupertino and I acted as an interpreter for better communication.

Councilmember Kitty Moore was also present.

Event 8. Saturday June 22, 2024 @ 11:00am, Cupertino Amateur Radio Emergency Service (CARES) Field Day at Memorial Park
Attended, along with Mayor Sheila Mohan, the annual Field Day of Cupertino Amateur Radio Emergency Service at Memorial Park. Our residents who volunteer for CARES are knowledgeable and passionate about serving when an emergency arises and will coordinate with City staff as well as Sheriff, Fire, County and neighboring agencies to serve our residents. Mayor Mohan and I received briefing on the equipment and procedures from our volunteers.

Event 9. Saturday June 22, 2024 @ 3:00pm, Eagle Court of Honor by Scout Troop 2466 @ the Fellowship Hall @ the Presbyterian Church Sunnyvale
Attended, along with Mayor Sheila Mohan, the Eagle Court of Honor to congratulate three female Eagle Scout recipients who were the very first female Eagle Scout awardees received by Scout Troop 2466!
1296
CC 07-02-2024
1296 of 1296

Cupertino City CouncilJuly 2, 2024

Cupertino City Council
July 2, 2024