Mountain View City Council
January 24, 2023

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
Goal PSA- 1: A high level of community safety with police, fire and emergency response services that meet or exceed industry accepted service standards.

Policy PSA- I.1: Adequate staffing. Maintain adequate police and fire staffing, performance levels and facilities to serve the needs of the community.

Policy PSA- 1. 2: Design for safety. Support and promote crime prevention and fire safety strategies in the design of new developments.

Goal PSA- 2: A total commitment to reducing criminal activity and instilling a feeling of safety and security in the community.

Policy PSA- 2.1: Community policing. Provide superior community -oriented police serVlcas.

Policy PSA- 2.2: Sense ofsafety. Ensure a sense of safety throughout the community.

Policy PSA- 2.3: Service and effectiveness. Explore ways to improve service delivery and police effectiveness.

Policy PSA- 2.5: Regional partnerships. Participate in regional partnerships to reduce crime and respond to emergencies.

Policy PSA-2.7: Police service levels andfacilities. Ensure Mountain View Police Department service levels and facilities meet demands from new growth and development.

Goal PSA-3: A community protected from fire, hazardous materials and environmental combination.

Policy PSA-3.1: Minimized losses. Minimize property damage, injuries and loss of life from fire.

Policy PSA- 3.2: Protection from hazardous materials. Prevent injuries and environmental contamination due to the uncontrolled release of hazardous materials through prevention and enforcement of fire and life safety codes.

Policy PSA- 3.3: Development review. Carry out development review procedures that encourage effective identification and remediation of contamination and protection of public and environmental health and safety.

Policy PSA- 3.4: Oversight agencies. Work with local, state and federal oversight agencies to encourage remediation of contamination and protection of public and environmental health and safety.

Policy PSA- 3. 5: Peak water supply. Ensure sufficient peak -load water supply to address fire and emergency response needs when approving new development.

Goal PSA-4: A well -prepared community that has developed plans to minimize risks from environmental and human Induced disasters.

Policy PSA- 4.1: Emergency response plan. Maintain and update the City' s emergency response plans.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 10 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
2014 Parks and Open Space Plan
The City of Mountain View' s Parks and Open Space Plan was adopted in 1992. The 2014 version of the Plan represents the sixth update since its first adoption. The Plan represents a review of open space resources within the City of Mountain View and offers a long-range vision intended to guide decisions made to advance park and open space resources. The Plan provides an evaluation of open space resources in the City and its neighborhoods and prioritizes recommendations for the acquisition, improvement, and preservation of parks and open space.

The Plan also establishes a City goal of 3. 00 acres of open space per 1, 000 residents.

Mountain View Municipal Code
Park Land Dedication or Fees in Lieu Thereof (Chapter 41. 3 and 41. 4). The City' s Park Land Dedication or Fees in Lieu ' Thereof allow developers to dedicate land, pay a fee in lieu of, or both, at the option of the City for park or recreational purposes. The Fees collected pursuant to this chapter are to be used only for the purpose of providing park or recreational facilities to serve the subdivision from which fees are collected. Fees collected shall be used to purchase land, buy equipment, construct improvements, rehabilitate a proposed or existing mini -park, community park, neighborhood park, recreational facility, Stevens Creek trail, community gardening facility or combination thereof serving said subdivision. The fee so required shall be based on the fair market value of the land that otherwise would have been required for dedication.

Mountain View Standard Conditions for Approval
As part of discretionary review, the City has standard conditions for different types of approvals as of October 25, 2021). For all construction activities, the City has standard conditions relating to public services and recreation, as summarized below.

School Impact Fee
Project is subject to school impact fees. To obtain information, fee estimates, and procedures, please contact the following local school districts: Mountain View Los Altos High School District at www.mvla.net or 650- 940- 4650; and Mountain View Whisman School District at www.mvwsd.org or 650- 526- 3500; or Los Altos Elementary School District at www.lasdschools. org or 650- 947- 1150.

Park Land Dedication Fee
Prior to the issuance of any building permits and prior to the approval of the parcel or final map, the applicant shall pay the Park Land Dedication Fee ( approximately $ 20, 000 to $ 40, 000 per unit) for each new residential unit in accordance with Chapter 41 of the City Code prior to the issuance of the building permit. No credit against the Park Land Dedication Fee will be allowed for private open space and recreational facilities. Provide the most current appraisal or escrow closing statement of the property with the following information to assist the City in determining the current market value of the land: ( 1) a brief description ofthe existing use of the property; ( 2) square footage of the lot; and ( 3) size and type of each building located on the property at the time the property was acquired.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 11
Draft Environmental Impact Report
ESA / 202000806
July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation

4. 13. 4 Significance Criteria
The thresholds used to determine the significance of impacts related to public services are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of the Project could have a significant impact on the environment if it would:
result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection;
ii) Police protection;
iii) Schools;
iv) Parks; or
v) Other public facilities.

Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.

Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

Approach to Analysis
Potential direct impacts to public services are discussed relative to potential substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, as directed by the Significance Thresholds defined in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Similarly, potential direct impacts to recreation are discussed related to the accelerated substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities and the construction/ expansion of recreational facilities.

The cumulative analysis considers potential public services and recreation impacts of the HEU' s implementation combined with cumulative development in the vicinity.

Implementation of the HEU could have a significant impact on public services if: (1) it would require the construction of new or physically altered governmental facilities in order to maintain acceptable levels of public services; and ( 2) the construction or alteration of such facilities would result in a substantial adverse physical impact on the environment.

For purposes of the impact analysis, it is assumed that any projects developed as a result of the HEU' s implementation would be designed to comply with the most up- to- date building and fire codes and would include fire safety measures and equipment, including but not limited to, use of fire retardant building materials, inclusion of emergency water infrastructure ( fire hydrants and sprinkler systems), installation of smoke detectors and fire extinguishers, installation of emergency response notification systems, and provision of adequate emergency access ways for City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
emergency vehicles. Project fire safety plans would be subject to review and approval by the City and MVFD.

4. 13. 5 Impacts of the Project
Impact PSR- 1: Implementation of the HEU would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire protection. ( Less than Significant)
Implementation of the Hh;l_1 would provido for Ole dovololmtont of addikowal housing wilts and would rosult in an incroase in the City' s population. While no specific development proposals are directly associated with the HEU, theoretical development would result in an increase in population and thus an increase in demand for fire protection and emergency medical response services from the MVFD. As discussed in Section 4. 13. 2, the MVFD regularly achieves its goal of responding to each emergency call within 6 minutes. The MVFD target response time of 6 minutes is more stringent than the NFPA 1710 Standard, which stipulates that the first fire engine should arrive to 90 percent of emergency calls within a range of 6: 15 and 6: 45 minutes. It is likely that the increase in population as a result of HEU will affect current response times. Travel time performance by region is variable and influenced by factors such as individual response unit workload, the size of the station, and the street system serving it.

The increase in population as a result of the HEU would be expected to generate the typical range of service calls, including fire, emergency medical service, and other incidents. New fire personnel, vehicles, and equipment would likely be required to provide adequate service and response times to serve future development. Therefore, the MVFD' s costs to maintain equipment and facilities and to train and equip personnel would also increase. However, the additional personnel and materials costs would likely be gradual as the increase in population as a result of development under the HEU would occur incrementally over time. In accordance with General Plan Policy PSA- 1. 1, the City would ensure that there is adequate fire staffing, performance levels, and facilities to serve the needs of the community. As such, it would be possible to assess the need for additional fire and emergency medical service personnel and equipment and address these needs to ensure that adequate fire service response time standards are maintained.

Additional fire facilities are not expected to be required to serve the population as a result of the HEU. However, if and when the construction or expansion of facilities to accommodate additional personnel or equipment should become necessary, CEQA review, General Plan provisions, Municipal Code regulations, and payment of impact fees would all be required.

Therefore, the impact on fire protection and emergency medical response services would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 13 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
Impact PSR-2: Implementation ofthe HEU would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered police facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police protection. ( Less than Significant)
Implementation of the HEU would provide for the development of additional housing units and would result in an increase in the City' s population. While no specific development proposals are directly associated with the HEU, theoretical development would result in an increase in population and thus an increase in demand for police protection services from the MVPD. As

1. 11SCUb6od in Section 4. 13. 2, in 2020 the MVPD employ@d 181 full ( 14.3 full-time), regular, and limited period positions to serve the City population of 82, 826. Based on the City' s population at the time, the existing officer to resident ratio of L7 officer per 1, 000 residents. The projected population growth without development under the HEU is approximately 134,000 residents while the projected growth with development under the HEU is approximately 142, 200 residents. This difference of approximately 8, 200 potential residents under the HEU site locations and anticipated development would result in a decrease in the officer to resident ratio to 1. 3 officers per 1, 000 residents. While there is no adopted officer -to -resident ratio in the City, the increase in population and associated increase in calls for service is likely to require additional police personnel. Additionally, as discussed in Section 4. 13. 2. 2, in 2020 the MVPD had a response time to " Emergency" and Priority 1 Events (first unit dispatched to first unit arriving) of 4 minutes or less 62. 8 percent of the time ( 707 out of 1, 126 events). Although there is no adopted response time goal in the City, the increase in population and associated increase in calls for service is likely to result in longer response times.

Implementation of the HEU would increase overall demand on police protection services in the City. Future development is expected to generate the typical range of service calls. Additional police personnel, vehicles and equipment would likely be required to provide adequate response times to serve future growth. Therefore, the City' s costs to maintain equipment and facilities and to train and equip personnel would also increase. However, the additional personnel and materials costs would likely be gradual as the increase in population would occur incrementally over time.

General Plan Policy PSA- 2. 7 ensures MVPD service levels and facilities meet demands from new growth and development. As such, it would be possible to assess the need for additional police personnel and equipment and address these needs to ensure that the law enforcement response time standards in the community are maintained. Additional police protection facilities are not expected to be required to serve the population as a result of the HEU. However, if and when the construction or expansion offacilities to accommodate additional personnel or equipment could become necessary, CEQA review, General Plan provisions, Municipal Code regulations, and payment of impact fees would all be required. Therefore, the impact on police protection services would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 14 ESA/ 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
Impact PSR-3: Implementation ofthe HEU would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered school facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for schools. ( Less than Significant)
Implementation of the HEU would provide for the development of additional housing units and would result in an increase in the City' s population. While no specific development proposals are directly associated with the HEU, theoretical development would result in an increase in population and thus an increase in school -aged children that could be enrolled in schools. The MVWSD Hnd MVLA would liholy sorvo thoso potontial school aged students.

The total housing units required in the 6tn Cycle RIINA is 11, 135. However, the California Department of Housing and Community Development ( HCD) recommends that jurisdictions plan for their RHNA plus a buffer of additional units equivalent to 15- 30 percent. To be conservative the City intends to identify a buffer and the City projects that 15, 000 units would be constructed during the HEU planning period from 2023 to 2031. Of the approximately 15, 000 new units, only a small percentage ( approximately 1, 400 units in the sites inventory and 2, 700 units beyond 2031) would result from changes in City policy, zoning, or Precise Plans, and the balance could theoretically occur with or without the Project because it is consistent with existing policy, zoning, and Precise Plans. The HEU would increase the number of school -aged children enrolled in MVWSD schools. The MVWSD uses a student generation rate of 0. 085 for market rate multifamily units, and a student generation rate of 0. 308 for below market rate multifamily units for grades K-5. MVWSD' s 6- 8 student generation rates are 0. 039 for market rate multifamily units and a student generation rate of 0. 247 for below market rate multifamily units ( MVWSD, 2022c). The anticipated development under the HEU would generate approximately 2, 276 new students for MVWSD schools, assuming all of the new units enabled by changes in development capacity via rezoning use the MVWSD' s below market rate multifamily unit student generation rate. All 15, 000 units projected during the HEU planning period would conservatively generate approximately 5, 480 students for MVWSD schools, using the RHNA allocation percentages for above and below market -rate units. As discussed in Section 4. 13. 2, MVWSD student enrollment was approximately 4, 526 students as of February 2022. Student enrollment over the past couple years has been in decline with peak enrollment over the last five years being 5, 132 students during the 2017- 2018 school year ( CDE, 2022b). The addition of new students generated under the HEU would exceed past student enrollment years, but there is currently capacity for new students. Additionally, the new students would be added to the district -wide enrollment of MVWSD schools incrementally over time as development occurs. While MVWSD for an increase in student population, the number of new students generated as a result of the HEU over time will eventually exceed past enrollment numbers. Therefore, facility updates to increase capacity would also likely be required. Any expansion of school facilities would be required to undergo environmental review as they are identified. Appropriate measures would be identified and implemented as applicable to reduce any construction -related or operational effects of those facilities.

The LASD also includes enrollment areas in the City for Springer Elementary School.

Approximately 146 units in the housing sites inventory would be included in this attendance area.

As such, development as a result of the HEU would generate approximately 92 students at City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 1 3- 1 5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
Springer Elementary School, assuming a student generation rate of 0. 63 per multifamily unit ( Los Altos, 2021). Student enrollment at Springer Elementary peaked in the 2016- 2017 school year at 501 students. Based on the 2020- 2021 enrollment of 346 students, Springer Elementary would have capacity to serve the new students generated as a result of the HEU. As such, expansion of LASD facilities are not expected to be necessary.

The HEU would also result in an increase in school - aged children enrollment ltt MVLA schools.

The MVLA uses a student generation rate of 0. 047 9- 12 grade students for market rate multifamily residential units and a student generation rate of 0. 312 9- 12 grade students for below market rate multifamily residential units ( MLVA, 2022b). Using the aforementioned unit numbers, the anticipated development under the HEU would generate approximately 1, 279 new students for MVLA schools, assuming all of the new unit,, onahled by changer, in dovolopmont capacity via rezoning use the MV LA' s below market rate multifamily unit student generation rate. All 15, 000 units projected during the HEU planning period would conservatively generate approximately 2, 930 students for MVLA schools, using the RHNA allocation percentages for above and below market -rate units. As discussed in Section 4. 13. 2, MVLA student enrollment was approximately 4, 563 in school year 2020- 2021. According to the 2020 MVLA Developer Fee Study, the District current enrollment already exceeds its capacity of 3, 287 and will continue to do so. With the addition of potential school -aged children enrollment the HEU would worsen this existing capacity exceedance. Therefore, facility updates to increase capacity would also likely be required. However, the new students would be added to the district -wide enrollment of MVLA schools incrementally over time as development occurs. Any expansion of school facilities would be required to undergo environmental review as they are identified. Appropriate measures would be identified and implemented as applicable to reduce any construction -related or operational effects of those facilities.

The City' s adherence to General Plan Policy POS- 5. 3 and POS- 5. 4, described under Section

4. 13. 3 would reduce the potential effects to school facilities associated with increased enrollment as a result of population growth. As described in Section 4. 13. 3, projects developed under the HEU would be required to comply with SB 50 and California Government Code Section 65996, which would fully mitigate the potential effect on public school facilities from the new student population that may be generated by the HEU. California Government Code Section 65996 and Education Code Section 17620 authorize school districts to levy a development fee on new residential projects to offset the costs associated with new students present in the districts as a result of new development. Section 65996 states that the payment of school impact fees that may be required by a State or local agency constitutes full and complete mitigation of school impacts from development. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
Impact PSR-4: Implementation ofthe HEU would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. ( Less than Significant) Implementation of the HEU would provide for the development of additional housing units and would result in an increase in the City' s population. While no specific development proposals are directly associated with the HEU, theoretical development would result in an increase in population and thus an increased use in existing neighborhood and regional parks, and recreational facilities. However, the population increase and resulting use of existing neighborhood and regional parks as well as recreation facilities would occur over time as individual prglucls are developed. llilliVidllkll l ul Nt t, uudot tlttl IIPI T would ho ( ubjo( l ill tho City' s Parkland Dediention Ordinance, which require either dedicatinT; laud, p,iyiug a ree ill lieu thereof, or both. The fees are then used for the purchase, development, and/ or improvement of park and recreational facilities located in or near the neighborhood where the new development is located. In -lieu fees can also be used to fund projects that provide a community -wide asset. The Parks and Recreation Commission recommends to the City Council how these fees should be applied to park and open space projects ( City of Mountain View, 2014). 1 As discussed in Section 4. 13. 2, Environmental Setting, Mountain View residents use nearby Shoreline at Mountain View Regional Park and its recreation facilities to meet recreation needs.

The regional park contains a wildlife preserve consisting of wetlands, marshes, upland habitats, a golf course, and a sailing lake. New residents as a result of the HEU would be expected to use these facilities from time to time; however, given the vast size of the regional park and its facilities as well as the relatively infrequent usage that future residents would make of them, the HEU would not result in their substantial deterioration. A modest increase in usage of built facilities such as the amphitheater, boat house, launch ramp, golf course, and trails, could result from buildout of the HEU; however, this incremental growth would not be likely to trigger the construction of new built facilities over and above the already foreseen plans of these regional park facilities.

While the HEU would increase the use of existing parks and recreational facilities, individual projects under the HEU would be subject to the City' s Parkland Dedication Ordinance, which requires land dedication or payment of a fee in lieu thereof. The fees are used for the purchase, development, and/or improvement of park and recreational facilities located in or near the neighborhood where the new development is located ( City of Mountain View, 2014). The increased demand on existing regional parks would also not substantially increase or accelerate the physical deterioration or degradation of existing parks and recreation facilities, as these areas are much larger in size and have planned for regional recreational use. In addition, open space developed as a result of requirements for individual projects would also absorb a small portion of the demand for parks and recreational facilities by new residents. Therefore, impacts from the accelerated physical deterioration of parks and recreation resources would be less than significant. i While the City is exploring adjusting these fees, it would be part of a broader analysis that will maintain access to high -quality parks ( e. g., by identifying other funding sources, maintaining and upgrading existing parks, etc).

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
Mitigation: None required.

Impact PSR- 5: Implementation of the HEU would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. (Less than Significant) Implementation of the HEU would provide for the development of additional housing units and would result in an increase in the City' s population. While no specific development proposals are directly associated with the HEU, theoretical development would result in an increase in population and thus an Increased demand for parks and recreation facilities. its dh CLIS'sed III Section 4. 13. 3, Regulatory Settinr& lho City han a goal of 3 acres of open space per 1, 000 residents. Based on the information from the 2014 Parks and Open Space Plan, which used a 2010 population of 74, 291, Mountain View is slightly below the open space standard with 2. 58 acres per 1, 00 residents when the North Bayshore Planning Area (which includes all of the City' s regional open space) is excluded from the calculation. When the North Bayshore Planning Area is factored in, the ratio rises to 13. 35 acres per 1, 000 residents which is well in excess of the City' s standards. At the time of this 2014 update, the City needed an additional 30.85 acres of open space to meet the City' s goal of 3. 00 acres of open space per 1, 000 residents (City of Mountain View, 2014). Based on the current population of 82, 826 with the addition of the 8, 200 potential residents from the HEU enabled by changes in development capacity via rezoning, the ratio would be approximately 2. 2 per 1, 000 residents without the inclusion of the North Bayshore Planning Area. With this inclusion the ratio would be approximately 11. 0 acres per 1, 000 residents. Therefore, the HEU would worsen this existing deficiency, assuming that the North Bayshore Planning Area is not included. Based on the City' s desired parkland to resident ratio, the population increase since the 2014 Parks and Open Space Plan Update as well as the addition of approximately 8, 200 residents to the current population would generate a demand for up to approximately 50. 2 acres of additional parkland ( 24. 6 acres from the HEU alone). As a matter of information, when the North Bayshore Planning Area containing the regional open space is included the City well exceeds its established goal.

Individual projects under the HEU would be subject to the City' s Parkland Dedication Ordinance, which requires land dedication or payment of a fee in lieu thereof. The fees are used for the purchase, development, and/ or improvement of park and recreational facilities located in or near the neighborhood where the new development is located ( City of Mountain View, 2014). The Fees are assessed on new residential development and additions in the City that will result in an increase in the resident population. The City' s Park Land Dedication Ordinance are consistent with the Quimby Act and provide up to 3 acres of parkland per 1, 000 residents added by the project, and advance the parks and recreation foals and policies of the General Plan and Parks and Open Space Plan. As the residential population of Mountain View increases as a result of the HEU, the construction of new parks and recreation facilities in the City would occur. The park projects developed as a result of the Paik Lcutd Dedication Of dinattce would be required to undergo environmental review as they are identified. Appropriate measures would be identified and implemented as applicable to reduce any construction - related or operational effects of those facilities.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 18 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
Although the HEU would worsen existing parkland deficiencies in the City, individual projects would be subject to the City' s Park Land Dedication Ordinance and associated City' s Standard Condition of Approval as they are developed. The City' s Park Land Dedication Ordinance requires land dedication or payment of a fee in lieu thereof. The fees are used for the purchase, development, and/ or improvement of park and recreational facilities located in or near the neighborhood where the new development is located and allows the City to meet the demand generated by new residential development. As noted above, parks, trails, and other recreational facilities developed as a result would be subject to environmental review as they are identified and appropriate measures would be identified and implemented as applicable to reduce any construction -related or operational effects of those facilities Therefore, parkland impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation. None tequlted.

4. 13.6 Cumulative Impacts
This section presents an analysis of the cumulative effects of the HEU in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects that could cause cumulatively considerable impacts. Significant cumulative impacts related to public services and recreation could occur if the incremental impacts of the HEU combined with the incremental impacts of one or more cumulative projects.

The geographic scope for cumulative effects on public services and recreation is citywide.

Impact PSR- LCU: Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on public services that would require new or physically altered governmental facilities, construction of which could have significant physical environmental impacts. (Less than Significant)
The HEU, in combination with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects would increase the demand for fire protection and emergency medical response services, police protection services, and public schools. As described in Section 4. 0, there are various other housing developments proposed to be constructed or under review approval consideration within Mountain View. As discussed above under Impacts PSR- 1 and PSR- 2, the HEU would have less than significant impacts with regard to fire and protection, emergency medical response services, and police protection services. The City would also be required to ensure compliance with development standards contained in General Plan Policy PSA- 1. 1 related to police and fire staffing and General Plan Policy PSA- 2. 7 related to police services. With regard to public schools, similar to future development under the HEU, cumulative projects would be subject to school impact fees.

Therefore, when considered in the cumulative context, the HEU' s public services -related impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 19 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
Impact PSR- 2. CU: Implementation of the HEU, combined with cumulative development in the vicinity and citywide, would not result in significant cumulative impacts to parks and recreation. ( Less than Significant Impact)
The HEU, in combination with past, present, existing, approved, pending, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the vicinity would incrementally increase the demand for and use of existing parks and recreation facilities. As discussed above under Impacts PSR- 4 and PSR- 5, the HEU would have less than significant impacts with regard to recreation. Similar to the HEU, cumulative development would be subject to the City' s standard conditions of approval and Park Land Dedication Ordinance that contribute to long-term parks and recreational facilities planning mild t xltxr ity ivaliitrvriiwiiis The City would rtl.so lat w( pliwd to (+Ilstiw t: utatltlittut: c vvltlt G( gieittl Plan Policies POS- 1. 1 and POS- 1. 2 related to the demand for parks and recreational facilities.

Therefore, whon considorod in the cumulative context, the HFi T' s parks and recreation - related impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. Cumulative impacts related to parks and recreation would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.

4. 13. 7 Summary of Public Services and Recreation Impacts Significance Significance After
Impact Before Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation
Impact PSR- 1: Implementation of the HEU Less than None required would not result in substantial adverse physical Significant impacts associated with the provision of or need
for new or physically altered fire protection
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times, or other performance objectives for fire
protection.

Impact PSR-2: Implementation of the HEU Less than None required would not result in substantial adverse physical Significant impacts associated with the provision of or need
for new or physically altered police facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for police
protection.

Impact PSR- 3: Implementation of the HEU Less than None required would not result in substantial adverse physical Significant impacts associatod with tho provision of or need
for new or physically altered school facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for schools.

Impact PSR-4: Implementation of the HEU Less than None required would not Increase the use of existing 5lgnilic ant
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 20 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact PSR-5: Implementation of the HEU Less than None required would not include recreational facilities or require Significant the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment.

Impact Pc,R- 1 CtV Implementation of the HFU, I oss than None required when combined with other past, present, or Significant
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on
public services that would require new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
W110ULtiurl of WIIiLlI LuulV I lave frigniFILArrl
physlwl erlvilunmeldal Impacls.

Irnpat,t PSR-P. CU. lviplernenlaliun of the I IEU, Lebb than Nol ie ibquiiod combined with cumulative development in the Signifiuunl vicinity and citywide, would not result in
significant cumulative impacts to parks and
recreation.

4. 13. 8 References
California Department of Education ( CDE), 2022a. Mountain View Los Altos Union High School District. Available: http:// www. ed- data. org/ district/ Santa- Clara/ Mountain- View- Los- AltosUnion- High. Accessed April 25, 2022.

California Department of Education ( CDE), 2022b. Mountain View Whisman School District.

Available: http:// www. ed- data. org/ district/ Santa- Clara/ Mountain- View-Whisman.

Accessed April 26, 2022.

California Department of Education ( CDE) , 2022b. Los Altos Elementary School District.

Available: http://www.ed-data.org/district/Santa-Clara/Los-Altos-Elementary. Accessed July 12, 2022.

California Department of Education ( CDE) , 2022b. Springer Elementary School. Available:
http://www.ed-data.org/school/Santa-Clara/Los-Altos-Elementary/Springer-Elementary.

Accessed July 12, 2022.

City of Los Altos, 2021. Public Review Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration, 355 First Street Residential Project, November 2021. Available: https:// www. losaltosca. gov/ sites/ default/ files/ fileattachments/ community_ development/ page/ 49991 / 35 5_ first_st_public_ rev_is_ mnd. pdf. Accessed July 13, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2014. City ofMountain View Parks and Open Space Plan 2014.

Available: https:// www. mountainview. gov/civicax/ filebank/ blobdload. aspx? B1obID= 14762. Accessed April 25, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2021. Mountain View 2030 General Plan, adopted July 10, 2012, as amended through April 13, 2021.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 21 ESA 1202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View, 2022a. Fire. Available:
https:// www. mountainview. gov/ depts/ fire/ default. asp. Accessed April 25, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2022b. Police Department. Available:
https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/police/ contact/defauit.asp. Accessed April 25, 2022.

Los Altos School District ( LASD), 2022. Business Services. Available: www. lasdschools. org/ Dstrict/Department/ 147- Business- Services. Accessed July 12, 2022.

Mountain View Fire Department ( MVFD) , 2021. 2020- 2021 Annual Report Mountain View Fire Department. Available: https:// www. mountainview. gov/ documents/ MVFD/ Annual% 20 Repui L9620FY962020 21. p(If. Accessed Api ll 25, 2022.

Mountain View Los Altos Union High School District ( MVLA), 2020. LevenDevelupe! Pe Study for Mountain View -Los Altos Union High School District, July 2'I , 2020. Available: https:// www. mvla. net/documentsBusiness/ Fiscal-Services/ Development°/ o20Impact%20 Fees/ 2020%20Developer% 20Fee%20Justification% 20Study%20-%20MVLA% 20 7.

27. 20. pdf. Accessed April 25, 2022. Mountain
View Los Altos Union High School District (MVLA), 2022a. General Information. Available:
https://www. mvla. net/About- MVLA/ General- Information/ index. html. Accessed April 25, 2022. MVLA,
2022b. Mountain View Los Altos Union High School District Response tothe Notice of Preparation forthe EIR, March 8, 2022 ( Appendix A) . Mountain
View Police Department (MVPD), 2020. 2020 Annual Report. Available: https:// www. mountainview.gov/civicax/ filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID= 36134. Accessed April 25, 2022. Mountain
View Whisman School District (MVWSD), 2022a. Mountain View Whisman School District Facts & Figures. Available: https://www. mvwsd. org/about/ facts figures. Accessed April 25, 2022. MVWSD,
2022b. Level I Developer Fee Study for Mountain View Whisman School District, May 5, 2022, Available: https://pl2cdn4static. sharpschool.com/UserFiles/ Servers/Server_ 418774/ File/Business%20Dept/ DF%20Study% 20-%20MTVWhisman. pdf. Accessed April 25, 2022. MVWSD,
2022c. Mountain View Whisman School District Response to the Notice of Preparation for the EIR, March 14, 2022 ( Appendix A). City
of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 13- 22 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation

4. 14. 1 Introduction
This section assesses the potential for the HEU to result in significant adverse impacts on transportation. This section first includes a description of the existing transportation environmental setting, and provides a regulatory framework that discusses applicable federal, state, and local regulations. This section also includes an evaluation of potential significant impacts of the Project on transportation.

The Notice of Piepatntion ( NOP) l'or the l,',W was circulated on Fohruary 4, ?, U?,?,, and a scoping meeting was held on February 24, 2022. The NOP and the comments received during the public connneut period cdn be found in Appendix A of this EIR. Comments relating to transportation received during the NOP comment period include concerns related to reducing vehicles miles traveled (VMT), maintaining bicycle and pedestrian access during construction, and parking concerns.

Comment letters were received from the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority ( VTA), and the California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans), among other interested parties. VTA was concerned about the effects of added housing in areas not well -served by transit. Caltrans is requesting the project conform to the development requirements for projects near and adjacent to the State Transportation Network.

4. 14. 2 Environmental Setting
Existing Roadway Network
Regional access to Mountain View is provided via US 101, State Route 85 ( SR 85) and State Route 237 ( SR 237), which are designated as highways in the 2030 General Plan. Other major roadways in the City include expressways (Central Expressway), boulevards (El Camino Real) main streets ( Castro Street), major retail streets ( Shoreline Boulevard), and avenues ( Evelyn Avenue, N. Whisman Road, Middlefield Road, Ellis Street, Rengstorff Avenue, Moffett Boulevard etc.). These streets provide access to the Project sites. The roadway network serving Mountain View, including roadway classifications from the 2030 General Plan, is shown in Figure 4. 14- 1.

The key roadways providing access to the Project sites are described below:

US 101 is a north -south highway that extends through and beyond the Bay Area, connecting San Francisco to San Jose. In Mountain View, US 101 is eight to ten lanes wide with three mixed - flow lanes and one high -occupancy vehicle ( HOV) lane in each direction west of SR 85, and two express lanes in each direction east of SR 85.

SR 85 is a north -south highway that begins at US 101, east of N. Shoreline Boulevard, extends south towards San Jose, and terminates at US 101 cast of the Silicon Valley Boulevard/ Bernal Road interchange. SR 85 is six lanes wide (two mixed -flow lanes and one HOV lane in each direction) in the Mountain View area.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

Mountain View
LEGEN[
Element
muiu•use ra[nway tnxisungl
Multidlse Pathway ( Proposed)
Source: Mountain View 2030 General Plan - Adopted July 2012 - Revised 09- 24- 21

HEXAGON

FEDERAL
fELO
Figure 4. 14- 1
Roadway Classification
NORTH
Not to scale
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
SR 237 is a four -lane to six -lane highway within the vicinity of Mountain View that extends west to El Camino Real and east to I-880 in Milpitas. East of Mathilda Avenue, SR 237 has two mixed -flow lanes and one express lane in each direction. West of Mathilda Avenue, SR 237 has two mixed -flow lanes in each direction.

Central Expressway is an east -west, four -lane to six -lane expressway. It begins at Trimble Road in the east, crosses Sunnyvale, extends westward and transitions into Alma Street. In Mountain View, Central Expressway has two eastbound lanes and two westbound lanes and a posted speed limit of 50 mph. There are no sidewalks or bike lanes along Central Expressway, but bikes are allowed to ride on the shoulders. On -street parking is not permitted on this roadway El Camino heal (State Route 82) is a six -lane boulevard in the City of Mountain View that extends from Santa Clara County northerly to San Mateo County. In Mountain View, El Camino Real has a raised, landscaped median with left -turn pockets provided at intersections. On -street parking is mostly allowed on both sides of the street. The speed limit is 35 miles per hour (mph).

Middlefield Road is an east -west four -lane avenue in the City of Mountain View that runs parallel to US 101. It begins at the intersection of Central Expressway in Mountain View and traverses westward through Redwood City. Middlefield Road has landscaped medians with left - turn pockets at intersections and has bike lanes and sidewalks on both sides of the street. The speed limit is 35 mph.

Shoreline Boulevard is a north -south major retail street/ avenue in the City of Mountain View that extends northward from El Camino Real across US 101 to Shoreline Park at the bay side. The four -lane roadway has landscaped medians with left -turn pockets and bike lanes and sidewalks on both sides of the street.

Existing Bicycle Facilities
Existing bicycle facilities based on the City of Mountain View Interactive Bike Map ( 2020) are shown on Figure 4. 14- 2. The following types of facilities existing in the City:

Class I Bikeways/ Multi- Use Paths provide a completely separate right- of-way and are designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians, with vehicle and pedestrian crossflow minimized. In general, bike paths serve corridors where on -street facilities are not feasible or where sufficient right- of-way exists to allow them to be constructed.

Class II Bikeways/ On- Street Bike Lanes are dedicated lanes for bicyclists generally adjacent to the outer vehicle travel lanes. These lanes have special lane markings, pavement legends, and signage. Bicycle lanes are typically at least five feet wide. Adjacent vehicle parking and vehicle/ pedestrian crossflow are permitted. Class II buffered bike lanes provide greater separation from an adjacent traffic lane and/ or between the bike lane and on -street parking. This separation is created with chevron or diagonal striping.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

Mountain View
X
b" HUMON
Element
Figure 4. 14- 2
Existing Bicycle Facilities
NORTH

1. S- le
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Class III Bikeways/Bicycle Routes are designated by signs or pavement markings for shared use with pedestrians or motor vehicles but have no separated bike right- of-way or lane striping. Bike routes serve either to a) provide a connection to other bicycle facilities where dedicated facilities are infeasible, or b) designate preferred routes through high -demand corridors.

Class IV Bikeways/ Cycle tracks/ Protected On -Street Bike Lanes provide a right- of-way designated exclusively for bicycle travel within a roadway and are protected from other vehicle traffic by physical barriers, including, but not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible vertical barriers such as raised curbs, or parked cars.

Fxisting bicycle facilities within or adjacont to the Housing Flomont I Tpdato planning sitos include:

Class 1 multi -use paths include trails along Shoreline Park, Permanente Creek Trail, Stevens Creek Trail, trail between Alta Avenue and Shoreline Boulevard, Hetch Hetchy Trail, LRT Trail between Middlefield Road and Hetch Hetchy Right of Way, and trail along Shoreline Boulevard between Wright Avenue and Villa Street.

Class II bikeways/ on- street bike lanes include a network of bike lanes in the North Bayshore region along Crittenden Lane, Garcia Avenue, Amphitheater Parkway, Charleston Road, Shoreline Boulevard, and Shorebird Way. Bike lanes also present along Moffett Boulevard, Whisman Road, Ellis Street, Clyde Avenue, Maude Avenue, Evelyn Avenue, Sylvan Avenue, California Avenue, Showers Drive, and San Antonio Road. A part time bike lane is present along Middlefield Road.

Class III bike routes are present along Shoreline Boulevard north of Charleston Road, Dale Avenue, Rainbow Drive, Pioneer Way, Escuela Avenue, and Leong Drive.

Existing Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities in the City of Mountain View consist of sidewalks, curb ramps, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals at signalized intersections. Other pedestrian facilities include multi -use trails such as the Stevens Creek Trail, Hetch Hetchy Trail, and Permanente Creek Trail.

Most streets in Mountain View have sidewalks. The unimproved streets, that is streets lacking in sidewalks, curbs, or paved shoulder surface are located in residential neighborhoods south of El Camino Real and west of San Antonio Road.

The housing sites are proposed near the major streets in the City that have adequate pedestrian facilities.

Existing Transit Facilities
Existing transit service in Mountain View is provided by the Valley Transportation Authority VTA), which includes bus and light rail services, Caltrain, MVgo Shuttles, and the Mountain view Community Shuttle. The transit routes that provide services near the City ai:e shown on Figure 4. 14- 3 and described in Table 4. 14- 1.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 5 ESA/ 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

Mountain View Housing Element
Amphith e
a+- Crittenden Ln 101 eatr' -
t r'
0%
pkKY p. ......
c5 Charleston Rd r
a
Plymo4t T
Old Middlefield We'* f' earAva
i
eDo Ra Terra Bella Ave
Ie
O
Mountain y
N ell
VI/ U
q Ce fre/ OT y
Q..
g
e/
ham ° Fypr
FF
e
m
d
a° IViNash! h9tonAve
o
E
Can ino Rea/
o°
LEGEND
Housing Element Sites - - - - - -- MVgo Shuttle Route A l J Local Bus Route
MVgo Shuttle Route B
Bryant Ave
Rapid Bus Route
MVgo Shuttle Route C
W Remington Dr
MVgo Shuttle Route D
Expiese Bus Route MV Conirnunity Shuttle
Frequent Bus Route Caltrain Route
LRT Orange Line r Caltrain Station Figure 4. 14- 3
Existing Transit Services
uH HOON
NORTH m S.

4. Environmental
TABLE 4. 14- 1

EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES
Resolution No. 18755

and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Route Route Description Weekday Hours Headwaysa
of Operation ( minutes)
VTA Bus Routes
Local Route 21 Palo Alto Transit Center - Santa Clara Transit Center 5: 30 AM - 10: 00 PM 30 Local Route 22 Palo Alto Transit Center - Eastridge 4: 13 AM - 2: 59 AM next day)
15 Local Route 40 Foothill College - Mountain View Transit Center 6: 14 AM - 10: 28 PM 30 Local Route 51 Moffett Field - West Valley College 6: 09 AM - 7: 18 PM 30 1 tuxal Hot Ito b III
I oral Route. 52
MoIloll I- lold/ Anno. s « nIw lit; Arta (; ollago
Foothill Gollege - Mountain View Transit Center
uu AM 6: 481' M
7- 07 AM - 6. 31 PM
du
35 Local Route 53 Sunnyvale Transit Center- Santa Clara Transit Center 6: 18 AM - 7: 40 PM 30 - 35 Express 104 Milpitas BART - Stanford Research Park 6:07 AM - 7:58 AM 4: 02 PM - 5: 42 PM
30 - 50
Rapid Route 522 Palo Alto Transit Center - Eastridge 5: 20 AM - 11: 14 PM 15 MVgo Shuttleb and Mountain View Community Shuttle,
MVgo Shuttles (A, B, C, D) Mountain View Transit Center - Throughout 6: 28 AM - 10: 38 AM 20 - 45 Mountain view 2:49 PM - 8:50 PM
MV Community Shuttle Throughout Mountain View 7: 00 AM - 7: 00 PM 30 VTA Lioht Rail Transit and Caltrain Commuter Rail
LRT Orange Line Mountain View - Alum Rock 5: 51 AM - 12: 46 AM 20 next day)
Caltrain Gilroy - San Francisco 4:22 AM - 1: 46 AM 10 - 40 next day)
NOTES:
a Headways during weekday peak periods as of May 2022.
b Operated by Mountain View Transportation Management Association. It provides free transportation connections between the Mountain View Transit Center and location throughout the City.
c Operated by Mountain View and Google. It provides free transportation connections between many residential neighborhoods, senior residences and services, city offices, library, park and recreational facilities, medical offices, shopping centers, and entertainment venues throughout Mountain View.

4. 14. 3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Federal Highway Administration ( FHWA)
The FHWA is a major agency of the United States Department of Transportation. In partnership with State and local agencies, the FHWA carries out Federal highway programs to meet the Nation' s transportation needs. The FHWA administers and oversees Federal highway programs to ensure that Federal funds are used efficiently.

Americans with Disabilities Act
Titles I, II, III and V of the ADA have been codified in Title 42 of the United States Code, beginning at section 12 10 1. Title III prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in " places of public accommodation" ( businesses and non-profit agencies that serve the public) and commercial facilities" ( other businesses). The regulation includes Appendix A to Part 36 City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Standards for Accessible Design) establishing minimum standards for ensuring accessibility when designing and constructing a new facility or altering an existing facility. Examples of key guidelines include detectable warnings for pedestrians entering traffic where there is no curb, a clear zone of 48" inches for the pedestrian travel way, and a vibration -free zone for pedestrians.

State
California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans)
Caltrans has authority over the State highway system, including freeways, interchanges, and arterial State Routes. Caltrans approves the planning, design, and construction of improvements ot till Stato c uitiollod artlitiw, int lu thig Iltgliway 101, + taUA Routo ( SR) 0 ( P,i Camino Roal), SR 85, SR 237, and [ tie associated interchanges for tliese fatalities located iii Mountain View.

Caltrans requirements are doscribod in their Guide for the Preparation of l -affic Impact Studies Caltrans 2001), which covers the information needed for Caltrans to review the impacts on state highway facilities including freeway segments.

Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
The California Transportation Commission (CTC) administers transportation programming.

Transportation programming is the public decision -making process, which sets priorities and funds projects envisioned in long-range transportation plans. It commits expected revenues over a multi -year period to transportation projects. The State Transportation Improvement Program STIP) is a multi -year capital improvement program of transportation projects on and off the State Highway System, funded with revenues from the State Highway Account and other funding sources. The California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans) manages the operation of State Highways in Mountain View.

AB 32 and Senate Bill 375
As a means to achieve the Statewide emission reduction goals set by AB 32 (" The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006"), SB 375 (" The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008") directs the California Air Resources Board ( CARB) to set regional targets for reducing GHG emissions from cars and light trucks. Using the template provided by the State' s Regional Blueprint program to accomplish this goal, SB 375 seeks to align transportation and land use planning to reduce VMT through modified land use patterns.

There are five basic directives of the bill: 1) creation of regional targets for GHG emissions reductions tied to land use; 2) a requirement that regional planning agencies create a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) to meet those targets (or an Alternative Planning Strategy if the strategies in the SCS would not reach the target set by GARB); 3) a requirement that regional transportation funding decisions be consistent with the SCS; 4) a requirement that the Regional Housing Needs Allocation numbers for municipal general plan housing element updates must conform to the SCS; and 5) CEQA exemptions and streamlining for projects that conform to the SCS. The implementation mechanism for SB 375 that applies to land uses in Mountain View is Plan Bay Area 2050" adopted by the Association of Bay Area Governments ( ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission ( MTC) in 2021 ( see below).

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Senate Bill 743
On September 27, 2013, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 743. Among other things, SB 743 created a process for changing the analysis of transportation impacts under CEQA, with the analysis focusing on a project' s VMT rather than impacts on intersection level of service ( LOS).

On December 30, 2013, the Governor' s Office of Planning and Research ( OPR) released a preliminary evaluation of alternative methods for transportation analysis. The original guidance documentation was geared toward projects in areas that are designated as transit priority areas, followed by other areas of the state. OPR issued another draft discussion document in March 2015, suggesting some new revisions to the formal CEQA Guidelines. In January 2016, OPR issuod another guidance dncumont and roquested additional input. In 2018, the CFQA Guidelines were revised to reflect the process set forth in SB 743 and became effective later that year, and the VMT provisions of the updated CEQA Guidelines commenced on July 1, 2020 ( although lead agencies had the right to elect to be governed by these provisions earlier than July 1, 2020).

The CEQA Guidelines now identify VMT as the most appropriate metric for evaluating a project' s transportation impacts. With the California Natural Resources Agency' s certification and adoption of the changes to the CEQA Guidelines, automobile delay and congestion, as measured by LOS and other similar metrics, generally no longer constitutes a significant environmental effect under CEQA ( Public Resources Code Section 21099, subdivision [ b] [ 31). It should be noted that LOS is used outside of the CEQA document to evaluate other non- CEQA transportation impacts of development projects, such as congestion, circulation, and safety issues and concerns.

Regional
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission ( MTC) is responsible for planning, coordinating, and financing transportation projects in the nine county Bay Area. The local agencies that comprise these nine counties help the MTC prioritize projects based on need, feasibility, and conformance with federal and local transportation policies. In addition to coordinating with local agencies, the MTC distributes State and federal funding through the Regional Transportation Improvement Program ( RTIP).

Plan Bay Area
As required by SB 375, all metropolitan regions in California must complete a Sustainable Communities Strategy as part of a Regional Transportation Plan. Plan Bay Area 2050 is the sustainable community strategy for Oils region and integralLes Orauspurtatiou, land use and housing to meet greenhouse gas reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board and meets the requirements of SB 375. In addition, the plan sets a roadmap for future transportation investments and identifies what it would take to accommodate expected growth.

In the Bay Area, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments adopted the latest plan in 2021. Under Plan Bay Area 2050' s strategies, just under half of all Bay Area households would live within one half -mile of frequent transit by 2050, with City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
this share increasing to over 70% for households with low incomes. Transportation and environmental strategies that support active and shared modes, combined with a transit - supportive land use pattern, are forecasted to lower the share of Bay Area residents that drive to work alone from 50% in 2015 to 33% in 2050. Greenhouse gas emissions from transportation would decrease significantly as a result of these transportation and land use changes, and the Bay Area would meet the state mandate of a 19% reduction in per capita emissions by 2035.

Santa Clara County Congestion Management Program
VTA is responsible for maintaining the standards of the CMP roadway system in Santa Clara County ( Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority 2017). VTA strives to maintain LOS E on dll CMP monitored facilities. Based on V' I'A`s Guidelines, a CMP analysis shall be included in a transportation analysis if a proposed development project is expected to generate 100 net new weekday a.m. or p.m. peak hour trips. Projects that meet the 100 trip threshold, may require a CMP intersection analysis, CMP freeway analysis, and transit evaluation in conformance with the CMP standards.

Cities that fail to meet the LOS E standard on CMP facilities are required to prepare and maintain a Multimodal Improvement Plan (formerly Deficiency Plan). Mountain View adopted a Multimodal Improvement Plan in 2018.

Local
Mountain View 2030 General Plan
The Mountain View 2030 General Plan is the guiding document for the City's physical development and preservation. It includes goals, policies and graphics that convey a long- term vision and guide local decision - making to achieve that vision. The Mobility Element of the General Plan includes the following policies related to transportation (City of Mountain View, 2012).

Goal MOB- 1: Streets that safely accommodate all transportation modes and persons of all abilities.

Policy MOB- 1. 1: Multi -modal planning. Adopt and maintain master plans and street design standards to optimize mobility for all transportation modes.

Policy MOB- 1. 2: Accommodating all modes. Plan, design and construct new transportation improvement projects to safely accommodate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, motorists, and persons of all abilities.

Policy MOB- 1. 3: Pedestrian and bicycle placemaking. Promote pedestrian and bicycle improvements that improve connectivity between neighborhoods, provide opportunities for distinctive neighborhood features and foster a greater sense of community.

Policy MOB- 1. 4: Street design. Ensure street design standards allow a variety of public and private roadway widths.

Policy MOB-1. 5: Public accessibility. Ensure all new streets are publicly accessible.

Policy MOB-L6: Traffic calming. Provide traffic calming, especially in neighborhoods and around schools, parks and gathering places.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 10 ESA 1202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Goal MOB- 2: Transportation networks, facilities and services accessible to all people.

Policy MOB-2.1: Broad accessibility. Improve universal access within private developments and public and transit facilities, programs and services.

Goal MOB- 3: A safe and comfortable pedestrian network for people of all ages and abilities at all times.

Policy MOB- 3.1: Pedestrian network Increase connectivity through direct and safe pedestrian connections to public amenities, neighborhoods, village centers, and other destinations throughout the city.

Policy MOB- 3.2: Pedestrian connections. Increase contiectivily through direct and safe pedestrian connections to public amenities, neighborhoods, village centers and other destinations throughout tho city.

Policy MOB-3.3: Pedestrian and bicycle crossings. Enhance pedestrian and bicycle crossings at key locations across physical barriers.

Policy MOB- 3.4: Avoiding street widening. Preserve and enhance citywide pedestrian connectivity by limiting street widening as a means of improving traffic flow.

Policy MOB- 3. 5: Walking and bicycling outreach. Actively engage the community in promoting walking and bicycling through education, encouragement and outreach on improvement projects and programs.

Goal MOB- 4: A comprehensive and well -used bicycle network that comfortably accommodates bicyclists of all ages and skill levels.

Policy MOB- 4.1: Bicycle Network. Improve facilities and eliminate gaps along the bicycle network to connect destinations across the city.

Policy MOB-4.2: Planningfor bicycles. Use planning processes to identify or carry out improved bicycle connections and bicycle parking.

Policy MOB- 4.3: Public bicycle parking. Increase the amount of well -maintained, publicly accessible bicycle parking and storage throughout the city.

Policy MOB- 4.4: Bicycle Parking Standards. Maintain bicycle parking standards and guidelines for bicycle parking and storage in convenient places in private development to enhance the bicycle network.

Policy MOB- 4.5: Promoting safety. Educate bicyclists and motorists on bicycle safety Goal MOB- 5: Local and regional transit that is efficient, frequent, convenient and safe.

Policy MOB- 5.1: Transit agencies. Coordinate with local and regional transit agencies including Metropolitan Transportation Commission, VTA, JPB ( Caltrain), SamTrans and the California High -Speed Rail Authority to improve transportation service, infrastructure and access lit tltc Illy.

Policy MOB- 5.2: California High -Speed Rail. Actively participate with the California High Speed Rail Authority in planning any future high- speed rail service to address urban design, traffic, noise and compatibility issues.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 11 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Policy MOB- 5.3: Local transportation services Create or partner with transit providers, employers, educational institutions, major commercial entities and event organizers to improve local transportation services.

Policy MOB- 5.4: Connecting key areas. Identify and implement new or enhanced transit services to connect Downtown, El Camino Real, San Antonio, North Bayshore, East Whisman and NASA Ames Research Park.

Policy MOB-5.5: Access to transit services. Support right- of-way design and amenities consistent with local transit goals to make it easier to get to transit services and improve transit as a viable alternative to driving.

Policy MOB- 3. 6: Lmeiging technologies. Explore emerging transit technologies such as Petsundl Rdpid Twn%il and lheii t ilywide dltflli( A-bility Goal MOB- 6: Safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycling access to schools for all children.

Policy MOB- 6. 1: Safe routes to schools. Promote Safe Routes to Schools programs for all schools serving the city.

Policy MOB- 6.2: Prioritizing projects. Ensure that bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements include projects to enhance safe accessibility to schools.

Policy MOB- 6.3: Connections to trails. Connect schools to the citywide trail systems.

Policy MOB- 6.4: Education. Support education programs that promote safe walking and bicycling to schools.

Goal MOB-7: Innovative strategies to provide efficient and adequate vehicle parking.

Policy MOB- 7.1: Parking Codes. Maintain efficient parking standards that consider reduced demand due to development conditions such as transit accessibility.

Policy MOB- 7.2: Off-street Parking. Ensure new off-street parking is properly designed and efficiently used.

Policy MOB- 7.3: Public parking management. Manage parking so that adequate parking is available for surrounding uses.

Goal MOB-8: Transportation performance measures that help implement larger City Goals.

Policy MOB- 8.1: Multi -modal performance measures. Develop performance measures and indicators for all modes of transportation, including performance targets that vary by street type and location.

Policy MOB-8.2: Level ofservice. Ensure performance measurement criteria optimize travel by each mode.

Policy MOB-8.3: Multi -modal transportation monitoring. Monitor the effectiveness of pullcles to reduce velticle inlles ttdveled (VMT) per set vice populdtiun by establishing transportation mode share targets and periodically comparing travel survey data to established targets.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Goal MOB-10: The most effective use of the city' s transportation networks and services.

Policy MOB 10. 1: Efficient automobile infrastructure. Strive to maximize the efficiency of existing automobile infrastructure and manage major streets to discourage cut through traffic on neighborhood streets.

Policy MOB 10.2: Reduced travel demand Promote effective TDM programs for existing and new development.

Policy MOB 10.3: Avoidance ofstreet widening. Limit widening of streets as a means of improving traffic and focus instead on operational improvements to preserve community character
Policy MOB 10.4: Emergency response. Monitor emergency response times and review etneigenc:y respottsc titrte standaids.

Goal MOB- 11: Well -maintained transportation infrastructure.

Policy MOB-11. 1: Funding. Ensure sustainable funding levels for maintaining all city transportation infrastructure.

Policy MOB- 11. 2: Prioritized existing facilities. Prioritize maintenance and enhancement of existing facilities over expansion.

Policy MOB- 11. 3: Facility types. Maintain and enhance walking, bicycling and transit related facilities to address community needs.

Policy MOB-11. 4: Life -cycle costs. Examine life -cycle costs when comparing project alternative in order to make the best use of limited City resources.

Mountain View Vehicle Miles Travelled Policy
In June 2020, the City of Mountain View City Council adopted a citywide VMT policy. The policy contains screening criteria to identify projects that are presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact. Screening criteria in the Mountain View VMT policy include criteria for:

Small projects (projects consisting of 12 or fewer single-family housing units, 20 or less multi -family housing units, and office developments of 10, 000 square feet or less), Projects located in areas with low VMT ( VMT that is 15 percent or greater below the regional average) , and,
Projects that are located within one- half mile of a major transit stop.

The policy also stablishes land use -specific baselines and thresholds for evaluating transportation impacts of project types that do not meet the screening criteria. The policy establishes the Nine - County Bay Area regional reference VMT baseline and a 15 percent threshold of significance for residential and office projects.

Mountain View Bicycle Transportation Plan Update
The Mountain View Bicycle Transportation Plan Update provides a vision for improving and encouraging bicycle travel in and through Mountain View ( City of Mountain View 2015). It City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 13 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
contains an analysis of existing bicycle facilities and provides recommendations for specific areas where facilities could be improved or expanded. The plan includes objectives, strategies, and performance measures to guide improvements to the City' s bicycle facilities, using the following categories: bicycle network; ridership; bicycle community; education, encouragement, and enforcement; and maintenance.

Mountain View Pedestrian Master Plan
The Mountain View Pedestrian Master Plan provides a vision for improving and encouraging pedestrian travel in Mountain View ( City of Mountain View 2014). It contains an analysis of existing pedestrian facilities and provides recommendations for specific areas where facilities could be unpiuved ui expanded.

City of Muu tai View Sta ula d Cu didwis ufAppiuval
As part of discretionary review, the City has standard conditions for different types of approvals updated as of October 25, 2021). The City has standard conditions relating to transportation, as summarized below.

Transportation Demand Management ( TDM) Program
Depending on the project description, some future residential projects might not need to prepare TDM plans. However, in most cases the property owner, property manager( s), and home -owners association ( HOA) or their representative( s) ( collectively, " the owners") are required to maintain a TDM program to achieve a reduction of inbound and outbound peak -hour vehicle trips generated by the site. Elements of the TDM program may provide commute and transportation alternatives to employees/ residents of the project for the life of the project. The TDM program measures shall be formally accepted by the property owners prior to building permit issuance through a legal agreement or recorded document, as determined by the City Attorney, with contents to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator. The Property owner, or tenant, shall prepare an annual TDM report and submit it to the City as proven effectiveness of its TDM program in meeting its peak -hour vehicle trip limit. The City may assess the property owner a penalty for noncompliance to the agreed upon TDM goals and associated monitoring activities.

Should a conflict arise between project -specific TDM conditions or a citywide TDM ordinance forthcoming), the latter will supersede. Mandatory TDM measures for the project may include:
a. Join and maintain ongoing membership in the MVTMA for the life of the project. b. Provide and maintain maximum vehicle parking and minimum bike parking as approved in the project, as well as end -of -trip facilities for bicyclists including showers and changing rooms. Access to shared bicycles for residents/ employees will also be provided and maintained, if a bike -share service is not nearby.
c. Provide conveniently located ride -share drop- off and waiting areas on -site. d. Provide and maintain shared, common, collaborative workspaces with WiFi for residents and their guests This amenity can he offered in partnership with nearby residents and businesses. e. Provide monetary incentives for alternative mode of travel, such as subsidized transit passes or bike -share for residents and/ or unbundled parking.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 14 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
f. Provide and maintain accessible and secure storage spaces for package delivery on -site. g. Provide local transportation information to all residents through a website, leasing office, and/ or initial sale information.
h. Support Safe Routes to Schools programs, including facilitating parent gatherings and coordination of walking, school buses, and/ or bike trains. i. Provide onsite charging facilities for Electric Vehicles j. Reserve priority parking stalls for approved carpool and vanpool vehicles k Other TDM measures as directed by the Planning Department Transportation Impact fee
Prior to issuance of any building permits and prior to approval of the parcel or final map, the applicant shall pay the transportation impact fee for the development. Residential category fees are based on the number of units. Retail, Service, Office, R& D, and Industrial category fees are based on the square footage of the development. Credit is given for the existing site use( s), as applicable.

Traffic Control Plans
A traffic control plan guides pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists safely through a work zone and is a requirement for any construction within the public right- of-way.

Upon submittal of the initial building permit and improvement plans, the applicant shall submit traffic control plans for any off -site and on -site improvements or any work that requires temporary lane closure, shoulder closure, bike lane closure, and/ or sidewalk closure for review and approval. Sidewalk closures are not allowed unless reconstruction of sidewalk necessitates temporary sidewalk closure. In these instances, sidewalk detour should be shown on the Traffic Control plans. Traffic control plans shall be prepared in accordance with the latest edition of the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices ( CA MUTCD) . A completed Traffic Control Checklist shall be included with each traffic control plan submittal.

Corner Street Sight Triangle
At street corners of controlled and/ or uncontrolled intersections, the site shall be compliant with Corner Triangles of Safety per the Public Works Standard Details and to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The project will be required to remove or modify all objects, including, but not limited to landscape, hardscape, poles, bollards, monument signs, mailbox banks/ cluster, planters, retaining walls, seat walls, bicycle racks, partitions, miscellaneous structures ( including columns), parking stalls, bicycle racks, etc., that are not compliant with safety triangle height and clearance requirements. Artwork, benches, tables, chairs, bicycle racks, and planters shall not be installed in this safety area. No new trees are permitted to be planted within the sight triangle.

Driveway or Side Street Sight Triangle
Sight triangles are the specified areas at intersections or driveways that should be clear of obstructions that may block a driver' s view of conflicting vehicles or pedestrians.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 15 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Within the pedestrian and/ or vehicle traffic safety sight triangle( s), for the project site and adjacent properties, the site shall be compliant with height and clearance requirements per the Public Works Standard Details and to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The project is required to remove or modify all objects, including, but not limited to landscape, hardscape, poles, bollards, signs, mailboxes, planters, retaining walls, seat walls, bicycle racks, partitions, buildings, and other structures, parking stalls, etc., that are not compliant with safety triangle height and clearance requirements.

Construction Management Plan
i Tpon submittal of the initial building permit and all subsequent building permit submittals, the applicant shall provide a construction traffic and parking management plan with the building plans. The plan must be approved prior to the issuance of a building perntlt, Including demolition.

The plan must show the following:

1. Truck Route: Truck route ( to and from project site) for construction and delivery trucks pursuant to City Code Sections 19. 58 and 19. 59 and which does not include neighborhood residential streets;
Construction Phasing Equipment, Storage, and Parking Show and identify construction vehicle and equipment parking area, material storage and lay -down area, sanitation facilities, and construction trailer location for each phase of construction. All construction vehicles, equipment, and trailer shall be located on -site or at a site nearby (not on a public street or public parking) arranged by the permittee/contractor. Construction equipment, materials, or vehicles shall not be stored or parked on public streets or public parking lots, unless approved by the Public Works Director due to special conditions. Construction contractors/ workers are required to park on -site or at a private property arranged by the permittee/contractor and shall not be allowed to use neighboring streets for parking/ storage; and

3. Sidewalks: Sidewalk closure or narrowing is not allowed during any on -site construction activities.

Traffic Control and Detour Plans: Traffic control plans, including detour plans, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval and included with building permit plans to the Building Inspection Division for any on -site improvements and/ or work related to any phase of the construction management plan that requires temporary roadway closure, lane closure, shoulder closure, and/or bike lane closure.

Pedestrian detour plans shall be provided when necessary. Traffic control plans shall be prepared in accordance with the latest edition of the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices ( CA MUTCD). A completed Traffic Control Checklist shall be included with each traffic control plan submittal. A separate Excavation Permit from the Public Works Department may be required prior to issuance of the building permit.

4. 14.4 Significance Criteria
The thresholds used to determine the significance of impacts related to transportation are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of the Project could have a significant impact on the environment if it would:

Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064. 3, subdivision ( b). For the purposes of this evaluation, this impact would be significant, if the implementation of the HEU would generate home -based VMT per resident within the HEU sites and development areas that is higher than 85 percent of the regional average home -based VMT per resident.

Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature ( e. g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses ( e. g., farm equipment).

Result in inadequate emergency access.

Scenarios Analyzed
The IIFI1 % plauuitig Cur the Ijeiiud I' miu Jauuary 31, M,23 through Innuary 31, 2031, and is expected to plan for approximately 15, 000 new housing units within this period. Of the approximately 15, 000 new units, only a small percentage would result from changes in City policy, zoning, or Precise Plans, and the balance could theoretically occur with or without the Project because it is consistent with existing policy, zoning, and Precise Plans.

The Project scenario has an analysis year of 2031, since that is the horizon of the Housing Element, and all the proposed units are expected to be built by that time. In addition, a cumulative scenario is also studied, which looks at the difference between the buildout ofthe City without and with the proposed General Plan, Zoning and Precise Plan Amendments.

Table 4. 14- 2 below presents growth projections used in this analysis and shows the amount of growth attributable to the Project and to cumulative growth and development.

TABLE 4. 14- 2

MOUNTAIN VIEW GROWTH PROJECTIONS
HEU
Existing 2031 Cumulative Contribution Cumulative
Baseline Under Proposed HEU Conditions with Growth no to Cumulative Growth with 2020) Construction 2021- 2031) Proposed HEU HEU Growth3 HEU Dwelling Units 37, 820 1, 847 15, 000 54, 700 63, 000 4, 100 67, 100 Population' 82, 826 3, 740 30, 000 116, 600 134, 000 8, 200 142, 200 Jobs 101, 965 8, 800 1
Oz 1
120, 000 133, 000 1
02 133, 000
SOURCE: City of Mountain View, 2022; Draft EIR Table 3- 2, see Chapter 3, Project Description.

The City of Mountain View citywide VMT policy contains screening criteria to identify projects that are presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact. Development projects may be exempt from additional VMT analysis under the City' s VMT guidelines, which provide various screening criteria to exempt residential projects from VMT include:

Small Project Screening: Single-family residential development of 12 units or fewer, multifamily residential development of 20 units or fewer, or office developments of 10,000 square feet or less.

Map -Based Screening: Residential land use projects located in areas of low VMT, defined as exhibiting VMT that is 15 percent or greater below the existing Nine -County Bay Area regional reference average VMT.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Transit Screening: All projects located within one- half mile of a major transit stop, or a stop along a high -quality transit corridor, pursuant to State definitions for such facilities, unless any of the following factors are exhibited by the project:

Floor Area Ratio ( FAR) of less than 0. 75;
Inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy ( SCS); Provides trtore pdtkittg tlratt required by the jurisdiction; or Replaces affordable housing with a fewer number of moderate or high -income residential units Affordable housing developments with 100 percent affordable units, either in a low VMT area or within r/2- mile of an existing major transit stop or within Y2- mile of a highquedity tiwisit corridor.

Affordable Housing Screening: Projects with 100 percent affordable housing.

4. 14. 5 Impacts of the Project
Impact TRA- 1: Implementation of the HEU would not conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. (Less - than significant)
Implementation of the HEU would be subject to and implement General Plan policies applicable to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and service. Additionally, development projects under the HEU would be subject to all applicable City guidelines, standards, and specifications related to transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities.

Project Design
Specifically, any modifications or new transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would be subject to and designed in accordance with all applicable General Plan policies. In particular, General Plan Policy MOB- 1. 2 promotes the planning, design and construction of new transportation improvement projects to safely accommodate the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, motorists, and persons of all abilities.

Mobility
Policy MOB 1. 3 promotes pedestrian and bicycle improvements that improve connectivity between neighborhoods, provide opportunities for distinctive neighborhood features and foster a greater sense of community; Policy MOB 1. 6 provides traffic calming, especially in neighborhoods and around schools, parks and gathering places.

Policy MOB 2. 1 requires improving universal access within private developments and public and transit facilities, programs and services; Policy MOB- 3. 1 increases connectivity through direct and safe pedestrian connections to public amenities, neighborhoods, village centers, and other destinations throughout the City.

Bicycles
Policy MOB- 4. 1 improves facilities and eliminates gaps along the bicycle network to connect destinations across the city; Policy MOB- 4. 4 maintains bicycle parking standards and guidelines City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 1 8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
for bicycle parking and storage in convenient places in private development to enhance the bicycle network.

Transit and Regional Transportation
Policy MOB- 5. 1 requires coordination with local and regional transit agencies including Metropolitan Transportation Commission, VTA, JPB ( Caltrain), SamTrans and the California High -Speed Rail Authority to improve transportation service, infrastructure and access in the city; Policy MOB- 5. 4 requires identification and implementation of new or enhanced transit services to connect Downtown, El Camino Real, San Antonio, North Bayshore, East Whisman and NASA Ames Research Park; Policy MOB- 5. 5 supports right-of-way design and amenities consistent with local transit goals to make It easler to get to ttanslt set vices end inip[ ove ttdnsit as d viable alternative to driving,
Smart Technology
Policy MOB- 5. 6 explores emerging transit technologies such as Personal Rapid Transit and their citywide applicability.

Schools
Policy MOB- 6. 1 promotes Safe Routes to Schools programs for all schools serving the City.

Accountability
Policy MOB- 8. 1 requires developing performance measures and indicators for all modes of transportation, including performance targets that vary by street type and location.

The City has also adopted a Bicycle Transportation Plan Update ( adopted November 2015) and a Pedestrian Master Plan ( adopted January 2014), which establishes the City' s vision for a network of bicycle and pedestrian facilities to encourage bicycling and walking as viable modes of travel around the City. The Plan identifies specific improvement projects around the City to improve the walking and bicycling environment. The bicycle plan and pedestrian plan propose new or upgraded bicycle/ pedestrian facilities and intersection improvements along major roads in the City including El Camino Real, Shoreline Boulevard, Moffett Boulevard, Middlefield Road, San Antonio Road, Logue Avenue, Maude Avenue, and Whisman Road near which the proposed housing sites are located.

The proposed HEU sites are also served by transit in the City as shown in Figure 4. 14- 3. The transit services in the vicinity of the proposed housing sites include the MVgo Shuttles, VTA rapid route 522, VTA frequent route 22, VTA local route ( 21, 40, 52), VTA LRT Orange Line, and Caltrain.

Because implementation of the HEU would be subject to all applicable City guidelines, standards, and specifications, the proposed HEU would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs for transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. Therefore, the HEU would result in a less than significant impact to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

Mitigation: None required.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 19 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Impact TRA- 2: Implementation of the HEU would not exceed an applicable VMT threshold of significance. ( Less than significant with Mitigation) Residential projects are evaluated based on the home -based VMT per resident metric. Home - based VMT is defined as all home -based automobile vehicle trips traced back to the residence of the trip -maker and includes the entire length of the trip. The home -based VMT is then divided by the population to calculate home based VMT per resident. Using the VTA' s travel demand modol VMT data and the State' s guideline, the City of Mountain View adopted the regional ( nine Bay Area Counties) home -based VMT per resident as the baseline for VMT analysis. VMT' s are calculated at the traffic analysis zone (TAZ) level. A TAZ is a unit of geography that contains land Use attributCS Such as number of housing units, tlttinber oI atlll mobiles per household, hotiselttlld incorne, and employment within these zones.

The VTA Model estimated that the baseline average regional VMT per resident is 14. 0 ( 13. 95).

Residential projects located in areas with low VMT near high -quality transit that incorporate transit -supporting features ( i.e., density, diversity of uses, distance to multimodal facilities, and demographics) will result in low VMT. The VTA Model was also used to estimate the VMT per resident for each TAZ in Mountain View. The VMT per resident for each TAZ in Mountain View are then compared with the regional average and the results are displayed in a " heatmap," a map that provides a graphical representation of data using color.

This heatmap, which is the basis of the Mountain View' s adopted VMT policy, is shown on Figure 4. 14- 4 and is used as the CEQA transportation screening map for residential projects. The map shows the locations of the HEU sites ( Approved Pipeline Projects and Opportunity Sites).

Most HEU sites are located in low VMT areas ( green areas on the map). The VMT per resident in these areas is less than 85% of the regional VMT per resident ( VMT below 11. 9) which means that proposed residential developments in these areas would have a less than significant VMT impact and no mitigation would be required.

The areas in yellow indicate that the VMT per resident is higher than 85 percent but still lower than the regional VMT per resident. The VMT per resident would vary between 12. 0 and 14. 0.

Proposed residential developments in these yellow areas potentially could have a significant VMT impact and require mitigation, including transportation demand management (TDM), multimodal improvements or reduced parking. Mitigation Measure TRA-1, Implement VMT Reduction Measures, would ensure that VMT per resident is less than 85% of the regional VMT per resident. Requirements for sites within the North Bayshore and East Whisman Precise Plan areas are discussed below.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4, 14- 20 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

01 L7-- j
O
0 3, 500
Feet
SOURCE: ESRI, 2022.

ESA
v
Neighborhoods
1 City of Mountain View
Q Neighborhoods
Approved Pipeline Project
100% Affordable Housing
Project
Other Approved
Opportunity Sites
Pending Projects - No
NASA Ames Rezoning Required
Federal)
Pending Projects -
Rezoning Required
Opportunity Site -
koioniny Reoulled
Opportunity Site ( No
iezuniny)
Rezone Area for General
IIIIIIIII Plan Village Center Ste
TAM., Rezone Area for El
deral) Camino Real Village
Center Site
Precise Plan
OEast Whisman
Q North Bayshore
Variation from from 9- County
Regional Average VMT Per
Capita ( 2020)
Below 11. 9 - Below
threshold ( 15% below
average)
12 - 14. 0 - Below regional
average
City of Mountain View
Figure 4. 14- 4
All Housing Sites and VMT per Capita
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Some residential development may occur on retail sites. In many cases ( such as General Plan Village Centers and El Camino Real Village Centers) the retail development would be replaced on -site as part of a mixed -use residential/ retail development. However, in some cases, the retail development would be removed. This would tend to occur on underutilized retail parcels.

Nevertheless, some reduction in retail square footage could occur, in which case customers would need to seek out the next closest retail establishment, which could increase trip lengths. Since Mountain View has several retail centers in proximity, especially on El Camino Real and San Antonio Road where these cases are most likely to occur, the increase in retail trip lengths is expected to be minor or non- existent. Therefore, the impact on citywide retail VMT is expected to be negligible. Also, the Mountain View VMT policy exempts local -serving retail from VMT analysis. For these reasons, the VMT impact of a potential small reduction in retail space would be less than significant.

East Whisman Precise Plan
A portion of the. Fast Whisman Precise Plan, which was adopted by the Mountain View City Council on November 5, 2019, is located in the large yellow area on the eastern edge of Mountain View. Most of this area is screened out of VMT analysis based on its access to VTA light rail.

However, in the case of lower FAR development or other conditions that would exclude the project from such screening, the East Whisman Precise Plan includes a range of Residential Transportation Demand Management ( TDM) Standards to limit vehicle miles traveled, such as:

T • TMA Membership. New residential developments with at least 100 units shall become Mountain View' s Transportation Management Association ( TMA) members. The TMA is sponsored by Mountain View businesses and landowners, including property owners in the North Bayshore and East Whisman areas. The key purpose of the TMA is to help its members and the surrounding community reduce vehicle congestion and improve connectivity by pooling resources and developing coordinated transportation strategies.

TDM Plans. All new residential projects shall have a TDM plan with programs and measures to achieve trip -reduction consistent with the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program, or other City trip -reduction standard.

TDM Monitoring. Annual TDM monitoring will be conducted to ensure peak parking demand is not exceeded. It will include parking counts to measure the peak parking demand and resulting parking rate.

Monitoring Results. Annual monitoring results shall be submitted to the City for review.

The report will include a description of the measures in place and any new or modified measures since the last monitoring period. Ifthe required trip -reduction standard is not met, a revised TDM plan will be submitted to the City identifying new programs or polices to address the exceedance and reduce the number of vehicle trips.

Maximum Parking. A portion of the Precise Plan that covers the yellow area on the map has maximum parking ratios for residential development. These developments are not permitted parking greater than 1 stall per studio or 1- bedroom unit or 2 stalls per 2 bedroom or larger unit.

In addition, the Precise Plan includes a broad range of multimodal improvements intended to facilitate non -automobile travel within the area. Development in the Precise Plan would build City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 22 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
improvements on their frontage and would pay an impact fee to help build other improvements in the area.

Implementation of these TDM Standards, parking standards and multimodal improvements would likely meet the Tier 1 though Tier 4 mitigation measures. This means residential development in East Whisman that is not already screened out would result in a less than significant impact with mitigation for the HEU sites located in the Fast Whisman Specific Plan area, North Bayshore Precise Plan
The North Bayshore Precise Plan is located in the large yellow area on the northern edge of Muutrtetut View. Thu Noi di BayshoreRMsidontial TDff Cuidelines report provide-, direction on how to implement and monitor a transportation demand management ( TDM) program for future residential developments in North Bayshore. The document provides:

A summary overview of the North Bayshore Residential TDM Guidelines, Context for a TDM program for residential development in North Bayshore, Detailed TDM strategies that new residential developments are required to implement, as well as additional best practices to further reduce parking and vehicle trip generation, A description of the tools to effectively monitor the TDM program and ensure that the program complies with City of Mountain View monitoring requirements.

To minimize vehicle trips and improve multimodal access to and within North Bayshore, the City of Mountain View requires residential projects of 10 or more units to meet a Residential vehicle trip performance standard. Residential projects in North Bayshore will need to limit the number of vehicles coming in and out of their site during the morning and evening peak hour periods.

A residential mode split target. The residential mode split target means developments should aim for at least 50% of daily project trips to be made by non -driving transportation modes.

Maximum parking standards. The maximum parking allowances for new residential development in North Bayshore as specified in the Precise Plan includes 0. 5 parking spaces for one -bedroom units and one parking space for two and three bedroom units.

Implementation of these TDM measures would likely meet the Tier 1 though Tier 4 mitigation measures. This means residential development not already screened out of VMT analysis would result in a less than significant impact with mitigation for the HEU sites located in the North Bayshore Specific Plan area.

Mitigation Measure TRA- 1: Implement VMT Reduction Measures.

Individual multifamily housing development proposals that do not screen out from VMT impact analysis shall provide a quantitative VMT analysis using the methods outlined by the City' s most recent VMT guidelines. Projects that result in a significant impact shall include travel demand management measures and/ or physical measures ( i.e. improving multimodal transportation network, improving street connectivity) to reduce VMT. The City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 23 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
City' s VMT guidelines identify four tiers of mitigation measures, all of which can be quantified within the VTA VMT tool:

Tier 1— Project Characteristics. Although it may be difficult to revise a project during environmental review, Tier 1 strategies allow the user to increase the project density, diversity of land uses, and add affordable and/ or below -market -rate housing to the residential and employment projects to reduce VMT.

Tier 2— Multi- Modal Network Improvements. These improvements include implementing bicycle lanes, improving the pedestrian network, implementing traffic calming, increasing transit accessibility, and improving network connectivity. These improvements require coordination with Mountain View staff and additional studies sigiial warrant allies, traffic calming studies, etc.) to drtrrmtn(,. feasibility.

Consultants should prioritize public improvements included in the City' s approved plans which contain various transportation improvements to hicycle) pedestrian, and roadway facilities as VMT mitigation. ( See above for list of adopted plans and policies.)
Tier 3— Parking. Parking strategies shown to effectively reduce VMT include reduced parking, increased bike parking or end -of -trip bike facilities. In order to be most effective, the areas surrounding the projects with reduced parking should have parking permit programs.

Tier 4— Travel Demand Management ( TDM) There are a multitude of TDM measures to reduce VMT. The VMT Tool includes all allowable TDM measures and their relative effectiveness. Based on the percentage of participation selected by the user, the VMT Tool calculates the resulting VMT reduction. The various TDM measures in the VMT Tool include school carpool programs, bike -sharing programs, car -sharing programs, trip reduction marketing/ educational campaigns, parking cash - out, subsidized transit, telecommuting, alternative work schedules, shuttles, pay to park, ride -sharing, unbundled parking, and subsidized vanpools.

Significance after Mitigation: Less than Significant.

Impact TRA-3: Implementation ofthe HEU would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. ( Less than significant) Subsequent projects under the HEU, including any new roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit infrastructure improvements would be designed according to the General Plan and other City transportation standards and subject to existing regulations that reduce or minimize hazardous conditions. With the adoption of the VMT policy, the City also established the requirement for a Multimodal Transportation Analysis ( MTA) which includes an evaluation of projects' access and circulation, vehicular level of service and queueing, and an evaluation of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit conditions. Therefore, the HEU would result in a less than significant impact to transportation hazards.

Mitigation: None required.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 24 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Impact TRA-4: Implementation ofthe HEU would not result in inadequate emergency access. ( Less than significant)
The General Plan and other City standards and regulations ( including the City' s Standard Conditions of Approval) include policies that would ensure efficient circulation and adequate access are provided in the City, which would help facilitate emergency response. All redevelopment including those in the HEU are subject to existing policies that ensure efficient circulation and adequate access.

Additional vehicles associated with new development sites could increase delays for emergency response vehicles during peak commute hours. However, emergency responders maintain response plutis that include use of ultetnutc tunic,, sirens Lu d other inetho& to byputis ruttgewttolt and minimize response times. In addition, California law requires driver,; to yield the right of way to emergency vehicles and remain stopped until the emergency vehicle passes to ensure the safe and timely passage of emergency vehicles.

Based on the above considerations, adequate emergency access would be provided to new development sites, and the impact would be less than significant. See Section 4. 8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, for further information regarding emergency access and egress.

Mitigation: None required.

4. 14.6 Cumulative Impacts
This section presents an analysis of the cumulative effects of the HEU in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development that could cause cumulatively significant impacts. Significant cumulative impacts related to transportation could occur if the incremental impacts of the HEU combined with the incremental impacts of cumulative development would be significant, and if the HEU' s contribution would be considerable.

Cumulative development projections are included in the project description and described in Section 4. 0. 3, Cumulative Impacts.

Impact TRA-LCU: Implementation of the HEU, in combination with cumulative development, would not conflict with an applicable program, plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. ( Less than significant) The findings of Impact TRA- 1. CU are identical to Impact TRA- 1. Because implementation of the HEU would be subject to all applicable City guidelines, standards, and specifications, the proposed HEU would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs for transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. Therefore, the HEU, in combination with cumulative development, would result in a less than significant impact to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

Mitigation: None required.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 25 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
Impact TRA- 2. 11CU: Implementation of the HEU, in combination with cumulative development, would not exceed an applicable VMT threshold of significance. ( Less than significant with Mitigation)
As discussed under Impact TRA-2, the HEU Plan' s sites in the green areas of the VMT heat map shown in Figure 4. 14- 4 would screen out because residential developments in these areas experience VMT per resident that are at least 15 percent below the regional VMT per resident.

Residential HEU sites that are located in the yellow areas can be mitigated by implementing the mitigation measures identified in Mitigation Measure TRA- 1. Therefore, the HEU Plan sites, in combination with cumulative developments, would also result in a less than significant VMT luilla l W llh ttllll} aatllult
Mitigation Measure TRA- LCU: Implement VMT Reduction Measures. ( See Impact TRA- 2 above)
Impact TRA- 3. CU: Implementation of the HEU, in combination with cumulative development, would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. ( Less than Significant)
Impact discussion is identical to Impact TRA-3. New development — including development allowed by the HEU -- is subject to review for conformance with design standards and specifications which address potential design hazards including sight distance, driveway placement, and signage and striping. The HEU, in combination with cumulative development, would result in a less than significant impact to transportation hazards.

Mitigation: None required.

Impact TRA-4. CU: Implementation of the HEU, in combination with cumulative development, would not result in inadequate emergency access. ( Less than Significant) Impact discussion is identical to Impact TRA-4. New development — including development allowed by the HEU -- is subject to review for conformance with design standards and specifications which address emergency access. The HEU, in combination with cumulative development, would result in a less than significant impact to emergency access.

Mitigation: None required.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 26 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation

4. 14. 7 Summary of Transportation Impacts
Significance Before Significance After
Impact Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation
Impact TRA- 1: Implementation of The HEU Less than Significant None required would not conflict with an applicable program,
plan, ordinance, or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the performance
of addressing the circulation system, including
transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

Impact TRA- 2: Implementation of the HEU Potentially Mitigation Measure Less than would exceed an applicable VMT threshold of Significant TRA- 1: Implement Significant with significance. VMT Reduction Mitigation
Mt: a tit 11 f' s
Impact I RA- 3: Implementation of the H1- 1. 1 I ess than Significant None required would not substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature or incompatible
uses.

Impact TRA-4: Implementation of the HEU Less than Significant None required would not result in inadequate emergency
access.

Impact TRA- 1. CU: Implementation of the HEU, Less than Significant None required in combination with cumulative development,
would not conflict with an applicable program,
plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures
of effectiveness for the performance of
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

Impact TRA- 2. CU: Implementation of the HEU, Potentially Mitigation Measure Less than in combination with cumulative development, Significant TRA- 1. CU: Significant with would exceed an applicable VMT threshold of Implement VMT Mitigation significance. Reduction Measures
Impact TRA- 3. CU: Implementation of the HEU, Less than Significant None required in combination with cumulative development,
would not substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature or incompatible
uses.

Impact TRA- 4. CU: Implementation of the HEU, Less than Significant None required in combination with cumulative development,
would not result in inadequate emergency
access.

4. 14. 8 References
City of Mountain View, 2021. Mountain View 2030 General Plan, adopted July 10, 2012, as amended through April 13, 2021.

City of Mountain View, 2021. Multi -Model Transportation Analysis Handbook, Version 1. 0, adopted February 2021.

City of Mountain View, 2019. East Whisman Precise Plan adopted November 5, 2019, Amended October 13, 2020.

City of Mountain View, 2017. North Bayshore Precise Plan adopted December 12, 2017 City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 27 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 14 Transportation
City of Mountain View, 2015, Bicycle Transportation Plan Update, adopted November 2015.

City of Mountain View, 2014. Mountain View Pedestrian Master Plan.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 14- 28 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
15 Utilities and Service Systems

4. 15. 1 Introduction
This section assesses the potential for the HEU to result in significant adverse impacts on utilities and service systems. This section first includes a description of the existing environmental setting as it relates to utilities and service systems, and provides a regulatory framework that discusses applicable federal, state, and local regulations. This section also includes an evaluation of potential significant impacts ofthe HEU on utilities and service systems.

The Notice of Preparation ( NOP) foi the EIR w is c hc, ulated on Foblluary 4, 2022 and a scoping ineethrp was held oii Febru fry 24, 2022. The NOP rind the t onunents tee eived dtti ing the ptiblic comment period can be found in Appendix A of this EIR. No comments relaiing to utilities and service systems were received during the NOP comment period.

4. 15. 2 Environmental Setting
Water
Water Distribution
The City owns, operates, and maintains a potable water distribution system that serves water throughout Mountain View. Several small pockets within the City are served by neighboring Cal Water. The City' s municipal water system services three pressure zones and consists of three wholesale water turnouts, four reservoirs, three pump stations, four active groundwater supply wells, and buried pipes of varying composition, ages and sizes ( City of Mountain View, 2021a).

The City' s 2010 Water System Master Plan includes recommendations for hydraulic improvements to maintain service for existing and future development, based on growth assumptions, design criteria, and hydraulic modeling data. An update to the City' s water master plan is currently underway, and expected to be completed in late 2022 ( City of Mountain View, 2021b).

Water Supply
The City of Mountain View receives the majority of drinking water from the City and County of San Francisco' s Regional Water System ( Regional System), operated by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission ( SFPUC). Mountain View is a member of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency ( BAWSCA), which represents the 26 water agencies that purchase water wholesale from SFPUC. Mountain View also purchases water wholesale from the Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) and pumps local groundwater from City -owned wells.

Mountain View has a recycled water distribution system to meet non -potable demand in the North Bayshore Area. In 2020, the City' s water supply production was 84 percent SFPUC, 10 percent Valley Water, 2 percent groundwater, and 4 percent recycled water ( City of Mountain View, 2021a).

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
Wastewater
Wastewater Conveyance
Mountain View' s sanitary sewer system includes 159 miles of mains and two pump stations to carry wastewater from the City to the Regional Water Quality Control Plan ( RWQCP) in Palo Alto for treatment. The City' s sanitary sewer capital costs are funded with sanitary sewer service charges from ratepayers, and the relatively new funding sources of utility impact fees in North Bayshore and the sanitary sewer capacity charges on new development. Over the past 30 years, the City' s capital costs have primarily consisted of funding annual replacement of end -of -life sanitary sewer mains and services. Around 2012, the City also began evaluating and programming projects for replacement of major infrastructure, such as large trunk mains, creek and freeway crossinps to improve reliability, and the City' s [unitary flower pump station (City of Muuntaln View, 2021b). The Cily ' s 2018 Sevvei System Mattageineul Plait provides a plan and schedule for the City to properly manage, operate, and maintain all parts of its wastewater collection system, The plan helps to either prevent sanitary sewer overflows or reduce their extent, and also helps mitigate any sanitary sewer overflows that do occur ( City of Mountain View, 2018). An update to the City' s wastewater master plan is currently underway, and expected to be completed in late 2022.

Wastewater Treatment
Mountain View pumps its wastewater to the RWQCP for treatment, which is owned and operated by the City of Palo Alto. The RWQCP serves the communities of Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and East Palo Alto as well as Stanford University. Wastewater from these communities is treated by the RWQCP prior to discharge to the Bay. The RWQCP has a design capacity of 39 million gallons per day ( mgd). Mountain View has an annual wastewater capacity allotment of 15. 1 mgd at the plant. Mountain View' s 2020 wastewater generation was

6. 88 mgd ( City of Mountain View, 2021a). The City' s agreement with the City of Palo Alto states that, when Mountain View reaches 80 percent of the 15. 1 mgd allowed by contract approximately 12. 08 mgd), the City may be asked to assist in future plant expansions ( City of Mountain View, 2012b).

Stormwater
The stormwater collection and treatment system within the vicinity of the Project site is owned and operated by the City of Mountain View Public Works Department. The City' s storm drainage system includes an underground gravity piping network, cross culverts, drywells, a detention pond, and five pump stations. Approximately 80 percent of the storm drain system discharges to Stevens and Permanent creeks. The remainder discharges to the Permanente Diversion Channel, Adobe Creek, and other sloughs which eventually drain into the bay ( City of Mountain View, 2012a). While the City' s storm drain system is less demanding of ongoing capital investment than the water and wastewater sewer systems, major repairs and upgrades are needed periodically. The primary capital demands related to the storm drainage system are aging pump stations, deteriorating storm culverts, and installation of green stormwater infrastrucuture and trash capture devices to comply with State regulations. In June 2019, Council approved the Storm Drain Fee Study to evaluate options for a storm drain service charge ( City of Mountain View, 2021b).

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
Other Utilities
Electricity and Natural Gas
Electricity in the City is provided by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG& E) and Silicon Valley Clean Energy ( SVCE). SVCE, is a Community Choice Energy Agency governed by 13 communities in Santa Clara County. SCVE purchases energy directly from the energy source and delivers to customers through existing PG& E infrastructure. Customers are automatically enrolled in the Carbon Free program which includes electricity generated from renewable and carbon -free sources. Customers can also choose a 100 percent renewable plan or can opt out and choose PG& E generation service which is approximately 80 percent carbon free ( SVCE, 2022).

C11% tollie1% VVllo l koow lu opt out ( if ; VICE' s eneig.y plans [(-((- Iv(- ele( li t lty Flom PG& E PC& F also provides natural gas service to the City.

Telecommunications
The City has two main telecommunications providers which are widely available within the City:

AT& T and Xfinity from Comcast. There are at least nine residential internet providers in the City. The average household in the City is determined to have 6- 7 choices for residential internet providers, which is considered to be above average ( Broadband Now, 2022).

Solid Waste
Recology Mountain View provides solid waste, recycling and organics collection services for residents and businesses in Mountain View. Once collected, solid waste and recyclables are transported to the Sunnyvale Materials Recovery and Transfer ( SMaRT) station for sorting and organics are transported to Recology' s composting facilities. Small quantities of waste may be transported to other landfills in the area by private contractors. Non -recyclable waste from the SMaRT station is transported to Waste Management' s Kirby Canyon Landfill in San Jose. Kirby Canyon Landfill has a permitted capacity of 36. 4 million cubic yards and a permitted throughput of 2, 600 tons of solid waste per day. As of 2017 ( the issuance of its most recent facility permit), the Kirby Canyon Landfill had an estimated remaining capacity of 16. 2million cubic yards and an estimated closure year of 2059 ( CalRecycle, 2017).

In 2019, the statewide average disposal rate was 6. 7 pounds per resident per day with a total of approximately 42. 2 million tons of solid waste landfilled (CalRecycle, 2021). The annual average disposal rate for the City of Mountain View in 2020 was 3. 2 pounds per resident per day CalRecycle, 2022).

In 2018, the City Council adopted a Zero Waste Policy which established a goal of diverting 80 percent of materials from landfill by 2020, and 90 percent by 2030. The City' s diversion rate was 79 percent in 2020. The City Council reviewed and approved the final Zero Waste Plan on October 29, 2019 ( City of Mountain View, 2019).

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems

4. 15. 3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The NPDES is a nationwide program for permitting of surface water discharges, including from municipal acid industrial point sources. In California, NPDES permitting authority is delegated to and administered by the nine regional water quality control boards ( regional water boards). The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Board has set standard conditions for each permittee in the Bay Area, including effluent limitation and monitoring programs. In addition to issuing and enforcing compliance with NPDES permits, each regional water board prepares and revises the relevant basin plan ( refer to the following discussion of state regulations).

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Subtitle D, contained in Title 42 of the United States Code Section 6901 et seq. contains regulations for municipal solid waste landfills and requires states to implement their own permitting programs incorporating the federal landfill criteria. The federal regulations address the location, operation, design, groundwater monitoring, and closure of landfills. The U.S. EPA waste management regulations are codified in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR) parts 239- 282. The RCRA Subtitle D is implemented by Title 27 of the PRC, approved by the U.S. EPA.

State
Urban Water Management Planning Act
California Water Code Section 10610 et seq. requires all public water systems that provide water for municipal purposes to more than 3, 000 customers, or that supply more than 3, 000 acre- feet per year ( AFY), to prepare an Urban Water Management Plan ( UWMP). UWMPs are key water supply planning documents for municipalities and water purveyors in California, and often form the basis of Water Supply Assessments ( WSAs) ( refer to the following discussion of Senate Bill [SB] 610 and SB 221) prepared for individual projects. UWMPs must be updated at least every 5 years on or before July 1, in years ending in 5 and 0. The City adopted its 2020 UWMP and an associated Water Shortage Contingency Plan in June 2021 ( City of Mountain View, 2021).

Senate Bills 610 and 221
The purpose and legislative intent of SB 610 and SB 221, enacted in 2001, is to preclude the approval of certain development projects without specific evaluations performed and documented by the local water provider that indicate that water is available to serve the project.

SB 610 requires the local water provider for a large- scale development project to prepare a WSA. 1 The WSA evaluates the water supply available for new development based on anticipated All projects that meet any of the following criteria require a WSA: ( 1) A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units; ( 2) a proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1, 000 persons or having mute than 500, 000 Square Ibet of fluui space; ( 3) a ptupused cuuunetcldl office building employing mute Utdn 1, 000 persons or having more than 250, 000 square feet of floor space; ( 4) a proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms; ( 5) a proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1, 000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650, 000 square feet of floor area; 6) a mixed -use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in SB 610; or ( 7) a project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500- dwelling- unit project.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
demand. The WSA must be included in the environmental document. The lead agency may evaluate the information presented in the WSA, and then must determine whether the projected water supplies would be sufficient to satisfy the project' s demands in addition to existing and planned future uses.

SB 221 requires the local water provider to provide " written verification" of "sufficient water supplies" to serve subdivisions involving more than 500 residential units per Government Code Section 66473. 7. Sufficiency is different under SB 221 than under SB 610. Under SB 221, sufficiency is determined by considering:

The availability of water over the past 20 years;
The applicability of any urban -water shortage contingency analysis prepared in compliance with Watei Code Set Gon 10632,
The reduction in water supply allocated to a specific use by an adopted ordinance; and The amount of water that can be reasonably relied upon from other water supply projects, such as conjunctive use, reclaimed water, water conservation, and water transfer.

As a result of the information contained in the written verification, as part of the tentative map approval process, a city or county may attach conditions to ensure that an adequate water supply is available to serve the proposed plan. Typically, following project certification, an additional water supply verification must be completed at the tentative map stage, prior to adoption of the final map, for certain tentative maps. In most cases, a WSA prepared under SB 610 would meet the requirement for proof of water supply under SB 221.

Assembly Bill 325
Assembly Bill (AB) 325, the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 1990, directs local governments to require the use of low -flow plumbing fixtures and the installation of drought - tolerant landscaping in all new development. Pursuant to the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act, the California Department of Water Resources developed a Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

California Health and Safety Code Section 116555
Under California Health and Safety Code Section 116555, a public water system must provide a reliable and adequate supply of pure, wholesome, healthful, and potable water.

Senate Bill 7 (2016)
In September 2016, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law SB 7, which requires new multifamily residential rental buildings in California constructed after January 1, 2018, to include a sub -meter for each dwelling unit and to bill tenants in apartment buildings accordingly for their water use to encourage water conservation.

Executive Orders B-29- 15 and B-37- 16
In April 2015, Governor Brown issued Executive Order B- 29- 15, which called for mandatory water use reductions. The executive order required cuts for public landscaping and institutions City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
that typically use large amounts of water ( e. g., golf courses), banned new landscape irrigation installation, and required municipal agencies to implement conservation pricing, subsidize water - saving technologies, and implement other measures to reduce the state' s overall urban water use by 25 percent. The order also required local water agencies and large agricultural users to report their water use more frequently.

In May 2016, Governor Brown issued Executive Oidei B- 37- 16, which made ate mandatory water use reduction of 25 percent permanent and directed the California Department of Water Resources and State Water Resources Control Board ( State Water Board) to strategize further water reduction targets. The order also made permanent the requirement that local agencies report their water use monthly. Additionally, certaln wasteful praulces such as sidewalk hosing and runol' l' causing landscape irr•igKll0m werN IM-tnauNntly outlaMad, whllU local agUnclus must prepare plans to handle droughts lasting 5 years.

Executive Order N-7-22
On March 28, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order ( EO) N- 7- 22 in response to intensifying drought conditions. Among other requirements, EO N- 7- 22 limits a county, city or other public agency' s ability to permit modified or new groundwater wells, and instructs the SWRCB to consider ( 1) requiring certain water conservation measures from urban water suppliers and ( 2) banning non- functional or decorative grass at businesses and institutions.

Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter -Cologne Act (Division 7 of the California Water Code) provides the basis for water quality regulation in California. The Porter -Cologne Act defines water quality objectives as the limits or levels of water constituents that are established for reasonable protection of beneficial uses of surface, ground, and saline waters of the state. The State Water Board administers water rights, water pollution control, and water quality functions throughout California, while the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Board conducts regional planning, permitting, and enforcement activities. For additional requirements, refer to Section 4. 9, Hydrology and Water Quality.

Water Quality Order No. 2004- 12-DWQ
In July 2004, the State Water Board adopted Water Quality Order No. 2004- 12- DWQ (General Order) which incorporates the minimum standards established by the Part 503 Rule and expands upon them to fulfill obligations to the California Water Code. However, since California does not have delegated authority to implement the Part 503 Rule, the General Order does not replace the Part 503 Rule. The General Order also does not preempt or supersede the authority of local agencies to prohibit, restrict, or control the use of biosolids subject to their jurisdiction, as allowed by law.

California Green Building Standards Code
Water and Wastewater
Part 11 of the Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards is referred to as the California Green Building Standards Code ( CALGreen Code). The CALGreen Code is intended to encourage more sustainable and environmentally friendly building practices, conserve natural resources, and City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 6 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
promote the use of energy -efficient materials and equipment. Since 2011, the CALGreen Code has been mandatory for all new residential and non-residential buildings constructed in the state.

Mandatory measures related to water conservation include water -conserving plumbing fixture and appliance requirements, including flow rate maximums, compliance with state and local water - efficient landscape standards for outdoor potable water use in landscape areas, and recycled water systems, where available. The CALGreen Code was most recently updated in 2019 to include new mandatory measures for residential and non-residential uses; the 2019 amendments to the CALGreen Code became effective January 1, 2020. Updates include more stringent requirements for residential metering faucets, and a requirement that all residential and non- residential developments adhere to a local water efficient landscape ordinance or to the State of California' s Modal Wator Efficiont Landscape Ordinanco, whichevor tq moro stringont.

Solid Waste
As amended, the California Green Building Standards Code ( CALGreen Code) requires readily accessible areas to collect recycling and organic waste that serve all buildings on the site for occupants of multi -family residential units ( CALGreen Code Title 24, Part 11 and Mountain View City Code Section 8. 20. 34.). The CALGreen Code also requires that residential building projects recycle and/ or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of their non -hazardous construction and demolition waste or comply with a local construction and demolition waste management ordinance, whichever is more stringent ( Section 5. 408. 1). The 2016 version of the code increased the minimum diversion requirement for non -hazardous construction and demolition waste to 65 percent from 50 percent ( in the 2013 and earlier versions) in response to AB 341, which declared the policy goal of the state that not less than 75 percent of solid waste generated would be source reduced, recycled, or composted by 2020.

Assembly Bill 939 (California Integrated Waste Management Act) AB 939, enacted in 1989 and known as the California Integrated Waste Management Act ( Public Resources Code Section 40050 et seq.), requires each city and county in the state to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element to demonstrate a reduction in the amount of waste being disposed to landfills. The act required each local agency to divert at least 50 percent of all solid waste ( from 1990 levels), beginning January 1, 2000, and at least 75 percent by 2010. .

Diversion includes waste prevention, reuse, and recycling. In 2006, SB 1016 revised the reporting requirements of AB 939 by implementing a per capita disposal rate based on a jurisdiction' s population (or employment) and its disposal. The new per capita disposal and goal measurement system moves the emphasis from an estimated diversion measurement number to an actual disposal measurement number, along with an evaluation of program implementation efforts.

The Integrated Waste Management Act requires local agencies to maximize the use of all feasible source reduction, recycling, and composting options before using transformation (incineration of solid waste to produce heat or electricity) or land disposal. The act also resulted in the creation of the state agency now known as the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery CalRecycle). Under the Integrated Waste Management Act, local governments develop and implement integrated waste management programs consisting of several types of plans and policies, including local construction and demolition ordinances. The act also set in place a comprehensive statewide system of permitting, inspections, and maintenance for solid waste City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
facilities, and authorized local jurisdictions to impose fees based on the types and amounts of waste generated.

In 2011, AB 341 amended AB 939 to declare the policy goal ofthe state that not less than 75 percent of solid waste generated would be source reduced, recycled, or composted by the year 2020, and annually thereafter.

Assembly Bills 341 and 1826
AB 341, signed into law in 2012, requires multi -family residential dwellings, businesses and schools to recycle. AB 1826 ( 2014) furthered diversion and recycling requirements by requiring that businesses aiid ntulti-family dwellings with more than five units also divert organic material.

AB 18Z6 doa,s not requires multi- tamily dwellings to divert compostable food scraps. Ilowever, as of January 2022, SB 1383 requires all generators to divert organic waste including food scraps and the City must enforce these provisions.

Senate Bill 1383
SB 1383 established targets to achieve a 50 percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025. SB 1383 granted CalRecycle the regulatory authority required to achieve the organic waste disposal reduction targets. It also established a target of recovering not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible food for human consumption by 2025.

Effective January 1, 2022, the City of Mountain View' s Mandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reduction Ordinance is the enforceable mechanism to regulate all generator compliance with SB 1383. To comply with this ordinance, residential trash would be collected in four different streams: trash, paper/ cardboard recyclables, mixed container recyclables ( food and beverage) and organics ( food scraps and green material) .

Regional
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Waste Discharge Regulations Discharges of stormwater runoff from municipal separate storm sewer systems ( MS4s) are regulated by the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES permit, under Order No. R2- 2022- 0018, issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Board.

Under Clean Water Act Section 402( p), stormwater permits are required for discharges from MS4s that serve populations of 100, 000 or more. The Municipal Regional Permit ( MRP) manages the Phase I Permit Program ( serving municipalities of more than 100, 000 people), the Phase II Permit Program ( for municipalities of fewer than 100, 000 people), and the Statewide Storm Water Permit for the California Department of Transportation.

The State Water Board and the individual water boards implement and enforce the MRP.

Multiple municipalities, including the City of Mountain View, along with Santa Clara County, are co- permittees.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
Municipal Regional Permit Provision C. 3
Under Provision C. 3 of the MRP, new and redevelopment projects that create or replace 5, 000 square feet or more of impervious surface area, are required to implement site design, source control, and Low Impact Development -based stormwater treatment controls to treat post -construction stormwater runoff. Low Impact Development - based treatment controls are intended to maintain or restore the site' s natural hydrologic functions, maximizing opportunities for infiltration and evapotranspiration, and for using stormwater as a resource ( e. g., rainwater harvesting for non -potable uses). The MRP also requires that stormwater treatment measures be properly installed, operated, and maintained.

In addition, the MRP requires new development and redevelopment projects that create or replace 1 acre or more of impervious surface to manage development - related increases hi peak runoff flow, volume, and duration, where such hydromodification is likely to cause increased erosion, generate silt pollutants, or cause other impacts on local rivers, streams, and creeks. Projects may be deemed exempt from these requirements ifthey do not meet the minimum size threshold, drain into tidally influenced areas or directly into San Francisco Bay, or drain into hardened channels, or ifthey are infill projects in sub -watersheds or catchment areas that are at least 65 percent impervious.

Local
City of Mountain View Water Conservation in Landscaping Regulations The City of Mountain View adopted the Water Conservation in Landscaping Regulations and the in 2010 in order to reduce water waste in landscaping by establishing standards for irrigation efficiency. These regulations were updated in 2016 and apply generally to new and rehabilitated landscapes of 500 square feet or greater.

Mountain View Green Building and Reach Codes
On November 12, 2019, the City Council adopted the Mountain View Green Building Code MVGBC) amendments, which include the Reach Code efforts. The MVGBC amends the State - mandated California Green Building Code (CALGreen) to include local green building standards and requirements for private development. Section 8. 20. 9 of the MVGBC amends Subsection 101. 10. 1. 1. 3 of the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code as follows:

All multifamily residential new construction with three units or more must comply with the following:
a. The mandatory measures of the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code and any Mountain View amendments;
b. Demonstrate energy compliance to meet or exceed Title 24, Part 6; c. 15 percent of the parking spaces shall be equipped with EV2 chargers installed and one Level 3/ DC Fast Charger shall be provided for every 100 spaces' d. Installation of photovoltaic (PV) panels on 50 percent of roof area ( a project may submit for an exception by providing documentation that the required percentage of PV installation will over -generate the kWh required to operate the proposed structure on an annual basis) ;
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
e. Space -conditioning equipment shall be electric, not be fueled by natural gas; Water -heating systems and equipment shall be electric or solar, not be fueled by natural gas;
g. Clothes dryers shall be electric, not be fueled by natural gas; and h. Cooking appliances and fireplaces shall be electric, not fueled by natural gas.

City of Mountain View Urban Water Management Plan
The City' s UWMP provides an analysis of the City of Mountain View' s available water supply, during normal and dry year scenarios, compared to current and pmjocted water demand The UWMP is a link between land use planning and water supply planning, developed to evaluate if sufficient water is available to meet lie needs of Mountain View' s existing and future water customers. The City adopted its 2020 UWMP and an associated Water Shortage Contingency Plan in June 2021 ( City of Mountain View, 2021).

The City' s 2020 UWMP found that projected water demand during normal and dry -year scenarios would be met using a combination of existing supplies and demand -reduction measures.

Valley Water, local groundwater, and recycled water supplies are projected to be fully available during all year types ( normal and dry) through 2045. Based on the information provided by the SFPUC under their Bay Delta Plan scenario, 2 Mountain View will have full SFPUC supply availability during normal years but will experience SFPUC supply shortfalls between 36 percent and 54 percent during dry years. Mountain View expects to meet current and future water needs during normal years but will experience 20 percent potable water supply shortfalls during dry years. These shortfalls would be made up through implementation of demand -reduction strategies, consistent with the City' s Water Shortage Contingency Plan.

Mountain View' s Water Shortage Contingency Plan serves as a flexible framework of planned response measures to mitigate water supply shortages. The Plan describes demand -reduction strategies to meet various stages of shortages, including up to 10 percent, 11 percent to 25 percent, 26 percent to 40 percent, and greater than 40 percent. Each stage includes a set of demand reduction actions that become progressively more stringent as the shortage condition escalates. All of the stages are designed to provide adequate water to protect public health and safety and satisfy the City' s fire protection needs.

City of Mountain View Water System Master Plan
The City' s 2010 Water System Master Plan includes recommendations for hydraulic improvements to maintain service for existing and future development, based on growth assumptions, design criteria, and hydraulic modeling data. An update to the City' s water master The State Water Board has amended the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta Estuary ( Bay Delta Plan) to establish water quality objectives to maintain the health of the Bay Delta ecosystem A main goal of the Bay Delta Plan is to increase salmon populations in the Bay Delta and three San Joaquin River tributaries. One of the affected tributaries is the ' Tuolumne River, which is SFPUC' s primary water source. If the Bay Delta Plan is implemented as adopted, the SFPUC will be able to meet system demand in normal years, but the SFPUC would experience supply shortages during dry years ranging from 30 percent to 49 percent.

The State Water Board, SFPUC, and others are currently negotiating a voluntary alternative to the Bay Delta Plan.

At this time, the final resolution of this process is uncertain.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 10 ESA/ 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
plan is currently underway, and expected to be completed in late 2022. The update will identify and prioritize utility needs and will help determine the level of investment needed over the next 10 years compared to funding expected to be available ( City of Mountain View, 2021b).

City of Mountain View Sewer System Management Plan
The 2018 Sewer System Management Plan includes policies and procedures necessary for the planning, management, operation, and maintenance of the City' s sewer system. The SSMP is intended to meet the requirements of the SWRCB General Waste Discharge Requirements GWDR) for Wastewater Collection Agencies ( City of Mountain View, 2018). An update to the City' s sewer system management plan is currently underway, and expected to be completed in late 2022. The update will identify and prioritize utility needs and will help determine the level of investment needed over the next 10 years compared to funding expected to be available ( City of Mountain View, 2021b).

City of Mountain View Construction and Demolition Debris Ordinance The City' s Green Building Code ( Chapter 8, Division III) requires at least 65 percent landfill diversion of debris from nearly every construction, renovation and/ or demolition project through salvage and recycling, which supersedes the City' s Construction and Demolition Debris Ordinance.

City of Mountain View Zero Waste Resolution and Zero Waste Strategic Plan In June 2018, the City Council adopted a zero -waste policy and in October 2020 a Zero Waste Plan, establishing a goal of 90 percent diversion of waste from the landfill by 2030. The goal of the initiatives of the City' s zero -waste plan is to reduce the per capita disposal rate for both residential and commercial sources.

Mountain View 2030 General Plan
The Mountain View 2030 General Plan is the guiding document for the City' s physical development and preservation. It includes goals, policies and graphics that convey a long-term vision and guide local decision -making to achieve that vision. The Infrastructure and Conservation Element of the General Plan includes the following policies related to utilities and service systems ( City of Mountain View, 2012a).

Policy INC-1: Utilities for New Development Ensure adequate utility service levels before approving new development.

Policy INC 2. 4: Emergency Preparedness and Critical Infrastructure. Ensure emergency preparedness for all critical infrastructure including potable water, wastewater, stormwater, recycled water, telecommunications, energy and streets.

Policy INC 4.1: Water Supply. Maintain and reliable water supply Policy INC 5.2: Citywide water conservation. Reduce water waste and implement water conservation and efficiency measures throughout the city.

Policy INC 6.1: Citywide wastewater. Ensure high -quality wastewater collection services and a well -maintained wastewater system.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 11 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
Policy INC 6.2: Pollution Source Control. Implement an effective and comprehensive industrial pretreatment program and industrial, commercial and residential pollution source control programs.

Policy INC 8.2: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit. Comply with requirements in the Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit ( MRP).

Policy INC 8. 5: Site -specific stormwater treatment Require post -construction stormwater treatment controls consistent with MRP requirements for both new development and redevelopment projects.

Policy INC 8. 6r Clreen , Streetv, Roquiro post construction stormwator treatment controls consistent with MRP requirements for both new development and redevelopment projects.

Policy INC 8. 7: Stormwater quality. Require post -construction stormwater treatment controls consistent with MRP requirements for both new development and redevelopment projects.

Policy INC 10. 4: Construction waste reuse. Require post -construction stormwater treatment controls consistent with MRP requirements for both new development and redevelopment projects.

Policy INC 11. 1: Waste Diversion and Reduction. Meet or exceed all federal, State, and local laws and regulations concerning solid waste diversion and implementation of recycling and source reduction programs.

Mountain View Standard Conditions for Approval
As part of discretionary review, the City has standard conditions for different types of approvals updated as of October 25, 2021). The City has standard conditions relating to utilities and services systems, as summarized below. These include, but are not limited to:

Landscape Design
Landscape design shall minimize runoff and promote surface filtration. Examples include: ( a) no steep slopes exceeding 10%; ( b) using mulches in planter areas without ground cover to avoid sedimentation runoff; (c) installing plants with low water requirements; and ( d) installing appropriate plants for the location in accordance with appropriate climate zones. Identify which practices will be used in the building plan submittal.

Efficient Irrigation
Common areas shall employ efficient irrigation to avoid excess irrigation runoff. Examples include: ( a) setting irrigation timers to avoid runoff by splitting irrigations into several short cycles; ( b) employing multi-progranunable irrigation controllers; ( c) employing rain shutoff devices to prevent irrigation after significant precipitation; ( d) use of drip irrigation for all planter areas which have a shrub density that will cause excessive spray interference of an overhead system; and ( e) use of flow reducers to mitigate broken heads next to sidewalks.

Stormwater Treatment (C. 3)
This project will create or replace more than ten thousand ( 10, 000) square feet of impervious surface; therefore, stormwater runoff shall be directed to approved permanent treatment controls City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
as described in the City' s guidance document entitled, " Stormwater Quality Guidelines for Development Projects." The City' s guidelines also describe the requirement to select Low -Impact Development ( LID) types of stormwater treatment controls; the types of projects that are exempt from this requirement; and the Infeasibility and Special Projects exemptions from the LID requirement.

The " Stormwater Quality Guidelines for Development Projects" document requires applicants to submit a Stormwater Management Plan, including information such as the type, location, and sizing calculations of the treatment controls that will be installed. Include three stamped and signed copies of the Final Stormwater Management Plan with the building plan submittal. The Stormwater Management flan must include a stamped and signed certification by a qualified Engineer, stating that the Stormwater Management Plan complies with the Cily' s guldelines and the State NPDES Permit. Stormwater treatment controls required under this condition may be required to enter into a formal recorded Maintenance Agreement with the City.

Hydromodification Management =
Postconstruction stormwater runoff shall drain to approved permanent Hydromodification Management ( HM) controls to mitigate increases in peak runoff flow and increased runoff volume. Projects that will decrease impervious surface area in comparison to the preproject condition are not subject to the HM requirement. Information related to this requirement, including the exemption criteria, is included in the City' s document entitled, " Hydromodification Management Plan Guidelines for Development Projects," and the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program' s manual entitled, " C. 3 Stormwater Handbook: Guidance for Implementing Stormwater Requirements for New and Redevelopment Projects." The City' s " Hydromodification Management Plan Guidelines for Development Projects" manual requires applicants to submit a Stormwater Management Plan, including information such as the type, location, and sizing requirements of the controls that will be installed. Include the Stormwater Management Plan with the building plan submittal. Property owners of projects that include stormwater controls constructed in accordance with this condition are required to enter into a formal recorded self -inspection and maintenance agreement with the City.

Stormwater Management Plan —Third -Party Engineer' s Certification The Final Stormwater Management Plan must be certified by a qualified third -party engineer that the proposed stormwater treatment controls comply with the City' s Guidelines and Provision C. 3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit ( MRP). A list of qualified engineers is available at the following link: http:// www. scvurppp- w2k. com/ consultants_ list.shtml.

Water and Sewer Capacity Charges
Prior to issuance of any building permits and prior to approval of the parcel or final map, the applicant shall pay the water and sewer capacity fees for the development. The water and sewer capacity charges for residential connections are based on the number and type of dwelling units.

Separate capacity charges apply for different types of residential categories to reflect the estimated demand of each type of connection. The water and sewer capacity charges for City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 13 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
nonresidential connections are based on the water meter size, building area, and building use, respectively. Credit is given for the existing site use (s) and meter size (s) , as applicable.

Storm Drainage Fee
Prior to issuance of any building permits and prior to approval of the parcel or final map, the applicant shall pay the off -site storm drainage fee per Section 28. 51( b) with the rates in effect at the time of payment.

Underground Services
All new and existing electric and telecommunication facilities serving the site are to be placed underground, including transformers. The undergrounding of the new and existing overhead electric and telecommunication lines is to be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any new buildings within the site. If allowed by the City, aboveground transformers, power meters, and pedestals shall be located so they are screened in the least visible location from the street or to the general public, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments.

Recycled Water Use Requirement
This site is within the City' s current or future recycled water service area. Recycled water use is required per the City Code for all irrigation within the City' s recycled water service area.

Mountain View Green Building Code/Construction and Demolition Ordinance If this project is subject to the requirements of the Mountain View Green Building Code, a Construction and Demolition Waste Management Plan shall be submitted with the building permit application and approved by the Public Works Solid Waste and Recycling Division prior to issuance of a building permit. A Final Construction and Demolition Waste Management Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to final inspection.

Green Building — Residential New Construction
The project is required to meet the mandatory measures of the California Green Building Standards Code and meet the intent of the applicable GreenPoint Rated points. All mandatory prerequisite points and minimum point totals per category to attain GreenPoint Rated status must be achieved, unless specific point substitutions or exceptions are approved by the Community Development Department. Formal project registration and certification through Build It Green is not required for compliance with the Mountain View Green Building Code ( MVGBC). The project is also required to comply with Title 24, Part 6.

Landscaping
Detailed landscape plans encompassing on- and off -site plantable areas out to the street curb must be included in building permit drawings. Minimum plant sizes are flats or one -gallon containers for ground cover, five -gallon for shrubs, and 24" box for trees. The drawings must be approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to building permit issuance and implemented prior to occupancy. All plans should be prepared by a licensed Landscape Architect and should comply with the City' s Landscape Guidelines, including the Water Conservation in Landscaping Regulations ( forms are available online at www. mountainview. gov/ planningforms). Additional City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 14 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
landscaping materials or modifications may be required by the Planning Division at final inspection to ensure adequate planting coverage and/ or screening.

4. 15. 4 Significance Criteria
The thresholds used to determine the significance of impacts related to utilities and service systems are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. implementation of the Project could have a significant impact on the environment if it would:

Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental Offocts.

Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years.

Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project' s projected demand in addition to the provider' s existing commitments.

Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

Approach to Analysis
Potential impacts to utilities are discussed based on the CEQA Significance Thresholds included in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines as listed above. Impacts are evaluated largely based on information included in the City' s General Plan, the City' s 2020 UWMP, the City' s Water System Master Plan, the City' s Sewer System Management Plan, and information from CalRecycle. A water supply assessment was also prepared for the HEU by Schaaf & Wheeler on behalf of the City of Mountain View ( Appendix D).

After considering the implementation of the proposed project as described in Chapter 3, Project Description, and compliance with the required regulatory requirements, the environmental analysis below identifies if the defined significance thresholds would be exceeded and, therefore, a significant impact would occur.

4. 15. 5 Impacts of the Project
Impact UTL- 1: Implementation of the HEU would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. ( less than Significant with Mitigation)
The HEU would accommodate additional residential development in the City and a related increase in demand for water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 15 ESA/ 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
gas, and telecommunications facilities. Residential developers are responsible for constructing water, sewer, and storm drainage improvements on new housing sites. Where a project has off - site impacts, such as increased stormwater runoff, increased sewer load or added congestion at a nearby intersection, additional developer expenses may be necessary to mitigate impacts. The contractor is required to make site improvements before constructing a building on the property.

Site improvements can include connections to existing utility systems, rough grading, and installation of water and sewer lines. Extension of this infrastructure would likely occur in existing adjacent roadways and, aside from short- term construction disturbance, would not result in any unusual or further environmental impacts than identified elsewhere in this Draft EIR for overall construction activity associated with the HET J. ADI Js would require minor tie- ins to the existing on -site utility systems served by the main dwelling unit, the constructlon of which would not result III slgtdflcent ettvhunntctitel Impacts due to the 511ra115ce1e of ground distuibeutce.

The scope of the City' s utility master plans includes development anticipated as a result of the City' s General Plan land use strategy, and recent certified Environmental Impact Reports and Precise Plans. This development includes General Plan growth estimates, plus growth affiliated with the North Bayshore, El Camino Real, East Whisman and San Antonio Precise Plans and approved recent Rezoning and General Plan Amendment projects, as these all have associated utility impact studies. As such, utility infrastructure and improvements as part of HEU for pipeline projects and opportunity sites that do not require rezoning would be included in the scope of the City' s utility master plans. However, development potential at the housing sites identified in the HEU for rezoning were not included in these projections.

The City is currently preparing utilities studies for the water, sewer, and stormwater drainage systems for the areas proposed for rezoning to identify needed improvements, provide cost estimates associated with the needed improvements, establish funding mechanism( s), and/ or incorporate into the City' s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). See the discussions below for anticipated infrastructure requirements for each utility system associated with the proposed multifamily housing sites.

Water Distribution
Projects developed as a result of the HEU are located within urbanized portions of the City and would connect to existing water City water infrastructure. Prior to issuance of any building permits and prior to approval of the parcel or final map, subsequent projects would be required to pay water capacity fees for the development in accordance with City Standard Condition of Approval ( Water and Sewer Capacity Charges). The capacity charges for residential connections are based on the number and type of dwelling units. The City also requires that redevelopment project applicants evaluate the off -site capacity impacts of their project through an engineering study and commit to providing off -site improvements as part of the project approval process. This is the primary means through which capacity deficiencies resulting from redevelopment are addressed, and Mitigation Measure UTL- 1, Fair -Share Contributions Toward Utility Improvements, would ensure that subsequent dovolopmont projects contribute their fair share toward CIPs identified by the City, based on the project' s determined contribution. Construction as a result of any necessary water system capacity improvements would be temporary and within City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
existing rights of way, and no unusual significant environmental impact would be anticipated due to construction activity.

Wastewater Conveyance
Projects developed as a result of the HEU are located within urbanized portions of the City and would connect to existing water City sanitary sewer infrastructure. Prior to issuance of any building permits and prior to approval of the parcel or final map, subsequent projects would be required to pay sewer capacity fees for the development in accordance with City Standard Condition of Approval (Water and Sewer Capacity Charges). The capacity charges for residential connections are based on the number and type of dwelling units. The City also requires that iedevelupineut ptuject applicants evaludte the off -site capacity impacts of their project through an engineering study and commit to providing off Site improvements as part of tho project approval process. This is the primary means through which sewer system capacity deficiencies resulting from redevelopment are addressed. Mitigation Measure UTL- 1, Fair -Share Contributions Toward Utility Improvements, would ensure that subsequent development projects contribute their fair share toward CIPs identified by the City, based on the project' s determined contribution.

Construction as a result of any necessary sanitary sewer system capacity improvements would be temporary and within existing rights of way, and no unusual significant environmental impact would be anticipated due to construction activity.

Stormwater Drainage
Projects developed as a result of the HEU that would create or replace more than 10, 000 square feet of impervious surface would be required to implement on -site stormwater treatment controls in compliance with the City' s Guidelines and Provision C. 3 of the MRP and mitigate increases in peak runoff flow and increased runoff volume. Final Stormwater Management Plans must be certified by a qualified third -party engineer per the City' s Standard Condition of Approval Stormwater Management Plan —Third -Party Engineer' s Certification). Stormwater runoff would be treated and retained on -site prior to entering the City' s stormwater system. City Standard Condition of Approval (Storm Drainage Fee) also requires that project applicants shall pay the off -site storm drainage fee per City Code Section 28. 51( b) for the construction of storm drainage facilities to serve the drainage needs of the City. Mitigation Measure UTL- 1 would also ensure that subsequent development projects contribute their fair share toward CIPs identified by the City, based on the project' s determined contribution. Construction of any necessary on- and offsite stormwater drainage infrastructure would be temporary and within existing rights of way, and no unusual significant environmental impact would be anticipated due to construction activity.

Other Utilities
New meter and service connections for electricity and telecommunications services would be coordinated with the provider at the time new development is proposed. All new and existing electric and telecommunication lines serving the sites would be placed underground, including transformers, as required by City Standard Condition of Approval ( Underground Services).

Construction of the undergrounding of the overhead electric and telecommunication lines would be temporary and within existing rights of way, and no unusual significant environmental impact would be anticipated due to construction activity. Because of the developed, urbanized nature of City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
the City, and existing and that no expansion of related facilities would be necessary to serve development projects as a result of the HEU.

As detailed in the Regulatory Setting, the City of Mountain View has adopted Reach Codes that include a requirement for all buildings seeking building permits after December 9, 2020 to be all -electric buildings." An " all -electric" building as defined in Section 9. 250 of Ordinance 2487 is a building that has no natural gas or propane plumbing installed within the building and that uses electricity as the source of energy for its space conditioning, water heating ( including pools and spas), cooking and clothes drying appliances. The Reach Codes include a requirement for all multi -family new construction to all -electric buildings with no natural gas infrastructure for space conditioning, water heating, coolant; or other appliances. This goes beyond the requirements in the 2022 Update to the Title 24 standards that will go into effect on January 1, 2023 and establish electric -ready nequirements in new huines, but do not explicitly prohibit natural gas. As a result, no impacts related to construction of natural gas infrastructure would occur.

Conclusion
Overall, the potential improvements or extension of utility infrastructure to serve development as a result of the HEU would be installed primarily in existing roadways and utility rights -of -way.

Aside from short- term construction disturbance, no unusual or further environmental impacts would be generated beyond those identified elsewhere in this Draft EIR for overall construction activity for the project. As such, the implementation of the HEU would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. Mitigation Measure UTL- 1 would ensure that subsequent development projects contribute their fair share toward CIPs identified by the City, based on the project' s determined contribution. The impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure UTL-l: Fair -Share Contributions Toward Utility Improvements
Subsequent development projects shall contribute the fair share amount identified by the City of Mountain View Public Works Department to fund capital improvements to the water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater drainage systems prior to issuance of a building permit.

Significance after Mitigation: Less than Significant
Impact UTL-2: Implementation of the HEU would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years. ( Less than Significant)
Implementation of the HEU would result in increased demand for potable water. The scope of the City' s 2020 UWMP includes development anticipated as a result of Mountain View' s General Plan land use strategy, and recent certified Environmental Impact Reports and Precise Plans. This development includes General Plan growth estimates, plus growth affiliated with the North Bayshore, El Camino Real, East Whisman and San Antonio Precise Plans and approved recent City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 18 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
Rezoning and General Plan Amendment projects. However, the total number of dwelling units exceed the previously anticipated housing units studied in the City' s 2020 UWMP by approximately 11, 100 dwelling units. As such, a water supply assessment was prepared for the HEU by Schaaf & Wheeler on behalf of the City of Mountain View (Appendix D).

The total water demand projected for the HEU at build -out beyond what was included in the City' s 2020 UWMP was estimated to be approximately 1. 1 mgd or 1, 244 AFY3 and represents the estimated increase beyond the City' s 2020 UWMP as a result of the HEU, including the water demands of the residential buildings and surrounding landscaping. These estimates are conservative as they do not account for existing water use credits for redevelopment sites, on -site vvdten conservation ef'fuils such ets landscaping with luvv wrnten use plwas, the use of recycled water for irrigation, dual plumbing and low flow sanitary fixtures, and technologies associated with LEED construction. During dry years, the irrigation demand for projects developed under the HEU can be expected to increase by 5%, while the indoor demands remain constant.

However, during dry years, landscape irrigation is considered a non -essential use and restriction is prioritized over indoor usage. Development under the HEU will be subject to staged water use restrictions associated with the City' s Water Shortage Contingency Plan.

The WSA found that the City of Mountain View water system has sufficient existing water supply to fully support development under the HEU above what was considered in the 2020 UWMP under normal, single dry, or multiple dry water years. Under normal conditions, the City is not projected to experience supply shortfalls. Shortfalls of up to 20% are projected for single dry -years and for multiple dry -years. Under all conditions, the City may need to impose water conservation measures, per Mountain View Municipal Code, Section 35. 28, to reduce demand.

Action Stage 1 calls for a demand reduction of up to 10% through increased public education and outreach to encourage voluntary reduction in water use. Action Stage 2 calls for a demand reduction of up to 25% through several mandatory water use restrictions and requirements, such as prohibiting at- home vehicle washing, except by bucket, and requiring water -conserving restaurant dishwashing spray valves. Stage 3 calls for a demand reduction of up to 40% through enforcements of filling swimming pools, requiring car washes to recirculate, and a more stringent requirement to fix leaks. Stage 4 calls for a demand reduction of greater than 40% by restricting all outdoor irrigation and additional, more stringent requirements for fixing leaks. The implementation of these measures would result in supply remaining sufficient for the projected future demand even in multiple dry -years.

Additionally, depending on the final outcome and implementation of the State Water Resources Control Board' s Bay Delta Water Quality Control Plan, Mountain View' s primary water supply from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission may be reduced significantly during dry years ( possibly up to 59. 5 percent) . Although the status of the Bay Delta Plan is still undetermined, Mountain View plans to utilize local groundwater wells as needed during dry years in order to limit cutbacks to 20 percent, and implement the City' s Water Shortage Contingency Plan to reduce water domand during droughts ( Schaff & Wheeler, 2022). 3 Based on the multifamily residential unit duty factor of 100 gpd for 11, 100 units.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 19 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
Projects developed as a result of the HEU would be required to comply with the CALGreen Code, which requires that new construction use high -efficiency plumbing fixtures, such as high - efficiency toilets, urinals, showerheads, and faucet fixtures. For outdoor water use, the CALGreen Code requires that irrigation controllers be weather- or soil moisture —based and automatically account for rainfall, or be attached to a rainfall sensor. Additionally, the projects would be required to comply with Standard Condition of Approval (Landscaping) and the City of Mountain View Water Conservation in Landscaping Regulations and the MVGBC which include water conservation requirements. Under the MVGBC, new buildings must use water -efficient plumbing fixtures or demonstrate a 20 percent reduction from a baseline water use. City Standard Conditions of Approval also require projects to install plants with low water requirements and include efficient irrigation systems in landscape design. Implementation of water eunservatlun and OP'flclency measures would niliilinlze the potable water demand generated. Ptujeas developed within the North Bayshore Precise Platt area would also be required to use recycled water for irrigation and projects developed within the East Whisman Precise Plan area would be required to construct recycled water compatible irrigation systems for connection to future extension of the recycled water system to the area, which would also reduce the potable water demand.

In addition, SB 221 applies to proposed residential developments of over 500 dwelling units and requires that the water supplier provide a written verification that the water supply for the project is sufficient, prior to issuance of the final permits. Because the proposed HEU anticipates up to approximately 16, 650 multifamily residential units, individual projects may be subject to the requirements of SB 221 ( Government Code section 66473. 7) and a verification of sufficient water supply ( SB 221) report would be required prior to final approvals for projects with 500 or more residential units.

Overall, because the WSA determined that the City of Mountain View water system has sufficient existing water supply to fully support development under the HEU above what was considered in the 2020 UWMP under normal, single dry, or multiple dry water years and development under the HEU would minimize its water demand through conservation and efficiency measures, the impact related to water supply would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required
Impact UTL- 3: Implementation of the HEU would result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the projece' s projected demand in addition to the provider' s existing commitments. ( Less than Significant)
Implementation ofthe HEU would result in an increase in population and thus an increased demand for wastewater treatment. The RWQCP has a design capacity of 39 mgd, and the City has an annual wastewater capacity allotment. of 15. 1 mgd at the plant. The City' s 2020 wastewater generation was 6. 88 mgd (City of Mountain View, 2021). Approximately 15, 000 new multifamily dwelling units could generate approximately 1. 4 mgd of wastewater. 4 The sites identified as part 4 Assumes a sewer duty factor of 90 gpd per unit for multifamily residential uses.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. t 5- 20 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
of the HEU' s housing sites inventory would account for approximately 17 percent of the unused capacity at the RWQCP. Additionally, projects would be subject to sewer capacity fees and City Standard Conditions of Approval ( Water and Sewer Capacity Charges) to address new demand.

Therefore, implementation of the HEU is not expected to result in wastewater treatment capacity issues at the RWQCP.

Development under the HEU would be required to comply with the CALGreen Code, which requires that new construction use high -efficiency plumbing fixtures, such as high -efficiency toilets, urinals, showerheads, and faucet fixtures. Additionally, the projects would be required to comply with the MVGBC which include water conservation requirements. Under the MVGBC, new buildings must use water -efficient plumbing fixtures or demonstrate a 20 percent reduction from a baseline water use. Implementation of water conservation and officioncy measuros would reduce the wastewater generated.

Since the RWQCP would have adequate capacity to serve the proposed HEU demand, implementation of the HEU would not result in wastewater treatment capacity issues. This impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.

Impact UTL-4: Implementation ofthe HEU would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess ofthe capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. ( Less than Significant) While no specific development proposals are directly associated with the HEU, theoretical development would generate solid waste during both construction and operation. During construction, construction - related debris would be generated. During operation, the additional residential uses would result in an increase in the demand for solid waste services.

Construction
As described in Section 4. 15. 3, Regulatory Setting, the City of Mountain View requires development projects to achieve at least 65 percent diversion under the CALGreen Code and create and maintain a construction waste management plan consistent with City Standard Condition of Approval Mountain View Green Building Code/Construction and Demolition Ordinance). The diversion requirement may be met through direct facility recycling, reuse of the materials on site, or donation to reuse and salvage businesses. The remaining residue from the materials that could not be recovered would be landfilled. The Kirby Canyon Landfill serves the City and accepts mixed construction and demolition waste, and has an estimated 16, 191, 600 cubic yards of remaining capacity ( 22, 668, 240 tons) and an expected closure date of 2059. Construction of development projects under the HEU is not expected to generate substantial amounts of solid waste during construction relative to the remaining capacity of the Kirby Canyon landfill. Therefore, construction associated with development under the HEU would not generate solid waste in excess of local infrastructure and would not impair the attainment of state -level or local waste reduction goals. This impact would be less than significant.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15-21 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
Operation
The HEU could provide for development of up to approximately 15, 000 new housing units in the City through 2031 which would generate solid waste. Of the total units it' s assumed that approximately 1, 400 units would be enabled by changes in development capacity via rezoning.

The balance of approximately 13, 600 units represents development that is already permitted under the City' s adopted General Plan, zoning, and Precise Plans. In addition, the analysis in this EIR also considers approximately 2, 700 units beyond 2031 that would be enabled by changes in development capacity via rezoning. Using the estimated number of residents ( calculated in Section

4. 12, Population and Housing) and the average disposal rate for the City in 2020, new residential uses would generate approximately 48 tons of waste per day ( 17, 520 tons per vear). 5 New residential uses enabled by changes in development capacity via rezoning would generate up to approximately 13 tons of waste per day ( 4, 745 tons per yeur). 6 The Kirby Cwiyoit Luttdfill uucepts approximately 2, 600 tons per day, has approximately 16, 191, 600 cubic yards of remaining capacity (22, 668,240 tons), and has an expected closure date of 2059. The daily solid waste estimates associated with development enabled by changes in development capacity under the HEU would account for less than 0. 5 percent of the permitted daily capacity of the Kirby Canyon Landfill and the daily solid waste estimates associated with all 15, 000 units would account for approximately 1. 8 percent, and as such implementation of the HEU would not generate substantial amounts of solid waste during operation relative to the capacity of local infrastructure.

Projects developed as a result ofthe HEU would be required to comply with existing solid waste reduction requirements, including applicable federal, State and local solid waste statutes and regulations during operation. Compliance with existing policies and regulations, including the CALGreen building and State recycling and organic material diversion requirements, would reduce the non-renewable sources of solid waste, and minimize the solid waste disposal requirements of HEU implementation. Therefore, operation under the HEU would not generate solid waste in excess of the local infrastructure, and would not impair the attainment of State - level or local waste reduction goals. This impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.

Impact UTL-5: Implementation of the HEU would not Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. ( Less than Significant)
During construction and operation associated with development under the HEU, development projects would be required to comply with federal, State, and local solid waste standards identified in Section 3. 16. 3, Regulatory Setting, such as the California Integrated Waste Management Act, AB 939, the CALGreen Code, AB 341 and AB 1826, and SB 1383. As previously discussed, projects developed as a result ofthe HEU would be required to be in compliance with the City' s Green Building Code and Cuitsttuclion dnd Demolition Ordinance, as required by Standard Condition of 5 Solid waste generation = 30, 000 residents x 3. 2 pounds per resident per day = 96, 000 pounds per day ( 48 tons per day) 6 Solid waste generation = 8, 200 residents x 3. 2 pounds per resident per day = 26, 240 pounds per day ( 13. 12 tons per day) City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 22 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
Approval ( Mountain View Green Building Code/ Construction and Demolition Ordinance). Recology Mountain View oversees the collection, transfer, and disposal of residential garbage, recycling, and organics in the City, assisting with keeping the City compliant with State -mandated recycling requirements ( AB 341, AB 1826 and SB 1383), including recycling of organics, and in support of the high recycling rate of the City and the Zero Waste Plan goals. As a result, development under the HEU would not conflict with applicable waste reduction policies. Therefore, the impact of the HEU tegatding compliance with solid vvasLe regulations would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.

4. 15. 6 Cumulative Impacts
This section presents an analysis of the cumulative effects of the HEU in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects that could cause cumulatively considerable impacts. Significant cumulative impacts related to utilities and service systems could occur if the incremental impacts of the HEU combined with the incremental impacts of one or more cumulative projects.

The geographic scope for cumulative effects on utilities and service systems is the service area for utility providers.

Impact UTL- 1. CU: Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on utility infrastructure. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable development described in Section 4. 0. 3, Cumulative Impacts, would increase the demand for water, wastewater conveyance and treatment, storm drainage, electrical and telecommunications systems infrastructure. Cumulative development would be subject to applicable development and utilities fees that would be collected by the City, construction of system improvements, and fair - share contributions to address the new utility system demand. The potential improvement or extension of utility infrastructure to serve cumulative development would be installed primarily in existing roadways and utility rights -of -way. Aside from short- term construction disturbance, no unusual or further environmental impacts would be generated beyond those identified elsewhere in this DEIR for overall construction activity associated with future development as a result of the HEU. For these reasons, and because changes proposed to utilities infrastructure as part of future developments will be subject to review and permitting requirements, and Mitigation Measure UTL- 1, the HEU would not contribute considerably to a significant cumulative impact in this regard, and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure UTL- 1: Fair -Share Contributions Toward Utility Improvements. ( See Impact UTL- 1 above)
Significance after Mitigation: Less than Significant
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 23 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
Impact UTL- 2. CU: Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on water supply. ( Less than Significant)
As noted under Impact UTL- 2, the scope of the City' s 2020 UWMP includes development anticipated as a result of Mountain View' s General Plan land use strategy, and recent certified Environmental Impact Reports and Precise Plans. This development includes General Plan growth estimates, plus growth alllllated with the North Bayshore, El Camino Real, East Whlsinan and San Antonio Precise Plans and approved recent Rezoning and General Plan Amendment projects. The WSA prepared for the HEU determined that the City' s water system has sufficient existing water supply to fully support development under the HEU above what was considered in the 2020 UWMI` under ttormal, single dry, or multiple dry water years ( Schaaf t4 Wheeler, 2022).

Therefore, implementation of the HEU would not contribute considerable to a cumulative impact on water supply. In dry years, the City expects to manage projected water supply shortfalls via its Water Shortage Contingency Plan and cumulative development projects would be subject to the same demand reduction measures. Depending on the final outcome and implementation of the State Water Resources Control Board' s Bay Delta Water Quality Control Plan, Mountain View' s primary water supply from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission may be reduced significantly during dry years ( possibly up to 59. 5 percent). Although the status of the Bay Delta Plan is still undetermined, Mountain View plans to utilize local groundwater wells as needed during dry years in order to limit cutbacks to 20 percent, and implement the City' s Water Shortage Contingency Plan to reduce water demand during droughts ( Schaaf & Wheeler, 2022).

Similar to the HEU, cumulative projects and projects developed would be required to comply with the CALGreen Code, City Standard Conditions of Approval, the City of Mountain View Water Conservation in Landscaping Regulations, and the MVGBC which include water conservation and efficiency requirements that would minimize the potable water demand generated. Therefore, the HEU' s cumulative water supply impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required
Impact UTL-3. CU: Implementation ofthe HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on wastewater treatment capacity. ( Less than Significant) Wastewater generation as a result of implementation of the HEU could combine with cumulative development in the City, as the potential population increase would also generate wastewater that could be treated at the RWQCP. As discussed for Impact UTL-3, the City has a wastewater capacity allotment of 15. 1 mgd at the RWQCP. Approximately 15, 000 new multifamily dwelling units developed as a result of the HEU could generate approximately 1. 4 mgd of wastewater, accounting for approximately 17 percent of the City' s unused capacity at the RWQCP. Of the total units it' s assumed that approximately 4, 100 units would be enabled by changes in development capacity via rezoning. The balance of units represents development that is already permitted under the City' s adopted General Plan, zoning, and Precise Plans. As such, implementation of the HEU would result in a cumulative contribution to wastewater generation of approximately 0. 4 mgd. The General Plan City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 24 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
EIR, which includes planned growth under the General Plan, projected that the City' s wastewater flow in 2030 would be 13. 78 mgd, or 91 percent of the City' s current capacity ( City of Mountain View, 2012b). However, it is noted that the City' s total wastewater generation in 2020 of 6.88 mgd was less than that of the existing ( 2010) rate of 8. 58 mgd studied in the General Plan EIR.

The City' s agreement with the City of Palo Alto states that, when Mountain View reaches 80 percent of the 15. 1 mgd allowed by contract ( approximately 12. 08 mgd), the City may be asked to assist in future plant expansion. The projected wastewater flow from estimated 2030 development associated with the City' s General Plan would reach 80 percent of the capacity limit and that level necessitates a study. If these projected flows are realized, the City would be iequilled to pulifoitn an engineering study per the Basic Agreement ( Laity of Mountain View, 01')[ I) Wlllle pl( rje( led G' 030 ( rEiteietl Platt flows etie not likely to h(- ifali?.ed t' nsideiiug Ule 2020 wastewater generation rate fur the City, the Basic Agteeuleul outlines the frdinewo> k to ensure that adequate wastewater treatment capacity is available.

Additionally, in the event that a city requires additional capacity in excess of the proportionate capacity allocated, and the additional capacity is not then being used by other partner agencies, the city requiring additional capacity may rent or purchase from another agency the additional capacity rights. This additional capacity may be transferred at the discretion of the governing body of other agencies and upon agreement of all agencies ( City of Mountain View, 2012b).

Based on the approximately 8. 22 mgd average daily excess capacity allocation for the City at the RWQCP and the HEU' s relatively minimal contribution to cumulative demand ( 0. 4 mgd), the implementation of the HEU would not contribute considerably to a significant cumulative impact on wastewater treatment capacity.

Mitigation: None required.

Impact UTL- 4. CU: Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on solid waste. ( Less than Significant)
Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would increase the generation of solid waste. The Kirby Canyon landfill has an expected closure date of 2059. As with projects developed as a result of the HEU, cumulative development projects would be required to comply with federal, state, and local solid waste standards, including waste diversion during construction, including at least 65 percent construction and demolition waste diversion, and during operation, including recycling and organic material diversion requirements. As such, non- renewable sources of solid waste and the solid waste disposal requirements of cumulative development would be reduced. Therefore, when considered in the cumulative context, the proposed HEU' s solid waste -related impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. Cumulative impacts would, therefore, be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 25 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems

4. 15. 7 Summary of Utilities and Service Systems Impacts Significance Before Significance After
Impact Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation
Impact UTL-1: Implementation of the HEU Potentially Mitigation Measure Less than would not require or result in the relocation or Significant UTL- 1: Fair -Share Significant construction of new or expanded water, Contributions
wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, Toward Utility electric power, natural gas, or Improvements
telecommunications facilities, the construction
or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects.
hnpaca UTL 2. hrlplulnunlaliun of Me I ICU L& LL than 9Ignlficant Non* roquirod wuuld I lave sufficient water supplies available
to Rerva the projoc:t and raasonlahly foresoeable
future development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years.

Impact UTL-3: Implementation of the HEU Less than Significant None required would result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider, which serves or
may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider' s existing
commitments.

Impact UTL- 4: Implementation of the HEU Less than Significant None required would not generate solid waste in excess of
state or local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid waste reduction
goals.

Impact UTL-5: Implementation of the HEU Less than Significant None required would not Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste.

Impact UTL- 1. CU: Implementation of the HEU, Potentially Mitigation Measure Less than when combined with other past, present, or Significant UTL- 1: Fair -Share Significant reasonably foreseeable projects, would not Contributions contribute considerably to cumulative impacts Toward Utility on utility infrastructure. Improvements
Impact UTL- 2. CU: Implementation of the HEU, Less than Significant None required when combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
contribute considerably to cumulative impacts
on water supply.

Impact UTL- 3. CU: Implementation of the HEU, Less than Significant None required when combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
contribute considerably to cumulative impacts
on wastewater treatment capacity.

Impact UTL- 4. CU: Implementation of the HEU, Less than Significant None required when combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
contribute considerably to cumulative impacts
on solid waste.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 26 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems

4. 15. 8 References
Broadband Now, 2022. Internet Providers in Mountain View. Available:
https:// broadbandnow. com/ California/ Mountain- View. Accessed May 23, 2022, California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery ( CalRecycle), 2017. Kirby Canyon Recycling and Disposal Facility Solid Waste Facility Permit ( 4,3- AN-0008), issued October 27, 2017.

CalRecycle, 2021. California' s 2019 Per Capita Disposal Rate Estimate, last updated February 17, 2021. Available: https:// www.calrecycle. ca.gov/lgcentraVgoalmeasure/ disposalrate/ mosueLuut. Accossud May 18, 2022.

Cal Recycle, 2022. Jutisdlcllun Per Capita Dispusal' i'tends 2016. 2020, Mountain View.

Available: https:// wwwZ. calrecycle. ca. gov/ LUCentral/ AnnualReporting/ slcp/ capacityplanning/ recycling/ ReviewReports. Accessed May 18, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2012a. Mountain View 2030 General Plan, adopted July 10, 2012, as amended through April 13, 2021.

City of Mountain View, 2012b. Mountain View 2030 General Plan Environmental Impact Report, September 2012.

City of Mountain View, 2018. City ofMountain View Sewer System Management Plan, June 2018.

Available: https:// www. mountainview. gov/ civicax/ filebank/ blobdload. aspx? blobid= 26636.

Accessed May 23, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2019. City ofMountain View Zero Waste Plan, October 29, 2019.

Available: https:// www. mountainview. gov/ civicax/ filebank/ blobdload. aspx?BlobID= 30681.

Accessed May 18, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 202la. City ofMountain View 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, June 8, 2021. Available: https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx? blobID= 35844. Accessed May 23, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2021b. Recommended Fiscal Year 2021- 22 through Fiscal Year 2025-26 Capital Improvement Program, May 25, 2021. Available: https:// www. mountainview. gov/ civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?B1obID= 36187. Accessed May 23, 2022.

Schaaf & Wheeler, 2022. Water SupplyAssessment for the Mountain View Housing Element Update Project, prepared by the City of Mountain View and Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers, July 2022 ( Appendix D).

Silicon Valley Clean Energy ( SVCE), 2022. Your Choices. Available:
https:// www. svcleanenergy. org/ choices/. Accessed May 23, 2022.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15- 27 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 15 Utilities and Service Systems
This page intentionally left blank
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 15-28 ESA 1202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 16 Effects Found Not to Be Significant

4. 16 Effects Found Not to Be Significant

4. 16. 1 Introduction
This section presents information regarding impacts of the Project for environmental topic areas that were determined to have no impact by the City of Mountain View. According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15128, an EIR shall contain a statement briefly indicating the reasons that various possible significant effects of a project were determined not to be significant and were therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR.

Effuctb of thu f'rujucl on thu f'ufluwing uttvitutttftelttal tupiL AWAt wvete Iuuud ttut lu be significant dutittg the Fllt lltot a%s Agtlt ultl1w attd l"ou-st l?t-souu es, Miuelrtl and Wildlife The following presents a brief summary of Project effects found not to be slgnlflcant, Including a discussion of reasons they would not be significant.

4. 16. 2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
The California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, has established the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program ( FMMP), which monitors the conversion of the State' s farmland to and from agricultural use. Four categories of farmland - Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Local Importance - are considered valuable. The bulk of the City of Mountain View is identified as Urban and Built -Up Land" by the FMMP and is surrounded by lands designated as Urban and Built -Up Land. The areas not identified as Urban and Built -Up Land are located in the North Bayshore area and are designated as " Other Land". According to the FMMP map for Santa Clara County, there is no Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance designated on any portion of the planning area for the HEU (DOC, 2016). Thus, the HEU would have no impact on important farmland.

The City of Mountain View' s Zoning Code provides one agricultural designation, Agriculture ( A, AW). However, there are only four of these designations in the City, one in the North Bayshore area, one in the Grant Road/ Sylvan Park area, and two in the Moffett/ Whisman Road area. None of these agricultural zoning designations fall within an area where housing sites are identified as part of the HEU. Therefore, the HEU would have no impact on these agricultural designated zones ( City of Mountain View, 2018a).

The California Land Conservation Act of 1965, commonly referred to as the Williamson Act, enables local governments to designate agricultural preserves and enter into contracts with private landowners for restricting specific parcels of land to agricultural, or related open space use. The City of Mountain View does not contain an area subject to an agricultural preserve or a Williamson Act Contract ( Santa Clara County, 2022). Thus, implementation of the HEU would not interact with or conflict with existing agricultural zoning or a Williamson Act contract, and would have no impact.

With respect to forestry resources, no existing timber harvest uses are located on or in the vicinity of the City. No areas of the City are designated or zoned for such use. As such, implementation of City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 16- 1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 16 Effects Found Not to Be Significant
the HEU would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest uses, and would have no impact on forest land or timberland.

Based on these considerations, implementation of the HEU would not result in conversion of farmland, on -site or off -site, to a non- agricultural use, nor would it result in conversion of forest land to non -forest land. Therefore, no impact to agricultural and forestry resources would occur.

Accordingly, this issue was not subjected to detailed analysis in the EIR.

4. 16. 3 Mineral Resources
Initial Statewide mapping of aggregate resources included a small area within the southern boundary of Mountain Viow along `itovo s C; took being classified as M1ZZ- 3, " Aieas cuntahting mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from the available data." However, based on subsequent mapping by the State of California for suitability of use as construction materials, it was determined that no minerals or aggregate resources of Statewide importance are located within the City. There are also no natural gas, oil, or geothermal resources identified in or adjacent to the City (City of Mountain View, 2012).

There are no known significant mineral resources in the City of Mountain View or on the potential HEU housing sites. Additionally, there are no areas zoned as mineral resource zones by the City' s General Plan ( City of Mountain View, 2018a & 2018b). Implementation of the HEU would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state; and would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. As a result, the HEU would not interfere with any mineral extraction operations and would not result in the loss of land designated for mineral resources. Therefore, no impact to mineral resources would occur. Accordingly, this issue was not subjected to detailed analysis in the EIR.

4. 16. 4 Wildfire
Impacts related to exposure of people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires are addressed in Section 4. 8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

In accordance with California Public Resource Code Section 4201- 4204 and Government Code Section 51175- 51189, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection ( CAL FIRE) has mapped areas of significant fire hazards based on fuels, terrain, weather, and other relevant factors. These zones, referred to as Fire Hazard Severity Zones ( FHSZ) , represent the risks associated with wildland fires. The City of Mountain View is not located in or near a State Responsibility Area (SRA) or lands classified as very high fire severity zones ( VHFSZ) ( CAL FIRE, 2022). The southern portion of the City of Mountain View is located at the edge of an area that has been mapped as a Wildland-Urban interface fire hazard area (ABAG, 2022). However, the majority of the City is highly developed with residential, commercial, office/industrial, and mixed use areas, therefore there is only sparse vegetation mainly concentrated at various parks.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 16- 2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 16 Effects Found Not to Be Significant
Therefore, no impact would occur with regard to wildfire. Accordingly, this issue was not subjected to detailed analysis in the EIR.

4. 16. 5 References
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), 2022. Wildland Urban Interface Map. Available:
https:// www. arcgis. com/ apps/ mapviewer/ index. html? layers= a4985d64969743db8feddf Olc96c9435. Accessed May 11, 2022.

California Depatttnunt of Couseivation ( DUC), 2016. Santa Clara C: otu tylmport. rrtl rm(afzd 2016, September 2018. Available: https: Hsantaclaralafco. org/ sites/ default/ files/ scll6. pdf.

Accessed May 11, 2022.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection ( CAL FIRE), 2022. FHSZ Viewer Map.

Available: https:Hegis. fire. ca.gov/ FHSZ/. Accessed May 11, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2018a. City of Mountain View Zoning Map, March 2018. Available:
https:// www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID= 10990. Accessed May 11, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2018b. Mountain View Land Use Designations, March, 2018. Available:
https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID= 10701. Accessed May 11, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2021. Mountain View 2030 General Plan, adopted July 10, 2012, as amended through April 13, 2021.

City of Mountain View, 2012. City ofMountain View Draft 2030 General Plan and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program Final Environmental Impact Report. September 2012.

Santa Clara County Planning Office, 2022. Williamson Act Properties Map. Available:
https:// sccplanning. maps. arcgis. com/ apps/ webappviewer/ index. html? id= 1 f39e32b4c 0644b0915354669778ce. Accessed May 11, 2022.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 16-3 ESA/ 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4. 16 Effects Found Not to Be Significant
This page intentionally left blank
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4. 16- 4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

Alternatives to the Project
Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, this chapter is provided to describe and evaluate alternatives to the Projea, including one or more " No Project" alternatives, and to identify one or more environmentally superior" alternatives. The primary purpose of this section is to provide decision -makers and the public with a qualitative review of alternatives to the Project that eliminate or substantially reduce any identified adverse environmental impacts while, at the same time, attaining most ofthe basic objectives of the Project.

The focus of the alternatives analysis in this chapter is on assessing the extent to which the Project alternatives would result in eliminating or reducing impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in Chapter 4, Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures. Project impacts that would be less than significant with and without mitigation as identified in Chapter 4 are also considered, but to a lesser extent.

L
The Notice of Preparation ( NOP) for the EIR was circulated on February 4, 2022 and a scoping meeting was held on February 24, 2022. The NOP and the comments received during the public comment period can be found in Appendix A of this EIR. Comments relating to alternatives received during the NOP comment period include a request by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority ( VTA) to analyze an alternative that would assume higher densities on housing opportunity sites through the reduction of off -site parking ratios. Such reduced ratios were suggested to be accomplished by either reducing parking minimums, applying parking maximums, or both in some or all portions of the City. The environmental effects of the reduced parking ratios and higher densities on land use, walk, bike and transit mode shares, and vehicle miles traveled ( VMT) were specifically requested to be analyzed under this proposed alternative.

5. 1 CEQA Requirements
CEQA requires that an EIR describe and evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15126. 6( a), ( d)). The " range of alternatives" is governed by the " rule of reason," which requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to foster informed decision -making and public participation ( Section 15126. 6( a), ( f)).

The range of alternatives shall include alternatives that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project and would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15126. 6( a)-( c)). CEQA generally defines " feasible" to mean an alternative that is capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the
reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, technological, and legal factors. In addition, the following may be taken into consideration when assessing the feasibility of alternatives: site suitability; economic viability; availability of infrastructure; general plan consistency; other plans or regulatory limitations; jurisdictional boundaries; and the ability of the proponent to attain site control ( Section 15126. 6( f) (1)). The EIR should briefly describe the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed and identify any alternatives that were rejected as infeasible, briefly explaining the reasons ( 15126. 6( c)).

The description or evaluation of alternatives does not need to be exhaustive, and an EIR need not consider alternatives for which the effects cannot be reasonably determined and for which implementation is remote or speculative. An EIR need not descilbe or evaluate the etwhoninental effects of alternatives in the same level of detail as the proposed project, but must include enough information to allow meaningful evaluation, analysts, and comparison with the proposed project CEQA Guidelines Section 15126. 6( d)).

The " no project" alternative must be evaluated. This analysis shall discuss the existing conditions, as well as what could be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15126. 6( e) ( 2)).

CEQA also requires that an environmentally superior alternative be selected from among the alternatives. The environmentally superior alternative is the alternative with the fewest or least severe adverse environmental impacts. When the " no project" alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, the EIR must also identify an environmentally superior alternative from among the other alternatives ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15126. 6( e) ( 2)).

5. 1. 1 Project Objectives
CEQA Guidelines Section 15124 (b) requires the description of the project in an EIR to state the objectives sought by the project.

A clearly written statement of objectives will help the lead agency develop a reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in the EIR and will aid the decision makers in preparing findings or a statement of overriding considerations, if necessary. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project." The primary purpose of the HEU is to comply with the requirements of State law by analyzing existing and projected housing needs, and updating goals, policies, objectives, and implementation programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing. The proposed Project is intended to ensure the City' s conformance with State housing requirements and seeks to:

Protect existing housing;
Encourage new housing for households at all income levels and for households with a range of diverse housing needs;
Remove undue constraints on new housing development, including for affordable housing development;
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 55- 2 ESA 1202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Altematives to the Proiect
Affirmatively further fair housing; and
Identify specific sites that could accommodate required housing units to meet the City' s RHNA.

5. 1. 2 Elimination and/ or Reduction of Identified Significant Impacts
CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6( b) states that " Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the significant effects that a project may have on the environment ( Public Resources Code Section 21002. 1), the discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the pl( fled, even if these etliellialives Would unl odo to sortie degwe the ttttuiutneul of the project. ul.rjec tivv%, of Would lie trrtrte rttstly "
Potentially significant environmental impacts that would result from implementation of the HEU are evaluated in Chapter 4, Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures, of this EIR. With implementation of mitigation measures identified for each resource area significantly impacted, many of the potentially significant impacts resulting from the HEU would be reduced to a less -than -significant level. The Project impacts listed below would remain significant and unavoidable even after mitigation, and the alternatives evaluated in this EIR have been selected because they are anticipated to reduce and/ or eliminate one or more of these significant impacts.

Air Quality Impact AIR-2: Implementation of the HEU would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. ( Significant and Unavoidable with Mitigation)

5. 2 Factors in the Selection of Alternatives
The nature and scope of the range of alternatives to be discussed is governed by the " rule of reason." The CEQA Guidelines recommend that an EIR should briefly describe the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed (Section 15126. 6[ c]). This alternatives analysis considers the following factors:

The extent to which the alternative would accomplish most of the basic objectives of the proposed project;
The extent to which the alternative would avoid or lessen the identified significant, or less - than -significant with mitigation, environmental effects of the proposed project; The feasibility of the alternative, taking into account site suitability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, and consistency with other applicable plans and regulatory limitations;
The extent to which an alternative contributes to a " reasonable range" of alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice; and
The requirement of the CEQA Guidelines to consider a " No -Project" alternative, and to identify an " environmentally superior" alternative in addition to the no -project alternative Section 15126. 6[ e]).

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Altennatives to the

5. 2. 1 Alternatives Considered but Rejected from Further Evaluation
A number of alternatives were considered for analysis and determined not to be feasible for the reasons explained in this section. These alternatives were not carried forward for analysis in the FIR.

Off -Site Alternative
The primary objective of the Housing Element Update is to ensure the City' s conformance with State law There would he no way to meet thi-, objective with an altornativo that did not focus on the City itself, and therefore this alternative was not analyzed further.

Additional Housing Sites
As part of the planning and community engagement process, additional sites were considered for rezoning for multifamily housing and inclusion as part of the HEU. These sites were ultimately eliminated from consideration for the following reasons:

Non -historic churches and other private non- profit institutions in residential ( R) zoning districts were considered as a part of the housing sites inventory. City staff did not receive any responses from the 28 letters sent to properties identified as non -historic churches in R Districts. Although these sites have partnered with the City on temporary housing solutions, particularly during the COVID- 19 pandemic, and are organizations with community -serving missions, additional policy development and outreach are necessary to determine the site -by - site information needed ( e. g., number of units, income level of units, etc.) to be included in the housing sites inventory. However, City staff has included a program in the Housing Plan ( 1. 2 Community Sites for Housing) to evaluate changes to the City Code to allow for affordable residential uses on these sites to respond to Council interest in reviewing such sites.

Non -historic Government sites were considered as a part of the housing sites inventory. City staff met with representatives from the California Department of Motor Vehicles ( DMV), VTA, and the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The DMV expressed concerns about adding housing to a site on Showers Drive, including concerns about compatibility with existing uses and ongoing obligations in operations of the sites.

NASA referred City staff to U. S. Army documents studying potential future uses on vacant land near the Moffett Boulevard/U.S. 101 interchange. The Army has no interest in building residential in that area. VTA was open to reimagining the bus yard on North Shoreline Boulevard to accommodate a mix of uses but did not see it as a viable project in the next eight years. Due to lack of property owner interest because of existing uses or constraints that would not result in housing development in the next eight years that could be counted toward the City' s RHNA, these sites were not considered.

Areas along South Drive around El Camino Hospital were considered as a part of the housing sites inventory. Based on preliminary discussions with El Camino Hospital, there is limited potential for residential uses along South Drive. The properties are owned by multiple owners, occupied with multiple long term practitioners, and have existing flooding hazard concerns. In addition, representatives of El Camino Hospital were concerned with compatibility and traffic issues.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the Project
A future Downtown Precise Plan Update may have the opportunity to include more housing.

However, significant analysis and outreach will be required before it can be considered which will not meet the time frame of the Housing Element.

West Terra Bella may have some opportunity sites, but the Vision Plan was rejected by Council in 2019 in favor of a Precise Plan and/ or a comprehensive Master Plan. Based on the lack of clear guidance for the area' s density and intensity and the need for significant outreach, development of a plan, and CEQA review, it would not meet the timeline for the Housing Element.

Reduced Parking Ratios
As noted above, VTA requested drat the EIR analyze an alternative that would assume higher densities on housing opportunity sites through the reduction of off -site parking ratios Such reduced ratios were suggested to be accomplished by either reducing parking minimums, applying parking maximums, or both in some or all portions of the City. Many of the proposed housing sites already have parking maximums and no minimums (e.g., sites within the North Bayshore and East Whisman Precise Plan areas). The programs in the HEU include a measure to review parking standards in at least one zoning district. In general, parking is not a constraint on density. Developments regularly meet their maximum densities while providing required parking.

However, it may be a constraint on costs, which is why the program was provided.

5. 2. 2 Alternatives to Lessen Identified Significant Effects As noted in several of the topical sections of Chapter 4 of this EIR, one significant and unavoidable effect was identified that would result from the HEU' s implementation related to air quality, as listed above in Section 5. 1. 2. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126. 6( b) notes that a principal purpose of alternatives is to identify alternatives to a project or its location that are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening the significant effects of a project. To that end, the City contemplated feasible alternatives that could avoid or lessen the effects related to air quality.

5. 3 Description of Alternatives Selected for Analysis
The following alternatives were selected for analysis based on the CEQA requirement for a No Project Alternative and the alternatives' ability to attain the basic objectives of the project while reducing one or more significant environmental impact. These alternatives are described in further detail and analyzed below.

Alternative 1: No Project. This alternative assumes that the HEU would not be adopted and that the goals and policies within the existing Housing Element would remain unchanged.

Further, the City' s existing land use and zoning designations would also remain unchanged.

Rezoning within portions of the City would not occur, however reasonably foreseeable development could still proceed, and residential development within the City would continue to be directed and governed in the manner that it is currently.

Alternative 2: Reduced Sites Alternative. This alternative would reduce the number of opportunity sites and rezoning areas identified in the HEU and locate development and resulting construction activity farther from existing neighborhoods.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 5 ESA 1202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the
Further details on these alternatives, and an evaluation of environmental effects relative to the HEU, are provided below.

5. 3. 1 Alternative 1: No Project Alternative
CEQA requires consideration of the No Project Alternative, which addresses the impacts associated with not moving forward with the project. The purpose of analyzing the No Project Alternative is to allow decision -makers to compare the impacts ofthe project versus no project.

Under the No Project Alternative, the HEU would not be adopted and the goals and policies within the City' s existing Housing Element would remain unchanged. The land use and zoning designations utrteutly to lrla( e Would toultuue the laud use dpttsttlus and develolttntu parameters that currently exist in the City As
noted in Chapter 3, Project Description, the City has existing policies and sites with existing residential capacities including: The
City has anumber of housing and mixed - use projects that are approved or have an active application onfile, known as "pipeline projects", that could collectively total approximately8, 600 units by 2031. 9
The City' s existing precise plans, General Plan Land Use designations, and zoning permit arange of residential densities indifferent areas ofthe City that can accommodate development of multifamily housing without adjustment. Apreliminary analysis estimates that there may be sufficient sites to accommodate approximately 4,700 units. Most of these sites are within Precise Plan areas, including El Camino Real, San Antonio, North Bayshore, and East Whisman, although there are sites identified forinclusion inthe inventory inother areas ofthe City as well. The
development of approximately 96 ADUs accessory dwelling units (ADUs) is also estimated tooccur based onexisting development trends. Programs
such as the City' s Below - Market -Rate Housing Program, Notice of Funding Availability ( NOFA) Affordable Housing Program, Affordable Housing Impact Fee, homelessness prevention programs, Community Stabilization and Fair Rent Act (CSFRA), Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance (TRAO), and others also may support housing needs of residents. Approximately
13,600 housing units could be accommodated under existing zoning and General Plan capacity inthe City, which exceeds the 11, 135 total housing units required inthe 6th Cycle RHNA.

While itis not known how many ofthese units would actually berealized during the planning period and at what affordability levels, the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated tobe lower than those expected tobe accommodated bythe proposed Project. However, since neitherahousing sites inventory northe programs necessary toimplement thehousing sites inventory would not be adopted under the No Project Alternative, the 6th Cycle RHNA requirements would not be met. This alternative would not meet any of the objectives ofthe HEU as defined above in Section 5.2. 1. The No Project Alternative would not update the City's Housing Element tocomply with State - mandated housing requirements and to address the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 6 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the Project
development of housing in the City between 2023 and 2031. Under the No Project Alternative, the changes in development capacity via rezoning under the proposed Project, based on City and community input to increase opportunities for housing and programs to affirmatively further equity and fair housing and support existing and future residents, would not occur. While there would still be a buffer to support future compliance with no -net -loss provisions, it would be marginally less than under the Project.

5. 3. 2 Alternative 2: Reduced Sites Alternative
The Reduced Sites Alternative would reduce the number of opportunity sites and rezoning areas Identified In the .l ICU dud lut. dle developinenl and lesulting cuurlrtullu dit tivlly frt ll e f o n existing neighborhoods. Opportunity sites and rezone areas generally located outside of Precise Plan areas ( i.e., within the Monta Loma/ Farley/ Rock Stroot and Springer/ Cuosta/ Phyllis neighborhoods were eliminated resulting in a reduction of approximately 537 units of development capacity.

This alternative was selected for analysis because it would lessen the HEU' s impacts to air quality, which were determined in Impact AIR- 2 of this EIR to be significant and unavoidable, even with mitigation. By concentrating all HEU development within the Precise Plan areas and along commercial corridors, the City could meet its RHNA obligations and also reduce the identified adverse impact of the HEU related to air quality.

This alternative would meet the objectives of the HEU as defined above in Section 5. 2. 1, but to a lesser extent than the proposed HEU. Fewer sites would be identified under the Reduced Sites Alternative that could accommodate required housing units to meet the City' s RHNA. As such, there would be lesser encouragement of new housing for households at all income levels and for households with a range of diverse housing needs and a reduction in the removal of constraints on new housing development, including for affordable housing development.

5. 4 Comparative Analysis of the Alternatives
This section presents a discussion of the comparative environmental effects of each alternative compared to the effects of the Project. As permitted by CEQA, the significant effects of the alternatives are discussed in less detail than are the effects of the proposed Project ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15126. 6[ d]). All impacts are described after implementation of any mitigation measures identified in Chapter 4 ( Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures, and Standard Conditions ofApprova of this EIR.

5. 4. 1 Alternative 1: No Project Alternative
Under the No Project Alternative, the HEU would not be adopted and the goals and policies within the City' s existing Housing Element would remain unchanged. The land use and zoning designations currently in place would continue and development would be subject to policies and standards that currently exist in the City. The overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed Project.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the
Impacts
Aesthetics
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant effects to aesthetics, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with theproposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under [ lie No Project Alteinative would be 41tlicipaled to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. The City' s existing land use and zoning designations would remain as they are currently, as would the City' s development standards. While development would still occur, it would conform to existing development patterns and no adverse visual changes would occur.

Air Quality
The No Project Alternative would likely result in significant and unavoidable effects to air quality, similar to the significant and unavoidable impact identified with the proposed HEU.

Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. This lesser -intensity development would presumably emit fewer overall emissions, although larger projects, or those requiring substantial ground disturbance, specialty construction equipment, or compressed and highly intensive construction schedules could still potentially surpass applicable regulatory criteria. Therefore, impacts would likely be significant and unavoidable, similar to the proposed HEU.

Biological Resources
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to biological resources, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU.

Regardless, potential impacts to biological resources would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the No Project Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU.

Regardless, potential impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources would be subject to the saute standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the No Project Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the Project
Energy
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to energy, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Regardless, any development would still be held to the same energy standards and regulations, regardless of which alternative is adopted, and the impact would be less than significant.

Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to geology, soils, and paleontological resources, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU.

Regardless, potential impacts related to geology and paleontological resources would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the No Project Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant effects to greenhouse gas emissions, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. This lesser -intensity development would presumably emit fewer greenhouse emissions that the proposed HEU, and would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU.

Overall, the impacts of the No Project Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to hazards and hazardous materials, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU.

Regardless, potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the No Project Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Hydrology and Water Quality
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to hazards and hazardous materials, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the
HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU.

Regardless, potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the No Project Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HFU.

Land Use and Planning
The No Project Alternative would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to land use and planning, as compared to the lens than significant iniparty associated with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU.

Under the No Project Alternative, the HEU would not be adopted and the goals and policies within the City' s existing Housing Element would remain unchanged. The land use and zoning designations currently in place would continue under the land use decisions and development parameters that currently exist in the City. However, this alternative would not update the City' s Housing Element to provide housing to fulfill the requirements of State law or to meet the City' s RHNA requirements, which would be a significant and unavoidable impact, as compared to the less -than -significant impacts associated with the proposed HEU.

Noise and Vibration
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to noise and vibration, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Regardless, potential impacts related to noise and vibration would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the No Project Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Population and Housing
The No Project Alternative would result in a less than significant impact to population and housing, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, the HEU would not be adopted and the goals and policies within the City' s existing Housing Element would remain unchanged. Resulting population growth would be less, as the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU, and would be consistent with the City' s current General Plan and zoning, thus constituting planned" growth.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 10 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the Project
Public Services and Recreation
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to public services and recreation, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with theproposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU.

Regardless, potential impacts related to public services and recreation would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the No Project Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Transportation
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to transportation and traffic, similar to the less -than -significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Total VMT would be less under the No Project Alternative, since there would be less development potential. Per capita VMT would vary depending on the location and type of new development, and individual development projects that are subject to additional review and do not screen out of a VMT analysis would require a separate, project -specific VMT analysis and would be required to implement VMT reduction measures if warranted in accordance with City policy, similar to the proposed HEU.

Utilities and Service Systems
The No Project Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to utilities and service systems, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the No Project Alternative, residential development in the City could still take place, but the overall number of new units accommodated under the No Project Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU.

Regardless, potential impacts related to utilities and service systems would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the No Project Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

5. 4. 2 Alternative 2: Reduced Sites Alternative
Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the number of opportunity sites and rezoning areas identified in the HEU would be reduced and development and resulting construction activity would be located farther from existing neighborhoods. Opportunity sites and rezone areas generally located outside of Precise Plan areas within the Mira Loma/ Farley/ Rock Street and Springer/ Cuesta/ Phyllis neighborhoods were eliminated resulting in a reduction of approximately 537 units of development capacity.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 1 1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Altennatives to the
Impacts
Aesthetics
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant effects to aesthetics, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with theproposed HEU. Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU.

While development would still occur, it would conform to existing development patterns and no adverse visual changes would occur, similar to the proposed HEU.

Air Quality
The Reduced Sites Alter -native would likely result in significant and unavoidable effects to air, quality, similar to the significant and unavoidable impact identified with the proposed HEU.

Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. This lesser -intensity development would presumably emit fewer overall emissions, and air quality -related health risk could be reduced in some areas of the City due to the farther distance of some emissions - generating activity to sensitive receptors.

However, it is possible that projects with substantial ground disturbance, specialty construction equipment, or compressed and highly intensive construction schedules could exceed construction criteria air pollutant emission significance thresholds, particularly if the Tier 4 Final equipment required by the mitigation measure is not commercially available. Also, reactive organic gases ROG) emissions from consumer products used during project operations may remain significant because use of such products is a function of consumer choice and commercial availability. For these reasons, criteria air pollutants from construction and operation of subsequent projects developed under the Reduced Sites would conservatively remain significant and unavoidable, similar to the proposed HEU, although potentially reduced due to the development of fewer sites.

Biological Resources
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to biological resources, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with theproposed HEU. Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Regardless, potential impacts to biological resources would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the Reduced Sites Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Regardless, potential impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Altematives to the Project
as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the Reduced Sites Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Energy
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to energy, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU.

Regardless, any development would still be held to the same energy standards and regulations, regardless of which altutnativu is aduptud, and tho impact would beh than Qignificant Geology, Soils, and Paleuntvloyical Resuuives
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to geology, soils, and paleontological resources, . similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Regardless, potential impacts related to geology and paleontological resources would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the Reduced Sites Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant effects to greenhouse gas emissions, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with theproposed HEU. Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. This lesser -intensity development would presumably emit fewer greenhouse emissions that the proposed HEU, and would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU. Overall, the impacts of the Reduced Sites Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less-than-signifcant impacts to hazards and hazardous materials, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Regardless, potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the Reduced Sites Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 13 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Altematives to the Project
Hydrology and Water Quality
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to hazards and hazardous materials, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Regardless, potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the Reduced Sites Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

I antl Il%e atifl Platufilk
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts related to land use and planning, as compared to the less -than -significant impacts associated with the proposed HEU Potential impacts related to land use and planting under the HEU and the Reduced Sites Alternative would be less than significant because each would amend the City' s General Plan polices and zoning standards as needed to ensure consistency with City policies and standards, and the impacts under the Reduced Sites Alternative and proposed HEU would therefore be similar. However, it is acknowledged that the Reduced Sites Alternative would reduce the buffer in the housing sites inventory intended to provide housing to fulfill the requirements of State law and to meet the City' s RHNA requirements.

Noise and Vibration
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to noise and vibration, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Regardless, potential impacts related to noise and vibration would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the Reduced Sites Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Population and Housing
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in a less than significant impact to population and housing, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU. Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Resulting population growth would be less, as the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU, thus constituting " planned" growth.

Public Services and Recreation
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to public services and recreation, similar to the less than .significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU.

Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 14 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the Proiect
Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Regardless, potential impacts related to public services and recreation would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the Reduced Sites Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

Transportation
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to transportation and traffic, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU.

Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Total VMT would be less under the Reduced Sites Alternative, since there would be less development potential. Per capita VMT would vary depending on the location and type of new development, and individual development projects that are subject to additional review and do not screen out of a VMT analysis would require a separate, project -specific VMT analysis and would be required to implement VMT reduction measures if warranted in accordance with City policy, similar to the proposed HEU.

Utilities and Service Systems
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less -than -significant impacts to utilities and service systems, similar to the less than significant impacts identified with the proposed HEU.

Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the overall number of new units accommodated under the Reduced Sites Alternative would be anticipated to be lower than those expected to be accommodated by the proposed HEU. Regardless, potential impacts related to utilities and service systems would be subject to the same standards and regulatory requirements as the proposed HEU, and the impacts of the Reduced Sites Alternative would therefore be similar to that of the proposed HEU.

5. 5 Overall Comparison of the Alternatives
The analysis of the alternatives is summarized and compared in Table 5- 1, which provides a summary of impact levels within all environmental topic areas. Overall, this table shows that some alternatives perform better or worse than others in reducing or avoiding the HEU' s impacts.

5. 5. 1 Environmentally Superior Alternative
CEQA Guidelines § 15126. 6( e) ( 2) requires an EIR to identify an environmentally superior alternative. If the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project Alternative, the EIR also must identify an environmentally superior alternative from among the other alternatives. In general, the environmentally superior alternative is defined as that alternative with the least adverse impacts to the project area and its surrounding environment. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126. 6( a) places emphasis on alternatives that " avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects" of a project.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 15 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the
Table 5- 1 below summarizes the impacts of the identified alternatives and provides a comparison of impacts. While the No Project and Reduced Sites Alternatives could lessen the severity of the identified significant and unavoidable air quality impact identified for the proposed HEU, neither of these alternatives would eliminate the impact, as it is possible that projects with substantial ground disturbance, specialty construction equipment, or compressed and highly intensive construction schedules could exceed construction criteria air pollutant emission significance thresholds.

TABLE 5- 1

ALTERNATIVE IMPACT SUMMARY AND COMPARISON
Alloniallvo I Altmiiative 2.

Impact HEU No Project Alternative Reduced Sites Alternative Aesthetics Lela plan Signifiwiit Loss than Significant 11/ 6 Less than SignificantWO Air Quality
Significant and Significant and Significant and
Unavoidable Unavoidableb Unavoidable D
Biological Resources Less than Significant Less than Significant W D Less than Significant it/ b Cultural Resources and Less than Significant Less than Significant i1/ 4 Less than Significant la/ 4 Tribal Cultural Resources
Energy Less than Significant Less than Significant 4/ 4 Less than Significant t?/L Geology, Soils, &
Paleontological Less than Significant Less than Significant 4/ 4 Less than Significant W4 Resources
Greenhouse Gas
Less than Significant Less than Significant W4 Less than Significant4/ 4 Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Less than Significant Less than Significant W4 Less than Significant 4/ b Materials
Hydrology and Water Less than Significant Less than Significant 4/ 4 Less than Significant 4/ 4 Quality
Land Use and Planning Less than Significant
Significant and
Unavoidable' a
Less than Significant4
Noise Less than Significant Less than Significant W4 Less than Significant4/ b Population and Housing Less than Significant Less than Significant W4 Less than Significantb Public Services and
Less than Significant Less than Significant 4/ 4 Less than Significant4/ 4 Recreation
Transportation Less than Significant Less than Significant 4/ b Less than Significant4/ 4 Utilities and Service
Less than Significant
Less than Significant W,5
Less than Significant 4/b
Systems
NOTES:
b - The impact is less than the proposed HEU.
i1 - The impact is greater than the proposed HEU.
la/ 4 - The impact is about the same as the proposed HEU.

The No Project Alternative would also introduce a new significant and unavoidable impact related to land use and planning. The No Project Alternative would not meet any of the objectives of the HEU as defined above in Section 5. 1. 1, nor is it legally feasible to implement. The No City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

5. Alternatives to the Proiect
Project Alternative would also not provide housing to fulfill the requirements of State law or meet the City' s RHNA requirements, which result in a significant and unavoidable land use and planning impact, as compared to the less -than -significant impacts associated with the proposed HEU and the Reduced Sites Alternative.

Determining an environmentally superior alternative can be difficult because of the many factors that must he balanced For example, the Reduced Sites Alternative could he preferred because, relative to the proposed HEU, this lesser -intensity development would presumably emit fewer overall emissions, and air quality -related health risk could be reduced in some areas of the City due to the farther distance of some emissions - generating activity to sensitive receptors, even thud#[ lire iutEld( t (( I[[( luslom would N- the xaine as the plollosed 11FIT IIuwcaiet, the viedured Sites Alternative would also result in a greater hnpact to land use and planning due to the reduction in the buffer in the housing sites inventory intended to provide housing to fulfill the requirements of State law and to meet the City' s RHNA requirements, although ultimately impacts would be the same as the proposed HEU.

The City has identified the Reduced Sites Alternative as the environmentally superior alternative because of its potential reduction in overall criteria air pollutant emissions and air quality -related health risk. Nonetheless, City decision -makers may weigh the relative benefits of the alternatives differently and with additional information received in or developed during the HEU approval process.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

5. Altematives to the
Resolution No. 18755

This page intentionally left blank
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5- 18 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

Other CEQA Considerations
Consistent with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15126. 2, this section discusses significant envirunniental effects, slg11111cnut lrfevelsible enviitnufteutal t ltauges, aud p,towtli- iudu( lug impacts associated with development of the Project. Project effects that were found to be less than significant are also discussed. Cumulative impacts are separately discussed in Chapter 4, Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.

6. 1 Significant Environmental Effects
Potentially significant environmental impacts that would result from implementation of the HEU are evaluated in the various subsections of Chapter 4. 0, Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures, of this EIR. With implementation of standard conditions and requirements, and mitigation measures identified for each resource area significantly impacted, many of the potentially significant impacts resulting from implementation of the HEU would be reduced to a less than significant level. The impact listed below would remain significant and unavoidable even after mitigation.

Air Quality Impact AIR-2: Implementation of the HEU would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. ( Significant and Unavoidable with Mitigation)

6. 2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Pursuant to Section 15126. 2( c) of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must consider any significant irreversible environmental changes that would be caused by a project should it be implemented.

Section 15126. 2 (c) states:

Uses ofnonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases ofthe project may be irreversible since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely. Primary impacts and, particularly, secondary impacts ( such as highway improvement which provides access to a previously inaccessible area) generally commit future generations to similar uses. Also irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with theproject. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption isjustified. " Resources that would be permanently and continually consumed by implementation of the HEU include water, electricity, natural gas, and fossil fuels; however, the amount and rate of consumption of these resources would not result in significant environmental impacts or the City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6- 1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

6. Other CEQA Considerations
unnecessary, inefficient, or wasteful use of resources. Construction activities related to the various development projects that could result from implementation of the HEU, though analyzed in the applicable technical section of this EIR, would result in the irretrievable commitment of nonrenewable energy resources, primarily in the form of fossil fuels, natural gas, and gasoline for automobiles and construction equipment. With respect to the operational activities associated with the HEU' s implementation, compliance with all applicable building codes, as well as EIR mitigation measures, would ensure that all natural resources are conserved to the maximum extent practicable. It is also possible that new technologies or systems would emerge, or would become more cost- effective or user- friendly, and would further reduce reliance upon nonrenewable energy resources.

The CEQA Guidelines also require a discussion of the potential for irreversible environmental dttnutge caused by du tccident associated with proposed projects. During the construction phase of the various development projects that could result from implementation of the HEU, construction equipment and materials would include fuels, oils and lubricants, solvents and cleaners, cements and adhesives, paints and thinners, degreasers, cement and concrete, and asphalt mixtures, which are all commonly used in construction. Once constructed, the completed structures would use and store small quantities of chemicals typical in residences, such as household cleaning solutions, paints and thinners, and motor fuel ( e. g., motor vehicles and lawn mowers). As stated in Section

4. 8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this EIR, these materials are regulated through a series of federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Compliance with these existing requirements would ensure that the potential to cause significant irreversible environmental damage from an accident or upset of hazardous materials would be less than significant.

6. 3 Growth -Inducing Impacts
The CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR evaluate the growth -inducing impacts of a proposed action ( Section 15126. 2[ d]). A growth -inducing impact is defined by the CEQA Guidelines as:

TJhe ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction ofadditional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects which would remove obstacles to population growth.... It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or oflittle significance to the environment.

A project can have direct and/ or indirect growth -inducement potential. Direct growth inducement could result if a project involved construction of new housing. A project can have indirect growth - inducement potential ifit would establish substantial new permanent employment opportunities e. g., commercial, industrial or governmental enterprises) or if it would involve a substantial construction effort with substantial short- term employment opportunities and indirectly stimulate the need for additional housing and services to support the new employment demand. Similarly, under CEQA, a project would indirectly induce growth if it would remove an obstacle to additional growth and development, such as removing a constraint on a required public service. Increases in population could tax existing community service facilities, requiring construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects. The CEQA Guidelines also require analysis of City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6- 2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report. July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

6. Other CEQA Considerations
the characteristics of projects that may encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively.

The timing, magnitude, and location of land development and population growth is based on various interrelated land use and economic variables. Key variables include regional economic trends, market demand for residential and non-residential uses, land availability and cost, the availability and quality of transportation facilities and public services, proximity to employment centers, the supply and cost of housing, and regulatory policies or conditions. Because general plans define the location, type, and intensity of growth within a given jurisdiction, they are the primary means of regulating development and growth in California. Since the Housing Element is a part of the City' s Genei al Plait, any ul dates to that elemeul Would lly dul'lulttun pluvide' t moans to plan for and regulate development in the areas considered as part of the HFU.

The growth inducing impacts analysis addresses the potential of the HEU' s implementation for unplanned growth inducement in the City of Mountain View and broader area. Under CEQA, a project is generally considered to be growth -inducing if it results in any one of the following:

I. Extension of urban services or infrastructure into a previously unserved area;

2. Extension of a transportation corridor into an area that may be subsequently developed; or

3. Removal of obstacles to population growth ( such as provision of major new public services to an area where those services are not currently available).

6. 3. 1 Extension of Urban Services or Infrastructure
The City of Mountain View, particularly in the areas under consideration for the HEU, is essentially built out. Urban services and infrastructure like roadways, utilities, and public services police and fire protection are already established and have been in place for decades. The absence of these types of services is not a constraint to development in the various HEU housing site areas. All of the HFU' s housing sites are already developed with residential, commercial, or light industrial uses and are served by existing urban infrastructure and services, or urban infrastructure and services lie immediately adjacent. Although on -site infrastructure improvements would need to be constructed to facilitate development in those areas, development of those areas for residential uses would only require a connection to existing services. In other words, the absence of these types of services does not present a constraint to development in any of the HEU housing areas, and the HEU' s implementation would not remove any obstacles to development of those areas. Consequently, implementation of the HEU would not induce unplanned growth in the City or broader area due to extension of urban services or infrastructure.

6. 3. 2 Extension of a Transportation Corridor
As stated in the discussion above, the County is already served by existing transportation facilities and roadways that lie immediately adjacent to the various HEU housing sites. The ostablished transportation network in the County and adjoining area, offer, local and regional access to and from all of the HEU housing sites. Any onsite circulation that would be required in the HEU housing sites would be facilitated by construction of internal streets that would connect City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6- 3 ESA 1202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

6. Other CEQA Considerations
to existing and adjacent roadways. Consequently, implementation of the HEU would not induce unplanned growth in the County or broader area due to extension of transportation corridors.

6. 3. 3 Removal of Obstacles to Population Growth
Section 15126. 2 (d) of the CEQA Guidelines states that an EIR should discuss " the ways in which the project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment." Growth can be induced in a number of ways, including through the elimination of obstacles to growth, through the stimulation of economic activity within the region, or through precedent -setting action. CEQA requires a discusbion of how d PIUjULL Wuld i11L1U laU POP11, d,6011, cnlploylnent, or hou.Sing in the ,aroa, surrounding the project site as well as an analysis of the infrastructure and planning changes that would he necessary to implement the project.

Projects that are characterized as having significant impacts associated with the inducement of growth are frequently those that would remove obstacles to additional growth, such as the expansion of sewer or water facilities that would permit construction of more development in the service area covered by the new facilities. Similarly, if a project would overburden existing infrastructure so as to require construction of new facilities that could result in significant impacts, then the project may be deemed to have a significant growth -inducing impact. In identifying new sites for multi -family housing, the County required that sites have access to existing or planned water, sewer, and other dry utilities with sufficient capacity available to support housing development. As discussed in the Section 4. 15, Utilities and Service Systems, the potential improvements or extension of utility infrastructure to serve development as a result of the HEU would be installed primarily in existing roadways and utility rights -of -way. Aside from short- term construction disturbance, no unusual or further environmental impacts would be generated beyond those identified elsewhere in this Draft EIR for overall construction activity for the Project.

Section 4. 11, Population and Horsing, analyzes the project' s overall effect on population and housing, including growth -inducing considerations. In terms of housing, implementation of the HEU could theoretically provide for development of approximately 15, 000 residential units to 2031. The resulting population increase would be approximately 30, 000 persons. For the City, the HEU would increase the currently allowed cumulative growth in the City by about 4, 100 dwelling units. This would be in addition to more than 23, 000 net new units that could be allowed under the cumulative growth of the City' s adopted General Plan, zoning, and Precise Plans. As such, the HEU' s contribution to cumulative population growth as a result of rezoning would be approximately 8, 200 persons.

This planned population growth in the County has been projected and directed by the Association of Bay Area Governments ( ABAG) as part of the 6'' Housing Element Cycle to meet the region' s housing needs allocation. Implementation of the HEU would require an amendment to the City' s General Plan and Zoning Code to accommodate the projected growth. Because general plans define the location, type, and intensity of growth within a given juilsdlcLIon, Lhey ' die Lhe p11111diy means of regulating development and growth in California. Since the I Iousing Element is a part of the City' s General Plan, any updates to that element would by definition provide a means to plan for and regulate development in the areas considered as part of the HEU. Additional new City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6- 4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Resolution No. 18755

6. Other CEQA Considerations
residential development that could derive from the HEU' s implementation would therefore be consistent with the growth projections in the City' s General Plan and Precise Plans as well as applicable regional plans adopted by ABAG and other relevant entities, and would help the region meet its regional housing allocation requirements. Consequently, implementation of the HEU would not induce substantial unplanned population growth that was not previously anticipated.

6. 3. 4 Summary
Implementation of the HEU would facilitate increased development of residential uses in specific 61NIS Or of +City. iiorwevei, it is impottant lu vole. that while the Idw tc;qultes the IIEU to Include an inventucy of housing sites and requires the City to zone those sites for multifamily housing, the City is not required to actually develop housing on these sites. Future development on the identified sites will be up to the property owners and will be largely dependent on market forces and ( in the case of affordable housing) available subsidies.

Regardless, any increased development that could arise in these areas following the HEU' s implementation would be developed in compliance with the General Plan land use and zoning designations and Precise Plans. Although on -site infrastructure improvements would occur as part of this development, these improvements would connect to existing infrastructure. No extensions or expansions of infrastructure systems or roads would be required beyond what is needed to serve project -specific demand. Consequently, the HEU' s implementation would not induce unplanned growth in the City or broader area due to extension of urban services or infrastructure.

For the above -described reasons, implementation of the HEU would not cause a new impact related to a substantial increase in population growth, and would be in line with the projected growth planned for the area as defined in the City' s General Plan, Precise Plans, and applicable regional planning directives.

6. 4 Cumulative Impacts
CEQA defines cumulative impacts as two or more individual impacts which, when considered together, are substantial or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. The cumulative analysis is intended to describe the " incremental impact ofthe project when added to other, closely related past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects" that can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time." CEQA Guidelines Section 15355) The analysis of cumulative impacts is a two- phase process that first involves the determination of whether a project, together with existing and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in a significant impact. If there would be a significant cumulative impact of all such projects, the EIR must determine whether the project' s incremental contribution" is cumulatively considerable, in which case, the cumulative impact would be significant ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15130).

The analysis of each environmental topic Included in Chapter 4, Errvironrnental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures, of this EIR considers possible cumulative impacts and identifies circumstances in which the Project would contribute to significant cumulative impacts. No cumulative impacts were determined to be significant after mitigation.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6- 55 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

6. Other CEQA Considerations
Resolution No. 18755