ATT 1 - Resolution for the Final EIR — Mountain View City Council, January 24, 2023 (part 3 of 4)

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 (County), are co-permittees. These entities formed the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP) to collectively address waste discharge requirements (WDRs) and manage stormwater runoff from storm drains and watercourses within their jurisdictions. The mission of the SCVURPPP is “to assist in the protection of beneficial uses of receiving waters by preventing pollutants generated from activities in urban service areas from entering runoff to the maximum extent practicable.” Member agencies implement pollution prevention, source control, monitoring, and outreach to reduce stormwater pollution in waterways and protect the water quality and beneficial uses of San Francisco Bay and Santa Clara County creeks and rivers (SCVURPPP 2022). The SCVURPPP produced the Santa Clara Basin Stormwater Resource Plan, which notes the presence of legacy pollutants of concern in the basin, specifically mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) that pose a risk to water resources through urban runoff (SCVURPPP 2019).

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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-14 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 in 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 if they do not meet the minimum size threshold, drain into tidally influenced areas or directly into San Francisco Bay, or drain into hardened channels, or if they are infill projects in subwatersheds or catchment areas that are at least 65 percent impervious.

County of Santa Clara Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan The County maintains an Emergency Operation Plan (EOP) that provides a framework for performing emergency functions before, during, and after an emergency event, natural disaster, or technological incident, and it supports the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) (County of Santa Clara Office of Emergency Services 2017). The County works together with State, Federal, and local agencies to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from incidents regardless of cause, size, or complexity effectively and efficiently. The EOP supports the overall mission of County of Santa Clara Office of Emergency Services (OES).

MEW Vapor Intrusion Study Area Requirements
At properties within the MEW Study Area, the USEPA’s Record of Decision (ROD) Amendment for the Vapor Intrusion Pathway, MEW Superfund Study Area (EPA 2010) and the Statement of Work Remedial Design and Remedial Action to Address the Vapor Intrusion Pathway, MEW Superfund Study Area (EPA 2011) specify the selected vapor intrusion remedy for future new buildings constructed within the MEW Superfund Vapor Intrusion Study Area, cited as follows:
“The selected remedy for all future buildings is Passive Sub-slab Ventilation with Vapor Barrier (and Ability to Convert to Active), Monitoring, and ICs [institutional controls]. Although Active Subslab/Sub-membrane Ventilation is considered to have a better long-term effectiveness than Passive Sub-slab Ventilation systems, areas with lower groundwater VOC concentrations are considered to have a lower potential for vapor intrusion at levels exceeding the Site indoor air cleanup levels, and therefore the passive option is more cost- effective in meeting the indoor air cleanup levels. Because areas overlying higher TCE groundwater concentrations are considered to have a greater potential for vapor intrusion at levels exceeding indoor air cleanup levels, implementing an active sub-slab/sub-membrane ventilation system is acceptable because of its high rating in long-term effectiveness.

For future building construction in the MEW Area, ICs will be implemented through the City of Mountain View’s planning and permitting procedures which will ensure that the appropriate remedy is applied to particular building construction. Where the property already has a recorded agreement in place with regard to future construction, these governmental controls will be layered with

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-15 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
the proprietary controls. Similarly in the Moffett Field Area, ICs will be implemented through NASA’s land use planning documents and it’s Environmental Issues Management Plan. Specifically, the land use planning documents should require the operation and maintenance of remedial measures and incorporation of the remedy into new construction.” The indoor air regulatory action levels are as listed below in Table 4.8-3:

TABLE 4.8-3

I NDOOR AIR CLEANUP LEVELS FOR LONG-TERM EXPOSURE FOR THE

MEW SITE - RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
MEW Site Chemical of Concern
Indoor Air Cleanup Level
(microgram per cubic meter [µg/m3])
Trichloroethene (TCE) 1
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) 0.4
cis-1,2-dichloroethene (1,2-DCE) 60
trans-1,2-DCE 60
Vinyl Chloride 0.2
1,1-dichlorethane (1,1-DCA) 2
1,1-dichloroethene (1,1-DCE) 210
SOURCE: US EPA 2011

Local
City of Mountain View Emergency Operations Center
The City of Mountain View Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is the central command and control facility responsible for carrying out the principles of emergency preparedness and emergency management, or disaster management functions at a strategic level in an emergency situation and ensuring the continuity of operation of the city. During a disaster the EOC is responsible for the strategic overview, or "big picture", of the disaster, and does not normally directly control field assets, instead it functions as making operational decisions and leaving tactical decisions to lower commands. The common functions of the EOC is to collect, gather and analyze data; make decisions that protect life and property, maintain continuity of the organization, within the scope of applicable laws; and disseminate those decisions to all concerned departments, residents, and agencies.

Mountain View Fire Department
Under an agreement with the County, the MVFD implements several hazardous materials programs for the City as a Participating Agency within the Unified Program. The MVFD also enforces storage, handling, and dispensing requirements for hazardous materials and other regulated materials, according to the City Hazardous Materials Permit Code Ordinance and Toxic Gases Ordinance.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Hazardous Materials Business Plan Program
The MVFD requires any facility storing aggregate quantities of any hazardous materials equal to or greater than 10 gallons of liquids, 50 pounds of solids, or 200 cubic feet of gases to report their chemical inventories to the MVFD by preparing a HMBP. An HMBP must include measures for safe storage, transportation, use, and handling of hazardous materials. The HMBP must also include a contingency plan that describes the facility’s response procedures in the event of a hazardous materials release. The HMBP informs the community on chemical use, storage, handling, and disposal practices. It is also intended to provide essential information to firefighters, health officials, planners, elected officials, workers, and their representatives so that they can plan for and respond to potential exposures to hazardous materials.

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 Public Safety, and Infrastructure and Conservation Elements of the General Plan includes the following policies related to hazards and hazardous materials (City of Mountain View, 2021).

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

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.

Goal INC-18: Prevention and remediation of contamination in groundwater, surface water, soil and from soil vapor and vapor intrusion.

Policy INC 18.1 Contamination prevention. Protect human and environmental health from environmental contamination.

Policy INC 18.2 Contamination clean-up. Cooperate with local, state and federal agencies that oversee environmental contamination and clean-up.

Policy LUD 2.5 Moffett Federal Airfield. Encourage compatible land uses within the Airport Influence Area for Moffett Federal Airfield as part of Santa Clara County’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Policy LUD 3.10 Zoning standards for sensitive uses. Allow sensitive uses such as childcare in the North Bayshore and East Whisman Change Areas with measures to protect those uses from hazardous materials used by surrounding businesses.

City of Mountain View Municipal Code
For construction work that will affect traffic on public streets, City of Mountain View will require the Project Applicant to apply for an Encroachment Permit (Section 27.17) or an Excavation Permit (27.31), depending on the nature of the activity. Included within these permits is the requirement to prepare and implement a Traffic Control Plan for all work that impacts traffic on an existing street. For proposed utility lines crossing a signalized intersection, the work must be completed in phases. Traffic control plans shall show the existing lane striping, traffic flow pattern with directional arrows, medians, delineators (cones), signs, and other warning devices for each phase of the work.

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 hazards and hazardous materials, as summarized below.

Toxic Assessment
A toxic assessment report shall be prepared and submitted as part of the building permit submittal. The applicant must demonstrate that hazardous materials do not exist on the site or that construction activities and the proposed use of this site are approved by: the City’ Fire Department (Fire and Environmental Protection Division); the State Department of Health Services; the Regional Water Quality Control Board; and any Federal agency with jurisdiction.

No building permits will be issued until each agency and/or department with jurisdiction has released the site as clean or a site toxics mitigation plan has been approved.

Hazardous Materials Contamination
To reduce the potential for construction workers and adjacent uses to encounter hazardous materials contamination from asbestos-containing materials (ACM) and lead-based paint, the following measures are to be included in the project:
a. In conformance with local, State, and Federal laws, an asbestos building survey and a lead- based paint survey shall be completed by a qualified professional to determine the presence of ACMs and/or lead-based paint on the structures proposed for demolition. The surveys shall be completed prior to demolition work beginning on the structures. b. A registered asbestos abatement contractor shall be retained to remove and dispose of all potentially friable ACMs, in accordance with the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) guidelines, prior to building demolition that may disturb the materials. All construction activities shall be undertaken in accordance with Cal/OSHA standards, contained in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Section 1529, to protect workers from exposure to asbestos. Materials containing more than 1% asbestos are also subject to Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) regulations.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-18 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
c. During demolition activities, all building materials containing lead-based paint shall be removed in accordance with Cal/OSHA Lead in Construction Standard, Title 8, CCR 1532.1, including employee training, employee air monitoring, and dust control. Any debris or soil containing lead-based paint or coatings shall be disposed of at landfills that meet acceptance criteria for the waste being disposed.

Discovery of Contaminated Soils
If contaminated soils are discovered, the applicant will ensure the contractor employs engineering controls and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize human exposure to potential contaminants. Engineering controls and construction BMPs will include, but not be limited to, the following: (a) contractor employees working on-site will be certified in OSHA’s 40 hour Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training; (b) the contractor will stockpile soil during redevelopment activities to allow for proper characterization and evaluation of disposal options; (c) the contractor will monitor area around construction site for fugitive vapor emissions with appropriate field screening instrumentation; (d) the contractor will water/mist soil as it is being excavated and loaded onto transportation trucks; (e) the contractor will place any stockpiled soil in areas shielded from prevailing winds; and (f) the contractor will cover the bottom of excavated areas with sheeting when work is not being performed.

Building Demolition PCB Control
Non-wood frame buildings constructed before 1981 that will be completely demolished are required to conduct representative sampling of priority building materials that may contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). If sample results of one or more priority building materials show PCBs concentrations ≥50 ppm, the applicant is required to follow applicable Federal and State notification and abatement requirements prior to demolition of the building. Submit a completed “Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Screening Assessment Applicant Package” with the building demolition plans for the project. A demolition permit will not be issued until the completed “PCBs Screening Assessment Applicant Package” is submitted and approved by the City Fire and Environmental Protection Division (FEPD). Applicants are required to comply with applicable Federal and State regulations regarding notification and abatement of PCBs-containing materials. Contact the City’s FEPD at 650-903-6378 to obtain a copy of the “PCBs Screening Assessment Applicant Package” and related guidance and information.

Hazardous Materials
If hazardous materials will be stored or used on-site (including paints, thinners, compressed gases, propane, diesel, gasoline, etc.), complete an Environmental Compliance Plan (ECP) application. Attach a copy of the completed ECP to your building plan submittal.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-19 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
plans. The plan must be approved prior to the issuance of a building permit, including demolition.

The plan must show the following:

1. T ruck 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;

2. Construction P hasing, 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.

4. 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.

4.8.4 Significance Criteria
The thresholds used to determine the significance of impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of the Project could have a significant impact on the environment if it would:
• Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
• Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
• Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. • Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-20 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
• For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
• Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.

Approach to Analysis
This environmental analysis of the potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials is based on a review of literature and database research, and the Mountain View planning documents referenced above.

Development in the City, including development allowed by the HEU is regulated by the various laws, regulations, and policies summarized above in Section 4.8.3, Regulatory Setting.

Compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations is assumed in this analysis and local and state agencies would be expected to continue to enforce applicable requirements to the extent that they do so now. Note that compliance with many of the regulations is a condition of permit approval.

A significant impact would occur if, after considering the features described in the Project Description and the required compliance with regulatory requirements, future development allowed by the HEU would create a significant hazard or meet other criteria listed above. For those impacts considered to be significant, mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the identified impacts.

Topics Considered and No Impact Determined
The Project would have no impact to the following topic based on the Project characteristics, its geographical location, and underlying site conditions. Therefore, this topic is not addressed further in this document for the following reason:
• Location within wildland fire area. As discussed in Section 4.8.2, Environmental Setting, Wildland Fires, none the proposed HEU housing site areas are located within an area designated by Calfire as a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Therefore, this significance criterion is not applicable to the Project and is not discussed further.

4.8.5 Impacts of the Project
Impact HAZ-1: Implementation of the HEU would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, disposal, or accidental release of hazardous materials. (Less than Significant)
Demolition
During the demolition of existing structures, if any, to enable the construction of new housing, the existing structures may contain hazardous building materials such as ACM, LBP, and other hazardous materials. Demolition activities may encounter hazardous building materials with

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-21 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
concentrations of hazardous materials above regulatory action levels, which could adversely affect construction workers, the public, and the environment.

The Project may involve the demolition and removal of existing structures, if any. As previously discussed, some structures may predate the 1970s bans on the use of ACM, LBP, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in building materials, and hazardous building materials are anticipated to be present in the structures. As discussed in Section 4.8.3, Regulatory Setting, Summary of Federal and State Hazardous Building Materials Regulations, and Mountain View Standard Condition of Approval (Hazardous Materials Contamination) and (Building Demolition PCB Control), numerous existing regulations require that demolition and removal activities that may disturb or require the removal of hazardous building materials must be inspected and tested for the presence of hazardous materials. If present, the hazardous building materials must be managed and disposed of in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. The removal of ACM and LBP would require the oversight and approval of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

The required compliance with the numerous laws and regulations discussed above that govern the testing, handling, removal, and disposal of hazardous building materials would limit the potential for creation of hazardous conditions due to the use or accidental release of hazardous materials, and would render this impact less than significant.

Construction
During the construction of new housing allowed under the Project, 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. The routine use or an accidental spill of hazardous materials could result in inadvertent releases, which could adversely affect construction workers, the public, and the environment.

Construction activities would be required to comply with numerous hazardous materials regulations designed to ensure that hazardous materials are transported, used, stored, and disposed of in a safe manner to protect worker safety, and to reduce the potential for a release of construction-related fuels or other hazardous materials into the environment, including stormwater and downstream receiving water bodies. Contractors would be required to prepare and implement Hazardous Materials Business Plans (HMBPs) that would require that hazardous materials used for construction would be used properly and stored in appropriate containers with secondary containment to contain a potential release. Mountain View Standard Condition of Approval (Hazardous Materials) would require the proper storage and containment of hazardous materials. The California Fire Code would also require measures for the safe storage and handling of hazardous materials.

As discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, construction contractors would be required to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction activities according to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit requirements. The SWPPP would list the hazardous materials (including

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-22 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
petroleum products) proposed for use during construction; describe spill prevention measures, equipment inspections, equipment and fuel storage; protocols for responding immediately to spills; and describe BMPs for controlling site runoff. Contaminated groundwater encountered during construction activities is prohibited from being discharged to the sanitary sewer system without permitting and approval of the City Fire & Environmental Protection Division. Discharge of treated, contaminated groundwater to the storm system must be permitted by the RWQCB.

In addition, the transportation of hazardous materials would be regulated by the USDOT, Caltrans, and the CHP. Together, federal and state agencies determine driver-training requirements, load labeling procedures, and container specifications designed to minimize the risk of accidental release.

Finally, in the event of a spill that releases hazardous materials at a construction site, a coordinated response would occur at the federal, state, and local levels, including the County or local fire departments, which would be the local hazardous materials response team. In the event of a hazardous materials spill, the fire and law enforcement departments would be simultaneously notified and sent to the scene to respond and assess the situation.

The required compliance with the numerous laws and regulations discussed above that govern the transportation, use, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials would limit the potential for creation of hazardous conditions due to the use or accidental release of hazardous materials, and would render this impact less than significant.

Operations
Once constructed, residences developed as a result of the Project would use and store small quantities of chemicals typical in residences, such as household cleaning solutions, paints and thinners, and motor fuel (e.g., for vehicles and lawn mowers). Few of the chemicals would be considered hazardous materials (e.g., bleach) and the anticipated volumes would be small (i.e., less than 5 gallons). Given that the quantities would be small, the routine use or an accidental spill of hazardous materials would render this impact less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________
Impact HAZ-2: Implementation of the HEU would not Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. (Less than Significant) As discussed in Section 4.8.2, Environmental Setting, Proximity to Schools, there are ten schools located within Mountain View. The accidental release or spill of hazardous materials transported through the vicinity near schools could expose school children and staff to hazardous materials.

Demolition and Construction
As discussed above in Impact HAZ-1, there are numerous regulations covering the transportation, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities. The required compliance with these regulations would ensure that the nearby school would not be exposed to

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-23 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
hazardous materials. In addition, any work that would encroach on public streets would require project applicants to apply to the Mountain View Public Works Department for an encroachment and excavation permit. These permits would require the preparation and implementation of a Traffic Control Plan to manage the movement of vehicles, including those transporting hazardous materials on roads adjacent to or near schools, as required by Mountain View Standard Condition of Approval (Construction Management Plan). Mountain View Standard Condition of Approval (Hazardous Materials) would require the proper storage and containment of hazardous materials.

With the implementation of the required Traffic Control Plan, the impact relative to hazardous materials, substances, or waste in proximity to schools would be less than significant.

Operations
As discussed in Impact HAZ-1, once constructed, residences allowed by the Project would use and store small quantities of chemicals typical in residences, such as household cleaning solutions, paints and thinners, and motor fuel (e.g., cars and lawn mowers). Few of the chemicals would be considered hazardous materials (e.g., bleach) and the anticipated volumes would be small (i.e., less than 5 gallons). Given that few of the routinely used chemicals would be considered hazardous and that the quantities would be small, the routine use or an accidental spill of hazardous materials near a school would render this impact less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________
Impact HAZ-3: Implementation of the HEU would not be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
As discussed in Section 4.8.2, Environmental Setting, Hazardous Materials Sites, some existing and some closed hazardous materials release sites are located within or adjacent to some areas proposed for housing as part of the HEU, meaning they are listed on the Cortese List (i.e., Government Code Section 65962.5 5) due to the release of hazardous materials. Construction on active or closed hazardous materials sites could expose construction workers, the public or the environment to hazardous materials.

As described in Section 4.8.3, Regulatory Setting, MEW Vapor Intrusion Study Area Requirements, projects constructed with the known vapor intrusion areas shown on Figure 4.8-1 would be required to construct vapor intrusion systems to prevent VOCs above the listed regulatory action levels from entering the breathing space of residences. The systems would consist of passive sub-slab ventilation with vapor barrier system with the ability to convert to active (i.e., mechanical pumping of sub-slab vapors). The systems would require routine vapor monitoring to quantify the concentrations of VOCs. In the event that Indoor Air Cleanup Levels are exceeded, the vapor intrusion system would be required to be converted to an active pumping system. Projects that overlie the Vapor Intrusion Study Area would also require establishing institutional controls to verify that the vapor intrusion systems are maintained. With compliance

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-24 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
with the existing regulations for development within the MEW Vapor Intrusion Study Areas, impacts that would be less than significant.

However, as discussed in Section 4.8.2, Environmental Setting, Hazardous Materials Sites, GeoTracker and EnviroStor Hazardous Materials Sites, and as shown on Figure 4.8-1, there are other hazardous materials sites in addition to the vapor intrusion areas. These other hazardous materials sites may contain contaminated soil and/or groundwater as a result of previous land uses. During construction, there is the potential to encounter previously unknown contaminated soil, and, if dewatering is needed, groundwater. Construction workers, the public, and the environment could be exposed to hazardous materials and the impact could be potentially significant.

As discussed in Impact HAZ-1, there are numerous regulations covering the transportation, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities. The required compliance with these regulations would reduce the exposure to hazardous materials. To further ensure that contaminated materials are properly handled, the project applicant would be required to implement Mitigation Measures HAZ-1, Phase I Assessment, as described below, which would reduce the impact to less than significant.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment.

Prior to the initiation of any construction requiring ground-disturbing activities on listed active hazardous materials cleanup sites, the project applicant shall complete a Phase I environmental site assessment for that property in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials Standard E1527 for those active hazardous materials sites to ascertain their current status. Any recommended follow up sampling (i.e., Phase II activities) set forth in the Phase I assessment shall be implemented prior to construction.

The results of Phase II studies, if necessary, shall be submitted to the local overseeing agency and any required remediation or further delineation of identified contamination shall be completed prior to commencement of construction.

Prior to final project design of any individual project that includes any earth-disturbing activities, the project applicant shall conduct a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I assessment). The Phase I assessment shall be prepared in general accordance with ASTM Standard E1527-21, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessment:

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process (or most current edition that is in force at the time of final project design), which is the current industry standard. The Phase I assessment shall include a records review of appropriate federal, State, and local databases within ASTM-listed search distances regarding hazardous materials use, storage, or disposal at the given site, a review of historical topographic maps and aerial photographs, a site reconnaissance, interviews with persons knowledgeable about the sites historical uses, and review of other relevant existing information that could identify the potential existence of Recognized Environmental Conditions, including hazardous materials, or contaminated soil or groundwater. If no Recognized Environmental Conditions are identified, then no further action would be required.

If Recognized Environmental Conditions are identified and the Phase I assessment recommends further action, the project applicant shall conduct the appropriate follow-up actions, which may include further records review, sampling of potentially hazardous

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-25 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
materials, and possibly site cleanup. In the event that site cleanup is required, the project shall not proceed until the site has been cleaned up to the satisfaction of the appropriate regulatory agency (e.g., DTSC, RWQCB, or SCCEHD) such that the regulatory agency issues a No Further Action letter or equivalent.

Significance after Mitigation: Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would ensure that site assessment and, if needed, site cleanup, would occur prior to any earth-disturbing activities within a given project site. This would reduce the potential for an unanticipated discovery during project construction, and reduce the potential effects on construction workers, the public, and the environment. With the implementation of this mitigation measure, this impact would be reduced to less than significant. _________________________
Impact HAZ-4: Implementation of the HEU would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area related to a public airport or public use airport. (Less than Significant)
Impacts relative to noise are analyzed in Section 4.11, Noise.

As described in Section 4.8.2, Environmental Setting, Proximity to Airports, some of the sites identified for housing as part of the HEU would be located within the Moffett Federal Airfield FAR Part 77 Surface that restricts the height of structures within the AIA. Structures that exceed the height restrictions could adversely affect navigable airspace and potentially cause aircraft accidents.

As described in Section 4.8.3, Regulatory Setting, Federal, Airports, restrictions on the height of buildings, antennas, trees, and other objects near Moffett Federal Airfield are regulated by the FAA, specifically, FAR Part 77. The FAR Part 77 map is used by the FAA and the Santa Clara County ALUC to identify potential obstructions and hazards to aviation traffic. The project applicant would be required to comply with the height restrictions. In the event that a project would extend into the FAR 77 surface, the project applicant would be required to apply for a variance with the FAA and the Santa Clara County ALUC. With compliance with these existing regulations on building heights, the impact relative to airports would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________
Impact HAZ-5: Implementation of the HEU would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. (Less than Significant)
Demolition and Construction
During construction of residences planned for in the HEU, construction workers would access the proposed housing sites, and equipment and materials would be delivered for construction. While most construction activities would occur within the proposed housing sites and off public roads, the construction activities may require some temporary road closures or restrictions for the delivery of materials and/or utility improvements that extend into streets. The road closures or restrictions could interfere with emergency response or evacuation.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-26 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
As discussed above in Impact HAZ-2, any work that would encroach on public streets would require project applicants to apply to the Mountain View Public Works Department for an encroachment and/excavation permit. These permits would require the preparation and implementation of a Traffic Control Plan to manage the movement of vehicles as required by Mountain View Standard Condition of Approval (Construction Management Plan). The Traffic Control Plan would manage demolition and construction traffic such that emergency vehicles that need to travel by the sites would not be affected. With the implementation of the required Traffic Control Plan, the impact relative to adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan would be less than significant.

Operations
Generally, the proposed HEU housing sites would not alter the overall land use patterns or land use designations to such an extent that would conflict with County or City emergency response and/or evacuation plans. In addition, the County and City have established response plans for significant hazards (e.g., floods, earthquakes, wildland fires, terrorism, and technological hazards) that include goals, programs, objectives, and action items to ensure effective emergency response to significant hazards. The number of additional residents is not anticipated to add a significant amount of vehicle trips and is not anticipated to result in significant impacts to for emergency response. The impact relative to emergency access would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________

4.8.6 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 hazards and hazardous materials could occur if the incremental impacts of the HEU combined with the incremental impacts of one or more cumulative projects identified in Section 4.0.3, Cumulative Impacts, would be significant and if the HEU’s contribution is considerable.

The geographic area affected by the proposed housing sites and their potential to contribute to cumulative impacts varies based on the environmental resource under consideration. The geographic scope of analysis for cumulative hazardous materials impacts encompasses and is limited to the proposed housing sites and their immediately adjacent area. This is because impacts relative to hazardous materials are generally site-specific and depend on the nature and extent of the hazardous materials release, and existing and future soil and groundwater conditions. For example, hazardous materials incidents tend to be limited to a smaller and more localized area surrounding the immediate spill location and extent of the release, and could only be cumulative if two or more hazardous materials releases spatially overlapped.

The timeframe during which the project could contribute to cumulative hazards and hazardous materials effects includes the construction and operations phases. For the proposed housing sites, the operations phase is permanent. However, similar to the geographic limitations discussed

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-27 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
above, it should be noted that impacts relative to hazardous materials are generally time-specific.

Hazardous materials events could only be cumulative if two or more hazardous materials releases occurred at the same time, as well as overlapping at the same location.

Impact HAZ-1.CU: Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts relative to hazards and hazardous materials. (Less than Significant) Cumulative Impacts during Construction
Significant cumulative impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials could occur if the incremental impacts of the proposed housing sites combined with the incremental impacts of cumulative development discussed above would substantially increase risk that people or the environment would be exposed to hazardous materials.

The construction activities for all cumulative development would be subject to the same regulatory requirements discussed for the proposed HEU housing sites for compliance with existing hazardous materials regulations, including spill response. Construction projects that have spills of hazardous materials would be required to remediate their respective sites to the same established regulatory standards as the proposed housing sites. This would be the case regardless of the number, frequency, or size of the release(s). The responsible party associated with each spill would be required to remediate site conditions to the same established regulatory standards.

The residual less-than-significant effects of the proposed housing sites that would remain after mitigation would not combine with the potential residual effects of cumulative projects to cause a potential significant cumulative impact because residual impacts would be highly site-specific and would be below regulatory standards. Accordingly, no significant cumulative impact with respect to the use of hazardous materials would result. For the above reasons, the Project would not cause or contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact with respect to the use of hazardous materials, and impacts would be less than significant.

Construction for two or more projects that occur at the same time and use the same roads could cause interference with emergency access. Similar to the HEU projects, for construction work that will affect traffic on public streets, the City of Mountain View will require project applicants to apply for an Encroachment and/or Excavation Permit that would include the requirement to prepare and implement a Traffic Control Plan for all work that would encroach within the public right-of-way. The encroachment permit would include traffic control measures to manage the movement of vehicles, including ensuring that emergency vehicles (e.g., police, fire, ambulances, and other vehicles traveling under emergency conditions) are able to pass through or by construction sites. Applicants are required to coordinate construction activities if traffic control/construction overlaps between two or more projects. With the implementation of the encroachment permit and its traffic control measures, the impact relative to emergency response or emergency evacuation would not cause or contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact, and impacts would be would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-28 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Cumulative Impacts during Project Operations
Significant cumulative impacts related to operational hazards could occur if the incremental impacts of the proposed housing sites combined with those of one or more of the above-listed projects to cause a substantial increase in risk that people or the environment would be exposed to hazardous materials used or encountered during the operations phase.

Once constructed, the residences would use and store small quantities of chemicals typical in residences, such as household cleaning solutions, paints and thinners, and motor fuel (e.g., cars and lawn mowers). Few of the chemicals would be considered hazardous materials (e.g., bleach) and the anticipated volumes would be small (i.e., less than 5 gallons). Given that the quantities would be small, the proposed HEU housing sites would not cause or contribute to a cumulatively significant impact with respect to the use of hazardous materials, and impacts would be less than significant.

For the cumulative projects that include the use of reportable quantities of hazardous materials, the cumulative project components involving the handling, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials would be required to prepare and implement an HMBP and comply with applicable regulations, including those governing containment, site layout, and emergency response and notification procedures in the event of a spill or release. Transportation and disposal of wastes, such as spent cleaning solutions, would also be subject to regulations for the safe handling, transportation, and disposal of chemicals and wastes. As noted previously, such regulations include standards to which parties responsible for hazardous materials releases must return spill sites, regardless of location, frequency, or size of release, or existing background contaminant concentrations to their original conditions. Therefore, compliance with existing regulations regarding hazardous materials transport would reduce the risk of environmental or human exposure to such materials. The combined effects of the proposed housing sites and cumulative projects would not be cumulatively considerable result in a significant cumulative impact, and impacts would be less than significant.

Similar to the HEU project, cumulative projects that are located within the Moffett Federal Airfield FAR Part 77 surface area would also be required to comply with the height restrictions identified in the CLUP. In the event that a cumulative project would extend into the FAR 77 surface, the project applicant would be required to apply for a variance with the FAA and the Santa Clara County ALUC. With compliance with these existing regulations on building heights, the combined effects of the proposed HEU housing sites and cumulative projects would not be cumulatively considerable result in a significant cumulative impact, and impacts would be less than significant.

Generally, the proposed HEU housing sites would not alter the overall land use patterns or land use designations to such an extent that would conflict with County or City emergency response and/or evacuation plans. It is assumed that cumulative projects would also be designed to not would conflict with County or City emergency response and/or evacuation plans. In addition, the County and City have established response plans for significant hazards (e.g., floods, earthquakes, wildland fires, terrorism, and technological hazards) that include goals, programs, objectives, and action items to ensure effective emergency response to significant hazards. The number of additional residents is not anticipated to add a significant amount of vehicle trips and is

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-29 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
not anticipated to result in significant impacts to for emergency response. The combined effects of the proposed housing sites and cumulative projects would not be cumulatively considerable result in a significant cumulative impact, and impacts would be less than significant. _________________________

4.8.7 Summary of Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts Impact
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact HAZ-1: Implementation of the HEU
would not create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, disposal, or accidental release
of hazardous materials.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact HAZ-2: Implementation of the HEU
would not Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact HAZ-3: Implementation of the HEU
would not be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and,
as a result, would it create a significant hazard
to the public or the environment.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure
HAZ-1: Phase I
Environmental Site
Assessment
Less than
Significant
Impact HAZ-4: Implementation of the HEU
would not result in a safety hazard or excessive
noise for people residing or working in the
project area related to a public airport or public
use airport.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact HAZ-5: Implementation of the HEU
would not impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact HAZ-1.CU: Implementation of the HEU,
when combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
contribute considerably to cumulative impacts
relative to hazards and hazardous materials.

Less than Significant None required -

_________________________

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

County of Santa Clara, 2017. County of Santa Clara Emergency Operations Plan. January.

San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2-2022-0018, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008, May 11, 2022. Available at https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/board_decisions/adopted_orders/2022/R2 -2022-0018.pdf. Accessed July 11, 2022.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.8-30 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program, 2022. About SCVURPPP.

Available at https://scvurppp.org/about-scvurppp/. Accessed April 30, 2020.

Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program, Santa Clara Basin Stormwater Resource Plan, August 2019. Available at https://scvurppp.org/wp-content/uploads/ 2019/08/SCB_SWRP_FINAL_8-20-19.pdf.

Record of Decision (ROD) Amendment for the Vapor Intrusion Pathway, MEW Superfund Study Area (EPA 2010) and the Statement of Work Remedial Design and Remedial Action to Address the Vapor Intrusion Pathway, MEW Superfund Study Area (EPA 2011).

State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), 2022. Geotracker and EnviroStor combined website. Available:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=mountain+ view+ca. Accessed April 27, 2022.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2010. Record of Decision (ROD) Amendment for the Vapor Intrusion Pathway, MEW Superfund Study Area. August 16.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2011. Statement of Work Remedial Design and Remedial Action to Address the Vapor Intrusion Pathway, MEW Superfund Study Area.

September 16.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), 2019. Fourth Five-Year Review Report for Middlefield-Ellis-Whisman (MEW) Superfund Study Area, Mountain View And Moffett Field, Santa Clara County, California. September.

Windus, Walter B., 2016a. Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Santa Clara County, Palo Alto Airport. Amended November 16.

Windus, Walter B., 2016b. Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Santa Clara County, Moffett Federal Airfield. Amended November 18.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality

4.9.1 Introduction
This section assesses the potential for the Project to result in significant adverse impacts on hydrology and water quality. This section first includes a description of the existing environmental setting as it relates to surface and groundwater, flooding, water quality, and other hydrological considerations, 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 hydrology and water quality.

4.9.2 Environmental Setting
Study Area
The City of Mountain View is located in northern Santa Clara County and is bordered by the San Francisco Bay to the North, the City of Palo Alto to the West, the City of Los altos to the South and Southwest, and Moffett Federal Airfield and the City of Sunnyvale to the East (see Figure 3-1 in Chapter 3 of this EIR, Project Description). The City of Mountain View is situated at an elevation of roughly 105 feet above mean sea level.

Surface Waters
Surface waters in the study area include ephemeral waterways such as Stevens Creek and Permanente Creek as well as the tributary Hale Creek that flows into it. Adobe Creek also runs through a small portion of the East side of Mountain View.

Surface Water Quality
Stevens Creek is listed on the Clean Water Act (CWA) 303(d) list1 condition category 52 as impaired for diazinon (pesticides), temperature, toxicity (total toxics), and trash with a TMDL being implemented for toxicity. None of the sources are known for the Stevens Creek Pollutants.

Permanente Creek is also listed on the CWA 303(d) list condition category 5 as impaired for diazinon (pesticides), selenium (metals), toxicity (total toxics), and trash with a TMDL being implemented for selenium. Pathways for pollutants to enter the creek are myriad. Trash may enter the creeks and streams from being wind-blow, illegally dumped, or potentially from the storm drainage system. Diazinon comes from urban runoff/storm sewers, and available data suggests that discharges from Lehigh Permanente Quarry located in the upper watershed contributes most

1 The term 303(d) list is short for the state’s list of impaired and threatened waters (e.g., stream/river segments, lakes). The state identifies the pollutant causing the impairment, when known. 2 Category 5 condition refers to a water segment where standards are not met and a TMDL is required, but not yet completed, for at least one of the pollutants being listed for the segment.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
of the selenium in Permanente Creek (RWCB, 2022a). Adobe Creek is not listed as an impaired area on the CWA 303(d) list (SWRCB, 2018).

Groundwater Resources
The California Department of Water resources (DWR) defines state groundwater basins based on geologic and hydrogeologic conditions. The DWR considers the Santa Clara Subbasin (DWR Groundwater Basin No. 2-009.02) an important and beneficial groundwater basin underlying the Santa Clara Valley. The Santa Clara subbasin occupies a structural trough parallel to the northwest trending Coast Ranges. The Diablo Range bounds it on the west and the Santa Cruz Mountains form the basin boundary on the east. It extends from the northern border of Santa Clara County to the groundwater divide near the town of Morgan Hill (DWR, 2004). The Santa Clara Basin is divided into two subbasins: the Santa Clara and Llagas subbasins, which cover a combined surface area of approximately 385 square miles. Due to different land use and management characteristics, the Santa Clara Subbasin is further divided into two management areas: the Santa Clara Plain and the Coyote Valley. The dominant geohydrologic feature is the Santa Clara Valley, which drains northward to the San Francisco Bay by tributaries such as Coyote Creek, the Guadalupe River, and Los Gatos Creek. The two drainages running through Mountain View’s City boundaries include Stevens Creek and Permanente Creek, which flow from the Santa Cruz Mountains to the Bay (City of Mountain View, 2021a).

Water Supply
Potable water supply for the City of Mountain is provided from three sources – the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), and local groundwater wells. The City obtains approximately 87 percent of its drinking water from the SFPUC Regional Water System, most of which originate from the Sierra Nevada snowmelt that flows into the Tuolumne River and is stored in the Hetch Hetchy reservoir in Yosemite National Park. A smaller portion of the water SFPUC water supply includes rainwater runoff collected in watersheds in Alameda, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties (City of Mountain View, 2021b).

The SCVWD, now known as Valley Water, supplies approximately 11 percent of the City’s potable water supply. Surface water is imported mainly from the South Bay Aqueduct, Dryer Reservoir, Lake Del Valle, and San Luis Reservoir, which all draw water from the Sacramento – San Joaquin River Delta watershed. The remaining supply comes from local rainfall which is captured in the Valley Water’s ten local reservoirs. Local water sources include Anderson and Calero reservoirs, however Anderson Reservoir is currently offline for dam rehabilitation (City of Mountain View, 2021b). Valley Water releases this water into local creeks and percolation ponds to replenish local groundwater aquifers and to manage environmental needs (City of Mountain View, 2022).

The City owns and operates groundwater wells that provide two percent of the potable water supply. Groundwater beneath Mountain View is present in two aquifers within the Santa Clara groundwater subbasin separated by natural clay formations. City wells are drilled deep into the lower aquifer where the clay formations and geology help protect the City’s groundwater supply from contamination. Groundwater is blended with SFPUC water for distribution to City water

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
customers. The City’s wells also serve as a backup water supply during emergencies (City of Mountain View, 2021b).

In 2020, The City’s overall water supply production was 84 percent SFPUC, 10 percent Valley Water, 2 percent groundwater, and 4 percent recycled water (City of Mountain View, 2021a).

Mountain View uses recycled water from the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant for irrigation and toilet flushing in the North Bayshore Area. There are currently 58 active customer connections to the City’s recycled water system, including Shoreline golf course regional park, Shoreline Amphitheatre, Charleston Park, and various business and roadway landscaping (City of Mountain View, 2021a).

The City of Mountain View’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan was developed to serve as a flexible framework of planned response measures to mitigate water supply shortages. The City’s Water Shortage Plan was prepared in accordance with the following guiding principles: shared contribution, meet basic health and safety needs, prioritize reducing nonessential water uses, minimize economic impacts to businesses, and communication at every stage. The current Water Shortage Plan identifies four stages of action in response to a water supply shortage (stages 1 through 4) (City of Mountain View, 2021a).

Flooding and Drainage
Flooding is inundation of normally dry land as a result of a rise in surface water levels or rapid accumulation of stormwater runoff during storm events. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), through its Flood Insurance Rate Mapping (FIRM) program, designates areas where urban flooding could occur during 100-year and 500-year flood events. A 100-year flood event has a one-percent probability of occurring in a single year. 100-year floods can occur in consecutive years or periodically throughout a decade. A 500-year flood event has a 0.2 percent probability of occurring in a single year. The City of Mountain View has areas that lie within the 100-year floodplain, mainly concentrated in the North Bayshore area. There are also some areas in the southern portion of the City located in 100-year floodplain areas (MTC and ABAG, 2020).

Tsunami and Seiche Hazards
Tsunamis are a series of waves generated by vertical movement of the sea floor, normally associated with earthquakes or volcanic eruptions. There is a small portion of Mountain View located in a tsunami evacuation zone (MTC and ABAG, 2020). This area is in the very northern portion of the North Bayshore Area of the City, and none of the proposed housing sites identified as part of the HEU are located within a tsunami evacuation zones. The housing sites located outside of the North Bayshore area are located inland from coastal areas and would not be subject to tsunamis.

Seiches are oscillations of enclosed or semi-enclosed bodies of water that result from seismic events, wind stress, volcanic eruptions, underwater landslides, and local basin reflections of tsunamis. The key requirement for the formation of a seiche is that a body of water be at least partially bounded, allowing for a standing wave to form. There is no body of water in the City of

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
sufficient size to produce a seiche. None of the housing sites are close to enclosed or semi- enclosed bodies of water.

4.9.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Clean Water Act
The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and subsequent amendments, under the enforcement authority of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), was enacted “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.” The purpose of the CWA is to protect and maintain the quality and integrity of the nation’s waters by requiring states to develop and implement state water plans and policies. The CWA gave the USEPA the authority to implement pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industry. In California, implementation and enforcement of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program is conducted through the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs). The CWA also sets water quality standards for surface waters and established the NPDES program to protect water quality through various sections of the CWA, including Sections 401 through 404 and 303(d) that are implemented and regulated by the SWRCB and the nine RWQCBs. Section 402 of the CWA would apply to the Project because the Project would be required to control discharges of pollutants from point sources, as discussed below.

Section 402
The 1972 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act established the NPDES permit program to control discharges of pollutants from point sources (Section 402). The 1987 amendments to the CWA created a new section of the CWA devoted to stormwater permitting (Section 402[p]). The USEPA has granted the SWRCB primacy in administering and enforcing the provisions of CWA and NPDES through the local RWQCBs. NPDES is the primary federal program that regulates point-source and non-point-source discharges to waters of the United States.

The SWRCB issues both general and individual permits for discharges to surface waters, including for both point-source and non-point-source discharges. In response to the 1987 amendments, the US EPA developed the Phase I NPDES Storm Water Program for cities with populations larger than 100,000, and Phase II for smaller cities. In California, the SWRCB has drafted the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4 General Permit). Development permitted by the HEU would be subject to the Phase II MS4 permit, discussed further below.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit The NPDES permit system was established in the CWA to regulate municipal and industrial point discharges to surface waters of the U.S. Each NPDES permit for point discharges contains limits on allowable concentrations of pollutants contained in discharges. Section 402 of the CWA contain general requirements regarding NPDES permits.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
The CWA was amended in 1987 to require NPDES permits for non-point source (i.e., stormwater) pollutants in discharges. Stormwater sources are diffuse and originate over a wide area rather than from a definable point. The goal of NPDES stormwater regulations is to improve the quality of stormwater discharged to receiving waters to the “maximum extent practicable” through the use of structural and non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs can include the development and implementation of various practices including educational measures (workshops informing public of what impacts results when household chemicals are dumped into storm drains), regulatory measures (local authority of drainage facility design), public policy measures, and structural measures (filter strips, grass swales and detention ponds). The NPDES permits that apply to activities in the City are described under State and local regulations.

Federal Emergency Management Agency
Under Executive Order 11988, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible for management of floodplain areas defined as the lowland and relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters subject to a 1 percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year (the 100-year floodplain). FEMA is a federal agency whose overall mission is to support citizens and first responders to ensure that the United States builds, sustains, and improves capabilities to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate all hazards. With regard to flooding, the FEMA provides information, guidance, and regulation associated with flood prevention, mitigation, and response. Under Executive Order 11988, FEMA requires that local governments covered by the federal flood insurance program pass and enforce a floodplain management ordinance that specifies minimum requirements for any construction within the 100-year floodplain. Through its Flood Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA manages the National Flood Insurance Program, which includes flood insurance, floodplain management, and flood hazard mapping functions. FEMA determines flood elevations and floodplain boundaries and distributes the flood insurance rate maps used in the National Flood Insurance Program. These maps identify the locations of special flood hazard areas, including 100-year floodplains (i.e., areas that would have a 1 percent annual chance of flooding).

Federal regulations governing development in a floodplain are set forth in Title 44, Part 60 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Those regulations enable FEMA to require municipalities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program to adopt certain flood hazard reduction standards for construction and development in 100-year floodplains.

State
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Division 7 of the Water Code Sections 13000, et sec.) is the primary water quality control law in California. Porter-Cologne established the State Water Resources Control Board and divided the state into nine regional basins, each overseen by a RWQCB. The nine RWQCBs have the primary responsibility for the coordination and control of water quality within their respective jurisdictional boundaries. The Porter-Cologne Act requires the RWQCBs to establish water quality objectives while acknowledging that water quality may be changed to some degree without unreasonably affecting beneficial uses. Water quality objectives are limits or levels of water quality constituents or characteristics established

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-6 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
for the purpose of protecting beneficial uses. Designated beneficial uses, together with the corresponding water quality objectives, also constitute water quality standards under the federal CWA. Therefore, the water quality objectives form the regulatory references for meeting state and federal requirements for water quality control. Designated beneficial uses for water bodies in the study area are described in the regional regulatory section (under Basin Plan discussion).

NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater Associated with Construction Activities (Order 2009-0009-DWQ)
Construction of multifamily housing allowed by the HEU would disturb more than one acre of land surface affecting the quality of stormwater discharges into waters of the U.S. These developments would, therefore, be subject to the NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order 2009-0009- DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002; as amended by Orders 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-006-DWQ).

The Construction General Permit regulates discharges of pollutants in stormwater associated with construction activity to waters of the U.S. from construction sites that disturb one acre or more of land surface, or that are part of a common plan of development or sale that disturbs more than one acre of land surface. The permit regulates stormwater discharges associated with construction or demolition activities, such as clearing and excavation; construction of buildings; and linear underground projects, including installation of water pipelines and other utility lines.

The Construction General Permit requires that construction sites be assigned a Risk Level of 1 (low), 2 (medium), or 3 (high), based both on the sediment transport risk at the site and the receiving waters risk during periods of soil exposure (e.g., grading and site stabilization). The sediment risk level reflects the relative amount of sediment that could potentially be discharged to receiving water bodies and is based on the nature of the construction activities and the location of the site relative to receiving water bodies. The receiving waters risk level reflects the risk to the receiving waters from the sediment discharge. Depending on the risk level, the construction projects could be subject to the following requirements:
• Effluent standards;
• Good site management “housekeeping;”
• Non-stormwater management;
• Erosion and sediment controls;
• Run-on and runoff controls;
• Inspection, maintenance, and repair; or
• Monitoring and reporting requirements.

The Construction General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that includes specific best management practices (BMPs) designed to prevent sediment and pollutants from contacting stormwater from moving off site into receiving waters. The BMPs fall into several categories, including erosion control, sediment control, waste management and good housekeeping, and are intended to protect surface water quality by preventing the off-site migration of eroded soil and construction-related pollutants

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
from the construction area. Routine inspection of all BMPs is required under the provisions of the Construction General Permit. In addition, the SWPPP is required to contain a visual monitoring program, a chemical monitoring program for non-visible pollutants, and a sediment monitoring plan if the site discharges directly to a water body listed on the 303(d) list for sediment.

The SWPPP must be prepared before the construction begins. The SWPPP must contain a site map(s) that delineates the construction work area, existing and proposed buildings, parcel boundaries, roadways, stormwater collection and discharge points, general topography both before and after construction, and drainage patterns across the project area. The SWPPP must list BMPs and the placement of those BMPs that the applicant would use to protect stormwater runoff. Additionally, the SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program; a chemical monitoring program for “non-visible” pollutants to be implemented if there is a failure of BMPs; and a sediment monitoring plan if the site discharges directly to a water body listed on the 303(d) list for sediment. Examples of typical construction BMPs include scheduling or limiting certain activities to dry periods, installing sediment barriers such as silt fence and fiber rolls, and maintaining equipment and vehicles used for construction. Non-stormwater management measures include installing specific discharge controls during certain activities, such as paving operations, vehicle and equipment washing and fueling. The Construction General Permit also sets post-construction standards (i.e., implementation of BMPs to reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges from the site following construction).

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014, effective January 1, 2015, authorizes local agencies to manage groundwater in a sustainable manner and allows limited state intervention when necessary to protect groundwater resources. SGMA defined “sustainable groundwater management,” established a framework for local agencies to develop plans, and implement strategies to sustainably manage groundwater resources, established basin prioritization (ranked from very low to high priority), and set a 20-year timeline for implementation. Basins are prioritized under the SGMA by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The HEU would apply to areas that are within the Santa Clara Subbasin and areas not located within a DWR-designated groundwater basin. The largest groundwater basin in Mountain View is the Santa Clara a subbasin, identified by DWR as a high-priority basin, though not one in condition of critical overdraft (DWR, 2022).

Valley Water updated its Groundwater Management Plan (GWMP) for the Santa Clara and Llagas subbasins in 2021, describing its comprehensive groundwater management framework including objectives and strategies, programs and activities to support those objectives, and outcome measures to gauge performance. The GWMP is the guiding document for how Valley Water will ensure groundwater basins within its jurisdiction are managed sustainably. The Santa Clara subbasin has not been identified as a groundwater basin in a state of overdraft (Valley Water, 2021).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Regional
San Francisco Bay Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) The Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin (Basin Plan) is the master water quality control planning document used to designate beneficial uses and surface and ground water quality objectives. The Project site is located within the water quality control jurisdiction of Region 2, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Region 2 is tasked with implementing the adopted Basin Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin through planning, permitting, and enforcement of established water quality objectives. In accordance with State Policy for Water Quality Control, Region 2 employs a range of beneficial use designations for surface waters (including creeks, streams, lakes and reservoirs), groundwaters, marshes, and mudflats that serve as the basis for establishing water quality objectives, discharge conditions, and prohibitions. The Basin Plan, as updated with amendments adopted through November 5, 2019, has identified existing and potential beneficial uses supported by the key surface water drainages throughout its jurisdictional planning area (RWQCB, 2019). Designated beneficial uses for water bodies in the study area are provided in Table 4.9-1.

TABLE 4.9-1

D ESIGNATED BENEFICIAL USES FOR WATER BODIES IN THE STUDY AREA Water Body Designated Beneficial Uses
Adobe Creek COLD, WARM, WILD, REC-1, REC-2
Permanente Creek GWR, COLD, RARE, SPWN, WARM, WILD, REC-1, REC-2 Hale Creek COLD, WARM, WILD, REC-1, REC-2
Stevens Creek FRSH, GWR, COLD, MIGR, RARE, SPWN, WARM, WILD, REC-1, REC-2 Existing and Potential Beneficial Uses Key:

COLD (Cold Freshwater Habitat), FRESH (Freshwater Replenishment), GWR (Groundwater Recharge), MIGR (Fish Migration), RARE (Preservation of Rare and Endangered Species), REC-1 (Water Contact Recreation), REC-2 (Noncontact Water Recreation), SPWN (Fish Spawning), WARM (Warm Freshwater Habitat), WILD (Wildlife Habitat).

SOURCE: RWQCB, 2019

Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program The Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP) supports member agencies in implementing stormwater quality activities in compliance with state and Federal water quality mandates. Mountain View along with all other incorporated cities and unincorporated areas in Santa Clara County participate in the SCVURPPP as permittees.

Members of this program are regulated waste dischargers under an NPDES permit program Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (Order No. R2-2015-0049) issued by the San Francisco Bay RWQCB, responsible for municipal storm drain systems and water courses that they own and operate. Municipal Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) carry stormwater runoff from hard surfaces such as roofs and pavement directly to creeks, wetlands and the Bay/Delta.

Under the MRP, stormwater pollution prevention includes limiting trash and other pollutants from entering the stormdrain. Some examples of MRP mandated local activities include implementing BMPs when washing or renovating paved areas, practicing good housekeeping measures to limit

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
pollution, requiring land development projects (public and private) to incorporate low impact development features and facilities to reduce runoff pollution over the life of a project.

Phase I - Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP)
The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) was amended in 1987 to address urban stormwater runoff pollution of the nation’s waters. In 1990, US EPA promulgated rules establishing Phase 1 of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater program. The Phase 1 program for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4s) requires operators that serve populations of 100,000 or greater to implement a stormwater management program as a means to control polluted discharges from these MS4s.

The Water Board issued county-wide municipal stormwater permits in the early 1990s to operators of MS4s serving populations over 100,000 (Phase 1). On November 19, 2015, the Water Board re-issued these county-wide municipal stormwater permits as one Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (Order No. R2-2022-0018) to regulate stormwater discharges from municipalities and local agencies in Santa Clara County and numerous other counties in the San Francisco Bay Area (RWQCB, 2022).

Local
City of Mountain View 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
The Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) provides an analysis of the City of Mountain View’s available water supply, during normal and dry-year scenarios, compared to current and projected 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 the needs of Mountain View’s existing and future water customers. This UWMP update also includes an update to the Water Shortage Contingency Plan. Mountain View’s municipal water system serves the majority of businesses and residents within the City limits. A small number of customers are served by the California Water Service Company. The City’s service population is currently 79,772, with an employment base of 98,270 (City of Mountain View, 2021a).

City of Mountain View Water Shortage Contingency Plan
The City of Mountain View’s Waster Shortage Contingency Plan was updated in May 2015 in response to the drought and was implemented between 2014 and 2017 to address mandates from the State Water Board and Governor. The City’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan was developed to serve as a flexible framework of planned response measures to mitigate water supply shortages (City of Mountain View, 2021a).

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 and Parks, Open Space, and Community Facilities Elements of the General Plan includes the following policies related to hydrology and water quality (City of Mountain View, 2021).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-10 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Goal INC-3: Functional, safe and well-maintained public rights-of-way that promote environmental sustainability.

Policy INC-3.3: Street Design for Stormwater. Encourage street designs that reduce stormwater flows and accomplish other City stormwater goals.

Policy INC-3.7: Recycled Water Separation. Ensure that expansion of recycled water infrastructure in the public right-of-way with other utilities adheres to separation criteria provided by the California Department of Public Health.

Goal INC-4: A sustainable water supply with sufficient supply and appropriate demand management.

Policy INC-4.1: Water Supply. Maintain a reliable water supply.

Policy INC-4.2: Participating in Regional Organizations. Participate in regional water supply organizations, support their efforts to maintain and improve the water supply and monitor statewide and regional water supplies.

Policy INC-4.4: Expanding Water Service Area. Provide water service to areas outside the City service area if it is mutually beneficial for the City and prospective new users.

Goal INC-5: Effective and comprehensive programs utilizing water use efficiency, water conservation and alternative water supplies to reduce per capita potable water use.

Policy INC-5.1: Community Awareness. Raise community awareness about water use efficiency and water conservation.

Policy INC-5.2: Citywide Water Conservation. Reduce water waste and implement water conservation and efficiency measures throughout the city.

Policy INC-5.3: Water Reuse. Remove barriers and provide guidance for the use of rainwater and graywater as alternative water supplies.

Policy INC-5.4: Smart Water Meters. Encourage water meter technologies that provide water usage feedback to customers.

Policy INC-5.5: Landscape Efficiency. Promote water-efficient landscaping including drought-tolerant and native plants, along with efficient irrigation techniques.

Policy INC-5.6: Indoor Efficiency. Promote the use of water-efficient fixtures and appliances.

Policy INC-5.7: Leadership in City Facilities. Provide leadership by promoting water use efficiency, water conservation and the use of recycled water at City-owned facilities.

Goal INC-6: A coordinated wastewater collection system that protects the community’s health and safety.

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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-11 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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-6.3: Wastewater Treatment Partnership. Partner with the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant to ensure high-quality water treatment.

Policy INC-6.4: Discharge Regulations. Coordinate with partners and other local agencies to monitor changing rules and regulations regarding wastewater discharge from the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant
Goal INC-7: A reliable, safe and extensive recycled water infrastructure system.

Policy INC-7.1: Citywide Recycled Water Use. Promote, require or offer incentives for using recycled water as an alternative to potable water Policy INC-7.2: Recycled Water System. Expand the use and availability of recycled water throughout the city.

Policy INC-7.3: Recycled Water in Parks. Promote the use of recycled water at City parks and open spaces or where available.

Policy INC-7.4: Recycled Water and Trees. Promote appropriate tree and landscape species irrigated by recycled water.

Policy INC-7.5: Rights-of-way and Infrastructure. Design public right-of-way to accommodate recycled water infrastructure.

Goal INC-8: An effective and innovative stormwater drainage system that protects properties from flooding and minimizes adverse environmental impacts from stormwater runoff.

Policy INC-8.1: Citywide Stormwater System. Maintain the stormwater system in good condition.

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-8.3: Cost-effective Strategies. Encourage stormwater strategies that minimize additional City administrative and maintenance costs.

Policy INC-8.4: Runoff Pollution Prevention. Reduce the amount of stormwater runoff and stormwater pollution entering creeks, water channels and the San Francisco Bay through participation in the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program.

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-8.6 Green Streets. Seek opportunities to develop green streets and sustainable streetscapes that minimize stormwater runoff, using techniques such as on- street bio-swales, bio-retention, permeable pavement or other innovative approaches.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Policy INC-8.7: Stormwater Quality. Improve the water quality of stormwater and reduce flow quantities.

Policy INC-8.8: Stormwater Infrastructure Funding. Develop permanent and ad hoc sources of funding to implement stormwater best practices in the city.

Goal INC-16: Rich and biologically diverse ecological resources which are protected and enhanced.

Policy INC-16.5: Wetland Habitat. Collaborate with and support regional efforts to restore and protect wetlands, creeks, tidal marshes and open-water habitats adjacent to San Francisco Bay.

Goal INC-17: A healthy and well-managed watershed that contributes to improved water quality and natural resource protection.

Policy INC-17.1: Flood Prevention. Provide and maintain City infrastructure to reduce localized flooding and protect community health and safety.

Policy INC-17.2: Natural Hydrology in Watersheds. Promote an ecologically sensitive approach to flood protection, encouraging natural hydrology and preserving habitat and ecology within watercourses.

Policy INC-17.3: Floodway Preservation. Preserve floodways as a natural flood control mechanism.

Policy INC-17.4: National Flood Insurance Program. Participate in the National Flood Insurance Program administered by the Federal Emergency Management Administration.

Goal INC-18: Prevention and remediation of contamination in groundwater, surface water, soil and from soil vapor and vapor intrusion.

Policy INC-18.1: Contamination Prevention. Protect human and environmental health from environmental contamination.

Policy INC-18.2: Contamination Clean-Up. Cooperate with local, state and federal agencies that oversee environmental contamination and clean-up.

Goal POS-12: A healthy urban forest and sustainable landscaping throughout the city.

Policy POS-12.4: Drought-tolerant Landscaping. Increase water-efficient, drought- tolerant and native landscaping where appropriate on public and private property.

Policy POS-12.5: Salt-tolerant Vegetation. Promote the use of salt-tolerant vegetation that can use recycled water.

City of Mountain View Municipal Code
Section 35.34 – Permanent stormwater pollution prevention measures required.

The City requires stormwater pollution prevention measures for development and redevelopment projects in order to reduce water quality impacts of stormwater runoff from the site for the life of the project The types of development and redevelopment projects required to install permanent stormwater pollution prevention measures are listed

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-13 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
in the city's NPDES permit for stormwater, and the city's guidelines. Permanent stormwater quality pollution prevention measures shall be selected and designed to the satisfaction of the city in accordance with the guidelines contained in the most recent versions of the following documents:

1. City of Mountain View Storm Water Quality Guidelines for Development Projects; and

2. NPDES municipal stormwater discharge permit issued to the city by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region.

Applicable development projects shall submit a stormwater management plan in accordance with the city's guidelines.

Section 8.163.1 – Establishment of a flood development permit.

A flood development permit shall be obtained before any construction or other development begins within any area of special flood hazard established in Sec. 8.162.2.

Application for a flood development permit shall be made on forms furnished by the building official and may include, but not be limited to plans in duplicate drawn to scale showing the nature, location, dimensions and elevations of the area in question; existing or proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, drainage facilities; and the location of the foregoing. Specifically, the following information is required:
• Proposed elevation in relation to mean sea level, of the lowest floor (including basement) of all structures; in zone AO, the elevation of highest adjacent grade and the proposed elevation of lowest floor of all structures; or • Proposed elevation in relation to mean sea level (Bench Mark No. U-180) to which any structure will be floodproofed, if required in Sec. 8.164.1.c.3; and • All appropriate certifications listed in Sec. 8.163.3.d of this article; and • Description of the extent to which any watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of proposed development.

Mountain View Standard Conditions of Approval
As part of discretionary review, the City has standard conditions for different types of approvals (updated as of October 25, 2021). The standard conditions of approval related to hydrology and water quality include the following:

State Of California Construction General Stormwater Permit A “Notice of Intent” (NOI) and “Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan” (SWPPP) shall be prepared for construction projects disturbing one (1) acre or more of land. Proof of coverage under the State General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit shall be attached to the building plans.

Construction Best Management Practices
All construction projects shall be conducted in a manner which prevents the release of hazardous materials, hazardous waste, polluted water, and sediments to the storm drain system.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-14 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Construction Sediment and Erosion Control Plan
The applicant shall submit a written plan acceptable to the City which shows controls that will be used at the site to minimize sediment runoff and erosion during storm events. The plan should include installation of the following items where appropriate: (a) silt fences around the site perimeter; (b) gravel bags surrounding catch basins; (c) filter fabric over catch basins; (d) covering of exposed stockpiles; (e) concrete washout areas; (f) stabilized rock/gravel driveways at points of egress from the site; and (g) vegetation, hydroseeding, or other soil stabilization methods for high-erosion.

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-programmable 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.

Parking Garages
For multiple-level parking garages, interior levels shall be connected to an approved wastewater treatment system discharging to the sanitary sewer.

Outdoor Storage Areas (Including Garbage Enclosures)
Outdoor storage areas (for storage of equipment or materials which could decompose, disintegrate, leak, or otherwise contaminate stormwater runoff), including garbage enclosures, shall be designed to prevent the run-on of stormwater and runoff of spills by all of the following:
(a) paving the area with concrete or other nonpermeable surface; (b) covering the area; and (c) sloping the area inward (negative slope) or installing a berm or curb around its perimeter. There shall be no storm drains in the outdoor storage area.

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 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-15 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 Plan must include a stamped and signed certification by a qualified Engineer, stating that the Stormwater Management Plan complies with the City’s guidelines 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.

Full Trash Capture
Projects located in “moderate,” “high,” or “very high” trash generating areas as outlined in the City’s Long-Term Trash Load Reduction Plan that are undergoing site improvements shall install full trash capture protection within the existing storm drain system. Examples of full trash capture systems include large trash capture devices, such as hydrodynamic separators or media filtration systems, or small trash capture devices, such as storm drain catch basin connector pipe screens.

Once installed, the property owner or property manager shall be responsible for maintaining the trash capture device. Maintenance shall be completed in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommended frequency, but at a minimum of one time per year. Indicate the type of full trash capture device that will be installed to remove trash from runoff for the entire project site, and include details for the installation of the trash capture system(s) in the building plans for the project.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Full Trash Capture (Off-Site Improvement)
Projects located in “moderate,” “high,” or “very high” trash generating areas as outlined in the City’s Long-Term Trash Load Reduction Plan that will construct off-site improvements to the public storm drain system shall install full trash capture protection within the newly constructed public storm drain system. Examples of full trash capture systems include large trash capture devices, such as hydrodynamic separators or media filtration systems, or small trash capture devices, such as storm drain catch basin connector pipe screens. Once installed, the property owner or property manager shall be responsible for maintaining the trash capture device.

Maintenance shall be completed in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommended frequency, but at a minimum of one time per year. Indicate the type of full trash capture device that will be installed to remove trash from runoff for the entire project site, and include details for the installation of the trash capture system(s) in the building plans for the project.

AO Flood Zone
The site is located within Special Flood Hazard Zone AO, depth 1, and must comply with the drainage and flood control requirements of the City Code. The elevation of the lowest floor of the building must be at least 1’ above the highest adjacent grade and must be above elevation 12.75 (NAVD 88). The highest adjacent grade is defined as the highest natural elevation of the ground surface prior to construction next to the proposed walls of the structure. The applicant shall obtain a Flood Development Permit from the Public Works Department prior to issuance of a building permit, including foundation work. It is recommended this permit be obtained before the design of the building plans is complete in order to avoid potential redesign of the building.

Grading Requirements
For sites located within a special flood hazard zone, the grading or site plan must show the elevation of the finished pad, lowest floor, highest adjacent grade for Flood Zone AO, and base flood elevation for Flood Zone AE. All elevations must be referenced to a City elevation benchmark. The benchmark number, description, elevation, and datum year shall be noted on the grading plan.

4.9.4 Significance Criteria
The thresholds used to determine the significance of impacts related to hydrology and water quality are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of the Project could have a significant impact on the environment if it would:
• Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality.
• Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. • Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite;

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows.
• In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation. • Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

Approach to Analysis
General
This environmental analysis of the potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality is based on a review of the results of a review of literature and database research and the City of Mountain View General Plan.

The Project would be regulated by the various laws, regulations, and policies summarized above in Section 4.9.3, Regulatory Setting. Compliance by the Project with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations is assumed in this analysis and local and state agencies would be expected to continue to enforce applicable requirements to the extent that they do so now. Note that compliance with many of the regulations is a condition of permit approval.

After considering the implementation of the HEU as described in Chapter 3, Project Description, and assuming compliance with the required regulatory requirements, the environmental analysis below identifies if significance thresholds would be exceeded and, therefore, a significant impact would occur. For those impacts considered to be significant, mitigation measures are proposed to the extent feasible to reduce the identified impacts. This analysis assumes that projects proposed under the HEU would be subject to Mountain View development standards and requirements with respect to stormwater and flooding, as applicable.

Topics Considered and No Impact Determined
The Project would have no impact to the following topics based on the Project characteristics, its geographical location, and underlying site conditions. Therefore, these topics are not addressed further in this document for the following reasons:
• Tsunamis and Seiches. Implementation of the HEU would not risk release of contaminants due to tsunami. Despite being located next to the San Francisco Bay, the portion of Mountain View at risk to tsunamis is contained to the northern most portion of the City (along the shoreline). However, the HEU housing sites are located inland and/or outside tsunami evacuation zones. As such, they are not at risk to a tsunami. Implementation of the HEU would not risk release of contaminants due to seiches because the HEU housing sites are not located close enough to an enclosed or semi-enclosed water body. Therefore, there would be no impact with respect to tsunamis or seiches.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-18 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.9.5 Impacts of the Project
Impact HYD-1: Implementation of the HEU would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. (Less than Significant)
Development projects proposed under the City of Mountain View HEU would have a significant impact if such development would violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements (WDR) Order No. R2-2015-0049, pursuant to NPDES Permit No. CAS612008, issued to Santa Clara County and in effect in the City of Mountain View. A violation could occur if the development would substantially increase pollutant loading levels in the sanitary sewer system, either through the direct introduction of contaminants generated by industrial land uses, or indirectly through stormwater pollution.

Construction
Construction of the housing units that could derive from the HEU’s implementation would involve ground disturbing activities such as trenching and excavation, removal of trees and other vegetation, and grading. As soil disturbing activities occur across a landscape, the potential for erosion and sedimentation increases. Disturbed soils are typically more susceptible to erosion from rain and wind, which in the absence of preventative measures, can lead to mobilization of sediments and silt through runoff. Erosion can escalate under storm events where slopes are steep.

To accomplish such construction, heavy equipment such as bulldozers, graders, earth movers, heavy trucks, trenching equipment and other machinery is likely to be used. Such machinery could contribute pollutants to stormwater runoff in the form of sediment and other pollutants such as fuels, oil, lubricants, hydraulic fluid, or other contaminants. Additionally, site work could result in conditions of runoff. Sediment, silt, and construction debris, if mobilized during construction could be transported to receiving waters such as Stevens Creek, Permanente Creek, or its tributaries. Degradation of water quality could occur and affect beneficial uses of these water bodies (see Table 4.9-1). In the absence of runoff controls, exceedances of water quality standards could result.

However, as described in Section 4.9.3, Regulatory Setting, construction projects that disturb one or more acres of ground disturbance, or less than one acre but would be part of a larger plan of development or sale, would be required to obtain coverage under the NPDES Construction General Permit. Preparation of a SWPPP, along with its implementation during construction, is required to comply with the NDPES Construction General Permit. Moreover, development projects implemented under the HEU would be subject to controls and requirements described in Section 35.34 of the Mountain View Municipal Code which establishes permanent stormwater pollution prevention measures for development and redevelopment projects. This code specifies that a stormwater management plan be prepared for such projects, subject to the City’s guidelines.

Consistent with General Plan Policies INC-8.2, INC-8.4, and INC-8.4, these standards are needed to minimize pollutants in stormwater runoff and protect watercourses.

With adherence to regulatory standards and NPDES Construction General Permit requirements along with associated measures and best management practices described in the SWPPP,

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-19 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
construction activities would not generate water quality violations. The impact associated with construction activities would therefore be less than significant.

Operation and Maintenance
Once constructed, development proposed under the HEU would be subject to municipal stormwater requirements (Order No. R2-2015-0049) which regulates stormwater discharges from the City of Mountain View. The City of Mountain View Storm Water Quality Guidelines for Development Projects as well as Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NDPES Permit contains post-construction stormwater control requirements that would be applicable to the HEU sites to ensure that ongoing stormwater exceedances do not occur. Compliance with the regulations cited would ensure that operational water quality impacts associated with the HEU’s implementation would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________
Impact HYD-2: Implementation of the HEU would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. (Less than Significant) The consideration of groundwater sustainability impacts includes both the project’s groundwater demand and its alteration of the recharge capability of the basins. If, for example, development of HEU projects were to require substantial quantities of groundwater during construction or operation, or if the development were to include placement of impervious surfaces to the extent that there would be an appreciable reduction in the overall recharge area for the groundwater basin, such activities could be considered potentially significant.

Construction
Projects proposed under the HEU would require water for their construction to suppress fugitive dust or for other construction purposes. As the projects have not been formally proposed, the estimated water demand associated with this construction is not currently known. However, it is likely that given the regional availability of recycled water, at least some portion of this demand could be met using recycled water. Moreover, based on the regulatory constraints outlined in the Water Shortage Contingency Plan, using potable water for construction is prohibited when recycled water is available. Therefore, construction would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies. Impacts associated with construction would be less than significant.

Operation
The City of Mountain View has a diverse portfolio of water supplies, including the SFPUC Regional Water System, Valley Water, City wells, and recycled water. The main water source for Mountain View is the SFPUC which supplies 84 percent of the City’s water supply. The Regional System supplies approximately 85 percent of its water from the Tuolumne River, collected in Hetch Hetchy Reservoir in Yosemite National Park. A smaller portion of the City’s water supply is provided by Valley Water, which is responsible for approximately 10 percent. Valley Water is responsible for the groundwater management in Santa Clara County including the Santa Clara

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-20 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Valley Basin. The Santa Clara Valley Basin is not currently in condition of critical overdraft and is a high priority groundwater basin, subject to the provisions of SGMA. However, only 2 percent of the City of Mountain View’s water supply production comes from groundwater (City of Mountain View, 2021a).

The projects constructed under the HEU would be in a defined groundwater basin, the Santa Clara Valley Basin. However, given that the City is not dependent on groundwater as its main water supply, which makes up approximately 2 percent of the water supply, this change would not substantially interfere with sustainable management of groundwater resources. Although the City depends on groundwater for dry year supplies, Valley Water’s GWMP for the Santa Clara and Llagas subbasins establishes recharge facilities, recycled water systems, and conservation strategies in order to proactively manage groundwater resources. Impacts would be less than significant with no mitigation required.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________
Impact HYD-3: Implementation of the HEU would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or iv) impede or redirect flood flows. (Less than Significant) As discussed under Impact HYD-1, construction of the residential developments that could derive from the HEU’s implementation project would entail the use of heavy equipment and would include greater than one-acre of ground disturbing activities for the development. Therefore, a Construction General Permit would be required under either scenario. Construction would entail alteration of the landscape and placement of impervious surfaces. In the absence of measures to capture runoff, impacts associated with erosion and siltation of local waterways could occur.

Similarly, runoff could enter city stormdrains and result in capacity exceedances.

In addition to the Construction General Permit and its associated NPDES requirements, the projects constructed under the HEU would be subject to the stormwater regulations of the City of Mountain View. This analysis assumes that the projects considered under the HEU would be subject to and would implement projects in a manner consistent with Mountain View municipal code requirements.

In addition to the Construction General Permit and its associated NPDES requirements, the projects constructed under the HEU would be subject to the stormwater regulations of the MRP as the City of Mountain View and Santa Clara County are permitees of the MRP. As part of the review process for municipal development which creates or replaces 5,000 square feet of impervious surface area, a stormwater control plan would be required to be prepared. Compliance with provision C.3 of the MRP must be demonstrated at the time of application for a development

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-21 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
project including rezoning, tentative map, parcel map, conditional use permit, variance, site development review, design review, development agreement or building permit (SCVURPPP, 2016). Source control of pollution, site design, and stormwater treatment measures are required for new and redevelopment. In addition to providing treatment and source control, projects recreating or replacing an acre or more of impervious area (unless exempted) must also provide flow controls (or hydromodification management measures) so that post project runoff does not exceed estimated pre-project rates and durations. Regulated projects for which building or grading permits are issued (after January 1, 2016) must include Low Impact Development (LID) design measures (such as pervious paving or bioretention areas) for stormwater capture and pretreatment.

Mountain View Municipal Code Division 4 contains additional regulatory requirements for stormwater treatment at new and redevelopment projects. Project development proposed under the HEU would be required to demonstrate that stormwater capacity exceedances would not occur by completing and implementing a stormwater control plan for the projects. The types of development and redevelopment projects required to install permanent stormwater pollution prevention measures are listed in the City’s NPDES permit for stormwater, and the city's guidelines. Applicable development projects will also be required to submit a stormwater management plan in accordance with the City’s guidelines. Implementation of these regulatory requirements would effectively decrease the level of runoff and ensure that stormwater capacity exceedances associated with the projects would not occur.

As identified in Section 4.9.2, Environmental Setting, some of Mountain View is located within a special flood zone hazard. Consistent with Mountain View Municipal Code Section 8.163.1, a flood development permit shall be obtained before any construction or other development begins within any area of special flood hazard established in Section 8.162.2. Adherence to permit conditions would ensure that flood flows are not redirected.

Adherence with the regulatory requirements and all associated BMPs would be sufficient to control impacts under this criterion. Based upon each of the considerations outlined above, the impact of the HEU’s implementation on stormwater runoff, erosion, and storm drainage and flooding would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________
Impact HYD-4: Implementation of the HEU would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation due to being located in a flood hazard zone. (Less than Significant) Portions of the City are within the 100-year flood zones as determined by FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps. There are pipeline projects in the HEU sites inventory that are located in the 100-year flood zone, near US-101 and El Camino Real’s crossing of Permanente Creek. In addition there is one opportunity site in the HEU sites inventory in the flood zone near El Camino Real and Miramonte Avenue. To reduce the potential impacts from the 100-year flood to new development, the projects developed as a result of the HEU within these zones would be required

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-22 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
to obtain a flood development permit as described in Section 8.163 and 8.164 of the City’s Municipal Code, and implement flood-proofing measures as required by the City’s Flood Hazard Ordinance. Implementation of the HEU would place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, but conformance with the City’s standard conditions of approval would ensure that these flooding impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________
Impact HYD-5: Implementation of the HEU would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. (Less than Significant)
As discussed under HYD-1, the City of Mountain View has well defined policies and regulatory controls which would be implemented to protect water quality during construction and operation of the projects under the HEU. Mountain View is a co-permittee to the Phase II Small MS4 General Permit, which requires municipalities to implement controls to limit contamination of municipal stormwater. Consistent with this general permit, a stormwater control plan is required for development projects that meets the SCVURPPP Post Construction Manual standards. As described in the Mountain View municipal code, the project applicant shall implement conditions of approval that reduce stormwater pollutant discharges through the construction, operation and maintenance of source control measures, low impact development design, site design measures, stormwater treatment measures and hydromodification management measures.

With adherence to these regulatory standards including the conditions stipulated in the Stevens Creek and Permanente Creek TMDL, pollution prevention and good housekeeping measures, the projects proposed under the HEU would not conflict with either of the Basin Plans in effect in for lands within Mountain View.

Groundwater sustainability depends on multiple factors including water demand, maintenance of a diverse portfolio of water supply (surface water, imported water, recycled water) conservation, conditions for groundwater recharge, as well as the climate. In response to the current drought a Water Shortage Contingency Plan was developed by the City of Mountain View to respond to current drought conditions and alleviate its effects into the future.

As discussed in HYD-2, the City of Mountain View does not rely primarily on groundwater for its water supply. Therefore, the HEU would not conflict with Valley Water’s GWMP. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-23 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.9.6 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 hydrology and water quality 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 hydrology and water quality is defined as the Mountain View city limits.

Impact HYD-1.CU: Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on hydrology and water quality. (Less than Significant) As described in Section 4.0, there are numerous other housing developments recently constructed, proposed to be constructed, or under design review approval consideration with the City.

Construction and operation of such development could reasonably combine with the effects of development allowed by the Mountain View HEU to increase the severity of impacts with respect to water resources.

Cumulative Impacts during Project Construction
Significant cumulative impacts related to hydrology and water quality could occur if the incremental impacts of the proposed housing sites combined with the incremental impacts of cumulative development would adversely affect water quality or water supply. The construction activities for all cumulative development would be subject to the same regulatory requirements discussed for the proposed housing sites, ensuring compliance with existing hydrology and water quality regulations, including preparation and implementation of SWPPPs in compliance with the state Construction General Permit and local erosion control regulations. With compliance with existing regulations, the Project would not cause or contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact with respect to the use of erosion or water quality and impacts would be less than significant.

Cumulative Impacts during Project Operations
Projects involving the creation or replacement of 5,000 SF of impervious surface area would be subject to MS4 requirements, including hydromodification management controls and LID design standards and would be required to demonstrate in their stormwater control plans that run off from such disturbance is adequately controlled to prevent erosion or impacts to water quality.

With compliance with existing regulations, the Project would not cause or contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact with respect to the use of erosion or water quality, and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-24 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.9.7 Summary of Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts
Impact
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact HYD-1: Implementation of the HEU
would not violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground water
quality.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact HYD-2: Implementation of the HEU
would not substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact HYD-3: Implementation of the HEU
would not substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would: i) result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site;
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or offsite; iii) create or contribute
runoff water which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or iv) impede or
redirect flood flows.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact HYD-4: Implementation of the HEU
would not risk release of pollutants due to
project inundation due to being located in a
flood hazard zone.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact HYD-5: Implementation of the HEU
would not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality control plan
or sustainable groundwater management plan.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact HYD-1.CU: Implementation of the HEU,
when combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
contribute considerably to cumulative impacts
on hydrology and water quality.

Less than Significant None required -

4.9.8 References
California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 2004. California’s Groundwater: Bulletin 118, Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin, Santa Clara Subbasin, last updated February 27, 2004. Available at: https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/ Groundwater-Management/Bulletin-118/Files/2003-Basin-Descriptions/2_009_02_Santa ClaraSubbasin.pdf. Accessed April 27, 2022.

California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 2022. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Basin Prioritization Dashboard. Available: https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bp- dashboard/final/. Accessed April 27, 2022.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-25 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), 2019. San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan, November 5, 2019. Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/water_issues/programs/planningtmdls/ basinplan/web/docs/ADA_compliant/BP_all_chapters.pdf. Accessed April 27, 2022.

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), 2018. 2018 California Integrated Report (Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List and 305(b) Report). Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/water_quality_assessment/2018_ integrated_report.html. Accessed April 27, 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, 2021a. City of Mountain View 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, June 8, 2021. Available: https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx? blobID=35844. Accessed April 27, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2021b. Water Quality 2020 Consumer Confidence Report, June 2021.

Available: https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx? BlobID=35804. Accessed April 27, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2022. Our Water Sources. Available: https://www.mountainview.gov/ depts/pw/services/water/sources.asp. Accessed April 27, 2022.

Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Association of Bay Area Governments (MTC and ABAG), 2022. Hazard Viewer Map. Available: https://mtc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/ webappviewer/index.html?id=4a6f3f1259df42eab29b35dfcd086fc8. Accessed April 27, 2022.

RWQCB, 2022a. Lehigh Index. Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/water_issues/hot_topics/Lehigh/.

Accessed July 11, 2022.

RWQCB, 2022b. California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, May 11, 2022. Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/board_decisions/adopted_orders/2022/R2 -2022-0018.pdf. Accessed July 11, 2022.

Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP, 2016). C.3 Stormwater Handbook, Guidance for Implementing Stormwater Requirements for New Development and Redevelopment Projects, June 2016. Available:
https://cleanwater.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb461/files/SCVURPPP_C.pdf. Accessed April 28, 2022.

Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water), 2021. 2021 Groundwater Management Plan for the Santa Clara and Llagas Subbasins. Available: https://s3.us-west-

2.amazonaws.com/assets.valleywater.org/2021_GWMP_web_version.pdf. Accessed July 11, 2021.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.9-26 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

This page intentionally left blank

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.10 Land Use and Planning

4.10.1 Introduction
As presented in Chapter 3, Project Description, the project analyzed in this EIR would include adoption of a General Plan amendment to add or modify goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs related to housing in the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan.

The Housing Element itself would contain an updated housing needs assessment; updated goals, policies, and programs that address the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing and that affirmatively further fair housing; and a housing inventory that meets the requirements of State law and provides a buffer of additional housing development capacity. The Project would also include modifications to provisions in the City’s General Plan Land Use map, zoning ordinance, zoning map, and adopted Precise Plans, as needed, to reflect the housing sites. These proposed actions are collectively referred to as the Housing Element Update (HEU) or “the Project.”
This section evaluates the potential for the Project to result in substantial adverse effects related to land use and planning. The Environmental Setting portion of this section includes descriptions of existing conditions relevant to land use and planning. Existing plans and policies relevant to land use and planning associated with implementation of the Project are provided in the Regulatory Setting section. Finally, the impact discussion evaluates potential effects related to land use and planning that could result from implementation of the Project in the context of existing conditions.

While an EIR may provide information regarding land use and planning issues, CEQA does not consider inconsistency with land use plans and policies to be a physical effect on the environment unless the plan or policy was adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating a significant environmental effect. Adverse physical effects on the environment that could result from implementation of the Project, including the changes to land use addressed in this section, are evaluated and disclosed in the appropriate technical sections of this EIR.

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 related to land use and planning received during the NOP comment period included concerns related to exposure to hazards, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and greenhouse gas emissions associated with new housing that could be developed with implementation of the Project. While these topics are related to land use and planning, potential physical effects associated with these topics are addressed, where applicable, in the appropriate technical sections of this EIR, including section

4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and section

4.14, Transportation.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.10.2 Environmental Setting
City of Mountain View
The City of Mountain View is located south of San Francisco at the southern end of the San Francisco Peninsula, where the Peninsula joins the Santa Clara Valley in northwestern Santa Clara County as shown in Figure 3-1 in Chapter 3, Project Description. The City of Mountain View is bordered by the cities of Palo Alto, Los Altos, and Sunnyvale, and also by the NASA- Ames/Moffett Federal Airfield complex to the east and the San Francisco Bay and tidal marshes to the north. Highways 101, 237, 82, and 85 run through the city.

The proposed Project would update the City of Mountain View’s Housing Element, which is a policy document that addresses housing issues and applies citywide. The housing sites inventory component of the housing element primarily identifies sites for development of multifamily housing that are principally located within the boundaries of adopted Precise Plans (discussed in the Regulatory Setting below) and along commercial corridors, though housing sites in other parts of the City are also included.

4.10.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to land use and planning are applicable to the proposed implementation of the Project.

State
Housing Element Requirements
State law requires that housing elements be updated every eight years (California Government Code Section 65588). The housing element must identify residential sites adequate to accommodate a variety of housing types for all income levels and to meet the needs of special population groups, such as the elderly, persons with disabilities, large families, farmworkers, families with female heads of households, and families and persons in the need for emergency shelter (California Government Code Section 65583). State law mandates that all cities and counties zone land appropriately to accommodate the increasing needs of regional population growth. Regional housing needs are determined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

The City’s Housing Element was last updated in 2014, and covers the “5th Cycle” housing element planning period from 2014 through 2022. Because this period is drawing to a close, State law [California Government Code Section 65588] requires the City to update its Housing Element by the deadline of January 31, 2023. In accordance with State law, the planning period for the updated Housing Element is from January 31, 2023 to January 31, 2031 and is referred to as the “6th cycle.”
There have been substantial changes to state laws regarding housing in the recent years, including changes to housing element requirements (for example requiring that housing elements

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
affirmatively further fair housing), changes to facilitate production of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and other forms of housing, and changes that limit local agencies’ ability to condition or deny applications for affordable housing. These changes are codified in the California Government Code, including in Chapter 3, Article 10.6, Housing Elements (Section 65580 et seq.) and elsewhere.

Regional
Association of Bay Area Governments Area Governments and RHNA The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is the comprehensive regional planning agency and council of governments for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area Region. Its members include the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma counties and 101 cities and towns of the San Francisco Bay Region.

ABAG determines the distribution of affordable housing in the region through its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. As discussed in Chapter 3, Project Description, for the period from 2023 to 2031, HCD has identified a regional housing need of 441,176 housing units in the Bay Area, which ABAG was responsible for distributing to local jurisdictions via adoption of its final RHNA Plan in December 2021.
1 Each jurisdiction’s RHNA includes
requirements for very low income, low income, moderate income, and above moderate households.

Plan Bay Area 2050
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is the federally recognized Metropolitan Planning Organization for the nine-county Bay Area and is the government agency responsible for regional transportation planning and financing. Plan Bay Area 2050, prepared by the ABAG and MTC, is the official regional long-range plan to improve housing, the economy, transportation, and the environment across the San Francisco Bay Area Region, and includes the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy as required under SB 375, and the Regional Transportation Plan.

Plan Bay Area 2050 connects the elements of housing, the economy, transportation and the environment through 35 strategies that will make the Bay Area more equitable for all residents and more resilient in the face of unexpected challenges. In the short-term, the plan’s Implementation Plan identifies more than 80 specific actions for MTC, ABAG and partner organizations to take over the next five years to make headway on each of the 35 strategies.

Between 2015 and 2050, Plan Bay Area 2050 estimates the Bay Area will add 1.4 million new jobs, for a total of 5.4 million bay area workers. Household growth is anticipated to follow pace, adding slightly fewer than 1.4 million new households for a total of 4 million households by 2050. This growth would bring the Bay Area’s population to an estimated 10.3 million residents

1 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), 2021. Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan:

San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031. Available https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2021-12/Final_ RHNA_Allocation_Report_2023-2031-approved_0.pdf. December 2021. Accessed on April 14, 2022.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
by 2050, up from around 7.8 million in 2021. Plan Bay Area 2050 estimates the region would need to build another 1.4 million new homes by 2050 to meet forecasted future demand.2 Because it will be several years before these growth projections are understood on a jurisdictional level and incorporated into regional and local transportation models, growth projections contained in Plan Bay Area 2040 represent the best available information for use in this EIR.3 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. Included in the 2030 General Plan are land use designations and a land use map. Land use designations define the type, intensity and density of development within the City, and include five general groups: Residential; Commercial; Office/Industrial; Mixed-Use; and Public/Institutional. Multifamily residential uses are allowed under the Residential and Mixed-Use land use designations at varying densities ranging from 7 to 80 dwelling units per acre in residential designations or 1.05 to 3.0 FAR in mixed-use designations.

The Land Use and Design Element of the General Plan includes the following policies that are relevant to the land use and planning evaluation for the Project.

Goal LUD-3: A diverse, balanced and flexible mix of land uses that supports a strong economy, complete neighborhoods, transit use and community health.

Policy LUD 3.1: Land use and transportation. Focus higher land use intensities and densities within a half-mile of public transit service, and along major commute corridors.

Policy LUD 3.2: Mix of land uses. Encourage a mix of land uses, housing types, retail and public amenities and public neighborhood open spaces accessible to the community.

Policy LUD 3.3: Health. Promote community health through land use and design.

Policy LUD 3.4: Land use conflicts. Minimize conflicts between different land uses.

Policy LUD 3.5: Diversity. Encourage residential developments serving a range of diverse households and incomes.

Goal LUD-6: Distinctive neighborhoods that preserve and enhance the quality of life for residents.

Policy LUD 6.1: Neighborhood character. Ensure that new development in or near residential neighborhoods is compatible with neighborhood character.

2 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), 2021. Plan Bay Area 2050. Final. Released October 1, 2021. Available: https://www.planbayarea.org/finalplan2050. Accessed April 14, 2022.
3 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), July 2017.

Plan Bay Area 2040; Projections 2040. Available online http://projections.planbayarea.org/. Accessed April 21, 2022.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Goal LUD-7: A vibrant Downtown that serves as the center for Mountain View social and civic life.

Policy LUD 7.5: Compatible uses and design. Ensure compatible uses and building design Downtown along the boundaries between residential and commercial areas.

Goal LUD-9: Buildings that enhance the public realm and integrate with the surrounding neighborhood.

Policy LUD 9.1: Height and setback transitions. Ensure that new development includes sensitive height and setback transitions to adjacent structures and surrounding neighborhoods.

Policy LUD 9.2: Compatible transit-oriented development. Encourage transit-oriented development that is compatible with surrounding uses and accessible to transit stations.

Precise Plans
To address site-specific development needs, the City has developed 25 Precise Plans covering various locations within the City. Precise Plans are a tool for coordinating future public and private improvements on specific properties where special conditions of size, shape, land owner- ship, or existing or desired development require particular attention. The Precise Plans provide detailed specifications for land uses, relationship to surrounding areas, use intensity, circulation, design, procedures for development review, and special conditions for development occurring within each Precise Plan area. The City’s Precise Plan areas are shown in Figure 3-2 in Chapter 3, Project Description. In the City, Precise Plans range from a small 3-acre development to large neighborhoods. The Precise Plans covering the largest areas and with the highest development potential as relevant to the Project are described below.

East Whisman Precise Plan
The East Whisman Precise Plan (adopted November 5, 2019, as amended through October 13, 2020) advances a sustainable, transit-oriented area with complete mixed-use neighborhoods and enhanced area mobility in an approximately 412-acre area on the eastern border of the City. It includes land use and development regulations for up to 2 million square feet of net new office uses, 100,000 square feet of retail uses, 200 hotel rooms, and 5,000 multi-family residential units (with goal of making 20 percent of the total residential units affordable).

North Bayshore Precise Plan
The North Bayshore Precise Plan (adopted November 25, 2014, as amended through December 7, 2021) supports transition of an approximately 650-acre area in the northern portion of the City into an innovative, sustainable, and complete mixed-use district that protects and stewards biological habitat and open space, and continues its role as a major high-technology employment center. The original North Bayshore Precise Plan did not include residential uses, but updates to the development standards and design guidelines of the plan adopted in December 2017 added residential uses in the areas designated for mixed-use development. The North Bayshore Precise Plan provides guiding principles, development standards, and design guidelines for up to 9,850 new multi-family residential units and 3.6 million square feet of office and commercial

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-6 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
development. The North Bayshore Precise Plan has a target of approximately 20 percent of residential units to be affordable.

El Camino Real Precise Plan
The El Camino Real Precise Plan (adopted November 17, 2014, as amended through April 13, 2021) provides planning priorities, development regulations, and an implementation strategy for the 3.9-mile stretch of the El Camino Real that runs through Mountain View. The El Camino Real Precise Plan contains direction for potential street improvements and implementation actions, standards, and guidelines for new residential densities and focused commercial areas.

San Antonio Precise Plan
The San Antonio Precise Plan (adopted December 2, 2014, as amended through November 17, 2020) guides the transformation of the existing regional commercial area into a mixed-use core within a broader existing residential neighborhood, taking into account the area’s proximity to transit services and location along two of the most heavily traveled corridors in the City:

El Camino Real and San Antonio Road. The San Antonio Precise Plan identifies planning principles and policies, development regulations, mobility improvements and an implementation strategy for approximately 123 acres of land, including and surrounding the San Antonio Center shopping area. It also includes new allowances for higher densities of housing, and an office cap of 600,000 square feet.

City of Mountain View Zoning Ordinance
The Zoning Ordinance serves as an implementing tool for the General Plan by establishing detailed, parcel-specific development regulations and standards in each area of the City. Although the two are distinct documents, the Mountain View General Plan and Zoning Ordinance are closely related, and State law mandates that zoning regulations be consistent with the General Plan maps and policies.

Development standards identified in the Zoning Ordinance include setbacks, lot area, lot width, density, floor area ratio, site coverage, landscaping and open area requirements, height limits, storage, and parking. The Zoning Ordinance organizes zoning districts into four broad categories:
residential; commercial/professional; industrial; and special purpose. Multifamily residential units are permitted uses under the R3 (Residential—Multiple-Family), R4 (Residential—High-Density Multiple-Family), and Planned community (P) districts.

4.10.4 Significance Criteria
The thresholds used to determine the significance of impacts related to land use and planning are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of the Project could have a significant impact on the environment if it would:
• Physically divide an established community.
• Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Approach to Analysis
The analysis of potential impacts related to land use and planning evaluates the potential for the Project to result in substantial adverse effects related to land use and planning, including physical division of an established community and the potential for implementation of the Project to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

As detailed in Chapter 3, Project Description, the Project would include adoption of a General Plan amendment to add or modify goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs related to housing in the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan. The Project would also include amendments to other elements of the General Plan in order to maintain internal consistency between the General Plan, the zoning ordinance, and adopted Precise Plans. The Project would also include modifications to provisions in the City’s General Plan Land Use map, zoning ordinance, zoning map, and adopted Precise Plans, as needed, to reflect the housing sites inventory.

Because these zoning and policy changes are part of the Project, by definition the Project would not conflict with them, and the analysis does not consider inconsistency with existing plan policies or codes to necessarily be indicative of significant environmental impacts. As previously discussed, consistent with CEQA, the analysis does not consider inconsistency with land use plans and policies to be a physical effect on the environment unless the plan or policy was adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating a significant environmental effect. Adverse physical effects on the environment that could result from implementation of the Project, including the changes to land use addressed in this section, are evaluated and disclosed in the appropriate technical sections of this EIR.

4.10.5 Impacts of the Project
Impact LUP-1: Implementation of the HEU would not physically divide an established community. (Less than Significant)
As presented in Chapter 3, Project Description, the Project would include adoption of a General Plan amendment to add or modify goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs related to housing in the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan. The Housing Element itself would contain an updated housing needs assessment; updated goals, policies, and programs that address the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing and that affirmatively further fair housing; and a housing inventory that meets the City’s RHNA and provides a buffer of additional housing development capacity. The Project would also include amendments to other elements of the General Plan in order to maintain internal consistency between the General Plan, the zoning ordinance, and adopted Precise Plans. The Project would also include modifications to provisions in the City’s General Plan Land Use map, zoning ordinance, zoning map, and adopted Precise Plans, as needed, to reflect the housing sites inventory.

As detailed in Section 3.4.1, Housing Sites Inventory, in Chapter 3, Project Description, the Project would include a number of strategies as provided for in State law and HCD guidance to address the requirements for a housing inventory and meet the City’s 6th Cycle RHNA plus a

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
buffer. While strategies and sites included in the Project will be refined based on community input and analysis as the EIR is being prepared, this EIR analyzes the impacts associated with the possible increase in housing production assuming use of the aforementioned strategies to plan for up to approximately 15,000 units, to the year 2031 focused primarily along the commercial corridors and in areas that currently accommodate commercial/industrial uses, mixed uses, and/or multifamily housing. Of the total units it is assumed that approximately 1,400 units would be enabled by changes in development capacity via rezoning. The balance of 13,600 units represents development that is already permitted under the City’s adopted General Plan, zoning, and Precise Plans. Future development on identified sites would continue to be at the discretion of individual property owners and will be largely dependent on market forces and, in the case of affordable housing, available funding and/or other incentives. Nonetheless, the analysis in this EIR conservatively assumes build-out of the sites inventory. 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.

While implementation of the HEU would result in the development of new housing and housing at higher densities than currently exist in some areas, as well as related amendments to other elements of the City’s General Plan, zoning ordinance, and Precise Plans, these changes would not alter the physical layout of the City such that movement within or across the housing sites or the City would be obstructed. The HEU also does not propose any roadways, such as freeways, that would divide the City or isolate individual neighborhoods within it. Consequently, implementation of the HEU would have a less-than-significant impact related to the division of an established community.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________
Impact LUP-2: Implementation of the HEU would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. (Less than Significant) As previously discussed, while an EIR may provide information regarding land use and planning issues, CEQA does not consider inconsistency with land use plans and policies to be a physical effect on the environment unless the plan or policy was adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating a significant environmental effect. Adverse physical effects on the environment that could result from implementation of the HEU, including the changes to land use addressed in this section, are evaluated and disclosed in the appropriate technical sections of this EIR.

As presented in Chapter 3, Project Description, and as discussed above in Impact LUP-1, the Project would include adoption of a General Plan amendment to add or modify goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs related to housing in the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan.

The Project would also include amendments to other elements of the General Plan in order to maintain internal consistency between the General Plan and zoning/Precise Plans. The Project would also include modifications to provisions in the City’s General Plan Land Use map, zoning ordinance, zoning map, and adopted Precise Plans, as needed, to reflect the housing sites inventory.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Implementation of the HEU would result in the development of new housing and housing at higher densities than currently exist in some areas. However, as part of the approval of the Project, existing policies and zoning would be amended to reflect the new conditions. In addition, the HEU would explain the City’s RHNA requirements and include policies necessary to advance the City’s housing program notwithstanding potentially competing policies in the currently adopted General Plan or Precise Plans. Consequently, the Project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, and the impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________

4.10.6 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 land use and planning could occur if the incremental impacts of the Project combined with the impacts of cumulative development identified in Section 4.0.3, Cumulative Impacts.

Impact LUP-1.CU: Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not physically divide an established community. (Less than Significant)
As noted in Section 4.0.3, Cumulative Impacts, the proposed HEU is a plan which provides the potential for increased residential development in specific locations across a broad geography, and Project-related growth in housing would combine with other, cumulative growth and development projects in the City. However, it is reasonable to assume that this growth would occur within the existing framework formed by roads and infrastructure. Also, as discussed above in Impact LUP-1, while implementation of the HEU would result in the development of new housing and housing at higher densities than currently exist in some areas, as well as related amendments to other elements of the City’s General Plan, zoning ordinance, and Precise Plans, these changes would not alter the physical layout of the City such that movement within or across the housing sites or the City would be obstructed. The Project also does not propose any roadways, such as freeways, that would divide the City or isolate individual neighborhoods within it. Consequently, cumulative impacts related to division of an established community would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-10 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact LUP-2.CU: Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. (Less than Significant) As discussed under Impact LUP-2, implementation of the HEU would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Other jurisdictions in the Bay Area are also updating their housing elements in response to meet RHNA requirements, and those jurisdictions would also update and amend their general plans and zoning codes, as applicable, to ensure planned and orderly growth that would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Consequently, cumulative impacts related to conflict with a land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________

4.10.7 Summary of Land Use and Planning Impacts
Impact
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact LUP-1: Implementation of the HEU
would not physically divide an established
community.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact LUP-2: Implementation of the HEU
would not cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact LUP-1.CU: Implementation of the HEU,
when combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
physically divide an established community.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact LUP-2.CU: Implementation of the HEU,
when combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
cause a significant environmental impact due to
a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect.

Less than Significant None required -

_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-11 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.10.8 References
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), July 2017. Plan Bay Area 2040; Projections 2040. Available:
http://projections.planbayarea.org. Accessed on April 21, 2022.

City of Mountain View, 2021. Mountain View 2030 General Plan, adopted July 10, 2012, as amended through April 13, 2021. Available: https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/ filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=10702. Accessed May 1, 2022.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.10 Land Use and Planning
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.10-12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

This page intentionally left blank

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.11 Noise and Vibration

4.11.1 Introduction
This section assesses the potential for the Housing Element Update (HEU) to result in significant adverse impacts from noise. This section first includes a description of the existing environmental setting as it relates to noise and vibration, 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 HEU from noise and vibration.

4.11.2 Environmental Setting
Existing Noise-Sensitive Land Uses
Human response to noise varies considerably from one individual to another. Effects of noise at various levels can include interference with sleep, concentration, and communication, and can cause physiological and psychological stress and hearing loss. Given these effects, some land uses are considered more sensitive to noise levels than others due to the duration and nature of time people spend at these uses. In general, residences are considered most sensitive to noise as people spend extended periods of time in them, including the nighttime hours. Therefore, noise impacts to rest and relaxation, sleep, and communication are highest at residential uses. Schools, hotels, hospitals, nursing homes, and recreational uses are also considered to be more sensitive to noise as activities at these land uses involve rest and recovery, relaxation and concentration, and increased noise levels tend to disrupt such activities. Places such as churches, libraries, and cemeteries, where people tend to pray, study, and/or contemplate, are also sensitive to noise but due to the limited time people spend at these uses, impacts are usually tolerable. Commercial and industrial uses are considered the least noise-sensitive.

Existing Noise Environment
The noise environment in and around the city is influenced by vehicular traffic, such as along Interstate 280 (I-280) U.S. Highway 101, State Highway (SR) 85, SR 237 and SR 82 (El Camino Real as well as local roadways such as Central Expressway. Other noise sources in the vicinity include the Valley Transportation A light rail and Caltrain rail operations, including warning bells and required horn blasts at at-grade crossings. Aircraft operations from Palo Alto Airport and Moffett Field also contribute to the noise environment of Mountain View. Noise-monitoring results conducted for the 2030 General Plan show that existing noise levels throughout the city ranged from 51.2 to 72.1 dBA Leq. The calculated Ldn at the long-term 24-hour noise monitoring location is 65 dBA Ldn. This range of noise level is typical of an urbanized setting that is not located near busy streets. In addition to roadway traffic, aircraft flights, landscaping maintenance

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
equipment, construction, loading and unloading, commercial activities and everyday neighborhood activities contribute to the ambient noise environment.

4.11.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Noise Control Act
In 1972, the Noise Control Act was established to address the concerns of noise as a growing danger to the health and welfare of the Nation's population, particularly in urban areas. In 1974, in response to the Noise Control Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety.
1 Table 4.11-1 summarizes U.S. EPA findings for residential land uses.

TABLE 4.11-1

SOUND LEVELS THAT PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH (DBA)
Category
Measure
of
Exposure
Indoor Outdoor
Activity
Interference
Hearing
Loss
To Protect
Against
Both Effects
Activity
Interference
Hearing
Loss
To Protect
Against
Both Effects
Residential with
Outside Space Ldn 45 70 45 55 70 55
Residential with
No Outside Space Ldn 45 70 45 - - -
NOTES:

Sound levels are yearly average equivalent in decibels; the exposure period which results in hearing loss at the identified level is a period of forty years.

SOURCE: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Information of Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an adequate Margin of Safety, 1974.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) aims to ensure worker safety and health in the United States by working with employers and employees to create better working environments. With regard to noise exposure and workers, OSHA regulations set forth accepted criteria to protect the hearing of workers exposed to occupational noise. Noise exposure regulations are listed in 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 1910.95. Section 1910.95(c)(1) states that an employer shall administer a hearing conservation program whenever noise exposure levels equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA.

Federal Aviation Administration
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has published guidelines for land use compatibility in 14 CFR Part 150. For aviation noise analyses, the FAA has determined that the 24-hour

1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), 1974. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an adequate margin of Safety. March 1974.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
cumulative exposure of individuals to noise resulting from aviation activities must be established in terms of Ldn as FAA’s primary metric. However, the FAA recognizes CNEL as an alternative metric for assessing aircraft (e.g., helicopters) noise exposure in California.

Based on FAA standards, a significant noise impact would occur if analysis shows that the project would cause noise sensitive areas to experience an increase in the aircraft noise level of 1.5 dB CNEL or more when aircraft levels are 65 dBA CNEL or higher. In addition, a significant noise impact would occur if noise sensitive land uses would be newly exposed to levels of 65 dBA CNEL or higher as a result of a project. For example, a 1.5 dB increase at an aircraft noise level of 63.5 dBA CNEL that brings the aircraft noise level to 65 dBA CNEL would be considered a significant impact.

According to Chapter 65 of Title 42 of the United States Code, and Articles 3 and 3.5 of Chapter 4 of Division 9 of the Public Utilities Code of the State of California, local enforcement of noise regulations and land use regulations related to noise control of airports (e.g., helistops) are preempted by the FAA.

State
Title 24
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations codifies Sound Transmission Control requirements, which establishes uniform minimum noise insulation performance standards for new hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached single- family dwellings. Specifically, Title 24 states that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dBA CNEL in any habitable room of new dwellings.

Department of Industrial Relations
The Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) protect workers and the public from safety hazards through its California Divisions of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) program. The Cal/OSHA Program is responsible for enforcing California laws and regulations pertaining to workplace safety and health and for providing assistance to employers and workers about workplace safety and health issues. DOSH enforces noise standards in the workplace in conjunction with OSHA through the CAL/OSHA program.

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 Noise Element of the General Plan includes the following policies related to noise (City of Mountain View, 2012).

Goal NOI-1: Noise levels that support a high quality of life in Mountain View.

Policy NOI 1.1: Land use compatibility. Use the Outdoor Noise Environment Guidelines as a guide for planning and development decisions (Table 7.1, illustrated below).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Policy NOI 1.2: Noise-sensitive land uses. Require new development of noise-sensitive land uses to incorporate measures into the project design to reduce interior and exterior noise levels to the following acceptable levels:
• New single-family developments shall maintain a standard of 65 dBA Ldn for exterior noise in private outdoor active use areas.
• New multi-family residential developments shall maintain a standard of 65 dBA Ldn for private and community outdoor recreation use areas. Noise standards do not apply to private decks and balconies in multi-family residential developments. • Interior noise levels shall not exceed 45 dBA Ldn in all new single-family and multi- family residential units.
• Where new single-family and multi-family residential units would be exposed to intermittent noise from major transportation sources such as train or airport operations, new construction shall achieve an interior noise level of 65 dBA through measures such as site design or special construction materials. This standard shall apply to areas exposed to four or more major transportation noise events such as passing trains or aircraft flyovers per day.

Policy NOI 1.3: Exceeding acceptable noise thresholds. If noise levels in the area of a proposed project would exceed normally acceptable thresholds, the City shall require a detailed analysis of proposed noise reduction measures to determine whether the proposed use is compatible. As needed, noise insulation features shall be included in the design of such projects to reduce exterior noise levels to meet acceptable thresholds, or for uses with no active outdoor use areas, to ensure acceptable interior noise levels.

Policy NOI 1.4: Site planning. Use site planning and project design strategies to achieve the noise level standards in NOI 1.1 (Land use compatibility) and in NOI 1.2 (Noise- sensitive land uses). The use of noise barriers shall be considered after all practical design-related noise measures have been integrated into the project design.

Policy NOI 1.5: Major roadways. Reduce the noise impacts from major arterials and freeways.

Policy NOI 1.6: Minimize noise impacts on noise-sensitive land uses, such as residential uses, schools, hospitals and child-care facilities.

Policy NOI 1.7: Stationary sources. Restrict noise levels from stationary sources through enforcement of the Noise Ordinance.

Policy NOI 1.8: Moffett Federal Airfield. Support efforts to minimize noise impacts from Moffett Federal Airfield in coordination with Santa Clara County’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan.

Policy NOI 1.9: Rail. Reduce the effects of noise and vibration impacts from rail corridors.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

Mountain View Municipal Code
The City of Mountain View addresses noise regulations to help protect the community from exposure to excessive noise and also specify how noise is measured and regulated. The City’s codes address noise issues and protect the community from exposure to excessive noise from sources such as construction activity, animals, amplified sound and stationary equipment. These codes specify how noise is measured and regulated. The City’s Zoning Ordinance also includes noise regulations and standards for uses such as drive-in and drive-through sales, commercial, and industrial land uses and sensitive uses, such as child-care centers. In addition, noise is Tabl,e 7.1 Oirtdoar Noise Envlro11ment Guidelines
C11111111unity Noise Expos1ne n Decibels (C!NEL)
Lend Use Category llllay/Nlgbt . Avenrge Noise II.eve! In lllleeibals ( l.d'n) 55 -Residen ial-Sing le-Family,
Duplex, tdabile Hames
Residen ial-Mul i-Fam-ly
Transient Lodging-Motels,
Hotels
~
Scnao ls, Libraries, Churchl!s,
Hospitals, ursing Hames
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
AmJ>hitheaters, Sports Arenas.

Outdoor Spectator SJ)Ort:s
Playgrounds. Nei,ghbarhoa<J
Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables ,
Water Reueation, Came eries
-Office Bu-lclings, Bus iness
Commercial a.id Professional
-Industria l, Manufacturing ,
Utilities, Agricultu re
t\'ORMAfLY ACCEPTABLE"
Specified land use IS setls.lactory, ba9ed upon
1rle es.s.umptlon that all\' llulldllW' i n,olired ere
·60
-
-
normal oon,entlonel construction, 1',11hout an~
11pei:aa1 noise lfi!lu latiOn r · ements._
- CONDfflONAHY ACCEPTABLE
Nl!l'f c:on91ructlan or dl!<>'etDpment !IOO.lld be unaer taKen only alter a detailed analy!lls o the noise
re4Jctlon requirements Is. maoe and needed noise
111:9Ulatlon features inctUded In tile de!llgn_
65 10, 75 8.0 8,5
I
~
I
~
I
I I
- t\'ORMAf.!.Y UNACCEPTABLE
tte-w oons.trUCIJoo or de..elopmenl should be dl!ICOUJ aged_ I llll!'ll' oons.truCllon or ~opmen does
oceed, a deta iled anafysls ol lhe noise reduction
r rements must Ile made and needed noise
,ns.ulellon features Included In the design.
- ClEAlll.Y UNACCEPTABLE"
tte-w oons.trUCIJoo or deYelopmenl cte-a,ty 11hould not be undertaken.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-6 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
regulated through project conditions of approval. The Mountain View Police Department and the City Attorney’s office enforce noise violations.

Section 8.70.1 of the City’s Municipal Code restricts the hours of construction activity to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. No construction activity is permitted on Saturday, Sunday, or holidays without written approval from the City. Authorized land uses and construction activity established through the discretionary land use permit process may be subject to specific noise conditions of approval that may be more restrictive. Construction activities are defined to include any physical activity on the construction site or in the project’s staging area, including the delivery of materials.

Section 21.26 of the City’s Municipal Code establishes quantitative noise level limits on noise from stationary equipment (such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning mechanical systems, and air compressors). The maximum allowable noise level is 55 dBA during the day and 50 dBA at night (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) at a residential receiving property, unless it has been demonstrated that such operation will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort or general welfare of the residents subjected to such noise, and the use has been granted a permit by the Zoning Administrator.

Mountain View Standard Conditions of 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 noise and vibration, as summarized below.

Vibration and Settlement Plan for Projects Adjacent to Historic Structures or Zero-Lot- Line Structures
At building permit submittal, the applicant shall prepare a Vibration and Settlement Plan which specifies monitoring and mitigation measures to avoid damage to the adjacent building(s) as a result of project construction. Approved monitoring protocols shall be in place prior to issuance of any building permits for the project.

Rooftop Equipment Screen
All rooftop equipment must be concealed behind opaque (solid) screening designed to complement the building design such that rooftop equipment is not visible from any elevation.

Details of the rooftop equipment and roof screens shall be included in the building permit drawings and approved by the Zoning Administrator.

Mechanical Equipment - Ground Screening
All mechanical equipment, such as air condenser (AC) units or generators, shall be concealed behind opaque screening. No mechanical equipment is permitted on front porches or balconies but may be located in the fenced yard area or building rooftops.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Mechanical Equipment – Noise
The noise emitted by any mechanical equipment shall not exceed a level of 55 dB(A) during the day or 50 dB(A) during the night, 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., when measured at any location on the adjoining residentially used property.

Interior Noise Levels
Construction drawings must confirm that measures have been taken to achieve an interior noise level of 45 dB(A)Ldn that shall be reviewed and approved by a qualified acoustical consultant prior to building permit submittal.

Construction Noise Reduction Measures
The following noise reduction measures shall be incorporated into construction plans and contractor specifications to reduce the impact of temporary construction-related noise on nearby properties: (a) comply with manufacturer’s muffler requirements on all construction equipment engines; (b) turn off construction equipment when not in use, where applicable; (c) locate stationary equipment as far as practical from receiving properties; (d) use temporary sound barriers or sound curtains around loud stationary equipment if the other noise reduction methods are not effective or possible; and (e) shroud or shield impact tools and use electric-powered rather than diesel-powered construction equipment.

Work Hours/Construction Site Signage
No work shall commence on the job site prior to 7:00 a.m. nor continue later than 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, nor shall any work be permitted on Saturday or Sunday or any holiday unless prior approval is granted by the Chief Building Official. The general contractor, applicant, developer, or property owner shall erect a sign at all construction site entrances/exits to advise subcontractors and material suppliers of the working hours and contact information, including an after-hours contact. Violation of this condition of approval may be subject to the penalties outlined in Section 8.6 of the City Code and/or suspension of building permits.

Construction Parking
The applicant shall prepare a construction parking management plan to address parking demands and impacts during the construction phase of the project by contractors or other continued operations on-site. The plan shall also include a monitoring and enforcement measure which specifies on-street parking is prohibited and will be monitored by the owner/operator of the property (or primary contractor), and penalties will be enforced by the owner/operator of the property (or primary contractor) for violations of on-street parking restrictions. Violations of this provision may result in a stop-work notice being issued by the City for development project. The construction parking management plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of building permits.

Notice of Construction
The applicant shall notify neighbors within at least 300’ of the project site of the construction schedule in writing, prior to construction. For multi-phased construction, separate notices may be required for each phase of construction. A copy of the notice and the mailing list shall be submitted for review prior to issuance of building permits.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Disturbance Coordinator
The applicant shall designate a “disturbance coordinator” who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints regarding construction noise. The coordinator (who may be an employee of the general contractor) will determine the cause of the complaint and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. A telephone number of the noise disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site fence and on the notification sent to neighbors adjacent to the site. The sign must also list an emergency after-hours contact number for emergency personnel.

Vibration Best Management Practices Construction Measures • Avoid impact pile driving and drill piles instead where possible. Drilled piles cause lower vibration levels where geological conditions permit their use. • Avoid using vibration rollers and tampers near sensitive areas. • In areas where project construction is anticipated to include vibration generating activities, vibration studies shall be conducted to determine the areas of impact and to present appropriate mitigation measures that may include the following:
– Identification of sites that would be exposed to project vibration compaction activities and could result in vibration impacts to structures;
– Develop a vibration monitoring and contingency plan;
– Construction contingency plan; and
– Conduct post-survey on structures where either monitoring has indicated high levels or complaints of damage have been made.

4.11.4 Significance Criteria
The thresholds used to determine the significance of impacts related to noise and vibration are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of the HEU could have a significant impact on the environment if it would:
• Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
• Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. • For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Approach to Analysis
Topics Considered and No Impact Determined
The HEU would have no impact to the following topics based on the HEU characteristics, its geographical location, and underlying site conditions. Therefore, these topics are not addressed further in this document for the following reasons:

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
• Expose people or structures to or generate excessive groundborne noise levels. The second criterion above relates to groundborne vibration and groundborne noise levels, but only the issue of groundborne vibration is relevant to the HEU. Groundborne noise occurs when vibrations transmitted through the ground result in secondary radiation of noise. Groundborne noise is generally associated with underground railway operations and with construction activities such as blasting, neither of which are likely to result from implementation of the proposed HEU. Future planned development within the City would not involve equipment that would produce groundborne vibration; therefore, no impacts related to the exposure of people or structures to, or the generation of, excessive groundborne noise levels would occur in connection with project operations. The potential for construction activities to result in groundborne vibration is addressed below in Impact NOI-3. • Projects located within the vicinity of a private air strip or an airport land use plan. The HEU planning area is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan area. The nearest airport to the City of Mountain View is Moffet Federal Airfield, approximately .50 miles to the nearest residential property. The 65 dBA noise contours for airport operations are contained within the area bounded by the intersections of Mary Ave and West Maude Ave, Mathilda Ave and Evelyn Ave, Evelyn Ave and Sunnyvale Ave, and the Highway 101/Highway 237 interchange (SCC, 2012). Therefore, the subsequent lease, development, and improvement projects (subsequent projects) that could occur under the Housing Element would not result in the long-term exposure of people residing or working in the area to excessive airport-related noise levels.

Additionally, the California Supreme Court’s California Building and Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (CBIA v. BAAQMD) decision 2 has indicated that the
impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents are generally not required to be considered in a CEQA evaluation, except when the project may exacerbate existing hazards or existing conditions. CEQA analysis is therefore concerned with a project’s impact on the environment, rather than with the environment’s impact on a project and its users or residents. Thus, with respect to existing traffic noise and existing rail noise and vibration on proposed sensitive land uses, the city is not required under CEQA to consider the effects of locating new receptors into an area where such noise and vibration levels already exist. Therefore, traffic and railroad noise exposure and rail vibration on future sensitive receptors within the city are not assessed in this Draft EIR. It should be noted, however, that CBIA v. BAAQMD decision does not preclude jurisdictions like the city from considering these types of impacts during its own planning and development review processes.

4.11.5 Impacts of the Project
Impact NOI-1: Implementation of the HEU would not generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. (Less than Significant)
Under the HEU, the primary source of temporary noise within the City would be from demolition and construction. Construction activities within the City would involve both off-road construction equipment (e.g., excavators, dozers, cranes, etc.) and transport of workers and equipment to and

2 California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, S213478. (A135335, A136212; 218 Cal.App.4th 1171; Alameda County Superior Court; RG10548693. Filed December 17, 2015.)

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-10 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
from construction sites. Table 4.11-2 shows typical noise levels produced by the types of off-road equipment that would likely be used during future construction areas within the City.

TABLE 4.11-2
REFERENCE CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVELS (50 FEET FROM SOURCE) Type of Equipment Lmax, dBA Hourly Leq, dBA/Percent Usea Backhoe 80 76/40
Jackhammer 85 78/20
Roller 85 78/20
Compactor 80 73/20
Paver 85 82/50
Crane 85 77/16
Grader 85 81/40
Concrete Mixer Truck 85 81/40
Loader 80 76/40
Air Compressor 80 76/40
Excavator 85 81/40
NOTES:
a Percent used during the given time period (usually an hour – hourly Leq) were obtained from the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide.

SOURCE: FHWA, 2006.

Construction noise is a major source of temporary noise within the City and would continue to be so regardless of whether or not the HEU is adopted. Noise levels near individual construction sites under the proposed HEU would not be substantially different from what they would be under the existing Housing Element. Since specific future projects within the City are unknown at this time, it is conservatively assumed that the construction areas associated with these future projects coul d be located within 50 feet of sensitive land uses. To quantify construction -related noise exposure at the nearest sensitive land uses, it is assumed that the two loudest pieces of construction equipment would operate within 50 feet of a sensitive receptor .

Under the HEU, sensitive receptors located within 50 feet of an excavator or other construction equipment producing similar levels of noise could be exposed to a noise level of 82 dBA L eq.

However, Section 8.70 Construction noise (a) Hours of construction specifically states no construction activity shall commence prior to 7:00 a.m. nor continue later than 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, nor shall any work be permitted on Saturday or Sunday or holidays unless prior written approval is granted by the chief building official. In addition, the following City of Mountain View Standard Conditions of Approval (Construction Noise Reduction Measures), (Work Hours/Construction Site Signage), (Construction Parking), (Notice of Construction), and (Disturbance Coordinator) would be required of development under the HEU which would further reduce construction noise levels.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-11 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Therefore, with required implementation of these construction best management practices and adherence to the City’s allowed hours of construction, impacts associated with future construction activities under the HEU with respect to conflicting with local noise standards would be less than significant .

Mitigation Measure: None required.
_________________________
Impact NOI-2: Stationary noise sources from development within the HEU area would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. (Less than Significant) Unlike industrial uses and some commercial land uses, residential uses are not typically associated with excessive noise generation. Characteristics of residential uses that are noise- producing include stationary source noises such as air conditioning equipment and pool equipment which generally do not generate substantial noise levels. At the present time, the type, size, and the location of any air handling equipment that may be associated with housing developed under the HEU is unknown. However, Section 21.26 of the City’s Municipal Code establishes quantitative noise level limits on noise from stationary equipment (such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning mechanical systems, and air compressors). The maximum allowable noise level is 55 dBA during the day and 50 dBA at night (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) at a residential receiving property.

In addition, the following City of Mountain View Standard Conditions of Approval (Rooftop Equipment Screen), (Mechanical Equipment - Ground Screening), and (Mechanical Equipment - Noise) would be required of development under the HEU which would further reduce operational stationary source noise levels. Based on these requirements, which are enforced by the City, the potential impact of stationary noise sources from development under the proposed HEU would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.
_________________________
Impact NOI-3: Implementation of the HEU would not generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. (Less than Significant) Future construction activities could occur under the proposed HEU which could have the potential to generate groundborne vibration within the City. Construction activities would occur in a variety of locations throughout the City under the HEU, which may require activities or use of off-road equipment known to generate some degree of vibration. Activities that would potentially generate excessive vibration, such as blasting or impact pile driving would not be expected to occur from housing development under the HEU, as such activities would typically be associated with high- rise development that is not envisioned.

Receptors sensitive to vibration include structures (especially older masonry structures), land uses where people would normally be expected to sleep (sleep disturbance), and equipment (e.g.,

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
magnetic resonance imaging equipment, high resolution lithographic, optical and electron microscopes). Such vibration-sensitive equipment typically is installed with vibration isolation systems to ensure operational quality control.

Regarding the potential effects of groundborne vibration to people, except for long-term occupational exposure, vibration levels rarely affect human health and because the City’s noise ordinance restricts construction activities to daytime hours, the potential for impacts related to sleep disturbance would be less than significant.

Since specific future projects within the City are unknown at this time, it is conservatively assumed that the construction areas associated with these future projects could be located within 50 feet of sensitive land uses. The primary vibration-generating activities associated with the proposed project would occur during grading, placement of underground utilities, and construction of foundations. shows the typical vibration levels produced by construction equipment at various distances. The most substantial source of groundborne vibrations associated with housing development construction would be the use of drill rigs for foundation peers, if required.

According to the Caltrans’ Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, the building damage threshold for historic and some older buildings is 0.25 PPV (in/sec). 3 As
indicated in Table 4.11-3 construction activities at distances of 25 feet or further from the nearest existing buildings would be well below the threshold of 0.25 PPV to avoid structural damage to historic and older buildings.

TABLE 4.11-3

VIBRATION LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Equipment
PPV (in/sec)a
At 25 Feet (Reference) At 50 feet
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.35
Auger Drill Rig 0.089 0.35
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.30
Jackhammer 0.035 0.14
NOTES:
a Vibration amplitudes for construction equipment assume normal propagation conditions and were calculated using the following formula: PPV (equip) = PPV (ref) x (25/D)1.1 where:

PPV (equip) = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance PPV (ref) = the reference vibration level in in/sec from pp. 31–33 and Table 18 of the Caltrans Vibration Guidance Manual, as well as Table 12-2 of the FTA’s Noise and Vibration Guidance Manual D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver
SOURCES: Caltrans, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020, pp. 29–34, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/noise/publications.htm, accessed on December 21, 2021; FTA, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018, https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise- and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf, accessed December 21, 2021.

3 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance manual. April 2020.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-13 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
In addition, the following City of Mountain View Standard Conditions of Approval (Vibration and Settlement Plan for Projects Adjecent to Historic Structures and Zero-Lot-Line Structures) and (Vibration Best Management Practices Construction Measures) would be required of development under the HEU which would further reduce construction-related vibration.

For these reasons, project-related construction and operational groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.
_________________________
Impact NOI-4: Transportation increases along roadways under the HEU would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above baseline levels without the project. (Less than Significant) Vehicular traffic noise increases associated with the proposed HEU were estimated using algorithms found in the FHWA’s Traffic Noise Model Technical Manual and the estimated traffic volumes provided by the Transportation consultant for this Draft EIR’s traffic analysis for the HEU. The results of the vehicular traffic noise modeling effort for the HEU Table 4.11-4 and are compared to year 2040 baseline conditions without the HEU.

The City has not adopted a specific, quantitative threshold for what constitutes a significant permanent increase in ambient noise levels. The smallest increase in loudness perceptible by the human ear is 3 dBA and increases of 5 dBA or greater are clearly perceptible. (Caltrans, 2013)

Therefore, in the absence of quantitative ambient noise level increase thresholds adopted by the city with respect to transportation sources, a substantial increase in ambient noise levels would be defined as either: a 5 dB increase, if after the increase the ambient noise level remains in the range of what would be “normally acceptable” at the sensitive land use where the noise is being received; or a 3 dB increase, if after the increase the ambient noise level exceeds the range of what would be “normally acceptable” at a noise-sensitive land use where the noise is being received. Regardless, as can be seen from the increases in roadside noise presented in Table 4.11- 4, the increase in roadside noise levels along all roadways analyzed was less than 1 dBA.

Therefore, adoption of the HEU update would have a less than significant impact with respect to operational roadway noise.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-14 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
TABLE 4.11-4

BASELINE AND PROJECTED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS ALONG STREETS

HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Roadway Segment
Baseline
Condition (2040)a
Baseline plus HEU
Conditiona
Project Increase
over Baseline
Conditiona
Significant
Increase
(Yes or No)?
Ellis Street from U.S. 101 to Middlefield Road 68.9 69.0 0.1 No North Whisman Road from U.S. 101 to Middlefield Road 65.5 65.6 0.1 No North Whisman Road from to Middlefield Road to Central Expressway 65.0 65.1 0.1 No Middlefield Road from Rengstorff Avenue to North Shoreline Boulevard 69.0 69.1 0.1 No Middlefield Road from North Shoreline Boulevard to Moffett Boulevard 69.9 69.9 0.0 No Middlefield Road from Moffett Boulevard to North Whisman Road 69.7 69.8 0.1 No Middlefield Road from North Whisman Road to SR 237 70.0 70.1 0.1 No Moffett Boulevard from Middlefield Road to Central Expressway 69.4 69.5 0.1 No El Camino Real from Showers Drive to Rengstorff Avenue 73.2 73.2 0.0 No El Camino Real from Rengstorff Avenue to South Shoreline Boulevard 70.7 73.7 0.0 No El Camino Real from South Shoreline Boulevard to Grant Road 74.1 74.2 0.1 No El Camino Real from Grant Road to SR 85 73.0 73.0 0.0 No Rengstorff Avenue from El Camino Real to California Street 68.8 68.9 0.1 No Grant Road from SR 237 to El Camino Real 74.0 74.0 0.0 No Grant Road from El Camino Real to Cuesta Drive 71.9 72.0 0.1 No Miramonte Avenue from El Camino Real to Cuesta Drive 66.9 67.1 0.2 No Miramonte Avenue from Cuesta Drive to Covington Road 64.7 64.9 0.2 No Cuesta Drive from Miramonte Avenue to Grant Road 70.7 70.8 0.1 No North Shoreline Boulevard from Charleston Road to U.S. 101 73.1 73.2 0.1 No North Shoreline Boulevard from U.S. 101 to Middlefield Road 69.1 69.2 0.1 No North Shoreline Boulevard from Middlefield Road to El Camino Real 67.5 67.6 0.1 No NOTES:
a Noise levels were determine using methodology described in FHWA’s Traffic Noise Model Technical Manual.

SOURCE: ESA, 2022 (Appendix D)

Mitigation Measure: None required.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-15 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact NOI-5: Implementation of the HEU would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels due to being located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. (Less than Significant)
Based on a review and comparison of the setting circumstances and housing sites potentially developed as a result of the HEU, it can be concluded that no impacts would result with respect to noise impacts from airport operations. Based on the 2022 noise contours for Moffett Field contained in the City’s General Plan and illustrated in Figure 4.11-1 below, while some of the housing sites of the HEU would be located within the airport influence area, all of the housing sites would be located outside the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour (City of Mountain View, 2012). The Project site is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels from aircraft operations and the impact is less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.
_________________________

4.11.6 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 noise and vibration could occur if the incremental impacts of the HEU combined with the incremental impacts of one or more of the cumulative projects or cumulative development projections for 2040 included in the project description and described in Section 4.0.3, Cumulative Impacts.

The geographic scope of analysis for cumulative noise and vibration construction impacts encompasses sensitive receptors within approximately 1,000 feet of the project site. 4 Beyond
1,000 feet, the contributions of noise from other projects would be greatly attenuated by both distance and intervening structures, and their contribution would be expected to be minimal. The geographic scope of analysis for cumulative noise operational impacts is the roadway network system analyzed for the transportation analysis.

4 This screening threshold distance was developed based on equations for stationary-source noise attenuation (California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement, September 2013). The analysis also used the combined noise level generated by the typical construction phases for a given project (assuming multiple pieces of equipment) at a distance of 50 feet. Using the attenuation equations, the maximum noise level of 89 dBA for both excavation and finishing would diminish to below 65 dBA at 1,000 feet. A receptor experiencing noise levels of 89 dBA from two adjacent construction sites would experience a cumulative noise level of 91 dBA (the acoustical sum of 89 dBA plus 89 dBA), which would still diminish to below 65 dBA at 1,000 feet. Hence, 1,000 feet is used as the geographic scope.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
_________________________
SOURCE: City of Mountain View, 2012 City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Figure 4.11-1
2022 Noise Contours for Moffett Federal Airfield

Moffett Federal Airfield
CNEL (dBs)
O 65 0 70 0 75
2022 Aircraft Noise Contours
with AIA
Figure 5
■--=:::::11--====1 Feet
0 3 ,000 6,000
N
A
Tt..,nap«-•bfS_..CwaCaonyPI--.Ollca ThaGISdo•w ■ -amnpilad ......,_.,,._..._ --... 1-. ... -....,..0liao•-no-ll)t 11i0!'11201l•V/MdAI.UC .... .,...._I\HUQ_l9W ____ .... IA,...d

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact NOI-1.CU: Construction activities associated with implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not result in generation of a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. (Less than Significant) Development that could occur with implementation of the HEU and the cumulative projects listed in Table 4.0-2, if constructed contemporaneously, could result in construction noise levels higher than those of development of the HEU alone at some receptor locations.

As discussed in Impact 4.11-1, above, sensitive receptors located within 50 feet of an excavator or other construction equipment producing similar levels of noise could be exposed to a noise level of 82 dBA L
eq. The City of Mountain View Noise ordinance exempts construction activities between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Additionally, the City of Mountain View Standard Conditions of Approval would be required of development under the HEU which include Standard Conditions of Approval detailed above in Impact NOI-1. These Standard Conditions of Approval would further reduce construction noise levels from development under the HEU as well as from cumulative projects.

Therefore, while the potential exists for construction projects under the HEU and other foreseeable development to occur simultaneously and in proximity to one another, construction equipment operations would operate within the constraints of the Municipal Code and Standard Conditions of Approval and impacts associated with future construction activities conflicting with local noise standards would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.
_________________________
Impact NOI-2.CU: Stationary noise sources from development within the HEU area, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. (Less than Significant)
Development that could occur with implementation of the HEU and the cumulative development described in Section 4.0 of this EIR, could result in stationary source noise levels higher than those of development of the HEU alone at some receptor locations.

At the present time, the type, size, and the location of any air handling equipment may be associated with housing developed under the HEU is unknown. As discussed in Impact NOI-2, Section 21.26 of the City’s Municipal Code establishes maximum noise levels. In addition, the City of Mountain View Standard Conditions of Approval would be required of development under the HEU and cumulative development projects which would further reduce operational noise levels from stationary sources. Standard Conditions of Approval, detailed above in Impact NOI-2 would all apply. Because these requirements would apply to all past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects as well as from development with the proposed HEU, the

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-18 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
cumulative impact with respect to stationary noise sources potentially resulting in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.
_________________________
Impact NOI-3.CU: Construction activities associated with implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration levels. (Less than Significant)
Development that could occur with implementation of the HEU and the cumulative development described in Section 4.0 of this SEIR could be constructed contemporaneously.

With regard to the potential for a cumulative vibration-related damage impact to occur, because vibration impacts are based on instantaneous PPV levels, worst-case groundborne vibration levels from construction are generally determined by whichever individual piece of equipment generates the highest vibration levels. Unlike the analysis for average noise levels, in which noise levels of multiple pieces of equipment can be combined to generate a maximum combined noise level, instantaneous peak vibration levels do not combine in this way. Vibration from multiple construction sites, even if they are located close to one another, would not combine to raise the maximum PPV. For this reason, the cumulative impact of construction vibration from multiple construction projects located near one another would generally not combine to further increase vibration levels. In essence, vibration effects are highly localized. In addition, the Standard Conditions of Approval, detailed above in Impact NOI-3, would be required of development under the HEU as well as cumulative development projects which would further reduce construction- related vibration.

Vibration impacts resulting from construction of subsequent projects under the HEU would not combine with vibration effects from cumulative projects in the vicinity. Therefore, cumulative groundborne vibration impacts related to potential damage effects and interference with vibration-sensitive equipment would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.
_________________________
Impact NOI-4.CU: Transportation activities under the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above baseline levels without the project and cumulative development. (Less than Significant) Development that could occur with implementation of the HEU and the cumulative development described in Section 4.0 of this SEIR, could result in increased roadside noise levels generated by an increase in roadway traffic.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-19 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Vehicular traffic noise increases associated with the proposed HEU inclusive of projected development in the cumulative year 2040 scenario were estimated using algorithms found in the FHWA’s Traffic Noise Model Technical Manual and the estimated 2040 traffic volumes provided in this Draft SEIR’s traffic analysis for the HEU. The results of the vehicular traffic noise modeling effort for the HEU were presented in Table 4.11-4, above.

As can be seen from the increases in roadside noise presented in Table 4.11-4, the cumulative increase in roadside noise levels compared to baseline 2021 conditions along all roadways analyzed was less than 1 dBA. Therefore, the cumulative increase in roadside noise levels would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure: None required.
_________________________

4.11.7 Summary of Noise and Vibration Impacts
Impact
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact NOI-1: Implementation of the HEU
would not generate a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact NOI-2: Stationary noise sources from
development within the HEU area would not
result in a substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact NOI-3: Implementation of the HEU
would not generate excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact NOI-4: Transportation increases along
roadways under the HEU would not result in a
substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above
baseline levels without the project.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact NOI-5: Implementation of the HEU
would not expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels due
to being located within the vicinity of a private
airstrip or an airport land use plan or within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact NOI-1.CU: Construction activities
associated with implementation of the HEU,
when combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
result in generation of a substantial temporary
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity
of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies.

Less than Significant None required -

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-20 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact NOI-2.CU: Stationary noise sources
from development within the HEU area, when
combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
result in a substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact NOI-3.CU: Construction activities
associated with implementation of the HEU,
when combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
result in exposure of persons to or generation
of excessive ground borne vibration levels.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact NOI-4.CU: Transportation activities
under the HEU, when combined with other
past, present, or reasonably foreseeable
projects, would not result in a substantial
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above baseline levels
without the project and cumulative
development.

Less than Significant None required -

4.11.8 References
Caltrans, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020, Table 19, p. 38, https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/ env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf, accessed January 20, 2022.

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

City of Mountain View. Mountain View, California – Code of Ordinances. 2021. Available online:
https://library.municode.com/ca/mountain_view/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIIT HCO_CH8BU_ARTVICONO. Accessed April 8, 2021.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2006. Roadway Construction Noise Model User Guide, 2006.

Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. September 2018. Available online: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/ fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact- assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf. Accessed January 31, 2022.

Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State of California 2017 General Plan Guidelines, 2017, p. 136, http://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_COMPLETE_7.31.17.pdf, accessed January 20, 2022.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-21 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Santa Clara County (SCC) Airport Land Use Commission. 2016, Moffet Federal Airfield Comprehensive Land Use Plan, November 2, 2012. Available online at:
https://plandev.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb941/files/ALUC_NUQ_CLUP.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2022.

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018, https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/ docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta- report-no-0123_0.pdf, accessed January 20, 2022.

U.S. EPA, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety, March 1974.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.11 Noise and Vibration
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.11-22 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

This page intentionally left blank

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.12 Population and Housing
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.12-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.12 Population and Housing

4.12.1 Introduction
This section assesses the potential for the Project to result in significant adverse impacts on population and housing. This section first includes a description of the existing environmental setting as it relates to population and housing, 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 population and housing.

4.12.2 Environmental Setting
Population
The Bay Area is the fifth-largest metropolitan area in the nation and has seen a steady increase in population since 1990. Many cities in the region have experienced significant growth in jobs and population. While these trends have led to a corresponding increase in demand for housing across the region, the regional production of housing has largely not kept pace with job and population growth. Between 2010 and 2020 the City of Mountain View’s population increased by approximately 9.8 percent. Santa Clara County’s overall population increased by 8.6 percent during this period. Overall, the Santa Clara County’s population growth has been consistent with the region, which has seen growth of approximately 8.4 percent over the same decade, and the City of Mountain View’s population growth has been higher than Santa Clara County and the region. Table 4.12-1 below shows the population trends for 2010-2020 for the City, Santa Clara County, and the region.

TABLE 4.12-1
P OPULATION TRENDS, 2010-2020
Population 2010 2020
% Change from
2000-2020
City of Mountain View 74,066 81,302 + 9.8%
Santa Clara County 1,781,642 1,934,171 + 8.6%
Bay Area Region a 7,150,739 7,748,930 + 8.4%
NOTES:
a The nine-county Bay Area Region includes Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties.

SOURCE: California Department of Finance, E-4 Series (CDOF, 2021a).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.12 Population and Housing
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.12-2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Housing
Trends for the change in the number of housing units mirror those for population described above. The number of housing units increased in the City between 2010 and 2020, but at a much higher rate than the region. Santa Clara County as a whole also showed growth in the number of households, at a rate higher the Bay Area Region, but less than the City. Average household size increased in the City over the decade, similar to Santa Clara County and the region. Table 4.12-2 below shows the housing tends for 2010-2020 for the City, Santa Clara County, and the region.

TABLE 4.12-2
H OUSING TRENDS, 2010-2020
2010 2020
% Change from
2010-2020
Housing Units a
City of Mountain View 33,881 37,820 + 11.6%
Santa Clara County 631,920 674,558 + 6.7%
Bay Area Region b 2,783,991 2,924,264 + 5.0%
Average Household Size
City of Mountain View 2.31 2.37
Santa Clara County 2.90 2.98
Bay Area Region b 2.65 2.70
NOTES:
a “Housing units” are all housing (occupied and unoccupied housing units). b The nine-county Bay Area Region includes Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties.

SOURCE: California Department of Finance, E-4 and E-5 Series (CDOF 2021a; 2021b); City of Mountain View, 2022.

Overall Relationship of Jobs and Housing
Jobs/housing balance evolves over time and reflects the role and location of particular areas within a larger regional context. Table 3-2 in Chapter 3, Project Description, shows 101,956 jobs in the City in 2020, and 133,000 jobs projected in 2040. In 2020, the City had approximately 47,903 employed residents, resulting in a ratio of 2.13 jobs for every employed resident (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020).

The total numbers of jobs and employed residents in 2020 the City indicates that the jobs-housing ratio for the City is imbalanced, and this trend is expected to continue through 2040.

4.12.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Fair Housing Act
The federal Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.), enacted in 1968, prohibits discrimination by direct providers of housing, such as landlords and real estate companies as well as other entities, such as municipalities, banks or other lending institutions and homeowners’ insurance companies whose discriminatory practices make housing unavailable to persons because of race or color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, or disability.

I I

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.12 Population and Housing
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.12-3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
State
California Housing Element Requirements
California law (Government Code Section 65580, et seq.) requires cities and counties to include a Housing Element as a part of their General Plans to address housing conditions and needs in the community. Housing Elements are prepared approximately every eight years, following timetables set forth in the law. The Housing Element must identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs and “make adequate provision for the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community,” among other requirements. The City adopted its current Housing Element in 2014 (City of Mountain View, 2014).

State law mandates that all cities and counties zone land appropriately to accommodate the increasing needs of regional population growth. Regional housing needs are determined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

Senate Bill 330
On October 9, 2019, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (HCA) into law, commonly known as Senate Bill (SB) 330 (Chapter 654, Statutes of 2019) to respond to the California housing crisis. On September 16, 2021, Gov. Newsom signed SB 8 (Chapter 161, Statutes of 2021), which is an extension of the HCA. The HCA aims to increase residential unit development, protect existing housing inventory, and expedite permit processing. This new law makes a number of modifications to existing legislation, such as the Permit Streamlining Act and the Housing Accountability Act.

SB 330 sets a temporary 5-year prohibition of residential density reduction associated with housing development projects from January 1, 2020, to January 1, 2025. SB 8 extended the temporary prohibition for an additional 5-year period, concluding on January 1, 2030. For example, during this temporary prohibition, a residential duplex cannot be demolished and replaced with a single-unit dwelling as this would be a net loss of one unit. In addition, existing units that are defined as protected must be replaced, and displaced tenants must be provided relocation benefits.

Regional
Association of Bay Area Governments Area Governments and Regional Housing Needs Allocation
The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is the comprehensive regional planning agency and council of governments for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area Region. Its members include the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma counties and 101 cities and towns of the San Francisco Bay region.

ABAG determines the distribution of affordable housing in the region through its Regional Housing Needs Allocation process. For the period from 2023 to 2031, HCD has identified a need of more than 441,000 housing units in the Bay Area — more than double the amount from the last eight-year cycle (187,000 units between 2015 and 2023). Housing needs are distributed for very low income, low income, moderate income, and above moderate households (ABAG, 2021).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.12 Population and Housing
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.12-4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
As discussed in Chapter 3, Project Description, jurisdictions in the Bay Area are currently updating their housing elements for the 6th Cycle, representing the eight-year planning period from 2023 to 2031. The City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) by income group is shown in Table 4.12-3, below. The City’s HEU must plan for housing that meets this RHNA, plus an appropriate buffer.

TABLE 4.12-3

M OUNTAIN VIEW REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
6TH HOUSING ELEMENT CYCLE (2023-2031)
Very Low
Income Units
(0-50% AMI)
Low Income
Units
(51-80% AMI)
Moderate
Income Units
(81-120% AMI)
Above Mod
Units
(>120% AMI)
Total New
Units
6th Cycle RHNA 2,773 1,597 1,885 4,880 11,135
% of Total 25% 14% 17% 44% 100%
SOURCE: ABAG, Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031 adopted December 2021.

Plan Bay Area 2050
SB 375 requires all metropolitan regions in California to complete a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) as part of a regional transportation plan. In the Bay Area, the MTC and ABAG are jointly responsible for developing and adopting an SCS that integrates transportation, land use, and housing to meet GHG reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board.

Plan Bay Area 2050, adopted in October 2021, serves as the SCS for the Bay Area, in accordance with SB 375.
1 Plan Bay Area 2050 is comprised of 35 strategies across the elements of housing, the economy, transportation, and the environment. A core household and employment growth strategy of Plan Bay Area is “focused growth” in existing communities along the existing transportation network. Key to implementing this focused growth strategy are Priority Development Areas (PDAs) and Transit-Rich Areas (TRAs), as recommended and approved by local governments. As defined by the plan, PDAs are areas where new development will support the needs of residents and workers in a pedestrian-friendly environment served by transit. Plan Bay Area also recommends increasing non-auto travel mode share and reducing vehicle miles traveled per capita and per employee by promoting transit-oriented development, transit improvements, and active transportation modes such as walking and bicycling.

Prior to Plan Bay Area 2050, Plan Bay Area 2040, adopted in 2017, was the most recent regional transportation plan and sustainable communities strategy for the Bay Area region. Plan Bay Area 2050 updates Plan Bay Area 2040 and is consistent with the current Regional Housing Needs Allocation cycle. However, since Plan Bay Area 2050 was adopted in late 2021, Plan Bay Area 2040 continues to serve as the basis for regional and county-wide transportation models until the models are updated. Updates to the models are anticipated within the next several years.

1 Association of Bay Area Governments, Plan Bay Area 2050, Final, adopted October 21, 2021.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.12 Population and Housing
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.12-5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 Land Use and Design Element of the General Plan includes the following policies related to population and housing (City of Mountain View, 2012).

Policy LUD 3.2: Mix of Land Uses. Encourage a mix of land uses, housing types, retail and public amenities, and public neighborhood open spaces accessible to the community.

Policy LUD 3.5: Diversity. Encourage residential developments serving a range of diverse households and incomes.

Policy LUD 6.2: Equitable location of amenities. Pursue equitable distribution of community amenities, public facilities and services within walking distance of residential neighborhoods.

City of Mountain View Below-Market-Rate Housing Program The City of Mountain View Municipal Code includes a Below-Market-Rate (BMR) Housing Program (Chapter 36, Article XIV, Division 2). The BMR Housing Program requires developers of new residential and applicable condominium conversions projects to make at least 15 percent of the total number of dwelling units within the development BMR units and/or pay a fee in lieu thereof.

Rowhouses and townhouses in residential ownership developments are subject to a 25 percent on- site BMR requirement

4.12.4 Significance Criteria
The thresholds used to determine the significance of impacts related to population and housing are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of the Project could have a significant impact on the environment if it would:
• Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure).
• Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

Approach to Analysis
The proposed project would update the City’s Housing Element and plan for development of additional housing. Importantly, the first significance threshold above requires an evaluation of whether the project would induce “unplanned growth,” which it would not, since the housing element itself is a plan. Similarly, the RHNA Plan and the housing requirements contained therein is also a plan. It thus follows that the HEU’s conformance with those plans would avoid a significant environmental impact. Nonetheless, the analysis informs consideration of whether implementation of the HEU would induce substantial unplanned population growth, and is

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.12 Population and Housing
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.12-6 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
supplemented with a consideration of whether the planned development of new housing would displace existing people or housing, necessitating construction of replacement housing.

4.12.5 Impacts of the Project
Impact POP-1: Implementation of the HEU would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly. (Less than Significant) Implementation of the HEU would provide for the development of additional housing units in the City and a resulting increase in the City’s population. While no specific development proposals are directly entitled through the HEU, the HEU would plan for development of up to approximately 15,000 new housing units in the City to 2031, which is equivalent to the 11,135 units assigned to the City through the RHNA process plus a buffer. In doing so, the Housing Element would be updated to identify specific sites for multi-family housing in the City shown in Figure 3-3. If all sites were developed at the planned densities to accommodate the total of up to approximately 15,000 new units to 2031, the population of the City would increase by approximately 30,000 persons. In addition, it’s assumed that approximately 4,100 units would be enabled by changes in development capacity via rezoning over the long term, beyond 2031. The actual pace of development will depend on market conditions, property owner interest, and other factors.

It is important to note that the identification of housing sites in the City’s Housing Element does not mean someone necessarily will develop housing on those sites at the planned unit count or level of affordability. Although the City must plan for housing development, it does not directly build, or require to be built, any housing. Instead, the identification of housing sites is intended to plan for and encourage housing, and its development by property owners and developers is largely dependent on market forces and (in the case of affordable housing) available subsidies.

Regardless, development under the HEU would conform to the City’s revised zoning allowances, in response to the ABAG’s RHNA allocation, which requires the City to identify sufficient housing sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA allocation, plus a buffer of additional units at appropriate densities. By definition, such development would be “planned” rather than unplanned, and would conform to the City’s zoning code and General Plan as amended, as well as the ABAG RHNA Plan.

Housing development that could occur as a result of the HEU’s implementation would require installation of infrastructure such as access roads and utilities. However, these infrastructure improvements would be designed to serve only the planned housing, and would not enable growth or facilitate unplanned growth beyond that housing.

Based upon these considerations, implementation of the HEU would not directly or indirectly induce unplanned population growth to the area, and the impact would therefore be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.12 Population and Housing
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.12-7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact POP-2: Implementation of the HEU would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. (Less than Significant)
Much of the developable area of the City is already developed, and nearly all of the parcels identified for rezoning as part of the HEU are already developed with some sort of use, be it residential or commercial uses. Accordingly, in order to develop additional residential uses on those parcels at the densities greater than that which is currently present, it stands to reason that the existing structures on the site would need to be removed and the higher-intensity residential use developed in its place. For example, a single-family parcel could be combined with neighboring commercial parcels and redeveloped into a multi-family residential project. Under such a scenario, the existing residents would vacate their properties, though such a circumstance would be voluntary through the sale of their properties to the prospective developer(s).

Regardless, residential use on the site would be perpetuated, though at a higher density, and there would be a net increase in available housing on the site. Therefore, the construction of replacement housing elsewhere would not be required. None of the proposed HEU housing site inventory sites (other than pipeline projects) include existing residential units. Projects proposed on sites with existing residential uses would be required to comply with tenant relocation and replacement requirements under SB 330. As such, the implementation of the HEU would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, and construction of replacement housing elsewhere would not be required. The impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________

4.12.6 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 population and housing 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 population and housing is the Bay Area Region.

The cumulative scenario is represented by the HEU and Plan Bay Area 2040, which estimate planned housing and population growth within the City and Bay Area region. For the City, the HEU would increase the currently allowed cumulative growth in the City by about 4,100 dwelling units. For the Bay Area region, Plan Bay Area 2040 anticipates the addition of 544,735 housing units between 2020 and 2040 (ABAG, 2018).

Impact POP-1.CU: Implementation of the HEU, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on population and housing. (Less than Significant) As discussed under the analysis for Impacts POP-1 and POP-2, implementation of the HEU would have a less than significant impact with respect to unplanned population growth or

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.12 Population and Housing
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.12-8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
residential displacement. Approximately 4,100 units would be enabled by changes in development capacity via rezoning. 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. As discussed above, the HEU represents a worst-case scenario by which population and housing effects in the City are evaluated. The potential population and housing growth provided for in the HEU conforms to the ABAG RHNA Plan. Under the HEU, if growth were to occur at the maximum densities specified, that growth would conform to the City’s zoning code and General Plan, as amended, as well as the ABAG RHNA Plan, and would thus constitute “planned growth.”
Other jurisdictions in the Bay Area are also updating their housing elements in response to the RHNA Plan. Updates to those housing elements would also conform to the housing unit and buffer requirements of the RHNA Plan, and those jurisdictions would also update and amend their General Plans and zoning codes to meet the requirements of the RHNA Plan. Similar to the City’s planned growth as described above, growth in these other jurisdictions would therefore be similarly “planned” and would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable effect as relates to unplanned growth. Accordingly, implementation of the HEU would not be cumulatively considerable, and the impact would therefore be less than significant.

Mitigation: None required.
_________________________

4.12.7 Summary of Population and Housing Impacts
Impact
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact POP-1: Implementation of the HEU
would not induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area, either directly or
indirectly.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact POP-2: Implementation of the HEU
would not displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact POP-1.CU: Implementation of the HEU,
when combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, would not
contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on
population and housing.

Less than Significant None required -

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.12 Population and Housing
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.12-9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.12.8 References
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), 2021. Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-203,1 adopted December 2021.

ABAG, 2018. Plan Bay Area Projections 2040, A Companion to Plan Bay Area 2040, November 2018.

California Department of Finance (CDOF), 2021a, E-4 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2021, with 2010 Census Benchmark, May 2021.

CDOF, 2021b. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State — January 1, 2011-2021, May 2021.

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

City of Mountain View, 2014. City of Mountain View 2015-2023 Housing Element, adopted October 14, 2014.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2020. American Community Survey, Table DP03 Selected Economic Characteristics, 2020: ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profiles.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.12 Population and Housing
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.12-10 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

This page intentionally left blank

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.13 Public Services and Recreation

4.13.1 Introduction
This section assesses the potential for the Project to result in significant adverse impacts on public services and recreation. This section first includes a description of the existing environmental setting as it relates to public services and recreation, 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 public services and recreation.

4.13.2 Environmental Setting

4.13.2.1 Fire Protection and Emergency Response
Mountain View Fire Department
The Mountain View Fire Department (MVFD) exists to save lives and property, protect the environment, and minimize the risk of fire and natural disaster. The MVFD has a fire prevention division and environmental division which aim to precent fires and injuries and limit the effects of fires and accidents. The Environmental Safety Section of the Fire Department implements State mandated water pollution control programs to minimize pollutant discharges into Mountain View creeks and the Bay. The MVFD has a multi-family inspection program to ensure proper maintenance of multi-family housing. MVFD firefighters are often the first responders and provide valuable services to the City including fire suppression, emergency medical treatment, technical rescue services, and response to hazardous materials releases (City of Mountain View, 2022a).

MVFD currently maintains 5 fire stations throughout the City. The MVFD fleet includes seven engines, one rescue, one Haz Mat vehicle, and one truck (City of Mountain View, 2022a).

Station 1, located at 251 South Shoreline Boulevard, has an engine company, ladder truck company, rescue company, and a battalion chief. Station 2, located at 160 Cuesta Drive, has two engine companies. Station 3, located at 301 North Rengstorff Avenue, has two engine companies, one of which is a California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) company. Station 4, located at 229 North Whisman Road, has three engine companies (two of which are reserves), one reserve battalion chief, and one utility company. Station 5, located at 2195 North Shoreline Boulevard, has an engine company, hazmat company, truck company (reserve), and a utility terrain vehicle. All the stations have 3 staff per shift, except for Station 1 which has 9 staff per shift (MVFD, 2021).

In 2021-2022, the MVFD had a total of 10,406 unit responses, which included 489 unit responses for fire-related call and 7,288 unit responses for rescue and EMS-related calls (MVFD, 2022).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
The MVFD regularly achieves its goal of responding to each emergency call within six minutes (City of Mountain View, 2021).

The MVFD provides paramedic level services on each of its engines, truck, and rescue. The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is the central command and control facility responsible for carrying out the emergency preparedness and emergency management as well as disaster management functions at a strategic level in an emergency situation. The common functions of the EOC is to collect, gather and analyze data; make decisions that protect life and property, maintain continuity of the organization, within the scope of applicable laws; and disseminate those decisions to all concerned departments, residents, and agencies (City of Mountain View, 2022a).

4.13.2.2 Police Protection
Mountain View Police Department
The Mountain View Police Department (MVPD) provides police services in the City of Mountain View. Services include crime suppression, investigation, traffic enforcement, youth services, community education, neighborhood and event services, and a K-9 patrol. In 2020, the MVFD employed 181 full (143 full-time), regular, and limited period positions to serve the City population of 82,739. The MVFD has 1 police chief and 1 deputy police chief; the rest of the staffing falls into the categories of administration, field operations, special operations, or public safety support services. In 2020, the MVPD had 3 K9 teams (MVPD, 2020). There is one police station in the City, located at 1000 Villa Street (City of Mountain View, 2022b).

Mountain View is divided into four geographic beats and although beats differ in size, the MVPD’s goal is to respond to high priority calls in less than four minutes (City of Mountain View, 2021). In 2020, the MPD had 27,127 calls for service, including dispatched and self- initiated responses. In 2020, there were 1,126 emergency calls and response time to emergency and priority 1 events (first unit dispatched to first unit arriving) was 4 minutes or less 62.8 percent of the time (707 out of 1,126 calls) (MVPD, 2020).

4.13.2.3 Public Schools
The City is served by the Mountain View Whisman School District (MVWSD), the Los Altos School District (LASD) and the Mountain View Los Altos Union High School District (MVLA).

Students attending preschool through Grade 8 living in Mountain View attend schools in the MVWSD and LASD. Students in Grade 9 or higher attend Mountain View High School, Alta Vista High School, or Los Altos high School in the MVLA.

Mountain View Whisman School District
The MVWSD, is located in Mountain View and serves a diverse student population in preschool through eighth grade. The MVWSD operates one preschool, nine K-5 elementary schools, two 6- 8 middle schools in the City. As of February 2022, MVWSD school facilities had a total enrollment of 4,526 students. As of September 2020 MVWSD employed 26 management staff (46 FTE), 310 teachers (297.65 FTE), and 302 classified staff (222.96 FTE) (MVWSD, 2022a).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
As authorized by California Government Code Sections 65995 and 65996, MVWSD collects school impact fees from developers of new residential building space. The impact fee revenue is used together with other MVWSD funds (e.g., State grants, general obligation bonds) to complete capital improvements. The amount of the fee (currently $3.19 per square foot of new residential space) is established through MVWSD Developer Fee Justification Study (MVWSD, 2022b).

Los Altos School District
The LASD operates nine schools serving the communities of Los Altos, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Los Altos Hills and unincorporated areas. There are seven elementary (K to 6th Grade) and two intermediate schools (grades 7 to 8). District-wide enrollment during the 2021 to 2022 school year was 3,576 students (CDE, 2022c). The only LASD school located in Mountain View is Springer Elementary. Total enrollment at Springer Elementary during the 2021 to 2022 school year was 346 students in grades K-6 (CDE, 2022d).

As authorized by California Government Code Sections 65995 and 65996, MVWSD collects school impact fees from developers of new residential building space. The impact fee revenue is used together with other LASD funds (e.g., State grants, general obligation bonds) to complete capital improvements. The current fee is $3.19 per square foot of assessable space for residential uses (LASD, 2022).

Mountain View Los Altos Union High School District
The MVLA serves the communities of Mountain View, Los Altos and Los Altos Hills. The MVLA district is comprised of two comprehensive high schools, an alternative high school, an adult education center, the Freestyle Academy for Arts & Technology, and Middle College. In 2020-2021 the MVLA had a total enrollment of 4,563 students (CDE, 2022a). The average student to teacher ratio at MVLA is 20:1 (MVLA, 2022a).

As authorized by California Government Code Sections 65995 and 65996, MVLA collects school impact fees from developers of new residential building space. The impact fee revenue is used together with other MVLA funds (e.g., State grants, general obligation bonds) to complete capital improvements. The amount of the fee (currently $1.36 per square foot of new residential space) is established through MVLA Developer Fee Justification Study (MVLA, 2020).

4.13.2.4 Parks and Recreation
The City of Mountain View, Community Services Department manages recreation programs and services in the City. The Community Services Department contains five divisions including forestry and roadway landscape, parks and open space, performing arts, recreation, and shoreline.

The City of Mountain View contains mini-parks, neighborhood parks, community parks, and a regional park.

Parks and Open Space
The City’s General Plan (2021) identifies four general park types: mini parks, neighborhood parks, community parks, and regional parks/open space. The City of Mountain View Parks and

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Open Space Plan (2014) provided the following definitions characterizing these spaces (City of Mountain View, 2014):
• A mini park is a specialized facility that serves a concentrated or limited population or specific groups such as children or senior citizens. They are typically up to 3 acres and serve residents within one-half mile.
• A neighborhood park is a higher-intensity recreation area providing play areas as well as open turf for athletics. They are typically 3 to 15 acres and serve residents within one mile. • A community park and/or recreational facility is an area of diverse environmental quality. They may include areas suited for intense recreational facilities such as athletic complexes and large swimming pools. May be an area of natural quality for outdoor recreation such as walking, viewing, sitting, and picnicking. May be any combination of the above, depending upon site suitability and community need. They are typically 15 to 50 acres and serve the entire City. • A regional park is an area of natural or ornamental quality for outdoor recreation such as picnicking, boating, fishing, swimming, camping, and trail uses; may include play areas.

They are typically over 50 acres and serve a population beyond the City limits.

Existing classifications and acreages of City-owned parks are shown in Table 4.13-1 below.

TABLE 4.13-1

E XISTING CITY-OWNED PARKS
Park type
Number of
Parks
Open Space
Acres
Mini Parks 18 14.25
Neighborhood Parks – School Sites 13 105.18
Neighborhood Parks – City Owned 5 27.44
Community Parks 2 49.48
Regional Parks and Open Space (including Stevens Creek Trail) 1 796.72 Total City Parks 39 993.07
SOURCE: City of Mountain View Parks and Open Space Plan (City of Mountain View, 2014)

School sites are an important part of the City’s park system as many residents rely on nearby schools to provide neighborhood recreational resources. Joint-use agreements between the City and MVWSD allow for shared public access to school grounds and facilities. These school sites, typically five acres or more, provide most of the city’s facilities for sports such as baseball, softball, and soccer. Mountain View’s long-standing policy supporting cooperative agreements with the school district allows joint use of 12 school park sites for recreation outside of school hours. These sites include all active and inactive school sites in the district in addition to one school in the MVLA District (City of Mountain View, 2021). School sites make up approximately 79 percent of the City’s neighborhood parks.

Shoreline at Mountain View regional Park is a 753-acre open space and wildlife preserve consisting of wetlands, marshes, upland habitats, a golf course, sailing lake. The historic Rengstorff House,

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
and two adjacent open space areas, Crittenden Hill and Vista Slope. The 2014 Mountain View Parks and Open Space Plan defined open space as parkland that does not have enclosed, single-use recreational facilities or parking lots built over the land (City of Mountain View, 2014).

Trails
Urban trails are defined as continuous open space corridors for walking, biking, hiking, offering scenic views, wildlife habitat, commute alternatives, and connections to neighborhoods, transit centers, and employment areas. The City’s multi-use trails connect neighborhoods and parks throughout the community and offer recreational opportunities to the City. There are five major trail systems addressed in the City of Mountain View Parks and Open Space Plan: Stevens Creek, Hetch Hetchy, Permanente Creek, Bay regional, and Whisman Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Trail (City of Mountain View, 2014).

The Stevens Creek Trail is a 5.14 mile (completed portion only), north-south trail that is owned by the City of Mountain View, Santa Clara Valley Water District, and PG&E. As of 2014, the trail is completed between Shoreline at Mountain View and Dale Avenue/Heatherstone Way. The Hetch Hetchy Trail is a 0.4 mile, east-west trail that is owned by the City of Mountain View. The trail connects the Ellis-Whisman-Middlefield industrial area to Stevens Creek Trail. The Bay Trail is a 2.25 mile (completed portion only), north-south trail that is owned by the City of Mountain View. The completed portion connects through Shoreline at Mountain View to the Sunnyvale Baylands. The Permanente Creek is a 1.17 mile, north-south trail that is owned by the Santa Clara Valley Water District. The paved trail exists between Shoreline at Mountain View and Rock Street. In 2013, an extension to Rock Street, including a bridge over Highway 101 and tunnel under Old Middlefield Way was completed. The Whisman Transit-Oriented Development Trail is a 0.3 mile, north-south trail owned by private property owners. The trail provides off- street pedestrian/bicycle pathway between North Whisman Road and Ellis Street (City of Mountain View, 2014).

Communities Facilities
Mountain View’s community facilities provide residents with social, recreational, and educational opportunities. Major community facilities include the Library, Mountain View Center for Performing arts, Senior Center, Child Care Center, Community Center, two swimming pools, and a tennis complex. These facilities exist in the Downtown Civic Center area and in the two community parks, Cuesta Community Park and Rengstorff Community Park. Shoreline at Mountain View Regional Park has a golf course (City of Mountain View, 2021).

4.13.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
National Fire Protection Association 1710
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1710 is the Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments. NFPA developed NFPA 1710 as an industry standard for the deployment of fire suppression operations to ensure safe and effective

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-6 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
fire service operations. The Standard 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 recognized that the NFPA 1710 Standard is the optimal nationally.

State
California Fire Code
The California Fire Code (Title 24, Part 9 of the California Code of Regulations) establishes regulations to safeguard against hazards of fire, explosion, or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures, and premises. The provisions of the Fire Code apply to the construction, alteration, movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal, and demolition of every building or structure throughout the State of California. The Fire Code includes regulations regarding fire‐resistance‐rated construction, fire protection systems such as alarm and sprinkler systems, fire services features such as fire apparatus access roads, means of egress, and fire safety during construction and demolition.

California Occupational Safety and Health Administration In accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 8 Sections 1270 “Fire Prevention” and 6773 “Fire Protection and Fire Equipment” the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) has established minimum standards for fire suppression and emergency medical services. The standards include, but are not limited to, guidelines on the handling of highly combustible materials, fire hose sizing requirements, restrictions on the use of compressed air, access roads, and the testing, maintenance and use of all fire fighting and emergency medical equipment.

Senate Bill 50
The Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998, or Senate Bill 50 (SB 50), authorizes school districts to levy developer fees to finance the construction or reconstruction of school facilities, and restricts the ability of local agencies to deny project approvals on the basis that public school facilities (classrooms, auditoriums, etc.) are inadequate. School impact fees are collected at the time when building permits are issued. Payment of school fees is required by SB 50 for all new residential development projects and is considered full and complete mitigation of any school impacts. School impact fees are payments to offset capital cost impacts associated with new developments, which result primarily from costs of additional school facilities, related furnishings and equipment, and projected capital maintenance requirements. As such, agencies cannot require additional mitigation for any impacts on school facilities or due to the inadequacy of school facilities. Indirect impacts related to school attendance or construction of new facilities must still be considered under CEQA (e.g., indirect impacts on traffic, air quality, noise).

Quimby Act
California Government Code Section 66477, Subdivision Map Act, referred to as the Quimby Act, permits local jurisdictions to require the dedication of land and/or the payment of in‐lieu fees solely for park and recreation purposes. The dedication of land or in‐lieu fees may be required for land or condominium subdivisions. Land dedicated and fees collected pursuant to the Quimby Act may only be used for developing new, or rehabilitating existing, park or recreational facilities. The

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Quimby Act effectively preserves open space needed to develop parkland and recreational facilities; however, the actual development of parks and other recreational facilities is subject to discretionary approval and is evaluated on a case-by-case basis with new residential development.

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 Land Use and Design, Mobility, Infrastructure and Conservation, Parks, Open Space and Community Facilities, and Public Safety Elements of the General Plan includes the following policies related to public services and recreation (City of Mountain View, 2021).

Goal LUD-3: A diverse, balanced and flexible mix of land uses that supports a strong economy, complete neighborhoods, transit use and community health.

Policy LUD-3.1: Land use and transportation. Focus higher land use intensities and densities within a half-mile of public transit service, and along major commute corridors.

Policy LUD-3.2: Mix of land uses. Encourage a mix of land uses, housing types, retail and public amenities and public neighborhood open spaces accessible to the community.

Goal LUD-5: Pedestrian-accessible village centers that serve surrounding neighborhoods.

Policy LUD-5.3: Community gathering. Encourage community gathering destinations such as plazas, open space or community facilities within village centers.

Policy LUD-5.4: Connections. Encourage pedestrian, bicycling and public transit connections and amenities between village centers and surrounding neighborhoods.

Goal LUD-6: Distinctive neighborhoods that preserve and enhance the quality of life for residents.

Policy LUD-6.5: Pedestrian and bicycling improvements. Support pedestrian and bicycling improvements and connections between neighborhoods.

Goal LUD-8: A network of pedestrian-oriented, sustainable and public spaces.

Policy LUD-8.2: Streets friendly to bicyclists and pedestrians. Encourage a network of streets friendly to bicyclists and pedestrians that create a safe and comfortable environment and include convenient amenities and features.

Policy LUD-8.3: Enhanced publicly-accessible bicycle and pedestrian connections.

Encourage new and existing developments to enhance publicly-accessible bicycle, pedestrian and transit connections.

Goal LUD-16: A diverse area of complementary land uses and open space resources.

Policy LUD-16.1: Protected open space. Protect and enhance open space and habitat in North Bayshore.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Policy LUD-16.6: Open space amenities. Encourage development to include open space amenities, plazas and parks that are accessible to the surrounding transit, bicycle and pedestrian network.

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

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

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.

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 Goal INC-16: Rich and biologically diverse ecological resources which are protected and enhances.

Policy INC-16.1: Natural areas. Work with regional agencies to protect and enhance natural areas.

Policy INC-16.2: Shoreline at Mountain View. Manage Shoreline at Mountain View Regional Park to balance the needs of recreational, open space, habitat, commercial and other uses.

Goal POS-1: An expanded and enhanced park and open space system.

Policy POS-1.1: Additional parkland. Expand park and open space resources to meet current City standards for open space acreage and population in each neighborhood.

Policy POS-1.2: Recreation facilities in new residential developments. Require new development to provide park and recreation facilities.

Goal POS-2: Parks and public facilities equitably distributed throughout the community and accessible to residents and employees.

Policy POS-2.1: Distribution of parks. Give priority for park acquisition to the Planning Areas identified in the Parks and Open Space Plan.

Policy POS-2.2: Connectivity and transit access. Improve connectivity and transit accessibility to parks.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Policy POS-2.3: Pedestrian and bicycle access. Improve pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, and create new connections to parks to minimize pedestrian and bicycle travel distances.

Policy POS-2.4: Access to Bay and natural areas. Promote safe access to San Francisco Bay, creeks, scenic features and other natural resources in the city and surrounding region.

Policy POS-2.5: Schools. Pursue strategies for preserving its park and open space areas if a school site is declared surplus by the school district.

Policy POS-2.6: Diverse park amenities. Design parks to address a range of activities for diverse populations.

Goal POS-3: Open space areas with natural characteristics that are protected and sustained.

Policy POS-3.1: Preservation of natural areas. Preserve natural areas, creeks and Shoreline at Mountain View Regional Park primarily for low-intensity uses. In special circumstances more active uses may be permitted if the overall natural character of the larger area is retained.

Goal POS-4: Parks and public facilities that are well designed and integrated with the surrounding neighborhood.

Policy POS-4.1: Community involvement. Involve and empower the community in planning and carrying out open space programs.

Goal POS-5: Cooperation between the City and local school districts to meet shared open space, recreation and education needs.

Policy POS-5.1: Cooperation with school districts. Continue cooperative arrangements with school districts to use open space and facilities at schools for public parks, playgrounds and recreation programs and establish new arrangements.

Policy POS-5.2: Schools and open space. Collaborate with the school district on new school development and intensification to accommodate population growth while preserving and protecting public parks and playgrounds.

Policy POS-5.3: School facilities. Ensure school facilities are constructed to serve community needs to the extent allowed by state law.

Policy POS-5.4: School facility needs. Collaborate with local school districts on their facility needs and provide information on development and growth trends.

Goal POS-6: An integrated system of multi-use trails connecting to key local and regional destinations and amenities.

Policy POS-6.1: Citywide network of pathways. Develop a citywide network of pedestrian and bicycle pathways to connect neighborhoods, employment centers, open space resources and major destinations within the city.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-10 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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-1.1: 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 services.

Policy PSA-2.2: Sense of safety. 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 and facilities. 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-11 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 of the 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-13 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 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 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.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-14 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact PSR-2: Implementation of the 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 discussed in Section 4.13.2, in 2020 the MVPD employed 181 full (143 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 1.7 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 of facilities 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.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-15 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact PSR-3: Implementation of the 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 and MVLA would likely serve these potential school-aged students.

The total housing units required in the 6
th Cycle RHNA 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 in 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 units enabled by changes in development capacity via rezoning use the MVLA’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.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact PSR-4: Implementation of the 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 projects are developed. Individual projects under the HEU would be subject to the City’s Parkland Dedication Ordinance, which require either dedicating land, paying a fee in 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.

1 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).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-18 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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. As discussed in Section 4.13.3, Regulatory Setting, the City has 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 Park Land Dedication Ordinance 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-19 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 required.
_________________________

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-1.CU: 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.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-20 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 and capacity improvements. The City would also be required to ensure compliance with General Plan Policies POS-1.1 and POS-1.2 related to the demand for parks and recreational facilities.

Therefore, when considered in the cumulative context, the HEU’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 Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
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
None required -
Impact PSR-2: Implementation of the 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
None required -
Impact PSR-3: Implementation of the 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
None required -
Impact PSR-4: Implementation of the 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
None required -

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-21 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact
Significance
Before Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
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
None required -
Impact PSR-1.CU: 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
None required -
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
None required -

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-Altos- Union-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/49991/355_first_st_public_ rev_is_mnd.pdf. Accessed July 13, 2022.

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

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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.13 Public Services and Recreation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.13-22 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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/default.asp. Accessed April 25, 2022.

Los Altos School District (LASD), 2022. Business Services. Available: www.lasdschools.org/ District/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 Report%20FY%2020-21.pdf. Accessed April 25, 2022.

Mountain View Los Altos Union High School District (MVLA), 2020. Level I Developer Fee Study for Mountain View-Los Altos Union High School District, July 27, 2020. Available:
https://www.mvla.net/documents/Business/Fiscal-Services/Development%20Impact%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 to the Notice of Preparation for the 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://p12cdn4static.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).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

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 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 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 k ey 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 east 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.

Mountain View Housing Element
Figure 4.14-1
Roadway Classification
Source: Mountain View 2030 General Plan - Adopted July 2012 - Revised 09-24-21 ~
..........

LEGEND
........

City of
Palo Alto
Highway
Expressway
Boulevard
Main Street
City of
Los Altos
Major Retail Street
Avenue
Residential Collector
Park Street
Flexible Street
Neighborhood Connector
Downtown Street
Residential Street
I
f
Multi-Use Pathway (Existing )
Multi-Use Pathway (Proposed )
r-
l
r
I L....-...:--, .....

I
...... ----. L I
...J
I
I
I
I
1 MOFFETT FEDERAL

I AIRFIELD
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I j
City of
Sunnyvale
0 NORTH
Notto Scale

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 Real (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 R oad 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.

Mountain
View
Mountain
View
280
101
82 85
237
Central Expy
South Dr
Grant Rd
El Camino Real
N Shoreline Blvd
W Middlefield Rd
San Antonio Rd
California St
Montecito Ave
Miramonte Ave
Moffett Blvd
Castro St
Latham St
Church St
Rock St
Ellis St
Charleston Rd
N Whisman Rd
Fairchild Dr
La Avenida St
Shorebird Wy
Sierra Vista Ave
E Evelyn Ave
Bryant Ave
S Springer Rd
W Dana St
Sylvan Ave
Showers Dr N Rengstorff Ave
Clyde Ave
Dale Ave
Terra Bella Ave
Central Ave
Leghorn St
Old Middlefield Way
Independence Ave
Phyllis Ave
Thompson Ave
Magdalena Ave
Hans Ave
Amphitheatre Pkwy
Del Medio Ave
Stierlin Rd
Huff Ave
Martens Ave
E Middlefield Rd
LogueAve
Foothill Expy
= Housing Element Sites
= Class I Bikeways/Multi-Use Paths
LEGEND
= Class II Bikeways/On-Street Bike Lanes
= Class III Bikeways/ Bike Routes
= Class IV Bikeways/Cycle Tracks
/Protected On-Street Bike Lanes
Mountain View Housing Element
Figure 4.14-2
Existing Bicycle Facilities
~ ~~XAGON ............ 0
NORTH
Notto Scale

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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.

Existing bicycle facilities within or adjacent to the Housing Element Update planning sites include:

Class I 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 are shown on Figure 4.14-3 and described in Table 4.14-1.

Mountain
View
Mountain
View
22 51
51 51H
51H
51H
51H
51H
53 21
21 21
21 40
4040 40
51 51 5140
40 51
52 52
52 52
280
101
82 85
237
522
104
Central Expy
Grant Rd
Villa St
El Camino Real
N Shoreline Blvd
W Middlefield Rd
San Antonio Rd
California St
Miramonte Ave
S Bernardo Ave
Moffett Blvd
Castro St
Middlefield Rd
Latham St
Ellis St
W Remington Dr
N San Antonio Rd
Charleston Rd
N Whisman Rd
E Evelyn Ave
Bryant Ave
S Springer Rd
W Dana St
Covington Rd
W Washington Ave
Sylvan Ave
Showers Dr
N Rengstorff Ave
Clyde Ave
Dale Ave
Terra Bella Ave
Central Ave
N El Monte Ave
Old Middlefield Way
Portland Ave
Clark Ave
Magdalena Ave
Amphitheatre Pkwy
Del Medio Ave
Crittenden Ln
Huff Ave
Pear Ave
Plymouth
St
LogueAve
Foothill Expy
= Housing Element Sites
= Local Bus Route
= LRT Orange Line
LEGEND
= Caltrain Route
= Caltrain Station
= MVgo Shuttle Route A
= MVgo Shuttle Route B
= MVgo Shuttle Route C
= MVgo Shuttle Route D
= MV Community Shuttle
= Rapid Bus Route XXX
= Express Bus Route XXX
XX
= Frequent Bus RouteXXX
Mountain View Housing Element
Figure 4.14-3
Existing Transit Services
-.......
~
~
....
-0-
0 NORTH
Notto Scale

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
TABLE 4.14-1

EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES
Route Route Description Weekday Hours
of Operation
Headwaysa
(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 Local Route 51h Moffett Field/Ames center – De Anza College 7:00 AM - 6:48 PM 60 Local Route 52 Foothill College - Mountain View Transit Center 7:07 AM - 6:31 PM 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 Shuttlec
MVgo Shuttles (A, B, C, D) Mountain View Transit Center - Throughout Mountain view
6:28 AM - 10:38 AM
2:49 PM - 8:50 PM
20 - 45
MV Community Shuttle Throughout Mountain View 7:00 AM - 7:00 PM 30 VTA Light Rail Transit and Caltrain Commuter Rail
LRT Orange Line Mountain View - Alum Rock 5:51 AM - 12:46 AM (next day)
20 Caltrain Gilroy - San Francisco 4:22 AM - 1:46 AM
(next day)
10 - 40
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 12101. 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 I I
I I
I I

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
(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 for all State-controlled facilities including Highway 101, State Route (SR) 82 (El Camino Real), SR 85, SR 237, and the associated interchanges for these facilities located in Mountain View.

Caltrans requirements are described in their Guide for the Preparation of Traffic 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 CARB); 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).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 issued another guidance document and requested additional input. In 2018, the CEQA 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][3]). 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 this region and integrates transportation, 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-10 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 all CMP monitored facilities. Based on VTA’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 M OB -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-1.6: Traffic calming. Provide traffic calming, especially in neighborhoods and around schools, parks and gathering places.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-11 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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-3.3: 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 M OB -4.1: Bicycle Network. Improve facilities and eliminate gaps along the bicycle network to connect destinations across the city.

Policy MOB-4.2: Planning for 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 in the city.

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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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-5.6: Emerging technologies. Explore emerging transit technologies such as Personal Rapid Transit and their citywide applicability.

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 M OB -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 of service. Ensure performance measurement criteria optimize travel by each mode.

Policy MOB-8.3: Multi-modal transportation monitoring. Monitor the effectiveness of policies to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per service population by establishing transportation mode share targets and periodically comparing travel survey data to established targets.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-13 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 of street 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 emergency response time standards.

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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-14 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 improved or expanded.

City of Mountain View Standard Conditions of 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 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. Jo
in 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 be 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-15 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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
Upon 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 permit, 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;

2. 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.

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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
• 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 HEU is planning for the period from January 31, 2023 through January 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 of the 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

Existing
Baseline
(2020)
Under
Construction
Proposed HEU
(2021-2031)
2031
Conditions with
Proposed HEU
Cumulative
Growth no
HEU
HEU
Contribution
to Cumulative
Growth3
Cumulative
Growth with
HEU
Dwelling Units 37,820 1,847 15,000 54,700 63,000 4,100 67,100 Population1 82,826 3,740 30,000 116,600 134,000 8,200 142,200 Jobs 101,965 8,800 02 120,000 133,000 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, multi- family 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-18 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
• 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 more parking than 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 ½-mile of an existing major transit stop or within ½-mile of a high- quality transit 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-3.1increases 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-19 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 easier to get to transit services and improve transit as a 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 p roposed 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.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-20 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 model 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 attributes such as number of housing units, number of automobiles per household, household income, 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.

£¤101
UV85
UV237
UV82
Miramonte Ave
Middlefield Rd
California St
Levin Ave
Rengstorff Ave
Bryant Ave
Ellis St
N Shoreline Blvd
Charleston Rd
Sylvan Ave
Calderon Ave
Shoreline Blvd
E Middlefield Rd
Old Middlefield Way
Central Expy
North Bayshore
Moffett/Whisman Road
Grant Road/Sylvan Park
Springer/Cuesta/Phyllis
Monta Loma/Farley/Rock Street
Central Neighborhoods
San Antonio/Rengstorff
NASA Ames
(Federal)
NASA Ames
(Federal)
Path: U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\2020xxx\D202000806_Mtn_View_Housing_Element\03_MXDs_Projects\EIR\FigX1_All_Housing_Sites_VMT_per_Capita.mxd, sgeissler 7/8/2022 SOURCE: ESRI, 2022.

N
0 3,500
Feet
City of Mountain View
Neighborhoods
Approved Pipeline Project
100% Affordable Housing
Project
Other Approved
Opportunity Sites
Pending Projects - No
Rezoning Required
Pending Projects -
Rezoning Required
Opportunity Site -
Rezoning Required
Opportunity Site (No
rezoning)
Rezone Area for General
Plan Village Center Site
Rezone Area for El
Camino Real Village
Center Site
City of Mountain View
Figure 4.14-4
All Housing Sites and V MT per Capita
Precise Plan
East Whisman
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
-----D
1111111111
-0 --===--===-=-

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-22 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 East 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:
• 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. If the 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-23 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 East 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 Mountain View. The North Bayshore Residential TDM Guidelines report provides 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-24 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 (signal warrant studies, traffic calming studies, etc.) to determine feasibility.

Consultants should prioritize public improvements included in the City’s approved plans which contain various transportation improvements to bicycle, 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 of the 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.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-25 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact TRA-4: Implementation of the 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 plans that include use of alternate routes, sirens and other methods to bypass congestion and minimize response times. In addition, California law requires drivers 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 T RA -1.CU: 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.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-26 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impact TRA-2.CU: 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 impact with mitigation.

Mitigation Measure TRA-1.CU: 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 d iscussion 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.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-27 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.14.7 Summary of Transportation Impacts
Impact
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
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 None required - Impact TRA-2: Implementation of the HEU would exceed an applicable VMT threshold of
significance.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure
TRA-1: Implement
VMT Reduction
Measures
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Impact TRA-3: Implementation of the HEU
would not substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature or incompatible
uses.

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

Less than Significant None required -
Impact TRA-1.CU: 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 None required -
Impact TRA-2.CU: Implementation of the HEU,
in combination with cumulative development,
would exceed an applicable VMT threshold of
significance.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure
TRA-1.CU:

Implement VMT
Reduction Measures
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
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 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 None required -

_________________________

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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.14 Transportation
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.14-28 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
City of Mountain View, 2015. Bicycle Transportation Plan Update, adopted November 2015.

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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.15 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 of the HEU on utilities and service systems.

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).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 crossings to improve reliability, and the City’s sanitary sewer pump station (City of Mountain View, 2021b). The City ’s 2018 Sewer System Management Plan 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).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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).

Customers who choose to opt out of SVCE’s energy plans receive electricity from PG&E. PG&E 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 José. 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).

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

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 and 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

1 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 more than 500,000 square feet of floor space; (3) a proposed commercial office building employing more than 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 Water Code Section 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 multi- family 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-6 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 Order B-37-16, which made the 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, certain wasteful practices such as sidewalk hosing and runoff-causing landscape irrigation were permanently outlawed, while local agencies 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, whichever is more stringent.

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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 of the 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 and multi-family dwellings with more than five units also divert organic material.

AB 1826 does not require multi-family dwellings to divert compostable food scraps. However, 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 in 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 if they do not meet the minimum size threshold, drain into tidally influenced areas or directly into San Francisco Bay, or drain into hardened channels, or if they 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);

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-10 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
e. Space-conditioning equipment shall be electric, not be fueled by natural gas; f. 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 projected 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 the 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

2 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-11 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 8.6: Green Streets. Require post-construction stormwater 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:

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-13 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 Plan must include a stamped and signed certification by a qualified Engineer, stating that the Stormwater Management Plan complies with the City’s guidelines 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.

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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-14 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-15 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 effects.
• 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 HEU. ADUs would require minor tie-ins to the existing on-site utility systems served by the main dwelling unit, the construction of which would not result in significant environmental impacts due to the small scale of ground disturbance.

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 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 water system capacity improvements would be temporary and within

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 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 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-18 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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, cooking 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 requirements in new homes, 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-1: 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-19 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 water conservation efforts such as landscaping with low water use plants, 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 demand during droughts (Schaff & Wheeler, 2022).

3 Based on the multifamily residential unit duty factor of 100 gpd for 11,100 units.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-20 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 conservation and efficiency measures would minimize the potable water demand generated. Projects developed within the North Bayshore Precise Plan 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 project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments. (Less than Significant)
Implementation of the 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-21 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 efficiency measures 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 of the HEU 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. (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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-22 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 year). 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 year).6 The Kirby Canyon Landfill accepts 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 of the 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 of the HEU would be required to be in compliance with the City’s Green Building Code and Construction and 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)

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-23 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 regarding compliance with solid waste 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
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-24 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 affiliated with the North Bayshore, El Camino Real, East Whisman 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 UWMP under normal, single dry, or multiple dry water years (Schaaf & 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 of the 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-25 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 required to perform an engineering study per the Basic Agreement (City of Mountain View, 2012b). While projected 2030 General Plan flows are not likely to be realized considering the 2020 wastewater generation rate for the City, the Basic Agreement outlines the framework 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.
_________________________

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-26 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

4.15.7 Summary of Utilities and Service Systems Impacts Impact
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation
Significance After
Mitigation
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.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure
UTL-1: Fair-Share
Contributions
Toward Utility
Improvements
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 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 project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments.

Less than Significant None required -
Impact UTL-4: Implementation of the HEU
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.

Less than Significant 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 None required -
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.

Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure
UTL-1: Fair-Share
Contributions
Toward Utility
Improvements
Less than
Significant
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 None required -
Impact UTL-3.CU: Implementation of the 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 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 None required -

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-27 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

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 (43-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/lgcentral/goalmeasure/disposalrate/ mostrecent. Accessed May 18, 2022.

Cal Recycle, 2022. Jurisdiction Per Capita Disposal Trends 2016-2020, Mountain View.

Available: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/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 of Mountain 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 of Mountain 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, 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?BlobID=36187. Accessed May 23, 2022.

Schaaf & Wheeler, 2022. Water Supply Assessment 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.15-28 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

This page intentionally left blank

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.16 Effects Found Not to Be Significant
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.16-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

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.

Effects of the Project on the following environmental topic areas were found not to be significant during the EIR process: Agriculture and Forest Resources; Mineral Resources; and Wildfire. The following presents a brief summary of Project effects found not to be significant, 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

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.16 Effects Found Not to Be Significant
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.16-2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 View along Stevens Creek being classified as MRZ-3, “Areas containing 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.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.16 Effects Found Not to Be Significant
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.16-3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 01c96c9435. Accessed May 11, 2022.

California Department of Conservation (DOC), 2016. Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2016, September 2018. Available: https://santaclaralafco.org/sites/default/files/scl16.pdf.

Accessed May 11, 2022.

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

Available: https://egis.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 of Mountain 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=1f39e32b4c 0644b0915354c3e59778ce. Accessed May 11, 2022.

4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures

4.16 Effects Found Not to Be Significant
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4.16-4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

This page intentionally left blank

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
CHAPTER 5
Alternatives to the Project
Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, this chapter is provided to describe and evaluate alternatives to the Project, 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 of the 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.

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

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 describe or evaluate the environmental effects of alternatives in the same level of detail as the proposed project, but must include enough information to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, 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 al so 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;
• E ncourage 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;

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
• 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 project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly.”
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 Q uality 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]).

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

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 EIR.

Off-Site Alternative
The primary objective of the Housing Element Update is to ensure the City’s conformance with State law. There would be no way to meet this objective with an alternative 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. • No n -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.

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
• 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 that 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.
• Al ternative 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.

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-6 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 of the project versus no project.

As noted in Chapter 3, Project Description, the City has existing policies and sites with existing residential capacities including:
• The City has a number of housing and mixed-use projects that are approved or have an active application on file, known as “pipeline projects”, that could collectively total approximately 8,600 units by 2031.
• The City’s existing precise plans, General Plan Land Use designations, and zoning permit a range of residential densities in different areas of the City that can accommodate development of multifamily housing without adjustment. A preliminary 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 for inclusion in the inventory in other areas of the City as well.
• Th e development of approximately 96 ADUs accessory dwelling units (ADUs) is also estimated to occur based on existing 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 in the City, which exceeds the 11,135 total housing units required in the 6th Cycle RHNA. While it is not known how many of these units would actually be realized during the planning period and at what affordability levels, 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. However, since neither a housing sites inventory nor the programs necessary to implement the housing 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 of the HEU as defined above in Section 5.2.1.

The No Project Alternative would not update the City’s Housing Element to comply with State- mandated housing requirements and to address the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-7 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 HEU and locate development and resulting construction activity farther from existing neighborhoods. Opportunity sites and rezone areas generally located outside of Precise Plan areas (i.e., within the Monta Loma/Farley/Rock Street and Springer/Cuesta/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 of Approval) 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.

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-8 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impacts
Aesthetics
The No Project Alternative would result in less-than-significant effects to aesthetics, 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. 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 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. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-9 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-10 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 HEU.

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 less-than-significant impacts 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.

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-11 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 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 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.

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-12 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Impacts
Aesthetics
The Reduced Sites Alternative would result in less-than-significant effects to aesthetics, 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.

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 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 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 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 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

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-13 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 alternative is adopted, and the impact would be less than significant.

Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources
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 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 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-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 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.

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-14 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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.

Land Use and Planning
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 planning 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

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-15 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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.

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-16 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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
Impact HEU
Alternative 1:

No Project Alternative
Alternative 2:

Reduced Sites Alternative
Aesthetics Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant/ Air Quality Significant and
Unavoidable
Significant and
Unavoidable
Significant and
Unavoidable 
Biological Resources Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant / Cultural Resources and
Tribal Cultural Resources Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant / Energy Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant / Geology, Soils, &
Paleontological
Resources
Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant / Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant/ Hazards and Hazardous
Materials Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant / Hydrology and Water
Quality Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant / Land Use and Planning Less than Significant Significant and Unavoidable  Less than Significant
Noise Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant/ Population and Housing Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant Public Services and
Recreation Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant/ Transportation Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant/ Utilities and Service
Systems Less than Significant Less than Significant / Less than Significant/ NOTES:
 - The impact is less than the proposed HEU.
 - The impact is greater than the proposed HEU.
/ - 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

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-17 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 be balanced. For example, the Reduced Sites Alternative could be 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 though the impact conclusions would be the same as the proposed HEU. However, the Reduced Sites Alternative would also result in a greater impact 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.

5. Alternatives to the Project
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5-18 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

This page intentionally left blank

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
CHAPTER 6
Other CEQA Considerations
Consistent with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2, this section discusses significant environmental effects, significant irreversible environmental changes, and growth-inducing 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 of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the 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 the project. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified.”

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

6. Other CEQA Considerations
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6-2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 damage caused by an accident 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:
[T]he ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional 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 of little 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 if it 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

6. Other CEQA Considerations
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6-3 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 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.

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:

1. 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 HEU’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 established transportation network in the County and adjoining areas offers 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

6. Other CEQA Considerations
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6-4 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 discussion of how a project could increase population, employment, or housing in the areas surrounding the project site as well as an analysis of the infrastructure and planning changes that would be 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 Housing, 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
th 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 jurisdiction, they are the primary means of regulating development and growth in California. Since the Housing 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

6. Other CEQA Considerations
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6-5 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
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 areas of the City. However, it is important to note that while the law requires the HEU to include an inventory 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 of the 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, Environmental 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.

6. Other CEQA Considerations
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6-6 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022

This page intentionally left blank

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 7-1 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
CHAPTER 7
Report Preparers

7.1 Lead Agency
City of Mountain View
Community Development Department
500 Castro Street, P.O. Box 7540
Mountain View, CA 94039-7540
Aarti Shrivastava, Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Eric Anderson, Advance Planning Manager
Ellen Yau, Senior Planner

7.2 EIR Consultants
Environmental Consultant
Environmental Science Associates (ESA)
787 The Alameda, Suite 250
San Jose, CA 95126
Luke Evans, Project Director Technical Review; Quality Assurance/Quality Control Jill Feyk-Miney, Project Manager Technical Review; Quality Assurance/Quality Control; Agriculture and Forestry Resources; Population and
Housing; Utilities and Service Systems; Alternatives;
Other CEQA Considerations
Steve Smith Aesthetics; Land Use and Planning
Cheri Velzy Air Quality
Brian Pittman Biological Resources; Senior Technical Review Rebecca Acosta Biological Resources
Jyothi Iyer Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Energy
Becky Urbano Historic Architectural Resources
Heidi Koenig Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources; Senior Technical Review
Ashleigh Sims Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Michael Burns Hazards and Hazardous Materials; Geology, Soils, Paleontological and Mineral Resources; Senior
Technical Review
Brandon Carroll Geology, Soils, Paleontological and Mineral Resources

7. Report Preparers
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 7-2 ESA / 202000806 Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2022
Ryan Yasuda Hydrology and Water Quality; Public Services and Recreation
Chris Sanchez Noise and Vibration; Senior Technical Review Nick Reynoso Noise and Vibration
Jason Neilsen GIS Services
Ron Teitel Graphics
Kristine Olsen Word Processing and Report Production
Transportation
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.
100 Century Center Court, Suite 501
San Jose, California 95112
At van den Hout, Vice President and Principal Associate

Utilities
Schaaf and Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers
4699 Old Ironsides Dr., Ste. 350
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Leif M. Coponen, PE, Vice President
Brett F. Crews, Assistant Engineer

INDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR

THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW HOUSING

ELEMENT UPDATE PROJECT
DE
CEMBER 2022
Exhibit B

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations i December 2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Considerations
Page
Section 1: Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 Statutory Requirements for Findings .............................................................................. 1 Record of Proceedings................................................................................................... 2 Incorporation By Reference ........................................................................................... 3 Findings ......................................................................................................................... 3 Section 2: Project Background and Overview .................................................................... 4 Brief Project Description ................................................................................................. 4 Project Objectives .......................................................................................................... 4 Alternatives .................................................................................................................... 5 Section 3: Effects Determined to Be Mitigated to Less-Than-Significant Levels ............ 6 Section 4: Significant Effects That Cannot Be Mitigated to a Less-Than- Significant Level ........................................................................................................ 24 Section 5: Feasibility of Alternatives to the Proposed Project ....................................... 27 Project Alternatives ...................................................................................................... 27 Section 6: Statement of Overriding Considerations ........................................................ 29 Section 7: Conclusion; No Recirculation of the Final EIR is Required .......................... 32

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 1 December 2022 Section 1: Introduction
Statutory Requirements for Findings
To support a decision on a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is prepared, the lead or responsible agency must prepare written findings of fact (Findings) for each significant effect on the environment identified in the EIR (e.g., Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code). The City of Mountain View, as the lead agency, has prepared these Findings for the City of Mountain View Housing Element Update (Project). The Findings must be adopted by the Mountain View City Council, which the City Council hereby elects to do as detailed more fully herein.

Section 15091(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines states that:
a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.

2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

In short, CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives where feasible to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur with implementation of a project. For those significant effects that cannot be mitigated to a less-than- significant level, the public agency is required to find that specific overriding economic, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.
1 CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 states: “If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposal project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered ‘acceptable.’”

1 Public Resources Code Section 21081(b).

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 2 December 2022 Record of Proceedings
Various documents and other materials constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council bases its Findings and decisions contained herein. For purposes of CEQA and the Findings set forth herein, the record of proceedings (Record of Proceedings) for the City’s decision on the Project consists of: (a) matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to, federal, State and local laws and regulations; and (b) the following documents which are in the custody of the City:
• Notice of Preparation and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Project (see, e.g., Appendix A of the Draft EIR for the Notice of Preparation); • The Public Review Draft EIR and supporting documentation prepared for the Project (Draft EIR published in July 2022 and all attached Appendices, and all documents cited, incorporated by reference, or referred to therein;
• All written and verbal comments and documents submitted to the City by agencies, organizations and members of the public on the Project and the Final EIR (before, during, and after the close of the public comment period up through the close of the public testimony portion of the City Council’s public hearing on the Project); • The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP); • The Public Review Final Environmental Impact Report/Responses to Comments Document and supporting documentation prepared for the Project (Final EIR published in November 2022), and all decisions, determinations, documents cited, incorporated by reference, or referred to therein;
• All findings and resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the Project, and all documents cited, incorporated by reference, referred to therein; • All locally adopted land use plans and ordinances, including, without limitation, general plans, specific plans and ordinances, master plans together with environmental review documents, findings, mitigation monitoring programs, and other documentation relevant to planned growth in the area such as the City of Mountain View 2030 General Plan and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program, adopted by the City Council on July 10, 2012 and the City’s Climate Action Plan (Climate Protection Roadmap adopted in 2015); • The City of Mountain View 2030 General Plan and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2011012069), including all appendices attached thereto, certified by the Mountain View City Council on July 10, 2012, and all findings, decisions, determinations, and resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the General Plan EIR;
• All staff reports, presentation materials, and other documents prepared by the City with respect to the Final EIR and the Project, and any minutes or verbatim transcripts of all City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 3 December 2022 information and Study Sessions, workshops, public meetings and public hearings held by the City in connection with the Project; and
• Any other materials required to be in the record of proceedings by public Resources Code Section 21167.6, subdivision (e).

The location and custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings are:

City of Mountain View Community Development Department
500 Castro Street, P.O. Box 7540
Mountain View, CA 94039-7540
Contact: Ellen Yau, [email protected]

Incorporation By Reference
The Final EIR is hereby incorporated into these Findings in its entirety. Without limitation, this incorporation is intended to elaborate on the comparative analysis of alternatives, the basis for determining the significance of impacts, the scope and nature of mitigation measures, and the reasons for approving the Project despite the conclusion regarding associated significant and unavoidable adverse impact.

Findings
The Findings set forth herein are based on substantial evidence contained in the Record of Proceedings, including, without limitation, the Final EIR, including relevant technical studies, reports, and evaluations supporting the Final EIR’s analysis. As previously stated, the Draft EIR (including, without limitations, all appendices attached thereto) addresses the potential effects on the environment that are associated with the Project as required under CEQA, and the Final EIR includes the public comments received on the Draft EIR and minor text and graphic revisions to the Draft EIR, which includes the Errata document dated November 2022. See Section 1 above for information regarding the location and custodian of the documents that comprise the Record of Proceedings.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 4 December 2022 Section 2: Project Background and Overview
This section provides a brief description of the Project, lists the objectives of the Project, and lists the Project alternatives evaluated in the Draft EIR.

Brief Project Description
The proposed Project includes actions by the City of Mountain View to update the City’s Housing Element in conformance with State law and make necessary adjustments to other elements of the City’s General Plan, zoning, and precise plans to maintain consistency within and between these documents. State law requires the City to update its current housing element by January 31, 2023. The Project analyzed in the EIR would include adoption of a General Plan amendment to add or modify goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs related to housing in the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan. The Housing Element itself would contain: an updated housing needs assessment; updated goals, policies, and programs that address the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing and that affirmatively further fair housing; and a housing inventory that meets the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation and provides a buffer of additional housing development capacity. The Project would also include modifications to provisions in the City’s General Plan Land Use Map, zoning ordinance, zoning map, and adopted Precise Plans, as needed, to reflect the housing sites inventory. Based on the City’s RHNA allocation, the HEU plans for an additional 11,135 dwelling units plus a sizeable “buffer.” This EIR evaluates the potential for approximately 18,000 multi-family housing units (including approximately 96 accessory dwelling units) during the HEU planning period (2023-2031) as a maximum scenario for purposes of the CEQA evaluation, understanding that the buffer size and the final sites selected for inclusion in the Housing Element will be determined by the City Council upon adoption of the HEU. Of this, approximately 16,530 units are already allowed under the City’s adopted General Plan, zoning, and Precise Plans and the remaining 1,250 units would be created through rezonings and General Plan amendments. In addition, the EIR also analyzes a possible increase in housing production from rezonings and General Plan Amendments of approximately 2,850 units beyond 2031.

Project Objectives
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;
• Affirmatively further fair housing; and
City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 5 December 2022 • Identify specific sites that could accommodate required housing units to meet the City’s RHNA.

Conducting community engagement and soliciting feedback to inform the contents of the HEU is a critical component of the planning process and will help to shape the HEU that is ultimately adopted by the City Council.

Alternatives
Based on the Project objectives and anticipated environmental consequences and pursuant to Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the following Project alternatives were selected for analysis:
• 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.

A more detailed description of these alternatives and required findings are set forth in Section 5 of this document, Feasibility of Project Alternatives. The detailed description is also provided in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 6 December 2022 Section 3: Effects Determined to Be Mitigated to Less-
Than-Significant Levels
The Final EIR identified certain impacts that would not be significant under the applicable CEQA thresholds and certain potentially significant effects that could result from the Project. Adoption of the mitigation measures described therein and summarized below will reduce these potentially significant effects to less-than-significant levels in most circumstances. The City makes CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 finding (a) with respect to all of the following impacts. This section provides a summary of the environmental effects of the Project determined to be less than significant as a result of the implementation of mitigation, which are evaluated in detail in the Final EIR, and provides written findings for each of those effects and significance conclusions, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.

Mountain View City CouncilJanuary 24, 2023

Mountain View City Council
January 24, 2023