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

Air Quality
Impact AIR -3: Implementation of the Project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Emission Reduction Measures for Subsequent Projects Exceeding the Significance Thresholds for Health Risks from Construction.

Project applicants within the HEU area proposing projects within 1,000 feet of existing or approved sensitive receptors shall prepare a project-level Health Risk Assessment (HRA) of construction impacts at the time the project is proposed. The HRA shall be based on project- specific construction schedule, equipment and activity data and shall be conducted using methods and models approved by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), California Air Resources Board (CARB), California Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Estimated project-level health risks shall be compared to the BAAQMD’s health risk significance thresholds for projects.

In the event that a project-specific HRA finds that the project could result in significant construction health risks that exceed BAAQMD significance thresholds, the project applicant shall implement Mitigation Measure AIR-1’s requirement for the use of all Tier 4 Final construction equipment to reduce project-level health risks to a less than significant level. In addition, all tower cranes, forklifts, man- and material- lifts shall be electric powered.

Finding
Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would require subsequent projects within 1,000 feet of existing or approved sensitive receptors to undergo a project-level HRA at the time the project is proposed and to utilize the clean construction equipment required by Mitigation Measure AIR-1 if the project-specific health risk thresholds are exceeded. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR- 2 would reduce construction health risk impacts to less than significant with mitigation by use of City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 7 December 2022 clean construction equipment that meet the Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards, or equivalent Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategy (VDECS), as certified by CARB.

Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant air quality impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR and adoption of the mitigation measures set forth above will reduce the significant effect to a less-than-significant level. Adoption of the conditions of approval will ensure the mitigation measures would be implemented as part of the Project.

Impact AIR-1.CU: Implementation of the Project, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, could result in exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and toxic air contaminants (TACs) under cumulative conditions; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Refer to Mitigation Measure AIR-2.

Finding
Health risk impacts from construction of residences within the Project areas could combine with risks from these existing TAC sources that would exceed BAAQMD cumulative risk thresholds.

However, future development under the Project would not cause a significant contribution to these existing risk levels, as shown in Impact AIR-3. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with incorporation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 8 December 2022 Biological Resources
Impact BIO -1: Implementation of the Project could h ave a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Special-Status Bat Protection Measures.

In coordination with the City, a preconstruction survey for special-status bats shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in advance of tree and structure removal within the subsequent project sites to characterize potential bat habitat and identify active roost sites. Should potential roosting habitat or active bat roosts be found in trees and/or structures to be removed under the project, the following measures shall be implemented:
• Removal of trees shall occur when bats are active, approximately between the periods of March 1 to April 15 and August 15 to October 15; outside of bat maternity roosting season (approximately April 16 – August 14) and outside the months of winter torpor (approximately October 16 – February 28), to the extent feasible. • If removal of trees during the periods when bats are active is not feasible and active bat roosts being used for maternity or hibernation purposes are found on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site where tree and building removal is planned, a no-disturbance buffer of 100 feet shall be established around these roost sites until they are determined to be no longer active by a qualified biologist. A 100-foot no-disturbance buffer is a typical protective buffer distance; however, this may be modified by the qualified biologist depending on existing screening around the roost site (such as dense vegetation) as well as the type of construction activity which would occur around the roost site. • The qualified biologist shall be present during tree removal if potential bat roosting habitat or active bat roosts are present. Trees with active roosts shall only be removed when no rain is occurring or is forecast to occur for 3 days and when daytime temperatures are at least 50°F.
• Removal of trees with potential bat roosting habitat or active bat roost sites shall follow a two-step removal process:
− On the first day of tree removal and under supervision of the qualified biologist, branches and limbs not containing cavities or fissures in which bats could roost, shall be cut only using chainsaws.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 9 December 2022 − On the following day and under the supervision of the qualified biologist, the remainder of the tree may be removed, either using chainsaws or other equipment (e.g., excavator or backhoe).

Finding
The Project has the potential to adversely affect special-status bats which may roost in and around the Project area through the removal of trees during construction. Direct mortality of special- status bats would be a significant impact. Potential Project-related impacts to special-status bats would be minimized to a less-than-significant level with the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which would require preconstruction survey for special-status bats and other avoidance measures during construction. With incorporation of this mitigation measure, construction-related impacts to special-status bats roosting in and around the Project area would be minimized and the impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant biological resources impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project.

Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR and adoption of the mitigation measures set forth above will reduce the significant effect to a less-than-significant level. Adoption of the conditions of approval will ensure the mitigation measures would be implemented as part of the Project.

Impact BIO-1.CU: Implementation of the Project, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, could contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on Biological Resources; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-1.

Finding
The implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would avoid and minimize impacts to roosting bats, thereby reducing the magnitude of this impact at the project-level to less than significant.

The Project’s contribution would not be considered cumulatively considerable because the Project would, like other projects that are part of the cumulative scenario, be required to implement all feasible mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts special-status bats, including performing preconstruction surveys to identify and protect active bat roosts. Therefore, the cumulative impacts to special-status bats would be less than significant.

Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant biological resources impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 10 December 2022 implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project.

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact CUL 1: Implementation of the Project could cause a substantial adverse change i n the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure CUL 1a: Historic Resource Evaluation.

Prior to issuance of a demolition permit for any previously unevaluated building 45-years of age or older on a site included in the housing sites inventory, the City shall require an evaluation of historical significance that includes consideration of the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, and the Mountain View Register of Historic Resources. This evaluation shall be completed by a professional who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications for History, Architecture, Architectural History, or Historic Architecture.

In accordance with Section 5024.1, if the building has been previously evaluated for eligibility as a historic resource under CEQA and that evaluation or survey is more than five-years old, the findings of that evaluation should be confirmed by a professional who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications as stated above.

Mitigation Measure CUL 1b: Historic Resource Avoidance.

If, after implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL 1a, the subject property is found to qualify as a historic resource and the proposed project includes demolition of the historic resource, the project shall be redesigned to remove or avoid demolition. Any redesign that includes significant alteration of the historic resource, as defined by Section 36.54.55(e) of the City of Mountain View Zoning Code, shall be required to comply with City Standard Condition of Approval (Secretary of the Interior Standards).

Finding
Housing development planned under the Project could result in the demolition or significant alteration of potential historical resources (as defined in Sec. 36.54.55 of the Zoning Code). It could also diminish the ability of historical resources to convey their historical significance, which would constitute a substantial adverse change in the significance of the resources.

However, with implementation of the General Plan polices, adherence to existing zoning and permit procedures, and application of Mitigation Measure CUL-1a and CUL-1b, impacts to City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 11 December 2022 known and potential historic resources at the National, State, and local levels would be reduced to less than significant.

Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant cultural resources impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project.

Impact CUL 1.CU: Implementation of the Project , when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, could contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on historic architectural resources; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Refer to Mitigation Measures CUL-1a and CUL-1b.

Finding
Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1a which would require previously unevaluated historic-age resources be evaluated, Mitigation Measure CUL-1b would require demolition avoidance for historic architectural resources, and City Standard Condition of Approval (Secretary of the Interior Standards) which would require Secretary of the Interior’s Standards compliance review for significant alterations of historic resources, would reduce the severity of impacts associated with the Project. Combined with General Plan Policies LUD 11.1 – 11.4 and the procedures for identification and alteration of historic resources in Division 15 of the Mountain View Zoning Code, the impacts associated with implementation of the Project would be mitigated to a less than significant level. The General Plan Policies and Zoning Code also apply to all projects identified in the cumulative project list. As a result, the Project’s contribution to the potentially significant cumulative impact on historic architectural resources would not be considerable, and the cumulative impact of the Project combined with cumulative development would be less than significant.

Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR and adoption of the mitigation measures set forth above will reduce the significant effect to a less-than-significant City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 12 December 2022 level. Adoption of the conditions of approval will ensure the mitigation measures would be implemented as part of the Project.

Impact CUL 2: Implementation of the Project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 ; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure CUL 2a: Inadvertent Discovery of Cultural Resources.

If pre-contact or historic-era archaeological resources are encountered during project construction and implementation, all construction activities within 100 feet shall halt and the City shall be notified. Pre-contact archaeological materials might include obsidian and chert flaked-stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil (“midden”) containing heat-affected rocks, artifacts, or shellfish remains; and stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones, or milling slabs); and battered stone tools, such as hammerstones and pitted stones. Historic-era materials might include stone, concrete, or adobe footings and walls; filled wells or privies; and deposits of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse. An archaeologist meeting the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS) for Archeology shall inspect the findings within 24 hours of discovery.

If the City determines that the resource qualifies as a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource (as defined pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines) and that the project has potential to damage or destroy the resource, mitigation shall be implemented in accordance with PRC Section 21083.2 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4, with a preference for preservation in place. If preservation in place is feasible, this may be accomplished through one of the following means: (1) siting improvements to completely avoid the archaeological resource; (2) incorporating the resource into a park or dedicated open space, by deeding the resource into a permanent conservation easement; (3) capping and covering the resource before building the project on the resource site after the resource has been thoroughly studied by a SOIS qualified archaeologist and a report written on the findings.

If avoidance is not feasible, the City shall consult with appropriate Native American tribes (if the resource is pre-contact or indigenous), and other appropriate interested parties to determine treatment measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any potential impacts to the resource pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21083.2, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4. This shall include documentation of the resource and may include data recovery (according to PRC Section 21083.2), if deemed appropriate, or other actions such as treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity and protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource (according to PRC Section 21084.3).

Mitigation Measure CUL 2b: Cultural Resources Study Requirements.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 13 December 2022 archaeological sensitivity. If the NWIC recommends that the proposed project site be reviewed by an archaeologist, the City shall require a site-specific cultural resources study by an archaeologist meeting the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS) for Archeology. The study shall consist of a cultural report that includes the results of: a cultural resources records search performed at the NWIC of the California Historical Resources Information System for the project area, a pedestrian survey of the project area, a historic context, an assessment of the sensitivity of the project area for buried precontact and historic-era resources, and identify if the project would potentially impact cultural resources. If the archaeologist determines that known cultural resources or potential archaeological sensitivity areas may be impacted by the project, additional research or treatment, potentially including subsurface testing, and/or a cultural resources awareness training may be required to identify, evaluate, and mitigate impacts to cultural resources, as recommended by the SOIS qualified archaeologist. If avoidance is not feasible, the City shall consult with appropriate Native American tribes (if the resource is pre-contact or indigenous), and other appropriate interested parties to determine treatment measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any potential impacts to the resource pursuant to PRC Section 21083.2, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4. This shall include documentation of the resource and may include data recovery (according to PRC Section 21083.2), if deemed appropriate, or other actions such as treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity and protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource (according to PRC Section 21084.3). The cultural report detailing the results of the research shall be prepared and submitted for review by the City and a final draft shall be submitted to the NWIC.

Finding
Mitigation Measure CUL-2a, Inadvertent Discovery of Cultural Resources revises the Discovery of Archaeological Resources Standard Condition to require a stop-work boundary around cultural material finds and establish protocol for avoidance or preservation in place of significant cultural resources, and Mitigation Measure CUL-2b, Cultural Resources Study Requirements establishes a requirement for a cultural resource study for all multifamily housing projects that require ground disturbance based upon review of a NWIC non-confidential records search of the proposed project site. These mitigation measures would address potential impacts to archaeological resources and reduce the potential of the Project to impact archaeological resources to a less-than- significant level.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 14 December 2022 Impact CUL 2.CU: Implementation of the Project , in combination with other cumulative development, could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 or could disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Refer to Mitigation Measures CUL-2a and CUL-2b.

Finding
The Project would contribute a negligible less than significant impact after the implementation of Measures CUL 2a and CUL 2b, which would require a SOIS qualified archaeologist to conduct a review of discretionary projects near known cultural resources or within archaeological sensitivity areas prior to construction, the cessation of activities in the vicinity of finds, and tribal consultation when indigenous resources are inadvertently identified during project construction.

As a result, the less-than-significant incremental impact would not be cumulatively considerable and thus would not combine with the incremental impact of other projects to cause a significant cumulative effect.

Impact TCR-1: Implementation of the Project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 ; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Refer to Mitigation Measures CUL-2a and CUL-2b.

Finding
Implementation of Measures CUL 2a and CUL 2b would establish protocol to identify, evaluate, and address any potential impacts to previously unknown tribal cultural resources. With implementation of these mitigation measures, any potential impacts to tribal cultural resources would be reduced to a less than significant level.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 15 December 2022 Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant tribal cultural resources impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project.

Impact TCR-1.CU: Implementation of the Project, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, could contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on tribal cultural resources; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Refer to Mitigation Measures CUL-2a and CUL-2b.

Finding
The Project would contribute a negligible less-than-significant incremental impact after the implementation of Measures CUL-2a and CUL-2b, which would require a SOIS qualified archaeologist to conduct a review of discretionary projects near known cultural resources or within archaeological sensitivity areas prior to construction, the cessation of activities and buffering of finds, and tribal consultation when indigenous resources are unexpectedly discovered during project construction. As a result, the Project’s incremental impact would not be cumulatively considerable and would not result in a significant cumulative effect.

Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant tribal cultural resources impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 16 December 2022 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact GHG-1: Implementation of the Project could generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment ; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure GHG-1: Require Compliance with Electric Vehicle (EV) Requirements in CALGreen Tier 2.

Subsequent development projects proposed as part of the HEU shall comply with EV requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2 at the time that a building permit application is filed.

Mitigation Measure TRA-1: Implement Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Reduction Measures.

Individual multifamily housing development proposals that do not screen out from VMT impact analysis shall provide a quantitative VMT analysis using the methods outlined by the City’s most recent VMT guidelines. Projects that result in a significant impact shall include travel demand management measures and/or physical measures (i.e. improving multimodal transportation network, improving street connectivity) to reduce VMT. The City’s VMT guidelines identify four tiers of mitigation measures, all of which can be quantified within the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (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 City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 17 December 2022 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.

Finding
With the implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 and TRA-1, all future projects proposed for development pursuant to the Project would be consistent with the BAAQMD’s recommended GHG significance thresholds. Compliance with these thresholds would mean that these projects would not generate GHG emissions either directly or indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant with mitigation.

Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant GHG impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR and adoption of the mitigation measures set forth above will reduce the significant effect to a less-than-significant level. Adoption of the conditions of approval will ensure the mitigation measures would be implemented as part of the Project.

Impact GHG-2: Implementation of the Project could conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases ; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Refer to Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and TRA-1.

Finding
Implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would ensure the Project’s consistency with BAAQMD GHG threshold A(2)(a) by requiring future development under the Project to comply with the EV charging infrastructure requirements in the version of CALGreen standards in place at the time of individual project review. The Project would be consistent with the other three GHG thresholds recommended by the BAAQMD. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, the Project would be consistent with the updated GHG thresholds recommended by the BAAQMD to meet the state’s GHG reduction and carbon neutrality goals in SB 32, EO B-55-13 and the 2017 Scoping Plan Update. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 18 December 2022 Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant GHG impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR and adoption of the mitigation measures set forth above will reduce the significant effect to a less-than-significant level. Adoption of the conditions of approval will ensure the mitigation measures would be implemented as part of the Project.

Impact GHG-1.CU: Implementation of the Project, in combination with past, present, e xisting, approved, pending, and reasonably foreseeable future pro jects, could result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment or conflict with applicable plans, policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Refer to Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and TRA-1.

Finding
Implementation of the Project would result in less than significant impacts with implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 and TRA-1 by ensuring consistency with all four GHG thresholds recommended by the BAAQMD which would in turn ensure consistency with the state’s GHG reduction and carbon neutrality goals for 2030 and beyond. Given that GHG emission impacts are cumulative in nature, the Project’s incremental contribution to significant cumulative GHG emissions would therefore not be cumulatively considerable, and the cumulative impact of GHG emissions generated by the Project would be less than significant with mitigation.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 19 December 2022 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-3: Implementation of the Project could 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, could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be 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 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., Department of Toxic Substances Control [DTSC], Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB], or Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health [SCCEHD]) such that the regulatory agency issues a No Further Action letter or equivalent.

Finding
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 City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 20 December 2022 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.

Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant hazardous materials impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project.

Transportation
Impact TRA-2: Implementation of the Project could exceed an applicable vehicle miles traveled (VMT) threshold of significance; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure TRA-1: Implement VMT Reduction Measures.

Individual multifamily housing development proposals that do not screen out from VMT impact analysis shall provide a quantitative VMT analysis using the methods outlined by the City’s most recent VMT guidelines. Projects that result in a significant impact shall include travel demand management measures and/or physical measures (i.e. improving multimodal transportation network, improving street connectivity) to reduce VMT. The City’s VMT guidelines identify four tiers of mitigation measures, all of which can be quantified within the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (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.) City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 21 December 2022 • 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.

Finding
Mitigation Measure TRA-1 would ensure that VMT per resident is less than 85 percent of the regional VMT per resident for residential sites located in areas of the City where the VMT per resident is higher than 85 percent. With the implementation of this mitigation measure, this impact would be reduced to less than significant.

Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant transportation impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project.

Impact TRA-2.CU: Implementation of the Project, in combination with cumulative development, could exceed an applicable VMT threshold of significance; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Refer to Mitigation Measure TRA-1.

Finding
Project sites that are located in areas of the City where the VMT per resident is higher than 85 percent can be mitigated by implementing the mitigation measures identified in Mitigation Measure TRA-1. Therefore, the Project sites, in combination with cumulative developments, would also result in a less than significant VMT impact with mitigation.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 22 December 2022 Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant transportation impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project.

Utilities and Service Systems
Impact UTL -1: Implementation of the Project could 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; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this 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.

Finding
Overall, the potential improvements or extension of utility infrastructure to serve development as a result of the Project 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 the EIR for overall construction activity for the project. As such, the implementation of the Project 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 Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) identified by the City, based on the project’s determined contribution. The impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant utilities impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR and adoption of the mitigation measures set City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 23 December 2022 forth above will reduce the significant effect to a less-than-significant level. Adoption of the conditions of approval will ensure the mitigation measures would be implemented as part of the Project.

Impact UTL-1.CU: Implementation of the Project , when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, could contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on utility infrastructure; however, with implementation of the identified mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

Refer to Mitigation Measure UTL-1.

Finding
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 the EIR for overall construction activity associated with future development as a result of the Project. 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 Project would not contribute considerably to a significant cumulative impact in this regard, and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation measures have been identified that, when implemented by the Project, will avoid or reduce this potentially significant utilities impact to a less-than-significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City of Mountain View hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project. Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR and adoption of the mitigation measures set forth above will reduce the significant effect to a less-than-significant level. Adoption of the conditions of approval will ensure the mitigation measures would be implemented as part of the Project.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 24 December 2022 Section 4: Significant Effects That Cannot Be Mitigated to a Less-Than-Significant Level
This section provides a summary of the environmental effects of the Project determined to be significant and unavoidable, which are evaluated in detail in the Final EIR, and provides written findings for each of those significant effects and significance conclusions, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.

A significant unavoidable impact is an impact that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level if the project is implemented, because feasible mitigation would not reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. Here, the Project will result in a project-level air quality impact that cannot be fully mitigated. The City makes Section 15091(a) findings (1) and (3) with respect to this impact for the reasons summarized below and as detailed more fully in the Final EIR.

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

Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Emission Reduction Measures for Projects Exceeding the Significance Thresholds for Criteria Pollutants.

Project applicants proposing projects that exceed BAAQMD screening levels shall prepare a project-level criteria air pollutant assessment of construction and operational emissions at the time the project is proposed. The project-level assessment shall either include a comparison of the project with other similar projects where a quantitative analysis has been conducted, or shall provide a project-specific criteria air pollutant analysis to determine whether the project exceeds the BAAQMD’s criteria air pollutant thresholds.

In the event that a project-specific analysis finds that the project could result in criteria air pollutant emissions that exceed BAAQMD significance thresholds, the project applicant shall implement the following emission reduction measures to the degree necessary to reduce the impact to less than the significance thresholds, and shall implement additional feasible measures if necessary to reduce the impact to less than the significance thresholds.

Clean Construction Equipment.

1. The project applicant shall use electric construction equipment when feasible.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 25 December 2022 Type of Fuel Used, (5) Engine HP, (6) Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategy (VDECS) information if applicable and other related equipment data. A Certification Statement is also required to be made by the Contractor for documentation of compliance and for future review by the BAAQMD as necessary. The Certification Statement must state that the Contractor agrees to compliance and acknowledges that a violation of this requirement shall constitute a material breach of contract.

The City may waive the requirement for Tier 4 Final equipment only under the following unusual circumstances: if a particular piece of off-road equipment with Tier 4 Final standards is technically not feasible or not commercially available; the equipment would not produce desired emissions reduction due to expected operating modes; installation of the equipment would create a safety hazard or impaired visibility for the operator; or there is a compelling emergency need to use other alternate off-road equipment. For purposes of this mitigation measure, “commercially available” shall mean the availability of Tier 4 Final engines similar to the availability for other large-scale construction projects in the region occurring at the same time and taking into consideration factors such as (i) potential significant delays to critical-path timing of construction for the project and (ii) geographic proximity to the project site of Tier 4 Final equipment.

3. The project applicant shall require the idling time for off-road and on-road equipment be limited to no more than 2 minutes, except as provided in exceptions to the applicable state regulations regarding idling for off-road and on-road equipment. Legible and visible signs shall be posted in multiple languages (English, Spanish, Chinese) in designated queuing areas and at the construction site to remind operators of the 2-minute idling limit.

Operational Emission Reductions

1. Projects shall be constructed without natural gas infrastructure and shall be “all electric.”

2. As required by Mitigation Measure GHG-1, projects shall provide EV charging infrastructure consistent with the applicable Tier 2 CALGreen standards in effect at the time.

3. Project applicants that do not screen out from VMT impact analysis shall implement VMT reduction measures as required by Mitigation Measure TRA-1.

Finding
Mitigation Measure AIR-1 is expected to be effective at reducing criteria pollutant emissions from construction and operation of individual projects developed in the Project area to below the BAAQMD thresholds; however, the specific emissions associated with future projects are not currently known, and therefore the effectiveness of emission reduction measures cannot be definitively determined. It is possible that projects with substantial ground disturbance, specialty construction equipment, or compressed and highly intensive construction schedules could exceed construction significance thresholds, particularly if the Tier 4 Final equipment required by the mitigation measure is not commercially available. Also, reactive organic gas (ROG) emissions City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 26 December 2022 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 Project would conservatively be significant and unavoidable with mitigation.

The identification of this significant and unavoidable impact does not preclude the finding of a less-than-significant or less-than-significant-with-mitigation impact for subsequent projects that are below the applicable screening criteria or that meet the criteria air pollutant thresholds of significance with implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1.

Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Project that will reduce the above-described significant air quality impact, but the mitigation would not reduce impact to a less-than- significant level, as described more fully in the Final EIR. The City hereby finds that implementation of the mitigation measures described above is feasible and they are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval for the Project.

Accordingly, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the Project which substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR but not to a level of insignificance. Adoption of the conditions of approval will ensure the mitigation measures would be implemented as part of the Project. Since mitigation would not be adequate to reduce the significant air quality impact to a less than significant level, the impact is identified as significant and unavoidable.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 27 December 2022 Section 5: Feasibility of Alternatives to the Proposed
Project
The Draft EIR included several Project alternatives. The City hereby concludes that the Draft EIR sets forth a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project so as to foster informed public participation and informed decision-making. The City finds that the alternatives identified and described in the Draft EIR were considered and further finds that two of them (an off-site alternative, an alternative containing Additional Housing Sites, and an alternative using reduced parking ratios) to be infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations set forth below pursuant to CEQA Section 21081 as described in Section 5.2.1 of the Draft EIR.

In addition to the Project, the following alternatives were evaluated in the Draft EIR and are more fully described in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR. Each alternative was evaluated against the Project Objectives listed in Section 2 of this document, as reference points for stakeholders and decision- makers in evaluating Project alternatives.

Project Alternatives
No Project Alternative
Under the No Project Alternative, the Project 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 the land use decisions and development parameters 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.

Finding
While the No Project Alternative could lessen the severity of the identified significant and unavoidable air quality impact identified for the proposed Project, the No Project Alternative would not 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.

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 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 Project. For all of these reasons, this alternative is infeasible, as supported by the administrative record for the proposed project.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 28 December 2022 Reduced Sites Alternative
Under the Reduced Sites Alternative, the number of opportunity sites and rezoning areas identified in the Project 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.

Finding
While the Reduced Sites Alternative could lessen the severity of the identified significant and unavoidable air quality impact identified for the proposed Project, the Reduced Sites Alternative would not 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.

This alternative would meet the objectives of the Project, but to a lesser extent than the proposed Project. 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. For all of these reasons, the City Council declines to adopt the Reduced Sites Alternative.

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.

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 Project, 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 Project. 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 Project. 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.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 29 December 2022 Section 6: Statement of Overriding Considerations
The City is the lead agency under CEQA for preparation, review, and certification of the Final EIR. As the lead agency, the City is also responsible for determining the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action, which of those impacts are significant, and which impacts can be mitigated through imposition of feasible mitigation measures to avoid or minimize such impacts to a level of “less than significant.

CEQA requires the lead agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable adverse impacts when determining whether to approve a project. In particular, Public Resources Code section 21081(a) provides that no public agency may approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified that identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out, unless the public agency makes one or more of three findings with respect to each significant effect. Public Resources Code section 21081(b) requires that where a public agency finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in an EIR and thereby leave significant unavoidable effects, the lead agency must also find that overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects of the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable [CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093(a)].

CEQA requires the lead agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the Final EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record [CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093(b)]. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. If a lead agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. The statement of overriding considerations does not substitute for, and is in addition to, findings required by CEQA Guidelines section 15091.

As required under Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City, having reviewed and considered the Final EIR, all other written materials within the Record of Proceeding, and all oral testimony presented at public hearings and other public meetings on the Final EIR, has balanced the benefits of the proposed Project against the identified unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the Project, and hereby adopts all feasible mitigation measures with respect to such impacts, certifies the Final EIR, and approves the Project. The City has also examined alternatives to the Project, none of which is feasible, meets the majority of the Project objectives, or is environmentally preferable to the Project for the reasons discussed in the Summary of Alternatives Evaluated (Section 5) and the Final EIR.

After balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed Project, the City has determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 30 December 2022 identified above are acceptable due to the following specific considerations in the record, which outweigh the unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts of the Project. Each of the considerations in the record, standing alone, is sufficient to support approval of the Project, in accordance with CEQA.

The Project will result in an air quality impact that cannot be fully mitigated. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Project, however, these would not fully mitigate the impact under CEQA. This significant unavoidable impact is identified and discussed in Section 4 of these Findings. The City further specifically finds that the significant unavoidable air quality during construction, is outweighed by the proposed Project’s benefits and is acceptable in light of the benefits of the project, based on the findings below:

• The City has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the Project, as described above. • All Mitigation Measures recommended in the Final EIR have been incorporated into the Project as enforceable conditions of approval and will be implemented through the MMRP, incorporated by reference herein.
• In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City has, in determining whether or not to approve the Project, balanced the economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits, including regionwide or Statewide environmental benefits of the project against these unavoidable environmental risks, and has found that the benefits of the Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects. The following statements specify the reasons why, in the City’s judgment, the benefits of the Project outweigh its unavoidable environmental risks. The City also finds that any one of the following reasons for approval cited below is sufficient to justify approval of the Project.

Thus, even if a court were to conclude that not every reason is supported by substantial evidence, the City will stand by its determination that each individual reason is sufficient.

The substantial evidence supporting the City’s Findings and the benefits described below can be found in the Record of Proceedings.
• The Project will assist the City in meeting its RHNA and goals for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing in the City, including affordable housing.

This will have benefits in reducing the City’s jobs-housing imbalance, which will improve access to jobs for the region. It will also increase the availability of affordable housing, improving standards of living for lower and moderate-income individuals and families.
• Providing housing associated with the Project to meet the needs of all income levels is critical to the long-term social and economic health of the City of Mountain View, including attracting and retaining middle-income professionals such as teachers and firefighters, providing housing opportunities for an aging population and/or multi- generational living, and managing the effects of homelessness on the community.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 31 December 2022 • The Project will allow the City to comply with State housing law, retain local land use control, and maintain eligibility to receive critical State and Federal funding for infrastructure improvements and public amenities.
• The Project supports the City’s efforts to reduce dependency on fossil fuels and nonrenewable energy, to decrease its share of GHG emissions and contributions to global climate change, and to help make Mountain View a more attractive place to live by adding density on underutilized sites served by existing transportation and infrastructure including the requirements not to incorporate any natural gas infrastructure.

As mentioned above, the foregoing benefits provided to the public and the broader Mountain View community through approval and implementation of the Project outweigh the identified significant adverse environmental impact of the Project that cannot be mitigated. Each of the Project benefits separately and individually outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental impact identified in the Final EIR, and therefore, the City finds those impacts to be acceptable.

Economic, social, and other considerations and benefits derived from the development of the Project override and make infeasible any alternatives to the Project or further mitigation measures beyond those incorporated into the Project as set forth in the MMRP.

On balance, the City finds that there are specific considerations associated with the Project that serve to override and outweigh the Project’s significant unavoidable effect. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, this adverse effect is considered acceptable.

For the foregoing reasons and as otherwise supported by substantial evidence in the Record of Proceeding, the City hereby adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations (“SOC”), which has balanced the benefits of the Project against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in reaching a decision to approve the Project.

Each of the Project benefits separately and individually outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental impact identified in the Final EIR and therefore finds those impacts to be acceptable.

Economic, social, and other considerations and benefits derived from the development of the Project override and make infeasible any alternatives to the Project or further Mitigation Measures beyond those incorporated into the Project.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 32 December 2022 Section 7: Conclusion; No Recirculation of the Final
EIR is Required
An EIR is adequate as long as it provides specific response to all specific questions about significant environmental issues and as long as the EIR, as a whole, reflects a good-faith effort at full disclosure. “Recirculation is not required where the new information added to an EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modification in an adequate EIR.” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(b))
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(a), new information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect on the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect that the project’s proponents have declined to implement. “Significant new information” requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure showing:

1. A new significant environmental impact that would result from the project (or any alternative) or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.

2. A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance.

3. A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it.

4. The Draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.

The changes and new information provided in the Final EIR (including the information contained in Chapter 2, Updated Project Information, and Chapter 4, Errata to the Draft EIR) merely amplifies and clarifies the Draft EIR analysis and do not include identification of new significant impacts or more severe impacts of any previously-identified significant impacts associated with the Project or mitigation measures, or new Project alternatives or mitigation measures that warrant consideration. None of the revisions made in the Final EIR change the significance findings of the Draft EIR or identify a new or more severe impact not disclosed in the Draft EIR or otherwise constitute significant new information requiring recirculation of the EIR.

The City finds the EIR is adequate and none of the commenters disclose any new “significant information” as defined by CEQA that would require recirculation of the EIR. No new significant or substantially more severe environmental impacts have been identified that would result from the Project or from an alternative or a new mitigation measure proposed as part of the Project.

Moreover, no new feasible mitigation measures or alternatives have been identified that are considerably different from others previously analyzed and would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the Project that the City has declined to implement. All of the responses City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Project

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 33 December 2022 to comments contained in this Final EIR merely provide information that clarifies and amplifies the evaluation of impacts contained in the Draft EIR. The City of Mountain View further finds that incorporating the new information does not deprive the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment on the Project or its effects, and that no information has been added to the Final EIR that would warrant recirculation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092.1.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and the information contained in the record, the City Council has made one or more of the following findings with respect to each of the significant effects of the Project:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR. As described above, mitigation measures have been incorporated for significant effects to Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Transportation, and Utilities and Service Systems.

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. As described above, a mitigation measure for Hazards and Hazardous Materials requires review and approval by regional regulatory agencies that oversee site contamination issues.

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. As described above, there are specific overriding considerations that make infeasible project alternatives and potential mitigation measures that would reduce a significant Air Quality impact to a less than significant level.

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 1 ESA / 202000806 Final Environmental Impact Report November 2022

APPENDIX A
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Purpose of this Document
This chapter contains the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) prepared in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a). The MMRP will be considered for adoption by the Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) and/or the City Council and will aid the City in its implementation and monitoring of measures included in the EIR and adopted by the EPC and/or City Council.

Exhibit C
A. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 2 ESA / 202000806 Final Environmental Impact Report November 2022

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE

M ITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Implemented By When Implemented Monitored By Verified By Air Quality
Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Emission Reduction Measures for Projects Exceeding the Significance Thresholds for Criteria Pollutants.

Clean Construction Equipment.

1. The project applicant shall use electric construction equipment when feasible.

2. The project applicant shall ensure that all diesel off-road equipment shall have engines that meet the Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards, as certified by CARB, except as provided for in this section. This requirement shall be verified through submittal of an equipment inventory that includes the following information: (1) Type of Equipment, (2) Engine Year and Age, (3) Number of Years Since Rebuild of Engine (if applicable), (4) Type of Fuel Used, (5) Engine HP, (6) Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategy (VDECS) information if applicable and other related equipment data. A Certification Statement is also required to be made by the Contractor for documentation of compliance and for future review by the BAAQMD as necessary. The Certification Statement must state that the Contractor agrees to compliance and acknowledges that a violation of this requirement shall constitute a material breach of contract.

Project applicant During construction Community
Development
Department
Community
Development
Department

A. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE

M ITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (CONTINUED) City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 3 ESA / 202000806 Final Environmental Impact Report November 2022
Implemented By When Implemented Monitored By Verified By Operational Emission Reductions

1. Projects shall be constructed without natural gas infrastructure and shall be “all electric.”

2. As required by Mitigation Measure GHG-1, projects shall provide EV charging infrastructure consistent with the applicable Tier 2 CALGreen standards in effect at the time.

3. Project applicants that do not screen out from VMT impact analysis shall implement VMT reduction measures as required by Mitigation Measure TRA-1.

Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Emission Reduction Measures for Subsequent Projects Exceeding the Significance Thresholds for Health Risks from Construction.

Project applicants within the HEU area proposing projects within 1,000 feet of existing or approved sensitive receptors shall prepare a project-level HRA of construction impacts at the time the project is proposed. The HRA shall be based on project-specific construction schedule, equipment and activity data and shall be conducted using methods and models approved by the BAAQMD, CARB, OEHHA and U.S. EPA. Estimated project-level health risks shall be compared to the BAAQMD’s health risk significance thresholds for projects.

In the event that a project-specific HRA finds that the project could result in significant construction health risks that exceed BAAQMD significance thresholds, the project applicant shall implement Mitigation Measure AIR-1’s requirement for the use of all Tier 4 Final construction equipment to reduce project-level health risks to a less-than-significant level. In addition, all tower cranes, forklifts, man- and material- lifts shall be electric powered.

Project applicant Prior to construction Community
Development
Department
Community
Development
Department
Biological Resources
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Special-Status Bat Protection Measures.

In coordination with the City, a preconstruction survey for special-status bats shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in advance of tree and structure removal within the subsequent project sites to characterize potential bat habitat and identify active roost sites. Should potential roosting habitat or active bat roosts be found in trees and/or structures to be removed under the project, the following measures shall be implemented:
• Removal of trees shall occur when bats are active, approximately between the periods of March 1 to April 15 and August 15 to October 15; outside of bat maternity roosting season (approximately April 16 – August 14) and outside the months of winter torpor (approximately October 16 – February 28), to the extent feasible.
• If removal of trees during the periods when bats are active is not feasible and active bat roosts being used for maternity or hibernation purposes are found on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site where tree and building removal is planned, a no-disturbance buffer of 100 feet shall be established around these roost sites until they are determined to be no longer active by a qualified biologist. A 100-foot no-disturbance buffer is a typical protective buffer distance; however, this may be modified by the qualified biologist depending on existing screening around the roost site (such as dense vegetation) as well as the type of construction activity which would occur around the roost site. • The qualified biologist shall be present during tree removal if potential bat roosting habitat or active bat roosts are present. Trees with active roosts shall only be removed when no rain is occurring or is forecast to occur for 3 days and when daytime temperatures are at least 50°F.

Qualified project staff
biologist
Prior to construction Community
Development
Department
Community
Development
Department
A. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (CONTINUED) City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 4 ESA / 202000806 Final Environmental Impact Report November 2022
Implemented By When Implemented Monitored By Verified By • Removal of trees with potential bat roosting habitat or active bat roost sites shall follow a two- step removal process:
- On the first day of tree removal and under supervision of the qualified biologist, branches and limbs not containing cavities or fissures in which bats could roost, shall be cut only using chainsaws.
- On the following day and under the supervision of the qualified biologist, the remainder of the tree may be removed, either using chainsaws or other equipment (e.g., excavator or backhoe).

Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure CUL 1a: Historic Resource Evaluation.

Qualified project staff
professional
Prior to demolition
permit issuance
Community
Development
Department
Community
Development
Department
Mitigation Measure CUL 1b: Historic Resource Avoidance.

Qualified project staff
professional
Prior to demolition
permit issuance
Community
Development
Department
Community
Development
Department
A. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (CONTINUED) City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 5 ESA / 202000806 Final Environmental Impact Report November 2022
Implemented By When Implemented Monitored By Verified By Mitigation Measure CUL 2a: Inadvertent Discovery of Cultural Resources.

If pre-contact or historic-era archaeological resources are encountered during project construction and implementation, all construction activities within 100 feet shall halt and the City shall be notified. Pre-contact archaeological materials might include obsidian and chert flaked- stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil (“midden”) containing heat-affected rocks, artifacts, or shellfish remains; and stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones, or milling slabs); and battered stone tools, such as hammerstones and pitted stones. Historic-era materials might include stone, concrete, or adobe footings and walls; filled wells or privies; and deposits of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse. An archaeologist meeting the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS) for Archeology shall inspect the findings within 24 hours of discovery.

If avoidance is not feasible, the City shall consult with appropriate Native American tribes (if the resource is pre-contact or indigenous), and other appropriate interested parties to determine treatment measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any potential impacts to the resource pursuant to PRC Section 21083.2, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4. This shall include documentation of the resource and may include data recovery (according to PRC Section 21083.2), if deemed appropriate, or other actions such as treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity and protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource (according to PRC Section 21084.3).

Construction
contractors, City staff,
Qualified archaeologist
During project
construction
Community
Development
Department
Community
Development
Department
A. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (CONTINUED) City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 6 ESA / 202000806 Final Environmental Impact Report November 2022
Implemented By When Implemented Monitored By Verified By Mitigation Measure CUL 2b: Cultural Resources Study Requirements.

Prior to approval of development permits for multifamily projects that include ground-disturbing activities, individual project applicants shall request a non-confidential records search from the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) to determine if the proposed project site has archaeological sensitivity. If the NWIC recommends that the proposed project site be reviewed by an archaeologist, the City shall require a site-specific cultural resources study by an archaeologist meeting the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS) for Archeology. The study shall consist of a cultural report that includes the results of: a cultural resources records search performed at the NWIC of the California Historical Resources Information System for the project area, a pedestrian survey of the project area, a historic context, an assessment of the sensitivity of the project area for buried precontact and historic-era resources, and identify if the project would potentially impact cultural resources. If the archaeologist determines that known cultural resources or potential archaeological sensitivity areas may be impacted by the project, additional research or treatment, potentially including subsurface testing, and/or a cultural resources awareness training may be required to identify, evaluate, and mitigate impacts to cultural resources, as recommended by the SOIS qualified archaeologist. If avoidance is not feasible, the City shall consult with appropriate Native American tribes (if the resource is pre- contact or indigenous), and other appropriate interested parties to determine treatment measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any potential impacts to the resource pursuant to PRC Section 21083.2, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4. This shall include documentation of the resource and may include data recovery (according to PRC Section 21083.2), if deemed appropriate, or other actions such as treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity and protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource (according to PRC Section 21084.3). The cultural report detailing the results of the research shall be prepared and submitted for review by the City and a final draft shall be submitted to the NWIC.

City staff, Qualified
archaeologist
Prior to approval of
development permits
for multifamily projects
that include ground-
disturbing activities
Community
Development
Department
Community
Development
Department
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Mitigation Measure GHG-1: Require Compliance with EV Requirements in CALGreen Tier

2. Subsequent development projects proposed as part of the HEU shall comply with EV requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2 at the time that a building permit application is filed.

Project sponsor When building permit
application is filed
Community
Development
Department
Community
Development
Department
A. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE

M ITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (CONTINUED) City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 7 ESA / 202000806 Final Environmental Impact Report November 2022
Implemented By When Implemented Monitored By Verified By Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment.

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 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.

Project applicant Prior to final project
design and initiation of
any construction
requiring ground-
disturbing activities
Oversight by the City’s
Community
Development
Department, DTSC,
RWQCB, and/or
SCCEHD
Community
Development
Department
A. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (CONTINUED) City of Mountain View Housing Element Update 8 ESA / 202000806 Final Environmental Impact Report November 2022
Implemented By When Implemented Monitored By Verified By Transportation
Mitigation Measure TRA-1: Implement Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Reduction Measures.

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.

Consultants and City
Staff
During environmental
review
Community
Development
Department and Public
Works Department
Community
Development
Department and Public
Works Department
Utilities and Service Systems
Mitigation Measure UTL-1: Fair-Share Contributions Toward Utility Improvements.

Project applicant Prior to building permit
issuance
Community
Development
Department and Public
Works Department
Community
Development
Department and Public
Works Department

Mountain View City CouncilJanuary 24, 2023

Mountain View City Council
January 24, 2023