HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM 1.1(g) REZONING
CA
LIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
PROGRAM EIR CONFORMANCE ANALYSIS AND
CEQA CHECKLIST
Oct
ober 2025
Attachment 8
C
ity of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) i October 2025
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 .0 Introduction and Purpose ........................................................................ 2
2.0 Housing Element Update 2023-2031 and Program EIR ........................... 4
3.0 Program 1.1(g) Project Description ......................................................... 5
4.0 Environmental Setting ........................................................................... 14
5.0 Analysis and Consistency with Program EIR .......................................... 15
6.0 Future Project-Specific Environmental Review ..................................... 16
7.0 Conclusion .............................................................................................. 17
8.0 CEQA Environmental Checklist .............................................................. 18
9.0 References ............................................................................................. 68
10.0 Lead Agency Authors and Consultants .................................................. 69 F
IGURES
Fig
ure 1 Location of Program 1.1(g) Sites .............................................................. 6 Figure 2 Leong and Fairchild Drive Existing Conditions ......................................... 7 Figure 3 1702 Miramonte and 777 Cuesta Drive Existing Conditions ................... 8 Figure 4 1949 Grant Road Existing Conditions .................................................... 10 Figure 5 677-699 Calderon Avenue Existing Conditions ...................................... 11 Figure 6 Mountain View Transit Station .............................................................. 12 T
ABLES
T
able 1 Leong and Fairchild Drive Information .................................................... 7 Table 2 1702 Miramonte Avenue and 777 Cuesta Drive Information ................. 9 Table 3 1949 Grant Road Information ................................................................ 10 Table 4 677-699 Calderon Avenue Information ................................................. 11 Table 5 Mountain View Transit Center Information .......................................... 12 Table 6 Summary of Proposed Rezonings and General Plan Amendments ....... 13
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 1 October 2025
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW
HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE PROGRAM 1.1(g) REZONING
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
PROGRAM EIR CONFORMANCE ANALYSIS AND CEQA CHECKLIST
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Update Program 1.1(g) Rezoning SITE ADDRESS: Various
Prev. Cert. EIRs/Negative Declarations:
City of Mountain View 2030 General Plan and GHG Reduction Program EIR (SCH#2011012069) (2012); and City of Mountain View Housing Element Update EIR (2022)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: The City proposes to implement the Housing Element Program
1.1(g) (Zoning Ordinance Update for Consistency with State Laws), which is an early step to facilitate implementation of the adopted sixth-cycle Housing Element Update. Specifically, the Housing Element Program 1.1(g) consists of amending the Zoning/Precise Plan and the General Plan designations of 19 parcels within five general areas throughout the City to ensure the Zoning and General Plan designations for all sites is consistent with the Housing Element site inventory and pipeline projects, and to allow for residential uses at the densities as identified in the Housing Element Update. Other minor clean-up amendments are proposed and necessary to implement State Laws, such as reductions to required parking near a major transit stop and requirements for avigation easements.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: Program 1.1(g) includes 19 parcels within five general areas located throughout the city. The sites identified are generally flat and located within developed, urban areas of the city, which are currently developed with existing commercial. The locations are generally along commercial corridors or in residential areas that are considered appropriate for redevelopment with multifamily housing uses at higher densities.
DETERMINATION: As outlined in this report, the proposed implementation of the Housing Element Program 1.1(g) would fall within the scope of the City's Housing Element Update Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2022020129, 2022), consistent with the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15168 for program EIRs. Implementation of Program 1.1(g) would not necessitate the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR or trigger any of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
The proposed project is in compliance with CEQA because the attached Checklist was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines and found that implementation of the City’s Housing Element Program 1.1(g) would fall within the scope of the Housing Element Update (HEU) Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2022020129, 2022), and would not result in new significant impacts, or require substantially different mitigation measures, as evaluated in the prior HEU Program EIR adopted by the City under the CEQA. Therefore, this document has been prepared as evidence of
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 2 October 2025 the Program’s conformance with the prior HEU Program EIR, in accordance with Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Prepared by: Date:
Community Development Department
All referenced documentation is available for public review at the City of Mountain View, located at 500 Castro Street, Mountain View, CA 94039 during normal business hours.
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The purpose of this supplemental environmental analysis is to evaluate whether the City of Mountain View’s Housing Element Program 1.1(g) falls within the scope of the City’s Housing Element Update Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2022020129, 2022), consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 for program EIRs. This analysis also evaluates whether any of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 necessitate the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR.
Program EIRs – CEQA Guidelines Section 15168
According to the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency may prepare a program EIR on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either:
(1) Geographically;
(2) As logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions; (3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program; or
(4) As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways.
Later activities in the program must be examined in light of the program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared. If a lead agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no subsequent EIR would be required, the agency can approve the subsequent activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required.
Whether a later activity is within the scope of a program EIR is a factual question that the lead agency determines based on substantial evidence in the record. Factors that an agency may consider in making that determination include, but are not limited to: consistency of the later activity with the type of allowable land use, overall planned density and building intensity, geographic area analyzed for environmental impacts, and covered infrastructure as described in the program EIR.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 3 October 2025 Subsequent EIR and Negative Declarations – Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines
The CEQA Guidelines (§15162) state that when an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
The CEQA Guidelines [§15168(c)(2)] state that:
Later activities under the program must be examined in the light of the program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared. If the agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no subsequent EIR would be required, the agency can approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required. Whether a later activity is within the scope of a program EIR is a factual question that the lead agency determines based on substantial evidence in the record. Factors that an agency may consider in making that determination include, but are not limited to, consistency of the later activity with the type of allowable land use, overall planned density and building intensity, geographic area analyzed for environmental impacts, and covered infrastructure, as described in the program EIR.
The analysis presented in the following sections provides substantial evidence that the proposed Program 1.1(g) falls within the scope of the prior program HEU EIR and would not result in new
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 4 October 2025 significant impacts or require substantially different mitigation measures, as compared to the previously approved HEU project evaluated in the prior EIR adopted by the City under the CEQA.
This document will not be circulated for public review but will be included in the project file and will be considered by the City when evaluating implementation of Program 1.1(g). The details of Program 1.1(g) are provided in Attachment 1.
2.0 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE 2023-2031 AND PROGRAM EIR
On April 11, 2023, the City Council adopted the Sixth Cycle Housing Element Update (HEU), which covers the eight-year planning period between 2023 to 2031. The Housing Element identifies the City’s current housing conditions and future housing needs while outlining initiatives to improve available housing for populations with various income levels within the City. The current plan covers the 2023 to 2031 period and is updated every eight years as mandated by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
Under the State Housing Element Law (specifically, Gov. Code section 65583.2), the City’s Housing Element is required to include an inventory of sites that are suitable to provide for the City’s share of its regional housing need allocation (RHNA) obligations.
The City prepared and certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR or Program EIR) pursuant to the State CEQA Statute and the CEQA Guidelines in 2023, which analyzed the potential physical environmental impacts of the City of Mountain View HEU at a more programmatic level. The HEU analyzed in the Program EIR included adoption of a General Plan amendment to add or modify goals, objectives, policies, and implementation programs related to housing in the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan. The Housing Element itself contained: an updated housing needs assessment; updated goals, policies, and programs that addressed the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing and that affirmatively furthered fair housing; and a housing inventory that met the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation and provided a buffer of additional housing development capacity. The HEU also included modifications to provisions in the City’s General Plan Land Use Map, Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code, Zoning Map, and adopted Precise Plans, as needed, to reflect the housing sites inventory.
Based on the City’s RHNA allocation, the HEU planned for an additional 11,135 dwelling units plus a sizeable “buffer.” The HEU Program EIR evaluated the potential for approximately 15,000 multi-family housing units (including approximately 96 accessory dwelling units) during the HEU planning period as a maximum scenario for purposes of the CEQA evaluation, understanding that the buffer size and the final sites selected for inclusion in the Housing Element were to be determined by the City Council upon adoption of the HEU. Of this, approximately 13,600 units were already allowed under the City’s adopted General Plan, Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Precise Plans and the remaining 1,400 units were to be created through rezonings and General Plan amendments to occur during the Housing Element planning period (up to 2031). In addition, the EIR also analyzed a possible increase in housing production from rezonings and General Plan amendments of approximately 2,700 units beyond 2031.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 5 October 2025 In addition to the amendments that were planned to take place within the Housing Element of the General Plan, the EIR acknowledged that the HEU could require amendments to other elements of the General Plan to ensure internal consistency and uniformity between the General Plan, City Code and Precise Plans. As specified in the EIR, the HEU would identify sites appropriate for the development of multifamily housing, and the City would rezone those sites as necessary to ensure an adequate “buffer” above the RHNA requirement and to provide additional potential development sites in high-opportunity neighborhoods.1
3.0 PROGRAM 1.1(g) PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Program 1.1(g) Overview:
The Housing Element Update included Program 1.1.g. (Zoning Ordinance Update for Consistency with State Laws), which requires updates to the Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code to ensure zoning and general plan designations for all sites is consistent with the Housing Element site inventory and pipeline projects. Housing Element Program 1.1.g is intended to create housing opportunities for sites identified as opportunity sites in the HEU site inventory and additional sites in higher-opportunity neighborhoods. The proposed zoning and General Plan approaches, as discussed further in this report, are intended to meet the minimum densities and provide commercial components as identified in the HEU, to preserve existing commercial uses, allow expansion of the existing convalescent hospital at 1949 Grant Road, and to consider zoning approaches that incorporate neighborhood transitions.
Housing Element Program 1.1(g) implements the rezoning requirements for specific properties in order to facilitate housing development consistent with the City’s Housing Element site inventory plus additional opportunity sites and RHNA obligations.
Program 1.1(g) specifically proposes the rezoning of the following properties to allow for residential development at the specified densities:
a. Leong Drive and Fairchild Drive properties at the west end of the Evandale Precise Plan (up to at least 43 DU/ac), with identification of sites requiring neighborhood commercial uses;
b. 1702 Miramonte Avenue and 777 Cuesta Drive (up to at least 30 DU/ac); c. 1949 Grant Road (up to at least 30 DU/ac);
d. 677-699 Calderon Avenue (up to at least 30 DU/ac) with required neighborhood commercial; and
e. Mountain View Transit Center (up to at least 75 DU/ac), with continued collaboration with Caltrain for residential development.
It should be noted that parcels along Moffett Boulevard were identified as a rezoning area in Program 1.1.g, which was slated for up to at least 1.85 FAR and approximately 72 DU/ac, with identification of sites requiring neighborhood commercial uses. Unlike the other rezoning areas identified in this Program 1.1(g), the parcels along Moffett Boulevard were identified as a “change
1 City of Mountain View. Housing Element Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH# 2022020129.
Prepared by ESA.2022. p. 2-3.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 6 October 2025 area” in the General Plan, resulting in the need for additional analysis and Council direction. On November 14, 2023, the City Council held a Study Session and directed staff to move forward with the preparation of a Moffett Boulevard Precise Plan. On November 19, 2024, Council held a Study Session on the visioning framework and Precise Plan boundaries and has since directed staff to return to the City Council in 2026 to discuss potential land use and density alternatives.
Because the Moffett Boulevard area is undergoing its own planning and environmental review, the Moffett Boulevard area will not be addressed further in this analysis.
The Housing Element imposes a December 31, 2025 deadline to adopt the zoning/precise plan and general plan amendments needed for any sites included in the sites inventory. This Housing Element program includes additional sites for rezoning that are not included in the sites inventory but were included as additional opportunity sites, as they will help increase housing opportunities to help the City meet its housing goals. While a specific deadline is not identified for sites that are extraneous to the sites inventory, City staff intends to bring all rezonings related to Program 1.1.g to Council by the December 31, 2025, deadline.
The specific Program 1.1(g) areas are described in additional detail below. Housing Element Program 1.1.g identified five areas (some are individual sites), not including the sites on Moffett Boulevard. See Figure 1 for a Citywide map showing the locations of the areas.
Figure 1: Location of Program 1.1(g) Sites
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 7 October 2025 Leong and Fairchild Drive (West end of the Evandale Precise Plan)
The west end of the Evandale Precise Plan consists entirely of subarea A of the Precise Plan. This area includes nine parcels occupied by a range of commercial uses, including a gas station, three hotels, and several small one-story retail and restaurant buildings. There is also a vacant site at 870 Leong Drive. Most of the buildings were built between 1950 and 1970. Five of these sites are in the Housing Element Sites Inventory, meaning that the existing uses are older, underutilized, or have other characteristics that support redevelopment. Table 1 includes additional key information about the area.
Figure 2: Leong and Fairchild Drive Existing Conditions
Table 1: Leong and Fairchild Drive Information
Existing Zoning
P-32(Evandale) Precise Plan —Area A (See Attachment 2,
Evandale Precise Plan)
Existing General Plan
Designation
Neighborhood Commercial
Residential Currently Allowed? No, except certain developments pursuant to AB 20112
Lot Area 6.03 acres
Housing Element Program
Direction
43 DU/acre + identify which sites will have required
commercial
2 AB 2011 went into effect in July 2023 and is intended to permit through a streamlined by -right process: (a) affordable housing on any sites zoned for retail and/or office uses; and (b) mixed- income housing on sites zoned for retail and/or office uses located along corridors with rights-of-way between 70’ and 150’ (including, for example, Miramonte Avenue, Cuesta Drive, and Grant Road). These provisions are set to expire in 2033.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 8 October 2025 Neighborhood Characteristics Accessible to freeway (adjacent to the U.S. 101 interchange).
Accessible to Stevens Creek Trail (less than 1,000’ away).
Surrounding uses:
— North Side: U.S. 101 access
— South Side: Single-family residential and a multi-family apartment
— West Side (across Moffett Boulevard): Ameswell Hotel
— East Side: Rowhouses and apartments
1702 Miramonte Avenue and 777 Cuesta Drive
These sites currently contain buildings with existing medical office uses. The 777 Cuesta Drive site is a condominium commercial property with 16 condominium units built in 1985, which is bordered by Permanente Creek on the west property line. The 1702 Miramonte Avenue site was built in 1954 and contains two medical office buildings. 1702 Miramonte Avenue is included in the HEU Site Inventory list, as it is an existing use with characteristics that support redevelopment and are in close proximity to goods and services. Table 2 includes additional key information about these two sites.
Figure 3: 1702 Miramonte and 777 Cuesta Drive Existing Conditions
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 9 October 2025
Table 2: 1702 Miramonte Avenue and 777 Cuesta Drive Information
Existing Zoning
CO – Commercial Office
Existing General Plan
Designation
Office
Residential Currently Allowed? No, except certain developments pursuant to AB 2011
Lot Area 1702 Miramonte Avenue: 0.67 acres
777 Cuesta Drive: 1.07 acres
Housing Element Program
Direction
30 DU/acre
Neighborhood Characteristics 1702 Miramonte Avenue:
• Near open space (less than one-half mile from Cuesta
Park).
• Adjacent to commercial uses (Blossom Valley shopping
center).
• Surrounding uses:
— North Side (across Sladky Avenue): Single-family
residential
— South Side (across Cuesta Drive): Gas station and
commercial uses
— West Side: Single-family and multi-family residential — East Side (across Miramonte Avenue): Church
777 Cuesta Drive:
• Near open space (less than one-quarter mile from Cuesta Park).
• Adjacent to commercial uses (Blossom Valley shopping
center).
• Surrounding uses:
— North Side (across Cuesta Drive): Church
— South Side: Single-family residential
— West Side (across Miramonte Avenue): Gas station
— East Side: Single-family residential (under construction)
1949 Grant Road
This site includes a convalescent hospital and surface parking lot for the hospital, which was built in the 1970s. The project site consists of two parcels under the same ownership. This site was not incorporated in the Housing Element Sites Inventory list, but was considered as an additional opportunity site. Table 3 includes additional key information about the site.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 10 October 2025
Figure 4: 1949 Grant Road Existing Conditions
Table 3: 1949 Grant Road Information
Existing Zoning
P-26 (Grant Martens) Precise Plan, Area B (see Attachment 3, Grant Martens Precise Plan)
Existing General Plan
Designation
Low Density Residential
Residential Currently Allowed? Yes, at 6 DU/acre
Lot Area 2.04 acres
Housing Element Program
Direction
30 DU/acre
Neighborhood Characteristics • Near open space (adjacent to Amy Imai Elementary School park and less than one-quarter mile from Cuesta Park).
• Access to commercial uses (e.g., grocery stores,
restaurants, etc.) and services (less than one-quarter mile from Grant Park Plaza).
• Surrounding Uses:
— North Side: Two-story residential
— South Side: Single-family residential
— West Side (across Grant Road): Fire station
— East Side: Amy Imai Elementary School Park
677-699 Calderon Avenue
This site includes a small commercial strip mall which contains a range of businesses, such as a restaurant, laundromat, liquor/convenience store, and other commercial businesses. The project site was built in 1949. The Calderon Avenue site was not included in the Housing Element Site
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 11 October 2025 Inventory list, but is considered as an additional opportunity site because it contains an older building that has characteristics associated with redevelopment potential. Table 4 includes additional key information about the site.
Figure 5: 677-699 Calderon Avenue Existing Conditions
Table 4: 677-699 Calderon Avenue Information
Existing Zoning
Commercial-Neighborhood (CN)
Existing General Plan
Designation
Neighborhood Commercial
Residential Currently Allowed? No, except certain developments pursuant to AB 2011 Lot Area 0.55 acres
Housing Element Program
Direction
30 DU/acre
Neighborhood Characteristics • Proximity to transit (less than three-quarter mile to Mountain View Transit Center).
• Proximity to commercial uses and services (less than one- half mile from downtown).
• Near open space (less than one-half mile from Stevens Creek Trail, Pioneer Park, and Eagle Park).
• Surrounding uses:
— North Side (across Dalma Drive): Single-family
residential
— South Side (across Church Street): Future City park and historic structure
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 12 October 2025 — West Side (across Calderon Avenue): One- to two-
story multi-family buildings
— East Side: Two-story apartments
Mountain View Transit Center
The area consists of five parcels that include the transit station (access to VTA and Caltrain transit platforms, access to buses and shuttles), public plaza, and surface parking. The project site consists of four parcels under Caltrain ownership. This site was not incorporated in the Housing Element Site Inventory list but was considered as an additional opportunity site. Table 5 includes other key information about the area.
Figure 6: Mountain View Transit Station
Table 5: Mountain View Transit Center Information
Existing Zoning
P-18 (Evelyn Avenue Corridori) Precise Plan —Transit
Services Area (See Attachment 4, Evelyn Avenue Corridor Precise Plan)
Existing General Plan Designation Downtown Mixed-Use
Residential Currently Allowed? No
Lot Area 4.71 acres
Housing Element Program
Direction
75 DU/acre, in addition, the City will continue to work with and facilitate Caltrain in the development of
residential on this site, possibly with other uses
Neighborhood Characteristics • Located at Mountain View Transit Center (includes access to Caltrain, VTA, and bus routes).
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 13 October 2025 • Adjacent to downtown, which includes restaurants and
other services.
• Surrounding uses:
— North Side (across Central Expressway): Residential
neighborhoods
— South Side (across Evelyn Avenue): Mix of
residential and commercial uses
— West Side: Commercial uses
— East Side: Offices
Among the range of options considered above, applying the General Plan Mixed-Use Village Center land use and its development standards would best accomplish the goals of target densities, neighborhood transitions, and preservation of existing commercial businesses. This approach would be most economical by utilizing existing standards to achieve Housing Element policy outcomes where possible while limiting reliance on the time- and resource-intensive processes to revise or create Precise Plans to only those instances when required. As a result, the City plans to rezone the Leong/Fairchild, Cuesta/Miramonte, and Calderon areas to allow the General Plan Mixed-Use Village Center land use. The Grant Road and Transit Center areas are planned for a more flexible Precise Plan approach.
See Table 6 below for the proposed zoning and General Plan designations for these sites.
Table 6: Summary of Proposed Rezonings and General Plan Amendments Housing
Element
Site
Housing
Element
Density
Goal
Housing
Element
Commercial
requirement
Proposed
Rezoning
Proposed
General Plan
Amendment
Proposed
Density
Leong Drive
and Fairchild
Drive (west
end of
Evandale
Precise Plan)
43 Identify sites to
have required
neighborhood
commercial
Amend Evandale
Avenue Precise
Plan Subarea
A—Allow
General Plan
Mixed-Use
Village Center
land use
Amend from
Neighborhood
Commercial to
General Mixed-
Use
1.35 FAR,
which is
equivalent to
approximately
43 DU/acre
1702
Miramonte
Avenue and
777 Cuesta
Drive
30 None identified Amend the
Commercial
Office (CO)
Zoning District
to allow General
Plan Mixed-Use
Village Center
land use
Amend from
Office to
Neighborhood
Mixed-Use
1.05 FAR,
which is
equivalent to
approximately
30 DU/acre
1949 Grant
Road
30 None identified Amend Grant-
Martens Precise
Plan Area—
Create Area C
Amend from
Low Density
Residential to
Medium-High
35 DU/acre
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 14 October 2025 and allow multi-
family
residential,
consistent with
the R3 (Multiple-
Family) Zoning
District.
Additionally, the
convalescent
hospital may
expand at the
same intensity
as multi-family.
Density
Residential
677-699
Calderon
Avenue
30 Yes, require
neighborhood
commercial
No changes
proposed. In
combination
with the General
Plan
amendment,
General Plan
Mixed-Use
Village Center
land use would
automatically be
allowed.
Amend from
Neighborhood
Commercial to
Neighborhood
Mixed-Use
1.05 FAR,
which is
equivalent to
approximately
30 DU/acre
Mountain
View Transit
Center
75 Possibly Amend Evelyn
Avenue Corridor
Precise Plan—
Allow residential
up to 75
DU/acre
Allow
residential up
to 75 DU/acre
75 DU/acre
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The city of Mountain View is located south of San Francisco at the southern end of the San Francisco Peninsula, in northwestern Santa Clara County. Mountain View is bordered by the city of Palo Alto to the northwest, the city of Los Altos to the west, the Santa Cruz Mountains to the south, and the city of Sunnyvale to east. The city is bordered by the NASA Ames/Moffett Federal Airfield complex to the northeast and the San Francisco Bay and tidal marshes to the north.
Program 1.1(g) proposes the rezoning of specific parcels within five general areas located throughout the city, in order to allow and facilitate future residential development consistent with the City’s Housing Element Update. The sites identified are generally flat and located within developed, urban areas of the city, which are currently developed with existing commercial or residential uses. The locations are generally along commercial corridors or in residential areas that are considered appropriate for redevelopment with multifamily housing uses at higher densities.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 15 October 2025
5.0 ANALYSIS AND CONSISTENCY WITH PROGRAM EIR
As set forth in the following discussion and findings, the proposed Program 1.1(g) is an activity within the scope of the HEU analyzed in the HEU Program EIR, and no further environmental document is necessary under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168.
The Draft HEU EIR specifically anticipated and analyzed the types of rezonings and potential future development contemplated in Program 1.1(g):
Type of Allowable Land Use
The Draft EIR analyzed "rezonings adopted with the Housing Element" and "opportunity sites requiring rezonings and/or General Plan amendments ('back-pocket' areas)" including specifically "Moffett Boulevard," "Mountain View Transit Center," and "other non-residential sites south of El Camino Real, such as 1949 Grant Road".
3 These match the sites identified in Program 1.1(g).
The existing convalescent hospital at the 1949 Grant Road site was included in the prior Grant- Martens Area Precise Plan and was considered to be a permanent, compatible use for the area.
This site was included and analyzed in the prior HE EIR. While not designated as a “residential” use, the convalescent hospital use is compatible with residential areas. The proposed increase in commercial intensity for the convalescent hospital use would be at the same scale of the residential identified for the Program 1.1(g) site. Commercial redevelopment of this site to a larger medical services extended care use would fit within the intent of the HEU and Program
1.1(g) and would result in similar impacts as residential uses.
Overall Planned Density and Intensity
The Draft EIR's analysis envelope of 15,000 units by 2031 and additional capacity beyond 2031 encompasses the development potential created by Program 1.1(g) rezonings. The densities specified in Program 1.1(g) (30-75 DU/ac) fall within the range of densities analyzed in the HEU EIR for multifamily housing development.
Geographic Area
All Program 1.1(g) sites are located within the City limits and were included in the geographic scope of the Draft EIR analysis.
4 The EIR specifically identified sites "focused primarily along the commercial corridors and in areas that currently accommodate commercial/industrial uses, mixed uses, and/or multifamily housing," which describes the Program 1.1(g) locations.
Covered Infrastructure and Environmental Effects
The Draft EIR addressed infrastructure, utilities, public services, and all CEQA environmental topic areas at a programmatic level sufficient to cover implementation of the HEU rezonings and future housing development under Program 1.1(g).5
3 City of Mountain View. Housing Element Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH# 2022020129. 2022. p. 2-5.
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 16 October 2025 Findings
According to the CEQA Guidelines, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required unless one of the following conditions exists:
1. Substantial changes to the project would require major revisions to the EIR due to new significant environmental effects or increased severity of previously identified effects.
2. Substantial changes in circumstances would require major revisions due to new significant effects or increased severity.
3. New information of substantial importance shows new significant effects, increased severity, or feasible mitigation alternatives not previously considered.
No Substantial Project Changes:
Program 1.1(g) implements rezonings that were anticipated and analyzed in the Program EIR as part of the HEU strategy. The program represents implementation of the "back-pocket" areas and other rezoning opportunities specifically contemplated in the EIR.
As mentioned above, increasing the allowed commercial intensity of the convalescent hospital use at 1949 Grant Road to serve the future increased residential population planned in this area would fit within the intent of the HEU and Program 1.1(g), and within the analysis in the prior EIR.
Other minor clean-up and clarifying amendments associated with State law, including provisions for parking reductions near major transit stops and avigation easements, are not anticipated to result in any new or more severe environmental impacts beyond those analyzed in the Program EIR. These amendments are not analyzed further in the analysis below.
No Substantial Changes in Circumstances:
The regulatory and environmental context remains as described in the EIR. The Adoption Consistency Memo from March 6, 2023, confirms that updates to the Housing Element "fall within the growth envelope analyzed in the EIR" and that "none of the updates to the HEU would involve a new significant environmental effect or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects."
6 No New Significant Information:
No new information has emerged since EIR certification that would indicate new significant effects, substantially more severe impacts, or new feasible mitigation measures not previously considered in the EIR.
6.0 FUTURE PROJECT SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND MITIGATION MEASURES
At this time, there are no specific development proposals or plans for housing projects on the Program 1.1(g) sites. Additional project-specific environmental review under CEQA will be required for future development projects, once the details of those proposals are known. As stated in the Program EIR, in the absence of project-specific design information, it would be
6 Environmental Science Associates. CEQA Memorandum – Mountain View Housing Element Update Revisions.
March 6, 2023.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 17 October 2025 speculative to quantify specific environmental impacts. For this reason, these impacts have been assessed qualitatively, resulting in programmatic mitigation measures that would apply to future development projects.7
As outlined in the following CEQA Checklist, all relevant mitigation measures identified in the EIR for the Housing Element Update would apply to subsequent development projects facilitated by Program 1.1(g), including measures addressing air quality, cultural resources, hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation.
7.0 CONCLUSION
Based on the Program 1.1(g) description and the above evaluation, implementation of Housing Element Program 1.1(g) is within the scope of the City of Mountain View Housing Element Update Program EIR. The Program EIR adequately analyzed the environmental impacts of the rezonings and the associated housing development implemented by Program 1.1(g). The specific sites, densities, and development types contemplated in Program 1.1(g) were anticipated and evaluated in the EIR's programmatic analysis. 1949 Grant Road includes policy language that would allow the convalescent hospital to expand at the same intensities as multi-family, but this is not anticipated to have impacts greater than multi-family and no further individual analysis is needed at this time. The other minor code amendments (parking reductions near major transit and avigation easements) will not have any additional impacts; therefore, no further analysis is required for these amendments.
Based on the information and the enclosed analysis, the City of Mountain View has concluded that no new or more severe environmental impacts would occur as a result of Program 1.1(g) beyond those analyzed in the prior HEU EIR, and all applicable mitigation measures would continue to apply. Therefore, no further environmental documentation is required under CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 for the implementation of Program 1.1(g). The City may rely on the certified Program EIR for the Housing Element Update as the environmental review for Program
1.1(g), consistent with the provisions for program EIRs under CEQA. As described above, project- specific environmental review will be required as specific development proposals are received for the individual sites.
None of the triggering factors contained in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines that require the preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR are present. For these reasons, a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR is not required.
This document will not be circulated for public review but will be included in the Program files, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168.
7 City of Mountain View. Housing Element Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH# 2022020129. 2022.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 18 October 2025
8.0 CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
This checklist evaluates the environmental topics under CEQA and identifies environmental factors that could be affected by the proposed project. Where there is a need for clarifying discussion, the discussion is included following the applicable section of the checklist.
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
1. Aesthetics. Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse
effect on a scenic vista?
Section 4.1 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic
highway?
Section 4.1 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
c. In non -urbanized areas,
substantially degrade the
existing visual character or
quality of public views of the
site and its surroundings?
(Public views are those that are
experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the
project is in an urbanized area,
would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic
quality?
Section 4.1 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
d. Create a new source of
substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
Section 4.1 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 19 October 2025 Discussion:
1.a-c. As described in the Program EIR for the HEU, the Program 1.1(g) sites are located within a developed urban, commercial and residential areas, which are surrounded by existing development. The sites are not located within scenic vistas or viewsheds. While the future development allowed under Program 1.1(g) could be taller and denser than the existing development on the sites and other structures in their immediate vicinity, the proposed rezoning sites are not located within visual corridors or viewsheds. Therefore, the Program 1.1(g) would not result in new or more significant impacts to views of scenic vistas or visual resources.
The Program 1.1(g) rezoning sites do not contain and are not located near scenic resources or highways, and therefore, would also not result in damage to any scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. As described in the Program EIR, new development that could occur under the Project would generally occur along commercial corridors; in areas that currently accommodate commercial uses, and/or multifamily housing; and other areas that are visually appropriate for increased development intensities.
8 Project-level environmental review under CEQA will be required for future development projects on the Program 1.1(g) sites when specific designs are proposed and site-specific impacts can be quantified.
Conformance with the City’s standard conditions will ensure that future development projects will not result in new or more substantial cumulative impacts to scenic vistas or visual resources. For these reasons, Program 1.1(g) would not result in a new or substantially increased significant adverse impact on any aesthetic resources or result in visual degradation of the visual character of the rezoning site areas than evaluated in the Program EIR.
1.d. Existing light sources on the project sites include exterior lighting from the buildings and streetlights. Sources of daytime glare include building windows and vehicles. The proposed Program
1.1(g) would allow for additional multi-family development and would increase the allowable densities on the sites, which would include additional exterior lighting for safety. The future level of lighting associated on the sites could be increased compared to the existing conditions, however, this would still be generally similar in extent and intensity to that of other surrounding development and would not adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
The City’s design guidelines for multi-family residential uses call for exterior lighting that does not produce glare and is not of intensity inappropriate for a residential environment. Future development projects will be required to conform to the City’s standard conditions, which require that at the time of building permit review, a lighting plan will be reviewed by the Community Development Department to ensure that lighting is directed downward and will not spill over onto adjacent properties or otherwise be highly visible, while providing adequate lighting for safety. For these reasons, the revised project would not create a significant new source of substantial light or glare.
Conclusion:
Based on the above discussion, the Program 1.1(g) project would not result in new or more significant aesthetic impacts than those identified in the Program EIR.
8 City of Mountain View. Housing Element Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH# 2022020129. 2022. p.
4.1-13.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 20 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources. Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
c. Conflict with existing zoning
for, or cause rezoning of, forest
land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section
12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by
Government Code section
51104(g))?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
d. Result in the loss of forest land
or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
e. Involve other changes in the
existing environment which,
due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of
Farmland to non -agricultural
use or conversion of forest land
to non-forest use?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 21 October 2025 Discussion:
2.a-e. The Program 1.1(g) sites do not contain any agricultural or forestry resources and are not designated as farmland or part of a Williamson Act contract. There are no areas that have been classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within these areas. Additionally, there are no forestlands, timberlands or timberland zoned areas, as defined in the California Public Resources Code, within the vicinity. The proposed rezoning sites are developed with residential and commercial uses and are located within a developed urban area that is surrounded by existing development. For these reasons, the Program EIR for the approved project concluded that there would be no impacts to agricultural resources. The Program 1.1(g) project would not impact agricultural resources and would not change this conclusion.
Conclusion:
The Program 1.1(g) project would not impact agricultural resources.
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
3. Air Quality. Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
Section 4.2 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Violate any air quality standard
or contribute substantially to
an existing or projected air
quality violation?
Section 4.2 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM AIR-1
c. 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?
Section 4.2 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
d. Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Section 4.2 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM AIR-2
e. Result in other emissions (such
as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
Section 4.2 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 22 October 2025 Discussion:
3.a. The Program EIR concluded that the HEU would advance and would not obstruct implementation of any measures in the 2017 Clean Air Plan that aim to improve connectivity and reduce transportation- related emissions. The proposed rezoning of the Program 1.1(g) sites would be an early step of implementing the HEU and would not hinder or delay implementation of any control measures contained in the 2017 Clean Air Plan. This impact was concluded to be less than significant in the Program EIR. The Program 1.1(g) rezoning would contribute to this same less than significant impact.
Project-level environmental review under CEQA will be required for future development projects on the Program 1.1(g) sites when specific designs are proposed and site-specific impacts can be quantified.
Conformance with the City’s standard conditions will ensure that future development projects will not obstruct implementation of any measures in the 2017 Clean Air Plan.
3.b-c. The Program EIR concluded that because at least some development allowed by the HEU would likely exceed the Bay Area Air District’s screening criteria, and because the specific characteristics of the subsequent projects are not currently known, this impact was conservatively concluded to be significant and unavoidable. The Program EIR identified Mitigation Measure AIR-1, which requires a quantitative analysis of projects exceeding the BAAQMD’s screening criteria for criteria pollutant emissions and specifies emission reduction measures that shall be implemented if significance thresholds for criteria pollutants are exceeded.
Program EIR Mitigation Measure AIR-1:
(Future) 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.
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.
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
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 23 October 2025 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. 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.
2. Project applicants that do not screen out from VMT impact analysis shall implement VMT reduction measures as required by Mitigation Measure TRA-1.
The City of Mountain View has made many of the items listed above in Mitigation Measure AIR-1 standard conditions of approval. Future development projects on the Program 1.1(g) sites will be required to adhere to the requirements of EIR Mitigation Measure AIR-1 and to implement the following City standard condition of approval related to air quality during construction.
Basic Air Quality Construction Measures
The applicant shall require all construction contractors to implement the basic construction mitigation measures recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) to reduce fugitive dust emissions. Emission reduction measures will include, at a minimum, the following measures:
a) All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) will be watered two times per day;
b) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site will be covered; c) All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads will be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited; d) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads will be limited to 15 mph; e) All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved will be completed as soon as possible.
Building pads will be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
f) Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measures Title 13, Section 2485, of the California Code of Regulations). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points; g) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation; and h) Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the City of Mountain View regarding dust complaints. This person will respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. BAAQMD’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 24 October 2025
Implementation of the above standard condition of approval would ensure that construction air pollutant emissions of the future development projects would not be significant. For this reason, the revised project would also not result in a cumulatively considerable increase in criteria air pollutants from construction emissions.
3.d. The Program EIR concluded that the while the overall HEU would result in a less than significant health impact associated with emissions of criteria pollutants and ozone precursors, future individual projects could generate criteria pollutant emissions ROG, NOx, and particulate matter during construction and/or operation that exceed the BAAQMD’s project-level thresholds. Future projects developed under the HEU would generate toxic air contaminants (TACs), primarily DPM, during construction and operation. DPM emissions would be generated from the combustion of diesel fuel in construction equipment and heavy-duty trucks transporting materials and equipment to and from individual project sites. Therefore, future specific development projects will be required to prepare health risk assessments to evaluate the significance of the impacts from construction and/or operation as compared to the BAAQMD’s significance thresholds.
The Program EIR identified the following mitigation measure for future development projects to reduce the project’s health risk/TAC impacts to nearby sensitive receptors to a less than significant level.
Program EIR Mitigation Measure AIR-2:
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.
Future development projects implementing the HEU on the Program 1.1(g) sites would be required to adhere to the Program EIR mitigation measure AIR-2.
Based on the analysis in the Program EIR, the EIR concluded that the HEU would not violate air quality standards or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant.
3.e. The future development projects would generate localized emissions of diesel exhaust during construction activity. While these emissions may be noticeable by adjacent receptors, such odors would be localized to the immediate area and would be temporary, and therefore, would not significantly impact people off-site.
The future projects on Program 1.1(g) sites would include residential uses and would generally not propose the use or storage of hazardous or odorous materials. Therefore, future development projects are not anticipated to generate substantial odors during their operation phase.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 25 October 2025 Conclusion:
With implementation of the Program EIR mitigation measures identified along with the City’s standard conditions Program 1.1(g) and future development projects would not result in new or more significant air quality impacts.
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
4. Biological Resources. Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse
effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California
Department of Fi sh and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
Section 4.3 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM BIO-1
b. Have a substantial adverse
effect on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural
community identified in local
or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game
or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
Section 4.3 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
c. Have a substantial adverse
effect on state or federally
protected wetlands (including,
but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or
other means?
Section 4.3 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
d. Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native
resident or migratory fish and
wildlife species or with
established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
Section 4.3 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 26 October 2025 impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies
or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
Section 4.3 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
f. Conflict with the provisions of
an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Section 4.3 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
4a-d. The Program 1.1(g) sites are located within developed urban, commercial and residential areas, which are surrounded by existing development. The sites are not located within sensitive or regulated habitats. Other than the landscape trees on the sites, the sites do not contain biological resources. No species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species are known to occur at the rezoning site locations, and no sensitive or jurisdictional habitats are present at or adjacent to the sites.
For these reasons, the HEU was concluded to have no impact to riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities, State or federally protected wetlands, wildlife corridors, or provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. The Program EIR determined the HEU would not contribute to a significant impact or cumulative impact related to these topics.9
The HEU Program EIR concluded that only
the following special-status species have a moderate
potential to occur at the Program 1.1(g) sites and be exposed to potential impacts. These species include breeding birds and their nests protected under the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code, as well as several special-status bat species.
Program EIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1:
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 (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
9 Ibid. p. 4.3-25.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 27 October 2025 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:
o 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.
o 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).
In addition, future development projects will be required to implement the following City standard condition of approval to avoid construction-related impacts to nesting raptors and other birds.
Preconstruction Nesting Bird Survey
To the extent practicable, vegetation removal and construction activities shall be performed from September 1 through January 31 to avoid the general nesting period for birds. If construction or vegetation removal cannot be performed during this period, preconstruction surveys will be performed no more than two days prior to construction activities to locate any active nests. The applicant shall be responsible for the retention of a qualified biologist to conduct a survey of the project site and surrounding 500’ for active nests—with particular emphasis on nests of migratory birds—if construction (including site preparation) will begin during the bird nesting season, from February 1 through August 31. If active nests are observed on either the project site or the surrounding area, the applicant, in coordination with the appropriate City staff, shall establish no-disturbance buffer zones around the nests, with the size to be determined in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (usually 100’ for perching birds and 300’ for raptors). The no-disturbance buffer will remain in place until the biologist determines the nest is no longer active or the nesting season ends. If construction ceases for two days or more and then resumes during the nesting season, an additional survey will be necessary to avoid impacts on active bird nests that may be present.
4e. The future development projects will likely remove existing trees on the sites. Because no specific projects have come forward yet, no design details are known at this time. Project-specific environmental and planning review will be required at the time specific projects are proposed. Future development projects on the Program 1.1(g) sites will be required to comply with the following City’s standard tree replacement requirements outlined in the City Code and the City’s Standard Conditions of Approval.
Replacement
The applicant(s) shall offset the loss of each Heritage tree with a minimum of two new trees.
Each replacement tree shall be no smaller than a 24-inch box and shall be noted on the landscape plans submitted for building permit review as Heritage replacement trees.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 28 October 2025 Street Tree Protections
All designated City street trees to remain are to be protected throughout construction activity with protection measures shown on building permit plans.
Tree Protection Measures
The tree protection measures listed in the project’s arborist report shall be included as notes on the title sheet of all grading and landscape plans. These measures shall include, but may not be limited to, six-foot chain link fencing at the drip line, a continuous maintenance and care program, and protective grading techniques. Also, no materials may be stored within the drip line of any tree on the project site.
Security Bond
The applicant(s) shall post a security bond to ensure that replacement trees are planted and become established (one year after planting) and to compensate for the trees that were lost due to illegal removal.
4.f. The Program 1.1(g) sites are not part of any habitat conservation plan and would not impact the implementation of any habitat plan.
Conclusion:
Based on the above discussion, the Program 1.1(g) rezoning project will not result in new or more significant biological resources impacts than those identified in the HEU Program EIR.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 29 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
5. Cultural Resources. Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined
in §15064.5?
Section 4.4 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM CULT-1
b. Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an
archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
Section 4.4 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM CULT-2
c. Disturb any human remains,
including those interred
outside the formal cemeteries?
Section 4.4 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM CULT-2
Discussion:
5a. The existing buildings on the project sites are not listed on the City of Mountain View Register of Historic Resources. As noted in the Program EIR, the City has made a concerted effort to avoid including sites in the housing sites inventory that may include historic resources.10 None of the existing development on the Program 1.1(g) sites was identified in the Citywide Historic Properties Survey as potentially eligible for any historic register. The buildings on the various sites do not meet the criteria of the California Register of Historical Resources or the Mountain View Historic Preservation Ordinance, and therefore, are not listed in the City’s Historic Resource Inventory and are not considered to be historic resources.
For any sites that have not been evaluated, the Program EIR included mitigation measure CULT-1a and 1b. To the extent applicable, future development projects would be required to adhere to this mitigation measure.
Program EIR Mitigation Measure CULT-1:
a. 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.
10 Ibid. p. 4.4-21.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 30 October 2025 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.
b. 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 Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code, shall be required to comply with City Standard Condition of Approval (Secretary of the Interior Standards).
5b-c. The Program 1.1(g) sites are within developed commercial and residential areas and are not considered to be archaeologically sensitive or likely to contain resources. Although it is unlikely that buried historic or prehistoric buried archaeological and paleontological resources are present on the sites, these resources could be encountered during excavation, construction, or infrastructure improvements for the future development projects.
The Program EIR included mitigation measure CULT-2a and 2b. To the extent applicable, future development projects would be required to adhere to this mitigation measure.
Mitigation Measure CUL-2
a. 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 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).
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 31 October 2025
b. Prior to approval of development permits for multifamily projects that include ground disturbing activities, City staff shall review the most recent and updated Northwest Information Center (NWIC) list: Historic Property Directory for the County of Santa Clara, to determine if known archaeological sites underlie the proposed project site. If it is determined that known cultural resources are within 0.25-mile of the project site, 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.
Similar requirements as those in the above mitigation measure have also been made standard City conditions of approval. The future projects would be required by the City to implement the below standard conditions of approval related to the discovery of pre-historic or historic period archaeological resources and human remains (in compliance with General Plan Policies LU-11.5 and LU-11.6), should they be encountered on the site. With incorporation of the following standard conditions of approval, the future development projects implementing Program 1.1(g) would not result in new impacts to archaeological or paleontological resources.
Discovery of Archaeological Resources
• Cultural Sensitivity Training. Tribal Cultural Sensitivity Training shall be provided to the construction crews at the beginning of the project to aid those involved in the project to become more familiar with indigenous history of peoples in the vicinity of the project site. • Discovery of Archaeological and Tribal Cultural Resources. If indigenous or historic-era cultural materials are unearthed during ground-disturbing activities, all activity within 100 feet of the find shall cease and the find shall be flagged for avoidance. The City and a qualified archaeologist, defined as one meeting the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology, and the Tamien Nation shall be immediately informed of the discovery. The qualified archaeologist and a Tamien Nation Tribal representative shall inspect the find within 24 hours of discovery and notify the City of their initial assessment.
Indigenous 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 and artifacts; stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones, or milling slabs); and battered-stone tools, such as hammerstones and pitted stones. Historic-period materials might include stone, concrete, or adobe footings and walls,
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 32 October 2025 filled wells or privies, and deposits of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse. If the find is determined to be potentially significant, the archaeologist, in consultation with a Tamien Nation Tribal representative, shall develop a treatment plan that could include site avoidance, capping, or data recovery.
Discovery of Human Remains
• Discovery of Human Remains. In the event of the discovery of human remains during construction or demolition, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site within a 50-foot radius of the location of such discovery, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains. The Santa Clara County Coroner shall be notified and shall make a determination as to whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his/her authority, he/she shall notify the NAHC, which shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native American. If no satisfactory agreement can be reached as to the disposition of the remains pursuant to this state law, then the landowner shall reinter the human remains and items associated with Native American burials on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance.
A final report shall be submitted to the City’s Community Development Director prior to release of a Certificate of Occupancy. This report shall contain a description of the mitigation programs and its results, including a description of the monitoring and testing resources analysis methodology and conclusions, and a description of the disposition/curation of the resources. The report shall verify completion of the mitigation program to the satisfaction of the City’s Community Development Director.
Conclusion:
The Program 1.1(g) would not result in new or more significant impacts to unknown archaeological or paleontological resources. With adherence to the above mitigation measures and standard conditions of approval, the future development projects under Program 1.1(g) would not avoid impacts to unknown archaeological or paleontological resources should they be discovered during excavation or construction.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 33 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
6. Energy. Would the project:
a. Result in a potentially
significant environmental
impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy, or
wasteful use of energy
resources, during project
construction or operation?
Section 4.5 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state
or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency.
Section 4.5 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
6a. The “project” proposed is Program 1.1(g) of the HEU, which involves the rezoning of 19 parcels within five general areas in order to allow for future development of additional residential uses as identified in the HEU. The proposed Program 1.1(g) sites are all infill sites within developed areas of the city.
Future development projects will be required to complete site-specific project-level environmental review once specific designs are known and proposed. Redevelopment of the sites would require the use of energy resources. However, Program proposes to allow for the future development of new, higher-density residential buildings, in conformance with the HEU, built to current codes and energy efficiency standards. For these reasons, Program 1.1(g) would not entail the wasteful or inefficient use of energy resources or result in new impacts.
6b. Infill development, such as that which would be facilitated by the proposed Program 1.1(g) project, is part of the City’s and State’s strategy for energy efficient development. The project would not conflict with or obstruct any plans regarding renewable energy or energy efficiency. Future projects would be constructed in compliance with the current energy efficiency standards set forth in Mountain View Green Building Code, Title 24, and CALGreen. For these reasons, the project would not conflict with or obstruct state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
Future development projects would be required to implement the City’s standard condition BID-31 to improve energy efficiency.
BID-31 – Reach Codes for Multi-Family Residential (New Construction) • Photovoltaic System Requirements: Photovoltaic (PV) installation on roof area to accommodate an all-electric building to 100% of annual kWh consumption offset, as amended in MVCC Section
8.20.9 and per Table 101.10.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 34 October 2025 Conclusion:
Program 1.1(g) would not result in new or more significant energy impacts.
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
7. Geology and Soils. Would the project:
a. Directly or indirectly cause
potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known
earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most
recent Alquist -Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground
shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground
failure, including
liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
Section 4.6 of
Program EIR
Section 4.6 of
Program EIR
Section 4.6 of
Program EIR
Section 4.6 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
b. Result in substantial soil
erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Section 4.6 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
c. Be located on a geologic unit or
soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a
result of the project, and
potentially result in on -or off -
site landslide, lateral
Section 4.6 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 35 October 2025 spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18 - 1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life
or property?
Section 4.6 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
e. Have soils incapable of
adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative
waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste
water?
Section 4.6 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a
unique paleontological
resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
Section 4.6 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
7.a. The “project” proposed is Program 1.1(g) of the HEU, which involves the rezoning of 19 parcels within five general areas in order to allow for future development of additional residential uses as identified in the HEU. Future development projects will be required to complete site-specific project- level environmental review once specific designs are known and proposed.
In order to minimize potential damage from seismic shaking, future development projects would be designed and constructed in accordance with City of Mountain View’s requirements and guidelines for Seismic Design Category D in the California Building Code. The projects shall implement specific recommendations contained in their required, design-level geotechnical reports prepared for the sites to the satisfaction of the City of Mountain View Building Division, in accordance with the standard condition of approval listed below. Implementation of standard conditions of approval and General Plan Policies would reduce the impacts of seismically induced ground shaking and reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death.
7.b. Similar to the above, future development projects implementing the HEU and Program 1.1(g) will be required to implement the City’s standard condition of approval which mandates the completion of a Construction Sediment and Erosion Control Plan. With implementation of this standard condition of approval, the future projects would not result in new soil erosion or loss of topsoil impacts.
7.c-d. The project area is generally flat and would not be subject to significant geologic hazards such as liquefaction, landsliding, lateral spreading, or differential settlement. For these reasons, would not result in significant or unique hazards due to these soil or geologic conditions.
As outlined in the Program EIR, the area does however, contain expansive soils. The following standard condition of approval shall be implemented to reduce the impacts of expansive soils, seismic, and seismic-related hazards (e.g., liquefaction, lateral spreading, and differential settlement) on the future project sites to a less than significant level.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 36 October 2025 Geotechnical Report
The applicant shall have a design-level geotechnical investigation prepared which includes recommendations to address and mitigate geologic hazards in accordance with the specifications of California Geological Survey (CGS) Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards, and the requirements of the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. The report will be submitted to the City during building plan check, and the recommendations made in the geotechnical report will be implemented as part of the project and included in building permit drawings and civil drawings as needed. Recommendations may include considerations for design of permanent below-grade walls to resist static lateral earth pressures, lateral pressures causes by seismic activity, and traffic loads; method for backdraining walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressure; considerations for design of excavation shoring system; excavation monitoring; and seismic design.
7.e. The Program 1.1(g) sites are within portions of the city with an existing sanitary sewer system.
Septic or alternative wastewater systems would not be used.
7.f. The Program 1.1(g) sites are developed with existing residential and commercial uses and are not located within an area of high paleontological sensitivity. Future projects would be required to implement the following City standard condition of approval related to the discovery of paleontological resources, should they be encountered on the site.
Discovery of Paleontological Resources
In the event that a fossil is discovered during construction of the project, excavations within 50 feet of the find shall be temporarily halted or delayed until the discovery is examined by a qualified paleontologist, in accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. The City shall include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. If the find is determined to be significant and if avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall design and carry out a data recovery plan consistent with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards.
Conclusion:
Program 1.1(g) would not result in new geologic or soils impacts than those identified in the HEU Program EIR. With implementation of the standard conditions identified above, specific future development projects would not create or exacerbate, or be subject to, significant geologic or soils hazards.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 37 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Would the project:
a. Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the
environment?
Section 4.7 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM GHG-1
b. Conflict with an applicable
plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emission of
greenhouse gases?
Section 4.7 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM GHG-1
Discussion:
8a-b. The “project” proposed is Program 1.1(g) of the HEU, which involves the rezoning of 19 parcels within five general areas in order to allow for future development of additional residential uses as identified in the HEU. No specific development is proposed at this time.
Infill housing, such as that proposed by the HEU and Program 1.1(g), is part of the City’s and State’s strategy to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions in the region. The Program would not conflict with or obstruct any plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gases emissions.
Future development projects will be required to complete site-specific project-level environmental review once specific designs are known and proposed. The future development projects implementing the HEU and Program 1.1(g) would generate GHG emissions, however, this would be offset through conformance with standard best management practices and current energy efficiency standards set forth in Mountain View Green Building Code, Title 24, and CALGreen, as well as implementation of the standard conditions of approval described above under section 3. Air Quality above.
The HEU Program EIR identified two mitigation measures that would be required for future development projects as applicable.
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 the electric vehicle (EV) requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2 at the time that a building permit application is filed.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 38 October 2025 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. Project 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, which are summarized in the HEU Program EIR.11
Conclusion:
The proposed rezonings associated with Program 1.1(g) will not result in new or more significant greenhouse gas emissions impacts.
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment
through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
Section 4.8 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment
through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
Section 4.8 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
c. Emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school?
Section 4.8 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
d. Be located on a site which is
included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a
Section 4.8 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM HAZ-1
11 Ibid. p. 4.14-23 and 4.14-24.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 39 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public
or the environment?
e. For a project located within an
airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use
airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in
the project area?
Section 4.8 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
f. Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
Section 4.8 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
g. Expose people or structures to
a significant risk of loss, injury
or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands
are adjacent to urbanized areas
or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
Section 4.8 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
9a-c. The “project” proposed is Program 1.1(g) of the HEU, which involves the rezoning of 19 parcels within five general areas in order to allow for future development of additional residential uses as identified in the HEU. No specific development is proposed at this time.
Buildings constructed prior to 1978 may include asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) in building materials such as roofs, tiling, and insulation. Asbestos-containing materials are of concern because exposure to them has been linked to cancer. Due to the age of the structures on the Program 1.1(g) sites, building materials may contain ACMs. Therefore, an asbestos survey would be required as part of future project development, as well as removal of potentially friable ACMs prior to building demolition.
Lead was widely used as a major ingredient in most interior and exterior oil-based paints prior to 1950.
In 1972, the Consumer Products Safety Commission limited lead content in new paint to 0.5 percent, and to 0.06 percent in 1978. Similar to ACMs, lead may also be present in older buildings.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 40 October 2025 The existing residential and commercial buildings on the Program 1.1(g) sites likely contain asbestos and lead-based paint. The City’s standard condition for the removal and disposal of these materials would be required as part of the future development projects.
The future development projects will be required to implement the City’s standard conditions of approval below.
Discovery of Contaminated Soils
If contaminated soils are discovered, the applicant will ensure the contractor employs engineering controls and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize human exposure to potential contaminants. Engineering controls and construction BMPs will include, but not be limited to, the following:
a) contractor employees working on-site will be certified in OSHA’s 40-hour Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training;
b) the contractor will stockpile soil during redevelopment activities to allow for proper characterization and evaluation of disposal options;
c) the contractor will monitor area around construction site for fugitive vapor emissions with appropriate field screening instrumentation;
d) the contractor will water/mist soil as it is being excavated and loaded onto transportation trucks; e) the contractor will place any stockpiled soil in areas shielded from prevailing winds; and f) the contractor will cover the bottom of excavated areas with sheeting when work is not being performed.
Hazardous Building Materials
To reduce the potential for construction workers and adjacent uses to encounter hazardous materials contamination from asbestos-containing materials (ACM) and lead-based paint, the following measures are to be included in the future projects:
a) In conformance with local, State, and Federal laws, an asbestos building survey and a lead-based paint survey shall be completed by a qualified professional to determine the presence of ACMs and/or lead-based paint on the structures proposed for demolition. The surveys shall be completed prior to demolition work beginning on the structures. b) A registered asbestos abatement contractor shall be retained to remove and dispose of all potentially friable ACMs, in accordance with the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) guidelines, prior to building demolition that may disturb the materials. All construction
activities shall be undertaken in accordance with Cal/OSHA standards, contained in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Section 1529, to protect workers from exposure to asbestos. Materials containing more than 1% asbestos are also subject to Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) regulations.
c) During demolition activities, all building materials containing lead-based paint shall be removed in accordance with Cal/OSHA Lead in Construction Standard, Title 8, CCR 1532.1, including employee training, employee air monitoring, and dust control. Any debris or soil containing lead- based paint or coatings shall be disposed of at landfills that meet acceptance criteria for the waste being disposed.
As described in the HEU Program EIR:
There are numerous regulations covering the transportation, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities. The required compliance with these regulations would ensure that nearby schools would not be exposed to hazardous materials. In addition, any work that would encroach on public streets would require project applicants to apply to the Mountain View Public Works Department for an encroachment and excavation permit. These permits would require the preparation and implementation of a Traffic Control Plan to manage the movement of vehicles,
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 41 October 2025 including those transporting hazardous materials on roads adjacent to or near schools, as required by Mountain View Standard Condition of Approval (Construction Management Plan). Mountain View Standard Condition of Approval (Hazardous Materials) would require the proper storage and containment of hazardous materials. With the implementation of the required Traffic Control Plan, the impact relative to hazardous materials, substances, or waste in proximity to schools would be less than significant.
Once constructed, future residences allowed by the project would use and store small quantities of chemicals typical in residences, such as household cleaning solutions, paints and thinners, and motor fuel (e.g., cars and lawn mowers). Few of the chemicals would be considered hazardous materials (e.g., bleach) and the anticipated volumes would be small (i.e., less than 5 gallons). Given that few of the routinely used chemicals would be considered hazardous and that the quantities would be small, the routine use or an accidental spill of hazardous materials near a school would render this impact less than significant.
12 9.d. As described in the Program EIR for the HEU project, some existing and some closed hazardous materials release sites are located within or adjacent to some areas proposed for housing as part of the HEU, meaning they are listed on the Cortese List (i.e., Government Code Section 65962.5 5) due to the release of hazardous materials. Construction on active or closed hazardous materials sites could expose construction workers, the public or the environment to hazardous materials.
Future projects constructed within the known vapor intrusion areas would be required to construct vapor intrusion systems to prevent VOCs above the listed regulatory action levels from entering the breathing space of residences. The systems would consist of passive sub-slab ventilation with vapor barrier system with the ability to convert to active (i.e., mechanical pumping of sub-slab vapors). The systems would require routine vapor monitoring to quantify the concentrations of VOCs. In the event that Indoor Air Cleanup Levels are exceeded, the vapor intrusion system would be required to be converted to an active pumping system. Projects that overlie the Vapor Intrusion Study Area would also require establishing institutional controls to verify that the vapor intrusion systems are maintained.
There are other hazardous materials sites in addition to the vapor intrusion areas. These other hazardous materials sites may contain contaminated soil and/or groundwater as a result of previous land uses. During construction, there is the potential to encounter previously unknown contaminated soil and groundwater. Construction workers, the public, and the environment could be exposed to hazardous materials.
As mentioned above, there are numerous regulations covering the transportation, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities. The required compliance with these regulations would reduce the exposure to hazardous materials. To further ensure that contaminated materials are properly handled, future project applicants would be required to implement Mitigation Measures HAZ-1, Phase I Assessment, as described below, which would reduce the potential for hazardous materials impacts due to contamination.
HEU Program EIR 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
12 Ibid. p. 4.8-24 and 4.8-25.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 42 October 2025 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., DTSC, RWQCB, or SCCEHD) such that the regulatory agency issues a No Further Action letter or equivalent.
If site-specific sampling determines that contaminated soils are present, the future applicants shall also be required to implement the additional standard conditions below.
Construction Health and Safety Measures:
Work within soil and groundwater contamination areas may expose construction workers to contaminants in the soil, groundwater, and associated vapors. The applicant/contractor is responsible for preparing and implementing an appropriate Health and Safety Plan to address the contamination and manage the operations in a safe manner and in compliance with the Cal/OSHA Construction Safety Orders and other State and Federal requirements.
Toxic Assessment:
A toxic assessment report shall be prepared and submitted as part of the building permit submittal.
The applicant must demonstrate that hazardous materials do not exist on the site or that construction activities and the proposed use of this site are approved by: the City’ Fire Department (Fire and Environmental Protection Division); the State Department of Health Services; the Regional Water Quality Control Board; and any Federal agency with jurisdiction. No building permits will be issued until each agency and/or department with jurisdiction has released the site as clean or a site toxics mitigation plan has been approved.
Soil Management Plan:
Prepare a soil and groundwater management plan for review and approval by the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health (SCCDEH). Proof of approval or actions for site work required by the SCCDEH must be provided to the Building Inspection Division prior to issuance of any demolition or building permits.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 43 October 2025 Vapor Barrier: A vapor barrier shall be installed beneath all structures to mitigate any issues associated with the potential for vapor intrusion within the structure. The vapor barrier design shall be equivalent to those required for sites with known concerns in Mountain View that are also exposed to groundwater. Specifications for the vapor barrier included in the Site Management Plan shall include thickness, type, durability, and diffusion rates for VOCs of concern. The specifications shall also describe the effectiveness of the liner over the life of the building.
9.e. Several of the Program 1.1(g) sites identified for housing would be located within the Moffett Federal Airfield FAR Part 77 Surface that restricts the height of structures within the AIA. Structures that exceed the height restrictions could adversely affect navigable airspace and potentially cause aircraft accidents.
Restrictions on the height of buildings, antennas, trees, and other objects near Moffett Federal Airfield are regulated by the FAA, specifically, FAR Part 77. The FAR Part 77 map is used by the FAA and the Santa Clara County ALUC to identify potential obstructions and hazards to aviation traffic. Future project applicants would be required to comply with the height restrictions. In the event that a project would extend into the FAR 77 surface, the project applicant would be required to apply for a variance with the FAA and the Santa Clara County ALUC. With compliance with these existing regulations on building heights, the impact relative to airports would be less than significant.13
9.f-g. The project proposes residential uses within established, infill residential areas of the city. The sites are not within wildland areas and are not subject to wildland fires. The Program 1.1(g) project would not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and would not increase hazards due to wildland fire risk.
Conclusion:
The proposed rezonings associated with Program 1.1(g) will not result in new or more significant hazardous materials impacts. Implementation of the HEU Program mitigation measure HAZ-1 and the City’s standard conditions of approval will ensure that future development projects do not result in site specific hazardous materials impacts.
13 Ibid. p. 4.8-25.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 44 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
10. Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the Project:
a. Violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge
requirements?
Section 4.10
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
Section 4.10
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
c. Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the
alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the
addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which
would:
i. result in substantial erosion
or siltation on- or off-site;
ii. substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on-
or offsite;
iii. create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater
drainage systems or
provide substantial
additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood
flows?
Section 4.9 of
Program EIR
Section 4.9 of
Program EIR
Section 4.9 of
Program EIR
Section 4.9 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 45 October 2025 d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or
seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project
inundation?
Section 4.9 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
e. Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water
quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater
management plan?
Section 4.9 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
10.a. As described previously, the “project” proposed is Program 1.1(g) of the HEU, which involves the rezoning of 19 parcels within five general areas, in order to allow for future development of additional residential uses as identified in the HEU. No specific development is proposed at this time. Therefore, the Program 1.1(g) project will not result in new or more significant impacts than identified in the HEU Program EIR.
Implementation of future development projects on these sites would require demolition, paving, and grading of the sites. These activities would temporarily increase the amount of unconsolidated materials and disturb potential pollutants. Grading activities could increase erosion and sedimentation that could be carried by runoff into natural waterways, which could increase sedimentation impacts to local creeks or the San Francisco Bay.
The sites are generally flat and within developed, urban areas, and redevelopment of the sites would not result in substantial new or increased hydrology or drainage impacts.
Project-level environmental review will be required once specific development projects are proposed.
Standard conditions regarding stormwater runoff will be required by the City and will be implemented to ensure that there are no impacts to drainage or water quality during construction or operation of the future projects.
Future projects would be required to comply with standard City conditions of approval, based on Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements, to reduce water quality impacts during construction.
Standard Conditions of Approval:
State of California Construction General Stormwater Permit A “Notice of Intent” (NOI) and “Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan” (SWPPP) shall be prepared for construction projects disturbing one acre or more of land. Proof of coverage under the State General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit shall be attached to the building plans.
Construction Best Management Practices
All construction projects shall be conducted in a manner which prevents the release of hazardous materials, hazardous waste, polluted water, and sediments to the storm drain system. Refer to the City of Mountain View document, “It’s in the Contract but not in the Bay” for the specific construction practices required at the job site.
Construction Sediment and Erosion Control Plan
The applicant shall submit a written plan acceptable to the City which shows controls that will be used at the site to minimize sediment runoff and erosion during storm events. The plan should include installation of the following items where appropriate: (a) silt fences around the site perimeter; (b)
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 46 October 2025 gravel bags surrounding catch basins; (c) filter fabric over catch basins; (d) covering of exposed stockpiles; (e) concrete washout areas; (f) stabilized rock/gravel driveways at points of egress from the site; and (g) vegetation, hydroseeding, or other soil stabilization methods for high erosion areas. The plan should also include routine street sweeping and storm drain catch basin cleaning.
Stormwater Treatment (C.3)
For future projects that will create or replace more than ten thousand (10,000) square feet of impervious surfaces, stormwater runoff shall be directed to approved permanent treatment controls as described in the City’s guidance document entitled, “Stormwater Quality Guidelines for Development Projects.” The City’s guidelines also describe the requirement to select Low-Impact Development (LID) types of stormwater treatment controls; the types of projects that are exempt from this requirement; and the Infeasibility and Special Projects exemptions from the LID requirement.
The “Stormwater Quality Guidelines for Development Projects” document requires applicants to submit a Stormwater Management Plan, including information such as the type, location, and sizing calculations of the treatment controls that will be installed. Include three stamped and signed copies of the Final Stormwater Management Plan with the building plan submittal. The Stormwater Management Plan must include a stamped and signed certification by a qualified Engineer, stating that the Stormwater Management Plan complies with the City’s guidelines and the State NPDES Permit.
Stormwater treatment controls required under this condition may be required to enter into a formal recorded Maintenance Agreement with the City.
Hydromodification Management
Post-construction stormwater runoff shall drain to approved permanent Hydromodification Management (HM) controls to mitigate increases in peak runoff flow and increased runoff volume.
Projects that will decrease impervious surface area in comparison to the pre-project condition are not subject to the HM requirement. Information related to this requirement, including the exemption criteria, is included in the City’s document entitled, “Hydromodification Management Plan Guidelines for Development Projects,” and the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program’s manual entitled, “C.3 Stormwater Handbook: Guidance for Implementing Stormwater Requirements for New and Redevelopment Projects.”
The City’s “Hydromodification Management Plan Guidelines for Development Projects” manual requires applicants to submit a Stormwater Management Plan, including information such as the type, location, and sizing requirements of the controls that will be installed. Include the Stormwater Management Plan with the building plan submittal. Property owners of projects that include stormwater controls constructed in accordance with this condition are required to enter into a formal recorded self-inspection and maintenance agreement with the City.
Stormwater Management Plan – Third-Party Engineer’s Certification The Final Stormwater Management Plan must be certified by a qualified third-party engineer that the proposed stormwater treatment controls comply with the City’s Guidelines and Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP).
Landscape Design
For residential and non-residential buildings, landscape design shall minimize runoff and promote surface filtration. Examples include:
a) No steep slopes exceeding 10 percent;
b) Using mulches in planter areas without ground cover to avoid sedimentation runoff; c) Installing plants with low water requirements; and
d) Installing appropriate plants for the location in accordance with appropriate climate zones.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 47 October 2025
Efficient Irrigation
For residential and nonresidential buildings: common areas shall employ efficient irrigation to avoid excess irrigation runoff. Examples include:
a) Setting irrigation timers to avoid runoff by splitting irrigations into several short cycles; b) Employing multi-programmable irrigation controllers; c) Employing rain shutoff devices to prevent irrigation after significant precipitation; d) Use of drip irrigations for all planter areas which have a shrub density that will cause excessive spray interference of an overhead system; and
e) Use of flow reducers to mitigate broken heads next to sidewalks, streets and driveways.
Compliance with the above City of Mountain View standard conditions will ensure that the future development projects implementing Program 1.1(g) will not result in new or more significant impacts to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.
10b. The Program 1.1(g) project only proposes rezoning of the identified sites, in order to facilitate future residential development to comply with the HEU. The project does not include installation of new groundwater wells and would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge.
10c-d. The future development projects allowed by Program 1.1(g) would construct additional residential uses within existing urban areas of the city, on sites that are currently developed. While redevelopment of the sites would alter the specific on-site drainage, these projects would not alter the overall drainage pattern of the areas. The projects would install stormwater treatment facilities, in compliance with the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit Provision C.3 requirements. The future projects would be required to treat their entire sites, including existing and proposed building roof areas, per provision C.3 regulations and as otherwise required under standard applicable standards and requirements as described above. For these reasons, the Program 1.1(g) project would not result in new or substantially increased drainage and runoff impacts.
None of the Program 1.1(g) sites are located within the 100-year flood zone. 14 Project-level environmental
review will be required for future development projects, which will require conformance with the City’s standard conditions of approval to ensure that any potential site specific flooding impacts would be avoided.
The locations of the sites are not likely to be affected by seiches, tsunamis, or mudflows and no policies or actions are needed to further reduce the impact.
10e. The Program 1.1(g) rezonings would not affect the existing policies and regulatory controls implemented to protect water supplies and water quality, and therefore, would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
Conclusion:
The proposed rezonings associated with Program 1.1(g) will not result in new or more significant hydrology or drainage impacts. With implementation of the standard conditions of approval, the future development projects would not result in new or more significant hydrology and water quality impacts.
14 FEMA. Flood Insurance Rate Maps. https://msc.fema.gov. Accessed September 18, 2025.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 48 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
11. Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established
community?
Section 4.10
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Cause a significant
environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental
effect?
Section 4.10
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
11a-b. The Program 1.1(g) project proposes to implement the rezoning of 19 parcels within five general areas identified as part of the HEU, in order to allow for future development of additional residential uses. No specific development is proposed at this time. The project sites are located within developed, commercial and residential areas of the city.
Future proposed buildings could be at a larger and more intense scale than the existing development on the sites, however, this would generally be compatible with the multi-family residential development nature of the site areas and is in accordance with the HEU vision.
Similar to as explained in the HEU Program EIR, implementation of Program 1.1(g) would help facilitate the future development of new housing and housing at higher densities than currently exist in some areas. However, the Program 1.1(g) specifically proposes rezoning of these sites to reflect the new conditions. In addition, the HEU and Program 1.1(g) are intended to help achieve the City’s RHNA requirements.
15 Therefore, Program 1.1(g) would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
Conclusion:
Based on the above discussion, the Program 1.1(g) project would not result in new or more significant land use compatibility impacts or cumulative land use impacts.
15 City of Mountain View. Housing Element Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH# 2022020129. 2022. p. 4.10-8 and 4.10-9.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 49 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
12. Mineral Resources. Would the Project:
a. Result in the loss of availability
of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the
state?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Result in the loss of availability
of a locally -important mineral
resource recovery site
delineated on a local general
plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
12a-b. The Program 1.1(g) sites are located within developed commercial and residential areas of Mountain View. No mining operations or mineral resources are present within the project area. The sites are not designated as a mineral resource recovery site by the City. Based on the General Plan EIR and the State of California maps of aggregate resources, there are no minerals or aggregate resources of statewide importance located within the City of Mountain View. There are no natural gas, oil, or geothermal resources identified within or adjacent to the City. The sites are located within urban areas, and there are no locally-important mineral resources identified by the 2030 General Plan. Therefore, as concluded for the HEU, the Program 1.1(g) project would not result in any impacts to mineral resources or the loss of availability of mineral resource recovery sites.
Conclusion:
Based on the above discussion, Program 1.1(g) would not result in mineral resource impacts.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 50 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
13. Noise. Would the project result in:
a. Generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards
established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other
agencies?
Section 4.11
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Generation of excessive ground
borne vibration or ground
borne noise levels?
Section 4.11
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
c. For a project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or
an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use
airport, would the project
expose people residing or
working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Section 4.11
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
13a. The project proposes rezoning of 19 parcels within five general areas within the city, in order to facilitate future development with additional residential uses. The Program 1.1(g) sites are located within developed, commercial and residential areas of the city and are mainly surrounded by commercial and residential uses.
Construction Noise
The primary source of temporary noise associated with future development projects under Program
1.1(g) would result from demolition and construction. Construction activities City would involve both off-road construction equipment (e.g., excavators, dozers, cranes, etc.) and transport of workers and equipment to and from the future project sites. Noise levels at the Program 1.1(g) sites would be similar to those identified for the overall HEU in the Program EIR.
Future development projects will be required to complete project-specific environmental review and will be required to implement and comply with applicable provisions of Chapter 8 of the Municipal Code as well as the following standard City conditions of approval to reduce construction noise. With required
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 51 October 2025 implementation of these construction best management practices and adherence to the City’s standard conditions of approval, including the allowed hours of construction, impacts associated with future construction activities under the HEU and Program 1.1(g) would be reduced and would not conflict with local noise standards.
Standard Conditions of Approval:
Construction Noise Reduction
The following noise reduction measures shall be incorporated into construction plans and contractor specifications to reduce the impact of temporary construction-related noise on nearby properties:
a) Comply with manufacturer’s muffler requirements on all construction equipment engines; b) Turn off construction equipment when not in use, where applicable; c) Locate stationary equipment as far as practical from receiving properties; d) Use temporary sound barriers or sound curtains around loud stationary equipment if the other noise reduction methods are not effective or possible; and e) Shroud or shield impact tools and use electric-powered rather than diesel-powered construction equipment.
Pile Driving Noise Reduction
The following measures shall be incorporated into construction plans and contractor specifications if pile driving is proposed:
a) Multiple pile drivers shall be considered to expedite construction. Although noise levels generated by multiple pile drivers would be higher than the noise generated by a single pile driver, the total duration of pile driving would be reduced; and b) Temporary noise control blanket barriers shall shroud pile drivers or be erected in a manner to shield the foundation pile holes as a standard construction noise control technique. Predrilling reduces the number of blows required to seat the pile.
Work Hours/Construction Site Signage
No work shall commence on the job site prior to 7:00 a.m. nor continue later than 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, nor shall any work be permitted on Saturday or Sunday or any holiday unless prior approval is granted by the Chief Building Official. The general contractor, applicant, developer, or property owner shall erect a sign at all construction site entrances/exits to advise subcontractors and material suppliers of the working hours and contact information, including an after-hours contact. Violation of this condition of approval may be subject to the penalties outlined in Section 8.6 of the City Code and/or suspension of building permits.
Notice of Construction
The applicant shall notify neighbors within 750 feet of the project site of the construction schedule in writing, prior to construction. For multi-phased construction, separate notices may be required for each phase of construction. A copy of the notice and the mailing list shall be submitted for review prior to issuance of building permits.
Disturbance Coordinator
The applicant shall designate a “disturbance coordinator” who will be responsible for responding to any local complaints regarding construction noise. The coordinator (who may be an employee of the general contractor) will determine the cause of the complaint and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. A telephone number of the noise disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site fence and on the notification sent to neighbors adjacent to the site. The sign must also list an emergency after-hours contact number for emergency personnel.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 52 October 2025
As was concluded for the HEU in the Program EIR, while the potential exists for future construction projects under Program 1.1(g) and other foreseeable development to occur simultaneously and in proximity to one another, construction equipment operations would operate within the constraints of the Municipal Code and standard conditions of approval, and therefore, impacts associated with future cumulative construction activities conflicting with local noise standards would be less than significant.
Operational Noise
Resident Activity
By rezoning the Program 1.1(g) sites to higher densities, the project will facilitate an increased number of residents and activity at the sites in the future. As directed by the California Supreme Court in the Make UC A Good Neighbor v. Regents of University of California (2024) case, noise from general resident activity at a site is not considered an environmental impact. Notwithstanding this Supreme Court case, additional units facilitated by Program 1.1(g) were planned for in the HEU and evaluated in the HEU Program EIR. Therefore, the Program 1.1(g) project would not substantially increase the noise from resident activity at the sites.
Traffic Noise
The HEU Program EIR evaluated whether the HEU could result in significant noise impacts due to increases in traffic noise levels at sensitive receptors in the vicinity. A substantial increase would occur if the project increased noise levels by three dBA Ldn in the site areas. In general, traffic volumes must double to result in a perceptible (three dB) noise increase. The analysis in the Program EIR determined that the anticipated future generated traffic facilitated by the HEU would not double traffic volumes in the project area and would not increase ambient noise levels by three dBA Ldn or greater. 16 For this
reason, the project-generated traffic noise would result in a less than significant impact.
As evaluated in the HEU Program EIR, the cumulative increase in roadside noise levels of the HEU plus other reasonably foreseeable projects, when compared to baseline conditions along all roadways analyzed, was less than one (1) dBA. Therefore, the cumulative increase in roadside noise levels would be less than significant.
Mechanical Building Equipment
Future residential structures that would be facilitated by the Program 1.1(g) project typically include stationary sources of operational noise such as mechanical heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. While the details are not known at this time, it is expected that future projects will include such equipment, potentially as well as an emergency generators for any elevators. Stationary equipment would be required to be located and shielded to operate within the City’s Noise Ordinance requirements.
The future development projects will be required to implement the following standard conditions of approval to ensure that impacts from mechanical equipment noise will be less than significant. This condition will be implemented during the building permit process, which is when the City will require a project-specific acoustical analysis as part of the permit application.
16 Ibid. p.4.11-13.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 53 October 2025 Mechanical Equipment
The noise emitted by any mechanical equipment shall not exceed a level of 55 dB(A) during the day or 50 dB(A) during the night, 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., when measured at any location on the adjoining residentially used property.
Noise Generation
All noise-generating activities (i.e., entertainment or amplified sound) are limited to interior areas only, and the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system shall be maintained to ensure that all windows and doors remain closed when the business is in operation.
Interior Noise Levels
Construction drawings must confirm that measures have been taken to achieve an interior noise level of 45 dBA Ldn that shall be reviewed and approved by a qualified acoustical consultant prior to building permit submittal.
Roof Deck Operation
The approved hours of operation for rooftop common areas shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and shall not allow amplified music. In the event any problems arise with the hours of operation or noise, the Zoning Administrator may hold a public hearing to review common-area operations and impose new or modified conditions of approval in response to public comment received. The public hearing shall be conducted and noticed in accordance with Chapter 36, Article XVI, Division 6, of the City Code.
13.b. The HEU Program EIR evaluated whether the HEU would result in the generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. That analysis determined that, with adherence to the City’s standard conditions of approval, construction of the future residential projects would not result in significant ground borne vibration impacts. Implementation of the rezonings associated with Program 1.1(g) would not change this conclusion.
Implementation the City’s standard conditions of approval regarding noise and vibration will ensure future development under Program 1.1(g) does not result in new construction-related vibration impacts.
13.c. Based on the analysis included in the HEU Program EIR, the Program 1.1(g) sites would not impact or be impacted by noise from airport operations. Based on the 2022 noise contours for Moffett Field contained in the City’s General Plan, none of the Program 1.1(g) rezoning sites would be located within the Moffett Airfield 60 dBA CNEL noise contour.
17 Therefore, the Program 1.1(g) project would not
expose future residents to excessive noise levels from aircraft operations, and the impact is less than significant.
Conclusion:
Based on the above discussion, the Program 1.1(g) project would not result in new or substantially more significant noise levels or vibration impacts. Standard conditions and best management practices will be implemented to ensure that there are no significant noise or vibration impacts during future project construction or operation. With implementation of the above required standard conditions of approval and previously identified mitigation measures, the future development projects would not result in new or more significant effects related to noise or vibration.
17 City of Mountain View. General Plan. 2012.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 54 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
14. Population and Housing. Would the Project:
a. Induce substantial population
growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
Section 4.12
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Displace substantial numbers
of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction
of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Section 4.12
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
14a. Implementation of Program 1.1(g) would be an early step in the implementation of the HEU.
Program 1.1(g) would rezone 19 parcels within five general areas throughout the City, with the intent of facilitating the future development of additional housing units in the City and a resulting increase in the City’s population. While no specific development proposals are directly entitled through Program 1.1(g), it would set the stage for specific residential projects to be proposed on these sites at higher densities than currently allowed. By definition, such development would be “planned” rather than unplanned and would conform to the Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and General Plan as amended, as well as HEU.
Future housing development that could occur as a result of the Program 1.1(g) implementation would require installation of infrastructure such as access roads and utilities. However, these infrastructure improvements would be designed to serve only the planned housing and would not enable growth or facilitate unplanned growth beyond that housing. Based upon these considerations, Program 1.1(g) would not directly or indirectly induce unplanned population growth to the area beyond that analyzed for the HEU.
14b. In order to develop residential uses on the Program 1.1(g) parcels, it is likely that the existing structures on the sites would need to be removed and higher-intensity residential uses developed in their place. However, the existing structures are commercial only and do not contain residential units.
Therefore, the implementation of the HEU would not displace existing people or housing, and the construction of replacement housing elsewhere would not be required. No displacement impact would occur.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 55 October 2025 Conclusion:
The Program 1.1(g) project would not result in new, or more significant, impacts or cumulative impacts to population or housing in the region.
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
15. Public Services.
Would the project result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could
cause significant
environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times
or other performance
objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection? Section 4.13
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Police protection? Section 4.13
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Schools? Section 4.13
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Parks? Section 4.13
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Other public facilities? Section 4.13
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 56 October 2025 Discussion:
Implementation of Program 1.1(g) would be an early step in the implementation of the HEU. Program
1.1(g) would rezone 19 parcels within five general areas throughout the City, with the intent of facilitating the future development of additional housing units in the City and a resulting increase in the City’s population. While no specific development proposals are proposed or directly entitled through Program 1.1(g), it would set the stage for future residential projects to be proposed on these sites at higher densities than currently allowed. Similar to the analysis of the HEU in the HEU Program EIR, the future development allowed by Program 1.1(g) would result in an increase in population and thus an incremental increase in demand for public services, such as fire protection and emergency medical response services, police protection services, schools, parks, and other recreational facilities.
Future development projects will be required to complete site-specific project-level environmental review once specific designs are known and proposed. The future development projects implementing the HEU and Program 1.1(g) will be required to analyze their project-specific impacts upon public services, and the potential needs for additional public facilities or staff, at that time.
Such future projects will be subject to the City’s standard conditions and requirements, such as the California Government Code Section 65996 School Impact Fees and the City’s Parkland Dedication Ordinance.
Conclusion:
The Program 1.1(g) project would not result in new or more significant impacts or cumulative impacts to public services. The future development projects implementing Program 1.1(g) will be required to analyze their project-specific impacts upon public services, and the potential needs for additional public facilities or staff, at that time.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 57 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
16. Recreation.
a. Would the project increase the
use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that
substantial physical
deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
Section 4.13
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Does the project include
recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion
of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
Section 4.13
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
16.a-b. The City of Mountain View currently owns and maintains approximately 993 acres of parks and open space facilities, including 22 urban parks and the Stevens Creek Trail.
Implementation of Program 1.1(g) would be an early step in the implementation of the HEU. Program
1.1(g) would rezone 19 parcels within five general areas throughout the City, with the intent of facilitating the future development of additional housing units in the City and a resulting increase in the City’s population. While no specific development proposals are proposed or directly entitled through Program 1.1(g), it would set the stage for future residential projects to be proposed on these sites at higher densities than currently allowed. Similar to the analysis of the HEU in the HEU Program EIR, the future development allowed by Program 1.1(g) would result in an increase in population and thus an incremental increase in demand for recreational facilities.
Future development projects will be required to complete site-specific project-level environmental review once specific designs are known and proposed. The future development projects implementing the HEU and Program 1.1(g) will be required to analyze their project-specific impacts upon recreational facilities at that time.
Conclusion:
Based on the above discussion, the Program 1.1(g) project will not result in new or more significant impacts or cumulative impacts to recreational facilities than analyzed in the HEU Program EIR. Future development projects implementing Program 1.1(g) will be required to analyze their project-specific impacts upon recreational facilities at that time.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 58 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
17. Transportation/Traffic. Would the project:
a. Conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance or policy addressing
the circulation system,
including transit, roadway,
bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
Section 4.14
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Would the project conflict or
be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
Section 4.14
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
c. Substantially increase hazards
due to a geometric design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
Section 4.14
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
d. Result in inadequate
emergency access?
Section 4.14
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
17.a. As mentioned previously, implementation of Program 1.1(g) would be an early step in the implementation of the HEU. Program 1.1(g) would rezone 19 parcels within five general areas throughout the City, with the intent of facilitating the future development of additional housing units in the City and a resulting increase in the City’s population. While no specific development proposals are proposed or directly entitled through Program 1.1(g), it would set the stage for future residential projects to be proposed on these sites at higher densities than currently allowed. Similar to the analysis of the HEU in the HEU Program EIR, the future development allowed by Program 1.1(g) would result in an increase in population and thus additional demand for transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
Implementation of the HEU would be subject to and implement General Plan policies applicable to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and service. Additionally, future development projects under the HEU would be subject to all applicable City guidelines, standards, and specifications related to transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. Because implementation of Program 1.1(g) would be subject to all applicable City guidelines, standards, and specifications, the proposed Program would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs for transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities and would not result in new or more significant impacts to these facilities.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 59 October 2025
17.b. The HEU Program EIR concluded that implementation of the HEU would not result in significant vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impacts other than within the North Bayshore area. Most of the Program
1.1(g) sites are within low VMT, infill areas of the city. According to the City of Mountain View’s VMT policy, residential projects located in areas of low VMT, defined as exhibiting VMT that is 15 percent or greater below the existing nine-county Bay Area regional average VMT shall be presumed to have a less- than-significant transportation impact. In addition, projects located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, or a stop along a high-quality transit corridor, pursuant to State definitions for such facilities, are considered to have a less than significant transportation VMT impact.
Program 1.1(g) would be an early step in the implementation of the HEU and would rezone 19 parcels within five general areas throughout the City, with the intent of facilitating the future development of additional housing units. No specific developments are proposed at this time. At the time specific development projects are proposed on the Program 1.1(g) sites, those projects would undergo project- level environmental review, which would include an evaluation of potential VMT impacts.
Future development projects will be required to adhere to the City’s standard conditions of approval to reduce vehicle trips and improve multi-modal transportation. For these reasons, the Program 1.1(g) rezoning project would not result in significant transportation impacts.
17.c-d. Future development projects would be required to complete project-level environmental review, once the specifics of the designs are known. As concluded for the overall HEU in the HEU Program EIR, subsequent projects implemented under the HEU (and Program 1.1(g)), including any new roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit infrastructure improvements, would be designed according to the General Plan and other City transportation standards and subject to existing regulations that reduce or minimize hazardous conditions.
Conclusion:
Based on the above discussion, the Program 1.1(g) project will not result in new or more significant transportation impacts or cumulative impacts.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 60 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
18. Tribal Cultural Resources. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a. Listed or eligible for listing in
the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical
resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or?
Section 4.4 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM CULT-1,
MM CULT-2
b. A resource determined by the
lead agency, in its discretion
and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria
set
forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe.
Section 4.4 of
Program EIR
No
No
No
MM CULT-1,
MM CULT-2
Discussion:
18.a-b. No known tribal resources exist within the Program 1.1(g) areas. The Program 1.1(g) sites are within developed commercial and residential areas and are not considered to be sensitive or likely to contain tribal cultural resources. The sites have previously been developed and disturbed and are not anticipated to include tribal cultural resources.
As described in the HEU Program EIR, SB 18 requires local governments to consult with tribes prior to making certain planning decisions and provides California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to cultural places. In accordance with the requirements of SB 18, Mountain View City staff conducted Native American outreach and consultation efforts. As a part the SB 18 process for the proposed HEU, the City emailed thirteen letters to ten tribes based on prior consultation on March 4, 2022 and the City sent tribal outreach letters to eleven Native American representatives from eight
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 61 October 2025 tribes that were identified by the City based on a tribal consultation list developed by the Native American Heritage Commission on May 11, 2022. No tribes responded to the tribal consultation efforts within 90 days and no responses were received prior to the publish date of the Draft EIR.18 However, additional outreach was conducted again for implementation of Program 1.1(g), and the City emailed letters to tribes on July 23, 2025. The City received two requests for consultation. One tribe was unresponsive to the City’s follow-up requests, and the other tribe (Tamien Nation) engaged in consultation. They did not object to the proposed amendments, but they provided recommendations for minor changes to the standard conditions of approval, which will be integrated into regular updates to the City’s standard conditions. Implementation of these measures would ensure that any previously unidentified tribal cultural resources are appropriately managed in accordance with applicable regulations. Therefore, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource.
The adopted HEU and associated General Plan include policies and implementation programs designed to identify and protect archaeological resources and human remains that could also be tribal cultural resources and could be adversely affected by future development activities. In addition, the HEU Program EIR included mitigation measure CULT-2a and 2b, described in Section 5 above, to avoid impacts to unknown resources that could be encountered during future development. To the extent applicable, future development projects under Program 1.1(g) would be required to adhere to this mitigation measure and to implement the standard conditions of approval described in Section 8.5.
Cultural Resources above. With incorporation of the prior Program EIR mitigation measures and the standard conditions of approval, implementation of the Program 1.1(g) project would not result in impacts to tribal cultural resources.
Conclusion:
Based on the above discussion, the Program 1.1(g) project falls within the umbrella of the HEU EIR and would not result in new or more significant impacts or cumulative impacts to tribal cultural resources.
18 City of Mountain View. Housing Element Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH# 2022020129. 2022. p. 4.4-25 and 4.4-26.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 62 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
19. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project:
a. 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?
Section 4.19
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
MM UTIL-1
b. Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project
and reasonably foreseeable
future development during
normal, dry, and multiple dry
years?
Section 4.19
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
c. Result in a determination by
the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s
existing commitments?
Section 4.15
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
d. Generate solid waste in excess
of State or local standards, or in
excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
Section 4.15
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
e. Comply with federal, state, and
local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
Section 4.15
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 63 October 2025 Discussion:
19.a. The Program 1.1(g) sites are located within urbanized commercial and residential infill areas of the City, which are served by all needed utilities (e.g. water, electricity, sanitary sewer facilities, and storm drain facilities). The HEU Program EIR determined that the approved project would not require the significant relocation or construction of new or expanded water, storm drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities.
As described in the HEU Program EIR, the HEU would accommodate additional residential development in the City and a related increase in demand for water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities. Residential developers are responsible for constructing water, sewer, and storm drainage improvements on new housing sites. Where a future development project has offsite impacts, such as increased stormwater runoff, increased sewer load or added congestion at a nearby intersection, additional developer expenses may be necessary to mitigate impacts. The contractor will be required to make site improvements before constructing. Site improvements can include connections to existing utility systems, rough grading, and installation of water and sewer lines. Extension of this infrastructure would likely occur in existing adjacent roadways and, aside from short-term construction disturbance, would not result in any unusual or further environmental impacts than identified in the HEU EIR for overall construction activity associated with the HEU.
Overall, the potential improvements or extension of utility infrastructure to serve future development as a result of the HEU and Program 1.1(g) would be installed primarily within 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 HEU EIR for overall construction activity. As such, the implementation of the HEU, and therefore, the Program 1.1(g), 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 be required of future development projects and would ensure that subsequent projects contribute their fair share toward Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) identified by the City.
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.
19.b. Implementation of Program 1.1(g), and the overall HEU, would result in increased demand for potable water. The City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) analyzed development anticipated as a result of Mountain View’s General Plan land use strategy, and included certified Environmental Impact Reports and Precise Plans that were approved by that time. This anticipated development included General Plan growth estimates, plus growth affiliated with the North Bayshore, El Camino Real, East Whisman and San Antonio Precise Plans. The total number of dwelling units added by the HEU and additional opportunity sites, however, exceeded the growth anticipated in the UWMP.
Therefore, a Water Supply Assessment was completed as part of the HEU EIR, which included the additional growth anticipated.19
The HEU Program EIR determined that the City of Mountain View had sufficient existing water supply to support the HEU under normal, single dry, or multiple dry water years. The increase in the number of
19 Ibid. p. 4.15-18 through 4.15-19.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 64 October 2025 units for the proposed Program 1.1(g) project would not result in insufficient water supply and would not change this conclusion.
Future development projects would be required to comply with the CALGreen Code, which requires that new construction use high-efficiency plumbing fixtures, such as high-efficiency toilets, urinals, showerheads, and faucet fixtures. For outdoor water use, the CALGreen Code requires that irrigation controllers be weather- or soil moisture–based and automatically account for rainfall, or be attached to a rainfall sensor. Additionally, the projects would be required to comply with the City’s standard condition of approval regarding Landscaping and the City of Mountain View Water Conservation in Landscaping Regulations and the MV General Building Code, which include water conservation requirements.
19.c. Implementation of the HEU would result in an increase in population and thus an increased demand for wastewater treatment. The HEU Program EIR found that there was sufficient capacity at the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (PARWQCP) and within the City’s existing treatment allocation to serve the additional units envisioned under the HEU. Program 1.1(g) would allow for development of a portion of the HEU units, and therefore, the project would not result in new or more significant wastewater impacts or exceed the wastewater treatment plant capacity.
19.d-e. While no specific development proposals are directly proposed by Program 1.1(g), future development would generate additional solid waste during both construction and operation. As concluded in the Program EIR for the HEU, the Program 1.1(g) sites would be served by the Kirby Canyon Landfill, which has sufficient capacity.
20 Future projects developed under Program 1.1(g) would also be required to comply with existing local and State programs and regulations, and the City’s standard conditions regarding solid waste. The increase in solid waste from the Program 1.1(g) sites would not result in new or significantly increased impacts related to solid waste and landfill capacity. Therefore, future projects under Program 1.1(g) would not generate solid waste that would exceed the local capacity and would not impair the attainment of State level or local waste reduction goals.
Cumulative Impacts. Future development of the Program 1.1(g) sites, when combined with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable development, would increase the demand for the utilities and services described above. Cumulative developments 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, which would offset the potential for cumulative utilities and services impacts.
Conclusion:
As documented in the Program EIR for the HEU, development envisioned under the HEU would not exceed the City’s applicable significance thresholds related to utilities and services and would not result in the need for new or expanded facilities. Based on the findings from the Program EIR, future development allowed by Program 1.1(g) would not contribute to additional deficiencies in the utilities and services. For these reasons, the project would not result in new or more significant effects related to utilities and services.
20 Ibid. p. 4.15-22.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 65 October 2025
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
20. Wildfire. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a. Substantially impair an
adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds,
and other factors, exacerbate
wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from
a wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
c. Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other
utilities) that may exacerbate
fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts
to the environment?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
d. Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including
downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage
changes?
Section 4.16
of Program
EIR
No
No
No
N/A
Discussion:
20.a-d. The City of Mountain View is not located within or near a State Responsibility Area or lands classified as very high fire severity zones.21 The Program 1.1(g) sites are generally flat and located within developed, urban infill areas of the city. The sites are not located within areas that may exacerbate fire risk or expose people or structures to significant risk. For these reasons, similar to the approved HEU, the Program 1.1(g) project would not result in wildfire impacts or increase the cumulative risk of wildfire.
21 Ibid. p. 4.16-2.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 66 October 2025
Conclusion:
The Program 1.1(g) project would not result in wildfire impacts or increase the cumulative risk of wildfire.
Environmental Issue Area
Where Impact
Was Analyzed
in Prior
Environmental
Documents.
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
Environmental
Documents
Mitigations
Implemented
or Address
Impacts.
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the
potential to degrade the
quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially
reduce the number or restrict
the range of an endangered,
rare or threatened species, or
eliminate important examples
of the major periods of
California history or
prehistory?
HEU Program
EIR
No
No
No
MM BIO-1
b. Does the project have impacts
that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental
effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the
effects of probable future
projects)?
HEU Program
EIR
No
No
No
MM AIR-1,
MM GHG-1,
MM UTIL-1
c. Does the project have
environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse
HEU Program
EIR
No
No
No
MM AIR-1,
MM AIR-1,
MM GHG-1,
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 67 October 2025 effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
MM HAZ-1,
MM UTIL-1
Note: Authority cited: CEQA (Public Resources Code 21000–21189) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000–15387).
Discussion:
21.a. Based on the analysis in the individual sections above, the proposed Program 1.1(g) would not degrade the quality of the environment, result in impacts to sensitive species or habitats, or eliminate important examples of California’s history or prehistory. Program EIR mitigation measure BIO-1, along with standard conditions of approval and best management practices and requirements, will be implemented as described in the prior sections to avoid unanticipated impacts.
21.b. This document evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposed Program 1.1(g) and evaluates whether the project will result in new or more significant impacts beyond those disclosed in the Program EIR for the previously approved HEU. The cumulative impact analysis from the HEU Program EIR is hereby incorporated by reference. The analysis considered other past, pending, and probable future projects whose impacts could combine to produce cumulative impacts. With adherence to the identified mitigation measures and incorporation of standard conditions of approval, the Program
1.1(g) project would not result in new cumulatively significant contributions to cumulative impacts.
Future development projects facilitated by Program 1.1(g) will also be conditioned to adhere to the same mitigation measures (MM AIR-1, MM CULT-1 and MM CULT-2, MM GHG-1, MM HAZ-1, MM UTIL- 1) that were identified in the Program EIR and required of the approved HEU, to ensure the future development will not result in new or more significant cumulative air quality, cultural resources and tribal cultural resources, or impacts.
21.c. As explained in the Program EIR for the HEU, while changes to the environment that could indirectly affect human beings would be represented by all of the designated CEQA issue areas, those that could directly affect human beings include air quality and hazardous materials. Implementation of the best management practices, standard permit conditions, mitigation measures, and adherence to General Plan, City Code, and state and federal regulations described in the Program EIR would avoid any significant impacts. No other direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings were identified. The increase in residential units and density proposed by Program 1.1(g) would not change this conclusion.
As mentioned above, the proposed project will also be conditioned to adhere to the same mitigation measures (MM AIR-1, MM GHG-1, MM HAZ-1, and MM UTIL-1) that were identified in the Program EIR to ensure the project will not result in new or more significant impacts to human beings.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 68 October 2025
9.0 REFERENCES AND SOURCES
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. 2022.
City of Mountain View. Mountain View 2030 General Plan. Adopted July 2012.
City of Mountain View. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program. Adopted July 2012.
City of Mountain View. Sixth Cycle Housing Element Update 2023-2031 Environmental Impact Report. SCH# 2022020129. Prepared by ESA. 2022.
City of Mountain View. Mountain View 2030 General Plan and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH#2011012069). July 2012.
City of Mountain View. Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code.
City of Mountain View. VTA Model, Variation from Regional Average VMT per Capita Map (2020).
ESA. CEQA Memorandum – Mountain View Housing Element Update Revisions. March 6, 2023.
FEMA. Flood Map Service Center. Flood Insurance Rate Maps. https://msc.fema.gov.
September 18, 2025.
City of Mountain View HEU Program 1.1(g) 69 October 2025
10.0 LEAD AGENCY AUTHORS AND CONSULTANTS
City of Mountain View
Community Development Department
Christian Murdock, Community Development Director
Amber Blizinski, Assistant Community Development Director Eric Anderson, Planning Manager
Krisha Penollar, Senior Planner
JHS Consulting, LLC
John Schwarz, President/Principal