HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-06-20 Architectural Review Board Agenda Packet
City of Palo Alto Page 1
=================MEETINGS ARE CABLECAST LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 26======================
Thursday June 20, 2013
REGULAR MEETING - 8:30 AM
City Council Chambers, Civic Center, 1st Floor
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
ROLL CALL:
Board members: Staff Liaison:
Clare Malone Prichard (Chair) Russ Reich, Senior Planner
Lee Lippert (Vice Chair)
Alexander Lew Staff:
Randy Popp Diana Tamale, Administrative Associate
Naseem Alizadeh Amy French, Chief Planning Official
Clare Campbell, Planner
Jason Nortz, Senior Planner
Margaret Netto, Contract Planner
Shahla Yazdy, Transportation Engineer
PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
Please be advised the normal order of public hearings of agenda items is as follows:
Announce agenda item
Open public hearing
Staff recommendation
Applicant presentation – Ten (10) minutes limitation or at the discretion of the Board.
Public comment – Five (5) minutes limitation per speaker or limitation to three (3)
minutes depending on large number of speakers per item.
Architectural Review Board questions of the applicant/staff, and comments
Applicant closing comments - Three (3) minutes
Close public hearing
Motions/recommendations by the Board
Final vote
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. Members of the public may speak to any item not on the
agenda with a limitation of three (3) minutes per speaker. Those who desire to speak must
complete a speaker request card available from the secretary of the Board. The Architectural
Review Board reserves the right to limit the oral communications period to 15 minutes.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
June 6, 2013
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
AGENDA
City of Palo Alto Page 2
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS. The agenda may have additional
items added to it up until 72 hours prior to meeting time.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. California Avenue Streetscape Improvements [13PLN-00211]: Request by the City of Palo
Alto Transportation Division for Architectural Review of streetscape improvements on
California Avenue, between El Camino Real and the CalTrain Station, including traffic calming
treatments, landscape elements with new street trees, street furniture, new street lighting,
parking enhancements, and a reduction from four vehicle travel lanes to two lanes.
Environmental Review: A Negative Declaration was adopted on November 28, 2011 for the
project. The ARB recommended approval of this project with a condition that the project
details return to ARB consent calendar.
2. 911 Hansen Way [12PLN-00474]: Request by Hoover Associates on behalf of Leland
Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees for Architectural Review of a new 5,672 square foot,
one-story addition to an existing 143,142 square foot manufacturing building for Varian (and
demolition of a 1,941 s.f. building) on a 13.7 acre lot. Environmental Assessment: A draft Initial
Study and Negative Declaration has been prepared and the public review period is May 24,
2013 to June 24, 2013. Zone District: Research Park (RP)
STUDY SESSION:
3. Mayfield Development Agreement Overview: Informational session regarding the 2005
Mayfield Development Agreement (MDA) allowing for general discussion regarding two
housing projects coming before the ARB that will satisfy the MDA requirement for Stanford to
provide 250 housing units; the first preliminary Architectural Review, also on June 20, 2013, is
the proposed mixed use building at 2500 El Camino Real that would provide 70 affordable
housing units (continued from June 6, 2013 ARB meeting).
NEW BUSINESS:
Preliminary Review:
4. 2500 El Camino Real [13PLN-00161]: Request by Stanford Real Estate for Preliminary
Architectural Review of a proposed four-story mixed use project with 70 residential units (one,
two and three bedroom units) of below market rate rental housing and approximately 7300
square feet of commercial space. Zone: CS (AS1). This item was continued from the June 6,
2013 meeting.
Major Review:
5. 405 Curtner Avenue [13PLN-00098]: Request by Salvatore Caruso on behalf of Zhen Zhen
Li for Architectural Review of a new 7,425 square foot, three story building with six residential
condominium units. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15303. Zone District:
RM-30.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
BOARD MEMBER BUSINESS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.
6. Recap of retreat discussion on Colleagues Memo.
7. Formation of subcommittees – nomination of special topics.
REPORTS FROM OFFICIALS.
Subcommittee Members: Naseem Alizadeh and Randy Popp
SUBCOMMITTEE: None.
STAFF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW:
Project Description: Installation of new walk up ATM machine
Applicant: Steve Stoddard
Address: 2180 W. Bayshore Road [13PLN-00100]
Approval Date: 6/11/13
Request for hearing deadline: 6/24/13
Project Description: Minor landscape changes including patio replacement and removal of two
redwood trees which will be replaced with City approved trees
Applicant: Christian Hansen
Address: 3172 Porter Drive, [13PLN-00045]
Approval Date: 6/12/13
Request for hearing deadline: 6/25/13
ADA. The City of Palo Alto does not discriminate against individuals with disabilities. To request accommodations to
access City facilities, services or programs, to participate at public meetings, or to learn more about the City’s compliance
with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), please contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at 650.329.2550 (voice)
or by e-mailing ada@cityofpaloalto.org.
Posting of agenda. This agenda is posted in accordance with government code section 54954.2(a) or section
54956.Recordings. A videotape of the proceedings can be obtained/reviewed by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (650)
329-2571.
Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Architectural Review Board after
distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Planning and Community
Environment Department at 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor, Palo Alto, CA. 94301 during normal
business hours.
Agenda Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
Architectural Review Board
June 20, 2013
Architectural Review Board
Shahla Y azdy, Transportation Engineer
Staff Report
Department: Planning and
Community Environment
California Avenue Streetscape Improvements [13PLN-002111: Request
by City of Palo Alto Transportation Division for Architectural Review of
revised plans addreSSing conditions of approval for the streetscape
improvements to California Avenue, between El Camino Real and the
. Caltrain Station. Environmental Review: A Negative Declaration was
prepared in accordance with CEQA guidelines and was adopted on
November 29, 2011.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) approve the proposed project
revisions to address the ARB comments and conditions provided at the June 6, 2013 meeting.
BACKGROUND
Previous ARB Review
The ARB reviewed the project on June 6, 2013 and voted to recommend approval of the project
with specific conditions to have project elements return on Consent. The staff report prepared for
that meeting is attached for reference.
DISCUSSION
The ARB was supportive of the project but requested clarification or modifications. for the
following items:
1. Change Ipe wood for proposed bench to something more sustainable.
After considering the ARB's feedback, the originally proposed Ipe wood benches are on still
being proposed for the project. The Ipe wood is an extremely durable material and it is "green"
for its durability (this is a 25 + year wood), low maintenance and its sustainable nature. City
13PLN-00211 Page 1 of4
Open Space & Parks Division Manager has requested that proposed furniture be low
maintenance. Some additional reasons to use the Ipe wood are as follows:
• Ipe is a hardwood and is very dense. It's difficult to cut, drill or carve, and is known for
its durability and longevity.
• Ipe is highly rot/insect resistant.
• Ipe requires no maintenance (paint or ink can be wiped off or sanded).
• The sustainability date sheet is included for Ipe wood.
• MFR can provide FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) Certification that Ipe wood cOnies
from the sustainable source.
2. Incorporate parking markers in design.
If budget allows, the pavement markers will be placed at the end of each diagonal parking
striping.
3. Change Bike Rack style.
Bike· rack style has been changed to Emerson Style by Landscape Form, see attached cut sheet.
4. Consider placing newspaper racks on plaza.
There are already two clusters of newspaper racks located just a block west of the plaza area
where patrons can pick up a paper on their way to the plaza. In addition, the community has
requested from City staff that additional newsracks not be placed at new locations. City Staff is
maintaining the same number of newspaper racks in a pedestal mounted design.
5. Change paving pattern on plaza.
The plaza paving pattern has been expanded to continue the radial pattern all the way throughout
the plaza area. See attached plan.
6. Consider laminar flow for the fountain.
Per the fountain artist, Mike Szabo, laminar tlow applies to floor mounted water nozzles
discharging onto the sculpture or solely out of the hardscape, into the air and return via
subsurface drains. The only discharge in this fountain is via reservoir at top of each sculpture
panel, so laminar effect does not apply.
7. Clarify green screen design/location.
The proposed green screen is located right behind the existing back of curb and in front of the
existing K-rail and is to screen the existing K-rail. See enclosed picture for the green screen and
K-raillocation.
If approved, City Staff will be coordinating with Caltrain for the placement of the green screen.
13PLN-00211 Page 2 of4
8. Consider water bottle filling option for drinking fountain.
Drinking fountain at the plaza area has been changed to a jug filler type with the incorporation of
a drinking fountain and a pet fountain (see enclosed cut sheet).
9. Use Silver Linden instead of Crape Myrtles.
ARB previously approved to use Silver Linden Trees for the new row of existing trees on the
south side of Cal Ave between EI Camino Real and Ash Street. City staff will move forward with
the placement of these trees on this block.
10. Confirm that furniture will be secured.
All site furnishing will be secured with surface mounting method.
11. Red striping along diagonal parking is confusing.
The red color AC bands have all been removed, except for the Central plaza area between Ash
and Birch Street.
12. Review narrowing of road and potential conflict at EI Camino ReallBus StoplDriveway and
Bike Corral.
Staff has reviewed and field verified the geometrics of this location and transitions comply to
design standards and with no potential conflicts.
13. Review transitions from brick/concrete at sidewalk.
A new ,concrete band in line with the existing building column is provided as the transition
between the existing brick paving on the side Birch Street. See enclosed picture for the location
of new concrete band and the relationship to the existing brick paving to remain on the side
street.
14. Make sure that the placement of the Streetlights and Pedestrian lights are consistent/uniform.
The lighting plan has been reviewed by the electrical engineer to provide consistent and uniform
lighting level in respect to the traffic geometry, tree locations and the utility lines. A lighting
diagram is included to show the geometry of the street lights and pedestrian lights.
Also, the base of the streetlights and pedestrian lights has been removed to provide a cleaner and
simple design, as requested.
15. Reconsider another color for the Bike Corrals.
13PLN-00211 Page 3 of4
....
A warm toned color concrete in Sunset Rose Color by Davis Colors and in medium sandblast
finish is proposed for the Bike Corrals on the street. This color works within the proposed colors
of the site elements along the street.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Negative Declaration was
prepared for this project and was adopted by the City Council on November 29, 2011. The
Negative Declaration concluded that the project would' not result in any significant environmental
impacts. Litigation challenging the CEQA compliance was filed shortly thereafter and the Santa
Clara County Superior Court ruled in February 2012 that the City did comply with CEQA.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Conditions of Approval
B. ARB Staff Report, June 6, 2013
C. Project Plans (Board members only)
Prepared By: Shahla Yazdy, Transportation Engineer ~
Manager Review: Jaime Rodriguez, Chief Transportation Official
13PLN-00211 Page 4 of4
.' .
ATTACHMENT A
DRAFT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
California Avenue Streetscape Improvements / File No. 13PLN-00211
PLANNING & COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
The Architectural Review Board (June 6, 2013) recommended approval of the application
referenced above, and the Director of Planning and Community Environment (Director)
approved the project on date, 2013.
PLANNING DIVISION
1. The project shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plans and related
documents received May 15, 2013, except as modified to incorporate these conditions of
approval.
2. The Conditions of Approval document shall be printed on all plans submitted for building
permits related to this project.
3. Transportation staff will work collaboratively with other City departments to assure all
required standards are complied with for the implementation of the project.
4. The following items shall return to the ARB on Consent for review and approval:
a. Change IPE wood for proposed bench to something more sustainable.
b. Incorporate parking markers in design.
c. Change Bike Rack style. .
d. Consider placing newspaper racks on plaza.
e. Change paving pattern on plaza.
f. Consider laminar flow for the fountain.
g. Clarify green screen design/location.
h. Consider water bottle filling option for drinking fountain.
1. Use Silver Linden instead of Crape Myrtles.
J. Confirm that furniture will be secured.
k. Red striping along diagonal parking is confusing.
1. Review narrowing of road and potential conflict at El Camino Real/Bus
StoplDriveway and Bike Corral.
m. Review Transitions from Brick/concrete at sidewalk.
n. Make sure that the placement of the Streetlights and Pedestrian lights are
consistent/uniform.
o. Reconsider another color for the Bike Corrals.
5. All trees shall be maintained, watered, fertilized, and pruned according to Best
Management Practices-Pruning (ANSI A300-2001 or current version). Any vegetation that
dies shall be replaced or failed automatic irrigation repaired by the property owner within
30 days of discovery.
Page 1 of2
"
ATTACHMENT A
6. The project approval shall be valid for a period of one year from the original date of
approval. In the event abuilding permit(s), if applicable, is not secured for the project
within the time limit specified above, the ARB approval shall expire and be of no further
force or effect. Application for extension of this entitlement may be made prior to the one
year expiration.
Page 2 of2
f ,
C I TY OF
P LO
',A TO
Agenda Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
ATTACHMENT B
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report
June 6, 2013
Architectural Review Board
Shahla Y azdy, Transportation Engineer Department: Planning and
Community Environment
California Avenue Streetscape Improvements [13PLN-002111: Request
by City of Palo Alto Transportation Division for Architectural Review of
streetscape improvements to California Avenue, between El Camino Real
and the CalTrain Station, that include traffic calming treatments, landscape
elements with new street trees,' street furniture, new street lighting, parking
enhancements, and reduction to vehicle travel lanes from ' four to two lanes.
Environmental Review: A Negative Declaration was prepared in accordance
with CEQA guidelines and was adopted on November 29,2011.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) recommend the Director of
Planning and Community Environment approve the proposed project, based upon the required
findings (Attachment A) and subject to the conditions of approval (Attachment B).
BACKGROUND
The City initiated the California A venue Transit Hub Corridor Streetscape project in the Fall
2010. The RBFIDavid Gates & Associates consultant team prepared the project improvement
plans for the project. The project includes additional sidewalk widening treatments and street
and pedestrian scale lighting in response to Council's request for additional community
anlenities. A streetscape furniture · and landscape treatment palette has been developed for the
. project as part of the community outreach process.
Previous Review
The ARB previously reviewed the project plans at a Study Session on February 21, 2013. The
comments provided on the project focused on the following design concepts:
13PLN-00211 Page I of6
• Provide more consistency between all streetscape furniture;
• Provide a more low key central plaza pattern on the asphalt;
• Simplify the wall materials using brick, granite, concrete, etc;
• Provide consistency in the furniture in the plaza; and
• Make sure pedestrian lights are spaced such that lights are located at pedestrian crossings.
The updated concept plans have been. revised based upon input received from the ARB, the
community, including businesses along California Avenue, and City staff. The updated plans are
included as Attachment C and will also be presented at the ARB meeting for review. The
following.G:i-?cussion clarifies the modifications to the project in response to the previous ARB
comments.
DISCUSSION
California Avenue is in a fully developed urban setting, with intensive development extending on
both sides of California Avenue. The California Avenue Caltrain Station is located on the east
side of the project, with pedestrian, bicycle and train traffic creating a strong visual boundary that
would be reinforced by placement of a new fountain. On the west end of the . project at El
Camino Real, the placement of native grasses and granite rocks in the center median would
create another strong visual boundary which would be reinforced by El Camino Real. An
eclectic mix of sculptures within the center medians and poetry inscribed in the brick walkways
along California Avenue create a unique urban experience.
The currently proposed street alignment, shown in Attachment C was adopted by the City
Council in July 2011 and is designed to balance the sidewalk and streets cape opportunity areas
evenly throughout the corridor. The proposed mix of traditional and modem streetscape
elements, such as benches and seat walls, should help to stimulate pedestrian activity and support
retail activities. The landscape elements are intended to respond to community interest for a mix
of colorful treatments with a strong seasonal enlphasis in the Spring and Summer, while
maintaining a greener appearance during other seasons. The proposed streetscape palette also
includes new street light standards for the proposed lighting along California Avenue.
Furniture and Materials
Over the course of the outreach process, a range of viewpoints on site furnishings were heard
from the community. Participants at the community meetings were shown imagery of a variety
of furnishing styles and were asked to indicate their preferences. Some participants felt that the
street should have sleek and modem furnishings, to give it a more contemporary look and feel.
Others preferred a more traditional style of furnishings, which they felt was more consistent with
some of the existing brick and wood elements and the warnl IDubience of the space. The
proposed benches would provide a middle ground between the two styles, with simple, clean
lines, contemporary metal accents and the warmth and traditional aesthetic of wood. Seat pads in
either natural granite or a warm concrete provide additional seating options. Trash receptacles are
proposed to be a warm gray metal with simple lines and include both litter and recycling sections
in one unit. Newspapers would be consolidated in single racks with multiple compartments to
13PLN-00211 Page 2 of6
reduce clutter. The intent is for the furnishings to act as a unifying element that conveys a
polished style, yet establishes a friendly and approachable atmosphere.
To provide more consistency between all streetscape site furniture, each site furniture element
has been revisited, and the currently proposed families of site elements are simple, clean and
strong in form and color finishes, with a touch of history and a look to the future. The gray
metallic finish is a consistent theme color for all metal· parts of site furnishings (legs and arm
rests of wood benches, the light pole, trash receptacle, news rack units and pedestal, drinking
fountain and game table). The proposed wood bench, granite bollards, concrete seat walls, trash
receptacles, news racks, street light and pedestrian lights, and bike racks all have simple and
clean forms. The proposed wood benches to replace the existing, at the existing brick walls
provide a simple and contemporary look.
To simplify the wall materials (previously proposed as brick, granite, concrete, stone veneer,
etc.), the existing brick walls would be retained, and all new seat walls would have a
simple/clean concrete form. The granite seating boulders and the stone veneer have been
removed from the wall palette.
Pedestrian lights have also been located at either side of the pedestrian crossings to emphasize
the pedestrian scale bulb-out and to enhance the safety and lighting levels at the crossings.
Working with the community, the preferred option for the improved plaza at the east end of the
street was developed. The plaza's focal element would be a dramatic custom sculptural water
feature by artist Michael Szabo. A variety of spaces would be provided in the plaza with a range
of seating options, including seatwalls and benches, as well as game tables.
Landscaping and Trees
The design for the plaza retains the existing Pistache trees, and additional trees would be planted
in the area left by the removal of parking spaces that are part of the existing plaza. The Parks
Department has requested the removal of the most easterly Pistache tree as to prevent the leaves
from clogging the fountain drainage system. Transportation staff will continue to work with
Parks to make sure all of their concerns are addressed. The proposed plaza shrub palette is made
up of drought tolerant plants including Coast Rosemary, Phormium, Agave, Dwarf Mat Rush,
Small Cape Rush, Flax Lily and Flowering Carpet Rose.
The proposed street tree palette follows the street's existing pattern and the City's Street Tree
Plan. Additional Crape Myrtles would be provided for accent color and to provide visual interest.
Additional pots, with shrubs and blooming trees, would provide vitality, color and retail
excitement throughout the corridor. Between El Camino Real and Ash Street, proposed shrubs
include Meidiland Rose, Phormium, Dwarf Mat Rush, Hot Lips Sage, u and New Zealand Flax,
and Flax Lily. From Ash Street to Park Boulevard, proposed shrubs include Hot Lips Sage,
Mexican Sage, Phormium, New Zeala~d Flax, Fescue, Flax Lily, Agave, and Flowering Carpet
Rose.
13PLN-00211 Page 3 of6
Five existing street trees are proposed for removal due to the new streetscape improvement work.
The trees impacted are two (2) Valley Oak Trees, one (1) Southern Live Oak and two (2)
Shumard Oak Trees. All will be replaced with the same or similar species trees in 24" box size.
The locations of these trees are shown in the Project Planting Plans, Attachment C.
Flexibility for Central Public Plaza Space
A flexible plaza design element is included between Ash Street and Birch Street and further
defined in Attachment C. The flexible plaza space would use curbless transitions between
sidewalks and the street to provide accessible public plaza space for special event uses or
seasonal expansion of retail activities. Decorative stone bollards to protect the street from the
sidewalk zones would introduce an opportunity for unique streets cape furniture to both
functional as barriers and aesthetically pleasing for the community.
To provide a more low key central plaza paving pattern, the colored asphalt paving pattern at
Central Plaza has been. simplified with strong terra cotta color pavement bands -the horizontal
bands define the sharrow/travel lanes and the parking zone while the vertical bands set the tone
and create a feel for the plaza. The simple square granite blocks are proposed as bollards (visual
barrier) at flush curbs between the parking zone and the sidewalk on either side of the plaza.
Park Boulevard Plaza
The Park Boulevard Plaza design is highlighted in the Attachment C and include several
community-requested treatments:
• Centering and buffering access to public art and fountain elements within ·the plaza to
preserve views to the fountain as a focal element down California Avenue;
• Providing ample useable seating areas for special plaza events or regular patron use;
• Maintaining accessible bicycle access and parking adjacent to the California Avenue transit
station and underpass;
• Preserving an unobstructed view of the California Avenue streetscape and hills west of the
project areas; and
• Introducing lighting improvements to the plaza.
Community Involvement
To date, the City has sponsored six design-focused community outreach meetings focusing on the
alignment and on placement of streets cape furniture such as seat walls, bicycle parking facilities,
newsracks, trash/recycle bins, commercial loading zones, etc. In addition, four merchant-focused
meetings, including one day-long workshop at Mollie Stone's Market, were also held to get input
from the businesses in the area as to what they'd like to see on their block, as part of the project.
Staff has also met with the Business Association of California Avenue (BACA) on a monthly
basis to update the businesses on the latest project developments. Input from attendees at the
community meetings showed a general desire to implement sidewalk widening alternatives as
part of the California Avenue project along with other pedestrian-scaled improvements such as
lighting, and bulb-outs at intersections to reduce crosswalk lengths and introduce additional
13PLN-00211 Page 4 of6
planting opportunities. Attendees also expressed a strong interest in the design of the Park
Boulevard Plaza.
Department Review
Staff has circulated the project plans to Public Works Engineering and Operations, Urban
Forestry, Landscape Architect, Parks and Open Space and Utilities Departments for review and
comments. Most comments have been incorporated and are shown in the attached plans.
One issue that staff would like direction from the ARB on is regarding the selection of the
proposed Silver Linden trees along the south side of California Avenue, between Ash and Birch.
The project includes adding five (5) new Silver Linden trees to the widened sidewalk area along
California Avenue, between Ash and Birch, where the sidewalk would be widened by an
additional 10ft. The trees would match the exiting trees that are currently on California Avenue
and would create a unifying visual corridor as the backbone of the streetscape design. The
proposed trees on the widened sidewalk would create a visual symmetry to the exiting Linden
trees on the north side of the block of California Avenue. -The overall effect 'will be, simple, clean
and strong. The nice form and vibrant green leaf color will provide a cohesive and distinct
corridor for vehicular speeds. The yellow white flowers, in drooping clusters, would provide
more delicate interest to the sidewalk users walking under the branches. These characteristics
make it a good tree for both auto and pedestrian users. The tree is tall when planted and fast
growing, providing shade quickly for cars parked along the street. Given their height, they will
not interfere with opening doors when entering and exiting the vehicle. From a maintenance
perspective, the tree is relatively clean with small leaves that will not clog drains and it is
relatIvely drought tolerant. In the long term, once the trees grow taller, the lower branches can be
trimmed to create nice overhead canopy for strolling the street in the shade, and maintains views
to storefronts. In addition, the area merchants have expressed that shading is important, as they
would like to utilize the widened sidewalks for outdoor seating and dining purposes, and the
shade provided by the Linden trees would provide a comfortable atmosphere as patrons enjoy
sitting on the proposed seat pads.
During the City department review, the Public Works Engineering Landscape Architect
suggested Crepe Myrtles as the second row of trees, instead of the proposed Silver Linden, on
California Avenue. The reason for this recommendation is because of the large scale nature of
the Linden Trees, and especially with the existing Linden Trees that are on this block, a smaller
scale tree, Crepe Myrtle, was suggested.
The ARB is requested to provide direction on the preferred tree selection.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will finalize the construction plans through June 2013 and will return to the Planning and
Transportation Commission and Council in late Summer 2013 to award the project for bids. The
City anticipates advertising the project for competitive bids in the Summer 2013 with
construction beginning in the Fall 2013.
13PLN-00211 Page 5 of6
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Negative Declaration was
prepared for this project and was adopted by the City Council on November 29, 2011. The
Negative Declaration concluded that the project would not result in any significant environmental
impacts. Litigation challenging the CEQA compliance was filed shortly thereafter and the Santa
Clara County Superior Court ruled in February 2012 that the City did comply with CEQA.
ATTACHMENTS
A. ARB Findings for Approval
B. Conditions of Approval
C. Project Plans
Prepared By: Shahla Yazdy, Transportation Engineer
Manager Review: Jaime Rodriguez, Chief Transportation Official
13PLN-00211 Page 6 of6
@. w
C I TY OF Architectural Review Board P 0
A
Agenda Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
June 20, 2013
Architectural Review Board
Margaret Netto, Contract Planner
Staff Report
Department: Planning and
Community Environment
911 Hansen Way [12PLN-00474]: Request by Hoover Associates on behalf of
Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees for Architectural Review of a
new 5,672 square foot, one-story addition to an existing 143,142 square foot
manufacturing building for Varian (and demolition of a 1,941 s.f. building) on a
1 J. 7 acre lot. Environmental Assessment: A draft InitiGll Study and Negative
Declaration has been prepared and the public review period is May 24, 2013 to
June 24, 2013. Zone District: Research Park (RP)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff has placed this itenl on consent calendar due to the minor amount of additional floor area
requested. Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) recommend approval of the
proposed project based upon the Architectural Review findings contained in Attachment A and
subj ect to the conditions of approval contained in Attachment B.
BACKGROUND
Site Information
The project site is located on the south side of Hansen Way on the Varian Medical Systems Inc.
campus. The 13.7 acre property serves as the corporate headquarters for Varian Medical Systems.
The site is occupied by a series of six, two-story buildings, each supported by surface on-site
parking facilities. The floor area within the six buildings totals 463,567 square feet. There are
1,296 parking spaces on the site and access to the site is from Hansen Way. The site also contains
landscaping, including nunlerous regulated trees.
The site is surrounded by office uses. The . nearest residential land uses are located approximately
1,250 feet west of the project site. All the properties immediately adjacent to the subject site and
across Hansen Way are designated Research/Office Park on both the Comprehensive Plan Land
Use and Circulation Map and the Zoning Map.
12PLN -004 7 4 Page 1 of3
Project Description
The proposed project is construction of a single-story 5,672 square foot addition to an existing
143,142 square foot manufacturing building, including three test cells and a console test
equipment area. The project includes demolition of an approximately 1,941 s.f. portion of an
existing building to allow construction of new test cell areas. The proposed addition will be used
for testing nledical radiation treatment equipment and will not increase the occupancy load of the
building. The net additional floor area is approximately 3,731 square feet.
These cells are concrete bunkers for testing medical devices before shipping for installation in
health care facilities around the world. The machines are regulated under the US Food and Drug
Administration (FDA). The three new cells will match the design of six prior cells constructed in
the same industrial area. The addition will be located toward the rear of the building and will be
partially hidden behind existing screen walls. Parapets, roof screen, materials and finishes will
match the existing building.
DISCUSSION
Comprehensive Plan Conformance
The proposed addition is consistent with the Research/Office Park land use designation.
Attachment D provides a list of applicable policies for this project.
Zoning Compliance
The proj ect is in compliance with applicable Research Park zone district and parking regulations.
The proposed height to the top of the roof plate is 22.11" feet with a 2-6" metal panel to match the
existing building. The maximum building height limit in the RP zone district is 35 feet.
Building Design, Materials and Lighting
The addition will match the existing metal panels with tex -cote finish over concrete. The addition
will match the existing colors (Kelly-Moore Della Creme) for the metal railing, siding, doors, and
hollow metal frames. Decorative wall mount lighting is proposed to match the existing lighting
(Attachment E-Lighting Detail).
Parking
The addition to the existing building would not result inadequate parking capacity for the area.
The existing site provides 1,296 parking spaces. The proposed project is three new test cells
which would not increase the occupancy load of the existing building. Therefore, the project
would not result in inadequate parking.
Trees and Landscaping
The project site has a research and development campus-style setting. The proposed· location of
the addition is an existing utility/equipment yard and no existing trees will be impacted. The
applicant has submitted a Special Tree Protection Plan.
Green Building
The applicant will need to conlplete the NR-3 application for compliance with the City's Green
Building Ordinance.
12PLN-00474 Page 2 of3
Public Feedback
During review of this project, all addresses within 600 feet of the subject sites boundaries were
notified.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Initial Study (IS), pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), was
prepared for the proposal. Based upon the IS, it was determined that the project would not have a
significant adverse impact on the environment. The IS' was available for public review beginning
May 24,2012 and the review period ends June 24, 2013. As of the preparation of this staff report,
no comments have been received. Comments received through June 24,2013 will be considered
by the Director of Planning and Community Environment prior to rendering a decision on the
ARB application.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C: -
Attachment D:
Attachment E:
Attachment F:
Attachment G:
Attachment H:
Attachment I:
Attachment J:
Attachment K:
Attachment L:
Findings for Approval
Conditions of Approval
Applicant's Project Description
Location Map
Lighting Detail
Zoning Compliance Table
Comprehensive Plan Table
Existing Photos
Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration
Mitigation Measure Agreement
AEI Consultants -Environmental & Engineering Services
Project Plans (Board Members Only)
COURTESY COPIES
Richard Campbell, Hoover Associates; rbcarch@aol.com
Prepared By: Margaret Netto, Contract Planner
Approved By: Amy French, AICP, Chief Planning Official
12PLN-00474 Page 3 of3
ATTACHMENT A
DRAFT FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
911 Hansen Way
13PLN--00474
The design and architecture of the proposed improvements, as conditioned, complies with
the Findings for Architectural Review as required in Chapter 18.76 of the PAMC.
(1) The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the City's
Comprehensive Plan in that the site is designated Research/Office Park and the
Comprehensive Plan Table (Attachnlent G) indicate compliance with all applicable
policies;
(2) The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site in that the
project is an addition to an existing manufacturing building within the Stanford,
Research Park;
(3) The design is appropriate to the function of the project in that the design is an
addition to an existing manufacturing building designed to meet green building
design standards and will not increase the occupancy load of the building. Parapets,
roof screen, materials and finishes will match the existing building:
(4) The proposal is an addition to an existing building in the ,Stanford Research
Park designed to be an environmentally conscious design like many of the
recent buildings added to the research park;
(5) The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between
different designated land uses. The proposed project is located along Hansen Way
and is only adjacent to other research park buildings but has been designed
consistent with existingmanufacturing'buildings within Varian Medical systems;
(6) The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site in
that the proposed project will be located toward the rear of the building and will be
partially hidden behind existing screen walls. Parapets, roof screen, materials and
, finishes will match the existing building;
(7) The planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an
internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors
and the general community in that the proposed project is an addition to an existing
manufacturing building on a site that has remained essentially the same since its
initial construction 50 years prior;
(8) No new landscaping is provided with the addition;
(9) Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the
project in that the proposal includes testing medical radiation treatment equipment
and will not increase the occupancy load of the building. The addition will be
located toward the rear of the building and will be partially hidden behind existing
screen walls;
(10) Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for
pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles the proposal does not include any new
improvements since the project is an addition to an existing manufacturing building;
(11) Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project in that
the existing healthy trees will be retained;
(12) The materials, textures, colors and details of construction are appropriate
expressions of the design and function in that the proposed design matches the
existing building;
(13) No new landscaping is proposed with the additiori;
(14) No new landscaping is proposed with the addition;
(15) The project exhibits green building and sustainable design that is energy efficient,
water conserving, durable and nontoxic, with high-quality spaces and high recycled
content materials.
(16) The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose of architectural review,
which is to:
(1) Promote orderly and harmonious development in the city;
(2) Enhance the desirability of residence or investment in the city;
(3) Encourage the attainment of the most desirable use of land and
improvements;
(4) Enhance the desirability of living conditions upon the immediate site or in
adjacent areas; and
(5) Promote visual environments which are of high aesthetic quality and variety
and which, at the same time, are considerate of each other.
The design is consistent for all of the reasons and findings enumerated above.
ATTACHMENT B
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
911 Hansen Way
12PLN-000474
PLANNING & COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
Planning Division
1. The plans submitted for Building Permit shall be in substantial conformance with
plans date stamped March 21, 2013 except as modified to incorporate these
conditions of approval.
2. The ARB approval letter including all Department conditions of approval for the
project shall be printed on the plans submitted for building permit.
3. The proposed project shall comply with the requirements of the Palo Alto Green
Building Ordinance prior to submittal for building permit.
4. The project is subject to compliance with the City of Palo Alto's Noise Ordinance
(P AMC 9.10). In addition, construction hours shall be established as per the
construction management plan to minimize disturbance to surrounding residents,
visitors, and businesses.
5. If groundwater is brought to the surface, it will properly be handled (including
any analytical testing) in accordance with all applicable regulations. During
excavation, if chemical odors are detected or if any staining of soil is observed,
the excavation work will be investigated.
Air Quality Conditions During Construction
6. Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during
windy periods.
7. All trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard and all hauling trucks to be
covered pursuant to governing agency requirements. Dust-proof chutes shall be
used as appropriate to load debris onto trucks during demolition.
8. Pave, apply water at least twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all
unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas.
9. Sweep as necessary (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas,
and staging areas and sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil
material is deposited onto adjacent roads.
10. Hydro seed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive constructions areas.
11. Enclose, cover water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed
stockpiles.
12. Limit traffic speeds on any unpaved roads to 15 mph.
13. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
14. Suspend construction activities that cause visible dust plumes to extend beyond
the construction site.
15. During construction, the project would generate localized emissions of diesel
exhaust during equipment operation and truck activity. The project site is not
affected by existing odor sources that would cause odor complaints from new
users of the proj ect.
Green House Gas Conditions During Construction
16. All exposed surfaces (e.g. parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas,
and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
17. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be
covered.
18. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed
using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry
power sweeping is prohibited.
19. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon
as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless
seeding or soil binders are used.
20. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting off warn not in use or reducing
the maximum idling times to 5 minutes (as required by the California Code if
Regulations *CCR). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at
all access points.
21. All constructions equipment shall be maintained and property tuned in accordance
with manufactures specification. All equipment shall be checked by a certified
mechanic and detemlined to be running in proper construction prior to operation.
22. Post a publicly visible sign with a telephone number and person to contact at the
Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take
corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be
visible to ensure compliance.
Building Division
23. Show compliance to California Title 24 Accessibility for existing buildings,
California Building Code, CBC sections 1134B, 1134B.2 & 1134B2.2 for the
following areas: the accessible parking and the primary path of travel to the
proposed building site.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Engineering Division
Include in plans submitted for a building permit:
24. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN: The plan set must include a grading &
drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional that includes existing and
proposed spot elevations and drainage flow arrows to demonstrate proper
drainage of the site. Adjacent grades must slope away from the building a
minimum of 2%. Downspouts and splashblocks should be shown on this plan, as
well as any site drainage features such as swales and area drains. Grading will not
be allowed that increases drainage onto, or blocks existing drainage from,
neighboring properties. Public Works generally does not allow rainwater to be
collected and discharged into the street gutter, but encourages the developer to
keep rainwater onsite as much as feasible by directing runoff to landscape and
other pervious areas of the site.
25. GRADING PERMIT: The site plan must include a table providing the cubic
yardage of dirt being cut and filled outside of the building footprint. If the total is
more than 100 cubic yards, a grading permit will be required. An application and
plans for a grading permit are submitted to Public Works separately from the
building permit plan set. The. application and guidelines are available at the
Development Center and on our website.
26. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: The City's full-sized "Pollution
Prevention -It's Part of the Plan" sheet must be included in the plan set. Copies
are available from Public Works at the Development Center or on our website.
27. SWPPP: The proposed development will disturb more than one acre of land.
Accordingly, the applicant will be required to comply with the State of
California's General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with
Construction Activity. This entails filing a Notice of Intent to Comply (NOI),
paying a filing fee, and preparing and implementing a site specific storm water
pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) that addresses both construction-stage and
post-construction BMP's for storm water quality protection. The applicant is
required to submit two copies of the NOI and the draft SWPPP to the Public
Works Department for review and approval prior to issuance of the building
permit. Also, include the City's standard "Pollution Prevention -It's Part of the
Plan" sheet in the building permit plan set. Copies are available from Public
Works at the Development Center.
28. IMPERVIOUS SlTRF ACE AREA: The project will be creating or replacing 500
square feet or more of impervious surface. Accordingly, the applicant shall
provide calculations of the existing and proposed impervious surface areas with
the building permit application. The Impervious Area Worksheet for Land
Developments form and instructions are available at the Development Center or
on our website.
Water Quality Control Plant
29. Construction Dewatering in area of known contamination: PAMC 16.09.117,
16.09.110(h): If the project is located in an area of known groundwater
contamination with Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) then the plans must
include the following procedure for construction dewatering: Prior to discharge of
any water from construction dewatering, the water shall be tested for volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) using EPA Method 601/602. The analytical results of
the VOC testing shall be transmitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Plant
(RWQCP). If the concentration of any VOC exceeds 5 ug/L (5 ppb), the water
may not be discharged to the storm drain system and an Exceptional Discharge
Permit for discharge to the sanitary sewer must be obtained from the RWQCP
prior to discharge. If the VOC concentrations exceed the toxic organics discharge
limits contained in the Palo Alto Municipal Code, a treatment system for removal
of VOCs will also be required prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer.
Additionally, any water discharged to the storm drain system must be free of
sediment.
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
Electrical
GENERAL
30. The applicant shall comply with all the Electric Utility Engineering Department
service requirements noted during plan review.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF DEMOLITION PERMIT
31. The Permittee shall be responsible for identification and location of all utilities,
both public and private, within the work area. Prior to any excavation work at the
site, the Permittee shall contact Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-
2600, at least 48 hours prior to beginning work.
32. The Applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all existing utility services
and/or meters including a signed affidavit of vacancy, on the form provided by the
Building Inspection Division. Utilities will be disconnected or removed within 10
working days after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued after
all utility services and/or meters have been disconnected and removed.
THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE INCORPORATED IN SUBMITTALS FOR
BUILDING PERMIT
33. A completed Electric Load Sheet and a full set of plans must be included with all
building permit applications involving electrical work. The load sheet must be
included with the preliminary submittal.
34. Applicant to confirm that new facility will be served from customer's padmount
transformer and that a new utility service is not being requested. If a new service
is being requested in addition to the existing service, Utilities Engineering will
provide additional comments and requirements.
35. Only one electric service lateral is permitted per parcel. Utilities Rule &
Regulation #18.
36. The developer/owner shall provide space for installing padmount equipment (i.e
transformers, switches, and interrupters) and associated substructure as required
by the City.
37. The customer shall install all electrical substructures (conduits, boxes and pads)
required from the service point to the customer's switchgear. The design and
installation shall be according to the City standards and shown on plans. Utilities
Rule and Regulations #16 and #18.
38. Location of the. padmount equipment shall be shown on the site plan and
approved by the Planning Department and Utilities Department.
39. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, and any other required
equipment shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show
that no conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials. In
addition, all aboveground equipment shall be screened in a manner that is
consistent with the building design and setback requirements.
40. For services larger than 1600 amps, the -customer will be required to provide a
transition cabinet as the interconnection point between the utilities and the
landscape materials. In addition, all aboveground equipment shall be screened in a
manner that is consistent with the building design and setback requirements.
41. For underground services, no more than four (4) 750 MCM conductors per phase
boxes.
50. All new underground conduits and· substructures shall be installed per City
standards and shall be' inspected by the Electrical Underground Inspector before
backfilling.
51. The customer is responsible for installing all underground electric service
conductors, bus duct, transition cabinets, and other required equipment. The
installation shall meet the National Electric Code and the City standards.
52. Meter and switchboard requirements shall be in accordance with Electric Utility
Service Equipment Requirements Committee (EUREC) drawings accepted by
Utility and CPA standards for meter installations.
53. Shop/factory drawings for switchboard (400A and greater) and associated
hardware must be submitted for review and approval prior to installing the
switchgear to:
Gopal J agannath, PE
Supervising Electric Project Engineer
Utilities Engineering (Electrical)
1007 Elwell Court
Palo Alto, CA 94303
54. Catalog cut sheets may not be substituted for factory drawing submittal.
55. All new undergrolmd electric services shall be inspected and be inspected and
approved by both the Building Inspections Division and the Electrical
Underground Inspector before energizing.
After construction and prior to Finalization
56. The customer shall provide as-built drawings showing the location of all
switchboards, conduits (nuITlber and size), conductors (number and size), splice
boxes, vaults and switch/transformer pads.
Prior to issuance of Building Occupancy
57. The applicant shall secure a Public Utilities Easement for facilities installed on
private property for City use. .
58. All required inspections have been completed and approved by both the Building
Inspection Division and the Electrical Engineering Inspector.
59. All fees must be paid.
ATIACHIVIENT C
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project is a 4,734 square foot single story addition to an existing manufacturing
facility, including three test 'cells and a console test equipment area. The project includes
demolition of a portion of an existing building to allow space for the new addition The
new addition will be used for testing of medical radiation treatment equipment and will
not increase the occupant load of the building. The addition will be partially hidden
behind existing screen walls. Parapets and a roof screen matching existing construction
will conceal mechanical equipment on the roof of the addition. Materials and finishes
will match the existing adjacent test cells.
VARiAN
medical av-tems
ADDITION TO BUILDING 3, TEST CELLS 15, 16,.21
911 HANSEN WAY
PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA
\ .
Hoover Associates Architects
1900 Embarcadero Road Suite 200
Palo Alto, CA 94303
The City of
Palo Alto
ATIACHIVIENT D
911 Hansen Way
Location Map
This map is a product of the
City of Palo Alto GIS
-. 0'
Tr,i&>:!:la;m;disa~~gtlal ~ , TheC;tydPibA~,,;os;rnes"t" •• I"J'&iWitybay!!m.®!iIIl9\:)ZJl3Cif¥!>IpaoA\\:) I,
\
,~ LfTHDNIA L'OHT/Nom --
FEATU RES & SPECI FICATIONS
INTENDED USE-For bullding-and wall-mounted applications.
(ONSTRU(T10N -Rugged, dle-cast,slngle-piecl! aluminum housing. DIe-cast door frame has a 1/8"thick
tempered glass lens. Door frame is fully gasketed with one-piece soUd silicone.
OPTICS -Segmented reflectors for superior uniformity and (onlrol. Reflectors are interchangeable. Three
full Moff distributions available: FT (forward throw), MD (medium throw) and WT (wide throw).
ELECTRICAL -Ballast SOW-1 SOW utilizes a high reactance, high power factor ballast. Metal halide 150W
and below are standard with pulse-starttechnology. 35S utilizes a readarn:e high powerfactorbaltast.175W
utilizes a constant-wattage autotransformer ballast. CSA, NOM orlHTL required for probe start shipments
outside ofthe US ror 175M. Not avaRable 175M S(WA. Ceraml( metal halide lamps are recommended for
use In appHcalions where superior color rendition, lumen maintenance and longer lamp life are desired.
Quick disconnect plug easi~ ~Isconnects reflector from ballast. Ballasts are 100% factory-tested.
S{)cketPorcelain, medium-base socket with-copper alloy, nickel-plated screw shell and (enter (ontact Ul
listed 660W, 600V 4KV pulse rated.
frnlsh: Standard finish Is textured dark brollze (DDRT) (orrosioll-reslstant.polyesterpowderfinlsh.Additional
architectural colors are available. Striping Is also available.
INSTALLATION -Universal mounting mechanism with Integral mounting support allows fixture to hinge
down. Bubble level provides correct alignment with each Installation.
LISTINGS -UL L~ted ~tandard). (SACertlfied (see Options). SUltableforwet IDcations (damp location lI~ed
m lens-up orientation). WLU option offers wet locatlon listing In up orientation (see Options), W6S rated. 25"C
ambient ELED: U.s. Patent No. 7,737,640. ~'"
WARRANTY -1-year limited warranty. Complete warranty terms located at ,.,. ~
www.acuitybrands comlCusloooResouKI's/Terms and [ondltjol!1.aSJ)x NIGHTTIME
Note: Spedfications subject to change without noti(e. FRiENDlY
Consiste/lt with lEED' goals & Green Globes" ailer;'
to, ~hI pGlIution redudoft
ATIACHMENT E
catalog WEST-100-FT-277-SF"PE-CSA"LPI Number
Notes
Type
.. --.... ~.-
Specifications
Length: 16-114(41.2)
Depth: 9-1/8 (23.2)
Overall Height: 7-114 (18.4)
*Welght: 30 Ills (13.6 kg)
Decorative Wall-Mounted Lighting
WST
METAL HALIDE: 50W-17SW
HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM: 35W-150W
I . I*~
~16-1/4_1 L9-1/8 I ~ (41.2) ----, I" (231) ,
AI! dime~on~ are Inches (cenUm~tffi) unle>sotherwi5e Indicated.
·Wrlght ,JS(OhtigUred in e~mple below.
For shortest lead times, (shown In bold).
WST
-~~trW~::: ::~~~ .
WST liig/t
ELED
2ELED
DFL
EC
IRS
PE
pressure ~
355'
50S
70S
100S
1505
Emergency lED sflondary source batteryfack with lime delay (-4°F min. operating temperature)1
Emergency lED secondary source (two modules) battery
pack with time delay (-{OF min. operating temperatureJlo
Diffusing lens
Emergency dr(ultll• 11
Intemal baddightshleldll
Photoelectric cell-button type (n/a TB}l4.
OlJlUOOR
QRS Quartz restrike systemll•1S
WLU Wet location door for up
orientation
(SA (SA certified
NOM NOM certlfielf
INTl Intemallonal shipment fur 175M
Sbll!l!ed seI!11[~1rlX14
WG Wire guard
VG Vandal guard
(blank)
DSST
DNAT
DWHG
DBLO
CRT
&nergenq circuit 12-volt (35W lamp Induded)9
Emergenq circuil12-volt (two 3SW lamps mcluded)9
Emergency drcuit 12-volt (20W lamp InciudedP
Emergency drcult 12-volt (two 20W lamps
induded)9
Dark bronze, textured LPI lamp Included
Sandstone, textured lAP Less lamp
Natural aluminum, textured
White, textured
Black, textured
Non-stkk protective coatln~ 11
Su~eT Durable Finishes
OOBXD Dark bronze
DBlXD Black
DNAXD-Natural aluminum
DWHXO White
DDBTXD Textured dark bronze
DULBXD Textured black
DNATXD Textured natural aluminum
DWHGXO TeJrtured w~lte
WST Metal Halide, High Pressure Sodium Wall Mounted
WST 150MHC FT lTL11069P
ISOIlLUMINANCE PLOT (Footcandla)
~
,"",'" ~~
\ (\ , ,
~ ,,21-I ~ J
j
~ !:---v"· ~ .25
o 2 4 6
-2 ~ (!t
-1 iii ::c
G o~ 5 1~ u. o
2~ z :l 3~
~ 4~
til C
5
150W pulse start melal halide lamp, horizontal
lamp orientation Footcandla values based on
12' mounllng height, 14000 rated lumens.
Luminaire Efticlancy: 52.9%
Lamp Initial lumens
Metal Halide 10'
SOWMH 3,900 0.43
70WMH 5,500 0.62
100WMH 8,500 0.95
150WMH 12,500 1.41
17SWMH 12,800 1.44
High Pressure Sodium
35WHPS 1,250 0.26
SOWHPS ·4000 0.45
70WHPS 6,400 0.72
100WHPS 9,500 1.07
lS0WHPS 16,000 1.80
Lamp options
WST 150MHC MD LTL11068P
ISOILLUMINANCE PLOT (Foolcandle)
~ ·2 ~
~ ~~ , ~.
~.
~ v//
~~
-1 iij ::c
C> o~ z ~ 1~ u. 0
2~ Z :J
3~ w 0 4~ ~ 0
5 o 2 4 5 6
150W pulse start metal halide lamp, horizontal
lamp orientation FOdtcandl& values based on
12' mounting height, 12500 rated lumens.
Lumlnaire Efficiency: 60.2%
Mountln9 height
12' 14' 16'
0.30 0.22 0.17
0.43 0,31 014
0.66 0,48 OJ7
0.98 0.72 0.55
1.0 0.73 0.56-
0.18 0.13 0.10
OJ1 0.23 0.17
0.50 0.37 0:28
0.74 0.54 0.41
1.25 0.91 0.70
" of lamp~wattage De12 2D(12 DC2012 2DC2012 EC ELED 2ELED
355 • • • • • • • 50S • • • • • • • 70S • • • • • • • 100S • • • • • 150S • • • • • SOM • • • • • • • 70M II! • ,. • • • • 100M • • • • • • • 150M • • • • • 175M • • • • •
,~ ~/THDJV.lA L/GHnNG® -An~cultvBrandsCompanv
WST 150MHC WT LTL 11070P
ISOILLUMINANCE PLOT (Footcandfe)
-2 I-::c C> -1 in ::c
C> o~
1~ u. 0
2~ Z :J
3~ IJ.I 0 4~ II) 15
5 o 2 3 4 5 6
150W pulse start metal halide lamp. horfzontal
lamp orientation Footcandle values based on
12' mounting height. 14000 rated lumens.
Lumlnaire Efficiency: 62.5%
rtotes
1 120V.
2 fllesewallages do not comply wllh California mle20 regulaUDIl5.
Mml spedfy CWI fom!! In Callilda.
Op~onal mUIll-tap !lillas! (120, 2ll8, 240, 277V~ (120, 717. mv ...
Canada; ships as 120V/347V).
5 ConsultfactoryforavaRabl~wattages.
1\va1lable wRh lSOMor lSOMHC.onl~.
May 00 ordere4 as ~n aamory WIth prefix"WS~ Must spedly nolsh.
B tIotavallablewlt.llCoplJam.
9 Not available with ELED, SF, DF. EC or QRS.
10 MalcImumwattage 100M. 105. MIMspccify 120Vor277V.
Not iYalla'le wUh QRS. EC or DC.
1l MaxImum alowable wattage IiImp Included.
12 NatavaDabie witb ELED, QRS or DCs.
13 Nohvailablt wilh medium tl1IOW tMD. MDIJ, MDUS) ~!fIbutlons.
14 'Must be ordered wIth fiXlul'1!; (anaot be Iic!ld lilslaned.
15 Hotavailablewllh Ell!>. lCorDU.
16 See wl'M.lithonia.a1lll/artll(()lo~ for adll'illonal (oia options.
17 8I'1(k finish only.
18 Mllst be 5ped~cd. Ul.P nol iWolllabl~wlth MHC.
OUTDOOR: One lithonia Way Conyers, GA· 30012 PhORO: 170.922.9000 fax: nO-918-U09 WM\',liUlOniacDm :m003-2012 Acuity Brands Ligntlng, Inc. All rights reserved. ~. 12ll1n2
ATTACHMENT F
ZONING COMPLIANCE TABLE
911 Hansen Way
12PLN-00474
Table 1: CONFORMANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.20 (RP DISTRICT)
Regulation Required Existing Proposed Conforms?
Site Addition
Min. Lot 43,560 s.f. 596,772 s.f. 4,734 Confonns
Size
Min. Site 100 ft. h"R ft. NA Existing
Width
Min. Site 150 ft. 1685 ft INA Existing
Depth
Min. Side 20 ft. I ??ft >85 ft Confonns
Setback ". / " .J
Max. Floor 514,217 s.f! 472,744 s.f. 476,475 s.f. Confonns
Area Ratio (using 0.4:1
based on total
Varian site
29.5 acres)
Max. Lot 30% (190,008 152,773 s.f. 154,563 s.f. Confonns
Coverage s.f.)
Max. 35ft+15ft NA 22' -11" Confonns
Building of mechanical
Height screeningl
1 Section 18.20.040(e) allows some flexibility in the maximum floor area and building height for spaces between
floors and on rooftops or in basements that are used only for mechanical equipment as long as the building has no
more than two habitable floors, the total of any such excluded areas does not exceed one-third of the building
footprint area, and rooftop equipment do not extend above a height of fifteen (15) feet above the roof.
ATTACHMENT G
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TABLE
911 Hansen Way
12PLN -0004 7 4
It has been determined that the project is in conformance with the following policies of the 2010
Comprehensive Plan:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY
Policy L-5: Maintain the scale and character of
the City. Avoid land uses that are overwhelming
and unacceptable due to their size and scale.
Policy L-42: Encourage Employment Districts
to develop in a way that encourages transit,
pedestrian and bicycle travel and reduces the
number of auto trips for daily errands.
Policy L-44: Develop the Stanford Research
Park as a compact employment center served by
a variety of transportation modes.
Policy L-48: Promote high quality, creative
design and site planning that is compatible with
surrounding development and public spaces.
Policy L-76: Require trees and other
landscaping with in parking lots.
CONSISTENCY REVIEW
The proposed project is construction of a
single-story 4,734 square foot addition to an
existing 143,142 square foot manufacturing
building including three test cells and a
console test equipment area. The project
includes demolition of a portion of an
. existing building to allow construction of
new test cell areas. The addition will be
located toward the rear of the building and
will be partially hidden behind existing
screen walls. Parapets, roof screen,
materials and finishes will match the
existing building.
The proposed addition will be used for
testing medical radiation treatment
; equipment and will not increase the
occupancy load of the building.
The proposed addition will be used for
testing medical radiation treatment
equipment and will not increase the
occupancy load of the building. A variety of
transportation modes will continue to be
utilized.
The proposed addition would be compatible
with the adjacent development. The
proposed design will matching the existing
building.
The proposal does not include any new
landscaping. Notrees will be removed
Note: This list is not exhaustIve. Additional policies/programs may be added to thIS table for
subsequent review and comment by the ARB and the public.
.,
•
SQ(WEInISSOCIAIFS
=PJOi'j(j][jQ
___ Interiors
fQOO~Rood
~~
Pete AItQ. CoOfomIo 94303
@3277g
Fox06O..l91 .24~Jl
VAR t AN
medical sys tems
Building 3 New Test Cells
15.16&21
2IO:lonSAi5"WOV
palo Alto (:A
11Zm
"":;-____ i1.15.12
.!'JA
G O.1
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building)
ATIACHMENTI
-
911
Hansen Way
Varian Building
Initial Study
DRAFT
Prepared by
City of Palo Alto
May 15, 2013
Page 1 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
City of Palo. Alto
Department of Planning and Community Environment
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. PROJECT TITLE
Varian Medical Building
Building 3
911 Hansen Way
Palo Alto~ California 94304
2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Palo Alto .
Department of Planning and Community Environment
250 Hamilton Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94303
3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER
Margaret Netto, Contract Planner
City of Palo Alto
650-796-5828
margaret.netto@cityofpaloalto.org .
4. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS
Richard B. Campbell
1900 Embarcadero Road; Suite 200 .
Palo Alto, CA 94303
5. APPLICATION NUMBER
12PLN-000474
6. PROJECT LOCATION
911 Hansen Way
Palo Alto, CA
Parcel Number: 142-20-093
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 2 I nitial" Study/Negative Declaration
The CIty of
Palo Alto
911 Hansen Way
Location Map -. o· ta1"
The project site is ill the northern .section of the City of Palo Alto, in the northern pru1 of Santa
Clara COlmty, west of U.S. Highway 101 and west of State Route 82 (EI Crunino Real), at the
south side of Hansen Way in the Val'iati Medical Systems Inc. Corporate Headquarters as shown
on Figure 1, Vicinity Map and Figure 2 Site Map. The larger subject property parcels total
approximately 13.7 acres and the property serves as the corporate headquarters for Varian
Medical Systems. The site is occupied by a series of six, two-story buildings each with surface
on-site parking facilities near each building. The relnainder of the site' consists of landscaping,
including nUlnerous 'regulated trees and on-site parking ..
The existing corporate headquarters is comprised of six buildings totaling 463,567 square feet of
floor are,a. There are 1,296 on-site parking spaces. Access to the site is from Hansen Way.
7. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
The land use designation of the proj ect site at 911 Hansen Way is 'Research/Office Park' in the
City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. This designation is intended for office, research and
manufGCcturing establishments whose operations would be buffered from adjacent residential
uses. Maximum ailowable floor area ratios can range from 0.3-0.5, depending on site conditions.
8. ZONING
The site is zoned RP (Research Park). The RP district provides for a limited group of research
and mal1ufacturing uses that may have unusual requirenlents with respect to space, light and air
that are more suitable in a research park environment. Premium research and development
facilities are encouraged in the RP zone district. Supporting office uses are limited and exist
primarily to gerve the primary research ruld manufacturing uses. The RP zone district is intended
for application to land designated for research and office park use in the Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan on sites that are west of EI Camino Real and held in large parcels, which
mayor nlay not be subject to ground leases. The proposed building addition to an existing
research and developlnent facility is consistent with the RP zone.
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is construction of a single-story 4,734 square foot addition to an existing
143,142 square foot manufacturing building. including'three test cells' and a console 'test
equipment area. The project includes demolition of a portion of an existing building to allow
construction of new test cell areas. The proposed addition will be llsed for testing medical
radiation treatment equiplnent and will not increase the occupancy load of the building. The
addition will be located toward the rear of the building and will be partially hidden behind
existing screen walls. Parapets, roof screen, materials and finishes will Inatch the existing
building.
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) . Page 3 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
10. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING
911 Hansen Way is located south of the intersection of Hansen Way and Page Mill Road in the
Stanford Research Park. The Research Park is the location of corporate headquarters and R&D
facilities for several pl'onlinent and international cOlnpanies. The site is surrounded by office
uses. The nearest residential land uses are located approxilnately 1,250 feet west of the project
she. .
11. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES
• County of Santa Clara, Office of the County Clerk-Recorder
• County of Santa Clara, Environmental Health Department.
• Santa. Clara Valley Water District
• Regional Water Quality Control Board
• Department of Toxic Substances Control
• State Clearinghouse
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 4 Initial Study/Negative. Declaration
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by
the informatiol1 sources a .lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. [A "No Ilnpact"
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does
not apply to projects like the one involved (e. g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No
Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general
standards (e. g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on n project-specific
screening analysis).]
2) All answers must take accolint oftlle wh9le action involved, including off-site as welJ as on-site, cumulative
as well as project-level~ indir~t as well as direct, and cOl1stmction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers
must indicate whether ~he impact is potentially significant, less than signjficant with mitigation, or less than
significant. Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be
significant. If tbere are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination 'is made!,
an EIR is required.
4) '~(Mitigated) Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from ·"Potenti~ny Significant Impact" to a "Less
than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how
they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Sect,ion 17, "Earlier
Analysis," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to· the tiering program ElR, or other CEQA process, an effect
'has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration pUl'su'ant to Section 15063 (C)(3)(D).
In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Id.entify and state where they are avaHab1e for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checkl~st were within the scope of
and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether
such. effects were addressed by mitiga.tion measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation .Measure$. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or renned fi'om the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project .
. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document
should, where appropriate, include a l'efel~elJCe to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) The explanation of each issue should Identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) . Page 5 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
i . !
I
DISCUSSION OF IMP ACTS
The following Environmental Checklist was used to identify environmental irilpacts, which could occur .
if the proposed project is implelnented. The left-hand colUlnn in the checklist lists the source(s) for ti1e
answer to each question. The sources cited are identified at the end of the checklist. Discussions of the
basis for each answer and ·a discussion of mitigation measures that are proposed to. reduce potential
significant hnpacts are included.
A. AESTHETICS
Issues and Supporting Int'OJ'maHon Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Resources Significant Signlfican t. Significant Impact
Issues Unless Impact
Would the project: Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Substantially degrade the existing visual X
character 01' quality of the site and its 1, 5
surroundings?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
public view or view corridor? 1,2,5 X
MapL4
c) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock X
outcroppings; and historic buildings within 1,2,5
a state scenic highway? MapL4
d) Violate existing Comprehensive Plan 1,2,5
policies regarding visual resources? X
e) Create a new source of substantial light or X
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
1, 5
f) Substantially shadow public open space 1,5 X
(other than public stt'eets and adjacent
sidewalks) between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00
p.m. from September 21 to March 21 ?
.DISCUSSION:
The subject site is located near the Page Mill Road view corridol', as shown in the Comprehensive Plan
1998 -2010. However, the proposed building would not block scenic views because the building is
located away from the intersection and behind existing buildings on-site. The proposed project is not
visible from Page Mill Road; access to the site is from Hansen Way. The proposed building would be
surrounded by parking lots that are adequately landscaped, and therefore would not impede scenic views.
There are no public open spaces within the project site. The project is subject to fmal review· and
recomnlendation by the Architectural Review Board (ARB), which will review the project plans. The
ARB win ensure a design that is aesthetically pleasing and compatible with its sunoundings in
compliance with findings for Architectural Review approval. The project site is located in an existing
offige park) and is not located within or near a scenic vista, scenic resources) or historic buildings, The
project has been designed to be compatible with the scale of the surrounding developlnent in the area.
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 6 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
The creation of additional lighting V:/ill be minimal and will be screened by existing walls. No significant
iInpacts from light and glare created from the new office building are anticipated. No substantial shadow
on public space is anticipated between 9:00 am to 3:00 pnl. Therefore, no shadow impact is anticipated.
The proposed project would not result in a significant impact to vi~ual character.
Mitigation Measures: None·
Significance after Mitigation: NA
B.. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects~ lead agencies may
refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California
Dept. ofCopservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and fannland.
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sonrces Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Iml>l1ct
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique ~armlandJ
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
.pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and 1 Monitoring Program of the California X Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural 1, 2,
uset or a WilliamsoJ;l Act contract? MapL9, X
c) lnvolve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
natlU'e, could result in conversion of 1 X Farmland, to non-agricuitllrai use?
DISCUSSION:
The project site is located in a developed office park area zoned Research Park District. The site is not
located in a "Prime Farmland", "Unique Farmland'\ or "Farmland of Statewide ltnportance" area, as
shown on the maps prepared for the Farmland Mapping and Monit01-ing Progrmn of the California
·Resources Agency. The site is not zoned for agricultural use) and is not regulated by the Williamson
Act. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated_
Mitigation ·Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA.
C. AIR QUALITY
.911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 7 Initial study/Negative Declaration
Issues and Supporting Information Resources SOU1'ces Potentially Potential1y Less Than No
Significant Signiiicant Significant 1m I) act
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Conflict with or obstruct with implementation. X
of the applicable air quality plan (1982 Bay 9
Area Air Quality Plan & 2000 Clean Air Plan)?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute X
substantially to an existing or projected air 9
quality violation indicated by the following:
i. Direct andlor indirect operational 9 X
emissions that exceed the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
criteria ait' pollutants of 80 pounds per day
and/or 15 tons per year for nitrogen oxides
(NO), reactive organic gases (ROG), and
fine particulate matter of less than 10
microns in diameter (PMtO);
ii. Contribute to carbon mOl10xide (CO) 1,9 X
concentrations exceeding the State
Ambient Air Quality Standard of nine
parts per miHion (ppm) averaged over
eight hours or 20 ppm for one hour( as
demonstrated by CALINE4 modeling~
which would be performed when a) project
CO emissions exceed 550 pounds per day
or 100 tons per year; or b) project traffic
would impact intersections or roadway'
links operating at Level of Service (LOS)
D, E or F or would cause LOS to decline to
D. E or F; or'c) project would increase
! traffic volumes on nearby roadways by
10% or more)?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
. project region is non-attainment under an X applicable federal or state ambient air quaHty . 9 standard (including releasing emissiohs which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
I
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial levels
of toxic air contaminants? 1 X
i. Probability of contracting cancer for the 9 X
,Maximally Exposed Individual (MEl)
exceeds 10 in one million
ii. Ground-level concentratiol1s of no.n-9 X
carcinogenic TACs would result in a
hazard index greater thall one (l) for the
MEl .'
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X
substantial number of people? 1
f) Not implement all applicable construction 9 X
emission control measures recommended in the
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 8 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
CEQ A Guidelines?
DISCUSSION:
The n10st recent clean air plan is the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan that was adopted by the BAAQMD
in September 2010. The proposed project would not conflict with the latest Clean Air planning efforts
since it is too small to conflict with regional population and projections and does not require
implementation of transportation control measures listed in the Clean Air Act (Bay Area Clean 2010 Air
Act)
Due to the project s~ze, construction period emissions would be less than significant. In its latest update
to the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, BAAQMD identified the size of land use projects that could result
in significaJ1t air pollutant emissions. For construction impacts, the project size was identified as
346,OOOsquare feet. Since the project proposes a new 4,734 square foot addition, it is c'oncluded that
emission would be below the BAAQMD significance thresholds for both constructions exhaust and
operational emissions.
As discussed above, the project would have emissions less than the sig~ificant thresholds adopted by
BAAQMD for evaluating impacts to ozone and particulate matter. Furthermore, the project would
generate a small amount of traffic, so the contribution of project-generated traffic to these levels would
be minimal and the project would not cause or contribute to a violation of an mnbient air quality
standard.
Construction activity is anticipated to involve minor site preparation and building constnlction. Dust.
would be generated during construction activities .. Most of the dust would result during grading
activities. The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines consider these· temporary impacts to be less
than significant if best management practices are en1ployed to reduce these en1issions.
Standard measures will be incorporated as standard project conditions of approval to control dust
emissions would result in impacts that are less than significant:
• Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods. .
• All trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard and all hauling trucks to be covered pursuant to
governing agency requirements. Dust-proof chutes shall be used as appropriate to load debris ·onto
trucks during demolition.
• Pave, apply water at least twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on· all unpaved access
roads> parking areas and staging areas.
• Sweep as necessary (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas
and sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil Inaterial is deposited onto adjacent
roads.
• Hydro seed or apply (non~toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive constructions areas.
• Enclose, cover water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles.
• Limit traffic speeds on any unpaved roads to 15 mph. .
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 9 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
• Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quic19y as possible.
• Suspend construction activities that cause visible dust plumes to extend beyond the construction site.
• During construction, the project would generate localized elnissions of diesel exhaust during
equipment operation and tnlck activity. The project site is not affected by existing odor sources that
would cause odor conlplaints from new users of the project.
Long-ten11 project emissions prinlarily stein fronl motor vehicles associated with the proposed project.
As discus.sed the project is not anticipated to result in a significant number of new vehicle trips.
Therefore, long term air-quality itnpacts are expected to ~e less than significant.
Sensitive receptors. are defined as childretl, elderiy, or ill people who can be lnore adversely affected by
air quality problems. The proposed project will be located in a developed office area abutting a
residential neighborhood. No sensitive receptors are located in the immediate area.
The proposed project of addition is not anticipated to create objectionable odors. No impacts are
anticipated. '
Mitigation Me~sures: None, with incorporation of standard co~ditions of approval.
SignifIcance after Mitigation: NA
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Issues and Supporting Informatioll Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant. Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
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 10c~1 or regional 1,2, plans, policies, or regulations, or by the MapNl X California Department ofFish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
communilyidentified in local or regional plans, 1,2, X policies, regulations, including federally MapNl protected-wetlamis as defined by Section 404
of the C]ean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool~ coastal, etc.)
through direct removal~ filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
c) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or 1,2 X migratory wildlife corridors, or' impede the use MapNl of native wildlife nursery sites?
d) Conflict with any local policies or ol~dinances X
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 10 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
e)
Issues and Supporting Information Resources 'Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
protecting biological resources. such as a tree
preservation policy or as defined by the City of 1,2,
Palo Altots Tree Preservation Ordinance 5,13,14 (Municipal Code Section 8.10)7
,Conflict with any applicable Habitat 1,2 X
Conservation Plan. Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
DISCUSSION:
The project site is located in an existing office development. The proposed project is within a land use
specifically designated for office development. Office uses are located adjacent to the project site. The
proposed project is located in an existing utility/eqiuPlnent yard. No existing trees will be impacted. The
applicant has submitted a Special Tree Protection Plan.
There are no natural comlnunities and no natural habitats located on the project site that would be
protected by an approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan; virtually all of the natural
vegetation on the project site and surrounding properties has been replaced by office developlnent and
ornamental landscaping. Connectivity 10 natural areas is non-existent; the project site is surrounded by
other development roadways. There is no natural surface water on or adjacent to the project site.
Consequently, the proposed project would have no unpact related to conflicts with the provisions of an
approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan.
Mitigation Measures: None, with incorporation of standard conditions of approval.
Significance after Mitigation: NA
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Issues 'and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impnct
Would the project: Issues Unless, Impact
M.itigation
Incorporated
a) Directly or indirectly destroy a local cultural X
resource that is recognized by CitX Cotmcil 1,2,5
resolution? L7
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource 1,2 X
pursuant to 15064.57 MapL8
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique 1,2 X
geologic feature? MapL8
911 Hansen Way' (Varian Building) Page 11 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
I.
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially -Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Iml>act
Would the pl"oject: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Illco)'po)'oted
d) Disturb any human remains, inCluding those 1,2
inter;t'ed olltside of formal cemeteries? MapLS X
e) Adversely affect a historic resource listed or X
f)
eligible for listing on the National and/or
California Register) or listed on the City's 1,2, 5, Historic Inventory? i MapL7
Eliminate important examples of major periods ,1, 5 X of California history 01' prehistory?
DISCUSSION:
The project site is located in an area of moderate to high sensitivity in terms of archaeological resource
areas, as .indicated in the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update EIlJ.. The Palo Alto Comprehensive
Plan Update EJR inc1udedin its mitigatiOljs that areas of moderate sensitivity shall be "subject to
surface survey and! or subsurface probing if ( a) the area is unimproved land,"(b) the proj ect will entail
excavation more than 5 feet below the existing grade on improved land, or (c) mass grading is
anticipated for large'commercial, transportation, or utility proJects.H The. pmposed project does not include
a basement level. Based on existing conditions and the extent of the proposed project> no significant impacts are
expected. If approved, the proJect would contain conditions in the form of il1st11.1ctions in the case of the
discovery of any cultural resources during'demolition or construction. However, if human remains are
. encotmtered during construction, the applicant would be required to comply with SeCtion 5097 of the
California Public Resources Code and Sections 7050.5.7051 and 7054 of the California Health and
Safety Code for human blrrials. The standard conditions would result in impacts that are less than
significant.
Mitigation Meas.urcs: None, with iJ?c·orporation of standard conditio.Ds of approval.
Significance after ~itigation: NA
F. GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources PotentiaHy Potentially I"ess Than No Significant Significant Significnnt Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impuct
Mitigation
IncorpoJ'ated
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects) including the See
risk of loss, injury, or death involving: below
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, X
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fai.llt
Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on 6
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 12 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 2,
MapNI0 X
iii) Se.ismic~related ground failure,
including liquefaction? 2 X
MapNS
iv) Landslides? 2 X
MapNS
b) Result in substant.ial soil erosion or the loss X
of topsoil? 1,5
c) Result in substantial siltation? 1,5 X
d) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the pnJject, and potentially X
result in on~ or off-site landslide, lateral 2,
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or MapN5,
collapse? 18
e) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Unifonn Building X
Code (1994» creating substantial risks to 5,
life or property? MapN5,
f) Have soils incapable of adequately
s'U,pporting the use of septic tanks ~r
alternative waste water disposal systems 1
where sewers are not available for the X
disposal of waste water?
g) Expose people or property to major 4 X
geologic hazards that cannot be mitigated
through the use o{ standard engineering ~
design and seismic safety techniques?
DISCUSSION:
The entire state of California is in a seismically active area and the site located in a strong seismic risk
area, subject to strong ground shaldng in the event of an earthquake.. Seislnic ground failure, including
liquefaction and subsidence of the land are possible, but not likely at the site. No known faults cross the
project site; therefore fault rupture at the site is very unlikely, but theoretically possible. The site is
located in an area of expansive soils or within a mapped liquefaction zone, as designated by the State of
California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act All new construction will be subject to the provisions of the
most current Uniform Building Code (UBC), portions of which are directed at minimizing seismic risk
and preventing loss of life and property in the event of an earthquake.
The City's required standard conditions of approval ensure that potential inlpacts on erosion and soil will
not be significant. Project conditions of approval willl'equire the applicant to submit a fmal grading and
. drainage plan subj ect to review by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of any grading and
building permits. The project will not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems. Therefore no impact is anticipated.
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 13 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Mitigation Measures: None} with incorporation of standard conditions of approvaL
Significance after Mitigation: NA
G. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially PotentiaJly Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would tbe project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigntio.n
Incorporated
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, eHher 1,5,9 X
directly or indil'ectlYt that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan) policy or 1,5,9 X
regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose
ofreducingthe emissions of greenhouse gases?
DISCUSSION:
The San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB) is currently' designated as a nonattainment area for'
state and national ozone standards and national particulate matter ambient air quality standards.
SFBAAB's non attainment status is attributed to the region's developnlent history. Past, present and
future development projects contribute to the region's adverse airquality impacts 011 a cumulative basis.
By lts very nature, air pollution is largely a cmnulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size, by
itself, to result in nonattainment of ambient ait quality standards. Instead, a project's individual
emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project's
contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project's impact on air quality would be
considered significant
In November 2009, the Bay Area ,Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD) published proposed
revisions to its CEQA Gui,delines for addressing air quality inlpacts. These updated Guidelines included
proposed quantitative thresholds for OHO enlissions, establishing both a "bright line," threshold'
~ignificant for GHG emissions and also an efficiency threshold. Using a methodology that models how
new land use development in the San Francisco Bay area can meet AB 32 GHG reduction goals, the
BBAQMD Guidelines establish a significance threshold of 1,100 ,metric tons of C02 per year. In
addition to this bright line threshold, the Guidelines include an "efficiency" threshold of 4.6 metric tons
of C02 per year per service population, which is defined as plus employees of the project. These
proposed GHG thresholds were adopted by the BAAQMD Board of Directors on lime 2,2010.
The project proposes a 4)734 square foot addition to an existing manufacturing building. The new
addition will be used for testing of medical radiation treatment equipment and will not increase the
occupancy load of the building. The new addition would not increase the number of trips to and from the
site. The BAAQMD screening threshold for GHG emissions resulting from office park development is
50,000 square feet. The net addition of 4,734 square feet of testing area would fall well below the
screening threshold. As a result, a d~tailed analysis of the project's GHG emissions is unnecessary
, because the project is assmned to result in a less than signifIcant GHG emissions impact.
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 14 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Because the construction GHG from the project would not be substantial, and te1l1pOrary in nature,
constnlctiol1 of the project would not interfere with meeting the AB32 OHO reduction goals.
Construction activities would telnporarily affect local air quality. Construction activities such as
eartmnoving, construction vehicle traffic, and wind blowing over exposed earth would generate exhaust
emissions and fugitive particulate matter enlissions that affect local and regional air quality. :However,
the results would not result in significant enlissions of any criteria pollutant.
For all proposed projects, BAAQMD recommends the implementation of Basic ConstnlCtioll conditions
that will be incorporated into the project as conditions. The proposed project will include the following
basic construction conditions recOlnmended by BAAQMD to reduce construction dust ilnpacts:
• All exposed surfaces (e.g. parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved
access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
• All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
• All visible' mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power
vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
• All roadways, driveways, and Sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible'.
Building pads shall be lai~ as soon as possible after grading l.mless seeding or soil binders are
used.
• Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting off warn not in use or reducing the Inaximum
idling times to 5 minutes (as required by the California Code if Regulations *CCR). Clear
signage shall be provided for constnlCtiol1 workers at all access points.
• All constructions equipment shalf be maintained and property' tuned in accordance with
manufactures specification. All equipmel1t shall be checked by a certified mechanic and
determined to be running in proper construction prior to operation.
• Post a publicly visible sign with a telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency
regarding dust conlplaints. This person shall respond and take c,orrective action within 48 hours,
The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance.
ThIS project would not result in significant OHO emissions related to project operation or construction.
MitigatioJ1 Measures: None required with conditions implemented.
H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Note: Some of the thresholds can also be dealt with under a topic heading of Public Health and Saf!!£. if the
, I d b' h h h d t' I prtmary lssues are re ale to a SU 'J}ect at er t an azar OUS rna erla use.
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Po.tcntiaUy Less TbaD No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Create t\ signifi~ant hazard to the-public or the X
environment through the routing transport, 'use,
or disposal of hazardous materials? 1, 13
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 15 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
upset and accident conditions involving the X
release of hazardous materials into the 1,13
enviromnent?
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous X
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within oneolquarter mile of an existing or 1, 13
proposed school?
Construct a 'school on a property that is subject 1 X
to hazards from hazardous materials
contamination, emissions or accidental release?
Be 10cated 011 a site which is included on a list X
of hazardous materials sites compiled put'suant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and; as a l~ 2) 5 resLJlt~ would it create a significant hazard to MapN9 the public or the environment?
i
For a project located within an airport land QSe
plan Of, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or X public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in 1 the project area?
For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working the 1 X project area?
Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency response t 2, 10 X plan or emergency evacuation pJan? MapN7
Expose people or structures to a significant risk
OflOS8, injury, or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to .x urbanized areas 01' where residences are 2 intermixed with· wildlands? MapN7
Create a significant hazard to the public or the 1 X
environment from existing hazardous materiaLs
contamination by exposing future occupants or
users of the site to contamination in excess of
soil and ground water cleanup goals developed
for the ~ite?
DISCUSSION:
The subject property, which consists of a medical manufacturing and testing building, is located on the
southeast side of Hansen Way in a mixed. commercial and residential area in Palo Alto. The property
totals 13.7 acre~ and is hnproved with a twos-story building (Building 3) arid a one story building
. (Building 3A) totaling 143,142 square feet. The proposed project is construction of a single-story 4,734
square foot addition to an existing Inanufacturing building including three test cells and console· test
equipment area. 'rhe project includes demolition of a portion of an existing building to allow
construction of new test cell· areas. The proposed addition will be used for testing medical radiation
. treatment equiplnent and will not increase the occupancy load of the building. The building is slab on
grade and is not constructed with basement or subgrade area. The subject property is currently owned by
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 16 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Varian Medical Systems, Inc. In addition to the silbject building, the property improved with asphalt
paved areas and associated landscaping.
AEI Consultants was retained by David J. Power,s and Associates. to COnd\lct a Phase 1 Environmental
Site Assessment. During the site reconnaissance, hazm'dous Inaterials consisting of compressed gases,
radioactive lnaterials and flammable n1aterials were observed in connection with the testing of medical
devices.
The subject property was identified in the regulatory database as a Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) Small Quantity Generator (SQG), California Hazardous Waste Information System
(HAZNET)~ and Facility Index Notification System (FINDS) site. In addition, the subject property was
identified along with several surrounding properties as an ENVIOSTOR site.
In April 1989, a preliminary assessment of the subject and surrounding properties comprising the Varian
site was performed. The conclusion of the preliminary assessment was that groundwater underlying the .
she had "been contaminated with TeE and other VOCs. Three main chlorinated VOC plume areas,
predominantly consisting of PCE andlor TCE, have been identified at the Varian Site.· These plumes
include the Building 1 Plume, Building 3 Plume, and Building 4 Plume. Groundwater from the three
VOe-affected zones was ,extracted and treated using 14 on-site extraction wells. The subject property
features seven monitoring wells used in the monitoring and rel11ediation of chlorinated solvents. The
subject site will continue to remediation activities under the oversight of the Department of Toxic
Substanges and Control (DTSC) until regulatory case closure is achieved.
Due to the age of the building, there is potential that asbestos~co~tailling materials (ACMs) are present.
An asbestos survey adhering to the AHERA sampling protocol should be performed prior to demolition
activities that may disturb suspect ACMs. Also due to the age of the' building, there is a potential that
lead based paint is present. It should be noted that construction activities that disturb materials or paints
containing any amount of lead may be subject to certain requirelnents of the 'OSHA lead standard
contained in 29CFR 1910.1025 and 1926.62.
The project site is located 3.8 miles to the west of the Palo Alto Airport. The additional public activity
with the proposed use of the site is not expected to pose airport-related safety hazards. Therefore, there
will be no impact. .
The proposed proje9t would be implenlented in accordance with the City of Palo Alto requirements
regarding adequate police, fire, and emergency access to the site. Therefore the proposed project would
not ill;terfere with any 'existing elnergency response or evacuation plan. No impact is anticipated.
Th'e project is not located in a designated Hre hazard area. Therefore there will be no impact.
Mitigation Measures H-l: The subject site will continue remediation activities under the oversight of the
Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC) until regulatory case closure is achieved.
Mitigation Measures H-2: Prior to the demolition of the building in site, a comprehensive asbestos survey in
comprehensive asbestos survey in compliance with the National Etnissions Standards for Hazardous Air
PollutaD.ts (NESHAP) and all State of California asbestos requirements shall be conducted, All
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 17 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
demolition activities will be undertaken ill accordance w~th Cal/OSHA standards to protect workers
frOln exposure to asbestos. If asbestos is found to be present, it will be disposed of at an appropriate
licensed facility in cOll1pliance with federal apd state regulations.
Mitigation Measlires B-3: Prior to demol.itioll material samples would need to be collected or an XRF survey
performed in order to determine if LBP is present. All building materials containing lead based paint shall be
removed in accordance with CallOSHA Lead Construction Standard, Title 8, California Code Regulations 153'2.1,
including employee air monitoring, and dust controL Any debris or soi1~containing lead based paint or coatings
w01.l14 be disposed of at landfills that meet acceptance ~riteria for the waste being djsposed.
Significance after Mitigation: Less Than Significant.
I. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Would the project: Issues . Unless Impad
!\1itigntion
Incorporated
a) Violate any water qual.ity standards or waste
discharge requirem~nts? 1,9 X
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or X
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit
in aquifer volume or a lowering oft11e local
groundwater table level (e.g., the production 2 rate of preMexisting nearby wells would drop to MapN2 a level which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits have
been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in substantial X erosion or siltation onw or offMsite? 1,5,9
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the -site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase th.e r,ate or amount of
surface runoff in a mannel; which would result 1,5,9 X in fleoding onN or off·site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
storm water drainage systems or provide X substantial additional sources of po lIuted 1~ 5 runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 1, 5 X
g) Place housing within a lOO-year flood hazard
area as mapped on a federal Flood .Hazard
911 Hansen Way (Varian BuildinQ) Page 18 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or
other flood hazard delineation map? 1,5,2 X
MapN6
h) Place within a lOO-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect 8 X flood flows? MapN6
i) Expose people or structul'es to a significant risk
ofloss, injury or death involve flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of a 2,6 X levee or dam or being located within a lOO-year MapN6 flood hazard area? N8
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 2,6' X
MapN6
N8
k) Result in stream bank instahility? 1 X
DISCUSSION:
The subject property was historically used for agriCultural purposes. There isa potential that agricultural
chemicals, such as pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, were used on-site. The subject property is
developed, and the 'entire area is paved over or covered by improvements that make direct contact with
potenti~l remaining concentrations in the soil unlikely. Based on this information~ the historic use of the
subject property for agricultural purposed is not expected to represent a significant environmental
concern.
Water quality is regulated by both State and.Federal agencies under the authority of the Clean Water Act
(CWA). Projects that have the potential to degrade water quality are subject to the regulations of those
agencies. Operational activities may' involve C0n11nOn urban pollutants such as surface litter, oil,
gasoline, grease~ paint, fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides. Construction activities involving soils
disturbances such as excavation, demolition, stockpiling, and grading activities could result in increased
erosion and sedhnentation to surface waters~ and could produce contruninated storm water runoff, a
major contributor to the degradation of water quality. These activities could result in the discharge of
poll:utants into surface water resources ruld could degrade water quality. The proposed project is located
in a commercial office area and involves an addition to an existing manufacturing building.
The site currently drains to two different water sheds. The southerly and westerly portion of the existing
buildings and adjacent areas drain to the south of the site. The northern portion of the existing buildings
and parking lot drains to the north of the site to Hansen Way. The proposed development will continue
the pattern so as to perpetuate the existing conditions as much as possible.
To mitigate any potential adverse inlpacts associated stonnwater runoff during construction and
operation, the City would require the project to develop and implelnent BMP's to control erosion
associated with construction such as watering the exposed soil, and permanent features to treat
stormwater runoff such as swales. Stormwater runoff water quality is regulated by the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program (established through the CW A). The
NPDES program objective i.s to control and reduce pollutants to water bodies from surface water
discharges. Locally, the program is administered by the Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB). Compliance with the NPDES Permit is mruldated by State and Federal statutes and
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 19 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
regtllati~ns. The City of Palo Alto participates in Santa Clara's Stormwater Managel11ent Plrul) which.
outlines mail1tenance activities to be undertaken by cities; targets industrial and illicit discharge;
describes public information about stormwater; provides guidance to cities for cOl1str'uction pertnits; and
establishes Inonitoring programs to measure the success of the other portions of the plan. Compliance
with the NPDES Permit is mandated by State and Federal statutes and regulations. The municipalities in
Santa Clara County have to require post-constnlction stomlwater controls as part of their obligations
under Provision C.3 of the countywide milllicipal stormwater NPDES perlnit, which is similar to other
Inunicipal stormwater permits in the Bay Area. The proposed project would not introduce improvements '
or activities that would be subject to the requirements of an existing or new water discharge permit.
Implementation of the proposed project would not violate any waste discharge l'equirements. Impacts are
considered to be less than significant.
Standard ARB conditions of approval require the incorporation of Best Managelnent Practices (BMPs)
for storm water pollution prevention in all construction operations, in conformance with the Santa Clara
Valley Non .. Point Source Pollution Control Program.
The project site is not located in an area of groundwater recharge~ and will not deplete groundwater
.supplles. Therefore, 110 inipacts' are ailtfcipated.' .,
The project site is not located within the Federal EUlergency Management Agenci s (FEMA) Flood
Zone A (100-year flood zone) (FEMA 2008). Therefore, there would be no imp~ct and no further
discussion is required.
The project site is inland on relatively flat ground and is not threatened by potential seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow hazards. Therefore, no impact would occur and no fhrther discussion is required.
Mitigation Measures: None with incorporation of standard conditions of approval.
Significance after Mitigation: NA
J. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Jssues and Supporting Information R~sources . Sources Potentially Potentially Less Thall No
Significant . Significant Significant Impact
Would,the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Physically divide an established community? 1, 5 X
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency wIth
jurlsdi~tion over the project (including, but not X limited to the general plan, specific plan~ local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an '1,3,5 environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community 1,2 X conservation plan? : MapNl
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 20 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Signiticant Impact
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorponted
d) Substantially advel'seJy.change the type or 1,2,3,5 X
intensity of existing or planned land use in the
area?
e) Be incompatible with adjacent land uses or with 1,5 X
the general character of the surrmmding are~,
including density and building height?
f) Conflict with established residentia1, 1,5 X
recreational, educationa1, religious, or scientific
uses of an area?
g) Convert prime farmland, unique fannland, or 1 X
farmland of statewide importance (farmland) to
non-agricultural use?
DISCUSSION:
911 Hansen Way is designated as Research/Office Park in the Palo Alto 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan
and RP in the Municipal (Zoning) Code. This land use designation is intended for office, research and
manufacturing establishments. The proposed project is consistent with the sluTolmding land uses.
Projects that have the potential to physically divide an established connnunity include new freeways and
highways, major arterials, raih'oad lines. The location and design of the project would not divide an
established commlUlity. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
The proposed proj ect would be subj ect to the requirements of several plans and policies, including the
Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and the Municipal Code. A description of the proposed projects
con1pliance with applicable land use and planning policies is provided below.
Comprehensive Plan Policies:
Policy L"42: Encourage employment districts· to develop in a way that encourages transit,
pedestrian and bicycle travel and reduces the number of auto trips.
Policy L-43: Provide sidewalks, pedestrian paths, an.d connections to the citywide bikeway
system within Employment Districts. PUrsue opportunities to build sidewalks, and
paths· in renovation and expansion projects.
Policy L-44: Develop the Stanford Research Park as a compact elnployment center served by a
variety of transportation modes.
The proposed project is construction of a single-story 4,734 sqllare foot to an existing 143,142 square
foot manufacturing building including three test cells and console test equipment area. The project
includes d~molition of a portion of an existing building to allow construction of new test cell areas. The
proposed addition will be used for testing medical radiation treatment equipment and will' not increase
the occupancy load of the building. The proj ect is subj ect to final review by the Architectural Review
Board (ARB), which will ensure a design that is aesthetically pleasing and compatible with its
surroundings and meets ARB approval findings.
911 Hansen Way (Varian· Building) Page 21 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
I I
I
There are no applicable habitat conservation plans or natural cOlnnlunity conservation plans that pertain
to the project site. Consequently> the proposed project would have no impact with respect to any habitat
conservation plan or natural conservation plan. '
The site is 110t located in a "Prhne Farmland"t "Unique Fannland", or "Farmland of Statewide
ImportanceH area} as, ~hown on the maps prepared for the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Progra111
of the CaliforJ.?ia Resources Agency. The site is not zoned for agricultural use, and is not regulated by
the Williamson Act. Consequently, the proposed project would 110t have an impact with respect to any
habitat cons~rvation plan or natural conservation plan.
Mitigation Measure~: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
K MINERAL RESOURCES ... ;. •... ':., . !,' , , . .,
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant
a)
b)
Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Result in the loss of availab ility of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state? 1, X
Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
impOltant mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan 1, X or other land use plan?
DISCUSSION:
The project will not impact known mineral or locally important mineral resources. No impacts to mineral
resources are expected.
Mitigation Measures: None Required.
Significance after Mitigation: NA
L. NOISE
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources P,otentially Potentially Less Tban No Impnct
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: " Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Exposure of persons to or "generation of noise X
levels in excess of standards e,stablished in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 22 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Issues and SuppOI'tlng Infol'mation Resources Sources Potentinlly Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Sigilificnnt
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
applicable standards of other agencies? 1,2, 5,
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of X
excessive ground borne vibrations or ground 1,2,5
borne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels 1 X
existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodicincl'ease in X
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project? 1
e) For a project located within an airport land use X
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to 1 excessive noise levels? '. , .... .... ; .. . .. ,
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private X
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to 1 excessive noise levels?
g) Ca~se the average 24 hour noise level (Ldn) to 5 X
increase by 5.0 decibels (dB) or more in an
existing residential area, ev~n jf the Ldn would
remain below 60 dB?
h) Cause the Ldn to increase by 3.0 dB or more in 5 X
an 'existing residential area, thereby causing the
Ldn in the area to exceed 60 dB?
i) Cause an increase of 3.0 dB or more in an 5 X
existing residential area where the Ldn
:currently exc~eds 60 dB?
j) Result in indoor noise levels for residential 5 X
development to exceed an Ldn of 45 dB?
k) Result in instantaneous noise levels of greater 5 X
than 50 dB in bedrooms or 55 dB in other
rooms in areas with an exterior Ldn of 60 dB or
greater?
1) Generate construction noise exceeding the 5 X
daytime background Leq at sensitive receptors
by 10 dBA or more?
DISCUSSION:
. Noise levels at the project site would continue to result primarily frOlu vehicular traffic along Page Mill
Road and Hansen Way, Existing and future noise levels at the project site are between 60 and 65 dBA
Ldn. Exterior noise levels would fall below the 'nonnally acceptable limit 'of 70 dBA Ldn for noise arid
land use compatibility, which would represent a less than significant impact. Standard office technology
would adequately reduce noise levels indoors.
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 23 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
GrotU1d~borne vibration resulting from project construction activities would be limited to the Varian
Medical Systems site only. There would · be no impact from ground borne vibration associated with
project operations.
The addition of project traffic would increase noise levels by less than 1 dBAdn at receivers along
roadway segments experiencing future project trips. Increases of less than 1 dBA Ldn are not
nleasur'able and are not co'nsidered substantial. Therefore long ternl noise related to the project would be
considered a less than significant impact.
It is anticipated that the addition will be fully air-conditioned and that there will be heating, ventilating
and air conditioning units that could be located in unshielded areas. Residential uses, at their nearest
point, would be about 1>250 feet from the proposed buildings. Additionally, residential units nearest the
project site would not have a line-of-site to any roof-top Inechanical equipment. Based on equiplnent
and accounting for the effects of acoustical shielding, noise generated by project mechanical equipment
is not anticipated to be audible at the nearest residential properties and would not exceed the standards
set forth in the City of Palo Alto Mtmicipal Code.
, ,,' Demolition and Construction Activities will result in temporary incl.'eases in'local ambient 'noise levels.
In addition, there may be increases in ground-borne vibrations resulting ' from demolition and
construction. Therefore, conditions of approval, incorporated as part of an approved delnolition and
construction management plan (secu.red before building permit issuance) would include the following:
• Require implementation of and compliance with the City of Palo Alto's Noise Ordinance (PAMC
9.10). In addition, construction hours shall be established as per the construction management plan
to minimize disturbance to surrounding residents, visitors, and businesses.
The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within the vicinity of a private airstrip.
Therefore, no impact is anticipated.
Mitigation Measures: None incorporated as conditions.
Significance after Mitigation: NA
M. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significnnt Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incor.p_OI·ated
a) Induce substantial popUlation growth in an X
area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other 1, 5
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing X
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? J
c) Displace substantialllUmbers of people, X
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 24 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sou "ces "Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
IncO)'porated
necessitating the construction ofreptacement
housing elsewhere? 1
d) Create a substantial imbalance between 1 X
employed residents and jobs?
e) Cumulatively exceed regional or local 1 X
population projections?
DISCUSSION:
With the proposed building addition, there is no net loss in the nUlnber of existing housing units and
would not increase population growth or displace a substantial number of existing housing units or
create the need for replacement housing elsewhere. No impacts are anticipated.
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
N. PUBLIC SERVICES
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered governmenta]
facilities, need for new or physically altered
govemmenta] 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 protectlon? 11 X
Police protection? X
"]
Schools? X 1
Parks? X 1
Other public facilities?
X 1
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 25 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
DISCUSSION:
Fire
The proposed project would not impact fire services to the area and the site is 110t located in a high fire
hazard area. .
Police
The site is not located within the jurisdiction of the Palo Alto Police Deparnnent. The facility would not
by itself result in the need for additional police officers~ equiplnent, or facilities.
Schools
No demand for additional schools ,will result frOll1 the project.
Parks
No significant direct demand for additional parks wo~ud result fronl the project, which is not expected to
generate an increase in Palo Alto's residential population.
Other Public Facilities
None
There would not be any substantial change in required services, inoluding Fire, Police, Schools, Parks
and other public faoilities as a result of the proposed project. Therefore, no impaots are anticipated.
Mitigation Measures:-None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
O. RECREATION
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources 'Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks or X
other recreational facilities such that
substantial phySical deterioration of the f~5 facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include 'recreational X
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities wh ich
might have an adverse physical effect on the 1,5 environment?
I
DISCUSSION:
The proposed office building would not cause a substantial change to the demand of recreation services.
Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
911 Hansen W~y (Varian Building) Page 26 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Mitigation Measures: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
P. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources ! Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant Significant
Would the proje~t: Issues Unless Impaet
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is
substantial in relation to the existing traffic
load and capacity of the street system (i.e" 5,10
result in a substantial increase in either the X
number. of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or cOl1gestion at,
intersections)? ..
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively,
a level of service standard established by the
county congestion manB;gement agency for 5,10 X
designated roads or highways?
c) Result in change in air traffic patterns, X
including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in 1
substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a X
design feature (e.g.> sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or i.ncompatible 1,5
uses (e.g" farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1,10 X
f) . Result in inadequate parking capacity? 1,5
X
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or X
progranls supporting alternative
transportatio11 (e,g" pedestrian, transit & 1,5
bicycle facilities)? .
h) Ca~lse a local (City of Palo Alto) intersection 1,5 X
to deterio,rate below Level of Service (LOS)
D and caUSe an in.crease in the average
stopped delay for the critical movements by
four seconds or more and the critical
volum.e/capacity ratio (V /C) value to increase
by 0.01 or more?
i) Cause a local intersection already operating at 5 X
LOS E or F to deteriorate in the average'
stopped delay for the critical movements by
four seconds or more?
j) Cause a regional intersection to deteriorate 5 X
from an LOS E or better to LOS F or cause
critical movement delay at such an
intersection already operating at LOS F to
911 Hansen W~y (Varian Building) Page 27 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
increase by four seconds or more and the
critical VIC value to increase by 0.01 or
more?
k) Cause a freeway segment to operate at LOS F 10 X
or contribute traffic in excess of 1 % of
segment capacity to a 'freeway segnlent
already operating at LOS F?
1) Cause any change in traffic that would 10 X
increase the Traffic Itlfusion on Residential ,
Environment (TIRE) index by 0.1 or more?
m) Cause queuing impacts based on a 10 X
comparative analysis between the design
queue length and the available queue storage
capacity? Queuing impacts include, but are
not limited to, spillback queues at project
access locations~ queues at turn lanes at
intersections that block through traffic;
queues at lane drops; queues at one
intersection that extend back to impact other
intersections, and spillback queues on ramps.
n) Impede the development or function of 1,5, 10 ,X
planned pedestrian or bicycle facilities?
0) Impede the operation of a transit system as a 10 X
p)
result of congestion?
Create an operational safety hazard? 1,5,10 X
DISCUSSION:
Based on staffs calculations, the proposed project would generate l~ss -than 50 net new peak hour trips;
therefore, a Traffic Impact Analysis is not required. The project would also have adequate site access
and circulation. These trips would not substantially degrade operations at nearby intersections. No traffic
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
The nearest airport is 3.8 miles east of the project site. Therefore, the implementation of the proj~ct
would result in a less than significant hnpact from the safety risks associated with air traffic patterns.
Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. '
Access to the site is from Hansen Way. The project has been reviewed by the City Fire Department and
Transportation Division and does not contain design features that will substantially increase hazards or
result in adequate emergency access. Consequently, impacts would be considered less than significant.
The addition to the existing building would not result inadequate parking capacity for the area. The
propos'ed project provides 1296 parking spaces. ~The' proposed project is three new test cells which
would not increase the occupancy load of the existing building. Therefore, the project would not result
in inadequate parking.
The proposed project would comply with all applicable plans and policies pertaining to alternative
transportation. The project would 110t generate ridership that would exceed the capacity of nearby
public transportation. The project would have no impact with respect to alternative transportation
plans or policies.
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 28 Initial Study/Neg~tive Declaration
Mitigation: None
Significance after Mitigation: NA
Q. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significftnt Significant Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality X
Control Board? 1,5
b) Require or result in the construction of new X
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expa:nsion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant l.S
environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new X
stonn·water drainage facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the constnIction of
which could cause significant environ.mental It 5
effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to X
serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded 1,5
entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by tbe wastewater X
treatment provider which serves O! may
serve the project that it has inadequate
capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing 1,5
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient X
permi:tted capacity to accommodate the
project's soUd waste disposal needs? 1,5
g) Comply with federal, state~ and local statutes X
an.d regulations related to solid waste? 1,5
h) Result in a substantial physical deterioration 1 X
of a pablic facility due to increased use as a
result of the project?
DISCUSSION:
The proposed project would not significantly increase the demand on existing utilities and service
.systems) or use resources in a wasteful or inefficient manner. As standard conditions of approval, the
applicant shall be required to submit calculations by a registered civil engineer to show that the on~site
and off site water, sewer and fire systems are capable of serving the needs of the development and
adjacent properties dul'ing peak flow demands. Trash and recycling facilities are proposed in'the project
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 29 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
to accommodate the expected waste and recycling streams that would be generated by the expected uses
within the building. Therefore, inlpacts would be considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None
Signiijcance after Mitigation: NA
R. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Issues and S,upporting Information Resources Sources Potentially . Potentially Less Than No Impact
Significant Significant
a)
b)
c)
Significant
Would the project: Issues Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
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. threatell to eliminate a plant or animal X
community) reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
01' eliminate important examples ofthe major 1,2
periods of California ~istory or prehistory?
Does the project have impacts that are
individually'limited, but cumulatively
C011sid.erable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a X
project are considerable when viewed, in
connection with the effects of past projects) 1) 2
the effects of other current proJects, ,and the
, effects of probable future projects)?
Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects X
on human beings) either directly or 1,2
indirectly?
DISCUSSION:
The project does not 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 aninlal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a
rare or endangered plant or animal. :The proposed project would not eliminate and important example of
California history.
The project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cwnulatively considerable nor does
it have substantial environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings
either directly or indirectly. The.project is located within the City's Stanford Research Park where there
are other projects that are under review and planned for the future. This project as part of infill
development does not result in considerable effects to the environment with the incorporation of
standard conditions.
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building) Page 30 Initial Study/Negative Declaration
it
d
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis
as descl'ibed on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT REPORT is required;
but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although' tbe proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) 'have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pu.'suant to applicable standards, and
(b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to thnt earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions, or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nQtbing further is required.
Project Planner
Director of Planning ao'd
Community Environment
911 Hansen Way (Varian Building)
Date
Date
Page 32 Initial Study/Negativ~ Declaration
ATIACHMENT J
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, HEREBY ATTEST THAT WE HAVE REVIEWED THIS INITIAL
EV ALUATION/DP~T l\llTIGATED NEGATIVE DECLAP~TION DATED l\fay 15,2013,
PREP ARED FOR THE PROPOSED BUILDING ADDmON OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE 911
HANSEN WAY, PAl~O Al~TO, CAIlIFORNlA, AND AGREE TO IMPI,F,MENT AI.I-4 MITIGA nON
MEASURES CONTAINED HEREIN •
.... ~
Date
Summary of Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measures H-I: The subject site will continue remediation activities under the oversight of the
Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC) until regulatory case closure is achieved.
Mitigation Measures H-2: Pripr to th~ demolition of th,~ B,-uilding in site,a comprehensive asbestos survey in
comprehensive asbestos survey in compliance with th~·· National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) and all State of California asbestos requirements shall be conducted. All demolition
activities will be undertaken in accordance with Cal/Q~RA standards to protect workers . frOD;1 exposure to
asbestos. If asbestos is found to be present, it will be 4isposed of at an appropriate licensed facility in
compliance with federal and state regulations.
Mitigation Measures H-3: Prior to demolition material samples would need to be collected or an XRF survey performed
in order to determine ifLHP is present. 1\11 building materials containing lead based paint shan be removed in accord~nce
witbCal/OSHA Lead Construction Standard, Title 8, California Code Regulations 1532.1, including employee air
monitoring, and dust control. Any debris or soil-containing leadibased paint or coatings would be disposed of at landfills
that meet acceptance criteria for the waste being disposed.
1
May 2,2013
PHASE I
ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
Property Identification:
911 Hansen Way
Palo Alto, Santa Clara County, Cal1fornia 94304
AEI Project No. 317806
DJP&A Project No. 13-036
Prepared for:
David J. Powers & Assodates, Inc.
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200
San Jose, California 95126
Prepared by:
AEI Consulta nts
2500 camino Diablo
Walnut Creek, california 94597
(925) 746-6000
1 "-~o\·~;t{"':·3·· ~:.' .. ' .Natlonal PrUen(f .. ' .... ..... Regional focus "':.:~1:;t'~, ....
LottI Soluti on;'-:'~'~~~~~~I~
~ .... ~~
l.';wW.rleicOllSllltiJllts.com
ATIACHMENTK
Atlanta
Chicago
Dallas
Denver
Irvine
Los Angeles
Miami
New York
Phoenix
Portland
San Jose
PROJECT SUMMARY
911 Hansen Way, Palo Alto, Santa Clara County, California 94304
Report Section
2.1 Current use of
subiect property
2.2 Adjoining
property
Information
3.1 Historical
SUmmary
4.0 Regulatory
Agency Records
Review
5.0 Regulatory
Database
Records Review
6.3 Previous Reports
7.0 Site Inspection
and
Reconnaissance
7.2.1 Asbestos-
Containing
Materials
7.2..2 Lead-Based Paint
7.2.3 Radon
7.2.4 Lead in Drinking
Water
7.2.S Mold
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page I
No REt HREC BER. Recommended Action
Further
Action
X
X X
X X
X X
X x
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
AEI
Consultants
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AEI Consultants (AE!) was retained by David J. Powers & Associates, Inc. to conduct a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), in general conformance with the scope and limitations. of
ASTM Standard Practice E1527'-05 and the EnVironmental Protection Agency Standards and
Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312) for the property located at 911 Hansen
Way in the City of Palo Alto, Santa Clara County, California. Any exceptions to, or deletions
from, this practice are described.in Section '1.3 of this report. '
PROPERTY DeSCRIPTION
The subject property, which consists, of a medical manufacturing and testing facility, is located
on the southeast side of Hansen Way in a mixed commercial and residential area of Palo Alto,
California. The property totals approximately 13.7 acres and is Improved with a two~story
building (Building 3) and a one-story bullding (Building 3A) totaling approximately 157,700
square feet. The buildings are slab-onMgrade and are not constructed with oasementsor sub-'
grade areas. The subject property is currently oCOJpled by Varian Medical Systems. On ... site
operations include administrative activities and the assembly and testing of medical· devices for
treating cancer and other medical conditions.. In addition to the sLibject property buUdings, the
property Is improved With an outdoor storage yard, fully enclosed storage structures, an
electrical substation 'structure and asphalt-paved parking areas and associated landscaping.
During the site reconnaissance, hazardous materials conSisting of compressed gases,
radioactive materials and flammable materials, were observed in connection with the assembly
and testing of medical devices. No environmental concerns associated with the storage and/or
use of these materials was noted during the site reconnaissance or durIng the review 'of
regulatory records. Please refer to Section 7'.1 for' additionalfnformation. '
The property was developed with the current improvements in i956. Prior to the current site
improvements, the subject property was identified as agricultural land from at least 1939 to
1956. From .at least 1956 onwards, the subject property was historically part. of a larger 70.83
acre tract used by Vari.an Associates~ Inc. and bounded by EI Camino Real to the northeast,
Page Mill Road on the northwest, and Hanover . Street on the southwest, with an apparent
address of 611 Hansen Way. The Varian site consisted of 15 buildings across seven complexes
(including the adjoining and adjacent properties to the northeast, southwest, west, and north)
and has been used by Varian sjnce 1952 for designing, building, marketing and servIdng high
technology products for customers in industry, communications, defense, science and medica"
industries. Products produced included electron tubes, solid state devices, vacuum components
and systems based on vacuum technology, analytical instruments, medIcal systems, and
magnetic components. In line with these oPerations, Varian used a variety of chemicals in its
operations, including paints and thinners, refrigerants, acids and other chemicals for etchIng
and stripping, and solvents such as tetrachloroethylene (PCE), trichloroethylene (TeE), 1,1,
trichloroethane (TCA), methyl ethyl ketone, silver, mercury, and methylene chloride.
The current subject property comprises Buildings 3 and 3A of the Varian site. Building 3 was
reportedly constructed in 1956 and· featured chemical storage, a machine shop, a paint booth,
two vapor degreasers, and a clean room. Building 3A was reportedly constructed in 1959 and
featured a storage shed, a photo lab, a carpentry shop and janitorial supply. In addition, two
underground petroleum storage tanks, an acid neutralization system, and an oil/waste oill
~hemical storage area were located at the subject property.
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
Page Ii AEI
Consultants
In addition to the subject property and immediately surrounding properties, surrounding areas
to the north, east and south also appear to be undergoing monitoring and/or remediation for
releases of chlorinated solvents, heavy metals and other contaminants. In particular, the
Hillview-Porter Region (located to the southeast and extending one-half mile to the south
southwest) consists of nine sites located within the Stanford Research Park and the Hillview
Porter Regional Site, which consists of the Veterans Administration Hospital Property (VAHP);
the portion of Barron Park Neighborhood (BPI\J) bounded by Ef Camino Real, Arastadero Road,
Miranda Avenue, and the southern property boundary of Varian Associates; and the stretch of
MataderoCreek between Foothill Expressway and EI camino Real.
Given the existence of these known ~urroundlng sources of contamination, and their active
monitoring and/or remediation under State supervision, it is apparent that subsurface soil and
groundwater conditions in the area of the subject and surrounding properties has been
significantly impacted by various commercials and industrial practices. As such, it is unlikely
that present subject property or surrounding property uses will materially impact the s,ubject.
property.
The"subject property was identified 'in the regulatory database as a Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) Smail-Quantity Generator (SQG), California Hazardous Waste Information
System (HAZNET), and Facility Index Notification System (FINDS) site. In addition, the subject
property was identified along with several surrounding properties as an ENVIROsrOR site.
These listings are further discussed in Section 5.l.
The immediately surrounding properties consist of the following:
Direction from Addtess ... Tenant/Use
Site
Northeast . Communications Power & Industries (607 Hansen Way)
Southeast Residential properties fronting Chlmalus Drive
Southwest Cooley Goodward Kronish, LLP (3175 Hanover Street)
West Varian Medical Systems Office Buildings (31001 3120 & 3130 Hansen Way)
North Hansen Way, followed by an electrical substation (950 Hansen Way) and Nest Inc.
Laboratory (900 Hansen Way). Further northwest across Hansen Way Is a multl-
tenant office building (3075 Hansen Way)
The adjoining property to the northeast (Communications & Power Industries) was identified in
the regulatory database as a RCRA-Corrective Action (CORRACTS), RCRA-Large"'Quantity
Generator (LQG), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), 2020 Correction
Action, HAZNET, FINDS, Hazardous Waste Property (HWP), Waste Discharge Permit (WDS),
Aboveground Storage Tank (AST), california Hazardous Material Incident Report System
(CHMIRS), and a Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) Listings facility.
Building 4 of the adjoining property to the west (Varian MedIcal Systems) was identified in the
regulatory database as a RCRA-Transport, Storage & Disposal Fadlity (TSDF), Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCUS) No-Further
Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP), RCRA CORRACTS, ENVIROsrOR, RCRA-SQG, Toxic Release
Inventory System (TRIS), CUPA Listings, HAZNET, HWP, WDS, 2020 Corrective Action, FINDS,
PCB Activity Databa~e Systems (PADS), and U.s. FinanCial Assurance fadlity.
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
PageUl AEI
Consultants
Building 46 of the ·adjoining property to the west (Varian Medical Systems) was identified in the
regulatory database as a NPDES, Emlssions Inventory Data (EMI), and CUPA Listings faciHty.
The adjacent property to the northwest (multi-tenant office building) was identified in the '
regulatory database as an .ENVIROSTOR facility. .
The adjacent property to the north (electrical substation) was identified In the regulatory
database as an Aboveground StorageTank (AST) facility.
Based upon. topographic map interpretatlon and groundwater monitoring, the direction of
groundwater flow beneath the subject property is inferred to be to the north and present at an
estimated depth of 19-26 feet below ground surface (bgs).
FINDINGS
Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) are ~efined by the ASTM Standard Practice E1S27-
05 ·as the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a
property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat
of a release of any hazardous substances ·or petroleum products into structures on the property
or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the property. AEI's assessment has
revealed the following RECs associated with the subject property or nearby properties: . .
• The subject property was historically part of a larger 70.83 acre tract used by Varian
AsSociates, Inc. (Varian Site) and bounded by EI Camino Real· to the northeast, Page Mill
Road·on the northwest, and Hanover Street on the.southwest. The Varian site consisted of
15 buildings across seven complexes (including the adjoining and adjacent properties to the
northeast, southwest, west, and north) and has been used by Varian since 1952 for
designing,. building, lTlarketing and servicing high technology products for customers i·n
industry, communications, defense, science and medical industries. Products produced
included electron tubes, solid state devices, vacuum components and systems based on
vacuum technology, analytical instruments, medical, systems, and magnetic components·.
In April 1989, a preliminary assessment of' the subject and surrounding properties
comprising the Va rian Site was performed. The assessment was initiated as part of a
discovery effort to identify sources of an area-wide volatile organic compound (VOe)
groundwater contamination problem within the larger Stanford Research Park Study Area in
Palo Alto. Fourteen companies within Stanford Research Park were been named In a
Regional Order which called for the characterization of the regiona', ,grou ndwater
contamination. The groundwater 'contaminants of concem were a variety of chlorinated
solvents, including TCE. The conclUSion of the preliminary assessment was that groundwater
underlying the site had been contaminated with TCE and other VOCs. Further,. although TCE
was migrating onto the site· from an up~gradlent offsitesource (namely Aydin Corporation,
located rvl;OOO~feet east of Buildings 3 and 3A, the current subject property), sampling
results indicated that the site has contributed to the overa11,groundwater contamination.
AccordIng to Stantec Consulting Corporation (Stantec) 2011 Annual Progress Report of the
"611 Hansen Way Site and Study Area" dated October 10, 2011~ chlprlnated VOCs including
peE, TCE, l,10 .. dichloroethene (l,l-DeE), cis-l,2.-dichloroethene (cis .. l,2-DCE), trans"1,2-
dichloroethene (trans-l;2":DCE), 1«'10 dlchloroethane (l,l-DCA), 1,1,1-TCA, l,l,2 .. trlchloro-
. Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page Iv AEI
Consultants
l,2,2"trifluoroethane (Freon 1.13), trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11), chloroform, and vinyl
chloride (VC), gasoline, and gasoline-related compounds have been detected in the soil and
groundwater of the Varian Site. The sources of this contamination are postulated to be:
o Historical aboveground chemical storage areas for Building lE (611 Hansen Way)
o An historical-paint booth, clean room, and machine shop in the western comer ·of
Building 3 (911 Hansen Way)
o Numerous chemical storage and process areas along the central portion of the west
wall of Building 4 (3120 Hansen Way)
o An historical clean room and aboveground TCE storage area in the southern corner of
Former Building 6 (3175 Hanover Street)
o Two former USTs that were removed in 1985 from the southern corner of Building 3
attributed to the gasoline and gasoline-related compound contamination.
Three main chlorinated voe plume areas, predominantly consisting of PCE and/or TeE,
have been identified at the Varian Site and are referred to by the building number with the
associated source area. These plume areas include the Building 1 Plume, Building 3 Plume,
and Building 4 Plume. VOC-affected groundwater flow zones are the three upper-most
zones referred to as the A1U, Al, and A2 zones.
Groundwater from the three VQC-affected zones was extracted and treated using 14 on-site
extraction wells (VEWwl through VEW-5, VEW-7 through VEW-14, and VEW-16), and
conveyed through double-contained piping to the treatment system located in the rear
-parking lot of 3075 Hansen Way (former Varian Building 7). The Bay Area Air Quality
IVianagement District (BMQMD) permits the air stripper operation and the treated
groundwater is discharged under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) general permit Issued by the Regional Water Quality-Control Board (RWQCB).
Groundwater from three off-site extraction wells (EW-12 through EW-14), which are part of
the adjacent California-alive-Emerson (COE) Study Area remediation program, was also
conveyed to the Varian treatment system for treatment and dismarge. On July 11~ 2006,
EW-14 was decommissioned under the oversight of the RWQCB, and the RWQCB authorized
_ permanent shutdown of EW-12 and a trial shutdown of EW-13 on February 9, 2007.
In August 2007, the existing groundwater extraction and treatment system (GWETS) was
shut down to facilitate in situ chemical oxidation (lSCO). In September 2007, chemical
oxidant injections, consisting of 1,050 gallons of approximately 10 percent sodium
permanganate (NaMn04) by weight, were completed into 15 wells. Since completing the
ISCO injections in September 2007, the GWET system has remained shut down and post
injection groundwater monitoring has been performed semi-annually.
Stantec's recommended future actions include the-submittal of the Third Five-Year Status
and Remedial Action Effectiveness Review Report in Novem ber 2011, and continuation of
groundwater monitoring alJd reporting.
The current subject property comprises Buildings 3 and 3A of the Varian site. The subject
property features seven monitoring wells used in the monitoring and remediation of
chlorinated solvents, denoted as V2h l, V3-4, V3~7, V3 .. 8, V3-9Al, V6-3, and VEW~10.
Groundwater samples collected from August 17, 2011 were analyzed for PCE, TeE, cis-l,2-
DCE, trans-l,2-DCE, VC, l,l,l-TCA, 1,1-DCA, 1,Z-DCA, 1/1-DCE, Freon 113, Freon 11,
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013 .
Page v AEI
Consultants.
methylene chloride, and chloroform. Concentrations of 7.4 1J9/L T~E and 1.5 I-Ig/L d5"'1,2-
DeE were detected In VEW-10. The remaining on-site wells do not appear to have been
sampled during the most recent sampling event. Historically, PCE, TCE and other
chlorinated solvents have been detected in on-site wells.
Based on this information, the historic uses of and releases from the subject property and
surrounding buildings of the larger Varian Site parcel have 'impacted the subsurface of the
subject property which represents a Recognized Environmental Condition. However, AEI
acknowledges the continuation of remediation activities under the oversight. of the
Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC) until regulatory case closure is
achieved. As such, no further' action is recommended with respect to this matter.
Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions (HRECs) are defined by the ASTM Standard
Practice E1527-0S as an environmentai condition Which in the past would have been considered
a recognized environmental condition, but which mayor may not be considered a recognized
environmental condition currently. AEI'5 assessment has revealed the following HRECs
associated with the subject property or nearby properties:
•. "No on-siteHRECs were identified during the course of this assessment. ,
De Minimis Environmentai Conditions include environmental concerns identified by AEI that
'warrant discussion but do not qualify as ·RECs, as defined by the ASTM Stal1dard Practice
E1S27-0S. AEI's assessment has revealed the following .de minimis environmental conditions
associated with the subject property or nearby properties:
• In addition to 'chlorinated solvent contamination, regulatory records indicate that the subject
property formerly operated two underground gasoline sto.rage tanks, one of which was
reported to be 2,Ooo-gallon5 in capacity. The tanks were reportedly removed in 1985 in
acCordance with Palo Alto Rre Department regulations. In 1987, gasoline odors were noted
during excavation work to ·install a fire sprinkler line. Subsequent soil samples confirmed
petroleum contamination, specifically benzene, tol4ene, ethyl .. benzene and xylene (BTEX),
as well as total petroleum hydrocarbons -gasoline (TPH-G). Between 1987 and 1992,
Cc!n~nie Environmental conducted an Investigation into the ,extent of soil contamination by
employing a ,soil gas survey, drilling 19 soil borings, and installing 17 soil vapor extraction
(SVE) wells. This investigation delineated the extent of BTEX and TPH-G in soil both
vertically and horizontally. A "hot Spot" was noted in the vicinity of one of the former USTs.
At initial startup of the SVE system on February 24, 1992" the greatest TPH .. G soH vapor
influent concentration ' detected was 47,450 parts per million by volume [ppmv]. The
average vapor influent concentration· for samples collected from all SVE ~ells was '21,000
ppmv for TPH-G. The ,sum of th.e BTEX components in vapor influent samples also was
detected at Its maximum at 3,472 ppmv, while the average BTEX concentration for all SVE
wells was 2,168 ppmv. After almost one year of operation, TPH-G levels had been reduced
to an average of 18 ppmv, and BTEX components had been reducedto less than 0.1 ppmv.
As of October 1993, TPH-G and BTEX soil vapor influent concentrations detected at all SVE
wells had decreased to below the detectable <;oncentration levels, of 1.0 ppmv for TPH-G
and 0.1 ppmv for BTEX compounds. The system was, therefore, shut down in December
1993 beCause the removal rate of TPH-G and BTEX had become zero. In addition, TPH-G
and BTEX'concentrations in, groundwater had b~n reduced slgnlfi~ntly during this period.
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
Page vi AEI
Consultants.
........ -.. ---.-.. ---.-~-----'-"-
Given the success of the SVE system/ Canonie Environmental recommended removal of the
SVE system which was agreed to by the DTSC in April 1995.
As noted above, the subject property and surrounding areas are currently under DTSC
oversight for remediation of chlorinated solvent rmpacts to groundwater. According to
Stantees 2011 Annual Progress Report dated October 10, 2011/ this remediation also covers
gasoline and gasoline-related compounds that have been .detected as a result of the UST
release. Therefore, traditional" 'closure' procedures for a UST release appear to have been
rolled into the larger remediation efforts that continue to this day. While the release from
the USTs appears to have been sufficiently minimized, only when chlorinated solvents
impacts have been remediated to the satisfaction of the DTSC is it likely that a case closure
or no further action status will be granted. AEI acknowledges the continuation of
remediation activities under the oversight of the Department of Toxic Substances and
Control (DTSC) until regulatory case closure is achieved.
Business Environmental Risks (BERs) include risks which can have a material environmental or
environmentally-driven impact on the business associated with the current or planned use of
the subject property/ not necessarily limited to those environmental issues required to be
investigated in' the standard ASTM scope. BERs may affect the liabilities and finat\cial '
obligations of the client, the health & safety of site occupants, and the value and marketability
of the subject property. AEI's assessment has revealed the following BERs associated with the
subject property or nearby properties:
• Due to the age of the subject property building/ there is a potential that asbestos-containing
materials (ACMs) are present. All suspect ACMs were observed in good condition and are
not expected to pose a health and safety concern to the occupants of the subject property
at this time. In the event that building renovation or demolition activities are planned, an
asbestos survey adhering to AHERA sampling protocol should be performed prior to
demolition or renovation activities that may disturb suspect ACMs.
• Due to the age of the subject property building, there is a potential that lead-based paint
(LBP) is present. All observed painted surfaces were in good condition and are not
expected to pose a health and safety concern to the occupants of the subject property at
this time. Local regulations may apply to lead-based paint in association with building
demolition/renovations and worker/occupant protection. Actual material samples would
need to be collected or an XRF survey performed in order to determine if LBP is present. It
should be noted that construction activities that disturb materials or paints containing any
amount of lead may be subject to certain reqUirements of the OSHA lead standard
contained in 29 CFR 1910.1025 and 1926.62.
• The subject property was historically used for agricultural purposes. There is a potential
that agricultural chemicals, such as pestiCides, herbicides and fertilizers, were used onsite.
The subject property is planned for commercial development, and the entire area of the
subject property will either paved over or covered by improvements that make direct
cOntact with any potential remaining concentrations in the soil unlikely. Based on this
information, the historic use of the subject property for agricultural purposes is not expected
to represent a sjgnlfica nt environmental concern.
Project No. 317806
May 2/2013
Page vII AEI
Consultants.
CONCLUSIONS, OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
We' have performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the property located at 911
Hansen Way in the City of Palo Alto, Santa Clara County,California, in general conformance
\jIiith the scope and limitations of ASTM Standard Practice E1527~05 and the Environmental
Protection Agency St~ndards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312). Any
.exceptions to, or deletions 'froml this practice are· described in Section 1.3 of this report. This
assessment has revealed evidence 'of RECs 1n connection with the property. Given that the
identified REC is part of current remediation actIvities under the oversight of the Department of
Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC), AEI recommends no further investigations for the subject
property at this time.
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page viii AEI
Consultants
TABLE 'OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 SCOPE OF WORK .............................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 SIGNIFICANT AsSUMPTIONS ...................................................... , .......................................................... 1
1.3 LIMITATIONS ................................................. , ............................................................................... »02
1.4 LIMmNGCoNDmONS .................................................................. : ................................................... 3
1.5 DATA GAPs AND DATA FAILURE ....................................................................................... , ................... 3
1.6 RELIANCE ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• , •••••••••••••••••••••••• , ••••••••••••• , •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3
2.0 SITE AND VICINITY DESCRIPTION ....................................................................... , ................ 4
2.1 SITE loCATION AND DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................ 4
2.2 SrrE AND VXQNIlY CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................. ~ ................................ 4
2.3 PHYSICAL SEl11NG ........................................................................................................................... 5
3.0 HISTORICAL REVIEW OF SITE AND VICINITY ....................................................................... 6
3.1 HISTORICAL SUMMARy ....................................................................................................................... 6
3.2" AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH REvIEW .................................... ; .... : .................................................. ·;' ... : .............. 7
3.3 SANBORN FIRE INSURANCE MAPS ........................................................... , ............................................. 8
3.4 CITY DIRECTORIES ........................................................ ; .................................................................. 8
3.5 HISTORICAL TOPOGRAPHIC.MAPS ............................................................................................ : ............ 8
3.6 CHAIN OF TmE ............................................................................................................................... 9
4.0 REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS REVIEW ...................................................................... n10
4.1 REGULATORY AGENCIES , ....................................... ,' .......................................................................... 10
5.0 REGULATORY DATABASE RECORDS REVlEW ............ u ...................................................... 12
5.1 RECORDS SUMMARy ........................................................................................................................ 12
6.0 INTERVIEWS AND USER PROVIDED INFORMATION ........................................................ 20
6.1 INTERVIEWS .............................................................. ; ................................................................... 20
6.2 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION .......................................................................................................... 20
6.3 PREVIOUS REPORTS AND OTHER PROVIDED DOCUMENTATION ................................................................... 21
7.0 SITE INSPECTION AND RECONNAISSANCE ...................................................................... 22
7.1 SUBJEtrPROPERTY RECONNAISSANCE FINDINGS .................................................................................... 22
7.2 NON-ASTM SERVICES ......................... It ............................................................................. to ........... 25
7.3 ADJACENT PROPERTY RECONNAISSANCE FINDINGS .................................................................................. 28
S.O SIGNATURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS ........................................................... 29
9.0 REFEREN CES ........ 1 ..................................................................... 1111 •••••••••••••••••• '11111 •••••••••••• 11.30
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page Ix AEI
Consultants.
FIGURI:S
1 SITE LOCATION MAP
2 SITE MAP
APPENDICES
A PROPERTY PHOTOGAAPHS
B REGULATORY DATABASE
C HISTORICAL SOURCES
D ReGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS
E OTHER SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
F QUALIFICATIONS
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
Page x AEI
Consultants
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report documents the methods and findings of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
(ESA) performed in general conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Standard
Practice E1527"05 and the Environmental Protection Agency Standards and Practices for All
Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312) for the property located at 911 Hansen Way in the City
of Palo Alto, Santa Clara County, California (Figure 1: Site Location Map, Figure 2: Site Map,
and Appendix A: Property Photographs).
1 .. 1 SCOPE OF WORK
The purpose of the Phase 'I Environmental Site Assessment is to assist the client in identifying
potential environmental liabilities associated with the presence of any hazardous substances or
petroleum products, their use, storage, and disposal at and in the vicinity of the subject
property, as well as regulatory non-compliance that may have occurred at the subject property.
Property assessment activities focused on: 1) a review of federal, state, tribal and local
databases that identify and describe underground fuel tank sites, leaking underground fuel tank
sites, hazardous waste generation sites, and hazardous waste storage and disposal fadlity sites
within the ASTM approximate minimum search distance; 2) a property and surrounding site
reconnaissance, and interviews with the past and present owners and current occupants and
operators to identify potential environmental contamination; and 3) a review of historical
sources to help ascertain previous'land use at the site and in the surrounding area.
The goal of AEI Consultants in conducting the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was to
identify the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on
the property that may indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a
release of any hazardous substance or petroleum product into the soli, -groundwater, or surface
water of the property.
1.2 SIGNIFICANT AssUMPTIONS
The following assumptions are made by AEI Consultants in this report. AEI Consultants relied
on information derived from secondary sources lnduding governmental agencies, the client,
designated representatives of the client, property contact, property owner, property owner
representatives, computer databases, and personal interviews. AEI COnsultants has reviewed
and evaluated the thoroughness and reliability of the information derived from secondary
sources including. government agendes, the client, designated representatives of the client,
property contact, property owner, property owner representatives, computer databases, or
personal interviews. It appears that all information obtained from outside sources and reviewed
for this assessment is thorough and reliable. However, AEI cannot guarantee the thoroughness
or reliability of this information.
Groundwater flow and depth to groundwater, unless otherwise specified by on-site well data, or
well data from adjacent sites are assllmed based on contours depicted on the United States
Geological Survey topographic maps. AEI COnsultants assumes the property has been correctly
and accurately identified by the client, designated representative of the client, property contact,
property owner, and property owner's representatives.
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
Page 1 AEI
Consultants
1.3 LIMITATIONS
Property conditions, as well as 'local, state, tribal and federal regulations can change
significantly over time. Therefore, the recommendations and ;conclusions presented as a result
of this study apply strictly to the environmental reguiationsand property conditions existing at
the time the study was performed. Available information has been analyzed using currently
accepted assessment techniques and it is believed that the Inferences made are reasonably
representative of the property. AEI Consultants makes no warranty, expressed or implied,
except that. the services have been performed in ·accordance with generally accepted
environmental property ·assessm.ent practices applicable at the time and locatIon of the study.
Considerations identified by ASTM as beyond the scope of a Phase 1 E~A that may affect
business environmental risk at a given property include the· following:· asbestos-containing
materials, radon, 1ead-based paint1.lead in drinking water, wetlands, regulatory compliance,
cultural and historic resources, industrial hygiene, health and safety, ecological resources,
endangered species, indoor air quality, mold, vapor intrusion, and high voltage lines. These
envir.onmental issues or condItions may warrant assessment based on the type of the property
transaction; however, they are conSidered non.-scope issues . under ASTM, Standard Practice
E1S27-0S.
If .requested by the·client, these non-scope issues· are discussed In Section 7.2. Otherwise, the
purpose of this assessment is solely to satiSfy one of the requirements for qualification of the
innocent landowner defense, contiguous property owner or bona fide prospective purchaser
under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)~
ASfM Standard Practice E1527-05 and the EPA Standards ·and Practices for All Appropriate
Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312) constitute the "all appropriate inquiry into the previous ownership
and uses of the property consistent with good commercial or customary practice" as defined in:
1) 42 U.S.C § 9601(35)(6), referenced in the ASTM Standard Practice E1527-0S.
2) Sections 101(35)(B) (U)and (iii) of CERCLA and referenced in the EPA Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate InqUiries (40 CFR Part 312). .
3) 42 U.S.C. 9601(40) and 42 U.S.C. 9607{q).
The Phase I EnVironmental Site Assessment is not, and should not be construed as, a warranty
or guarantee about the presence or absence of environmental contaminants that 'may affect the
property. Neither is the assessment intended to assure clear title to the property in question.
The sole purpose of assessment into property title records is to ascertain a hlstorical baSis of
prior land use. All findings, conclusions, and recommendations stated in this report are based
upon facts, ·circumstances, and industry"accepted procedures .for such services as they existed
at the time this report was prepared (i.e., federal, state, and local laws, rules, regulations,
market conditions, economic conditions, political climate, and other appllcabl·e matters). An'
findings, condusions, and recommendations stated In this rePort are . based on the data and
Information provided, and observations and conditions that existed on the date and time of the
property vl~lt.
Responses received from local, state, or federal agencies or other secondary· sources. of
information after the issuance of thls report may change certain facts, findings, conclUSions, or
. circumstances to· the rePort. A change in any fact, circumstance, or industry-accepted
Project No. 317806
·May 2,2013
Page 2
----_ .. _-_. ----
AEI
Consultants.
procedure upon which this report was based may adversely affect the findings, conclusions, and
recommendations expressed in this report.
1.4 LIMmNG CONDITIONS
The performance of this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was limited by the following
condition(s):
• The User did not complete the ASTM User questionnaire or provide the User information to
AEI. AEI assumes that qualification for the LLPs is being established by the User in
documentation outside of this investigation.
• Interviews with historical owners, operators, or occupants were not possible within the time
frame of this investigation. Based on the quality of information obtained from other
sources, this data gap is not expected to alter the findings of this assessment.
• Due to the time ,constraints associated with this report, AEI was not able to obtain records
from the Palo Alto Eire Department (PAFD), or the Santa Clara,County Environmental Health
Department (SCCEHD). However, based on the deta'iled information gathered from other
sources, such as the aerial photographs and building department records' the absence of
this information is not expected to alter the findings of this investigation.
1.5 DATA GAPS AND DATA FAILURE
According to ASTM E1S27-0S, data gaps occur when' the Environmental 'Professional is unable
to obtain information required/ despite good faith efforts to gather such information.
Data failure is one type of data gap. According to ASTM E1527-05 "data failure occurs when all
of the standard historical sources that are reasonably ascertainable and likely to be useful have
been reviewed and yet the objectives have not been met". Pursuant to ASTM Standards,
historiCal sources are required to document property use back to the property's first developed
use or back to 1940, whichever is earlier.
Signlficant data gaps' were not identified during the course of this assessment.
1.6 REUANCE
All reports, both verbal and written, are for the benefit of David J. Powers &. Associates, Inc.
This report has no other purpose and may not be relied upon by any other person or-entity
without the written consent of AEI. Either verbally or in writing, third parties may come into
possession of this report or all or part of the information generated as a result <;>f this work. In
the absence of a written agreement with AEI granting such rights, no third parties shall have
rights of recourse or recovery whatsoever under any course of action against AElt its Officers,
employees, vendors, successors or assigns. Reliance is provided in accordance with AEI's
Proposal and Standard Terms &. Conditions executed by David J. Powers & Associates, Inc. on
March 20, 2013. The limitation of liability defined in the Terms and Conditions is the aggregate
limit of AEI's liability to the client and all relying parties. -
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page 3 AEI
Consultants
2.0 SITE AND VICINITY DESCRIPTION
2.1 SITE -LOCATION AND DESCRIPTlON
The subject property, which consists of a medical-manufacturing and testing facility, is located
on the southeast side of Hansen Way in a-mixed commercial -and residential area of Palo Alto,
"California. The property totals approximately 13.7 acres and is improved with a two~story
bullding (Building 3) and a one~story _ building (Bunding 3A) tota"llng approximately 157,700
square "feet. The buildings are slab-on~grade and are not constructed With basements or sub
grade areas. The subject property is currently occupied by Varian Medical Systems. On .. site
-operations indud~ administrative activities and-the assembly and testing of medical dev-jces for
treating cancer -and other medIcal conditions. _ In addition to the subject property buildings, the
property is improved with an outdoor storage yard, fully -enclosed storage structures, an
electrical substation structure and asphalt-paved parking areas and associated landscaping.
The subject property was identified in the reg ulatory database as a Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) SmaU~Qua ntity-Generator -(SQG), California Hazardous Waste 'Information
System (HAZNET), and Facility Index Notiflcati-on System (FINDS) site. In addition, the subject
property ' was. identified along with several surrounding properties as an ENVIROSTOR site.
These listings are further discussed in Section 5.1. -
The Assessor's Parcell\lumber (APN)-for tJ:le subject property is 142~20~097. According to Mr.
Yuki Yamahata (property manager), heatIng -and -cooling syst-ems on the subject property are
fueled by natural gas and electricity the aty of Palo Alto. Potable water and sewage disposal
are also provided by the City of Palo Alto.
Refer to Figure -1: Site location Map, Figure 2: Site Map, and Appendix A: Property Photographs
for site location.
2.2 SITE AND VICINITY CHARACTERISTICS
The subject property Is located in a mixed commercial and residential area of Palo Alto. The
immediately surrounding properties consist -of the following:
--'Dh'e~iori from -:-
: ---~iw --'" :-, .. ,':' ..
Northeast
Southeast
SOuthwest --
West
-North
Proj.ect No. 317806
May 4/2013
Page 4
.,..-,"' ACJdress-Teriant/Us,~ ----
---. t· .. : .... -, -------',,' -.-!." ....... ---
Communications Power & Industries (60.7 Hansen Way}
Residential properties fronting Chimalus-Drlve
Cooley Goodward Kronlsh, LLP,(3175 Hanover Street)
Varian-Medical Systems Office Buildings (3100, 3120. & 3130 Hansen Way)
Hansen Way, followed by an electrical substation (950 Hansen Way) and Nest Inc.
Laboratory (900 Hansen Way). Further. northwest across Hansen Way is a multl-
tenant office bulldlng{3075 Hansen Way) ,
AEI
Consultants. -
The adjoining property to the northeast (Communications & Power Industries) was identified in
tile regulatory database as a RCRA-Corrective Action (CORRACfS), RCRA-Large-Quantfty
Generator (LQG), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), 2020 Correction
Action, HAZNET, FINDS, Hazardous Waste Property (HWP), Waste Discharge Permit (WDS),
Aboveground Storage Tank (AST), California Hazardous Material Incident Report System
(OiMIRS), and a Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) Listings facility.
Building 4 of the adjoining property to the west (Varian Medical Systems) was identified in the
regulatory database as a RCRA-Transport, Storage & Disposal Facility (TSDF), Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCL1S) No-Further
Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP), RCRA CORRACTS, ENVIROSTOR, RCRA" SQG, Toxic Release
Inventory System (TRIS), CUPA Listings, HAZNET, HWP, .WDS, 2020 Corrective Action, FINDS,
PCB Activity Database Systems (PADS), and U.S. Financial Assurance fadlity.
Building 48 of the adjoining property to the west (Varian Medical Systems) was identified in the
regulatory database as a NPDES, Emissions Inventory Data (EMI), and CUPA Listings facility.
The adjacent property to the northwest (multi~tenant office building) was Identified in the
regulatory database as an ENVIROSTOR facility.
The adjacent property to the north (electrical substation) was identified in the regulatory
d~tabase as an Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) facility.
2.3 PHYSICAL SenING
Geology: According to Information obtained from the US GeologIcal Survey (USGS),· the area
surrounding the subject property is underlain by quaternary alluvium and marine depOSits of the
Cenozoic-era. Based on a review of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Survey
for the area of the subject property, the soils in the vidnity of the subject property are classified as
Urban land-Cropley complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes, typically found In qlluvlal fans and consist of
disturbed and human transported material or alluvium derived from calcareous shale. Solis from this
series are characterized as being more than 80 inches to· the water table or other restrictive feature,
being well-drained with high (about 9.1 inches) available water capacity, and non-salinity to slight
salinity.
USGS Topographic Map:
Nearest surface water to subject property:
Gradient Direction/ Source:
Estimated Depth to Groundwater/Source:
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page 5
Palo Alto, California Quadrangle
Matadero Creek, located N1,OOO feet east
North, based on groundwater monitoring data for
the subject and surroundlnQ properties
19-26 feet bgs, based on groundwater monitOring
data for the subject and surrounding properties
AEI
Consultants
3.0 HISTORICAL REVIEW OF SITE AND VICINITY
3.1 ,HISTORICAL SUMMARY
Reasonably ascertainable standard historical sources ,as outlined in ASTM Standard E1S27-0S
were used to determine previous uses and occupancies of the subject property that are likely to
have led to RECs tn connection With the subject property. A chronological summary of historical
data found, including but not limited to aerial photographs, historic city directories, Sanborn fire
insurance, maps and agency records is as follows:
,9a~ Range, s~"bj~~·~rp'pert.v" ' :,'s.,uJice(s)' -"' " -'r,
..
.,,; .. ' P~$f;1i,i)t,iQIJ I u.se', ' ~ "
. ",
1939-1956 Agricultural land Aerial photographs.
196Q-Present Office and manufacturing Aerial photographs, city directories; building records,
site reconnaissance, regulatorY records
The property was developed with the current improvements in 1956. Prior to the current site
improvementsf the subject property was identified as agricultural land from at least 1939 to
1956. There is a potential that agricultural chemicals, 'such as pesticides, herbiddes and
fertilizers( were used onsite. The subject property is zoned as RP (Research Park) and for
commercial 'development, and. the entire a rea .of the subject property is either paved over or
covered by improvements that make direct contact with any potential remaining concentrations
in the soli unlikely_ Based on, this information, the historic use of the subject property for
agricultural purposes is not expected to represent a Significant environmental concern.
According, to available historical and regulatory information, the subject property was historically
part of a larger 70.83 acre tract used by Varian Associates, Inc. and bounded by ,EI Camino Real
to the northeast, Page MlII Road on the northwest, and Hanover Street on the southwest, with
an apparent address of 611 Hansen Way. The Varjan site consisted of 15 buildings across
seven complexes (including the adjoin.ing and adjacent properties to the north~ast, southwest
west, and north) and has been used, by Varian since' 1,952 for'designing, building, marketing
and servicing. high technology ,products for customers in Industry, communications, defense,
seence and medical 'Industries. 'Products produced included electron tubes, solid state devices,
vacuum components and syst~ms based on vacuum technology, analytical instruments, medical
systems, and magnetic components. In line With these opera'tions, Varian used a variety of
chemicals in its operations, including paints and thinners, refrigerants, adds and other
chemicals for etching and stripping, and solvents such as tetrachloroethylene (peE)!
trichlorOethylene (TCE), l,l, .. tric.hloroethane(TCA), methyl ethyl ketone, silver, mercury, and
methylene 'chloride.
The current subject property comprises Buildings 3 and 3A of the Varian site. Building 3 was
reportedly constructed In 1956 and featured chemical storage, a machine shop, a paint booth,
two vapor aegreasers, and a dean room. Building 3A was reportedly constructed in 1959 and
featured a storage shed, a photo lab, a carpentry shop and janitorial supply. In addition, two '
underground petroleum storage tanks, an acid neutralization system, and an oil/waste oil/
chemical storage area were'located at the subject property.
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
Page 6 ·AEI
Consultants.
Refer to Section 5.1 regarding environmental concerns associated with the larger subject.
property parcel's historical activities.
In addition to the subject property and immediately surrounding properties, surrounding areas
to the north, east and south also appear to be undergoing monitOring and/or remediation for
releases of chlorinated solvents, heavy metals and other contaminants. In particular, the
Hillview-Porter Region (located to the southeast. and extending one-half mile to the south
southwest) consists of nine sites located within the Stanford Research Park and the Hillview
Porter Regional Site! which consists of the Veterans Administration Hospital Property (VAHP);
the portion of Barron Park Neighborhood (BPN) bounded by EI Camino Real, Arastadero Road,
Miranda Avenue, and the southern property boundary of Varian Associates; and the stretch of
Matadero Creek between Foothill Expressway and EI Camino Real.
Given the existence of these known surrounding sources of contamination! and their active
monitoring and/or remediation under State supervision, it is apparent that subsurface soil and
groundwater conditions' in the area of the subject and surrounding properties has been
s;gnificantlyimpacted by various commercials and industrial practices •. As .such"it.isunlikely,,·,
that present subject property or surrounding property uses will materially impact the subject
property.
If available, copIes of historical sources are provided in the report appendices.
3.2 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH REVIEW
. AEI Consultants reviewed aerial photographs of the subject property and surrounding area.
Aerial photographs were reviewed for the following y~ars:
[)~te($} Scale'
1939 Unknown
1948
1956 Unknown
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page 7
$~bj~Qi Pro~rtv D~rlptloo
Agricultural land
Agricultural land
Surrounding Area Descrlptlons
North: A9ricuftural land,
South: Southern Pacific Railroad
followed by'agr1culturalland
East: Agricultural la,nd
West: Southern Pacific Railroad
followed by agricultural land
North: Agricultural land
Northwest: Hansen Way followed
by a building
South: The Imprint of the Southern
PaCific Railroad followed by
agricultural land and a commercial
building
East: Single family residences
West: The imprint of the Southern
Pacific Railroad followed by
agricultural land and a commercial
building
AEI
Consultants.
1964 Unknown Current Building 3, parking lot and North: Commercial buildings
1968 undeveloped area In southernmost Northwest: Hansen Way followed
1980 portion of property by commerdal buildings
South: Parking lot and commerdal
buildings
East: Slngl~ family residences
West: Parking lot and commercl'al
buildings
:1:9.87 Unknown Current buildings and parking lot North:' Commerdal buildings
1991 Northwest: Hansen Way followed
1998 bycommer.dal buildings
2002 ' South: Parking lot and commerci~1
2005 ,buildings
East: Single family residences
west: ,Parking ,lot and commercial
buildings
2012 u.nknown The subject property appears North: Commercial buildings
substantially .similar to those Northwest: Hansen Way followed
r~ , improvements noted during the site' bycommerdal'buHdlngs '
reronnaissance. South: 'Parki~g lot and commerCial
buildings
East: Single family residences
West: Parking lot and commercial
buildings
3'.3 SANBORN FIRE INSURANCE MAPS
Sanborn Fire Insurance maps were developed In the .late 1800s and early 1900s for use as an
assessment tool for fite insurance rates in urbaniz€d areas. A search was made of the Seattle
Public Library online collection of Sanborn Fire Insurance' maps. Sanborn map coverage was
not available for the. subject .property.
3.4 CITY DIRECTORIES
A search of histOric city directories was conducted for the subject property at the Palo Alto
Public LIbrary. Directories were available and reviewed for the years 1950, 1955,' 1960, 1965,
1970,' 1975, 1980; 1985, 1990-1991, 1995,,1996, 1999-2000, 2005, and 2011. The following
table summarizes the results of the dty directory search.
oty DIrectory Search Results '. ' , Date:Cs)': ,', :'·O(;Qlpitnt,ti$t~d· , --
, ,
1950-1Q55 Address not listed
1960 '''Under Construction" ~-,
1965k 2005 Address not listed,
2011 Varian Medical Systems
3.5 HISTORICAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS
In accordance with our approved scope, of services, historical topographic maps were not
reviewed as a part of this assessment.
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page 8 AE·I
Consultants
3.6 CHAIN OF TrrLE
In accordance with our approved scope of services, a Chain of Title search was not performed
as part of this assessment.
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
Page 9 AEI
Consultants
i I '
4.0' REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS REVIEW
4.1 REGULATORY AGENCIES
local and state agencies, such as environmental health departments, fire prevention bureaus,
and building and planni.ng departments are contacted to identify any current or previous reports
of hazardous materials use, storage, and/or unauthorized releases. that may have impacted the
subject property. In addition, 'information pertaining to Activity and Use Limitations (AUls),
defined as legal or physical restrictions, or limitations on the use of, or access to, a site or
facility, is requested.
4.1.1 HEALTH DEPARTMENT
On March 2.7, 2013, AEI contacted the Santa Clara County Environmental Health Department .
(SCCEHD) for Information on the subject property and nearby sites of concern. Files at this
agency may contain information regarding hazardous materials storage, as well as information
regarding unauthorized releases of petroleum hydrocarbons or .other contaminants that may
affect the soil or groundwater in the area. Duelo the time constraints assoCiated with this
report, AElwas not able to obtain records from SCCEHD. However, based on the detailed
'information gathered from other sources, suCh as the aerial photographs and bullding
-department records, the absence of this information is not expected to alter the findings of this
investigation.
4.1.2 FIRE DEPARTMENT
On March 27, 2013, AEI contacted the Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) for information on the
subject property and/or nearby sites of concern to identify any evidence of previous or current
hazardous material usage. Due to the time constraints associated 'with this. report, AEI was not
able to obtain records from SCCEHD. However, based on the detailed information gathered
from other sources, such' as the aerial photographs and building department records, the
absence of this information is not expected to alter the findings of this investigation.
4.1.3 BUILDING DE.PARTMENT
On March 28, 2013, AEI visited the City of Palo Alto Development Center for information ·on the
subject property in order to identify historical tenants and property use. Please refer to the
following table for a listing of permits reviewed:
SU/. 'l1g Pennlts e\ll~
·Year.($.) . . Ow.n.er/A·ppilcant· .
1998 . Varian Medical Systems
1999 Varian Medical Systems
2001 Varian Medical Systems
2002 Varian Medical Systems
2004 Varian Medical Systems
2004 Varian Medical Systems
2007 Varian Medical Systems
Project No. 317806
. May 2, 2013
Page 10
' . . ··~$erJptlori: ·Qf P.efmitlSuUding ':Uss .
Interior alterations "
Installation of hazardous (matelial) storage
building
Electrical permit for new awning
Endosure adjacent·to cooling tower
Test cell addition to existing building
Install upgraded 4160v-480/277V substation In
existing utility yard to exlstlnq system
Test cell addition to existing building
AEI
Consultants.
A City of Palo Alto Development Center staff member, informed AEI that internal Building
Department records state that in 1957 a building was constructed at 911 Hansen Way and it
was described as the "effective year built".
4.1.4 PLANNING DEPARTMENT
On March 28, 2013, AEI visited the City of Palo Alto Development Center and for information on
the subject property in order to identify AULs associated with the subject property. A Planner
on-Duty informed AEI that the Planning & Community Environment Department has no
information indicating the existence of AULs was on file for the subject property.
4.1.5 COUNTY ASSESSOR OFFICE
On March 28, 2013, AEI visited the Santa Clara County assessor's website for information on
the subJect property in order to determine the earliest recorded date of development and Use.
Limited Information was available from the assessor's website, pertaining mainly to property
values. A copy of the Santa Clara County assessor's parcel map and property information is
induded in Appendix E.
4.1.6 DEPARTMENTOF OIL AND GAS
, California Department of COnservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGR)
maps concerning the subject property and nearby properties were reviewed. DOGR maps
contain information regarding oil and gas development. According to the DOGR maps, there
are no oil or gas wells within 500 feet of the subject property. No environmental concerns were
noted during the DOG map review.
4.1.7 OTHER AGENCIES 'SEARCHED
On March 28, 2013, AEI visited the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
GeoTracker website for information on the regulatory listings of the subject and surrounding
properties. Information retrieved 'from the GeoTracker is summarized in Section 5.1.
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
Page 11 AEI
Consultants.
5.0 REGULATORY DATABASE RECORDS REVIEW '
AEI contracted Environmental Data Resources (EDR) to conduct a search of federal, state,
tribal, and local databases containing known and suspected sites of environmental
contamination. The number of listed sites identified within the approximate minimum search
distance (AMSD) from the Federal and State environmental records database listings specified
in ASTM Standard E 1527~OS are .stll'!Jmarized in the following table. A copy of the regulatory
database report is included in Appendix B of this report. .
The subject property was identified in the regulatory database as a RCRA-SQG, HAZNET, and
.FINDS site. in addition, the subject property was identified along with several surrounding
properties as an ENVIROSTOR site. These listings are further discussed below.
In determining If a site is a potential environmental concern to the subject property in the
records summary table below, AEI has appUed the following criteria to classify the site(s) as low
concern: 1) the site(s) only hold an operating pennit (which does not imply a release), 2) the
.site(s) have been granted "No FurtherAction" by the appropriate regulatory agency, and/or 3)
based upon AEI's reView, the distance and/or topographic position relative to the subject
property reduce the level of risk assodated with the site(s).
5.1 RECORDS SUMMARY
.. 'Da~ba:s~' .
.. ..
NPL
DEUSTED NPL
CERCUS
CERCUS NFRAP
ReRA CORRACTS
RCRA~TSD
RCRA LG-GEN, SM~GEN,
CESQGs, VGN, NLR
US ENG CONTROLS
US INST CONTROLS
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
Page 12
'. 'Search'.:: ~ S~bjeet '
Dj~tan~e . ··property
. (M.iles) Li$t~d .
1 No
0.5 N.o
0.5 No
O.S No
1 No
0.5 No
TP/ADJ Yes
TP No
TP No
:TQta', .... ·potentf~LEltvironlne.nbJl:
Number ·. ·C~ncemto.:·the Subje.ct
. of '. prpp~ttY. . .
L.i$.ti .... gs.· '. . .. ·JYe.s/NPl' '.
1 The listed Site is discussed
below
0
1 . The listed site 15 discussed
below
8 Two of the listed sites are'
further discussed below.
Based on distance, local site
topography, and/or current
regulatory status, the
remaining listed facilities are
not expected to represent a
. significant environmental
concern.
7 No
1 The listed sl te Is discussed
below
3 The listed sites are discussed
below
0
0
AEI
Consultants.
Database
.. ' ..
ERNS
STATE/TRIBAL HWS
(lnc1 udes Spills, sue,
Envlrostor, Historical Cal
Sites)
STATE/TRIBAL SWLF
STATE/TRIBAL
REGISTERED STORAGE
TANKS
STATE/TRIBAL LUST
STATE/TRIBAL ENG-INST
CONTROLS
STATE/TRIBAL VCP
STATE/TRIBAL
BROWNFIELD
Project No. 317806
May 2/2013
Page 13
Search" Subject
Distance Property
.. (Miles) Listed
TP No
1 Yes
0.5 No
TP/ADJ No
0.5 No
TP No
0.5 No
0.5 No
Total Potential " Environmental
Number "Concern "to the Subject
of . Property
Listirag s_ " (Yes/No)
0
55 Based on proximity to the
subject property, several of
these sites are further
discussed below.
Based on distance, local site
topography, and/or current
regulatory status1 the
remaining listed facllitles are
not expected to represent a
significant environmental
concern.
0
0
20 Based on proximity to the
subject property, several of
these sites are further
discussed below.
Based on distance, local site
top<;>graphy, and/or current
regulatory status, the
remaining listed facilities are
not expected to represent a
significantenvtronmental
concern.
0
0
0
AEI
Consu Itants.
, Database
" " .. . ,
ORPHAN
NON-ASTM DATABASES
. ,. SeardJ·" SubJect' . Total , ....
DJ$t~nce . . 'Prope'rty .; .N"rn~e.r
(Miles).. l.i$ted, of
Listings
N/A No 6
TP/ADJ Yes Multiple
Site Name: Varian (and several Iterations thereof)
Database(s): ENVIROSTOR and multiple other listings
Address: 607, 611, 911, 913,3030., 3075 &. 3140 Hansen Way
Distance: Subject Property and Surrounding Area
Direction: Subject Properly and Surrounding Area
COl11ments:
Tbe VarIan Site
-Po~entiaJ E~wiro'nmenta' .
c~nc~rn to the, S'uJ)ject . :,Pro~ .
. (VesINo),
bne of the identified orpha n
sites Is located adjacent to the
sLlbj~ property and Is
discussed below. One of the
sItes is'located within 200 feet
of the subject property but
does not represent a significant
,environmental concern. The
remaining 4 sites are not
located In the Immediate
vlcinlty (SOO-feet) of the
'subject property and are not
expected to represent a
significant environmental
concern.
Further discussed below.
As noted In Section 3.1, I the subject property was historically part of a larger 70.83 acre tract used by
Varian· Assodates, Inc. (Varian Site) and bounded by EI Camino Real to the northeast, Page Mill Road
on the northwest, and Hanover Street on the southwest The Varian site consisted of 15 buildings
across seven complexes (Including the adjoining and adjacent properties to the. northeast, southWest,
west, and north) and has been used by Varian since 1952 for .designing, building, marketing and
servicing high technology. products for OJstomers In Industry, communications, defEmse, sdence and
medical Industries. Products produced Induded electron tubes, solid state devices, vacuum components
and systems based on vacuum technology, analytical Instruments, medical systemsi and magnetic
components. .
In April 19891 a preliminary assessment of the subject and surrounding properties compriSing the
Varian. Site was performed. The assessment was Initiated as part of a discovery effort to Identify
sources of an area-wide volatile organic compound (VOC) groundwater contamination problem Within
the larger Stanford Research Park Study Area in Palo Alto. Fourteen companies within stanford
Research Park were been named In a Regional Order' which called for the characterization of the
regional groundwater contamination. The groundwater contaminants of concern were a variety of
.chlorinated solvents, Induding TeE. The conclusion of the preliminary assessment was that
groundwater underlying the site had been contaminated with TeE and other VOCs. Further, although
TeE was mlgratJng onto the sIte from an up-gradlent offstte source (namely Aydin CorporatIon, located
Nl,OOO~feet east of Buildings 3 and 3A1 the current subject property), sampling results Indicated that the site has contributed to the overall groundwater contamination.
According to Stantec Consulting Corporation (Stantec) 2011 Annual 'Progress Report of the \\611
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013 .
Page 14 AEI
Consultants.
Hansen Way Site and Study Area" dated october 10, 2011, chlorinated VOCs Including PCE, TeE, 1,10-
dlchloroethene (l,l-DeE), ds~l,2Mdlchloroethene (cis-l,2-DeE), trans-l,2-dlchloroethene (trans-l,2-
DeE), 1,10 dlch!oroethane (l/l-DCA), 1/1/1-TCA, 1/1,2-trlchloro-1,2,2-trlfluoroethane (Freon 113),
trlchlorofluoromethane (Freon 11), chloroform, and vinyl chloride (VC), gasoline, and gasoline-related
compounds have been detected In the 5011 and groundwater of the Varian Site. The sources of this
contamination are postulated to be:
• Historical aboveground chemical storage areas for Building lE (611 Hansen Way)
• An historical paint booth, clean room, and machine shop In the western rorner of Building 3 (911
Hansen Way)
• Numerous chemical storage and process areas along the central portion of the west wall of
Building 4 (3120 Hansen Way)
• An . historical clean room and aboveground TCE storage area in the southern comer of Former
Building 6 (3175 Hanover Street)
• Two former USTs that were removed in 1985 from the southern comer of Building 3 attributed to
the g~sollne and gasoline-related compound contamination.
Three main chlorinated VOC plume areas, predominantly. consisting of PCE and/or TeE, have been
Identified at the Valian Site and are referred to by the building number with the associated source
area. These plume areas Include the Building 1 Plume, Building 3 Plume, and Building 4 Plume. VOC
affected groundwater flow zones are the three upper-most zones referred to as the AIU, Ai, and A2
zones.
Groundwater from the three VOe-affected zones was extracted and treated using 14 on-site extraction
wells (VEW-l through V~-51 VEW-7 through VEW-14, and VEW-16), and conveyed through double
contained piping to the treatment system located in the rear parking lot of 3075 Hansen Way (former
Varian Building 7). The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BMQMD) permits the air sb"ipper
operation and the treated groundwater Is discharged under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) general permit Issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB). Groundwater from three off-site extraction wells (EW-12 through EW-l4), which are part of
the adjacent california-Olive-Emerson (COE) study Area remediation program, was also conveyed to
the Varian treatment system for treatment and discharge. On July 11, 2006, EW,:,14 was
decommissioned under the oversight of the RWQCB, and the RWQCB authorized permanent shutdown
of EW-12 and a trial shutdown of EW-13 on February 9,2007.
In August 2007, the existing groundwater extraction and treatment system (GWETS) was shut down to
facilitate In situ chemical oxidation (15CO). In September 2007, chemical oxidant injections, consisting
of 1,050· gallons of approximately 10 percent sodium permanganate (NaMn04) by weight, were
completed into 15 wells. Since completing the ISCO injections in September 2007, the GWET system
has remained shut down and post-injection groundwater monitoling has been performed semi
annually.
Stantec's recommended future actlons Include the submittal of the Third Five-Year Status and
Remedial Action Effectiveness Review Report In November 2011, and continuation of groundwater
monitoring and reporting.
The Subject Property
The current subject property comprises Buildings 3 and 3A of the Varian site. The subject property
features seven monitoring wells used In the monitoring and remediation of chlorinated solvents,
denoted as V2-1/ V3-4, V3-7, V3-B, V3-9Al, V6-3, and VEW-l0. Groundwater samples collected from
August 17, 2011 were analyzed for PCE, TeE, cls-l,2~DCE, trans-1/2-DCE, VC, 1/l,l-TCA, l,l-DCA,
1,2:' DCA, l/l-DeE, Freon 113/ Freon 11, methylene chloride, and chloroform. Concentrations of 7.4
1J9/L TCE and 1.5 l-Ig/L cls-l,2-DCE were detected In VEW-I0. The remaining on-slte wells do not
a " r to have been sam led durin the most recent sam Ii event. Historical peE TCE and other
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
Page 15 AEI
Consultants.
chlorinated solvents have been detected in on-site wells.
Based on this information, the historic uses of and releases from the subject property and surrounding
buildings of the larger Varian Site parcel have impacted the subsurface of the subject property which
represents a Recognized EnVironmenta·1 Condition. However, -AEI acknowledges the continuation of
remediation activities under the oversight of the Department of ToXic Substances and Control (DTSC)
until reglJlatory case ·closure Is achieved.
Subject Property -Former USTs
In addition to chlorinated solvent contamination, regulatory records indicate that the subject property
formerly operated two underground gasoline storage tanks, one of which was reported to be 2,000-
gallons In capadty. The tanks were reportedly removed in 1985 in accordance with Palo · Alto 'FIre
Department regulations. In 1987, gasoline odors were noted during excavation work to install a fire
sprinlder Ii.ne. Subsequent soli samples conflrmed petroleum contamination, .spedflcally benzene,
toluene, ethyl-benzene and xylene (BTEX), as well as total petroleum hydrocarbons --gasoline (TPH
G). Between 1987 and 1992, Canonle Environmental conducted an Investigation into the extent of soil
contamination by employing a soil gas survey, drilling 19 soil borings, and Installing 17 soil vapor
extraction .(SVE) wells. This investigation delineated the extent of BTEX and TPH-G In soU both
vertically alidhorlzontally. A "hot spot'lwas noted In the vicinity of oneofthEfformer USTs.
At Initial startup of the SVE system on February 24, 1992, the greatest TPH-G soli vapor lilAuent
concentration detected was 47,450 parts per million by volume [ppmv]. The average vapor InflUent
concentration for samples collected from all SVE wells was 2~,OOO ppmv for TPH~G. The sum of the
BTEX components In vapor Influent .samples also was detected at Its maximum at 3,472 ppmv, While
the average ·BTEX concentration for all SVE wells was 2,168 ppmv. After almost one year of operation,
TPH~ levels had been reduced to an average of 18 ppmv ,and BTEX components had been reduced to
less than'O.l ppmv. As of October 1993, TPH-G and BTEX 5011 vapor Influent concentrations detected··
at all SVE wells had decreased to below the detectable concentration levelS·of 1.0 ppniv for TPH-G and
0.1 ppmv for BTEX compounds. The system was, therefore, 'shut down in December 1993 because the
removal rate of TPH-G and BTEX had become zero. In addition, TPH-G and BTEX concentrations In
groundwater had been reduced significantly during this· period. Given the success of the SVE··system,
Canonie EnVironmental recommended removal of theSVE syStem ·whlch was agreed to by the DTSC In
April 1995. .
As ·noted above, the subject property and surrounding areas are c.urren~ly under DTSC oversight for
remediation of chlorinated solvent Impacts to groundwater. According to Stantec's 2011 Annual
Progress Report dated October 10, 2011, this remediation · also covers gasoline and gasoline~related
compounds that have been detected as a result of the UST release. TMerefore, traditional 'dosure'
procedures for ·a UST release· appear to have been rolled Into the larger remediation efforts that
continue to this day. While the release from the USTsappears to' have been suffldently minimized,
·only when chlorinated solvents Impacts have been remediated to the satisfaction of the DTSC is it likely
that a case dosure or no further action status will be granted. Therefore, AEI acnowkedges the
. contInuation of remediation activities under the oversight of the Department of Toxic Substances and
Control DTSC · until r ulato case closure is achieved. '
Site Name: Varian Oncology Systems
Oatabase(s): RCRA':'SQG, FINDS, HAZNET
Address: 911 Hansen Way
Distance: Subject Property
Direction: Sub OCt Pro e
Comments:
Details rovlded in the database for the RCRA-S
Project No. 317806
May· 2, 2013
Page 16 .
has been
AEI
Consultants
I
classified as a small quantity generator of hazardous waste since October 12, 2000 and was classified
as a large quantity generator of hazardous waste ,on M(!rch 8, 1999. The subject property has
generated wastes such as benzene, carbon tetrachloride, TCE, peE, mercury, sliver and chloroform.
Information available from the Right-to-Know Network Indicates that the property received three'
written Informal violation warnings on September 22, 2008, each of which have been classified as In
compliance on October 21, 2008.
Details provided'in the HAZNET IIsti,ngs Indicate that the subject property 'generated the following
waste types and volumes In 2011i 0.024 tons of lab waste chemicals, 0.0035 tons of off-specification
aged or surplus organics, 1.35 tons of other organic solids, 0.0025 tons of liquids with pH <2.
Based on the discussion above, the former activities associated with this site have, impacted the
subsurface of the subject property and represents a Recognized Environmental Condition, and AEI
recommends the continuation of remediation activities under the oversight of the DTSC until regulatory
case closure is achieved.
Site N?tme: Val}Cln f'1~dica.1 SyRtems . ..;',.. ,
Database(s):' RCRA-TSDF, CERCLIS NFRAP, RCRA CORRACTS, ENVIROSTOR, RCRA-SQG, TRIS, CUPA
Ustings, HAZNET, HWP, WDS~ 2020 Corrective ACtion, FINDS, PADS, NPDES, EMI, U.S. financial
Assurance
Address: 3120 & 3130 Hansen Way
Distance; Adjoi ning
Direction: West (cross~gradient)
comments:
Historically this facility was Building 4 and Building 4B within the Varian Site. Please see above for
discussion of historic operations at this and surrounding facilities and their impact on the subject
property.
Given the historic contamination of subsurface solis and groundwater In the area surrounding the
subject property and adJoining/adjacent sites, and this facility's relative cross-gradient topographic
location compared to the subject property/ current commercial or industrial practices at this facility are
unlikelY to materially impact the subject_property.
Site Name: Communication & Power Industries
Oatabase(s): RCRA-CORRACTS, RCRA~LQG, NPDES, 2020 Correction Action, HAZNET, ANDS, HWP/
WDS, AST, a-IMIRS, CUPA Listings
Address: 607 Hansen Way
Distance: Adjoining
DIrection: Northeast (downwgradlent)
Comments:
According to prior AEI assessments, this fadlity Is currently utilized as an administrative and
manufacturing property for vacuum and microwave tube manufacture. Historically this fadllty was
Building 2 within the Valian Site. Please see above for discussion of historic operations at this and
surrounding facilltlf!!s and their Impact on the subject property.
Given the hIstoric contamination of subsurface solis and groundwater In the area surrounding the
subject property and adjoining/adjacent sites, and this facility's relative down-gradlent topographic
location compared to the subject property, current commercial or Industrial practices at this fadllty are
unlikely to materially Impact the subject property.
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page 17 AEI
Consultants.
Site Name: CPA Hansen Way Substation
Database(s): AST
Address: 950 Hansen Way
Distance: Adjacent
Direction: North (down..gradlent)
Comments:
Details provided in the AST database listings Indicate that a 12, 615-gallon aboveground storage tank
is located at this site. The presence of the aboveground storage tank at this site does not represent a
significant environmental concern.
Site Name: Aydin Energy DlvIsio·n/Aydin Energy/Aydin Corporation
Database(s): CERCLIS NFRAP, RCRA SQG, Hist. cal-Sites, CA BOND EXP. PLAN, FINDS, .cortese,
HIstoric Cortese, ~LIC, DEED·
Address: 3180 Hanover Street
Distance: ru1,OOo-feet
Direction: 'West-southwest (hydrologically cross-aradlent)
Comments: :
Based on records on file wIth the DTSC oollne database EnvlroStor, this Site. was listed as a State Site
in relation to a release of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and VOCS that fmpacted the groundwater
and soil of the site. According to the regulatory database, this site was. listed as a· RCRA SQG site In
association with the manufacturing of electronic components, and was Identified as an NFRAP site as
of February 28, 1989. According to Envlrostor, Aydin :Energy Corporation occupied the site as an·
electrical power eqUipment manufacturing and repair facility from 1968 to 1984, aRd Is located in
Stanford Industrial Park. This site was certified with land use restrictions as of September 30, 1997.
Surface cover Is required; the development of day· care centers, elder care centers, resldences, public
or private schools for persons under the age of 21, and hospitals Is prohlbltedj only extraction of
groundwater for site remediation is permitted; food production Is prohibited; and notification prior to
development, after change of property ownership, and prior to subsurface work is required. ,.-
Based on the inferred groundwater flow direction and/or relative proximity to the subject property, the
release at this site has limited potential to Impact the subject property. However, assessment of the
subject property does not rndlcate' that the subject property would be investigated as a .source of this
contamination. It is unlikely that the subject property owner would be responsible for any clean up .
costs associated with the release at this site. Based on this Information,. no further action or
Investigation appears to be warranted at this time. .
Site Name: Hewlett~Packard
Database(s): NPL, CERCUS, US ENG CONTROLS, ROD, NPDES, HIST CORTESE, SLIe, ENF
Address: 620-640 Page Mill Road
Distance: N2,400· feet
Direction: .North/northwest (uP'-Qradlent)
Comments:
Details provided in the database for the CERCLIS listings Indicate that this site was removed from the
CERCLIS list This site was referred to the RWQCB as of January 1, 2008 and this site has been open
for remedlatfoR as of December 31, 1990. According to available information on GeoTracker, a release
of ethylene dlbromide (EDB); l,l,l-trichloroethane (TCA)i acetone, benzene, other chlorinated
hydrocarbons, other solvent or non-petroleum hydrocarbons, TeE, and xylenes impacted the 5011 and
groUndwater of the site. Based on the Inferred groundwater flow direction and/or rela1:ive proximity to
the subject property, the release at this site has the potentIal to Impact the subject property. It is
unlikely that .the subject property would be responsible for any clean-up' costs associated with the
release at this site. Based on this informatlonl no further action or Investigation appears to be
Project No. 317806
May~, 2013
Page 18 AEI
Consultants.
I warranted at this time. J
Given the known contamination resulting from historic uses of the subject property and
adjoining/adjacent properties, and contamination from other surrounding sources, it is unlikely
that the remaining listed facilities wilt have a marked effect on the subsurface condition of the
subject property. Given this likelihood, and the active monitoring and remediation of the
subject property and surrounding areas, these surrounding listed facilities do not appear to
warrant further investigation at this time.
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page 19 AEI
Consultants.
6.0 INTERVIEWS AND USER PROVIDED INFORMATION
6.1 INTERVIEWS
Pursuant to ASTM E1527-05, the following interviews were performed during this investigation
in order to obtain information indicating RECs in connection with the subject property.
6.1.1 INTERVIEW WITH OWNER
AEI requested an interview 'with the subject properly owner; however, the sul?ject property
owner has not responded as of this report date. Based on the quality of information obtained
from other sources! this limitation is not expected to alter the overall-findings of this
investigation.
6.1.2 INTERVIEW WITH KEY SITE MANAGERS
The key site manager Mr. Yuki-Yamahata, Manager of Corporate Facilities Engineering was·
contacted by telephone on March 27, 2013. Mr. Yamahata has been assodated with the
. subject property since approximately 2006. Mr. Yamahata provided generaL information
regarding historic and current operations at the subject property. According to Mr. Yamahata
the facility was constructed 1n 1961 and has been occupied by Varian Medical Systems since
that date.
During the site inspection on March 28, 2013, Mr. Art McGlamery of Hoover Architects was
asked if he was aw.are of any of the following:
Any pending, threatened, or past litigation relevant to hazardous substances or
petroleum products in, on, or from the property. Yes X No
Any pendln.g,· threatened or past admh-ilstrative proceedings relevant to
hazardous substances or p,etroleum products In, on or from the property. Yes X No
Any notices from any governmental entity regarding ·any possible violation ·of .
'environmental laws or possible lIablllty relating to hazardous. substances or
petroleum products. Yes X No
Any lnddents of flooding, leaks, or other water Intruslon,and/or complaints
related to indoor air Quality. Yes X No
6.1.3 INTERVIEW WITH OTHERS
Information obtained during interviews with local government offidals is incorporated into the
approprtate segments of this section.
6.2 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION
User provided information is 'Intended to help identify the possibility of RECs in connection with
the subject property. According to ASTM E1527w05 and EPA's AAI Rule, certain items should be
researched by the prospective landowner or grantee, and the results of such inquiries may be
provided -to the environmental professional. The responsibility for qualifying for Landowner
Liability Protections (LLPs) by conducting the inquiries ultimately rests with the User, and
,providing the information to the environmental professional would be prudent if such
information j·s available.
Project No. 317806
, May '2; 2013
Page 20 AEI
Consultants
The User did not complete the ASTM User questionnaire or provide the User information to AEI.
AEI assumes that qualifICation for the LLPs is being established by the User in documentation
outside of th is assessment.
6.3 PREVIOUS REPORTS AND OTHER PROVIDED DOCUMENTATION
No prior reports or relevant documentation in association with the subject property were made
available to AEI during the course of this assessment.
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page 21 AEI
Consultants
7.0 SITE INSPECTION AND RECON~AISSANCE
On March 28, 2013, a site reconnaissance of the subject property and adjacent properties was
conducted by Mr. Scott Van de Mark of AEI in order to obtain information indicating the
iikelihood of RECs at the· subject property ,and' adjacent properties as specified in ASTM
Standard Practice E1527 .. 05 §8.4.2, 8.4.3 and 8.4.4. During the onsite reconnaissance, AEI w,as
accompanied by Mr. Art McGlamery of Hoover Architects. Mr. McGlamery serves as a consulting
architect to Varian Medical Systems and is involved with upcoming planned renovations and
constructbn at the subject property. During the onsite reconnaissance AEI was able to Inspect
all of the subject property" however due to restricted access AEI was not able to inspect the
following areas; elevator utility room, flammable materials storage unit and the radioactive
materials storage unit.
7.1 SUBJECT PROPERTY ,RECONNAISSANCE FINDINGS
No' observation .' ~ .. , . .~ .
x Hazardou1? Substar:lces and/or Petroleum Products rn Connection with Property Use
x Aboveground & Underground Hazardous Substance or Petroleum Product Storage
Tanks (ASTs lUSTs) '. ,
x Hazardous Substance and Petroleum Product Containers and Unrdentifled
Containers not In Connection with Property Use
x Unidentified Substance Containers
x Electrical or Mechanical Equipment Likely to Contain Fluids
X Interior Stains or Corrosion
t--_-I __ x~_~g, Pungent or Noxious Odors
X I Pools of LiqUid
x Drains, Sumps and Clarifiers
x Pits, Ponds, and Lagoons
x Stained 5011 or Pavement
x stressed Vegetation
x Solid Waste Disposal or Evidence ,of Fill. Materials
x Waste Water Discharges
x Wells
X Septic Systems
X Other'
The subject property is currently occupied by Varian' Medical Systems. On~site operations
consist of business ,administration, manufacturing and testing. The above identjfied observed
items are further discussed below. '
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND/OR, PETROLEUM PRODUCTS:1N CONNECTION WITH PROPERTY USE
HartatdolJ,s Material,:' : '
, ,(SileiqQan~f;yi ' . '
Compressed gases; air, argon,
helium, nitrogen, oxYgen, sulfur
hexafluoride
(5' cvllnders/appr. 40~50)
Project No. 317806
'May 2,2013
Page 22
Various locations In Building 3
and in the storage yard
adjacent to building 3
. " ·'$:eeond.aiy.":
c'ontalnment
• I •• I •
No
,stairii.ng/ ' . 'SpiUs"
NA
AEI
Consultants
Hazardous Material location Secondary Stainingl
(sizelquantity) Containment Spills
Lead contaminated debris (30 Building 3 No No
aallon drum/i)
Synthetic electric insulaUhg 011 storage yard adjacent to No No
(55 gallon drums) Building 3
Propane (33 pound cyllnders/S) Storage yard adjacent to No NA
Building 3
Radioactive labeled drums (55 Storage yard adjacent to No NA
gallon drums/7) Buildinc 3
Soils from adjacent property soil Parking area of Building 3 No No
borings
According to representatlve of Varian . Medical Systems, Inc., the facility no longer uses
chlortnated"based solvents for degreasing parts produced during the manufacturing process.
Specifically, the property reportedly uses Asahlklin AK-225T solvents for .cJegreasing. This
solvent does not contain _ peE, TCE .... or. other chlorinated compounds. The solv~t)~ .~re stored
on-site in small bottles, used, and then collected by Veolia ES Technical Services who then
reclaim the solvents for re-use.
other flammable materials are located within.6 deditated storage structure located in a storage
yard at the south end of Building 3A. AEI was .not granted access to this structure due to
security concerns. No obvious Indicators of spills, releases, or other evidence of material·
mishandling was noted during the site visit.
Based on the quantities observed, the maintenance, condition and sealing of the observed
drums, and the lack of evidence of leaks, spHls, staining, or mishandling, and information
SUpplied by representatives of Varian Medical Systems, Inc., the presence of these materials is
not expected to represent a sIgnificant environmental concern.
ABOVEGROUND & UNDERGROUND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE OR PETROLEUM PRODUCT STORAGE
TANKS (ASTS lUSTS)
SiZ$ (gallons)/ Contents Location Construction/SecondarY
Containment
Hydrogen gas (10' vertical storage Building 3 Steel/no
tank/2 and 8' vertical storace tank/3)
Uquidnltrogen (14' vertical storage Storage yard adjacent to Steel/no tank/i) Building 3
Hydrogen gas (20' horizontal storage Storage yard adjacent to Steel/no
tank/i) Building 3
Given the stored materials and lack of evidence to suggest a significant release, the observed
ASTs do not appe~r to represent a si.gnificant environmental concern.
ELECTRICAL OR MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT LIKELY TO CONTAIN FLUIDS
Toxic polychlOrinated biphenyls (PCBs) were commonly used historically in electrical equipment
such as transformers, fluorescent lamp ballasts, and capacitors. According to United States EPA
regulation 40 CFR, Part 761, there are three .categories for classifying such eqUipment: <50
ppm of PCBs is considered "Non-PCB"; between 50 and 500 ppm Is considered "PCB-
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page 23 AEI
Consultants.
Contaminated'~; and >500 ppm is considered "PCB-Containing". Pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
2605{e)(2){A), the manufacture, process, or distributIon in commerce or use of any
polychlorinated biphenyl in any manner other than in a totally enclosed manner was prohibited
after January 1, 1977.
Electrical Substation
An electrical substation was obselVed on the subject property during the s!te inspectio~. No
information was provided regarding the age, ownership or technical specifications of the
substation. Given the unknown age and date of installation of the electrical substation, it is not
known if the substation contains any PCB containing· fluids. Federal Regulations (40 CFR 761.
Subpart G) require any release of m'aterial containing greater th.an 50 ppm PCB and occurring
after May 4, 1987, be cleaned up by the Owner following the United States Environmental
Protection Agency's (USEPA) PCB spill cl.eanup policy. No spills, staining or leaks were observed
on or around the substation. Based 'on the good condition of the substation, Jt is not expected
to represent 'a siQnificant enVironmental concern.
Elevator
The subject property bu'ilding is equipped with a hydraulic elevator. The hydraulic fluid
contained within elevator systems can potentially contain toxic polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs). Based on the construction date of the building (pre-1978), the potential exists that
hydraulic fluid within the eqUipment may have contained PCBs. The equipment room for the
elevator was not accessible during. AErs site' reconnaissance. The elevator is reportedly
maintained by a private third-party contractor. Based on the regular maintenance of the
eqUipment, the elevator is not expected to represent a significant environmental concern.
DRAINS, SUMPS.AND CLA~FIERS
Three storm drains are located in the north end of the. storage yard adjacent to Building 3. One
of the storm drains is located within 10 feet of seven 55-gallon drums affixed with Radioactive
labels. Given the excellent housekeeping· and maintenance of the storage yard and the good
and. secured condition of the referenced drums, the presence of the drums affixed with
Radioactive lab.els in close proximity to the storm drain does r)ot represent 'a Significant
environmental concern, however it Is recommended that the drums be located in a more secure
area in the storage yard' and further away from any storm drains or they should be stored
indoors in Building 3 or 3A. The other two storm drains in the north end of the storage yard
are not jocated near any hazardous substances or petroleum products. Based on the use of the
drains solely for storm water runoff, the presence of the drains is not expected to represent a
Significant environmental concern.
Multiple storm drains were obselVed in the parking area of the subject property. No hazardous
substances or petroleum products were noted In the vicinity of the drains. Based on the use of
the drains.solely for storm water runOff, the presence of the drains is not expected to represent
a significant environmental concern.
Floor drains are present in each of the test cell' rooms in Building 3 and floor drains are also
located In restroom areas of Building 3. No ·storage of hazardous' materials or petroleum
products appeared present near the drains. Based on these observations, the presence of the
drajns is not expected to represent a Significant environmental concern.
Project No. 317806
May 2,'2013
Page 24 AEI
Consultants
7.2 NON .. ASTM SERVICES
7.2.1 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING BUnDING MATERIALS
OSHA
For buildings constructed prior to 1981, the Code of Federal Regulation's (29 CFR 1926.1101
and 29 CFR 1910.1001) define presumed asbestos~containing material (PACM) as 1. Thermal
System Insulation (TSI), e.g., boiler 'insulation, pipe lagging, fireproofing; and 2. Surfacing
Materials, e.g., acoustical ceilings. Building owners/employers are responsible for locating the
presence and quantity of PACM. Building Owners/employers can rebut installed material as
PACM by either having an Inspection in accordance with Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response
Act (AHERA) '(40 CFR Part 763, Subpart E) or hiring an accredited inspector to take bulk
samples of the suspect material.
Typical materials not covered by the presumptive rule include but. are not limited to: floor tiles
and adhesives, wallboard systems, siding and roofing. Building materials such as wallboard
systems may contain asbestos but unless a building owner/employer has specific knowledge 'or -
should have known through the exercise of due diligence that these other materials contain
asbestos, the standard does not compel the building owner to sample these materials.
NESHAP
The applicability of the EPA's National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP, 40 CFR Chapter 61, Subpart M) apply to the owner or operator of a facility where an
inspection for the presence of, asbes~os-containing matelials (ACM), including category I
(asbestos containing packings, gaskets, resilient floor coverings and asphalt roofing products),
and Category II (all remaining types of non~friable asbestos containing material not included In
Category I that when dry, cannot be crumbled, pulverized or reduced to powder by hand
pressure), non-friable ACM must occur prior to the commencement of demolition or renovation
activities. NESHAP defines ACM as any material or product that contains greater than 1%
asbestos. It should be noted that the NESHAP regulatIon applies to all facilities regardless, of
construction date, including,: 1.. Any institutional, commerCial, puplic, industrial, or reSidential
structure, installation, or building; 2. Any ship; and 3. Any active or inactive waste disposal site.
This' requirement is typically enforced by the EPA or by local air pollution control/air quality
management districts.
The information ,below is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute an
asbestos survey. In addition, the information is not intended to comply wlth"federal, state or
local regulations in regards to ACM. '
Due to the age of the subject property building, there is a potential that ACMs are present. The
condition and friability of the identified suspect ACMs is noted jn the following table:
Suspect Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs)
,M~tel:'ial
Drywall Systems
Flooring Systems
Ceiling llies
Roofing Systems
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
Page 25
i..o(atJon ' ,
Throughout Building Interior
Throughout Building Interior
Throughout Building Interior
Roof
Fti~l.>le Condition
Yes Good
No Good
Yes Good
Not Inspected Not Inspected
AEI
Consu Itants.
All observed suspect ACMs were in good condition and are not expected to pose a health and
safety concern to the occupants of the subject property at this time. In the event that building
renovation or demolition activities are planned, an asbestos survey adhering to AHERA sampling
protocol should be performed prior to demoUtion or renovation activities that may disturb
suspect ACMs.
7.2.2 LEAD .. BASED PAINT
Lead-based paint (LBP) is defined as any paint, varnish, stain, or other applied coating that has
21 mg/cm2 (5,000 I-Ig/g or 5,000 ppm) or more of lead by federal guideUnes; state ,and local
definitions may differ from the federal definitions in 'amounts ranging from 0..5 mg/cm2 to 2.0
mg/cm2• SectIon 1017 of the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Guidelines, Residential
Lead"Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, othelWise known as "Title X", defines' a, LBP
hazard is "any condition that causes exposure to lead that would result in adverse human
health effects'" resulting from lead-contaminated dust, bare" lead-contaminated soil, and/or
lead-contaminated paint that is deteriorated or present on acces51bl~, friction, 'or 'impact
surfaces. Therefore, under Title X, intact lead-based paint on most walls and ceilings would, not
be considered a "hazard", although the paint should be maintained and its condition and
monitored to ensure that it do.es not deteriorate and become a hazard. Additionally, Section
1018 of this law directed HUD and EPA to require, the disdosure of known information on lead~
based paint and lead-based paint hazards before the sale or lease of most housing built before
1978. Most private housing, public housing, federally owned or subsidized housing are affected
by this rUle.' ,
Lead-containing paint (LCP) is defined as any paint ,with any detectable amount of lead present
in it. It is important to note that LCP may create a lead hazard when being: removed. The
condition of these materials must be monitored when they are ,being disturbed. In the event
LCP is subject to abrading, sanding, tor.ching and/or cutting during demolition or renovation
activities, there may be regulatory issues that must be addressed.
The Information below is for general informational pl:lrposes only and does nat constitute a lead
hazard evaluation. In addition, the information is not .intended to comply with federal, state or
local regulations in regards to lead-containing paints.
In buildings constructed after 1978, it is unlikely that LBP is present Structures built prior, to
1978 and especiaJly prior to the 1960's should be expected to contain LBP.
Due to the age of the subject· property building, there Is a potential that lead-based paint (LBP)
is present. All observed painted'surfaces were in good condition and are not expected to pose
a health and safety concern to the occupants of the subject property at this time. Local
regulations may apply to lead--based paint in association with building demolition/renovations
and worker/occuparlt protection. Actual materIal samples would need to be collected or an XRF
sUivey performed in order to determine if LBP is present. It should be noted .that construction
activities that disturb materials or paints containing fJny amount of lead may be subject to
certain requirements of the OSHA lead ,standard contained in ~9 CFR 1910.1025 and 1926.62.
Project No. 317806
May 2',' 2013
Page 26
. .
AEI
Consultants
7.2.3 RADON
Radon is a naturally-occurring, odorless, invisible gas. Natural radon levels vary and are closely
related to geologic formations. Radon may enter buildings through basement sumps or other
openings.
The US EPA has prepared a map to assist National, State, and local organizations to target their
resources and to implement radon-resistant building, codes. The map divides the country into
three Radon Zones, Zone 1 being those areas with the average predicted indoor radon
concentration in residential dwellings exceeding the EPA Action limit of 4.0 plcoCuries per Liter
(pall). It is important to note that the EPA has found homes with elevated levels of radon in
all three zones, and the EPA recommends site specific testing in order to determine radon levels
at a specificlecation. However, the map does give a valuable indication of the propensity of
radon gas accumulation in structures.
Radon sampling was not requested as-part of this assessment. According to the US EPA, the
radon zone level for the area is Zone 2 which has a predicted average indoor screening level
~, between-;2-.0 pOll and equal to or b~low the action level of 4.0 pCi/L set forth"by the'EPA~"
7 .2.4 DRINKING WATER SOURCES AND LEAD IN DRINKING WATER
The aty of Palo Alto supplies potable water to the subject property. The most recent water
quality report (2010) states that lead levels in samples from the area's water supply were well
within standards established by the US EPA.
7.2.5 MOLD/INDOOR AIR QUALITY ISSUES
Molds are simple, microscopic organisms, which can often be seen in the form of discoloration,
frequently green, gray, white, brown or black. When excessive moisture or water accumulates
Indoors, mold growth will often occur, particularly if the moisture problem remains undiscovered
or Is not addressed. As such, interior areas of buildings characterized by poor ventilation and
high humidity are the most -common locations of mold growth. Building materials induding
drywall, wallpaper, baseboards, wood framing, insulation, and carpeting often play host to such
grpwth. Mold spores primarily cause health problems through the Inhalation of mold spores or
the toxins they emit when they ·are present in large numbers. This can occur primarily when
there is active mold growth within places where people live or work.
Mold, if present, mayor may not visually manifest itself. Neither the individual completing this
inspection, nor AEI has any liability for the identification of mold-related concerns except as
defined in applicable industry standards. In short, this Phase I ESA should not be construed as
a mold sUivey or inspection.
AEI Consultants observed' interior areas of the subject building in order to identify the
significant presence of mold. AEI did not note obvious visual or olfactory indications of the
presence of mold, nor did AEI observe obvious indications of significant water damage. As
such, no b{Jlk sampling of suspect surfaces was conducted as part of this assessment and no
additIonal action with respect to mold appears to be warranted at this time.
This activity was not designed to discover all areas which may be affected by mold growth on
the subject property. Rather, it is intended to give the dient an IndIcation if significant (based
on <;>bserved areas) mold growth is present at the subject property. Additional areas of mold
Project No. 317806
May 2,2013
Page 27 AEI
Consultants
. ("k
not observed as part of this limited assessment, possibly in pipe chases, HVAC systems and
behind enclosed walls and ceilings, may be present on the subject property
7.3 . ADJACENT PROPERTVRECONNAISSANCE FINDINGS
'. '. No'· ObserYQtiQn ..
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
~,
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
--Hazardous Substances and/or Petroleum 'Products in Connection with Property Use
Aboveground & Underground Hazardous Substance or Petroreum Product Storage
. Tanks .(ASTs lUSTs)
Hazardous Substance .and Petroleum Product Contaloers and Unidentified
Containers not In Connection with Property Use .
Unidentified Substance Containers
Electrical or M-echanlcal Equipment Likely to Contain Fluids
Strong, Pungent or Noxious Odors
Pools of liquid
Drains, SUmp.s _and Clarifiers
Stained SOli or Pavement
stressed Vegetation
Solid Waste Disposal or Evidence of Fill Materials
Waste Water Discharges
Wells
Septic Systems
Other
The above identified obselVed items are further discussed below~
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ANDloR PETROLEUM PRODUCTS IN ·CONNECTION WIrH PROPERTY USE
Surrounding properties are currently (and historically have been) :engaged in manufacturing and
commercial practices that have resulted In _placement on numerous regulatory listings. Further
discussIon of these listings can be found in section'S.1.
DRAINS, SUMPS AND CLARIFIERS
Multiple storm drains were observed in neighboring paved parking areas. No hazardous
substances or petroleum products were noted in the vicinity of the drains. Based on the Use of
the drains solely for storm water runoff, the presence of the drains is not expected to represent
a significant environmental concern.
Project No. 317806
-May -2~ 2013
Page 28-AEI
Consultants
I
8.0 SIGNATURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS
By signing this report, the senior author declares that, to the best of his or her professional
knowledge and belief,· he or she meets the definition of Environmental Professional as defined
in §312.10 of 40 CFR Part 312.
The senior author has the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to
assess a property of the nature, history and setting of the subject property. The senior author
has developed and performed the all appropliate Inquiries in conformance with the standards
and practices set forth in 40CFR Part 312.
Prepared By:
Scott Van de Mark'
Associate Consultant
Project No. 317806
May 21 2013
Page 29
Reviewed By:
~?t#-
Michael Clements
Senior Author
AEI
Consultants
. :
9.0 REFERENCES
. :'.'.' l~m,·· ......
TopographIc Map
Regulatory Database
Aerial Photographs
-Building Department
City Diredorles
Radon
tory Information
Project No. 317806
May 2, 2013
'Page 30
:·Diite:t:.s}:.: : .
1997
March 22, 2013.
1939, 1948, 1956, 1964,
196~,1980, 1987, 1991,
and 1998
March 28 2013
March 28, 2013
April 1, 2013
March 28, 2013
.. $OUtal.:· .. "
United States Geological Survey
Environmental Data Resources
USGS
Palo Alto Development Center
Palo Alto Public library's colledion of Polk's and
Haines & Company Reverse Directories
htto:IIwww.eoa.oov/radon/zonemaD.htmI
California GeoTracker
httD:lloeotracker waterboards.ca.oov/default.asJ)
AEI
Consultants.
FIGURES
AEI
Consultants.
SITE LOCATIO·N MAP
911 Hansen Way, Palo Alto, California, 94304
AEI Palo Altq Quadrangle .
Created 1997 FI~URE 1
Source: USGS Project Number: 317806 Consultants
\.'
SITE MAP N
911 Hansen Way, Palo Alto, California 94304 A
Legend
Approximate Property Boundary
Groundwater Flow Direction
Groundwater Monitoring Wells
Former USTs ., .. ~ .. ~ .... , .
""' ........... 1
FIGU.RE 2 AEI
Project Number: 317806 Consultants
@ w
~genda Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
June 20, 2013
Architectural Review Board
Russ Reich, Senior Planner
5
Architectural Review Board
Staff Report
Department: Planning and
Community Environment
405 Curtner Avenue [13PLN-00098]: Request by Salvatore Caruso on behalf
of Zhen Zhen Li for Architectural Review of a new 7,425 square foot, three
story, six unit, residential condominium complex. Each unit will be provided
with 4 balconies and a private at grade patio and a two car garage.
Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines section 15303. Zone
District: RM-30.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Architectural Review Board (ARB) recommend approval of the proposed
project based upon the findings contained in Attachment A and conditions of approval contained
in Attachment B.
BACKGROUND
Site Information
The 12,375 sq. ft. site is located in the Multifamily Residential RM-30 zone district. The property
is currently a vacant parcel. The site is relatively flat with 10 trees. Most of the trees are located
along the left side of the property. Three of the trees are Valley . Oaks and one is a . large Coast
Live Oak. Of the four oak trees, three are large enough to be considered protected trees under
City ordinance. All of the oak trees will be retained. The property is bounded by two-story
multifamily uses to the north east, a vacant parking lot for the former Compadres Restaurant to the
south east, an oil change shop and office use to the south west, and Curtner A venue to the
northwest with single-story multifamily uses across the street. The property is located very close
to El Camino Real. It is the first residential parcel on Curtner behind the office and oil change
shop that front on El Camino. Beyond the commercial properties that line El Camino, the
neighborhood is an eclectic mix of one and two story multifamily buildings on both sides of
Curtner Avenue.
13PLN-00098 Page 1 of 4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant has proposed to construct a new 35 foot tall three-story building to house six
residential condominium units. A tentative map and final map will be processed to establish the
six condominium units. Because there are more than four units, the map must be reviewed by the
Planning and Transportation Commission and the City Council. Each of the units would be
1,237.5 square feet in area, resulting in a total building floor area of 7,425 square feet. Each unit
would have three bedroon1s, three bathrooms, a two car garage, multiple balconies and a ground
level patio. Fiv~ of the garages would provide for side by side spaces and one would be a tandem
garage. The garages would be accessed by a long driveway at the right side of the property. The
driveway would be paved with permeable pavers and would extend from the street all the way to
the rear of the lot, terminating at a trash enclosure structure at the rear of the parcel. The property
would be separated from the adjacent commercial property parking lot by a six foot tall cement
block wall. The wall would have a decorative cap and a smooth stucco finish on the side facing
the project. The side of the wall facing the commercial parking lot would be a'painted finish only.
The rear and left side of the project would be enclosed by a seven foot tall decorative redwood
fence.
The building would have a smooth cement plaster finish and a stone veneer at the base. It would
be accented by a wood finish laminate cladding and three large metal screens painted to match the
wood color of the panels. The garage doors, balcony railings, and window trims would all be of a
brushed metal finish. The building would feature large canted bay windows in each of the dining
rooms and a split roof down the center of the building allowing for clerestory windows for
additional light. The electric and gas meters are proposed on the front face of the building and
would be screened by a five foot tall wall with the same stone veneer as is proposed for the base
of the building.
The front doors would have pedestrian access via a winding pathway that would extend from the
sidewalk, along the left side of the building, through a landscaped garden area, and around the
back of the building to connect up with the driveway. The ten trees existing on the property are
located on the left side of the parcel. Four of these trees would be removed and the six remaining
trees would be located along the garden pathway. A new Elm street would be planted at the front
of the project.
DISCUSSION
Trees
As stated previously, four of the 10 trees on the property are proposed to be removed. The
remaining six trees will be protected during the projects construction. Four of the remaining six
trees are oak trees, one of which is a large Coast Live Oak. There are multiple conditions of
approval related to the retention and preservation of these trees. The canopy of the large oak will
need significant pruning to accommodate the new building but the project arborist and the City's
arborist have reviewed the proposal and have determined that the amount of pruning will not be a
detriment to the tree.
13PLN-00098 Page 2 of4
Context-Based Design Criteria
The proposed building has a significant anlount of fenestration and a multitude of interesting
exterior features such as balconies and large canted bay windows. While these are interesting
elements, these features appear to be continuously repeated across each of the building faces with
rigid regularity. It is this repetition of elements that causes the building to appear somewhat
monolithic. The building may benefit from some variation in the detailing of the fa9ade. At three
stories tall, the building is somewhat taller than the others in the vicinity. Some transitions in
height may be helpf-ul to better relate to the context of the one and two story buildings. The
Context-Based Design Criteria encourage the breaking down the scale of the building to provide a
better relationship to the neighborhood. They also encourage that doorways, windows and
landscape elements be oriented to establish a relationship to the street. The proposed front fa9ade
does not appear to relate well to the street. Privacy is well maintained with the preservation of the
existing landscape buffer between the project and the adjacent residential neighbor. Staff requests
that the ARB determine if the building massing needs additional refinement to meet the criteria.
Solar Heat Gain
The proposed project has a large amount of glazing that faces southwest. There are a multitude of
windows that would have the potential for significant heat gain due to their southwestern
exposure. The proposal could incorporate extended roof overhangs, or other solar shading devices
such as sun shades to reduce this potential heat gain. It nlay also be possible to consider planting
trees along the edge of the driveway as shown in the rendered images.
Parking
The project will provide a total of 14 parking spaces. The code requires two parking spaces for
each dwelling unit, one of which must be covered. For the six residential units proposed, 12
spaces would be required, six covered and six uncovered. The project proposes that all 12 spaces
will be covered and enclosed within private two car garages. Five of these garages provide for
the traditional side by side parking arrangement while the sixth garage is a tandem arrangement
where one car parks in front of the other. The guest parking space requirement is 33% of the total
number of dwelling units proposed within the project. For the six units, the requirement is 2 guest
parking spaces. The two guest parking spaces are provided at the rear of the parcel. One long
term bicycle parking space is required per unit. The parking garages are large enough that the
bike parking is accommodated within each garage.
Wall
The proposal includes a six foot tall cenlent block wall on the property line, separating the project
from the adjacent commercial office and oil change facility. The project side of the wall is
proposed to be a smooth finish cement plaster painted to match the building while the side facing
the commercial properties is proposed to be a painted finish only. Staff requests that the ARB
comment on the proposed treatment of the painted side of the wall facing the commercial uses.
Due to the potentially high visibility of this wall face, staff recommends that the ARB consider the
visual impact this wall may have fronl off-site views.
13PLN-00098 Page 3 of4
Green Building
The applicant has employed several green building technics to improve the sustainability of the
project. The following is a list of some of the items:
1 ) Wood I -joists or Web Trusses for Flooring.
2) Water Efficient Fixtures.
3) Operable Windows or Skylights are Placed to Induce Cross Ventilation in at least one
room in 80% of units.
4) LowlNo-VOC paints & coating.
5) Reduced formaldehyde in interior finish.
6) Permeable pavers in driveway
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Since the project is within an existing urbanized area and only proposes a total of six new
residential units, it is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15303.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C:
Attachment D:
Attachment E:
Attachment F:
Attachment G:
Attachment H:
Draft ARB and Context Based Design Findings
Draft Conditions of Approval
Applicant's Project Description Letter
Zoning Compliance Table
Comprehensive Plan Compliance Table
Location Map
Public Comment
Development Plans (Board Members Only)
COURTESY COPIES
Salvatore Caruso Design Corp., 980 EI Camino Real, Suite 200, Santa Clara, CA 95050
Zhen Zhen Li, 18801 Bellgrove Circle, Saratoga, CA 95070
Prepared by: Russ Reich, Senior Planner CfZ-.
Reviewed by: Amy French, AICP, Chief Planning Official
13PLN-00098 Page 4 of4
ATTACHMENT A
FINDINGS FOR ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPROVAL
405 Curtner Avenue
13PLN-000098
The design and architecture of the proposed improvements, as conditioned, complies with
the Findings for Architectural Review as specified in PAMC Chapter 18.76.
1) The design of the proposed six-unit multi-family development is consistent and
compatible with applicable elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan in that the
site is designated Multiple Family Residential and the Comprehensive Plan Table
indicates compliance with applicable policies.
2) The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site in that the
proposed building is located within a nlultifamily zone district where other
nlultifamily buildings are common;
3) The design is appropriate to the function of the project in that the design makes
the most functional use possible given the narrow constraints of the 75-foot wide
lot and the location of the existing protected oak trees;
4) In areas considered by the board as having a unified design character or historical
character, the design is compatible with such character. Not applicable. The area
does not have a unified design character.
5) The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas
between different designated land uses in that the scale of the proposed project
creates a buffer between the comnlercial propel1ies along El Canlino adjacent to
the west of the project and the lower scale residential neighborhood to the east of
the project;
6) The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site in
that the proposed residential use of the building will be compatible with the other
multifamily buildings in the area;
7) The planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create
an internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants,
visitors and the general community in that the proposed design makes good use of
the available space on this narrow lot, accommodating the requirements for open
space, parking and sufficient vehicular access;
8) The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the
function of the structures in that ample open space is provided in the form of
145 Hawthorne Avenue (12PLN-00072) Page 1 of3
private patio areas and multiple balconies for each of the six dwelling units as
well as common open space along the right side and rear of the property;
9) Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the
project in that the proposal includes sufficient parking and areas to accommodate
trash and recycling needs of the development;
10) Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for
pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles in that adequate parking areas are proposed
despite the narrowness of the lot;
11) Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project in that
the proposal will ensure the preservation of six existing trees four of which are
oaks;
12) The materials, textures, colors and details of construction and plant material are
appropriate expressions of the design and function in that the dwellings are in the
modem style of architecture with fa9ade materials, details and window design that
are consistent with this style;
13) The landscape design concept for the site, as shown by the relationship of plant
masses, open space, scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors create a
desirable and functional environment in that the remaining open areas are fully
planted and the utility equipment is screened as best is possible;
14) Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site, capable of being properly
maintained on the site, and is of a variety, which would tend to be drought
resistant and to reduce consumption of water in its installation and maintenance;
15) The project exhibits green building and sustainable design that is energy efficient,
water conserving, durable and nontoxic, with high quality spaces and high
recycled content materials. The design is energy efficient and incorporates
renewable energy design elements including, but not limited to:
1) Wood I-joists or Web Trusses for Flooring.
2) Water Efficient Fixtures.
3) Operable Windows or Skylights are Placed to Induce Cross Ventilation in
at least one room in 80% of units.
4) LowlNo-VOC paints & coating.
5) Reduced formaldehyde in interior finish.
6) Permeable pavers in driveway
16) The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose of architectural review,
which is to:
a. Promote orderly and harmonious development in the city;
145 Hawthorne Avenue Page 2 of3
b. Enhance the desirability of residence or investment in the city;
c. Encourage the attainment of the most desirable use of land and
improvements;
d. Enhance the desirability of living conditions upon the immediate site or in
adjacent areas; and
e. Promote visual environments which are of high aesthetic quality and variety
and which, at the same time, are considerate of each other.
In conclusion, the proposed project is consistent for all of the reasons and findings
specified above.
Havvthc)rne Avenue (12PLN-00072) Page 3 of3
ATTACHMENT A
CONTEXT-BASED DESIGN CONSIDERATIONSIFINDINGS
405 Curtner Avenue
13PLN-00098
Pursuant to PAMC 18.13.060(b), in addition to the findings for Architectural Review
contained in PAMC 18.76.020(d) 'Multiple Family Context-Based Design Criteria,' the
following additional findings have been made in the affirmative:
1) Massing and Building Facades: Massing and building facades shall be designed to
create a residential scale in keeping with Palo Alto neighborhoods, and to provide
a relationship with streets. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the
various rooflines, porches, balconies, and variety of siding minimize massing of
the three story building. All exposed sides of the building units are designed with
the same level of care and integrity.
2) Low-Density Residential Transitions: Where new projects are built abutting
existing lower-scale residential development, care shall be taken to respect the
scale and privacy of neighboring properties. This finding can be made in the
affirmative in that the proposal retains most of the existing trees along the
property line that faces the adjacent residential neighbor to maintain privacy
screening of the neighboring property.
3) Project Open Space: Private and public open space shall be provided so that it is
usable for the residents and visitors of the site. This finding can be made in the
affirmative in that the project incorporates a private ground floor private patio for
each unit as well as four small balconies for each of the six dwelling units. The
common open space is situated on the left side of the property and exceeds the
nlinimum required.
4) Parking Design: Parking shall be accommodated but shall not be allowed to
overwhelm the character of the proj ect or detract from the pedestrian
environment. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the parking is
provided within private garages beneath the proposed units.
5) Large (multi-acre) Sites. Large (in excess of one acre) sites shall be designed so
that street, block, and building patterns are consistent with those of the
surrounding neighborhood. This finding is not applicable to this project since the
site is much smaller than I acre.
6) Housing Variety and Units on Individual Lots: Multi-family projects may include
a variety of unit types such as small-lot detached units, attached
rowhouses/townhouses, and cottage clusters in order to achieve variety and create
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 1 of2
transitions to adjacent existing development. The project is consistent with this
finding in that the six, three bedroom condominium units are not typical of the
predominant type of housing within the neighborhood.
7) Sustainability and Green Building Design. The project incorporates several items
in the Build It Green Multifamily Green Point Checklist such as permeable pavers
for the driveway, water efficient fixtures, and low/no VOC paints and coatings.
In conclusion, the proposed project at 405 Curtner Avenue [13PLN-00098] is consistent
with the Multiple Family Context-Based Design Criteria for all of the reasons and
findings specified above.
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 2 of2
Planning Division
ATTACHMENTB
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
405 Curtner Avenue
13PLN-00098
1. The plans submitted for Building Permit shall be in substantial compliance with plans date
stamped June 12,2013 except as modified to incorporate these conditions of approval.
2. These ARB conditions of approval shall be printed on the plans submitted for building
permits.
3. The applicant is required to pay all Development Impact Fees, including the park land
dedication fees and the BMR in-lieu housing fee.
Utilities Electric
4. All electric meters shall be at one location.
5. Given that there are 6 meters, a nlain service disconnect is required. Only one electric
service is allowed per parcel.
All CP AU's electric standard can be found at this link:
www.cityofpaloalto.org/ElectricServiceRequirements
Fire Department
6. Driveway shall be posted -NO PARKING -
7. HOA shall enforce towing of parked vehicles blocking driveway.
Public Works Engineering
8. SUBDIVISION APPLICATION: The applicant needs to file for a Major Subdivision
Application with the Planning Department for creating five (5) or more condominium units.
9. OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS: As part of this project, the applicant, at minimum, will be
required to repave (2-inch grind and pave) the full width of Curtner Avenue and install all
new sidewalk, curb, gutter, and driveway approach in the public right-of-way along the
property frontage per Public Works' latest standards and/or as instructed by the Public Works
Inspector. The plan must note that any work in the right-of-way must be done per Public
Works' standards by a licensed contractor who must first obtain a Permit for Construction in
the Public Right-of-Way ("Street Work Permit") from Public Works at the Development
405 Curtner Avenue Page 1 of 13
Center.
10. STREET TREES: The applicant may be required to replace existing and/or add new street
trees in the public right-of-way along the property's frontage. Call City Public Works'
arborist at 650-496-5953 to arrange a site visit so he can determine what street tree work will
be required for this project. The site or tree plan must show street tree work that the arborist
has determined including the tree species, size, location, staking and irrigation requirements.
Any removal, relocation or planting of street trees; or excavation, trenching or pavement
within 10 feet of street trees must be approved by the Public Works' arborist. The plan must
note that in order to do street tree work, the applicant must first obtain a Permit for Street
Tree Work in the Public Right-of-Way ("Street Tree Permit") from Public Works' Urban
Forestry.
11. STORM WATER RUNOFF SYNOPSIS: Provide a synopsis of pre and post-development
storm water runoff flows and drainage systems. Summarize existing storm water drainage
patterns such as where the existing site runoff drains to. Explain the increase in the site storm
water runoff flow for post-development. Show justification that the existing City storm water
drainage system has the capacity to handle the increase in the flow.
12. DRAINS IN PARKING GARAGES: Any drains within the covered parking area shall be
connected to an oil separator then to sanitary sewer lines. Storm water runoff from any
exposed surface without canopies need to be connected to a storm drain system.
13. STORM WATER TREATMENT: This project must meet the latest State Regional Water
Quality Control Board's (SRWQCB) C.3 provisions. The applicant is required to satisfy all
current storm water discharge regulations and shall provide calculations and documents to
verify compliance. All projects that are required to treat storm water will need to treat the
permit-specified amount of stornl water runoff with the following low impact development
(LID) methods: rainwater harvesting and reuse, infiltration, evapotranspiration, or
biotreatment. However, biotreatment (filtering storm water through vegetation and soils
before discharging to the storm drain system) will be allowed only where harvesting and
reuse, infiltration and evapotranspiration are infeasible at the project site. Complete the
Infiltration/Harvesting and Use Feasibility Screening Worksheet (Santa Clara Valley Urban
Runoff Pollution Prevention Program C.3 Stormwater Handbook -Appendix I). Vault-based
treatment will not be allowed as a stand -alone treatment measure. Where storm water
harvesting and reuse, infiltration, or evapotranspiration are infeasible, vault-based treatment
measures may be used in series with biotreatment, for example, to remove trash or other
large solids.
Reference: Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.l1.030(c)
http://www.scvurppp-w2k.com/permit_c3_docs/c3_handbook_2012/Appendix_I
Feasibility _2012.pdf
In order to qualify the project as a Special Project for LID treatment reduction credit,
complete and submit the Special Projects Worksheet (Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff
Pollution Prevention Program C.3 Stormwater Handbook -Appendix J: Special Projects).
Any Regulated Project that meets all the criteria for more than one Special Project Category
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 2 of 13
may only use the LID treatment reduction credit allowed under one of the categories.
http://\V\\lW.scvurppp-v.,r2k.comJpermit c3 docs/c3 handbook 20l2/Appendix J
Special_Projects _2012. pdf).
The applicant must incorporate permanent storm water pollution prevention measures that
treat storm water runoff prior to discharge. The prevention measures shall be reviewed by a
qualified third-party reviewer who needs to certify that it complies with the Palo Alto
Municipal Code requirements. This is required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
The third-party reviewer shall be acquired by the applicant and needs to be on the Santa
Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program's (Program) list of qualified
consultants. Any consultant or contractor hired to design/and/or construct a storm water
treatment system for the project cannot certify the project as a third-party reviewer.
http://www.scvurppp-w2k.comJconsultants2012.htm?zoom _ highlight=consultants
Within 45 days of the installation of the required storm water treatment measures and prior to
the issuance of an occupancy permit for the building, third-party reviewer shall also submit
to the City a certification for approval that the project's permanent measures were
constructed and installed in accordance to the approved permit drawings. The project must
also enter into a maintenance agreement with the City to guarantee the ongoing maintenance
of the pernlanent C.3 storm water discharge compliance measures. The maintenance
agreement shall be executed prior to the first building occupancy sign-off.
The following comments are provided to assist the applicant at the building permit phase.
You can obtain various plan set details, forms and guidelines from Public Works at the City's
Development Center (285 Hamilton Avenue) or on Public Works' website:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/pwd/forms-permits.asp
Include in plans submitted for a building permit:
14. GRADING & EXCAVATION PERMIT: For disturbing greater than 10,000 SF of land area,
a Grading and Excavation Permit needs to be obtained from PWE at the Development Center
before the building permit can be issued. Refer to the Public Works' website for "Excavation
and Grading Permit Instructions." For the Grading and Excavation Permit application,
various documents are required including a grading and drainage plan, soils report, Interim
and Final erosion and sediment control, and storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP).
Refer to our website for "Grading and Excavation Permit Application" and guidelines.
Indicate the amount of soil to be cut and filled for the project.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebankldocumentsI11695
15. GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: The plan set must include a grading and drainage
plan prepared by a licensed professional that includes existing and proposed spot elevations
and showing drainage flows to demonstrate proper drainage of the site. Other site utilities
may be shown on the grading plan for reference only, and should be so noted. No utility
infrastructure should be shown inside the building footprint. Installation of these other
utilities will be approved as part of a subsequent Building Permit application.
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 3 of 13
Site grading, excavation, and other site improvements that disturb large soil areas may only
be performed during the regular construction season (from April 16 through October 15th) of
each year the permit is active. The site must be stabilized to prevent soil erosion during the
wet season. The wet season is defined as the period from October 15 to April 15. Methods of
stabilization are to be identified within the Civil sheets of the improvement plans for
approval.
16. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP's): The applicant is required to submit a
conceptual site grading and drainage plan that conveys site runoff to the nearest adequate
municipal storm drainage system. In order to address potential storm water quality impacts,
the plan shall identify BMP's to be incorporated into the Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) that will be required for the project. The SWPPP shall include permanent
BMP's to be incorporated into the project to protect storm water quality. (Resources and
handouts are available from PWE. Specific reference is made to Palo Alto's companion
document to "Start at the Source", entitled "Planning Your Land Development Project").
The elements of the PWE-approved conceptual grading and drainage plan shall be
incorporated into the building permit plans.
The developer shall require its contractor to incorporate BMP's for storm water pollution
prevention in all construction operations, in conformance with the SWPPP prepared for the
project. It is unlawful to discharge any construction debris (soil, asphalt, sawcut slurry, paint,
chemicals, etc.) or other waste materials into gutters or storm drains. (P AMC Chapter
16.09).
The applicant is required to paint the "No DumpinglFlows to Baron Creek" logo in blue
color on a white background, adjacent to all storm drain inlets. Stencils of the logo are
available from the Public Works Environmental Compliance Division, which may be
contacted at (650) 329-2598. A deposit may be required to secure the return of the stencil.
Include the instruction to paint the logos on the construction grading and drainage plan.
Include maintenance of these logos in the Hazardous Materials Management Plan, if such a
plan is part of this project.
17. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: The City'S full-sized "Pollution Prevention
-It's Part of the Plan" sheet must be included in the plan set. Copies are available from
Development Center or on our website. Also, the applicant must provide a site-specific
storm water pollution control plan sheet in the plan set.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebankldocuments/2732
18. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA: Since the project will be creating or replacing 500 square
feet or more of impervious surface, the applicant shall provide calculations of the existing
and proposed impervious surface areas. The calculations need to be filled out in the
Impervious Area Worksheet for Land Developments form which is available at the
Development Center or on our website, then submitted with the building permit application.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebankldocuments/2718
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 40f13
19. WORK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY -If any work is proposed in the public right-of-way, such
as sidewalk replacement, driveway approach, curb inlet, storm water connections or utility
laterals, the following note shall be included on the Site Plan next to the proposed work:
"Any construction within the city right-of-way must have an approved Permit for
Construction in the Public Street prior to commencement of this work. THE
PERFORMANCE OF THIS WORK IS NOT AUTHORIZED BY THE BUILDING
PERMIT ISSUANCE BUT SHOWN ON THE BUILDING PERMIT FOR INFORMATION
ONLY."
20. LOGISTICS PLAN: The contractor must submit a logistics plan to PWE prior to
commencing work that addresses all impacts to the City's right-of-way, including, but not
limited to: pedestrian control, traffic control, truck routes, material deliveries, contractor's
parking, concrete pours, crane lifts, work hours, noise control, dust control, storm water
pollution prevention, contractor's contact, noticing of affected businesses, and schedule of
work. The plan will be part of the building permit submittal.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicaxlfilebank/documents/2719
21. FINALIZATION OF BUILDING PERMIT: The Public Works Inspector shall sign off the
building permit prior to the finalization of this permit. All off-site improvements shall be
finished prior to this sign-off. Similarly, all as-builts, on-site grading, drainage and post
developments BMP's shall be completed prior to sign-off.
Public Works Tree Specialist
PRIOR TO DEMOLITION, BUILDING OR GRADING PERMIT ISSUANCE
22. BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTAL REVIEW. Prior to submittal for staff review, the
plans submitted for building permit shall be reviewed by the project site arborist to verify
that all the arborist's recommendations have been incorporated into the final plan set. The
submittal set shall be accompanied by the project site arborist's certification letter that the
plans have incorporated the following information:
a. Final Tree Protection Report (TPR) design changes and preservation measures.
b. Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual Standards, Section 2.00 and PAMC 8.10.080.
c. Outstanding items. Itemized list and which plan sheet the measures are to be
located.
d. Landscape and irrigation plans are consistent with CPA Tree Technical Manual,
Section 5.45 and Appendix L, Landscaping under Native Oaks and P AMC
18.40.130.
23. PLAN SET REQUIREMENTS. The final Plans submitted for building permit shall
include the following information and notes on the relevant plan sheets:
a. Sheet T -1 Tree Protection-it's Part of the Plan
(http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/environmentlurbancanopy . asp ), Applicant shall
complete the Tree Disclosure Statement. Inspections and monthly reporting by the
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 5 of 13
project arborist are mandatory. (All projects: check #1; with tree preservation
report: check #2-6; with landscape plan: check #7.)
b. The Tree Preservation Report (TPR). All sheets of the TPR approved by the City,
Tree Management Experts, Tree Protection Plan and Addendum, dated March 1,
2013, shall be printed on numbered Sheet T-1 (T-2, T-3, etc.) and added to the
sheet index. The TPR is approved for this project to be implemented in its
entirety, including inspection schedule and reporting to the city. Tree protection
shall be continuously maintained until final landscaping.
c. Protective Tree Fencing Type. Delineate on grading plans, irrigation plans, site
plans and utility plans, Type II fencing around Street Trees and Type I fencing
around ProtectedlDesignated trees as a bold dashed line enclosing the Tree
Protection Zone (per the approved Tree Preservation Report) per instructions on
Detail #605, Sheet T-1, and the City Tree Technical Manual, Section 6.35-Site
Plans.
d. Site Plan Notes. Note #1. Apply to the site plan stating, "All tree protection and
inspection schedule measures, design recommendations, watering and
construction scheduling shall be implemented in full by owner and contractor, as
stated in the Tree Protection Report on Sheet T -1 and the approved plans". Note
#2. All civil plans, grading plans, irrigation plans, site plans and utility plans and
relevant sheets shall include a note applying to the trees to be protected, including
neighboring trees stating: "Regulated Tree--before working in this area contact
the Tree Management Experts, 415-606-3610, "; Note #3. Utility plan sheets shall
include the following note: "Utility trenching shall not occur within the TPZ of
the protected tree. Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that no trenching
occurs within the TPZ of the protected tree by contractors, City crews or final
landscape workers. See sheet T -1 for instructions."
e. TREE PROTECTION ZONE (TPZ)Show on all relevant plan sheets the fencing
types, including root buffer material and separate trunk wrap, near the sensitive
tree root areas adjacent to foundation, grading, landscape; utility runs, irrigation,
lighting, scaffolding, etc. to adequately shield the protected tree roots.
24. The Tree Protection Report and Addendum, dated March 1,2013 Special Inspections.
Add to the Contractor & Arborist Inspection Schedule (Sheet T -1, Table 2-2), the
following:
a. Inspection of Irrigation Trenching Layout (prior to trenching)
b. Inspection of Pruning schedule of the protected oaks outlined in the TPR shall be
strictly adhered to, subject to enforcement penalties triggered by excessive or poor
quality pruning, cutting by unauthorized construction personnel, framers, roofers,
etc.
25. LANDSCAPE PLANS .
. a. The landscape plan and irrigation trenching submitted is not acceptable due to
inlpacts to the protected trees. Sod lawn and spray irrigation shall be removed
from the tree trunk area. Between the N fenceline and the new walkway, the plans
shall show a new scheme that has been approved by the project site arborist and
consistent with the City Tree Technical Manual, Addendum 5, Landscaping under
Native Oaks.
Page 6 of 13
b. Walkway layout, grading and materials shall be approved by the project site
arborist, and direct construction supervision by same is required.
c. Provide a detailed landscape and irrigation plan encompassing on-and off-site
plantable areas out to the curb shall be approved by the Architectural Review
Board. A Landscape Water Use statement, water use calculations and a statement
of design intent shall be submitted for the project. A licensed landscape architect
and qualified irrigation consultant will prepare these plans, to include:
i. All existing trees identified both to be retained and removed including street trees.
ii. Complete plant list indicating tree and plant species, quantity, size, and locations.
111. Irrigation schedule and plan.
IV. Fence locations.
v. Lighting plan with photometric data.
vi. Trees to be retained shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to
ensure survival.
Vll. All new trees planted within the public right-of-way shall be installed per Public
Works (PW) Standard Planting Diagram #603 or 604 (include on plans), and shall
have a tree pit dug at least twice the diameter of the root ball.
Vlll. Landscape plan shall include planting preparation details for trees specifying
digging the soil to at least 30-inches deep, backfilled with a quality topsoil and
dressing with 2-inches of wood or bark mulch on top of the root ball keeping clear
of the trunk by I-inch.
ix. Automatic irrigation shall be provided to all trees. For trees, PW Detail #513
shall be included on the irrigation plans and show two bubbler heads mounted on
flexible tubing placed at the edge of the root ball. Bubblers shall not be mounted
inside an aeration tube. The tree irrigation system shall be connected to a separate
valve from other shrubbery and ground cover, pursuant to the City's Landscape
Water Efficiency Standards. Irrigation in the right-of-way requires a street work
permit per CPA Public Works standards.
x. Landscape Plan shall ensure the backflow device is adequately obscured with the
appropriate screening to minimize visibility (planted shrubbery is preferred,
painted dark green, decorative boulder covering acceptable; wire cages are
discouraged).
d. Planting notes to include the following mandatory criteria:
1. Prior to any planting, all plantable areas shall be tilled to 12" depth, and all
construction rubble and stones over 1" or larger shall be removed from the site.
11. Note a turf-free zone around trees 36" diameter (18" radius) for best tree
performance.
e. Mandatory Landscape Architect (LA) Inspection Verification to the City. The LA
of record shall verify the performance measurements are achieved with a separate
letter of verification to City Planning staff, in addition to owner's representative
for each of the following:
i. A percolation & drainage check have been performed and is acceptable.
ii. Fine grading inspection of all plantable areas has been personally inspected for
tilling depth, rubble removal, soil test amendments are mixed and irrigation
trenching will not cut through any tree roots.
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 7 of 13
iii. Tree and Shrub Planting Specifications, including delivered stock, meets
Standards in the CPA Tree Technical Manual, Section 3.30-3.50. Girdling roots
and previously topped trees are subject to rejection.
26. TREE PROTECTION VERIFICATION. Prior to demolition, grading or building permit
issuance, a written verification from the contractor that the required protective fencing is
in place shall be submitted to the Building Inspections Division. The fencing shall
contain required warning sign and remain in place until final inspection of the project.
DURING CONSTRUCTION
27. EXCAVATION RESTRICTIONS APPLY (TTM, Sec. 2.20 C & D). Any approved
grading, digging or trenching beneath a tree canopy shall be performed using' air-spade'
method as a preference, with manual hand shovel as a backup. For utility trenching,
including sewer line, roots exposed with diameter of 1.5 inches and greater shall remain
intact and not be damaged. If directional boring method is used to tunnel beneath roots,
then Table 2-1, Trenching and Tunneling Distance, shall be printed on the final plans.
28. PLAN CHANGES. Revisions and/or changes to plans before or during construction shall
be reviewed and responded to by the project site arborist, Tree Management Experts,
415-606-3610, with written letter of acceptance before submitting the revision to the city
for review.
29. CONDITIONS. All Planning Departnlent conditions of approval for the project shall be
printed on the plans submitted for building permit.
30. TREE PROTECTION COMPLIANCE. The owner and contractor shall implement all
protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations and construction
scheduling as stated in the TPR, and is subj ect to code conlpliance action pursuant to
P AMC 8.10.080. The required protective fencing shall remain in place until final
landscaping and inspection of the project. Project arborist approval must be obtained and
documented in the monthly activity report sent to the City. A mandatory Monthly Tree
Activity Report shall be sent monthly to the City beginning with the initial verification
approval, using the template in the Tree Technical Manual, Addendum 11.
31. TREE DAMAGE. Tree Damage, Injury Mitigation and Inspections apply to Contractor.
Reporting, injury mitigation measures and arborist inspection schedule (1-5) apply
pursuant to TTM, Section 2.20-2.30. Contractor shall be responsible for the repair or
replacement of any publicly owned or protected trees that are damaged during the course
of construction, pursuant to Title 8 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and city Tree
Technical Manual, Section 2.25.
32. GENERAL. The following general tree preservation measures apply to all trees to be
retained: No storage of material, topsoil, vehicles or equipment shall be permitted within
the tree enclosure area. The ground under and around the tree canopy area shall not be
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 8 of 13
altered. Trees to be retained shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to
ensure survival.
PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY
33. LANDSCAPE INSPECTION. The Planning Department shall be in receipt of written
verification that the Landscape Architect has inspected all trees, shrubs, planting and
irrigation and that they are installed and functioning as specified in the approved plans.
34. TREE INSPECTION. The contractor shall call for an inspection by the Project Site
Arborist to evaluate all trees to be retained and protected, as indicated in the approved
plans, the activity, health, welfare, mitigation remedies for injury, if any, and for the long
term care of the trees for the new owner. The report shall provide written verification to
the Planning Department that all trees, shrubs, planting and irrigation are installed and
functioning as specified in the approved plans. A final Tree Activity Report describing
the state of the tree health with photographs shall be provided to the Planning Department
prior to written request for temporary or final occupancy. If applicable, the final report
may be used to navigate the security guarantee return process.
POST CONSTRUCTION
35. MAINTENANCE. All landscape and trees shall be maintained, watered, fertilized, and
pruned according to Best Management Practices-Pruning (ANSI A300-2001 or current
version). Any vegetation that dies shall be replaced or failed automatic irrigation
repaired by the current property owner within 30 days of discovery.
Water Quality Control Plant
36. PAMC 16.09.170,16.09.040 Discharge of Groundwater
The project is located in an area of suspected or known groundwater contamination with
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). If groundwater is encountered then the plans must
include the following procedure for construction dewatering:
37. Prior to discharge of any water from construction dewatering, the water shall be tested for
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) using EPA Method 6011602 or Method 624. The
analytical results of the V OC testing shall be transmitted to the Regional Water Quality
Control Plant (RWQCP) 650-329-2598. Contaminated ground water that exceeds state or
federal requirements for discharge to navigable waters may not be discharged to the
storm drain system or creeks. If the concentrations of pollutants exceed the applicable
limits for discharge to the storm drain system then an Exceptional Discharge Permit must
be obtained from the RWQCP prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. If the
VOC concentrations exceed the toxic organics discharge linlits contained in the Palo Alto
Municipal Code (16.09.040(m)) a treatment system for removal ofVOCs will also be
required prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer. Additionally, any water discharged to
the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system must be free of sediment.
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN~00098) Page 9 of 13
38. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(10) Dumpsters for New and Remodeled Facilities
New buildings and residential developments providing centralized solid waste collection,
except for single-family and duplex residences, shall provide a covered area for a
dumpster. The area shall be adequately sized for all waste streams and designed with
grading or a berm system to prevent water runon and runoff from the area.
39. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(14) Architectural Copper
On and after January 1, 2003, copper metal roofing, copper metal gutters, copper metal
down spouts, and copper granule containing -asphalt shingles shall not be permitted for
use on any residential, commercial or industrial building for which a building permit is
required. Copper flashing for use under tiles or slates and small copper ornaments are
exempt from this prohibition. Replacement roofing, gutters and downspouts on historic
structures are exempt, provided that the roofing material used shall be prepatinated at the
factory. For the purposes of this exemption, the definition of "historic" shall be limited to
structures designated as Category 1 or Category 2 buildings in the current edition of the
Palo Alto Historical and Architectural Resources Report and Inventory.
40. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(b) Copper Piping
Copper, copper alloys, lead and lead alloys, including brass, shall not be used in sewer
lines, connectors, or seals coming in contact with sewage except for domestic waste sink
traps and short lengths of associated connecting pipes where alternate materials are not
practical. The plans must specify that copper piping will not be used for wastewater
plumbing.
41. PAMC 16.09.205(a) Cooling Systems, Pools, Spas, Fountains, Boilers and Heat
Exchangers It shall be unlawful to discharge water from cooling systems, pools, spas,
fountains boilers and heat exchangers to the storm drain system.
42. PAMC 16.09.165(h) Storm Drain Labeling
Storm drain inlets shall be clearly marked with the words "No dumping -Flows to Bay,"
or equivalent.
Water, Gas & Wastewater Division
43. The applicant shall submit a completed water-gas-wastewater service connection
application -load sheet for each unit for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must
provide all the information requested for utility service demands (water in fixture
units/g.p.m., gas in b.t.u.p.h, and sewer in fixture units/g.p.d.). The applicant shall
provide the existing (prior) loads, the new loads, and the combinedltotalloads (the new
loads plus any existing loads to remain).
44. The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility construction. The plans must
show the size and location of all underground utilities within the development and the
public right of way including meters, backflow preventers, fire service requirements,
sewer mains, sewer cleanouts, sewer lift stations and any other required utilities.
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 10 of 13
45. The applicant must show on the site plan the existence of any auxiliary water supply, (i.e.
water well, gray water, recycled water, rain catchment, water storage tank, etc).
46. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading the existing utility mains
and/or services as necessary to handle anticipated peak loads. This responsibility includes
all costs associated with the design and construction for the installation/upgrade of the
utility mains and/or services.
47. F or contractor installed water and wastewater mains or services, the applicant shall
submit to the WGW engineering section of the Utilities Departnlent four copies of the
installation of water and wastewater utilities off-site improvement plans in accordance
with the utilities department design criteria. All utility work within the public right-of
way shall be clearly shown on the plans that are prepared, signed and stamped by a
registered civil engineer. The contractor shall also submit a complete schedule of work,
method of construction and the manufacture's literature on the materials to be used for
approval by the utilities engineering section. The applicant's contractor will not be
allowed to begin work until the improvement plan and other submittals have been
approved by the water, gas and wastewater engineering section. After the work is
complete but prior to sign off, the applicant shall provide record drawings (as-builts) of
the contractor installed water and wastewater mains and services per City of Palo Alto
Utilities record drawing procedures. For contractor installed services the contractor shall
install 3M marker balls at each water or wastewater service tap to the main and at the
City clean out for wastewater laterals.
48. An approved reduced pressure principle assembly (RPPA backflow preventer device) is
required for all existing and new water connections from Palo Alto Utilities to comply
with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605
inclusive. The RPP A shall be installed on the owner's property and directly behind the
water meter within 5 feet of the property line. RPP A's for domestic service shall be lead
free. Show the location of the RPP A on the plans.
49. An approved reduced pressure detector assembly is required for the existing or new water
connection for the fire system to comply with requirements of California administrative
code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive (a double detector assembly may be
allowed for existing fire sprinkler systems upon the CPAU's approval). reduced pressure
detector assemblies shall be installed on the owner's property adjacent to the property
line, within 5' of the property line. Show the location of the reduced pressure detector
assembly on the plans.
50. All backflow preventer devices shall be approved by the WGW engineering division.
Inspection by the utilities cross connection inspector is required for the supply pipe
between the meter and the assembly.
60. The applicant shall pay the capacity fees and connection fees associated with new utility
service/s or added demand on existing services. The approved relocation of services,
Page 11 of 13
meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the cost of the person/entity
requesting the relocation.
61. Each unit shall have its own water and gas meter shown on the plans.
62. A separate water meter and backflow preventer is required to irrigate the approved
landscape plan. Show the location of the irrigation meter on the plans. This meter shall
be designated as an irrigation account an no other water service will be billed on the
account. The irrigation and landscape plans submitted with the application for a grading
or building permit shall conform to the City of Palo Alto water efficiency standards.
63. A new water service line installation for domestic usage is required. Show the location of
the new water service and meters on the plans. The water meters must be grouped in the
City planting strip just back of sidewalk per the WGW Utility standards.
64. A new water service line installation for fire system usage is required. The fire system
can be a combined service off the domestic meters if the Fire Department approves.
Show the location of the new fire service on the plans. The applicant shall provide to the
engineering department a copy of the plans for fire system including all Fire
Department's requirements.
65. A new gas service line installation is required. Show the new gas meter location on the
plans. The gas meter location shall be above ground towards the front of the building or
property and must conform with utilities standard details.
66. A new sewer lateral installation is required. Show the location of the new sewer lateral
on the plans. One 6" sewer lateral shall serve the entire project.
67. The applicant shall secure a public utilities easement for facilities installed in private
property (the gas line). The applicant's engineer shall obtain, prepare, record with the
county of Santa Clara, and provide the utilities engineering section with copies of the
public utilities easement across the adjacent parcels as is necessary to serve the
development.
68. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures can not be
placed over existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services. Maintain l' horizontal
clear separation from the vault/cabinet/concrete base to existing utilities as found in the
field. If there is a conflict with existing utilities, Cabinets/vaultslbases shall be relocated
from the plan location as needed to meet field conditions. Trees may not be planted
within 10 feet of existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services or meters. New water,
gas or wastewater services/meters may not be installed within 10' or existing trees.
Maintain 10' between new trees and new water, gas and wastewater
services/mains/meters.
69. To install new gas service by directional boring, the applicant is required to have a sewer
cleanout at the front of the building. This cleanout is required so the sewer lateral can be
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 12 of 13
videoed for verification of no damage after the gas service is installed by directional
boring.
70. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto utility standards
for water, gas & wastewater.
405 Curtner Avenue (13PLN-00098) Page 13 of 13
II
SALVATORE CARUSO
DESIGN CORPORATION
Attachment C
PROJECT DESCRIPTION -405 Curtner Ave ..
This project aims to deliver a high quality residential complex providing 6
town-house units. The current site would be transformed into a modem,
architecturally pleasing transition between the busy 'CS' zones and the calm and
quiet residential (RM-30) areas.
405 Curtner Ave. is 0.284 acres of undeveloped and blighted land that stands as
an eyesore for the community that surrounds it. .
Our proposition is to using the highest grade materials, durable wood framing
technique and elegant metal supports, to showcase advanced construction methods.
While implementing Green Building requirements will ensure nlinimal
environmental impact. Each unit will be provided with a maximum of 1,237.5 s.f.
of living area, including: 3 bedrooms, 3 full bathrooms, modem kitchen, an opening
living room and dining area. Along with 2-car garage and ample private and
common open spaces, we will produce a house worthwhile to call home.
Our team at Salvatore Caruso Design Corp. will be working closely with Palo
Alto city's planning and council to ensure this project will meet all codes and
regulations while providing an aesthetic improvement to this community.
Sincerely,
Salvatore Caruso, AIA
SALVATORE CARUSO DESIGN CORPORATION
255 North Market Street, Suite 200, San Jose, CA 95110
TFT .FPH()NF (L10~\ QQ~_L10~7'). TPT prnPlPl1 fL1()R) OOR_!l()QQ
II
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
FOR RM-30 ZONE DISTRICT
Maximum Residential Density
(units per acre)
Maximum Site Coverage (building
footprint)
Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
Minimum Site Open Space
30%(percent)
Minimum Usable Open Space
( 150 sq. ft. per unit)
Minimum Common Open Space
( 75 sq. ft. per unit)
Minimum Private Open Space
(50 sq. ft. per unit)
Building setbacks
Front
Rear
Right Side
Left Side
Building height
Daylight Plane
BMR units
Parking (spaces per unit)
Guest Parking 33%
Bike parking
ATTACHMENT D
ZONING TABLE
405 Curtner Avenue -13PLN-00098
ZONE DISTRICT PROPOSED
STANDARD PROJECT
30 per acre 8 units 6 units
40% (4,950 sq. ft.) 3,296 sq. ft.
0.6:1 7,425 sq. ft. 7,425 sq. ft.
30% 3,712 sq. ft. 3,964.5 sq. ft.
150 sq. ft. x 6 = 900 3,714 sq. ft.
sq. ft.
75 s.f. x 6 450 sq. ft. 2,260 sq. ft.
50 sq. ft. x 6 = 300 s.f. 171 sq. ft.! unit
20 feet 20 feet
10 feet 13 feet 6 inches
10 feet 25 feet 2 inches
10 feet 10 feet
35 feet 35 feet
none na
15% of6 units = 1 1 or in-lieu fee
unit
2 spaces x 6 units = 12 12
spaces
33% of 6 units = 2 2 guest spaces
spaces
1 space per unit 6 spaces in garage
6 units x 1 = 6 spaces
405 Curtner Avenue (l3PLN-00098) Page 1 of 1
CONFORMANCE
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
conforms
ATTACHMENTE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TABLE
405 Curtner Avenue
13PLN-00098
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY
Policy L-12: Preserve the character of
residential neighborhoods by encouraging new
or remodeled structures to be conlpatible with
the neighborhood and adjacent structures.
Policy L-14: Design and arrange new
multifamily buildings, including entries and
outdoor spaces, so that each unit has a clear
relationship to a public street.
Policy L-48: Promote high quality, creative
design and site planning that is compatible
with surrounding development and public
spaces.
CONSISTENCY REVIEW
The proposed project provides a transition between the
commercial properties to the west and the lower scale
residential properties to the east
Due to the narrowness of the lot it is not practical that
all the units are oriented to the public street but the
proposal does have a pedestrian walkway leading from
the sidewalk, through a landscaped garden to the front
I doors of each of the units.
The proposed development reflects modem architecture
which wiould be compatible with the various styles of
the neighboring buildings.
Policy L-70: Enhance the appearance of A new street tree will be planted at the front of the site.
streets and other public spaces by expanding
and maintaining Palo Alto's street tree system.
450 Curtner Avenue 13PLN-00098) Page 1 of 1
·.i
405 Curtner Avenue
The City of
Palo Alto
This map is a product of tt
City of Palo Alto GIS
--0' 15(
Reich, Russ
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
David Fisher <dcfisher@hotmail.com>
Thursday, June 13, 2013 10:49 PM
Architectural Review Board; Reich, Russ
David Fisher
405 Curtner Avenue 13PLN-00098
To the Architectural Review Board,
Attachment G
I am unable to attend the June 20th hearing, but as a 28+ year resident of Curtner Avenue, I am writing to
express my strong opposition to plan 13PLN-00098 proposed for 405 Curtner.
Historically, Curtner Avenue has been one of relatively few areas in Palo Alto where the housing is both
moderately high density and <relatively> affordable. Curtner Avenue is a short street consisting primarily of
snlall apartments and a few modest condominiums. It is immediately adjacent to the two primary mass trar
corridors in Palo Alto: EI Camino Real and Caltrain. The three-bedroom, three-bath, two-car garage
condominiums proposed for 405 Curtner Avenue would be entirely out of place on Curtner. More importal1'
they would represent a missed opportunity. .
As you are well aware, and as freeway traffic morning and night will attest, Palo Alto continues to suffer frol
a gross imbalance of jobs and housing. 405 Curtner presents an excellent opportunity to address some tiny
fraction of that imbalance. It is one of the few locations in Palo Alto where a higher density of smaller units
would be entirely site appropriate. Smaller one-bedroom units, or even some of the micro-apartments that
seem to be so trendy at the moment (Curtner had micro apartments before rnicro apartments were coolL
could easily double the number of residents on the site relative to the proposed plan. It would put these
residents just steps from easy self-propelled or mass transit access to Stanford, the Stanford Industrial Park,
?nd downtown.
The proposed condominiums are out of place on Curtner Avenue and represent a missed opportunity. They
are not in the best interest of Palo Alto and I urge you to reject the plan.
Best regards,
David Fisher
271 Curtner Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94306
650-424-9897
1