Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-07-14 Ordinance 4433 (2)Approving a Development Agreement Between the Board of Trustees of QT/14/97 the Leland Stanford Junior University and the City of Palo Alto eff r1, ORDINANCE NO. 4433 ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY AND THE CITY OF PALO ALTO The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. A. A development agreement has been requested of the City for the approval of development of certain real property collectively known as Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects, and more particularly described in the subject Development Agreement. B. The City Council finds and determines that notice of intention to consider the development agreement has been given pursuant to Government Code section 65867. C. The Planning Commission and the City Council have each conducted a public hearing on the Development Agreement, amendments to the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, a Tentative Map, and various related land use approvals. D. The City Council has reviewed the contents of the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the Projects, and all other relevant information, including staff reports, and all testimony, written and oral, presented on the matter. E. The City Council finds and determines that the development agreement is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Palo Alto, as amended. The City Council has specifically considered the regional welfare and the impacts of the development agreement upon the regional welfare. The City Council finds and determines that the benefits of the project set forth in the development agreement, and findings including statements of overriding consideration for each project, establish the reasonable relationship of the Projects and of the approvals to the regional welfare. SECTIQN ?. The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement between the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University and the City of Palo Alto, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and authorizes the Mayor to execute the agreement on behalf of the City. 1 970721 kcO031801 SRCTIPN 3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a copy of the development agreement to be recorded with the County Recorder not later than ten (10) days after it becomes effective. SECTION 4. The City Council adopts this ordinance in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. EECTON 5. This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first (31st) day after its adoption but, if submitted to a referendum by the Council on its own motion, or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to Article IV, section 3 of the Charter, it shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until it is approved by the voters. If an initiative appearing on the same ballot with this ordinance amends one or more of the same provisions of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Ordinance as this ordinance or any actions incorporated into the development agreement, and both this ordinance and the initiative are approved, but the ordinance receives fewer votes than the initiative, a direct and irreconcilable conflict with the entirety of this ordinance shall be deemed to exist, and no part of this ordinance or any actions incorporated into the development a reement shall become finally effective. If an initiative appearing on the same ballot with this ordinance amends one or more of the same provisions of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Ordinance as this ordinance or any actions incorporated into the development agreement, and both this ordinance and the initiative are approved, but the initiative receives fewer votes than this ordinance, a direct, irreconcilable /1 // // 1/ 1/ /1 // // /1 1/ 2 910721 lac fl03l1101 conflict with the entirety of the initiative shall be deemed to exist, and no part of the initiative shall become effective. INTRODUCED: June 30, 1997 PASSED: July 14, 1997 AYES: ANDERSEN, EAKINS, HUBER, iLNISS, MCCOWN, ROSENBAUM, SCHNEIDER, WHEELER NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: FAZZINO A ( 'LJ erk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior City Attorney NOS DOCUMENT iSCERTIFIED TD SE * ORDINANCE DULY PAD BY THE COUNCIL OE THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND THEREA, [ER POSTEQ IN CDifNCIL C$AM!EiiS Odtf '1/J7/ 47 (WITHIN /S DAYS Of ITS PASSAGE) o+$iih for declare) +seder pearly 01 pillory Mot die IortQole, is 1s D :,, 1 Director of P? a:an!'""'and Community nvi ronnlent 3 970721 lac 0031Iid 1 • EXHIBIT `A" Development Agreement This document is recorded for the benefit of the City of Palo Alto and is entitled to be recorded free of charge in accordance with Section 6103 of the Government Code. After Recordation, mail to: City Clerk City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Between CITY OF PALO ALTO, a chartered city and BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, a body having corporate powers under the laws of the State of California 1 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 • • THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (hereinafter "Agreement") is entered into as of this 14th day of August, 1997, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a chartered city of the State of California (hereinafter "City"), and THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, a body having corporate powers under the laws of the State of California (hereinafter "Stanford"). RICITALS THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT is entered into on the basis of the following facts, understandings and intentions of the parties: A. These Recitals use certain terms with initial capital letters which are defined in Section 1 of this Agreement. City and Stanford intend to refer to those definitions when the capitalized terms are used in these Recitals. B. Government Code sections 65864-65869.5 authorize the parties to enter into a binding development agreement for the development of real property within City's jurisdiction. C. Pursuant to Government Code section 65865, City has adopted Resolution No. 6597 establishing procedures and requirements for consideration of development agreements. D. Stanford is the owner of the Property described in Exhibit "A." E. Stanford has applied for, and the City has certified or approved, as applicable, certain environmental documents and land use approvals and entitlements relating to the development of the Project. These actions (the "Project Approvals") consist of the following: 1. CEQA Compliance. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's CEQA implementing guidelines and procedures (collectively, "CEQA"), the Project, this Agreement and the Project Approvals were the subject of an environmental impact report ("EIR"). The EIR was certified as adequate by the City Council on June 30, 1997, and the data, analyses, comments, responses, mitigation measures and other information contained in the EIR was considered by the City Council prior to its consideration of and action on the Project, this Agreement, and the Project Approvals. In connection 2 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 with the certification and consideration of the EIR in relation to its approval of the Project, this Agreement and the Project Approvals, the City Council made findings pursuant to CEQA as set forth in its Resolution No. 7685, dated June 30, 1997 ('CEQA Findings"). The CEQA Findings are attached to this Agreement as Exhibit "B." 2. 1997 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. On June 30, 1997, the City Council adopted the hereinafter described Resolutions amending the Comprehensive Plan to provide for the Project ("1997 Comprehensive Plan Amendments"). The 1997 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, which are attached to this Agreement and collectively labeled as Exhibit "C", are described as follows: a. Resolution No. 7687, Amending the Land Use Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Relating to the Streamside Open Space Land Use Category b. Resolution No. 7686, Amending the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan for Lands of Stanford University Located Generally at 1000 Sand Hill Road (Stanford West Apartment Project) c. Resolution No. 7689, Amending the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan for Lands of Stanford University Located at 600 and 700 Sand Hill Rcad (Stanford West Senior Project) d. Resolution No. 7690, Amending the Land Use Map and the Street Network Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Relating to Roadway and Circulation Changes and Changes in the Boundaries of the Streamside Open Space Area in the Vicinity of the Stanford Shopping Center e. Resolution No. 7688, Amending Various Elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Relating to Road ILfprovements in the Sand Hill Road Corridor 3. 1997 Zoning Ordinance Amendments. On July 14, 1997, the City Council adopted the hereinafter described Ordinances amending the Zoning Ordinance to provide for the Project ("1997 Zoning Ordinance Amendments"). The 1997 Zoning Ordinance Amendments, which are attached to this Agreement, and collectively labeled as Exhibit "D", are described as follows: 9717104 heOQ3t59$ 3 of 35 a. Ordinance No. 4430, Amending Section 20.08.020 (The Setback Map) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Change the Setback Line Along a Portion of Sand Hill Road b. Ordinance No. 4426, Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal. Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Classification of Property Known as 600 Sand Hill Road and a Portion of 1000 Sand Hill Road from PF to PC and from RM-30 to PC, Respectively (Stanford West Senior Housing) c. Ordinance No. 4427, Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Zone Classification of Property Located at 600, 700 and 1000 Sand Hill Road from RN; -30 to PF and from PF to Rai- 3 0 d. Ordinance No. 4428, Amending Section 18.43.050 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (Community Commercial District Site Development Regulations), Relating to the Allowable Floor Area of the Stanford Shopping Center e. Ordinance No. 4429, Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Zone Classification of Property Located at 180 El Camino Real from CC to CC (L) (Stanford Shopping Center) f. Ordinance No. 4431, Conditionally Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) by Prezoning as RM-40 a Portion of a New Parcel to be Created by the Realignment of Pasteur Drive and by Prezoning as PF(L) an Area of Land That Will Become Part of Pasteur Drive. g. Ordinance No. 4432, Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Zone Classification of a Portion of a New Parcel to be Created by the Realignment of Pasteur Drive at Sand Hill Road from PF(L) to RM-40 4. 1997 Tentative Map. On June 30, 1997, the City Council approved a tentative subdivision map with an exception for road right-of-way width for portions of the Project ("2997 Tentative Map") . The 1997 Tentative Map, which is dated October 16, 1996, is on file with the Department of Planning and Community Environment, and is incorporated herein by this reference. 4 of 35 9707041=0031598 • 5. Other Approvals and Entitlements. On June 30, 1997, the City Council granted certain other approvals and entitlements to provide for the Project, as follows: a. Architectural Review approval of the Stanford West Apartments site b. Design Enhancement Exception to allow lees private open space for 28 apartment unite than is otherwise required, for the Stanford West Apartments c. Variance to allow an 18 foot setback on Sand Hill Road for parking spaces and carports where 25 feet is otherwise required, for the Stanford West Apartments d. Variance to allow on -street parking where off- street parking is otherwise required, for the Stanford West Apartments e, Site and Design approval for the Stanford West Apartments site f. Design Enhancement Exception to side yard fencing regulations to allow no solid wall or fence to be provided along the common property line between the Multiple Family (RM) zoned site and the Planned Community (PC) zoned Senior Housing site g. Architectural Review approval of the Senior Housing site h. Architectural Review approval of the Shopping Center expansion i. Variance to allow a setback 1-1/2 Arboretum Road for various retail building feet is otherwise required, for the Shopping Center expansion Stanford feet on where 24 Stanford j. Architectural Review approval for the Roadway Improvements 6. Conditions of Approval. The 1997 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the 1997 Zoning Ordinance Amendments, the 1997 Tentative Map, and the Other Entitlements were adopted and approved by the City Council subject to specific conditions (collectively, the 'Conditions of 5 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 Approval"). The Conditions of Approval are attached to this Agreement as Exhibit "E." 7. Development Agreement Ordinance. City has duly adopted and posted, in accordance with all applicable laws, ordinances and charter provisions, Ordinance No. 4433 authorizing the Mayor to execute this Agreement on behalf of the City. A certified copy of the Ordinance is attached as Exhibit "J." F. City desires to obtain the binding agreement of Stanford for the development of the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, the Comprehensive Plan, as amended, the zoning and the various other approvals and conditions related thereto. G. Stanford desires to obtain the binding agreement of City that City will permit Stanford to develop the Property in accordance with the Applicable Rules and Subsequent Applicable Rules, including any modifications permitted by this Agreement. H. Stanford has applied to City pursuant to the Development Agreement Act and City's Resolution No. 6597 for approval of a development agreement providing for the binding agreements desired by the parties hereto, City's Planning Commission and Council have given notice of intention to consider this Agreement, have conducted public hearings thereon pursuant to Government Code section 65867 and City's Resolution No. 6597 and have found that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with City's Comprehensive Plan, as amended. I. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have been found by City to be fair, just and reasonable, and provide benefits to City. J. This Agreement is consistent with the present public health, safety and welfare needs of the residents of the City of Palo Alto and the surrounding region. City has approved the Project and granted the entitlements after considering the impacts and benefits of the Project upon the health, safety and welfare of the City and the region. City has also determined that the Project, as conditioned and modified, represents a reasonable balancing of the competing interests of the affected region. K. This Agreement will bind future City Councils to the terms and obligations specified in this Agreement and limit, to the degree specified in this Agreement and under state law, the future exercise of City's ability to preclude development on the Property. 6 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 • • L. This Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning and provide for the orderly development of the Property, eliminate uncertainty about the validity of exactions imposed by City, allow installation of necessary improvements, provide for public services appropriate to the development of the Project, and generally serve the public interest, both within the City of Palo Alto and in the surrounding region. M. Development of the Project in accordance with this Agreement and the Approvals will provide for orderly development consistent with City's Comprehensive Plan. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by City staff, its Planning Commission and the City Council, and have been found to be fair, just and reasonable. Specifically, the Planning Commission and the City Council have found that: 1. The provisions of this Agreement and its purposes are consistent with the goals, policies, programs and standards specified in City's Comprehensive Plan; 2. This Agreement will help attain important economic, social, environmental and planning goals of City and enhances and protects the public health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City of Palo Alto and the surrounding region. 3. Stanford will incur substantial costs in providing public improvements, facilities and services for the benefit of the public in excess of that required to address the impacts of the Project; 4. This Agreement will mitigate significant environmental impacts; and 5. This Agreement will otherwise achieve the goals and purposes for which the Development Agreement Act was enacted. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do hereby agree as follows: 1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires: (a) "Applicable Rules" means the rules, regulations and official policies of City in force on June 30, 1997, governing permitted uses of the Property, governing density, and governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the Project, as amended by the Project Approvals. (b) "City" is the City of Palo Alto. 7 of 35 -4* 970704 lac 003159$ (c) 'Comprehensive Plan" is the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. (d) 'Conditions of Approval" are the conditions placed upon the approval of the Project by the City Council, and include the environmental mitigations adopted by the City Council. The Conditions of Approval are attached Exhibit "E.'° (e) 'Development Agreement Act" means Sections 65864 - 65869.5 of the California Government Code. (f) "Discretionary Action" includes a "Discretionary Approval" and is an action which requires the exercise of judgment, deliberation or a decision, and which contemplates and authorizes the imposition of revisions or conditions, by City, including any board, commission or department and any officer or employee thereof, in the process of approving or disapproving a particular activity, as distinguished from an activity which merely requires City, including any board, commission or department and any officer or employee thereof, to determine whether there has been compliance with applicable statutes, ordinances, regulations, or conditions of approval. (g) "Effective Date" is August 14, 1997. (h) 'Mortgage" means and refers, singly and collectively, to any mortgages, deeds of trust, security agreements, assignments and other like security instruments encumbering all or any portion of the Property or Stanford's rights under this Agreement. (i) "Mortgagee' means and refers to the holder of any Mortgage encumbering all or any portion of the Property or Stanford's rights under this Agreement, and any successor, assignee or transferee of any such Mortgage holder. (j) "Party" is a signatory to this Agreement, or a successor or assign of a signatory to this Agreement. (k) "Project" means development of the Property in accordance with the Applicable Rules, Project Approvals, and this Agreement, including the following five projects studied in the Environmental Impact Report: The Stanford West Apartment Project (the "Apartment Project"); the Stanford West Senior Housing Project (the "Senior Project"); the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion Project (the "Shopping Center Project"); a collection of various roadway improvements, including widening and extension of Sand Hill Road, widening and improvement of Quarry Road, construction of a new Vineyard Lane, extension of Palo Road, extension of Stockfarm 8 of 35 970704 lac 0031398 • Road, and related roadway improvements (the 'Roadway Project"); and the creation and annexation of a small parcel of property that will be created by the relocation of Pasteur Drive at Sand Rill Road (the "Annexation Project"). A more detailed description of the separate projects that comprise the "Project' is set forth in Chapter 3 of the EIR, as modified by EIR Chapter 14 and the "RIR Summary of Changes Incorporated into the Project' and is attached as Exhibit "F." (1) "Project Approvals' means the Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Zoning Ordinance Amendments, variances, site and design and architectural review, tentative or final maps, and any other permits, licenses or other entitlements, discretionary or ministerial, relating to the development of the Property, which are described in Recital E or attached Exhibits "B" through "E.' (m) The "Property" means and is more particularly described in attached Exhibit "A." (n) "Public Improvements" means those public improvements that Stanford agrees to construct and dedicate to the City, or that the City or such other public entity as the City shall lawfully designate, may acquire, construct, equip, install, operate or maintain. (o) "Stanford" is the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, a body having corporate powers under the laws of the State of California and its successors, assigns, transferees, or other persons or entities acquiring title to or an ownership interest in the Property or Project. (p) "Subsequent Applicable Rules' means the rules, regulations and official policies of City, as they may be adopted and effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement, governing permitted uses of the Property, governing density, and governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the Project. (q) "Zoning Ordinance' is the zoning ordinance for the City of Palo Alto (Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code). 2. Interest of Stanford. Stanford represents to City that, as of the Effective Date, it owns the Property in fee, subject only to encumbrances, easements, covenants, conditions, restrictions and other matters of record. 3. Binding Effect. Subject to the provisions of Section 18(f) below, this Agreement, and all of the terms and conditions hereof, shall run with the land and shall be binding 9 of 35 970704 Isc 0031598 upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective assigns, heirs or other successors in interest. 4. Negatjgn of Agency. The parties acknowledge that, in entering into and performing this Agreement, each is acting as an independent entity and not as an agent of the other in any respect. Nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making City and Stanford joint venturers or partners. 5. Pevelopment of the Property. The following specific restrictions shall govern the use and development of the Property: set forth Agreement, developed, not exceed Applicable (a) Permitted Uses. The Property may be used as in the Applicable Rules, Project Approvals and this including without limitation Exhibits "b" through '°E.` (b) Maximum Density and Intensity of Uses. When the density and intensity of use of the Property shall those densities and intensities of use set forth in the Rules, Project Approvals and this Agreement. (c) Dedication of Property for Publi Pu Provisions for the dedication of land for public purposes are set forth in Section 6 below. • (d) Other Development Standards. All design and development standards not set forth in the Project Approvals or this Agreement shall be in accordance with the Applicable Rules as applied to the project through the applicable zoning and other future actions taken by City; provided such standards shall not be inconsistent with the Project Approvals. (e) Subsequent Applicable Rg.les. A Subsequent Applicable Rule can be applied to the Project without Stanford's consent only if City determines it necessary to protect against conditions which create a substantial and demonstrable risk to the physical health or safety of residents or users of the Project or the affected surrounding region. Dedications. Exactions. Mitigations and Reservations. Stanford shall make the dedications, exactions, mitigations or reservations required by the Project Approvals and Applicable Rules, and all real property conveyances, encumbrances, or other contracts of any kind shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The specific provisions of the Project Approvals shall control over conflicting or duplicative provisions of the Applicable Rules relating to dedications, exactions, mitigations or 10 of 35 970704 lac 0031398 • reservations. For convenience, Section 6(a) contains an exemplary list of the easements required by the Project Approvals, but it shall not create any independent, additional requirements. (a) Easements. (1) Apartment Project. Necessary easements to serve the Apartment Project for electric, water, gas, wastewater and storm drain purposes; an easement or easements for purposes of bicycle and pedestrian access on "Main" Street and between the existing bike/pedestrian bridge at San Mateo Avenue and the Project; necessary easements to serve the Apartment Project for emergency vehicle access; and other dedications per subdivision approval, as all such easements are described in the 1997 Tentative Map and Project Approvals. (2) the Senior Project drain purposes; an Santa Clara Valley Senior Project for such easements are Approvals. Senior Project. Necessary easements to serve for electric, water, gas, wastewater and storm access and maintenance easement in favor of the Water District; necessary easements to serve the emergency vehicle access; and bike paths, as all described in the 1997 Tentative Map and Project (3) Epping Center Project. Necessary easements to serve the Shopping Center for electric, water, gas, wastewater and storm drain purposes, as all such easements are described in the Project Approvals (4) Roadway Easements. Easements for right-of-way purposes for all public streets; necessary easements for traffic signal control; necessary easements for electric, water, gas, wastewater and storm drain purposes; easement for utility vehicle access to, and reasonable clearance around, the utility substation on Quarry Road; and public transit easements, as all such easements are described in the 1997 Tentative Map and the Conditions of Approval. (b) Below -Market -Rate ("BMR") Housing Requirement. Stanford shall make certain units in the Apartment Project available for leasing at below -market rental rates (the "BMR Program") to fulfill its obligations under Program 13 of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan with respect to both the Apartment Project and the Senior Housing Project. The specific requirements of the BMR Program are set forth in the attached Exhibit "G." Certain additional terms of the BMR Program described in Exhibit "G" shall be determined by Stanford, subject to the reasonable approval of City's Director of Planning and Community Environment, before a certificate of occupancy is issued for the Apartment Project. 11 of 35 970704lac 0031598 r,r7 , (c) Apartment gental Management Plan. Stanford shall prepare and silbmi t an Apartment Rental Management Plan for the apartment project which shall provide that priority for the units shall be given to Stanford employees and persons working on Stanford lands. The Apartment Rental Management Plan shall be consistent with Exhibit 'H-i" and in a form acceptable to the City Manager. The Apartment Rental Management Plan attached as Exhibit "H-i" is acceptable and approved. The Apartment Rental Management Plan shall be in effect for the duration of the project, and shall survive the term of this Agreement. (d) City -Retained. Experts. Several Conditions of Approval for the Project require the exercise of highly specialized technical skills or professional judgment by City, and in order to fulfill these obligations City will be required to retain professional experts as consultants or contractors. City shall retain complete review and approval responsibility for the functions performed by such retained experts, and City shall not delegate final decision making responsibility to such experts. (1) Payment. Stanford shall pay the total costs incurred by City in contracting for the services of certain third party professional experts in connection with construction of the Project (collectively, 'City Consultants'), as required by the Conditions of Approval. The compensation payable to the City Consultants shall be ccomensurate with the prevailing market rates in the Palo Alto or greater Bay area for similar services. Upon City approval of the initial agreement for services for each City Consultant, Stanford shall deposit with City an amount up to 20% of the total approved contract amount. The exact amount of the deposit will vary depending on the consultant contract and will be determined by the City staff person assigned to oversee the contract. Thereafter, each quarter, City shall provide Stanford with an estimate of the amounts that will be payable to the City Consultants during the following three-month period, indicating for each how much deposit is currently available, how much additional deposit will be needed to fund the contracts during that period, and a schedule for providing the additional deposits. City shall provide Stanford with statements itemizing the charges to Stanford in reasonable detail. Stanford understands and acknowledges that City's contractual agreements with each City Consultant will provide that no work under such contract shall commence or continue, as the case may be, until and unless sufficient funds are on deposit to the account of that contract to cover the cost of such work, and that failure on the part of Stanford to make timely payments may result in a cessation of construction -related operations. 12 of 35 970704 lac 0031398 • • Stanford may inspect and audit City's records with respect to all such charges in accordance with the California Public Records Act. (2) Scope of Work and Authority. The scope of work for each of the City Consultants shall provide only for those services that are reasonably necessary to fulfill the purposes described in the Conditions of Approval . Additional services may be provided, as mutually agreed upon by City and Stanford. City agrees to establish in the initial scope of work for each City Consultant the general duties to be performed by the City Consultant, a fixed hourly rate of pay, and an estimated total contract amount, based on City staff's professional judgment and knowledge of the project at the time the contract is executed. City and Stanford recognize and acknowledge that the schedule of work for most City Consultants will be greatly dependentupon such variables as the timing of submittals from Stanford and its consultants, construction scheduling and timing and unplanned contingencies, and that these variables may result in and require changes in the scope of services or estimated budget for a City Consultant contract. City shall perform proper oversight to ensure that only the reasonable and necessary amount of time and effort is being expended by each City Consultant, to competently perform his or her assigned tasks according to the standards of his or her profession, in an efficient, economical and timely manner. (3) Fee Waiver. City shall not require Stanford co pay any fees otherwise payable under the Municipal Fee Schedule for any services that will be performed by a City Consultant pursuant to this section 6.4. (4) Required Consultants. The City Consultants that Stanford shall be required to fund are listed below. a. Arborist. b. Creek Restoration Specialist. c. Archaeologist/Historian. d. Senior Level Planner. e. Building Plan Checker and Inspector. f. Electric Utility Engineer/Inspector. g. Public Works Engineer/Inspector. h. Hydrologist. (e) Annexations. City shall petition the Local Agency Formation Commission to annex to City the unincorporated island that will be created by the relocation of Pasteur Drive at Sand Hill Road. Stanford agrees that it will not oppose the annexation and that it will cooperate by executing all necessary 13 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 • • documents, by providing information required by LAFCO or City, acting as the conducting authority, and by attending LAFCO and City hearings and testifying in favor of the annexation. Stanford shall not be required to pay any of the costs of the annexation other than compensation of its staff and retained experts necessary to comply with the provisions of this section 6(e). (f) Purposes. Stanford shall designate and shall require its contractors and subcontractors to designate the Property as the place of sale of "fixtures" furnished and installed by them for the Project, and also to designate and require its contractors and subcontractors to designate the Property as the place of use of "materials" used in construction of the Project. Stanford agrees and shall require its contractors and subcontractors to complete and file any forms as the State Board of Equalization may reasonably require to effect the designations required by this section 6 ( f) , pursuant to Regulation 1806 of the State Board of Equalization. (g) El Camino Park. City leases land from Stanford along El Camino Real that is improved with El Camino Park facilities, and other recreational and commercial facilities (collectively, the "Current Lease"). The parties shall amend the Current Lease: (i) to define the premises leased to the City to include only (1) those portions of the Current Lease premises that are now dedicated for park purposes, pursuant to, and as described in, Section 22.08.230 (the "park") and (2) that portion of the Current Lease premises which includes the train depot lease area (the "depot"), as more particularly described in Exhibit "H-2," attached hereto. The amendment is hereinafter referred to as the "Amended Lease;" (ii) to extend the term of the Amended Lease to June 30, 2033; (iii) with respect to the park, to reduce the rent under the Amended Lease to $1.00 per year; and (iv) with respect to the depot, to continue under the same terms and conditions as the Current Lease, provided, that City 970704 Lc 0031598 14 of 35 shall have the right to terminate the depot lease on February 26, 2013. The Amended Lease will be effective as of the date Stanford is issued the first building permit for either the Apartment project or the Senior Housing project. A map generally showing the property included in the Current Lease and the property to be included in the Amended Lease is attached as part of Exhibit "H-2." To effect the purpose of this provision, City shall assign to Stanford any subleases it now has with respect to that property under the Current Lease which will not be included in the Amended Lease, and Stanford agrees to accept such assignments. (h) Child Care. Stanford will lease to a qualified child care provider, at a rent of $1.00 per year, an approximately one-half acre parcel on the Stanford West site between the Village Green and Governor's Lane, for the purpose of constructing and operating a child care facility, subject to obtaining all required permits. In the event that Stanford is unable to find a provider willing to construct the facility, Stanford shall construct it prior to the opening of the final phase of the Stanford West Apartments. If Stanford is unable to find a provider willing to operate the facility, Stanford shall operate it. This provision shall be in. effect for the duration of the project, and shall survive the term of this Agreement. (i) Sand Hill Corridor Future Development. Until December 31, 2020, Stanford shall not develop the approximately 139 -acre parcel known as Special Condition Area "B," as defined in the 1989 General Use Permit, except for academic and recreational fields (including the golf course) and associated support facilities; provided, it may propose Stanford University faculty, staff or student housing in that part of Area "B" east of Fremont Road. A map showing the location of Area "B" is attached as Exhibit "H-3." (j) No Other Dedications. Except as set forth in this Section or Section 9 below, or as may be agreeable to Stanford, Stanford shall not be required to make any dedications or reservations of the Property, or any portion thereof or interest therein, or of any other property in connection with the development, construction, use, or operation of the Project, or any portion thereof. 15 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 (k) Contributions. Stanford shall not be required to construct public improvements or make financial contributions to City in lieu of public improvements, except as expressly set forth in this Agreement, or as may be agreeable to Stanford, or as provided in Sections 8 and 9 below. V n 7. Phasing Schedule. Stanford shall construct the Project and comply with the Conditions of Approval, including the requirements of Section 6 of this Agreement, in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit "I." Stanford shall have no obligation to develop the project, or any component of it, unless and until it obtains a building permit or permits, at which time Stanford shall be obligated to complete each component of the project for which the building permit or permits were obtained, as well as all public improvements, conditions of approval, mitigation measures, or other elements of the project approvals required by the phasing schedule to be completed before occupancy of each component for which building permits have been obtained. Stanford may develop the Project in its sole discretion in accordance with Stanford's time schedule, subject to the Term of this Agreement set forth in Section 17, provided construction is not accelerated and the order, sequence and phasing of the Project shown on Exhibit "I" is not altered. Stanford may request a change in the order, sequence and phasing of development of the Project components. If Stanford requests such a change, it shall provide City an amended Exhibit "I" showing the requested change and explaining the reasons for the proposed amendment. Within a reasonable time of receiving the amended exhibit, the City Manager (a) shall determine whether additional environmental review is required; (b) may re -determine the timing of the construction of the dedications, exactions, mitigations, reservations, or other conditions of approval, including without limitation any public improvements, so that the improvements necessary to serve each component of the Project and to mitigate its impacts are completed before occupancy of such component and may modify the amended exhibit to reflect his or her determinations; and, finally, (c) shall approve or disapprove the requested change. If Stanford desires to proceed in accordance with the amended exhibit, it shall promptly give written notice of its acceptance of the amended exhibit, otherwise the existing Exhibit "I" shall remain in effect. Stanford may request in writing a change in the time of performance of any condition of approval or mitigation measure. Within a reasonable time of receiving the request, the City Manager or her designee (a) shall determine whether additional environmental review is required because of the proposed change; (b) may condition approval upon changes in the timing of related 16 of 35 970704 lac 003134E conditions or mitigation measures; and, finally, (c) shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the requested change. Within a reasonable time of receiving the City Manager's decision approving the request, Stanford shall give written notice of its acceptance or of its withdrawal of the request. The change shall be effective upon receipt by the City of the notice of acceptance. S. clondit79ns and ,impopitions. Stanford shall comply with the following conditions and impositions in connection with subdivision and development of the Property: (a) Comply with all Project Approvals and Conditions of Approval; (b) Complete any action deemed necessary pursuant to Section 9 below. Construct the road improvements approved as 96- AR.B-92. 9 Agreement.,and Assurances. (a) Agreement and AssUrwnces on the Part of Stanford. The parties acknowledge and agree that development of the Property will result in substantial public needs and further acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers unique benefits on Stanford which can only be balanced by the provision of extraordinary public benefits. The parties intend by this Agreement to provide consideration to the public to balance the private benefits conferred on Stanford by providing for the satisfaction of certain direct and indirect public needs resulting from or relating to the Project, and to provide public assurance that this Agreement is fair, just and reasonable, and prompted by the necessities of the situation so as to provide extraordinary benefits to City. Stanford acknowledges that the Conditions of Approval, including without limitation any dedications, mitigation, exactions and reservations, are fair, just and reasonable under the circumstances, and in consideration of the benefits conferred by this Agreement, Stanford hereby waives and releases any challenge, protest or other rights it may have with respect to the legality of the Conditions of Approval. In consideration of the foregoing and in consideration of City's assurances for completion of the Project pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in Section 9(b) and (f) below, Stanford hereby agrees as follows: (1) Stanford will develop the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Project Approvals, and the Applicable Rules, and with the Subsequent Applicable Rules when required by this Agreement. 17 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 (2) In addition to any other remedies provided the City under this Agreement, if. Stanford fails to make any payment or complete any other material act or performance specified in this Agreement, Stanford shall have no further right or entitlement to any certificate of occupancy until the default has been cured as provided in Section 10(c) of this Agreement; provided further that Stanford shall have no further right or entitlement to any building permit unless it is diligently proceeding to complete such actions necessary to cure the default as provided in Section 10(c) of this Agreement. The Parties recognize that this subparagraph may result in the limitation or cessation of the rights otherwise conferred by this Agreement upon Stanford (as defined to include any successors, assigns, transferees, or other persons or entities acquiring title to or an interest in the Property or Project) for development. (b) Agreement and Assurances on the Part of the city. In order to effectuate the provisions of this Agreement and as an inducement for Stanford to obligate itself to carry out the covenants and conditions set forth in the preceding Section 8(a) of this Agreement and in consideration for Stanford doing so, City hereby agrees and assures Stanford that. Stanford will be permitted to carry out and complete the entire Project, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the conditions established in the Project Approvals and the Applicable Rules. In furtherance of such agreement and assurance, and pursuant to the authority and provisions set forth in the Development Agreement Act, City, in entering into this Agreement, hereby agrees and acknowledges that: (1) Entitlement to Develop. As of the Effective Date, Stanford has acquired and been granted the vested right to develop the Project to the extent and in the manner provided in this Agreement, subject to the Conditions of Approval imposed by the Protect Approvals and in accordance with the Applicable Rules awl Subsequent Applicable Rules when required by this Agreement, and City hereby finds the Project consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. Any change in the Applicable Rules, including, without limitation, any change in any applicable general or specific plan, zoning, subdivision or building ordinance or regulation, adopted or becoming effective on or after the Effective Date including, without limitation, any such change by means of ordinance, initiative, referendum, resolution, policy, order or moratorium, initiated or instituted for any reason whatsoever and adopted by the Mayor, City Council, Planning Commission or any other board, commission or department of City, or any officer or employee thereof, or by the electorate, as the case may be, which would, absent this Agreement, otherwise be applicable to the Project and which would conflict in any way with or bu more res- 18 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 • • trictive than the Applicable Rules, shall not be applied by City to the Project without Stanford's consent unless City determines it necessary to protect against conditions which create a substantial and demonstrable risk to the physical health or safety of residents or users of the Project or the affected surrounding region. Any Subsequent Applicable Rule can be applied to the Project without Stanford's consent only if City determines it necessary to protect against conditions which create a substantial and demonstrable risk to the physical health or safety of residents or users of the Project or the affected surrounding region. Any subsequent Discretionary Action which does not change the density, intensity of use or other site development standards permitted on the Property shall be governed by the Applicable Rules, unless City determines that a Subsequent Applicable Rule is necessary to protect against conditions which create a substantial and demonstrable risk to the physical health or safety of residents or users of the Project or the affected surrounding region. Any subsequent Discretionary Action which does change the density, intensity of use or other site development standards permitted on the Property shall be subject to the Subse- quent Applicable Rules provided, however, that no such subsequent Discretionary Action, when approved, will constitute grounds for the termination of this Agreement or otherwise affect the en- forceability of this Agreement with respect to the development of the Property hereunder. Any subsequent Discretionary Actions by City or any conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for such Discretionary Actions by City, shall not, without Stanford's consent, prevent development of the Property for the uses and to the maximum density or intensity of development and other site development standards set forth in this Agreement, unless City determines it is necessary to protect against conditions which create a substantial and demonstrable risk to the physical health or safety of residents or users of the Project or the affected surrounding region. (2) Consistency with Applicable Rules. City finds, based upon all information made available to City prior to or concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, that there are no Applicable Rules that would prohibit or prevent the full completion and occupancy of the Project in accordance with uses, densities, designs, heights and sizes incorporated and agreed to herein. (3) Subsequent Discretionary Action. With respect to any Discretionary Action or Discretionary Approval that is required subsequent to the execution of this Agreement, City agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold from Stanford or 19 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 • • unreasonably condition or delay any such Discretionary Action or Discretiorary Approval which must be issued by City in order for the Project to proceed to construction and occupancy. In addition, no condition shall, without Stanford's consent, preclude or otherwise limit Stanford's ability to develop the Project in accordance with the density and intensity of use and site development specifications set forth in this Agreement nor other- wise conflict with any provision of this Agreement, unless City determines it is necessary to protect against conditions which create a substantial and demonstrable risk to the physical health or safety of residents or users of the Project or the affected surrounding region. (c) Cooperation and Implementation. City agrees that it will cooperate with Stanford to the fullest extent reasonable and feasible to implement this Agreement. Upon satisfactory completion by Stanford of all required preliminary actions and payments of appropriate fees, City will commence and in a timely manner proceed to complete all steps necessary for the implementation of this Agreement and the development of the Property in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the processing and checking of any and all Project Approvals, agreements, covenants, applications and related matters required under the conditions of this Agreement, building plans and specifications and any other plans necessary for the development of the Property, filed by Stanford and the issuance of all necessary building permits, occupancy certificates or other required permits for the construction, use and occupancy of the Property. Stanford will, in a timely manner, provide City with all documents, plans and other information necessary for City to carry out its obligations hereunder. (d) Identification of Applicable Rules. Prior to the Effective Date, the parties will use reasonable efforts to identify two (2) sets of the Applicable Rules, one (1) set for the City and one (1) set for Stanford, so that if it becomes necessary in the future to refer to any of the Applicable Rules, there will be a common set of the Applicable Rules available to both parties. Failure by City to identify written Applicable Rules shall in no manner limit City's ability to later identify or use such Applicable Rules. (e) No Other Exactions. Except as set forth in Sections 6, 7, 8, and 9 and except as may be required by the Conditions of Approval, no other exactions shall be required to be paid, dedicated, constructed or contributed by Stanford in connection with this Agreement or any Project Approval, unless City determines, based upon conditions not anticipated by City and Stanford on or before the Effective Date, that such exaction is necessary to protect against conditions which create a substantial 20 of 35 970704 lac 6031598 I and demonstrable risk to the physical health and safety of residents or users of the Project or the affected surrounding region. For purposes of this Agreement, exaction shall mean any requirement of City in connection with or pursuant to any Applicable Rule or any Project Approval for dedication of land, construction or improvement of public facilities, payment of fees or making any other contribution required in order to address impacts of development on the community or the impacts of this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, usual and customary application, processing and permit fees of the type now in effect shall not be considered exactions, and shall be paid by Stanford in whatever amount has been established by City in a generally applicable manner at the time any such application, processing or permit is sought by Stanford. (f) Application of Subse en t Applicable Rules. Stanford hereby agrees that any Subsequent Applicable Rules can be applied to the Project if City determines, based upon conditions not anticipated by City and Stanford on or before the Effective Date, that it is necessary to do so in order to protect against conditions which create a substantial and demonstrable risk to the physical health and safety of residents or users of the Project or the affected surrounding region. 10. Periodic Review of Compliance. (a) Periodic Review. City shall review this Agreement annually, on or before the anniversary of the Effective Date, in accordance with the procedures and standards set forth in this Agreement and in Resolution No. 6597 in order to ascertain compliance by Stanford with the terms of the Agreement. Stanford shall submit an annual report, in a form reasonably acceptable to City, within 30 days after written notice from City. The annual report shall be accompanied by an annual review fee sufficient to cover the estimated costs of review and administration of the Agreement during the succeeding year. The amount of the annual review and administration fee shall not exceed City's actual costs for such review and administration. (b) Special Review. The City Council of City may order a special review of compliance with this Agreement at any time. The Director of Planning and Community Environment ("Planning Director") or City Council, as determined from time to time by the City Council, shall conduct such special reviews. (c) Procedure. (1) During either a periodic review or a special review, Stanford shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The burden of 21 of 35 970704 lac 003159E S proof on this issue shall be on Stanford. The Parties acknowledge that failure by Stanford to demonstrate good faith compliance shall constitute grounds for termination or modification of this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of this Section 10. (2) Upon completion of a periodic review or a special review, the Planning Director shall submit a report to the City Council setting forth the evidence concerning good faith compliance by Stanford with the terms of this Agreement and the recommended finding on that issue, (3) If the City Council finds on the basis of substantial evidence that Stanford has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the review shall be concluded. (4) i.f the City Council makes a finding that Stanford has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the City shall provide written notice to Stanford describing: (i. such failure to comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement ,referred to herein as a "Default"), (ii) whether the Default can be cured, (iii) the actions, if any, required by Stanford to cure such Default, and (iv) the time period within which such Default must be cured. If the Default can be cured, Stanford shall have at a minimum 90 days after the date of such notice to cure such Default, or in the event that such Default cannot be cured within such 90 -day period but can be cured within one (1) year, Stanford shall have commenced the actions necessary to cure such Default and shall be diligently proceeding to complete such actions necessary to cure such Default within 90 days from the date of notice. If the default cannot be cured or cannot be cured within one (1) year, as determined by City during periodic or special review, the City Council may modify or terminate this Agreement as provided in Section 10(d) and Section 10(e). (5) If Stanford fails to cure a Default within the time periods set forth in Section 10(c)(4), the City Council may modify or terminate this Agreement as provided in Section 10(d) and Section 10(e). (d) Proceedings Upon Modific4tipn or Termination. If, upon a finding under Section 10(c) and the expiration of the cure period specified in Section 10(c)(4) above, City determines to proceed with modification or termination of this Agreement, City shall give written notice to Stanford of its intention so to do. The notice shall be given at least ten calendar days before the scheduled hearing and shall contain: 22 of 35 970704 lac 00313911 (1) The time and place of the hearing; (2) A statement as to whether or not City proposes to terminate or to modify the Agreement; and (3) Such other information as is reasonably necessary to inform Stanford of the nature of the proceeding. (e) Hearings on Modification or Termination. At the time and place set for the hearing on modification or termination, Stanford shall be given an opportunity to be heard and shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The burden of proof on the issue shall be on Stanford. If the City Council finds, based upon substantial evidence, that Stanford has not complied in good faith with the terms or conditions of the Agreement, the City Council may terminate this Agreement or modify this Agreement and impose such conditions as are reasonably necessary to protect the interests of City. The decision of the City Council shall be final and subject to judicial review only pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5. (f) Certificate of Compliance. If, at the conclusion of a periodic or special review, Stanford is found to be in compliance with this Agreement, City shall, upon request by Stanford, issue a Certificate of Compliance ("Certificate") to Stanford stating that after the most recent periodic or special review and based upon the information known or made known to the Planning Director and City Council that: (1) this Agreement remains in effect, and (2) Stanford is not in default. The Certificate shall be in recordable form, shall contain information necessary to communicate constructive record notice of the finding of compliance, shall state whether the Certificate is issued after a periodic or special review and shall state the anticipated date of commencement of the next periodic review. Stanford may record the Certificate. Whether or not the Certificate is relied upon by assignees or other transferees or Stanford, City shall not be bound by a Certificate if a default existed at the time of the periodic or special review, but was concealed from or otherwise not known to the Planning Director or City Council. 11. Modification. Amendment or Cancel.a.tion. Subject to meeting the notice and hearing requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Act, this Agreement may be modified or amended from time to time by mutual consent of the parties or their successors in interest in accordance with the provisions of Section 65868 of the Development Agreement Act and City's Resolution No. 6597; provided, however, that any amendment which does not relate 23 of 35 970704 }ac 0031598 • to the term, permitted uses, density or intensity of use, site development standards, provisions for reservation and dedication of land, conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements relating to subsequent Discretionary Actions, or any conditions or covenants relating to the use of the Property, if deemed appropriate by City, shall not require notice or public hearing. 12. Remedies for Default. It is acknowledged by the parties that City would not have entered into this Agreement if it were to have liability in damages under this Agreement, or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. The parties intend by the provisions of this Section 12 that City shall have no liability for damages arising out of a breach of this Agreement. It is further acknowledged that City would not have entered into this Agreement if Stanford had not acknowledged that a reasonable relationship exists between all dedications, reservations, conditions, impositions or other exactions imposed and the impact of the Project upon the community. In addition, it is further acknowledged that City would not have entered into this Agreement if Stanford had not acknowledged that the direct and indirect impacts of the Project warrant and require the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Each of the parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law or equity available for the breach of any provision of this Agreement, including but not limited to temporary or permanent injunctive relief or restraining orders, except that City shall have no liability in damages to Stanford during the term of this Agreement or thereafter with respect to any acts which are alleged to have commenced or occurred during the term of this Agreement. The parties further acknowledge that money damages and remedies at law generally are inadequate and specific performance is an appropriate remedy for the enforcement of this Agreement and should be available to all parties for the following reasons: (a) Money damages against City are excluded as provided above. (b) Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it may not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its original condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun. After such implementation, Stanford nay be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property or portions thereof. Stanford has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement, and it is not possible 24 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 • to determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate Stanford for such efforts. Except for non -damages remedies, including the remedy of specific performance, Stanford, for itself, its successors and assignees, hereby releases City, its officers, agents and employees from any and all claims, demands, actions, or suits of any kind or nature arising out of any liability, known or unknown, present or future, including, but not limited to, any claim or liability, based or asserted, pursuant to Article I, Section 19 of the California Constitution, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, or any other law or ordinance which seeks to impose any other liability or damage, whatsoever, upon the City because it entered into this Agreement, because of the terms of this Agreement, or because of the manner of implementation or performance of this Agreement. Ail legal actions shall be heard by a reference from the Santa Clara County Superior Court pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 638, et seq. Stanford and City shall agree upon a single referee who shall then try all issues, whether of fact or law, and report a finding and judgment thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under the circumstances of the controversy before him. If Stanford and City are unable to agree on a referee within ten (10) days of a written request to do so by either party hereto, either party may seek to have one appointed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 640. The cost of such proceeding shall initially be borne equally by the parties. Any referee selected pursuant to this Section 11 shall be considered a temporary judge appointed pursuant to Article 6, Section 21 of the California Constitution. 13. Litigation Expenses. If a legal action or proceeding is brought by any party because of default under this Agreement, or to enforce a provision thereof, the prevailing party therein shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief, to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs from the losing party as determined by the court in which said action or proceeding is pending. 14. Superseding State or Federal Law. In the event that any state or federal law or regulation enacted or adopted after the date of this Agreement shall prevent or preclude compliance with any of the provisions hereof, such provisions shall be modified or suspended only to the extent and for the time necessary to achieve compliance with said law or regulation and the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall be in full force and effect. Upon repeal of said law or regulation or occurrence of other circumstances removing the effect thereof upon this Agreement, the provisions hereof shall be restored to their full original effect. 25 of 35 9'T0704 !ac 0031393 15. Hol4 Harmless. Stanford agrees to and shall hold City, its officers, agents, employees and representatives, harmless and shall defend and indemnify City, its officers, agents, employees and representatives from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from the operations of Stanford, or its contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees or other persons acting on its behalf in relation to development of the Property. This hold harmless Section applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the operations referred to in this Agreement, regardless of whether or not City prepared, supplied or approved plans or specifications or both. In addition to the foregoing, Stanford agrees to pay all costs, expenses, resultant charges, and damages, including but not limited to attorney's fees, incurred by or imposed upon City as a result of any litigation attacking this Agreement or any aspect of the Project. City agrees to and shall hold Stanford, its officers, agents, employees and representatives, harmless and shall defend and indemnify Stanford from liability for damages or claims arising out. of the wrongful or negligent acts of City in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, provided, however, that nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to allow damages against City for breach of this Agreement or as otherwise limited by Section 12. In the event a claim is filed with either party for which indemnification is claimed under this paragraph, the party seeking indemnification shall give notice to the indemnifying party of the full particulars of the claim promptly after learning of same. The party seeking indemnification shall not settle such a claim after a demand for indemnification has been made without the consent of the indemnifying party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 16. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered personally or by overnight courier service or sent by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. Any notice given by: (i) personal delivery, (ii) recognized overnight national courier service, or (iii) registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, shall be deemed to have been duly given and received upon receipt. Notices to the parties shall be addressed as follows: 26 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 City: with a copy to: Stanford: with a copy to: City Manager City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 City Attorney City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 Stanford Management Company 2770 Sand Hill Road Menlo Park, California 94025 Office of the General Counsel Stanford University 105 En.cina Hall Stanford, California 94305 Any notice so delivered shall be effective upon the date of personal delivery or, in the case of mailing, or the date of delivery as shown on the U.S. Postal Service return receipt. Any party may change its address for notice by giving ten (10) days' notice of such change in the manner provided for in this paragraph. 17. Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall commence as of the Effective Date, and shall continue for fifteen (15) years from the Effective Date or until earlier terminated by mutual consent of the parties or as otherwise provided by this Agreement. Upon the termination of this Agreement, no party shall have any further right or obligation hereunder except with respect to any obligation to have been performed prior to such termination or with respect to any default in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement which has occurred prior to such termination or with respect to any obligations which are specifically set forth as surviving this Agreement. 18. Miscellaneous. (a) Co4struction. As used in this Agreement, and as the context may require, the singular includes the plural and vice versa, and the masculine gender includes the feminine and neuter and vice versa. (b) Severability. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void, 27 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected to the extent the remaining provisions are not rendered impractical to perform taking into consideration the purposes of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provision of exactions and consideration referenced in Section 9 of this Agreement are essential elements of this Agreement and City would not have entered into this Agreement but for such provisions, and therefore in the event such provisions are determined to be invalid, void or unenforceable, this entire Agreement shall be null and void and of no force and effect whatsoever as of the date such determination becomes final. (c) Recordation. Upon execution of this Agreement, City shall promptly arrange for its recordation as provided in Government Code section 65868.5. Failure to record this Agreement within the time period provided for in Section 65868.5 shall not affect its validity or enforceability amongst the Parties hereto. (d) Captions and References. The captions of the Sections and subsections of this Agreement are solely for convenience of reference, and shall be disregarded in the construction and interpretation of this Agreement. (e) Time. Time is of the esser«.:e of this Agreement and of each and every term and condition hereof, provided that failure by City to give notices at the times specified in this Agreement during a periodic review or special review, or termination or modification proceeding shall not affect the validity of such proceedings if Stanford has actual notice of such proceedings. (f) Assignment. (1) Right to Assign. Stanford shall have the right to sell, transfer or assign the Property, in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall be permitted to cause a violation of the Subdivision Map Act, Government Code section 66410, at sag.), to any person or entity at any time during the term of this Agreement; provided: (i) Concurrently with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within ten (10) business days thereafter, Stanford shall notify City, in writing, of such sale, transfer or assignment and shall provide City with an executed agreement, in a form reasonably acceptable to City, by the purchaser, transferee or assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee or assignee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of Stanford under this Agreement. 28 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 • • (ii) No sale, transfer or assignment of any right or interest under this Agreement shall be made without the prior written consent of the City Council, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld. Notwithstanding the failure of any purchaser, transferee or assignee to execute the agreement required by subparagraph (I) above, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee or assignee, but the benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to such purchaser, transferee or assignee until and unless such agreement is executed. (2) Release of Stanford. Notwithstanding any sale, transfer or assignment, Stanford shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement unless Stanford is given a release in writing by City, which release will be provided by City upon the full satisfaction by Stanford of all the following conditions: (1) Stanford no longer has a legal or equitable interest in the portion of the Property being transferred. (ii) Stanford is not then in default and default proceedings have not been commenced by City under this Agreement. (iii) Stanford has provided City with the notice and executed agreement required under Section 18(f)(1)(ii) above. (iv) The purchaser, transferee or assignee provides City with security reasonably satisfactory to City to secure performance of its obligations under this Agreement. Nothing contained in this Section I8(f) shall prevent a transfer of the Property, or any portion thereof, to an institutional lender as a result of a foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure and any lender acquiring the Property, or any portion thereof, as a result of foreclosure or a deed in licu of foreclosure shall take such Property subject to the rights and obligations of Stanford under this Agreement; provided, however, in no event shall such lender be liable for any defaults or monetary obligations of Stanford arising prior to acquisition of title to the Property by such lender and provided further in no event shall any such lender or its successors or assigns be entitled to a building permit or occupancy certificate for any portion of the Project for which any fees required by this Agreement have not been paid to City or for any portion of the Project for which any other obligation under this Agreement remains unperformed. 29 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 • Subject to the provisions of this Section 18(f), the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this Agreement shall inure to, all successors -in -interest to the parties to this Agreement. (g) Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. No waiver of any right or remedy in respect of any occurrence or event shall be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect of any other occurrence or event. (h) Governing State Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. This Agreement shall be construed as a whole according to its fair language and common meaning to achieve the objectives and purposes of the parties. The rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement, all parties having been represented and having fully participated in the negotiation of this Agreement. (1) Certificate of Compliance. At any time during the term of this Agreement, any lender or other party may request any party to this Agreement to confirm that to the best of such party's knowledge, no defaults exist under this Agreement or if defaults do exist, to describe the nature of such defaults. Each party hereby agrees to provide a certificate to such lender or other party within ten (10) business days of the request therefor. The failure of any party to provide the requested certificate within such ten (10) business day period shall not constitute a confirmation that to the best of such party's knowledge, no defaults exist under this Agreement. (j) Mortgagee Protection. The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Stanford in any manner, at Stanford's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. The City acknowledges that the lenders providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with Stanford and representatives of such lenders to consider any such request for interpretation. City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation provided such interpretation is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: 30 of 35 970704 lac 003159$ (1) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust on the Property made in good faith and for value. (2) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any part thereof, which Mortgagee, has submitted a request in writing to the City in the manner specified herein for giving notices, shall be entitled to receive written notification from City of any default by Stanford :in the performance of Stanford's obligations under this Agreement. (3) If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to Stanford under the terms of this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within twenty (20) days of sending the notice of default to the Stanford. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement. 4 Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, in no event shall such Mortgagee be liable for any defaults or monetary obligations of Stanford arising prior to acquisition of title to the Property by such Mortgagee and provided further in no event shall any such Mortgagee or its successors or assigns be entitled to a building permit or occupancy certificate until all fees due under this Agreement (relating to the portion of the Property acquired lay such Mortgagee) have been paid to the City and until any other default has been cured. (k) Force Majeure. Neither party shall be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond the party's control (including the party's employment force), court actions (such as restraining order or injunctions), or other causes beyond the party's control. If any such events shall occur, the term of this Agreement and the time for performance by either party of any of its obligations hereunder shall be extended for the period of time that such events prevented such performance. (1) Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth and contains the entire understanding and agreement of the parties. There are no oral or written representations, understandings, undertakings, or agreements which are not contained or expressly 31 of 35 970704 lac 003 1398 referred to herein, and any such representations, understandings, or agreements are superseded by this Agreement. No evidence of any such representations, understandings, or agreements shall be admissible in any proceeding of any kind or nature relating to the terms or conditions of this Agreement, its interpretation, or breach. (m) No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns, including mortgagees. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. (n) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed by the parties in counterparts, which counterparts shall be construed together and have the same effect as if all of the parties had executed the same instrument . (o) urisdiction and Venue. Any action at law or in equity arising under this Agreement or brought by an party hereto for the purpose of enforcing, construing or deteru ining the validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be filed and tried in the Superior Court of the County of Santa Clara, State of California, and the parties waive all provisions of law providing for the filing, removal or change of venue to any other court. (p) Further Actions. Each of the parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other to the extent contemplated in the performance of all obligations under this Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Agreement. Upon the request of either party at any time, the other party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. (q) Authority to Execute. The person or persons executing this Agreement warrant and represent that they have the authority to bind Stanford to the performance of its obligations hereunder. (r) Administrative Appeal. Whenever in the Applicable Rules or Project Approvals any requirement or action by Stanford is made subject to the approval or satisfaction however expressed, of any entity, other than City, including City -retained experts (referred to in this subsection as a "third party"), such condition shall not be interpreted as providing the third party the right to make any final decision other than as may be vested in it by law other than the Applicable Rules. Where a third party has no 32 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 right vested in it by law other than the Applicable Rules to make a'final decision, a condition requiring approval or satisfaction of such third party, however expressed, shall mean that the third party shall provide, as appropriate, advice, consultation a recommendation and/or an initial decision regarding the condition. The actual determination in such case will be made by the official or entity of City required or authorized to make such determination in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Appeals from determinations made by City officials or entities shall be made in accordance with applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. (s) Exhibits. The following exhibits to which reference is made in this Agreement are deemed incorporated herein in their entirety: Exhibit A - Real Property Legal Description Exhibit B - CEQA Findings Exhibit C - Comprehensive Plan Amendments Exhibit D Zoning Ordinance Amendments Exhibit E - Conditions of. Approval Exhibit F Project Description Exhibit G BMR Letter of Agreement Exhibit H-1 - Apartment Rental Management Plan Exhibit H-2 - El Camino Park Current and Amended Lease Area Map and Train Depot Lease Area Legal Description Exhibit H-3 - Special Condition Area "B" Exhibit I - Phasing Schedule Exhibit J - Development Agreement Ordinance No. If the Recorder refuses to record any Exhibit, the City Clerk may replace it with a single sheet bearing the Exhibit identification letter, stating the title of the Exhibit, the reason it is not being recorded, and that the original, certified by the City Clerk, is in the possession of the City Clerk and will be reattached to the original when it is returned by the Recorder to the City Clerk. 33 of 35 970704 iac 0031598 (t) Vignature Pages. For convenience, the parties may execute and acknowledge this Agreement on separate signature pages which, when attached hereto, shall constitute this as one complete Agreement. (u) Precedence. In the event of any conflict or inconsistency among this Agreement, the Project Approvals and the Applicable Rules, the provisions of this Agreement shall have precedence and shall control over the conflicting or inconsistent provisions; and the provisions of the Project Approvals shall have precedence and shall control over the Applicable Rules. (v) Recordation. Whenever recordation is required or may be required by either party, City shall be responsible for recordation. If City fails to record a document when required, Stanford may, but is not obligated to, record the document and by doing so Stanford does not assume the duties or obligations of City established by this subsection or the Development Agreement Act nor does it waive any right it may have to compel City to properly perform its duties and obligations. The failure of City to record or to properly record this Agreement or any other document as provided herein 3hall not affect or limit in any way Stanford's rights to enforce- this Agreement and to rely upon it. /1 // // // /1 // // // // // /1 // // /I // // // I/ '/ I/ // // // // I/ // // // 34 of 35 970704W! 0031598 • () Refe endum. If the Ordinance approving this Agreement is submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Ordinance shall be suspended and inoperative until approved by the voters. IF WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties es of the day and year first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO City Clerk APPROVRD AS TO FORK: City Attorney Mayor STANFORD By: Its: APPROVED: By: Its: City Manager APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: rector of Planning and Community Environment 35 of 35 9707O4a.c 003159i CERTIFICATE OF ACENOI(LEDC ENT (Civil Code S 1189) STATE OF ) )ss.. COUNTY OF On , before me, , a notary public in and for said County, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized. capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature (s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal, CERTIFICATE OP ACIECNIEDGMENT (Civil Code S 1189) STATE OF ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On , before me, , a notary public in and for said County, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity ies'-; and that by his/her/their signature (s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. i i i CER aPICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGKRET (Civil Code § 1189) STATE OF )ss. COUNTY OF On , before me, , a notary public in and for said County, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and, acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. EXHIBIT ORDINANCE # 4433 FILM ROLL # 1~ April 16, 1997 BKF Project No. 896060 PROJECT DESCRIPTION • EXHIBIT "A" (page 1 of 3) All that real property situate in the City of Palo Alto and the County of Santa Clara, State of California, being the lands of The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University and The State of California, and as shown on the Tentative Map and adjacent lands, a plat of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit E", more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the intersection of the northwesterly line of the proposed Sand Hill Road right of way line as shown on said Tentative Map, with the City of Menlo Park and the City of Palo Alto city limit line, last said line also being at or near San Francisquito Creek; thence northeasterly along said proposed northwesterly line of Sand Hi!] Road to a point on the southwesterly line of Parcel 1 as shown on the Parcel Map filed July 15, 1970 in Book 270 of Maps at pages 34 and 35.. Official Records of Santa Clara County; thence northwesterly along said southwesterly line of Parcel 1 to its intersection with said Menlo Park and Palo Alto city limit line (at or near San Francisquito Creek); thence in a general northerly direction along said city limit line to its intersection with the southwesterly right of way line of El Camino Real; thence southeasterly along said southwesterly line of El Camino Real, 50 feet; thence northeasterly, at right angles to last said southwesterly line, to a point on the northeasterly line of El Camino Real; thence southeasterly along said northeasterly line of El Camino Real to its intersection with the northwesterly line of University Avenue; thence southwesterly, at right angles to said El Camino Real, to a point on the southwesterly right of way line of El Camino Real; thence northwesterly along said southwesterly line of El Camino Real to its intersection with the southeasterly line of the proposed Quarry Road right of way line; thence southwesterly and southerly along said proposed southeasterly and easterly line of Quarry Road to a point 50 feet south of the southerly right of way line of proposed Vineyard Lane; thence westerly, at right angles to the easterly line of said proposed Quarry Road, to a point on the westerly line of said Quarry Road; thence northerly, northwesterly and westerly along the southerly return at the proposed intersection of Vineyard Lane and Quarry Road to a point on the proposed southerly line of Vineyard Lane; thence along said proposed southerly line of Vineyard Lane to its intersection with the southeasterly line of the proposed Sand Hill Road right of way line; thence southwesterly along said propoz,ad southeasterly line of Sand Hill Road to its intersection with the existing northeasterly right of way line of Pasteur Drive; thence southeasterly along said northeasterly line to its intersection with the westerly line of Welch Road; thence southerly along said westerly line of Welch Road to its intersection with the existing City of Palo Alto City limit line, said line also being the most southerly right of way line of existing Pasteur Drive; thence westerly along said City limit line and existing southerly line of Pasteur Drive to its intersection with the Page 1 of 2 • • EXHIBIT "a" (page 2 of 2) 4 proposed southerly right of way line of Pasteur Drive, said line also being the proposed City of Palo Alto City limit line; thence westerly along said proposed southerly line of Pasteur Drive and along said proposed City limit line to its intersection with the southeasterly line of the proposed Sand Hill Road right of way line; thence southwesterly along said proposed southeasterly line of Sand Hill Road to its intersection with the City of Menlo Park and the City of Palo Alto City limit line, last said line also being at or near San Francisquito Creek; thence northwesterly along said City limit line to the POINT OF BEGINNING. This description was prepared under my direction. By: Davis R. Thresh, P.L.S. No. 6868 License Expires: 9/30/2000 Dated: Co- Page 2 of 2 '4 SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK PROJECT DESCRIPTION LIMITS PARCEL 1 270 PM 34-35 SAND HILL ROAD -- --r 1 CH _ROAD, „-- i.-^ � ry \\\� 7 _ .', UNIVERSITY ' AVENUE EXHIBIT 'E ' to Exhibit "A u rn r 11 (page 3 of 3) EXHIBIT "B* CEQA FINDINGS (Exhibits "B" through "F" of the CEQA Resolution) • EXHIBIT B STANFORD WEST APARTMENT PROJECT COUNCIL FINDINGS CONCERNING MITIGATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF ALTERNATIVES The City Council of the City of Palo Alto ("Council") has read and considered the Final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the Stanford West Apartments project. The EIR has been prepared for five projects including the Stanford West Apartments, Stanford West Senior Housing, Stanford Shopping Center Expansion, Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements ("SHRE/RRI") projects, referred to collectively herein as the "Sand Hill'Corridor projects," and the Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation project. These projects are described in Chapter 3 of the EIR, and include, as approved by the Council, the changes and revisions described in Chapter 11 and in the "Final Summary of Project Changes" made a part of the EIR by the certifying resolution. Pursuant to Section 21081(a) of the Public Resources Code, the Council has considered each environmental impact of the Stanford West Apartments project identified in the EIR, and each of the mitigation measures and project alternatives evaluated in the EIR. The Council's detailed findings for each significant environmental impact or potentially significant environmental impact identified in the EIR are set forth below. Each significant or potentially significant environmental impact identified in the EIR is listed in bold. Those mitigation measures adopted or partially adopted by the Council are also numbered in bold. The Council's reasons for rejection or partial rejection of certain mitigation measures and reasons for selection among alternative potential mitigation measures are described where appropriate. The Council's reasons for rejecting specific alternatives to the project identified in the EIR are stated in Part II of these findings. 1 970702 lac 0031587 • • PART I CAQBS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ADOPTED TO REDUCE IMPACTS 4.1 LAND 1Y 4.1-5 Implementation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development within the Sand Hill Road Corridor, would result in a change in character in the area. The EIR concludes that there are no feasible mitigation measures available which will substantially reduce the identified significant land use impacts and that these impacts are therefore unavoidable. The Council also finds that due to the magnitude of change in use and character of the existing vacant Stanford West Apartments site, the identified impacts are significant. The conditions for approval of the Stanford West Apartments project, however, incorporate a number of mitigation measures which will lessen the overall severity of these impacts by reducing visual impacts, preserving grassland habitat area, protecting the San Francisquito Creek riparian zone from intrusion and providing for planting of new and replacement trees on the project site. These measures are discussed more fully in sections of these findings pertaining to mitigation of visual, transportation, noise and biological impacts. Despite these measures, however, the impact remains significant. 4.2 VISULL QUALITY/LIGET AND GLARE 4.2-1 The proposed projects would result in major visual changes within the Sand Hill Road corridor for viewers traveling on Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-1(b), as revised at p. 14-3 of the EIR, requires that final landscaping plans provide for large scale, shrub/understory planting between Sand Hill Road and apartment parking lots to augment screening of the site from Sand Hill Road. In addition to adoption of mitigation measure 4.2-1(b), changes were made in the project design during the environmental review process which partly implemented recommended mitigation measure 4.2-1(a). Specifically rthanges discussed at pp. 11-1 - 11-5 of the FEIR were made in the project design to reduce impacts on Governor's Lane and to open a potential view corridor. The project as approved, however, will include construction of a child care facility in the area formerly designated for construction of these apartment buildings. The child care facility will not significantly impact the Governor's Lane corridor, but will reduce the view corridor benefit in this area. 2 970702 lac 00315g7 The Council finds that the foregoing changes made to the project and the adoption of mitigation measure 4.2-1(b) will lessen somewhat the project's impact on views from the Sand Hill Road corridor, but will not reduce the impact to a less than significant level. The adopted changes and mitigation measure, in conjunction with other features of the project design, will somewhat reduce the visual impact of development and loss of existing views by preserving limited open space views along Sand Hill Road and by screening buildings with foliage, thereby reducing the viewer's perception of a continuous wall of development. These measures, however, will not overcome the major unavoidable change in visual character and loss of views of open space and the San Francisquito Creek riparian area which would necessarily result from any substantial development on the site. This impact therefore remains significant. The Council also finds that it is not desirable to further mitigate the visual impacts by redesigning the project to create additional view corridors as recommended in mitigation measure 4.2-1(a). Given that the developed portions of the project site will be extensively screened from Sand Hill Road by foliage as provided in mitigation measure 4.2-l(b), the actual visual benefit of additional view corridors would be slight. Redesign of the project to include view corridors would also result in loss of additional apartment units and/or loss of the child care facilities required by the Development Agreement for the project and Condition 14.A of the project conditions of approval. In view of the City's existing severe shortage of rental housing units and need for child-care services, neither of these losses is acceptable as a tradeoff for the slight visual benefit of additional view corridors. The Council finds that the nford West Apartment project is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan's Scenic Highways section as amended. The Council finds that the location of the required covered parking in Sand Hill Road's twenty-five foot special setback will, because of the design of the parking areas and the extensive amount of existing and proposed -landscaping, be compatible with the scenic highway designation of Sand Hill Road. The EIR identified the need for a stopping place for the public to use to view the scenic environment. Provision of a roadside stopping place would be incompatible with the arterial design of Sand Hill Road. Main Street will allow members of the public opportunities to use stopping places to view the area, including the historic Governor's Lane and the riparian backdrop of San Francisquito Creek, Views of Governor's Lane and the riparian backdrop will also be possible for those traveling along Sand Hill Road, especially at locations west of the intersections of Sand Hill Road with Vineyard Lane and with Pasteur Drive. 4.2-3 Views of pedestrians and bicyclists on the pedestrian path/bikeway from the creek crossing to Sand Hill Road would be greatly altered from views of open space to a developed, urbanized environment. Mitigation measure 4.2-3 provides that the final landscape plans for the project shall include sufficient density, height, and 970702 tic 0031387 proximity of proposed tree plantings to the east of the pedestrian path to minimize views to project buildings in the long term. Tree plantings shall be designed to achieve canopy closure above and to the east of the pedestrian path. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the project's impact on views from the pedestrian/bicycle bridge, but will not reduce the impact to a less than significant level. The required landscaping will substantially screen views of the Stanford West Senior Housing project to the east and therefore provide some visual relief from the overall change of visual character of the area. This measure will not, however, eliminate the substantial visual impact associated with development of the Stanford West Apartments project, and the impact therefore remains significant. 4.2-8 Visual disturbance from construction of the proposed projects could have temporary adverse visual impacts. Mitigation measure 4.2-8 requires that on -site staging and storage of construction equipment and materials should be minimized to reduce visual disturbance during construction. Equipment and material storage that does occur on -site should be visually screened. Graded areas should be watered regularly to minimize fugitive dust. Construction should be staged and scheduled to minimize the duration of disturbance in each affected viewshed. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the adverse visual impact of project construction, but will not reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measure will limit the duration and visibility of construction equipment and grading activities on the site, but will not eliminate the significant visual impact necessarily associated with major construction activities on the site. This impact therefore remains significant. 4.2-9 The proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development in the Sand Hill Road Corridor, could adversely affect the visual character of the corridor for viewers traveling on Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-9 recommends that mitigation measures 4.2-1(a-i) be implemented for all the Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects, including the Stanford West Apartments project. The Council has adopted or partially adopted the provisions of project -specific mitigation measures 4.2 -1(a) -(l) pertaining to the Stanford West Apartments project, except as noted in connection with the findings for Impact 4.2-1. The Council finds that the adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts from development of the Sand Hill Road corridor for reasons previously stated in relation to each adopted mitigation measure, but that these measures collectively will not reduce the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts to a less than significant level. 4 970702 lac 0031587 i • The Council has adopted or partially adopted the provisions of mitigation measures 4.2-1(a)-(1) as they pertain to the Stanford West Apartments project. The Council finds that the adoption of these mitigation measure will lessen the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts from development of the Sand Hill Road corridor for reasons previously stated in relation to each adopted mitigation measure, but that these measures collectively will not reduce the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts to a less than significant level. The additional project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4.2-9 have been adopted, partially adopted, or rejected as stated in the findings for the Stanford West Senior Housing, Stanford Shopping Center expansion and Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements projects. To the extent these measures have been adopted, they collectively will reduce but not eliminate the significant adverse cumulative visual impacts of the Sand Hill Corridor projects. This cumulative impact therefore remains significant. The Council recognizes that future development, to the extent allowed in the Sand Hill Corridor, will continue to add to the significant cumulative visual impacts associated with the approved projects. 4.2-11 The proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development, could adversely alter views from the pedestrian/bicycle bridge crossing San Francisquito Creek to Menlo Park. Mitigation measure 4.2-11 provides that the applicant shall provide landscape screening cf the Children's Health Council facilities from the bike path. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's contribution to cumulative impacts on views from the pedestrian/bicycle bridge, but will not reduce the project's contribution nor the cumulative impact to a less than significant level. The required landscaping will substantially screen views of the Children's Health Council, therefore reducing the amount of buildings and paved area immediately visible from the bridge crossing area. The visual screening, however, will not reduce the visual impact of new development associated directly with the Stanford West Apartments and resulting change in visual character of the area site. The cumulative impact therefore remains significant. 4.2-13 The proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development, could generate light and glare from buildings and roadways that could have adverse effects on nearby residents and on -coming drivers along Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-13 provides that interior and exterior light sources associated with all of the approved Sand Hill Road Corridor projects, including the Stanford West Apartments project, 5 970702 lac 0031587 e • shall be shielded or directed in such a manner as to prevent visibility of the light sources and to eliminate light spillover beyond the perimeter of the proposed project. Specific measures recommended in accordance with section 18.64.030 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code include the following: (a) Exterior light fixtures on the housing buildings should be mounted no higher than 15 feet at the rear of the buildings. (b) Lighting of the building exterior and parking lot should be of the lowest intensity and energy use adequate for its purpose. (c) Unnecessary continued illumination, such as illuminated signs, should be avoided. (d) Timing devices should be considered for exterior and interior lights in order to minimize light glare at night without jeopardizing security. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the project's contribution to potential cumulative light and glare impacts to insignificance. This measure has also been incorporated into the conditions of approval for other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The adopted mitigation measure will have the effect of eliminating substantial spillover of light from each individual project and will therefore lessen the potential cumulative impact to insignificance. 4.3 culguRAL RESOURCES 4.3-1 Implementation of the proposed projects would result in damaging effects on important historic and/or prehistoric archaeological resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(b) requires that prior to development the applicant shall conduct a data recovery program on all areas in which construction is believed to have a potential to result in significant archaeological impacts. The program shall consist of an initial phase of intensive subsurface archaeological testing meeting minimum standards specified in the EIR. Significant resources encountered shall be subject to recovery, evaluation and preservation as provided in mitigation measure 4.3-1(c). All work shall be subject to review and monitoring by an independent archaeologist engaged by the City. Following construction, mitigation measure 4.7-3(f) shall be implemented; this measure requires that mowing instead of discing of grassland areas be used to provide necessary fire clearances, thus avoiding damage to near -surface artifacts. The Stanford West Apartment management shall post signs and enforce rules to minimize disruption of the archaeological area by residents or others. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(c) requires manual excavation and recovery of archaeological resources from any areas encountered during construction which are determined to hold important archaeological resources and requires the recovery, evaluation and 6 970702 lac 0031587 • preservation of these resources. The measure also provides for ongoing monitoring of construction activities in areas potentially containing archaeological resources and for preparation of further detailed plans to ensure protection and recovery of any significant resources encountered in such areas. The plans shall include (a) provisions for artifact cataloging, analysis, and curation; (b) identification and coordination with most -likely Native American descendants concerning monitoring and reburial of Native American remains, if any are encountered; (c) plans for preparation of technical reports; (4) analysis and preservation of artifacts and documentation and analysis of non -recoverable site features. All of the foregoing shall be performed in accordance with current scientific and professional standards. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(d), as modified in p. 14-9 of the EIR, provides that any mechanical excavation for underground utility lines in Level 1 avoidance areas shall be conducted under the supervision of an archaeologist. If mechanical excavation is determined to pose a threat to archaeological resources, excavation will be conducted manually. Removed soil shall be screened and any artifacts recovered will be analyzed, reported and curated as provided j n mitigation measure 4 .3 - ? (c) . Mitigation measure 4.3-1(e) limits the placement of paved bicycle or pedestrian paths or light -duty roads and specifies additional measures to ensure that no impacts will result from placement or construction of these paths or roads in areas likely to contain archaeological resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(f) provides that construction activities involving substantial ground disturbance (greater than 12* in depth) near any known archaeological site shall be subject to monitoring. This measure also applies to all construction in all bevel 1 archaeological areas which have not been shown to contain significant resources during initial Phase 1 testing. The discovery of archaeological resources during monitoring will trigger evaluation and recovery of the resources, if appropriate, in accordance with mitigation measures 4.3-1(g) and 4.3-1(c), Mitigation measure 4.3-1(g) provides that if previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered during construction, work shall cease in the immediate area until qualified archaeologists assess the significance of the resources and make mitigation recommendations (e.g., manual excavation of the immediate area), if warranted. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(h) requires the applicant and contractors to comply with the requirements of Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code if possible Native American burials or remains are found during construction. This code section requires that a Native American Most Likely Descendant (determined in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission) be notified within 24 hours and arrangements made for appropriate reburial. This and related sections of the Public 7 970101 lac 0031387 Resources Code also provide that remains shall be protected from further construction work or vandalism pending reburial. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures, taken together with the project design, will lessen the project's impacts to historic and prehistoric archaeological resources to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures are collectively intended to supplement the principal form of mitigation incorporated into the design of the project, which is physical avoidance and in -site preservation of archaeological resources. The site plans for the Stanford West Apartments project have taken into account the known presence of substantial archaeological resources on portions of the site nearest to San Francisquito Creek. No development is approved in areas presently known to contain important archaeological resources. Within the areas believed to have a potential to contain important archaeological resources (the Level 1 avoidance zone) , development of buildings and landscaping is limited to approximately 52,000 square feet. In most areas the site plans provide a buffer (Level 2 avoidance zone) between development and known or probable archaeological resources. Within the Level 1 and Level 2 avoidance areas subject to development, the adopted mitigation measures provide for complete recovery, preservation and study of all significant resources encountered in accordance with current scientific and professional standards, thus ensuring that there will be no loss of scientific or historical value of these resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(h) also provides for reburial of Native American remains, it any, encountered during development. Because adopted mitigation measures will avoid any net loss of historic or scientific value of presently unknown important archaeological resources found on the site, the net impact of the project will not be significant. Rejected Mitigation Measure In approving the project, the Council has not adopted alternate mitigation measure 4.3-1(a) discussed in the EIR. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(a) would have required the project to be redesigned if feasible to avoid all areas designated as Level 1 avoidance areas and to reduce development in Level 2 avoidance areas. A revised site plan shown as Figure 4.3-2 in the EIR indicates that implementation would rFsult in elimination of approximately 80 residential units from the project. The Council finds that mitigation measure 4.3-1(a) is infeasible as it relates to impacts to archaeological resources on the site because the measure would eliminate housing units from the project without resulting in any substantial reduction in net overall impacts of the project on archaeological resources. There is disagreement between Stanford's archaeologists and the City's EIR consultants as to the extent of probable significant archaeological resources on the site. Stanford's archaeologist believes that the development plan avoids all areas of known or probable significant resources. The EIR has taken a more conservative approach and designated a Level 1 sensitivity area 8 9707021u 00313117 which includes additional areas not presently known to contain significant archaeological resources but which the EIR consultants believe have a potential to include such resources. The development plans limit development (buildings and landscaping) to approximately 52,000 square feet of area which the SIR identifies as having the potential to hold important archaeological resources. Most or all of this area has been previously subjected to surface disturbance in the form of agricultural ploughing. Potential impacts of development in this area and on all other areas of the site have been reduced to less than significant levels by the adoption of mitigation measures 4.3 -1(b) -(h). Because it is presently uncertain that the development plan will result in disturbance of any significant archaeological resources and because alternate measures are available and have been implemented to reduce all potential impacts to insignificance, implementation of mitigation measure 4.3-1(a) is not necessary to avoid significant impacts on archaeological resources from the project and cannot be justified in light of the loss of housing units which would result. from implementation of the measure. 4.3-2 Implementation of the proposed projects could result in loss of the Governor's Lane historic landscape feature. Mitigation measure 4.3-2(a) provides that fencing or other appropriate protection shall be installed prior to construction to protect Governor's Lane from direct physical impacts to this historic resource. Existing viable eucalyptus trees in Governor's Lane shall be preserved; those determined not to be viable may be removed and replaced with the species being used along the entire Governor's Lane alignment (e.g., Sycamore). Mitigation measure 4.3-2(h), which is directed at preserving the historical context of Governor's Lane corridor, has been partially adopted as a condition of project approval. The adopted provisions (subparagraphs (3) and (4)) of this mitigation measure provide that (a) the proposed parking lane which parallels Sand Hill Road shall be terminated at the western edge of the Governor's Lane corridor, thus avoiding intrusion and disruption of the continuity of the restored Governor's Lane, and (b) that the pedestrian pathways which bisect the Governor's Lane corridor shall be paved using materials consistent with the historical nature of the corridor (e.g. decomposed granite, cobblestone, brick, etc.). The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's impacts on the Governor's Lane historic feature to a less than significant level. The effect of these measures will be to preserve the location, visual impression and existing trees of this historic landscape feature with a minimum of direct physical disturbance. Other measures incorporated into the project call for planting of additional suitable trees to restore and enhance this historic feature and ensure its permanent retention on the site. 9 970702 lac 0031587 • Rejected Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures 4.3-1(a) and 4.3-2(b) provide for specific additional measures to reduce impacts to the Governor's Lane corridor, specifically (a) portions of buildings which intrude into the Governor's ::pane corridor shall be removed; and (b) Main Street shall be reconfigured the wrap around the northeastern terminus of Governor's Lane. These additional mitigating measures have not been incorporated into the conditions of approval adopted by the Council. The Council finds that these additional measures are infeasible because they cannot be accomplished without substantial disruption of the proposed development plan and would jeopardize the project's ability to provide needed child care facilities. While the residential buildings originally proposed to be constructed in the Governor's Lane have been relocated, the revised project plans call for construction of child care facilities in this area. The child care facilities constitute an essential element of the approved project. In light of the mitigation measures which have been adopted, the location of the child care facilities in this area will not have a significant impact on the historic value of Governor's Lane. Reconfiguration of Main Street to fully avoid Governor's Lane would require redesign of the project and would result in unacceptable loss of recreational open space for the project. These rejected mitigation meeiures are not necessary tc reduce impacts on Governor's Lane to less than significant levels and therefore cannot be justified in terms of their net overall effects on the project. 4.3-6 The proposed projects, in conjunction with other cumulative development projects in the San Francisquito Creek drainage, could result in damage or destruction of important prehistoric and historic cultural resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-6 recommends that all planning jurisdictions within the San Francisquito Creek drainage implement cultural resource testing and data recovery measures, similar to those described in Mitigation measure 4.3-1 for projects involving development of sensitive cultural resource sites. The Council has adopted the recommended mitigation measure .for the Stanford West Apartments project and all other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level and will also lessen the cumulative impact of the Sand Hill Corridor projects collectively to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects within the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is 10 970702 lac 0031587 within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impact from future projects on archaeological resources is presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures is presently unknown, the Council canno. determine at this time the extent to which the recommended mesures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative visual impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.4 TRANSPORTATION 4.4-2 Bicycle and/or pedestrian access and safety could be affected by development of the proposed projects. Mitigation measure 4.4-2(a) requires that the final design for bicycle and pedestrian circulation within the Stanford West Apartments and Senior Housing sites shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Chief Transportation Official to ensure the circulation system will function as a part of regional or inter -city bicycle and pedestrian 'onnectiolAs. Mitigation measure 4.4-2(e) provides that for five years following project construction, the project applicant will fund an annual review of reported traffic accident data at the Sand Hill Road/I-280 interchange to determine whether a significant increase in bicycle/auto conflicts has occurred. If an increase is documented, the applicant will work with Caltrans, the City of Menlo Park and San Mateo County to design and obtain funding for safety improvements required to minimize these conflicts. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's impacts on pedestrian and bicycle travel to insignificance. The project as proposed includes provisions to preserve and improve existing bicycle and pedestrian routes through the project site. The adopted mitigation measure will ensure that the final design ensures safe bicycle and pedestrian access to and through the site to local and regional bicycle and pedestrian paths, including those being implemented in conjunction with other elements of the Sand Hill Corridor projects. These measures also require Stanford to work with responsible agencies to eliminate safety problems resulting from increased bicycle and vehicle traffic at the Sand Hill Road/I-280 intersection if such problems are determined to exist in the future. 4.4-7 Development of the proposed projects could degrade the level of service of study area intersections, and contribute to increased intersection delay. The studies and analysis performed for the EIR demonstrate that the project, either singly or in conjunction with other 11 970702 lac 0031587 approved Sand Hill Corridor projects, will not have significant adverse effects on levels of service at most intersections near the project site. The EIR concluded, however, that changes and increases in traffic patterns resulting from the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects collectively will result in significant adverse changes in traffic conditions at a total of seven area intersections, specifically: Arboretum Road/Galvez Street El Camino Real/Page Mill Road El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue Junipero Serra Blvd./Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue Middlefield Road/Willow Road Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue The EIR concludes that traffic from the Stanford West Apartments project, considered in light of the concurrent approval of the modified Sand Hill Road Extension, Widening and Related Roadway Improvements project, will result in significant adverse changes at a. total of four area intersections, specifically: Arboretum Road/Galvez Street El Camino Real/Page Mill Road Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue Middlefield Avenue/Willow Road The conditions of approval nevertheless require the applicant to contribute to all of the following mitigation measures. RoadlGalvez Street: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(a) provides that the applicant shall install a traffic signal or other appropriate traffic control device(s) at the intersection of Arboretum Road/Galvez Street, and shall be required to pay the full cost of the improvement. This measure shall be implemented when the intersection satisfies appropriate signal warrants as determined by the Chief Transportation Official. In the event that she City and the applicant determine that use of a traffic circle or "roundabout' will provide for the same or better LOS and safety as a traffic signal, the traffic circle may be constructed at•the applicant's expense instead of a traffic signals or other traditional traffic control device(s). El Camino Real/Page Mill Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(b) provides that the applicant shall contribute a fair share of the costs of the following planned improvements: Add a southbound right turn lane. Add a westbound right turn lane. Add a northbound right turn lane, and extend the westbound left turn lane by 100 feet. 12 9717702 lac 0031587 I These measures should be implemented when the intersection approaches LOS P. as evaluated through periodic monitoring to be carried out by the applicant on behalf of the City. Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(c) provides that the applicant shall contribute a fair share to the following improvements to this intersection mandated by the Menlo Park General Plan: Widen Sand Hill Road to ..:grid second eastbound left turn lane. Widen Sand Hill Road to add second westbound left turn lane. Modify signal phasing. The applicant shall also pay the costs of installing an exclusive right turn lane on the northbound approach of Santa Cruz Avenue and providing dual left turn lanes on both the northbound and southbound Santa Cruz Avenue approaches. Conditions of approval 1.c and 12 for the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project, as adopted by condition of approval 2.h for this project, provide that the applicant shall advance funds to pay the full costs of these improvements if the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, with respect to any improvements within that jurisdiction, enters into an agreement co reimburse the applicant for costs in excess of its fair share. If no reimbursement agreement is adopted, the applicant shall pay its fair share based on traffic attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Implementation of this mitigation measure will not occur until approvals are obtained from the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable. Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(d) requires the applicant to pay a fair share of the costs of the following improvements to the Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection mandated by the Menlo Park General Plan or recommended in the EIR: Widen northbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane. Install an additional southbound left -turn lane. Conditions of approval l.c and 12 for the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project, as adopted by condition of approval 2.h for this project, provide that the applicant shall advance funds to pay the full costs of these improvements if the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable, enters into an agreement to reimburse the applicant for costs in excess of its fair share. If no reimbursement agreement is adopted, the applicant shall pay its 13 970702 lac 0031387 fair share based on traffic attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Implementation of this mitigation measure will not occur until approvals are obtained from the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable. Middlef'eld Avenue/Willow Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(*) identifies a number of improvements which would be necessary to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts at this intersection, including the following: Add a second southbound left turning lane. Restripe eastbound approach. Modify signal phasing, including a leading left turn phase in the signal phasing for the north and south directions. The timing of these improvements will be determined by City of Menlo Park, through periodic monitoring and/or thr subsequent environmental impact analysis and documentation. it e h Condition 2.i partially implements this mitigation measure by requiring that the applicant shall either make signal timing improvements sufficient to return traffic levels of service at this intersection to level of service D, or contribute its fair share of the costs to construct the recommended intersection improvements. This obligation would not be triggered until current level of service falls to E or worse, Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz v.nu Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(h) provides that the applicant shall conduct an operational analysis of the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Alpine Road/Junipero Serra Boulevard intersections to identify the appropriate combination of roadway and traffic signal improvements necessary to improve operation to LOS D during peak hours, if feasible. The EIR also recommends that the following mitigation measures be implemented to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts at specified intersections within the City of Menlo Park, but does not provide for direct participation by the applicant in implementation of these mitigation measures. El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(f) recommends that the following improvements to the E) Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue intersection be complete as prescribed in the City of Menlo Park's general plan: Widen northbound approach to add third northbound through lane. Restripe southbound approach to add third southbound through lane. 14 970702 Iac0031587 • Widen westbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane. El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(g) recommends that the following improvements to the El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue intersection be completed as prescribed in the City of Menlo Park's general plan: Restripe northbound approach to add third northbound through lane. Restripe southbound approach to add third southbound through lane. Widen westbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane. Final design shall include provisions for bicycle traffic. In addition, the EIR recommends that signal phasing at this intersection be modified to include split phasing in the east/west direction and a leading left turn phase in the north/south direction. In addition to these specific mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, the final conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments project include a number of additional conditions which are intended to reduce individual automobile trips to and from the project site, and thereby potentially further reduce the project's impacts on area intersections. These conditions include the following: Condition 7.g requires the construction of a bicycle and pedestrian connecting pathway between the Stanford West Apartments and neighboring Oak Creek Apartments, if approval for this connecting pathway is obtained from the ground lessee of the Oak Creek Apartments property. Condition 14.A requires the applicant to provide for on -site child care. The provisions for a child care facility are more fully described in the Development Agreement. Condition 62 requires the applicant to provide an on -site convenience retail facility to enable residents to make small purchases of convenience food and household items without generating off -site vehicle trips. Changes to the tiered priority system for the project have been included in the Development Agreement for the project. These changes will result in increased priority for Stanford employees who are likely to be able to travel to and from work by foot, bicycle or public transit. 15 970702 lac 0031587 • The Council finds that these adopted changes and mitigation measures, if implemented, will lessen the project's impacts on traffic at the four significantly affected intersections to a less than significant level, and will also substantially lessen the impact of the project's contribution to cumulative traffic at other intersections significantly affected by the Sand Hill Corridor projects collectively. Mitigation measures 4.4 -7(a) -(e), as modified by the conditions of approval, require the applicant to pay all or a fair share of the costs of physical improvements necessary to enable each of the affected intersections to serve anticipated cumulative traffic demands at acceptable levels of service. Mitigation measure 4.4-7(h) also provides for identification of appropriate additional intersection improvements should the City of Menlo Park elect to achieve a higher level of service at the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Alpine Road/Junipero Serra Boulevard intersections. Conditions of approval 7.g, 14.A and 62 require additional changes to the project which will potentially eliminate some vehicle trips to and from the project site by providing on -site child care and convenience shopping facilities, thus eliminating the need for some vehicle trips, and by encouraging use of bicycles or walking for visits be_ween residents of the Oak Creek Apartments and Stanford West Apartments. The Council recognizes that final authority to approve and implement the identified mitigation measures at three of the four intersections significantly affected by the project is vested in public agencies other than the City, specifically the County of Santa Clara (mitigation measure 4.4-7(a), Arboretum Road/Galvez Street); the City of Menlo Park (mitigation measures 4.4-7(c), Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and 4.4-7(e), Middlefield Avenue/Willow Road) ; and the County of. San Mateo (mitigation measure 4.4-7 (c) , Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue). Responsibility and authority for implementing the recommended mitigation measures at the additional intersections cumulatively impacted by the project is also vested in other public agencies, specifically the City of Menlo Park (mitigation measures 4.4-7(f), El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue, and 4.4-7(g), El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue) and 4.4-7(d), Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue). The Council finds that the identified mitigation measures can and should be approved and implemented by these agencies. However, the Council also recognizes that in the event that one or more of the listed mitigation measures are not approved and implemented by the appropriate responsible agency, the project will cause significant adverse impacts on the Arboretum Road/Galvez Street, Middlefield Ave./Willow Road and/or Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersections, and may contribute to significant impacts at other intersections cumulatively affected by the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Because it cannot presently be determined if or when the appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented by the respective responsible agencies, these impacts are considered by the Council to be potentially significant. 16 970702 lac 0031587 4.4-8 Construction activities could lead to both temporary disruption of transportation system operation, as well as to permanent damage to elements of the system such as pavement and bridges. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(a) requires the applicant to provide adequate off-street parking for all construction -related vehicles throughout the construction period. If adequate parking cannot be provided on the construction sites, a satellite parking area shall be designated, and a shuttle bus shall be operated to transfer construction workers to the job sites. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(b) provides that construction activities related to the project are prohibited from substantially limiting pedestrian access (e.g, by blocking pedestrian routes), without prior approval from the City of Palo Alto and/or Caltrans. Any approval shall require submittal and approval of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation measure 4-4.8( provides that the applicant shall be prohibited from limiting bicycle access (e.g. by blocking .or restricting existing routes) while constructing the project, without prior approval from the City of Palo Alto and/or Caltrans or the City of Menlo Park (depending upon the jurisdiction of the requested action). Any approval will require submittal and approval of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(d) provides that the applicant shall be required to prohibit or limit the number of construction material deliveries from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m., and from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(e) provides that the applicant shall be required to prohibit or limit the number Of construction employees arriving or departing the site from the hours of 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(f) requires that 'all construction -related equipment and materials shall be delivered and removed on truck routes designated by the cities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park. Heavy construction vehicles shall be prohibited from accessing the sites from other routes. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(g) requires the applicant to repair any structural damage to public roadways caused by construction equipment or vehicles, returning any damaged sections to original structural condition. The effectiveness of this measure shall be guaranteed by requiring surveys of road conditions before and after construction. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(h) prohibits the applicant from limiting access to public transit (e.g. by relocating or restricting access to bus stops or transfer facilities), and from 17 770702 1.c 0031317 limiting movement of public transit vehicles, without prior approval from the Santa Clara Transit Agency or other appropriate jurisdiction. Any approval will require submittal of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(i) provides that in lieu of mitigation measures 4.4-8(a) through (h), the project applicant may prepare a detailed construction impact mitigation plan for approval by the City's Chief Transportation Official and City of Menlo Park Transportation Manager prior to commencing any construction activities with potential transportation impacts in their respective jurisdictions. The plan must address all aspects of construction traffic management necessary to eliminate or reduce transportation impacts to acceptable levels. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential construction phase traffic and transportation impacts to a less than significant level. These measures provide for comprehensive planning for construction traffic to avoid conflicts with other transportation needs and establish standards and criteria which will. ensure that significant adverse impacts are avoided. 4.5 AIR QUALITY 4.5-1 The PM,Q generated during the construction of the proposed projects could be harmful to nearby pollutant -sensitive land uses. Mitigation measure 4.5-1 requires the applicant to implement a construction phase program which includes the following measures to reduce generation of particulate matter on the project site during construction: Water all active construction areas at least twice a day, or as needed to prevent visible dust plumes from blowing off -site. Use tarpaulins or other effective covers for on -site storage piles and for haul trucks on public streets. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas during construction. Sweep all paved access routes, parking areas, and staging areas daily (preferably with water sweepers). Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible amounts of soil material is carried onto public streets. If the working area of any construction site exceeds four acres at any one time, implement the following additional measures: 18 970702 lac 0031387 Apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles. Limit construction site vehicle speed to 15 mph on unpaved areas. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. If the working area of any construction site is located near any sensitive receptors, implement the following measures in addition to those listed above: Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 25 mph. The last mitigation would be applicable to the Stanford West Apartments site where.it approaches the Children's Health Council. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the identified impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of twice daily watering has been shown to reduce construction site PM10 emissions by at least 50 percent. This practice, in conjunction with the other listed measures, will reduce PM10 emissions during construction to less than the BAAQMD threshold of significance for all anticipated construction activity. 4.5-2 ROG, NOx, and PM emissions generated by motor vehicles and residential stationary sources associated with the proposed projects would exceed the 80 lbs/day threshold and could hinder regional and local attainment of State ozone and PMr, standards. The EIR concludes that air pollution emissions from the project -- almost entirely from related vehicle traffic -- would be approximately 55 lbs/day for reactive organic compounds (ROG), 65 lbs/day for nitrogen oxides (NOx) and 51 lbs/day of 'PMt0 particulates, all below the threshold of significance recognized by the BAAQMD and utilized in the EIR. Due to continuing changes in automotive technology, it is further expected that emissions would drop to 26 lbs/day of ROG and 49 lbs/day of NOx and remain at 51 lbs/day of PM10 by the year 2010. The project therefore will not individually have a significant adverse effect on air quality. The EIR also concluded, however, that the project would contribute to significant total air quality impacts from the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects as a whole. The conditions of approval of the project, however, do include measures intended to reduce overall numbers of vehicle trips from the project and resulting air pollution emissions. 19 970702 lac 0031587 Mitigation measure 4.5-2 (a) requires the City to implement mitigation measure 4.4-2(a), which provides that final design for bicycle and pedestrian circulation within the Stanford West Apartments and Senior Housing sites shall be reviewed to ensure the circulation system will function as a part of regional or inter -city bicycle and pedestrian connections, thereby promoting increased use of bicycles or pedestrian travel by area residents. Condition 7.g requires the construction of a bicycle and pedestrian connecting pathway between the Stanford West Apartments and neighboring Oak Creek Apartments, if approval for this connecting pathway is obtained from the ground lessee of the Oak Creek Apartments property. Condition 14.A, as more fully described in the Development Agreement, requires the applicant to provide for on -site child care, which will eliminate the need for project residents to drive to off -site child care. Condition 62 requires the applicant to provide a small on -site convenience retail facility, which will enable residents to make purchases of convenience food and household items without generating off -site vehicle trips. Changes to the tiered priority system for the project have been included in the Development Agreement for the project. These changes will result in increased priority for Stanford employees who are likely to be able to travel to and from work by foot, bicycle or public transit. The Council finds that these measures will lessen project related air pollution impacts somewhat, but will not reduce the cumulative impact of the Sand Hill Corridor Projects to less than significant levels. The cumulative air quality impacts of the Sand Hill Corridor Projects will therefore be significant. 4.5-4 Cumulative daily traffic along major roadways in the project and study areas would emit more NO", and P with the implementation of the Sand Hill Road Projects, but emissions of ROG would decrease. The EIR did not identify any mitigation measures for this area -wide cumulative impact. The Council has adopted various project conditions and mitigation measures, including mitigation measure 4.5-2(a) and Conditions 7.g, 14,A, as further described in the Development Agreement, and 62, as well as the tiered priority rental system described in the Development Agreement, to reduce traffic from the Stanford West Apartments project. However, cumulative traffic -related air pollution emissions are regulated primarily through measures beyond the City's jurisdiction or control. Individual vehicle emissions and automotive fuels are subject to regulation only by state or federal government. Regional traffic levels are also heavily influenced by past and future planning and land use decisions of other jurisdictions over which the City has no control. The Council therefore finds that no 20 970702 lac 0031587 additional feasible mitigation measures are presently available to the City to substantially lessen cumulative air quality impacts due to increases in regional traffic and that these impacts must therefore be considered significant. 4.6 NOISE 4.6-1 The noise generated during the construction of the proposed projects could be disruptive to nearby noise -sensitive land uses. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(a) provides that cons'..ruction activities will be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and if weekend work is necessary, to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturday, and to the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(b) provides that construction equipment shall be outfitted and maintained with noise reduction devices (i.e., mufflers, enclosures for stationary equipment, etc.) to obtain at least an average 10 dBA reduction shown feasible in Table 4.6-5. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(c) - provides that stationary noise sources (e.g., compressors, concrete mixers, etc.) shall be located on portions of the sites furthest away from residential and other noise -sensitive areas, and that acoustic shielding shall be used with such equipment. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will substantially lessen construction phase noise impacts on surrounding residents, but will not reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures will directly reduce noise generated by construction activities on -site and will eliminate construction noise impacts during normal sleeping hours. , However, construction noise impacts will remain significant due to the levels of noise unavoidably generated by large scale construction activity and heavy equipment. 4.6-3 Traffic generated by the proposed projects and other cumulative developments and the traffic accommodated by the proposed roadway improvements would impact existing and proposed residential and other sensitive land uses adjacent to roadways in the project and study areas. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(a) requires that project residential units facing Sand Hill Road contain sufficient acoustic insulation to meet State Title 24 indoor noise standards. The Council finds that this mitigation measure will reduce any potential significant noise impacts on project residents to a less than significant level by requiring noise protection to be built into residential units to reduce interior noise levels to acceptable levels. 21 970702 1a 0031587 The RIR also concluded that although the project would not cause significant noise impacts, traffic from the project would contribute to cumulative noise impacts on some residences along Sand Hill Road. The conditions of approval for the project therefore incorporate the following mitigation measures to assist in mitigating potential cumulative traffic -related noise impacts. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(b) requires the applicant to construct a landscaped buffer strip with at least a 3 -foot -high berm along Sand Hill Road between Stanford Avenue and Oak Avenue in conjunction with implementation of the Sand Hill Road widening and realignment between Santa Cruz and Oak Avenues. Mitigation measure 4.6 - construct a soundwall 6 feet Avenue and Stanford Avenue in the Sand Hill Road widening to at the nearby intersection. 3(c) requires the applicant to high or higher between Santa Cruz conjunction with implementation of reduce noise from traffic increases Mitigation measure 4.6-3(d), as modified by Condition 2.e of the project conditions of approval, requires the applicant to monitor noise increases in residences in the designated areas along Sand Hill Road where the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects may be responsible for more than 50% of potential increases in traffic -related noise. If noise increases are detected, the applicant shall be responsible for the costs of measures such as additional insulation, double -glazed windows, or individual soundwalls as determined necessary by acoustic study to return interior noise levels in these residences to pre -project levels or 45 dBa. Residents may also contribute any further funds necessary to further reduce interior noise levels to acceptable levels. The Council finds that these mitigation measures, if implemented, will substantially lessen significant cumulative traffic -related noise impacts along the Sand Hill Road corridor although these measures will not necessarily reduce cumulative noise impacts to a less than significant level for every residence affected by the project. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(d) provides for a fair share contribution by the applicant to the costs of physically upgrading affected residences with noise mitigation measures. Mitigation measures 1.6-3(b) and 4.6-3(c) provide for construction of physical barriers to reduce noise to acceptable ?.evels at protected residences. The adopted mitigation measure 4.6-3(d) will impose responsibility for necessary monitoring of actual noise increases on the applicant and also imposes responsibility on the applicant to pay a share of actual mitigation costs in proportion to the applicant's responsibility for these impacts where the Sand Hill Corridor projects are the predominant cause of cumulative traffic -related noise impacts. The Council does not believe that the applicant can or equitably should be held responsible for more than a fair share of the costs of mitigating these potential cumulative noise impacts. Revisions made by the City to mitigation measure 4.6-3(d) are intended to strengthen the measure by fixing responsibility for noise monitoring on the applicant, and to also amend the measure to provide that the 22 910702 Esc 0031517 applicant shall be financially responsible only for a fair share of the costs of implementing the mitigation measure. The Council recognizes that mitigation measure 4.6-3(d), as adopted, will not result in lessening of cumulative noise impacts at locations at which less than 50% of the cumulative traffic -related noise increase is attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council also recognizes that since implementation of mitigation measure 4.6-3(d) also requires the cooperation of affected homeowners, the physical improvements necessary to reduce noise levels at some affected residences to acceptable levels may not be constructed by choice of the owner. The Council therefore recognizes that rotwithstanding adoption of the identified mitigation measures, cumulative traffic -related noise impacts may remain significant for some residences affected by the projects. With respect to mitigation measures 4.o -3(b) and 4.6-3(c), which will mitigate noise impacts on certain residences in Menlo Park, the Council further recognizes that although the conditions of approval require the applicant to accept responsibility for implementation of these mitigation measures, approval for implementation of these measures must be obtained from the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that implementation of these mitigation measures can and should be approved by the City of Menlo Park. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that approval for implementation of these measures is not obtained from Menlo Park, affected residences in Menlo Park would experience significant cumulative traffic -related noise impacts due to increased cumulative traffic on Sand Hill Road. 4.7 IQJO(tCAL RESOURCES 4.7-1 Implementatio, of the proposed projects would result in loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(a) requires that native trees removed for the projects shall be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 on a per acre basis with specimens of the same species obtained from locally collected stock, and provides for additional replanting if survival rates fall below 80 percent. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(b) requires that non-native landscape trees removed for the projects be replaced on a two -to -one basis. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(c) provides that the City shall contract with an independent arborist to (a) review construction plans to provide for maximum retention of trees and necessary additional tree protection measures; b) monitor project construction; and c) recommend changes in the tree removal plan a7 necessary during construction. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(e) requires that all trees adjacent to project construction areas which are not removed will be avoided and protected according to specified procedures incorporated into all construction and/or demolition contracts. 23 9707021u 0031587 The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's long term impacts on trees and related wildlife habitat to less than significant levels. The adopted measures will also substantially lessen but will not avoid significant adverse short term and intermediate term impacts. The adopted measures provide for protection of as many trees as possible during project construction and replacement of all trees removed as a result of the project at a 2-1 to 3-1, ratio with additional measures to ensure the success of replanting. This mitigation program will therefore eventually result in replacement habitat of equal or greater value. However, because it will take a number of years before replacement trees rec_ch a level of maturity to those being removed and provide equivalent habitat value, there will be a significant short-term and intermediate term decline in quality of trees and related habitat value at the project site, 4.7-2 Construction of the proposed projects would result in tree removals that could directly destroy nests, eggs and immature birds, and would remove future nesting habitat for birds, including sensitive species such as raptors and migrating songbirds. Mitigation measure 4.7-2(a) provides that in order avoid the nesting season of raptors and sensitive songbirds, tree removals shall not take place between February 15 and June 30, unless otherwise determined by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) on a case -by -case basis. Mitigation measure 4.7-2(b) provides that if tree removal between January 1 and February 15 is required, a pre -construction survey shall be conducted to identify the presence, or lack thereof, of nests of raptors. If nests are identified, CDFG shall be contacted and appropriate protocols for nest relocation shall be implemented. If relocation of occupied, viable nests is not feasible, construction shall be delayed and the tree left undisturbed until completion of nesting activity. Mitigation measure 4.7-2(c) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7 -1(a) -(f) and 4.7 -4(a) -(c) (tree replacement and riparian habitat replacement), discussed above and below. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's impacts on nesting birds to a less than significant level. These measures will avoid any direct destruction of nests and provide for eventual replacement or enhancement of all nesting habitat lost. While there will be a short term loss of nesting habitat for all bird species and short and intermediate term loss of nesting habitat for raptors, there are sufficient alternate nesting sites in the area that this impact will not have any significant adverse effect on overall nesting opportunities or on bird populations. 4 ...J 4.7-3 Loss of non-native grasslands near San Francisquito Creek Mitigation measure 4.7-3(a) provides that grassland habitat shall be preserved within the area between San Francisquito Creek 24 9707021st 0031587 S and the Stanford West Apartments. This area shall be enhanced by protection from discing, and by replanting with native grasses and wildflowers and monitored for at least five years to ensure success. Mitigation measure 4.7-3(b) requires that remaining grassland habitat be enhanced by seeding with a mix of California native grasses and forbs, and/or planting of plugs of native grasses before winter rainfall in the year of grassland removal. Mitigation measure 4.7-3(c) requires that all replacement grassland shall be planted on -site. Mitigation measure 4.7-3(d) requires that all replacement grassland shall be monitored for a minimum of two years to ensure at least 50 percent survival. If irrigation or fertilizers are used, all replacement grasses shall be "weaned" of any supplemental water and fertilizer by the third year. Mitigation measure 4.7-3(e) requires that a yearly maintenance and monitoring report shall be provided to the City detailing compliance with the replacement planting success criteria. If the success criteria are not met, the City shall require the project applicant to implement remedial actions that will result in a minimum 50 percent survival after five years of the last date of planting. Mitigation measure 4.7-3(f) provides that mowing for fl. re control shall be performed around the perimeter of any grassland areas, leaving as much of the internal area intact as allowable to local fire authorities, and leaving the mowed area no higher than 18 inches. Mitigation measure 4.7-3(g) provides that the City may require a performance bond or other security to ensure any necessary replanting of grasslands if determined necessary. 'This mitigation measure is implemented and modified by Condition 2 of the project conditions of approval. Mitigation measure 4.7-3(h) requires the applicant to prohibit future use of retainad grassland area for any construction -related activities. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's impacts on grassland habitats to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures provide for preservation and enhancement of a substantial area of natural grasslands on the site. The EIR indicates that native revegetation can increase general habitat values and the carrying capacity for wildlife using this area. The cessation of discing can increase the burrowing rodent population for foraging raptors. Consultation with CDFG indicates that enhancement of the remaining grassland can mitigate the overall impact of the project on grasslands to a less than significant level. 25 970702 lac 0035587 • 4.7-8 Ongoing operation of the proposed projects could adversely affect aquatic life, including sensitive animal species, in San Francisquito Creek, by increasing runoff and non -point source urban pollutant loads. Mitigation measure 4.7-8(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9 -1(a) -(c), discussed below. Mitigation measure 4.7-8(b) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-4(a) and (b), discussed below. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential impacts on aquatic life in San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures provide for implementation of construction phase and post -construction storm water runoff management plans which will utilize recognized best management practices to minimize siltation and runoff of contaminants from the project site. Residual silt and contaminant runoff reaching San Francisquito Creek is not expected to constitute a sufficient addition to loads from existing development in the watershed to result in any measurable further deterioration of water quality conditions. 4.7-9 Operation of the proposed projects would increase human access resulting in direct impacts to sensitive animal species and disturbance and trampling damage to sensitive riparian habitat adjacent to San Francisquito Creek and to the Creek channel. Mitigation measure 4.7-9(a) requires that existing trails providing access to the riparian habitats along San Francisquito Creek be obliterated by dense barrier plantings of native riparian shrubs. A new trail will be designed for the length of the San Francisquito riparian corridor in the project area, located outside of riparian habitats and the drip lines of existing trees. Appropriate measures will be utilized to encourage exclusive use of this trail. Educational interpretive signs and displays shall be posted along this trail. View points shall be established in areas adjacent to the Creek where their siting will cause minimal damage to existing riparian vegetation. Direct public access to the Creek bank and channel shall not be permitted except over existing crossings and for access to these carefully sited view points. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the potential impacts of increased human intrusion of the San Francisquito Creek riparian area to a less than significant level. The adopted measure provides for substantial preventive action to minimize future human intrusion and resulting impacts to the riparian zone, and for restoration of existing damage, thus potentially resulting in a net beneficial impact to the riparian corridor. 26 970702 lac 0031387 • 4.7-10 implementation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with other proposed projects in the area would result in incremental :ass of trees and associated wildlife habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-10(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7-1(a, b, c, and e), discussed above, for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. Mitigation measure 4.7-10(c) recommends that all planning jurisdictions in the project area implement their respective tree protection and preservation ordinances. For those jurisdictions without such an ordinance, measures similar to those presented in mitigation measure 4.7-1 should be implemented on a project -by -project basis. The Council has adopted the recommended mitigation measures for the Stanford West Apartments project and other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the cumulative loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat to a less than significant level. Adoption and implementation of these measures in conjunction with the Stanford West Senior Housing and Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements projects will also reduce the combined cumulative impact of the projects to a less than significant level. These measures generally provide for full replacement of trees lost due to implementation of the project, thus eliminating any significant cumulative impact. Adoption of equivalent mitigation measures for future development projects reviewed by the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project. The Council finds, however, that City decisionmakers can and should adopt such measures in conjunction with any future projects which may result in cumulative loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat within the City. With respect to future implementation of the recommended measures by other jurisdictions in the area, the Council finds that implementation is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of the identified other agencies and that such measures can and should be adopted by such agencies. However, because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impacts from future development in the area are presently speculative and unknown, and the extent to which the recommended mitigation measures will be implemented by all responsible jurisdictions is also presently unknown and is beyond the control of the City, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will lessen or avoid the potential cumulative impact, and therefore finds that the cumulative impact remains potentially significant. 27 970702 lac 0031 $7 • 4.7-11 Construction of the proposed projects, in conjunction with other projects in the project area, would cumulatively result in tree removals that could directly destroy nests, eggs and immature birds, and would remove future nesting habitat for birds, including sensitive species such as raptors and migrating songbirds. Mitigation measure 4.7-11(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7 -2(a -c), discussed above, for the Sand Hill Corridor development projects. Mitigation measure 4.7-11(b) recommends that all planning jurisdictions in the project area implement measures similar to those presented in mitigation measure 4.7-2 on a project -by -project basis. The conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments project incorporate the applicable o oject-specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4. 7- 11 (a) . The Council has also adopted the recommended project -specific mitigation measures as conditions of approval for the Stanford West Senior Housing and Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements projects. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption of these mitigation measures in conjunction with the approved projects will also reduce the combined cumulative impact of the projects to a less than significant level. These measures generally provide for avoidance of tree -cutting which may directly impact nesting activities and provide for full replacement of trees lost due to implementation of the project, thus eliminating any significant cumulative impact. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects approved by the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of the potential cumulative impact from future projects is presently entirely speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative visual impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption. of available mitigation measures by the City. 28 970702 Inc 0031387 4.7-12 The proposed projects, in conjunction with other proposed projects in or adjacent to the San Francisquito Creek riparian corridor, would result in the loss of non-native grasslands which, due to contiguousness with riparian habitat, provide increased habitat diversity and foraging habitat for certain wildlife species, including raptors. Mitigation measure 4.7-12(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7 -3(a -h), discussed above. Mitigation measure 4.7-12(b) recommends that further development of open grassland areas adjacent to San Francisquito Creek or its tributaries (primarily in the foothills southwest of Junipero Serra Road) not be approved without provisions to implement mitigation measures similar to those of Mitigation Measure 4.7-3 (a) - (h) , in consultation with CDFG. The Council has adopted the recoiiuuended mitigation measures for the project and other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that adoption of the recott ended project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to potential cumulative losses of trees and nesting habitat to a less than significant level. With respect to future projects within the City's jurisdiction which may contribute to cumulative loss of cultural resources, the City will consider implementation of the recommended measures at the time future development proj( ':s are proposed. With respect to future implementation of the recommended measures by other jurisdictions in the area, the Council finds that implementation is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of the identified other agencies and that such measures can and should be adopted by such agencies. However, because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impacts from future development in the region are presently speculative and unknown, and the extent to which the recommended mitigation measures will be"adopted by all responsible jurisdictions is also presently unknown and is beyond the control of the City, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will lessen or avoid this potential cumulative impact, and therefore finds that'the cumulative. impact remains potentially significant and unavoidable. 4.7-15 Ongoing operation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with similar projects within the same watershed, could cause cumulative adverse affects on aquatic life, including sensitive animal species, in San Francisquito Creek, by increasing runoff and non -point source urban pollutant loads. Mitigation measure 4.7-15 recommends implementation of the mitigation measures prescribed in mitigation measures 4.9 -7(a) -(c) for all future projects in the San Francisquito Creek watershed. The conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments project incorporate each of the applicable recommended project -specific mitigation measures. The Council has also adopted 29 970702 Isc 0031587 • the recommended project -specific mitigation measures as conditions of approval for the other Sand Hill Corridor projects approved concurrently with the project. The Council finds that adoption of these recommended project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption and implementation of these mitigation measures in conjunction with the other Sand Hill Corridor projects will also reduce the combined cumulative impact of these projects to a less than significant level. The adopted project -specific measures generally provide for preparation and compliance with detailed Storm Water Pollutant Prevention Plans which will include specific measures to prevent excessive sediment or pollution runoff which might result in significant adverse effects on aquatic life or habitat values ii San Francisquito Creek. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures for future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects approved by the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of the potential cumulative impact from future projects is presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative impact resulting from increased runoff of sediment and pollutants, into San Francisquito Creek. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.7-16 Operation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with similar projects in or adjacent to the riparian corridor of 'San Francisquito Creek or its tributaries, would increase human access, cumulatively resulting in direct impacts to sensitive animal species and disturbance and trampling damage to sensitive riparian. habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-16(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7-9(a) and (b), discussed above for the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects. Mitigation measure 4.7-16(b) recommends that all planning jurisdictions in the project area implement measures similar to those presented in mitigation measure 4.7-9 on a project -by -project basis. 30 970702 lac 0031587 The Council has adopted each of the project -specific mitigation measures referenced in mitigation measures 4.7-16(a) and 4.7-16(b), in the conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments project and Stanford West Senior Housing project. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the projects' contribution to potential cumulative impact on the San Francisquito Creek riparian corridor to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects within the City located near riparian habitat areas. With respect to future development projects located outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impacts from future development are presently entirely speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which cther agencies can and will implement the recommended measures•is presently unknown, the Council cannot. determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative effects. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the Council. 4.8 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY 4.8-1 Expansive or weak soils could damage foundations by providing inadequate support. Mitigation measure 4.8-1(a) requires that site specific soil suitability analysis be conducted and soil stabilization procedures and foundation design criteria be adopted in accordance with engineering criteria where the existence of expansive and compressible soil conditions is known or suspected. Mitigation measure 4.8-1(b) requires participation by the project's registered soil engineer as deemed necessary to oversee, verify, and report on soil engineering procedures and results. The EIR concludes that this impact is potentially, but not necessarily, significant, based on actual conditions encountered at the site. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen impacts related to potentially expansive or weak soils to a less than significant level. These measures provide for implementation of standard engineering procedures and criteria which will ensure construction of safe buildings and foundations. 31 970702 lac 60313E7 • • 4.8-2 The Stanford Sand Rill Road Corridor Projects area is subject to very strong seismically induced groundshaking which could threaten life and damage property. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(a) requires documented site -specific seismic -restraint criteria to be incorporated in the design of foundations and structures of project structures. The criteria must meet the minimum seismic -resistant design standards of CUBC Seismic Zone 4. Additional seismic -resistant earthwork and construction design criteria will be incorporated in the project where recommended by qualified experts. Roads, foundations and underground utilities in fill or alluvium shall be designed to accommodate settlement or compaction produced by seismic forces. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(b) requires on -site participation by the project's registered geological or geotechnical engineering consultant, as deemed appropriate, to oversee, verify, and report on seismic -restraint * rocedures and results. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(c) requires that an engineering geologist be contracted for third party review of all geologic, soils and engineering reports prepared for the proposed projects. Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the impact of exposure to seismic events to a less than significant level. These measures implement standard engineering procedures and criteria for preventing major building failures and resulting injury or loss of life from any seismic event reasonably anticipated to occur in the project area. 4.8-4 Implementation of any combination of the projects, in conjunction with cumulative development within San Mateo and Santa Clara counties and the cities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park, .would increase the number of people and structures subject to strong seismic groundahaking and the subsequent risk of injury, loss of life and property damage. Mitigation measure 4.8-4(a) recommends that documented site -specific seismic -restraint criteria to be incorporated in the design of foundations and structures of all future development in the project area, including (1) minimum seismic -resistant design standards shall conform to the CUBC Seismic Zone 4 Standards; (2) additional seismic -resistant earthwork and construction design criteria shall be incorporated as necessary, based on the site -specific engineering recommendations; (3) site preparation shall be supervised by geological or geotechnical consultants; (4) "as built" maps and a report shall be filed with the City, showing details of the site geology, the location and type of seismic -restraint facilities, and documenting satisfactory seismic performance for buildings, roads, foundations and underground utilities. Mitigation measure 4.8-4(b) recommends requiring on -site oversight, verification and reporting by registered geological or 32 970702 lac 0031387 geotechnical engineering consultants where deemed appropriate by the City's Chief Building Official. The conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments project and for each of the other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects incorporate measures equivalent to the project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4.8-4(a). The Council finds that adoption of these project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impact to a less than significant level, and will also lessen the combined cumulative impact of the Sand Will Corridor projects to a less than significant level. The adopted project -specific measures generally provide for incorporation of adequate seismic safety measures into all new construction as provided by mitigation measures 4.8 -2(a) - (c) . Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future developmen► projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should he adopted in conjunction with any future projects approved by the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that these agencies can and should implement such measures. Because the recommended mitigation measures rely in part upon compliance with existing seismic safety practices and standards, it is expected that other jurisdictions will implement the measures to a large extent. However, because the extent of the potential cumulative impact from future projects is presently unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures beyond current minimum standards is uncertain, the Council cannot fully determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen the potential cumulative impact associated with increased development in the seismically sensitive region around the projects. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 4.9-1 Grading, excavation and construction activities could result in increased deposition of sediment and/or discharge of pollutants in the storm drainage system and San Francisquito Creek and adversely affect water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-1(a) requires the applicant to prepare, retain and implement a SWPPP which describes the site, erosion and sediment controls, means of material storage and waste disposal, implementation of approved local plans, post -construction control measures and maintenance responsibilities, and non -storm water management controls. The plan shall implement appropriate Best Management Practices ("BMPs") identified in the EIR. 33 970702 lac 0031387 • Mitigation measure 4.9-1(b) requires that the SWPPP shall be prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the City's Director of Public Works prior to issuance of a building permit. The SWPPP shall be implemented and inspected as part of the approval process for the grading plans for each project. Mitigation measure 4.9-1(c) requires that all construction contracts include the City's construction contract Pollution Prevention Language as part of the project specifications. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential sedimentation and contaminant impacts on San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures implement regulatory requirements and practices demonstrated to prevent excessive or damaging runoff of sediments and pollutants from development sites. Residual runoff of sediments and contaminants from construction areas, if any, will not occur in sufficient quantities to significantly degrade existing water quality. 4.9-4 Increased impervious surface and landscaping associated with development of the Proposed Projects could increase urban contaminants in surface runoff potentially reducing water quality in San Francisquito Creek. Mitigation measure 4.9-4(a) requires implementation mitigation measures 4.9-1(a) through (c) for all approved Sand Hi Corridor projects. Mitigation measure 4.9-4(b) requires that the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall include in the final project design appropriate BMPs selected by the City, consisting either of detailed measures specified in the EIR or equivalent measures. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential impacts on San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures require implementation of design features and operational practices which will reduce contamination of exposed surfaces at the project site and trap or otherwise minimize runoff of such contaminants from the site. Residual contaminant runoff reaching San Francisquito Creek is not expected to constitute a sufficient addition to loads from existing development in the watershed to result in any measurable further deterioration of water quality. 4.9-5 Project construction activities in combination with other construction projects in the Watershed could cumulatively increase sediment and other construction -related pollutants in San Francisquito Creek and adversely affect water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(a) recommends that all area jurisdictions ensure that project applicants include BMPs in construction contracts implementing the requirements of NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit #CAS029718. 34 970702 lac 0031587 • • Mitigation measure 4.9-5(b) recommends that applicants for all area projects of five acres or more, be required to prepare a detailed SWPPP under the State General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(c) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-1(a) through (c) for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. The recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures have been incorporated in the conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments. The Council finds that adoption of these project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to potential cumulative sedimentation and contaminant impacts associated with construction to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City's jurisdiction is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the Stanford West Apartments project; however, the Council finds that the City can and should require implementation of the recommended measures at the time future development projects are proposed. With respect to implementation of the recommended mitigation measures by jurisdictions other than the City, the Council finds that implementation of such measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the recommended measures can and should be implemented by these agencies to the extent feasible. These measures are generally consistent with requirements imposed by state law. However, because the nature and extent of potential area -wide cumulative impacts from future development are presently unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative effects. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the Council. 4.9-6 Increased impervious surfaces associated with development of the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects and areas in 'the San Francisquito Creek Watershed could cumulatively increase surface runoff, potentially increasing the frequency and severity of existing downstream flooding. Mitigation measure 4.9-6 recommends that all jurisdictions regulating development in the San Francisquito Creek watershed require that adequate drainage and flood control facilities be provided for existing and planned development, in compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies and ordinances and in coordination with Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) requirements. The Council finds that measures included in the project design and mitigation measures incorporated in the conditions of project approval, specifically an on -site retention basin and mitigation 35 970702 lac 0031587 • • measure 4.9-2, effectively implement the above recommended mitigation measure for the Stanford West Apartments project and will reduce the potential contribution of the project to cumulative flooding impacts to a less than significant level. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project. However, the Council finds that the City can and will consider adoption and implementation of appropriate mitigation measures as future development projects are proposed and in accordance with its comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances. With respect to implementation of the recommended mitigation measure by other jurisdictions in the San Francisquito Creek watershed, the Council finds that jurisdiction and responsibility for implementation of the recommended mitigation measure is vested in other public agencies and that such agencies can and should adopt and implement appropriate mitigation programs. Because the extent of potential cumulative impacts from future watershed development is currently unknown and because the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the adequate mitigation measures will be implemented by other agencies, the Council cannot presently determine whether the identified potential significant cumulative impact will be substantially lessened or avoided by the recommended mitigation. This cumulative impact therefore remains potentially significant. 4.9-7 Increased impervious surface associated with development of the Stanford Sand Rill Road Corridor Projects and are o in the San Francisquito Creek Watershed could cumulatively increase urban eontAminsnts in surface runoff potentially reducing water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(a) recommends that all local jurisdictions ensure that future project applicants include BMPs as part of project design in accordance with San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB) requirements. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(b) notes that it is within the jurisdiction of the SFBRWQCB to require that comprehensive SWPPPs and monitoring programs be implemented by all storm water dischargers associated with specified industrial activities,' in compliance with the State's General Permits, and to require that such plans shall include BMPs or equally effective measures. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(c) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-4(a) and (b) by all approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments project incorporate each of the recommended project -specific mitigation measures or equivalent measures to mitigate identified potential cumulative contaminant impacts to San Francisquito Creek. The Council finds that adoption of these recommended measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impact to a less than significant level. The recommended mitigation measures have also been adopted in connection with 36 970702 lac 0031587 approval of the other approved Sand Hill Road Corridor projects, and will lessen the combined cumulative impact of the projects to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures for future development in the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project. However, the Council finds that the City can and should adopt equivalent measures for all future projects approved within its jurisdiction. With respect to impacts resulting from future development outside the City, jurisdiction and responsibility for implementation of recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures is vested in other public agencies. The Council finds that these jurisdictions can and should implement such measures. However, because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impacts from future development are presently speculative and unknown, and the degree to which other jurisdictions will implement recommended mitigation measures is uncertain, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented outside the City's boundaries and also cannot determine the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid the identified potential cumulative impact. This cumulative impact therefore remains potentially significant. . 4.11 UTILITIES, ENERGY AND INFRASTRUCTURE 4.11-3 The proposed projects could use water wastefully. Mitigation measure 4.11-3 requires that in order to reduce water consumption, the project design shall incorporate measures to maximize the efficient use of water and minimize total water consumption. Specific measures to be included are the following: All landscape designs shall incorporate and address the City Landscape Water Efficiency Standards. The project sites would be subject to an annual maximum water allowance for landscaping. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department, Resource Management Division to determine other conservation related improvements that would apply to the projects. The EIR concluded that because final plans have not been completed by the applicant specifying how water, particularly for landscaping, would be efficiently used, there existed a potential that water could be used wastefully by the project. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen this potentially significant impact to insignificance by ensuring that final landscaping and construction plans meet current City Water Efficiency Standards and incorporate additional conservation measures if recommended by City staff. 37 970702 lac 9031587 i 4.11-4 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing water services. Mitigation measure 4.11-4 provides that prior to the start of construction of infrastructure, the project applicant shall provide a plan for review and approval to the City of Palo Alto Director of Utilities outlining the approach to be taken to minimize the impact to existing utilities and customers. The EIR determined that operations necessary to connect infrastructure associated with the project to existing service lines and facilities could result in potentially significant interruptions of utility services for existing users, specifically interruptions of water service (Impact 4-11-4), wastewater service (Impact 4-11-11), electrical service (Impact 4-11-17) and gas service (Impact 4-11-24.) The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen each of these potentially significant impacts to a less than significant- level by requiring the applicant to submit and obtain approval of plans which will provide for completion of all utility connections for the project with the minimum necessary interruption of existing services. 4.11-7 Cumulative development could use water wastefully. Mitigation measure 4.11-7 provides that the City shall ensure that each new project approved within the City requiring ARB approval is required to be consistent with and implement the City policies and programs related to water conservation. The EIR concluded that existing City policies and programs are adequate to avoid cumulative wasteful use of water, and that a significant adverse impact had the potential to occur only if the City failed to continue to implement these policies and programs. The recommended mitigation measure provides that the City will continue to implement existing water conservation policies by making compliance a condition of ARB approval for all new projects. While implementation of this mitigation measure is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the Stanford West Apartments project, the Council finds that this mitigation measure can and should be implemented with respect to future projects within the City and will lessen the identified potentially significant cumulative impact to insignificance. 4.11-9 The proposed projects would require improvement of the existing 21 -inch wastewater line. Mitigation measure 4.11-9 requires that in the event that open -trench technology is used, the project applicant shall ensure that the new 24 -inch wastewater line is constructed coincident with, and placed in the right-of-way of, Palo Road, during Phase I of project construction, thereby avoiding potential biological impacts and conflicts with future uses associated with the alternate location of the line. 38 970702 lac 0031387 The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the potential significant adverse impacts associated with construction of a new 21" wastewater line to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure requires the applicant to either use technology which avoids trenching and resulting tree removal in the Stanford arboretum, or to relocate the route of the replacement pipeline along existing right-of-way containing no significant environmental resources in order to avoid impacts to the arboretum. 4.11-10 The proposed projects would generate additional wastewater flows that could exceed the capacity of the existing 27 -inch wastewater line. Mitigation measure 4.11-10(a) provides that if the proposed project is developed prior to the Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF) project, the project applicant shall perform flow metering and a capacity study of the 27 -inch wastewater line, and shall be responsible for the costs of the improvement associated with the projects. All aspects of construction within the railroad right-of-way shall meet Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (PCJPB)requirements and shall be approved by the PCJPB. Mitigation measure 4.11-10(b) provides that if the PAMF project is developed prior to the proposed projects, the project applicant shall coordinate with the Palo Alto Utilities Department and the PAMF project engineers to ensure that the proposed downstream 27 -inch wastewater line is enlarged with adequate capacity for the proposed Stanford West housing and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion projects. The EIR concluded that the project, in conjunction with the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion and proposed PAMF expansion project, would likely result in cumulative wastewater flows which exceed the capacity of the existing 27" wastewater line serving these projects. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen this potential impact to insignificance by requiring the applicant to bear the costs of all improvements determined necessary to provide adequate wastewater line capacity for all three projects, and that all improvements within the railroad right-of-way crossed by the pipeline be constructed with the approval of the PCJPB, which maintains the rail lines. 4.11-11 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing wastewater services. Mitigation measure 4.11-11 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4, discussed above. See findings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 39 970702 lac 0031587 4.11-13 Cumulative development could require major infrastructure improvements to the existing wastewater system. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(a) recommends that the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department ensure that developers responsible for construction of new wastewater lines coordinate with all other parties intending to utilize the line. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(b) recommends that sewer line capacity studies satisfactory to the City's Director of Utilities be conducted prior to initiating future cumulative development. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(c) recommends that all final designs for the sizing of new sewer mains shall be based on infiltration from a 20 -year storm and peak base wastewater flow. The EIR concluded that lack of coordinated planning for future development could result in failure to adequately size area wastewater lines, resulting in future need to again upgrade these lines to provide needed capacity. The recommended mitigation measures provide for full evaluation and correct sizing of mains prior to cumulative development. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's contribution to this potential cumulative impact to a less -than significant level. These mitigation measures will also lessen the overall potential cumulative impact to a less than significant level since implementation of these measures will result in provision of adequate long-term capacity for all reasonably foreseeable development. 4.11-17 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing electrical services. Mitigation measure 4.11-17 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4 for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. See findings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 4.11-24 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing gas services. Mitigation measure 4.11-24 implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-•4 for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. See findings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND SCROQLS 4.12-4 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of fire suppression service calls to the Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) . Mitigation measure 4.12-4 identifies three alternative means for offsetting cumulative increased demands on Palo Alto Fire 40 970702 lac 0031587 Department resources. Condition of approval 2.1 for the project adopt the third of these alternate means, specifically: The City will provide additional resources to the PAFD through the City's General Fund from the increased tax revenues generated by the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other future cumulative projects. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the identified cumulative impact on fire suppression services to a less than significant level for each of the Sand Hill Corridor projects and future development. Cost and revenue projections for the approved projects indicate that increased tax revenues from the projects and other potential future development will be more than adequate to fund additional resources for the PAFD necessary to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased PAFi, resources identified in EIR mitigation measure 4.12-4, specifically (1) fair share applicant funding of new PAFD personnel, and (2) fair -share contributions from future projects, are not necessary based on current information to maintain adequate fire protection within the City and would result in imposing unnecessary special additional costs on new development. 4.12-5 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of medical emergency service calls to the PAFD. Mitigation measure 4.12-5 identifies two alternative means of covering costs of additional emergency medical services should increases in current personnel and/or equipment prove necessary to meet future demand. Condition of approval 2.m provide that the City shall adopt the second of these alternatives, specifically, the City shall provide additional medi-van resources to.the PAFD if needed with general fund increases from tax revenues generated by the projects and other future cumulative projects. The Council has adopted the second of these mitigation alternatives for the Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen the identified potential cumulative impact on emergency medical services to a less than significant level. Cost and revenue projections indicate that increased tax revenues from the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other potential future development will be adequate to fund additional emergency medical resources as needed to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased emergency medical services identified in EIR mitigation measure 4.12-5, specifically that future development projects directly pay a fair share toward a medi-van unit or, is not necessary to maintain adequate level of emergency medical services based on current information. 41 970702 !ac 0031567 4.12-6 Increased construction traffic from cumulative development could reduce PAPD response times. Mitigation measure 4.12-6 provides that as part of the project approval process, the City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment shall ensure the following: All projects coordinate with the PAFD and PAPD to prepare an emergency response plan for the construction period that specifies alternate emergency response routes to the project site and vicinity which meet the Departments' response time goals; and The Emergency Response Plan for all Sand Hill Corridor projects will specify procedures to allow simultaneous construction without increasing emergency response times to an unacceptable level. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's potential impact on PAFD emergency response times to insignificance. This measure ensures that detailed plans will be developed and implemented to ensure that existing :z. adequate alternative response routes will be kept open at all times to permit PAFD responses to all service areas within PAFD response time standards. 4.12-8 Design of the proposed projects could present security risks to occupants and police patrol personnel. Mitigation measure 4.12-8 provides that the applicant's lighting and landscaping plans will be reviewed with the Palo Alto Police Department (PAPD) to eliminate safety risks. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation. measure will lessen the identified potential safety impact, to a less than significant level. This measure will ensure that qualified City police officers will review lighting and landscaping plans so that plans are designed to eliminate potential security hazards such as poorly lit areas along walkways. 4.12-10 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of police service calls to the PAPD. Mitigation measure 4.12-10 identifies three alternate means of funding additional police services to offset increased demand on Palo Alto Police Department resources. Condition 1.j of the project conditions of approval provides that the City shall adopt the second of these alternatives, specifically, the City shall fund additional PAPD resources from increased tax revenues generated by the projects and other future cumulative projects, The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the potential cumulative impact of the project and of new development generally on police services to a less than significant level. Cost and revenue projections indicate that increased tax 42 970702 lac 0031$V7 • revenues from the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other potential future development will be adequate to fund additional police resources as needed to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. 4.12-11 Designs of cumulative development projects could present security risks to occupants and police patrol personnel. Mitigation measure 4.12-11 recommends that the City Department of Planning and Community Environment ensure that future project lighting and landscaping are reviewed with the PAPD to reduce safety risks. The ARE shall provide final review and approval. This mitigation measure has been effectively implemented with respect to the Stanford West Apartments project through the adoption of mitigation measure 14.12-8. The Council finds that adoption of the measure will reduce the project's contribution to any potential significant cumulative impact to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure has also been adopted in conjunction with approval of the Stanford West Senior Housing project. Adoption of this mitigation measure as a policy governing review and approval of all future development within the City •is beyond the scope of the decision and approvals granted for the Stanford West Senior Housing project. However, the Council finds that the recommended mitigation measure can and should be implemented. in relation to future development projects within the City. 4.12-12 Increased construction traffic from cumulative development could increase PAPD response times Mitigation measure 4.12-12 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.12-6 by all approved Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects. This mitigation measure has been implemented by adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-6 for the each of the approved Sand Hill. Corridor projects. The Council finds that implementation of mitigation measure 4.12-6 will lessen the cumulative impact of construction of the projects on PAPD response times to a less than significant level. 4.12-13 The proposed projects would increase enrollments and associated resource demands on the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD). Mitigation measure 4.12-13(a) recommends that the project applicant negotiate with the PAUSD for the following mitigation measures: Fair share funding for new classrooms and other costs not covered by statutory development fees; or Fair share of funding for the reopening of closed facilities. 43 970702 lac 0031387 • Mitigation measure 4.12-13(b) recommends that the applicant negotiate with the PAUSD to fund its fair share of 11 new teaching positions in area schools. The Council finds that implementation of these measures is beyond the authority and control of the City and that adoption of these measures by the City is therefore infeasible. The City's authority to impose mitigation measures for school related impacts is restricted by state law. Implementation of the identified mitigation measures is dependent upon voluntary agreement between the applicant and PAUSD. Copies of communications between the applicant and PAUSD which have been received by the Council indicate that the applicant has initiated efforts to ascertain and potentially contribute a fair share of school costs resulting from implementation of the project which are not covered by increased tax revenues or development fees from the project. However, because implementation and effectiveness of the proposed voluntary mitigation remains uncertain, the Council finds that the identified impacts on public schools must be considered potentially significant. 4.12.14 Cumulative development, including the proposed Stanford West Apartments Project, would cause K -12th grade enrollments to exceed PAUSD school capacity of 916 students or 12 percent in year 2004-2005. The EIR proposed the adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-14 to mitigate this identified cumulative impact. Mitigation measure 4.12-14 recommends that the City adopt a policy that encourages all future developers to contribute their fair share over and above payment of the development fee to mitigate school impacts. The Council recognizes that cumulative impacts on public schools are potentially significant, and further finds that these impacts would remain potentially significant whether or not the suggested mitigation measure is adopted as a policy of the City since contributions by developers would remain voluntary regardless of City encouragement. Adoption of a City policy of encouraging future developers to contribute school mitigation funds in excess of mandatory development fees is beyond the scope of approvals'for the Stanford West Apartments project; and the Council has not adopted this mitigation. However, the Council has taken substantial steps to encourage the project applicant to discuss and fund mutually acceptable mitigation measures with school district, and can and will continue to take similar steps to encourage voluntary additional contributions by developers of future projects with the goal of fully offsetting any impacts which cannot be :mitigated through mandatory development fees and tax revenue increase associated with new development. 44 9707021= 0031587 • • 4.12-17 The operation of the proposed projects would increase solid waste generation in the City of Palo Alto requiring increased diversion to meet the goals of AB 939. Mitigation measure 4.12-17(a) requires that as a condition of project approval, the applicant shall prepare and obtain approval from the City Public Works Department of a landfill diversion management program that meets the diversion goals of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) and AB939. The program shall include specific provisions detailed in the EIR. Mitigation measure 4.12-17(b) recommends that the City require all new development projects to prepare operation recycling programs which will meet the AB939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000. The program shall include specific provisions detailed in the EIR. The Council finds that adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-17(a) will lessen the project's potential solid waste impacts to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure requires the applicant to develop, with City supervision, a plan which will ensure that solid wastes from the project are processed in a manner which ensure compliance with the recycling goals of AB939. Adoption and enforcement of mitigation measure 4.12-17(a) will also implement mitigation measure 4.12-17(b) with respect to the project. Adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-17(b) as a policy governing review and approval of all future development within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the Stanford West Apartments project. However, the Council finds that adoption of the proposed mitigation measure can and should be adopted in relation to future development projects within the City. 4.12-18 The proposed projects would increase solid waste generation in the City of Palo Alto during construction requiring increased diversion to meet the goals of AB 939. Mitigation measure 4.12-18 requires the applicant to prepare and implement a construction recycling plan approved by the City Public Works Department. The plan shall include specific steps to achieve the City's short-term SRRE diversion goal of 30-40 percent through various specified measures. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the identified potential solid waste impact to a less than significant level. The approved recycling plan will ensure that provision is made for recovering all recyclable wastes generated during construction, thus avoiding unnecessary placement of recyclable materials in landfills. 45 970702 !at 0031587 • 4.12-19 Cumulative development anticipated by the City through Year 2010, including the proposed projects, would increase solid waste generation by 5.5 percent over 1995 levels to 155,650 tone per year based on the projected growth of population and employees. Mitigation measure 4.12-19(a) recommends that the City require significant new development projects to prepare construction recycling plans as part of the project approval process. The construction plan shall include specific steps to achieve the AB939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000 through various specified measures. Mitigation measure 4.12-19(b) recommends that the City require new development projects to prepare long-term operational recycling programs as part of project approval process. The programs should meet the A3939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000, and include various additional specified elements These mitigation measures have been effectively applied to the Stanford West Apartments project through the adoption of mitigation measures 4.12-17(a) and 4.12-18. The Council finds that adoption of those measures will reduce the project's contribution to potential cumulative solid waste impacts to a less than. significant level. Adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-19(a) and 4.12-19(b) as policies governing review and approval of all future development within the City is beyond the scope of the decision and approvals granted for the Stanford West Apartments project. However, the Council finds that the proposed mitigation measure can and should be adopted in relation to future development projects approved by the City. 5.2_ GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS The EIR concluded that the Stanford West Apartments, project will have a significant growth inducing impact in that upgrading of the existing 21" sewer line serving the project area to the 24" line necessary to serve the project and the Stanford West Senior Housing and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion projects will remove an obstacle to growth of the Stanford Medical Center, which has announced tentative plans for expansion. The EIR does not identify any potential mitigation measures for this growth -inducing impact. The 24° sewer line will be constructed with the minimum size pipe available with sufficient capacity to ensure adequate service of the approved Sand Hill Corridor development projects. Since excess capacity will still be provided by this sewer line which could facilitate expansion of the Stanford Medical Center or other development, this impact is significant. The EIR concluded that the overall set of roadway improvements may serve to remove an obstacle to development of the contemplated 400,000 square foot expansion of the Stanford Medical Center. The traffic impacts of such development of the Medical Center as well as the impacts of cumulative development along the Sand Hill corridor were considered in the cumulative impacts analysis contained in the EIR. The EIR finds the impacts of such cumulative 46 970702 lac 0031387 development within the Sand Hill corridor significant, as discussed elsewhere in these findings. PART U ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT The Council has also considered the alternatives to the project analyzed in the FEIR. Based on the following considerations, the Council has determined that all identified alternatives to the project are infeasible. The findings set forth below stating this Council's reasons for rejecting each alternative in favor of the project describe several separate grounds for rejecting each alternative, each of which this Council has determined constitutes an independent basil for this Council's decision to approve the project and to reject the proposed alternative. No Project - No Development This alternative assumes that no development is permitted on the proposed project site and the site remains vacant open space. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible because: (1) The alternative would preclude development of needed affordable and market rate rental housing within the City; and (2) The alternative ,is inconsistent with longstanding City Comprehensive Plan designation of the property for residential development. Rejection of the project in favor of this alternative would necessarily defeat the project objective of providing new affordable and market rate rental housing in the area and would further defeat Stanford's objective of providing new rental housing for employees in close proximity to the Stanford campus, thus reducing vehicle travel for Stanford employees and improving the area's overall jobs/housing balance. Precluding residential development of the property would also be inconsistent with the City's existing comprehensive plan and zoning designations of the property which provide for residential development of 10-40 units per acre on the property. No Project - No Action This alternative assumes that the current development plan is rejected and future development permitted in accordance with existing zoning and comprehensive plan designations for the site. The City's existing comprehensive plan and zoning designations of the property allow development of 10-40 residential units per acre. The EIR assumes that development under this alternative would consist of 800-900 residential units. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible for the following reasons. (1) By requirirg preparation and processing of new development plans, the alternative would result in a 48 970702 lac 0031587 substantial, unacceptable further delay in production of needed affordable and market rate rental housing; (2) Development under this alternative would result in many worse environmental impacts than the proposed project due to increased development density and larger development footprint, increased traffic, air quality and other impacts associated w.th increased number of residents on the site. This alternative would not lessen any environmental impacts of the project but would in most cases result in more severe impacts and reduced ability to mitigate these impacts through preservation of view corridors, grassland habitat preservation, avoidance of archaeologically sensitive areas, and provision of on -site recreational open space. The site plan of the approved project has been substantially modified through the 1993-1994 public outreach process, subsequent review with City staff, and the 1996-1997 public review process to a site plan that will facilitate a sense of community, disperse traffic on a grid street network and accommodate substantial open space. Redesign to a more conventional multiple family development would likely result in the loss or reduction of these attributes of the approved project. The Council finds that the approved project represents an acceptable accommodation of competing community concerns for creation of housing and protection of community character and environmental values, and that any plan to accommodate greater amounts of housing would result in unacceptable impacts and conflicts with these community values. 75% Development Alternative This alternative consists of development of the project site at approximately 75% of the density of the approved project, or about 471 residential units. Due to reduced' density, this alternative could reduce developed area by approximately 25%, allowing for an incremental reduction in most project impacts. However, there is no guarantee that reduced density development would necessarily result in a corresponding reduction in developed area on the site. Even assuming that substantial reduction in developed area was achieved, the project would still result in significant and unavoidable land use, visual and biological impacts due to the change in character, loss of open space and loss of grassland habitat which would result from any substantial development on the project site. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible because: (1) The alternative would result in an unacceptable loss of needed rental housing units; and (2) Reduction of the project by approximately 157 units would result in continued demand and resulting pressure for construction of new housing within the City or 49 970702 lac 0031587 surrounding area, particularly pressure for development of new employee housing on existing open ,;pace areas on Stanford University lands. Implementation of this alternative would have the immediate unacceptable effect of eliminating needed rental housing units from the project. Construction of all units in the proposed project is required to assist the City in meeting its anticipated need for new housing units for the period 1996-2002. Projections prepared by the Association of Bay Area Governments, which serve as the basis for the City's 1990 Comprehensive Plan Housing Element and the draft Comprehensive Plan Housing Element currently being developed by the City quantify the City's fair share of regional housing demand for this period to be a total of 1244 new residential units, including 276 units for very low income residents, 208 units for low income residents, 299 units for moderate income residents and 461 units for above -moderate income residents. Evidence presented to the Council during the hearings on the project indicate that there is a particularly acute need for construction of new rental housing of the type offered by the project. This acute need for new rental housing is further confirmed by continuing very low vacancy rates of 1% or less for rental housing within the City which have been documented in the Housing Element Technical Document prepared in conjunction with the City's current draft Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. Elimination of approximately 157 units from the project would substantially and unacceptably impair the City's ability to provide needed new housing within the City and to contribute its fair share to satisfying state and regional housing demands. Implementation of the 75% density alternative also would not avoid the environmental impacts of the project which have been shown to be of greatest public concern, i.e. loss of undeveloped open space and related natural habitat and substantial visual and other impacts associated with change in character of the project site. Implementation of this alternative would 'result only in incremental reductions in many of the project's impacts, and in somewhat greater ability to mitigate certain impacts such as potential impacts to archaeological resources and loss of grassland habitat. The Council does not believe that these incremental reductions in environmental impacts are significant enough to justify the substantial reduction in the number of housing units in the project. The Council finds that in the overall balance of growth management planning and environmental considerations, efficient use of the project site, which has been designated for housing development for many years in the City's Comprehensive Plan, for the maximum number of residential units which can be accommodated consistent with environmental and design constraints is preferable to reduced density development which will result in continued unmet demand and pressure for construction of affordable new housing, particularly new rental housing. 970702 lac 0031587 50 • • 50% Development Al.ternatj.ve This alternative consists of development of the project site at approximately 50% of the density of the approved project, or about 315 residential units. Due to reduced density, this alternative could potentially permit reduction of developed area by approximately 50t, allowing for greater design flexibility and incremental reduction in most project impacts, including preservation of approximately 8 acres of additional grasslands as compared with the proposed project. However, there is no guarantee that a 50% reduced development density would necessarily result in a corresponding reduction in developed area on the site. Even assuming that a substantial reduction in developed area was achieved, the project would still result in significant and unavoidable land use, visual and biological impacts due to the change in character, loss of open space and loss of grassland habitat area which will result from any substantial development on the project site. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible because: (1; The alternative would result in an unacceptable loss 4of needed rental housing units; and (2) Reduction of the project by approximately 315 units would result in continued demand and resulting pressure for construction of new housing within the City or surrounding area, particularly pressure for development of new employee housing on existing open space areas on Stanford University lands. As in the case of the 75% development alternative, implementation of this alternative would have the immediate (only more severe) unacceptable effect of eliminating needed rental housing units from the project. Construction of all units in the proposed project is required to assist the City "in meeting its anticipated need for new housing units for the period 1996-2002, and to offset the current acute shortage of rental housing. Elimination of approximately 315 units from the project would seriously and unacceptably impair the City's ability to provide needed new rental housing within the City and to contribute its fair share to satisfying state and regional housing objectives. While implementation of this alternative also would reduce most environmental impacts of the project, in some cases substantially, the alternative would not avoid the significant environmental impacts of the project which have been shown to be of greatest public concern, i.e. loss of undeveloped open space and related natural habitat and substantial visual and other impacts associated with change in character of the project site. The Council does not find that the incremental reductions in environmental impacts associated with this alternative are significant enough to justify the loss of 315 housing units from the project. 51 970702 lac 0031587 The Council finds that in the overall balance of growth management considerations, efficient use of the project site, which has been designated for housing development for many years in the City's comprehensive plan, for the maximum number of residential units which can be accommodated consistent with environmental and design constraints, is preferable to reduced density development which will result in continued unmet demand and pressure for construction of affordable new housing, particularly rental housing. No ,HQuSiPg 1.lternative The EIR also examined a "no -housing" alternative which would have consisted of approving 160,000 square feet of new commercial space for the Stanford Shopping Center and approving the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project while denying approval for the proposed Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects. The primary purpose for consideration of this alternative in the EIR was to examine the effects on the area transportation system of approving the proposed roadway improvements and proposed shopping center expansion elements of the Sand Hill Corridor projects, without the addition of traffi,, from housing projects. With respect to the Stanford West Apartments project, the Council finds that this alternative is infeasible for the reasons previously stated in reference to the No Project -No Development alternative. Housing With Limited Shopping Center Development The EIR also examined a "housing with limited shopping center expansion" alternative consisting of (1) approval of the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing; (2) construction of 49,000 square feet of new Stanford Shopping Center space only; (3) without any of the roadway improvements proposed in,the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project. The Council does not consider this alternative to be an`alternative to the Stanford West Apartments project. This alternative was evaluated in the EIR to examine the effects on the area transportation system of approving residential development and limited shopping expansion, without the benefit of major .area roadway improvements proposed in the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements. This alternative is discussed in the findings relating to the Stanford Shopping Center project. Alternate Sites: Campus West Site The Campus West alternative site is an undeveloped parcel owned by Stanford located south of Sand Hill Road and across from the Oak Creek Apartments which border the Stanford West Apartments site. The Campus West site is currently outside the jurisdiction of the City and entirely within the territory of the County of Santa Clara. The EIR considered relocation of both the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects to this 52 970702 lac 0031587 • • site, and concluded that both could be substantially accommodated with extensive redesign and a probable increase in building heights. The EIR also noted that some reductions could be made in the total number of units approved on the West Campus site to better accommodate site constraints and provide for mitigation of impacts. However, for purposes of considering this alternative, the Council has assumed that all 628 units of the approved Stanford West Apartment project could be accommodated on the Campus West site without resulting in greater environmental impacts for this alternative than predicted in the EIR. In comments on the DEIR, some members of the public also coumented that relocation of the Stanford West Apartments alone to this site would allow increased preservation of open space and design flexibility to mitigate or avoid potential impacts of development on the site. In considering this alternative, the Council has also considered the possibility of relocating the Stanford West Apartments project only to the Campus West site. The Council finds that Campus West alternative is infeasible for the following reasons, 1. The alternative is inconsistent with existing Santa Clara County and City of Palo Alto land use designations and policies for use of the site; and 2. Implementation of this alternative is uncertain and speculative and, even if implemented, would involve substantial unacceptable delay in development of needed new affordable and market rate housing. The Campus West site is presently designated in the Santa Clara County General Plan and Stanford's general use permit as "Major Educational and Institutional Uses." The land is also designated in Stanford's master land use plans for "Major Educational and Institutional Uses." Stanf!,rd's long term development plans for this property contemplate:. 'development of educational, research or other facilities directly related to the University's academic mission rather than non -University housing or income -producing uses. While other locations are available for expansion of existing academic uses on the Stanford campus, some'of these lands are presently designated as open space and not approved for substantial new development. Because development of housing on the Campus West site is inconsistent with Stanford's existing long-term plans, it is uncertain that Stanford would attempt to implement this alternative if requested by the City. Failure by Stanford to pursue this alternative would result in loss of all new housing associated with the project. If Stanford does elect to pursue this alternative, implementation would require submittal of an entirely new application and commencement of a new approval process by the County of Santa Clara, or by the City if annexation is proposed as part of the project. Due to the size of the project and potential environmental impacts of development at this alternate location, the approval process would necessarily involve a complete redesign of the project, a new environmental impact report and development review process, resulting in substantial 53 970702 lac 0031387 delays in construction of any actual new housing. Because many of the potential impacts of this alternative, including traffic, loss of open space, loss of habitat area and change in character of the area are similar in nature to the impacts of the approved project, it is probable that implementation of the alternative would also be subject to public opposition similar to that encountered for the approved project. Development of rental housing on the Campus West site is inconsistent with existing County land use designation for the property. Under existing County policies and agreements between Stanford, the County and the City, any proposal for development of the housing project on the site would include annexation of the property to the City. Although the City would have primary final approval authority for the project, the City cannot prejudge its ultimate decision on any such application. Implementation of the alternative is therefore uncertain even assuming annexation is proposed. Because there is already a substantial and immediate need for additional housing in the City, the Council believes that the additional delay and uncertainty of implementation of this alternative are unacceptable and render the alternative infeasible. In detezuLining this alternative to be infeasible, the Council has considered the limited potential environmental advantages of this alternative over the approved project and concluded that these advantages do not justify substantial further delay in providing needed housing. The EIR concluded that since the amount and type of development on the Campus West site would be similar to the approved project, the majority of impacts would remain approximately the same. Some impacts, such as impacts on cultural resources, riparian habitat and already less -than -significant noise and visual impacts on residents of Menlo Park would be further reduced or avoided by this alternative. As discussed on page 6.1- 65 of Volume 3 of the EIR, even though the site ally screened from Sand Hill Road by a line of young Oak tres,ptheisize of the buildings would be such that development of this site would change the existing rural character of the site to an urban character. It is not likely that mitigation could be provided for this impact. Because a portion of the site is presently undeveloped open space and contains extensive grasslands and oak habitat, significant impacts on land use, biological resources as well as the change in character of the area would still result from the alternative. These impacts would remain significant, although less severe, if the Stanford West Apartment project only were developed to the Campus West site without the addition of the Stanford West Senior Housing project. The Campus West alternative also would not preclude eventual development and resulting impacts of development at the Stanford West Apartments site for reasons discussed in relation to the No -Project alternative, and may therefore ultimately result in no net environmental advantage. Overall these incremental reductions in some impacts associated with the approved project dc not justify continued delay in construction of needed new rental housing nor the risk of large-scale loss of potential housing units if this uncertain alternative is not ultimately approved and implemented. 970702 lac 00315137 54 Hill Road/I-2_90 Alternative Site The EIR evaluated two additional alternative sites which could collectively be developed to accommodate the 630 units originally proposed in the Stanford West Apartments project. Two non -adjoining sites were considered as an alternative in recognition of the fact that there are no other parcels within the area, other than the proposed site and Campus West site, which are both large enough to accommodate the project and potentially available for housing development. Accommodation of the project at alternate sites other than the Campus West site would thus require division of the project into separate units and development at separate locations. Other potential alternate sites which could accommodate portions of the project were also considered during scoping for the project and determined to be infeasible. A summary of reasons for rejection of these other potential alternate sites appears in the EIR. The Council also finds that each of the potential alternative sites evaluated and rejected from further consideration during scoping for the EIR is not a feasible alternative site for the project for the reasons identified in the EIR. In considering the feasibility of the Rickey's Hyatt - Sand Hill Road/I-280 alternative, the Council has considered the feasibility of each site separately to determine whether either could feasibly be utilized to accommodate any portion of the project and therefore partially achieve the objective of providing new housing. The Council finds, for the reasons stated below, that neither of the two parcels could feasibly be utilized for a part of the development. The Council also finds that in the event that either one of the sites were determined to be feasible for a portion of the project, this proposed alternative would remain infeasible as a whole due to the unacceptable loss of housing units which would result from only partial development of the project at a single alternate site. In finding this alternative infeasible, the Council is aware that the EIR has designated this alternative as the environmentally superior alternative among those considered in the EIR. The Council finds, however, that the extremely uncertain and speculative nature of these alternatives, and the certainty of substantial additional delay in construction of needed new housing even if this alternative could be implemented, render the alternative infeasible despite its potential environmental advantages. In addition, this alternative would not preclude eventual development and resulting impacts of development at the Stanford West Apartments site for reasons discussed in relation to the No -Project alternative, and may therefore ultimately result in no net environmental advantage. Rickey's Hyatt Parcel: The Rickey's Hyatt site consists of an approximately 14 acre area east of El Camino Real and south of Arastradero Road which the EIR assumed could be developed to accommodate approximately 200 apartment units under current City zoning. The site is currently developed with a hotel and served by 970702 lac 0031587 55 • • all necessary public services. The EIR indicates that because the site is already developed, implementation of this alternative would have substantially fewer environmental impacts than the approved project, although some impacts on neighboring residential uses could occur. The Council finds that development of the Rickey's Hyatt site as an alternative to the project is infeasible for the following reasons: (1) Implementation of this alternative is uncertain and speculative and would involve substantial unacceptable delay in development of needed new affordable and market rate rental housing; and (2) The alternative would not achieve Stanford's objective of providing new employee housing close to the existing S:anf ord campus. Although the site is located within the City and is presently zoned to permit residential development, Stanford does not presently own the Rickey's Hyatt site. Implementation of this alternative would thus require a lengthy and uncertain process of acquiring the site, preparing and processing development plans and conducting public environmental review. Because the outcome of this process cannot presently be fully predicted and is highly uncertain, this alternative is too speculative to be considered a viable alternative to the approved project by the Council. In addition, even if this alternative could be successfully implemented, the lengthy process of site acquisition, preparation of new plans and processing through City development review would result in unacceptable substantial delays in actual construction of needed new housing units. The location of this alternate site is also significantly distant from the Stanford main campus areas and too'far from major Stanford facilities to provide for convenient pedestrian or bicycle access, thus defeating one of the objectives of the approved project. The Council recognizes that Stanford's objective of providing new housing for campus employees close to the Stanford campus is consistent with sound public planning policies and should be supported. Sand Hill Road/I-280 Parcel: The SHR/I-280 site consists of approximately 21 acres located within the City of Menlo Park near the intersection of Sand Hill Road and the 1-280 Freeway. The site is currently undeveloped and could physically accommodate approximately 430 apartment units but would have to be rezoned to permit such development. The Council finds that development of this parcel as an alternative to the project is infeasible for the following reasons: (1) The proposed alternative is inconsistent with existing zoning designations and planned use for the property; 56 970702 lac 0031587 (2) Implementation of this alternative is uncertain and would involve substantial delay in development of needed new affordable and market rate rental housing; and (3) The alternative would not achieve Stanford's objective of providing new employee housing close to the existing Stanford campus_ The Sand Hill Road/I-280 site is zoned for "Professional Administration and Office" uses under the City of Menlo Park's current zoning, but is presently undeveloped open space and rural in character. Stanford currently owns the property. However, implementation of this alternative would require preparation and processing of new development plans, new environmental review and approval of a rezoning by the City of Menlo Park. Because there is substantial uncertainty as to whether the City of Menlo Park would approve the proposed development, practical viability of this alternative is uncertain. In addition, commencement of an entirely new planning and approval process with the City of Menlo Park would result in unacceptable substantial delays in construction of needed new housing units. The location of this alternate site is also too far from the Stanford main campus areas to provide for easy pedestrian or bicycle access, thus defeating one of the objectives of the approved project. The Council recognizes that Stanford's objective of providing new housing for campus employees close to the Stanford campus is consistent with sound public planning policies and should be supported. Hoover Pavilion/ElCamino Park Alternative At the request of the City's Planning Commission, Chapter 13 of the FEIR evaluated an alternative to the project consisting of locating the Stanford West Apartments project on two undeveloped parcels south of Sand Hill Road. The two proposed alternate sites consist of (1) the Hoover site, consisting of approximately 18.5 .acres in the Stanford Arboretum lands surrounding the Hoover Pavilion, and (2) the El Camino Park site, consisting of 3 acres'in El Camino Park. These sites were initially considered as possible alternative sites during scoping for the EIR, but were found not to be feasible alternate sites for housing at this time by City staff and therefore not discussed in the DEIR. The Council finds that the Hoover site and El Camino Park alternate sites, either collectively or individually, are not reasonable, realistic or feasible alternatives to the project for the following reasons. Hoover Site (1) Development of housing on most of the site would be inconsistent with existing land use designations and planning policies of the County of Santa Clara, which presently exercises actual development control over the property, inconsistent with land use designations in the 57 970702 lac 0031587 • City Comprehensive Plan which would apply in the event of annexation, and inconsistent with land use plans and policies of Stanford University. (2) Development of the site would result in unacceptable historic and aesthetic impacts on the Stanford Arboretum. (3) Implementation of the alternative is speculative and uncertain and would in any case result in unacceptable delays in development of needed new housing within the area. Approximately five acres of the proposed Hoover site is designated for possible housing development in the applicable land use plans of Stanford University. Development of this portion of the site alone, however, would result in unacceptable loss of housing units from the project. The County of Santa C� ' general plan and Stanford's general u a to Clara's portions of cal use permit desig:.ate most the site for academic and open space uses, and consider most of these lands important for scenic wildlife values, as well as for academic potential. v ual and Land Use Plan designates the majority of Stanford'sRee r and Open Space (Stanford Arboretum). Por the site Special ai. Reserver designated as Special Condition Areasy Acs of the site (the El iino are also and D (the Palm Drive frontage) , which both �require aa separate County Use Permit for Approximately 8 acres of the site are designated future development. Arboretum Region Plan as "'Untouchable,' it Stanford's highest historic significance,'iUri%ouchable, that is, having Lhe contains policies which would a tThe City's Comprehensive Plan also annexation the Cit pp } to `he property in the event of use of the lands. The which establish the City's preferred portions of the proposed Hoover site cies also and precludeerequire development of land included in. the Stanford Arboretum as open space. ace Theseeeon of use designations and policies reflect a long-term land policy preserving the Stanford Arboretum, which occupies a substantial portion of the site, as historically significant open space for the Stanford c- ampus. The Council finds these policies are suporte by important and valid historic, aesthetic and planning considerations which make development of the protected portions of the site unacceptable and infeasible. relocation of the The Council recognizes that project to the Hoover site would result in certain environmental trade-offs, including of the existing open space and grasslandhabitat preservation a atthe Stanford West Apartments site at the expense of loss of historic open space and a substantial number of trees at the Hoover site. The Council finds, however, that given the longstanding land use policies providing for development of the Stanford West Apartments site and favoring protection of the historic and aesthetic qualities of the Stanford Arboretum, the environmental trade-offs do not result in any net public benefit which would justify changes to the established land use plans and policies for the area. It is also uncertain whether Stanford University, as the owner of the site, would pursue this proposed alternative if requested to 970702 lac 0031587 58 do so by the City. Present agreements between the City and County of Santa Clara provide that development of the site for any income producing uses would be preceded by annexation to the City. While the City would therefore likely have final approval authority over any application for rental housing development on the Hoover site, the City cannot prejudge its ultimate decision on any such application, and implementation of the alternative is therefore uncertain even if annexation were proposed. Regardless of whether approval would ultimately be granted, redesign, reapplication and conduct of a new development review process for this alternative would result in substantial unacceptable delay in construction of needed new housing. El Camino Park Site: The Council finds that development at the El Camino Park site is not a feasible alternative to the project for the following reasons: (1) Development of housing on the site would be inconsistent with existing City land use designations and policies governing the site; and (2) Implementation of this alternative is speculative and uncertain due to the requirement for a public vote to remove the existing park dedication status of the land, and would involve unacceptable delays in development of needed new housing. Implementation of this alternative would result in development of approximately 75 apartment units on 3 acres of publicly leased land in El Camino Park. The land is currently designated as Public Parks in the City's comprehensive plan and zoned PF (Public Facilities), and is dedicated park land under the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Use of the land for other than park purposes may be approved only by majority vote of Palo Alto voters in a popular election. Because the outcome of the necessary popular election cannot be predicted, implementation of this alternative is unacceptably speculative and uncertain. In addition, even if approved by the voters, preparation and processing of new plans and completion of development review for this alternative would result in unacceptable substantial delays in actual construction of needed new housing. The Council also does not support conversion of dedicated park lands to non -park uses in the absence of some return benefit to public parks and recreation, such as might be obtained through a land exchange, or other overriding public benefits. No potential benefit to public parks or recreation has presently been identified for this alternative, and the Council therefore find this alternative unacceptable and infeasible on this additional policy ground. 59 970702 lac 0031587 Additional.,Alternatives proposed ;n Public Co , ents Public Acgpiti4tion(Presek-v4tion A number of commenters during the EIR process proposed that the project site be preserved in an undeveloped state and dedicated to various uses such as a nature preserve, low -intensity public recreational space, gardens, or similar non -developmental types of uses or combinations of uses. In each of these cases the Council finds that the alternative is infeasible because the alternative would preclude the development of needed housing on the site and would be inconsistent with the City's longstanding Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations for the site. In addition, implementation of these suggested preservation alternatives would generally require acquisition of the site by a public or non-profit agency and ongoing expense for maintenance, insurance and other costs associated with property ownership. No commenter has identified a practical source of funds for either acquisition or subsequent improvement, maintenance and management of the site, nor does the Council believe that the acquisition and maintenance could be carried out with City funds an revenues without unacceptable impacts on other City programs. For these reasons the Council believes that preservation alternatives proposed by members of the public are not feasible, notwithstanding the understandable strong desire to preserve the site as open space. 60 970702 lac 0031S$7 • • EXHIBIT C STiMMRD NEST SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT COUNCIL FINDINGS CONCERNING MITIGATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF ALTERNATIVES The City Council of the City of Palo Alto ("Council") has read and considered the Final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the Stanford West Senior Housing project. The EIR has been prepared for five projects including the Stanford West Apartments, Stanford West Senior Housing, Stanford Shopping Center Expansion, Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements ("SHRE/RRI") projects, referred to collectively herein as the "Sand Hill Corridor projects," and the Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation project. These projects are described in Chapter 3 of the EIR, and include, as approved by the Council, the changes and revisions described in Chapter 11 and in the "Final Summary .of Project Changes" :jade a part of the EIR by the certifying resolution. Pursuant to Section 21081(a) of the Public Resources Code, the Council has considered each environmental impact of the Stanford West Senior Housing project identified in the EIR, and each of the mitigation measures and project alternatives evaluated in the EIR. The Council's detailed findings for each significant environmental impact or potentially significant environmental impact identified in the EIR are set forth below. Each significant or potentially significant environmental impact identified in the EIR is listed in bold. Those mitigation measures adopted or partially adopted by the Council are also numbered in bold. The Council's reasons for rejection or partial rejection of certain mitigation measures and reasons for selection among alternative potential mitigation measures are described where appropriate. The Council's reasons for rejecting specific alternatives to the project identified in the EIR are stated in Part II of these findings. 970702 lee 0031 SYi PART I CHANGES AND MITIGATION MEASURES ADOPTED TO REDUCE IMPACTS 4.1 USE 4.1-5 Implementation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development within the Sand Hill Road Corridor, would result in a change in character in the area. The EIR concludes that there are no feasible mitigation measures available which will substantially reduce the identified significant land use impacts and that the identified impact is therefore unavoidable.. The Council also finds that although the Stanford West Senior Housing project will not itself have a significant adverse impact on existing land use, the cumulative impact of changes to the existing character cf the Sand Hill corridor resulting from the approved Sand Hill Corridor projects collectively will be significant. Changes and mitigation measures have been included in the Stanford West Senior Housing project which will lessen this cumulative impact. These measures are more fully discussed in findings pertaining to cultural, visual, transportation, noise and biologial impacts and include measures such as those providing for replacement of trees removed during development of the project in order to maintain the existing wooded environment; tree planting and other landscaping along Sand Hill Road in oder to visually screen project buildings with foliage, thus reducing the visual impact of new development on the site; modifications of the site plan to minimize already less than significant visual and noise impacts on Menlo Park residents across San Francisquito Creek and on adjoining uses; provision for bicycle and pedestrian access through the site to avoid interference with foot and bicycle travel and retention of existing historical features to the extent feasible. Despite these measures, however, the impact remains significant. 4.2 VISUAL QUALITY/LIGHT AND GLARE 4.2-1 The proposed projects would result in major visual changes within the Sand Hill Road corridor for viewers traveling on Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-1(c) requires that final landscape plans for the project shall provide for planting of dense evergreen tree and understory plantings along Sand Hill Road to achieve maximum visual screening of the site. The mitigation calls for complete screening of the site by foliage when all plantings reach matu--ity. Mitigation measure 4.2-1(d) requires that landscape trees planted between Sand Hill Road and the proposed Health Care Center building be 20- to 24 -feet in height at the time of installation. 2 970702 lac 00315171 Mitigation measure 4.2-1(e) requires that the entrance drive to the Health Care Center bE redesigned to narrow it to the greatest extent feasible while continuing to meet functional traffic and traffic safety design standards. Large trees (20- to 24 -feet in height at installation) shall be planted alongside the entrance way. Mitigation measure 4.2-1(f) requires that large trees be planted along the Sand Hill Road facade of the eastern wing of the Health Care Center building. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's long term adverse impacts on views from Sand Hill Road to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures provide for visual screening of the site from Sand Hill Road with trees and other natural vegetation. The Council also recognizes, however, that visual screening of the site will be incomplete until the required landscaping reaches maturity, and that the short-term impacts of the project on views rom Sand Hill Road will therefore be significant. 4.2-3 Views of pedestrians and bicyclists on the pedestrian path/bikeway from the creek crossing to Sand Hill Road would be greatly altered from views of open space to a developed, urbanized environment. Mitigation measure 4.2.3 provides that the final landscape plans for the project shall include sufficient density, height, and proximity of proposed tree plantings to the east of the pedestrian path to screen project buildings from views of pedestrians and bicyclists on the path/bikeway. Tree plantings shall be designed to achieve canopy closure above and to the east of the pedestrian path. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the project's impact on views from the pedestrian/bicycle bridge, but will not reduce the impact to a less than significant level. The required landscaping will substantially screen views of buildings on the project site. However the required landscaping, particularly before trees reach maturity, will not completely eliminate views of new four story buildings or fully mitigate the resulting change in visual character of the area. The impact therefore remains significant. 4.2-8 Visual disturbance from construction of the proposed projects could have temporary adverse visual impacts. Mitigation measure 4.2-8 requires that on -site staging and storage of construction equipment and materials should be minimized to reduce visual disturbance during construction. Equipment and material storage that does occur on -site should be visually screened. Graded areas should be watered regularly to minimize fugitive dust. Construction should be staged and scheduled to minimize the duration of disturbance in each affected viewshed. 970702 iac 003!388 The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the adverse visual impact of project construction, but will not reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measure will limit the duration and visibility of construction equipment and grading activities on the site, but will not eliminate the significant visual impact necessarily associated with major construction activities on the site. This impact therefore remains significant. 4.2-9 The proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development in the Sand Hill Road Corridor, could adversely affect the visual character of the corridor for viewers traveling on Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-9 requires that mitigation measures 4.2-1(a-1) be implemented for all the Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects, including the Stanford West Senior Housing project. The Council has adopted or partially adopted the provisions of mitigation measures 4.2 -1(a) -(l) as they pertain to the Stanford West Senior Housing project. The Council finds that the adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts from development of the Sand Hill Road corridor for reasons previously stated in relation to each adopted mitigation measure, but that these measures collectively will not reduce the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts to a less than significant level. The additional project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4.2-9 have been adopted or rejected as stated in the findings for the Stanford West Apartments, Stanford Shopping Center Expansion, and Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements projects. To the extent these measures have been adopted, they collectively will reduce but not eliminate the significant adverse cumulative visual impacts of the Sand Hill Corridor projects. This cumulative impact therefore remains significant. The Council recognizes that future development, to the extent allowed in the Sand Hill Corridor area will continue to add to•the significant cumulative visual impacts associated with the approved projects. 4.2-11 The proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development, could adversely alter views from the pedestrian/bicycle bridge crossing San Prancisquito Creek to Menlo Park. Mitigation measure 4.2-11 provides that the applicant shall provide landscape screening of the Children's Health Council facilities from the bike path. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's contribution to cumulative impacts on views from the pedestrian/bicycle bridge, but will not reduce the 4 970702 lac 0031588 project's contribution nor the cumulative impact to a less than significant level. The required landscaping will substantially screen views of the Children's Health Council, thereby reducing the overall visibility of buildings, but will not eliminate the remaining unavoidable substantial change in visual character of the area associated with development of the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing project. The cumulative impact will therefore remain significant. 4.2-13 The proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development, could generate light and glare from buildings and roadways that could have adverse effects on nearby residents and oncoming drivers along Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-13 provides that interior and exterior light sources associated with all of the approved Sand Hill Corridor projects shall be shielded or directed in such a manner as to prevent visibility of the light sources and to eliminate light spillover beyond the perimeter of the proposed project. Specific measures recommended in accordance with section 18.64.030 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code include the following: (a) Exterior light fixtures on the housing buildings should be mounted no higher than 15 feet at the rear of the buildings. (b) Lighting of the building exterior and parking lot should be of the lowest intensity and energy use adequate for its purpose. (o.) Unnecessary continued illumination, such as illuminated signs, should be avoided. (d) Timing devices should be considered for exterior and interior lights in order to minimize light glare at night without jeopardizing security. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the project's contribution to potential cumulative light and glare impacts to insignificance. The adopted mitigation measure will have the effect of eliminating substantial spillover of light from the project site and will therefore reduce any potential cumulative impact to insignificance. This mitigation measure has also been incorporated into the conditions of approval for other approved Sand Hill Road Corridor projects and will therefore eliminate any potential significant cumulative effect by confining the impacts of each project to its own location. 9707021wW31588 4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES 4.3-1 Lmplamentation of the proposed projects would result in damaging effects on important historic and/or prehistoric archaeological resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(b) requires that prior to development the applicant shall conduct a data recovery program on all areas in which construction is believed to have a potential to result in significant archaeological impacts. The program shall consist of an initial phase of intensive subsurface archaeological testing meeting minimum standards specified in the EIR. Significant resources encountered shall be subject to recovery, preservation and study as provided in mitigation measure 4.3-1(c). All work shall be subject to review and monitoring by an independent archaeologist engaged by the City. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(c) requires manual excavation and recovery of archaeological resources from any areas encountered during construction which are determined to hold important archaeological resources and for the recovery, preservation and study of these resources. The measure also provides for ongoing monitoring of construction activities in potentially sensitive areas of the site and for preparation of further detailed procedures to ensure protection and recovery of any significant resources encountered in such areas. The plans shall include (a) provisions for artifact cataloging, analysis, and curation; (b) identification and coordination with most -likely Native American descendants concerning monitoring and reburial of Native. American remains, if any are encountered; (c) plans for preparation of technical reports; (d) analysis and preservation of artifacts and documentation and analysis of non -recoverable site features. All of the foregoing shall be performed in accordance with current scientific and professional standards. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(d), as modified in -p. 14-9 of the EIR, provides that any mechanical excavation for underground utility lines in Level 1 avoidance areas shall be conducted under the supervision of =n archaeologist. If mechanical excavation is deteLulined to pose a threat to archaeological resources, excavation will be conducted manually. Removed soil shall be screened and any artifacts recovered will be analyzed, reported and curated as provided in mitigation measure 4.3-1(c). Mitigation measure 4.3-1(e) limits the placement of paved bicycle or pedestrian paths or light -duty roads and specifies additional measures to ensure that no impacts will result from placement or construction of these paths or roads in areas likely to contain archaeological resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(f) provides that construction activities involving substantial ground disturbance (greater than 12" in depth) near any known archaeological site shall be subject to monitoring. Sr70702 lac 0031588 Mitigation measure 4.3-1(g) provides that if previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered during construction, work shall cease in the immediate area until qualified archaeologists assess the significance of the resources and make mitigation recommendations (e.c., manual excavation of the immediate area), if warranted. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(h) requires the applicant and contractors to comply with the requirements of Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code if Native American burials or other possible Native American human remains are located during construction. This code section requires that a Native American Most Likely Descendant (determined in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission) be notified within 24 hours and appropriate provisions made for appropriate reburial. This and related sections of the Public Resources Code also provide that remains shall be protected from further, construction work or vandalism. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(j) requires that recent information obtained by Stanford be consulted in the Archaeological Testing Plan for the site. Areas beneath existing buildings have not been subject to previous subsurface testing will be test following demolition of existino buildings and prior to new construction. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the project's impacts on archaeological resources to a less than significant level. While potentially significant archaeological resources are believed to exist on the project site and could be affected by development, the extent of such resources is not presently known. The archaeological resources in some areas are also likely to have been damaged or destroyed by past development. The adopted mitigation measures will ensure that any important archaeological resources encountered in areas subject to development will be identified, removed and preserved for further study in accordance with accepted scientific standards, ensuring no loss of scientific or historical value of the resources. The adopted measures also ensure that proper respect will be afforded any burials and any other culturally important Native American remnants which might be impacted by the project. Rejected Mitigation Measure The EIR also proposed an alternate mitigation measure 4.3-1(a) which has not been adopted by the City. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(a) would require the Stanford West Senior Housing project to be redesigned to avoid disturbance to all buried intact or partially intact prehistoric or historic resources on the site. The Council finds that mitigation measure 4.3-1(a) is infeasible as it relates to the project because the measure would result in other environmental impacts and/or elimination of housing units from the project, without resulting in a countervailing net benefit in terms of protection of archaeological resources. Completion of studies to determine the full extent of surviving 7 970702 !ac 0031588 archaeological deposits on the site to guide project redesign would substantially delay construction of the project. In addition, depending upon the extentof surviving archaeological resources confirmed, redesign of the project could result in loss of housing units and/or other undesirable effects such as relocating buildings within setback areas closer to San Francisquito Creek: visual impacts from increased building heights or relocation, or loss of additional trees or loss of residential units or other facilities intended for the benefit of future senior residents of the project. Alternate mitigation measures are available and have been adopted to reduce potential impacts on archaeological resources to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures will ensure that any important archaeological resources encountered in areas subject to development will be identified, removed and preserved for further study in accordance with accepted scientific standards, ensuring no loss of scientific or historical value of the resources. Because alternative measures have been adopted to avoid significant effects on archaeological resources, implementation of mitigation measure 4.3-1(a) is not necessary to avoid these impacts and cannot be justified in light of delays in project implementation and potential other adverse environmental effects discussed above. 4.3-3 Implementation of the proposed projects could result in damaging effects on the Leland Stanford, Jr. Stone Monument. Mitigation measure 4.3-3(b) provides that the monument/mausoleum site shall be marked with a plaque, and the monument preserved and relocated on -site to an area open to public viewing as near to the original location as possible. The relocated monument will be incorporated in landscape plans to preserve and enhance its historical significance. Mitigation measure 4.3-3(c) provides that the remains of the original mausoleum shall be subject to an archaeological data recovery program. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the identified impact on historic resources to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures provide for preservation of the Leland Stanford Jr. monument near its historic location, recording of its original location with a plaque and recovery of any surviving artifacts or other historically significant information associated with the present location of the monument and former mausoleum site. The Council believes that relocation of the monument on the site will not substantially diminish its historic value or significance. Rejected MitigatJ on: The EIR also identified an alternative mitigation measure 4.3-3(a), which would require redesign of the Stanford West Senior Housing project to permit the Stone Monument to be preserved where it is presently situated. The Council finds that this measure is infeasible in that implementation of the measure could result in 8 970702 lac 0031388 • • increases in other impacts such as visual impacts from increased building heights or relocation, relocation of buildings closer to San Francivquito Creek, loss of trees, or loss of residential units or other facilities intended for the benefit of future senior residents of the project. As an alternative to this measure the Council has adopted mitigation measure 4.3-3(b), which provides for relocation and preservation of the monument near its present location. While the EIR concludes that the location of the monument is historically significant, the Council finds that the historic significance of the monument will not be substantially reduced by relocation on the site. The original historic location of the monument will continue to be marked with a plaque. 4.3-4 Implementation of the proposed projects could result in destruction of the Old Carriage House, the only remaining architectural feature from the Stanford Estate. Mitigation measure 4.3-4(a), as modified by condition 2f, requires that the Old Carriage House be fully protected and preserved in place. The applicant shall submit for approval plans which provide for fencing during construction and long term protection of the Carriage House. The applicant shall provide, a bond or other financial security to ensure performance of this mitigation measure. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will avoid all potential adverse impacts to the Old Carriage House. The adopted mitigation measure provides for full protection and long term protection of this historic structure. 4.3-5 Implementation of the proposed projects could result in damaging effects on the Stanford Convalescent Home Gates. Mitigation measure 4.3-5(b) provides that if preservation of the stone entry gate pillars in their current location is not feasible, the gates pillars shall be moved on' the site and incorporated into the project's landscape plan. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the project's potential adverse impacts on the Stanford Convalescent Home Gates to a less than significant level. This measure will preserve the gates on the site to permit continued public recognition of the entryway and to maintain their historic feeling and association within the project area. Since the gates have already previously been moved from their original location, the Council does not believe that further relocation will significantly reduce the historic value or significance of the gates. Rejected Mitigation Measures The EIR also proposed an alternate mitigation measure 4.3-5(a) which has not been adopted by the City. Mitigation measure 4.3-5(a) would require redesign of the entry to the Stanford West Senior Housing Health Care Center and Ronald McDonald House to 9 970702 lac 0031588 • permit the convalescent home entry gates to be preserved where they are presently situated. The Council finds that this mitigation measure is infeasible because it would disrupt the project site plan, potentially resulting in loss of additional trees and increased visual impacts from relocation of access ways. The gates were not part of the original Stanford estate and have been relocated from their original location near El Camino Real to their current location. While the presence of the gates is considered to be an important reflection of the area's history, their location is not considered to be historically significant. The alternate mitigation measure 4.3-5(b) recommended in the EIR has been adopted instead and will provide for preservation of the pillars on the site by incorporation into the landscape plans for the site and will avoid any significant adverse impact without disrupting desirable features of the proposed site plans. 4.3-6 The proposed projects, in conjunction with other cumulative development projects in the San Francisquito Creek drainage, could result in damage or destruction of important prehistoric and historic cultural resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-6 recommends that all planning jurisdictions within the San Francisquito Creek drainage implement cultural resource testing and data recovery measures, similar to those described in mitigation measure 4.3-1 for projects involving development of sensitive cultural resource sites. The Council has adopted the recommended mitigation measure for the Stanford West Senior Housing project and all other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level and will also lessen the cumulative impact of the Sand Hill Corridor projects collectively to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with future projects approved icy the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future devlopment projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impact from future projects on archaeological resources is presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented by such other public agencies or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential 10 970702 lac 0031588 cumulative cultural resources impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.4 TRAPSPORTATION 4.4-2 Bicycle and/or pedestrian access and safety could be affected by development of the proposed projects. Mitigation measure 4.4-2(a) requires that the final design for bicycle and pedestrian circulation within the Stanford West Apartments and Senior Housing sites shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Chief Transportation Official to ensure the circulation system will function as a part of regional or inter -city bicycle and pedestrian connections. Mitigation measure 4.4-2(e) provides that for five years following project construction, the project applicant will fund an annual review of reported traffic accident data at the Sand Hill Road/I-280 interchange to determine whether a significant increase in bicycle auto conflicts has occurred. If an increase is documented, the applicant will work with Caltrans, the City cf Menlo Park and San Mateo County to design and obtain funding for safety improvements required tc minimize these conflicts. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's impacts on pedestrian and bicycle travel to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures ensure that the final project design will provide for safe bicycle and pedestrian access to, from and through the project site to local and regional bicycle and pedestrian paths, including those being implemented in conjunction with other elements of the Sand Hill Corridor projects. These measures also require Stanford to work with responsible agencies to eliminate safety problems resulting from increased. bicycle and vehicle traffic at the Sand Hill Road/I-280 intersection if such problems are determined to exist in the future. 4.4-7 Development of the proposed projects could degrade the level of service of study area intersections, and contribute to increased intersection delay. The studies and analysis performed for the FEIR demonstrate that the project, either singly or in conjunction with other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects, will not have significant adverse effects on levels of service at most intersections near the project site. The FEIR concluded, however, that changes and increases in traffic patterns resulting from the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects collectively will result in significant adverse changes in traffic conditions at a total of seven area intersections, specifically: Arboretum Road/Galvez Street El Camino Real/Page Mill Road El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue 11 970702 lac 00315&8 El Canino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue Junipero Serra Blvd./Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue Middlefield Road/Willow Road Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue The Stanford West Senior Housing project alone will have significant adverse impacts on traffic levels at only four area intersections, specifically: Arboretum Road/Galvez Street El Camino Real/Page Mill Road Middlefield Road/Willow Road Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue The conditions of approval nevertheless require the applicant to contribute to all of the following mitigation measures. Arboretum Road/Galvez Street: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(a) requires the applicant to install a traffic signal or other appropriate traffic control device(s) at the intersection of Arboretum Road/Galvez Street, and pay the full cost of these improvements. This measure shall be implemented when the intersection satisfies appropriate signal warrants as determined by the Chief Transportation Official. In the event that the City and the applicant determine that use of a traffic circle or "roundabout" will provide for the same or better LOS and safety as a traffic signal, the traffic circle may be constructed. at the applicant's expense instead cf_ a traffic signals or other traditional traffic control device(s). El Camino Real/Page Mill Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(b) requires the applicant to contribute a fair share of the costs of the following planned improvements: Add a southbound rightturn lane. Add a westbound right turn lane. Add a northbound right turn lane; and extend the westbound left turn lane by 100 feet. These measures should be implemented when the intersection approaches LOS F, as evaluated through periodic monitoring to be carried out by the applicant on behalf the City. Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(c) requires the applicant to pay a fair share of the costs of the following improvements to the following improvements to the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection: Widen Sand Hill Road to add second eastbound left turn lane; Widen Sand Hill Road to add second westbound left turn lane; 12 970702 Lc 0031388 Modify signal phasing; Install an exclusive right turn lane on the northbound approach of Santa Cruz Avenue; and Provide dual left turn lanes on both the northbound and southbound Santa Cruz Avenue approaches. The applicant shall also pay the costs of installing an exclusive right turn lane on the northbound approach of Santa Cruz Avenue and providing dual left turn lanes on both the northbound and southbound Santa Cruz Avenue approaches. Conditions of approval 1.c and 12 for the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project, and adopted by condition of approval 2.d for this project, provide that the applicant shall advance funds to pay the full costs of these improvements if the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, with respect to any improvements within that jurisdiction, enters into an agreement to reimburse the applicant for costs in excess of its fair share. If no reimbursement agreement is adopted, the applicant shall pay its fair share (subject to limits based on engineering estimates) based on traffic attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Implementation of this mitigation measure will not occur until approvals are obtained from the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable. Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(d) requires the applicant to pay a fair share of the costs of the following improvements to the Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection mandated by the Menlo Park General Plan or recommended in the EIR: - Widen northbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane. - Install an additional southbound left -turn lane. Conditions of approval l.c and 12 for the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project, as adopted by condition of approval 2.d for this project, provide that the applicant shall advance funds to pay the full costs of these improvements if the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable, enters into an agreement to reimburse the applicant for costs in excess of its fair share. If no reimbursement agreement is adopted, the applicant shall pay its fair share (subject to limits based on reasonably engineering estimates) based on traffic attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Implementation of this mitigation measure will not occur until approvals are obtained from the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable. Middlefield AvenuelWillow Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(e), identifies a number of improvements which would be necessary to 13 970702 lac 0031588 mitigate cumulative traffic impacts at this intersection, including the following: Add a second southbound left turning lane. Restripe eastbound approach. Modify signal phasing, including a leading left turn phase in the signal phasing for the north and south directions. The timing of these improvements will be determined by the City of Menlo Park, through periodic monitoring and/or through subsequent environmental impact analysis and documentation. Condition 2.e of the conditions of approval partially implements this mitigation measure by requiring that the applicant shall either make signal timing improvements sufficient to return traffic levels of service at this intersection to level of service D, or to contribute its fair share of the costs to construct the recommended intersection improvements. This obligation would not be triggered until current level of service falls to E or worse. Land Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Junipero Serra Blvd./Alpine Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(h) provides that the applicant shall conduct an operational analysis of the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Alpine Road/Junipero Serra Boulevard intersections to identify the appropriate combination of roadway and traffic signal improvements necessary to improve operation to LOS D during peak hours, if feasible. The EIR also recommends that the following mitigation measures be implemented to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts at specified intersections within the City of Menlo Park, but does'not provide for direct participation by the applicant in implementation of these mitigation measures. El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(f) recommends that the following improvements to the El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue intersection be completed as prescribed in the City of Menlo Park's general plan: Widen northbound approach to add third northbound through lane. Restripe southbound approach to add third southbound through lane. Widen westbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane. El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(g) recommends that the following improvements to the El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue intersection be 14 970702 lac 0031588 • completed as prescribed in the City of Menlo Park's general plan: Restripe northbound approach to add third northbound through lane. - Restripe southbound approach to add third southbound through lane. Widen westbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane. Final design shall include provisions for bicycle traffic. In addition, the EIR recommends that signal phasing at this intersection be modified to include split phasing in the east/west direction and a leading left turn phase in the north/south direction. The Council finds that these adopted mitigation measures, if implemented, will lessen the project's impacts on traffic at the four significantly affected intersections to a less than significant level, and will also substantially lessen the impact of the project's contribution to cumulative traffic at other intersections significantly affected by the Sand hill Corridor projects collectively. Mitigation measures 4.4 -7(a) -(e), as modified by conditions of approval, require the applicant to pay all or a fair share of the costs of physical improvements necessary to enable each of the intersections, as noted, to serve anticipated cumulative traffic demands at acceptable levels of service. Mitigation measure 4.4-7(h) also provides for identification of appropriate additional intersection improvements should the City of Menlo Park elect to achieve a higher level of service and the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Alpine Road/Junipero Serra Boulevard intersections. The Council recognizes that final authority to approve and implement the identified mitigation measures at three of the four intersections significantly affected by the project is vested in public agencies other than the City, specifically the County of Santa Clara (mitigation measure 4.4-7(a), Arboretum Road/Galvez Street); the City of Menlo Park (mitigation measures 4.4-7(c), Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and 4.4-7(e), Middlefield Avenue/Willow Road); and County of San Mateo (mitigation measure 4.4-7(c), Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue). Responsibility and authority for implementing the recommended mitigation measures at the additional intersections cumulatively impacted by the project is also vested in other public agencies, specifically the City of Menlo Park (mitigation measures 4.4-7(f), El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue, and 4.4-7(g), El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue) and 4.4-7(d), Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue). The Council finds that the identified mitigation measures can and should be approved and implemented by these agencies. However, the Council also recognizes that in the event that one or more of the listed mitigation measures are not approved and implemented by the 15 970702 lac 0031323 appropriate responsible agency, the project will result in significant adverse impacts on the Arboretum Road/Galvez Street, Middlefield Avenue/Willow Road and/or Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersections, and could contribute to significant impacts at other intersections cumulatively affected by the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Because it cannot presently be determined if or when the appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented by the respective responsible agencies, these impacts are considered by the Council to be potentially significant. 4.4-8 Construction activities could lead to both temporary disruption of transportation system operation, as well as to permanent damage to elements of the system such as pavement and bridges. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(a) requires the applicant to provide adequate off-street parking for all construction -related vehicles throughout the construction period. If adequate parking cannot be provided on the construction sites, a satellite parking area shall be designated, and a shuttle bus shall be operated to transfer construction workers to the job sites. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(b) provides that construction activities related to the project are prohibited from substantially limiting pedestrian access (e.g, by blocking pedestrian routes), without prior approval from the City of Palo Alto and/or Caltrans. Any approval shall require submittal and approval of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than• -significant level. Mitigation measure 4-4.8(c) provides that the applicant shall be prohibited from limiting bicycle access (e.g. by blocking or restricting existing routes) while constructing the project, without prior approval from the City of Palo Alto or Caltrans and/or the City of Menlo Park (depending upon the jurisdiction of the requested action). Any approval will require submittal and approval of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(d) provides that the applicant shall be required to prohibit or limit the number of construction material deliveries from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m., and from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(e) provides that the applicant shall be required to prohibit or limit the number of construction employees from arriving or departing the site from the hours of 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(f) requires that all construction -related equipment and materials shall be delivered and removed on truck routes designated by the cities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park. Heavy construction vehicles shall be prohibited from accessing the sites from other routes. 16 970702 !ac 003!5$1 Mitigation measure 4.4-8(g) requires the applicant to repair any structural damage to public roadways, returning any damaged sections to original structural condition. The effectiveness of this measure shall be guaranteed by requiring surveys of road conditions before and after construction. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(h) prohibits the applicant from limiting access to public transit. (e.g. by relocating or restricting access to bus stops or transfer facilities), and from limiting movement of public transit vehicles, without prior approval from the Santa Clara Transit Agency or other appropriate jurisdiction. Any approval will require submittal of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(1) rovides that in lieu of mitigation measures 4.4-8(a) through al), the project applicant may prepare detailed construction impact mitigation plans for approval i 1 Transportation by the City of Palo Alto Chief � � x�}. _..tior Official and City of Menlo Park Transportation Manager prior to commencing any construction activities with potential transportation impacts in their respective jurisdictions. The plan must address all aspects of construction traffic management: necessary to eliminate or reduce transportation impacts to acceptable levels. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential construction phase traffic and transportation impacts to a less than significant level. These measures provide for comprehensive planning foxy construction traffic and establish standards, criteria and implementing measures which will ensure that significant interference with vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian and emergency vehicle access is avoided during all phases of construction. 4.5 AIR QUALITY 4.5-1 The Plim generated during the construction of the proposed projects could be harmful to nearby pollutant -sensitive land uses. Mitigation measure 4.5-1 requires the applicant to implement a construction phase program which includes the following measures to reduce generation of particulate matter on the project site during construction: Water all active construction areas at least twice a day, or as needed to prevent visible dust plumes from blowing off -site. Use tarpaulins or other effective covers for on -site storage piles and for haul trucks on public streets. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas during construction. 17 970702 lac 0031588 Sweep all paved access routes, parking areas, and staging areas daily (preferably with water sweepers). Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible amounts of soil material is carried onto public streets. If the working area of any construction site exceeds four acres at any one time, implement the following additional measures: Apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles. Limit construction site vehicle speed to 15 mph on unpaved areas. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. If the working area of any construction site is located near any sensitive receptors, implement the following measure in addition to those listed above: Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 25 mph. The last mitigation would be applicable to the Sand Hill Road widening where it passes the 14 single family homes in Menlo Park between Santa Cruz Avenue and Oak Avenue. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the identified potential adverse construction phase impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of twice daily watering has been shown to reduce construction site PM10 emissions by at least 50 percent. This practice, in conjunction with the other listed measures, will reduce PM10 emissions during construction to less than the BAAQMD threshold of significance of 80 lbs/day for all anticipated construction activity. 4.5-2 ROG, NO*, and 14 410 emissions generated by motor vehicles and residential stationary sources associated with the proposed projects would exceed the 80 lbs/day threshold and could hinder regional and local attainment of State ozone and MI6 standards. Mitigation measure 4.5-2 (a) requires the City to implement mitigation measure 4.4-2(a), which provides that final design for bicycle and pedestrian circulation within the Stanford West Apartments and Senior Housing sites shall be reviewed to ensure the circulation: system will function as a part of regional or inter -city bicycle and pedestrian connections, thereby promoting increased use of bicycles or pedestrian travel by area residents. 18 970702 lac 0031588 • S The EIR concludes that air pollution emissions from the project, resulting primarily from increased project -related vehicle traffic -- would be approximately 31 lbs/day for reactive organic compounds (ROG), 30 lbs/day for nitrogen oxides (NOx) and 29 lbs/day of PMIo particulates, all below the threshold of significance recognized by the BAAQMD and utilized in the EIR. Due to continuing changes in automotive technology, it is further expected that emissions would drop to 15 lbs/day of ROG, 29 lbs/day of NOx and 29 lbs/day of PM10 by the year 2010. The project individually therefore will not have a significant adverse effect on air quality. The EIR also concluded, however, that the project would contribute to significant cumulative air quality impacts from the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects as a whole. The Council finds that this cumulative air quality impact is significant. 4.5-2 ROG, NOx, and PM10 emissions generated by motor vehicles and residential stationary sources associated with the proposed projects would exceed the 80 lbs/day threshold and could hinder regional and local attainment of State ozone and PM10 standards. The EIR concludes that air pollution emissions from the project --almost entirely from related vehicle traffic --would be approximately 55 lbs/day for reactive organic compounds (ROG), 65 lbs/day for nitrogen oxides NOx and 51 lbs/day of PM10 particulates, all below the threshold of significance recognized by the BAAQMD and utilized in the EIR. Due to continuing changes in automotive technology, it is further expected that emissions would drop to 26 lbs/day of NOx and remain at 51 lbs/day of PM10 by the year 2010. The project, therefore, will not individually have a significant adverse effect on air quality. The EIR also concluded, however, that the project would contribute to significant total air quality impacts from the Sand Hill corridor projects as a whole. Mitigation measure 4.5-2(a) requires the City to implement mitigation measure 4.4-2(a), which provides that final design for bicycle and pedestrian circulation within the Stanford West Apartments and Senior Housing sites shall be reviewed to ensure.the circulation system will function as a part of regional or inter- city bicycle and pedestrian connections, thereby promoting increased use of bicycles or pedestrian travel by area residents. The Council finds that this measure will lessen project related air pollution impacts somewhat, but will not reduce the cumulative impact of the Sand Hill corridor projects to less than significant levels. The cumulative air quality impacts of the Sand Hill corridor projects will, therefore, be significant. 19 970702 lac 0031388 • 4.5-4 Cumulative daily traffic along major roadways in the project and study areas would emit more N©*, and PM6 with the implementation of the Sand Hill Road Projects, but emissions of ROG would decrease. The EIR found that the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects would collectively contribute to significant cumulative increases of emissions of NOx and PM10 in the project area. The project's contribution to these cumulative impacts has been discussed in relation to Impact 4.5-2. Cumulative traffic -related air pollution emissions are regulated through means beyond the City's jurisdiction and control. Individual vehicle emissions and automotive fuels are subject to regulation only by state or federal government. Regional traffic levels are also heavily influenced by past and future planning and land use decisions over which the City has no control. The Council therefore finds that no additional feasible mitigation measures are presently available to the City to mitigate the cumulative impact due to increases in regional traffic, and legal authority and responsibility for feasible mitigation measures, it any, is vested in other public agencies. This cumulative impact is therefore significant. 4.6 NOISE 4.6-1 The noise generated during the construction of the proposed projects could be disruptive to nearby noise -sensitive land uses. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(a) provides that construction activities will be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and if weekend work is necessary, to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturday, and to the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(b) provides that construction equipment shall be outfitted and maintained with noise reduction devices (i.e., mufflers, enclosures for stationary equipment, etc.) to obtain at least an average 10 dBA reduction shown feasible in Table 4.6-5. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(c) provides that stationary noise sources (e.g., compressors, concrete mixers, etc.) shall be located on portions of the sites furthest away from residential and other noise -sensitive areas, and that acoustic shielding shall be used with such equipment. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will substantially lessen construction phase noise impacts on surrounding residents, but will not reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. The measures will reduce noise generated by construction activities and will eliminate construction noise during normal sleeping hours. However, construction noise impacts will remain significant due to the levels of noise inherently generated by large scale construction activity and heavy equipment. 20 970702 lac 0031588 4.6-3 Traffic generated by the proposed projects and other cumulative developments and the traffic accommodated by the proposed roadway improvements would impact existing and proposed residential and other sensitive land uses adjacent to roadways in the project and study areas. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(a) requires that project residential units facing Sand Hill Road contain sufficient acoustic insulation to meet State Title 24 indoor noise standards. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will eliminate any potential significant noise impacts on project residents by requiring noise protection to be built into residential units to reduce interior noise levels to acceptable levels. The FIR concluded that although some residences in the area of the Sand Hill Corridor projects would experience significant cumulative noise impact from expected traffic increases on area roadways, the contribution of the Stanford West Senior Housing project to these cumulative noise impacts would be less than significant . The FIR also concluded that although the project would not directly cause significant noise impacts, traffic from the project would contribute to cumulative noise impacts on some residences along Sand Hill Road. The conditions of approval for the project, therefore incorporate the following mitigation measures to assist in mitigating potential cumulative traffic -related noise impacts. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(b) requires the applicant to construct a landscaped buffer strip with at least a 3 -foot -high berm along Sand Hill Road between Stanford Avenue and Oak Avenue in conjunction with implementation of the Sand Hill Road widening and realignment between Santa Cruz and Oak Avenues. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(c) requires the applicant to construct a soundwall 6 feet high or higher between Santa Cruz Avenue and Stanford Avenue in conjunction with implementation of the Sand Hill Road widening to reduce noise from traffic increases. at the nearby intersection. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(d), as modified by Condition 2.g of the project conditions of approval, requires the applicant to monitor noise increases in residences in the designated areas along Sand Hill Road where the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects may be responsible for more than 5Ot of potential increases in traffic -related noise. If noise increases are detected, the applic...rit shall be responsible for the costs of measures such as additional insulation, double -glazed windows, or individual soundwalls as determined necessary by acoustic study to return interior noise levels in these residences to pre -project levels or to 45 dBa. Residents may also contribute any further funds necessary to further reduce interior noise levels to acceptable levels. 21 970702 lac 00315U S The Council finds that these mitigation measures, if implemented, will substantially lessen significant cumulative traffic -related noise impacts along the Sand Hill Road corridor although these measures will not necessarily reduce cumulative noise impacts to a less than significant level for every residence affected by the project. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(d) provides for a fair share contribution by the applicant to the costs of physically upgrading affected residences with noise mitigation measures. Mitigation measures 4.6-3(b) and 4.6-3(c) provide for construction of physical barriers to reduce noise to acceptable levels at protected residences. The adopted mitigation measure 4.3-6(d) will impose responsibility for necessary monitoring of actual noise increases on the applicant and also imposes responsibility on the applicant to pay a share of actual mitigation costs in proportion to the applicant's responsibility for these impacts where the Sand Hill Corridor projects are the predominant cause of cumulative traffic -related noise impacts. The Council does not believe that the applicant can or equitably should be held responsible for more than a fair share of the costs of mitigating these potential cumulative noise impacts. Revisions made by the City to mitigation measure 4.3-6(d) are intended to strengthen the measure by fixing responsibility for noise monitoring on the applicant, and to also amend the measure to provide that the applicant shall be financially responsible only for a fair share of the costs of implementing the mitigation measure. The Council recognizes that mitigation measure 4.6-3(d), as adopted, will not result in lessening of cumulative noise impacts at locations at which less than 50% of the cumulative traffic -related noise increase is attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council also recognizes that since implementation of mitigation measure 4.6-3(d) also requires the cooperation of affected homeowners, the physical improvements necessary to reduce noise levels at some affected residences to acceptable levels may not be constructed by choice of the owner. The Council therefore recognizes that notwithstanding adoption of the identified mitigation measures, cumulative traffic -related noise impacts may remain significant for some residences affected by the projects. With respect to mitigation measures 4.6•-3(b) and 4.6-3(c), which will mitigate noise impacts on certain residences in Menlo Park, the Council further recognizes that although the conditions of approval require the applicant to accept responsibility for implementation of these mitigation measures, approval for implementation of these measures must be obtained from the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that implementation of these mitigation measures can and should be approved by the City of Menlo Park. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that approval for implementation of these measures is not obtained from Menlo Park, affected residences in Menlo Park would experience significant cumulative traffic -related noise impacts due to increased cumulative traffic on Sand Hill Road. 22 970702 lac 0031588 4.7 BIOLOGICAL R SOURCE 4.7-1 Implementation of the proposed projects would result in loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(a) requires that native trees removed for the projects shall be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 on a per acre basis by the same species from locally collected stock, and provides for additional replanting if survival rates fall below 9Q percent. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(b) requires that non-native landscape trees removed for the projects be replaced on a two -to -one basis. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(c) provides that the City shall contract with an independent arborist to (a) review plans to provide for maximum retention of trees and necessary additional tree protection measures; b) monitor project construction and c) recommend changes in the tree removal plan as necessary during construction. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(e) requires that all trees adjacent to project construction areas which are not removed will he avoided and protected according to specified procedures incorporated into all construction and/or demolition contracts. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's long and intermediate term impacts on trees and related wildlife habitat to less than significant levels, and will substantially lessen but will not avoid significant adverse short term impacts (0-10 years) to trees and related wildlife habitat within the City's jurisdiction. These measures provide for protection of as many trees as possible during project construction and replacement of all trees removed as a result of the project at a greater than 1-1 ratio. These mitigation measures will therefore eventually result in replacement of all trees and related habitat of equal or greater value. However, because it will take a number of years before replacement trees reach a level of maturity similar to those being removed, there will be a significant short-term and intermediate term decline in quality of trees and related habitat value at the project site. 4.7-2 Construction of the proposed projects would result in tree removals that could directly destroy nests, eggs and immature birds, and would remove future nesting habitat for birds, including sensitive species such as raptors and migrating songbirds. Mitigation measure 4.7-2(a) provides that in order to avoid the nesting season of raptors and sensitive songbirds, tree removals shall not take place between February 15 and June 30, unless otherwise determined by CDFG on a case -by -case basis. Mitigation measure 4.7-2(b) provides that if tree removal between January 1 and February 15 is required, a pre -construction survey shall be conducted to identify the presence, or lack 23 970702 lac 0031588 • thereof, of nests of raptors. If nests are identified, CDFG shall be contacted and appropriate protocols for nest relocation shall be implemented. If relocation of occupied, viable nests is not feasible, construction shall be delayed and the tree left undisturbed until completion of nesting activity. Mitigation measure 4.7-2(c) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7 -1(a) -(f) and 4.7 -4(a) -(c) (tree replacement and riparian habitat replacement), discussed above. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's impacts on nesting birds to a less than significant level. These measures will avoid any direct destruction of nests and provide for eventual replacement or enhancement of all nesting habitat lost. While there will be a short term loss of nesting habitat for all bird species and short and intermediate term loss of nesting habitat for raptors, there are sufficient alternate nesting sites in the area that this impact will not have any significant adverse effect on overall nesting opportunities or on bird populations. 4.7-5 Construction -related noise and human activity for the proposed projects could create impacts to native wildlife species. Mitigation measure 4.7-5 prohibits construction activities within 50 -feet of riparian habitats along San Francisquito Creek during the nesting season (February 15 - June 30), unless otherwise determined on a case -by -case basis by the CDFG. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's potential noise and disturbance impacts on wildlife to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measure will ensure that construction activity does not disrupt mating or nesting activities of birds in this area. While some temporary disruption of activities of other species may occur during the allowed construction period, this temporary disturbance will not be sufficient to have any significant or long-term effects, such as loss of feeding areas or mating opportunities, on species or individuals within the area. 4.7-8 Ongoing operation of the proposed projects could adversely affect aquatic life, including sensitive animal species, in San Francisquito Creek, by increasing runoff and non -point source urban pollutant loads. Mitigation measure 4.7-8(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9 -1(a) -(c), discussed below. Mitigation measure 4.7-8(b) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-4(a) and (b), discussed below. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the identified potential impact on aquatic life in San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The EIR concluded that the project, in conjunction with other Sand Hill Road Corridor 24 970702 lac 0031585 i projects, could result in increased runoff of sediments and contaminants into San Francisquito Creek due to increased extent of paved surfaces, landscaping and ground disturbances associated with the projects. The adopted mitigation measures require preparation and implementation of construction phase and post -construction storm water runoff management plans which will incorporate recognized best management practices to minimize siltation and runoff of contaminants from the project areas. These measures will reduce runoff of sediment or contaminants to levels which will not cause any detectable change in net water quality in San Francisquito Creek. 4.7-9 Operation of the p posed projects would increase human access resulting in direct impacts to sensitive animal species and disturbance and trampling damage to sensitive riparian habitat adjacent to San Francisquito Creek and to the Creek channel. Mitigation measure 4.7.9(a) requires that existing trails providing access to the riparian habitats along San Francisquito Creek be obliterated by dense barrier plantings of native riparian shrubs. A new trail will be designed for the length of the San Francisquito riparian corridor in the project area, located outside of riparian habitats and the drip lines of existing trees. Appropriate measures will be utilized to encourage exclusive use of this trail. Educational interpretive signs and displays shall be posted along this trail. View points shall be established in areas adjacent to the Creek where their siting will cause minimal damage to existing riparian vegetation. Direct public access to the Creek bank and channel shall not: be permitted except over existing crossings and for access to these carefully sited view points. Mitigation measure 4.7-9(b) requires the project to be redesigned so that no new development occurs within the 100 -foot setback from the top of bank based on a 2:1 slope from the toe of the San Francisquito Creek channel. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the potential impacts of increased human intrusion of the San Francisquito Creek riparian area to a less than significant level. Due to the age of project residents, incidents of direct intrusion into San Francisquito Creek and its banks by residents are expected to be low to non-existent. While the project will also draw employees and visitors, including children, to the site and the project also provides for continued public access on trails close to San Francisquito Creek, mitigation measure 4.7-9(a) provides for substantial 'preventive measures to minimize direct human intrusion and resulting impacts to the riparian zone, and for restoration of existing damage, thus potentially resulting in a net beneficial impact to the riparian corridor. Mitigation measure 4.7-9(b) requires that a 100 foot buffer zone be maintained between the Creek and new development; the 100 foot buffer zone represents a buffer width generally accepted for biological mitigation purposes. This mitigation measure has been implemented through changes, including relocation of the pool and parking spaces 25 970702 lac 0031588 • • formerly located within the 100 foot buffer, incorporated into the project by the applicant prior to Council approval. 4.7-10 Implementation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with other proposed projects in the area would result in incremental loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-10(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7-1(a, b, c, and e), discussed above, for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. Mitigation measure 4.7-10(c) recommends that all planning jurisdictions in the project area, implement their respective tree protection and preservation ordinances. For those jurisdictions without such an ordinance, measures similar to those presented in mitigation measure 4.7-1 should be implemented on a project -by -project basis. The Council has adopted the recommended mitigation measures for the Stanford West Senior Housing project and other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the cumulative loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat to a less than significant level. Adoption and implementation of these measures in conjunction with the Stanford West Apartments and Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway improvements projects will also reduce the combined cumulative impact of these projects to a less than significant level. These measures generally provide for full replacement of trees lost due to implementation of the project, thus eliminating any significant cumulative impact. Adoption of equivalent mitigation measures for future development projects reviewed by the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project. The Council finds, however, that City decisionmakers can and should adopt such measures in conjunction with any future projects which may result in cumulative loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat within the City. With respect to future implementation of the recommended measures by other jurisdictions in the area, the Council finds that implementation is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of the identified other agencies and that such measures can and should be adopted by such agencies. However, because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impacts from future development in the area are presently speculative and unknown, and the extent to which the recommended mitigation :measures will be implemented by all responsible jurisdictions is also presently unknown and is beyond the control of the City, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will lessen or avoid the potential cumulative impact, and therefore finds that the cumulative impact remains potentially significant. 26 970702 lac 0031 588 4.7-11 Construction of the proposed projects, in conjunction with other projects in the project area, would cumulatively result in tree removals that could directly destroy nests, eggs and immature birds, and would remove future nesting habitat for birds, including sensitive species such as raptors and migrating songbirds. Mitigation measure 4.7-11(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7 -2(a -c), discussed above, for the Sand Hill Corridor development projects. Mitigation measure 4.7-11(b) recommends that all planning jurisdictions in the project area implement measures similar to those presented in mitigation measure 4.7-2 on a project -by -project basis. The conditions of approval for the Stanford West Senior Housing project incorporate the applicable prciect-specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4.7-11(a) . The Council has also adopted the recommended project -specific mitigation measures as conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments and Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements projects. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption of these mitigation measures in conjunction with other approved projects will also reduce the combined cumulative impact of the projects to a less than significant level. These measures generally provide for avoidance of tree -cutting which may directly impact nesting activities and provide for full replacement of trees lost due to implementation of the project, thus eliminating any significant cumulative impact. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with future projects approved by the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that these agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of the potential cumulative impact. from future projects is presently entirely speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative visual impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 27 970702 lac 0031388 • 4.7-15 Ongoing operation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with similar projects within the same watershed, could cause cumulative adverse affects on aquatic life, including sensitive animal species, in San Francisquito Creek, by increasing runoff and non -point source urban pollutant loads. Mitigation measure 4.7-15 requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9 -7(a) -(c) for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. The conditions of approval for the Stanford West Senior Housing project incorporate each of the applicable recommended project -specific mitigation measures. The Council has also adopted the recommended project -specific mitigation measures as conditions of approval for the other Sand Hill Corridor projects approved concurrently with the project. The Council finds that adoption of these recommended project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impact to a less than significant level. Adoption and implementation of. these mitigation measures in conjunction with the other Sand Hill Corridor projects will also reduce the combined cumulative impact of these projects to a less than significant level. The adopted project -specific measures generally provide for preparation and compliance with detailed Storm Water Pollutant Prevention Plans which will include specific measures to prevent excessive sediment or pollution runoff which might result in significant adverse effects on aquatic life or habitat values in San Francisquito Creek. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures for future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects approved by the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of the potential cumulative impact from future projects is presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative impact resulting from increased runoff of sediment and pollutants into San Francisquito Creek. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 28 970702lac 0031588 • 4.7-16 Operation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with similar projects in or adjacent to the riparian corridor of San Francisquito Creek or its tributaries, would increase human access, cumulatively resulting in direct impacts to sensitive animal species and disturbance and trampling damage to sensitive riparian habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-16(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7-9(a) and (b), discussed above for the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects. Mitigation measure 4.7-16(b) recommends that all planning jurisdictions in the project area implement measures similar to those presented in mitigation measure 4.7-9 on a project -by -project basis. The Council has adopted each of the project -specific mitigation measures referenced in mitigation measures 4.7-16(a) and 4.7-16(b), in the conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments project and Stanford West Senior Housing project. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the projects' contribution to potential cumulative impact on the San Francisquito Creek riparian corridor to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should he adopted in conjunction with any future projects within the City located near riparian habitat areas. With respect to future development projects located outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impacts from future development are presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or.the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative effects. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the Council. 4.8 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY 4.8-1 Expansive or weak soils could damage foundations by providing inadequate support. Mitigation measure 4.8-1(a) requires that site specific soil suitability analysis be conducted and soil stabilization procedures and foundation design criteria be adopted in accordance with engineering criteria where the existence of expansive and compressible soil conditions is known or suspected. 29 9707021u 0031588 Mitigation measure 4.8-1(b) requires participation by the project's registered soil engineer as deemed necessary to oversee, verify, and report on soil engineering procedures and results. The EIR concludes that this impact is potentially, but not necessarily, significant, based on actual conditions encountered at the site. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen impacts related to potentially expansive or weak soils to a less than significant level. These measures provide for implementation of standard engineering procedures and criteria which will ensure construction of safe buildings and foundations. 4.8-2 The Stanford Sand Sill Road Corridor Projects area is subject to very strong seismically induced groundshaking which could threaten life and damage property. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(a) requires documented site -specific seismic -restraint criteria to be incorporated in the design of foundations and structures of the project which meet the minimum seismic -resistant design standards of CUBC Seismic Zone 4. Additional seismic -resistant earthwork and construction design criteria will be incorporated in the project where recommended by qualified experts. Roads, foundations and underground utilities in fill or alluvium shall be designed to accommodate settlement or compaction produced by seismic forces. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(b) requires on -site participation by the project's registered geological or geotechnical engineering consultant, as deemed appropriate, to oversee, verify, and report on seismic -restraint procedures and results. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(c) requires that an engineering geologist be contracted for third party review of all geologic, soils and engineering reports prepared for the proposed projects. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the impact of exposure to seismic events to a less than significant level. These measures implement standard engineering procedures and criteria for preventing major building failures and resulting injury or loss of life from any seismic event reasonably anticipated to occur in the project area. 4.8-4 Implementation of any combination of the projects, in conjunction with cumulative development within San Mateo and Santa Clara counties and the cities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park, would increase the number of people and structures subject to strong seismic groundshaking and the subsequent risk of injury, loss of life and property damage. Mitigation measure 4.8-4(a) recommends that documented site -specific seismic -restraint criteria to be incorporated in the design of foundations and structures in the projects area, including the following (1) minimum seismic -resistant design standards shall conform to the CUBC Seismic Zone 4 Standards; (2) 30 970702 lac ©031588 • • additional seismic -resistant earthwork and construction design criteria shall be incorporated as necessary, based on the site -specific engineering recommendations; (3) site preparation shall be supervised by geological or geotechnical consultants; (4) "as built" maps and a report shall be filed with the City, showing details of the site geology, the location and type of seismic -restraint facilities, and documenting satisfactory seismic performance for buildings, roads, foundations and underground utilities. Mitigation measure 4.8-4(b) recommends requiring on -site oversight, verification and reporting by registered geological or geotechnical engineering consultants where deemed appropriate by the City's Chief Building Official. The conditions of approval for the Stanford West Senior Housing project and for each of the other Sand Hill Corridor projects approved by the Council incozporate measures equivalent to the project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4.8-4 (a) . The Council finds that adoption of these project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impact to a less than significant level, and will also lessen the combined cumulative impact of the Sand Hill Corridor projects to a less than significant level. The adopted project -specific measures generally provide for incoiporation of adequate seismic safety measures into all new construction as provided by mitigation measures 4.8 -2(a) -(c). Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects approved by the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other 'public agencies and that these agencies can and should implement such measures. Because the recommended mitigation measures rely in part upon compliance with existing seismic safety practices and standards, it is expected that other jurisdictions will implement the measures to a large extent. However, because the extent of the potential cumulative impact from future projects is presently unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures beyond current minimum standards is uncertain, the Council cannot fully determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen the potential cumulative impact associated with increased development in the seismically sensitive region around the projects. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 31 970702 lac 003158S • 4.9 ETDROLogy Amp WATER QUALITY T 4.9-1 Grading, excavation and construction activities could result in increased deposition of sediment and/or discharge of pollutants in the storm drainage system and San Francisquito Creek and adversely affect water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-1(a) requires the applicant to prepare, retain and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ("SWPPP") which describes the site, erosion and sediment controls, means of material storage and waste disposal, implementation of approved local plans, post -construction control measures and maintenance responsibilities, and non -storm water management controls. The plan shall implement appropriate Best Management Practices ("BMPs") identified in the EIR. Mitigation measure 4.9-1(b) requires that the SWPPP shall be prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the City's Director of Public Works prior to issuance of a building permit. The SWPPP shall be implemented and inspected as part of the approval process for the grading plans for each project. Mitigation measure 4.9-1(c) requires that all construction contracts include the City's construction contract Pollution Prevention Language as part of the project specifications. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential sedimentation and contaminant impacts on San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures implement regulatory requirements and practices demonstrated to prevent excessive or damaging runoff of sediments and pollutants from development sites. Residual runoff of sediments and contaminants from construction areas, if any, will not occur in sufficient quantities to significantly degrade existing water quality. 4.9-4 Increased impervious surface and landscaping associated with development of the Proposed Projects could increase urban contaminants in surface runoff potentially reducing water quality in San Francisquito Creek. Mitigation measure 4.9-4(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-1(a) through (c) for all approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. Mitigation measure 4.9-4(b) requires that the SWPPP shall include in the final project design appropriate BMPs selected by the City, consisting either of detailed measures identified in the EIR or equivalent measures. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential impacts on San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. These adopted mitigation measures require implementation of design features and operational practices which will reduce contamination of exposed surfaces at the project site 32 970702 lac 003 U88 and trap or otherwise minimize runoff of such contaminants from the site. Residual contaminant runoff reaching San Francisquito Creek is not expected to constitute a sufficient addition to loads from existing development in the watershed to result in any measurable further deterioration of water quality. 4.9-5 Project construction activities in co bination with other construction projects in the Watershed could cumulatively increase sediment and other construction -related pollutants in San Francisquito Creek and adversely affect water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(a) recommends that all area jurisdictions ensure that project applicants include BMPs in construction contracts implementing the requirements of NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit #CAS029718. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(b) recommends that applicants for all area projects of five acres or more, be required to prepare a detailed SWPPP under the State General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(c) requires implementation .of mitigation measures 4.9-1(a) through (c) for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. The recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures have been incorporated in the conditions of approval for the Stanford West Senior Housing project and for the other Sand Hill Corridor projects approved concurrently with the project. The Council finds that adoption of these project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to potential cumulative sedimentation and contaminant impacts associated with construction to a less than significant level and will also lessen the combined cumulative impact of the approved Sand Hill Corridor projects to a less than significant level. The adopted measures require implementation of control measures which will preclude significant sedimentation or contaminant impacts from the projects. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City's jurisdiction is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that the City can and should adopt and implement such measures for any future projects approved by the City which have a potential to adversely affect San Francisquito Creek. With respect to implementation of the recommended mitigation measures by jurisdictions other than the City, the Council finds that implementation of such measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the recommended measures can and should be implemented by these agencies. These measures are generally consistent with requirements imposed by state law. However, because the nature and extent of potential area -wide cumulative impacts from future development are presently unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures beyond minimum standards is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the 970702 lac 0031588 33 • • extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will avoid potential cumulative impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the Council. 4.9-6 Increased impervious surfaces associated with development of the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects and areas in the San Francisquito Creek Watershed could cumulatively increase surface runoff, potentially increasing the frequency and severity of existing downstream flooding. Mitigation measure 4.9-6 recommends that all jurisdictions regulating development in the San Francisquito Creek Watershed require that adequate drainage and flood control facilities be provided for existing and planned development, in compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies and ordinances and in coordination with Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) requirements. The Council finds that measures included in the project design and mitigation measures incorporated in the conditions of project approval, specifically use of the on -site retention basin on the neighboring Stanford West Apartments project site and mitigation measure 4.9-2, effectively implement the above recommended mitigation measure for the Stanford West Senior Housing project and will reduce the potential contribution of the project to cumulative flooding impacts to a less than significant level. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project. However, the Council finds that the City can and will consider adoption and implementation of appropriate mitigation measures as future development projects are proposed and in accordance with its comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances. With respect to implementation of the recommended mitigation measure by other jurisdictions in the San Francisquito Creek watershed, the Council finds that jurisdiction and responsibility for implementation of the recommended mitigation measure is vested in other public agencies and that such agencies can and should adopt and implement appropriate mitigation programs. Because the extent of potential cumulative impacts from future watershed development is currently unknown, and because the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which adequate mitigation measures will be implemented by other agencies, the Council cannot presently determine whether the identified potential significant cumulative impact will be substantially lessened or avoided by the recommended mitigation. This cumulative impact therefore remains potentially significant. 34 970702 lac 0031588 • S 4.9-7 Increased impervious surface associated with development of the Stanford Sand Sill Road Corridor Projects and areas in the San Francisquito Creek Watershed could cumulatively increase urban contwftimants in surface runoff potentially reducing water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(a) recommends that all local jurisdictions ensure that future project applicants include BMPs as part of project design in accordance with San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB) requirements. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(b) notes that it is within the jurisdiction of the SFBRWQCB to require that comprehensive SWPPPs and monitoring programs be implemented by all storm water dischargers associated with specified industrial activities, in compliance with the State's General Permits, and to require that such plans shall include BMPs or equally effective measures. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(c) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-4(a) and (b) by all approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The conditions of approval :for the Stanford West Senior Housing project incorporate each of the recommended project -specific mitigation measures or equivalent measures to mitigate identified potential cumulative contaminant impacts to San Francisquito Creek. The Council finds that adoption of these recommended measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. The recommended measures have also been adopted in connection with approval of the other approved Sand Hill Road Corridor projects, and will lessen the combined cumulative impact of the projects to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures for future development is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project. However, the Council finds that the City -can and should adopt equivalent measures for all projects approved within its jurisdiction. With respect to impacts resulting from future development outside the -City, jurisdiction and responsibility for implementation of recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures is vested in other public agencies. The Council finds that these jurisdictions can and should implement such measures. However, because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impacts from future development are presently speculative and unknown, and the degree to which other jurisdictions will implement recommended mitigation measures is uncertain, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented outside the City's boundaries and also cannot determine the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid the identified potential cumulative impact. This cumulative impact therefore remains potentially significant. 970702 tae 003 t 588 35 4.10 PUBLIC SAPSTY 4.10-1 Implementation of the proposed projects could expose construction workers to unidentified existing soil and/or groundwater contaminants at levels which could cause illness. Mitigation measure 4.10-1(a) requires that after demolition of the existing structures, an investigation shall be completed to detect and/or determine the extent of any contaminated soil or groundwater on the project site. Mitigation measure 4.10-1(c) requires that if investigation reveals evidence of chemical contamination, underground storage tanks, or other environmental impairments on the site, a remediation plan shall be prepared which will (1) specify measures to protect workers and the public; and (2) ensure clean up and disposal of contaminants and protect public health in accordance with federal, state, and local requirements. Work in the areas of potential hazard shall not proceed until the site remediation plan has been implemented. Appropriate agencies shall be notified as required. A site health and safety plan shall also be developed and implemented in compliance with OSHA requirements to ensure worker safety. The EIR concluded that although there are no known deposits or residues of unsafe contaminants on the project site, toxic materials and biological wastes were present on the site during its use as Stanford's Children's Hospital, and there remains a potential that such materials could be found in soils on the site. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measures will reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level by ensuring that the site is fully investigated and evaluated for the possible presence of harmful substances, and indicated remediation efforts undertaken if contaminants are detected in amounts which might pose a hazard. 4.10-2 Implementation of the proposed projects could expose construction workers to asbestos containing materials presently located in buildings and other structures, resulting in adverse health effects. Mitigation measure 4.10-2(b) requires that all asbestos containing materials shall be removed and appropriately disposed of by a licensed asbestos abatement contractor prior to any building demolition. A site health and safety plan will be developed and implemented in compliance with OSHA requirements to ensure worker safety. The EIR concluded that due to the known presence of asbestos in some buildings which will be demolished on the site, there exists a potentially significant threat that workers could be exposed to asbestos during demolition. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level by requiring that all asbestos containing materials be removed by qualified personnel 36 970702 tac 003 t SBS • through accepted safe practices, and that any residual potential impacts be addressed through appropriate safety measures incorporated into a health and safety plan for project workers. 4.10-4 Implementation of the proposed projects could expose construction workers to electrical transformers and/or fluorescent light ballasts potentially containing PCBs, and subsequent adverse health effects. Mitigation measure 4.10-4(a) requires that all transformers on the project site that have not been tested for PCBs shall be tested prior to demolition and construction activities. Transformers found to contain PCBs will be removed and disposed of appropriately. Mitigation measure 4.10-4(c) requires that light ballasts in existing on -site facilities be tested for PCs prior to demolition. Should PCBs be detected, all light ballasts shall be removed from the facility and appropriately disposed. of by a licensed hazardous waste hauler per Title 22 requirements. Mitigation measure 4.10-4(e) requires that a site health and safety plan be developed in compliance with OSHA requirements to ensure worker safety prior to commencing removal and disposal of PCB -laden materials. The EIR concluded that two electrical transformers and florescent light fixtures on the property could contain PCBs which could have a significant impact on construction workers if accidentally released during demolition activities. The Council finds that the adopted mitigations measures will lessen this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level by providing for testing and safe removal of all transformers and florescent fixtures containing PCBs prior to commencement of demolition and construction activities. 4.11 UTILITIES. ENERGY. AND INFRASTRUCTURE 4.11-3 The proposed projects could use water wastefully. Mitigation measure 4.11-3 requires that in order to reduce water consumption, the project design shall incorporate measures to maximize the efficient use of water and minimize total water consumption. Specific measures to be included are the following: All landscape designs shall incorporate and address the City Landscape Water Efficiency Standards. The project sites would be subject to an annual maximum water allowance for landscaping. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department, Resource Management Division to determine other conservation related improvements that would apply to the projects. 37 970702 lac 0031588 • • The EIR concluded that because final plans have not been completed by the applicant specifying how water, particularly for landscaping, would be efficiently used, there existed a potential that water could be used wastefully by the project. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen this potentially significant impact to insignificance by ensuring that final landscaping and construction plans meet current City Water Efficiency Standards and incorporate additional conservation measures if recommended by City staff. 4.11-4 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing water services. Mitigation measure 4.11-4 provides that prior to the start of construction of infrastructure, the project applicant shall provide a plan for review and approval to the City of Palo Alto Director of Utilities outlining the approach to be taken to minimize the impact to existing utilities and customers. The EIR determined that operations necessary to connect infrastructure associated with the project to existing service lines and facilities could result in potentially significant interruptions of utility services for existing users, specifically interruptions of water service (Impact 4-11-4), wastewater service (Impact 4-11-11), electrical service (Impact 4-11-17) and gas service (Impact 4-11-24.) The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen each of these potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level by requiring the applicant to submit and obtain approval of plans which will provide for completion of all utility connections for the project with the minimum necessary interruption of existing services. 4.11-7 Cumulative development could use water wastefully. Mitigation measure 4.11-7 provides that the City shall ensure that each new project approved within the City requiring ARB approval is required to be consistent with and implement the City policies and programs related to water conservation. The EIR concluded that existing City policies and programs are adequate to avoid cumulative wasteful use of water, and that a significant adverse impact had the potential to occur only if the City failed to continue to implement these policies and program9. The recommended mitigation measure provides that the City will continue to implement existing water conservation policies by making compliance a condition of ARB approval for all new projects. While implementation of this mitigation measure is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the Stanford West Senior Housing project, the Council finds that this mitigation measure can and should be implemented with respect to future projects and will lessen the identified potentially significant cumulative impact to insignificance. 38 970702 lac 0031 US • 4.11-9 The proposed projects would require improvement of the existing 21 -inch wastewater line. Mitigation measure 4.11-9 requires that in the event that open -trench technology is used, the project applicant shall ensure that the new 24 -inch wastewater line is constructed coincident with, and placed in the right-of-way of, Palo Road, during Phase I of project construction, thereby avoiding the potential biological impacts and conflicts with future uses associated with the alternative location of the line. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the potential significant adverse impacts associated with construction of a new 21" wastewater line to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure requires the applicant to either use technology which avoids trenching and resulting tree removal in the Stanford arboretum, or to relocate the route of the replacement pipeline along existing right-of-way containing no significant environmental resources in order to avoid impacts to the arboretum. 4.11-11 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing wastewater services. Mitigation measure 4.11-11 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4, discussed above. See findings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 4.11-13 Cumulative development could require major infrastructure improvements to the existing wastewater system. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(a) recommends that the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department ensure that developers responsible for construction of new wastewater lines coordinate with all other parties intending to utilize the line. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(b) recommends that sewer line capacity studies satisfactory to the City's Director of Utilities be conducted prior to initiating future cumulative development. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(c) recommends that all final designs for the sizing of new sewer mains shall be based on infiltration from a 20 -year storm and peak base wastewater flow. The EIR concluded that lack of coordinated planning for future development could result in failure to adequately size area wastewater lines, resulting in future need to again upgrade these lines to provide needed capacity. The recommended mitigation measures provide for full evaluation and correct sizing of mains prior to cumulative development. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's contribution to this potential cumulative impact to a less -than significant level. These mitigation measures will also lessen the overall potential cumulative impact to a less than significant level since 39 9707021ac 0031588 • implementation of these measures will result in provision of adequate long-term capacity for all reasonably foreseeable development. 4.11-17 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing electrical services. Mitigation measure 4.11-17 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4 for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. See findings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 4.11-24 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existin3 gas services. Mitigation measure 4.11-24 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4 for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. See findings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND SCHOOLS 4.12-2 The proposed projects would increase the number of emergency medical service calls to the PAFD. Mitigation measure 4.12-2(b) requires the applicant to pay a fair share for the cost of a new paramedic unit. This measure is implemented through Condition 45 of the project conditions of approval, which provides that the applicant shall pay $36,960 to the City as its share of the costs of a new paramedic van. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's potential impact on emergency medical services to a less than significant level. Condition 45 ensures that necessary funds will be made available when addition of new paramedic unit is determined necessary by the City to maintain current levels of service. The Council also finds that adoption of the alternative mitigation measure 4.12-2(a) identified in the EIR is not necessary to avoid potential significant adverse effects of the project on emergency medical services. Mitigation measure 4.12-2(a) proposes that the applicant provide private on -demand ambulance service to residents of the Stanford West Senior Housing project. The Council finds that increasing City-wide emergency medical response capabilities through a combination of applicant funds and other funds is a more desirable and cost-effective means of maintaining adequate emergency medical service levels for project residents and City residents generally than requiring the applicant to maintain special on -call ambulance services for project residents. 40 970702 Iav 00315,8 4.12-4 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of fire suppression service calls to the PAPD. Mitigation measure 4.12-4 identifies three alternative means for offsetting cumulative increased demands on Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD)resources. The conditions of approval for the project adopt the third of these alternate means, specifically: - The City will provide additional resources to the PAFD through the City's General Fund from the increased tax revenues generated by the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other future cumulative projects, The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the identified cumulative impact on fire suppression services to a less than significant level for each of the Sand Hill Corridor projects and future development. Cost and revenue projections for the approved projects indicate that increased tax revenues from the projects and other potential future development will be more than adequate to fund additional resources for the PAFD necessary to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased PAFD resources identified in EIR mitigation measure 4.12-4, specifically (1) fair share applicant funding of new PAFD personnel, and (2) fair -share contributions from future projects, are not necessary based on current information to maintain adequate fire protection within the City and would result in imposing unnecessary special additional costs on new development. 4.12-5 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of medical emergency service calls to the PAID. Mitigation measure 4.12-5 identifies two alternative means of covering costs of additional emergency medical services should increases in current personnel and/or equipment prove necessary to meet future demand. The conditions of approval provide that the City shall adopt the second of these alternatives, specifically, the City shall provide additional medi-van resources to the PAFD if needed with general fund increases from tax revenues generated by the projects and other future cumulative projects. The Council has adopted the second of these mitigation alternatives for the Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen the identified potential cumulative impact on emergency medical services to a less than significant level. Cost and revenue projections indicate that increased tax revenues from the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other potential future development will be adequate to fund additional emergency medical resources as needed to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased emergency medical services identified in EIR mitigation measure 4.12-5, specifically that future development projects directly pay a fair share toward a medi-van unit or, is not necessary to 41 970702 lac 0031388 • maintain adequate level of emergency medical services based on current information. 4.12-6 Increased construction traffic from cumulative development could reduce PAM response times. Mitigation measure 4.12-6 provides that as part of the project approval process, the City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment shall ensure the following: - All projects coordinate with the PAFD and Palo Alto Police Department (PAPD) to prepare an emergency response plan for the construction period that specifies alternate emergency response routes to the project site and vicinity which meet the Departments' response time goals; and The Emergency Response Plan for all Sand Hill Corridor projects will specify procedures to allow simultaneous construction without increasing emergency response times to an unacceptable level. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's potential impact on PAFD emergency response times to insignificance. This measure ensures that detailed plans will be developed and implemented to ensure that existing or adequate alternative response routes will be kept open at all times to permit PAFD responses to all service areas within PAFD response time standards. 4.12-8 Design of the proposed projects could present security risks to occupants and police patrol personnel. Mitigation measure 4.12-8 provides that the applicant's lighting and landscaping plans will be reviewed with the PAPD to eliminate safety risks. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the identified potential safety impact to a less than significant level. This measure will ensure that qualified City police officers will review lighting and landscaping plans to so that the plans are designed to eliminate potential security hazards such as poorly lit areas along walkways. 4.12-10 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of police service calls to the PAPD. Mitigation measure 4.12-10 identifies three alternate means of funding additional police services to offset increased demand on Palo Alto Police Department resources. Condition 2.0 of the project conditions of approval provides that the City shall adopt the second of these alternatives, specifically, the City shall fund additional PAPD resources from increased tax revenues generated by the projects and other future cumulative projects, 42 970702 lac 0031588 • • The Council findu that adoption of this measure will lessen the potential cumulative impact of the project and of new development generally on police services to a less than significant level. Cost and revenue projections indicate that increased tax revenues from the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other potential future development will be adequate to fund additional emergency medical resources as needed to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased emergency medical services identified in EIR mitigation measure 4.12-5, specifically that future development projects directly pay a fair share toward a medi-van unit or, is not necessary to maintain adequate level of emergency medical services based on current information. 4.12-11 Designs of cumulative development projects could present security risks to occupants and police patrol personnel. Mitigation measure 4.12-11 recommends that the City Department of Planning and Community Environment ensure that future project lighting and landscaping are reviewed with the PAPD to reduce safety risks. The ARB shall provide final review and approval. This mitigation measure has been effectively implemented. with respect to the Stanford West Senior Housing project through the adoption of mitigation measure 14.12-8, The Council finds that adoption of the measure will reduce the project's contribution to any potential significant cumulative impact to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure has also been adopted in conjunction with approval of the Stanford West Apartments project. Adoption of this mitigation measure as a policy governing review and approval of all future development within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the Stanford West Senior Housing project. However, the Council finds that the recommended mitigation measure can and should be implemented in relation to future development projects within the City. 4.12-12 Increased construction traffic from cumulative development could increase PAPD response times. Mitigation measure 4.12-12 requires implementation , of mitigation measure 4.12-6 by all approved Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects. This mitigation measure has been implemented by adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-6 for the each of the approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that implementation of mitigation measure 4.12-6 will lessen the cumulative impact of construction of the projects on PAPD response times to a less than significant level. 43 970702 lac 0031588 • • 4.12-14 Cumulative development, including the proposed Stanford West Apartments Project, would cause R -12th grade enrollments to exceed PAUSD school capacity of 916 students or 12 percent in year 2004-2005. The EIR proposed the adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-14 to mitigate this identified cumulative impact. Mitigation measure 4.12-14 recommends that the City adopt a policy that encourages all future developers to contribute their fair share over and above payment of the development fee to mitigate school impacts. The Stanford West Senior Housing project will not result in addition of any children to area schools, and thus will not cause or contribute to any cumulative impact on public schools regardless of the adoption of this suggested mitigation measure. However, the Council recognizes that cumulative impacts on public schools from future development are potentially significant, and further finds that these impacts would remain potentially significant whether or not the suggested mitigation measure is adopted as a policy of the City since contributions by developers would remain voluntary regardless of City encouragement. Adoption of a City policy of encouraging future developers to contribute school mitig=,.cion funds in excess of mandatory development fees is beyond the scope of approvals for the Stanford West Senior Housing project. r--yever, the Council has taken substantial steps to encourage the project applicant to discuss and fund mutually acceptable mitigation measures with the school district in conjunction with the Stanford West Apartments project approved concurrently with this project, and can and will continue to take similar steps to encourage voluntary additional contributions by developers of future projects with the goal of fully offsetting any impacts which cannot be mitigated through mandatory development fees and tax revenue increases associated with new development. 4.12-17 The operation of the proposed projects would increase solid waste generation in the City of Palo Alto requiring increased diversion to meet the goals of AB 939. Mitigation measure 4.12-17(a) requires that as a condition of project approval, the applicant shall prepare and obtain approval from the City Public Works Department of a landfill diversion management program that meets the diversion goals of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) and AB939. The program shall include specific provisions detailed in the EIR. Mitigation measure 4.12-17(b) recommends that the City require all new development projects to prepare operation recycling programs which will meet the AB939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000. The program shall include specific provisions detailed in the EIR. The Council finds that adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-17(a) will lessen the project's potential solid waste impacts to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure requires the applicant to develop, with City supervision, a plan which will 44 970702 lac 003!588 • ensure that solid wastes from the project are processed in a manner which ensure compliance with the recycling goals of AB939. Adoption and enforcement of mitigation measure 4.12-17(a) will also implement mitigation measure 4.12-17(b) with respect to the project. Adoption of mitigation measure 4,12-17(b) as a policy governing review and approval of all future development within the City is beyond the scope of the decision and approvals granted for the Stanford West Senior Housing project. However, the Council finds that the proposed mitigation measure can and should adopted in relation to future development projects approved by the City. 4.12-18 The proposed projects would increase solid waste generation in the City of Palo Alto during construction requiring increased diversion to meet the goals of AB 939. Mitigation measure 4.12-18 requires the applicant to prepare and implement a construction recycling plan approved by the City Public Works Department. The plan shall include specific steps to achieve the City's short-term SRRE diversion goal of 30-40 percent through various specified measures. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the identified potential solid waste impact to a less than significant level. The approved recycling plan will ensure that provision is made for recovering all recyclable wastes generated during construction, thus avoiding unnecessary placement of recyclable materials in landfills. 4.12-19 Cumulative development anticipated by the City through Year 2010, including the proposed projects, would increase solid waste generation by 5.5 percent over 1995 levels to 155,650 tons per year based on the projected growth of population and employees. Mitigation measure 4.12-19(a) recommends that the City require significant new development projects to prepare construction recycling plans as part of the project approval, process. The construction plan shall include specific steps to achieve the AB939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000 through various specified measures. Mitigation measure 4.12-19(b) recommends that the City require new development projects to prepare long-term operational recycling programs as part of project approval process. The programs should meet the AB939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000, and include various additional specified elements These mitigation measures have been effectively applied to the Stanford West Senior Housing project through the adoption of mitigation measures 4.12-17(a) and 4.12-18. The Council finds that adoption of those measures will reduce the project's contribution to potential cumulative solid waste impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-19(a) and 4.12-19(b) as policies governing review and approval of all future development within the City is beyond the scope of the decision and approvals granted for the Stanford West Senior Housing project. 45 970702 lac 0031 MS However, the Council finds that adoption of the proposed mitigation measures or equivalent measures can and should be adopted in relation to future development projects approved by the City. The EIR concluded that the Stanford West Senior Housing project will have a significant growth inducing impact in that upgrading of the existing 21• sewer line serving the project area to the 24° line necessary to serve the project and the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion projects will remove an obstacle to growth of the Stanford Medical Center, which has announced tentative plans for expansion. The EIR does not identify any potential mitigation measures for this growth - inducing impact. The 24" sewer line will be constructed with the minimum size pipe available with sufficient capacity to ensure adequate service of the approved Sand Hill Corridor development projects. Since excess capacity will still be provided by this sewer line which could facilitate expansion of the Stanford Medical Center or other development, this impact is significant. The EIR concluded that the overall set of roadway improvements may serve to remove an obstacle to development of the contemplated 400,000 square foot expansion of the Stanford Medical Center. The traffic impacts of such development of the Medical Center as well as the impacts of cumulative development along the Sand Hill corridor were considered in the cumulative impacts analysis contained in the EIS. The EIR finds the impacts of such cumulative development within the Sand Hill corridor significant, as discussed elsewhere in these findings. 46 9707021as 0031588 PART II ALTERNATIVES TO TEE PROJECT The Council has also considered the alternatives to the project analyzed in the EIR. Based on the following considerations, the Council has determined that all identified alternatives to the project are infeasible. The findings set forth below stating this Council's reasons for rejecting each alternative in favor of the project describe several separate grounds for rejecting each alternative, each of which this Council has determined constitutes an independent basis for this Council's decision to approve the project and to reject the proposed alternative. No Project - No Development. This alternative assumes that no new development is authorized on the project site. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible because it would preclude development of needed and desirable new housing and care facilities within the City for senior citizens. In addition, this alternative would result in continued lack of productive use of the property despite its existing developed condition. The Council believes that redevelopment of the property for beneficial uses such as that proposed by the applicant is desirable and preferable to locating new development on currently undeveloped land. No Pro -i t - No Action This alternative assumes that the existing buildings on the project site are reoccupied and returned to use as an active medical facility. Renovation and improvement of existing structures to meet current standards and needs of the medical use would probably take place under this alternative. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible because it would not result in the development of needed and desirable new housing and care facilities for senior citizens_ This alternative would also result in worsening of the current jobs -housing balance within the City, in contravention of the City's important policy of attempting to achieve a more favorable balance of employment opportunities to housing opportunities in the City. In addition, while some short-term on -site impacts of this alternative could be less than the proposed project, this alternative would result in higher traffic and air quality impacts than the approved project. Implementation of this alternative is also highly uncertain in that there is presently no known persons or institution which has expressed an interest in occupying the site for medical uses. 75% Development Alternative This alternative consists of development of approximately 292 rather than 388 senior residential units on the site, and corresponding 25% reductions in the number of skilled nursing units 47 970702 lac 0031 588 and assisted living units in the Health Care Center. This alternative would permit elimination of one building and modifications to others including elimination of wings and reduction in height by eliminating some upper stories. A proposed revised site plan implementing this alternative is included at p. 6.1-34 of the EIR; the Council also assumes that this alternative design could be modified to further reduce visual impacts if this alternative were selected for implementation. Due to reduced density and corresponding reduction in some building heights and building mass, this alternative would result in some incremental reduction of traffic, visual, land use and other impacts of the proposed project. However, some reduction of these impacts has also already been accomplished by revisions and mitigation measures adopted during the City's CEQA process. Because the alternative still involves substantial redevelopment of the site with large new buildings, the alternative will still result in significant and unavoidable land use, visual and traffic impacts at some intersections, although of lesser magnitude than the proposed project. The Council further finds that this alternative is infeasible because it would result in an unacceptable loss of needed housing units and special care facilities for senior citizens. Construction of all units in the proposed project is required to assist the City in meeting its anticipated need for new housing units for the period 1996-2002, and to meet special needs identified in the federally required "Consolidated Plan for the City of Palo Alto (1995-2000)," which estimates a need for construction of up to 1,000 units of assisted living units and skilled nursing or 24 -hour care facilities for up to 950 individual senior citizens in the City. Studies performed by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), summarized in the draft Housing Element Technical Document for the draft City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan now in preparation, project a need for construction of 1244 new housing units within the City for the period 1996-2002 to enable the City to satisfy its fair share of regional housing demands. Elderly households presently comprise about 25%- of all households in the City. Elimination of approximately 96 residential units and a corresponding reduction in other residential care facilities provided by the project would substantially and unacceptably impair the City's ability to provide new quality housing for senior residents of the City and to meet the anticipated need for new assisted living units in the City and the region. Reduction of the project by approximately 96 units would also result in continued demand and resulting pressure for construction of new senior housing within the City or surrounding area. In addition, during public hearings the Council received substantial public testimony indicating that the project will provide attractive alternate housing for senior residents of the City who now occupy traditional single family homes, enabling these senior citizens to move from underutilized single family homes and make these homes available for purchase or rental by younger families. 48 970702 lac 0031588 Reduction of the number of units included in the project would also reduce this secondary housing benefit of the project. The marginal decreases in environmental impacts which would result from this alternative are not justified by the significant loss of senior housing units and reductions in senior care facilities which would result from the alternative. The Council believes that in the overall balancing of growth management and housing needs, efficient use of the project site for the maximum number of senior residential units which can be accommodated consistent with environmental and design constraints is preferable to reduced density development which will result in loss of needed senior residential units and care facilities. 50% Development Alternative This alternative consists of development of approximately 194 rather than 388 residential units on the site, and corresponding 50% reductions in the number of skilled nursing units and assisted living units in the Health Care Center. This alternative would permit elimination of buildings and modifications to others including elimination of wings and reduction in height by eliminating some upper stories. Due to reduced density and reduced building mass, this alternative would reduce many of the impacts of the project, including, traffic, visual, land use and other impacts but would not avoid or reduce to insignificance the significant land use, visual and traffic impacts associated with redevelopment of the site. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible because it would result in an unacceptable loss of needed housing units and special care facilities for the City's senior citizens. Construction of all units in the proposed project is required to assist the City in meeting its anticipated need for new housing units for the period 1996-2002, and to meet, special needs identified in the federally required "Consolidated Plan for the City of Palo Alto (1995-2000)," which estimates a need for construction of up to 1,000 units of assisted living units and skilled nursing or 24 -hour care facilities for up to 950 individual senior citizens in the City. Studies performed by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), summarized in the draft Housing Element Technical Document for the draft City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan now in preparation, project a need for construction of 1244 new housing units within the City for the period 1996-2002 to enable the City to satisfy its fair share of regional housing demands. Elderly households presently comprise about 25% of all households in the City. Elimination of approximately 192 residential units and a 50% reduction in other senior care facilities provided by the project would substantially and unacceptably impair the City's ability to provide new quality housing for senior residents of the City and to meet the anticipated need for new assisted living units in the City and the region. 49 970702 lac 4031588 • Reduction of the project by approximately 192 units would also result in continued demand and resulting pressure for construction of new senior housing within the City or surrounding area. In addition, during public hearings the Council received substantial public testimony indicating that the project will provide attractive alternate housing for senior residents of the City who now occupy traditional single family homes, enabling these senior citizens to move from underutilized single family homes and make these homes available for purchase or rental by younger families. Reduction of the number of units included in the project would also reduce this secondary housing benefit of the project. The decreases in environmental impacts which would result from this alternative are not justified by the significant loss of senior housing units and reductions in senior care facilities which would result from the alternative. The Council believes that in the overall balancing of growth management and housing needs, efficient use of the project site for the maximum number of senior residential units which can be accommodated consistent with environmental and design constraints is preferable to reduced density development which will result in loss of needed senior residential units and care facilities and continued demand for construction of such facilities at other locations in the area. QmPlAs West Alternative Site The Campus West alternative site is an undeveloped parcel owned by Stanford south of Sand Hill Road and across from the Oak creek Apartments which border the Stanford West. Apartments site. The Campus West site is currently outside the jurisdiction of the City and entirely within the territory of the County of Santa Clara. The EIR evaluated relocation of both the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects to this site, and concluded that both could be substantially accommodated with extensive redesign and a probable increase in building heights. The EIR also noted that some reduction could be made in the total number of units approved on the West Campus site to better accommodate site constraints and provide for mitigation of impacts. However, for purposes of considering this alternative, the Council has assumed that all senior residential units and all other senior care facilities currently proposed as part of the Stanford West Senior Housing project could be accommodated on the Campus West site with acceptable environmental effects. In considering this alternative, the Council has also considered the possibility of partially adopting this alternative by relocating only the Stanford West Senior Housing project to the Campus West site. Development of the Stanford West Senior Housing only on the site would provide maximum flexibility to design and locate the project to minimize adverse environmental effects, and could limit loss of open space on the Campus West site to less than half of the site. The Council, however, finds that development of the Stanford West Senior Housing on the West Campus site, either alone or in conjunction with development of the Stanford West Apartments project, is infeasible and should be rejected for the following reasons: 50 970701 lac 0031588 1. The alternative is inconsistent with existing Santa Clara. County and City of Palo Alto land use designations and policies for use of the West Campus site. Use of the property for housing unrelated to academic needs is also inconsistent with Stanford's long range master plan for use of campus lands. 2. Implementation of this alternative is uncertain and would, even if implemented, involve substantial delay in construction of new senior housing and care facilities. 3 On balance, the alternative is not environmentally superior to the proposed project in that it would result in loss of existing open space and related grassland and oak habitat rather than reuse of an existing developed site. The Campus West site is presently designated in the Santa Clara County general plan and Stanford's general use permit and in Stanford's land use plans as ^Major Educational and Institutional Uses." Long term development plans for this property by Stanford contemplate development of educational, research or other facilities directly related to the University's academic mission rather than non-University housing or income -producing uses. Because development of housing, particularly housing not intended for academic use, on the Campus West site is inconsistent with Stanford's existing long-term plans, it is uncertain that Stanford would attempt to implement this alternative if requested by the City. Failure by Stanford to pursue this altezuuative would result in loss of all new senior housing units and related senior care facilities associated with the project. If Stanford did elect to pursue this alternative, implementation would require submittal of an entirely new application and commencement of a new approval process either by the County of Santa Clara, or by the City if annexation is proposed as part of the project. Due to the size of the project and potential environmental impacts of development at this alternate location, the approval process would necessarily involve a complete redesign of the project and a new environmental iwpact report, resulting in substantial delays in construction of any actual new senior housing and care facilities. Because many of the potential impacts of this alternative, including loss of open space, visual impacts, increase in area traffic and changes in character of the area and loss of habitat area are similar in nature to the impacts of the approved project, it is probable that implementation of the alternative would also be subject to public opposition greater than experienced by the approved project. Under existing agreements between Stanford, the County of Santa Clara and the City, development of senior housing on this site would include annexation of the property to the City. While the City would have primary approval authority over any such development proposal, the City cannot prejudge its ultimate decision on any such application, and implementation of the alternative is therefore uncertain even if annexation is proposed. Because there is already a substantial and 51 9707021er 0031388 immediate need for additional housing and for new senior care facilities in the City, the Council believes that the additional delay and uncertainty of implementation of this alternative are unacceptable and further render the alternative infeasible. This alternative would also have important adverse environmental impacts which the Council finds are, on balance, worse than those of the proposed project. Specifically, this alternative would result in substantial loss of grassland and oak savannah habitat area, loss of open space and related land use and visual impacts along the Sand Hill Road Corridor. While relocation of the project to the Campus West site would also avoid or reduce some of the impacts associated with redevelopment of the former Children's Hospital site, these impacts have in all cases been mitigated to levels this Council finds acceptable, and which the Council finds are more acceptable than the substantial impacts which would result from development of the Campus West site. Quarry Road/El Camino Alternative Sit The Quarry Road/E1 Camino site consists of approximately- 6 acres of undeveloped land owned by Stanford at the intersections of El Camino Real and Quarry Road. The site is presently located within the jurisdiction of the County of Santa Clara; however, for purposes of considering this alternative, the Council assumes that the site would be annexed to the City as part of the approval process for the alternative. The Council finds that development of the Stanford West Senior Housing at this alternative site is infeasible and therefore rejects the alternative on the following grounds: 1) Due to the smaller amount of land available at this site, development at this site would result in unacceptable loss of senior housing units; 2) The site is not as well suited for development of senior housing as is the proposed site, and would result in incompatibility with surrounding uses; 3) Implementation of this alternative is uncertain and speculative and would, even if implemented, involve substantial delay in construction of new senior housing and care facilities; and 4) This alternative would not be sufficiently environmentally preferable to the proposed project to justify its adoption rather than the proposed site. Due to the smaller (6 acre) size of this alternative site, EIR estimates that approximately 225 senior housing units, or about 58% of the proposed project overall, could be constructed on the site after making reasonable allowances for setbacks, landscaping and parking. A maximum of 240 residential units could be allowed at residential zoning density of 40 units per acre. Implementation of this alternative would thus result in the loss of 144 or more 52 9707021u 0031388 senior residential use from the project. This loss of senior housing units is unacceptable and renders the project infeasible for reasons previously stated in reference to the 75% and 50% reduced density alternatives. The site is also not as well suited for development of senior housing and care facilities as is the proposed site. The site is presently surrounded on three sides by roadways and major commercial and institutional uses. Due to the relatively small size of the parcel, noise and other impacts from these adjoining uses could not be adequately mitigated through buffer zones and landscaping to meet the needs of project senior residents. Because of the necessary height and bulk of buildings, the senior housing project would also be visually incompatible with existing character of the surrounding area. Implementation of this alternative would also require preparation and review of entirely new development plans, including the probable preparation of a new environmental impact report. Under current agreements between Stanford, the County of Santa Clara and the City the site would be annexed to the City prior to development, and the City would have primary approval authority over any such development proposal. The City Council cannot prejudge the ultimate decision on any such development proposal, and there are substantial reasons, discussed above, to believe that such a proposal would not ultimately be approved. Because there is already a substantial and immediate need for additional housing and for new senior care facilities in the City, the Council believes that the additional delay and uncertainty of implementation of this alternative further renders the alternative infeasible. This alternative would also not result in substantial environmental advantages over the approved project that are so substantial as to justify approval of this alternative instead of the proposed project, Development of the Quarry Road site would result in loss of existing open space, as well ,as trees which currently occupy the site, and would also result in substantial visual and land use impacts due to the change in character of the site. While relocation of the project to the Quarry Road site would also avoid some of the impacts associated with redevelopment of the former Children's Hospital site, the mitigation measures and conditions of approval adopted in conjunction with the approved project mitigate these same impacts to acceptable levels. The Council finds that given the loss of open space and visual and land use impacts which would result from development on the Quarry Road site, the redevelopment of the former Children's Hospital Site for the project will result in less environmental impacts overall than development at the Quarry Road site. No Housing Alternative The EIR also examined a "no -housing" alternative which would have consisted of approving 160,000 square feet of new commercial space for the Stanford Shopping Center and approving the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project while 53 970702 lac 0031588 s • denying approval for the proposed Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects. The primary purpose of this EIR alternative was to examine the effects on the area transportation system of approving only the proposed roadway improvements and proposed shopping center expansion elements of the Sand Hill Corridor projects. With respect to the Stanford West Senior Housing project, the Council finds that the alternative is infeasible for the reasons previously stated in reference to the No Project -No Development alternative. kQusing With Limited Shopping Center Development The RIR also examined a "housing with limited shopping center expansion" alternative consisting of (1) approval of the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing; (2) construction of 49,000 square feet of new Stanford Shopping Center space only; (3) without any of the roadway improvements proposed in the Sand Hill. Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project. The Council does not consider this alternative to be an alternative to the Stanford West Senior Housing project. This alternative was evaluated in the EIR to examine the effects on the area transportation system of approving only residential development and limited shopping expansion, without major area roadway improvements. This alternative is discussed in the findings relating to the Stanford Shopping Center project. 54 970702ic 003i3$8 • EXHIBIT D $TANIPORD SHOPPING CRNT$R MANSION PROJECT COUNCIL FINDINGS CONCERNING MITIGATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES The City Council of the City of Palo Alto ("Council") has read and considered the Final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project. The RIR has been prepared for five projects including the Stanford West Apartments, Stanford West Senior Housing, Stanford Shopping Center Expansion, Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements ( "SHRE/RRI") projects, referred to collectively herein as the "Sand Hill Corridor projects," and the Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation project. These projects are described in Chapter 3 of the EIR, and include, as approved by the Council, the changes and revisions described in Chapter 11 and in the "Final Summary of Project Changes" made a part cf the Final EIF, by the certifying resolution. Pursuant to Section 21061(a) of the Public Resources Code, the Council has considered each environmental impact of the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project identified in the EIR, and each of the mitigation measures and project alternatives evaluated in the EIR. The Council's detailed findings for each significant enviromeatal impact or potentially significant environmental impact identified in the EIR are set forth below. Each significant or potentially significant environmental impact identified in the EIR is listed in hold. Those mitigation measures adopted or partially adopted by the Council are also numbered in bold. The Council's reasons for rejection or partial rejection of certain mitigation measures and reasons for selection among alternative potential mitigation measures are described where appropriate, The Council's reasons for rejecting specific alternatives to the project identified in the EIR are stated in Part II of these findings. 1 970702 !sc 0031539 PART I CHANGES AND MITIGATION )L ASU'RES ADOPTED TO REDUCE IMPACTS 4.1 ANT) USE 4.1-5 Implementation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development within the Sand Hill Road Corridor, would result in a change in character in the area. The EIR concludes that there are no feasible mitigation measures available which will substantially reduce the identified significant land use impact and that this impact is therefore unavoidable. The approved Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project itself will have relatively little adverse effect on the existing character of the Sand Hill Corridor because the site is currently extensively developed. The conditions for approval of the project and other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects incorporate a number of mitigation measures which will lessen the overall severity of these impacts by reducing visual impacts, providing for replacement and restoration of trees and habitat affected by the project of trees, enhancing opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle travel in the corridor and mitigating potential noise impacts on residences along Sand Hill Road. The measures adopted in conjunction with approval of the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project are discussed in greater detail in the detailed findings set forth below regarding mitigation of visual, transportation, biological and noise impacts of the project. Changes have also been incorporated into the project, including relocation of proposed parking structures to the south side of the Stanford Shopping Center and reduction of the project to construction of 80,000 sq. ft. of commercial space which will further reduce the project's contribution to the identified cumulative land use impact. However, the Council recognizes that the cumulative effect of changes to the existing character of the Sand Hill corridor resulting from approval of the Stanford West Apartments, Stanford West Senior Housing and Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements projects concurrently with the project are significant. 4.2 VISUAL QUALITY/LIGHT AND GLARE 4.2-1 The proposed projects would result in major visual changes within the Sand Hill Road corridor for viewers traveling on Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-1(g), as modified by condition 2.g, requires that the density and frequency of street tree planting in the center medians and southern road edge of Sand Hill Road shall be extended to run continuously along the Sand Hill Road Extension, to achieve eventual canopy closure between trees. 2 970702 lac 0031589 Mitigation measure 4.2-1(1) provides that the Proposed Parking Structures shall be consolidated on the Quarry Road side of the Shopping Center to supply the same number of spaces. The Council finds that implementation of these measures will lessen the project's visual impacts within the Sand Hill Road corridor to a less than significant level. The adopted measures provide for relocation of the proposed parking structure to the Quarry Road side of the Stanford Shopping Center, thus r.xisplerely eliminating the visual impacts of this structure on views frcat Sand Hill Road. This change has been voluntarily incorporated into the project design by the applicant as discussed in Chapter 13 of the Final EIR, and is further implemented through conditions 2. 4, 5A, 11, and 13 of the project conditions of approval. The amount of new commercial development included in the project has also been reduced to 80,000 square feet, which will result in a commensurate reduction in the amount of parking. While some new construction will occur within view of Sand Hill Road, this development will be visually compatible with existing development on the site and is not of sufficient mass or proximity to Sand Hill Road to cause a significant adverse visual impact. Any remaining potential visual impact will be further offset by landscaping along the medians and southern edge of Sand Hill Road which will substantially screen the development from view, The relocation of the single new parking structure to Quarry road will also eliminate the need for implementation of mitigation measure 4.2-1(k). 4.2-4 Proposed new project features including four-story Senior Housing buildings, the proposed parking structure at Quarry Road, and various retail buildings along Arboretum Road would alter the character of the existing setting in the vicinity of Arboretum Road and Quarry Road, with potential adverse effects on viewers there and in the Shopping Center. Mitigation measure 4.2-4(a) requires that design guidelines or other mechanisms approved by the Palo Alto Architectural Review Board should be applied to help ensure compatibility of the new streetscape and avoid design incompatibilities among prominently placed proposed retail buildings on Arboretum Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-4(d) provides that existing landscaping removed for the widening of Quarry Road will be replaced with plantings of trees and shrubs of sufficient density and height to screen both the Hoover Pavilion parking lot and adjacent substation from casual view of travelers on Quarry Road. Conditions 4 and 5 of the project conditions approval impose further design requirements, including further review by the City's Architectural Review Board to reduce the visual length and potential monolithic quality. These conditions have been adopted in place of mitigation measures 4.2-4(b) and 4.2-4(c). Condition 4 requires that the new parking structure shall be limited to a maximum height of 24 feet 10 inches to the top of the railing, to accommodate approximately 1535 cars. The existing 3 970702 lac 0031389 • * parking structure at the corner of Quarry Road and Arboretum Road will remain. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's visual impacts on the Arboretum Road/Quarry Road area to a less than significant level. While the project will result in additional development in this area and addition of a large parking structure, these project elements are not incompatible with existing development in the area. Appropriate landscaping will be utilized to soften and screen views. The adopted mitigation measures will ensure that available architectural techniques are utilized to minimize visual impacts and achieve overall compatibility between new construction and existing development in the area. 4.2-8 Visual disturbance from construction of the proposed projects could have temporary adverse visual impacts. Mitigation measure 4.2-8 requires that on -site staging and storage of construction equipment and materials should be minimized to reduce visual disturbance during construction. Equipment and material storage that does occur on -site should be visually screened. Graded areas should be watered regularly to minimize fugitive dust. Construction should be staged and scheduled to minimize the duration of disturbance in each affected viewshed. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the adverse visual impact of project construction, but will not reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measure will limit the duration and visibility of construction equipment and grading activities on the site, but will not eliminate the significant visual impact necessarily associated with major construction activities on the site. This impact therefore remains significant. 4.2-9 The proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development in the Sand Hill Road Corridor, could adversely affect the visual character of the corridor for viewers traveling on Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-9 recommends that mitigation measures 4.2-1(a-1) be implemented for all the Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects. The project specific mitigation measures recommended in 4.2-9 for the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion have been adopted or effectively implemented by changes in the proposed project. The Council finds that adoption of these changes and mitigation measures will lessen the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts to the Sand Hill corridor to a less than significant level. The additional project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4.2-9 have been adopted, partially adopted, or rejected as stated in the findings for the 4 970702 lac 0031559 • ! Stanford West Apartments, Stanford West Senior Housing, and Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements projects. To the extent these measures have been adopted, they collectively will reduce but not eliminate the significant adverse cumulative visual impacts of the Sand Hill Corridor projects. This cumulative impact therefore remains significant. The Council recognizes that future development, to the extent allowed in the Sand Hill Corridor, will continue to add to the significant cumulative visual impacts associated with the approved projects. 4.2-12 The combined visual effect of proposed projects could adversely alter views within the El Camino Real viewahed. Mitigation measure 4.2-12 requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.2 -6(a -c). Mitigation measure 4.2-6(a) requires the applicant to prepare and implement design guidelines or controls for development of the retail structure at Quarry Road and El Camino Real to ensure compatibility with the area, subject to approval by the Palo Alto Architectural Review Board and Planning Commission. An alternative, which the Council has rejected, provides that the applicant may remove this structure from the site plan, relocating the square footage to other portions of the Shopping Center if feasible. Mitigation measure 4.2-6(b) requires the intersection of Quarry Road and El Camino Real to be redesigned to improve overall visual quality and pedestrian operations, including the following specific changes: (a) reduce the width and number of proposed lanes of El Camino Real; (b) include a minimum 10 -foot wide landscaped median and pedestrian refuge area in the center median of El Camino Real. Mitigation measure 4.2-6(c) provides that if mitigation measures 4.2-1(1), 4.2-5(b) and 4.2-6(b) are all adopted, the applicant shall be required to conduct a detailed study of traffic progression and traffic signal coordination on El Camino Road,and prepare a signal coordination plan. The plan shall encompass signalized intersections on El Camino Real from Embarcadero Road to the proposed Sand Hill Road extension and must demonstrate that northbound left -turn queues at both the Quarry/El Camino Real and Sand Hill Road/El Camino Real intersection will not obstruct northbound through lanes. Mitigation measure 4.2-6(d) requires that large evergreen shrubs or evergreen trees be incorporated in the final landscape plan along the north edge of Quarry Road and other areas near the corner of El Camino Real, in order to maintain some visual screening of the parking lot areas from the new intersection during winter months. 970702 lac 0031389 These measures will be implemented through the conditions of approval of the SHRE/RRI project and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project as appropriate. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts on the El Camino Real viewshed to a less than significant level and will also lessen the combined cumulative effect of the project and the SHRE/RRI project to a less than significant level. These measures provide for modifications to the proposed projects to diminish the extent of visual changes in the affected project area and for further design review and improvement to ensure compatibility with the existing visual character of the area. Mitigation measure 4.2-6(c) is designed to offset any adverse traffic impacts which will result from implementation of these measures. With respect to mitigation measure 4.2-6(a), the Planning Commission considered the alternative of eliminating the proposed retail building near Quarry Road and El Camino and recommended against this alternative. The Council also finds that relocation of this building is unnecessary and would defeat one of the design objectives of the Shopping Center expansion plans, specifically to provide an improved transition from the central shopping area of the Stanford Shopping Center to El Camino Real and adjoining portions of the City. The project conditions of approval implement the alternate form of mitigation proposed in mitigation measure 4.2-6(a). The Council finds that this measure will mitigate the adverse impact associated with the original design of the outlying building to a less than significant level. 4.2-13 The proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development, could generate light and glare from buildings and roadways that could have adverse effects on nearby residents and on -coming drivers along Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-13 provides that interior and exterior light sources associated with all of the approved Sand Hill Corridor projects shall be shielded or directed in such a manner as to prevent visibility of the light sources and to eliminate light spillover beyond the perimeter of the proposed project. Specific measures recommended in accordance with section 18.64.030 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code include the following: (a) Exterior light fixtures on the housing buildings should be mounted no higher than 15 feet at the rear of the buildings. (b) Lighting of the building exterior and parking lot should be of the lowest intensity and energy use adequate for its purpose. (c) Unnecessary continued illumination, such as illuminated signs, should be avoided. (d) Timing devices should be considered for exterior and interior lights in order to minimize light glare at night without jeopardizing security. 6 970702 he 0031589 The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the project's contribution to potential cumulative light and glare impacts to insignificance. The adopted mitigation measure will have the effect of eliminating substantial spillover of light from the project site and will therefore reduce any potential cumulative impact to insignificance. This measure has also been incorporated into the conditions of approval for other approved Sand Hill Corridor development projects and will therefore eliminate any potential significant cumulative effect by confining the impacts of each project to its own location. 4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES 4.3-1 Implementation of the proposed projects would result in damaging effects on important historic and/or prehistoric archaeological resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-I(g) provides that if previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered during construction, work shall cease in the immediate area until qualified archaeologists assess the significance of the resources and make mitigation recommendations e . g . , manual excavation of the immediate area), if warranted. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(h) requires the applicant and contractors to comply with the requirements of Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code if Native American burials or other possible Native American human remains are located during construction. This code section requires that a Native American Most Likely Descendant (determined in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission) be notified within 24 hours and appropriate provisions made for appropriate reburial. This and related sections of the Public Resources Code also provide that remains shall be protected from further construction work or vandalism. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(k) provides that project construction activities shall be subject to archaeological monitoring where ground disturbance will exceed 24 inches below existing grade. Monitoring may be conducted on an intermittent basis only where; in the opinion of the applicant's archaeologist and the City's archaeologist, soils are culturally sterile. Construction personnel shall be required to contact the applicant's archaeologist in the event that suspected cultural resources are uncovered in the absence of a monitor. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the project's potential impact on archaeological resources to a less than signific;;.nt ?evel. No significant archaeological resources are known to exist on the project site nor is there a high probability of encountering any such resources given the distance from San Francisquito Creek and developed nature of the site. The EIR nevertheless concluded that potentially significant impacts could occur if important archaeological resources were unexpectedly encountered on the site. The adopted 7 970702 lac 0031389 mitigation measures provide Eor monitoring of construction activities to ensure that any important archaeological resources encountered will be identified, protected and removed and preserved for further study in accordance with accepted scientific standards, ensuring no loss of scientific or historical value of the resources. The adopted measures also ensure that proper respect will be afforded any burials and any ether culturally important Native American remnants which might be impacted by the project. 4.3-6 The proposed projects, in conjunction with other cumulative development projects in the San Francieguito Creek drainage, could result in damage or destruction of important prehistoric and historic cultural resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-6 recommends that all planning jurisdictions within the San Francisquito Creek drainage implement cultural resource testing and data recovery measures, similar to those described in mitigation measure 4.3-1 for projects involving development of sensitive cultural resource sites. The Council has adopted the recom mended project -specific mitigation measures for Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project and all other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the project's potential contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level and will also lessen the cumulative impact of the Sand Hill Corridor projects collectively to a less than significant level, Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be considered in conjunction with any future projects within the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the reco3:mlended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impact from future projects on archaeological resources is presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative visual impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 8 970702 lac 0031389 4.4 TR. NSPQRTATIOW 4.4-7 Development of the proposed projects could degrade the level of service of study area intersections, and contribute to increased intersection delay. The EIR concluded that changes and increases in traffic patterns resulting from the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects collectively will result in significant adverse changes in traffic conditions at a total of seven area intersections, specifically: Arboretum Road/Galvez Street El Camino Real/Page Mill Road El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue Junipero Serra Blvd./Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue Middlefield Road/Willow Road Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue The approved Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project alone, however, would have significant adverse impacts on traffic levels at only four area intersections, specifically: - Arboretum Road/Galvez Street El Camino Real/Page Mill Road Middlefield Road/Willow Roud Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue The conditions of approval nevertheless require the applicant to contribute to all of the following mitigation measures. Arboretum Road/Galvez Street: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(a) requires the applicant to install a traffic signal or other appropriate traffic control device(s) at the intersection of Arboretum Road/Galvez Street, and pay the full cost of these improvements, This measure shall be implemented when the interse*tion satisfies appropriate signal warrants as determined by the Chief Transportation Official. In the event that the City and the applicant determine that use of a traffic circle or "roundabout" will provide for the same or better LOS and safety as a traffic signal, the traffic circle may be constructed at the applicant's expense instead of a traffic signals or other traditional traffic control device(s). El Camino Real/Page Mill Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(b) requires the applicant to contribute a fair share of the costs of the following planned improvements: Add a southbound right turn lane; Add a westbound right turn lane; Add a northbound right turn lane; and Extend the westbound left turn lane by 100 feet. 9 970702 Jac 0031589 • These measures should be implemented when the intersection approaches LOS F, as evaluated through periodic monitoring to be carried out by the applicant on behalf the City. Sand Hill Road/Santw Cruz Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(c) requires the applicant to pay a fair share of the costs of following improvements to the following improvements to the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection: Widen Sand Hill Road to add second eastbound left turn lane; Widen Sand Hill Road to add second westbound left turn lane; Modify signal phasing; Install an exclusive right turn lane on approach of Santa Cruz Avenue; and Provide dual left turn lanes on both the southbound Santa Cruz Avenue approaches. The applicant shall also pay the costs of installing an exclusive right turn lane on the northbound approach of Santa Cruz Avenue and providing dual left turn lanes on both the northbound and southbound Santa Cruz Avenue approaches. Conditions of approval 1.c and 12 for the SHRE/RRI project, as adopted by condition of approval 2.c for this project, provide that the applicant shall advance funds to pay the full costs of these improvements if the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, with respect to any improvements within that jurisdiction, enters into an agreement to reimburse the applicant for, costs in excess of its fair share. If no reimbursement agrement is adopted, the applicant shall pay its fair share (subject to limitations based on engineering cost estimates) based on traffic attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Implementation of this mitigation measure will not occur until approvals are obtained from the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo,' as applicable. the northbound northbound and Junkpero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(d) requires the applicant to pay a fair share of the costs of the following improvements to the Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection mandated by the Menlo Park General Plan or recommended in the EIR: Widen northbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane. Install an additional southbound left -turn lane. Conditions of approval l.c and 12 for the SHRE/RRI project, as adopted by condition of approval 2.c for this project, provide that 10 970702 lac 003150 the applicant shall advance funds to pay the full costs of these improvements if the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable, enters into an agreement to reimburse the applicant for costs in excess of its fair share. If no reimbursement agreement is adopted, the applicant shall pay its fair share (subject to limitations based on engineering cost estimates) based on traffic attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Implementation of this mitigation measure will not occur until approvals are obtained from the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable. Middlefield Avenue/Willow Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(e), as modified by Condition 2.d of the conditions of approval, requires the applicant to pay its fair share of the following improvements to the Middlefield Avenue/Willow Road mandated by the City of Menlo Park general plan or recommended in the EIR, when the City of Menlo Park determines to proceed with these improvements. Add a second southbound left turning lane. Restripe eastbound approach. Modify signal phasing. Including a leading left turn phase in the signal phasing for the north and south directions. The timing of these improvements will be determined by the City of Menlo Park, through periodic monitoring and/or through subsequent environmental impact analysis and documentation. Condition 2.d partially implements this mitigation measure by requiring that the applicant shall either make signal timing improvements sufficient to return traffic levels of service at this intersection to level of service D, or contribute its fair share of the costs to construct the recommended intersection improvements. This obligation would not be triggered until current level of service falls to E or worse. Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Junipero Serra Blvd./Alpine Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(h) provides that the applicant shall conduct an operational analysis of the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Alpine Road/Junipero Serra Boulevard intersections to identify the appropriate combination of roadway and traffic signal improvements necessary to improve operation to LOS D during peak hours, if feasible. The EIR also recommends the following mitigation measures be implemented to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts within the City of Menlo Park, but does not provide for direct participation by the applicant in implementation of these mitigation measures. El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(f) recommends that the following improvements to the El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue intersection be completed as prescribed in the City of Menlo Park's general plan: 11 970702 lac 0031519 Widen northbound approach to add third northbound through lane. Restripe southbound approach to add third southbound through lane. Widen westbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane. El CamijiQ Real/Val rAiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(g) recommends that the following improvements to the El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue intersection be completed as prescribed in the City of Menlo Park's general plan: Restripe northbound approach to add third northbound through lane. Restripe southbound approach to add third southbound through lane, Widen westbound approach tc add exclusive right turn lane. Final design shall Include provisions for bicycle traffic. In zddition, the EIR recommends that signal phasing at this intersection be modified to include apiit phasing in the east/west direction and a leading left turn phase in the north/sJuth direction. The Council finds that these adopted mitigation measures, if implemented, will lessen the project's impacts on traffic at the four significantly affected intersections to a less than significant level, and will also substantially lessen the impact of the project's contribution to cumulative traffic at other intersections significantly affected by the Sand Hill Corridor projects collectively. Mitigation measures 4.4 -7(a) -(e) require the applicant to pay all or a fair share of the costs of physical improvements necessary to enable each of these affected intersections to serve anticipated cumulative traffic demands at acceptable levels of service. Mitigation measure 4.4-7(h) also provides for identification of appropriate additional intersection improvements should the City of Menlo Park elect to achieve a higher level of service and the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Alpine Road/Junipero Serra Boulevard intersections. The Council recognizes that authority to approve the identified mitigation measures at three of the four intersections significantly affected by the project is vested in public agencies other than the City, specifically the City of Menlo Park (Sand Hill Road widening and related improvements in Menlo Park, mitigation measure 4.4-7(c), Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and mitigation measure 4.4-7(e), Middlefield Avenue/Willow Road); County of Santa Clara (mitigation measure 4.4-7(a), Arboretum Road/Galvez Street 12 970702 lac 0031589 • intersection); the and County of San Mateo (mitigation measure 4.4-7(c), Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection). Responsibility and authority for implementing the recommended mitigation measures at the additional intersections cumulatively impacted by the project is also vested in other public agencies, specifically the City of Menlo Park (mitigation measures 4.4-7(f), El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue, and 4.4-7(g), El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue) and 4.4-7(d), Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue). The Council finds that the identified mitigation measures can and should be approved and implemented by these agencies. However, the Council also recognizes that in the event that one or more of the recommended mitigation measures are not approved or implemented by the appropriate responsible agencies, the project will result in significant adverse impacts on the Arboretum Road/Galvez Street, Middlefield Road/Willow Road and/or Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection(s), and will contribute to significant impacts at other intersections cumulatively affected by the Sand Hill corridor projects. Because it cannot presently be determined if or when the appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented by the respective responsible agencies, these impacts are considered by the Council to be potentially significant, 4.4-8 Construction activities could lead to temporary disruption of transportation system operation, as well as to permanent damage to elements of the system such as pavement and bridges. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(a) requires the applicant to provide adequate off-street parking for all construction -related vehicles throughout the construction period. If adequate parking cannot be provided on the construction sites, a satellite parking area shall be designated, and a shuttle bus shall be operated to transfer construction workers to the job sites. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(b) provides that construction activities related to the project are prohibited from substantially limiting pedestrian access (e.g, by blocking pedestrian routes), without prior approval from the City of Palo Alto and/or Caltrans. Any approval shall require submittal and approval of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation measure 4-4.8(c) provides that the applicant shall be prohibited from limiting bicycle access (e.g. by blocking or restricting existing routes) while constructing the project, without prior approval from the City of Palo Alto and/or Caltrans or the City of Menlo Park (depending upon the jurisdiction of the requested action). Any approval will require submittal and approval of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(d) provides that the applicant shall be required to prohibit or limit the number of construction 13 970702 lac 0031589 material deliveries from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m., and from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(e) provides that the applicant shall be required to prohibit or limit the number of construction employees from arriving or departing the site from the hours of 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(f) requires that all construction -related equipment and materials shall be delivered and removed on truck routes designated by the cities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park. Heavy construction vehicles shall be prohibited from accessing the sites from other routes. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(g) requires the applicant to repair any structural damage to public roadways, returning any damaged sections to original structural condition. The effectiveness of this measure shall be guaranteed by requiring surveys of road conditions before and after construction. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(h) prohibits the applicant from limiting access to public transit (e.g. by relocating •or restricting access to bus stops or transfer facilities), and from limiting movement of public transit vehicles, without prior approval from the Santa Clara Transit Agency or other appropriate jurisdiction. Any approval will require submittal of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(I) provides that in lieu of mitigation measures 4.4-8(a) through (h), the project applicant may prepare detailed construction impact mitigation plans for approval by the City of Palo Alto Chief Transportation Official and City of Menlo Park Transportation Manager prior to commencing any construction activities with potential transportation impacts in their respective jurisdictions. The plan must address all aspects of construction traffic management necessary to eliminate or reduce transportation impacts to acceptable levels. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(j) requires the applicant to prepare and comply with a parking management plan approved by the Chief Transportation Official. The plan may not simply transfer the impact of temporary parking loss to adjacent surface streets, commercial districts, or residential neighborhoods, and must address specific measures identified in the EIR. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential construction phase traffic and transportation impacts to a less than significant level. These measures provide for comprehensive planning for construction traffic and establish standards, criteria and implementing measures which will ensure that significant interference with vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian and emergency vehicle access is avoided during all phases of construction. The adopted mitigation measures also require the applicant to offset parking demand created by loss of 14 970702 lac 0031589 shopping center parking spaces during construction phases by means which will not impact other parking facilities in the area. 4.S Lit 4.3-1 The Plan generated during the construction of the proposed projects could be hassful to nearby pollutant -sensitive land uses. Mitigation measure 4.5-1 requires the applicant to implement a construction phase program which includes the following measures to reduce generation of particulate matter on the project site during construction: - Water all active construction areas at least twice a day, or as needed to prevent visible dust plumes from blowing off -site. Use tarpaulins or other effective covers for on -site storage piles and for haul trucks on public streets. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas during construction. Sweep all paved access routes, parking areas, and staging areas daily (preferably with water sweepers). Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible amounts of soil material is carried onto public streets. If the working area of any construction site exceeds four acres at any one time, implement the following additional measures: Apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles. Limit construction site vehicle speed to 15 mph on unpaved areas. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. If the working area of any construction site is located near any sensitive receptors, implement the following measure in addition to those listed above: Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 25 mph. 15 910702 lac 0031389 The last mitigation would be applicable to the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion site where it approaches Ronald McDonald House and the Stanford University Medical Center. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the identified potential adverse construction phase impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of twice daily watering has been shown to reduce construction site PM10 emissions by at least 50 percent. This practice, in conjunction with the other listed measures, will reduce PM/0 emissions during construction to less than the BAAQMD threshold of significance for all anticipated construction activity. 4.5-2 ROG, NOe and PM,. emissions generated by motor vehicles and residential stationary sources associated with the proposed projects would exceed the 80 lbs/day threshold and could hinder regional and local attainment of State ozone and PM10 standards. Mitigation measure 4,5-2 (a) requires the City to implement mitigation measure 4.4-2 a), which provides final design for bicycle and pedestrian circulation within the Stanford West. Apartments and Senior Housing sites shall be reviewed to ensure tthe circulation system will function as a part of regional or inter -city bicycle and pedestrian connections, thereby promoting increased use of bicycles or pedestrian travel by area residents. The Council has required that the plans for those projects incorporate this mitigation measure. Mitigation measure 4.5-2 (b) requires the City to implement mitigation measure 4.4-2(d), which requires the applicant to provide a bicycle and pedestrian actuated crossing phase of El Camino Real north of the proposed Sand Hill Road intersection, promoting increased bicycles or pedestrian. accessibility of the shopping center. The EIR concludes that air pollution emissions from the project, resulting primarily from increased project -related vehicle traffic -- would be below the thresholds of significance for NOx, PM1© and ROG emissions recognized by the BAAQMD and utilized in the EIR. Due to continuing changes in automotive technology, further reductions are expected by the year 2010. The project therefore will not have a significant adverse effect on air quality. The EIR also concluded, however, that the project would contribute to significant air quality impacts from the Sand Hill Corridor projects collectively. The Council finds that this cumulative air quality impact is significant, despite adoption of the above identified mitigation measures. 4.5-4 Cumulative daily traffic along major roadways in the project and study areas would emit more NO,, and PlIk with the implementation of the Sand Hill Road Projects, but emissions of ROG would decrease. The EIR found that neither the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion nor any of the other Sand Hill Corridor projects will 16 970702 lac 003I3E9 • individually produce significant air quality impacts. However, the three Sand Hill Corridor development projects collectively will result in a significant cumulative increase of NOx and PM10 emissions of in the project area. The EIR did not identify any mitigation measures for this area -wide cumulative impact. Cumulative traffic -related air pollution emissions are regulated through means beyond the City's jurisdiction and control. Individual vehicle emissions and automotive fuels are subject to regulation only by state or federal government. Regional traffic levels are also heavily influenced by past and future planning and land use decisions over which the City has no control. The Council therefore finds that no additional feasible mitigation measures are presently available to the City to substantially lessen this cumulative impact due to increases in regional traffic, and because the legal authority and responsibility, if any, for feasible mitigation measures is vested in other agencies beyond the City's control. The identified cumulative impact is significant. 4.6 NOISE 4,6-1 The noise generated during the construction of the proposed pro#eats could be disruptive to nearby noise.. sensitive land uses. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(a) provides that construction activities will be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and if weekend work is necessary, to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturday, and to the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(b) provides that construction equipment shall be outfitted and maintained with noise reduction devices (i.e., mufflers, enclosures for stationary equipment, etc.) to obtain at least an average 10 dBA reduction shown feasible in Table 4.6-5. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(c) provides that stationary noise sources (e.g., compressors, concrete mixers, etc.) shall be located on portions of the sites furthest away from residential and other noise -sensitive areas, and that acoustic shielding shall be used with such equipment. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will substantially lessen construction phase noise impacts of the project, but will not reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. The adopted measures will reduce noise generated by construction activities and will eliminate construction noise during normal sleeping hours. However, significant noise impacts will remain due to inherent noise generated by large scale construction activity and heavy equipment. 17 970702 lac 0031589 4.6-3 Traffic generated by the proposed projects and other cumulative developments and the traffic accommodated by the proposed roadway improvements would impact existing and proposed residential and other sensitive land uses adjacent to roadways in the project and study areas. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(b) requires the applicant to construct a landscaped buffer strip with at least a 3 -foot -high berm along Sand Hill Road between Stanford Avenue and Oak Avenue in conjunction with implementation of the Sand Hill Road widening and realignment between Santa Cruz and Oak Avenues. Mitigation measure 4.6 construct a soundwall 6 feet Avenue and Stanford Avenue in the Sand Hill Road widening to at the nearby intersection. -3(c) requires the applicant to high or higher between Santa Cruz conjunction with implementation of reduce noise from traffic increases Mitigation measure 4.6-3(d), as modified by Condition 2.e o the project conditions of approval, requires the applicant t monitor noise increases in residences in the designated areas aid Sand Hill Road where the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects may b responsible for more than 50% of potential increases i traffic -related noise. If noise increases are detected, th applicant shall be responsible for the costs of measures such a additional insulation, double -glazed windows, or individua soundwalls as determined necessary by acoustic study to retur interior noise levels in these residences to pre -project levels o to 45 dBa. Residents may also contribute any further fund necessary to further reduce interior noise levels to acceptabl levels. f 0 g e n e 9 1 n r 8 Ea. Council finds that these mitigation measures, if implemented, will substantially lessen significant cumulative traffic -related noise impacts along the Sand Hill Road corridor although these measures will not necessarily reduce cumulative noise impacts to a less than significant level for every residence affected by the project. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(d) provides for a fair share contribution by the applicant to the costs of physically upgrading affected residences with noise mitigation measures. Mitigation measures 4.6-3(b) and 4.6-3(c) provide for construction of physical barriers to reduce noise to acceptable levels at protected residences. The adopted mitigation measure 4.3-6(d) will impose responsibility for necessary monitoring of actual noise increases on the applicant and also imposes responsibility on the applicant to pay a share of actual mitigation costs in proportion to the applicant's responsibility for these impacts where the Sand Hill Corridor projects are the predominant cause of cumulative traffic -related noise impacts. The Council does not believe that the applicant can or equitably should be held responsible for more than a fair share of the costs of mitigating these potential cumulative noise impacts. Revisions made by the City to mitigation measure 4.3-6(d) are intended to strengthen the measure by fixing responsibility for noise monitoring on the applicant, and to also amend the measure to provide that the 18 970702 lac 0031389 • applicant shall be financially responsible only for a fair share of the costs of implementing the mitigation measure. The Council recognizes that mitigation measure 4.6-3(d), as adopted, will not result in lessening of cumulative noise impacts at locations at which less than 50% of the cumulative traffic -related noise increase is attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council also recognizes that since implementation of mitigation measure 4.6-3(d) also requires the cooperation of affected homeowners, the physical improvements necessary to reduce noise levels at some affected residences to acceptable levels may not be constructed by choice of the owner. The Council therefore recognizes that notwithstanding adoption of the identified mitigation measures, cumulative traffic -related noise impacts may remain significant for some residences affected by the projects. With respect to mitigation measures 4.6-3(b) and 4.6-3(c), which will mitigate noise impacts on certain residences in Menlo Park, the Council further recognizes that although the conditions of approval require the applicant to accept responsibility for implementation of these mitigation measures, approval for implementation of these measures must be obtained from the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that implementation of these mitigation measures can and should be approved by the City of Menlo Park. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that approval for implementation of these measures is not obtained from Menlo Park, affected residences in Menlo Park would experience significant cumulative traffic -related noise impacts due to increased cumulative traffic on Sand Hill Road, 4,7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 4.7-1 Implementation of the proposed projects would result in loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(a) requires that Native trees removed for the projects shall be replaced at a ratio of 3:'1 on a per acre basis by the same species from locally collected stock, and provides for additional replanting if survival rates fall below 80 percent. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(b) requires that non-native landscape trees removed for the projects be replaced cn a two -to -one basis. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(c) provides that the City shall contract with an independent arborist to (a) review plans to provide for maximum retention of trees and necessary additional tree protection measures; b) monitor project construction ; and c) recommend changes in the tree removal plan as necessary during construction. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(e) requires that all trees adjacent to project construction areas which are not removed will be avoided and protected according to specified procedures incorporated into all construction and/or demolition contracts. 19 970702 lac 0031589 • The Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project will not result in loss of any native trees. The extensive removal of existing landscape trees is nevertheless considered a significant impact. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended mitigation measures will lessen the project's long and intermediate term impacts on trees to less than significant levels, and will substantially lessen but will not avoid significant adverse short term impacts (0-10 years). The adopted measures for retention and protection of existing trees to the extent possible during project construction and replacement of all trees removed as a result of the project at a greater than 1-1 ratio. These mitigation measures will therefore result in replacement of all trees lost. However, because it will take a number of years before replacement trees reach a level of maturity similar to those being removed, the project will result in a significant short-term impact on the quality of trees and related habitat value in the project area . 4.7-8 Ongoing operation of the proposed projects could adversely affect aquatic life, including sensitive animal species, in San Francisquito Creek, by increasing runoff and non -point source urban pollutant loads. Mitigation measure 4.7-8(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9 -1(a) - (c) , discussed below. Mitigation measure 4.7-8(b) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-4(a) and (b), discussed below. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the project's potential runoff and pollution impact on aquatic life in San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures require preparation and implementation of construction phase and post -construction storm water runoff management plans which will incorporate recognized best management practices to minimize siltation and runoff of contaminants from the project areas. Residual silt'and contaminant runoff reaching San Francisquito Creek, if any, will not constitute a sufficient addition to loads from existing development in the watershed to result in any measurable further deterioration of water quality conditions. 4.7-10 Implementation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with other proposed projects in the area would result in incremental loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-10(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7-1(a, b, c, and e), discussed above, for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. Mitigation measure 4.7-10(c) recommends that all planning jurisdictions in the project area, implement their respective tree protection and preservation ordinances. For those jurisdictions without such an ordinance, measures similar to those presented in mitigation measure 4.7-1 should be implemented on a project -by -project basis. 20 970702 lac 0031589 • • The conditions of approval for the project incorporate each of the project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4.7-10(a). The applicable recommended project -specific mitigation measures have also been adopted in the conditions of approval for each of the Sand Hill Corridor projects approved concurrently with the project. The Council finds that adoption of these project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption and implementation of these measures in conjunction with the other Sand Hill Corridor projects will reduce the combined cumulative impact of these projects to a less than significant level. These measures generally provide for full replacement of trees lost due to implementation of the project, thus eliminating any significant cumulative impact. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the proiect; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects within the City or annexed to the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within, the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and. should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of potential cumulative loss of trees and related habitat from future projects is presently entirely speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative visual impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.7-15 Ongoing operation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with similar projects within the same watershed, could cause cumulative adverse affects on aquatic life, including sensitive animal species, in San Francisquito Creek, by increasing runoff and non -point source urban pollutant loads. Mitigation measure 4.7-15 requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9 -7(a) -(c) for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. The conditions of approval for the project incorporate each of the applicable project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measures 4.9 -7(a) -(c). The Council has also adopted the recommended project -specific mitigation measures as conditions of approval for the other Sand Hill Corridor projects approved concurrently with the project. The Council finds that adoption of these project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption and implementation of these mitigation 21 970702 lac 0031$139 • measures in conjunction with the other Sand Hill Corridor projects will also reduce the combined cumulative impact of the projects to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures generally provide for preparation and compliance with detailed Storm Water Pollutant Prevention Plans which will include specific measures to prevent excessive sediment or pollution runoff which might result in significant adverse effects on aquatic life or habitat values in San Francisquito Creek. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects within the City or annexed to the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development beyond the City's boundaries, jurisdiction and responsibility for adoption of recommended measures is vested in other public agencies. The Council finds that these agencies can and should implement these measures. Because the nature and extent of the potential cumulative impact from future projects is presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this. time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative impact resulting from increased runoff of sediment and pollutants into San Francisquito Creek. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.8 GEOLOGY. SOILS AND $SEISMICITY 4.8-1 Expansive or weak soils could damage foundations by providing inadequate support. Mitigation measure 4.8-1(a) requires site specific soil suitability analysis be conducted and soil stabilization procedures and foundation design criteria be adopted in accordance with engineering criteria where the existence of expansive 'and compressible soil conditions is known or suspected. Mitigation measure 4.8-1(b) requires participation by the project's registered soil engineer as deemed necessary to oversee, verify, and report on soil engineering procedures and results. The EIR concludes that soil conditions encountered during construction could, but will not necessarily, create a risk of inadequate support for new construction associated with the project. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the potential impact of potentially expansive or weak soils to a less than significant level. These measures implement standard engineering procedures and safeguards for ensuring safe construction of new structures. 22 970702 Iac0031589 4.8-2 The Stanford Sand Rill Road Corridor Projects area is subject to very strong seismically induced groundshaking which could threaten life and damage property. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(a) requires documented site -specific seismic -restraint criteria to be incorporated in the design of foundations and structures of the project which meet the minimum seismic -resistant design standards of CUBC Seismic Zone 4. Add4.tional seismic -resistant earthwork and construction design criteria will be incorporated in the project where recommended by qualified experts. Roads, foundations and underground utilities in fill or alluvium shall be designed to accommodate settlement or compaction produced by seismic forces. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(b) requires on -site participation by the project's registered geological or geotechnical engineering consultant, as deemed appropriate, to oversee, verify, and report on seismic -restraint procedures and results. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(c) requires that an engineering geologist be contracted for third party review of all geologic, soils and engineering reports prepared for the proposed projects. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the impact of exposure to seismic events to a. less than significant level. These measures implement standard engineering procedures and criteria for preventing major building failures and resulting injury or loss of life from any seismic event reasonably anticipated to occur in the project area. 4.8-4 Implementation of any combination of the projects, in conjunction with cumulative development within San Mateo and Santa Clara counties and the cities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park, would increase the number of people and structures subject to strong seismic groundshaking and the subsequent risk of injury, loss of life and property damage. Mitigation measure 4.8-4(a) recommends that documented site -specific seismic -restraint criteria to be incorporated in the design of foundations and structures in the projects area, including the following (1) minimum seismic -resistant design standards shall conform to the CUBC Seismic Zone 4 Standards; (2) additional seismic -resistant earthwork and construction design criteria shall be incorporated as necessary, based on the site -specific engineering recommendations; (3) site preparation shall be supervised by geological or geotechnical consultants; (4) "as built" maps and a report shall be filed with the City, showing details of the site geology, the location and type of seismic -restraint facilities, and documenting satisfactory seismic performance for buildings, roads, foundations and underground utilities. Mitigation measure 4.8-4(b) recommends requiring on -site oversight, verification and reporting by registered geological or 23 970702 lac 0031589 geotechnical engineering consultants where deemed appropriate by the City's Chief Building Official. The conditions of approval for the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project and for each of the other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects incorporate measures equivalent to the project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4.8-4(a). The Council finds that adoption of these project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impact to a less than significant level, and will also lessen the combined cumulative impact of the Sand Hill Corridor projects to a less than significant level. The adopted project -specific measures generally provide for incorporation of adequate seismic safety measures into all new construction as provided by mitigation measures 4.8 -2(a) -(c). Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects approved by the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that these agencies can and should implement such measures. Because the recommended mitigation measures rely in part upon compliance with existing seismic safety practices and standards, it is expected that other jurisdictions will implement the measures to a large extent. However, because the extent of the potential cumulative impact from future projects is presently unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures beyond current minimum standards is uncertain, the Council cannot fully determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures, will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen the potential cumulative impact associated with increased development in the seismically sensitive region around the projects. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 4.9-1 Grading, excavation and construction activities could result in increased deposition of sediment and/or discharge of pollutants in the storm drainage system and San Francisquito Creek and adversely affect water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-1(a) requires the applicant to prepare, retain and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which describes the site, erosion and sediment controls, means of material storage and waste disposal, implementation of approved local plans, post -construction control measures and maintenance responsibilities, and non -storm water management 24 970702 lac 0031389 controls. The plan shall implement appropriate Best Management Practices ("BMPs") identified in the EIR Mitigation measure 4.9-1(b) requires that the SWPPP shall be prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the City's Director of Public Works prior to issuance of a building permit. The SWPPP shall be implemented and inspected as part of the approval process for the grading plans for each project. Mitigation measure 4.9-1(c) requires that all construction contracts include the City's construction contract Pollution Prevention Language as part of the project specifications. Because the project site is already largely paved and developed, the potential impact of the project is small. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential sedimentation and contaminant impacts on San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures implement regulatory requirements and practices demonstrated to prevent excessive or damaging runoff of sediments and pollutants from development sites. Residual runoff of sediments and contaminants from construction areas, if any, will not occur in sufficient quantities to significantly degrade existing water quality. 4.9-4 Increased impervious surface and landscaping associated with development of the Proposed Projects could increase urban contaminants in surface runoff potentially reducing water quality in San Francisquito Creek. Mitigation measure 4.9-4(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-1(a) through (c) for all approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. Mitigation measure 4.9-4(b) requires that the SWPPP shall include in the final project design appropriate BMPs selected by the City, consisting either of detailed measures identified in the EIR or equivalent measures. Since the project site is already largely paved and developed, the impact is likely to be small. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended measures will in any event lessen the project's potential impact on San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures require implementation of design features and operational practices which will reduce contamination of exposed surfaces at the project site and trap or otherwise minimize runoff of such contaminants from the site. Residual contaminant runoff reaching San Francisquito Creek is not expected to constitute a sufficient addition to loads from existing development in the watershed to result in any measurable further deterioration of water quality. 9707021 at 0031589 25 • • 4.9-S Project construction activities in combination with other construction projects in the Watershed could cumulatively increase sediment and other construction -related pollutants in San lrancisquito Creek and adversely affect water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(a) recommends that all area jurisdictions ensure that project applicants include BMPs in construction contracts implementing the requirements of NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit #CAS0297? 8 . Mitigation measure 4.9-5(b) recommends that applicants for all area projects of five acres or more, be required to prepare a detailed SWPPP under the State General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(c) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-1(a) through (c) for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. The recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures have been incorporated in the conditions of approval for the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project. The Council finds that adoption of these project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to potential cumulative sedimentation and contaminant impacts associated with construction to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City's jurisuiction is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that the City can and should require implementation of the recommended measures at the time future development projects are proposed. With respect to implementation of the recommended mitigation measures by jurisdictions other than the City, the Council finds that implementation of such measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the recommended measures can and should be implemented by these agencies to the extent feasible. These measures are generally consistent with requirements imposed by state law. However, because the nature and extent of potential area -wide cumulative impacts from future development are presently unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative effects. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the Council. 26 970702 Ise 0031589 4.9-7 Increased impervious surface associated with development of the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects and areas in the San Francisquito Creek Watershed could cumulatively increase urban conta'4nants in surface runoff potentially reducing water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(a) recommends that all local jurisdictions ensure that future project applicants include BMPs as part of project design in accordance with San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB) requirements. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(b) notes that it is within the jurisdiction of the SFBRWQCB to require that comprehensive SWPPPs and monitoring programs be implemented by all storm water dischargers associated with specified industrial activities, in compliance with the State's General Permits, and to require that such plans shall include BMPs or equally effective measures. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(c) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-4(a and (b) by all approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The conditions of approval for the project incorporate each.of the recommended project -specific mitigation measures or equivalent measures to mitigate identified potential cumulative contaminant impacts to San Francisquito Creek, The Council finds that adoption of these recommended measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impact to a less than significant level. The recommended mitigation measures have also been adopted in connection with approval of the other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects, and will lessen the combined cumulative impact of the projects to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures for future development in the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project. However, the Council finds that the City can and should adopt equivalent measures for all future projects approved within its jurisdiction. With respect to impacts resulting from future development outside the City, jurisdiction and responsibility for implementation of recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures is vested in other public agencies. The Council finds that these jurisdictions can and should implement such measures. However, because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impacts from future development is currently unknown, and the degree to which other jurisdictions will implement recommended mitigation measures is uncertain, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented outside the City's boundaries and also cannot determine the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid the identified potential cumulative impact. This cumulative impact therefore remains potentially significant. 27 9707021st 0031559 4.10. PUBLIC SAFETY 4.10-1 Implementation of the proposed projects could expose construction workers to unidentified existing soil and/or groundwater contaminants at levels which could cause illness. Mitigation measure 4.10-1(b) requires that prior to project construction, a site assessment shall be performed to confirm whether there are any hazardous materials contamination at the northeast corner of the Quarry and Arboretum intersection from any underground tanks on the site. Mitigation measure 4.10-1(c) requires that if investigation reveals evidence of chemical contamination, underground storage tanks, or other environmental impairments on the site, a remediation plan shall be prepared which will (1) specify measures to protect workers and the public; and (2) ensure clean up and disposal of contaminants and protect public health in accordance with federal, state, and local requirements. Work in the areas of potential hazard shall not proceed until the site remediation plan has been implemented. Appropriate agencies shall be notified as required. A site health and safety plan shall also be developed and implemented in compliance with OSHA requirements to ensure worker safety. The FIR concluded that although no known deposits or residues of unsafe contaminants exist on or adjacent to the project site, several underground tanks associated with old gas stations formerly located on corners of the property are known to have existed. Testing of these tanks and surrounding soils had not been completed at the time of preparation of the Final FIR, and the EIR therefore concluded that a potential existed for significant impacts related to hazardous substances associated with these tanks. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measures will reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level by ensuring that the site is fully investigated and evaluated for the possible presence of harmful substances, and adequate remediation efforts undertaken if contaminants are detected in amounts which might pose and danger to workers or passers-by on the site. 4.10-2 Implementation of the proposed projects could expose construction workers to asbestos containing materials presently located in buildings and other structures, resulting in adverse health effects. Mitigation measure 4.10-2(a) requires that prior to building renovation, an asbestos survey shall be performed by a licensed asbestos abatement contractor on all building areas anticipated to be renovated during project construction. Mitigation measure 4.10-2(b) requires that all asbestos containing materials shall be removed and appropriately disposed of by a licensed asbestos abatement contractor prior to any building demolition. A site health and safety plan will be developed and 28 970702 lac 0031589 implemented in compliance with OSHA requirements to ensure worker safety. The EIR concluded that workers could potentially encounter asbestos -containing materials during renovation work on some existing buildings on the project site. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level by requiring that all buildings scheduled for renovation be surveyed for asbestos containing materials prior to renovation, that any materials located be removed by qualified personnel using accepted safe practices, and that any residual potential impacts be addressed through appropriate safety measures incorporated into a health and safety plan for project workers. 4.10-4 Implementation of the proposed projects could expose construction workers to electrical transformers and/or fluorescent light ballasts potentially containing PCBs, and subsequent adverse health effects. Mitigation measure 4.10-4(b) provides that if the removal or relocation of any existing transformers is required, the applicant shall confirm whether or not it contains PCBs. If the transformer contains PCBs, it shall be removed and disposed of appropriately. Mitigation measure 4.10-4(d) requires that the need for removal, relocation or demolition of existing fluorescent light ballasts will be determined prior to project implementation. Any fluorescent lights affected by project shall be inspected to determine the potential presence of PCBs, and any lights containing PCBs removed and appropriately disposed of by a licensed hazardous waste hauler per Title 22 requirements. Mitigation measure 4.10-4(e) requires that a site health and safety plan be developed in compliance with OSHA requirements to ensure worker safety prior to commencing removal and disposal of PCB -laden materials. The EIR concluded that electrical transformers and florescent light fixtures on the property could contain PCBs which could have a significant impacts on construction workers if accidentally released during demolition activities. The Council finds that the adopted mitigations measures will lessen this potentially significant impact to a less than significant level by providing for testing and safe removal of all transformers and florescent fixtures containing PCBs prior to commencement of renovation and construction activities. 4.11 UTILITIES, ENERGY, AND INFRASTRUCTURE 4.11-3 The proposed projects could use water wastefully. Mitigation measure 4.11-3 requires that in order to reduce water consumption, the project design shall incorporate measures to 29 970702 lac 0031589 maximize the efficient use of water and minimize total water consumption. Specific measures to be included are the following: All landscape designs shall incorporate and address the City Landscape Water Efficiency Standards. The project sites would be subject to an annual maximum water allowance for landscaping. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department, Resource Management Division to determine other conservation related improvements that would apply to the projects. The EIR concluded that because final plans have not been completed by the applicant specifying how water, particularly for landscaping, would be efficiently used, there existed a potential that water could be used wastefully by the project. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen this potentially significant impact to insignificance by ensuring that final landscaping and construction plans meet current City Water Efficiency Standards and incorporate additional conservation measures if recoliaLtended by City staff. 4.11-4 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing water services. Mitigation measure 4.11-4 provides that prior to the start of construction of infrastructure, the project applicant shall provide a plan for review and approval to the City of Palo Alto Director of Utilities outlining the approach to be taken to minimize the impact to existing utilities and customers. The EIR determined that connection of infrastructure associated with the project to existing service lines and facilities could result in potentially significant interruptions of utility services for existing users, specifically interruptions of water service (Impact 4-11-4), wastewater service (Impact 4-11-11), electrical service (Impact 4-11-17) and gas service (Impact 4-11-24.) The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen each of these potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level by requiring the applicant to submit and obtain approval of plans which will provide for completion of all utility connections for the project with the minimum necessary interruption of existing services. 4.11-7 Cumulative development could use water wastefully. Mitigation measure 4.11-7 provides that the City shall ensure that each new project approved within the City requiring ARB approval is required to be consistent with and implement the City policies and programs related to water conservation. The EIR concluded that existing City policies and programs are adequate to avoid cumulative wasteful use of water, and that a significant adverse impact had the potential to occur only if the 30 970702 lac 003 on • • City failed to continue to implement these policies and programs. The adopted mitigation measure provides that the City will continue to implement existing water conservation policies by making compliance a condition of ARB approval for all new projects. The Council finds that this mitigation measure will lessen the potwntially significant cumulative impacts to insignificance. 4.11-9 The proposed projects would require improvement of the existing 21 -inch wastewater line. Mitigation measure 4.11-9 requires that in the event that open -trench technology is used, the project applicant shall ensure that the new 24 -inch wastewater line is constructed coincident with, and placed in the right-of-way of, Palo Road, during Phase I of project construction, thereby avoiding potential biological impacts and conflicts with future uses associated with the alternative location of the line. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen. the potential significant adverse impacts associated with construction of a new 21" wastewater line to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure requires the applicant to either use technology which avoids trenching and resulting tree removal in the Stanford Arboretum, or to relocate the route of the replacement pipeline along existing right-of-way containing no significant environmental resources in order to avoid impacts to the Arboretum. 4.11-10 The proposed projects would generate additional wastewater flows that could exceed the capacity of the existing 27 -inch wastewater line. Mitigation measure 4.11-10(a) provides that if the proposed project is developed prior to the Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF) project, the project applicant shall perform flow metering and a capacity study of the 27 -inch wastewater line, and shall be responsible for the costs of the improvement associated with the projects. All aspects of construction within the railroad right-of-way shall meet Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (PCJPB) requirements and shall be approved by PCJPB. Mitigation measure 4.11-10(b) provides that if the PAMF project is developed prior to the proposed projects, the project applicant shall coordinate with the Palo Alto Utilities Department and the PAMF project engineers to ensure that the proposed downstream 27 -inch wastewater line is enlarged with adequate capacity for the proposed Stanford West housing and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion projects. The SIR concluded that the project, in conjunction with the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion and proposed PAMF expansion project, would likely result in cumulative wastewater flows which exceed the capacity of the existing 27" wastewater line serving these projects. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen this potential impact to 31 970701 lac 0031559 insignificance by requiring the applicant to bear the costs of all improvements determined necessary to provide adequate wastewater line capacity for all three projects, and that all improvements within the railroad right-of-way crossed by the pipeline be constructed with the approval of the PCJPB, which maintains the rail lines. 4.11-11 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing wastewater services. Mitigation measure 4.11-11 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4, discussed above. See findings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 4.11-13 Cumulative development could require major infrastructure improvements to the existing wastewater system. Mitigation measure 4.1.1-13(a) recommends that the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department ensure that developers responsible for construction of new wastewater lines coordinate with all other parties intending to utilize the line. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(b) recommends that sewer line capacity studies satisfactory to the City's Director of Utilities be conducted prior to initiating future cumulative development. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(c) recommends that all final designs for the sizing of new sewer, mains shall be based on infiltration from a 20 -year storm and peak base wastewater flow. The EIR concluded that lack of coordinated planning for future development could result in failure to adequately size area wastewater lines, resulting in future need to again upgrade these lines to provide needed capacity. The recommended mitigation measures provide for full evaluation and correct sizing of mains prior to cumulative development. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's contribution to this potential cumulative impact to a less -than significant level. These mitigation measures will also lessen the overall potential cumulative impact to a less than significant level since implementation of these measures will result in provision of adequate long-term capacity for all reasonably foreseeable development. 4.11-17 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing electrical services. Mitigation measure 4.11-17 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4 for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. See ..indings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 32 970702 lac 0031589 4.11-24 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing gas services. Mitigation measure 4.11-24 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4 for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. See findings re mitigation measure 4.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND SCHOOLS 4.12-3 Increased traffic due to projects could reduce Palo Alto F times, especially during special peak commute hours, and seasonal known to increase significantly. Mitigation measure 4.12-3(a) project approval, the project construction vehicle management pi 4.11-4. the construction of the proposed ire Department (PiPD) response events on the Stanford Campus, holidays, when traffic flow is requires that as a condition of applicant shall prepare a an that: Uses established truck routes for large construction vehicles; Includes an approved construction plan, including scheduling, routes and methods, to minimize construction impacts during peak annual traffic periods (e.g., special events at Stanford University, holiday seasons, etc.). Ensures that Sand Hill Road will remain open at all times in each direction to allow direct access to the Stanford University Medical Center from both directions. Mitigation measure 4.12-3(b) requires the applicant to prepare and comply with an emergency response plan that specifies alternate emergency response routes to the project sites and vicinity which meet the PAFD and Palo Alto Police Department (PAPD) response time goals. The Plan shall keep one lane in each direction of Sand Hill Road open at all times. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's construction -phase impact on emergency response times to a less than significant level.. The measure provides for detailed planning which will ensure that adequate alternate response routes and a minimum of one open lane on Sand Hill Road are maintained at all times during to construction for emergency traffic. 4.12-4 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of fire suppression service calls to the PAFD. Mitigation measure 4.12-4 identifies three alternative means for offsetting cumulative increased demands on Palo Alto Fire Department resources. The conditions of approval for the project adopt the third of these alternate means, specifically: 33 970701 lac 0031589 The City will provide additional resources to the PAFD through the City's General Fund from the increased tax revenues generated by the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other future cumulative projects. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the identified cumulative impact on fire suppression services to a less than significant level for each of the Sand Hill Corridor projects and future development. Cost and revenue projections for the approved projects indicate that increased tax revenues from the projects and other potential future development will be more than adequate to fund additional resources for the PAFD necessary to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased PAFD resources identified in EIR mitigation measure 4.12-4, specifically (1) fair share applicant funding of new PAFD personnel, and (2) fair -share contributions from future projects, are not necessary based on current information to maintain adequate fire protection within the City and would result in imposing unnecessary special additional costs on new development. 4.12-5 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of medical emergency service calls to the PAFD. Mitigation measure 4.12-5 provides that future cumulative projects could pay fair share toward a medi-van unit; or, alternately, the City could provide additional medi-van resources to the PAFD with general fund increases from tax revenues generated by the projects and other future cumulative projects. The Council has adopted the second of these mitigation alternatives for the Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen the identified potential cumulative impact on emergency_ medical services to a less than significant level. Cost and revenue projections indicate that increased tax revenues from the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other potential future development will be adequate to fund additional emergency medical resources as needed to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased emergency medical services identified in EIR mitigation measure 4.12-5, specifically that future development projects directly pay a fair share toward a medi-van unit or, is not necessary to maintain adequate level of emergency medical services based on current information. 4.12-6 Increased construction traffic from cumulative development could reduce PAFD response times. Mitigation measure 4.12-6 provides that as part of the project approval process, the City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment shall ensure the following: All projects coordinate with the PAL) and PAPD to prepare an emergency response plan for the construction period 9707021st 0031 S$4 34 that specifies alternate emergency response routes to the project site and vicinity which meet the Departments' response time goals; and The Emergency Response Plan for all Sand Hill Corridor projects will specify procedures to allow simultaneous construction without increasing emergency response times to an unacceptable level. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's potential impact on PAFD emergency response times to a less than significant level. This measure ensures that detailed plans will be developed and implemented to ensure that existing or adequate alternative response routes will be kept open at all times to permit PAFD responses to all service areas within PAFD response time standards. 4.12-9 Increased traffic due to the construction of the proposed projects could increase police response times, especially during special events on the Stanford Campus, peak commute hours, and seasonal holidays, when traffic flow is known to increase significantly. Mitigation measure 4.12-9 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.12-3 (b) . The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's construction -phase impact on emergency response times to a less than significant level. Mitigation measure 4.12-3(b) provides for detailed planning which will ensure that adequate alternate response routes for emergency traffic are maintained at all times during to construction. 4.12-10 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of police service calls to the PAPD. Mitigation measure 4.12-10 provides that one of the following measures shall be implemented to offset increased demand on Palo Alto Police Department resources, The project applicant shall provide fair share funding for additional PAPD personnel; - The City shall require fair -share contributions from all future projects placing increased demand on the PAPD; or The City could fund additional PAPD resources from increased tax revenues generated by the projects and other future cumulative projects. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the potential cumulative impact of the project and of new development generally on police services to a less than significant level. Cost and revenue projections indicate that increased tax revenues from the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other potential 35 970702 lac 0031589 • future development will be adequate to fund additional emergency medical resources as needed to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased emergency medical services identified in ° SIR mitigation measure 4.12-5, specifically that future development projects directly pay a fair share toward a medi-van unit or, is not necessary to maintain adequate level of emergency medical services based on current information_ 4.12-11 Designs of cumulative development projects could present security risks to occupants and police patrol personnel. Mitigation measure 4.12-11 recommends that the City Department of Planning and Community Environment ensure that future project lighting and landscaping are reviewed with the PAPD to eliminate safety risks. The ARE shall provide final review and approval. The Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project will not contribute to any cumulative security risk for citizens or police officers. Adoption of this mitigation measure as a policy governing review and approval of all future development within the City is beyond the scope of the decision and approvals granted for the project. However, the Council finds that the recommended mitigation measure can and should be implemented in relation to future development projects involving potential security problems within the City. 4.12-12 Increased construction traffic from cumulative development could increase PAPD response times. Mitigation measure 4.12-12 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.12-6 by all approved Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects. This mitigation measure has been implemented by adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-6 for the each of the approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that implementation of mitigation measure 4.12-6 will lessen the cumulative impact of construction of the projects on PAPD response times to a less than significant level. 4.12-14 Cumulative development, including the proposed Stanford West Apartments Project, would cause R -12th grade enrollments to exceed PAUSD school capacity of 916 students or 12 percent in year 2004-2005. The EIR proposed the adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-14 to mitigate this identified cumulative impact, Mitigation measure 4.12-14 recommends that the City adopt a policy that encourages all future developers to contribute their fair share over and above payment of the development fee to mitigate school impacts. The Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project will not have any significant impact on school enrollments. Adoption of a City policy of encouraging future developers to contribute school 36 970702 lac 00315E9 mitigation funds in excess of mandatory development fees is beyond the scope of approvals for the project. However, the Council recognizes that cumulative impacts on public schools from other future development are potentially 'significant, and further finds that these impacts would remain potentially significant whether or not the suggested mitigation measure is adopted as a policy of the City since contributions by developers would remain voluntary regardless of City encouragement. The Council has taken substantial steps to encourage the project applicant to discuss and fund mutually acceptable mitigation measures with affected school districts in relation to the Stanford West Apartments project, and can and will continue to take similar steps to encourage voluntary additional contributions by developers of future projects with the goal of fully offsetting any impacts which cannot be mitigated through mandatory development fees and tax revenue increases associated with new development. 4.12-17 The operation of the proposed projects would increase solid waste generation in the City of Palo Alto requiring increased diversion to meet the goals of AB 939. Mitigation measure 4.12-17(a) requires that as a condition taf project approval, the applicant shall prepare and obtain approval from the City Public Works Department of a landfill diversion management program that meets the diversion goals of the Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) and AB939 . The program shall include specific provisions detailed in the EIR. Mitigation measure 4.12-17(b) recommends that the City require all new development projects to prepare operation recycling programs which will meet the AB939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000. The program shall include specific provisions detailed in the FIR. The Council finds that adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-17(a) will lessen the project's potential solid waste impacts to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure requires the applicant to develop, with City supervision, a plan which will ensure that solid wastes from the project are processed in a manner which ensure compliance with the recycling goals of AB939. Adoption and enforcement of mitigation measure 4.12-17(a) will also implement mitigation measure 4.12-17(b) with respect to the project. Adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-17(b) as a policy governing review and approval of all future development within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project. However, the Council finds that adoption of the proposed mitigation measure can and should be adopted in relation to future development projects within the City. 4.12-18 The proposed projects would increase solid waste generation in the City of Palo Alto during construction requiring increased diversion to meet the goals of AB 939. Mitigation measure 4.12-18 requires the applicant to prepare and implement a construction recycling plan approved by the City 37 970702 lac 0031389 Public Works Department. The plan shall include specific steps to achieve the City's short-term SRRE diversion goal of 30-40 percent through various specified measures. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the identified potential solid waste impact to a less than significant level. The approved recycling plan will ensure that provision is made for recovering all recyclable wastes generated. during construction, thus avoiding unnecessary placement of recyclable materials in landfills. 4.12-19 Cumulative development anticipated by the City through Year 2010, including the proposed projects, would increase solid waste generation by 5.5 percent over 1995 levels to 155,650 tons per year based on the projected growth of population and employees. Mitigation measure 4.12-19(a) recommends that the City require significant new development projects to prepare construction recycling plans as part of the project approval process. The construction plan shall include specific steps to achieve the AB939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000 through various specified measures. Mitigation measure 4.12-19(b) recommends that the City require new development projects to prepare long-term operational recycling programs as part of project approval process. The programs should meet the AB939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000, and include various additional specified elements These mitigation measures have been effectively applied to the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project through the adoption of mitigation measures 4.12-17(a) and 4.12-18. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will reduce the project's contribution to potential cumulative solid waste impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-19(a) and 4.12-19(b) as policies governing review and approval of future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of the approvals granted for the project. However, the Council finds that the proposed mitigation measure can and should be adopted in relation to future development projects approved by the City.' 5.2 GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS The EIR concluded that the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project will have a significant growth inducing impact in that upgrading of the existing 21" sewer line serving the project area to the 24" line necessary to serve the project and the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects will remove an obstacle to growth of the Stanford Medical Center, which has announced tentative plans for expansion. The Elk does not identify any potential mitigation measures for this growth -inducing impact. The 24" sewer line will be constructed with the minimum size pipe available with sufficient capacity to ensure adequate service of the approved Sand Hill Corridor development projects. Since excess capacity will still be provided by this sewer line 38 9707021u 0031589 which could facilitate expansion of the Stanford Medical Center or other development, this impact is potentially significant. The EIR concluded that the overall set of roadway improvements may serve to remove an obstacle to development of the contemplated 400,000 square foot expansion of the Stanford Medical Center. The traffic impacts of such development of the Medical Center as well as the impacts of cumulative development along the Sand Hill corridor were considered in the cumulative impacts analysis contained in the EIR. The EIR finds the impacts of such cumulative development within the Sand Hill corridor significant, as discussed elsewhere in these findings. 39 970702 lac O0315m9 • • PART II ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT The Council has also considered the alternatives to the proposed Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project analyzed in the EIR. Based on the following considerations, the Council has determined that all identified alternatives to the project are infeasible. The findings set forth below stating this Council's reasons for rejecting each alternative in favor of the project describe several separate grounds for rejecting each alternative, each of which this Council has determined constitutes an independent basis for this Council's decision to approve the project and to reject the proposed alternative. STANFORD SHOPPING CENTER EXPANSION No Proiect - No Action Alternative Under the No Action alternative, the applicant would retain the ability to expand existing shopping center facilities with 43,000 square feet of additional retail space. This development would include addition of new buildings to the center. The EIR assumed that this alternative would not include construction of any large new parking structures. The shopping center parking lot would need to be reconfigured to compensate for parking spaces displaced for new construction, and loss of some existing trees in parking areas would occur. The overall number of parking spaces available at the shopping center could decrease, particularly if the Sand Hill Road Fxtension and Related Roadway Improvements project were still implemented. Overall this alternative would result in similar although somewhat reduced impacts as the approved project, except that the additional visual impacts associated with a new parking structure would not occur. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible because it would not achieve the project objective of maintaining the Stanford Shopping Center's current economic competitiveness and would not generate funding necessary to implement needed roadway improvements included in the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements. While the Sand Hill Corridor projects have been individually reviewed and analyzed by the City, the projects have been planned by the applicant as an integrated set of development proposals. The costs of the proposed Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements to the applicant will be offset primarily from increased revenues generated by the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion. Stanford has indicated that limited expansion of the shopping center by 49,000 square feet will not increase revenues sufficiently to make funding of the roadway improvements economically feasible for Stanford, and that the roadway improvements included in the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements therefore would not be undertaken if additional expansion is not allowed. Funding for these roadway 40 97Q'1Q3 lac 0031539 improvements is not available from the City or any other public agency and the improvements will not occur if not funded by the applicant. The Council has determined the implementation of the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project is necessary to alleviate already poor traffic conditions in the Sand Hill Corridor and to accommodate anticipated cumulative traffic increases and traffic from the approved Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects at acceptable levels of service. Denial of the SHRE/RRI project to avoid the need for expansion of the Stanford Shopping Center is not a feasible alternative, nor is denial of the Stanford West Apartments project or Stanford West Senior Housing project to reduce the need for area road improvements a feasible alternative, for reasons stated in the findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted for these projects. The reduced development permitted under the No Action alternative also would not achieve a basic reasonable economic objective of the project. Evidence received by the Council confirms that increasing the overall retail base and diversity of the Stanford Shopping Center is essential to maintaining its competitive status among regional shopping centers. The 80,000 square feet of increased retail space allowed under the approved project represents a reasonable minimum necessary to assure Stanford the ability to maintain its current relative attractiveness and competitiveness in relation to other regional shopping centers in the long term. In addition, development under the No Action alternative would not provide for increased parking to support new retail space and would be likely to result in a:a actual decrease in the current ratio of parking to retail space, rendering the shopping center less attractive to both retailers and customers. Overall, the potential incremental reductions in environmental impacts which would result from the No Action alternative do not justify this alternative in comparison with the approved project. In finding the No Action alternative infeasible, the Council does not find that additional growth �f the Stanford Shopping Center is beneficial or desirable for its own sake. The Council is persuaded, however, that the additional expansion allowed under the approved project is necessary to maintain the overall long-term economic health and viability of the Stanford Shopping Center and its lessees, and to sustain the corresponding social and economic benefits to the community. No Project - No Development The No Development alternative would result in no expansion or new construction at the Stanford Shopping Center. This alternative would eliminate all impacts associated with the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project, as well as all benefits resulting from the expansion. Long-term implementation of this alternative would require revisions to the City's existing zoning ordinance, which allows additional expansion of the Stanford Shopping Center by approximately 49,000 square feet. 41 97070213c 0031389 The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible for the same reasons as the No Action alternative. This alternative would not permit the applicant to achieve its reasonable economic objectives and would eliminate funding for needed area roadway improvements included in the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements. The adverse long-term economic consequences of this alternative would also probably be far more severe than for the No Action alternative and could result a decline in the economic viability of the Stanford Shopping Center. As in the case of the No Action alternative, the Council finds that expansion of the existing Stanford Shopping Center facilities is necessary to maintain the overall attractiveness, competitiveness and economic health and viability of the shopping center and its lessees and corresponding benefits to the community, 160,000 Square Foot Expansion (Originally Proposed Project) As originally proposed by the applicant and evaluated in the EIR, the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project included a total of 160,000 square feet of commercial space. The original proposed project also included construction of new multi -story parking structures adjacent to Sand Hill Road. The applicant modified the proposed parking structure plans during environmental review to relocate the proposed structures south of the main shopping center buildings and along Quarry Road in order to avoid unacceptable visual and land use impacts on the Sand Hill Road corridor. Even with the relocation of these structures, however, the 160,000 square foot alternative would result in greater direct and cumulative impacts than the approved project. The 160,000 square foot alternative is further deemed infeasible by the Council because it would result in an unacceptable adverse impact on the jobs/housing balance within the City and surrounding area and would in this respect unacceptably offset the overriding beneficial housing impacts of the Stanford West Apartments project approved concurrently with the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion. 75% Reduced Density Alternative The EIR also evaluated a 75% Reduced Density alternative for the project consisting of development of approximately 120;000 square feet of new commercial space. The Council assumes that relocation of proposed parking structures to Quarry Road and all applicable mitigation measures incorporated into the approved project could be incorporated into the 75% Reduced Density alternative to minimize impacts. This alternative would still result in incrementally greater direct and cumulative impacts than the approved project. The 75% Reduced Density alternative is further deemed infeasible by the Council because it would result in an unacceptable adverse impact on the jobs/housing balance within the City and surrounding area and would unacceptably offset the overriding beneficial housing impacts of the Stanford West Apartments project. 42 970702 lac 0031 589 50% Reduced Density Alternative The Draft EIR evaluated a 50% Reduced Density alternative consisting of development of approximately 50,000 square feet of new retail space. The 50% Reduced Density alternative evaluated in the Draft EIR includes construction of parking structures adjacent to Sand Hill Road. The 50% Reduced Density alternative was given further consideration by the Planning Commission in its review of the DEIR, resulting in a Planning Commission recommendation for evaluation of a modified 50 % reduced density alternative which included relocation of parking structures and other proposed modifications to the location of new construction included in the project. This recommendation resulted in the "50% Stanford Shopping Center Expansion Alternative" evaluated in section 13.2 of the Final EIR. The Council finds that this 50% Reduced Density alternative as originally analyzed in the Draft EIR is infeasible and unacceptable because it would result in greater impacts than the approved. project, particularly visual and land use impacts on the Sand Hill Road corridor. The DEIR 50% Reduced Density alternative would result in essentially the same direct and cumulative impacts as the approved project in many respects, e.g. traffic generation and potential construction phase impacts, but does not incorporate additional desirable design changes and refinements included in the approved project to improve the overall design of the shopping center project. The Council finds that the approved project represents a superior design which should be adopted by the City. "50% Stanford Shopping Center Expansion Alternative" At the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the Final EIR included evaluation of a Refined 50% Stanford Shopping Center Expansion Alternative which incorporated various. design improvements. The approved project follows the Refined 50% Stanford Shopping Center Expansion Alternative, insofar as the new parking structure will be located on Quarry Road rather than Sand Hill Road, subject to changes and refinements added by the Council and by Stanford. The "Final Summary of Project Changes" noted that changes in the location buildings on the site would not have 'any significant environmental effect. No Housing Alternative The EIR also examined a "no -housing" alternative which would have consisted of approving 160,000 square feet of new commercial space for the Stanford Shopping Center and approving the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project while denying approval for the proposed Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects. The primary purpose of this EIR alternative was to examine the effects on the area transportation system of approving only the proposed roadway improvements and proposed shopping center expansion elements of. the Sand Hill Corridor projects. With respect to the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project, the Council finds that the alternative is 43 970702 lac 0031589 infeasible for the reasons previously stated in relation to the 160,000 square foot alternative. HopsinQ With Limitgd Shopping Center Development The EIR also examined a "housing with limited shopping center expansion" alternative consisting of (1) approval of the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing; (2) construction of 49,000 square feet of new Stanford Shopping Center space only; (3) without any of the roadway improvements proposed in the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project. The Council does not consider this alternative to be an alternative to the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project. This alternative was evaluated in the EIR to examine the effects on the area transportation system of approving only residential development and limited shopping expansion, without major area roadway improvements. This alternative is not considered feasible because it would not provide an adequate roadway system to meet the needs of the approved Sand Hill Corridor projects and cumulative traffic growth expected in the area, and would result in the unacceptable traffic conditions reported in the discussion of this alternative in the EIR. With respect to the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion element of this alternative, the alternative is considered infeasible for the same reasons as the No Action alternative. Alternative Sites The EIR did not evaluate potential alternative sites for the proposed Stanford Shopping Center expansion for the reason that such alternatives would be fundamentally inconsistent with the nature of the proposed project and would not advance the basic project objectives of enhancing the attractiveness and competitiveness of the Stanford Shopping Center. Evidence received by the Council confirms that increasing the overall retail base and diversity of the Stanford Shopping Center is essential to maintaining its competitive status among regional shopping centers. Construction of new commercial retail space at other locations would not achieve the basic objectives of the project. The Council also has received no evidence that construction of additional commercial space at any alternatesite would result in fewer or less severe environmental impacts than the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project. The Council therefore finds that alternative sites do not constitute reasonable or potentially feasible alternatives to the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project and that alternative sites for the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion were therefore reasonably not evaluated in the EIR. 44 970702 lac 0031589 EXHIBIT E WAY MPR COUNCIL FINDINGS CONCERNING MITIGATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF ALTERNATIVES TheCity Council of the City of Palo Alto ("Council") has read and considered the Final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements ("SHRE/RRI") project. The EIR has been prepared for five projects including the Stanford West Apartments, Stanford West Senior Housing, Stanford Shopping Center Expansion, SHRE/RRI projects, referred to collectively herein as the "Sand Hill Corridor projects," and the Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation project. These projects are described in Chapter 3 of the EIR, and include, as approved by the Council, the changes and revisions described in Chapter 11 and in the "Final Summary of Project Changes, made a part of the Final EIR by the certifying resolution. Pursuant to Section 21081(a) of the Public Resources Code, the Council has considered each environmental impact of the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project identified in the EIR, and each of the mitigation measures and project alternatives evaluated in the EIR. The Council's detailed findings for each significant environmental impact or potentially significant environmental impact identified in the EIR are set forth below. Each significant or potentially significant environmental impact identified in the EIR is listed in bold. Those mitigation measures adopted or partially adopted by the Council are also numbered in bold. The Council's reasons for rejection or partial rejection of certain mitigation measures and reasons for selection among alternative potential mitigation measures are described where appropriate. The Council's reasons for rejecting specific alternatives to the project identified in the EIR are stated in Part II of these findings. 1 9 N,02 lac 0031390 PART I CHARGES AND MITIGATION MEASURES ADOPTED TO REDUCE IMPACTS 4.1 LAND USE The EIR identified the following potential signi use effects of the Sand Hill Road Extension, Widening Roadway Improvements project. 4.1-1 The proposed projects could result in a change in the character of the land uses on or around sites. ficant land and Related substantial the project 4.1-5 Implementation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development within the Sand Hill Road Corridor, would result in a change in character in the area, The EIR concludes that there are no feasible mitigation measures available which will substantially reduce the identified significant land use impacts and that these impacts are therefore unavoidable. The Council also finds that changes to the existing character of the Sand Hill corridor as a result of the project, both individually and in conjunction with the Sand Hill Corridor development projects approved concurrently with the project, are significant. The conditions for approval of the project, however, incorporate a number of mitigation measures which will lessen the overall severity of these impacts by reducing visual impacts, providing for replacement of trees and restoration of habitat affected by the project of trees, enhancing opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle travel in the Sand Hill Road corridor and mitigating the potential noise impacts on neighboring residents. These measures are discussed in greater detail in the findings pertaining to mitigation of cultural, visual, transportation, noise and biological impacts. The project has also been modified to reduce the extension of Sand Hill Road between Arboretum and El Camino Real to two through traffic lanes, thus substantially reducing the visual impact and overall change of character of road development along this section of the Sand Hill corridor. Despite these measures, however, the impact remains significant. Project Areas Outside the City Authority and responsibility for mitigating impacts of those portions of the project west of San Francisquito Creek, including relocation of portions of the golf course, is vested in the City of Menlo Park, and, to a limited extent, the County of Santa Clara and County of San Mateo. The EIR also identifies mitigation measures which, if adopted by these agencies, will reduce the project's overall impact on the existing land use of the area, and will in some cases, if implemented, actually result in an improvement in 2 970702 lac 0031590 • existing conditions. The Council finds that in the event that elements of the project within the City of Menlo Park, County of Santa Clara and County of San Mateo are approved, these measures can and should be adopted by the respective responsible agencies to lessen the adverse impacts of the project, although the impacts will remain significant. 4.2 VISUAL OU LITY/LIGHT AND GLARE 4.2-1 The proposed projects would result in major visual changes within the Sand Hill Road corridor for viewers traveling on Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-1(h)', as applicable to the City, requires that planted crib walls or other means of allowing interplanting or overhanging of vegetation should be incorporated if architecturally and technically feasible in the retaining wall southeast of the San Francisquito Creek bridge. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the visual impacts of the project on travelers on Sand Hill Road, but will not reduce the impact to a less than significant level. The Council also finds that other changes and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project and conditions of approval of the project which will lessen the project's overall visual impacts to drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians on Sand Hill. Road to the extent feasible. These changes and mitigation measures include the reduction of the Sand Hill Road extension from four lanes, as originally proposed, to two through lanes and provisions for installation and maintenance cf landscaping and medians in the project conditions of approval. Additional changes and mitigation measures have also been adopted in conjunction with the other proposed Sand Hill Corridor projects to also reduce overall visual impacts on travelers in the Sand Hill Corridor. However, notwithstanding adoption of these changes and mitigation measures, the overall adverse visual impacts of the project tor travelers on Sand Hill Road will remain significant, due to the substantial change in existing conditions which will result from construction of additional paved traffic and bicycle lanes, increased number of intersections, traffic signals and other road improvements. Rejected Mitigation Measures Mitigation measure 4.2-1(I) would require that the proposed bicycle and pedestrian path be realigned, if feasible, off of the road shoulder and set back from the road east of the San Francisquito Creek crossing. Vegetation screening would also be established between the path and road if feasible. The City Planning Commission recommended rejection of this mitigation measure on the basis of testimony that this proposed mitigation measure would adversely affect bicycle use of the proposed pathway. The Council finds that implementation of this mitigation measure is infeasible and undesirable due to potential adverse effect on bicycle use, and because the cost and design 3 970702 lac 0031590 • problems involved in implementation of this measure are not justified by the marginal and very localized decrease the measure would achieve in overall visual impacts of the project. Mitigation measure 4.2-1(j) proposes narrowing of the proposed road improvements to fewer lanes in the area of San Francisquito Creek at both the bridge crossing and the proposed extension area. Center median design should be revised to permit additional center median tree planting in this area and the area east of Santa Cruz Avenue. The Council has required reduction of the Sand Hill Road extension from Arboretum to El Camino Real to two lanes, thus partially implementing this measure. However, with respect to restricting Sand Hill Road to fewer than four lanes at the San Francisquito Creek crossing, the Council finds that implementation of this proposed mitigation measure is infeasible and undesirable because long-term retention of Sand Hill Road as a two lane road west of Arboretum is not practical in view of anticipated regional transportation needs and vehicle traffic demands. Studies performed for the EIR indicate that cumulative traffic on Sand Hill Road, together with traffic from the other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects, cannot be accommodated on a two-lane Sand Hill Road west of Arboretum at acceptable levels of service and without causing substantial unacceptable delays for vehicle traffic in the Sand Hill Corridor. The Council also recognizes that the City of Menlo Park may, as a practical matter, independently impose this mitigation measure as it applies to the San Francisquito Creek bridge because the bridge widening will required approvals from both the City and Menlo Park. The Council does not recommend, however, that Menlo Park adopt this as a mitigation measure for the reasons stated above. Project Areas Outside the City With respect to those portions of the project.located west of San Francisquito Creek and outside of City territory, the EIR recommended the following mitigation measures: Mitigation measure 4.2-1(h) provides for a number of measures to reduce visual impacts along the expanded Sand Hill Road in Menlo Park, including the following. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(f) provides for preservation of a large elderberry tree adjacent to the expanded Sand Hill road. (This has already been incorporated into the plans.) The retaining wall east of the Sand Hill Road Bridge shall be kept to the minimum necessary length and height. Materials used shall be in keeping with the character of the scenic roadway and plantings shall be used to obscure the view of the wall. Mitigation measure 4.2-1(j) proposes, in part, that center median designs should be revised to permit additional center median tree planting in the area east of Santa Cruz Avenue. 4 970702 lac 0031590 • • Jurisdiction and responsibility for adoption and implementation of these measures is vested in the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that in the event the portions of the project within Menlo Park are approved, these mitigation measures can and should be adopted by Menlo Park. If implemented, these measures would lessen but would not eliminate the significant visual impacts of the project within Menlo Park due to the overall magnitude of changes in existing setting resulting from the project. 4.2-5 The proposed projects would diminish the visual quality of the City's wooded north entry on El Camino Real frontage adjacent to San Francisquito Creek. Mitigation measure 4.2-5(a) requires that the Sand Hill Road extension be realigned approximately 40 feet southwards to more closely coincide with the bounds of the existing Stanford Shopping Center parking lot where it approaches El Camino Real. Mitigation measure 4.2-5(b) requires that the Sand Hill Road/El Camino Real intersection be redesigned so that new lanes on El Camino Real are located within the existing pavement area of El Camino Real, and do not interfere with the wooded gateway area near the creek. Tree removal as a result of the widening of El Camino Real, shall not be allowed. The final landscape plan shall be modified to increase the amount of major tree planting at both the intersection and the portions of the southern edge of Sand Hill Road visible from the intersection, in order to reduce post -construction views into the shopping center parking lots, and if possible, reduce the visibility of the increased scale of the intersection. Both of these measures have been incorporated into the final design of the approved project. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the identified visual impacts to a less than significant level. These measures will preserve the existing wooded area in the area of the gateway and preserve existing roadway width and frontage along El Camino Real, thus generally preserving the existing visual character of the gateway area and eliminating the potential impacts identified in the EIR. 4.2-6 The proposed projects would diminish the visual quality of the El Camino Real frontage between San Francisquito Creek and Quarry Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-6(a) requires the applicant to prepare and implement design guidelines or controls for development of the retail structure at Quarry Road and El Camino Real to ensure compatibility with the area, subject to approval by the Palo Alto Architectural Review Board and Planning Commission. Alternately, the applicant may remove this structure from the site plan, relocating the square footage to other portions of the Shopping Center if feasible. As discussed below, the Council has adopted the mitigation measure, rejecting the alternative. 5 970702 !ac 0031590 Mitigation measure 4.2-6(b) requires the intersection of Quarry Road and El Camino Real to be redesigned to improve overall visual quality and pedestrian operations, including the following specific changes: (a) reduce the width and number of proposed lanes of El Camino Real; (b) include a minimum 10 -foot wide landscaped median and pedestrian refuge area in the center median of El Camino Real. Mitigation measure 4.2-6(c) provides that if mitigation measures 4.2-1(1), 4.2-5(b) and 4.2-6(b) are all adopted, the applicant shall be required to conduct a detailed study of traffic progression and traffic signal coordination on El Camino Road and prepare a signal coordination plan. The plan shall encompass signalized intersections on El Camino Real from Embarcadero Road to the proposed Sand Hill Road extension and must demonstrate that northbound left -turn queues at both the Quarry/E1 Camino Real and Sand Hill Road/El Camino Real intersection will not obstruct northbound through lanes. Mitigation measure 4.2-6(d) requires that large evergreen shrubs or evergreen trees be incorporated in the final landscape plan along the north edge of Quarry Road and other areas near the corner of El Camino Real, in order to maintain some visual screening of the parking lot areas from the new intersection during winter months. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the identified impact to a less than significant level. These measures provide for modifications that diminish the extent of visual changes in the affected project area and for further design improvements to ensure compatibility with the existing visual character of the area. Mitigation measure 4.2-6(c) is designed to offset any adverse traffic impacts which will result from implementation of these measures. With respect to mitigation measure 4.2-6(a), the Planning Commission considered the alternative of eliminating the proposed retail building near Quarry Road and El Camino and recommended against this alternative. The Council also finds that relocation of this building is unnecessary and would defeat one of the design objectives of the Shopping Center expansion plans, specifically to provide an improved transition from the central shopping area of the Stanford Shopping Center to El Camino Real and adjoining portions of the City. The project conditions of approval implement the mitigation proposed in mitigation measure 4.2-6(a)rather than the alternative. The Council finds that this measure will mitigate the adverse impact associated with the original design of the outlying building to a less than significant level. 4.2-8 Visual disturbance from construction of the proposed projects could have temporary adverse visual impacts. Mitigation measure 4.2-8 requires that on -site staging and storage of construction equipment and materials should be minimized to reduce visual disturbance during construction. Equipment and material storage that does occur on -site should be visually 6 9707021ac 0031590 screened. Graded areas should be watered regularly to minimize fugitive dust. Construction should be staged and scheduled to minimize the duration of disturbance in each affected viewshed. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the adverse visual impact of project construction, but will not reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measure will limit the duration and visibility of construction equipment and grading activities on the site, but will not eliminate the significant unavoidable visual impact necessarily associated with major construction activities on the site. This impact therefore remains significant. Project Areas Outside the City The Council finds that the adoption and implementation of these measures on portions of the project outside the City is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park, and that these mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that project approvals are granted by Menlo Park. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that Menlo Park approves the project but does not implement the recommended mitigation measures, significant adverse impacts could result. 4.2-9 The proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development in the Sand Hill Road Corridor, could adversely affect the visual character of the corridor for viewers traveling on Sand Hill Road. The EIR recommended adoption of mitigation measure 4.2-9 to mitigate this identified cumulative impact. Mitigation measure 4.2-9 requires that mitigation measures 4.2-1(a-1) be implemented for all the Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects. The Council has adopted mitigation measure 4.2-1(h) and partially implemented mitigation measure 4.2-1(j), but has determined that implementation of mitigation measures 4.2-1(1) and the narrowing of Sand Hill Road to two lanes at the San Francisauito Creek crossing (mitigation measure 4.2-1(j), are infeasible and undesirable for reasons previously stated. The Council finds that the adopted measures will lessen the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts along the Sand Hill Road corridor, but that these impacts will remain significant. Due to the major change in visual character associated with extending, widening and adding related improvements to Sand Hill Road, these impacts would also remain significant even with the adoption of the additional mitigation measures identified in the EIR. With respect to cumulative visual impact resulting from the other Sand Hill Corridor projects, the additional project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4.2-9 have been adopted, partially adopted, or rejected as stated in the findings for the Stanford West Apartments, Stanford West Senior Housing and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion projects. To the extent these measures have been adopted, they collectively will 7 970702 lac 0031390 • reduce the significant adverse cumulative visual impact of the Sand Hill Corridor projects, but will not reduce the impact to a less than significant level. This cumulative impact therefore remains significant. The Council recognizes that future development, to the extent allowed in the Sand Hill corridor, will continue to add to the significant cumulative visual impacts associated with the approved projects. Project Areas Outside the City With respect to the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts within the City of Menlo Park, the Council finds that in the event the portions of the project within Menlo Park are approved, the applicable provisions of recommended mitigation measures 4.2-1(h) and (j) can and should be implemented by the approving agency. If implemented, these measures would lessen the cumulative visual impact but would not reduce it tc a level of insignificance. 4.2-12 The combined visual affect of proposed projects could adversely alter views within the El Camino Real viewshed. Mitigation measure 4.2-12 requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.2 -6(a -c), discussed previously. The recommended mitigation measures have been adopted as described in the findings for Impact 4.2-6. The Council finds that adoption of these measures, together with adoption of measures in conjunction with the approval of the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion, will reduce to insignificance the project's contribution to cumulative visual impacts on the El Camino Real viewshed for the reasons stated in relation to Impact 4.2-6. 4.2-13 The proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development, could generate light and glare from buildings and roadways that could have adverse effects on nearby residents and on -coming drivers along Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measure 4.2-13 provides that interior and exterior light sources associated with all of the approved Sand Hill Corridor projects shall be shielded or directed in such a manner as to prevent visibility of the light sources and to eliminate light spillover beyond the perimeter of the proposed project. Specific measures recommended in accordance with section 18.64.030 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code include the following: (a) Exterior light fixtures on the housing buildings should be mounted no higher than 15 feet at the rear of the buildings. (b) Lighting of the building exterior and parking lot should be of the lowest intensity and energy use adequate for its purpose. 8 970702 lac 0031590 • (c) Unnecessary continued illumination, such as illuminated signs, should be avoided. (d) Timing devices should be considered for exterior and interior lights in order to minimize light glare at night without jeopardizing security. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the project's contribution to potential cumulative light and glare impacts to insignificance. While increased light and glare on roadways is an unavoidable and expected effect of the project, the recommended mitigation measures provide for avoidance of unnecessary impacts from signs and lighting associated with the project. The adopted mitigation measures, in conjunction with landscaping which will reduce passage of light and glare from roadways to residences, will have the effect of eliminating substantial spillover of light from the project sites and will therefore reduce any potential cumulative impact to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure has also been incoLporated into the conditions of approval for other approved Sand Hill Road Corridor projects and will therefore eliminate any potential significant cumulative effect by confining the impacts of each project to its own location. Project Areas Outside the City Adoption and implementation of these measures on portions of the project outside the City is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that project approvals are granted by Menlo Park. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that Menlo Park approves the project but does not implement the recommended mitigation measures, significant adverse impacts could result. 4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES 4.3-1 Implementation of the proposed projects would result in damaging effects on important historic and/or, prehistoric archaeological resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(b) requires that prior to development the applicant shall conduct a data recovery program on all areas in which construction is believed to have a potential to result in significant archaeological impacts. The program shall consist of an initial phase of intensive subsurface archaeological testing meeting minimum standards specified in the EIR. Significant resources encountered shall be subject to recovery, preservation and study as provided in mitigation measure 4.3-1(c). All work shall be subject to review and monitoring by an independent archaeologist engaged by the City. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(c) requires manual excavation and recovery of archaeological resources from any areas encountered 9 970702 lac 0031590 • • during construction which are determined to hold important archaeological resources and for the recovery, preservation and study of these resources. The measure also provides for ongoing monitoring of construction activities in potentially sensitive areas of the site and for preparation of further detailed procedures to ensure protection and recovery of any significant resources encountered in such areas. The plans shall include (a) provisions for artifact cataloging, analysis, and curation; (b) identification and coordination with most -likely Native American descendants concerning monitoring and reburial of Native American remains, if any are encountered; (c) plans for preparation of technical reports; (d) analysis and preservation of artifacts and documentation and analysis of non -recoverable site features. All of the foregoing shall be performed in accordance with current scientific and professional standards. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(f) provides that construction activities involving substantial ground disturbance (greater than l2" in depth) near any known archaeological site shall be subject to monitoring. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(g) provides that if previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered during construction, work shall cease in the immediate area until qualified archaeologists assess the significance of the resources and make mitigation recommendations (e.g., manual excavation of the immediate area) , if warranted. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(h) requires the applicant and contractors to comply with the requirements of Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code if Native American burials or other possible Native American human remains are located during construction. This code section requires that a Native American Most Likely Descendant (determined in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission) be notified within 24 hours and appropriate provisions made for appropriate reburial. This and related sections of the Public Resources Code also provide that remains shall be protected from further construction work or vandalism. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(k) provides with respect to the project that construction activities shall be subject to archaeological monitoring in the area of the Sand Hill Road Extension, and for road improvements in all other areas for which a potentially significant impact has been identified, where ground disturbance will exceed 24 inches below existing grade. Monitoring may be conducted on an intermittent basis only where, in the opinion of the applicant's archaeologist and the City's archaeologist, soils are culturally sterile. Construction personnel shall be required to contact the applicant's archaeologist in the event that suspected cultural resources are uncovered in the absence of a monitor The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the project's impacts on archaeological resources 10 970702 lac 0031390 • within the City to a less than significant level. Presently known archaeological resources which may be affected by the project are limited to an area close to the San Francisquito Creek bridge. The adopted mitigation measures will ensure that all such resources which cannot be avoided during construction activities will be identified, removed and preserved for further study in accordance with accepted scientific standards, ensuring no loss of scientific or historical value of the resources. The adopted mitigation measures also ensure that any additional, presently unknown, important archaeological resources in areas affected by the project will similarly be identified, removed and preserved. The adopted measures also ensure that proper respect will be afforded any burials and any other culturally important Native American remnants which might be impacted by the project. Project Areas Outside the City Adoption and implementation of these measures on portions of the project outside the City is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, specifically the City of Menlo Park and Counties of Santa Clara and San Mateo. The Council finds that the above identified mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that approvals are granted by these agencies. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that these agencies approve elements of the project within their jurisdiction but do not implement the recommended mitigation measures, significant adverse impacts will result. Rejected on Measure The EIR also proposed an alternate mitigation measure 4.3-1(a) which has not been adopted by the City. Mitigation measure 4.3-1(a), as it relates to the project, would require that road and bridge widening in the vicinity of San Francisquito Creek be limited to the existing road surface area. The Council finds that this mitigation measure is infeasible and undesirable because the measure would effectively prohibit widening of the roadway and bridge to four lanes and therefore fail to achieve the basic objective of the project of providing increased traffic capacity along Sand Hill Road. The Council also does not recommend adoption of this mitigation measure by Menlo Park in conjunction with its approval of the bridge widening and Sand Hill Road widening for these same reasons. Because alternate mitigation measures are available and have been implemented to reduce all potential impacts to insignificance, the Council finds that the proposed mitigation measure is not justified in view of its substantial adverse effects it would have on traffic in the Sand Hill Road corridor. The Council recognizes that approval for the bridge widening will also be required from the City of Menlo Park, and Menlo Park may as a practical matter impose this mitigation measure through its independent authority over the project. The Council does not recommend that the City of Menlo Park adopt this measure for the reasons stated above. 11 970702 lac 0031590 4.3-5 Implementation of the proposed projects could result in damaging effects on the Stanford Convalescent Home Gates. Mitigation measure 4.3-5(b) provides that if preservation of the stone entry gate pillars in their current location is not feasible, the gates shall be moved on the site and incorporated into the project's landscape plan. This measure has been adopted in conjunction with approvals granted for the Stanford West Senior Housing project. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's impact on the historically valuable stone gate pillars to a less than significant level. This measure will preserve the gates on the site to permit continued public recognition of the entryway and to maintain their historic feeling and association within the project area, The Council finds that preservation of the gates in their current location is not necessary to mitigate this impact. Rejected Mitigation Measure. The EIR also proposed an alternate mitigation measure 4.3-5(a) which has not been. adopted by the City. Mitigation measure 4.3-5(a) would require redesign cf the entry to the Stanford. West Senior Housing Health Care Center and Ronald McDonald House to permit the Stone Entry Gates to be preserved where they are presently situated. The Council finds that this mitigation measure is infeasible because it would unnecessarily disrupt site plans for the Stanford West Senior Housing project, potentially resulting in loss of additional trees and increased visual impacts from relocation of access ways. The gates were not part of the original Stanford estate and have been relocated from their original location near El Camino Real to their current location. While the presence of the gates are considered to be an important reflection of the area's history, their location is not considered to be historically significant. The alternate mitigation measure 4.3-5(b) prescribed in the EIR has been adopted instead and will provide for preservation of the pillars on the site by incorporation .into.the landscape plans for the site and will avoid any significant adverse impact. 4.3-6 The proposed projects, in conjunction with other cumulative development projects in the San Francisquito Creek drainage, could result in damage or destruction of important prehistoric and historic cultural resources. Mitigation measure 4.3-6 recommends that all planning jurisdictions within the San Francisquito Creek drainage implement cultural resource testing and data recovery measures, similar to those described in mitigation measure 4.3-1 for projects involving development of sensitive cultural resource sites. 12 9707021u 003!390 The Council has adopted the recommended mitigation measures for the SHRE/RRI project and all other approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level and will also lessen the cumulative impact of the Sand Hill Corridor projects collectively to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be considered in conjunction with any future projects within the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of potential cumulative impact from future projects on archaeological resources is presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative visual impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.4 TRANSPORTATION Public Transit Service Impacts 4.4-1 Public transit service could be affected by development of the proposed projects. Mitigation measure 4.4-1(a) requires that a new transit bus passenger transfer and layover area(s) be located at a site acceptable to Santa Clara Transportation Authority, SamTrans and the City. The site will be located so that transit passenger access to the Stanford Shopping Center will not be degraded, and, if possible, improved. This measure may be implemented by locating new facility near the Shopping Center, or by modifying routes that currently use the transfer facility to include a stop close to the Shopping Center. Mitigation measure 4.4-1(c) requires that all new, relocated, and removed transit stops and pullouts shall be incorporated into a transit plan reviewed and approved by the City, SCCTA, and SamTrans. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the identified impact to a less than significant level. The EIR determined that the only potentially significant Impacts of the project on public transportation result from relocation or 13 970702 lac 0031590 potential loss of transit stops and facilities. By requiring replacement and possible improvement of the existing transfer and layover area serving the Stanford Shopping Center, and requiring review and approval by qualified transportation professionals of the relocation of any other transit facilities affected by the project, the adopted mitigation measures will avoid any reduction in passenger access to the Stanford Shopping Center or any other area affected by the project, and could result in improved access. The conditions of approval of the project also incorporate mitigation measures 4.4-1(b) and 4.4-1(d). Mitigation measure 4.4-1(b) requires the applicant to provide Marguerite service to the Sand Hill Road Corridor development project sites at a frequency and capacity integrated with other residential and employment sites served by the system. Mitigation measure 4.4-1(d) requires the applicant to operate an on -call passenger shuttle service to and from the Stanford West Senior Housing project. The Council finds that the addition of the Marguerite shuttle service to the Senior Housing project site will render the on -call shuttle unnecessary, and the Council, therefore, will not require that this additional measure be implemented. Although the EIR did not conclude that the project would adversely affect the availability of transit services to the Stanford West Apartments or Stanford West Senior Housing, these mitigation measures will enhance the availability of transportation services to these projects, improving the overall functionality of the transportation system served by the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements. Bicycle and Pedestrian Impacts 4.4-2 Bicycle and/or pedestrian access and safety could be affected by development of the proposed projects. Mitigation measure 4.4-2(b) requires that Class II bike lanes be provided on those portions of Sand Hill Road, Arboretum Road, Vineyard Lane, Pasteur Drive, Stock Farm Road, and Quarry Road which will be modified or reconstructed as part of the project. The bike lanes shall meet City of Palo Alto design requirements as designated by the Chief Transportation Official. Mitigation measure 4.4-2(c) requires that appropriate pedestrian and bicycle crossing devices and markings be provided at all signalized intersections modified or reconstructed as part of the project. All devices and markings shall meet applicable design standards in their respective jurisdiction. Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) design standards shall be observed at all pedestrian crossings created or modified by the proposed projects. Mitigation measure 4.4-2(d) requires the applicant to provide a bicycle and pedestrian actuated crossing phase of El Camino Real on the north side of the proposed Sand Hill Road intersection, if the City Chief Transportation Official determines that the measure is feasible and will not have unacceptable effects on intersection vehicular level of service. 14 970702 lac 0031390 Mitigation measure 4.4-2(e) provides that for five years following project construction, the project applicant will fund an annual review of reported traffic accident data at the Sand Hill Road/I-280 interchange to determine whether a significant increase in bicycle/auto conflicts has occurred. If an increase is documented, the applicant will work with Caltrans, the City of Menlo Park and San Mateo County to design and obtain funding for safety improvements required to minimize these conflicts. Mitigation measure 4.4-2(f) requires that bicycle and pedestrian facilities be constructed at the intersection of Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Junipero Serra Blvd./Alpine Road. The proposed design will be reviewed and approved by the City of Menlo Park Transportation Manager. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will avoid the project's potential adverse impacts on pedestrian and bicycle travel and will in fact improve and enhance safe bicycle and pedestrian travel in the project area. The adopted mitigation measures, together with elements included in the project, will extend bike lanes constructed to accepted safety standards along the full length of Sand Hill Road affected by the project. The adopted mitigation measures will also ensure construction of safe and adequate pedestrian and bicycle crossings of all major roadways affected by the project, thus actually improving existing conditions for bicycle and pedestrian travel in the project area. Mitigation measure 4.4-2(f) also requires that adequate bicycle and pedestrian crossings be constructed at the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Junipero Serra Blvd./Alpine Road intersections. Mitigation measure 4.4-2(e) further requires the applicant to work with responsible agencies to eliminate safety problems resulting from increased bicycle and vehicle traffic at the Sand Hill Road/I-280 intersection if such problems are determined to exist in the future. The Council recognizes that jurisdiction and -responsibility for implementation of these mitigation measures in areas beyond the City's boundaries is vested in the City of Menlo Park. Approvals for some intersection improvements may also be required from the County of San Mateo and County of Santa Clara. The Council finds that Menlo Park can and should adopt and implement the recommended mitigation measures, but also recognizes that in the event that Menlo Park does not approve elements of the SHRE/RRI project within its jurisdiction or does not otherwise allow implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, potentially significant adverse impacts on pedestrian and vehicle travel could result along portions of Sand Hill Road and intersections outside the City's jurisdiction due to increases in traffic in these areas resulting from the Sand Hill Corridor projects. 15 970702 lac 0031590 • • 4.4-7 Development of the proposed projects could degrade the level of service of study area intersections, and contribute to increased intersection delay. The EIR concluded that the SHRE/RRI project overall will result in substantial benefits for local and regional traffic circulation, but that changes in traffic travel patterns related to the project and increases in traffic from the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects collectively will result in significant adverse changes in traffic conditions at a total of seven area intersections, specifically: Arboretum Road/Galvez Street El Camino Real/Page Mill Road El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue Junipero Serra Blvd./Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue Middlefield Road/Willow Road Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue The SHRE/RRI project alone, however, would have significant adverse impacts on traffic levels at only four area intersections, specifically: Arboretum Road/Galvez Street El Camino Real/Page Mill Road Middlefield Road/Willow Road Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue The conditions of approval require the applica:'r to contribute to all of the following mitigation measures to lessen these impacts and other impacts of the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Arboretum Roads/Galvez Street: Mitigation measure 4.4-7 (a) requires the applicant to install a traffic signal or other appropriate traffic control device(s) at the intersection. of Arboretum Road/Galvez Street, and pay the full cost of these improvements. This measure shall be implemented when the intersection satisfies appropriate signal warrants as determined by the Chief Transportation Official. In the event that the City and ,the applicant determine that use of a traffic circle or "roundabout" will provide for the same or better LOS and safety as a traffic signal, the traffic circle may be constructed at the applicant's expense instead of a traffic signals or other traditional traffic control device(s). El Camino Real/Page Mill Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(b) requires the applicant to contribute a fair share of the costs of the following planned improvements: Add a southbound right turn lane; Add a westbound right turn lane; 16 970702 h c 003 1390 Add a northbound right turn lane; and Extend the westbound left turn lane by 100 feet. These measures should be implemented when the intersection approaches LOS F, as evaluated through periodic monitoring to be carried out by the applicant on behalf of the City. $s nd hill Road/Santa Cruz AvenuQ: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(c) requires the applicant to pay a fair share of the costs of the following improvements to the following improvements to the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection: Widen Sand lane; Hill Road to add second eastbound left turn Widen Sand Hill Road to add second westbound left turn lane; Modify signal phasinu; Install an exclusive right turn lane on the northbound approach of Santa Cruz Avenue; and Provide dual left turn lanes on both the northbound and southbound Santa Cruz Avenue approaches. The applicant shall also pay the costs of installing an exclusive right turn lane on the northbound approach of Santa Cruz Avenue and providing dual left turn lanes on both the northbound and southbound Santa Cruz Avenue approaches. Conditions 1.c and 12 of the project conditions of approval provide that the applicant shall advance funds to pay the full costs of these improvements if the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, with respect to any improvements in that jurisdiction, enters into an agreement to reimburse the applicant for costs in excess of its fair share. If no reimbursement agreement is adopted, the applicant shall pay its fair share (subject to limitations based on engineering cost estimates) based on traffic attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Implementation of this mitigation measure will not occur until approvals are obtained from the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable. Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(d) requires the applicant to pay a fair share of the costs of the following improvements to the Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection mandated by the Menlo Park General Plan or recommended in the EIR: Widen northbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane; Install an additional southbound left -turn lane. 17 970702 lac 0031590 • Conditions l.c and 12 of the project conditions of approval provide that the applicant shall advance funds to pay the full costs of these improvements if the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable, enters into an agreement to reimburse the applicant for costs in excess of its fair share. If no reimbursement agreement is adopted, the applicant shall pay its fair share (subject to limitations based on engineering cost estimates) based on traffic attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Implementation of this mitigation measure will not occur until approvals are obtained from the City of Menlo Park and/or the County of San Mateo, as applicable. Middlefield Avenue/Willow Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(•), identifies a number of improvements which would be necessary to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts at this intersection, including the following: Add a second southbound left turning lane. Restripe eastbound approach. Modify signal phasing, including a leading left turn phase in the signal phasing for the north and south directions. The timing of these improvements will be determined by the City of Menlo Park, through periodic monitoring and/or through subsequent environmental impact analysis and documentation. Condition 1.f of the project conditions of approval partially implements this mitigation measure by requiring that the applicant shall either make signal timing improvements sufficient to return traffic levels of service at this intersection to level of service D, or contribute its fair share of the costs to construct the recommended intersection improvements. This obligation would not be triggered until current level of service falls:to E or worse. Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Junipero Serra Blvd./Alpine Road: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(h) provides that the applicant shall conduct an operational analysis of the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Alpine Road/Junipero Serra Boulevard intersections to identify the appropriate combination of roadway and traffic signal improvements necessary to improve operation to LOS D during peak hours, if feasible. The EIR also recommends that the following mitigation measures be implemented to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts at specified intersections within the City of Menlo Park, but does not provide for direct participation by the applicant in implementation of these mitigation measures. El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(f) recommends that the following improvements to the El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue intersection be completed as prescribed in the City of Menlo Park's general plan: 18 970702 lac 0031590 Widen northbound approach to add third northbound through lane. Restripe southbound approach to add third southbound through lane. Widen westbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane. Fl Camino Rea_1/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue: Mitigation measure 4.4-7(g) recommends that the following improvements to the El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue intersection be completed as prescribed in the City of Menlo Park's general plan: Restripe northbound approach to add third northbound through lane. Restripe southbound approach to add third southbound through lane. Widen westbound approach to add exclusive right turn lane. Final design shall Include provisions for bicycle traffic. In addition, the EIR recommends that signal phasing at this intersection be modified to include split phasing in the east/west direction and a leading left turn phase in the north/south direction. The Council finds that these adopted mitigation measures, if implemented, will lessen the project's impacts on traffic at the four significantly affected intersections to a less than significant level, and will also substantially lessen the impact of the project's contribution to cumulative traffic at other intersections significantly affected by the Sand Hill Corridor projects collectively. Mitigation measures 4.4 -7(a) -(e) require the applicant to pay all or a fair share of the costs of physical improvements necessary to enable each of these affected intersections to serve anticipated cumulative traffic demands at acceptable levels of service. Mitigation measure 4.4-7(h) also provides for identification of appropriate additional intersection improvements should the City of Menlo Park elect to achieve a higher level of service at the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and Alpine Road/Junipero Serra Boulevard intersections. The Council recognizes that final authority to approve those portions of the SHRE/RRI project located outside the City, and to approve and implement the identified mitigation measures at three of the four intersections significantly affected by the project, is vested in public agencies other than the City, specifically the City of Menlo Park (Sand Hill Road widening and related improvements in Menlo Park, mitigation measure 4.4-7(c), Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and mitigation measure 4.4-7(e), Middlefield Avenue/Willow Road); 19 970702 Lc 0031390 • County of Santa Clara (mitigation measure 4.4-7(a), Arboretum Road/Galvez Street intersection); and the County of San Mateo (mitigation measure 4.4-7(c), Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection). Responsibility and authority for implementing the recommended mitigation measures at the additional intersections cumulatively impacted by the project is also vested in other public agencies, specifically the City of Menlo Park (mitigation measures 4.4-7(f), El Camino Real/Ravenswood Avenue, and 4.4-7(g), El Camino Real/Valparaiso Avenue/Glenwood Avenue) and 4.4-7(d) Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue). The Council finds that the identified mitigation measures can and should be approved and implemented by these agencies. However, the Council also recognizes that in the event that portions of the project located the City of Menlo Park are not approved or that if one or more of the listed mitigation measures are not approved and implemented by the appropriate responsible agencies, the project will result in significant adverse impacts on the Arboretum Road/Galvez Street, Middlefield Road/Willow Road and/or Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection(s), and will contribute to significant impacts at other intersections cumulatively affected by the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Because it cannot presently be determined if or when the appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented by the respective responsible agencies, these impacts are considered by the Council to be potentially significant. 4.4-8 Construction activities could lead to both temporary disruption of transportation system operation, as well as to permanent damage to elements of the system such as pavement and bridges. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(a) requires the applicant to provide adequate off-street parking for all construction -related vehicles throughout the construction period. If adequate parking cannot be provided on the construction sites, a satellite parking area shall be designated, and a shuttle bus shall be operated to' transfer construction workers to the job sites. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(b) provides that construction activities related to the project are prohibited from substantially limiting pedestrian access (e.g, by blocking pedestrian routes), without prior approval from the City of Palo Alto and/or Caltrans. Any approval shall require submittal and approval of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation measure 4-4.8(c) provides that the applicant shall be prohibited from limiting bicycle access (e.g. by blocking or restricting existing routes) while constructing the project, without prior approval from the City of Palo Alto and/or Caltrans or the City of Menlo Park (depending upon the jurisdiction of the requested action). Any approval will require submittal and approval of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. 20 970702 Lac 0031590 Mitigation measure 4.4-8(d) provides that the applicant shall be required to reohibit or limit the number of construction material deliveries from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m., and from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays. Mitigation-. measure 4.4-8(e) provides that the applicant shall be required to prohibit or limit the number of construction employees from arriving or departing the site from the hours of 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(f) requires that all construction -related equipment and materials shall be delivered and removed on truck routes designated by the cities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park. Heavy construction vehicles shall be prohibited from accessing the sites from other routes. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(g) requires the applicant to repair any structural damage to public roadways, returning any damaged sections to original structural condition. The effectiveness of this measure shall be guaranteed by requiring surveys of road conditions before and after construction. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(h) prohibits the applicant from limiting access to public transit (e.g. by relocating or restricting access to bus stops or transfer facilities), and from limiting movement of public transit vehicles, without prior approval from the Santa Clara Transit Agency or other appropriate jurisdiction. Any approval will require submittal of specific construction management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a less -than -significant level. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(I) provides that in lieu of mitigation measures 4.4-8(a) through (h), the project applicant may prepare detailed construction impact mitigation plans for approval by the City of Palo Alto Chief Transportation Official and City of Menlo Park Transportation Manager prior to commencing any construction activities with potential transportation impacts. The plan must address all aspects of construction traffic management necessary to eliminate or reduce transportation impacts to acceptable levels. Mitigation measure 4.4-8(k) requires the applicant to identify and implement measures to ensure that construction activities do not reduce roadway capacity during major athletic events or other special events involving substantial numbers of visitors to the campus. This measure may be implemented by requiring special supplemental permits for Stanford -sponsored events during significant construction periods, or by other means. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential construction phase traffic and transportation impacts to a less than significant level. These measures provide for comprehensive planning for construction traffic and establish standards, criteria and implementing measures which will ensure that significant interference with vehicle, 97C702 lac 0031394 • • bicycle, pedestrian and emergency vehicle access is avoided during all phases of construction. Project Areas Outside the City Adoption and implementation of the applicable recommended measures on portions of the project outside the City is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that approvals are granted for those portions of the project outside the City. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that Menlo Park approves the project but does not implement the recommended mitigation measures, significant adverse impacts could result. 4.5 AIi Qj7ALITY 4.5-1 The PM,o generated during the construction of the proposed projects could be harmful to nearby pollutant -sensitive land uses. Mitigation measure 4.5-1 requires the applicant to implement a construction phase program which includes the following measures to reduce generation of particulate matter on the project site during construction: Water all active construction areas at least twice a day, or as deeded to prevent visible dust plumes from blowing off -site. Use tarpaulins or other effective covers for on -site storage piles and f or haul trucks on public streets. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas during construction. Sweep all paved access routes, parking areas, and staging areas daily (preferably with water sweepers). Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible amounts of soil material is carried onto public streets. If the working area of any construction site exceeds four acres at any one time, implement the following additional measures: Apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles. Limit construction site vehicle speed to 15 mph on unpaved areas. 22 970702 lac 0031390 Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. If the working area of any construction site is located near any sensitive receptors, implement the following measures in addition to those listed above: Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 25 mph. The last mitigation would be applicable to the Sand Hill Road widening where it passes the 14 single family homes in Menlo Park between Santa Cruz Avenue and Oak Avenue. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the identified potential adverse impact from construction phase dust and particulate matter to a less than significant level. Implementation of twice daily watering has been shown to reduce construction site PM10 emissions by at least 50 percent. This practice, in conjunction with the other listed measures, will reduce PM10 emissions during construction to less than the RAAQM!? threshold of significance of 80 lbs/day for all anticipated construction activity. Project Areas Outside the City Adoption and implementation of the applicable recommended measures on portions of the project outside the City is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that approvals are granted for those portions of the project outside the City. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that Menlo Park approves the project but does not implement the recommended mitigation measures, significant adverse impacts could result. 4.5-2 ROG, NOx, and PMw emissions generated by motor vehicles and residential stationary sources associated with the proposed projects would exceed the 80 lbs/day threshold and could hinier regional and local attainment of State ozone and PM.Q standards. Mitigation measure 4.5-2(a) requires the City to implement mitigation measure 4.4-2(a), which provides that final design for bicycle and pedestrian circulation within the Stanford West Apartments and Senior Housing sites shall be reviewed to ensure the circulation system will function as a part of regional or inter -city bicycle and pedestrian connections, thereby promoting increased use of bicycles or pedestrian travel by area residents. Mitigation measure 4.5-2(c) requires the City to implement mitigation measure 4.4-1, discussed above. The EIR concludes that the project will have no significant adverse effect on air pollution emissions, but that the Sand Hill 23 970702 lac 0031390 • • Road Corridor projects collectively would produce emissions which would exceed BAA MD thresholds of significance. The Council finds that this cumulative air quality impact is significant. 4.5-4 Cumulative daily traffic along major roadways in the project and study areas would emit more NOx, and PI6 with the implementation of the Sand Hill Road Projects, but emissions of ROG would decrease. The EIR found that the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects, would collectively contribute to significant cumulative increases of emissions of NOx and PM,0 in the project area, but that the SHRE/RRI project, by improving traffic capacity and service, and reducing congestion and delays in the project area, would actually decrease total anticipated emissions of NOx by 38 lbs per day and emissions of ROG by 249 lbs per day, thus resulting in a beneficial net air quality impact. The project will also result in a less -than -significant contribution of 56 lbs/day of PM,0 to cumulative PM10 emissions. The EIR did not identify any feasible mitigation measures for reducing cumulative air quality impacts associated with other development and cumulative traffic increases in the project area. Cumulative traffic -related air pollution emissions are regulated through means beyond the City's jurisdiction and control. Individual vehicle emissions and automotive fuels are subject to regulation only by state or federal government. Regional traffic levels are also heavily influenced by past and future planning and land use decisions over which the City has no control. The Council therefore finds that no additional feasible mitigation measures are presently available to the City to mitigate this cumulative impact, due to increases in regional traffic, and legal authority and responsibility, if any, for feasible mitigation measures is vested in other agencies beyond the City's control. The Council therefore finds that the identified cumulative impact is significant. 4,6 NOISE 4.6-1 The noise generated during the construction of the proposed projects could be disruptive to nearby noise -sensitive land uses. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(a) provides that construction activities will be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and if weekend work is necessary, to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturday, and to the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(b) provides that construction equipment shall be outfitted and maintained with noise reduction devices (i.e., mufflers, enclosures for stationary equipment, etc.) to obtain at least an average 10 dBA reduction shown feasible in Table 4.6-5. 24 9707021u 0031530 Mitigation measure 4.6-1(c) provides that stationary noise sources (e.g., compressors, concrete mixers, etc.) shall be located on portions of the sites furthest away from residential and other noise -sensitive areas, and that acoustic shielding shall be used with such equipment. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will substantially lessen construction phase noise impacts on surrounding residents and visitors within the City, but will not reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. The measures will reduce noise generated by construction activities and will eliminate construction noise during normal sleeping hours. However, significant noise impacts will remain due to inherent noise generated by large scale construction activity and heavy equipment. Project Areas Outside the City With respect to those portions of the project located beyond the City's boundaries, the EIR recommends the adoption of the above mitigation measures 4.6-1(a), (b) and (c) and also recommends the followin=g additional measure: Mitigation measure 4.6-1(d) provides that where construction of Sand Hill Road requires work in the road segment fronted by homes between Oar and Santa Cruz Avenues, temporary noise barriers shall be erected to protect the residents. The Council finds that the adoption and implementation of these measures outside the City of Palo Alto's boundaries is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park, and that these mitigation measures can and should be adopted by the responsible agency in the event that approvals are granted for those portions of the project located within the respective jurisdictions of these agencies. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that these responsible agencies approve the project but do not implement the recommended mitigation measures, significant adverse noise impacts would result. 4.6-3 Traffic generated by the proposed projects and other cumulative developments and the traffic accommodated by the proposed roadway improvements would impact existing and proposed residential and other sensitive land uses adjacent to roadways in the project and study areas. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(b) requires the applicant to construct a landscaped buffer strip with at least a 3 -foot -high berm along Sand Hill Road between Stanford Avenue and Oak Avenue in conjunction with implementation of the Sand Hill Road widening and realignment between Santa Cruz and Oak Avenues. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(c) requires the applicant to construct a soundwall 6 feet high or higher between Santa Cruz Avenue and Stanford Avenue in conjunction with implementation of 25 970702 lac 0031390 410 the Sand Hill Road widening to reduce noise from traffic increases at the nearby intersection. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(d), as modified by Condition 1.g of the project conditions of approval, requires the applicant to monitor noise increases in residences in the designated areas along Sand Hill Road where the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects may be responsible for more than 50% of potential increases in traffic -related noise. If noise increases are detected, the applicant shall be responsible for the costs of measures such as additional insulation, double glazed windows, or individual soundwalls as determined necessary by acoustic study to return interior noise levels in these residences to pre -project levels or to 45 dBa. Residents may also contribute any further funds necessary to further reduce interior noise levels to acceptable levels. The Council finds that these mitigation measures, if implemented, will substantially lessen significant cumulative traffic -related noise impacts along the Sand Hill Road corridor although these measures will not necessarily reduce cumulative noise impacts to a less than significant level for every residence affected by the project. Mitigation measure 4.6-3(d) provides for a fair share contribution by the applicant to the costs of physically upgrading affected residences with noise mitigation measures. Mitigation measures 4.6-3(b) and 4.6-3(c) provide for construction of physical barriers to reduce noise to acceptable levels at protected residences. The adopted mitigation measure 4.3-6(d) will impose responsibility for necessary monitoring of actual noise increases on the applicant and also imposes responsibility on the applicant to pay a share of actual mitigation costs in proportion to the applicant's responsibility for these impacts where the Sand Hill Corridor projects are the predominant cause of cumulative traffic -related noise impacts. The Council does not believe that the applicant can or equitably should be held responsible for more than a fair share of the costs of mitigating these potential cumulative noise impacts. Revisions made by the City to mitigation measure 4.3-6(d) are intended to strengthen the measure by fixing responsibility for noise monitoring on the applicant, and to also amend the measure to provide that the applicant shall be financially responsible only for a fair share of the costs of implementing the mitigation measure. The Council recognizes that mitigation measure 4.6-3(d), as adopted, will not result in lessening of cumulative noise impacts at locations at which less than 50% of the cumulative traffic -related noise increase is attributable to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council also recognizes that since implementation of mitigation measure 4.6-3(d) requires the cooperation of affected homeowners, the physical improvements necessary to reduce noise levels at some affected residences to acceptable levels may not be constructed by choice of the owner. The Council therefore recognizes that notwithstanding adoption of the identified mitigation measures, cumulative traffic -related noise impacts may remain significant for some residences affected by the projects. 26 970702 lac 0031590 * • With respect to mitigation measures 4.6-3(b) and 4.6-3(c), which will mitigate noise impacts on certain residences in Menlo Park, the Council further recognizes that although the conditions of approval require the applicant to accept responsibility for implementation of these mitigation measures, approval for implementation of these measures must be obtained from the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that implementation of these mitigation measures can and should be approved by the City of Menlo Park. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that approval for implementation of these measures is not obtained from Menlo Park, affected residences in Menlo Park would experience significant cumulative traffic -related noise impacts due to increased cumulative traffic on Sand Hill Road. 4,7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 4.7-1 Implementation of the proposed projects would result in loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(a) requires that native trees removed for the projects shall be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 on a per acre basis by the same species from locally collected stock, and provides for additional replanting if survival rates fall. below 80 percent. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(b) requires that non-native. landscape trees removed for the projects be replaced on a two -to -one basis. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(c) provides that the City shall contract with an independent arborist to (a) review plans to provide for maximum retention of trees and necessary additional tree protection measures; b) monitor project construction ; and c) recommend changes in the tree removal plan as necessary during construction. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(e) requires that all` trees adjacent to project construction areas which are not removed will be avoided and protected according to specified procedures incorporated into all construction and/or demolition contracts. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(g) provides that native trees removed from natural riparian habitats shall be replaced in accordance with mitigation measure 4.7-1(a) in open space areas adjacent to San Francisquito Creek, either in portions of the abandoned golf course and temporary bridge construction disturbance areas, and/or adjacent to the Stanford West Apartments and Senior Housing sites. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's long and intermediate term impacts on trees and related wildlife habitat within the City's jurisdiction to less than significant levels. These measures will also substantially lessen but will not avoid significant adverse short term impacts (0-10 years) to trees and related wildlife habitat within the City's jurisdiction. These measures provide for protection of as many trees as possible during project construction and replacement 27 970702 lac 0031390 • • of all trees removed as a result of the project at a greater than 1-1 ratio. These mitigation measures will therefore eventually result in replacement of all trees and related habitat with new trees and habitat of equal or greater value. However, because it will take a number of years for replacement trees to reach a level of maturity similar to those being removed, there will be an unavoidable short-term decline in quality of trees and related habitat value in the project area as a result of the project. Project Areas Outside the City With respect to those portions of the project located outside the City's boundaries, the EIR recommended adoption of the above mitigation measures 4.7-4(a), (b), (c), (e) and (g) and also the following two additional measures: Mitigation measure 4.7-1(d) provides that mitigation for loss of the large coast live oak on the Stanford University golf course shall be determined by the City of Menlo Park in accordance with its ordinance governing removal of "heritage" trees. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(f) provides that the large elderberry tree near existing Tee # 4 of the Stanford University golf course shall be preserved, fenced and protected from construction impacts by following the recommendations in Mitigation Measure 4.7-1(d). These measures shall be accomplished as part of comprehensive riparian and oak woodland mitigation and monitoring program as specified under Mitigation Measure 4.7-3. The Council finds that adoption and implementation of these mitigation measures for elements of the project outside the City of Palo Alto's boundaries is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, specifically the City of Menlo Park and County of Santa Clara, and that these mitigation measures can and should be adopted by these public agencies in the event that approvals are granted for those portions of the project located within the respective jurisdictions of these agencies. The Council recognizes, however, that in the event these mitigation measures are not adopted by the responsible agencies, significant adverse impacts will result. 4.7-2 Construction of the proposed projects would result in tree removals that could directly destroy nests, eggs and immature birds, and would remove future nesting habitat for birds, including sensitive species such as raptors and migrating songbirds. Mitigation measure 4.7-2(a) provides that in order to avoid the nesting season of raptors and sensitive songbirds, tree removals shall not take place between February 15 and June 30, unless otherwise determined by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) on a case -by -case basis. Mitigation measure 4.7-2(b) provides that if tree removal between January 1 and February 15 is required, a pre -construction survey shall be conducted to identify the presence, or lack 28 970702 lac 0031590 thereof, of nests of raptors. If nests are identified, CDFG shall be contacted and appropriate protocols for nest relocation shall be implemented. If relocation of occupied, viable nests is not feasible, construction shall be delayed and the tree left undisturbed until completion of nesting activity. Mitigation measure 4.7-2(c) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7 -1(a) -(f) and 4.7 -4(a) -(c) (tree replacement and riparian habitat replacement), discussed above. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's impacts on nesting birds within the City to a less than significant level. These measures will avoid any direct destruction of nests and provide for eventual replacement or enhancement of all nesting habitat lost. While there will be a short term loss of nesting habitat for all bird species and short and intermediate term loss of nesting habitat for raptors, there are sufficient alternate nesting sites in the area that this impact will not have any significant adverse effect on overall nesting opportunities or on bird populations. Project Areas Outside the City With respect to those portions of the project located outside the City, the Council finds that the adoption and implementation of the foregoing mitigation measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, specifically the City of Menlo Park and County of Santa Clara, and that these mitigation measures can and should be adopted by these public agencies in the event that approvals are granted for those portions of the project located within the respective jurisdictions of these agencies. The Council recognizes, however, that in the event these mitigation measures are not adopted by the responsible agencies, significant adverse impacts will result. 4.7-4 The proposed widening of the Sand Hill Road Bridge would result in loss of riparian vegetation and associated habitat values and would encroach urban development closer to the San Francisquito Creek corridor. Mitigation measure 4.7-4(a) requires that removal of riparian vegetation during construction shall be confined to the minimal area necessary and specifies additional measures to protect habitat values, including Compliance with mitigation measure 4.7-1; Plans to minimize impacts to riparian habitats from bridge construction shall be prepared to the satisfaction of a creek restoration. specialist. Replacement of wing walls with crib walls or large rocks/boulders that would allow planting of native riparian shrubs and trees will be considered; 970702 lac 0031390 29 Construction staging areas and access roads shall be located away from sensitive riparian habitats to the extent practicable; Damage to riparian trees shall be minimized by installing temporary barrier fencing; No disturbance will be allowed within the drip lines of trees to be avoided; No fencing, signs, electrical lines, etc. shall be attached to existing trees; The project shall avoid an unusually large blue elderberry adjacent to the Stanford University Golf Course Hole #4; [The project plans indicate that the elderberry would be avoided.] Recommendations in the arborist's report to avoid damage to tree roots shall be implemented. Mitigation measure 4.7-4(b) provides for preparation and implementation of a detailed mitigation plan where removal of riparian vegetation cannot be avoided. The mitigation plan shall provide for replacement of riparian trees, understory shrubs, and habitat values caused by construction of the new bridge and shall be developed in consultation with CDFG. Additional creek restoration measures will be developed as appropriate in coordination with CDFG, Coyote Creek Riparian Station (CCRS), and Coordinated Resource Management and Planning (CRMP) to allow for increased structural diversity in the channel through strategic placement of logs and other natural features. A general clean-up of the creek and bank stabilization and erosion control efforts should be included. A maintenance plan for temporary irrigation of plantings and control of non-native plant species shall be developed. This plan shall include minimum performance criteria of 80% for survivability at the end of a minimum 5 -year period. Plant materials used in mitigation shall be confined to California native species propagated from seeds or cuttings collected in the riparian corridor of San Francisquito Creek. Mitigation measure 4.7-4(c) Sand Hill Road shall be realigned up to 40 feet southwards to more closely coincide with the bounds of the existing Stanford Shopping Center parking lot where it approaches El Camino Real. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's impacts on riparian habitat to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures provide for a number of specific measures to avoid impacts on riparian habitat to the extent possible and provide for replacement and restoration of riparian habitat destroyed by construction activities. These measures will eliminate all significant impacts to the riparian habitat zone in the area of the Sand Hill Road extension. While permanent loss of a small area of riparian habitat in the area of 30 970702 lac 0031590 • the Sand Hill Road bridge widening is unavoidable when this portion of the project is commenced, the adopted measures will reduce damage to a less than significant level by minimizing the amount of riparian habitat affected and providing for permanent restoration of all riparian habitat incidentally affected by construction activities. Project Areas Outside the City The Council recognizes that construction of the San Francisquito bridge widening will require approval from the City of Menlo Park and that approval and full implementation of the recommended mitigation measures will also require approval and cooperation of the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that in the event that the City of Menlo Park grants necessary approvals for the bridge widening, Menlo Park can and should adopt the recommended mitigation measures. In the event, however, that necessary approvals for the bridge widening are not granted by Menlo Park, or that Menlo Park declines to approve or permit the implementation of the above mitigation measures which have been made conditions of the City of Palo Alto's approval of the project, the bridge widening will not be authorized to proceed by the City and the identified potentially significant impacts of the bridge widening on riparian habitat will not occur. 4.7-5 Construction -related noise and human activity for the proposed projects could create impacts to native wildlife species. Mitigation measure 4.7-5 prohibits construction activities within 50 -feet of riparian habitats along San Francisquito Creek during the nesting season (February 15 - June 30), unless otherwise determined on a case -by -case basis by the CDFG. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential noise and disturbance impacts on wildlife to a less than significant level. This potential impact will occur only in the area of the San Francisquito Creek bridge widening. The adopted mitigation measure will ensure that construction activity does not disrupt mating or nesting activities of birds in this area. While some temporary disruption of movement or feeding activities of other species may occur in this area during allowed construction period, this temporary disturbance will not be sufficient to have any long-term effects, such as loss of feeding or mating opportunities, on species or individuals within the area. Project Areas Outside the City The Council recognizes that approval for the bridge widening project must also be obtained from the City of Menlo Park and that adoption of the recommended mitigation measures for construction activities within Menlo Park is within the responsibility and authority of Menlo Park. The Council finds that in the event that Menlo Park grants approval for the bridge widening, Menlo Park can and should adopt the recommended mitigation measure. However, because the timing of construction activities for the bridge 31 970702 toe 0031590 widening will as a practical matter be subject to conditions imposed by the City in conjunction with its approval of the project, the Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure by the City will avoid the identified potential significant impact of the bridge widening whether or not the recommended mitigation measure is also adopted as a condition of project approval by Menlo Park. 4.7-6 During construction, runoff from the proposed projects could adversely affect aquatic life, including sensitive animal species, in San Prancisquito Creek due to erosion and sedimentation from disturbed areas. Mitigation measure 4.7-6 requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9 -1(a) -(c), which are discussed in greater detail in connection with Impact 4.9-1. Generally, these measures require the applicant to prepare and comply with a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ("SWPPP") which includes appropriate specific measures to reduce or eliminate potential erosion and sedimentation impacts. This potential impact results from the bridge widening element of SHRE/RRI project only. The Council finds that adoption of the identified mitigation measures will lessen the project's potential runoff impacts on aquatic life to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures require the preparation and compliance with a SWPPP, which will include specific measures to prevent excessive sediment or pollution runoff which might result in significant adverse effects on aquatic life or habitat values in San Francisquito Creek. Project Areas Outside the City The Council recognizes that approval for the bridge widening element of the project must also be obtained from the City of Menlo Park and that adoption of mitigation measures for construction activities within Menlo Park is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of Menlo Park. The Council finds that in the event that Menlo Park grants approval for the bridge widening, Menlo Park can and should adopt the recommended mitigation measures. Because the bridge widening is unlikely to be approved by Menlo Park separate from its approval for the widening of Sand Hill Road to four lanes and because preparation and implementation of a SWPPP is required by state law for all major construction projects, the Council also finds that there is no significant potential that significant unavoided impacts on aquatic life in San Francisquito Creek will occur as a result of the project. 4.7-7 Installation of the Sand Hill Road bridge widening project could adversely impact aquatic life, including sensitive species. Mitigation measure 4.7-7(a) requires that specific measures be taken to ensure that the bridge widening project will not create a long-term obstacle to upstream steelhead migration. If it is 32 970702 lac 0031590 • determined that the stream topography has not been adequately restored after construction, the applicant will be required to take further action to ensure adequate passage under the direction of CDFG. Mitigation measure 4.7-7(b) requires all in -channel construction to occur during a dry periods (previous to winter rains), or with appropriate cofferdams or other dewatering measures subject to the approval of CDFG. In no case will in -channel. construction occur during the rainy period (approximately October 15 to May 15) if construction would endanger migrating and breeding aquatic species, or disrupt migration or breeding. Mitigation measure 4.7-7(c) provides that the bridge construction area shall be surveyed for California red -legged frogs and northwestern pond turtles prior to construction, in accordance with CDFG survey protocols (Appendix I) , If frogs or turtles are found, specific mitigation measures will be implemented to protect these species. These measures could include: (1) collection and relocation of frog adults and larvae and turtles to suitable locations upstream immediately prior to construction, and (2) post -construction habitat enhancement of the site for turtles and frogs. Enhancement measures would include removal of non-native trees and shrubs, replacement with native woody riparian species such as willow, and provisions for physical improvements to the site for those species such as installation of basking logs for pond turtles. Mitigation measure 4.7-7(d) requires the applicant to comply with applicable terms and mitigation measures established by the Section 1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement negotiated with CDFG. Mitigation measure 4.7-7(e) requires implementation_ of all provisions of mitigation measures 4.7-5 and 4.7-6 applicable to the project. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the potential impacts of bridge widening on aquatic life in San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures will prevent interference with steelhead migration in San Francisquito Creek by preventing construction activities during the migration period and requiring restoration of the stream channel after completion of construction. The mitigation measures will also prevent any loss of California red -legged frogs and northwestern pond turtles, if any are found to exist in the bridge -widening area, by ensuring their removal prior to construction and requiring restoration of habitat values in the streambed after construction. While the project may result in some disturbance and possible loss of individuals of other non -sensitive species, and permanent loss of a small amount of habitat area, these impacts will be less than significant due to the limited area affected by the project. The adopted mitigation measures will prevent significant permanent loss of habitat by requiring restoration of all areas temporarily disturbed by construction activities. 33 970702 lac 0031590 • • Project Areas Outside the City The Council recognizes that approval for the bridge widening must also be obtained from the City of Menlo Park and that adoption of the recommended mitigation measures for construction activities within Menlo Park is within the responsibility and authority of Menlo Park. The Council finds that in the event that Menlo Park grants approval for the bridge widening, Menlo Park can and should adopt the recommended mitigation measures. However, because compliance with the mitigation measures adopted by the City will be required for construction of the bridge widening in any event, the Council finds that the identified potential significant impacts of the bridge widening will be reduced to a less than significant level whether or not the recommended mitigation measures are also adopted as conditions of project approval by Menlo Park. 4.7-8 Ongoing operation of the proposed projects could adversely affect aquatic life, including sensitive animal species, in San Francisquito Creek, by increasing runoff and non -point source urban pollutant loads. Mitigation measure 4.7-8(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9 -1(a) -(c), which are discussed in greater detail in connection with Impact 4.9-1. Generally, these measures require the applicant to prepare and comply with a SWPPP, which includes appropriate specific measures to reduce or eliminate potential erosion and sedimentation impacts discussed below. Mitigation measure 4.7-8(b) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-4(a) and (b), which are discussed in greater detail in connection with Impact 4.9-4. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the identified potential runoff and pollution impact on aquatic life in San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The EIR concluded that the project, in conjunction with other Sand Hill Road Corridor projects, could result in increased runoff of sediments and contaminants into San Francisquito Creek due to increased extent of paved surfaces, landscaping and ground disturbances associated with the projects. The adopted mitigation measures require preparation and implementation of construction phase and post -construction storm water runoff management plans which will incorporate recognized best management practices to minimize siltation and runoff of contaminants from the project areas. Residual silt and contaminant runoff reaching San Francisquito Creek, if any, will not constitute a sufficient addition to loads from existing development in the watershed to result in any measurable further deterioration of water quality conditions. With respect to those portions of the project located outside the City's boundaries, including changes to the Stanford golf course, the Council finds that adoption of the recommended mitigation measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, specifically the City of Menlo Park and 34 970702 lac 0031590 County of Santa Clara, and that these mitigation measures can and should be adopted by these jurisdictions if they grant approvals for those elements of the project located within its jurisdiction. Because the recommended mitigation measures implement requirements of state law, the Council also finds that there is no significant potential that unavoided significant adverse runoff impacts will result from approval of the project. 4.7-10 Implementation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with other proposed projects in the area would result in incremental loss of trees and associated wildlife habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-10(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7-1(a, b, c, and e), discussed above, for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. Mitigation measure 4.7-10(b) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7-1(d, f, and g), discussed above. Mitigation measure 4.7-1©(c) recommends that all planning jurisdictions in the project area, implement their respective tree protection and preservation ordinances. For those jurisdictions without such an ordinance, measures similar to those presented in mitigation measure 4.7-1 should be implemented on a project -by -project basis. The conditions of approval for the SHRE/RRI project incorporate each of the project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measures 4.7-10(a) and (b) . The Council has also adopted all of the applicable recotnttended project -specific mitigation measures as conditions of approval for each of the Sand Hill Corridor projects approved concurrently with the project. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the SHRE/RRI project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption and implementation of these measures in conjunction with the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects will also reduce the combined cumulative impact of these projects to a less than significant level. These measures generally provide for full replacement of trees lost due, to implementation of the project, thus eliminating any significant cumulative impact. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the SHRE/RRI project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects within the City or annexed to the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of potential cumulative loss of trees and 35 970702 lac 0031590 related habitat from future projects is presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative visual impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.7-11 Construction of the proposed projects, in conjunction with other projects in the project area, would cumulatively result in tree removals that could directly destroy nests, eggs and immature birds, and would remove future nesting habitat for birds, including sensitive species such as raptors and migrating songbirds. Mitigation measure 4. 1 Ligation measures 4.7 -2(a - West Apartments, Stanford projects. Mitigation measure 4.7 jurisdictions in the projec, those presented in mitigatio. basis. J 7-11(a) requires implementation of c) , discussed above, for the Stanford West Senior Housing and SHRE/RRI -11(b) recommends that all planning t area implement measures similar to measure 4.7-2 on a project -by -project The conditions of approval for the SHRE/RRI project incorporate the applicable project -specific mitigation measures reco,-tarlended in mitigation measure 4.7-11 (a) . The Council has also adopted the recommended project -specific mitigation measures as conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects approved concurrently with the project. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the SHRE/RRI project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts 'to a less than significant level. Adoption of these mitigation measures in conjunction with of the approved projects will also reduce the combined cumulative impact of the projects to a less than significant level. These measures generally provide for avoidance of tree -cutting which may directly impact nesting activities and provide for full replacement of trees lost due to implementation of the project, thus eliminating any significant cumulative impact. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the SHRE/RRI project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with future projects approved by the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that these agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of the potential cumulative impact from future projects is 36 9707021st 0031590 • • presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative visual impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.7-12 The proposed projects, in conjunction with other proposed projects in or adjacent to the San Francisquito Creek riparian corridor, would result in the loss of non-native grasslands which, due to contiguousness with riparian habitat, provide increased habitat diversity and foraging habitat for certain wildlife species, including raptors. Mitigation measure 4.7-12(b) reconu.1ends that further development of open grassland areas adjacent to San Francisquito Creek or its tributaries (primarily in the foothills southwest of Junipero Serra Road) not be approved without provisions to implement mitigation measures similar to those of mitigation measures 4.7 -3(a) -(h), in consultation w_`h CDFG. The Council recognizes that although the SHRE/RRI project will not itself result in an environmentally significant loss of grassland habitats, it will contribute to cumulative loss of grassland habitat in the San Francisquito Creek drainage through destruction of up to approximately 4.9 acres of existing grasslands. The project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measure 4.7-12(b) have been adopted by the Council as conditions of approval for the Stanford West Apartments project. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects considered by the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the SHRE/RRI project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be considered in conjunction with any future projects within the City or annexed to the City. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within .the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of the potential cumulative impact from future projects is presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative visual impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 37 970702 lac 0031590 • . 4.7-15 Ongoing operation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with similar projects within the same watershed, could cause cumulative adverse affects on aquatic life, including sensitive animal species, in San Francisquito Creek, by increasing runoff and non -point source urban pollutant loads. Mitigation measure 4.7-15 requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9 -7(a) -(c) for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. These measures incorporate mitigation measures 4.9 -1(a) -(c) and 4.9-4((a) and (b), which are discussed in greater detail in relation to Impact nos. 4.-1 and 4.9-4. The conditions of approval for the SHRE/RRI project incorporate each of the applicable project -specific mitigation measures recommended in mitigation measures 4.9 -7(a) -(c) . The Council has also adopted the recommended project -specific mitigation measures as conditions of approval for the other Sand Hill Corridor projects approved concurrently with the project. The Council finds that adoption of the recommended project -specific measures will lessen the SHRE/RRI project's contribution to the identified cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption and implementation of these mitigation measures in conjunction with the other Sand Hill Corridor projects will also reduce the combined cumulative impact of these projects to a less than significant level. The adopted project -specific measures generally provide for preparation and compliance with detailed SWPPP's, which will include specific measures to prevent excessive sediment or pollution runoff which might result in significant adverse effects on aquatic life or habitat values in San Francisquito Creek. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the SHRE/RRI project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects within the City or annexed to the City. Project Areas Outside the City Adoption and implementation of the recommended mitigation measures on portions of the project outside the City is within,the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park and County of Santa Clara. The Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that approvals are granted by these agencies. The Council also recognizes, howeve, that in the evut that these agencies approve elements of the project but do not implement the recommended mitigation measures, significant adverse impacts could result. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development projects outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that the agencies can and should implement such measures to the extent feasible. Because the nature and extent of the potential cumulative impact from 970702 lac 0031390 38 future projects is presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid potential cumulative impact resulting from increased runoff of sediment and pollutants into San Francisquito Creek. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. However, because the recommended mitigation measures generally implement requirements of state law, the Council finds that the potential for such significant cumulative impacts is low. 4.8 GFQ.OGY. SOILS AND SEISMICITY 4.8-1 Expansive or weak soils could damage foundations by providing inadequate support. Mitigation measure 4.8-1(a) requires site specific soil suitability analysis be conducted and soil stabilization procedures and foundation design criteria be adopted in accordance with engineering criteria where the existence of expansive and compressible soil conditions is known or suspected. Mitigation measure 4.8-1(b) requires participation by the project's registered soil engineer as deemed necessary to oversee, verify, and report on soil engineering procedures and results. The BIR concludes that soil conditions encountered during construction could, but will not necessarily create a risk of inadequate support for roadways and bridge foundations associated with the project. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen impacts related to potentially expansive or weak soils to a less than significant level. These measures implement standard engineering procedures and safeguards for ensuring safe construction of all roadways and related improvements. Project Areas Outside the City Adoption and implementation of these measures on portions of the project outside the City is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that approvals are granted by Menlo Park. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that Menlo Park approves the project but do not implement the recommended mitigation measures, significant adverse impacts could result. 39 970702 Lac 003I390 • • 4.d-2 The Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects area is subject to very strong seismically induced groundshaking which could threaten life and damage property. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(a) requires that documented site -specific seismic -restraint criteria be incorporated in the design of foundations and structures of the project which meet the minimum seismic -resistant design standards of CUBC Seismic Zone 4. Additional seismic -resistant earthwork and construction design criteria will be incorporated in the project where recommended by qualified experts. Roads, foundations and underground utilities in fill or alluvium shall be designed to accommodate settlement or compaction produced by seismic forces. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(b) requires on -site participation by the project's registered geological or geotechnical engineering consultant, as deemed appropriate, to oversee, verify, and report on seismic -restraint procedures and results. Mitigation measure 4.8-2(c) requires that an engineering geologist be contracted for third party review of all geologic, soils and engineering reports prepared for the proposed projects. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen impacts of exposure to seismic events to a less than significant level. These measures implement standard engineering procedures for ensuring adequate resistance of project elements to expected seismic events. Project Areas Outside the City Adoption and implementation of these measures on portions of the project outside the City is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park. The Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that approvals are granted by these agencies. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that these agencies approve the project but do not implement the recommended mitigation measures, significant adverse impacts could result. 4.8-3 Excavation and construction activities to widen Sand Hill Road Bridge could increase erosion of soil, increase deposition of sediment, and decrease bank stability in San Francisquito Creek. Mitigation measure 4.8-3 requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.7 -7(b) -(e), which provide for full mitigation of potential impacts on the San Francisquito Creek habitat. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential erosion impacts on San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The adopted measures preclude construction activity during times of active stream flow and require restoration of the stream channel to natural conditions following completion of bridge construction, thus avoiding any 40 970702 Lac 0031590 projects within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the SHRE/RRI project; however, the Council finds that such measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with any future projects approved by the City. Project Areas Outside the City This impact is not cumulatively significant for project improvements outside the City, since these improvements are improvements of existing roadways and intersections. With respect to cumulative impacts from future development outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that these agencies can and should implement such measures. Because the recommended mitigation measures rely in part upon compliance with existing seismic safety practices and standards, it is expected that other jurisdictions will implement the measures to a large extent. However, because the extent of the potential cumulative impact from future projects is presently unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended mitigation measures beyond current minimum standards is uncertain, the Council cannot fully determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen the potential cumulative impact associated with increased development in the seismically sensitive region around the projects. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the City. 4.9 HYDROLQGY MID 11A ` SR QUALITY 4.9-1 Grading, excavation and construction activities could result in increased deposition of sediment and/or discharge of pollutants in the storm drainage system and San Francisquito Creek and adversely affect water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-1(a) requires the applicant to prepare, retain and implement a SWPPP which describes the site, erosion and sediment controls, means of material storage and waste disposal, implementation of approved local plans, post -construction control measures and maintenance responsibilities, and non -storm water management controls. The plan shall implement appropriate Best Management Practices ("BMPs") identified in the EIR. Mitigation measure 4.9-1(h) requires that the SWPPP shall be prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the City's Director of Public Works prior to issuance of a building permit. The SWPPP shall be implemented and inspected as part of the approval process for the grading plans for each project. Mitigation measure 4.9-1(c) requires that all construction contracts include the City's construction contract Pollution Prevention Language as part of the project specifications. 42 970702 !u 0031590 Mitigation measure 4.9-1(d) requires the applicant to implement mitigation measures 4.7 -7(b) -(d). The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential sedimentation and contaminant impacts on San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The adopted mitigation measures implement regulatory requirements and practices demonstrated to prevent excessive or damaging runoff of sediments and pollutants from development sites. Residual runoff of sediments and contaminants from construction areas, if any, will not occur in sufficient quantities to significantly degrade existing water quality. Project Areas Outside the City Adoption and implementation of the recommended mitigation measures on portions of the project outside the City is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park and County of Santa Clara. The Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that approvals are granted by these agencies. The Council also recognizes, however, that in the event that these agencies approve elements of the project but do not implement the recommended mitigation measures, significant adverse impacts could result. 4.9-3 Widening Sand Hill Road Bridge would alter the shape of the San Francisquito Creek channel, potentially causing future hydraulic changes that could erode and/or destabilize downstream Creek banks. Mitigation measure 4.9-3(a) requires that the applicant fund preparation of a hydraulic analysis of the proposed bridge extension, abutments, wing wails, and adjacent channel configuration to demonstrate that there will be no increased flow rates which could increase downstream erosion. The results of the analysis shall be reviewed and approved by appropriate specialists 'under contract to the City and by the Santa Clara Valley Water District ("SCVWD") . Mitigation measure 4.9-3(b) requires that 4f substantial erosive flow rates are identified, the applicant will be required to incorporate sufficient flow -rate reduction features. These measures may include planting willows, roughening the bridge abutment, placing large boulders in the low flow level of the channel, or a combination of such measures to offset the increased erosive force. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the project's potential significant impact on hydrology of San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. The adopted measures provide for full hydraulic analysis of the potential effects of bridge reconstruction and incorporation of design features or other flow -rate reduction features which will 43 970702 lac 0031390 avoid any overall increase in stream flows and resulting downstream erosive effects from the bridge widening. Project Areas Outside the City Authority and responsibility for approval and implementation of the recommended mitigation measures is shared with the City of Menlo Park. However, since the bridge widening cannot, as a practical matter, proceed without City approvals and compliance with conditions imposed by the City, there is no potential that the project will proceed without implementation of the City's adopted mitigation measures. 4.9-4 Increased impervious surface and landscaping associated with development of the Proposed Projects could increase urban contaminants in surface runoff potentially reducing water quality in San Francisquito Creek. Mitigation measure 4.9-4(a) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-1(a) through (c) for all approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. Mitigation measure 4.9-4(b) requires that the SWPPP shall include in the final project design appropriate BMPs selected by the City, consisting either of detailed measures identified in the EIR or equivalent measures. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential operational contaminant impacts on San Francisquito Creek to a less than significant level. These adopted mitigation measures require incorporation of design features which will trap or otherwise minimize runoff of contaminants from paved surfaces constructed as part of the project. Residual contaminant runoff reaching San Francisquito Creek is not expected to constitute a sufficient addition to loads from existing development in the watershed to result in any measurable further deterioration of water quality. Project Areas Outside the City Adoption and implementation of the recommended mitigation measures on portions of the project outside the City is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park and County of Santa Clara. The Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that approvals are granted by these agencies. Since these measures reflect in part requirements of state law, the Council finds that there is no significant potential that the identified potential impacts will result from approval of portions of the project outside the City. 44 970702 lac 0031390 • • 4.9-5 Project construction activities in combination with other construction projects in the Watershed could cumulatively increase sediment and other construction -related pollutants in San Francisquito Creek and adversely affect water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(a) recommends that all area jurisdictions ensure that project applicants include BMPs in construction contracts implementing the requirements of NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit #CAS029718. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(b) recommends that applicants for all area projects of five acres or more, be required to prepare a detailed SWPPP under the State General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(c) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-l(a) through (c) for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. The recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures have been incorporated in the conditions of approval for the project and for the other Sand Hill Corridor projects approved concurrently with the project. The Council finds that adoption of these project -specific measures will lessen the project's contribution to potential cumulative sedimentation and contaminant impacts associated with construction to a less than significant level and will also lessen the combined cumulative impact of the approved Sand Hill Corridor projects to a less than significant level. The adopted measures require implementation of control measures which will preclude significant sedimentation or contaminant impacts from the projects. Project Areas Outside the City Adoption and implementation of the recommended project -specific mitigation measures for portions -of the project outside the City is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park and County of Santa Clara. The Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures can and should be adopted in the event that approvals'are granted by these agencies. Since the recommended measures implement requirements of state law, it is unlikely that a significant impact will result from approval of portions of the project located outside the City. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures with respect to future development projects within the City's jurisdiction is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the SHRE/RRI project; however, the Council finds that the City can and should adopt and implement such recommended measures for any future projects approved by the City which have a potential to adversely affect San Francisquito Creek. With respect to implementation of the recommended mitigation measures by jurisdictions other than the City, the Council finds that implementation of such measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies 45 970702 tic 0031590 and that the recommended measures can and should be implemented by these agencies. These measures are generally consistent with requirements imposed by state law. However, because the nature and extent of potential area -wide cumulative impacts from future development are presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement the recommended measures beyond minimum standards is presently unknown, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will avoid potential cumulative impacts. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant despite the adoption of available mitigation measures by the Council. 4.9-6 Increased impervious surfaces associated with development of the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects and areas in the San Prancisquito Creek Watershed could cumulatively increase surface runoff, potentially increasing the frequency and severalty of existing downstream flooding. Mitigation measure 4.9-6 recommends that all jurisdictions regulating development in the San Francisquito Creek Watershed require that adequate drainage and flood control facilities be provided for existing and planned development, in compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies and ordinances and in coordination with SCVWD requirements. Due to the limited increase in existing paved areas effected by the project, the SHRE/RRI will not significantly contribute to any potential cumulative flooding impacts. Measures have been included in the design and conditions of approval of the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects which will lessen the collective contribution of the Sand Hill Corridor projects to potential flood impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption and implementation of the recommended mitigation measure with respect to future development within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the SHRE/RRI project; however, the Council finds that appropriate measures can and should be adopted in conjunction with future development to the full extent required by City general plan policies and regulations.' Project Areas Outside the City The cumulative impact from portions of the project located outside the City are not considered potentially significant due to the small area of additional paved surfaces which will result from the projects. With respect to future development located outside of the City, the Council finds that implementation of the recommended measures is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of other public agencies and that these agencies can and should implement the recommended mitigation. Because the extent of potential cumulative impacts from future development are presently speculative and unknown, and because the extent to which other agencies can and will implement appropriate mitigation measures or programs and the degree to which implementation will result in 970702 lac 0031590 46 effective mitigation are not presently known, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented or the extent to which implementation will lessen potential cumulative effects. The Council therefore finds that this cumulative impact remains potentially significant. 4.9-7 Increased impervious surface associated with development of the Stanford Sand Rill Road Corridor Projects and areas in the San Francisquito Creek Watershed could cumulatively increase urban contaminants in surface runoff potentially reducing water quality. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(a) recommends that all local jurisdictions ensure that future project applicants include BMPs as part of project design in accordance with SFBRWQCB requirements. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(b) notes that it is within the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB` to require that comprehensive SWPPPs and monitoring programs be implemented by all storm water dischargers associated with specified industrial activities, in compliance with the State's General Permits, and to require that such plans shall include BMPs or equally effective measures. Mitigation measure 4.9-7(c) requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-4(a) and (b) by all approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The conditions of approval for the SHRE/RRI project incorporate each of the recommended project -specific mitigation measures or equivalent measures to mitigate the identified potential cumulative contaminant impact to San Francisquito Creek. The Council finds that adoption of these recommended measures will lessen the project's contribution to the identified potential cumulative impact to a less than significant level. The recommended measures have also been adopted in connection with approval of the other approved Sand Hill Road Corridor projects, and will lessen the combined cumulative impact of the projects to a less than significant level. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures for future development within the City is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the SHRE/RRI project. However, the Council finds that the City can and should adopt equivalent measures for all projects approved within its jurisdiction. Project Areas Outside the City The cumulative impact from portions of the project located outside the City are not considered potentially significant due to the small area of additional paved surfaces which will result from the projects. With respect to impacts resulting from future development outside the City, jurisdiction and responsibility for implementation of recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures is vested in other public agencies. The Council finds that these jurisdictions can and should implement such measures. However, because the nature and extent of potential cumulative 47 970702 lac 0031590 impacts from future development are presently speculative and unknown, and the degree to which other jurisdictions will implement recommended mitigation measures is uncertain, the Council cannot determine at this time the extent to which the recommended measures will be implemented outside the City's boundaries and also cannot determine the extent to which these measures, if implemented, will lessen or avoid the identified potential cumulative impact. This cumulative impact therefore remains potentially significant. 4.11 UTILITIES. ENERGY._ AND rNFRASTRUcTURX 4.11-3 The proposed projects could use water wastefully. Mitigation measure 4.11-3 requires that in order to reduce water consumption, the project design shall incorporate measures to maximize the efficient use of water and minimize total water consumption. Specific measures to be included are the following: • All landscape designs shall incorporate and address the City Landscape Water Efficiency Standards. The project sites would be subject to an annual maximum water allowance for landscaping. The project applicant shall coordinate with the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department, Resource Management Division to determine other conservation related improvements that would apply to the projects. The EIR concluded that because final plans have not been completed and evaluated, there existed a potential that water used for irrigating median strips and landscaping could be used inefficiently. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measure will lessen this potentially significant impact to insignificance by ensuring that final landscaping and construction plans meet current City Water Efficiency Standards and incorporate additional conservation measures if recommended by City staff. 4.11-4 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing water services. Mitigation measure 4.11-4 provides that prior to the start of construction of infrastructure, the project applicant shall provide a plan for review and approval to the City of Palo Alto Director of Utilities outlining the approach to be taken to minimize the impact to existing utilities and customers. The EIR determined that connection of infrastructure associated with the Sand Hill Corridor projects to existing service lines and facilities could result in potentially significant interruptions of utility services for existing users, specifically interruptions of water service (Impact 4-11-4), wastewater service (Impact 4-11-11), electrical service (Impact 4-11-17) and gas service (Impact 4-11-24.) Construction activities associated with the SHRE/RRI project could potentially further delay timely connections in the absence of adequate planning and coordination. 970702 lac 0031 590 48 S The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measures will lessen each of these potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level by requiring the applicant to submit and obtain approval of plans which will provide for completion of all utility connections for the project with the minimum necessary interruption of existing services. 4.11-7 Cumulative development could use water wastefully. Mitigation measure 4.11-7 provides that the City shall ensure that each new project approved within the City requiring ARB approval is required to be consistent with and implement the City policies and programs related to water conservation. The EIR concluded that existing City policies and programs are adequate to avoid cumulative wasteful use of water, and that a significant adverse impact had the potential to occur on',y if the City failed to continue to implement these policies and programs. The recommended mitigation measure provides that the City will continue to implement existing water conservation policies by making compliance a condition of ARB approval for all new projects. While implementation of this mitigation measure is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the Stanford West Senior Housing project, the Council finds that this mitigation measure can and should be implemented with respect to future projects and will lessen the identified potentially significant cumulative impact to insignificance. 4.11-9 The proposed projects would require improvement of the existing 21 -inch wastewater line. Mitigation measure 4.11-9 requires that in the event that open -trench technology is used, the project applicant shall ensure that the new 24 -inch wastewater line is constructed coincident with, and placed in the right-of-way of, Palo Road, during Phase T of project construction, thereby avoiding potential biological impacts and conflicts with future uses associated with the alternative location of the line. The SHRE/RRI itself will not contribute to the need .for expanded wastewater lines, but will facilitate development of the Sand Hill Corridor development projects which contribute to this impact. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the potential significant adverse impacts associated with construction of a new 21" wastewater line to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure requires the applicant to either use technology which avoids trenching and resulting tree removal in the Stanford arboretum, or to relocate the route of the replacement pipeline along existing right-of-way containing no significant environmental resources in order to avoid impacts to the arboretum. 49 970702 lac 0031590 • 4.11-11 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing wastewater services. Mitigation measure 4.11-11 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4, discussed above. See findings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 4.11-13 Cumulative development could require major infrastructure improvements to the existing wastewater system. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(a) recommends that the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department ensure that developers responsible for construction of new wastewater lines coordinate with all other parties intending to utilize the line. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(b) recommends that sewer line capacity studies satisfactory to the City's Director of Utilities be conducted prior to initiating future cumulative development. Mitigation measure 4.11-13(c) recommends that all final designs for the sizing of new sewer mains shall be based on infiltration from a 20 -year storm and peak base wastewater. flow. The EIR concluded that lack of coordinated planning for future development could result in failure to adequately size area wastewater lines, resulting in future need to again upgrade these lines to provide needed capacity. The SHRE/RRI project will not directly contribute to the need for future expanded wastewater lines and facilities, but will facilitate development of the Sand Hill Corridor development projects which will contribute to this need. The recommended mitigation measures provide for full evaluation and correct sizing of mains prior to cumulative development. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's contribution to this potential cumulative impact to a less -than significant level. These mitigation measures will also lessen the overall potential cumulative impact to a less than significant level since implementation of these measures will result in provision of adequate long-term capacity for all reasonably foreseeable development. 4.11-17 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing electrical services. Mitigation measure 4.11-17 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4 for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. See findings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 50 970702 lac 0031590 • 4.11-24 Construction of the proposed improvements could disrupt existing gas services. Mitigation measure 4.11-24 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.11-4 for all Sand Hill Corridor projects. See findings re mitigation measure 4.11-4. 4.12 MIMIC SERVICES AND SCHOOLS 4.12-3 Increased traffic due to the construction of the proposed projects could reduce PAFD response times, especially during special events on the Stanford Campus, peak commute hours, and seasonal holidays, when traffic flow is known to increase significantly. Mitigation measure 4.12-3(a) requires that as a condition of project approval, the project applicant shall prepare a construction vehicle management plan that: Uses established truck routes for large construction vehicles. Includes an approved construction plan, including scheduling, routes and methods, to minimize construction impacts during peak annual traffic periods (e.g., special events at Stanford University, holiday seasons, etc.). Ensures that Sand Hill Road will remain open at all times in each direction to allow direct access to the Stanford University Medical Center from both directions. Mitigation measure 4.12-3(b) requires the applicant to prepare Rnd comply with an emergency response plan that specifies alternate emergency response routes to the project sites and vicinity which meet the Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) and Palo Alto Police Department (PAPD) response time goals. The Plan shall keep one lane in each direction of Sand Hill Road open at all times. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's construction -phase impact on emergency response times. The measure provides for detailed planning which will ensure that adequate alternate response routes and a minimum of one open lane on Sand Hill Road are maintained at all times during to construction for emergency traffic. 4.12-4 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of fire suppression service calls to the PAFD. Mitigation measure 4.12-4 provides that in order to offset cumulative increased demand on Palo Alto Fire Department resources, one of the following measures shall be implemented: 51 970702 lac 0031590 The project applicant shall provide funding to support the acquisition of additional PAFD personnel for their fair share of cumulative impacts; The City should require fair -share contributions from all future projects placing increased demand on the PAFD; or From the increased tax revenues generated by the projects and other future cumulative projects, the City could provide additional resources to the PAFD from the City's General Fund. Increased traffic on Sand Hill Road and related roadway improvements may result in some incremental increase in fire suppression service calls, but this cumulative impact is anticipated primarily due to increased development and population associated with the Sand Hill Corridor development projects and other future development. The Council has adopted the third of these mitigation alternatives for the project through the conditions of approval. The Council finds that this mitigation measure will lessen the identified cumulative impact on fire suppression services to a less than significant level for each .of the Sand Hill Corridor projects and future development, Cost and revenue projections for the approved projects indicate that increased tax revenues from the projects and other potential future development will be more than adequate to fund additional resources for the PAFD necessary to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased PAFD resources identified in EIR mitigation measure 4.12-4; specifically (1) fair share applicant funding of new PAFD personnel, and (2) fair -share contributions from future projects, are not necessary based on current information to maintain adequate fire protection within the City and would result in imposing unnecessary special additional costs on new development. 4.12-5 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of medical emergency service calls to the PAFD. Mitigation measure 4.12-5 provides that future cumulative projects could pay fair share toward a medi-van unit; or, alternately, the City could provide additional medi-van resources to the PAFD with general fund increases from tax revenues generated by the projects and other future cumulative projects. While increased traffic on Sand Hill Road and related improved roadways included in the project could result in some incremental increase in emergency medical responses, the EIR concluded that this potential cumulative impact would result primarily from increased population and development associated with the Sand Hill Corridor development projects and future development. The Council has adopted the second of these mitigation alternatives for the Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that this mitigation measure will lessen the identified potential cumulative impact on emergency medical services to a less than significant 52 970702 lac 0031590 • level. Cost and revenue projections indicate that increased tax revenues from the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other potential future development will be adequate to fund additional emergency medical resources as needed to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased emergency medical services identified in EIR mitigation measure 4.12-5, specifically that future development projects directly pay a fair share toward a medi-van unit or, is not necessary to maintain adequate level of emergency medical services based on current information. 4.12-6 Increased construction traffic from cumulative development could reduce PAFD response times. Mitigation measure 4.12-6 provides that as part of the project approval process, the City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment shall ensure the following: All projects coordinate with the PAFD and PAPD to prepare an emergency response plan for the construction period that specifies alternate emergency response routes to the project site and vicinity which meet the Departments' response time goals; and The Emergency Response Plan for all Sand Hill Corridor projects will specify procedures to allow simultaneous construction without increasing emergency response times to an unacceptable level. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's potential impact on PAFD emergency response times to insignificance. This measure ensures that detailed plans will be developed and implemented to ensure that existing or adequate alternative response routes will be kept open at all times to permit PAFD responses to all service areas within PAFD response time standards. 4.12-9 Increased traffic due to the construction of the proposed projects could increase police response times, especially during special events on the Stanford Campus, peak commute hours, •and seasonal holidays, when traffic flow is known to increase significantly. Mitigation measure 4.12-9 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.12-3(b). The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's construction -phase impact on emergency response times. Mitigation measure 4.12-3(b) provides for detailed planning which will ensure that adequate alternate response routes and a minimum of one open lane on Sand Hill Road are maintained at all times during to construction for emergency traffic. 53 970702 lac 0031590 • • 4.12-10 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of police service calls to the PAPD. Mitigation measure 4.12-10 identifies three alternate means of funding additional police services to offset increased demand on Palo Alto Police Department resources. Condition 2.c of the project conditions of approval provides that the City shall adopt the second of these alternatives, specifically, the City shall fund additional. PAPD resources from increased tax revenues generated by the projects and other future cumulative projects, This cumulative impact will result primarily from increased population and development with the Sand Hill Corridor development projects and other future development; however, increased traffic on Sand Hill Road and related roadways could result in some incremental increase in PAPD responses to the Sand Hill Corridor area. The Council finds that the adopted mitigation will lessen the potential cumulative impact of the project and of new development generally on police services to a less than significant level. Cost and revenue projections indicate that increased tax revenues from the Sand Hill Corridor projects and other potential future development will be adequate to fund additional police services as needed to maintain current levels of service throughout the City. The Council also finds that the alternative means of funding increased police services identified in the EIR is not necessary to maintain adequate level of police services based on current information. 4.12-11 Designs of cumulative development projects could present security risks to occupants and police patrol personnel. Mitigation measure 4.12-11 recommends that the City Department of Planning and Community Environment ensure that future project lighting and landscaping are reviewed with the PAPD to lessen safety risks. The ARB shall provide final review and approval. The EIR did not find that the SHRE/RRI project would have any significant direct or cumulative impact on public security. Project specific mitigation measures have been adopted in conjunction with other Sand Hill Corridor projects which will mitigate any potential cumulative impact from the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Adoption of this mitigation measure as a policy governing review and approval of all future development within the City is beyond the scope of the decision and approvals granted for the Stanford West Senior Housing project. However, the Council finds that the recommended mitigation measure can and should be implemented in relation to future development projects within the City. 4.12-12 Increased construction traffic from cumulative development could increase PAPD response times. Mitigation measure 4.12-12 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.12-6 by all approved Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects. 54 9707021u 0031590 This mitigation measure has been implemented by adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-6 for the each of the approved Sand Hill Corridor projects. The Council finds that implementation of mitigation measure 4.12-6 will lessen the cumulative impact of construction of the projects on PAPD response times to a less than significant level. 4.12-14 Cumulative development, including the proposed Stanford West Apartments Project, would cause 1C -12th grade enrollments to exceed PAJSD school capacity of 916 students or 12 percent in year 2004-2005. The EIR proposed the adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-14 to mitigate this identified cumulative impact. Mitigation measure 4.12-14 recommends that the City adopt a policy that encourages all future developers to contribute their fair share over and above payment of the development fee to mitigate school impacts. The SHRE/RRI project will not result in addition of any children to area schools, and thus will not cause or contribute to any cumulative impact on public schools regardless of the adoption of this suggested mitigation measure. However, the Council recognizes that cumulative impacts on public schools from future development are potentially significant, and further finds that these impacts would remain potentially significant whether or not the suggested mitigation measure is adopted as a policy of the City since contributions by developers would remain voluntary regardless of City encouragement. Adoption of a City policy of encouraging future developers to contribute school mitigation funds in excess of mandatory development fees is beyond the scope of approvals for the SHRE/RRI project. However, the Council has taken substantial steps to encourage the project applicant to discuss and fund mutually acceptable mitigation measures with the school district in conjunction with the Stanford West Apartments project approved concurrently with this project, and can and will continue to take similar steps to encourage voluntary additional contributions by developers of future projects with the goal of fully offsetting any impacts which cannot be mitigated through mandatory development fees and tax revenue increases associated with new development. 4.12-18 The proposed projects would increase solid waste generation in the City of Palo Alto during construction requiring increased diversion to meet the goals of AB 939. Mitigation measure 4.12-18 requires the applicant to prepare and implement a construction recycling plan approved by the City Public Works Department. The plan shall include specific steps to achieve the City's short-term Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) diversion goal of 30-40 percent through various specified measures. The Council finds that adoption of this measure will lessen the identified potential solid waste impact to a less than 55 970702 lac 0031390 significant level. The approved recycling plan will ensure that provision is made for recovering all recyclable wastes generated during construction, thus avoiding unnecessary placement of recyclable materials in landfills. 4.12.19 Cumulative development anticipated by the City through Year 2010, including the proposed projects, would increase solid waste generation by 5.5 percent over 1995 levels to 155,650 tons per year based on the projected growth of population and employees. Mitigation measure 4.12-19(a) recommends that the City require significant new development projects to prepare construction recycling plans as part of the project approval process. The construction plan shall include specific steps to achieve the AB939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000 through various specified measures. Mitigation measure 4.12-19(b) recommends that the City require new development projects to prepare long-term operational recycling programs as part of project approval process. The programs should meet the AB939 diversion goal of 50 percent by 2000, and include various additional specified elements While construction of the project will result in generation of solid wastes, future operations of the project will not produce any significant quantities of solid waste. The recommended mitigation measures have been effectively applied to the SHRE/RRI project through the adoption of mitigation measure 4.12-18. The Council finds that adoption. of this measure will reduce the project's contribution to potential cumulative solid waste impacts to a less than significant level. Adoption of mitigation measures 4.12-19(a) and 4.12-19(b) as policies governing review and approval of all future development within the City is beyond the scope of the decision and approvals granted for the Stanford West Senior Housing project. However, the Council finds that adoption of these proposed mitigation measures or equivalent measures' can and should be considered in relation to future development projects within the City. 5.2 GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS The EIR concluded that the SHRE/RRI project would have a significant growth inducing impact in that it would facilitate expansion of the Stanford Shopping Center beyond the approximately additional 49,000 square feet allowed under City zoning restrictions. No mitigation measures are identified in the EIR for this significant impact and the impact is significant. In addition, changes were made in the proposed Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project to limit actual expansion to 80,000 square feet of new commercial space, substantially below the 160,000 square feet initially proposed by the applicant. While these actions will not permanently preclude possible further shopping center expansion, these actions will substantially lessen the short and intermediate term growth inducing impact of the project on the Stanford Shopping Center. 56 9707021ac 0031590 • • The EIR also concluded that relocation of Pasteur Drive as part of the SHRE/RRI project and resulting creation of a new 2.5 acre parcel will have a potentially significant growth inducing impact on the parcel. No mitigation measures are identified in the EIR for this impact and the impact therefore remains potentially significant. Chapter 5.1 of the EIR evaluates the potential environmental impacts which may result from development of this Parcel. The Council has fully considered these potential impacts and found them acceptable in granting approval for the Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation and for the SHRE/RRI project. The EIR also concluded that the improvement and extension of Palo Drive as part of the SHRE/RRI project would substantially improve access to the Hoover Pavilion area of the Stanford University property, thereby reducing a potential obstacle to development of existing vacant land in this area and resulting in a potentially significant growth -inducing impact. No mitigation measures are identified in the EIR for this impact. The potential impacts of residential development in portions of the affected area were considered in the EIR as part of its evaluation of potential alternative sites for the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects, The Council has reviewed this information and concluded that large-scale housing development in this area is not feasible at the present time due to extensive conflicts with adopted land use plans and policies of the City, County of Santa Clara and Stanford University. However, existing land use designations in this area do allow some development and changes could be made to the existing land use policies which restrict development in the area in the long term. The Council therefore also concurs that this growth inducing impact is potentially significant. The EIR concluded that extension of Stock Farm Road as part of the project would substantially improve access to the area currently designated as Special Condition Area "8" in Stanford's General Use Permit, thereby eliminating an obstacle to development and resulting in a potentially significant growth -inducing impact for this area. However, the Council finds that because the extension of Stock Farm Road will result in permanent improvements which could facilitate future development, this impact remains potentially significant in the long term. The EIR concluded that the overall set of roadway improvements may serve to remove an obstacle to development of the contemplated 400,000 square foot expansion of the Stanford Medical Center. The traffic impacts of such development of the Medical Center as well as the impacts of cumulative development along the Sand Hill corridor were considered in the cumulative impacts analysis contained in the EIR. The EIR finds the impacts of such cumulative development within the Sand Hill Corridor significant, as discussed elsewhere in these findings. 57 970702 lie 0031390 • • PART II ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT SHRE/RRI ALTERNATIVES AND SPECIAL ROADWAY CONSIDERATIONS The EIR for the SHRE/RRI project evaluated a No Project alternative and 15 additional "Special Roadway Considerations' which consist of alternative configurations of roadways and related improvements for the Sand Hill Corridor. The Council has considered each of these potential alternatives to the approved project and finds that each of the identified alternatives and special roadway considerations is infeasible (except as set forth below) and/or is within the jurisdiction and responsibility of another public agency. The findings set forth below stating this Council's reasons for rejecting each alternative in favor of the proposed project describe several separate grounds for rejecting each alternative, each of which this Council has determined constitutes an independent basis for this Council's decision to approve the project and to reject the proposed alternative. In considering these alternatives and special roadway considerations, the Council recognizes that major elements of the project are located outside the territory of the City and that jurisdiction and responsibility for approval, rejection and consideration of alternatives and mitigation measures for these elements of the project is vested in other public agencies. Primary jurisdiction and authority is vested in the City of Menlo Park, although approval of certain improvements and mitigation measures related to the project will be required from the County of Santa Clara and County of San Mateo. The Council also recognizes that approval of the San Francisquito Creek bridge widening element of the project will, as a practical matter, require approval from both the City of Palo Alto and City of Menlo Park since portions of the project site lie within both jurisdictions. In considering the alternatives and special roadway considerations other than the No Project alternative and Special Roadway Consideration No. 5, the Council recommends that basic elements of the project located within Menlo Park also be approved by Menlo Park. The Council also finds, however, that in the event that those portions of the project located within Menlo Park are not approved, or are only partially approved, the Council's findings concerning the feasibility and desirability of each of the alternatives and Special Roadway Considerations be.Lpw would remain the same and the Council would find the approved project to be the preferable alternative and would therefore approve the project regardless of approval or non -approval of elements of the project subject to authority of Menlo Park and/or other responsible agencies. As further discussed in relation to Special Roadway Consideration No. 5, the Council specifically makes this finding with respect to the potential alternative scenario in which the City of Menlo Park were to elect not to approve widening of Sand Hill Road to four lanes within its jurisdiction notwithstanding approvals granted by the Council for expansion of portions of Sand Hill Road to four lanes within the City's jurisdiction. 58 970702 lac 0031390 pc) Project (N4 Action/No Development) Alternative Under this alternative, none of the proposed area roadway improvements would be constructed. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible and unacceptable because it would result in continuing degradation of traffic conditions in the Sand Hill Corridor and surrounding area, would not provide road improvements necessary to serve the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects approved by the Ccuncil and would not meet any other objectives of the project. The Sand Hill Road Extension, Expansion and Related Roadway Improvements are intended to provide a comprehensive package of road improvements to serve existing and expected cumulative traffic in the project area and to accommodate additional traffic generated by the Stanford West Apartments, Stanford West Senior Housing and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion projects. Analysis performed in the EIR, and amply documented by public testimony in hearings on the Sand Hill Corridor projects demonstrates that Sand Hill Road and several key intersections within the project area are already functioning at unacceptable or marginally acceptable levels of service. Due to the limited capacity of Sand Hill Road and lack •of direct and logical connection to El Camino Real, many vehicles also utilize residential streets to traverse the area, resulting in adverse impacts on residential neighborhoods. The EIR analysis also indicates that cumulative traffic will continue to increase in the area whether or not the proposed road improvements are implemented, resulting in continuing overall degradation of area -wide traffic conditions, increased delays and unacceptable levels of service at critical intersections and continued increases in use of residential streets by commuter and other through traffic. Approval of the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects without approval of elements of the SHRE/RRI project would significantly further worsen conditions in the area of these projects and at critical intersections utilized by traffic from these projects. These impacts would be further compounded by continued expansion of the Stanford Shopping Center, whether up to the approximately 49,000 square feet allowed by prior City zoning approvals or through the addition of further square footage allowed in connection with the proposed Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project. The Council has determined that approval of the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects is desirable and necessary to permit the City to achieve City housing goals and objectives. In order to provide vehicle access and egress to these residential projects at acceptable levels of service and to also provide additional roadway capacity to accommodate expected cumulative traffic increases in the Sand Hill Corridor, and to reduce undesirable use of residential and secondary streets in the project area for through traffic, the Council finds it is necessary to undertake substantial improvements to the existing road network in the Sand Hill Corridor. The approved project has been carefully designed to provide needed improvements without unnecessary or excessive environmental costs and in the judgment of 970702 lac 0031390 59 the Council provides the overall best available solution for area transportation needs. Reduced $ca a Roadw@Ly 41rernatives The EIR evaluated an alternative to the proposed SHRE/RRI project consisting of improvements to selected intersections in the project area, but without widening or extension of Sand Hill Road and major improvements to any other roadways included in the SHRE/RRI project. The Council finds that the Reduced Scale Roadway alternative is infeasible and unacceptable because it would not achieve the major objective of the project of providing and improving long-term regional traffic capacity in the Sand Hill Road corridor, and would not as effectively achieve the project objectives of accommodating locally generated traffic, including traffic from the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion projects at acceptable levels of service. The Draft EIR concluded that the intersection improvements included in the Reduced Scale Roadway alternative would mitigate many of the effects of increased traffic from the Sand Hill Corridor development projects, but would not provide any relief from the existing unsatisfactory arterial level of service on Sand Hill Road or from further degradation of existing conditions on Sand Hill Road anticipated to result from cumulative traffic increases unrelated to the proposed Sand Hill Corridor projects. Because this alternative does not provide for substantial improvement of conditions for through traffic on Sand Hill Road, it also would not achieve the project objective of reducing traffic on secondary and residential streets in the area currently used as alternative travel routes to avoid congestion on Sand Hill Road. Overall, this alternative would not result in any comprehensive or long-term solution for area traffic problems and would at most result in maintenance or small improvements in levels of service at individual intersections in the project area. Project With Four. Lane Sand Hill Road Extension As originally proposed and evaluated in the DEIR, the Sand Hill Road extension element of the SHRE/RRI project provided for a four lane extension of Sand Hill Road from Arboretum to El Camino Real. The Council rejected this proposed project in favor of the approved project on the grounds that the four lane extension would result in more severe impacts in terms of change of character of the Sand Hill Corridor and would result in overall higher volumes of traffic on Sand Hill Road due to the propensity of the four lane road to draw traffic to Sand Hill Road. As approved, the project will provide acceptable levels of service at the Sand Hill Road/E1 Camino and Sand Hill Road/Arboretum intersections notwithstanding the reduction of the Sand Hill Road extension to two lanes, and will result in somewhat reduced volumes of traffic at other intersections along Sand Hill Road. While the approved project 60 9707021u 0031590 • will nct achieve ali of the regional traffic benefits of the project as effectively as the project with a four -lane extension, the Council finds that the two lane extension, coupled with expansion of Sand Hill Road to four lanes east of Arboretum, and the other roadway improvements, provides the best overall balancing of local and regional traffic demands with the City's objectives of maintaining the overall character of the area to the extent possible and avoiding encouragement of continued overuse and excessive reliance on automobiles as a primary means of travel. Special Roadway Consideration 1: Two -Lane Extension of Sand Hill Road Special Roadway Consideration 1, as discussed in the DEIR, would substitute a two-lane, rather than a four -lane, extension of Sand Hill Road from Arboretum Drive to El Camino Real. The SHRE/RRI project as approved by the Council substantially implements this alternative. Speci l Roadway Consideration Two -Lane Extension of Sand Hill Road/Limited Turr. Movements at El Camino Real SRC 2 assumes a two-lane extension of Sand Hill Road, similar to SRC 1, but with only right -in, left -in, and right -out turning movements allowed between Sand Hill Road and El Camino Real. Southbound and northbound El Camino Real traffic would be allowed to turn into the new two-lane roadway extension, but eastbound Sand Hill Road traffic would only be allowed to turn right (southbound) onto El Camino Real. Through movements across El Camino Real between Sand Hill Road and Alma Street would remain prohibited. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible and unacceptable because it would unduly restrict the flow of area traffic and not as effectively achieve the overall traffic service objectives of the project. This alternative also would not have any substantial environmental advantages over the approved project. SRC 2 would require vehicles traveling east on Sand Hill Road to destinations north of Sand Hill Road to either utilize Arboretum and Quarry roads or other indirect routes to El Camino, thus unnecessarily increasing traffic on these roads and affedted intersections, or to locate alternate routes through residential streets or secondary roadways in Menlo Park which are not intended for such traffic. Approximately 65' of the displaced traffic would be expected to utilize Arboretum Drive and Quarry Road to reach El Camino resulting in decreased LOS at the Quarry Road/El Camino intersection unless additional turning lanes are provided at that location. Remaining traffic would be diverted to other area roads, including roads through Menlo Park residential. areas. The Council believes that the overall transportation service and management objectives of the project are better served by providing for direct to El Camino Real for east -bound traffic from Sand Hill Road. 61 970702 Iac 0031390 Special. Roadway CanEtiftratj,on 3: Two -Lang Bxt erasion with 10 Widening of $aryd Hill. Road SRC 3 would provide a two-lane extension of Sand Hill Road from Arboretum Drive to El Camino Real, with no widening of Sand Hill Road west of Arboretum. All existing portions of Sand Hill Road would remain at the current number of lanes. No frontage road would be constructed and the Sand Hill Road bridge would not be widened. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible and unacceptable because it would result in unacceptable overall traffic levels of service in the affected area and would not as effectively achieve the long term traffic management objectives of the project. Overall, SRC 3 would result in significantly different travel conditions than the approved projects, due to the absence of additional capacity en Sand Hill Road. While SRC 3 would provide a two-lane direct connection between Sand Hill Road and El Camino, thus attracting additional traffic to Sand Hill Road, SRC 3 does not provide for arty substantial increase in traffic capacity along portions of Sand Hill Road east of Arboretum. This section of Sand Hill Road will be required to serve not only existing and expected cumulative traffic but additional local and regional traffic which will result from the approved Sand Hill Corridor development projects and increased traffic resulting from the extension of Sand Hill Road through to El Camino Real. In the absence of increased capacity provided by expansion of Sand Hill Road to four lanes and related intersection improvements, this additional traffic will result in unacceptable congestion and delay on Sand Hill Road. Although this alternative would reduce the effects of the project on existing trees, on San Francisquito Creek and on an identified archaeological site, the Council finds that these impacts can and have been adequately mitigated through mitigation measures adopted in the conditions for the approved project. Implementation of this alternative would also reduce the attractiveness of Sand Hill Road as an alternative to residential and secondary streets in the area, primarily in Menlo Park, thus reducing or eliminating another potential beneficial effect of the approved project. Overall, the Council finds that the balancing of local and regional transportation demands and environmental and planning considerations is best achieved by expansion of those portions of Sand Hill Road located east of Arboretum to provide needed additional traffic capacity. Special Roadway Consideration 4: No Extension, No Widening of Sand Hill Road SRC 4 assumes there would be no extension of Sand Hill Road from Arboretum Road to El Camino Real, nor widening of the existing Sand Hill Road west of Arboretum Road. The proposed Frontage Road, parallel to Sand Hill Road between the Creek and Santa Cruz Avenue would not be constructed. However, the other components of the proposed roadway improvement plan, including the extension of Stock 62 970702 tac 0031590 • • Farm Road to Sand Hill Road, the construction of Vineyard Lane, the extension and improvement to Palo Road, the modifications to El Camino Real, and the modification of Quarry Road, would be completed. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible and unacceptable because it would not achieve any of the major long term traffic management objectives of the project and would result in unacceptable overall traffic conditions in the project area due to expected increased cumulative traffic and traffic from the approved Sand Hill Corridor development projects. This alternative is similar to the No Project alternative except that it provides for limited localized road improvements and improved connections to Sand Hill Road in the immediate project area. While these improvements would result in some localized traffic circulation benefits, they would not provide additional traffic capacity on Sand Hill Road needed to avoid adverse impacts from the addition of significant future cumulative traffic and traffic from the approved Sand Hill Corridor development projects. As a result, significant increases in congestion and delay in the Sand Hill Road corridor would result under this alternative, despite the local improvements which would be provided. Special Roadway Consideration 5: No Improvements to Sand Hill Road West of San Francisquito Creek SRC 5 includes the four -lane extension of Sand Hill Road to El Camino Real, as well as other proposed roadway improvements. However, Sand Hill Road would be widened only east of San Francisquito Creek to Arboretum Road. No improvements would be made to the portion of Sand Hill Road in Menlo Park, or to the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection. The Sand Hill Road Bridge over San Francisquito Creek would not be widened, and the intersection of Oak Avenue and Sand Hill Road would not be altered. The Frontage Road, parallel to Sand Hill Road between Oak Avenue and Santa Cruz Avenue, would not be constructed. This SRC describes the condition in San Mateo County in the event that the City of Menlo Park were to choose not to approve the portion of the Sand Hill Road Widening project (including the Sand Hill Road Bridge) located within its jurisdiction. With respect to those portions of the SHRE/RRI project located within the City of Palo Alto, the Council finds that the four lane extension aspect of this alternative is infeasible and unacceptable for the reasons stated with respect the "Project With Four Lane Sand Hill Road Extension" alternative, i.e. that the project would have unacceptable adverse impacts on the character of the surrounding area. The City's overall transportation objectives can be achieved with less impact on the existing character of the area with the two-lane extension of Sand Hill Road. With respect to those portions of the project located outside the City's territory, the Council recognizes that authority and responsibility for approval of these elements of the project is vested in other public agencies, primarily the City of Menlo Park. 63 970702 lac 0031590 • S The Council, however, does not recommend this alternative and believes that it is infeasible and unacceptable in the long term. This alternative would result in continuing deterioration of traffic conditions and unacceptable traffic levels of service in the affected area and would not achieve the long term traffic management objectives of the project. While this alternative would result in substantial improvements within the City of Palo Alto, the restriction of Sand Hill Road to two lanes at San Francisquito Creek would continue to limit the capacity of Sand Hill Road and would have substantially the same effect as SRC 3, i.e. substantial degradation of traffic conditions on Sand Hill Road due to the addition of cumulative traffic and traffic from the approved Sand Hill Corridor development projects. In addition, this alternative does not provide for improvements along portions of Sand Hill Road within Menlo Park which were included in the project to improve or eliminate already existing traffic -related noise and aesthetic problems experienced by neighboring residents. Adoption of this alternative by Menlo Park would therefore result in worse impacts for some Menlo Park residents than the approved project. The Council finds that adverse environmental impacts of the project on San Francisquito Creek and within Menlo Park can be adequately mitigated through measures identified in the EIR for the proje.ct which may be implemented by the City and Menlo Park. Continuation of the two-lane status of Sand Hill Road will not serve the regional traffic service objectives of the project and will result in worse traffic related impacts, including noise, air pollution, travel time delays and degraded levels of service than the approved project and is not in the best interests of any public agency nor of citizens affected by the project. Special Roadway Consideration 6: Alma Street Closure at Sand Hill Road/El Camino Real Intersection SRC 6 includes all of the proposed roadway improvements, except that the existing Alma Street would be closed immediately east of El Camino Real. There would not be a connection between Alma Street and El Camino Real, nor between Alma Street and Sand Hill Road. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible and unacceptable because it would result in decreased traffic mobility and degraded levels of services on a number of streets in Palo Alto east of El Camino. Implementation of this alternative would not have any substantial positive or negative effect on impacts related to the Sand Hill Corridor projects. Analysis in the EIR, however, indicates that this alternative would have significant adverse impacts to the downtown Palo Alto area south of Lytton. This impacts are considered undesirable and unacceptable by the Council. Special Roadway Consideration 7: Through Movement Allowed from Sand Hill Road to Alma Street SRC 7 would allow through traffic from Alma across El Camino onto Sand Hill Road and vice versa, and westbound left turns from 64 970702 lac 0031590 • El Camino onto Sand Hill Road, unlike the proposed project. SRC 7 would otherwise be the same as the proposed project. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible and unacceptable because it would result in unacceptable deterioration of traffic level of service at the El Camino/Sand Hill Road intersection and unacceptable traffic impacts and potential increased traffic -related noise on residential streets in the City. SRC 7 would result in a through route from Sand Hill Road directly to the downtown Palo Alto area, thus attracting increased vehicle trips to City roadways such as Hawthorn, Everett and Lytton and through adjoining residential areas. In addition, by adding cross -traffic and increased numbers of signalized turning movements at the intersection of El Camino and Sand Hill Road, this alternative would result in substantial deterioration of level of service at this intersection from LOS C with the approved project to LOS E under SRC 7. These significant impacts are not sufficiently offset by possible benefits tc mobility choices to justify approval of this SRC. apecial Roadway Consideration 8: Right -In, Left -Out Only at Sand Hill Road/Oak Avenue Intersection SRC 8 assumes approval of all components of the proposed project, with the exception that right hand turns from southbound lane of Oak Hill Road onto Sand Hill Road (westbound) would be prohibited. Only the southbound left turn from Oak to eastbound Sand Hill, and the inbound right turn from westbound Sand Hill to Oak Avenue, would be permitted under SRC 8. The changes to the SHRE/RRI project proposed in SRC 8 are located outside of the City's territory. Jurisdiction and responsibility for consideration and possibly adoption of this alternative is vested the City of Menlo Park. The Council, however, does not recommend approval of this alternative. The possible benefit of SRC 8 is a reduction of 180 westbound peak hour vehicle trips on Sand Hill Road west of Oak Road, and some corresponding reduction of southbound traffic on Oak Road near Sand Hill Road. This traffic, however, would be redistributed on other area roads including residential streets, thus conflicting with 'one of the major traffic management objectives of the project of reducing traffic on residential and secondary roadways in the area of the project. Special Roadway Consideration 9: Full Movement at Sand Hill Road/Oak Avenue Intersection SRC 9 provides for a full intersection at Sand Hill Road/Oak Avenue. Unlike the proposed project, the left turn from eastbound Sand Hill Road to Oak Avenue would be permitted. The only changes to the SHRE/RRI project proposed in SRC 9 are located outside of the City's territory. Jurisdiction and responsibility for consideration and possible adoption of this alternative is vested in City of Menlo Park. The Council, however, 65 970702 lac 003 3 590 • does not recommend approval of this alternative. The benefit of SRC 9 consists of an increase in mobility and convenience identifiable for residents of the area near Oak Avenue south of Sand Hill Road. This benefit will be offset by deterioration in traffic LOS at the Oak Avenue/Sand Hill Road intersection from LOS B to LOS C during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, and also by potential increases in traffic through adjoining residential areas. These adverse results are not justified by the localized benefits of SRC 9 and conflict with the larger local and regional traffic management objectives of the project. Special F:c dway Consideration 10: Oak Avenue Closure SRC 10 consists of construction of all roadway and intersection improvements of the originally proposed project, except that Oak Avenue would be closed immediately north of Vine Street, and therefore would not connect with. Sand Hill Road. There would be a cul-de-sac at this new terminus of Oak Avenue. Traffic from Vine Street would access Sand Hill Road via a connection using the existing segment of Oak Avenue. The changes to the SHRE/RRI project proposed in SRC 10 are located outside of the City's erritory. Jurisdiction and responsibility for consideration and adoption of this alternative is vested in the City of Menlo Park. The Council does not make any recommendation for or against approval of this alternative. SRC 10 would not result in any significant beneficial or adverse impacts on area -wide or regional traffic conditions. SRC 10 would result in a substantial reduction of traffic and related noise on Oak Avenue, but increased traffic on other local streets resulting from the diversion of traffic from Oak Avenue. The Council finds that approval or disapproval of this alternative is a policy question appropriately resolved by the City of Menlo Park. Special Roadway Consideration 11: No Direct Access to Sand Hill Road from Leland and Stanford Avenues SRC 11 would eliminate direct connections between Sand Hill Road and Leland and Stanford Avenues across the proposed Frontage Road. This would allow construction of a soundwall in the landscape median/berm proposed to be located between Sand Hill Road and the adjacent residences, should one be desired or required. The proposed Frontage Road would end in a cul-de-sac west of Oak Avenue, and the Oak Avenue/Sand Hill Road intersection would remain in its existing configuration. The changes to the SHRE/RRI project proposed in SRC 11 are located outside of the City's territory. Jurisdiction and responsibility for consideration and possible adoption of this alternative is vested in other public agencies, specifically the City of Menlo Park and County of San Mateo. The Council does not make any recommendation for or against approval of this alternative. SRC 11 would not significantly affect traffic conditions on Sand Hill Road or at any major intersection. This alternative would result in trade-offs between accessibility to the 66 970702 lac 0031590 University Heights neighborhood, and reduction in local traffic and noise impacts caused by the reconfiguration of local roadways and construction of a noise wall. The Council finds that approval or disapproval of this alternative is a policy question appropriately resolved by the City of Menlo Park and County of San Mateo. Special Roadway Consideration 12: No Stock Farm Road Connection SRC 12 consists of all roadway improvements as originally proposed, except that the extension of Stock Farm Road from the Stanford Campus to Sand Hill Road would not be constructed. This SRC considers the effects of failure of the County of Santa Clara to grant necessary approvals for the Stock Farm road extension. The changes to the proposed project included in SRC 12 are located in unincorporated territory of the County of Santa Clara. Jurisdiction and responsibility for consideration and possible adoption of this alternative is therefore vested in the County of Santa Clara. The Council, however, does not recommend adoption of this alternative. Although not a critical element of the proposed project, the Stock Farm Road extension would permit traffic entering and leaving the Stanford University central facilities .to avoid portions of Sand Hill Road to the east of the proposed Stock Farm/Sand Hill Road intersection, thus reducing congestion in that area. The Stock Farm/Sand Hill Road connection also contributes to more efficient routing of traffic through or around the Santa Cruz/Sand Hill Road and Santa Cruz/Alpine/Junipero Serra intersections. Elimination of the Stock Farm Road extension would decrease the moderately beneficial effect of the SHRE/RRI protect at these two intersections. Special Roadway Consideration 1 Left Turn Lanes Road_with in SRC 13 assumes that Quarry Road would remain a two-lane road rather than be expanded to four lanes, and that a single left -turn lane would be provided on northbound El Camino Real. The intersection of Quarry Road and El Camino Real, however, would be modified to allow all movements, unlike the present configuration which allows only the right turn in from southbound El Camino Real. The Council finds that this alternative is infeasible and unacceptable because it would interfere with achievement of the traffic management objectives of the SHRE/RRI project and would result in unacceptable traffic conflicts on Quarry Road due to the location of new parking facilities approved as part of the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion along Quarry Road. The principal effect of SRC 13 on traffic would be to divert local traffic to or from El Camino Real to other local east -west streets, primarily Palm Drive and the Sand Hill Road extension, with resulting increases in vehicle trips on those streets. With the addition of substantial new parking facilities along Quarry Road, increased lane capacity on Quarry Road is also necessary to avoid substantial conflicts among vehicles traveling Quarry Road and vehicles entering and leaving parking structures, with resulting delays and increased 67 970702 1a 0031590 • accident potential. Approval of this alternative would result in traffic conditions on Quarry Road which are unacceptable to the Council. Special oadway ConsideratiQlz 14; Aggressive Transportation Demand Measures SRC 14 assumes that aggressive Transportation Demand Measures (TDM) would be successfully implemented in the cities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park. This SRC assumes also that Stanford properties covered under the General Use Permit (GUP) would not generate any net new trips, per the General Use Permit agreement. All elements of the proposed project would still be implemented. The Council finds that achievement of the traffic reductions assumed by SRC 14 is not feasible due to lack of feasible means of implementing or enforcing TDM requirements of the magnitude necessary to achieve substantial traffic reductions in the project area. In addition, jurisdiction and responsibility for implementation and enforcement of mandatory TDM programs would be vested in other public agencies over which the City has no control. The Council strongly supports TDM programs. The City of Palo Alto currently offers TDM programs for its employees and provides support for private employers which seek to implement TDM measures on a voluntary basis. Stanford University has also implemented a number of TDM measures in conjunction with policies of its general use permit. The Council finds that other public agencies can and should adopt similar measures. The City of Menlo Park currently provides support for voluntary TDM measures. However, the City and neighboring jurisdictions currently lack authority to impose direct mandatory TDM requirements on existing or proposed development. While other measures suggested in the EIR such as transit studies and increases in parking fees can be considered by the City and neighboring jurisdictions as part of any comprehensive transportation and traffic management strategy, adoption of such measures is beyond the scope of approvals granted for the SHRE/RRI project. Special Roadway Consideration 15: Addition of Connecting Road between Main Street (Stanford West Apartments) and Oak Creek Apartments SRC 15 involves the addition of a road connecting the eastern end of the Oak Creek Apartments with Main Street in the Stanford West Apartments, immediately north of the intersection of Main Street/Sand Hill Road/Pasteur Drive. The Council gave extensive consideration to the proposed Oak Creek Apartments connector in its deliberations on the Stanford West Apartments project and was prepared to require implementation of this measure as a condition of project approval, notwithstanding objections received from the applicant due to the potential adverse effect of the connector road on archaeological resources. The objective of the Council was to promote a sense of community and neighborhood connection between the Oak Creek Apartments and 68 970702 lac 0031590 • Stanford West Apartments. Communications received from the owners of the Oak Creek Apartments, however, indicate that these private property owners do not support and will not consent to the connector road. The Council finds that lack of consent from affected property owners makes implementation of the proposed connector roadway infeasible. The Stanford West Apartments project has been revised to include an unpaved bicycle and pedestrian path between the Oak Creek Apartments and Stanford West Apartments. This pathway will serve to promote the Council's objective of promoting community feeling and interchange between the adjoining apartment projects by promoting pedestrian and bicycle travel between the projects and reducing any sense of separateness caused by the open space area between the projects. Alternatives Proposed in Public Comments Proposed Alpine Road Alternative During scoping for the EIR and in comments on the DEIR, various members of the public proposed, as an alternative to widening Sand Hill Road to four lanes, an alternative consisting of constructing a new arterial roadway from Alpine Road through Stanford campus lands to connect with major roadways in Palo Alto. The stated purpose of this alternative is to relieve the need for widening on Sand Hill Road. No specific route has been suggested for this alternative, although a number of commenters have recommended that the new roadway connect to and utilize existing roadways on the Stanford campus to the extent practical. Following scoping for the EIR, City staff determined that this alternative was not feasible and did not warrant further study in the EIR because of potential economic and environmental costs of the proposed alternative roadway. The reasons for rejection of this alternative were further discussed in responses to comments on the DEIR. The Council also finds that the Alpine Road alternative is infeasible because it would result in unacceptable environmental impacts, unacceptable economic costs and is speculative and uncertain of implementation due to dependency upon approvals by the. Counties of San Mateo and Santa Clara and inconsistency with existing County land use policies and circulation plans. The Council also finds that this alternative was correctly determined to be infeasible in scoping for the EIR, and did not merit further consideration in the EIR nor preparation and circulation of a supplemental EIR. Implementation of this alternative, regardless of the route finally selected, would require construction of a new roadway across currently undisturbed portions of San Francisquito Creek and across existing open space lands mapped by Stanford as having significant environmental value. Extensive grading would be required. Construction and operation of the roadway would further serve to divide an existing large contiguous area of natural open space and would have the potential to induce new development into this area, potentially resulting in further substantial 69 970702 Inc 0031590 • highlyenvir ntal impacts. Implementation of this alternative ��speculative in that implementation would re is also alarm Stanford University and approval require internali f not and San Mateo. Such approvals, by the at all, s of to occur within a raon, if granted at all existing land use sable time are also believesthe plans routing othe affected area. period under C the ouncil The City throughr l the existing Stanford central campus areal is neither route leno with the academic on desirable nor Implementation of this alternative would of also hr signalized intersection where the university. JuniPero Serra proposed new require a new delays Boulevard, resulting in roadway crossed es along this major travel route. Fore all a of theaddiabove reasonsa nproposed alternative road could not feasibly obtain van r objective of the Sand Hill Road extension and widen' at less environmental cost than the any approved in part by the Council, Pro�ect as presently proosedtand 970702 Ise 0031390 70 • • EXHIBIT P P, ,Z$j DRIVE PAIL ANNEXATION COUNCIL FINDINGS CONCERNING MITIGATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES During preparation of the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Sand Hill Corridor projects it was determined that implementation of the projects would result in creation of a new, undeveloped 2.5 acre parcel of land located immediately south of Sand Hill Road and east of the realignment portion of Pasteur Drive proposed as an element of the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements projects. Annexation of this newly created parcel from the County of Santa Clara to the City of Palo Alto has been proposed in conjunction with the Sand Hill Corridor projects. No development of this land is proposed or contemplated at this time. However, the annexation and assumed pre -zoning of this parcel was designated as a "project° for purposes of the EIR, and potential long term impacts which may result from eventual development cf the Pasteur Drive Parcel evaluated in the EIR. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines section 15091, the Council has considered the identified potential future impacts of annexation and pre -zoning, the mitigation measures for these potential impacts identified in the EIR and the alternatives to the project identified in the EIR in light of all evidence in the administrative record of proceedings on the Sand Hill Corridor projects, and makes the following findings. I. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES: A. Annexation of the Pasteur Drive Parcel will not result in any physical changes on the parcel or any other changes to the existing physical conditions on or around the parcel, and therefore will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. The Council therefore has not adopted any changes or mitigation measures for the project in conjunction with annexation of the parcel. B. Future development of the Pasteur Drive Parcel has the potential to result in significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the EIR. Jurisdiction and responsibility for adoption and implementation of mitigation measures for these identified impacts will be vested in the City of Palo Alto and its various departments and subdivisions. The Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures or equivalent measures can and should be adopted by the City in connection with future development approvals and that these mitigation measures, if adopted and implemented, will lessen all 1 970702 !as 0031591 significant or potentially significant adverse environmental impacts of the project to a less than significant level. 1. Cultural Resgur;es. Although no significant archaeological or other cultural resources are presently known to exist on or adjacent to the site, development of the site could possibly result in impacts to currently unknown archaeological resources. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measure 5.1-1 requires that a qualified archaeologist be retained to monitor construction activities. In the event that significant archaeological resources or Native American burials are discovered during construction, construction work in the area will be halted and further appropriate mitigation measures recommended by the archaeologist shall be implemented. The Council finds that implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potential adverse impact on archaeological resources to a less than significant revel. The measure implements standard practices for monitoring construction and implementing further mitigation measures as needed to avoid impacts to any archaeological resources discovered on the site. 2. Air Ouality--Construction Dust. Dust generated by construction activities on the site could lead to violations of federal or state standards for PM10 emissions and could adversely affected nearby properties, including particularly residents of the 1100 Welch Road apartment complex. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measure 5.1-2 requires implementation mitigation measure 4.5-1, which provides for implementation of the following dust control measures as needed to prevent dust emissions from the site during construction: Water all active construction areas,at least twice a day, or as needed to prevent visible dust plumes from, blowing off -site. Use tarpaulins or other effective covers ,for on -site storage piles and for haul trucks on public streets. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas during construction. Sweep all paved access routes, parking areas, and staging areas daily (preferably with water sweepers). Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible amounts of soil material is carried onto public streets. 2 970702 lac 0031591 Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 25 mph. The last mitigation would be applicable to the project due to the presence of the 1100 Welch Road apartments immediately adjacent to the site. The Council finds that implementation of these measures will lessen the potential dust emission impact to a less than significant level. Exceedance of the BAAQMD threshold of significance of 80 lbs/day for PM10 emissions during construction is unlikely due to the small size of the parcel. Implementation of twice daily watering has been shown to reduce construction site PM1, emissions by at least 50 percent. This and other measures wil ensure that PM10 emissions during construction are reduced to levels well below the identified threshold of significance. 3. Noise. Existing noise data gathered at the neighboring Welch Road apartments site indicates that residents of the project site are likely to be exposed to traffic generated noise of up to 64 dBa. Construction activity on the site could also result in significant noise impacts on neighboring properties, particularly the Welsh Road apartments. Mitigation Measures: With respect to noise impacts on future residents, exposure to exterior noise levels of up to 54 dBa along the portions of the site nearest Sand Hill Road may be unavoidable. Reduction of interior noise levels to an acceptable level of 45 dBa or less can and will be achieved through incorporation of construction techniques and materials as required by law. Because most living activities on the site will be conducted indoors, or may be concentrated in areas of the site away from Sand Hill Road, the Council finds that these measures will reduce noise impacts to a less than significant level. With respect to construction phase noise impacts, mitigation measure 5.1-3 requires implementation of mitigation measure 4.6-1. Mitigation measure 4.6-1 requires implementation of the following measures. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(a) provides that construction activities will be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and if weekend work is necessary, to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturday, and to the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(b) provides that construction equipment shall be outfitted and maintained with noise reduction devices (i.e., mufflers, enclosures for stationary equipment, etc.) to obtain at least an average 10 dBA reduction shown feasible in Table 4.6-5. Mitigation measure 4.6-1(c) provides that stationary noise sources (e.g., compressors, concrete mixers, etc.) shall be located on portions of the sites furthest away from residential and 970702 lac 0031591 • other noise -sensitive areas, and that acoustic shielding shall be used with such equipment. The Council finds that implementation of these measures will reduce potential construction noise impacts on neighboring residents to a less than significant level. While operation of heavy equipment on the site and other construction activities could result in potential noise impacts. However, given the relatively small size and limited duration of anticipated construction activities, implementation of these mitigation measures will limit noise impacts sufficiently to preclude significant impacts on neighboring residents. 4, Biological Impacts. Development of the site could potentially damage or require removal of four existing mature oak trees on the site. Mitigation Measures. It is probable that at least three of the oak trees on the site could be avoided by construction due to their location near Sand Hill Road. Mitigation measures 5.1-4 provides, however, that in the event that trees will potentially be lost or damaged due to proposed development, mitigation shall be provided in accordance with mitigation measure 4.7-1, which provides for the following measures: Mitigation measure 4.7-1(a) requires that native trees removed for the projects shall be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 on a per acre basis with specimens of the same species obtained from locally collected stock, and provides for additional replanting if survival rates fall below 80 percent. Mitigation measure. 4.7-1(b) requires that non-native landscape trees removed for the projects be replaced on a two -to -one basis. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(c) provides that, the City shall contract with an independent arborist to (a) review construction plans to provide for maximum retention of trees and necessary additional tree protection measures; b) monitor project construction; and c) recommend changes in the tree removal plan as necessary during construction. Mitigation measure 4.7-1(e) requires that all trees adjacent to project construction areas which are not removed will be avo..ded and protected according to specified procedures incorporated into all construction and/or demolition contracts. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential biological impact to a less than significant level. These measures provide for protection of as many trees as possible during project construction and replacement of all trees removed as a result of the project, with additional measures to ensure the success of replanting. Due to the small number and the location of trees on the project site, short term impacts caused by loss of trees, if any, would not be considered 4 970702 lac 0031591 • • significant. All long term impacts will be fully mitigated by maturing of replacement trees required by the adopted mitigation. 5. ecology. Soils and Seismicity. Development on the site would be subject to potential hazards from expansive or weak soils encountered during construction and from earthquakes following construction. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measure 5.1-5 recommends implementation of mitigation measures 4.8-4(a) and (b). Mitigation measure 4.8-4(a) provides that documented site -specific seismic -restraint criteria will be incorporated in the design of foundations and structures of all future development on the site, including (1) minimum seism=.c-resistant design standards shall conform to the CUBC Seismic Zone 4 Standards; (2) additional seismic -resistant earthwork and construction design criteria shall be incorporated as necessary, based on the site -specific engineering recommendations; (3) site preparation shall be supervised by geological or geotechnical consultants; (4) "as built" maps and a report shall be filed with the City, showing details of the site geology, the location and type of seismic -restraint facilities, and documenting satisfactory seismic performance for buildings, roads, foundations and underground utilities. Mitigation measure 4.8-4(b) requires on -site oversight, verification and reporting by registered geological or geotechnical engineering consultants where deemed appropriate by the City's Chief Building Official. The Council finds that adoption of these mitigation measures will lessen the identified potential geological impacts to a less than significant level. These measures require implementation of sound engineering practices and standards which will preclude construction of unsafe buildings or dmprovements on the property. 6. Hydrology and Water Quality. Construction activities and an increase in paved areas on the site after development could increase sedimentation or contamination in San Francisquito Creek. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation measure 5.1-6 requires implementation of mitigation measures 4.9-5(a) and 4.9-6. Mitigation measure 4.9-5(a) provides that the City shall ensure that construction contracts for the project incorporate best management practices for minimizing potential runoff and sedimentation impacts from the project site consistent with requirements of the applicable NPDES Municipal Storm Water permit. Mitigation measure 4.9-6 requires that development on the site be required to comply with applicable Comprehensive Plan goals 5 970702 lac 0031591 and policies, ordinances and Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) requirements. The Council finds that adoption of these measures will lessen the project's potential runoff and sedimentation impacts to a less than significant level. These measures ensure compliance with existing regulatory requirements which will preclude potentially significant impacts. 2. ILTNATIV$ TO TEE PROJECTS: Approvals granted for annexation and pre -zoning of the Pasteur Drive Parcel will not result in any direct or immediate changes to the property or resulting environmental impacts. Creation of the Pasteur Drive Parcel is not a result of these approvals but is a direct and unavoidable physical result of the realignment of Pasteur Drive proposed and approved as part of the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project. Rejection of the proposed annexation and pre -zoning, i.e. a "no -project" alternative is considered infeasible by the Council because this alternative would result in enclosure of a small isolated parcel of unincorporated County of Santa Clara land within the City east of Pasteur Drive, which will remain a City road. Annexation of the Pasteur Drive Parcel is mandated by conventional sound planning and administrative practices and existing City, County and LAFCC annexation policies. While the consideration or granting of approvals for actual development of the Pasteur Drive Parcel is beyond the scope of actions currently being considered by the Council with respect to the property, the Council has considered the potential alternative land uses for the parcel identified in the EIR as alternatives to the pre -zoning of the property for multiple -family residential development (RM-40). The Council finds that each of the identified is infeasible in view of the following specific social and environmental considerations. Open Space Alternative: Annexation and pre -zoning of the property for residential development will not preclude Stanford from retaining the parcel as open space. However, long-term retention of the site as open space would preclude economically beneficial use by the owner and would preclude new housing development potentially needed by the City. Due to its small size and location surrounded by roadways and existing development, the site has no significant value as wildlife habitat, for agriculture, for public recreational uses, for preservation of scenic qualities or any other important open space use. Overall the Council believes that residential development constitutes the most logical and desirable use -f the property. The City currently faces a shortage of affordable housing and particularly rental housing, and this shortage is likely to continue to exist for the foreseeable future. In contrast to residential development, permanent restriction of the property for open space uses would not substantially advance any important City objectives and would 6 970702 lac 0031591 • preclude potential development of housing needed to meet City and regional housing goals and objectives. Commercial. Alternative: The property could physically be developed with commercial building suitable for convenience retail or other neighborhood serving commercial development. Development for commercial purposes, however, would not avoid or substantially lessen any impacts associated with residential development of the site, and would be likely to result in substantially greater traffic impacts. No evidence received by the Council suggests any substantial existing or future need for neighborhood facilities at this location. Commercial development of the site would also preclude development of housing which is likely to be needed to meet City and regional housing objectives. Overall, commercial development would not result in any significant environmental advantages over residential development and would represent a less desirable and beneficial use of the land than housing development. Medical Office Alternative: The site could also physically accommodate a medical office building, altho c;h it is uncertain that such development would actually be attracted to the site. If developed, medical office use would not avoid or significantly reduce any impacts associated with residential development of the site, and would be likely t.o result in substantially greater traffic impacts than residential development. No evidence received by the Council suggests any substantial demand for development of medical offices at this location. Medical office development on the site would also preclude development of housing which is likely to be needed to meet City and regional housing objectives. Overall, development of medical offices or any similar office and professional use on the site would not result in any significant environmental advantages over residential development, and would represent a less desirable and beneficial use of the land than housing development. 7 970702 lac 0031591 • • EXHIBIT 'C" COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS a. Resolution No. 7687, Amending the Land Use Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Relating to the Streamside Open Space Land Use Category b. Resolution No. 7686, Amending the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan for Lands of Stanford University Located Generally at 1000 Sand Hill Road (Stanford West Apartment Project) c. Resolution No. 7689, Amending the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan for Lands of Stanford University Located at 600 and 700 Sand Hill Road (Stanford West Senior Project) d. Resolution No. 7690, Amending the Land Use Map and the Street Network Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Relating to Roadway and Circulation Changes and Changes in the Boundaries of the Streamside Open Space Area in the Vicinity of the Stanford Shopping Center e. Resolution No. 7688, Amending Various Elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Relating to Road Improvements in the Sand Hill Road Corridor. { es- • RESOLUTION NO. 7687 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE PALO ALTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATING TO THE STREAMSIDE OPEN SPACE LAND USE CATEGORY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended that the Council amend the Land Use Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on the matter, and has reviewed the contents of the Environmental Impact Report {"EIR") prepared for the project and all other relevant information, including staff reports, and all testimony, written and oral, presented on the matter; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the public interest, health, safety and welfare of Palo Alto and the surrounding region require amendment to the Land Use Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan as set forth in Section 2 hereof, to more accurately describe the definition of the "Streamside Open Space" land use category. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby amends the Land Use Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan by amending the definition of the land use category "Streamside Open Space" to read as follows: Streamside Open Space: the corridor of riparian vegetation along a natural stream. The corridor will generally vary in width up to 2QQ, feet; provided, that in the San Francisquito Creek corridor, between El Camino Real and the Sand Hill Road bridge over the creek, the open space corridor varies in width between approximately 310 feet and 80 feet. The aerial delineation of the open space in this segment of the corridor, as opposed to other segments of the corridor, is shown to approximate scale on the land use map. Hiking, biking, and riding trails may be developed in the streamside open space. SECTION 3. The City Council adopts this resolution in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. SECTION 4. This resolution shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees 1 970703 lac 0031579 4 • • of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. This delayed effective date is intended and shall be construed to provide a sufficient period of time between adoption of the resolution and its effective date to allow a complete and exclusive opportunity for the exercise of the referendum power pursuant to the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Constitution of the State of California. A referendum petition filed after the effective date shall be rejected as untimely. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Cle.k Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 970703 lac 0031579 RESOLUTION NO. 7686 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP OF THE PALO ALTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR LANDS OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY LOCATED GENERALLY AT 1000 SAND HILL ROAD (STANFORD WEST APARTMENT PROJECT) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended that the Council amend the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on the matter, and has reviewed the contents of the Environmental Impact Report ('EIR") prepared for the project and all other relevant information, including staff reports, and all testimony; written and oral, presented on the matter; NOW, THEREFORE, the Courci1 of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the public interest, health, safety and welfare of Palo Alto and the surrounding region require amendment to the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan as set forth in Section 2 hereof. Such amendment of the Land Use Map will permit the redevelopment of a vacant site, a small portion of which requires the amendment set forth in Section 2, for multiple family residential uses, specifically rental apartments, including below market rate units. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby amends the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan with respect to property located at 1000 Sand Hill Road by clearly establishing the boundary of the Streamside Open Space designated area to be 200 feet from the centerline of San Francisquito Creek (which is also the boundary between the Cities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park) at all locations on the site, except for a small area in the western portion of the site, in which area the boundary of the Streamside Open Space designated area is reduced to a width of approximately 160 feet from the centerline of San Francisquito Creek, all, as shown. on Change Area A of 'Map 1," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. $ECTI©N 3. The City Council adopts this resolution in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. SECTION 4. This resolution shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after i.ts adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of 1 9707031st 0031573 the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. This delayed effective date is intended and shall be construed to provide a sufficient period of time between adoption of the resolution and its effective date to allow a complete and exclusive opportunity for the exercise of the referendum power pursuant to the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Constitution of the State of California. A referendum petition filed after the effective date shall be rejected as untimely. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney 2 Director of Plan nI ncx and Community Environment 970703 lac 0031573 Change from Strearasidc Open Space to Nta;or Institution/Special Faci:ity Change from 5trcamsidel Open Space to Multiple Family Residential r 7 - ha tgc from Streamsidei Open Space to Multiple Famiiv Residential Gpcc Sparc } Ch3.3: fro!^. Lk.c.)jor F1ractt RicsdeCtia! Multiple Family Residential Office/ Research Park Change from Major Institution/ iniyersity lands/ Campus Education Facilty to Major Institution/ Special Facility Change from Major Institution/ University lands/Campus Education !Facility to ?ultiple Family Residential The C i! y of Palo Alto tlaNNtNO atv!stoN Major Institution/ Special Facility Map 1 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Amendments This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS C_ • • I 4 RESOLUTION NO. 7689 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP OF THE PALO ALTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR LANDS OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY LOCATED AT 600 and 700 SAND HILL ROAD (STANFORD WEST SENIOR PROJECT) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended that the Council amend the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on the matter, and has reviewed the contents of the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the project and all other relevant information, including staff reports, and all testimony, written and oral, presented on the matter; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the public interest, health, safety and welfare of Palo Alto and the surrounding region require amendments to the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan as set forth in Sections 2 and 3 hereof. Such amendments of the Land Use Map will permit the redevelopment of a vacant hospital site for multiple family residential uses, specifically a senior housing complex, including senior condominiums and a health care facility with assisted living and skilled nursing units. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby amends the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan with respect to property located at 600 Sand Hill Road by: (1) changing the land use designation on the site from Major Institution/Special Facility to Multiple Family Residential as shown on Change Area B of "Map 1," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and (2) clearly establishing the boundary of the Streamside Open Space designated area to be 200 feet from the centerline of San Francisquito Creek, except for that portion of the site where,the boundary of the Streamside Open Space designated area is reduced to a distance ranging between approximately 80 feet and 160 feet from the centerline of the San Francisquito Creek, as shown on Change Area C of "Map 1." SECTION 3. The City Council hereby amends the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan with respect to property located at 700 Sand Hill Road by: (1) changing the land use designation for a small portion of the site from Multiple Family Residential to Major Institution/Special Facility as shown on Change Area D of "Map 1"; and (2) changing the land use designation for a small portion of the site from Streamside Open Space to Major Institution/Special Facility, as shown on Change Area E of "Map 1." s7o-ms Ic 003 t 580 1 SECTION 4. The City Council adopts this resolution in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act -("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. SZCTIO1 5. This resolution shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. This delayed effective date is intended and shall be construed to provide a sufficient period of time between adoption of the resolution and its effective date to allow a complete and exclusive opportunity for the exercise of the referendum power pursuant to the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Constitution of the State of California. A referendum petition filed after the effective date shall be rejected as untimely. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and 2 Community Environment 970103 !.c 00315$0 3.7.1e itom Stre1:claw: Open Sp.sce to Nt;i tiple Fams;;r itesider.tial Strcoms:C: pea Space Trott S:......,:" Opca Space to :i;ot as,titut o�.`S; e.isl Fazia_wt C Chang frcrn Strea;::itz S 1 Mult Gr , Fz^Saa `itcs aer,tia:;i 1 {� S:::aY S:a. Cta'.3- R! tt f f:cc. Research Park Chanzc fror t 7`'.ajor tr stitutioc! University lardsrCampus Edutatio Faciity to ?.iajca Institution/ Special Facility Change from D!s;ot Institution! l'risersity landslCa;rpus EdL<ation 1�ac lily to Multiple Family Residential. 7 6 t C i t y of Palo Alto �LAA'MIMD DiVl$tQ pen S; I.CSGy: Ic_c. lA ;::: ast...u.,_. $;c:il! Fs:i1a�' tJ Major Iastitutlo.?! Special Facility Map 1 , Comprehensive Plan Land Use Amendments This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS Oa OM= 3:0' 600' r e. t T. i • RESOLUTION NO. 769Q RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP AND THE STREET NETWORK MAP OF THE PALO ALTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATING TO ROADWAY AND CIRCULATION CHANGES AND CHANGES IN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE STREAMSIDE OPEN SPACE AREA IN THE VICINITY OP THE STANFORD SHOPPING CENTER '.OEREAS, the Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended that the Council amend the Land Use Map and the Street Network Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on the matter, and has reviewed the contents of the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the project and all other relevant information, including staff reports, and all testimony, written and oral, presented on the matter; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council ray the Vity of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the public interest, health, safety and welfare of Palo Alto and the surrounding region require amendments to the Land Use Map and the Street Network Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan as set forth in Sections 2, 3 and 4 hereof. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby amends the Land Use Map and the Street Network Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan as shown on "Map 4," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and as more particularly described as follows: a. The extension of Sand Hill Road from Arboretum to El Camino Real is hereby added to and designated as an Arterial street on said maps. b. Vineyard Lane, Stock Farm Road and Palo Road are hereby added to and designated as Collector streets on said maps. c. Pasteur Drive between Sand Hill Road and Welch Road, designated on said maps as a Collector street, is hereby shown on said maps in its realigned, relocated configuration. d. Quarry Road between El Camino Real and Arboretum Road, designated on said maps as an Arterial street, is hereby shown on said maps in its changed configuration. 9707031u 0031576 1 • • SECTION 3. The City Council hereby amends the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan with respect to vacant property located between Sand Hill Road and San Francisquito Creek in the vicinity of the Stanford Shopping Center, the configuration of which property will be altered by the extension of Sand Hill Road from Arboretum to El Camino Real, by clearly establishing the boundary of the Streamside Open Space for said parcel, which ranges from approximately 180 feet to 310 feet from the centerline of San Francisquito Creek, as shown on "Map 3" and more particularly described on "Exhibit "A" to "Map 3," which map and exhibit are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby amends the Land Use Map of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan by: (1) changing the land use designation of the 2.50 acre parcel to be created by the realignment of Pasteur Drive at Sand Hill Road from "Major Institution/University Lands/Campus Education Facilities" to "Multiple Family Residential," as shown on Change Area "F" of "Map 1", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and (2) changing the land use designation of a portion of land that will become part of the reconfigured Pasteur Drive, from "Major Institution/University Lands/Campus Education Facilities" to "Major Institution/Special Facilities," as shown on Change Area "G" of "Map 1". SECTION 5. The City Council adopts this resolution in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. SECTION 6. This resolution shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter' of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. This delayed effective date is intended and shall be construed to provide a sufficient period of time between adoption of the resolution and its effective date to allow a complete and exclusive opportunity // // // // // // // // 2 970703 lac 0031576 for the exercise of the referendum power pursuant to the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Constitution of the State of California. A referendum petition filed after the effective date shall be rejected as untimely. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 3 970703 lac ©031376 Charisz from s -ez T.,:e_ ©;.c Space to Ma;or Iti S:itatio.:/Spectff F ;i.:;'•t • Chat gc frtsrs Strea Ope: Space to Mul;iple Family Residential `�. Streamside itutio \OpcG S_pp ce a�ilrr; Cta-3- t 1 .7 i 1•'y 3 J L 1'. •SIi:7 nil al ,r' 1 Change from lajo: Institutionf L iv:rsity land7%Causpus Educatio Fac'slty to Major institution! Special Facility Change trout N1.2;,.0: .1 ? University Fands/Ca.-¢.;:s t Facility to Multiple. Family Rci.C: a 't 7 b c C i i) of Palo Alto ► L w 1i ' l 1 G Q 1 Y 17 t O Pa 's per. Spate Major L stitutionf Sp dial Facility P.:gior Cori . ,,ity Ltini: It= A:ror I:,..,..,:. 5;c:iit Facility to T S lio:- Famik' Resierntir' Major Institution/ Special Facility Map 1 Compreheisive Plan Land Use Amendments fivers], This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS all mow sommaton I b c C i t y of Palo Alto LA1414IWG DI Y111D 1• Regional! Community Commercial Map 3 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Amendments This map is a product of the City or P 10 Alto GIS C' KO' INV L C y. a ;;; ;.7 r VC Amend Arterial Street •.1ACd Arterial • Street Amend Co lector y Add Collector Street Collector Arterial Expressway Freeway 7 ! e C i t y of L A N N t M o c t t I R l o Interchange Palo Alto City Boundary Map 4 Comprehensive Plan Land Use c: Street Network Map Amendments 'leis rap is a product or the City of Palo Alto GIS • • RESOLUTION NO. 7688 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING VARIOUS ELEMENTS OF THE PALO ALTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATING TO ROAD IMPROVEMENTS IN THE SAND HILL ROAD CORRIDOR WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended that the Council amend various elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on the matter, and has reviewed the contents of the Environmental Impact Report t"EIR") prepared for the project and all other relevant information, including staff reports, and all testimony, written and oral, presented on the matter; NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The City interest, health, safety and surrounding region require amen Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan as hereof. Council finds that the public welfare of Palo Alto and the dments to various elements of the set forth in Sections 2 through 6 SECTION 2. The City Council hereby amends the Transportation Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan by amending Policy 5, to read as follows: Policy 5: Avoid major increases in street capacities except as necessary to remedy severe traffic congestion in the Sand Hill Road corridor. In other portions of the City, undertake only critically needed intersection improvements connected with severe traffic congestion or neighborhood intrusion problems or both. Where capacity is increased, balance the needs of, motor vehicles with those of pedestrians and bicyclists. SECTION 3. The City Council hereby amends the Transportation Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. by amending Program 19 to read as follows: Program 19: Reduce traffic congestion on Sand Hill Road while prohibiting a direct connection from Sand Hill Road to Palo Alto Avenue/Alma Street across El Camino Real. Sand Hill Road has severe traffic congestion problems. Major improvements need to be made, in a comprehensive manner, including widening the road and extending it to El Camino Real; as well as upgrading and coordinating traffic signals, bike lanes, sidewalks and crosswalks as minimum safety actions. In addition, in order to ease the severe congestion in the Sand Hill Road corridor, other roadways must be improved to create new and better use of existing routes of travel. These include widening and upgrading Quarry Road to allow two way traffic from El Camino Real 1 970703 lac 0031577 • to Arboretum; upgrading Arboretum; creating Vineyard Lane; extending Palo Road to connect with Quarry Road; and extending Stock Farm Road to connect with Sand Hill Road. However, any connection of Sand Hill Road to Palo Alto Avenue and Alma Street would encourage traffic increases on Alma Street and nearby residential streets, especially north of Downtown and, therefore, should not be approved. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby amends the Land Use Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan by amending the discussion under 'Transportation" of the "Objectives, Policies and Programs' to read as follows: Transportation The Plan Map reflects the policy of avoiding major increases in automobile traffic capacities in most cases. The Plan Map includes an extension of Sand Hill Road from Arboretum Road to El Camino Real. In solving the severe traffic congestion problems in the Sand Hill corridor it was concluded that improvements in addition to extending Sand Hill Road were needed. These improvements include widening Sand Hill Road; widening and upgrading Quarry Road to allow two way traffic from El Camino Real to Arboretum Road; upgrading Arboretum Road; creating Vineyard Lane; extending Palo Road to connect with Quarry Road; and extending Stock Farm Road to connect with Sand Hill Road. Major transportation policies are to improve mass transit and increase transit ridership. Existing and proposed bus routes are mapped in the Transportation section. Transit planning is primarily the responsibility of Santa Clara County and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. SECTION 5. The City Council hereby amends the Urban Design Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan by amending Program 26 of Policy 8, to read as follows: Scenic Highways Policy 8: Provide safe, attractive scenic routes which will serve the motoring public, the bicyclist, the pedestrian, and in some areas the equestrian. Program 26• Add Sand Hill Road, University Avenue, Embarcadero Road, Page Mill/Oregon Expressway, Interstate 280, and Arastradero Road from Foothill Expressway to Interstate 280 to the list of protected scenic routes in Palo Alto. Four attractive urban streets --Sand Hill Road, University Avenue, Embarcadero Road, and Page Mill Road/Oregon Expressway --are proposed scenic routes. 2 970703 lac 0031577 • Sand Hill Road provides a linkage between El Camino Real, a state historic route, and Interstate 280, a California Scenic Highway. The intersection of Sand Hill Road and El Camino Real is located adjacent to the north gateway into Palo Alto at the San Fransquito Creek Bridge. It is here that the relationship of the scenic corridor to the creek is most obvious, as an approximately 1,500 foot long segment of wooded and riparian vegetation remains open to public views on the northwest side of the scenic route. The Sand Hill Road scenic corridor is designed to modern arterial standards, with development along major segments of its extent. Adjacent land uses include the Stanford Shopping Center, housing, medical, professional, research and development, and administrative office uses, among others. The scenic route is characterized by its broad setbacks and rural, oak -dominated landscaping. Informal groupings of oak trees, California natives, and eucalyptus set in natural grasses and wildflowers are the common landscape elements. Significant portions of the roadway are visually enhanced with planted medians, containing trees and shrubs that either extend the rural landscape theme, or provide a more formal landscape character, as in that portion of the route that adjoins the Stanford Shopping Center. As it approaches the scenic Juniperro Serra Boulevard and Interstate 280, the undeveloped foothills are a significant scenic element of the background landscape. University Avenue east of Middlefield is a curving street, lined with gracious magnolia trees. Many visitors remark on the striking entrance to Palo Alto that this tree -lined street affords. It passes the historic Squire House, whose facade has been preserved by a special easement. West of Middlefield, a beautified University Avenue traverses the City's Downtown and leads directly into Palm Drive, the formal main entrance to Stanford University. Embarcadero Road, from Harbor Road to El Camino Real, is the main access to the Palo Alto Baylands. Embarcadero west of Bayshore Freeway is lined with trees and some houses of historic interest. The Baylands portion contains the site of historic Wilson's Landing on the former San Francisquito Creek and expansive views of open space. Page Mill Road/Oregon Expressway, from Bayshore Freeway, to Interstate 280, has wide setbacks in Stanford Industrial Park west of El Camino Real. Design criteria imposed upon its tenants by Stanford University have set a high standard for this route. The width and landscaping make the Oregon Expressway portion visually pleasing. The route leads to the Palo Alto Baylands and the foothills. SECTION 6. The City Council adopts this resolution in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. SECTION 7. This resolution shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees 3 970703 lac 0031577 s s• of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. This delayed effective date is intended and shall be construed to provide a sufficient period of time between adoption of the resolution and its effective date to allow a complete and exclusive opportunity for the exercise of the referendum power pursuant to the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Constitution of the State of California. A referendum petition filed after the effective date shall be rejected as untimely. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 970703 lac 0031577 4 EXHIBIT 'D ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS a. Ordinance No. 4430, Amending Section 20.08.020 (The Setback Map) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Change the Setback Line Along a Portion of Sand Hill Road b. Ordinance No. 4426, Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Classification of Property Known as 600 Sand Hill Road and a Portion of 1000 Sand Hill Road from PF to PC and from RM-30 to PC, Respectively (Stanford West Senior Housing) c. Ordinance No. 4427, Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Zone Classification of Property Located at 600, 700 and 1000 Sand Hill Road from RM-30 to PF and from PF to RM••30 d. Ordinance No. 4428, Amending Section 18.43.050 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (Community Commercial District Site Development Regulations), Relating to the Allowable Floor Area of the Stanford Shopping Center e. Ordinance No. 4429, Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Zone Classification of Property Located at 180 El Camino Real from CC to CC (L) (Stanford Shopping Center) f. Ordinance No. 4431, Conditionally Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) by Prezoning as RM-40 a Portion of a New Parcel to be Created by the Realignment of Pasteur Drive and by Prezoning as PF(L) an Area of Land That Will Become Part of Pasteur Drive g. Ordinance No. 4432, Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Zone Classification of a Portion of a New Parcel to be Created by the Realignment of Pasteur Drive at Sand Hill Road from PF(L) to RM-40 Jr • ORDINANCE NO.44 3 v ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 20.08.020 (THE SETBACK MAP) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE THE SETBACK LINE ALONG A PORTION OF SAND HILL ROAD The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds as follows: a. The Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended that the Council amend Section 20.08.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (the "Setback Map") to change the setback line along a portion of Sand Hill Road. b. After duly noticed public hearing, and upon consideration of said recommendation and of all testimony offered upon the matter, the Council finds that the public interest, health, safety and welfare of Palo Alto and the surrounding region require the amendment to the Setback Map as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2. Section 20.08.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (the "Setback Map") is hereby amended by establishing the setback line along certain portions of Sand Hill Road at twenty- four (24) feet, as shown on "Map 5," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION The City Council adopts this ordinance in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. // // // // // // // // // // // // 1/ // /1 // 1/ /1 1/ 1 970703 lac 0031582 SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 2 970703 lac 0031312 • • Map 5 Special Setback Map Amendments PLAp$INL Dlr,slo This map is a product of tht City of Palo Alt© GIS • • ORDINANCE NO. 4 A(P ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS 600 SAND HILL ROAD AND A PORTION OF 1000 SAND HILL ROAD FROM PF TO PC AND FROM RM-30 TO PC, RESPECTIVELY (STANFORD WEST SENIOR HOUSING) follows: The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as SECTION 1. (a) The Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, and the Architectural Review Board, after duly noticed public hearing, have recommended that Section 18.08.040 (the Zoning Map) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code be amended as hereinafter set forth. (b) The City Council, after duly noticed public hearing, and upon due consideration of the recommendations and of all testimony offered upon the matter, finds that the proposed amendment is in the public interest and will promote the public health, safety and welfare, as hereinafter set forth; SECTION 2. Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the "Zoning Map," is hereby amended by changing the zoning of certain property known as 600 Sand Hill Road from "PF Public Facility" to "PC Planned Community," and by changing the zoning of a portion of that certain property known as 1000 Sand Hill Road from "RM-30 Multiple -family Residence" to "PC Planned Community." Both properties are referred to collectively as the "subject property." The subject property is shown on the map labeled Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 3. The City Council hereby finds with respect to the subject property that: (a) The site is so situated, and the use proposed for the site is of such a characteristic that the application of general districts or combining districts will not provide sufficient flexibility to allow the proposed development. The development includes a health care facility offering assisted living and skilled nursing care to the senior population residing at the community, a use not typically considered incidental to a multiple family permitted use. 1 970703 Ieo 0031584 (b) Development of the site under the provisions of the PC Planned Community district will result in public benefits not otherwise attainable by application of the regulations of general districts or combining districts. The senior residential community that will be built and operated on this underutilized, former hospital site, is a particularly beneficial reuse of this site, which will provide specialized housing and health services, for which there is an unmet need, thus enabling residents in need of this type of housing to remain in the community. In addition, the project will increase the network of pedestrian and bicycle paths and trails across the site and connecting with the larger network of paths and trails existing and proposed in the area, facilitating public access to the creek and across this site. This circulation network also provides safe and attractive connections between housing, the Shopping Center, the Stanford Medical Center, the Stanford Campus and nearby open spaces, including an adjacent "Village Green" area to 'be developed as part of the Stanford West Apartment Housing project. (c) The use permitted and the site development regulations applicable within the district are consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, as detailed in the discussion beginning on page 6 of the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated July 24, 1996. The permitted use and site development regulations are compatible with existing and potential uses on adjoining sites or in the general vicinity, as follows: 1) the site was planned and designed in conjunction with the apartment housing and the shopping center improvement projects proposed for approval on the adjacent sites, and the Children's Health Council project on another adjacent site; 2) the project as conditioned will have minimal noise and traffic impacts on the surrounding land uses; and, 3) the redevelopment of the former hospital site minimizes disturbance to the existing trees and landscaping in such a manner that visibility into the project site remains unchanged from many public vantage points. SECTION 4. Those certain plans entitled "Stanford West Senior Housing" prepared by The Steinberg Group, dated October 16, 1996, and approved by the Architectural Review Board on October 16, 1996, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Division office, 2 9707031w 0031584 • • e and to which copy reference is hereby made, are hereby approved as the Development Plan for the subject property, pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code section 18.68.120. Said Development Plan is approved for the following uses, and subject to the following conditions: (a) Permitted Uses. The permitted uses shall be limited to the following facilities for seniors: independent living/condominium units; a health care center that includes assisted living units and a skilled nursing facility; and associated amenities to serve those facilities. (b) ,nditional Uses. No conditional uses shall be permitted. (c) development Development the Special Site Development Regulations. All improvements and shall be substantially in accordance with the approved Plan, which shall be amended as required to comply with Requirements set forth in subparagraph (e) . (d) Parking and Loading Requirements. The parking governing the subject property shall be in accordance with the Development Plan, which shall be amended as required to comply with the Special Requirements set forth in subparagraph (e). (e) Special Requirements. The Conditions of Approval adopted by the City Council in approving this ordinance, attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by reference, are hereby approved as the special requirements of the PC zone established by this ordinance. To the extent of a conflict between the Development Plan and these special requirements, these special requirements shall apply. (f) Development Schedule. The development schedule shall be as specified in the Development Agreement referenced in Section 6. SECT/ON 5. The City Council adopts this ordinance in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. // // 1/ 1/ // // // 970703 Lc 4031 4 3 SECTION 6. This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES- NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM Senior Asst. City Attorney City Manager Director of Planning and Community Environment 4 970703 Ise 0031514 S hangc fro Rtsi -30 to M -30(D T k c Ci ty c Palo A • ?rcposet1 r.ewj propert). i=nc Change from PF to RM _3: r; 0 LAPPING D I IQP hang c tst:-1 PF to PC rgc from NI -30 to PF Map 2 Zone Map Amendments RcmaiOn PF 0 0 0 " ?arigi • 'ro Change from Chanr: from' RM-3© to PC Pi to R.M -30 tnap is a proCcet of the City of Palo Alto GIS a• 02* • CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE STANFORD WEST SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT 600 SAND HILL ROAD The conditions of approval consist of: mitigation measures identified in the OR, as herein modified, rejected or adopted by reference without modification. and additional conditions imposed pursuant to the City's police powers. MI of these conditions are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP). The recitation of the mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring Program is intended to be the same as in the EIR, as adopted or revised by these conditions of approval. In the event a mitigation measure or condition is worded differently in the MMP than in these conditions of approval, including those mitigation measures adopted by reference, these conditions shall control. The Monitoring and Reporting Procedures in the MMP are intended to implement, not to modify, these conditions of approval, and the Procedures shall be interpreted accordingly, in a manner that does not diminish or add to the requirements imposed on the applicant. Zone Changes (94-ZC-17) The approval of the Senior Housing Project is conditioned upon the applicant receiving approval for the set of road improvements (commonly known as Sand Hill Road Widening and Extension and Related Roadway improvements), or some portion of those improvements as may be determined by the Palo Alto City Council. The following shall return to the ARB for final review and approval prior to the submittal of plans for a building permit: 2. The mitigation measures identified as applicable to either "All Projects" or to the "Stan- ford West Senior Housing Project" in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) are incorporated hereby as conditions of project approval, except as noted below. The Project Plans shall be revised to comply with all required mitigation measures and shall return to the ARB for final review and approval. Please refer to prior staff reports for analysis regarding the rejected and preferred mitigation measures listed below. a. Public Services Mitigation 4.12-14. City of Palo Alto could adopt a policy encouraging future developers to contribute their fair share for school impacts July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 1 of 7 Pt;es • • over and above payment of the development fee, shall not be required to be implemented. b. Public Services Mitigation 4.12-16. City of Palo Alto could implement public or private financing mechanisms for obtaining additional park lands and/or for rehabilitating existing parks in a way that expands their usefulness, shall not be required to be implemented. c. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-1(d): which requires the applicant to operate an on -call passenger shuttle service to and from Senior Housing shall not be required to be implemented. d. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(c and d) is modified to read as follows: The applicant should pay the full cost of implementing Mitigation Measures 4.4- 7(c and d), which require improvements to the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and the Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersections. These improvements should be constructed during the same time frame of the remainder of the proposed road improvements in the Santa CruziOak Avenue area, and should be included in the final construction phasing plan. (Refer please to Road Conditions 1 c and 12). Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(e) is modified to read as follows: Should the City of Menlo Park within ten (10) years of the effective date of the Development Agreement desire to make improvements to the Middlefield/Willow intersection, to improve a LOS E or worse condition, the applicant shall be required to contribute its fair (proportionate) share of the cost either to make signal timing improvements sufficient to return the intersection to LOS D or, if it is not possible to achieve a LOS D through signal timing modifications, to construct the improvements listed in the EIR, rather than making a no contribution, as the EIR currently states. Cultural Resources Mitigation 4.3-4(a) is modified to read as follows: The Old Carriage House shall be protected in place. Fencing or other appropriate protection should be installed prior to construction to avoid impact to this important historic resource. The applicant shall submit to the City a plan for protection of the Old Carriage House, that shall include the parties responsible for long-term protection, and the specific protection requirements (from structural stabilization to funding, for example). The City of Palo Alto July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 2 of 17 Pages shall approve the Carriage House protection plan prior to issuance of a demolition permit for the Stanford West Senior housing project. The project applicant shall post a bond or other form of financial security acceptable to the City Attorney during the demolition and construction phases to ensure retention of the Carriage House. Noise Mitigation 4.6-3(d) shall be modified as follows: This mitigation requires the applicant to monitor interior noise levels of properties identified as being potentially impacted by increased noise attributable to the projects. Compensation to these owners to provide acoustical upgrades is required under certain conditions, as described in the Mitigation. This mitigation shall only be required to be implemented for those areas where the contribution from the projects is greater than 50% of the total impact. These areas are shown on Exhibit A. An acoustic study shall be performed both before and after construction of all projects, at the applicant's cost. The study shall document pre -project interior noise levels for all sensitive receptors identified on Exhibit A immediately following project approval. Post -construction noise levels shall be established immediately following completion of all approved projects or following December 31, 2000, whichever conies later. For those receptors where the post - construction interior noise levels are higher than pre -construction levels and exceed 45 dBA, the study shall identify measures and costs necessary to: i) return noise levels to pre -construction levels; and ii) achieve a 45 dBA interior noise standards. The project applicant shall be required to pay the cost identified to return the interior noise levels to pre -construction levels or to 45 dBA, whichever is higher. if there is a difference in costs between options i and ii, the property owner may elect to make up the difference in cost to implement option ii. It is possible, and likely, that there will not be a difference in cost between option i and ii. The EIR also identifies alternative mitigation measures for the impacts listed below. The preferred mitigation measure for each of these impacts (as listed in the EIR) is also identified below. These mitigation measures are incorporated hereby as conditions of project approval. Impact: Cultural Resources Impact 4.3-1, avoid construction in the Level I archeological sensitive area, as illustrated on Figure 4.3-2 on page 4.3-33. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation 4.3-1(b) and (c), data recovery program, shall be implemented rather than Mitigation 4.3-1(a), avoidance of all construction in the Level 1 sensitivity area. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 3 of 17 Pages • IIDgaI: Cultural Resources Impact 4,3-3, possible damaging effects on Leland Stanford. Jr. monument. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation Measure 4.3-3(b), relocation of the monument on the site to a location open to public viewing, shall be implemented rather than Mitigation 4.3-3(a), in -place preservation. k. Impact: Cultural Resources impact 4.3-5, possible damaging effects on. the Stanford Convalescent Home Gates. Furthermore, the gates shall be relocated per the requirements of condition 7e. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation Measure 4.3-5(b), incorporate the gates into the projects landscape plan, shall be implemented rather than Mitigation Measure 4.3-5(a), in -place preservation. Impact Public Services Impact 4.12-2, the project would increase the number of emergency medical service calls to the Fire Department. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation 4.12-2(b), the applicant shall pay fair share for the cost of a new paramedic unit, shall be implemented rather than mitigation 4.12-2(a), applicant shall provide private ambulance service (refer to Coriition 45 for additional information regarding payment of fair share costs), m. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-4, increased demand due to cumulative projects on Palo Alto Fire Department. Recommended Mitigation: Option three, City could provide additional resources to the PAFD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-5, increased demand due to cumulative project on medical emergency service. Recommended Mitigation: Option two, City could provide additional medi-van resources to the PAFI) from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. o. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-10, increased demand due to cumulative projects on Palo Alto Police Department, July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 4 of 17 Pages Recommended Mitigation: Option three, City could provide additional resources to the PAPD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. 3. The final design, colors and materials of all project buildings shall return to the ARB for review and approval. Final landscape plans, lighting, design of public improve- ments, walls and fences and all other similar improvements shall return to the ARB for review and approval. An artist and interpretative designer shall be retained by the applicant to provide input and assistance for the design of the final project details, particularly those related to the environmental, recreational and cultural public assets on the sites, and the provision of public art. The applicant shall submit with the final plans a statement outlining the specific plan details which respond to the artistfinterpre- tative designer's input. The final project plans shall take into account the following maintenance, security and safety provisions: Approval of any nonstandard paving materials shall be coordinated with Public Works Engineering prior to any final approval by the ARB, and is subject to approval of a maintenance agreement which requires the applicant to provide all maintenance for such materials; b. The applicant shall confer with the Police Department prior to submitting final project plans to ensure lighting and landscape plans incorporate appropriate security recommendations. All lighting plans shall be in conformance with Mitigation Measures 4.2-7(a) and 4.2-13. c. A sign program for the site, including signs to be posted on private streets (such as no parking, private street, tow away zones, public access points, etc.), and an address numbering program, shall be reviewed by the Police Department and approved by the ARB. d. Signs and landscaping shall meet the sight distance requirements of PAMC 18.83.080, applicable to project frontages where driveways are present, and in parking lots. Landscaping shall be specifically identified in the landscape plan as meeting these height requirements. e. The proposed materials for the independent living building base shall be revised to be of a more durable nature that can withstand sustained use over time without showing damage. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 5 of 17 Pages The final landscape plan shall include an indication that all species of trees to be used as street trees have been approved by the City Arborist. A significant percentage of these trees shall be deciduous. 5. Any changes to the project plans in regard to location and size of recycling and trash facilities shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Operations Division. 6. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, electric panel switch- boards, and other required utilities, shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials and shall be screened in a manner which respects the building design and setback requirements. These locations shall also be approved by Utilities Engineering. 7. The following revisions shall be made to the project plans and included on the plans submitted for final Architectural Review Board approval prior to submittal of a build- ing permit application: As required by Mitigation Measure 4.4-1(b), Stanford's Marguerite shuttle shall service the project. More specifically, the Marguerite shall follow a route into the Senior Housing project (as opposed to only stopping on Sand Hill Road). The site plan shall be modified to include provisions for at least one Marguerite shuttle stop internal to the project. If, at any time following implementation of the service, it is determined by the City and Stanford that the routing of the Marguerite Service into the project site is no longer desirable due to negative effects on overall service, the Chief Transportation Official shall have the authority to allow the internal service routing to be discontinued. b. The applicant shall construct a Class I bicycle/pedestrian path, with a minimum 8 -foot paved width (10 -foot paved width preferred) and a 2 -foot unpaved graded shoulder on each side, between the easterly end of "Main" Street (where it crosses Sand Hill Road to become Vineyard Lane) and the signalized entrance to Ronald McDonald House, which shall be a combined sidewalk and bicycle path adjacent to Sand Hill Road (generally as shown on the current plan set dated 10/16/96). The path shall be sited to avoid damaging existing trees. If* necessary in order to avoid damaging any existing trees, the width of the unpaved shoulders may be less than 2 feet. In order to promote intersection crossing safety in the confined area between the Senior Housing Project and Sand Hill Road, this path shall be routed across the two signalized driveways at the normal location for a pedestrian crosswalk. If necessary to protect trees near the Sand Hill Road/Arboretum Road intersection, the path may be routed away from the signalized intersection (into the site) as far as possible before the path July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 6 of 17 Pages crosses the driveway. The west end of this path shall have two branches: 1) intersecting "Main" Street at the crosswalk across the north leg of "Main" Street at the Main Street/Sand Hill Road/Vineyard Lane intersection; and, 2) intersecting Main Street at the corner of its intersection with the driveway of the Senior Housing project (in the same place the sidewalk intersects the corner). Design of the intersections and crossings shall meet with the approval of the Chief Transportation Official. c. In the vicinity of the Children's Health Council, the recreational path shall be located to pass through the "Village Green" area, around the perimeter of the parking lot, and shall be so signed (as generally shown on the current plan set dated 10/16/96). It shall intersect the CHC driveway opposite the paved path from the bicycle/pedestrian bridge. d. Between the Ronald McDonald House and the Health Care building, the recre- ational path shall be relocated, if feasible, to provide a more direct route that is not in the parking lot, nor directly in front of building entrances. Proper directional signage shall be provided, e. The Stanford Convalescent Home Gates shall be moved from their present location at the entry to the Ronald McDonald House, to the main entry for the Senior Housing project at Arboretum Road. f. A minimum of 20 feet of space shall be provided between the front access road and the edge of pavement of Sand Hill Road, to allow adequate room for land- scaping and the provision of a Class I bicycle/pedestrian path. g. No parking shall be allowed along the access road at the rear of the Health Care or Independent living Buildings. The 24 spaces shown on the revised plans dated October 16, 1996 shall be removed from the area presently shown on the plans. This parking may either be eliminated entirely, or relocated to acceptable areas of the site subject to the approval of the ARB. h. Inconsistencies between the site and conceptual landscape plans illustrating revisions made by the applicant during the ARB public review process (dated October 16, 1996), and the elevations and supporting detailed plans provided with the original submittal plans (dated April 1, 1996), shall be corrected. Inconsistencies to be eliminated include, but are not limited to, the following: all building floor plans, unit plans, conceptual site sections and building sections, and the tree removal plan, shall be revised to reflect changes made to the site plan July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 7 of 17 Pages • including the significant redesign of the health care center building and the minor redesign of the independent living building. 8. If the Stanford West Apartment Housing project proposed for the adjacent site is not approved or is not constructed simultaneously with this project, then the applicant shall be required to submit a revised site plan for off -site circulation, infrastructure and open space modifications in order to ensure safe and convenient bicycle, pedestrian and auto connections, infrastructure extensions and open space arrangements. Prior to Issuance of a Demolition Permit: Utilities The Contractor 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 Contractor shall contact Underground Service Alert @ (800) 642-2444, at least 48 hours prior to beginning work. 10: The Applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all 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. Prior to Submittal of a Building Pe Planning and TYrzrtsportatio 11. An independent arborist shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The arborist will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-1. The arborist will be retained, as needed to perform the work related to this project as specified in Mitigation 4.7-1, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the arborist's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 12. An independent creek restoration specialist shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The creek restoration specialist will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.7-4(a), 4.7-4(b), 4.7 -7(a -e) and 4.7 - July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 8 of 17 Pages 9(a). The creek restoration specialist will be retained, as needed to oversee implementa- tion of the above mitigations, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from me applicant for the creek restoration specialist's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a De _apment Agreement. 13. An independent archeologist/historian shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The archeologist/historian will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.3-1, 4.3-2, 4.3-3, 4.3-4, and 4.3-5. The archeologist) historian will be retained, as needed to oversee implementation of the above mitigations, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the archeolo- gist'historian's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Develop- ment Agreement. 14. A contract senior level planner shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant. ;o oversee the implementation of this project, including processing of the Final Map. The planner shall be retained, as needed, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the contract planner's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement, The applicant shall continue to pay for planner services under the Planning Division's Cost Recovery Program until such time as the contract planner is hired. 15. A contract building plan checker and inspector shall be retained by the City,at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary plan check and inspection work associated with this project. The plan checker and inspector shall be retained, as needed, from the time the applicant submits plans for a building permit until final construction is approved by the Building Inspection Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the plan checker and inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 16. The applicant shall appoint a project manager knowledgeable of building permitting and construction processes for the duration of the project permitting and construction period. The Project Manager shall be responsible for coordinating the construction process with City staff and for facilitating the applicant's role in receiving building permits and complying with conditions of approval before and during construction. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 9 of 17 Pages The applicant shall provide an access and maintenance easement to the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and shall provide to the City an easement for bicycle and pedestrian access, along San Francisquito Creek on the proposed senior housing parcels. The easement shall consist of a strip 22 feet wide coincident with the rear access road. The easement shall be shown on the face of the final map to the satisfac- tion of the Water District and the City Public Works Department. 18. As property owner, the applicant shall file with the City, on behalf of the Children's Health Council, an application requesting modification of Architectural Review Board Approval File No. 94-ARB-202 and Use Permit File No.94-UP-21 to receive final approval of the CHC parking lot and landscaping site plan revisions necessary to implement changes to the boundaries between the CHC and the senior housing. Utilities. 19. An electric utility engineer/inspector and a water gas`. astewater utility engineer! inspector shall be retained by the City. at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary plan check and inspection work associated with this project, including processing of the Final Map. The engineer/inspectors shall be retained, as needed, from just prior to the applicant commencing meetings with the Utilities Department to finalize needed improvement plans until final construction is approved by the Inspec- tion Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the engineer! inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 20. The applicant shall submit detailed improvement plans and specifications for all utility construction. The plans must show the final alignment and sizing of electric, water, gas, and wastewater services within the development and within the utility easements. All final design details shall be in accordance with the published specifications of the Utilities Department, and subject to the approval of the Utilities Engineering Division. 21. The applicant shall meet and confer with the WOW Utilities Engineering staff, and then submit a plan, prepared in accordance with the published specifications of the Utilities Department, for final approval, indicating the final configuration of the water distribution system to be implemented. 22. The applicant shall submit flow calculations which shall show that the off -site and on - site water and sewer mains are sized adequately to provide the domestic water, fire flows and sewer capacity needed to serve this project in conjunction with any of the other development projects being considered simultaneously (Stanford West Senior Housing and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion) during anticipated peak loads. All July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 10 of 17 Pages • field testing required to determine current capacities of existing utilities shall be performed by the applicant's engineer at their expense. Calculations must be stamped by a registered civil engineer. Public Works Engineering 23. An engineer/inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary project management, plan check and inspection work associated with this project, including processing of the Final Map. The engineer/inspector shall be retained, as needed, from the submittal of final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the engineer/ inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 24. The applicant shall submit a final grading and drainage plan for review and approval by Public Works Engineering. 25. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit or temporary lease from Public Works Engineering for the proposed construction which will impact the use of sidewalk or street or on property in which the City holds an interest. 26. A grading permit must be obtained from the Building Inspection Division if excavation exceeds 100 cubic yards. 27. The applicant shall be required to file a notice of intent (NCI) for coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board's General Permit for storm water discharges associated with construction and post construction activity. The applicant shall provide an additional copy to Public Works Engineering Division of the NOI when applying for a grading/building permit. 28. The proposed development will result in a change in the impervious area of the site. The applicant shall provide calculations showing the adjusted impervious area with the building permit application. A storm drainage fee adjustment will take place in the month following the final approval of the construction by the Inspection Services Division. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit: Planning and Transportation July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housi ig Page 11 of 17 Pages • • A final subdivision map, which subdivides the project site into parcels, one with 388 airspace condominiums, and provides for adjustments between this project site and the adjacent Stanford West Apartment Housing and Children's Health Council sites, shall be approved by the City of Palo Alto and recorded at the Office of the County Recorder prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. See also the Conditions of Approval for the Tentative Subdivision Map. 30. The applicant shall agree to a program for providing Below Market Rate Units in ful- fillment of Program 13 of the Housing Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, as provided in the Letter of Agreement dated October 15, 1996. Utilities 31. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading on -site and off -site water and wastewater utilities as necessary to handle peak loads. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with required improvements to on -site and off -site gas mains and services, All improvements to the gas system will be by the City of Palo Alto or the City's contractor. The approved relocation of service, meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the applicant's expense. All installation of new utilities and upgrading of existing utilities necessary for the proposed project shall be constructed and paid for as required by City of Palo Alto Utilities Rules and Regulations. 32. All new electric service shall be underground. The applicant shall be responsible for all electric substructure installation required for extending the electric distribution system. The City, upon acceptance of the facilities will furnish and install all cables, switches and other equipment required for the system extension. All connection, on -site and off - site fees and credit if any will be based on Utilities Rules and Regulations. 33. The applicant shall not be allowed to begin work until the utility improvement plans, project specifications, and load sheets have been approved by the Water, Gas and Wastewater Engineering Division and the City's Cross Connection Control Inspector. Utility connection charges must be paid prior to the scheduling of any work performed by the City of Palo Alto or the applicant. 34. All utility mains shall be installed, to the satisfaction of the Utilities Engineering, in Sand Hill Road and "Main" Street, and other areas as necessary to facilitate these installations, prior to commencement of Senior Housing Phase I construction. 35 A. waste water discharge permit to be obtained from Utilities Water -Gas -Wastewater Engineering is required. July 14, 1997 Conditions -. Senior Housing Page 12 of 17 Pages A separate water meter shall be installed to irrigate the approved landscape plan. This meter shall be designated as an irrigation account and no other water service will be billed on the account. 37. Ultra low flush toilets are required. All tank and valve toilets must be specified as using 1.6 gallons per flush or less. All urinals must be specified as using 1 gallon per flush or less. Public Works Engineering 38. The project is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD). A permit must be obtained from SCVWD and a copy provided to the City. 39. The applicant shall obtain a Permit for Construction in a Public Street from Public Works Engineering for construction proposed in the City of right-of-way, 40. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City in a form approved by the City Attorney which guarantees the completion of the required public improvements as well as any area subject to public access requirements, and shall post a bond or other form of financial security acceptable to the City Attorney, in an amount determined by the Director of Public Works, as security for performance of this obligation. Public Works Water Quality Control 41. Food service facilities shall install one or more grease interceptors on sewer lines servicing sinks, dishwashers, and floor drains. The size of such interceptors shall be in conformance with the Uniform Plumbing Code provision of the California Building Standard Code (24 CCR). 42. Laboratory areas shall have sinks and any floor drains plumbed separately from bath- rooms and these sewer lines shall have discharge sampling ports constructed on them. No shelves which could be used for chemical storage shall be constructed above sinks. 43. Discharge of contaminated groundwater to the sanitary sewer shall only be allowed if reuse options have been studied and determined to be impractical by the Director of the City's Water Quality Control Plant. Discharge of swimming pool water to the storm drain system, street or gutter is not permitted. Therefore, a sanitary sewer clean -out shall be located such that a hose can be used to convey overflow swimming pool water to the sanitary sewer. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 13 of 17 Pages Fire Department 45. The applicant shall pay $ 36,960 to the City as its fair share costs for the acquisition of a paramedic van. 46. A hazardous Materials Management Plan is required to be submitted to the Fire Department in accordance with State Law. 47. The applicant shall apply to the Fire Department for a Hazardous Materials Storage permit fee for the storage of any hazardous materials associated with the health center, swimming pool, maintenance areas or common areas, and pay the required fee. 48. Groundwater remediation or vapor extraction systems will require Fire Department permits and approvals. 49. The all-weather, combination access road/ pedestrian and hike path at the rear of the site shall have a minimum paved width of 20 feet in order to comply with emergency vehicle access requirements. 50. Fire hydrants shall be placed throughout the site at a minimum spacing of 300 feet. Along the rear of the buildings facing the creek, wharf hydrants shall be placed in locations to be approved by the Fire Marshal. A plan indicating all fire service features shall be provided for review and approval by the Fire Marshal, including fire hydrant placement, emergency vehicle access, fire sprinkler, water flow and alarm system calculations. 51, The applicant shall submit plans to the Fire Department which show that all buildings comply with requirements for fire sprinklers, per PAMC, Section 15.04.170(dd), and fire alarms (including graphic annunciator), with Central Station supervision for both. 52, Building plans shall incorporate the following features: elevator access for a minimum gurney size of 84 inches by 24 inches and two emergency personnel; floor control valves; rated corridors; emergency lighting and illuminated exit signs; panic hardware and portable fire extinguishers. 53. The Fire Department shall determine that plans satisfy emergency fire access requirements, including turning radii throughout the site, per PAMC Title 15, UFC Article 10. During Construction: July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 14 of 17 Pages Utilities 54. The contractor shall submit for approval by Utilities Engineering Division the manufacturer's literature on the materials to be used. 55. The applicant shall provide meter protection for any gas meters that may be subject to vehicle damage. 56. All customer piping shall be inspected and approved by the Building Inspection Division before gas service is instituted. Gas meters will be installed at least three working days after the building piping final inspection. 57. All new traffic signals and proposed modifications to existing traffic shall be per City of Palo Alto Traffic Signal Standards and costs shall be borne by the applicant. 58. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground inspector before energizing. 59. All new underground service conduits and substructures shall be inspected before backfilling. 60. The applicant's contractor shall obtain a street opening permit from the Department of Public Works before digging in the street right-of-way. Public Works Engineering 61. To reduce dust levels, it shall be required that exposed earth surfaces be watered as necessary. Spillage resulting from hauling operations along or across any public or private property shall be removed immediately and paid for by the.contractor. Dust nuisances originating from the contractor's operations, either inside or outside of the right-of-way shall be controlled at the contractor's expense. 62. The contractor must contact the Public Works Inspector prior to any work performed in the public right-of-way. 63. No storage of construction materials is permitted in the street or on the sidewalk without prior approval of Public Works Engineering. 64. All construction within City right-of-way, easements or other property under City's jurisdiction shall conform to standard specifications of the Public Works and Utility July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 15 of 17 Pages Departments, unless exceptions have been specifically granted through this or other entitlements related to this project. 65. The applicant shall require its contractors to incorporate best management practices (BMP's) for storm water pollution prevention in all construction operations, in conformance with the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. The Building Inspection Division shall monitor BMP's with respect to the Applicant's construction activities on private property; and the Public Works Department shall monitor BMP's with respect to the applicant's construction activities on public property. It is unlawful to discharge any construction debris (soil, asphalt, saw cut slurry, paint, chemicals, etc.) or other water materials into gutters or storm drains. Fire Department 66. In order to ensure fire safety, the fire service system shall he fully operational to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal prior to any framing of buildings on the site. Police Department 67. All construction activities shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance, Chapter 9.10 PAMC, which requires, among other things, that a sign be posted and that construction times be limited as follows: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sunday Prior to Final Inspection of Work Performed under the Building Permit: Planning and Transportation 68. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Division, along with a request for inspec- tion, written certification signed by a landscape architect that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with all aspects of the approved landscape plans, that the irrigation has been installed and tested for timing and function, and that all plants, including street trees, are healthy and have a reasonable chance for survival. Public Works Engineering July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 16 of 17 Pages • The Public Works Inspector shall sign off the building permit prior to finalization of this permit. Public Works Water Quality Control 70. The project shall be designed so that no wastewater (including equipment cleaning wash water, vehicle wash water, cooling water, air conditioner condensate, and floor cleaning wash water) can be discharged to the storm drain system, the street or gutter. The applicant shall present a plan for approval by the Water Quality Control Plant to prevent unlawful discharges by occupants of the project. Utilities/Resource Conservation 71. Unpolluted water, from cooling or vacuum systems as an example, may not be dis- charged through direct or indirect connection to a city sewer without a city permit. Such water must be reused or recirculated, unless no alternatives exist and is approved by the Utilities Department. S:\PLAN\PLADIV\CMR\SANDHILL\FINAL\ULTIMATE\CONDSWSH.CC6 July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 17 of 17 Pages • S ORDINANCE NO. a 4 ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 600, 700 AND 1000 SAND HILL ROAD FROM RM-30 TO PF AND FROM PF TO RM-30 The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds as follows: a. The Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended that the Council amend Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (the "Zoning Map") . b. After duly noticed public hearing, and upon consideration of said recommendation and of all testimony offered upon the matter, the Council finds that the public interest, health, safety and welfare of Palo Alto and the surrounding region require the amendments to the Zoning Map as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2. Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code ("the Zoning Map") is hereby amended by changing the zone classification of certain portions of property located at 600, 700 and 1000 Sand Hill Road from "RM-30 (Medium Density Multiple -family Residence)" to "PF (Public Facilities)" and from PF (Public Facilities)" to "RM-30 (Medium Density Multiple -family Residence)" as shown on "Change Area A" and "Change Area E" of "Map 2" and, more particularly, to the insert to "Map 2," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 3. The City Council adopts this ordinance in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. // // // // // // // // 1/ // // // // // // 1 9 rZf7O3 lac 00315$1 S Iii 4. This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mayor y Manager Senior "I st . City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 2 970703 lac 0031381 Proposed new roperty line range t rom RM -30 to PF Change from PF to RM-3O kM -30(D) The City of Palo Alto Change fro: PF to PC • • • • Remain PF • • • hange from RM-30 to PF Change from FF to RM -30 Change from RM -30 to PC C- eC C C C 4' ORDINANCE NO.+'1 . ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.43.050 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS), RELATING TO THE ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA OF THE STANFORD SHOPPING CENTER The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds as follows: a. The Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended that the Council amend Section 18.43.050 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (Community Commercial District Site Development Regulations). b. After duly noticed public hearing, and upon consideration of said recommendation and of all testimony offered upon the matter, the Council finds that the public interest, health, safety and welfare of Palo Alto and the surrounding region require the amendments to the Zoning Map as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2. Section 18.43.050 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (Community Commercial District Site Development Regulations) is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.43.050 Site Development Regulations. The following site development regulations shall apply in the CC community commercial district. When the CC community commercial district is combined with the pedestrian shopping combining district or with the civic center combining district, more restrictive regulations may apply. Also more restrictive regulations may be recommended by the architectural review board and approved by the director of planning and community environment, pursuant to Chapter 16.48. (a) Site area. No requirement is established. (b) Site width. No requirement is established. (c) Site depth. No requirement is established. (d) Front yard. No requirement is established. (e) Rear yard. No requirement is established. (f) Side yard. No requirement is established. (g) Floor area ratio. The maximum floor area ratio shall be as follows: (1) The maximum floor area ratio for the Town and Country Shopping Village Shopping Center shall be .35 to 3.; and office uses at said shopping center shall be limited to fifteen percent of the floor area of the shopping center ex.“iting as of August 1, 1989. For the purposes of this section "Town and Country 1 970703 lac 003I578 m Village Shopping Center" is defined as all properties zoned CC and bounded by El Camino Real, Embarcadero Road, Encina Avenue, and the Southern Pacific right-of-way. (2) Stanford Shopping Center shall not be permitted to add more than sixty five thousand eighty thousand (80, 000)` square feet of floor area to the total amount of floor area of the Shopping Center existing as of August 1, 1989 June 14, 1996, one lion three hundred , thirty-twothousand three hundred s x:332,362) square feet, for a total square footage not Ilion four hundred . twelve thousand three hundred a 62). For the purposes of this section, "Stanford Shopping Center is defined as all properties zoned CC and bounded by El Camino Real, Sand Hill Road, Quarry Road and , the properties) bordering Arboretum Road to the south the future alignment of Vineyard Lane. (h) Site coverage. No requirement is established, except as provided in Section 18.43.070. (i) Height. The maximum height shall be 15.2 meters (fifty feet) . (j) Accessory facilities and uses. Regulations governing accessory facilities and uses, and governing the application of site development regulations in specific instances, are established by Chapter 18.88. (k) Outdoor sales and storage. (1) Except in shopping centers, all permitted office and commercial activities shall be conducted within a building, except for: (A) Incidental sales and display of plant materials and garden supplies occupying no more than one hundred eighty-six square meters (two thousand square feet) of exterior sales and display area, (B) Outdoor eating areas operated incidental to permitted eating and drinking services, (C) Farmers' markets which have obtained a conditional use permit, and (D) Recycling centers which have obtained a conditional use permit. (2) Any permitted outdoor activity in excess of one hundred eighty-six square meters (two thousand square feet) shall be subject to a conditional use permit. Exterior storage shall be prohibited, except as provided under (D) of this subsection. 2 970703 lac 0031578 ' (1) Site and design review. Residential and nonresidential mixed use projects shall be subject to site and design review in accord with Chapter 18.62. (m) Special setbacks. Where applicable, setback lines imposed by a special setback map pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of this code shall be followed for the purpose of determining legal setback requirements. S8CTION 3. The City Council adopts this ordinance in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 3 97b7O3 Inc D031 S7t • ORDINANCE No . `1 4 aq ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 180 EL CAMINO REAL FROM CC TO CC (L) (STANFORD SHOPPING CENTER) The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SEf TION 1. The City Council finds as follows: a. The Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended chat the Council amend Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (the `Zoning Mapp) . b. After duly noticed public hearing, and upon consideration of said recommendation and of all testimony offered upon the matter, the Council finds that the public interest, health, safety and welfare of Palo Alto and the surrounding region require the amendments to the Zoning Map as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2. Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code ("the Zoning Map") is hereby amended by changing the zone classification of that certain portion of the property located at 180 El Camino Real (also known as the Stanford Shopping Center), which is located between Sand Hill Road and San Francisquito Creek, from 'CC (Community Commercial) " to "CC (L) (Community Commercial, Landscape Combining)" as shown on "Map 7," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION _,. The City Council adopts this ordinance in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. // // // // // // // // // // // // 1/ // // 1 970703 lac 0031113 SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted ►:o a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: A.BS ENT : ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED: Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 2 970703lac 0031583 'l, .n.� /J t* *. ' .J t.t.:�4 �o..eeY-... . w '.. .r r. •.a 41 OW f.IK.I ).. .li) 4'11 •naajn rr +t14:1.cA a Iii 1u f.tw.) woY.y*c.iti C 1vow, t, :•,., j%I );.YO :1'11 04.•05.71-:N rcO :OIIQ 1.4AW :s 4 A 1PJ,1. 1111u41iStOD00001:N.i10-r k14-41 Olt! • lae 4 4 i, i3pp r, .- i kpr �� r ms's Si 1( . ,. r i , l - I Ii i n , i+t N I IuuS roa L ifj,1 F ' ' ! K )+ 1� i l i I I � yl _ L ' 1 1< I „,,, i,., t `! +ftl I t,l l ' et' r l jlf 1:'i 1 ji .1 'alf" � , r rill' 4 7;afln,;,,u, I. s -r t i i r t. 5flf.s ss! F9 in 44t; 45,317. jj� it . 011KIt FP HL_, ( L U U 0 r:{__ f-1 EDFt C i tioot 1., L IS:St 4, U{/ mom 4 j 1) ALI . !lath ?I NAAS SH ALL KTgMA1 VALLT IIIA16�Typ. 1; ALL HiOlosiU TIRO PLA NriN o IN M1II40 MINAS SMALL M AI Af l P101•0110 WWII PL ANTIw IN MIRING AUWI WA LL M Al 9+1 11 ' WK 1µA041/0 - 11 Ni , I GAL. Ni . 1 CAL 91 MA UT! I ICON TIM COhPIW . 60 Nli,r11 N AP PLACAT CNAPTIPTW O. La I S No Sca le `1—VM Gee ,---lsfescrza t Wit n SOURCE. Stan,oM Manag emen t Co a -C Backer, Amoo n. & Ross Inc . ALxnl I. t5SS. L:1.._ `l = S.rford Rktie:. i ('mtn -�j Esnn++6 Trot . - Propm ed ton to Msto.O EIrum; Ctuixsa ra, Osis, Pn*Wre. 1 4,41 _ j Pm pceN Ot otrl Ice `+ Pm1 Aand flema nng Arun ins �- T.o utroor's Lan; '- Proccual S JNae Ca oa sut over ^Nw< FeNC Gnaw f n 1 y �f Figure 3-18: Stanford West Apartments Landscape Plan op 3-3 • • =EMT "F' PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. Pages 3-30 through 3-85 of Volume 2, Chapter 3 of the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects EIR; b. Pages 14-1 through 14-2 of Volume 6, Chapter 14 of the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects EIR; and c. "Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects EIR Summary of Current Project Descriptions (pages 1 through 21). 3. Project Description parking lots fronting on Quarry Road would be reconfigured at this time. Finally, Palo Road would be extended and improved (see Figure 3-13). Phase I would take place during the first five and one-half months after approval of the projects and receipt of required permits. During Phase II, modifications to the Stanford Golf Course would continue. Additional development at the Stanford West Apartments would continue with the two center blocks (located between Side Street "A" and Side Street "B"). Buildings I and 6 of the Senior Housing project would be completed. At the Stanford Shopping Center, all remaining surface parking lots would be reconfigured, and improvements would be made to El Camino Real (not including removal of the jug -handle), Arboretum Road, and Vineyard Lane. Sand Hill Road would be extended from El Camino Real to the first entrance to the Stanford Shopping Center, a distance of about 400 feet (see Figure 3-14). New gas, electric, and sewer lines would be constructed along Main Street in the Stanford West Apartments site. Phase I1 would take eight months. During Phase III, Sand Hill Road would be widened from Arboretum to Santa Cruz Avenue, including the construction of the frontage road'cul-de-sac between Santa C.uz Avenue and Oak Avenue in Menlo Park and the San Francisquito Creek Bridge widening. It should be noted that approval of the City of Menlo Park would be required to construct the project as proposed from San Francisquito Creek to Santa Cruz Avenue. Stockf rrn Road would be extended and Pasteur Drive would be realigned. The remaining blocks of the Stanford West Apartments project would he constructed, and the Health Care Center containing the assisted living facility and skilled nursing facility would be constructed to complete the Stanford West Senior Housing project. The Sand Hill Road Extension would be completed from the initial extension to Arboretum Road. The jug -handle main entrance to the Stanford Shopping Center from El Camino Real would be removed. Finally, all of the proposed retail space and parking structures would be constructed during this phase (see Figure 3-15). Phase III would take nineteen months. Stanford West Apartments Project Location The Stanford West Apartments site is located on approximately 47.8 acres on Sand Hill Road, near the intersection of Pasteur Drive. The site is bounded by Sand Hill Road on the south, the proposed Stanford West Senior Housing (former Children's Hospital at Stanford) site and the Children's Health Council (currently under reconstruction) on the east, San Francisquito Creek and residential uses in Menlo Park on the north, and the Oak Creek Apartments on the west (see Figure 3-3). Project Applicant Objectives The primary objectives for the Stanford West Apartments, as stated by the applicant are as follows: ■ Increase the are: supply of market rate and below market rate housing; 95066\fdeir\projdesc 3-30 3. Project Description Provide infill housing which will make best possible use of available transportation and other infrastructure, with an emphasis on housing for employees of Stanford University and employees working on Stanford lands; Create a high -quality, highly livable and desirable community; Design the new neighborhood to integrate with and preserve important natural and historic features existing on the site; Create a new neighborhood reminiscent of established Palo Alto and Menlo Park neighborhoods; and ■ Create a residential neighborhood feeling through sensitive planning, architecture, landscape, and interior design. Project Characteristics Uses and Density Apartment Buildings The Stanford West Apartments project proposes the construction of 630 units arranged in building clusters of four to 20 units per cluster (see Figure 3-17). Each building cluster would range from two to three stories in height. The project is being developed primarily to provide housing for employees of Stanford University, and employees working on Stanford lands. Additional project components include common open space, a community center (for residents' use), and internal roadways, parking areas, and infrastructure connections. Community open space (a Village Green) is proposed to be located on the east side of the site and would be available for the use of project residents and the general public. Additional public open space is planned along San Francisquito Creek on the north side of the site. This open space would be maintained to preserve archaeological resources, to provide a buffer to the biologically important Creek corridor, and to accommodate a regional bike/pedestrian trail with public access to the riparian corridor (see Figure 3-18). 95©66\fdeir\projdesc 3-31 • 3. Project Description Community Center A community center for the apartment residents would be located at the northwest edge of the Village Green (see Figure 3-19). The center would contain a meeting/conference facility, a health and fitness area, and leasing/property management office space. Additional uses proposed include an adjacent recreation area with a pool, and maintenance and support facilities. Village Green The Village Green would be located between the Stanford West Apartments project and the neighboring Children's Health Council and proposed Stanford West Senior Housing, both east of the Apartment site. At Sand Hill Road, the Village Green would be approximately 600 feet wide. At its closest point, the Apartments project would be about 220 feet west of the Senior Housing project. Further north, the eastern end of the proposed community building would be approximately 75 feet west of the Children's Health Council property. The Village Green, as proposed, would consist of two distinct areas. The southern area would encompass an area of approximately two and one-half acres along Sand Hill Road. This area would function primarily as a multi -purpose meadow with lawn, defined on the south side by a wood fence similar to those planned to be along Sand Hill Road. This area is intended to be suitable for active play and recreation, including informal soccer or football games, kite flying, free play, and large community gatherings. The Sand Hill Road edge itself would be consistent with the oaks and non -irrigated grasses along other parts of Sand Hill Road. Portions of the Village Green also provide peak stormwater detention during major rainstorms (see discussion on page 3-40). The northern portion of the Village Green would encompass about two acres located across the road to the north of the large meadow. This area is intended to provide a smaller scale outdoor space suitable for community events, such as picnics, outdoor fairs, and informal games. Setbacks Setbacks from adjacent features and uses help define the Stanford West Apartments project.. The project would be built along Sand Hill Road. A setback for parking and structures from the edge of the road right-of-way of 25 feet is required along Sand Hill Road. In several cases parking spaces or structures would encroach into this setback, reducing it to as little as 19 feet in some locations (see Figure 3-17). All of the existing trees along the Sand Hill Road frontage of the Apartments project would be preserved with the exception of a single oak tree at the intersection of the entrance road at the Vineyard intersection. On the west side of the project, there would be a setback of approximately 180 feet between the closest project road or parking and the existing hedge that defines the eastern end of the Oak Creek Apartment. The setback between the project and San Francisquito Creek would vary in distance, with an average setback of approximately 230 feet from the calculated top of bank (this would be 950661fdeirltxojdesc 3-34 • • 3. Project Description approximately 290 feet from the center of the Creek). The smallest setback between the project and the Creek would be approximately 100 feet to top of bank (160 feet to center of Creek) at the western end of Main Street. The largest setback would be approximately 410 feet to top of bank (470 feet to center of Creek) at the northern end of Side Street "A." See Figure 3-17 which depicts the calculated top -of -bank with notation "2:1 from Toe of Creek Bank". Design Concept The Stanford West Apartments project would be organized around a grid system of roads. The main spine of the grid would be Main Street, which would connect to Sand Hill Road at two locations: (1) the intersection at Pasteur Drive and (2) the intersection at Vineyard Lane. Main Street would be a two-lane, two-way street, except for the block between Side Street "A" and Side Street "B" where Main Street would divide into a complete loop around a park (see Figure 3-20). There would be no direct access to garages on Main Street, but access to interior auto courts would be provided at two locations in each block. Each of the blocks in the development would be internally organized around pedestrian ways and internal landscaped areas. These internal areas would have special paving and plantings, garden seating and fountains, and would provide access to apartments, auto courts, and bicycle storage (see Figure 3-21). Primary access to private garages and exterior apartments would be provided along Entry Streets, Side Street, and Lanes. Building facades would be highly articulated in order to give the impression of more smaller structures, Building heights would average 32 feet above grade (see Figure 3-22). Circulation The proposed internal street network would be based on a grid design with a main street, side streets, and parking lanes. Three traffic signals (Pasteur DrivefMain Street, Entry Road, and Vineyard Lane/Main Street) and multiple right in -right out entrances along Sand Hill Road would provide access to and from the project. All of the streets internal to the Stanford West Apartments project would be private streets, including Main Street, Entry Street, and Side Streets A, B and C. Sand Hill Road and Pasteur Drive would be public streets. As proposed, the Stanford West Apartments project would include a total of 1,193 parking spaces. Of the total, there would be 650 private parking spaces in enclosed garages; each unit would have its own enclosed garage space accessed either off an auto court or directly from the street. The remaining 543 spaces would include 11 handicap spaces, and 532 surface spaces on the street or in covered carports. The proposed allotment of parking spaces meets the City's requirement of 1,191 spaces, including 64 visitor spaces. An existing bicycle commuter route enters the Stanford West Apartments site via the bike bridge from Menlo Park at San Mateo Avenue. As proposed, bicycle traffic would be routed on a path from the bridge through the proposed community center parking lot along Entry Street to Sand Hill Road. Although bicycles could also use Main Street, as proposed Sand Hill Road would be the primary route to the intersection of Pasteur Drive and Sand Hill Road and the Stanford 95o661fdeirlprojdesc 3-36 Figure 3-20: Stanford West Apartments Main Street —Landscape Plan Fig ure 3-21 Stanford West Apartments Indi vidual Bl ock Lands cape Plans t Sand Hill Road 97068 • r '"-, SECTION A -A s • rs Fs •.. .... It 4 , 1, .__. 777 ' — �.. .� —. $s a�_^_'_^_^•_' .. ..4, 4 .., CO URTYARD ELEVATDCN BUILDING 'A' 1 +hcoy , / w4.' •,p..;•e :A ' sa'.A:x"' 4444.4 4 r, COURTY ARD ELEVA llONBL'lLDi1:G' A' SOURCE: Siathaid atat Co. a nd Baa an A nton 6 Rea Inc., Ap9 1. 1996. Wee SE CT'K\kF SIDE ST REET ES.Ei'4'I'XT. 2{.'RIa`.G r- b ?FN.b=.� -'t✓.± _at e- o. rt .4' ? % �. ( �} /r � J- �a✓4 t Wfl ''0. '6 /'"1 LANE Et F.%ATK ' BOLDING A. Figure 3-22 Stanford West Apartments Elevations 3-39 3. Project Description University campus to the south. An alternate route for bicycles would be via a route between the community center and the Children's Health Council, then along Main Street through the Village Green to the intersection of Sand Hill Road Vineyard Lane/ Main Street. A recreational trail is planned for use by pedestrians and bicyclists in the open space along San Francisquito Creek. The trail would be an unpaved surface approximately 15 feet wide. This trail would follow the alignment of San Francisquito Creek along the entire north edge of the housing project sites. Infrastructure and Utilities The proposed Stanford West Apartments would require extension of a range of utilities and infrastructure to serve the future development on the site. Domestic water to the proposed Stanford West Apartments would be provided by the City of Palo Alto. City of Palo Alto water lines serving the site would be tied to the existing City lines serving the Stanford Medical Center which are located in Sand Hill Road and i s Welch Road. The main water line serving the site would be under the proposed Main Street (see Figure 3-7), New wastewater lines would be built under Pasteur Drive, Main Street. and Entry Street, tying into the existing system under Welch Road (see Figure 3-8). A new storm drain would be connected to the existing City line under Sand Hill Road and Welch Road (see Figure 3-9). Two detention basins have been designed as part of the Senior and Apartment Housing Projects (see Figure 3-23); the detention basins have been designed to detain one-half of the increased peak runoff from the proposed projects during a 10 -year storm. The detention basin in the Village Green would cover an area of approximately three-quarters of an acre and would be gradually sloped to a depth of about two feet below the surrounding grade (see. Figure 3-24). The small detention basin in the Apartment project would be less than 10,000 square feet and about four feet deep. There are two wells on the project site that are connected to the Stanford Water System. This system is separate from the City Water System and serves the campus with water for a variety of purposes, including emergency backup. The wells are currently connected to the Stanford system immediately west of the project site on Sand Hill Road. The project would include realignment of these water lines under proposed streets within the project (see Figure 3-10). Electrical service to the project would be provided through underground lines in Sand Hill Road, Main Street, and Entry Street. An existing overhead line running from the former Children's Hospital at Stanford site to a well located near San Francisquito Creek would be removed and replaced with an underground connection (see Figure 3-11). Natural gas service would be provided through connections to existing lines under Welch Road/Pasteur Drive which currently serve the Oak Creek Apartments. A new gas main would be constructed under Sand Hill Road and connected to a main across El Camino Real at the intersection of Palo Alto Avenue and Bryant Avenue (see Figure 3-12). 95o66tfdeir\projdesc 3-40 -- nazVIM or ?tar PROPOSED fmw w.r Noce i, i 7' No Scale SOURCE. litehlord lrhnyormon Co . Sin d Bru N Kamm& Nu*, June Si, 19x6. i�- - Detention Basin Figure 3-23 Stanford West Apartments Storm Drainage Plan I I%•,' i t 8ubbiRr t 78.3 I o I �N i7.3 // II // T .. .+. • I I ter. I / Ir I /° II Ii �i Inlet• t Drai • to Structure i ❑ inietn I t /'���..�/ # # r P / i I / 4:11 + I I w % s'�/I /f I���InIfZ a` 9� It" •r �• A.rli II Structure °- `�.. I I Bubbler i � i i / 7,../ 8 f Section AA Section BB Sand Will Road Play Fold/ Open Space , Stand t gip"..II.i.MO.lr°rH..J i. rr.. Y[fi,ll l.,r.r MI..,/rI.r11 .. v1:, Mousing I Play Field / Open Spice SOURCE: SWA Group, April *996: EIP Associates. April 19%. Figure 3-24 Detention Basin At Village Green Esitsfog toe+ exri ElonmDet l!t FOt • 3. Project Description Governor's Lane The Stanford West Apartments project would remove up to 14 trees, including the historic Governor's Lane eucalyptus trees (see discussion that follows). Governor's Lane (also referred to as "Governor's Row") is an historic row of eucalyptus trees that cuts at an angle across the eastern end of the Apartment site. Governor's Lane is a remaining vestige of the tree -lined lane that ran from the Stanford Estate to Lake Lagunita, located on the main campus near Junipero Serra Blvd. and Campus Drive West. The project applicant proposes to replace the existing eucalyptus trees on the project site with a double row of California Sycamore. The newly planted Governor's Lane is proposed to be situated between three residential buildings at the eastern end of the project (see Figure 3-17). The Lane is proposed to be planted with a hedge on both sides, paved with a granular material, and identified with signs or gates. Rental Structure The Stanford West Apartments would be rental units made available to the public based on. a "tiered priority system" by which Stanford intends to make the Apartment units continuously available to Stanford Faculty and staff on a priority basis. To the extent that the supply of units exceeds the demand from Stanford faculty and staff, vacant units would be made available to employees of employers on Stanford -owned lands. This subset of potential renters would include employees working at Stanford-ielated entities such as the Stanford Shopping Center as well as employees working for unrelated employers such as the ones located in the medical offices on Welch Road and in the Stanford Research Park, If the supply of vacant units exceeds the demand from all Stanford -related employees, units would be made available to the general public. Residents of the Apartments would be required to maintain their employment eligibility in order to remain in their unit. Should their eligibility status change, their right to occupy the unit would be terminated unless there were no "qualified" renters for the unit. This requirement would be strictly enforced following a "reasonable" transition period which would be provided to facilitate resident's relocation. Project Approvals The following is a list of the various City approvals necessary for implementation of the proposed Stanford West Apartments project. All City of Palo Alto approvals would be by the Palo' Alto City Council, unless otherwise noted. City of Palo Alto ■ Site and Design approval; Subdivision approval; Variance to allow parking space and building (carports) encroachments into the Special and Arterial Setback on Sand Hill Road, and to allow off-street parking requirements to be met with on -street parking spaces; 95©66\fdeir\projdesc 3-43 • • 3. Project Description • Design Enhancement Exception for setback, daylight plane and private open space requirements related to parcelization of the site; • ChAnge in Comprehensive Plan land use designation from Streamside Open Space to Multiple Family Residential (for a very small portion of the site only); Building permits (Department of Planning and Community Environment); and ▪ Other approvals as necessary to implement the proposed project. Other Approvals s Compliance with NDPES General Construction Permit (SFBRWQCB). The project applicant has requested that the City also enter into a Development Agreement pursuant to Section 65864 et. seq. of the California Government Code (this would be approved by the City Council). The Development Agreement would address financial responsibility and other matters relating to the financing of public improvements or implementation of project conditions and mitigation measures, but would not alter any of the physical development or impacts associated with the project nor reduce any of the mitigation measures adopted with the project. Project Schedule and Phasing It is anticipated that construction of the Stanford West Apartments project would begin after certification of this EIR and project approval, probably in early to rnid-1997. Construction of the Stanford West Apartments project would be completed by the end of Year 2000. The Apartments project would be built in three major phases. Phase 1 would include 215 units located in three blocks of development east of Side Street "A." Phase •1 would take approximately 12 months to construct, starting approximately 8.5 months following project approval. Phase 2 would include 180 units located in 2+ blocks between Side Street "A" and Side Street "B"; this phase would include the park block of Main Street. Phase 2 would be constructed over a 12 month period, starting approximately 18.5 months following project approval and 2 months prior to the completion of Phase 1. Phase 3 would include the remaining 235 units located west of Side Street "B." Phase 3 would take approximately 12 months to construct, starting approximately 29.5 months following project approval and about 2 months prior to completion of Phase 2. Each phase of project construction would take a total of approximately 12 months. During that time site preparation and grading would take about one month; infrastructure, foundations and streets would take approximately 5 months; exterior framing would take approximately 4 months; interior construction would take approximately 2 months; and exterior landscaping would take about one month. A more detailed estimate of construction phasing for a typical phase of the Stanford West Apartments project is included in Table C-2, in Appendix C (Phasing Appendix). 95066\fdeiriprojdesc 3-44 3. Project Description Stanfor1 West Senior Housing Project Location The Stanford West Senior Housing site is located on 22.3 acres of land previously occupied by Children's Hospital at Stanford. The site is bounded by the Stanford West Apartments and Children's Health Council sites on the west, Sand Hill Road on the south, the Ronald McDonald House on the east, and San Francisquito Creek and the Allied Arts neighborhood of Menlo Park on the north (see Figure 3-3). Project Applicant Objectives The primary- objectives for the Stanford West Senior Housing project, as stated by the applicant are to: ■ vide an outstanding full service residential facility for seniors in a location with excellent access to medical, retail, academic, and other resources; • Offer a range of distinct types of living and care arrangements within the COM- unity; • Replace the existing Children's Hospital buildings and redevelop the site in a manner that balances the natural beauty of the site with the specific functional demands of the seniors facility; and a Design the project so that significant natural features are preserved with a minimum of disruption to existing vegetation. Project Characteristics The proposed Stanford West Senior Housing project would be located on the former site of Children's Hospital at Stanford (CH@S) (see Figure 3-3). As part of the proposed projects, all of the existing buildings would be demolished and the paved areas removed. As part of the demolition of the former CH@S and excavation of the site, existing below -grade mechanical tunnels would also be removed. The Stanford West Senior Housing project would provide a full continuum of care for its senior residents, along with a full range of living, support, and care services. The minimum age for entry would be 60 years, but Stanford expects that over time the average age would be in the mid -80s. The project would consist of a total of 388 independent living/condominium units for senior citizens, and a health care center that would include a 70 -room assisted living facility and a 48 -room skilled nursing facility (see Figure 3-25). It is expected that most residents would purchase independent living units and pay monthly management fees. When necessary, residents of independent living units would have priority access to the Health Care Center. 95O661fdeirlprojdesc 345 MA MOO 7 NO Bade vlu.to ! olun ligUA t ilariord Wa napilart awn% w+++IR aMl+, 441, tiM. S' N Pit / . CRf4 .0• 11. �.wm.�'' •1 RROIEC7 DATA 1ulMl .t11111➢ yV, t7MR bATA •1Wf •MA /, i4 rN ti M rM * iry rr•R in wM „ II i r nAaeni lersrw y Figure 3-25 ' Stanford West Senior Nowlin • 3. Project Description A portion of the currently approved Children's Health Council parking lot would need to be redesigned and partially relocated in order to accommodate the Stanford \Vest Senior Housing project. The proposed configuration is shown on Figure 3-26. The Stanford West Senior Housing project would generate a total of 165 jobs. including 65 jobs associated with the Independent Living Units and 100 jobs at the Health Care Center. The construction of the Stanford West Senior Housing would require the removal of up to 181 trees. Independent Living Units The 388 independent living units would be contained in one of three major structures, each four stories in height. The units would range in size frorn 800 to 1.800 square feet, with one-, two-, and three -bedroom configurations. Most units would have a full kitchen, laundry, and deco_ or patio. In the Main Building (Buildings 2, 3, 4, and 5), common areas are proposed that Etioulci inch -de a variety of uses to meet the needs of project residents. The first floor common areas would include a lobby/entry, an adjacent lounge, several dining rooms, a kitchen and an employee lounge, a post office and mail room, a sales office, a reception/security room, and restrooms for the public and staff (see Figure 3-27). Second floor common areas would include the following uses: a coffee shop/convenience store, a billiards room, a nursingtwellness room, two conference rooms, a library, and public restrooms. Third floor common areas would include a beauty salon, a bank, an exercise room, an arts and crafts room, two card rooms, a chapel, a dark ,room, a sewing room, an electronic data center (computer room), several small offices, and public restrooms. Fourth floor common areas would include a large auditorium with a stage, a walling track, and public restrooms. A single story pool/spa building would be constructed on the north side of the Main Building, immediately adjacent to the service road and within about 25 -feet of the calculated top of the bank of San Francisquito Creek. The Senior Housing project would include a total of 499 parking spaces. The majority of the parking (388 spaces) and all service/delivery operations would be located on the basement level (see Figure 3-28). The remaining 111 parking spaces would be at grade. The Independent Living Units portion of the Stanford West Senior Housing would employ approximately 65 full time employees. Elevations of the Independent Living Units are shown in Figure 3-29. Health Care Center (Assisted Living/Skilled Nursing Facilities) The three-story Health Care Center would house the assisted living rooms and skilled nursing facility. The Health Care Center would be located between the eastern end of the Main Building of the Senior Housing project and the Ronald McDonald House. The Health Care Center would face Sand Hill Road; at its closest, the Health Care Center would be set back approximately 48 95066\fdeir\projdesc 3-47 ChiWleni Health tires HOildlhg No. i Stan[Ord 11' ttu Apartrcrnte t1..r>ra 255,5K — <f. Umbra Shopping Linter NO TE tt AI 1. DI ANFIN c. ARIA:1 MIA1.1. nE AUIr1S 1A 1X '.115"+ 105/54 :5 A t; DROAIMEID 1RFF P1 AN TINt: IN F ARMING A PI -AS SIIA ;1 RI. AT At t PkOp01EO KN RU R PL ANTING: IN PARKIN(: A REA S SIIA1.I. RR AT 11110( %4t! RIMMING l lNCD,Rt R1eMA1VIAC, 12 (:.11 %A N <GAt. 10+ a . I COI t 574:44 ADM 'nett KM. J3. I!t Ronab Xi[rali haw E RNINII Tra11 ✓ PIKV011 d Twn IV MI NA &Sins ChatOc2 , 415, COLCOLL PIRPaii. IPA) • Prapotae 0111• d TNa1 # _ L' JWIc Pim r. KIMI CO Preview *w an Figure 3-26 Stanford West Senior Housing Landscape Plan >SRtaabatl RW mean..ae (b. amine ifibrll Olwp. Jong 1,1114 1 FIRCT Ff nog ()ROSS FLOOR AREA • 191,243 SQ, T7. (WO 1 PEDRM , JI I !LORI. 1 )IEDRI. B TOTAL 9I BUILDING J ROOM G 09 S CHEMATIC LAYOUT �T—�— ‘111111 0111 .01 00s0 /0,0601 .0. 100 0 am left lama' NAM 14 L taawlgyl Nrlvw[[[[i r w w rw.MAtin . p. y+ frill swm.w o t n+�iwr,.0r•irm ai auY .— .wrW. . rw rla a. rr .�r.rnw.a.n.,•. .a...it�.ta+rr 0040, •0001, Ile y[ . 01110 WSW w.erw rOn l 0020 N tl. ptMR r...v . 0140~.. lair Noy'Mil 100• 0[Iwo * r nt a as W M Pa►• aim govc.Y.n) wrq ir.-.�1.4.. .. Oa r f. Loam FtMM to wows 00 wes e Ir 0140104 w Ma P...,••••1.6 . 1A1[ 101 01111.166116116 art. Nov warm r al. r.nt .[••q ...}.rt rw n 114 w in .0010.011•1 WW1 GARAGE LEVEL /SERVICE AREA SNOGWC E AMC* li i» q rt GARAGE._____.__ IWO Spry _... TOTA. 06.00 SQ ft. 1 0 RIX)Sj iN WIII ', M,tTIC L AY OUT MINIMI:M ROOM 'M i ts: t ,01140 na e --L .' ,.gg O►j iUipirHMI. U00.{Gi6 B3 MAI *lltN}rANC mama 4M 1i U, .[ TVR/.4R pG Mp G 0 CC[QM r[[C AL Gtovtil 46. IIGG6Cl 6K l M « IA YdGM it ya{RA%b 4iCYLti AO GG a6 m.. .1l*OACI AL t ItkVli AyH M Ak01TC GAA AG[ YAR[aW4 [2.14p 2Kas N ILG G k al 66 OLG c 003 1 OLEIC ma, iR SLOG 00 3+04 6 1400 -'MAL A. M R ARCA Figure 3-28 Stanford West Senior Housing: Garage Floor Plan It, 411401 • srN1O? f ousr xc, $�JQ HQU$ING .,"tt r" ' • C4,1.4 ♦• SCrtY1Ci. Sbtlmd WfnOmwfu nfdT►r 4++«vu. Apt 1.1064. Figure 3.29 Stanford West Senior Housing: Elevations 3. Project Description feet from the Sand Hill Road right-of-way. A one-story mechanical building would be located behind the Health Care Center, between the Center and the service/delivery road. This building would be located approximately 50 feet from the calculated top -of -bank of San Francisquito Creek. The 40,080 square foot first floor of the Health Care Center would consist of the skilled nursing facility, with 48 rooms of 350 square feet apiece. The rooms would be designed to allow more than one occupant per room. Some isolation rooms would be limited by the health code to only one occupant. Nationwide, most residents in skilled nursing desire a private room but cannot afford the cost. The project applicant believes that it is reasonable to assume that double occupancy would range from 30 percent of the rooms at initial occupancy to 75 percent in the long term. A variety of support uses would be housed in other rooms on the first floor, inn iudincc a dining room, a fully equipped kitchen, housekeeping, administrative offices, medical records room, three clinical offices and four clinical exam rooms, a procedure room, a small lab, a nurse's station, a physical therapy room, a lobby/reception area, an employee lounge, a day care room, a small conference room, a beauty saloon, two utility rooms, two tub rooms, a speech therapy room,, and several mechanicaUelectrical or building service rooms. The skilled nursing facility would employee approximately 100 persons. The second and third floors of the Health Care Center (approximately 36,685 square feet each) would accommodate the assisted living facility, consisting of 70 single -occupant assisted living rooms of 550 square feet each; these rooms would include private baths and small kitchenettes. Each floor would include 35 assisted living rooms, two dining rooms, two lounges, a serving kitchen, restrooms, an office, a reception area, a housing/maintenance room, a small activity room, a small room with medical storage, a janitorial room, and mechanical/service space. The assisted living facility would employee approximately 65 persons. A total of 66 surface parking spaces would be provided adjacent to the Health Care Center; 35 spaces would be shared with the Ronald McDonald House. The shared spaces would be jointly used by -patrons and employees of the Health Care Center, as well as patrons and employees of the Ronald McDonald House. Circulation The nain entrance to the Senior Housing project would be from the intersection of Sand Hill Road and Arboretum Road. Secondary entrances would be from the intersection of Sand Hill Road and Vineyard Lane, and from the entrance to the Health Care Center. The primary entrance to the Health Care Center would be from the existing Ronald McDonald House entrance, which would also serve as the primary service/delivery entrance to the Senior Housing project. Service/delivery trucks would enter at this location, pass through the Health Care Center/Ronald McDonald House shared parking lot, and follow the service road behind the Senior Housing project to the below -grade service ramp. All service and delivery operations would occur below grade. 95o66\fdeir\pro}desc 3-52 • • 3. Project Description The service/delivery road would also serve as a pedestrian and bicycle path. It would be connected to the areawide path system at the Children's Health Council parking lot on the west and at the Ronald McDonald House on the east. Farther to the east the existing path system follows the Creek and crosses El Camino Real at Alma Avenue. To the west, the path system connects to the north -south path that connects Menlo Park and the University campus via the San Francisquito Creek bicycle bridge. Infrastructure and Utilities The proposed Stanford West Senior Housing would require the reconstruction of all of the utilities and infrastructure currently serving the site. A new City of Palo Alto water line would connect the Main Building to the 12 -inch water line under Sand Hill Road. In addition, a new water line is proposed to connect the Health Care Center to the Sand Hill Road line, and then loop behind the project (under the service/delivery road) to connect with the line serving Children's Health Council and Main Street through the proposed Apartments project (see Figure 3-7). New wastewater lines would be provided on the project site (see Figure 3-30). In addition, the project would be connected to the existing wastewater system through a new 12 -inch line under Arboretum Road, connecting to the existing line in Quarry Road. A new storm drainage system would serve the project site. Currently, all storm drainage is diverted into the Sand Hill Road trunk line, which delivers the storm water directly to San Francisquito Creek via a 90 -inch outfall near El Camino Real. As proposed, the eastern half of the site would continue to drain in this fashion; direct connections to the Sand Hill Road trunk line would be located at Arboretum Road and at the entrance to the Health Care Center. The western half of the project site would be drained into a portion of the system that would divert directly to the Sand Hill Road trunk line in storm events of less magnitude than the 10 -year storm. For larger storms, peak flows would overflow into a detention basin located in the Village Green (see Figure 3-30). This detention basin was previously described under the Stanford West Apartments. Electrical service would be provided from underground lines to be placed in Sand Hill Road. The existing overhead electrical line, which traverses the project site from the Ronald McDonald House, along Sand Hill Road, and serves the water wells on the Apartments site, would be removed. Ronald McDonald House would be provided with new connections to the underground service. Natural gas service would be provided from lines to be connected to new lines under Sand Hill Road and an existing line under Arboretum Road, Project Approvals The following is a list of the various City approvals necessary for implementation of the proposed Stanford West Senior Housing project. All City of Palo Alto approvals would be by the Palo Alto City Council, unless otherwise noted. 950661fdeirlprojdcsc 3-53 -� ONECTO14Or RAE _••••� MONAD SAWN Dajw M'[S a SOURCE: Sa nford Manapamanf Co . an d Brian Kanto Fmk SCA LE: 7' - 200' •A+M L II"' Figure 3-30 Stanford West Senior Housing Storm Drainage Plan • S City of Palo Alto 3. Project Description Zone change from Public Facility (PF) to Planned Community Zone (PC); Zone Change from Medium Density Multiple Family Residential (RM-30) to Planned Community Zone and from Public Facility to RM-30 to accommodate adjustments between the Senior Housing parcel and the Apartment parcel; Zone Change from RM-30 to Public Facility to accommodate adjustments between the Senior Housing parcel and the Children's Health Council parcel, as described above in Project Characteristics; Design Enhancement Exception to sideyard fencing regulations to allow no solid wall or fence to be installed along the common property line between the RM zoned apartment site and the proposed PC zoned senior site, where one would otherwise be required; ▪ Change in Comprehensive Plan land use designation from Major institution/Special Facilities and Strearside 'Ten Space to Multiple Family Residential; Change in Comprehensive Pian land use designation from Multiple Family and Streamside Open Space to Major lnstitution'Special Facilities to accommodate adjustments between the Senior Housing parcel and the Children's Health Council parcel, as described above in Project Characteristic::; ■ Subdivision approval to divide from surrounding parcels and for condominium purposes; Demolition permit for removal of existing structures, pavement, and utilities of the former Children's Hospital at Stanford (Department of Planning and Community Environment); Building permits (Department of Planning and Community Environment); a Permits from the Palo Alto Fire Department for the storage and use of haaardous materials (Fire Department); and Other approvals as necessary to implement the proposed project. Other Approvals ua Compliance with NDPES General Construction Permit (SFBRWQCB); Building permits for construction of the Health Care Center, including the Skilled Nursing Facility and the Assisted '.iving Facility from the California State Office of Statewide Hospital Planning and Development (OSHPD); and ® Approval of a Residential Care For the Elderly (RCFE) license from the Community Care License office of the California State Department of Social Services. 95066\fdeirlprgidesc 3-55 3. Project Description The project applicant has also requested that the City enter into a Development Agreement pursuant to Section 65864 of the California Government Code (this would be approved by the City Council). The Development Agreement would address financial responsibility and other matters relating to the financing of public improvements or implementation of project conditions and mitigation measures, but would not alter any of the physical development or impacts associated with the project nor reduce any of the mitigation measures adopted with the project. Project Schedule and Phasing It is anticipated that the Stanford West Senior flous=,ng project would be initiated after certification of this EIR and project approval, probably in mid -to -late 1997. Project completion would likely occur by the end of Year 2000. The demolition of the entire existing CH, S facility woaldd be completed in a single phase prior to the start of construction of Phase 1 of the Stanford \Vest Senior Housing:. Since the demolition would take four to six months to complete, it is expected that dernoliti c n would be started three to four months following project approval. During Phase I, Building Nos. 2, 3, 4 ar:d 5 (240 units and common areas': of the Senior Housing project would be built (see building numbers on Figure 3-26). Construction: of these buildings would take approximately 12 months, starting approximately 8.5 months following project approval. (Construction of Phase I of the Stanford West Senior Housing project would start at the same time as the construction of Phase 1 of the Stanford West Apartments.) Dining Phase II Buildings 1 and 6 (148 units) would be constructed, completing the independent living units. Construction of Phase II would take approximately 12 months, starting approximately 18.5 months following project approval and about two months prior to completion of Phase 1. Phase III would involve construction of the Health Care Center. Construction of this phase would take approximately 12 months, starting approximately 29.5 months following project approval and about 12 months prior to the completion of Phase 2. Overall, construction of the Stanford. West Senior Housing project would take place over a period of about 32 months (due to overlapping phases). Stanford Shopping Center Expansion Project Location The Stanford Shopping Center is located at the northeast comer of the Stanford University campus. It is bounded by El Camino Real on the east, Quarry Road on the south, other retail and medical office buildings on the west, and the proposed Sand Hill Road alignment and undeveloped lands adjacent to San Francisquito Creek on the north (see Figure 3-3). Existing uses located at the Shopping center, and current square footage are shown in Table 3-2. Expansion of Stanford Shopping Center would occur in a number of locations, with the largest component in the vicinity of Macy's Men's Store, in the northeastern part of the existing Shopping Center. There would also be construction of some small-scale retail spaces along Arboretum Road, between the existing Shopping Center and Nordstrom's store, an additional 950661fdeirtprojdesc 3-56 Project Description TABLE 3-2 STANFORD SHOPPING CENTER EXPANSION RETAIL AREA TABULATION (LN SQUARF. FEET) Existing Retail Area Proposed Retail Area Total Nordstrom 180,000 Nordstrom 10,000 Saks 89,393 Saks -10,000 Building I 5,000 Subtotal 269,393 5,000 274,393 Neiman Marcus 120,000 Macy's 225,830 Emporium 228,986 Macy's Men's 94,337 Shops 393,816 Building 2 5,000 Building 3 11,000 Building 4 9,000 Building 5 3,000 Building 6 89,000 Building 7 13,500 Building 8 19,500 Building 9 5,,,0{10 Subtotal 1069 969 155,000 i.217969 TOTAL 1,332,3 62 160,000 1,492,362 SOURCE: Stanford Management Company, November 7, 1995 950661fde irlproj desc 3-57 3. Project Description small scale retail building near the intersection of Quarry Road and El Camino Real, and another small retail building near the Stanford West Senior Housing Health Care Center (see Figures 3-30 and 3-31). Two parking structures would be constructed: the South Structure at the corner of Quarry and Arboretum Road (replacing the existing structure), and the North Structure on the rthearn edge of the Center, adjacent to the main component of the expansion. Project Applicant Objectives The summary objectives for the improvements to the Stanford Shopping Center, as stated by applicant are to: ■ Increase the Shopping Center's competitiveness by improving the parking and circulation in and around the Shopping Center to better serve the existing customer and tenant base; Improve the overall tenant mix by adding more merchandise categories, including pedestrian -oriented, local -serving uses; and • Relate the Shopping Center more closely to its immediate surroundings and to downtown Palo Alto. Project Characteristics The proposed Stanford Shopping Center Expansion would involve a range of changes to the existing Stanford Shopping Center, including addition of several new retail buildings, changes to the parking configuration, and improvements to infrastructure and utilities serving the Center (see Figure 3-31). Retail Additions The Stanford Shopping Center is an existing regional shopping facility with approximately 1.3 million sq.ft. of retail space. The proposed projects involve the construction of 160,000 sq;ft. of space in nine separate buildings; some buildings would be physically attached to the existing Shopping Center, while others would be free-standing structures (see Table 3-2 and Figures 3-31 and 3-32). The proposed projects would include 92,000 sq.ft. of retail space which would be added to the main shopping center complex near Macy's Men's Store. A new two-story building (Building 6; 89,000 sq.ft.) would include a new pedestrian mall extension on the ground level and would have a bridge connection to the Macy's Men's Store and Emporium buildings and to the new North Parking Structure. A one-story, 3,000 sq.ft. retail building would be located adjacent to this new building (Building 5). The proposed projects also include the expansion (33,000 sq.ft.) of two existing one-story buildings (Buildings 7 and 8) to two-story buildings to complete the upper level connection between the proposed Building 6 and the existing Macy's Men's Store and Emporium buildings. Three additional one-story buildings (Buildings 1, 2, and 3), totalling 21,000 sq.ft, are proposed 95O661fdei rlpro j d esc 3-58 1111;1 e iiil t1 : i ii a ;s C' 95066 Man ' Outlaw mar. fia Sca4 • 111111 M,A AI A I aaia. s.... 11..41$1$.011./ $$$ $‘11,,"1.1$ ,1 Al a wwllr a Ya, a nwrs. .l. 6w Maa1 M6 at1M aa4.1 . of to Ptttnlly* on, at..n to a au6n Aa5M M... r M }.. 6.16....1` a 164, •, taa wn.{ ulna. r<w r1.r ss uu.. 46 ... r.4. ♦1411ra ,W. I . Ra. MYaaf. *1646, **W. M.W6too ..t.- r, SOURCE: S4rdq Manapemant Cu . an d EL- ER.wn 4 A.ap , d d .iuca, J.r1a I. 19106. Figure 3-32: Stanford Shopping Center Expansion --Landscape Plan 1tw�t�iS l 3-6r1 — Or A.0013., nci or inc _ +[ N:ct& wt.- BUS SNi.TER i Figure 3-33 Roadway Improvements: El Camino Real' Sand Hill Road Extension OrcAAAAI u r4" RAter SCALE r • •0 a 3. Project Description to be located between Neiman-Marcus and Nordstrom, across from Arboretum Road. A new pedestrian walkway is proposed at the corner of El Carnino Real and Quarry Road. The pedestrian walkway would surround 9,000 sq.ft. of new retail space (Building 4). A second new pedestrian path, adjacent to an additional 5,000 sq.ft. of new retail space (Building 9), is also proposed which would extend the existing street market area of the Shopping Center toward the proposed Stanford West projects, and the Ronald McDonald House. Parking Changes to the Stanford Shopping Center parking are proposed to provide additional needed parking spaces, and to accommodate new retail structures and road network changes (i.e., Quarry Road, Vineyard Lane and Sand Hill Road Extension) that would displace existing surface parking. The Stanford Shopping Center currently provides 5,751 parking spaces in surface lots and one, two -level parking structure (see Table 3-3). The changes proposed would result in a net increase of 625 spaces over existing conditions for the entire Shopping Center, with a total of 6,376 parking spaces available after completion of the project. Two new parking structures are proposed to replace parking lost as a result of the proposed expansion and the proposed extension of Sand Hill Road, and to provide parking for the new retail areas. A new four -level, 842 -car parking structure (North Structure) would be located adjacent to proposed Building 6. A bridge at the third level would provide direct access to the upper retail level. The proposed North Structure would be a concrete parking structure with "punched out" window articulations which are intended to provide the structure with a more "complete" look than is typical with many parking strictures. The North Structure would be 38 - feet high (to top of street facade), with 49 -foot elevator towers in each corner, The roof parking level is at 34 -feet above the street. The Sand Hill Road face of the North Structure would be 476 -feet in length. The design of this face of the structure is divided into two major faces through architectural treatments. A new four-Ievel, 2,328 -car parking structure (South Structure) would be constructed on the site of the existing parking structure. The proposed South Structure would replace the existing two - level structure with a four -level structure of similar design to that of theNorth Structure. The South Structure would have the same height characteristics as the North Structure. The Quarry Road face of the South Structure would be 536 -feet in length and the Arboretum Road face of the structure would be 395 -feet in length. Like the North Structure, the faces of the $outh Structure are divided into smaller segments through architectural treatments. The entire surface parking area of the Stanford Shopping Center would be resurfaced and reconfigured. The reconfiguration would be made necessary by the changes to the ingress/egress points to the Shopping Center parking areas, as well as by the addition of new retail spaces in areas that are currently parking lot, and the need to maximize the available space to achieve the highest amount of parking physically possible within the fixed area of the Shopping Center. The reconfiguration of the parking lots would require the removal and/or relocation of nearly all of the existing planted landscaped medians and islands in the parking lots. As proposed, the Stanford Shopping Center would have 1,073 parking spaces west of Arboretum Road (in the Nordstrom/former Saks parking lot), and 5,294 parking spaces in the parking areas east of Arboretum (including 2,120 surface parking spaces and 3,174 spaces in parking structures). 9506E\fdeir\projdesc 3-61 3. Project Description TABLE 3-3 STANFORD SHOPPING CENTER PARKING INVENTORY Project Element Resulting in Loss of Parking Location Existing Future Net Change Vineyard Lane and West Nordstrom and former Saks 1,183 1,073 -110 Portion of Quarry Fifth Avenue Parcel Quarry Road Extension South of Retail Bldg #3 to h'iacy's (South Parking 952 2,332 1,380 Structure) 513 472 -41 South of Macy's - Emporium 211 214 3 Southeast Corner of SSC Sand Hill Road Fast & North of Macy's Men's 407 261 -146 Extension North of SSC & Overflow Lot 236 0 -236 (North of Sand Hill Road) North of SSC (North Parking 262 842 580 Structure) North & West of Neiman- 289 387 98 Marcus SSC Eastern Entrance East of SSC & South of Macy's 780 786 6 Men's Southeast SSC El Camino Real/Quarry 94 0 -94 Pedestrian Way Entrance to Emporium Relocated North Macy's Men's to Ronald 242 0 -242 Circulation Drive McDonald House Entrance New Retail Bldg. #2 West of Neiman-Marcus 70 0 -70 New Retail Bldg. #1 East of Nordstrom 70 0 -70 New Retail Bldg. #4 Southeast of Emporium 46 0 -46 New Retail Bldg. #9 Northwest of SSC 132 0 -132 New Retail Bldgs. #5 and #6 West of Macy's Men's 264 0 -264 TOTAL 5,751 6,367 616 SOURCE: Stanford Management Company, June 1996. 95066\fdeirlprojdesc 3-62 3. Project Description As a result of the comp;chensive reconfiguration of the Shopping Center parking lots, all of the existing landscape medians located within the bounds of the existing parking lots would be removed and replaced with new plantings. Street trees which bound the parking lots on El Camino Real, Quarry Road, Arboretum Road and Sand Hill Road west of Ronald McDonald House would remain. Approximately 5S5 landscape trees would be removed in and around the Shopping Center parking lots. Infrastruc Various circulation improvements would also be implemented as part of this project to improve the Shopping Center's ingress and egress and to separate through traffic flows from internal pedestrian and vehicle traffic. The proposed improvements are described below as part of the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements component of the proposed projects. The only changes to the Palo Alto water system in the vicinity of the Stanford Shopping Center would be the inclusion of a new lateral under the Sand Hill Road extension, adjacent to the Stanford Shopping Center. Other than hookups to new retail space, no other changes to the water system are proposed. osed. No changes to the wastewater system are proposed due to the proposed projects, other than normal hookups for individual users in the Shopping Center. A new storm d.rain line would be constructed between the proposed North Parking Structure and the retail portion of the Shopping Center. This line would connect to the trunk line in Sand Hill Road. No other changes to the storm drainage system in the Shopping Center would be proposed.. Two joint trenches are proposed to connect the Shopping Center to electrical service across El Camino Real. An existing overhead transmission line that crosses El Camino Real at Quarry Road would be relocated to the joint trench at that location; the otherjoint trench would be located at the Sand Hill Road/El Camino Real intersection. A new underground service would be provided across the eastern face of the Shopping Center, providing a looped connection between the lines to be placed in Sand Hill Road and in Quarry Road. No changes to the natural gas service to the Shopping Center are proposed. Project Approvals The following is a list of the various approvals necessary for implementation of the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project. All approvals would be by the Palo Alto City Council, unless otherwise noted. 9506d1#deir\projdesc 3-63 3. Project Description City of Palo Alto a Municipal Code Zoning Ordinance text change (see discussion below); a Architectural Design Review; a Variance to allow building encroachments into the Special Setbacks on Quarry Road, Arboretum Road, and the proposed Sand Hill Road extension; la Demolition permits for removal of the existing south parking structure and existing pavement areas (Department of Planning and Community Environment); wr Building permits (Department of Planning and Community Environment); and a Other approvals as necessary to implement the proposed project. The Zoning Ordinance limits new development at the Shopping Center to 65,000 sf.ft. Section 18.43.050(g)(2) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code reads: Stanford Shopping Center shall not be permitted to add more than sixty-five thousand square feet of floor area to the total amount of floor area of the shopping center existing as of August 1, 1989. Approximately 16,000 sq.ft. of this allowed development has been used, leaving the Shopping Center the ability to expand by no more than an additional 49,000 sq.ft. The applicant is requesting the ordinance language be revised to limit additional development area to 160,000 sq.ft, 111,000 sq.ft. more than currently allowed.' Thus, the new zoning ordinance cap would be set at 160,000 square feet of new development following the effective date of the ordinance change. The applicant has also requested that the City enter into a Development Agretanent pursuant to Section 65864 of the California Government Code (this would be approved by the City Council). The Development Agreement would address financial responsibility and other The original recommendation to place a development cap on the Stanford Shopping Center came from the 1989 Citywide Lind Use and Transportation Study. Although not formally included hi the City Council's anion which established the cap, the study stated: Foisting and projected traffic conditions in the area do no: Iv allowing a substantial expansion of the shopping carter. Minor x: nsioits should be permitted to mega lair. the continuing viability of the Center and accommodate tenant irpravemenu. Consideration of any major expansion of the shopping center should be contingent upon resolution of the major traffic issues and improvements in the Sand Hill corridor. See City of Palo Alto, 'Citywide ide Land Usc and Transportation Study,' 1989, p. 93. In May of 1992, during their review of a study commissioned to assess the economic health of several of the City's commercial areas (A Planning Policy Audit of Retail Arras, prepared by Gruen+G uen Associates), the City Council clarified their position regarding the development cap by adopting the following policy: Delay the removal of the 65,000 square foot development cap on the Stanford Shopping Center until such time as the circulation and parking issues have been dealt with. 95066\fdeinprojdesc 3-64 • I Project Description matters relating to the financing of public improvements or implementation of project conditions and mitigation measures, but would not alter any of the physical development or impacts associated with the project nor reduce any of the mitigation measures adopted with the project. Project Schedule and Phasing It is anticipated that construction of the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project would be initiated after certification of this EIR and project approval, probably in mid -to -late 1997. Construction of the expansion project would be completed by the end of Year 2000. As proposed, during the first two phases of development, the only improvements to occur in the Shopping Center would be changes to the parking lots and improvements to adjacent roads (described below under Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements). During Phase I, the parking lots located along Quarry Road from El Camino to the proposed South Structure would he reconfigured. The Shopping Center's portion of Phase I would last for a period of three months. The second phase of construction would involve reconfiguration of the parking lots that face along El Camino Real, Sand Hill Road, and Arboretum Road. During this time Sand Hill Road would be constructed from the El Camino Real intersection to an entrance into the Shopping Center parking lot approximately 400 feet west of the intersection. In addition, Vineyard Lane would be constructed along the back side of Nordstrom. Phase II would take place over a period of eight months. The last phase of construction would take 12 months and would involve most of the major construction at the Shopping Center, including all of the retail buildings and both parking structures. During this period Sand Hill Road would be extended the remainder of the way to Arboretum Road. Construction of the entire set of improvements to the Stanford Shopping Center would take approximately 30 months. Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements Project Location Sand Hill Road extends from Interstate 280 (1-280) easterly through Menlo Park in San Mateo County, across San Francisquito Creek, and through part of the City of Palo Alto to its terminus at Arboretum Road (see Figure 3-3). Sand Hill Road is currently a four -lane road from 1-280 to Santa Cruz Avenue, where it narrows to two lanes until it dead -ends at Arboretum Road. At Arboretum Road, Sand Hill Road vehicle traffic either turns right on to Arboretum Road, or enters the Stanford Shopping Center parking lot. Access is available to El Camino Real via a circuitous route through the Center's parking area, or via Arboretum Road to Palm Drive or Galvez Street. 95066\fdeirtprojdesc 3-65 ! • 3. Project Description Along with the widening and extension of Sand Hill Road, related improvements would occur throughout the network of roadways connected to or in the vicinity of Sand Hill Road between El Camino Real and Santa Cruz Avenue. Extension (four lanes) of Sand Hill Road and the widening and improvements to Quarry Road would occur between El Camino Real and Arboretum Road. Widening of Sand Hill Road would occur along the entire existing alignment up to Santa Cruz, necessitating modifications to Stanford University Golf Course (relocation of two golf course holes to an area between Hole #2 and the Stanford Environmental Safety Facility; see Figure 3-40). Along Sand Hill Road, from Oak Avenue to Santa Cruz Avenue, a new frontage road would be constructed between the north side of Sand Hill Road and the adjacent residences in the University Heights neighborhood. The frontage road would be separated from Sand Hill Road by a landscaped berm median. Stanford Road and Leland Road would connect through the median to Sand Hill Road. The existing Palo Road, a private road, would be realigned between Palm Drive and Quarry Road and the intersection of Palo and Quarry Roads would be reconfigured and signalized further to the east. Vineyard Lane, a private road, would connect Sand Hill and Quarry Roads at the southwest end of the Stanford Shopping Center. Pasteur Drive would be realigned approximately 330 feet to the west. Stockfarrn Road would be extended in the area southeast of the Oak Creek Apartments. The abandoned portion of Pasteur Drive would be cleared of pavement and annexed to the City of Palo Alto along with the proposed alignment of Pasteur Drive. Utilities, which are to be relocated, would be coordinated with the City of Palo Alto.. As part of that annexation procedure, it is likely that the City would request a pre -zoning of RM-40, similar to the adjacent 1100 Welch Road housing project. The annexation of this parcel is considered as a separate project under this EIR (see page 3-72). El Camino Real would be modified between Sand Hill Road and Quarry Road. At the Sand Hill Road/Alma intersection, the only change to the El Camino Real approach from Menlo Park would be the addition of a single right -turn lane from El Camino Real onto Sand Hill Road. There would be no changes to the Alma side of the intersection except for reconfiguration of the two islands. The existing traffic signal at the intersection of El Camino Real and Alma Avenue would be modified to allow travel from El Camino Real to Sand Hill Road; no access would be allowed directly from Sand Hill Road to Alma Avenue. The existing landscaped median which runs from the current Stanford Shopping Center entrance intersection to the Alma intersection would be substantially changed. First, it would be divided to allow uncontrolled left turns (no signals or stop signs) from El Camino Real into the second of two new two-lane entrance/exits to the Shopping Center. The width of the median would be narrowed over much of its length to allow room for cars to stack in left turn lanes at Sand Hill Road and the two entrances to the Shopping Center. The median would be substantially widened from Quarry Road to about 150 feet south of the south entrance to the Shopping Center. The frontage road/turn-lane (referred to as the "jug -handle") used to cross from the northbound side of El Camino Real to the existing main entrance to the Shopping Center would be abandoned in favor of a single uncontrolled left -turn lane at that entrance. The current main entrance signal would be moved to the intersection of Quarry Road and El Camino Real. On El Camino Real, there would be two northbound left turn lanes onto westbound Quarry Road. Automobiles merging onto northbound El Camino Real from University 95066\fdeirlprojdesc 3-66 • • 3. Project Description Avenue would be unable to make a left turn at Quarry Road because a curb separating that merge lane would be extended all the way to the Quarry intersection. This extended curb lane is proposed to eliminate unsafe weaving by cars attempting to cross El Camino Real to make the left turn at Quarry. Instead, those cars would be forced to go further north on El Camino Real, either to one of the two entrances to the Shopping Center, or to Sand Hill Road (see Figures 3-33 and 3-34). Project Applicant Objectives The primary objectives for the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements, as stated by the applicant are to: ▪ Improve vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian circulation in the Sand Hill Road corridor, between El Camino Real and Santa Cruz Avenue; Improve access to and through the Stanford Shopping Center, Campus, and edica Center employment districts; Reduce the level of regional/business traffic on residential streets; oe Encourage walking and bike use by increasing the 'nfety and attractiveness of these routes in and along the roadway; and • Improve access to and from the Stanford University Hospital Emergency Room. Project Characteristics The proposed projects would involve the extension and widening of Sand Hill Road, the widening of Quarry Road, and related transportation improvements, as detailed below. Extension of Sand Hill Road in a four -lane configuration from the existing Arboretum Road to El Camino Real (see Figure 3-33 and Figure 3-35). Beginning in the area of Arboretum Road, the new extension would be located on the existing parking lot pavement. Nearer to El Canino Real, the extension would begin to leave the existing pavement, with the two westbound lanes at the El Camino Real intersection located approximately 40 feet closer to the top of the creek bank than the existing parking lot. The new intersection at El Camino Real would allow all movements except the through movements between Sand Hill Road and Alma Street/Palo Alto Avenue and the left turn from Alma Street to El Camino Real.3 The extension of Sand Hill Road would result in the removal of up to 102 trees; No changes would be made to the downtown Palo Alto side of this intersection. 950661fdeirlprojdesc 3-67 s F•' 40—'t R.40 -1 MO( Po. Pau a 44 4001EY. .EXI,STING TRAFF IC; SlC;4 Al WHC1 C Yl' 1tlr mtl o, ! • DIE " Mb a 1K US tAAc6tt 1t.s +D L[ 'cork m ec nC c.. #.a ti rcna6 at wss.rt t0C+ ws. _ per -1 swWCCD. O tut w a rN2 a 01A J 5 66 wi (3 0..13,4111 • 11t sc ow a tK M etn lmn. leal RAM R M 'rec., Met =Add AT tow. iSC CET -8 AC.1feR a NOS S.A .MN UT .4e' R. B VS F .+ .CL.TZR Wei t* 4r71C sa�N HIlS GUCr01.T-` (SEE GETAa ,-1) (1 er�nC p1Cc0ANO ., A CO I a Ptglor at ran! p60knk � 195' — (3 es se. . a lac 1te obo. oelr, (ioa 9t m ac to :wC root. mon 11C30430.0.64.0/ toc.m6 ,181141,1, Kw4. E, ttaa L 097FCTMY. I Mot t :a toot¢ Q Pw •iMYt ' 7]'�' a s.au.m J t 9t,-- Sp. S'In ,� were a x Owl wadi 11.04*» a .tc m to ttoow. n •C1*Ml at•+PYt t +oaa ftna VET C2! V f V 3 OE A all Rwagfa cry { • R/O (-43cl i V!; (S( (it Th:4 -It zr 2ECIR . AK' 2' ufUAF-t 32 ' s(. Figure 3-34 Roadway Improvements: El Camino Real; Q uarry Road Widening S OURC(, Se1h11'iW .r nt Ct and NM. Kir.= FW, ,1tne ) 1946 22 6 • 3. Project Description Widening and improvement of Quarry Road to a four -lane road from Arboretum Road to El Camino Real, including addition of a three-way intersection at El Camino Real/Quarry Road. Two left turn lanes from northbound El Camino Real to Quarry Road would be provided, along with all other turning movements (see Figure 3-34). The widening and improvement of Quarry Road would result in the removal of up to 101 trees; ■ Modification to the existing main entrance to the Stanford Shopping Center from an existing four -lane entry/exit with a signalized intersection to become a two-lane entry/exit allowing uncontrolled left turns from northbound El Camino Real, as well as right turns in and out of the shopping center parking lot. This change would include removal of the existing northbound signalized jug -handle lane providing access to Stanford Shopping Center across El Camino Real (see Figure 3-33); a Addition of a new two-lane entrylexit to the Stanford Shopping Center located between Sand Hill Road and the e.xistinn main entry/exit (see Figure 3-33); Modification to El Camino Real between the University Avenue interchange and the Sand Hill RoadiAlrna intersection (see Figures 3-33 and 3-34), including reconstruction of the landscaped median in El Carnino Real to allow left turns and associated stacking lanes at Quarry Road, two entrances to Stanford Shopping Center, and Sand Hill Road. The curb separating the northbound on -ramp at University from the main flow of traffic on El Camino Real would be extended. This is intended to eliminate the possible weave from the northbound on -ramp to the left -turn lanes at Quarry Road. Construction of a new, private, two-lane roadway from Sand Hill Road to Quarry Road (behind the existing Nordstrom store and referred to as "Vineyard Lane") (see Figure 3-35). The construction of Vineyard Lane would remove up to 21 trees; Widening of Sand Hill Road from two lanes to four lanes between Santa Cruz Avenue in Menlo Park and Arboretum Road in Palo Alto (see Figures 3-35 through 3-38). The widening of Sand Hill Road would remove up to 96 trees; Construction of a new frontage road with a cul-de-sac, parallel to Sand Hill Road between Oak Avenue and Santa Cruz Avenue in Menlo Park. The frontage road would be separated from Sand Hill Road by a landscaped berm. Leland Avenue and Stanford Avenue would continue to have direct access across the frontage road to Sand Hill Road (see Figure 3-38); at Widening of the existing two-lane bridge over San Francisquito Creek by approximately 31 feet to provide a total of four 11 -foot lanes, two six-foot bicycle lanes and two five- foot sidewalks with a handrail. Construction of the bridge widening would start with placement of a temporary "K -rail" along the edge of the travel lanes and the installation of shoring along the edge of the existing roadway. Access ramps to the bottom of the creek would be excavated on both sides of the creek. Cofferdams would then be installed around the limits of excavation 950661fdeirlprojdesc 3-70 i av r Vona row MI6 pa 1131,10. peak' wnsuogJY /own p.JQAau1A fautuaptM PQo EI 111H Puri :*IUIweAo adwi Aempoeu Gc-e aandti O*: r ;Y3 r.A!C)J P, (G -ltr130 00 )0 TrN OIS Oljd' \tk:Ct ONUSDC.1 A .xri> ---.`. I :a"""iry.: ,s ww MDUJJIM BUS S TOP WITH Z ..R.60. ~� No. pup(OUTq €1.30' X30' F R.5O' � •. SOURCE. S9rb+d Mrwpnwil C4. and & 4n IWRu Souk Are T. IM. O RELCCATE EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL ' , tf f-r7C J e/4 1 4/4 R 3 —R.30' 27 k* TRAFFh; -/ • gpMt— • — 8' 11 - r •14 Figure 3-3E. Roadway Improvements —Sand Mil Road Widening/ Pasteur Drive Realignment 3 ''= _.,.'cif17 95060 1. `^= BUS ouCKGUT 91EC-OETN E. -T) M pd1EY EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL SOLACE: Sta700 t+rr7nwnt Go. •n o Brien Ka rp= Fa ulk Jun e I. 19%. SEC TION T-7 3i 8' 10 BUS DUC( GUT (SEE PETI;IL-1 .._6' _..,. I I Moc13-2 X151161G TRAFFLE .. .. Si000t, !� f _ \-R SuS C'JCKO UT R=30 ' ,r -4 } TR<w' i SEE CE'AIL-1) 77' otwax -i Dorn-"�. 117 !(' xy • ar� x s •1i1 • Ni R .Tr qf M{ Rref CU OMO f KulC ! •WC '� ! r•r{ T, nsa CM% wCTW/ •r +rwc .0 LW -6,64 r Figure 3-37: Roadway Improvements —Sand Hill Road Widening/ Stocktarm Road Extension SAND "HEL L ROAD MODIFY EXISTIKG— TRAFFIC SIGN AL - Z N key SAP! FRANL'iSOUtTO CREEK N' • 4 11. R 90/1 rA r lOW[ O OaA It AM MO TO }[ TK4 00101100100 AoT YVUGrC 40[aIYR on v NoC$Fr E%I"::TNG .-/ 7P trFi(: S K,NA. I,, -guy Dutrca.:/ (sIC DC tut -i1" • CCIESI ViAN %TEnS \, tl.PIDE5T1tlAh ACCf .S' `^RI• -rJOC *ALY. uROFCSED F AI`JGF - N10EMN(.; PEGESTRt AN RA?IW AY-Zi 39 a Tr . a• v*Ass 0 •yro T Fa Figure 3.38 Roadway improvement a: Sand Hill R oad Widen ingllSan Francisquito Creek Bridge! Oak Avenue: Sante Cruz Avenue 6W11G4 DoInbM Y.rr ion., :.t. .'d600"0 011.0 P.A.. Axe 914E No 74 • • 3. Project Description for new bridge footings and the area behind the cofferdams would be dewatered. The construction of bridge footings, abatements, and concrete wingwalls would require excavation for foundations and driving of support piles. Following construction, the cofferdams would be removed, access ramps backfilled, and the bridge deck constructed of concrete or steel girders. Final steps in bridge construction would involve completion of the approach roadways and removal of shoring and the temporary K -rails (see Figure 3-39). The bridge widening project would remove up to 13 trees. Six-foot wide, striped on -street bicycle lanes on both sides of (1) Sand Hill Road between Santa Cruz Avenue and El Camino Real, (2) Vineyard Lane, (3) Quarry Road, (4) Apartments Entry Street, (5) Arboretum Road. and (6) Pasteur Drive (see Figure 3-5); Bike lane connections to pedestrian bike bridge hike lanes through Stanford University Medical Center (see Figure 3-5't: • A recreational pedestrian 'bicycle trail through the open space that currently exists between San Francisquito Creek and the Stanford Shopping Center parking lot, from El Camino Real to Ronald McDonald House_ and along the service:'deiivery road behind the Senior Housing project. between the Children's Health Council parking lot and Building 1 of the Senior Housing project, connecting to the pedestriantoicycle bridge at the Village Green, then continuing along San Francisquito Creek (following the existing informal path), finally meeting Sand Hill Road adjacent to the Oak Creek Apartments. The trail would be an unpaved surface approximately 15 -feet wide (see Figure 3-5); tit Pedestrian sidewalks and paths are proposed along both sides of Sand Hill Road (except between Santa Cruz Avenue and Pasteur Drive, where the walkway would be restricted to the north side due to the presence of archaeological resources), El Camino Real, Quarry Road, and Arboretum Road. The existing pathway in front of the Oak Creek Apartments would be extended in front of the apartments and west across the new bridge and along the new frontage road to Santa Cruz Avenue (see Figure 3-5); From Sand Hill Road, pedestrian waP:ways would provide accessto Searsville Road, the extended Stockfann Roa 3, Pasteur Drive, Vineyard Lane, and Arboretum Road. The pedestrian network would also connect the Stanford Shopping Center to the Stamford Campus, the Medical Center, downtown Palo Alto, and the proposed Stanford West housing projects. Additional connections provide access from the housing projects and Sand Hill Road to the Creek side trail, described above; ▪ Realignment and extension of Palo Road between Palm Drive and Quarry Road, with a newly configured and signalized intersection at Quarry Road. The new intersection would allow all movements between Palo Drive, Quarry Road and the Shopping Center (see Figure 3-34). The Palo Road improvement project would remove up to 81 trees; Realignment of Pasteur Drive between Welch Road and Sand Hill Road (see Figure 3-36). The realignment of Pasteur Drive would remove up to four trees; 950661fdeirlprojdesc 3-75 t, At C66i... � 6= ROAD WAY. • 'r SCALE: 1' • 20' 105— aWCI. 0 d I i1.,wM1wn co . Rna I KYpu foUM . s$ Ir I• TON 3 Y6wtkSj ELEVATION 1.. JO' -p' IIa12 1' . 1O' —O " %.517 . 115 —55 Mvt RO-E5 APPROX W--35 14tiK '''''-1 ,5413 :s C ritnA.0 fOR APPRO% 3 utX+txy; TYP1 AL BRIDGE SEAT ► 1jd' . 1'-0' ktiD;,G w, C014C 31AR4+fR; S!011015 Figure 3.39 Sand Hill Road Bridge Detail At San Frarnciaquito Creek "I l • 3. Project Description • Extension of Stockfann Road from Campus Drive West to Sand Hill Road (see Figure 3-37); Modification of the Stanford University Golf Course to accommodate the widening of Sand Hill Road between San Francisquito Creek and Santa Cruz Avenue. The modifications affect Holes #2, #3, and #4, and involve expansion of the Golf Course into a 3.6 -acre parcel located east of Hole #2 and west of the Environmental Safety Facility; (see Figure 3-40); and Various related intersection, traffic signal, and entryway- improvements and changes, including the following traffic signal improvements on Sand Hill Road: ► El Camino Real (modification to existing signal) ► Shopping Center entries (two new signals would replace see oral stop signs) ► Arboretum Road (modification to existing signal) ► Vineyard Lane (new signal) ► Stanford West Apartments Entry Street (new signal) ► Pasteur Drive (reloc-tion of existing signal) ► Eastern entry to Oak Creek Apartments (modification of existing signal) • Western entry to Oak Creek Apartments (modification of existing signal) ► Oak Avenue (modification of existing signal) ► Santa Cruz Avenue (modification of existing signal) It is assumed that for all City of Palo Alto public streets, landscape medians would be maintained by the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department. Landscape medians in the portion of the Sand Hill Road located in Menlo Park would be maintained by either the City of Menlo Park or Stanford University, at the discretion of the City of Menlo Park. In the eventthat the landscape medians are ultimately maintained by the City of Menlo Park, there would be a small increase in demand for maintenance services in the City. The operation of the proposed changes to the area roadway system, described above, is described in Section 4.4 of this EIR, including changes to areawide and local traffic flows. Project Approvals The following is a list of the various City approvals necessary for implementation of the proposed Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements projects. All City of Palo Alto approvals are by the Palo Alto City Council, unless otherwise noted. City of Palo Alto Change in Comprehensive Plan land use designated from Proposed Arterial and Streamside Open Space to Arterial for the proposed Sand Hill Road extension; Architectural Design Review pursuant to Section 16.48.050(a) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (public projects and construction on public property); 950661fdeir\projdesc 3-77 3. Project Description wt New public deductions, easements and abandonments of existing and new rights -of -way and vacation of existing rights -of -way; and • Other approvals as necessary to implement the proposed project. Other Jurisdictions The following is a general summary of the various approvals necessary from jurisdictions other than the City of Palo Alto. The approving body is noted in parentheses. Grading and encroachment permits for the Sand Hill Road widening between San Francisquito Creek and Santa Cruz Avenue, and a grading permit for modifications to the Stanford University Golf Course in Menlo Park (City of Menlo Park Development Services Department); Possible General Plan amendment to accommodate the road widening into the Golf Course, which is currently designated Landscape Greenways, Buffers, and Parkways (Menlo Park City Council). Possible de -annexation from the City of Menlo Park to San Mateo County for road right- of-way on the north side of Sand Hill Road between Oak Avenue and Santa Cruz Avenue for construction of a frontage road between Sand Hill Road and adjacent residences :Menlo Park City Council; San Mateo County LAFCO; San Mateo County); a Encroachment permits from Caltrans for improvements to intersections on El Camino Real at Sand Hill Road, Quarry Road, and the entrances to Stanford Shopping Center (California Department of Transportation); Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game (pursuant to Sections 1601-1603 of the State Fish and Game Code) for improvements to the Sand Hill Road Bridge within San Francisquito Creek (California Department of Fish and Game); Authorization for discharge of fill into waters of the United States pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for poi Lions of the bridge construction (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers); Architecture and Site Approval (pursuant to the General Use Permit) from Santa Clara County for modifications to the Golf Course, extension of Stockfarm Road, and extension of Palo Road (Santa Clara County Architectural and Site Approval Committee); Creek encroachment permits from the San Mateo County Public Works Department, San Francisquito Creek District for improvements to the Sand Hill Road Bridge (San Mateo County Public Works Department); 95o66tfdeirlprojdesc 3-79 eject 3cacnption a Creek encroachment permit from the Santa Clara Valley Water District for improvements to the Sand Hill Road Bridge (Santa Clara Valley Water District); and a Water quality certification associated with Clean Water Act compliance for the Sand Hill Road Bridge improvements from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay (San Francisco Bay RWQCB). Project Schedule and Phasing It is anticipated that the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project would be initiated after certification of this EIR and project approval, probably in mid -to -late 1997. Project completion would likely occur prior to Year 2000. At approximately the same time as Phase I of the housing projects, the following aspects of the roadway improvements would he constructed ss Widening of Quarry Road between Arboretum Road and El Camino Real; a Extension and improvements to Palo Road between Palm Drive and Quarry Road; and a Modifications to the Stanford Golf Course. Phase I elements would take approximately five and one-half months. Modifications to the Stanford Golf Course would continue for an additional eight months. At approximately the same time as Phase II of the housing projects, the following aspects of the roadway improvements would be constructed: a Construction of Vineyard Lane; a Improvements on El Camino Real from University Avenue to Sand Hill Road (not including removal of the jug -handle); a Arboretum Road modifications; and a Construction of a portion of the Sand Hill Road Extension from El Camino Real to the first entrance of the shopping center. Phase II elements would take approximately eight months. At approximately the same time as Phase HI of the housing and Stanford Shopping Center projects, the following elements of the roadway improvements would be constructed: a Construction of the remainder of the Sand Hill Road Extension from a point 400 feet west of El Camino Real to Arboretum Road; 95066\#dcirlprojdesc 3-80 • • Project Description a Removal of the jug -handle crossing of El Camino Real; a Widening of Sand Hill Road from Arboretum Road to Santa Cruz Avenue; sr Widening of the San Francisquito Creek Bridge; r� Extension of Stockfarm Road; and ■ Realignment of Pasteur Drive. Phase III elements would take approximately 19 months. The widening of the San Francisquito Creek Bridge would take approximately six months. Prior to construction of the bridge, the road approaches or, both sides of the bridge would be constructed to provide areas for construction staging. Bridge widening construction would be staged from the already -constructed road approaches to the bridge. The bridge is 'wide enough to provide two lanes of traffic and pedestrians and cyclists on the north side. There will be from time -to -time a need to close down one lane of traffic to move equipment and materials. Tnis would be accommodated during off-peak hours. Pasteur Drive Parcel and Other Annexations A series of small annexations and/or de -annexations would be anticipated hn order to facilitate implementation of the proposed roadway improvements. The proposed Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation is proposed by the City as a result of the realignment of Pasteur Drive, described above. This project would maintain the existing condition in which the entirety of Pasteur Drive is located within the incorporated City of Palo Alto. Without this project, Pasteur Drive would be located in the City of Palo Alto at its intersections with Welch Road and Sand Hill Road, but in unincorporated Santa Clara County in between the two intersections. In order to avoid this situation, the City has proposed this annexation. In addition, several other annexations and de - annexations would be pursued to ensure that roads would be entirely within a single jurisdiction. Since these annexations are not proposed by the project applicant, they are evaluated separately from the environmental evaluation of the proposed Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects contained in Chapter 4. Rather, the evaluation of the environmental effects of the Pasteur Drive Parcel and other annexations are contained in Chapter 5.1. Project Location The Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation site is located on approximately 1.15 acres of land currently under and immediately west of Pasteur Drive. The site will be created by the realignment of Pasteur Drive, between Welch Road and Sand Hill Road, proposed as part of the Stanford Sand Hill Road Projects. Once the Pasteur Drive realignment has taken place, a triangular parcel would be created that would be bounded by Sand Hill Road on the north, the 1100 Welch Road housing project on the east, and Pasteur Drive on the west (see Figure 3-41). 950661fdeir\projdesc 3-81 Uwiwrorpproud Sai a Clara Cowry No Scale Existing City Boundary - -1 1 1 inemoia Cu?' 0/Palo Aim Proposed City Boundary City/County Boundaries Pro posed Pasteur Drive Realignment Area to be Annexed to City of Palo Alto Pasteur Drive Parcel (1.15 Acres) SOURCE: EUP Associates, June 1996. —_•__� " Bend flip p 0Q om, j 0 U! n Figure 3-41 Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation 95066 ¢ip '2 91 3. Project Descnption Other annexations and de -annexations would occur along Sand Hill Road between Pasteur Drive and Santa Cruz Avenue, and along Quarry Road between El Camino Real and Arboretum Road. Project Objectives This project is not part of the application submitted by Stanford Management Company. However, the proposed realignment of Pasteur Drive, which is part of the application, would create this "island" parcel. The City, the County, and Stanford have all indicated a desire to consider the annexation of this parcel to the City. The primary objective for the Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation is as follows: a Avoid the creation of an island of unincorporated County land in the area surrounded by Sand Hill Road, Pasteur Drive, and Welch Road. Creation of the parcel would also meet the following objective: a Increase the supply of residentially -zoned land available for future housing development. The objective of the other annexations and de -annexations is as follows: Ensure that all of the lanes of a road seg.. Project Characteristics en are located in a single jurisdiction, As proposed, the Pasteur Drive Parcel would be designated Multiple -Family Residential under the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that residential densities in Multiple -Family Residential areas would range from 12 to 40 units per acre, depending upon the factors affecting the site. During annexation procedures, the City of Palo Alto will be required to pre -zone the Pasteur Drive Parcel. It is currently anticipated that the parcel would be pre -zoned RM-40, the same as the adjacent 1100 Welch Road parcel. Stanford Management Company has indicated that if developed at a maximum reasonable density, similar to that of the adjacent 1100 Welch Road project, the Pasteur Drive Parcel could accommodate up to 35 residential units. For the purposes of analysis in this EIR, it is assumed that the ultimate use of the Pasteur Drive Parcel would be the development of 35 residential units, similar to and connected with the adjacent 1100 Welch Road project. It should also be noted that the City would propose to annex two other small slivers of land currently located in the County in order to accommodate road widenings proposed by the project applicant. In particular, land on the south side of Sand Hill Road, between Pasteur Drive and San Francisquito Creek, would be required to be annexed from Santa Clara County to Palo Alto so 95066\fdeirlprojdesc 3-83 • • 3. Project Description that the entirety of Sand Hill Road would be located within the City of Palo Alto. Also, the south side of Quarry Road, between El Camino Real and the Hoover Pavillion would be required to be annexed from Santa Clara County to Palo Alto so that the entirety of Quarry Road would be located within the City of Palo Alto. No separate environmental analysis of these small "housekeeping" annexations is included in this EIR, beyond the analysis of the proposed projects. The City does not believe that these two small annexations would create environmental impacts in and of themselves. Project Approvals The following is a list of the various City approvals necessary for implementation of the proposed Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation project. All City of Palo Alto approvals are by the Palo Alto City Council, unless otherwise noted. Annexation from Santa Clara County to the City of Palo Alto for the land pocket created by the realignment of Pasteur Drive (Santa Clara County LAFCO; Palo Alto City Council; Santa Clara County); Change in Comprehensive Plan land use designation from Major Institution!University Lands`Campus Educational Facility to hiultip`_se Family Residential; !s Pre -zoning to High Density Multiple Family Residential (RM-40) and rezoning from Public Facility (Landscape Combining) to RM-40 for the land pocket created by the realignment of Pasteur Drive; Annexation from the City of Palo Alto to the County of Santa Clara for two small portions of rights -of -way along Pasteur Drive and Sand Hill Road to accommodate the realignment of Pasteur Drive (Santa Clara County LAFCO; Palo Alto City Council; Santa Clara County); Annexation from Santa Clara County to the City of Palo Alto for road rights -of -way of an area on the south side of Sand Hill Road across from the Oak Creek Apartments, on the south side of Quarry Road between Hoover Pavilion and El Camino Real, and the land pocket created by the realignment of Pasteur Drive (the land will be adjacent to the 1100 Welch Road project)` (Santa Clara County LAFCO; Palo Alto City Council; Santa Clara County); and ■ Other approvals as necessary to implement the proposed project. • The territory to be annexed will also include a small sliver of land located within Quarry Road. This small county area was added to the city stress as a result of a construcion project by Stanford in the early 1990s. The annexation of this small sliver is considered a 'lsousakeeping' measure. 950661fdeir\projdesc 3-84 It is anticipated that the annexation of the Pasteur Drive Parcel, along with other associated City approvals described above, would take place prior to the actual construction of the Pasteur Drive realignment project, described previously to take place during Phase III of the development projects. 14. SUMMARY OF TEXT CHANGES This chapter presents all of the revisions made to the DEIR as a result of responding to comments, as well as minor corrections and revisions initiated by City staff based on their on- going review. Added text is shaded and deleted text is struck through. The revisions are presented in the same sequence as the text appears in Volumes 1 through 5. TEXT CHANGES NOTE: Deleted text is struck through; new text is shaded Executive Summary While the term "earthen swales" is used on page 1-45 (Executive Summary) of the DEIR, the term "grass swale" is used in Section 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality. Page 1-45, last sentence, is revised to read: Measures to reduce the magnitude of this impact include the inclusion of such features as oil/grease traps in the storm drain systems and/or eat s swales. Project Description Page 3-44, fifth bullet, is revised to read: ■ Compliance with NPDES General Construction Permit (SFBR 1 Bowftg.9. Page 3-55, first bullet under Other Approvals is revised to read: a Compliance with NPDES General Construction Permit �WQCBXSWRC). Page 3-79 of the DEI.R, under the heading "Other Jurisdictions", is revised to read: Other Jurisdictions The following is a general summary of the various approvals necessary from jurisdictions other than the City of Palo Alto. The approving body is noted in parentheses. FtetBd anne?Cait n Ctty's apprzived Urban 95066\feirlsummary. t 4 14-1 • 14. Summary. of Text Changes Detachment from the County Litre Service Area for any Santa Clams' annexed to the City of Palo Alto; Grading and encroachment permits for the Sand Hill Road widening between San Francisquito Creek and Santa Cruz Avenue, and a grading permit for modifications to the Stanford University Golf Course in Menlo Park (City of Menlo Park Development Services Department); Palo Aito goon &mice Area ,expansion along the saisEhertt`al;i ent of Quart' between El Carttiao Real and Palo Road, and west of Hoover Pavilion to Arboretum (Santa Clara County Local .Agency Formation Comzutssxon); Possible General Plan amendment to accommodate the road widening into the Golf Course, which is currently designated Landscape Greenways, Buffers, and Parkways (Menlo Park City Council). a Possible de -annexation from the City of Menlo Park to San Mateo County for road right- of-way on the north side of Sand Hill Road between Oak Avenue and Santa Cruz Avenue for construction of a frontage road between Sand Hill Road and adjacent residences (Menlo Park City Council; Sari Mateo County LAFCO; Sari Mateo County); a Encroachment permits from Caltrans for improvements to intersections on El Camino Real at Sand Hill Road, Quarry Road, and the entrances to Stanford Shoppir Cer.er (California Department of Transportation); Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game (pursuant to Sections 1601-1503 of the State Fish and Game Code) for improvements to the Sand Hill Road Bridge within San Francisquito Creek (California Department of Fish and Game); a Authorization for discharge of fill into waters of the United States pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for portions of the bridge construction (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers); e Architecture and Site Approval (pursuant to the General Use Permit) from Santa Clara County for modifications to the Golf Course, extension of Stockfarm Road, and extension of Palo Road (Santa Clara County Architectural and Site Approval,Conunittee); Creek encroachment permits from the San Mateo County Public Works Department, San Francisquito Creek District for improvements to the Sand Hill Road Bridge (San Mateo County Public Works Department); Creek encroachment permit from the Santa Clara Valley Water District for improvements to the Sand Hill Road Bridge (Santa Clara Valley Water District); and a Water quality certification associated with Clean Water Act compliance for the Sand Hill Road Bridge improvements from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay (San Francisco Bay RWQCB). Page 3-80 of the DEIR, following the second bullet at the top of the page, is revised to read: tenn 950661feir\summary. 14 cis .: Water> existing 6 inch of two).. 14-2 STANFORD SAND HILL ROAD CORRIDOR PROJECTS EIR SUMMARY OF CURRENT PROJECT REVISIONS INTRODUCTION This document supplements the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 93013029). The purpose of this summary is to provide updated descriptions and analysis on certain aspects of the proposed projects which have been changed or modified as a result of evacuation by the City of Palo Alto City Council. Because the Final FIR is intended as a long-term reference document for the Sand Hill Road Corridor projects, the City has determined it advisable to prepare this summary to describe the projects proposed by Stanford and considered by the City Council in their final from. This summary will be included in and is considered an integral pact of the Final EIR. After public hearings on the Final EIR conducted between January and April 1997 and meetings between City staff and the applicant, the City Council requested the applicant to make several revisions to the projects plans. Revisions have been made to four of the five projects including the Stanford West Apartments, Stanford West Senior Housing, Stanford Shopping Center Expansion and Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements. The Pasteur Drive Parcel Annexation has not been revised in any way. As discussed below, the project revisions would not result in (1) any new significant environmental impacts, (2) a substantial increase:.in the severity of a previously identified significant impact, or (3) additional feasible alternatives .or mitigation measures considerably different from those analyzed previously. The City Council will consider this summary with the previously prepared chapters of the Final EIR prior to making a decision on the adequacy of the EIR or taking action to approve any pf the proposed projects. CURRENT PROPOSED PROJECT REVISIONS In the course of environmental review and evaluation of the proposed Sand Hill Road Corridor projects, the applicant has proposed or agreed to a number of project revisions intended to address environmental and planning issues raised by City staff, the City Planning Commission and members of the public. Changes to the projects agreed to prior to evaluation by the City Council are summarized in Chapter 11 of the Final EIR. S VI.A..NwAcptmNutsANDIULLY:IR•ADDMEIR•REV'S WPD 1 Stanfornd Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions During its consideration of the projects between January and June 1997, the Palo Alto City Council requested the applicant to make further revisions in the projects' designs or implementation. The remainder of this document presents the latest applicant revisions, evaluates the revisions to the impacts identified in the Draft EIR and Final EIR, and identifies any additional impacts that could occur, or mitigation measures that would be required as a result of the revisions. Stanford Nvot Apartments The Stanford West Apartments project has been revised to include a child care facility and a 675 square foot resident -seeing retail center, to be located within the previously proposed Community Building. It should be noted that the provision of a child care facility and a resident -serving retail center has been analyzed in Chapter 13 of the Final EIR, Response to Major Issues Raised by the Plannin` Commission. on pages 13-38 throur'i 1 -4 i . Please also refer to that discussion. In addition. a bicycle and pedestrian path has been added to the site plan that would provide a connection between the Oak Creek Apartments and the Stanford \Vest Apartments. These revisions arc described in detail below. Description of Project Revisions Child Care Facility Subsequent to the publication of the Draft EIR, the applicant revised the Stanford West Apartments site plan in response to recommendations of the Planning Commission and the Architecutural Review Board (ARB), and Draft EIR Mitigation Measures to reduce impacts on cultural and visual resources. As discussed in Chapter 11 of the Final EIR, the revisions include relocating.18 of the 20 units to other areas of the site and relocating 43 parking spaces to an area along the alignment of the historical Governor's Lane. Two units and seven spaces are removed entirely from the plan. As a result of the revisions, there will be approximately 0.7 acres adjacent to the Village Green available for this use. Under the current revisions and as directed by the City Council, the child care facility would be located in the area that was originally proposed for two apartment buildings containing 20 units. The total site area of the child care facility would be 0.5 acres, or 21,780 square feet. The child care facility would be subject to City approval under a Conditional Use Permit and architectural review if the Stanford \Vest Apartments project is approved. In addition. the applicant has agreed to lease the property to a qualified child care provider at a rent of $ 1.00 per year. In the event that the applicant is unable to successfully solicit a provider to construct and/or operate the facility, the applicant has committed to construction and operation of the child care facility. No design or specific, size or operating parameters have been proposed for a future child care facility on the identified site. In order to evaluate the ultimate foreseeable development of a child care S TEA R'V'LADfYCTiP1SA.'.'DWL.CAEIA•. DMEfil-hfVS IN PO 2 • S:anfor n 1htt Road Corridor Projects Surmmna' of Curren; Project Revisions facility on the identified site, the City has attempted to outline potential development parameters for the facility as described below. As discussed in Chapter 4.12 of the EIR, it is estimated that the proposed Stanford West Apartments project would generate 75 children requiring day care. In order to develop a project description for the purposes of this analysis, the State of California Community Care Licensing Division of the Department of Social Services (Child Day Care - General and Day Care Centers Division 12, Chapters 1 and 2 of CCR Title 22'), the City of Palo Alto Office of Human Services and several day care facilities in Palo Alto were contacted to obtain use and spice requirements for a new child care facility. The following description and various assumptions were based on State requirements and discussions with day care directors. The State requires a minimum of 35 square feet of indoor playact vit . s7ace and 75 square feet of outdoor play/activity space. Based on 75 children, titer,. woulj bc a r;... 1 ;or a minimum of 2,625 ' square feet of indoor play/activity space and 5.62 square feet of C�.. . _,.�. , :i,.t;w`!, space. These figures do not account for total space needs. Other than not rd o ing certaui spaces to be calculated as part of the indoor play/activity space, the State does no = a ot!er space requirements. In addition, the State requires one sink and one toilet per 15 ch:i .;.n, \'.•ich ,'.o'aid result In the need for five toilets and sinks; however, there are no square t:�o:t:`ee requirements for bathroom space. As such, directors of child care facilities in Palo Alto were consulted to determine the total indoor and outdoor square footage typically needed to accommodate 75 children. The following are the results of those consultations. A new facility that would accommodate 75 children and meet minimum State space requirements would be approximately 5,500 to 7,000 square feet. A total staff of 10 to 12, including part-time and full-time employees, would be needed. indoor space would include play/activity space, an office for the director, office space for meetings with parents, central storage space, teacher's lounge, teacher's work room, food preparation area, diaper changing area, three to four classrooms with closet space, restrooms and hail space. The outdoor play area would be approximately 6,000 to 8,000 square feet. in addition to the outdoor play area, the site would also need to provide approximately 30 parking spaces', drop-off space for parents, space for approximately ten bicycle racks or lockers, and other miscellaneous outdoor space including walkways and landscape areas.' It is assumed that the above described child care facility could be accommodated on a 0.5 acre site. It may require that the facility be two -stories, depending on the outdoor space layout. If two -stories, the building likely would be required to place all adult areas in the upper story with the majority, if not all of the space devoted to children on the first level. In addition, two stairways would be required.' S\PLA\J'LADh1CAMR'S:\N1 rILLTIR-ADD\rIR•RE:vS PD • Changed Environmental Impacts Stanfor nd H11: Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions By placing a child care facility in the same location as the originally proposed apartment buildings, some of the specific impacts that were described in the EIR for those buildings would once again occur. These and other changed environmental impacts are presented below, Visual Ouality The placement of the child care facility in the area of the originally proposed apartment buildings would increase the magnitude of visual impact within the Sand Hill Road Corridor over that discussed in Chapter 11 of the Final EIR, but the impact would be similar to, but somewhat smaller than that described in the Draft EIR. The impact would be due to the rein ;o;uetion of a building within the view corridor of Governor's Lane, which would have been ayoi d with the revisions presented in Chapter 11 of the Final FIR. However, the impact would be somewhat less than that described in the Draft EIR since the building would be lower than those o:icinally proposed. In either case, however, Visual Quality In, -pact 4.2-1 would remain significant a Pd unavoidable due. to the overall visual changes in the Sand Hill Road Corridor that would cce r from other project elements. Cultural Resources The reintroduction of buildings within the area adjacent to Governor's Lane would affect the historical value of that resource. As such, Cultural Resource Impact 4.3-3 would increase to the same level of significance as that presented in the Draft EIR, and would no longer be reduced in magnitude as presented in Chapter 11 of the Final EIR. Biological Resources Although the exact configuration of the child care facility within the 0.5 acre site is not known at this time, it can be assumed that the number of trees lost would be similar, if not the same, as described in the Draft EIR for the originally proposed project. Since the child care facility would be in the area of the originally proposed two buildings, Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 4.7 -1(a) -(e) identified for tree loss would apply. S TLAMPL A DIV CMIRISAND111L R•AADMEIR•REVS WPU 4 • Transportation Vehicle Trips Stanfor.nd Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions As part of Chapter 13 of the Final EIR, Response to Major issues Raised by the Planning Commis- sion, the transportation impacts of placing a child care facility at the Stanford \Vest Apartments site were evaluated (see pages 13-38 through 13-41). In summary, there is some potential benefit in the area from providing a day care center on the project site. In the context of the study area trip generation and vehicle miles traveled, however, the reductions are considered small, and would not result in the mitigation of any identified project -related impact to a less -than -significant level. Nor would the reductions eliminate the need for any of the more substantial proposed circulation improvements or transportation -related mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, for example, the widening of Sand Hill Road or the additional turn lanes at the Sand Hill Road!Santa Cruz Avenue intersection. Circulation Vehicular access to the child care facility site is limited due to the inability to use Governor's Lane as a vehicular access route. Access to the site would likely need to be through the visitors parking lot located at the Village Green off Main Street. Due to the roadway configuration of Main Street and the location of the visitors parking lot, turn pockets and signage (stop signs) may be necessary at the intersection of the parking lot entrance and Main Street to minimize the potential for excessive backups into the parking lot. In addition, the visitors parking lot would need to be modified to accommodate the through movement to the child care facility. Additional signage would be necessary to facilitate access to the site and safety for the children. Depending on the site layout (i.e., visitors parking lot may or may not be merged with the child care parking), signage may be necessary to keep the use of the parking facilities restricted to their intended purpose Although the specific design and layout of the child care facility would likely involve circulation improvements (e.g., reconfiguration of parking lot, additional signage, etc.), these would be considered minor and would not create additional environmental impacts over that previously identified in the EIR. Other Issue Areas All other impacts identified in the Draft EIR would essentially be the same for the child care facility since it involves development of the area with land uses similar in scale and intensity to the two originally proposed apartment buildings. In addition, impacts and mitigation measures identified in S J'lAN'PLADIMSIR SAKDHILLYIR•ADD\ EIR-RL•\'S R"PD 5 Stanfori€nd Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions the Draft EIR that apply to "Ail Projects" and the Stanford \Vest Apartments project would still occur and apply to the child care facility. 2. Resident -Serving Retail Center The Stanford %Vest Apartments project has been revised to incorporate a resident -serving retail center that would be approximately 675 square feet located within the proposed Community Building. The retail center would be in place at the time of full occupancy of the Stanford \Vest Apartments project (i.e. 95 percent of the units are occupied). One additional employee may be needed to operate the retail center if it cannot be operated by personnel of the proposed Community Building. The retail center would likely include seating, a bar/serving area, commercial kitchen equipment (refrigeration, microwaves, sinks and other preparation facilities), shelving, display cabinets and access to trash/recycling areas. The resident -serving retail center would be within walking distance of the r*artnlents and provide everyday retail needs and services such as: a Sundries slIch as aspirin, stamps and candy; Newspapers, paperbacks and other reading mat Drop-off and pick-up dry cleaning and laundry; Miscellaneous travel items/notions; and Food and beverages such as fresh fruit, bagels and muffins, pre -prepared salads, sandwiches, sushi, deli plates, cookies, pies and cakes, coffee, tea, milk, yogurt, eggs, bottled or canned juices, sodas and water. The resident -serving retail center would be provided on a trial basis for a period of two years. If at the end of that time the facility is not generating enough demand and revenue to maintain itself, the applicant may discontinue operation of the center, but must notify the City. If the applicant believes it is appropriate to discontinue operating the center, the City will be allowed to conduct its own review of the economic feasibility of the center, and the City Council will have the right to review any proposed closure of the center. However, the final decision to continue or discontinue the operation will be made by the applicant. S V'LA%.M.ADIV+C'AIRaA.DIMOErR•ADOVNEIR•REVS WPC) 6 • Changed Environmental Impacts Transportation and Circulation Stanford'*�nd Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions As discussed for the new child care facility, the provision of a resident -serving retail center was analyzed as part of Chapter 13 of the Final EIR. Response to Major Issues Raised by Planning the Commission (see pages 13-3S through 13-41). In summary, there is some potential benefit in the area from providing a resident -serving retail center on the project site. In the context of the study area trip generation and vehicle miles traveled, however, the reductions are considered small, and would not result in the mitigation of any identified project -related impact to a less -than -significant level. Nor would the reductions eliminate the need for any of the more substantial proposed circulation improvements, for example, the widening of Sand Hill Road or the additional turn lanes at the Sand Hill Rcad'S .nta Cruz Avenue intersection. Other Issue Areas Since the total number of units would not be affected by the current project changes and only one new employee might be added, there would be no measurable effect on any impacts generated by population, including Utilities and Public Services. Similarly, since there would be no net change in total building area the conclusions found in analyses dependent on amount of developed area including Land Use, Visual Quality, Cultural Resources, Construction Noise, Air Quality, GeologyiSoils and Seismicity, Biological Resources, and Hydrology and Water Quality, would not change. Very small changes in traffic flow would not be expected to change any of the conclusions about impacts related to Noise and Air Quality. Oak Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Connector The Stanford West Apartments project has been revised to incorporate a bicycle/pedestrian connector path between the proposed project and the Oak Creek Apartments, contingent upon the approval of the ground lessee of the Oak Creek Apartments property. The path would be located approximately midway between Sand Hill Road and San Francisquito Creek. The specific location would be determined in future discussions among representatives of the Oak Creek Apartments, the City and the applicant. The connector path would have an all weather compacted surface (not asphalt) and would be approximately 15 feet wide. Ultimate design of the path would be subject to ARB approval if the Stanford West Apartments project is approved. Changed Environmental Impacts An evaluation of providing a connecting road for automobile use between proposed Main Street and the Oak Creek Apartments is presented in Section 6.2 of the Draft EIR in the discussion of Special Roadway Consideration 15 (see pages 6.2-39 through 6.2-41). The proposed bicycle/pedestrian path S ULAWLADMICTIA",SAXD111LL'EtLADO'AIR-REVS IA PO 7 Stanforilirld Hiii Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions would result in similar, but lessened, impacts. Please also refer to the discussion of Special Roadway Consideration 15 in the EiR. As was described in Section 4.3 of the EIR, a new bicycle%pedestrian connector path between the two apartment complexes has the potential to disrupt cultural resources. The area between the apartment complexes falls within Archaeological Sensitivity Level 1 and Level 2 Zones (see Figure 4.3-1 in the EIR, page 4.3-27). 'l he sensitivity can generally be summarized as higher near San Francisquito Creek and lower near Sand Hill Road. The limited test units that have been excavated in that area (a total of six units within an approximate 20,000 square foot area), indicate that the area contains significant cultural deposits, and although the deposits may increase in artifact density closer to the Creek, the entire area is considered of potential significance. The testing summary on the work conducted in the area of the no‘v (defined as "Area A", Bocek and Rick, 1986, Archat'o!ogica! S•izi7,nifi:an e if'es .'re:75 A and B) describes the cultural manifestations as follows: • i Closer to Sand Hill Road, most of the cultural material is limited to the upper 2 feet of the soil; Artifacts appear in several strata closer to the Creek at depths of 8 feet; A well-defined hearth was found 7.5 feet below the surface near the Creek; and Historic material was found in the upper 12 inches of soil dating from the 1880's; two possible Mexican ceramic sherds were found which could date to the late 18th century. It must be noted that the above testing area comprised only one -quarter of one percent of the sin -face area, yet all six units yielded notable remains. The EIR recommends different mitigation options in Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 4.3-1 including complete avoidance (i.e., modify project design to completely avoid resources), data recovery/testing or placement of the path on a raised bed, which would essential provide a "cap". It should be noted, as stated on page 4.3-31 of the EIR, CEQA Appendix K, paragraph 1I(A) indicates that "In -situ preservation of a site is the preferred manner of avoiding damage to archaeological resources". Once the exact location of the connector path has been determined, Mitigation Measure 4.3- (e) in the EIR would be implemented. This measure calls for the area of the path to be examined to define that "...(1) previous near -surface disturbance has resulted in the likely displacement of artifacts from their original context, [and] (2) no visible features ... are present in the proposed path..." In addition, it calls for the path to be built on a "raised roadbed of imported fill material", using manual labor or lightweight rubber -tired S V'LAWLAD111CAIR'SA\'D41ILL1EIR.ADDMEIR•REVS WPJ S Stanford d Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions vehicles. All visible artifacts in the area are to be surface -collected prior to disturbance. The project applicant's archaeologist may propose additional measures beyond these measures (e.g. subsurface testing and/or data recovery) based on the results of the examination of the proposed path alignment and surface collection. Should any testing or data recovery be conducted, it must meet the requirements of Mitigation Measure 4.3-1(c), and other applicable measures defined in the EIR. Implementation of one or more of these measures, which would occur once the exact location has been determined, would reduce potential impacts on subsurface cultural resources to a less -than - significant level as determined in the EIR. Therefore, the connector path would not create additional impacts or need additional mitigation measures beyond those presented in the EIR.. Biological Resources Since the location of the path is unknown, it is not possible to qu ntif,• the extent of potential impact on biological resources. The area under consideration primarily contains non-native grassland. A few oak trees are present immediately adjacent to Sand Hill Road and closer to the Creek. The area in between is vacant of any trees. Since the Stanford West Apartments project aiceadv proposes a trail along the Creek, it is not likely that another path would he provided in close proximity to the Creek that could affect Creek resources. However, the loss of grassland habitat and oak trees could occur. These impacts are analyzed in the FIR as Impacts 4.7-1 and 4.7-3. Although the connector path would slightly increase the magnitude of impact on the loss of grassland habitat and potentially increase the number of trees to be removed, it would not substantially increase project -related impacts. Mitigation Measures 4.7-1 and 4.7-3 would be required and commensurately increased for the connector path. Transportation and Circulation From a traffic perspective, the addition of an internal bicycle/pedestrian connector path would not affect vehicular traffic flows within the project or on Sand Hill Road. Bicycle and pedestrian accessibility for Oak Creek residents and Stanford Nest Apartments residents to both sites would be improved. However, no changes to the analyses presented in the Draft EIR or Final EIR would occur from the addition of the path. Other Issue Areas Since this revision does not change the number of units or total building area, there would be no measurable affect on any other impacts identified in the EIR. SU'LAMPLAD;v',C.MIRSANDIILLL IR.ADD\FIR.REVS 0 9 Stanford Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions 4. Priority Ranking System The Stanford \Vest Apartments priority ranking system (previously referred to in the EIR as the "tiered priority system"') has been revised to ensure that those in the highest priority categories (i.e., Stanford employees, other employees working on Stanford land) will be given the right to reside in the Apartments ahead of those in lower categories (i.e., people working on other sites in Palo Alto and Menlo Park and the general public). In addition, a 12 -month notice period will be provided to those in lower categories who must leave to be replaced by those in higher categories. Changed Environmental Impacts Transportation and Circulation The EIR assumed that 50 percent of the apartment units would be occupied by Stanford employees with the remainder occupied by people unaffiliated with Stanford. With this revision to the priority system, there would be a greater chance that Stanford -affiliated employees will reside in the Apartments over the long-term. This could result in an overall reduction of traffic generated by the Stanford West Apartments project compared to that presented in the EIR. However, this would not change any conclusions about traffic and circulation impacts described in the EIR. Other Issue Areas Although the revision could result in an overall reduction of traffic, thereby slightly reducing the resultant air quality and noise impacts, the reduction would not be measurable. Similarly, since the revision would not change any physical component of the project, all other analyses as presented in the EIR would remain unchanged. Stanford West Senior Housing Consistent with EIR Mitigation Measure 4.7-9(b), the applicant has agreed to relocate the proposed pool/spa facility out of the 100 -foot San Francisquito Creek setback. In addition, the 24 parking spaces proposed to be located behind the Health Care Center as part of revisions made in Chapter 11 of the EIR (see page 11-13), would also be relocated to avoid potential biological resource impacts. The specific location of the pool facility and parking will be resolved by the ARB if the Stanford West Senior Housing project is approved. S IPLAMPLADlV1ChIR'SANDIIILUEIR•ADOSEIR•REVS N'PD 10 • Stanford. Rill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions Changed Environmental Impacts Visual Quality With the relocation of the pool/spa facility and parking spaces the less -than -significant Visual Quality Impact 4.2-2 relating to impacts on Menlo Park residents would he further reduced. Although the overall visual change would lessen in magnitude, the revision is not substantial enough to eliminate this impact entirely. DioLogical Resources This project revision implements Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 4.7-9(b), which requires relocation of the oo1'sna facility. In addition, with the removal of the 24 parking spaces proposed under the revisions presented in Chapter 11 of the EIR, impacts to Creek resources would be further lessened. However, since trails Would still be provided adjacent to the Creek, Mitigation Measure 4.7-9(a) would apply. It should also be noted that although the ultimate location of the facility and parking spaces would be outside the 100 -foot setback, it is likely that the removal of additional On - site trees would he required in order to accommodate the relocation. The EIR identified the loss of trees for the Stanford West Senior Housing project as significant (impact 4.7-1). As such, Mitigation Measure 4.7 -1(a) -(e) would apply. These measures provide for protection of existing trees to the extent feasible and for full replacement of all trees actually lost as a result of construction. No other changes to Biological Resources impacts would occur. Other Issue Areas Since the revisions consist of a rearrangement of relatively minor project components and would not increase the amount of development that would occur on -site, the analyses for all other issue areas presented in the EIR would not change. ,St pjord Shopping Center Expansion Description of Project Revisions The Stanford Shopping Center project has been revised to include 80,000 square feet of retail space instead of the originally proposed 160,000 square feet. This revision is similar to the Draft EIR's 50% Reduced Density Stanford Shopping Center Alternative and the Planning Commission's Recommendation to reduce the amount of retail expansion and relocate the North Parking Structure with respect to impacts of 80,000 square feet. Please refer to the 50% Reduced Density Stanford Shopping Center Alternative impact discussion found on pages 6.1-54 through 6.1-58 of the EIR and Section 13.2 of Chapter 13, Response to Major Issues Raised by Planning Commission, found on pages 13-20 through 13-32 of the EIR. S WI. YPLAD1V'MR'SANDH1LI EJR•ADDS'EIR•REVS WPD 11 Stanford Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions No revised plans have been submitted showing the specific locations of the additional square footage; however, in conversations between City and Stanford staff, the applicant indicated that the 80,000 square feet would be within the footprint of the originally proposed 160.000 square feet, most likely within Building 2 (10,000 square feet), Building 4 (9,000 square feet), and Building. 6 (61,000 square feet in two stories), as shown in Figure 1. The analysis in Chapter 13 of the EIR concluded that the relative allocation of the reduced square footage did not make any significant difference with respect to environmental impacts. Likewise, the project as currently proposed would not add any significant new impacts. Only one new parking structure would be constructed. The new structure. Parking Structure I, would be located on Quarry Road next to the existing parking structure. The maximum height of the new parking structure at the gu;i d rail wou 24 feet 10 inches (see Figure 2). The stair towers, ho:Scver, would extend ilkrrc xi t'e c ehtt feet above the' guard rail heiAt. Approximately 1,535 spaces would he provide . Changed Environmenta rnpacts Visual Quality As described for the o, iginaiiy proposed (160,000 square feet) Stanford Shopping Center Expansion project on pages 4.2-34 and 4.2-35, Section 4.2 of the FIR, the features of the project that would contribute the most to the significant and unavoidable visual change in the Sand Hill Road Corridor included the North Parking Structure, the four -lane extension, and Building 6 with 89,000 square feet (two -stories). With the latest set of project revisions, all three of these components have changed or are likely to change compared to the originally proposed project; the North Parking Structure would still be eliminated as presented in Chapter 11 of the EIR, the extension has been reduced to two -lanes, and Building 6 would likely remain in a portion of its original location but be reduced in size and located further back from Sand Hill Road. Although Building 2 could increase in size compared to the originally proposed project, the change would not alter the conclusions of the EIR. In addition, if Building 3 on Arboretum Road were moved, visual impacts would be lessened in this area overall. These changes would reduce the magnitude of visual impact related to the Stanford Shopping Center Expansion. However, since Building 6 would likely be built at two -stories, adding a new visual element to the area, and other project components would still he built, the significant and unavoidable visual impact for the Sand Hill Road corridor (Impact 4.2-1) would still occur and Mitigation Measure 4.2-1(g) for the Stanford Shopping Center would still apply. The further reduction of parking area and the potential for removal of Building 9 proposed under this revision would reduce Draft EIR Visual Quality Impact 4.2-4 identified for Quarry Road. Although the elimination of two of the three proposed new parking structures and possibly Building 9 (see Figure 3 -32R -A on page 11-21 in Chapter I 1 of the Final EIR) would result in a substantial decrease in visual impact, the addition of one new structure would still be considered significant. Mitigation SVI. ANUN, ADI1/4'CM.SANN! \EIR•REVSWPO 12 Stanf Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions Figure 1 SAPLANIPLADDACMR\SANDDILOEIR•ADD.\"EIR-REVS WPD 13 Stanford Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary orCu-rent Project Revisions Measure 4.2-4(b), as modified by the conditions of approval, would still be required to minimize the visual effects of the building length. AU other visual quality impacts would remain the same as presented in the EIR. Transportation As discussed in Section 13:2 of the EIR, there would be a slight improvement in intersection LOS under this revision (see page 13-25). The reduction is more of a result of reducing the expansion than the relocation or reallocation of retail space or parking. The relocation of the parking structure has only a limited impact on traffic circulation at those intersections adjacent to the site, and no impact on the intersections that are not in the immediate area of the Shopping Center. A large proportion of the Shopping Center traffic is already expected to use the Quarry Road entrance in the proposed project scenario, and relocating a greater proportion of the parking supply closer to this entrance does not significantly alter the arrival/departure patterns previously estimated for the proposed project. Therefore, the further reduction of parking area and reallocation of retail space would not significantly alter the conclusions of the EIR. Other Issue Areas This revision involves a further reduction to the amount of developed space presented for Refined 50% Stanford Shopping Center Expansion Alternative Section 13.2 of in the EIR. Since the proposal would remove two new parking structures, the associated impacts of construction and operation of those structures would commensurately decrease for all other issues areas. Since the revisions involve the removal of proposed retail buildings and reallocation of retail space, the overall amount of retail development would not alter compared to the Refined 50% Stanford Shopping Center Alternative, and would be within the magnitude of impacts described for the originally proposed project. However, no impact identified in the EIR would be eliminated as a''result of the revisions. Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements Description of Project Revisions As described for Special Roadway Consideration l in the EIR (Section 6.2), in response to Council direction, the applicant has revised the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project to provide for a two-lane, rather than four -lane, extension of Sand Hill Road from Arboretum Drive to El Camino Real (see Figure 3). The existing portion of Sand Hill Road would be widened from two through travel lanes to four lanes, from Arboretum Road to Santa Cruz Avenue as originally proposed. The widening would be consistent with earlier Planning Commission recommendations, and with revised mitigation measures and conditions. S V'I.A\1PLADII'+CrIA`.SA\D IIlLVF.IR•ADD\'EIR•REVS WPP 15 Stanford Hili Road Corridor Projects Suring of Current Project Revisions The extension would have westbound left turn pockets at the two entrances to the Shopping Center and at Arboretum Road. The intersection configuration at Sand Hill Road and El Camino Real would consist of two left turn lanes and a single right turn lane. There would be no provision for any future connection to Alma Street (see Figure 3). The right -of -say width for the extension of Sand Hill Road would be 72 feet, as shown on Figure 3. The right-of-way would increase to 83 feet on the approach to El Camino Real in order to accommodate the second left turn lane, as well as a right turn lane. The northern edge of the right-of-way alignment would be consistent with the recommendations of the AR.B, Planning Commission and staff. The 100 -foot setback from San Francis quito Creek would be observed. Ail other road;.Sa'. p,on-nts (i.e..Stock Farr Ro_d. Quarry Road, Arboretum Road, Palo D-n\e, Pa tear Drive and Vineyard Lane) would remain as proposed. Changed Environmental Impacts Since the applicant revisions are similar to the Special Roadway Consideration 1 and 3 presented in the EIR, refer to pages 6.2-3 through 6.2-6 and panes 6.2-8 through 6.2-11 for a discussion of environmental impacts, with the exception of transportation and Circulation which is addressed below. Transportation and Circulation The revisions to the project include components of both Special Roadway g onsideration 1 and 2. The main differences between Special Roadway Consideration I and the project revisions include the reduced Stanford Shopping Center Expansion (80,000 square feet) and the addition of an eastbound left turn lane on Sand Hill Road at the intersection with El Camino Real. The main difference between Special Roadway Consideration 3 and the project revisions is that Special Roadway Consideration 3 is two -lanes for the entire section of Sand Hill Road from Santa Cruz Avenue to El Camino Real. Analysis was conducted of the Sand Hill Road'El Camino Real intersection to determine likely peak hour Level of Service under the currently proposed configuration. This analysis assumed peak hour traffic demand volumes comparable to those estimated for Special Roadway Consideration 1, the two-lane extension coupled with a four -lane Sand Hill Road from Arboretum Road to Santa Cruz Avenues To make the two left -turn lanes function effectvely, both would need to be approximately 300 feet in length. S WLAA\PI ADi\'CAIR'SANDHILLVIR DD,'ELR.REVS Who 17 • Stanfordid Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions Based upon this evaluation, it is apparent that the currently proposed revisions to the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Improvements project would not create traffic impacts at this location any greater than those identified in the EIR. Other Revisions In addition to the revisions presented and analyzed above, the City and applicant agreed to the following changes to the Draft Development Agreement: Special Condition Area B Until the year 2020, the applicant has agreed to only develop ac, deniic and recreational fields and associated support facilities in Special Condition Area B with the exception of r tai:;i>-4 the right to propose faculty, staff and/or student housing in the t..4a east of Fremont Road (see Figure 4). Although there are no plans at this time to develop this area for housing. any future proposal would be developed within the framework of the County Genera: Use Permit (e.g. t,,; population counts toward the population cap and there would continue to he a requirement of no net new trips). Also, consistent with the provisions of Area B, any proposed building, or development having more than 5,000 square feet would require a separate County Use Permit. 2. El Camino Park Lease Agreement The "El Camino Park" lease currently includes the land that is park dedicated, known as El Camino Park, as well as the areas the City subleases to the Holiday Inn, MacArthur Park, the Red Cross and the Valley Transportation Authority (the train depot). Under the revised development agreement, as of the time the first building permits are issued for the Stanford West Apartments or Stanford West Senior Housing projects: (1) those portions of the lease that were not dedicated parkland and train depot lease area would revert back to Stanford, (2) the lease for the dedicated parkland would be extended from 2013 to 2033, at a rent of one dollar per year, and (3) the lease for the train depot lease area would be extended and remain under the current terms and conditions, except that the,City would have a right to terminate that lease as of the current termination date in 2013. These changes in the development agreement would not result in changes to any of the analyses presented in the FIR. Further, any development proposed for Special Condition Area B will be subject to separate environmental review. Conclusions The revisions described and analyzed in this summary implement recommendations of the City Council, Planning Commission and ARB, and mitigation measures contained in the Draft EIR and Final EIR. In the case of the Stanford West Apartments project, the addition of a child care facility, 51PLANPLADIV,.CAIRSA\DIIILLIEIK•ADD\EIR-ilEVS WPD 18 • Figure 4 S:1PLANIPLADIWCMR'S NDIIILVEIR•ADDMEIR•REVS.WPD 19 Stanforad Hill Rod Corr' Summary of Current Project Stanfo!' nd Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions resident -serving retail center and bic) cleipedestrian connector path have all been previously analyzed in the EIR. The refinements of these additions as described above do not result in any additional impacts. The Stanford West Senior Housing project has been revised to specifically reduce biological resource impacts within San Francisquito Creek implementing Mitigation Measure 4.7-9(b). As a result of this revision, visual quality impacts are also reduced. No additional impacts are identified. The Stanford Shopping Center Expansion revision further reduces the impacts identified for the Refined 50% Reduced Density Stanford Shopping Center Alternative presented in Chapter 13 of the Final EIR, Response to Major Issues Raised by the Planning Commission. No additional impacts are identified. Revisions to the Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements project represent a further refinement of Special Roadway Consideration 1 and 3 presented in Section 6.2 of the Draft EIR. Based upon new analyses performed for the new configurations no additional impacts would occur over that analyzed in the EIR. In summary, the revisions presented in this document do not create any additional significant impacts, increase substantially the magnitude of any impact over that previously identified in the Draft EIR and Final EIR, or require the implementation of any additional mitigation measures. SWLANAPLADtV'O1R5.ANNULI \EIR•ADD NIE1R•REVS %VPD 20 Stanford Hill Road Corridor Projects Summary of Current Project Revisions ENDNOTES 1. It should be noted that the requirements discussed in this analysis are not considered "official" under Title 22. As quoted from the inside cover of this document, The following Child Day Care - General and Day Care Centers regulations are an unofficial version of the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 12, Chapters I and 2. These regulations have been updated to reflect changes through August, 1993.... Nonetheless, based on discussions with the Coastal Region Community Care Licensing Office in San Bruno, these regulations are the basis for licensing new child care facilities in California. Available sources indicate that there should be one space per employee in addition to one additional space per 350 square feet, or a total of 25 to 30 spaces to accommodate the needs of staff, Visitors and drop-off by parents. Chuck Bernstein, Executive Director of Heads Up! Child Development Center main office, personal communication with Kendra Ryan, EIP Associates, April 30, 1997. Janice Shaul, InfanCroddler/Preschool Coordinator, Palo Alto Community Child Care, personal communication with Kendra Ryan, EIP Associates, April 30, 1997. Chuck Bernstein, Executive Director of Heads Up! Child Development Center main office, personal communication with Kendra Ryan, EIP Associates, April 30, 1997. Because the current proposal actually calls for 80,000 square feet of expansion at the Shopping Center rather than the 160,000 square feet assumed in both the proposed project and SRC 1, the current proposal would likely not result in conditions any worse than the LOS C estimate, and possibly better. S 1PLAMPZADILYSIRIS.ND1ILL LTFIR•ADOS.EIR.REVS %L'PD 21 ORDINANCE NO. L.f(4 I ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CONDITIONALLY AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING MAP) BY PREZONING AS RM-40 A PORTION OF A NEW PARCEL TO BE CREATED BY THE REALIGNMENT OF PASTEUR DRIVE AND BY PREZONING AS PF(L) AN AREA OF LAND THAT WILL BECOME PART OF PASTEUR DRIVE The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SEC'IO N The City Council finds as follows: a. The Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended that the Council conditionally amend Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (the "Zoning Map") by prezoning the property hereinafter described. b. After duly noticed public hearing, and upon consideration of said recommendation and of all testimony offered upon the matter, the Council finds that the public interest, health, safety and welfare of Palo Alto and the surrounding region require the conditional amendments to the Zoning Map as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2. Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code ("the Zoning Map') is conditionally amended by prezoning the following property: a. A portion of the parcel to be created by the realignment of Pasteur Drive is hereby prezoned to the."RM-40 (High Density Multiple -family Residence)" zoning classification, as shown on "Map 6," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. b. An area of land that will become part of Pasteur Drive as a result of its realignment is hereby prezoned to the "PF(L)(Public Facilities, Landscape Combining)" zoning classification, as shown on "Map 6." SECTION 3. The amendments to the zoning map made pursuant to Section 2 shall be conditioned upon the annexation of the properties referred to in Section 2 to the City of Palo Alto. As of the effective date of annexation of each such property, that property will have the zoning classification to which the property was prezoned, in accordance with Section 2. Until the effective date of annexation of each of the properties, the zoning map shall identify such properties as "prezoned." SECTION 3. The City Council adopts this ordinance in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. 970703 lac 0031373 SECTIQIl 4. This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendum by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPRO City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 2 970703 tic 0031373 P T C c C i t y of Palo Alto !LAMN{NG o1riljoa RM-30(D) Change from PF(L) to RM -40 Pre -zone to RM -40 tanforct' Uniyersity. C inpus This map is a product or the City or Palo Alto GIS top' r ORDINANCE NO. 44 3 a - ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE (THE ZONING MAP) TO CHANGE THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION OF A PORTION OF A NEW PARCEL TO BE CREATED BY THE REALIGNMENT OF PASTEUR DRIVE AT SAND HILL ROAD FROM PF(L) TO RM-40 The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council finds as follows: a. The Planning Commission, after duly noticed public hearing, has recommended that the Council amend Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (the "Zoning Map") . b. After duly noticed public hearing, and upon consideration of said recommendation and of all testimony offered upon the matter, the Council finds that the public interest, health, safety and welfare of Palo Alto and the surrounding region require the amendments to the Zoning Map as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2. Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code ("the Zoning Map") is hereby amended by changing the zone classification of a portion of that parcel to be created by the realignment of Pasteur Drive at Sand Hill Road from "PF(L)(Public Facilities, Landscape Combining)" to "RM-4©(High Density Multiple - family Residence) ", as shown on "Map 6," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 3. The City Council adopts this ordinance in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. // // // // // // // // // // // // // // // // 1 970703 lac 0031574 4. SET=ON 4. This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first day after its adoption, but shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until the Ordinance Adopting the Development Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University has been approved by the City Council and, if submitted to a referendlxn by the City Council on its own motion or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to the Article VI, section 3 of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, until approved by the voters. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS FORM: Senior Asst, City Attorney 2 APPROVED: Mayor City Manager Director of Planning and Community Environment 970703 tae 0031374 .e!':t r The C i t y of Palo Alt© AMMiM6 DIYiIIO Chz n e from , RR1- Stanfor i ttii ors?t : ;' amp Map 6 Zone Map Amendments This map is a product of the tl of Palo Alto GIS 0 203' k E t• a s EXHIBIT "E• CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL a. Stanford West Apartments b. Stanford West Senior Housing c. Stanford Shopping Center Expansion d. Sand Hill Road Extension and Related Roadway Improvements e. Sand Hill Corridor Projects Tentative Map • • CONDITIONS THE STANFORD WEST APARTMENT HOUSING PROJECT 1000 SAND HILL ROAD The conditions of approval consist of: mitigation measures identified in the EIR, as herein modi- fied, rejected or adopted by reference without modification, and additional conditions imposed pursuant to the City's police powers. All of these conditions are included in the Mitigation Moni- toring Program (MM?). The recitation of the mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring Program is intended to be the same as in the EIR, as adopted or revised by these conditions of approval. In the event a mitigation measure or condition is worded differently in the MMP than in these conditions of approval, including those mitigation measures adopted by reference, these conditions shall control. The Monitoring and Reporting Procedures in the MN -1P are intended to implement, not to modify, these conditions of approval, and the Procedures shall be interpreted accordingly, in a manner that does not diminish or add to the requirements imposed on the applicant, Site and Design Application (94-D-5) The approval of the Stanford West Apartment Housing project is conditioned upon the applicant receiving approval for the set of road improvements (commonly known as Sand Hill Road Widening and Extension and Related Roadway Improvements), or some portion of those improvements as may be determined by the Palo Alto City Council. The following shall return to the ARB for final review and approval prior to the: submittal of plans for a building permit: 2. The mitigation measures identified as applicable to either "All Projects" or to the "Stan- ford W'r'est Apartment Housing Project" in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) are incorporated hereby as conditions of project approval, except as noted below. The Project Plans shall be revised to comply with all required mitigation measures and shall return to the ARB for final review and approval. Please refer to prior staff reports for analysis regarding the rejected and preferred mitigation measures listed below. a. Visual Quality Mitigation 4.2-1(a), redesign to open additional view corridors to the creek, as illustrated in Figure 4.2-22 on page 4.2-47 of the EIR shall not be required to be implemented. July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page I of 16 Pages i b. Visual Quality Mitigation 4.2-9, requires implementation of Mitigation (a-1). As noted in the bullet above, Mitigation 4.2-1(a) has been rejected for this project, and therefore, is rejected from this mitigation also. c. Cultural Resources Mitigation 4.3-2(b), preserve historical context of Gover- nor's Lane, as illustrated on Figure 4.3-2 on page 4.3-33 of the EIR. Bullets one and two, remove portions of apartment buildings and Main Street which intrude into Governor's Lane, shall not be required to be implemented. Bullets three and four, terminate parking lane at western edge of Governor's Lane corridor and use materials for path consistent with historical character of Governor's Lane, are required to be implemented. d. Cultural Resources Mitigation 4.3.1(a) requires the implementation of Mitiga- tion 4.3-2(b). As noted above, the following portion of Mitigation 4.3-2(b) has been rejected for this project, and therefore, is rejected for this mitigation also: bullets one and two. e. Noise Mitigation 4.6-3(d). This mitigation requires the applicant to monitor interior noise levels of properties identified as being potentially impacted by increased noise attributable to the projects. Compensation to these owners to provide acoustical upgrades is required under certain conditions, as described in the Mitigation. This mitigation shall only be required to be implemented for those areas where the contribution from the projects is greater than 50% of the total impact. These areas are shown on Exhibit A. An acoustic study shall be performed both before and after construction of all projects, at the applicant's cost. The study shall document pre -project interior noise levels for all sensitive receptors identified on Exhibit. A immediately following project approval. Post -construction noise levels shall be established immediately following completion of all approved projects or following December 31, 2000, whichever comes later. For those receptors where the post - construction interior noise levels are higher than pre -construction levels and exceed 45 dBA, the study shall identify measures and costs necessary to: i) return noise levels to pre -construction levels; and ii) achieve a 45 dBA interior noise standards. The project applicant shall be required to pay the cost identified to return the interior noise levels to pre -construction levels or to 45 dBA, whichever is higher. If there is a difference in costs between options i and ii, the property owner may elect to make up the difference in cost to implement option ii. It is possible, and likely, that there will not be a difference in cost between option i and ii. f. Public Services Mitigation 4.12-14. City of Palo Alto could adopt a policy encouraging future developers to contribute their fair share for school impacts July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 2 of 16 Pages over and above payment of the development fee, shall not be required to be implemented. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(r and d) is modified to read as follows: The applicant should pay the full cost of implementing Mitigation Measures 4.4- 7(c and d), which require improvements to the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and the Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersections. These improvements should be constructed during the same time frame of the remainder of the proposed road improvements in the Santa Cruz/Oak Avenue area, and should be included in the final construction phasing plan. (Refer please to Road Conditions lc and 12). h. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(e) is modified to read as follows: Should the City of Menlo Park within ten (10) years of the effective date of the Development Agreement desire to make improvements to the Middlefield/Willow intersection, to improve a LOS E or worse condition, the applicant shall be required to contribute its fair (proportionate) share of the cost either to make . signal timing improvements sufficient to return the intersection to LOS D or, if it is not possible to achieve a LOS D through signal timing modifications, to con- struct the improvements listed in the EIR, rather than making a no contribution, as the EIR currently states. Biological Resource Mitigation Measure 4.7-3(g): The City may require, as a condition of approval, the applicant to provide a performance bond or other form of financial security acceptable to the City Attorney to replant any replacement grasslands found not to be alive at the end of the require five=year maintenance period. The amount of the bond shall be sufficient to cover the City's cost to replant native grassland. A qualified biologist approved by the City shall, upon written request of the applicant at the end of the maintenance period, and in consultation with CDFG determine the health of the replacement grasslands and release the security, in the event that all replacement grasslands are alive. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-1(d): which requires the applicant to operate an on -call passenger shuttle service to and from the Senior Housing shall not be required to be implemented. k. Public Services Mitigation 4.12-16. City of Palo Alto could implement public or private financing mechanisms for obtaining additional park lands and/or for rehabilitating existing parks in a way that expands their usefulness, shall not be required to be implemented. July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 3 of 16 Pages • The E1R also identifies alternative mitigation measures for the impacts listed below. The preferred mitigation measure for each of these impacts (as listed in the EIR) is also identified below. These mitigation measures are incorporated hereby as conditions of project approval. 1. impact: Cultural Resources Impact 43-1, construction in the Level 1 archeo- logical sensitive area, as illustrated on Figure 43-2 on page 4.3-33 of the EfR. Recommenced Mitigation: Mitigation 4.3-1(b) and (c), data recovery program, shall be implemented rather than Mitigation 43-1(a). avoidance of all construc- tion in the Level 1 sensitivity area. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.124, increased demand due to cumulative projects on Palo Alto Fire Department. Recommended Mitigation: Option two (the third bullet), City could provide additional resources to the PAR) from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. n. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-5, increased demand due to cumulative projects on medical emergency service. Recommended Mitigation: Option two, City could provide additional rnedi-van resources to the PAFD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. o. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-10, increased demand due to cumulative projects on Palo Alto Police Department. Recommended Mitigation: Option two (the third bullet). City could provide additional resources to the PAPD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. 3. The final design, colors and materials of all project buildings shall return to the ARB for review and approval. Final landscape plans, lighting, design of public improvements, walls and fences and all other similar improvements shall return to the ARB for review and approval. An artist and interpretative designer shall be retained by the applicant to provide input and assistance for the design of the final project details, particularly those related to the environmental, recreational and cultural public assets on the site, and the provision of public art, The applicant shall submit with the final plans a statement out- lining the specific plan details which respond to the artist/interpretative designer's input. July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 4 of 16 Pages The final project plans shall take into account the following maintenance, security and safety provisions: a. Approval of any nonstandard paving materials shall be coordinated with Public Works Engineering prior to any final approval by the ARB, and is subject to approval of a maintenance agreement which requires the applicant to provide all maintenance for such materials; b. The applicant shall confer with the Police Department prior to submitting final project plans to ensure lighting and laadscape plans incorporate appropriate security recommendations. c. A signs program for the site, including signs to be posted on private streets (such as no parking, private street, tow away zones, public access points, etc.), and an address numbering program, shall he reviewed by the Police Departrne.nt and approved by the ARB. d. Signs and landscaping shall meet the sight distance requirements of PAMC 18.883.080, applicable to project frontages where driveways arc present, and in parking lots. Landscaping shall be specifically identified in the landscape plan as meeting these height requirements. 4. The final landscape plan shall include an indication that all species of trees to be used as street trees have been approved by the City Arborist. A significant percentage of these trees shall be deciduous. 5. Any changes to the project plans in regard to location and size of recycling and trash facilities shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Operations Division. 6. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, electric panel switchboards, and other required utilities, shall be shown on the iandscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials and shall be screened in a manner which respects the building design and setback requirements. These locations must also be approved by Utilities Engineering. 7. The following revisions shall be made to the project plans and included on the plans sub- mitted for final Architectural Review Board approval prior to submittal of a building permit application: a. As required by Mitigation Measure 4.4-1(b). Stanford's Marguerite shuttle shall service the project. More specifically, the Marguerite shall follow a route into the apartment project (as opposed to only stopping on Sand Hill Road). The site plan July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 5 of 16 Pages shall be modified to include provisions for at least one, and possibly two. Margue- rite shuttle stops internal to the project. If, at any time following implementation of the service, it is determined by the City and Stanford that the routing of the Marguerite Service into the project site is no longer desirable due to negative effects on overall service, the Chief Transportation Official shall have the auth- ority to allow the internal service routing to be discontinued. The applicant shall designate "Main" Street between its west and east ends at Sand Hill Road as a Class Ill "Bicycle Route", and the City will so designate this route on the City's official bicycle route map. Bicycle lanes shall not be provided on the "Entry" Street. c. The applicant shall construct and/or reconstruct the existing paved off -road path between the existing bike/pedestrian bridge at San Mateo Avenue and the new development(s) to Class I standards, with a 10 -foot paved width. Appropriate lighting fixtures, which meet the requirements of Mitigation Measures 4.2-7(a) and 4.2-13, shall be installed along these paths. d. The bicycle/pedestrian path serving the existing bicycle/pedestrian bridge at San. Mateo Avenue shall be rerouted to not pass through the Community Center park- ing lot, to have a minimum 20 -foot wide corridor (to include the 10 -foot path, the two -foot shoulders on each side and a minimum of 3 feet of landscaping on each side), and a clearly defined landing area where it intersects "Main" Street, and to intersect "Main" Street directly opposite the "Entry" Street, forming a fourth leg of the intersection. The path in this area shall be a Class I path with a 10 -foot paved width, 2 -foot graded shoulders on each side, and the remaining width of the corridor to be landscaped. e. The easterly branch of the bicycle/pedestrian path from the bridge at San Mateo Avenue that intersects the entry driveway of Children's Health Council (CHC) shall meet the CHC driveway at a right angle, with a minimum of 100 feet of sight distance in both directions. f. The children's play area shall be located so that it is not separated from the Com- munity Center building by the bicycle/pedestrian path (as generally shown on the current plans dated October 16, 1996). g. July 14, 1997 Subject to the approval of the ground lessee of the Oak Creek property, pedes- trian/bicycle pathway shall be provided between the Oak Creek Apartments and proposed Stanford West Apartment West Apartment project, which shall be designed to the satisfaction the Chief Transportation Official and the ARB. Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 6 of 16 Pages The proposed 20 -foot width of Side Streets A, B and C shall be accompanied by 32 -foot curb radii at the intersections with Sand Hill Road, which is two feet more than the radii at these intersections when the street widths were proposed to be 24 fxt. A double yellow centerline shall be placed on each side street for a distance of 50 feet back from Sand Hill Road. In order to meet the parking requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, the applicant shall prepare a plan which places up to 40 parking spaces in one or more land- scape reserve areas on the site. This landscape reserve plan shall be approved by the Architectural Review Board and the Director of Planning and Community Environment. For that portion of Main Street between the Sand Hill Road/Pasteur Drive inter- section and the first "E" type apartment building, the minimum street configura- tion shall be two 10 -foot lanes with 7 -foot parallel parking provided continuously on both sides of the street, or two l I -foot lanes with 7 -foot parallel parking provided on only one side of the street The applicant shall further design the parking areas needed to serve the units located between the "Entry" Street and the Village Green in order to limit intrusions into the Governor's Lane and Village Green as much as possible. If divided lights are used on the windows, they must be a form of true divided lights or an acceptable close approximation and a sample must be presented for final ARB approval. No false muntons shall be used. If divided lights are used, they do not need to he provided on every building, but within each building, window treatment must be consistent. m. Inconsistencies between the site and conceptual landscape plans illustrating revisions made by the applicant during the ARB public review process (dated October 16, 1996), and the elevations and supporting detailed plans provided with the original submittal plans (dated April 1, 1996), shall be corrected. Inconsisten- cies to be eliminated include, but are not limited to, the following: a) all context landscape plans and sections, building type plans, elevations and tree removal plan shall be revised to reflect the removal of 40 units between Governor's Lane and the Village Green and their relocation into the other proposed apartment buildings; b) all street sections shall be revised to reflect several minor changes in the street and parking design. If the Stanford West Senior Housing project proposed for the adjacent site is not approved, or is not constructed simultaneously, then the applicant shall be required to July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 7 of 16 Pages submit a revised site plan for off -site circulation, infrastructure and open space modifi- cations. in order to ensure safe and convenient bicycle, pedestrian and auto connections, infrastructure extensions and open space arrangement. Prior to Submittal of Building Permit Planning and Transportation 9. An independent arborist shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The arborist will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-1. The arborist will be retained, as needed to perform the work related to this project as specified in Mitigation 4.7-1, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the arborist', services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Develop- ment Agreement. 1p. An indepcnuen creek restoration specialist shall be retained by the City at the expense of the appl cunt. The creel; restoration specialist will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation ofM;ligation Measures 4.7-4(a), 4.7-4(b), 4.7 -7(a -e) and 4.7-9(a). The creek restoration specialist will be retained, as needed to oversee implementation of the above mitigations, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the inspection Services Division_ The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the creek restora- tion specialist's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Develop- ment Agreement. 11. An independent archeologist/historian shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The archeolosgist/historian will be under contract to the City to oversee imple- mentation of Mitigation Measures 4.3-1 and 4.3-2. The archeologist/historian will be retained, as needed to oversee implementation of the above mitigations, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final con- stniction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the archeologist/historian's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 12. A contract senior level planner shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the appli- cant, to oversee the implementation of this project, including processing of the Final Map. The planner shall be retained, as needed, from the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions - Apartment Housing Page 8 of 16 Pages contract planner's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Develop- ment Agreement. The applicant shall continue to pay for planner services under the Planning Division's Cost Recovery Program until such time as the contract planner is hired. 13. A contract building plan checker and inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary plan check and inspection work associated with this project. The plan checker and inspector shall be retained, as needed, from the time the applicant submits plans for a building permit until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the plan checker and inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement 14. The applicant shall appoint a project manager knowledgeable of building permitting and construction processes for the duration of the project permitting and construction period. The Project Manager shall be responsible for coordinating the construction phase of the project with City staff and for facilitating the applicant's role in receiving building per- mits and complying with conditions of approval before and during construction. 14A. The applicant shall provide day care on the apartment site, which will a) reduce car trips by parents, and b contribute to community -building among the residents of the projects. The specific provisions for child care shall be set forth in the Development Agreement. Utilities. 15. An electric utility engineer/inspector and a water/gas/wastewater utility engineer/ inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary plan check and inspection work associated with this project, including process- ing of the Final Map. The engineer/inspectors shall be retained, as needed, from just prior to the applicant commencing meetings with the Utilities Department to finalize needed improvement plans until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Divi- sion. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the engineer/inspec- tor's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agree- ment. 16. The applicant shall submit detailed improvement plans and specifications for all utility construction. The plans must show the final alignment and sizing of electric, water, gas, and wastewater services within the development and within the utility easements. All final design details shall be in accordance with the published specifications of the Utilities Department, and subject to the approval of the Utilities Engineering Division. July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 9 of 16 Pages 17. The applicant shall meet and confer with the WGW Utilities Engineering staff, and then submit a plan, prepared in accordance with the published specifications of the Utilities Department, for final approval, indicating the final configuration of the water distribution system to be implemented. 18. The applicant shall submit flow calculations which shall show that the off -site and on -site water and sewer mains are sized adequately to provide the domestic water, fire flows and sewer capacity needed to serve this project in conjunction with any of the other develop- ment projects being considered simultaneously (Stanford West Senior Housing and Stan- ford Shopping Center Expansion) during anticipated peak loads.. All field testing required to determine current capacities of existing utilities shall be performed by the applicant's engineer at their expense. Calculations must be stamped by a registered civil engineer. Public Works Engineering 19. An engineer/inspector shall be retained by the Cite, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary project management, plan check and inspection work associated with this project, including processing of the Final Map. The engineer/inspector shall be retained, as needed, from the submittal of final project plans for review and approval by, the ARE until final construction is approved by the inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the engineer/ inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 20. The applicant shall submit a final grading and drainage plan for review and approval by Public Works Engineering. 21. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit or temporary lease from Public Works Engineering for the proposed construction which will impact the use of sidewalk or street or on property in which the City holds an interest. 22. A grading permit must be obtained from the Building Lnspection Division if excavation exceeds 100 cubic yards. 23. The applicant shall be required to file a notice of intent (N01) for coverage under the , State Water Resources Control Board's General Permit for storm water discharges associated with construction and post construction activity. The applicant shall provide an additional copy to Public Works Engineering Division of the N©1 when applying for a grading/building permit. 24. The proposed development will result in a change in the impervious area of the site. The applicant shall provide calculations showing the adjusted impervious area with the July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 10 of 16 Pages • • building permit application. A storm drainage fee adjustment will take place in the month following the final approval of the construction by the Inspection Services Division. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit: Planning and Transportation 25. A final subdivision map which subdivides the project site into three parcels shall be approved by the City of Palo Alto and filed with the Office of the County Recorder prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits. See also Conditions of Approval for Tentative Subdivision Map. The applicant shall agree to a program for providing Below Market Rate Units in fulfill- ment of Program 13 of the Housing Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, as provided in the Letter of Agreement dated October 15, 1996 and included in the Condi- tions of Approval for the Tentative Subdivision Map covering this project (File No. 94 - SUB -6). 26A. The applicant shall enter in an agreement with the City, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, guaranteeing that a tiered rental system for the project providing priority to Stanford employees and persons working on Stanford lands will be maintained. Utilities 27. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading on -site and off -site water and wastewater utilities as necessary to handle peak loads. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with required improvements to on -site and off -site gas mains and services. Construction of all improvements to the gas system will be completed by the City of Palo Alto or the City's contractor. The approved relocation of service, meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the applicant's expense. All installation of new utilities and upgrading of existing utilities necessary for the proposed project shall be constructed and paid for by the applicant as required by the City of Palo Alto Utilities Rules and Regulations. 28. All new electric service shall be underground. The applicant shall be responsible for all electric substructure installation required for extending the electric distribution system. The City, upon acceptance of the facilities will furnish and install all cables, switches and other equipment required for the system extension. All connection, on -site and off -site fees and credit if any will be based on Utilities Rules and Regulations. July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 11 of 16 Pages s • 29. The applicant shall not be allowed to begin work until the utility improvement plans, project specifications, and load sheets have been approved by the Water, Gas and Waste- water Engineering Division and the City's Cross Connection Control Inspector. Utility connection charges must be paid prior to the scheduling of any work performed by the City of Palo Alto or the applicant. All utility mains shall be installed, to the satisfaction of the Utilities Engineering, in Sand Hill Road and "Main" Street, and other areas as necessary to facilitate these installations, prior to commencement of Apartment Phase I construction. 31. The applicant shall obtain a wastewater discharge permit from Utilities Water -Gas - Wastewater Engineering. 32. A separate water meter shall be installed to irrigate the approved landscape plan. This meter shall be designated as an irrigation account, and no other water service will be billed on the account. 33. Ultra low flush toilets are required. All tank and valve toilets must be specified as using 1.6 gallons per flush or less. All urinals must be specified as using 1 gallon per flush or. less. 34. The contractor shall submit for approval by Utilities Engineering Division the manu- facturer's literature on the materials to he used. All new traffic signals and proposed modifications to existing traffic signals shall be per City of Palo Alto Traffic Signal Standards and costs shall be borne by the applicant. Separate approvals for signals located on El Camino Real must be obtained from Caltrans. Public Works Engineering 36. The project is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD). A permit must be obtained from SCVWD and a copy provided to the City. 37. The applicant shall obtain a Permit for Construction in a Public Street from Public Works Engineering for construction proposed in the City of right-of-way. 38. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City in a form approved by the City Attorney which guarantees the completion of the required public improvements, as well as any area subject to public access requirements, and shall post a bond or other form of financial security, in an amount determined by the Director of Public Works, as security for performance of this obligation. July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions -- Apartment Housing Page 12 of 16 Pages • Public Works Water Quality Control 39. Discharge of swimming pool water to the storm drain system, street or gutter is not permitted. Therefore, a sanitary sewer clean -out shall be located such that a hose can be used to convey overflow swimming pool water to the sanitary sewer. Fire fkpartmeat 40. A hazardous Materials Management Plan shall be submitted to the Fire Department in accordance with State Law. 41. The applicant shalt apply to the Fire Department for a Hazardous Materials Storage permit for the storage of any hazardous materials associated with the swimming pool, maintenance areas or common areas. and pay the required fee. 42. Any groundwater remediation or vapor extraction systems will require Fire Department permits and approvals. 43. The applicant shall submit plans to the Fire Department which show that all buildings comply with requirements for fire sprinklers, per PAMC, Section 15.04.170(dd), and fire alarms (including graphic annunciator), with Central Station supervision for both. Fire hydrants shall be placed throughout the site at a minimum spacing of 300 feet, Additional hydrants may be necessary where parking lanes interface with the open space area at the rear of the site, as required by the Fire Marshal. A plan indicating all fire service features shall be provided for review and approval by the Fire Marshall, including fire hydrant placement, emergency vehicle access, fire sprinkler, water flow and alarm system calculations. 45. The Community Center building plans shall incorporate the following features: portable fire extinguishers; illuminated exits; emergency lighting; and panic hardware. 46. The Fire Department shall determine that plans satisfy emergency fire access require- ments, including turning radii throughout the site and a minimum 20 feet wide access on the one-way road around the internal "park" area, per PAMC Title 15, LTC Article 10 as generally shown on the site plan dated October 16, 1996). July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 13 of 16 Pages During Construction: Utilities 47. The applicant shall provide meter protection for any gas meters that may be subject to vehicle damage. 48. All customer piping shall be inspected and approved by the Building Inspection Division before gas service is instituted. Gas meters will be installed at least three working days after the building piping final inspection. 49. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Build- ing Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing. 50. All new underground service conduits and substructures shall be inspected and approved before backfilling. 51. The applicant's contractor shall obtain a street opening permit from the Department of Public Works before digging in the street right-of-way. Public Works Engineering 52. Exposed earth surfaces shall be watered as necessary to reduce dust levels. Spillage resulting from hauling operations along or across any public or private property shall be removed immediately at the expense of the applicant. Dust nuisances originating from the applicant's contractors operations, either inside or outside of the right-of-vi9y shall be controlled at the applicant's expense. 53. The applicant must contact the Public Works Inspector prior to any work performed in the public right-of-way. 54. No storage of construction materials is permitted in the street or on the sidewalk without prior approval of Public Works Engineering. 55. All construction within City right-of-way, easements or other property under City's juris- diction shall conform to standard specifications of the Public Works and Utility Depart- ments, unless exceptions have been specifically granted through this or other entitlements related to this project. 56. The applicant shall require its contractors to incorporate best management practices (BMP's) for storm water pollution prevention in all construction operations, in conform- ance with the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. The Build- ing Inspection Division shall monitor BMP's with respect to the applicant's construction activities on private property; and the Public Works Department shall monitor BMP's July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 14 of 16 Pages with respect to the applicant's construction activities on public property. 11 is unlawful to discharge, either accidentally or intentionally any construction debris (soil, asphalt, saw cut slurry, paint, chemicals, etc.) or other water materials into gutters or storm drains. Fire Department 57. In order to ensure fire safety, the fire service system shall be fully operational to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal prior to any framing of buildings on the site. Police Department 58. All construction activities shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance, Chapter 9.10 PAMC, which requires, among other things, that a sign be posted and that construction times be limited as follows: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sunday Prior to Final Inspection of Work Performed under the Building Permit: Planning and Transportation 59. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Division, along with a request for inspection, written certification signed by a landscape architect that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with all aspects of the approved landscape plans, that the irrigation has been installed and tested for timing and function, and that all plants, including street trees, are healthy and have a reasonable chance for survival. Public Works Engineering 60. The Public Works Inspector shall sign off the building permit prior to finalization of this permit. Public Works Water Quality Control 61. The project shall be designed so that no wastewater (including equipment cleaning wash water, vehicle wash water, cooling water, air conditioner condensate, and floor cleaning wash water) can be discharged to the storm drain system, the street or gutter. The appli- cant shall present a plan for approval by the Water Quality Control Plant to prevent unlawful discharges by tenants of the project, July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions - Apartment Housing Page 15 of 16 Pages After Construction: Planning and Transportation 62. The resident -serving retail center would be provided on a trial basis for a period of two years, commencing no later than upon full occupancy. At the end of the two-year period, the applicant will review the economical feasibility of the facility. If the applicant determines the facility is not economically feasible, and does not wish to continue the operation, it will provide at least 90 days notice of its determination of economic infeasiblity and its intent to discontinue the operation to the Director of Planning and Community Environment, along with documentation to support its determination. Staff shall review the documentation and, within the 90 -day period, forward a report of its review to the City Council, with a copy to the applicant. The Council may, but need not, consider the matter. Upon receipt of the report, and upon the request of the Director or the Council, Stanford shall reconsider its intent to discontinue the operation. However, the applicant shall have the right to make the final decision. The applicant shall notify the Director of its decision. Utilities/Resource Conservation 63. Unpolluted water, from cooling or vacuum systems as an example, may not be discharged through direct or indirect connection to a city sewer without a city permit. Such water must be reused or recirculated, unless no alternatives exist and is approved by the Utili- ties Department. E:\PROJECTS\PALOALTO\CM R1CM R30I 97\CONFORM D\CON DS WAH.CC6 July 14, 1997 Attachment 17: Conditions — Apartment Housing Page 16 of 16 Pages CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE STANFORD WEST SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT 600 SAND HILL ROAD The conditions of approval consist of: mitigation measures identified in the EIR, as herein modified, rejected or adopted by reference without modification, and additional conditions imposed pursuant to the City's police powers. All of these conditions are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP). The recitation of the mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring Program is intended to be the same as in the EIR, as adopted or revised by these conditions of approval. In the event a mitigation measure or condition is worded differently in the MMP than in these conditions of approval, including those mitigation measures adopted by reference, these conditions shall control. The Monitoring and Reporting Procedures in the MMP are intended to implement, not to modify, these conditions of approval, and the Procedures shall be interpreted accordingly, in a manner that does not diminish or add to the requirements imposed on the applicant, The approval of the Senior Housing Project is conditioned upon the applicant receiving approval for the set of road improvements (commonly known as Sand Hill Road Widening and Extension and Related Roadway Improvements), or some portion of those improvements as may be determined by the Palo Alto City Council. The following shall return to the ARB for final review and approval prior to the submittal of plans for a building permit: 2. The mitigation measures identified as applicable to either "Ali Projects" or to the "Stan- ford West Senior Housing Project" in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) are incorporated hereby as conditions of project approval, except as noted below. The Project Plans shall be revised to comply with all required mitigation measures and shall return to the ARB for final review and approval. Please refer to prior staff reports for analysis regarding the rejected and preferred mitigation measures listed below. a. Public Services Mitigation 4.12-14. City of Palo Alto could adopt a policy encouraging future developers to contribute their fair share for school impacts July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 1 of 17 Pages over and above payment of the development fee, shall not be required to be implemented. Public Services Mitigation 4.12-16. City of Palo Alto could implement public or private financing mechanisms for obtaining additional park lands and/or for rehabilitating existing parks in a way that expands their usefulness, shall not be required to be implemented. c. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-I(d): which requires the applicant to operate an on -call passenger shuttle service to and from Senior Housing shall not be required to be implemented. d. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(c and d) is modified to read as follows: The applicant should pay the full cost of implementing Mitigation Measures 4.4- 7(c and d), which require improvements to the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and the junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersections. These improvements should be constructed during the same time frame of the remainder of the proposed road improvements in the Santa Cruz/Oak Avenue area. and should be included in the final construction phasing plan. (Refer please to Road Conditions lc and 12). e. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(e) is modified to read as follows: Should the City of Menlo Park within ten (1 0) years of the effective date of the Development Agreement desire to make improvements to the Middlefield/Willow intersection, to improve a LOS £ or worse condition, the applicant shall be required to contribute its fair (proportionate) share of the cost either to make signal timing improvements sufficient to return the intersection to LOS D or, if it is not possible to achieve a LOS D through signal timing modifications, to construct the improvements listed in the EIR, rather than making a no contribution, as the EIR currently states. Cultural Resources Mitigation 4.3-4(a) is modified to read as follows: The Old Carriage House shall be protected in place. Fencing or other appropriate protection should be installed prior to construction to avoid impact to this important historic resource. The applicant shall submit to the City a plan for protection of the Old Carriage House, that shall include the parties responsible for long-term protection, and the specific protection requirements (from structural stabilization to funding, for example). The City of Palo Alto July 14, 1997 Conditions -- Senior Housing Page 2 of 17 Pages • shall approve the Carriage House protection plan prior to issuance of e demolition permit for the Stanford West Senior housing project. The project applicant shall post a bond or other form of financial security acceptable to the City Attorney during the demolition and construction phases to ensure retention of the Carriage House. Noise Mitigation 4.6-3(d) shall be modified as follows: This mitigation requires the applicant to monitor interior noise levels of properties identified as being potentially impacted by increased noise attributable to the projects. Compensation to these owners to provide acoustical upgrades is required under certain conditions, as described in the Mitigation. This mitigation shall only be required to be implemented for those areas «• here the contribution from the projects is greater than 50% of the total impact.. These areas;..=e shown on Exhibit A. An acoustic study shall be performed bath before and after construction of all projects, at the applicant's cost. The study shall document pre -project interior noise levels for all sensitive receptors identified on Exhibit A immediately following project approval. Post -construction noise levels shall be established immediately following completion of all approved projects or following December 31, 2000, whichever comes later. For those receptors where the post - construction interior noise levels are higher than pre -construction levels and exceed 45 d13A, the study shall identify measures and costs necessary to: i) return noise levels to pre -construction levels; and ii) achieve a 45 dBA interior noise standards. The project applicant shall be required to pay the cost identified to return the interior noise levels to pre -construction levels or to 45 dBA, whichever is higher. If there is a difference in costs between options i and ii, the property owner may elect to make up the difference in cost to implement option ii. It is possible, and likely, that there will not be a difference in cost between option i and ii. The EIR also identifies alternative mitigation measures for the impacts listed below. The preferred mitigation measure for each of these impacts (as listed in the EIR) is also identified below. These mitigation measures are incorporated hereby as conditions of project approval. Impact: Cultural Resources Impact 4.3-1, avoid construction in the Level 1 archeological sensitive area, as illustrated on Figure 4.3-2 on page 4.3-33. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation 4.3-1(b) and (c), data recovery program, shall be implemented rather than Mitigation 4.3-1(a), avoidance of all construction in the Level 1 sensitivity area. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page3of17Pages • Impact: Cultural Resources Impact 4.3-3, possible damaging effects on Leland Stanford, Jr. monument. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation Measure 4.3-3(b), relocation of the monument on the site to a location open to public viewing, shall be implemented rather than Mitigation 4.3-3(a), in -place preservation. k. Impact: Cultural Resources Impact 4.3-5, possible damaging effects on the Stanford Convalescent Home Gates. Furthermore, the gates shall be relocated per the requirements of condition 7e. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation Measure 4.3-5(b), incorporate the gates into the projects landscape plan, shall be implemented rather than Mitigation Measure 4.3-5(a), in -place preservation. 1. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-2, the project would increase the number of emergency medical service calls to the Fire Department. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation 4.12-2(b), the applicant shall pay fair share for the cost of a new paramedic unit, shall be implemented rather than mitigation 4.12-2(a), applicant shall provide private ambulance service (refer to Condition 45 for additional information regarding payment of fair share costs), m. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-4, increased demand due to cumulative projects on Palo Alto Fire Department. Recommended Mitigation: Option three, City could provide additional resources to the PAFD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. n. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-5, increased demand due to cumulative project on medical emergency service. Recommended Mitigation: Option two, City could provide additional medi-van resources to the PAFD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-10, increased demand due to cumulative projects on Palo Alto Police Department. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 4 of 17 Pages Recommended Mitigation: Option three, City could provide additional resources to the PAPD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. 3. The final design, colors and materials of all project buildings shall return to the ARB for review and approval. Final landscape plans, lighting, design of public improve- ments, walls and fences and all other similar improvements shall return to the ARB for review and approval. An artist and interpretative designer shall be retained by the applicant to provide input and assistance for the design of the final project details, particularly those related to the environmental, recreational and cultural public assets on the sites, and the provision of public art. The applicant shall submit with the final plans a statement outlining the specific plan details which respond to the artist/interpre- tative designer's input. The final project plans shall take into account the following maintenance, security and safety provisions: a. Approval of any nonstandard paving materials shall be coordinated with Public Works Engineering prior to any final approval by the ARB, and is subject to approval of a maintenance agreement which requires the applicant to provide all maintenance for such materials; b. The applicant shall confer with the Police Department prior to submitting final project plans to ensure lighting and landscape plans incorporate appropriate security recommendations. All lighting plans shall be in conformance with Mitigation Measures 4.2-7(a) and 4.2-13. c. A sign progra i for the site, including signs to be posted on private streets (such as no parking, private street, tow away zones, public access points, etc.), and an address numbering program, shall be reviewed by the Police Department and approved by the ARB. d. Signs and landscaping shall meet the sight distance requirements of PAMC 18.83.080, applicable to project frontages where driveways are present, and in parking lots. Landscaping shall be specifically identified in the landscape plan as meeting these height requirements. e. The proposed materials for the independent living building base shall be revised to be of a more durable nature that can withstand sustained use over time without showing damage. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 5 of 17 Pages 4. The final landscape plan shall include an indication that all species of trees to be used as street trees have been approved by the City Arborist. A significant percentage of these trees shall be deciduous. Any changes to the project plans in regard to location and size of recycling and trash facilities shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Operations Division. 6. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, electric panel switch- boards, and other required utilities, shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials and shall be screened in a manner which respects the building design and setback requirements. These locations shall also be approved by Utilities Engineering. The following revisions shall be made to the project plans and included on the plans submitted for final Architectural Review Board approval prior to submittal of a build- ing permit application: As required by Mitigation Measure 4.4-1(b), Stanford's Marguerite shuttle shall service the project. More specifically, the Marguerite shall follow a route into the Senior Housing project (as opposed to only stopping on Sand Hill Road). The site plan shall be modified to include provisions for at least one Marguerite shuttle stop internal to the project. If, at any time following implementation of the service, it is determined by the City and Stanford that the routing of the Marguerite Service into the project site is no longer desirable due to negative effects on overall service, the Chief Transportation Official shall have the authority to allow the internal service routing to be discontinued. The applicant shall construct a Class I bicycle/pedestrian path, with a minimum 8 -foot paved width (10 -foot paved width preferred) and a 2 -foot unpaved graded shoulder on each side, between the easterly end of "Main" Street (where it crosses Sand Hill Road to become Vineyard Lane) and the signalized entrance to Ronald McDonald House, which shall be a combined sidewalk and bicycle path adjacent to Sand Hill Road (generally as shown on the current plan set dated 10/16/96). The path shall be sited to avoid damaging existing trees. If necessary in order to avoid damaging any existing trees, the width of the unpaved shoulders may be less than 2 feet. In order to promote intersection crossing safety in the confined area between the Senior Housing Project and Sand Hill Road, this path shall be routed across the two signalized driveways at the normal location for a pedestrian crosswalk. If necessary to protect trees near the Sand Hill Road/Arboretum Road intersection, the path may be routed away from the signalized intersection (into the site) as far as possible before the path July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 6 of 17 Pages crosses the driveway. The west end of this path shall have two branches: 1) intersecting "Main" Street at the crosswalk across the north leg of "Main" Street at the Main Street/Sand Hill Road/Vineyard Lane intersection; and, 2) intersecting Main Street at the corner of its intersection with the driveway of the Senior Housing project (in the same place the sidewalk intersects the corner). Design of the intersections and crossings shall meet with the approval of the Chief Transportation Official. c. In the vicinity of the Children's Health Council, the recreational path shall be located to pass through the "Village Green" area, around the perimeter of the parking lot, and shall be so signed (as generally shown on the current plan set dated 101 16196). It shall intersect the CHC driveway opposite the paved path from the bicycle/pedestrian bridge. d. Between the Ronald McDonald House and the Health Care building, the recre- ational path shall be relocated, if feasible, to provide a more direct route that is not in the parking lot, nor directly in front of building entrances. Proper directional signage shall be provided. The Stanford Convalescent Home Gates shall be moved from their present location at the entry to the Ronald McDonald House, to the main, entry for the Senior Housing project at Arboretum Road. A minimum of 20 feet of space shall be provided between the front access road and the edge of pavement of Sand Hill Road, to allow adequate room for land- scaping and the provision of a Class I bicycle pedestrian path. g - No parking shall be allowed along the access road at the rear of the Health Care or Independent living Buildings. The 24 spaces shown on the revised plans dated October 16, 1996 shall be removed from the area presently shown on the plans. This parking may either be eliminated entirely, or relocated to acceptable areas of the site subject to the approval of the ARB. h. Inconsistencies between the site and conceptual landscape plans illustrating revisions made by the applicant during the ARB public review process (dated October 16, 1996), and the elevations and supporting detailed plans provided with the original submittal plans (dated April 1, 1996), shall be corrected. Inconsistencies to be eliminated include, but are not limited to, the following: all building floor plans, unit plans, conceptual site sections and building sections, and the tree removal plan, shall be revised to reflect changes made to the site plan July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 7 of 17 Pages including the significant redesign of the health care center building and the minor redesign of the independent living building. 8. If the Stanford West Apartment Housing project proposed for the kdjacent site is not approved or is not constructed simultaneously with this project, then the applicant shall be required to submit a revised site plan for off -site circulation. infrastructure and open space modifications in order to ensure safe and convenient bicycle, pedestrian and auto connections, infrastructure extensions and open space arrangements. Prior to Issuance of a Demolition Permit: Utilities 9. The Contractor 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 Contractor shall contact Underground Service Alert @ (800) 642-2444. at least 48 hours prior to beginning work. 10. The Applicant shall submit a request to disconnect ail 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. Prior to Submittal of a Building Permit: Planning and Transportation 11. An independent arborist shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The arborist will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-1. The arborist will be retained, as needed to perform the work related to this project as specified in Mitigation 4.7-1, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the arborist's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 12. An independent creek restoration specialist shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The creek restoration special' . t will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.7-4(a). 4.7-4(b), 4.7 -7(a -e) and 4.7 - July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 8 of 17 Pages i 9(a). The creek restoration specialist will be retained, as needed to oversee implementa- tion of the above mitigations, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the creek restoration specialist's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 13. An independent archeologist/historian shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The archeologist/historian will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.3-1, 4.3-2, 4.3-3, 4.3-4, and 4.3-5. The archeologist/ historian will be retained, as needed to oversee implementation of the above mitigations, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the archeolo- gist/historian's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Develop- ment Agreement. 14. A contract senior level planner shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to oversee the implementation of this project, including processing of the Final Map. The planner shall be retained, as needed, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the contract planner's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. The applicant shall continue to pay for planner services under the Planning Division's Cost Recovery Program until such time as the contract planner is hired. 1S. A contract building plan checker and inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary plan check and inspection work associated with this project. The plan checker and inspector shall be retained, as needed, from the time the applicant submits plans for a building permit until final construction is approved by the Building Inspection Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the plan checker and inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 16. The applicant shall appoint a project manager knowledgeable of building permitting and construction processes for the duration of the project permitting and construction period. The Project Manager shall be responsible for coordinating the construction process with City staff and for facilitating the applicant's role in receiving building permits and complying with conditions of approval before and during construction. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 9 of 17 Pages 17. The applicant shall provide an access and maintenance easement to the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and shall provide to the City an easement for bicycle and pedestrian access, along San Francisquito Creek on the proposed senior housing parcels. The easement shall consist of a strip 22 feet wide coincident with the rear access road. The easement shall be shown on the face of the final map to the satisfac- tion of the Water District and the City Public Works Department. 18. As property owner, the applicant shall file with the City, on behalf of the Children's Health Council, an application requesting modification of Architectural Review Board Approval File No. 94-ARB-202 and Use Permit File No.94-UP-21 to receive final approval of the CHC parking lot and landscaping site plan revisions necessary to implement changes to the boundaries between the CHC and the senior housing. Utilities. 19. An electric utility engineer/inspector and a water/gas/wastewater utility engineer/ inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary plan check and inspection work associated with this project, including processing of the Final Map. The engineer/inspectors shall be retained, as needed, from just prior to the applicant commencing meetings with the Utilities Department to finalize needed improvement plans until final construction is approved by the Inspec- tion Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the engineer/ inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 20. The applicant shall submit detailed improvement plans and specifications for all utility construction. The plans must show the final alignment and sizing of electric, water, gas, and wastewater services within the development and within the utility easements. All final design details shall be in accordance with the published specifications of the Utilities Department, and subject to the approval of the Utilities Engineering Division. The applicant shall meet and confer with the WGW Utilities Engineering staff, and then submit a plan, prepared in accordance with the published specifications of the Utilities Department, for final approval, indicating the final configuration of the water distribution system to be implemented. The applicant shall submit flow calculations which shall show that the off -site and on - site water and sewer mains are sized adequately to provide the domestic water, fire flows and sewer capacity needed to serve this project in conjunction with any of the other development projects being considered simultaneously (Stanford West Senior Housing and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion) during anticipated peak loads. All July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 10 of 17 Pages field testing required to determine current capacities of existing utilities shall be performed by the applicant's engineer at their expense. Calculations must be stamped by a registered civil engineer. Public Works Engineering 23. An engineer/inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary project management, plan check and inspection work associated with this project, including processing of the Final Map. The engineer/inspector shall be retained, as needed, from the submittal of final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the engineer/ inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. The applicant shall submit a final grading and drainage plan for review and approval by Public Works Engineering. 25. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit or temporary lease from Public Works Engineering for the proposed construction which will impact the use of sidewalk or street or on property in which the City holds an interest. 26. A grading permit must be obtained from the Building Inspection Division if excavation exceeds I() cubic yards. 27. The applicant shall be required to file a notice of intent (NOI) for coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board's General Permit for storm water discharges associated with construction and post construction activity. The applicant shall provide an additional copy to Public Works Engineering Division of the NOI when applying for a grading/building permit. 28. The proposed development will result in a change in the impervious area of the site. The applicant shall provide calculations showing the adjusted impervious area with the building permit application. A storm drainage fee adjustment will take place in the month following the final approval of the construction by the Inspection Services Division. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit: Planning and Transportation July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 11 of 17 Pages • 29. A final subdivision map, which subdivides the project site into parcels, one with 388 airspace condominiums, and provides for adjustments between this project site and the adjacent Stanford West Apartment Housing and Children's Health Council sites, shall be approved by the City of Palo Alto and recorded at the Office of the County Recorder prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. See also the Conditions of Approval for the Tentative Subdivision Map. 30. The applicant shall agree to a program for providing Below Market Rate Units in ful- fillment of Program 13 of the Housing Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, as provided in the Letter of Agreement dated October 15, 1996. Utilities 31. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading on -site and off -site water and wastewater utilities as necessary to handle peak loads. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with required improvements to on -site and off -site gas mains and services. All improvements to the gas system will be by the City of Palo Alto or the City's contractor. The approved relocation of service, meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the applicant's expense. All installation of new utilities and upgrading of existing utilities necessary for the proposed project shall be constructed and paid for as required by City of Palo Alto Utilities Rules and Regulations. 32. All new electric service shall be underground. The applicant shall be responsible for all electric substructure installation required for extending the electric distribution system. The City, upon acceptance of the facilities will furnish and install all cables, switches and other equipment required for the system extension. All connecion, on -site and off - site fees and credit if any will be based on Utilities Rules and Regulations. 33. The applicant shall not be allowed to begin work until the utility irnprovement plans, project specifications, and load sheets have been approved by the Water, Gas and Wastewater Engineering Division and the City's Cross Connection Control Inspector. Utility connection charges must be paid prior to the scheduling of any work performed by the City of Palo Alto or the applicant. All utility maids shall be installed, to the satisfaction of the Utilities Engineering, in Sand Hill Road and "Main" Street, and other areas as necessary to facilitate these installations, prior to commencement of Senior Housing Phase I construction. 35 A waste water discharge permit to be obtained from Utilities Water -Gas -Wastewater Engineering is required. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 12 of 17 Pages • • 36. A separate water meter shall be installed to irrigate the approved landscape plan. This meter shall be designated as an irrigation account and no other water service will be billed on the account. 37. Ultra low flush toilets are required. All tank and valve toilets must be specified as using 1.6 gallons per flush or less. All urinals must be specified as using 1 gallon per flush or less. Public Works Engineering 38. The project is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD). A permit must be obtained from SCVWD and a copy provided to the City. 39. The applicant shall obtain a Permit for Construction in a Public Street from Public Works Engineering for construction proposed in the City of right-of-way. 40. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City in a form approved by the City Attorney which guarantees the completion of the required public improvements as well as any area subject to public access requirements. and shall post a bond or other form of financial security acceptable to the City Attorney, in an amount determined by the Director of Public Works, as security for performance of this obligation. Public Works Water Quality Control 41. Food service facilities shall install one or more grease interceptors on sewer lines servicing sinks, dishwashers, and floor drains. The size of such interceptors shall be in conformance with the Uniform Plumbing Code provision of the California Building Standard Code (24 CCR). 42. Laboratory areas shall have sinks and any floor drains plumbed separately from bath- rooms and these sewer lines shall have discharge sampling ports constructed on them. No shelves which could be used for chemical storage shall be constructed above sinks. 43. Discharge of contaminated groundwater to the sanitary sewer shall only be allowed if reuse options have been studied and determined to be impractical by the Director of the City's Water Quality Control Plant. 44. Discharge of swimming pool water to the storm drain system, street or gutter is not permitted. Therefore, a sanitary sewer clean -out shall be located such that a hose can be used to convey overflow swimming pool water to the sanitary sewer. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 13 of 17 Pages • Fire Department 45. The applicant shall pay $ 36,960 to the City as its fair share costs for the acquisition of a paramedic van. A hazardous Materials Management Plan is required to be submitted to the Fire Department in accordance with State Law, 47. The applicant shall apply to the Fire Department for a Hazardous Materials Storage permit fee for the storage of any hazardous materials associated with the health center, swimming pool, maintenance areas or common areas, and pay the required fee. 48. Groundwater remediation or vapor extraction systems will require Fire Department permits and approvals. 49. The all-weather, combination access road/pedestrian and bike path at the rear of the site shall have a minimum paved width of 20 feet in order to comply with emergency vehicle access requirements, 50. Fire hydrants shall be placed throughout the site at a minimum spacing of 300 feet. Along the rear of the buildings facing the creek, wharf hydrants shall be placed in locations to be approved by the Fire Marshal. A plan indicating all fire service features shall be provided for review and approval by the Fire Marshal, including fire hydrant placement, emergency vehicle access, fire sprinkler, water flow and alarm system calculations. 51. The applicant shall submit plans to the Fire Department which show that all buildings comply with requirements for fire sprinklers, per PAMC, Section 15.04.170(dd), and fire alarms (including graphic annunciator), with Central Station supervision for both. 52. Building plans shall incorporate the following features: elevator access for a minimum gurney size of 84 inches by 24 inches and two emergency personnel; floor control valves; rated corridors; emergency lighting and illuminated exit signs; panic hardware and portable fire extinguishers. 53. The Fire Department shall determine that plans satisfy emergency fire access requirements, including turning radii throughout the site, per PAMC Title 15, UFC Article 10. During Construction: July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 14 of 17 Pages Utilities 54. The contractor shall submit for approval by Utilities Engineering Division the manufacturer's literature on the materials to be used. 55. The applicant shall provide meter protection for any gas meters that may be subject to vehicle damage. 56. All customer piping shall be inspected and approved by the Building Inspection Division before gas service is instituted. Gas meters will be installed at least three working days after the building piping final inspection. 57. All new traffic signals and proposed modifications to existing traffic shall be per City of Palo Alto Traffic Signal Standards and costs shall be borne by the applicant. 5S, All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing. 59. All new underground service conduits and substructures shall be inspected before backfilling. The applicant's contractor shall obtain a street opening permit from the Department of Public Works before digging in the street right-of-way. Public Works Engineering 61. To reduce dust levels, it shall be required that exposed earth surfaces be watered as necessary. Spillage resulting from hauling operations along or across any public or private property shall be removed immediately and paid for by the "contractor. Dust nuisances originating from the contractor's operations, either inside or outside of the right-of-way shall be controlled at the contractor's expense. 62. The contractor must contact the Public Works Inspector prior to any work performed in the public right-of-way. 63. No storage of construction materials is permitted in the street or on the sidewalk without prior approval of Public Works Engineering. . All construction within City right-of-way, easements or other property under City's jurisdiction shall conform to standard specifications of the Public Works and Utility July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 15 of 17 Pages Departments, unless exceptions have been specifically granted through this or other entitlements related to this project. 65. The applicant shall require its contractors to incorporate best management practices (BMP's) for storm water pollution prevention in all construction operations, in conformance with the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. The Building Inspection Division shall monitor BMP's with respect to the Applicant's construction activities on private property; and the Public Works Department shall monitor BMP's with respect to the applicant's construction activities on public property. It is unlawful to discharge any construction debris (soil, asphalt, saw cut slurry, paint, chemicals, etc.) or other water materials into gutters or storm drains. Fire Department In order to ensure fire safety, the fire service system shall be fully operational to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal prior to any framing of buildings on the site. Police Department 67. All construction activities shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance, Chapter 9.10 PAMC, which requires, among other things, that a sign be posted and that construction times be limited as follows: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sunday Prior to Final Inspection of Work Performed under the Building Permit: Planning and Transportation 68. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Division, along with a request for inspec- tion, written certification signed by a landscape architect that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with all aspects of the approved landscape plans, that the irrigation has been installed and tested for timing and function, and that all plants, including street trees, are healthy and have a reasonable chance for survival. Public Works Engineering July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 16 of 17 Pages 69. The Public Works Inspector shall sign off the building permit prior to finalization of this permit. Public Works Water Quality Co 70. The project shall be designed so that no wastewater (including equipment cleaning wash water, vehicle wash water, cooling water, air conditioner condensate, and floor cleanin$ wash water) can be discharged to the storm drain system, the street or gutter. The applicant shall present a plan for approval by the Water Quality Control Plant to prevent unlawful discharges by occupants of the project. Utilities/Resource Conservation Unpolluted water, from cooling or vacuum systems as an example, may not be dis- charged through direct or indirect connection to a city sewer without a city permit. Such water must be reused or recirculated, unless no alternatives exist and is approved by the Utilities Department. S.\PLAN\PLADIV\\CMRiSANDHILLFIN,IL\UL T FitIATE!CON DS44S43.CCc July 14, 1997 Conditions - Senior Housing Page 17 of 17 Pages • r CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL STANFORD SHOPPING CENTER EXPANSION PROJECT ISO EL CAMIINO REAL The conditions of approval consist of: mitigation measures identified in the EIR, as herein modi- fied, rejected or adopted by reference without modification. and additional conditions imposed pursuant to the City's policy powers. All of these conditions are included in the Mitigation Moni- toring Program (MMP). The recitation of the mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring Program is intended to be the same as in the EIR, as adopted or revised by these conditions of approval. In the event a mitigation measure or condition is worded differently in the MiMP than in these conditions of approval, includine those mitigation r;e.;:ire, adopted by reference, these Ma . _ 1 • to conditions shall control. The � �:.;;}��:wring and i:cn�� rtin� Pr;:�,��:;r_. !- t;�--_ \,:�I: are intended implement, not to modify, these conditions of approval, and the Prc:ed1 cs shall be interpreted accordingly, in a manner that does not diminish or add to the. requires is imposed on the applicant. Architectural Review Application (94-ARB-259) The approval of the Stanford Shopping Center expansion is conditioned upon the appli- cant receiving approval for the set of road improvements (commonly known as Sand Hill Road Widening and Extension and Related Roadway Improvements), or some portion of those improvements as may be determined by the Palo Alto City Council. The following shall return to the ARB for final review and approval pripr to the submittal of plans for a building permit: 2. The mitigation measures identified as applicable to either "Al! Projects" or to the "Stan- ford Shopping Center Expansion Project" in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR)'are incorporated hereby as conditions of project approval, except as noted below. The Project Plans shall be revised to comply with all required mitigation measures and shall return to the ARB for final review and approval. Please refer to prior staff reports for analysis regarding the rejected and preferred mitigation measures listed below. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions - Shopping Center Expansion Page 1 of 16 Pages a. Visual Quality Mitigation 4.2-9, requires implementation of Mitigation 4.2- 1(a - I). As noted below, the following portion of Mitigation 4.2 -1(a -l) has been rejected for this project, and therefore, is rejected from this mitigation also: Item (k). b. Visual Quality Mitigation 4.2.12, requires implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.2 -6(a -c). The following portion of Mitigation 4.2-6 has been rejected for the shopping center expansion project, and is therefore also rejected from this mitigation: option two of itern(a). c. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(c and d) is modified to read as follows: The applicant should pay the full cost of implementing Mitigation Measures 4.4- 7(c and d), which require improvements to the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and the Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersections. These improvements should be constructed during the same time frame of the remainder of the proposed road improvements in the Santa CruziOak Avenue area, and should be included in the final construction phasing plan. (Refer please to Road Conditions lc and 12). d. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(e) is modified to read as follows: Should the City of Menlo Park within ten (10) years of the effective date of the Development Agreement desire to make improvements to the Middlefield/Willow intersection, to improve a LOS E or worse condition, the applicant shall be required to contribute its fair (proportionate) share of the cost either to make signal timing improvements sufficient to return the intersection to LOS D or, if it is not possible to achieve a LOS D through signal timing modifications, to construct the improvements listed in the EIR, rather than making a no contribu- tion, as the EIR currently states. e. Noise Mitigation 4.6-3(d). This mitigation requires the applicant to monitor interior noise levels of properties identified as being potentially impacted by increased noise attributable to the projects. Compensation to these owners to provide acoustical upgrades is required under certain conditions, as described in the Mitigation. This mitigation shall only be required to be implemented for those areas where the contribution from the projects is greater than 50% of the total impact. These areas are shown on Exhibit July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Center Expansion Page 2 of 16 Pages • • A. An acoustic study shall be performed both before and after construction of all projects, at the applicant's cost. The study shall document pre -project interior noise levels for all sensitive receptors identified on Exhibit A immediately following project approval. Post -construction noise levels shall be established immediately following completion of all approved projects or following December 31, 2000, whichever comes later. For those receptors where the post - construction interior noise levels are higher than pre -construction levels and exceed 45 dBA, the study shall identify measures and costs necessary to: i) return noise levels to pre -construction levels; and ii) achieve a 45 dBA interior noise standards. The project applicant shall be required to pay the cost identified to return the interior noise levels to pre -construction levels or to 45 dBA, whichever is higher. If there is a difference in costs between options i and ii, the property owner may elect to make up the difference in cost to implement option ii. It is possible, and likely, that there will not be a difference in cost between option i and ii. Air Quality Mitigation 4.5-2(a) and (b) requires implementation of Mitigation 4.4-2(a) which does not apply to this project, and therefore, is rejected as to this. project. €• Visual Quality Mitigation 4.2-1(g) shall be modified to require that the density and frequency of street tree planting in the center median and southern road edge of Sand Hill Road shall be extended to run continuously along the Sand Hill Road extension to achieve eventual canopy closure between trees. h. Public Services Mitigation 4.12-14. City of Palo Alto could adopt a policy encouraging future developers to contribute their fair share for school impacts over and above payment of the development fee, shall not be required to be implemented. i. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-1(d): which requires the applicant to operate an on -call passenger shuttle service to and from the Senior Housing shall not be required to be implemented. Public Services Mitigation 4.12-16. City of Palo Alto could implement public or private financing mechanisms for obtaining additional park lands and/or for rehabilitating existing parks in a way that expands their usefulness, shall not be required to be implemented. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Center Expansion Page 3 of 16 Pages The Draft Efft also identifies alternative mitigation for the impacts listed below. The preferred mitigation for each of these impacts (as listed in the EIR) is also identified below. These mitiga- tion measures are incorporated hereby as conditions of project approval. k. Impact: Visual Quality Impact 4.2-1, major visual changes within the Sand Hill Road corridor. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation 4.2-1(1), the proposed Sand Hill Road and Quarry/Arboretum parking structures shall be consolidated on the Quarry Road side of the shopping center shall be implemented rather than Mitigation 4.2-1(k), redesign Quarry/Arboretum parking structure. The revised shopping center plans dated October 16, 1996, which were approved by the ARB, incorporated this alternative. (Refer to Condition 4 for further requirements related to this alterna- tive parking structure). iunr.,; t: Visual Quality Impact 4.2-4, alter the character of the existing setting in the vicinity of Arboretum Road and Quarry Road. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation 4.2-1(1), the proposed Sand Hill Road an.d Quarry/Arboretum parking structures shall be consolidated on the Quarry Road side of the shopping center shall be implemented rather than Mitigation 4.2-4(b) and (c). (Refer also to Conditions 2k and 4). rn. Impact: Visual Quality Impact 4.2-6(a), diminish the visual quality of El Camino Real frontage. Recommended Mitigation: Option one, implement design controls for the retail building to be located at the corner of Quarry Road and El Camino Real, shall be implemented, rather than Option two, eliminate the building. n. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-4, increased demand due to cumulative projects on Palo Alto Fire Department. Recommended Mitigation: Option three, City could provide additional resources to the PAFD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-5, increased demand due to cumulative project on medical emergency service. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions -- Shopping Center Expansion Page 4 of 16 Pages • • jcommencied Mitigation: Option two, City could provide additional medi-van resources to the PAFD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. P. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-10, increased demand duc to cumulative projects on Palo Alto Police Department. Recommeqed Mitigation: Option three, City could provide additional resources to the PAPD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. The pedestrian -only walkway from the retail building at the corner of Quarry Road and El Camino Real to the main shopping center shall not cross any parking lot circulation aisles or roads, except for one crossing of the perimeter road immediately next to the shopping center buildings. A feature of the landscape plan shall include protection from the ele- ments, as much as feasible (e.g., a vine covered arbor or closely spaced trees providing an overhead canopy). along the pedestrian walkway 4. ltl.itigation Measure 4.2-1(1), .which regaIres consohdation of the Ma proposed parking structures into three connected structures on the Quarry Road frontage of the shopping center, was incorporated in the revised plans dated October 16. 1996. The plans shall be further revised to show a single new parking structure no taller than 24 feet 10 inches to the top of the railing, to accommodate approximately 1,535 cars, in addition to the exist- ing parking structure. The details of the new parking structure design shall be submitted to the ARB for final approval prior to submittal of a building permit. The final design of the facade shall be designed to reduce the visual length and potential monolithic quality. A cohesive and attractive sign program, or other method of providing direction to the shopping center interior shall also be submitted and approved by the ARB. 5. The final design, colors and materials of all project buildings shall return to the ARB for review and approval. Final landscape plans, lighting, design of public improvements, walls and fences and all other similar improvements shall return to the ARB for review and approval. An artist and interpretative designer shall be retained by the applicant to provide input and assistance for the design of the final project details, particularly thole related to the environmental, recreational and cultural public assets on the site, and the provision of public art. The applicant shall submit with the final plans a statement out- lining the specific plan details which respond to the artist/interpretative designer's input. The final project plans shall take into account the following maintenance, security and safety provisions: July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Center Expansion Page 5 of 16 Pages • a. Approval of any nonstandard paving materials shall be coordinated with Public Works Engineering prior to any final approval by the ARB, and is subject to approval of a maintenance agreement which requires the applicant to provide all maintenance for such materials; b. The applicant shall confer with the Police Department prior to submitting fina! project plans to ensure lighting and landscape plans incorporate appropriate security recommendations. c. A parking garage security and lighting plan, which includes such possible meas- ures as installation of emergency "blue phones" similar to those being placed at other Stanford facilities, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Police Department. d. Signs and landscaping shall meet the sight distance requirements of PANIC 18.83.050, applicable to project frontages where driveways are present, and in parking lots. Landscaping shall be specifically identified in the landscape plan as meeting these height requirements. 5A. Applicant shall further modify its plans to show the single new parking structure, as per Condition 4, additional floor area not to exceed 80,000 square feet with building locations consistent with the October 16, 1996 ARB approved plan set for the 160,000 square feet. 6. The final landscape plan shall include an indication that all species of trees to be used as street trees have been approved by the City Arborist. A significant percentage of these trees shall be deciduous. 7. Any changes to the project plans in regard to location and size of recycling and trash facilities shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Operations Division. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, electric panel switchboards, and other required utilities, shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials and shall be screened in a manner which respects the building design and setback requirements. 9. The project plans submitted for final ARB review and approval shall be revised to comply with the following requirements related to provision of bicycle parking spaces. a. The number of spaces to be provided shall be equal to 10% of the number of parking spaces required for the new square footage to be added (for a 80,000 - July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Center Expansion Page 6 of 16 Pages • square foot addition, a total of 29 bicycle spaces are required). Of the spaces required, 40% shall be Class I, 30% shall be Class II and 30% shall be Class ID. b. The plans shall show the number and class of all bike parking spaces existing and proposed in the shopping center, as well as locations of store entrances. c. The plans shall ensure that bicycle parking is balanced around the center (i.e., parking is provided at many locations and with the number of spaces proposed for each location reasonable related to the amount of retail space located adjacent), and located conveniently near to retail entrances. 10. As required by Mitigation Measure 4.4-1(b), Marguerite service shall be provided at a level at least comparable to, and improved if possible, to that existing today. The service is not required to enter the shopping center site. The site plan shall indicate provision of Marguerite stops on the roads surrounding the shopping center. In regard to the alternative parking structure design for the Quarry Road frontage sub- mitted for review by the ARB at their 10/16/96 meeting, the following revisions shall be made to the project plans and included on the plans submitted for final Architectural Review Board approval prior to submittal of a building permit application: a. The pedestrian crossing at the two major entrance driveways to the new parking structure and parking lots shall be reduced in width and curb radii reduced by incorporating one or more of the following, or some other measures: 1) pull the driveway medians back away from Quarry Road to permit entering trucks to turn into opposing lanes; 2) reduce the two inbound lanes to one at the intersection. If an additional lane is deemed necessary for parking structure access, it may be possible to widen the driveway to two inbound lanes just past the intersection. b. Provide further details of the ramps and stall configuration for the new parking structure. ,t c. The plan for the new and existing parking structures must be reconciled with the transit stop and layover plan required by Mitigation Measure 4.4-1(a), in order to resolve any conflicts between access points to the structures and where bus lay- overs may be planned. 12. The revised plans shall show no more than 80,000 additional square feet of floor area, for a maximum Shopping Center floor area of 1,412,362 square feet, as specified in Section 18.43.050 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Center Expansion Page 7 of 16 Pages • • 13. When the plans return to the ARB for final design detail approval, improved design development for the following specific items shall be presented and the plans presented to the ARB must be at a larger scale, more conducive to reading the details of the design: a. Any second floor retail bridge connections. The facade of the two-story retail building 6. Of specific concern is the flat facade. Prior to Issuance of a Demolition Permit: Utilities 14. Where necessary, the Applicant 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 Applicant shall contact Underground Service Alert @ (800) 642-2444, at least 48 hours prior to beginning work. 15, Where necessary, the Applicant shall sumii a request to disconnect all utility services and/or meters including a signed affidavit of vacancy, on the form provided by the Build- ing 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. Prior to Submittal of a Building Permit: Planning and Transportation 16. An independent arborist shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The arborist will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation•.of Mitigation Measure 4.7-1. The arborist will be retained, as needed to perform the work related to this project as specified in Mitigation 4.7-1, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the arborist's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Develop- ment Agreement. 17. An independent archeologist/historian shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The archeologist/historian will be under contract to the City to oversee imple- mentation of Mitigation Measures 4.3-1 and 4.3-2. The archeologist/historian will be July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Center Expansion Page 8 of 16 Pages retained, as needed, to oversee implementation of the above mitigations, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtain- ing payment from the applicant for the archeologist/historian's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 18. A contract senior level planner shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the appli- cant, to oversee the implementation of this project. The planner shall be retained, as needed, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the contract planner's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. The appli- cant shah continue to pay for planner services under the Planning Division's Cost Recovery Program until such time as the contract planner is hired. 19. A Contract wilding plan checker and inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary plan check and inspection work asso- ciated with this project. The plan checker and inspector shall be retained, as needed, from the time the applicant submits plans for a building permit until final construction is approved by the Building Inspection Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the plan checker and inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 20. The applicant shall appoint a project manager knowledgeable of building permitting and construction processes for the duration of the project permitting and construction period. The Project Manager shall be responsible for coordination with City staff and for facilitat- ing the applicant's role in receiving building permits and complying with conditions of approval before and during construction. Utilities. 21. An electric utility engineer/inspector and a water/gas/wastewater utility engineer/ inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary plan check and inspection work associated with this project. The engineer/ inspectors shall be retained, as needed, from just prior to the applicant commencing meetings with the Utilities Department to finalize needed improvement plans until final construction is approved by the inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtain- ing payment from the applicant for the engineer/inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City prior to the applicant commencing meetings with the Utilities Department to finalize needed improvement plans. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions - Shopping Center Expansion Page 9 of 16 Pages 22. The applicant shall submit detailed improvement plans and specifications for all utility construction. The plans must show the final alignment and sizing of electric, water, gas, and wastewater services within the development and within the utility easements. All final design details shall be in accordance with the published specifications of the Utili- ties Department, and subject to the approval of the Utilities Engineering Division. 23. The applicant shall submit flow calculations which shall show that the off -site and on -site water and sewer mains are sized adequately to provide the domestic water, fire flows and sewer capacity needed to serve this project in conjunction with any of the other develop- ment projects being considered simultaneously (Stanford West Senior Housing and Stan- ford Shopping Center Expansion) during anticipated peak loads. All field testing required to determine current capacities of existing utilities shall be performed by the applicant's engineer at their expense. Calculations must be stamped by a registered civil engineer. Public Works Engineering 24. An engineer/inspector shall he ret_ined by the C ty, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary project management. plan check and inspection work associated with this project. The eTigiEeerlinspector shall be retained, cis needed, from the submittal, of final project plans for review and approval by the AR:13 until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the engineer/inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement, 25. The applicant shall submit a final grading and drainage plan for review and approval by Public Works Engineering. 26. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit or temporary lease from Public Works Engineering for the proposed construction which will impact the use of sidewalk or street or on property in which the City holds an interest. 27. A grading permit must be obtained from the Building Inspection Division if excavation exceeds 100 cubic yards. 28. The applicant shall be required to file a notice of intent (NOI) for coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board's General Permit for storm water discharges associ- ated with construction and post construction activity. The applicant shall provide an additional copy to Public Works Engineering Division of the NO1 when applying for a grading/building permit. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions - Shopping Center Expansion Page 10 of 16 Pages Prior to issuance of a Building Permit: Planning and Transportation 29. This project is subject to a housing in -lieu fee based on the building square footage shown on the building permit plans. The fee is adjusted annually in the spring and the fee in effect at the time of building permit issuance is the fee required Utilities 30. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading on -site and off -site water and wastewater utilities as necessary to handle peak loads. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with required improvements to on -site and off -site gas mains and services. All improvements to the gas system will be by the City of Palo Alto or the City's contractor. The approved relocation of service, meters. hydrants,, or other facilities will be performed at the applicant's expense. All installation of new utilities and upgrad- ing of existing utilities necessary for the proposed project shall be constructed and paid for as required by City of Palo Alto Utilities Rules and Regulations, 31. All new electric service shall be underground. The applicant shall be responsible for all electric substructure installation required for extending the electric distribution system. The City, upon acceptance of the facilities will furnish and install all cables, switches and other equipment required for the system extension, The expenses incurred due to upgrad- ing the existing Shopping Center 4 kV system to 12 kV will be borne by the City. The applicant will be required to provide easements at the shopping center for all electric utility equipment required for the expansion, and for the 4kV to 12 kV conversion. All connection, on -site and off -site fees and credit if any will be based on Utilities Rules and Regulations. 32. The applicant shall not be allowed to begin work until the utility improvement plans, project specifications, and load sheets have been approved by the Water, Gas and Waste- water Engineering Division and the City's Cross Connection Control Inspector. Utility connection charges must be paid prior to the scheduling of any work performed by the City of Palo Alto or the applicant. 33. A waste water discharge permit to be obtained from Utilities Water -Gas -Wastewater Engineering is required. 34. A separate water meter shall be installed to irrigate the approved landscape plan. This meter shall be designated as an irrigation account and no other water service will be billed on the account. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Center Expansion Page 11 of 16 Pages • S 35. Ultra low flush toilets are required. All tank and valve toilets must be specified as using 1.6 gallons per flush or less. All urinals must be specified as using 1 gallon per flush or less. 36. The applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from Caltrans for all utility work in the El Camino Real right-of-way. The applicant must provide a copy of the permit to Water -Gas -Wastewater Engineering, Public Works Engineering and Transportation. Public Works Engineering 37. The applicant shall obtain a Permit for Construction in a Public Street from Public Works Engineering for construction proposed in the City of right-of-way. 38. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City in a form approved by the City Attorney which guarantees the completion of the required public improvements, and shall post a bond or other acceptable security, in an amount determined by the Director of Public Works, as security for performance of this obligation. Public Works Water Quality Control 39. Food service facilities shall install one or more grease interceptors on sewer lines servicing sinks, dishwashers, and floor drains. The size of such interceptors shall be in conformance with the Uniform Plumbing Code. 40. Discharge of contaminated groundwater to the sanitary sewer shall only be allowed if reuse options have been studied and determined to be impractical by the Director of the City's Water Quality Control Plant. Fire Department 41. A hazardous Materials Management Plan is required to be submitted•Xo the Fire Depart- ment in accordance with State Law. 42. Any groundwater remediation or vapor extraction systems will require Fire Department permits and approvals. 43. The applicant shall submit plans to the Fire Department which show that all buildings, including parking structures, comply with requirements for fire sprinklers, per PAMC, Section 15.04.170(dd), and fire alarms (including graphic annunciator), with Central Station supervision for both. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Center Expansion Page 12 of 16 Pages 44. Building plans shall incorporate the following features: for two-story buildings, elevator access for a minimum gurney size of 84 inches by 24 inches and two emergency person- nel; for two-story buildings, floor control valves, including basement; emergency lighting and illuminated exit signs; panic hardware and portable fire extinguishers; wet hose cabinets in the parking structure. 45. The Fire Department shall deterniine that plans satisfy emergency fire access require- ments, including turning radii throughout the site, per PAMC Title 15, UFC Article 10. 46. A plan indicating all fire service features shall be provided for review and approval by the Fire Marshal, including fire hydrant placement, emergency vehicle access, fire sprinkler, water flow and alarm system calculations. 47. The Fire Department shall determine that plans satisfy emergency fire access require- ments per PAMC Title 15, UFC Article 10. 48. On -site fire hydrants are required wherever any portion of a new structure is greater than 150 feet from an existing hydrant, per the specifications of the Fire Department, PAMC Title 15, UPC Article 10. During Construction: Utilities 49. The applicant shah submit for approval by Utilities Engineering Division the manu- facturer's literature on the materials to be used. 50. The applicant shall provide meter protection for any gas meters that may be subject to vehicle damage. 51. All customer piping shall be inspected and approved by the Building Inspection Division before gas service is instituted. Gas meters will be installed at least three working days after the building piping final inspection. 52. All new traffic signals and proposed modifications to existing traffic signals shall be per City of Palo Alto Traffic Signal Standards and costs shall be borne by the applicant. Approvals for signals located at El Camino Real must be obtained from Caltrans. Appli- cant shall reimburse the City for one -quarter of the annual costs of maintenance of the traffic signals installed at the intersections of Sand Hill and Stock Farm Roads and of Quarry and Palo Roads. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Center Expansion Page 13 of 16 Pages 53, MI new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Build- ing Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing. All new underground service conduits and substructures shall be inspected before backfilling. 55. The applicant's contractor shall obtain a street opening permit from the Department of Public !Works before digging in the street right-of-way. Public Works Engineering 56. To reduce dust levels, it shall be required that exposed earth surfaces be watered as necessary. Spillage resulting from hauling operations along or across any public or private property shall be removed immediately and paid for by the applicant. Dust nuisances originating from the applicant's operations, either inside or outside of the right-of-way controller; at the applicant's expense. 57. The applicant must contact the Public Works Inspector prior to any work performed in the public right-of-way. 53. No storage: of construction materials is permitted in the street or on the sidewalk without prior approval of Public Works Engineering. All construction within City right-of-way, easements or other property under City's juris- diction shall conform to standard specifications of the Public Works and Utility Depart- ments, unless exceptions have been specifically granted through this or other entitlements related to this project. The applicant shall require its contractors to incorporate best management practices (BMP's) for storm water pollution prevention in all construction operations, in conform- ance with the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. The Inspection Services Division shall monitor BMP's with respect to the Applicant's con- struction activities on private property; and the Public Works Department shall monitor BMP's with respect to the applicant's construction activities on public property. It is unlawful to discharge any construction debris (soil, asphalt, saw cut slurry, paint, - chemicals, etc.) or other water materials into gutters or storm drains. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Center Expansion Page 14 of 16 Pages Police Department • 61. All construction activities shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance, Chapter 9.10 PAMC, which requires, among other things, that a sign be posted and that construction times be limited as follows: 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sunday Prior to Final Inspection of Work Performed under the Building Permit: Planning and Transportation 62. The applicant shall submit to the Planning LIvision, along with r pw L:r ��i h a request for i �s ction, written certification signed by a landscape architect that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with all aspects of the approved landscape plans, that the irriga- tion has been installed and tested for timing and function, and that all plants, including street trees, are health)" and have a reasonable chance for survival. Public Works Engineering 63. The Public Works Inspector shall sign off the building permit, for each phase if needed, prior to finalization of this permit. All off -site improvements shall be finished prior to this sign -off. Public Works Water Quality Control 64. The project shall be designed so that no wastewater (including equipment cleaning wash water, vehicle wash water, cooling water, air conditioner condensates and floor cleaning wash water) can be discharged to the storm drain system, the street or gutter. The appli- cant shall present a plan for approval by the Water Quality Control Plant to prevent unlawful discharges by tenants of the project. Utilities/Resource Conservation 65. Unpolluted water, from cooling or vacuum systems as an example, may not be discharged through direct or indirect connection to a city sewer without a city permit. Such water must be reused or recirculated, unless no alternatives exist and is approved by the Utili- ties Department. July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions -- Shopping Center Expansion Page 15 of 16 Pages , After Construction: Planning 66. To the extent allowed under current leases, the Shopping Center shall require employees of its tenants to park in locations which are, in general, least proximate to retail tenants. E:IPROJECTSTALOA LT NC,MR1Ch1R304971CONFORMt31CONDSSC.CC6 July 14, 1997 Attachment 26: Conditions — Shopping Ce ,-er Expansion Page 16 of 16 Pages • S CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SAND HILL ROAD EXTENSION, WIDENING AND RELATED ROAD IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT The conditions of approval consist of: mitigation measures identified in the EIR, as herein modi- fied, rejected or adopted by reference without modification, and additional conditions imposed pursuant to the City's police powers. All of these conditions are included in the Mitigation Mon- itoring Program (MMP). The recitation of the mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring Program is intended to be the same as in the EIR, as adopted or revised by these conditions of approval. In the event a mitigation measure or condition is worded differently in the MMP than in these conditions of approval, including those mitigation measures adopted by reference, these conditions shall control. The Monitoring and Reporting Procedures in the MMP are intended to implement, not to modify, these conditions of approval, and the Procedures shall be interpreted accordingly, in a manner that does not diminish or add to the requirements imposed on the applicant. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPLICATION The following shall return to the ARB for final review and approval prior to the submittal of plans for a building permit: 1. The mitigation measures identified as applicable to either "All Projects" or to the " Sand Hill Road Extension, Widening and Related Road Improvements Project" in the Environ- mental Impact Report (EIR) are incorporated hereby as conditions of project approval, except as noted below. The Project Plans shall be revised to comply:with all required mitigation measures and shall return to the ARB for final review and approval. Please refer to prior staff reports for analysis regarding the rejected and preferred mitigation measures listed below. a. Visual Quality Mitigation 4.2-1(i), the requirement to realign the bike path/ pedestrian path near the San Francisquito Creek crossing shall not be imple- mented. b. Visual Mitigation 4.2-1(j): Road improvements could be narrowed to fewer lanes at the bridge crossing. Center median should be revised to permit additional July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 1 of 22 Pages • planting in this area and in the area east of Santa Cruz Avenue, shall not be required to be implemented. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(c and d) is modified to read as follows: The applicant should pay the full cost of implementing Mitigation Measures 4.4- 7(c and d), which require improvements to the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue and the Junipero Serra Boulevard/Alpine Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersections. These improvements should be constructed during the same time frame of the remainder of the proposed road improvements in the Santa Cruz/Oak Avenue area, and should be included in the final construction phasing plan. (Refer please to Condition 12). d. Visual Quality Mitigation 4.2-9, requires implementation of Mitigation 4.2- 1(a-1). As noted above, the following portions of Mitigation 4.2-1 have been rejected for this project, and therefore, are rejected from this mitigation also: Item (i) and Item W. e. Cultural Resources Mitigation 4.3-1(a): which requires that the project be redesigned to avoid cultural resources including: the Sand Hill Road bridge widening shall be limited to the existing road surface, shall not be required to be implemented. f. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(e) is modified to read as follows: Should the City of Menlo Park within. ten (10) years of the effective date of the Development Agreement desire to make improvements to the Middlefield/Willow intersection, to improve a LOS E or worse condition, the applicant shall be required to contribute its fair (proportionate) share of the cost either to make signal timing improvements sufficient to return the intersection to LOS D or, if it is not possible to achieve a LOS D through signal timing modifications, to con- struct the improvements listed in the EIR, rather than making a no contribution, as the ELR currently states. g. July 14, 1997 Noise Mitigation 4.6-3(d) is modified to read as follows: This mitigation requires the applicant to monitor interior noise levels of properties identified as being potentially impacted by increased noise attributable to the projects. Compensation to these owners to provide acoustical upgrades is required under certain conditions, as described in the Mitigation. This mitigation shall only be required to be implemented for those areas where the contribution from the Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 2 of 22 Pages 2. The E)R also identifies alternative mitigation for the impacts listed below. The preferred mitigation for each of these impacts (as listed in the EJR) is also identified below. These mitigation measures are incorporated hereby as conditions of project approval. a. Impact: Cultural Resources Impact 4.3-1, avoid construction in the Level I archeological sensitive area, as illustrated on Figure 4.3-2 on page 4.3-33. Recommended Mitigation: Mitigation 4.3-1(b) and (c), data recovery program, shall be implemented rather than Mitigation 4.3-1(a), avoidance of all construc- tion in the Level I sensitivity area. Impact: Public Services Impact 4.12-4, increased demand due to cumulative projects on Palo Alto Fire Department. Recommended Mitt gat ion: Option three, City could provide additional resources to the PAFD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. Jmpact: Public Services Impact 4,12-10, increased demand due to cumulative projects on Palo Alto Police Department. Recommend Mitigation: Option three, City could provide additional resources to the PAPD from increased tax revenues generated by cumulative projects, is the preferred choice. 3. The following mitigation measures are subject to the decision making authority of the City of Menlo Park. If the City of Menlo Park decides not to implement any of these mitigation measures, the City of Palo Alto will not require them to be fulfilled in order for the applicant to proceed with the portions of the projects within the City of Palo Alto (mitigation language presented below is paraphrased): Visual Quality Mitigation 4.2-7(b): Construct a raised berm separating the proposed frontage road between Santa Cruz Avenue and Oak Avenue from the realigned Sand Hill Road. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-7(c): As modified by Conditions of Approval 1.e. and 12, this mitigation requires the applicant to pay the full cost of improvements to the Sand Hill Road/Santa Cruz Avenue intersection. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions - Road Improvements Page 4 of 22 Pages projects is greater than 50% of the total impact. These areas are shown on Exhibit A. An acoustic study shall be performed both before and after construction of all projects, at the applicant's cost. The study shall document pre -project interior noise levels for all sensitive receptors identified on Exhibit A immediately following project approval. Post-constraction noise levels shall be established immediately following completion of all approved projects or following December 31, 2000, whichever comes later. For those receptors where the post - construction interior noise levels are higher than pre -construction levels and exceed 45 dBA, the study shall identify measures and costs necessary to: i) return noise levels to pre -construction levels; and ii) achieve a 45 dBA interior noise standards. The project applicant shall be required to pay the cost identified to return the interior noise levels to pre -construction levels or to 45 dBA, whichever is higher. If there is a difference in costs between options i and ii. the property owner may select to make up the difference in cost to implement option ii. It is possible, and likely, that there will not be a difference in cost between option i and ii. h. Visual Quality Mitigation 4.2-6(a) requires design guidelines or control for development of the retail building at El Camino Real and Quarry Road. The alternative, to remove the structure from the site plan, is rejected. Public Services Mitigation 4.12-14. City of Palo Alto could adopt a policy encouraging future developers to contribute their fair share for school impacts over and above payment of the development fee, shall not be required to be implemented. j• Cultural Resources Mitigation 43-5(a), which requires redesign of the entry gate to the Senior Housing project and Ronald McDonald House, shall not be required to be implemented. k. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-1(d), provide on -call passenger shuttle service to and from the Senior Housing, shall not be required to be implemented. Public Services Mitigation 4.12-16. City of Palo Alto could implement public or private financing mechanisms for obtaining additional park lands and/or for rehabilitating existing parks in a way that expands their usefulness, shall not be required to be implemented. July 14, I997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 3 of 22 Pages • • Cultural Resources Mitigations 4.3-1(b), (c), (0, (g), (h), and (k): Establishes methods and protocols for retrieving data from important cultural resources. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-2(b): Requires appropriate pedestrian and bicycle cross- ing devices and markings at all signalized interaction installed or modified as pan of project. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-2(c): Implement appropriate pedestrian and bicycle crossing devices and markings at all signalized intersections modified or reconstructed as part of the project. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-8(a): Provide adequate off-street parking for all con- struction -related vehicles throughout construction period. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-8(b) and (c): Limitations on restriction of auto, pedes- trian and bicycle movements during construction. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-8(€): Use established truck routes for delivery of con- struction materials. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-8(g): Repair any structural damage to public roadways as a result of project construction. Transportation Mitigations 4.4-8(h): Applicant is prohibited from limiting access to public transit without prior approval. Transportation Mitigation 4.4-8(i): A detailed construction impact mitigation plan may be submitted in -lieu of Mitigation Measures 4.4-8(a) through (h). Air Quality Mitigation 4.5-1: Establishes construction protocols to reduce construction related air quality impacts. Noise Mitigations 4.6-1(a), (b) and (c): Establishes construction hours and other protocols to reduce noise impacts during construction. Noise Mitigation 4.6-3(d): Applicant shall pay fair share of noise attenuation modifica- tions to sensitive receptors identified in the EIR. Condition of Approval i.e. modifies mitigations requirements and the definition of fair share for areas identified on Exhibit A of the Conditions. Only one of the areas identified on the Exhibit is located in Menlo Park. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 6 of 22 Pages Biological Resources Mitigations 4.7-1(a), (b), (c) and (e): Specifies native and non- native tree replacement ratios, requires hiring of arborist to oversee final project design and construction and specifies tree protection measures. Biological Resources Mitigation 4.7-1(g): Replace native riparian trees removed for bridge construction. Biological Resources Mitigation 4.7-2(a) and (b): Tree removal timing in regard to nesting raptors. Biological Resources Mitigation 4.7-4(a) and (b): Specifies methods for minimizing removal of riparian vegetation, and for replacement when removal is necessary. Biological Resources Mitigation 4.7-7(a), (b), (c) and (d): Establishes protocols for bridge construction to protect creek wildlife. Geology, Soils and Seismicity Mitigation 4.8-1(a): Requires documented site -specific soil suitability analysis, soil stabilization procedures, and design criteria recommendations. Geology, Soils and Seismicity Mitigation 4.8-1 (b): Requires on -site participation by a registered soils engineer. Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation 4.9-1(b): A SWPPP shall be prepared by an erosion control professional. Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigations 4.9-3(a) and (b): Prepare hydraulic analysis of proposed bridge extension. Utilities, Energy and Infrastructure Mitigation 4.11-3: Incorporate measures to maximize efficient use of water and minimize total water consumption, including for all landscape designs. Public Services and Schools Mitigation 4.12-3(a): Prepare a construction vehicle , management plan. Public Services and Schools Mitigation 4.12-3(b): Prepare an emergency response plan for the construction period. 5. The final landscape plans, lighting and design of all public improvements shall return to the ARB for final review and approval. An artist and interpretative designer shall be July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions - Road Improvements Page 7 of 22 Pages • retained by the applicant to provide input and assistance for the design of the final project details, particularly those related to the environmental, recreational and cultural public assets, and the provision of public art. The applicant shall submit with the final plans a statement outlining the specific plan details which respond to the artist/interpretative designer's input. Approval of any nonstandard paving materials shall be coordinated with Public Works Engineering prior to any approval by the ARB, and is subject to approval of a maintenance agreement which requires applicant to provide all maintenance of such materials. a. Inconsistencies between the site and conceptual landscape plans illustrating revisions made by the applicant during the ARB public review process (dated October 16, 1996), and the elevations and supporting detailed plans provided with the original submittal plans (dated April 1, 1996), shall be corrected. The appli- cant shall also revise its plans to reflect the two-lane configuration of the Sand Hill Road extension, as required by Condition 5(f). Inconsistencies to be elimi- nated and changes to be made include, but are not limited to, the following: a) the intersection of Sand Hill Road at the entry to the Senior Health Care Center and Ronald McDonald House shall be relocated as shown on the revised Senior Hous- ing site plan; b) the Sand Hill Road extension and the Sand Hill Road/El Camino Real intersection shall be shown realigned to be approximately 40 feet closer to the Shopping Center, as shown on the revised Shopping Center site plan; c) all context plans, conceptual utility plans, Key Maps, street sections, illustrative sections and construction phasing plans shall be updated to reflect the revised site plans for the Shopping Center, the Senior Housing and the Apartment Housing. 6. The final landscape plan shall include an indication that all species of trees to be used as street trees have been approved by the City Arborist. A significant percentage of these trees shall be deciduous. 7. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backfiow preventers, electric panel switchboards, and other required utilities, shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials and shall be screened in a manner which respects the building design and setback requirements. These locations shall also be approved by Utilities Engineering. 8. The following modifications and refinements shall be incorporated into the final road improvement plans: a. The applicant and the City shall develop a written agreement to specify the details of an annual monitoring program for evaluation and possible establishment of left turn pockets and protected left turn phasing, to include locations, parameters, and July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 8 of 22 Pages • triggering thresholds for new left turn pockets. The program shall continue for 5 years from the time of project completion. At a minimum, the following intersec- tions shall be included in this monitoring program: • Sand Hill RoadNineyard Lane/Main Street (east and west bound • Sand Hill Road/Apartment Entry Street (east bound) • Quarry Road/Palo Road/Shopping Center Entrance (east and west bound) • Arboretum Road/Shopping Center Entrance (north and south bound) • Arboretum Road/Quarry Road (north and south bound) At these locations, the proposed project shall be designed such that left turn pockets could be installed in the future, while maintaining at least 5 feet of median width at the intersection. At the intersection of Arboretum Road and Quarry Road. the monitoring program shall determine if 8 -phase signal operation is needed. which would be accomplished by construction of a south bound left turn pocket and removal of the shared north bound left turn. The applicant shall be responsible for fundinT, and constructing any change resulting from this monitor- ing program. r7. Prior to submittal of the final road design plans, the following revisions related to left turn pockets and protected left turn phases shall be evaluated to the satisfac- tion of the Chief Transportation Official: a) add left -turn pockets and protected left turn phasing on east and westbound Sand Hill Road at the Vineyard Lane/ Main Street intersection; and, b) eliminate the left -turn pocket and any protected left turn phasing on eastbound Quarry Road at Palo Road. Minimum outside lane widths of D4 feet are required, with 15 feet preferred, along the portion of El Camino Real in the project area, including the northbound on - ramp at Quarry Road and the adjacent outside north bound through lane. d. Left turns from Palo Road to Palm Drive shall only be allowed if additional information submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer, and approved by the Chief Transportation Official, indicate that adequate gaps exist for the projected volume. e. As required by Mitigation Measure 4.4-2(d), a bicycle and pedestrian actuated crossing phase shall be added to the Sand Hill Road/El Camino Real intersection. In addition to the requirements of the mitigation, the applicant shall provide the same configuration for the northbound El Camino Real right turn lane as currently existing, unless the need for a longer lane is demonstrated by information pro - July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 9 of 22 Pages • vided by the applicant's traffic engineer, to the satisfaction of the Chief Transpor- tation Official. f. The Sand Hill Road extension shall be redesigned to be a divided two-lane road with landscaped median and bicycle lanes from Arboretum Road to El Camino Real et a width of 72 feet; provided, that its approach to El Camino Real, for a distance as shall be approved by the Chief Transportation Official, it shall be designed to include two left -turn lanes and one right -turn lane, for a right-of-way width of 83 feet (see Exhibit 13). Mitigation Measures 4.2-5(a) and 4.7-4(c), which require the alignment of the extension of Sand Hill Road as it approaches El Camino Real to be realigned to more closely coincide with the bounds of the existing shopping center parking lot shall be implemented, as generally shown in Figure 4.2-34 on page 4.2-79 of the Draft EIR (requires road to be moved approximately 38 to 40 feet south). Addi- tional landscaping shall be provided as specified in Mitigation 4. 2-5i;h), Mitigation Measure 4.2-6(b). which requires the re -configuration of the Quarry Road/ El Carnino Real intersection shall be implemented. as generally shown in Figure 4.2-37 on page 4.2-87 of the Draft FIR. The redesign shall specifically include the following changes: Remove one El Camino Real northbound through lane on each side of Quarry Road; • Remove the southbound El C. Real right turn lane; Move the northbound and southbound bus stops on El Camino Real closer to the north edge of Quarry Road; and, Change the traffic assignment of the middle lane of the Quarry Road approach to a shared leftiright. The landscape plan shall be revised to include landscaping improvements and cleanup in the City's gateway area between San Francisquito Creek and the new Sand Hill Road extension to El Camino Real. The intent of the landscaping should be to be improve the appearance of a natural wooded gateway to the City as an extension of the riparian vegetation associated with San Francisquito Creek. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 10 of 22 Pages • The plans shall include any necessary circulation and parking improvements at the interface of the Stanford Barn parking lot and Vineyard Lane. to the satisfaction of the Chief Transportation Official. k. The first southbound access point (south of the Vineyard/Sand Hill intersection) into the Nordstrom parking lot from Vineyard Lane shalt be moved farther south, in order to prevent cars turning into the lot from having to wait for the northbound queue to clear (from Vineyard to Sand Hill Road), thus causing queuing north back to and onto Sand Hill Road. The bicycle lanes along the entire length of Sand Hill Road shall be a minimum of 7 feet wide. This width may include up to 2 feet of concrete gutter or V -drain. Where a curb and gutter or V -drain is provided, the asphalt section of the bicycle lane shall be no less than 5 feet wide. Where no formal edge treatment may be approved (please refer to Condition 28 for related information regarding the drainage plan for Sand Hill Road), the clear width of the asphalt in the bicycle lane shall be 7 feet. m. The portion of the "Searsville" bike/pedestrian path which is designated "pedes-. trian only" (the left fork where the path makes a Y near Sand Hill Road) and which leads to steps down to Sand Hill Road near the San Francisquito Creek bridge crossing shall be removed from the project plans. All bicycle and pedes- trian travel on the "Searsville" path shall be directed to the signalized intersection at Sand Hill Road and the Oak Creek Apartments. This change is generally illustrated in the attached Exhibit C. n. At intersections that have right -turn -only lanes, bike lanes must be placed to the left of that lane. o. The crosswalk on Vineyard Lane between Nordstrom and the Welch Road properties shall be realigned to form a direct pedestrian connection from the Medical Center area to the Shopping Center. Relocation of the crosswalk will prevent pedestrians from crossing where there is no crosswalk in order to maintain the most direct walking route between the shopping and medical centers. P. In the area between the Ronald McDonald House signalized intersection and EI Camino Real (adjacent to the extension of Sand Hill Road), the 10 -foot wide unpaved recreational trail shall be moved as close to the creek as possible, but in conformance with the requirements of Mitigation Measure 4.7-9(a), and be narrowed to a 3-5 foot wide unpaved walking only trail, The design of the adjacent paved bicycle/pedestrian path may incorporate up to a maximum of three July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 11 of 22 Pages 1 moderate meanders in its alignment, in order to improve aesthetics and avoid trees. This adjacent path shall be constructed to Class I standards, with a paved width of ten feet. q. The applicant shall construct a small "bicycle jughandle" at the "Entry" Street/ Sand Hill Road intersection so that eastbound bicyclists can exit the eastbound bicycle lane approximately 100 feet before the intersection, and approach the intersection in the northbound direction as a fourth kg. Design speed shall be 15 mph. The jughandle shall be provided with a bicycle detector loop to provide a green signal indication across Sand Hill Road. Subject to the approval of the ground lessee of the Oak Creek property, ped- estrian/bicycle pathway shall be provided between the Oak Creek Apartments and proposed Stanford West Apartment West Apartment project, which shall be designed to the satisfaction the Chief Transportation Official and the ARB, s, The landscape plan for the area adjacent to San Francisquito Creek shall include the planting of several significant sized trees, to the satisfaction of the ARB, to help mitigate the removal of the existing monumental trees for construction of the bridge and road widening. 9. As required by Mitigation Measures 4.4-!(a and c), the applicant shall prepare a final Transit and Marguerite Plan for transit service within the project area. In addition to the specifications of these mitigations. the Transit Plan shall identify the location and dimensions of bus stops, bus layover areas, the number of individual buses and the number of each bus line to be accommodated at each location. The Transit Plan shall ensure that facilities for all existing transit services are provided within the project area in convenient and accessible locations for transit riders and meet ADA requirements. 10. Installation and maintenance of bus shelters at the main high use bus stops on Quarry, Arboretum and Sand Hill Roads adjacent to the Shopping Center, as'recomrnended by the Chief Transportation Official in coordination with the Santa Clara County Transportation Authority and SamTrans, shall be provided. 11. Should either of the two housing projects proposed by Stanford (Stanford West Senior Housing and Stanford West Apartment Housing) not be approved by the City, then the applicant shall be required to submit revised plans indicating how intersection configur- ations and locations along Sand Hill Road would be redesigned to compensate for the lack of new or revised development on those sites. The revised plan shall be approved by the Palo Alto City Council. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 12 of 22 Pages • • Prior to Issuance of a Demolition Permit: Planning and Transportation 12. a. Within 5 days of delivering to the City of Palo Alto improvement plans for the Sand Hill Road improvements as required by Condition 8, the applicant shall deliver to the City of Menlo Park and the County of San Mateo a full set of the plans and drawings prepared to show the proposed improvements of Sand Hill Road and related physical mitigations to intersections in the recipient's jurisdic- tion, together with its written offer, in a form acceptable to the Palo Alto City Attorney to fund the construction of those improvements in accordance with this condition.' The referenced intersections are Santa Cruz/Sand Hill and Junipero Serra/Alpine/Santa Cruz. The proposed improvements to Sand Hill Road and the intersections are those shown in the proposed plans as modified and approved as 96-ARB-92. (See Roadway Improvement Condition 1(c).) b. Applicant shall pay its fair share (as set forth in the EIR) of the costs of the road and intersection improvements constricted within the City of Menlo Park and the County of San Mateo as follows. Applicant shall fund the total cost of the improvements in the City of Menlo Park if that City offers to enter into an agree- ment to reimburse applicant for the portion of the costs, including an amount attributable to interest, in excess of the applicant's fair share. Applicant shall fund the total cost of the improvements in San Mateo County if the County offers to enter into such a reimbursement agreement. if there is no reimbursement agree- ment, applicant shall pay its fair share of the total cost. The total cost of such improvements shall not exceed the amount of an engineer's estimate based on the plans and drawing described in paragraph (a). The engineer's estimate shall be done to the satisfaction and approval of the City of Palo Alto Director of Public Works and shall include an annual inflation adjustment. c, This condition shall apply until the end of the tenth full year€ollowing final approval of 96-ARB92. The specific process by which the proposed road improvements would be formally considered by the City of Menlo Park is unclear. Nonetheless, the intent of this condition is to place the burden on the applicant to do whatever is necessary (a) to communicate that it is required by this condition to fund those improvements and to offer to do so, and (b) to facilitate that funding in a timely and prompt manner whenever that City decides to proceed with construction. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 13 of 22 Pages • Utilities 13. All utility lines located in the current Pasteur Drive right-of-way shall be relocated to the new proposed Pasteur Drive alignment, including electric, water, wastewater and gas lines, but not including the storm drain line. This relocation shall take place simultaneous with, or prior to, the installation of the new Pasteur Drive surface improvements. 14. Where necessary, the Applicant 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 Applicant shall contact Underground Service Alert @ (800) 642-2444, at least 48 hours prior to beginning work. 15. Where necessary, the Applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all utility services and/or meters on the form provided by the Inspection Services 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. Prior to Submittal of Grading, Encroachment or Street Opening Permit: Planning and Transportation 16. An independent arborist shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The arborist will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-1. The arborist will be retained, as needed to perform the work related to this project as specified in Mitigation 4.7-1, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the arborist's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Develop- ment Agreement. 17. An independent creek restoration specialist shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The creek restoration specialist will be under contract to the City to oversee implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.7-4(a), 4.7-4(b), 4,7 -7(a -e) and 4.7-9(a). The creek restoration specialist will be retained, as needed to oversee implementation of the above mitigations, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the creek restor- ation specialist's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Develop- ment Agreement. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 14 of 22 Pages 1$. An independent archeologist/historian shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The archeologist/historian will be under contract to the City to oversee imple- mentation of Mitigation Measures 4.3-1 and 4.3-2. The archeologist/historian will be retained, as needed to oversee implementation of the above mitigations, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtain- ing payment from the applicant for the archeologist/historian's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 19. A contract senior level planner shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the appli- cant, to oversee the implementation of this project, including processing of the Final Map. The planner shall be retained, as needed, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the contract planner's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. The applicant shall continue to pay for the planner's services under the Planning Division's Cost Recovery Program until such time as the contract planner is hired. 20. A contract building plan checker and inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary plan check and inspection work associated with this project. The plan checker and inspector shall be retained, as needed, from the time the applicant submits plans for a building permit until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the plan checker and inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 21. The applicant shall appoint a project manager knowledgeable of building permitting and construction processes for the duration of the project permitting and construction period. The Project Manager shall be responsible for coordination with City.staff and for facili- tating the applicant's role in receiving building permits and complying with conditions of approval before and during construction. 22. The applicant shall prepare all necessary materials, including plans and documents, that are required for the City to seek and obtain Caltrans approval and necessary permits for roadway and intersection layouts and construction on and along El Camino Real, includ- ing its intersections with Quarry Road, Sand Hill Road, Alma Street, University Avenue/ Palm Drive, and Stanford Shopping Center access roads. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 15 of 22 Pages Utilities. 23. An electric utility engineer/inspector and a water/gas/wastewater utility engineer/ inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all neces ary plan check and inspection work associated with this project, including processing of the Final Map. The engineer/inspectors shall be retained, as needed, from just prior to the applicant commencing meetings with the Utilities Department to finalize needed improvement plans until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the engineer/ inspector's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 24. The applicant shall submit detailed improvement plans and specifications for all utility construction. The plans must show the final alignment and sizing of electric, water, gas, and wastewater services within the utility easements. All final design details shall be subject to the approval of the Utilities Engineering Division. '15, The applicant shall submit flow calculations which shall show that the off -site and on -site water and sewer mains are sized adequately to provide the domestic water, fire flows and sewer capacity needed to serve this project in conjunction with any of the other develop- ment projects being considered simultaneously (Stanford West Senior Housing and Stanford Shopping Center Expansion) during anticipated peak loads. All field testing required to determine current capacities of existing utilities shall be performed by the applicant's engineer at theii expense. Calculations must be stamped by a registered civil engineer. Public Works Engineering 26. An independent hydrologist with expertise in biotechnical remediation shall be retained by the City at the expense of the applicant. The hydrologist will be under contract to the City to oversee the implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.9-3(a)Ind (b). The hydrol- ogist will be retained, as needed, to oversee implementation of the above mitigations, from the time the applicant submits final project plans for review and approval by the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mech- anism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the hydrologist's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 27. An engineer/inspector shall be retained by the City, at the expense of the applicant, to perform all necessary project management, plan check and inspection work associated with this project, including processing of the Final Map. The engineer/inspector shall be retained, as needed, from the submittal of final project plans for review and approval by July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions -- Road Improvements Page 16 of 22 Pages the ARB until final construction is approved by the Inspection Services Division. The mechanism for obtaining payment from the applicant for the engineer/ inspector's specialist's services shall be agreed to by the applicant and the City in a Development Agreement. 28. The applicant shall submit a final grading and drainage plan for review and approval by Public Works Engineering. The grading and drainage plan for the Sand Hill Road Improvements shall indicate drainage improvements of curb and gutter or concrete V - drain in locations subject to the final approval of the Public Works Director. Earthen swales may be provided in some locations in -lieu of concrete V -drains, subject to approval of the Public Works Director and subject to approval of a maintenance agree- ment specifying that Stanford will be responsible for maintenance of the earthen swales. The shoulder area of Sand Hill Road shall incorporate the requirement for a bike lane, to be 5 feet in width when adjacent to curb and gutter or V -drain and 7 feet in width when adjacent to pavement edge (should any earthen swales be approved). 29. The applicant shall obtain an cncroachmem permit Engineering for the proposed construction which w or on property in which the City holds an interest. r to ary lease from Public Works act. the use of sidewalk or street A grading permit must be obtained from the Building Inspection Division if excavation exceeds 100 cubic yards. 31, The applicant shall be required to tile a notice of intent (NOD for coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board's General Permit for storm water discharges associated with construction and post construction activity. The applicant shall provide an additional copy to Public Works Engineering Division for the NOI when applying for a grading/building permit. Prior to Issuance of Grading, Encroachment and Street Opening Permits: Planning and Transportation 32. A final subdivision map, covering the easements and dedications related to Sand Hill Road, Pasteur Drive, Vineyard Lane and Arboretum Road, shall be submitted to the City of Palo Alto and recorded at the Office of the County Recorder prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. See also the Conditions of Approval for the Tentative Subdivision Map. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 17 of 22 Pages • 33. The public utilities and storm drain easements and dedications related to Quarry Road and Palo Road shall be provided via a separate map or other instrument in recordable form acceptable to the City Attorney and the City's Real Property Manager. Utilities 34. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading on -site and off -site water and wastewater utilities as necessary to handle peak loads. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with required improvements to on -site and off -site gas mains and services. All improvements to the gas system will be by the City of Palo Alto or the City's contractor. The approved relocation of service, meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the applicant's expense. All installation of new utilities and upgrad- ing of existing utilities necessary for the proposed project shall be constructed and paid for as required by City of Palo Alto Utilities Rules and Regulations. 35. All new electric service shall b . underground. The applicant shall t o responsible for all electric substructure installation required for extending the electric distribution system. The City, upon acceptance of the facilities will furnish and install all cables, switches and other equipment required for the system extension. All connection, on -site and off -site fees and credit if any will be based on Utilities Rules and Regulations. 36. The final design of the required relocation of the overhead electric utility line along Quarry Road shall be approved by Electric Utilities Engineering Division, Planning Division and Public Works Engineering Division. 37. The applicant shall submit for review and approval by Utilities Engineering a plan demonstrating that adequate utility vehicle access to, and clearance around, the utility substation on Quarry Road has been provided. 38. The applicant shall not be allowed to begin work until the utility improvement plans, project specifications, and load sheets have been approved by the Water, Gas and Wastewater Engineering Division and the City's Cross Connection Control Inspector. Utility connection charges must be paid prior to the scheduling of any work performed by the City of Palo Alto or the applicant. 39. The applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from CALTRANS for all utility work in the El Camino Real right-of-way and an Encroachment Permit from Santa Clara County Department of Transportation for all utility work in any County Road right-of- way. The applicant must provide a copy of the permit to the Water -Gas -Wastewater Engineering, Public Works Engineering and Transportation. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 18 of 22 Pages 40. A waste water discharge permit to be obtained from Utilities Water, Gas, Wastewater Engineering is required. 4L A separate water meter shall be installed to irrigate the approved landscape plan. This meter shall be designated as an irrigation account and no other water service will be billed on the account. Public Works Engineering 42. The applicant shall obtain a Permit for Construction in a Public Street from Public Works Engineering for construction proposed in the City of right-of-way. 43. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City in a form approved by the City Attorney which guarantees the completion of the required public improvements, includ- ing public utilities as well as any areas subject to public access requirements, and shall post a bond or other form of financial security, acceptable to the City Attorney, in an amount determined by the Director of Public Works, as security for performance of this obligation. During Construction: Utilities 44. The applicant shall submit for approval by Utilities Engineering Division the manu- facturer's literature on the materials to be used. 45. The applicant shall provide meter protection for any gas meters that may be subject to vehicle damage. 46. All customer piping shall be inspected and approved by the Building Inspection Division before gas service is instituted. Gas meters will be installed three working days after the building piping final inspection. 47. All new traffic signals and proposed modifications to existing traffic signals, except those located on El Camino Real, shall be per City of Palo Alto Traffic Signal Standards and costs shall be borne by the applicant. Signals located on El Camino Real shall be per Caltrans standards. 48. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Build- ing Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 19 of 22 Pages • • 49. All new underground service conduits and substructures shall be inspected before backfilling. 50. The applicant's contractor shall obtain a street opening permit from the Department of Public Works before digging in the street right-of-way, Public Works Engineering 51. Exposed earth surfaces shall be watered as necessary to reduce dust levels. Spillage resulting from hauling operations along or across any public or private property shall be removed immediately at the expense of the applicant. Dust nuisances originating from the applicant's contractors operations, either inside or outside of the right-of-way shall be controlled at the applicants expense. 52. The applicant must contact the Public Works Inspector prior to any work performed in the public right-of-way. 53. No storage of construction materials is permitted in the street or on the sidewalk without prior approval of Public Works Engineering. 54. All construction within City right-of-way, easements or other property under City's jurisdiction shall conform to standard specifications of the Public Works and Utility Departments, unless exceptions have been specifically granted through this or other entitlements related to this project. 55. The applicant shall require its contractors to incorporate best management practices (BMP's) for storm water pollution prevention in all construction operations, in conform- ance with the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. The Inspection Services Division shall monitor BMP's with respect to the Applicant's con- struction activities on private property; and the Public Works Department shall monitor BMP's with respect to the applicant's construction activities on public property. It is unlawful to discharge any construction debris (soil, asphalt, saw cut slurry, paint, chem- icals, etc.) or other water materials into gutters or storm drains. Police Department 56. All construction activities shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance, Chapter 9.10 PAMC, which requires, among other things, that a sign be posted and that construction times be limited as follows: July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 20 of 22 Pages • 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Sunday Prior to Final inspection of Work Performed under the Permits: Planning and Transportation 57. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Division, along with a request for inspection, written certification signed by a landscape architect that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with all aspects of the approved landscape plans, that the irriga- tion has been installed and tested for timing and function, and that all plants, including street trees, are healthy and have a reasonable chance for survival. Public Works Engineering 58. The Public Works Inspector shall sign off the building per necessary, prior to finalization of this permit. Following Project Completion Planning and Transportation fo ach phase if 59. The applicant shall retain and fund an independent consultant to complete an evaluation study of the pedestrian and bicycle components of the entire Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor project area. The purpose of the study is to do a post completion evaluation of how well the pedestrian and bicycle components of the project are serving the needs of the users and general public, and to identify improvements or enhancements that could be considered for future implementation. The scope of work should include usage patterns and counts, operational features and characteristics, an assessment of what is working well and what is not, development of recommended actions for improvement or enhance- ment for future consideration. The scope of work for the study and the consultant selected to perform the study shall he reviewed and approved by the Chief Transportation Official. The study is to be conducted within two to three years of the completion of most of the components of the project. July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions - Road Improvements Page 21 of 22 Pages The applicant shall provide assistance to the City as needed to accomplish all annexation proceedings required to implement the proposed road improvements. Such assistance shall include, but not be limited to preparation of all required map exhibits, provision of information related to the application required of LAFCO and attendance at any LAFCO hearings. Attachments: Exhibit A: Illustration of Noise Impact Areas to be Mitigated Exhibit B: Road map Exhibit C: Illustration of Portion of "Se e" Path to be Removed £:WROJECTS`,FALOALTOECN1R'C MR3`1i9?,CC?\'FORN1MCG\DS!1R.CC4 July 14, 1997 Attachment 30: Conditions — Road Improvements Page 22 of 22 Pages CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP COVERING THE STANFORD WEST APARTMENT HOUSING, THE STANFORD WEST SENIOR HOUSING AND THE SAND HILL ROAD EXTENSION, WIDENING AND RELATED ROADWAY L iPROVEMENTS PROJECTS (94 -SUB -6) The conditions of approval consist of: mitigation measures identified in the EIR, as herein modified, rejected or adopted by reference without modification, and additional conditions imposed pursuant to the City's police powers. All of these conditions are included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP). The recitation of the mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring Program is intended to be the same as in the EAR, as adopted or revised by these conditions of approval. In the event a mitigation measure or condition n is worded differently in the MMP than in these conditions of approval, including those mitigation measures adopted by reference, these conditions shall control. The Monitoring and Reporting Procedures in the MMP are intended to implement, not to modify, these conditions of approval, and. the Procedures shall be interpreted accordingly, in a manner that does not diminish or add to the requirements imposed on the applicant. Prior to Approval of Final Map: I. All utility lines located in the current Pasteur Drive right-of-way shall be relocated to the new proposed Pasteur Drive alignment, including electric, water and gas lines, but not including the storm drain line. This relocation shall take place simultaneous with, or prior to, the installation of the new Pasteur Drive surface improvements, 2. A Public Access Easement for the trail located along the creek on the Apartment Housing parcels shall be shown on the final map. 3. The open space area between the creek and the apartment buildings on the apartment site shall be shown on the final map and shall be protected from future development in a manner acceptable to the City Attorney, and such protection shall be recorded on the final map. Uses allowed in the open space area shall generally be restricted to recreational trails/bicycle paths as shown on the tentative map, view points, interpretive signs and displays, and archaeologic resources protection and study. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Tentative Map Page 1 of 3 Pages air • C 4. The applicant shall provide an access and maintenance easement to the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and a general public access easement, along San Francisquito Creek on the proposed senior housing parcel. The easement shall consist of a strip a minimum of 22 feet wide coincident with the rear access road. The easement shall be shown on the face of the final map to the satisfaction of the Water District and the City Public Works Department. 5. Any public utility easements necessary for the provision of gas and electric mains shall be placed on the final map to the satisfaction of the Utilities Department. 6. The maps shall be revised to show the existing public right-of-way, which shall not be vacated along the Sand Hill Road frontage along the length of the Oak. Creek Apartments. 7 The map shall be revised to show a narrower right-of-way of, approximately 72 feet, for the Sand Hill Road extension between Arboretum Road and El Camino Real, to accommodate two travel lanes with landscaped median; except at the approach to and, intersection of El Camino Real, the road shall be widened to approximately 83 feet. include a right -turn lane and two left -turn lanes. 8. The applicant's appointed Project Manager shall arrange a meeting with Public Works Engineering, Utilities Engineering, Planning, Fire, and Transportation Departments after approval of this map and prior to submitting the improvement plans. The purpose of the meeting is to review all conditions of approval and to discuss the standards for design of all off -site improvements including the street and all required utilities. These improvement plans must be completed and approved by the City prior to submittal of a parcel or final map. 9. All construction within City right-of-way, easements or other property under City's jurisdiction shall conform to standard specifications of the Public Works and Utility Departments, unless exceptions have been specifically granted through this or other entitlement related to this project. 10. The subdivider shall dedicate the proposed rights -of -way and all necessary public utility, storm drain, and public access easements as shown on the approved tentative subdivision map, or as modified by conditions of approval or the final design detail plans to be approved by the Architectural Review Board. These dedications shall be shown on the face of the final map. There shall be no public access easement on Palo Road and Stock Farm Road, which are private streets not within the city limits. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Tentative Map Page 2 of 3 Pages I 11. The subdivider shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the City of Palo Alto. The agreement shall be recorded with the approved final map at the Office of the Santa Clara County Recorder and shall include the following agreements: a? The subdivider shall submit improvement plans for the design of the improve- ments proposed for all public rights -of -way and all improvements within any area subject to public access requirements and all public utilities. These improvements shall be installed by the subdivider, at the subdivider's expense and shall be secured by a bond or other form of financial security acceptable to the City Attorney. All public improvements shall be constructed by a licensed contractor and shall conform to the City's standard specifications, except as otherwise modified by the project conditions of approval. 12. A maintenance agreement, in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, shall be executed between the City and subdivider, establishing continual maintenance by the applicant of the following improvements: • All publicly accessible improvements located on private property within any area subject to a public access requirement, such as sidewalks and landscaping; All landscaping within public rights of way (including median strips) for Sand Hill Road, El Camino Real, Quarry Road and Arboretum Road and installed pur- suant to project plans and conditions of approval of the Sand Hill Road projects; • Special paving located on public streets, such as Sand Hill Road, or within any Utility Access Easement; Any other improvements as may be agreed to by the City of Palo Alto and Stanford University. • City shall reimburse Stanford an amount equal to the cost that would be incurred by the City to maintain the median landscaping along Sand Hill Road from the intersection with Arboretum to the City limits at San Francisquito Creek. Requirements for a public access easement or for a "PAE" may be satisfied by dedication of an easement or its equivalent by dedication on the map or by separate instrument, at the discretion and to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. July 14, 1997 Conditions - Tentative Map Page 3 of 3 Pages EXHIBIT "G" • Ci of PaloAlto October 15, 1996 Mr. Curtis Feeny Executive Vice President Real Estate Stanford Management Company 2770 Sand Hill Road inspection Services PLannir^ Menlo Park, CA 94025 Tra.-es-pc ratio l Department ofPia►tnutgand Community Environment Subject: Below Market Rate (BMR) Agreement for Stanford West Apartments, Senior Condominium Project and Assisted Living Facility Dear Curtis: This letter summarizes the agreement reached between you and Planning Division staff regarding satisfaction of the provisions of the City of Palo Alto Below Market Rate (BMR) Program for the proposed Stanford housing projects on Sand Hill Road in Palo Alto. The requirements for a BMR component in a residential project are contained in Program 13 of the City of Palo Alto Housing Element. Program 13 is further supplemented for rental housing developments by the "Amended Below Market Rate Rental (BMR) Guidelines", as adopted by the City Council ©n September 8, 1986 (copy attached). The A:recipent and The Project: This Letter of AgreemenC'(the "Agreement") relates to the proposed 628 -unit Stanford West Apartment Project ("the Apartments"), the 388 - unit "for sale" Stanford West Senior Condominium ("Senior Condominiums") Project and the 62 -unit Assisted Living Facility rental housing project. The three components are combined into one Agreement as only one subdivision mapapplication will be filed, and because all of the units provided in satisfaction of the BMR program for all three components will be located in the Apartments. For purposes of this Agreement, the three components collectively are defined as "the Project." The rioject is located on the north and west sides of Sand Hill Road on Stanford -owned land near the Stanford Shopping Center and the Stanford Medical Center. The proposed 46 -room Skilled Nursing Facility qualifies as a convalescent facility under the City's Zoning Ordinance, and as such, is a medical facility exempted from 250 HamiltonAvenue P.O. Box 1C250 Palo Alto,CA91300 415.329.2401 415.329.2240Fax • Mr. Curtis Feeny October 15, 1996 Page 2 the below market program requirement. as well as from the commercial housing mitigation fees levied on commercial -industrial projects under Chapter 16.47 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC). It should be noted that the proposed commercial expansion of the Stanford Shopping Center is not included in this Agreement, although that project must pay commercial housing mitigation fees in accordance with PAMC Chapter 16.47. Subdivision Map Required: You intend to obtain City Council approval of a final subdivision map for the Project. The terms of this Agreement will be incorporated into the Subdivision: Agreement, which must be completed and signed prior to the final subdivision map being considered by the City Council, This Agreement is based on statements in the project description submitted to the City by Stanford that the 628 -unit apartment component will be developed as a rental housing development and will aol . have an underlying condominium map. Duration of Agreement: This Agreement shall be in effect for 59 years from the date the first shell building permit is issued for any portion of the Project. The date of the first shell building permit is referred to in this Agreement as the "Start Date," Number. Type and Distribution of BMR Units: Under this Agreement, all BMR units provided in satisfaction of the BMR program requirements for the Project will be located within the Apartments. The proportionate number of each unit type rented at BMR rates shall be comparable to the ratio of studio, 1 -bedroom, 2 -bedroom. and 3 - bedroom units in the Apartments, except that no 2 -bedroom townhouse units are required to be rented as BMR units. Based on the unit mix in the Apartments proposed by Stanford, the distribution of BMR units among the unit types shall conform to the following percentages: Per Cent of Total Required BMR Units Unit Type 9.2% Studio units 25.O% 1 -bedroom units 55.9% 2 -bedroom units 9.9% 3 -bedroom townhome units A11996tiLTBMRSW.FtN Page 2 of 10 • • Mr. Curtis Feeny October 15, 1996 Page 3 Should the mix of units in the Apartments be modified during the approval and construction process, the percentage mix of BMR units shall be recalculated as agreed to by Stanford Management Company and the City. Phase -in of Required Number of BMR U: The required number of BMR units is to be phased in beginning with the Start Date. In addition to the number of units required to satisfy the BMR requirement for the Apartments, additional units shall be rented at BMR rents to eligible households to satisfy the BMR requirements of the Senior Condominiums and the Assisted Living Facility. The percentage of units for each component of the Project shall be phased as follows: The Apartments: During the ten calendar years from the Start Date to the 10th anniversary of the Start Date, 10 percent (10%) of all units available for rent shall be rented at BMR rents, as defined herein, to eligible households. For the five calendar years from the 10th anniversary of the Start Date to the 15th anniversary of the Start Date, twelve and a half percent (12.5%) of all units available for rent shall be rented at BMR rents to eligible households. From the 15th anniversary of the Start Date through the remainder of the 59 year regulatory period, fifteen percent (15%) of all units shall be rented at BMR rents to eligible households. For example, assuming the total number of Apai tziient units is 628, the maximum required BMR units after the 15th anniversary of the Start Date is 94 units to satisfy the BMR requirement for only the Aparumen s. Senior Condominiums: Additional BMR rental units at the Apartments shall be made available to eligible households on the same phase -in schedule as given. above for the Apartments; that is, during the ten calendar years from the Start Date to the 10th anniversary of the Start Date, one BMR unit shall be made available to eligible households for every tenth Senior Condominium sold. For example, assuming the total number of Senior Condominium units is 388, the maximum required additional BMR units in the Apartments to satisfy the BMR requirements for the Senior Condominiums, will be 58 after the 15th anniversary of the Start Date. A:119961LTBMRSW.FIN Page 3 of 10 Mr. Curtis •Feeny October 15, 1996 Page 4 Assisted Living Facility: Upon issuance of an occupancy permit for any portion of the Assisted Living Facility, 3 additional units at the Apartments shall be rented at BMR rents to eligible households in effect as of the date of issuance of the occupancy permit. On the 10th anniversary of the Start Date, one additional unit shall be rented to eligible households in the Apartments at BMR rents for a total of 4 additional rental BMR units. No additional requirement is included. in our discussions, we determined and agreed that the BMR requirement appropriate for the Assisted Living Facility should account for the facts that the residential living units are much smaller than in other comparable rental units, that more extensive common spaces and facilities will be included than are generally associated with rental housing and additional services are provided not associated with typical BMR housing. The BMR requirement was thus based on a calculation of the square footage of residential space at 40+J square feet per unit multiplied by the total of 62 units times the 15% BMR requirement or a total of 3.720 square feet. 3,720 square feet is the combined approximate area of four average units in the Apartments. Physical Location: The BMR units shall be distributed throughout the Apartments and shall be comparable in all aspects to all other units including, but not limited to construction quality, floor area, appearance, finish, amenities and access to facilities. To the extent feasible, a proportionate share of the total number of required BMR units shall be located in each building and on each floor level of the buildings in the Apartments. BMR Rents.: BMR Rents are total monthly charges for rental of BMR units which comply with this Agreement. Base BMR Rents: Base rents are established as those equal to the HUD Section 8, Or successor program, Fair Market Rents (FMRs) for that unit type in effect in February 1996. Those are: Studio Units = $641 1 -bedroom units = $731 2 -bedroom units = $903 3 -bedroom townhome units = $1,238 A:'s19961LTBMRSW.FIN Page 4 of 10 Mr. Curtis .Peery October 15, 1996 Page 5 Annual Rent Adjustments: As of the Start Date, the Base BMR Rents shall be adjusted by one-third of the increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, Rent Residential, San Francisco -Oakland area (CPI) from the base CPI for February 1996 of 171.7, to the latest index available on the Start Date. Thereafter, on each anniversary of the Start Date, the BMR Rents for each unit type, may be adjusted by one-third of the increase in CPI using the latest index available prior to the anniversary of the Start Date. The calculation of the rent adjustment is made only once a year and is to be effective as of the Start Date anniversary. The resulting BMR rents are the maximum applicable as leases expire or new tenants move -in to the BMR units over the 12 month period following the Start Date anniversary. No cap is placed on the amount of the annual adjustment and no negative adjustments are required. Stanford shall submit new proposed rents to City for approval at least 90 days prior to the effective date. If the City does not approve or disapprove proposed rents within 30 days of receipt by City, the proposed rents shall be considered approved, This will allow for • 60 day minimum notification to tenants of rent changes. Rents less than the maximum allowed by this Agreement may be charged. Rents for BMR tenants may fit be increased more than once in any 12 month period regardless of whether the tenant is renting under a month -to -month rental agreement or an annual lease. All applicable State and local laws and ordinances affecting the operation of rental housing apply to the operation of the BMR units at the Project. Annual Lease Required: Notwithstanding any language to the contrary in Section 9.68.020(d) of the PAMC, the provisions of PAMC Chapter 9.68, including the requirement to offer tenants a one year lease, shall apply to all the units in the. Apartments, including the BMR units. Eligible fig zs ..oldS.: To be eligible for rental of a BMR unit, a household must have a certified gross household income below 80 per cent of the then current HUD median income for Santa Clara County, adjusted for family size. Priority for Occupancy: Current City of Palo Alto Council adopted BMR Guidelines provide an occupancy preference for persons who live or work within the City limits of Palo Alto when they apply for BMR occupancy. We have agreed to a modification of this preference for the purposes of this Agreement because of the unique contribution of employer -developed housing and the common objective of encouraging occupancy in the Apartments by persons working on Stanford lands in order to reduce auto trips generated by the Project. Priorities for initial occupancy, in order of preference, for all BMR units will be: A:1189MT8MRSW. F IN Page 5 of 10 Mr. Curtis .Feeny October 15, 1996 Page 6 lstprjority: Eligible households of which at least one adult member is employed by Stanford University for a minimum of 30 hours per week at or above minimum wage. 2nd. Priority: Eligible households of which at least one adult member is employed for a minimum of 30 hours per week at or above minimum wage on lands owned by Stanford, including but not limited to Stanford Medical Center, Children's Hospital, Stanford Shopping Center, Stanford Linear Accelerator and the Stanford Research Park. 3rd. Priority: Eligible households of which at least one adult member lives or is employed within the City limits of Palo Alto or Menlo Park. 4th Priorit': All other eligible households who do not meet the criteria for priorities one, two or three. Income Certification: Each BMR tenant's household income shall be certified prior to initial occupancy and recertified on an annual basis according to the procedures of the HUD Section 8 or successor program. BMR tenants whose incomes upon recertification exceed the then -current median incomes (100 percent) for Santa Clara County, adjusted for family size, will no longer qualify for BMR rent. At that time the following provisions shall apply to each tenant who has failed to qualify for BMR rent. 'Unless an exception is granted as provided below, within a reasonable time after receiving notice that a tenant has failed, at recertification, to qualify for BMR rent, Stanford must give each such tenant (a) written notice advising the tenant of the results of the recertification and that the BMR tenancy will terminate on the first of the month following the expiration of sixty days from the mailing of the notice to the tenant's address at the Apartments; and, (b) a written offer to enter into a market rate rental agreement of the unit occupied by the tenant. A "market rate rental agreement " is an agreement not subject to control under the terms of this Agreement and containing terms and provisions, including rent, as are offered to public generally by Stanford at the time the offer is made. Stanford shall not discriminate against the tenant because of the tenant's former status as a BMR tenant or for any other reason prohibited by law. If the former BMR tenant chooses to vacate the unit after receiving the notice, and after a reasonable time for cleaning and/or renovation and marketing, A\19961LTBuRSW.FIN Page 6 of 10 Mr. Curtis •Feeny October 15, 1996 Page 7 Stanford must rent the unit or. at Stanford's discretion, a unit of comparable tyre (e.g., studio, 1 -bedroom. ect.) To a qualified BMR tenant in accordance with this Agreement. If the former BMR tenant chooses to enter into a market rate rental agreement, then no later than three months after commencement of the new tenancy, Stanford must designate the first available unit of comparable type and rent it to a qualified BMR tenant in accordance with this Agreement; provided however. if the former BMR tenant does not perform the tenant's obligations under the terms of the rental agreement. Stanford may fi?e an unlawful detainer proceeding and if it does, its obligation to rent another unit shall be postponed until it recovers possession of the former BMR unit plus a reasonable time to clean and/or renovate and market the unit. Exceptions to the provision of this Agreement requiring termination of the BMR. tenancy upon failure to qualify at recertification may be granted at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Community Environment upon application by Stanford and a showing of extraordinary circumstances. If an exception is granted, the tenant may continue in possession for a term determined by the Director of Planning and Community Environment at BMR rent and the unit will continue to qualify as a BMR unit for all purposes. Actual Report: Stanford shall prepare and submit to the City an annual report on the status of the BMR units and compliance with the requirements of the BMR program and this Agreement. While Stanford may delegate the responsibility, for managing the BMR units to a third party, Stanford, as the property owner, shall be responsible for compliance with this Agreement. Guidelines Required: Prior to occupancy of any unit in the Project, Stanford shall prepare and obtain City approval of "Stanford West BMR Procedures and Guidelines" that shall describe the administration, monitoring and reporting for the BMR units at the Project. The "Stanford West BMR Procedures and Guidelines" shall reflect the terms of this Agreement and City policies as contained in the most recently adopted "Below Market Rate Program Rental Guidelines." The "Stanford West BMR Procedures and Guidelines" shall not be inconsistent with this Agreement. The "Stanford West BMR Procedures and Guidelines" shall describe in more detail procedures for the selection of tenants, the rental of BMR units, and the implementation of the BMR rental program. At a minunum Stanford shall be A:t199611ii3MRSW. FIN Page 7 of 10 • • Mr. Curtis Teeny October 15, 1996 Page 8 responsible for the following activities, which shall be addressed in the `Stanford West BMR Procedures and Guidelines:" a Periodic outreach and information to eligible households by priority for occupancy, as required; • Provision of information to interested BMR applicants; • Maintenance of waiting list for BMR units by priority; • Verification of eligibility for occupancy of BMR units, including verification of income, employment, location of job site, household composition, etc. and annual re -certification of each BMR household's eligibility: • Determination of BMR rents and rental of BMR units at rents which comply with this Agreement; • Selection of BMR tenants from qualified applicants; • Training of personnel, both on -site contract staff and Stanford staff in BMR rules, administration and procedures; • Inclusion, and enforcement of BMR provisions in the tenant's rental agreements and leases in order to maintain ongoing compliance with this Agreement; • Inclusion of a rent transition agreement in BMR lease; • Providing the correct number, location and unit type of required BMR units; • Periodic reporting to City regarding compliance with this Agreement; • Maintenance of records to adequately demonstrate compliance with this Agreement; • Cooperation with the City, and its designees, in the periodic monitoring, review and auditing of records, reports and other information to confirm compliance with this Agreement; • Termination of ineligible BMR tenants from the program and provision of the next similar sized vacant unit in the Project at BMR rents to eligible households; and • Implementation of a periodic administration / monitoring fee to pay the cost of City review of tenant eligibility prior to occupancy, if required by audit as discussed below under remedies. Remedies for Non -Compliance: The City reserves the right to monitor and audit the implementation of the BMR rental program at any time. If non-compliance is evident, Stanford shall be given in writing an appropriate period of time to remedy any areas of non-compliance. If compliance or evidence indicating appropriate action toward compliance cannot be obtained within six months to the satisfaction of the City, City A:11996`,LTRMRSW.FIN Page 8 of 10 • Mr. Curtis.Feeny October 15, 1996 Page 9 reserves the right to perform, review or monitor any of the activities necessary to implement this Agreement with Stanford to pay the actual cost for. City's time and overhead plus a 50% penalty for as long as City must assume responsibility. City may contract with a third party for these tasks. Alternatives: Should the number of units or the mix of unit types be modified in any portion of the Project during the approval and construction process, new calculations, based on the methodology in this Agreement, shall be prepared and enforced subject to review and approval by City. This Agreement has assumed that all three components of the Project will be built, that the Apartments will not have a condominium map and that the Senior Condominiums will be sold. Should the Senior Condominiums not be constructed, the BMR requirement for the remaining two portions of the Project shall remain as in this Agreement. Should the Assisted Living Facility not be constructed, the BMR requirement for the remaining two portions of the Project shall remain as in . this Agreement. Any other change not anticipated by this Agreement shall require a renegotiation of the BMR requirements consistent with the City BMR program at that time. Please sign this Agreement where shown below and return to me, indicating that we have reached agreement regarding your BMR contribution. Thank you for your cooperation during the discussions of the BMR program compliance. Sincerely, KENNETH KENNETH R. SCHREIBER Director of Planning and Community Environment Attachment: City of Palo Alto BMR Rental Guidelines cc: Marlene Prendergast, Palo Alto Housing Corporation Affordable Housing Action June Fleming, City Manager Sue Case, Senior Assistant City Attorney Jim Gilliland, Assistant Planning Official Lori Topley, Senior Planner Cathy Siegel, Housing Coordinator A:11996V.TBMRSW.FIN Page 9 of 10 I agree to provide a Below Market rate component to the Stanford West Apartments, Stanford West Senior Condominiums and Assisted Living Facility as described in this Letter of Agreement dated October 15, 1996. • CITY OF PALO ALTO BELOW MARKET RATE (BMR) RENTAL GUIDELINES As Amended and Adopted by City Council on September 8, 1986 BACKGROUND Program 12 of the 1985-2000 Housing Element of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan establishes the Below Market Race (BMR) Program. The Program requires that, in housing developments of ten or more units, not less than 10 percent of the units should be provided at rates affordable to low and moderate income households. This requirement applies to ownership and rental housing. Until 1985, all housing projects providing BMR units have been ownership developments, for which the City has established policies and procedures. In order to respond to the development of rental units, the BMR Rental Guidelines were developed by a committee of the Palo Alto Housing Corporation and City staff, and adopted by the City Council, on August 12, 1985. Amendments were made by the City Council on September 8, 1986. 1. INCOME AND RENT STANDARDS (Refer to attached Table I) 1. income Limits upon Occupancy of BMR Rental Units: Only households having gross income below 80 percent of the then -current HUD median income for Santa Clara County, adjusted for family size,, are eligible to occupy BMR rental units, either upon initial rent -up or upon filling any subsequent vacancy. 2. D3 . Refit: BMR units may be rented for monthly amounts not exceeding those allowed under the then -current }IUD Section 8 Existing Housing Fair Market Rents (FMRs) or successor program, subject to the terms of any lease under paragraph I1.3. As of February 21, 1996, the FMRs in Palo Alto are as follows: Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom S 641 S 731 S 903 S 1,238 S 1,391 p:\dtamale\vict\housing\bmrguide Page 1 of 5 The rent that may be charged to households holding a Section 8 Certificate or Voucher under paragraph I1.2, shall be as established by the Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara, and may differ from the then -current FMRs. 3. Rent Adjustment: BMR rents for occupied units shall be adjusted as of any annual anniversary date of the lease by application of the appropriate Section 8 annual adjustment factor most recently published by HUD. II. TENANT SELECTION AND CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES 1. Allowable Family Size: Occupancy of BMR rental units shall be limited to the following: 1 bedroom: 1 - 2 persons 2 bedroom: 2 - 4 persons 3 bedroom: 3 - 6 persons 4 bedroom: 4 - 8 persons 2. BMR Tenant Selection: Priority for occupancy of all BMR rental units shall be given to those eligible household, a member of which either lives or works in the City of Palo Alto. During the 30 -day period following the date the City and the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAI-IC) receive notification from the owner (or owner's agent) of an impending availability or vacancy in a BMR rental unit, priority for occupancy of that unit shall be given to eligible households holding a Section 8 Certificate or Voucher issued by the Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara, or other similar rental assistance document. The rental -assisted family • selected shall be allowed up to 15 days to move into the unit after it is ready for occupancy. If no qualified rental -assisted family is available to occupy the vacated unit, the owner shall be free to rent the BMR unit to any other eligible BMR tenant. The qualifications of BMR rental tenants will be independently verified by the City or its designee (Santa Clara County Housing Authority of Palo Alto Housing Corporation). One -Year Lease Offer: Each BMR tenant shall be offered the opportunity to enter into a lease which has a minimum term of one year, consistent with Section 9.68.030 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, even if the rental units.are in a condominium project. Such offer must be made in writing. If the tenant rejects the offer, such rejection must also be in writing. A lease may be renewed upon the mutual agreement of both parties. p;\dtamale\vict\housing\borguide Page 2 of 5 • 4. Annual Income Re -Certification: Each BMR tenant's household income shall be re- certified on an annual basis according to the procedures of Section 8 or successor program. The City of Palo Alto or its designee will independently verify such income. BMR tenants whose incomes rise to levels above the then -current HUD median incomes (100 percent) for Santa Clara County, adjusted for family size, will no longer qualify for BMR rent (refer to Table I). The owner must then give such tenant 30 -days written notification to that effect, advising said tenant that the rent thereafter will be at market rate as determined by the owner, but not to exceed the rates for comparable market -rate units in the complex. The owner must then provide to the BMR. program a substitute unit of comparable quality as soon as one becomes available, and rent it to a qualified BMR tenant in accordance with these guidelines. III. SIZE AND LOCATION OF BMR RENTAL UNITS BMR rental units shall generally be of the same size (number of bedrooms and square footage) as the market -rate units. The BMR units should be distributed throughout the rental complex, and should be indistinguishable from the exterior, BMR units shall contain standard appliances common to new rental units, but need not have luxury accessories. IV. IN LIEU PAYMENT OF BMR RENTAL UNITS The main objective of the BMR Program is to create a permanent stock of affordable housing units, but in special cases it is recognized that it may not be possible or practical to provide units at the site or elsewhere. In lieu of providing units on site, one of the following alternatives, listed in priority order, may be used, provided that approval of such alternative by the Director of Planning and Community Environment must occur at the time of initial project approval or be the subject of a subsequent action by the City Council: Off -Site BMR Units: The developer may provide an equal number of ownership or rental units elsewhere in the City. These units may be new or existing, and are subject to the same conditions of price and rental rate as on - site BMR units. Such units must be approved by the City; based on considerations such as size, location, amenities and condition. 2. Lump Sum Cash Payment: The developer may, upon approval by the Director of Planning and Community Environment, pay to the City, prior to the issuance of an occupancy certificate, a Iump-sum, cash amount calculated at 5 percent of the market value of the completed project. The market value shall be based on an appropriate appraisal by an appraiser agreed upon by the City and the developer and paid for by the developer. If a condominium map has been placed on the project, the basis for such appraisal(s) shall be as condominium ownership units rather than as rentals. p:\dtamale\vict\housing\bmrguide Page 3 of 5 • • V. PROCEDURES -WHEN BMR RENTAL UNITS ARE SOLD AS CONDOMINIUMS Price Determination: Projects with condominium subdivision maps that will rent BMR units for an indefinite period (which, in the case of housing units financed with mortgage revenue bonds, shall be at least as long as required by the terms of the bond agreements) shall have basic sales prices established at the outset for such BMR units, in accordance with the BMR Ownership Program. Such initial sales values shall he increased by an amount equal to one-third (113) of any increase of the Consumer Price Index; all Urban Consumers for the San Francisco/Oakland area during the period between the month of issuance of the Occupancy Permit for the BMR units and the month of notification of intent to sell the units, with further adjustments for improvements and deterioration per the BMR Ownership Program. 2. Buyer Selection: When units are sold as BMR condominiums, buyers shall be selected in accordance with the "BMR Waiting List" maintained by the Palo AIto Housing Corporation. At the time the landlord notifies the City of intent to sell, the landlord shall also notify BMR tenants in such units of the pending sale and non -renewal of lease. Conversion to Condotninium: Rental projects with no condominium subdivision map must comply with the Condominium Conversion Ordinance. VI. TIME LIMIT FOR BMR UNITS All BMR rental units must remain under the'BMR restrictions for a period of 59 years. If the BMR rental units are sold as BMR condominiums, they shall be subjectto the City's deed restrictions. p:\dtamale\vict\housing\bmrguide Page 4 of 5 TABLE 1 BMR RENT GUIDELINES: Income & Rents February, 1996 (A) Unit Size (B) Number of Occupants (C) Fair Market Rents (FMRs) (D) 80% of Median Income (E) HUD 1996 Median Income Studio 1 641 37,750 47,200 1 -Bedroom 1 731 37,750 47,200 2 43,150 53,900 2 -Bedroom 2 903 43,150 53,900 3 48,550 60,650 4 53,900 67,400 3 -Bedroom 3 1,238 • 48,550 60,650 4 53,900 67,400 5 58,250. 72,800 6 62,550 78,200 4 -Bedroom 4 1,391 53,900 , 67,400 5 58,250 72,800 6 62,550 78,200 7 66,850 83,600 8 71,150 88,950 (C) Fair Market Rents (FMR's) established by HUD February 21, 1996 (0) Calculations are based on 80% of the 1996 Median Income for Santa Clara County of 567,400 issued by HUD on 12114195. p:\dtamale\vice\housing\bmrguide Page 5 of 5 9► EXHIBIT H -I APARTMENT RENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN STANFORD WEST APARTMENT PROJECT In renting the apartments in the Stanford \Vest Apartment Project, Stanford shall give priority to applicants as follows:: 1st priority: Households of which at least one adult member is employed by Stanford University for a minimum of 30 hours per week at or above the minimum wage. • 2nd Priority: Households of which at least one adult member is employed for a minimum of 30 hours per week at or above the minimum wage on lands owned by Stanford, including but not limited to, Stanford Medical Center, Children's Hospital, Stanford Shopping Center, Stanford Linear Accelerator and the Stanford Research Park. • 3d Priority: Households in which at least one adult member is employed within the City limits of Palo Alto or Menlo Park, and households in which at least one member is age 62 or older, and lives in either of those cities. a 4th Priority: Al! other households who do not meet the criteria for priorities one, two or three. Initial Leasing Program: Stanford will publicize the availability of the apartments to priorities I and 2 by direct communication with its employees, by communications to its tenants requesting that they inform their employees, and by newspaper advertisements. For the first 60 days that a unit is available for leasing, Stanford will rent apartments only to persons who provide documentation, satisfactory to Stanford, of priority 1 or 2 employment. ` During that time, Stanford may maintain a waiting list for persons in priorities 3 and 4. 'At the end of 60 days, Stanford may rent apartments to persons in priorities 3 and 4. If at any time the number of persons seeking to rent exceeds the supply of apartments available, Stanford shall rent based on the priorities set out above. This program shall remain in effect until all apartments have been rented at least once, at +vhich time the Subsequent Leasing Program shall take effect. If the Project is completed in phases. this Program shall be applied to each phase. Subsequent Leasing Program. Stanford shall ,naintain a waiting list of persons in priorities 1, 2 and 3 who desire to rent an apartment and may maintain a list of persons in priority 4. The lists may be segregated by apartment type and, if so, a person may be on more than one list. Persons seeking to be placed on a list shall complete a registration form and shall supply proof of status (employment or residency as applicable) satisfactory to Stanford. Upon receipt of a completed form and proof, Stanford's agent shall mark the date and time of receipt on the face of the form. The names of the persons submitting registration forms shall be placed on the appropriate lists in the order received. CA970080.023/W 67 8.020 07/02/97 03:19 PM t S • When Stanford is prepared to rent an apartment, Stanford shall notify the first person on the applicable priority I list who shall have seven (7) days after receipt of notice to execute Stanford's standard form lease. (Notice shall be deemed to have been received two days after mailing to the address shown on the waiting list.) The lease shall commence at the earlier of (a) a date acceptable to the tenant and Stanford, or (b) 30 days after execution of the agreement. If the person does not enter into a lease, the person's name shall be removed from the list; provided the person may sign a new registration form, provide proof of status and be placed at the bottom of the list. The apartment shall be offered in turn to the persons on the priority 1 list and, if no one on that list executes a lease, then to those on the priority 2 list and, if no one on either list executes a lease, then to those on the priorit4 3 list. If the apartment is not rented to a person on the priority 1.2 or 3 lists, Stanford may rent the apartment to any person. BMIR UNITS. This Plan covers the teasing of market rate units only. Below Market Rate (WAR) units arc subject to a different management plan. to be prepared in accordance with the RMR Agreement between Stanford and the City of Palo Alto, RECERTIFICATION OF TENANTS. Th term •of the leases shah not exceed one year. Annually, Stanford shah confirm that persons in priority I remain employed by the University. Annually, tenants in priorities 2 and 3 shall submit proof satisfactory to Stanford that they remain eligible for priority Annually or upon expiration of a lease for less than one year, tenants shall be given the opportunity to submit documentation to establish that they qualify for a higher priority. If the tenants in priorities 1 and 2 constitute less than 50% of the total tenants in the Project and if there are persons on the priority 1 or 2 waiting lists, Stanford shall refuse to extend or renew the leases of priority 4 tenants; and, if after doing so, the tenants in priorities I and 2 still constitute less than 50% of the total, Stanford shall refuse to extend or renew the leases of priority 3 tenants until the 50% standard is achieved. Vacancies created by refusal to extend or renew shall be filled pursuant to the Subsequent Leasing Program. Ha tenant's lease is not renewed or extended by Stanford, the tenant may extend the Lease for one year. The one year extension will be terminable by the tenant at any time, upon 30 days written notice to. Stanford. CA970000.©27 2 • • EXHIBIT "H-2" (page 1 of 4 ) LEGAL DESCRIPTION D TO COUNTY TRANSIT BEGINNING at a point in the southwesterly line of the Palo Alto Station Grounds, as said Station Grounds is described in that certain easement of Leland Stanford to the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, dated November 23, 1892, and recorded October 28, 1915, in Volume 435 of Deeds at Page 244, Santa Clara County Records, said point being distant thereon North 51° 28' 00" West 112.084 feet from the intersection of said Station Grounds line and the center line of University Avenue; THENCE northeasterly, from a tangent that bears North 60° 26' 57" East, on a curve to the right, having a radius of 300.00 feet through a central angle of 11' 55' 52" and an arc distance of 62.471 feet; THENCE. easterly from a tangent that bears South 77° 29' 26" East. on a curve to the right, having a radius of 189.00 feet through a central angle of 10° 41' 01" and an arc distance of 35.242 feet to a point distant 50 feet northwesterly at right ankles from the southerly production of the center line of University Avenue; THENCE North 38° 32' 00" East a distance of 2.464 feet: THENCE North 51° 28' 00" West a distance of 847.30 feet; THENCE South 38° 32' 00" West a distance of 70.00 feet; THENCE South 16° 59' 58" East a distance of 143.126 feet; THENCE South 51° 28' 00" East a distance of 421.365 feet; THENCE Easterly, along a curve to the left, the radius of which is 13.635 feet, the arc distance of which is 21.418 feet for a distance of 19.283 feet to a point of reverse curve; THENCE Easterly, along a curve to the right, the radius of which is 13.635 feet, the arc distance of which is 21.418 feet for a distance of 19.283 feet; THENCE South 51° 28' 00" East a distance of 202.609 feet; THENCE Northeasterly, along a curve to the right, the radius of which is 300.00 feet, the arc distance of which is 56.136 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing an area of 2.504 acres more or less. CA971710.OSS(04678-ago 4111111111, 08/2347 04:17 PIA EXHIBIT "H-2 (page 2 of 4) LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1B Southerly Parking Annex C Palo Alto S.P. Depot Commencing at a point of intersection between the center line of University Avenue in the City of Palo Alto and the Southwesterly line of the Palo Alto Station Grounds, said Station Ground line being a common boundary between said Station Grounds as described in that certain easement of Leland Stanford to the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, dated Nov. 23, 1892, and recorded Oct. 28, 1915, in Vol. 435 of Deeds at page 244, Santa Clara County Records in which the bearing of said line is called S. 510 28' E. and lands described in that certain lease of The Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University to the City of Palo Alto, dated June 10, 1915 and recorded Sept. 23, 1915, in Vol. P of Leases at page 333 et seq., Santa Clara County Records in which the bearing of said line is called N. 51° 45' W.; thence S. 51 28' 00" E. along said Northwesterly line a distance of 113.68 feet to the true point of beginning; thence along a line that bears S. 51° 28' 00" E. a distance of 161.50 feet, said line being the Northeasterly boundary line of Parcel 2 of Lot 38 as shown on the certain map entitled "Survey of Lots 37 and 38 Stanford University Lands Palo Alto, California", dated August 1955, sheet 2 of 2 sheets; thence N. 38° 32' 00" E. a distance of 76.00 feet; thence N. 51° 28' 00" W. a distance of 94.50 feet; thence S. 38° 32' 60" W. a distance of 26.00 feet; thence N. 51° 28' 00" W. a distance of 87.45 feet; thence Southwesterly, from a tangent that bears S. 30 06' 41" W. on a curve to the left having a radius of 380.00 feet, a central angle of 80 09' 06", and an arc length of 54.06 feet back to the true point of beginning. Containing an area of 0 .26 acres, more or less. 2 CA971710.055 • EXHIBIT "H--" (page 3 of 4 ) Reserving unto LESSOR the right of public ingress and egress, and parking in common, over those roadways, excluding exclusive bus lanes, and parking areas sho‘‘n on the plans for construction on said parcels approved by the City of Palo Alto and The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University in accordance with the May 29, 1981 Master Agreement University Avenue Southern Pacific Depot filed in the office of the Palo Alto City Clerk as • Contract #41I0 subject to any requirements of the California Public Utilities Commission for Railroad Commuter parking. Further reserving unto LESSOR the right to construct a parking structure over Parcel I B so long as said future construction shall not interfere with the utility of the surface parking. CAA71710.055 M � obit -H-2 . (page 4 of 4) Stanford Sand Hill Corridor Projects Development Agreement toll Camino Par* ,.ease .4r LEGEND CU RREN T EL CAMINO PAR R L EA SE (=,1,260 A. I. SOOL(ASE SOU MOARIE3 100 0 800 iW 100 400 .100 Legend Park dedicated land - retained by City with the lease extended to 2033. IL r t sr!, if•._ .:. K:3 '( 't It iY r} -['b j t'Y ► .tyY. :. _. .. �.ir'l ti "1�.,•{�)a4i5;4 �i11s.}3'►t . �. LOr, P. NOSO' 04.14.0v441 1 L Transit Depot Sublease area - retained 6y the City to 2033 Sublease areas returned to Stanford University I I AL MA J st EM arrt raAy ,1 v0%.1 A:t tZV ! ymrrir ri rf-r T►fIf 01,a EXIST. LEASES/SUBLEASES EL GAMINO PARK AS OF 7-1-82 CITY OF PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA Stith HO. OF Silt CIS UNTIL 2020 RECREATION & ACADEMIC FIELDS ASSOCIATED SUPPORT USES FACULTY / STAFF / STUDENT H OUSING ALSO ALLOWED IN CROSS HAT CHED AREA SPECIAL CONDITION AREA 'B' BOUNDARY s, £-x„ czar}1x2 EXHIBIT "I' PHASING SCHEDUL Page 3-16 and pages 3-21 through 3-30 of Volume 2, Chapter 3 of the Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects • I 3. Project Description A number of local storm drain improvements would be necessary to serve the proposed projects (see Figure 3-9). The improvements are site specific, each tying into the storm drain interceptor under Sand Hill Road. This facility was designed and constructed in the late 1980's based on plans that included full development of the proposed projects sites. More detailed maps of storm drainage improvements proposed at the Stanford West Apartments and Stanford West Senior Housing projects are depicted in Figures 3-23 and 3-24 of the EIR. Stanford University has a water system that is separate from that of the City of Palo Alto. Two wells that are on the Stanford West Apartments site are tied into this system. Development of the Apartments project would require changes to the location of water lines carrying water from these water wells (see Figure 3-10). An array of changes would be made to the electrical infrastructure in the study area. New ducts would be placedunder Sand Hill Road, Pasteur Drive, Quarry, Road, and through the Shopping Center parking lot (see Figure 3-11). An existing overhead line on the Stanford West housing sites would be removed and an overhead line crossing El Camino Real at Quarry Road would be relocated and remain as an overhead line. New connections to the existing electrical system would be made at Alma Street near Palo Alto Avenue, and at Pasteur Drive near Welch Road. Improvements to the natural gas system that serves the study area would include a new line under wand Hill Road that would connect to existing lines at Palo Alto Avenue and Bryant Avenue, at Pasteur Drive and Welch Road, at Sand Hill Road and Arboretum Road, and at a main that serves the Oak Creek Apartments (see Figure 3-12). Phasing The proposed projects would be built in three major phases, as is described in Table 3-1 and Figures 3-13 through 3-16. The phases overlap somewhat with a total construction period of approximately 32 months following approval of the projects and all necessary: permits. During Phase 1 modifications to the Stanford University Golf Course,would be initiated in anticipation of later realignment of Sand Hill Road. Further to the east, construction would be started on the Stanford West Apartments with the eastern three blocks being completed during Phase I. At this same time, the central four buildings of the Stanford West Senior Housing (Buildings 2, 3, 4, and 5) would be built. As a part of Phase 1, a new gas line would be constructed along Sand Hill Road from Oak Creek Apartments to Palo Alto Avenue and Bryant Street. Also, new electric and water lines would be constructed along Sand Hill Road from the realigned Pasteur Drive to El Camino Real. The new Sand Hill Road water line would be in place prior to construction of any woodframe on the Stanford West Housing Project sites. These three main utility lines would be constructed as part of Phase 1 in order to avoid trenching in the new Sand Hill Road to be constructed in Phases 2 and 3. A new sewer line would be constructed along Arboretum Road from Quarry Road to Sand Hill Road. This sewer line would serve the Stanford West Senior Housing site. At the Stanford West Apartments site new gas, electric, water, sewer, telephone, and storm drain facilities would be constructed and connected to the main utility lines in Sand Hill Road. On the south side of the Stanford Shopping Center, Quarry Road would be widened from Vineyard Lane to El Camino Real. Adjacent Shopping Center 95o66\fdeirlprojdesc 3-16 3, Proje ct Description 'ABLE 3-1 STANFORD SAND II LL ROAD COR RIDOR PROJECTS ESTIMATED PHASING INFORMATION Projec t Name Project Element I)ttrattc,n Average Employer Maximum Employees STANFORD WEST APARTMENTS 1 Phase 1 12 Months 67 160 Phase 11 12 Months 67 160 Phase 111 12 Months 67 160 STANFORD WEST SENIOR HOUSING independent Living Units - Phase 1 12 Months 68 170 independent Living Units - Phase 11 12 Months 68 170 Health Care Center (Skilled Nursing/Assisted Livi ng) - Phase III 12 Months 40 95 STA NFORD SHOPPING CENTER EX PANSION Retail Expansion 14 Months n/a n/a South Parking Structure 11.5 Months n/a n/a North Parking Stricture 7.5 Months n/a n/a Total 67 140 950661fdcirlprojdesc 3-21 TABLE 34 STANFORD SAND HILL ROAD CORRIDOR PROJECTS ESTIMATED PHASING INFORMATION `Project Name laroje t Element Duration Avow Employees Mnxitrtum ampii�y+arts SAND H ILL ROAD EXTENSI ON AND RELATED ROADWAY IMrRovEME:t+Crs a Pasteur Drive Realignment (Phase 11I) 12 Weeks 8 15 Quarry Road Widening (Phase ;) 22 Weeks 8 17 Stockfarrn Road Extension (Phase 111) - 8 Weeks 6 15 Sand Hill Road Extension (Phase 1) 11 Weeks 6 12 N El Camino Real Improvements (Phase 1) 22 Weeks 8 16 r Arboretum Road Improvements (Ph ase 11) 6 Weeks 7 _ 15 I Palo Road Extension (Phase I) 9 Weeks 6 12 Vineyard Lane (Phase II) 8 Weeks 7 15 Sand Hill Road Widening (Santa Cruz to SF Creek Bridge) (Phase HI) 22 Weeks 8 18 Sand Hill Road Widening (Shopping Center to Creek Bridge) (Phase H) 40 Weeks 10 18 , San Francisquito Creek Bridge Widening (Phase 11) 26 Weeks 9 16 NOT E: nfa = not available. SOURCE: Stanford Management Company; Brian Kangas Faulk Engineers, February 1996. 950661fue ir\projdesc 3-22 -Er=vie 01 al *_. Mv Sl �� MAN�eN • EL-£ Figure 3-13 Phase 1 improvements 344 A Pa gre0 MP 41.4 •114M5 e x.. NW MOP Wa it S W. . *.1- ISDN SOURCE: �yT' - t E K N AM* II. IOW Figure 3-;4 Phase II Improv ements 3-26 s�uawanoidwl ID esaud S t- aJn6ld S AND HILL RO AD PROJECTS CON STRUCTION PH ASINCx SCHEI: ULE 10 Task Name 0wa11on 1 2 A 4 5 6 7 8 6 10 11 12 19 14 15 16 17 18 10 ?0 21 77 23 74 75 26 27 2a 77 501711-171-21-371 E:15 19 it} 4. 43 1i ay 1 Protect approval A Parmla 1004 IMMININWIEMInal 2 SUR Conslruclon 04 + 3 Sand 1111 Road falaled poll Co urse work 3004 ' 4 Quarry Road 1204111111.111111111111 •. S Palo Road 454 1 .111 6 Roadway Imo os 1204 7 Shopping Cantor Su rface Parkin g along Quarry 804 MN a El Camino Real 1104 ®1111111 9 Shopping Can ter Seduce parking along ECR 90d MEMEl 10 Sand H I( Er Canino Real 10 Sho ppin g Confer Access) 60d NM 11 Arboretum Road 304 EU 12 Vi neyard Lana 4Od MIME 13 Slopping Center Surface Parking along SHR 604 11111.11 14 Sand Fog ( Shopping Cen ter Across is SF Crook llridgo) 2104 15 Palo Road In iorsoctlon 0 Palm 011vo 200 lal 16 Pasteur Drivo 604 MEM 17 Stock Farm Ro ad 400 MIMI 15 San Fian clsqullo Creek Dodge 1200 -i'A's R San d Fee ( SF Crook Ekldgo to Santa Cm: A ve.) 1704 MIEREVIEN 20 San d HO Rd. Parking Sau clmo 1700 - 21 Roomy R0. Parking Structure 2404 IIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 22 Shopping Can to r Expan sion 2754 1111111111111111111111111.111111111.1111111111111 23 "1 Sla nlord Wow Aparlmonls ( Plisse 1) 2604 - 24 Stanfo rd Weal A4la rtn onls ( Pismo 2) 2604 .. 25 Slanlord West Apagelonla ( P11111 3) 2804 25 Slanload West Senior Hou selg ( MIS I) 260d 27 Slarde ed Wesi San tos Housing ( Phase 2) 2804 ..... . : .. ... .. OS— 5lariord Wail Sen ior Homely ( Phase 3) 20fM dw BRIAN KANGAS MU CK Oats: 6/ 9/96 Task Mileston e Critical Summary SOURCE: Stanford Management Co. and Figure 3-16: Bar Chart Schedule ei Brian Kangas Faulk, Juno 5, 199E. 9tFQ8lI _ _ . 3. Project Description parking lots fronting on Quarry Road would be reconfigured at this time. Finally, Palo Road would be extended and improved (see Figure 3-13). Phase I would take place during the first five and one-half months after approval of the projects and receipt of required permits. During Phase II, modifications to the Stanford Golf Course would continue. Additional development at the Stanford West Apartments would continue with the two center blocks (located between Side Street "A" and Side Street "B"). Buildings 1 and 6 of the Senior Housing project would be completed. At the Stanford Shopping Center, all remaining surface parking lots would be reconfigured, and improvements would be made to El Camino Real (not including removal of the jug -handle), Arboretum Road, and Vineyard Lane. Sand Hill Road would be extended from El. Camino Real to the first entrance to the Stanford Shopping Center, a distance of about 400 feet (see Figure 3-I4). New gas, electric, and sewer lines would be constructed along Main Street in the Stanford West Apartments site. Phase II would take eight months. During Phase HI, Sand Hill Road would be widened from Arboretum to Santa Cruz Avenue, including the construction of the frontage road/cul-de-sac between Santa Cruz Avenue and Oak Avenue in Menlo Park and the San Francisquito Creek Bridge widening. It should be noted that approval of the City of Menlo Park would be required to construct the project as proposed from San Francisquito Creek to Santa Cruz Avenue. Stockfarrn Road would be extended and Pasteur Drive would be realigned. The remaining blocks of the Stanford West Apartments project would be constructed, and the Health Care Center containing the assisted living facility and skilled nursing facility would be constructed to complete the Stanford West Senior Housing project. The Sand Hill Road Extension would be completed from the initial extension to Arboretum Road. The jug -handle main entrance to the Stanford Shopping Center from El Camino Real would be removed. Finally, all of the proposed retail space and parking structures would be constructed during this phase (see Figure 3-15). Phase III would take nineteen months. Stanford West Apartments Project Location The Stanford West Apartments site is located on approximately 47.8 acres on Sand Hill Road, near the intersection of Pasteur Drive. The site is bounded by Sand Hill Road on the south, the proposed Stanford West Senior Housing (former Children's Hospital at Stanford) site and the Children's Health Council (currently under reconstruction) on the east, San Francisquito Creek and residential uses in Menlo Park on the north, and the Oak Creek Apartments on the west (see Figure 3-3). Project Applicant Objectives The primary objectives for the Stanford West Apartments, as stated by the applicant are as follows: Increase the area supply of market rate and below market rate housing; 950661fdeirlprojdesc 3-30 EXHIBIT 'J' ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY AND THE CITY OF PALO ALTO I ORDINANCE NO. 14433 ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY AND THE CITY OF PALO ALTO The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: ,SECTION 1. A. A development agreement has been requested of the City for the approval of development of certain real property collectively known as Stanford Sand Hill Road Corridor Projects, and more particularly described in the subject Development Agreement. B. The City Council finds and determines t .it notice of intention to consider the development agreement has been given pursuant to Government Code section 55967. C. The Planning Commission and the City Council have each conducted a public hearing on the Development Agreement, amendments to the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, a Tentative Map, and various related land use approvals. D. The City Council has reviewed the contents of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR.') prepared for the Projects, and all other relevant information, including staff reports, and all testimony, written and oral, presented on the matter. E. The City Council finds and determines that the development agreement is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Palo Alto, as amended. The City Council has specifically considered the regional welfare and the impacts of the development agreement upon the regional welfare. The City Council finds and determines that the benefits of the project set forth in the development agreement, and findings including statements of overriding consideration for each project, establish the reasonable relationship of the Projects and of the approvals to the regional welfare. SECTION 1. The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement between the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University and the City of Palo Alto, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and authorizes the Mayor to execute the agreement on behalf of the City. 1 9707211ac0031801 $ECTIQN 2. The City Clerk is directed to cause a copy of the development agreement to be recorded with the County Recorder not later than ten (10) days after it becomes effective. SECTION 3. The City Council adopts this ordinance in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ('CEQA') findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective upon the thirty-first (31st) day after its adoption but, if submitted to a referendum by the Council on its own motion, or by a certified sufficient petition of the electorate, pursuant to Article IV, section 3 of the Charter, it shall be suspended and inoperative unless and until it is approved by the voters. If an initiative appearing on the same ballot with this ordinance amends one or more of the same provisions of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Ordinance as this ordinance or any actions incorporated into the development agreement, and both this ordinance and the initiative are approved, but the ordinance receives fewer votes than the initiative, a direct and irreconcilable conflict with the entirety of this ordinance shall be deemed to exist, and no part of this ordinance or any actions incorporated into the development agreement shall become finally effective. If an initiative appearing on the same ballot with this ordinance amends one or more of the same provisions of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Ordinance as this ordinance or any actions incorporated into the development agreement, and both this ordinance and the initiative are approved, but the initiative receives fewer votes than this ordinance, a direct, irreconcilable // // /1 // // // // // // // 2 970721 lac 0031801 conflict with the entirety of the initiative shall be deemed to exist, and no part of the initiative shall become effective. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney Director of Planning and Community Environment 970721 Isc 0031 E01