Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-07-14 Ordinance 4433 (3)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 11c 0031801 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 ord finance 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 MOS DOCUMENT ISCERTIFIED MDSE* ORDINANCE DULY PAD BY THE COUNCIL Of THE art(); PALO ALTO AND TMEREA, [ER POSTEQ IN COUNCIL CHAMDERSOdtf 'l/J7/Q7 (WITHIN IS DAYS Of ITS PASSAGE) o+$iih for declare) +seder pearly 01 pillory tat die foreipim, is 1s D:71 1 Director cf P? a:an!'""'and Community nvi ronnlent 3 970721 lac 0031 101 • • EXHIBIT `A" Development Agreement This document is recorded for the benefit of the City of Palo Alto and is entitled to be recorded free of charge in accordance with Section 6103 of the Government Code. After Recordation, mail to: City Clerk City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Between CITY OF PALO ALTO, a chartered city and BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, a body having corporate powers under the laws of the State of California 1 of 35 970704 lac 0031598 • • THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (hereinafter "Agreement") is entered into as of this 14th day of August, 1997, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a chartered city of the State of California (hereinafter "City"), and THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, a body having corporate powers under the laws of the State of California (hereinafter "Stanford"). R$CITALB 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 lac 003159$ 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 Went 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 ("1997 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 less private open space for 28 apartment units 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. 1. 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 9M0704 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 Hill 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. (0) "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 assign, 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 P'u Provisions for the dedication of land for pubic 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 (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-1" and in a form acceptable to the City Manager. The Apartment Rental Management Plan attached as Exhibit "H-1" 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 commensurate 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 dependent upon 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 prcject, 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 ,impopitiona. 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 Pert 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 ether 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 Actions. 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 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 Le 003159E • 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 terns and conditions of this Agreement, the review shall be concluded. (4) if 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 0031598 (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 tears 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 Lhe 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) Construction. 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 essence 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 (1) 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 Iac0031598 • 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 instr:urnent . (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. Os) 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 - E1 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. // // // // // I/ // // // // // // // // I/ // I/ // I/ // // // // // // // // 34 of 35 97'0704W! 0031598 1 • () 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 ee 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 NT (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 OF 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 # • EXHIBIT "A" (page 1 of 3) April 16, 1997 BKF Project No. 896060 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 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 Hill 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 s uthv,e sterly line of Parcel 1 to its intersection with said Menlo Park and Palo o to 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 E1 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 proposed 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- OE- �7 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 OP 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 Hi11'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 1 CAGES 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 or. 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/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(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 4.2-1(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 visuaily 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 -l) 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)-(1) 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, hut 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 programon 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 i.res 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 bicyc.ae or pedestrian paths or light -duty roads and specifies additicnal 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 penc!ing 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 retrains, 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 concain 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 circulati.ion 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 rot 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 :codified 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 • 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'elt 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. u e h Condition 2.i partially implements this mitigation measure by requiring that the applicant shall either rake 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 completeu 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 1 • 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(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 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 97070? 1.c 0031517 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 '>Mt0 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 0031387 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 0031587 applicant shall be financially responsible only for a fair share of the costs of implementing the mitigation measure. The Council recognizes that mitigation treasure 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 rewire 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 IOLOOICAL 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 a 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 970702 1a 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 • 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 • 4.7-1Q implementation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with other proposed projects in the area would result in incremental loua of trees and associated wildlife habitat. Mitigation measure 4.7-1O(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 043I3$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 apeciea 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 recoiia<<ended 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 outer 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 reconuitended 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 • 1 4.8-2 The Stanford Sand Rill Road Corridor Projects area is subject to very strong seismically induced groundahaking 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" reaps 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►t 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 003E387 • 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 sign ifica by 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 X4.9 -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 contAmi,ants 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, lesser 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 or 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 fallowing: 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 ar, unacceptable level. The Council finds that adoption of this mitigation measure will lessen the project's potential impact on PAFD emergency response tires to insigr.ificance. 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 Coun:i1 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 Housin 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 enc"ollments 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 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 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 xx 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 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 development is perrr.r_ted 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 chat 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 zany 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 assuring 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: (2J The alternative would result in an unacceptable Joss 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 -N 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 en 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 dnd 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:anford 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 Cassino 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 an 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 Count, of Santa C� ' general plan and Stanford's general u } a to Clara's portions of cal use per"' -it 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 tanfual o and Land Use Plan designates the majority of Stanford's 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 areany future designated any deveanpmrdt. Arboretum Region Plan as �� t in StStanford'shighest 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 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 r The Council recognizes that project 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 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. Charges 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 biological 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 order 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 OUALITY/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 maturity. 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 00315811 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 (2©- 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 -terra impacts of the project on views from 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 lac 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)-(1) 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. 9707021ac 0031588 4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES 4.3-1 Lmplamentatiou 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 Treasure 4.3-1(b) 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 existing 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 devrg,lJpment 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 Treasure 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 Caitrans, the City .of 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/Grlvez 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 00315138 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 litigation 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 1.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 Palo 1 Tr nspD r - by the City of 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 treasures will lessen the project's potential construction phase traffic and transportation impacts to a less than significant level. These measures provide for comprehensive planning fox' 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 Ixc 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 PM,u 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 iac 0031588 • 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 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 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, if 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 ,ignificanr. 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 0031'88 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 RBSO1RCE 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 be 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 tern 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 4.7-1©(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 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 p,oiect-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 00315U • 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 tributariea, would increase human access, cumulatively resulting in direct impacts to aensitive animal speciea 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. Reads, 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 incoiporatio i 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 0031588 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-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 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 0031388 • • 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 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 4.1©-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 Iac0031588 • • 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 1 • 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 nuxiaber 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 law 00315,8 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 (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 iri 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 PALM response tim s. 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 al1 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 emulative 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 -terra 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 policl_es 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 EIR. The EIR finds the impacts of such cumulative development within the Sand Hill corridor significant, as discussed elsewhere in these findings. 46 97o1O2Ias0631588 PART 11 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 ttie proposed alternative. No Project - No Development. This alternative assumes that no new development is authorized on the project site. The Council fired: 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. m;'as 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. _o 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. Ouarry 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 Rea]. 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 canriot 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 1ac0031588 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 iri Chapter 11 and in the "Final Summary of Project Changes" made a part cf the Final EIR, 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 MSASU'RES ADOPTED TO REDUCE IMPACTS 4.1 ,LAND USE 4.1-5 Implementation of the proposed projects, in conjunction with cumulative development within the Saud 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 tor 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 frczn 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 lsc 0031559 • 1 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 1© -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/E1 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 E1 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 i>portant 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:mlenied 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 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. 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 CaxninQ 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 modifies' 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 0031389 • 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(1) 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 bass/u1 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 constriction 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 PM10 standards. Mitigation Treasure 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 NOx, 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 00313E9 • 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 cumularive 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.r1. 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 alon 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 Francisqui.to 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 1 • 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 in 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 encpineering 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 evert -.s 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 970702lac 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-l(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 • • 4.9-5 Project construction activities in combination with other construction projects in the Watershed could cumulatively increase sediment and other construction -related pollutants in San lrancisquito Creak 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 Storer, 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 contributiora 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 EIR 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 an 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 EIR, 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 PC3s. If the transformer contains PCBs, it shall be removed and disposed of appropriately. Mitigation measure 4.14-4(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 0031589 • • 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 4.11-1O(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 4.11-1O(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 developament 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 foresa_eable 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 tor 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 PAFD 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 pleasure 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 Desig=as 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 ARB 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-L7(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 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 00313119 • • PART II ALTERNATIVES TO TEE 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 970702 13c 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(1) 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 p_esexve 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 E1 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/Ei Camino Real intersection will not obstruct northbound throuoh 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 E1 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 0031390 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 recomme ded rni Ligation 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 litigation 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 12' 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 night 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 Treasure 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 (douse 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 0431590 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 11 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 applicar 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 bath 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 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, 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 tinning 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 he 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) 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 riot 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, 21 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.io 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 ;ratter 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 1 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 FAAQMD 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 hinter 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 equ i psten t . Project Areas Qutside 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-i, 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 isc 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 reclines 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 0031 590 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 Courcii 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 or: 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 recotnulended 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. mi. Ligation measures 4.7 -2(a - West Apartments, Stanford projects. Mitigation measure 4.7 jurisdictions in the projec, those presented in mitigation basis. 7-11(a) requires implementation of , 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,-marmended 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 projecta 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 t:o 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 AND WA ` 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 walls, 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 lac 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 rectrranended 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 he 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. Mitigat.ior. 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 0031390 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 • The Council finds that the adopted mitigation measures will lessen each of these potentially significant impacts to a lees 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 1 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 infiltrations 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 Iac 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 9707021u 0031590 • • 4.12-10 Cumulative development would increase the annual number of police service calla 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 Tear 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-].9(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 $cale. 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 CanEtiftr .tip 3: Two -Lang Bxt, sion with IIo 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 any 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 finis 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 an 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 • • 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 0031590 • 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:o.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 lac 0031590 • accident potential. Approval of this alternative would result in traffic conditions on Quarry Road which are unacceptable to the Council. Special oadway ConsideratiQlz 14z 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 • highly ntal impacts. Implementation of this alters ��speculative in that implementation would re alternative is internalalso alarm Stanford University and approval require tf not and San Mateo. Such approvals, by the Counties of to occur within a raon, if granted at all existing land use sable time are alsoexisting believes the plans routing fortheaffected area. period under C the ouncil The City through theo ale g Stanford central campus publicr is neither route through nor with the academic on desirable nor Implantation 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 des ys along this major travel route. Fore all a of theaddiabove reasons proposed alternative road could not feasibly obtain vanreasuor 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 97070= 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 froth, 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 kg 0031591 significant or potentially significant adverse environmental impacts of the project to a less than significant level. 1. Cultural Res9. ;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 level. 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.rn. 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 1ac0031591 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 - 1 • 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 20Q, 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 Cou_:ci1 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 nl ncx and Community Env ,ronment 970703 lac 0031573 Change from Strearasidc Open Space to Ma;or Institution/Special Fa:i:ity Change from Strcarnsidel Open Space to Islultiple Family Residential r 7 - ha tgc froth Strcamsid: Open Spice to Multiple Famiiv Residential Gpcc Sparc } Ch3.3: fro!^. [!..c.)jor Fogarty Ri�sdcr.tia! Multiple Family Residential Office/ Research Park Change from Major Institution/ iniversity lands/ Campus Education Facilty to Major Institution/ Special Facility Change from Major Institution/ University lands/Campus Education !Facility to ?Multiple Family Residential The C i! y of Palo Alto tlaNN1NO atv!s10N Major lnstitutiot Special Facility Map 1 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Amendments This map is a product of the City of Palo AIIO GIS C_ • • 1 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 sao 1 SECTION 4. The City Council adopts this resolution in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act -("CEQA") findings adopted by Resolution No. 7685. SZCTIOi 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$0 1Z:1 itom Stre1:claw: Open Spz.ce to Nt.41tip':e FamiIv, R slder.tial Strcoms:C: pea Space iro.T. S:......,:� Opca Space to :i;ot as,titu[io�.`S;e.isl Fazia_wt c , Chang fr..., Strea;::itz S 1 i Gr Fz^Sp :e Multi;i4 f {� S:: zaY S:a. Cta'.3- R! tt f f:cc. Research Park Chanzc frost A'.ajos irutitutioc! University lardsrCarnpus Edutatio Faciity to ?.iajca Institution/ Special Facility Change from D!3 or Institution! l'risersity lands.'Cz;rpus EdL<ation .1Facility to Multiple Family P..esideotiaL. 7 b t C i t y of Palo Alto �LAA'MIMD DiVl$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 (t8111�t Z`' 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 OF 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 Open Space to Ma;or Itivitctio.:/Specta! F ;i.:;'•t • Chat gc frogs Strea;ns: e Open Space to Mul;iple Family Residential `�. Streamside itutio \OpGG S_pp ce a�ilst; Cta-3- tr. 1 .7 i 1•'y 3 J L Office/Res,: Pa 's L ,r' 1 Change from lajo: Institutionf L iversity landi%Campus Educatio Fac'slty to Major institution! Special Facility Change trout N1.2;,.0: .1 ? University fonds/Ca.-¢.;:s Et - z' 1 t Facility to Multiple. Fa:nay 7 b c C i i) of Palo Alto ► L w 1i ' l 1 G Q 1 Y 17 t O per. Spate Major Izstitutionf Special Facility P.Ggior Cogs . ,,ity Cornmeirci:: Ltinj: It= A. or I:,..,..,:. 5;c:ial 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 or Palo Alto GIS all mow amminsion 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 •.1 ACC Arterial • Arend Co3lector y Add Collector Street Collector Arterial Expressway Freeway 7 ! e C i t y of L A N N t M O r t t I R l o Interchange Palo Alto City Boundary Map 4 Comprehensive Plan Land Use c: Street Network Map Amendments This rap is a product O� 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 0031377 • 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. $ECTIQN 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 unposed 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