HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESO 9168Resolution No 9168
Resolution ·of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Certifying
the Adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Report for
the Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and
Replacement Project Pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act and Adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. Introduction and Certification.
(a) The City Council of the City of Palo Alto ("City Council"), in the exercise of
its independent judgment, makes and adopts the following findings to comply with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"; Pub. Resources Code, §§
21000 et seq.), and Sections 15091, 15092, and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code
Regs., § 15000 et seq.). All statements set forth in this Resolution constitute formal findings of
the City Council, including the statements set forth in this paragraph. These findings are made
relative to the conclusions of the City of Palo Alto Stanford University Medical Center
("SUMC") Facilities Renewal and Replacement Final Environmental Impact Report (State
Clearinghouse No. 2007082130) (the "Final EIR") , which includes the Draft Environmental
Impact Report ("Draft EIR"), Public Comments, and Responses to Comments. The Final EIR
addresses the environmental impacts of the implementation of the Stanford University Medical
Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project (the "Project", as further defined in Section
2(b) below) and is incorporated herein by reference. These findings are based upon the entire
record of proceedings for the Project.
(b) Mitigation measures associated with the potentially significant impacts of the
Project will be implemented through the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
described below, which is the responsibility of the City.
(c) The City of Palo Alto is the Lead Agency pursuant to Public Resources Code
section 21067 as it has the principal responsibility to approve and regulate the Project. Stanford
Hospital and Clinics, Lucile Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford and Stanford University
(hereafter collectively, "SUMC Project sponsors") are the Project applicants.
(d) The City exercised its independent judgment in accordance with Public
Resources Code section 20182.1(c), in retaining the independent consulting firm PBS&J to
prepare the Final EIR, and PBS&J prepared the Final EIR under the supervision and at the
direction of the City's Director of Planning and Community Environment.
(e) The City, through PBS&J, initially prepared the Draft EIR and circulated it
for review by responsible and trustee agencies and the public and submitted it to the State
1
110607 jb 0130719
Clearinghouse for review and comment by state agencies, for a comment period which ran from
May 20, 2010, through June 27, 2010. As noted above, the Final EIR includes the Draft EIR,
copies of all comments on the Draft EIR submitted during the comment period, the City's
responses to those comments, and phanges made to the Draft EIR following its public
circulation.
(t) The City's Planning and Transportation Committee has reviewed the Final
EIR and a draft of these findings and has provided its recommendations to the City Council
regarding certification of the Final EIR. The City Council has independently reviewed the Final
EIR and has considered the Planning and Transportation Committee's recommendations in
making these findings.
(g) Based upon review and consideration of the information contained therein,
the City Council hereby certifies that the Final EIR was completed in compliance with CEQA,
and reflects the City of Palo Alto's independent judgment and analysis. The City Council has
considered evidence and arguments presented during consideration of the Project and the Final
EIR. In determining whether the Project may have a significant impact on the environment, and
in adopting the findings set forth below, the City Council certifies that it has complied with
Public Resources Code sections 21081, 21081.5, and 21082.2.
(h) Section 6 of the Final EIR shows all revisions which the Final EIR made to
the Draft EIR. Having reviewed this section and the Final EIR as a whole, the City Council
hereby finds, determines, and declares that no significant new information has been added to the
Final EIR so as to warrant recirculation of all or a portion of the Draft EIR. Likewise, the City
Council has considered all public comments and other information submitted into the record
since publication of the Final EIR, and further finds that none of that additional information
constitutes significant new information requiring recirculation of the Final EIR.
SECTION 2. Project Information.
The following Project information is supplied to provide context for the discussion
and findings that follow, but is intended as a summary and not a replacement for the information
contained in the Draft EIR, Final EIR, or Project approvals.
(a) Project Objectives
The Project Objectives of both SUMC Project sponsors in proposing the Project and
the City in approving the Project are set forth in Section 2.3 of the Draft EIR, which is
incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Project Description
The Project is the demolition, replacement, expansion, and development of new
medical facilities at the SUMC Sites, which are comprised of the 56-acre Main SUMC Site and
9.9-acre Hoover Pavilion Site. The SUMC Project would demolish approximately 1.2 million
square feet of existing buildings at the SUMC Sites and construct approximately 2.5 million
2 .
110607 jb 0130719
square feet of hospital, clinic, and research facilities, for a net increase of about 1.3 million
square feet of hospital and clinic uses (research space would not increase). In addition, other
existing buildings would be renovated to meet seismic standards, and approximately 2,053 net
new parking spaces would be added to the sites.
The Project is located on two sites that are collectively about 66 acres: the
approximately 56-acre Main SUMC Site and the approximately 9.9-acre Hoover Pavilion Site.
The Main SUMC Site is located mainly in the City of Palo Alto, south of Sand Hill Road and is
primarily bounded to the north and east by Welch Road, to the south by Quarry Road, and to the
west by Stanford University lands. A 0.75-acre portion of the Stanford University School of
Medicine area within the Main SUMC Site is located in unincorporated Santa Clara County, and
is proposed for ru:mexation to the City of Palo Alto. The Hoover Pavilion Site is about 1,700 feet
east of the Main SUMC Site, at the southwestern comer of Quarry Road and Pal9 Road.
A complete description of"the Project as originally proposed by the SUMC Project
sponsors is set forth in Section 2 of the Draft EIR (as amended on pages 6-71 to 6-72 of the Final
EIR). In addition, a description of the Tree Preservation Alternative is located at pages 5-15
through 5-22 of the Draft EIR (as amended on pages 6-128 through 6-130 of the Final EIR). As
further discussed later herein, the City is approving the Tree Preservation Alternative, with
certain components of the Village Concept Alternative incorporated, rather than the Project as
originally proposed. Thus, as used in these Findings, the term "Project" is intended to reference
the Tree Preservation Alternative and includes the following linkages components of the Village
Concept Alternative and Mitigation Measure TR-6.1.
• Provision of a connection from the planned Everett Avenue bicycle and
pedestrian undercrossing to the EI Camino/Quarry Road intersection.
Once the tunnel is completed, this linkage will provide a direct connection
between the SUMC Project sites and Downtown North. To implement
this linkage component, the SUMC Project sponsors will provide
$2,250,000 for the City to construct these improvements.
• Creation of an enhanced bicycle and pedestrian connection between the
Stanford Shopping Center and SUMC (through the Stanford Bam area).
The connection will provide an alternative route to Quarry Road, which is
auto dominated. This connection will extend between Vineyard Lane and
Welch Road. Pedestrian traffic signals and crosswalks shall be placed at
the crossing of Vineyard Lane and Welch Road. The crosswalk will be
enhanced, either by striping or by the use of contrasting paving. To
implement this linkage component, the SUMC Project sponsors will
construct these improvements at a cost of up to $700,000.
• Enhanced signalized intersections in the Project vicinity, particularly
along Quarry Road, Vineyard and Welch Roads to include 12-foot
pedestrian crosswalks on all legs, with textured or colored paving or
diagonal or longitudinal zebra striping as determined by the City,
pedestrian push buttons and countdown pedestrian signal heads, and other
specific improvements that are determined as necessary during the design
3
110607 jb 0130719
include:
process, such as median refuge islands, advanced signing, flashing
beacons, in-pavement lighting, etc. To implement this linkage component,
in combination with the Quarry Road corridor linkage component set forth
below, the SUMC Project sponsors will provide a total of $400,000 for the
City to construct these improvements.
• Incorporation into the Quarry Road corridor, from El Camino Real to
Welch Road, of improvements to and within the public right-of-way to
enhance the pedestrian and bicycle connection, including urban design
elements and way finding, wider bicycle lanes as necessary, on Quarry
Road, enhanced transit nodes for bus and/or shuttle stops, and prominent
bicycle facilities. To implement this linkage component, in combination
with signalized intersections linkage component set forth above, the
SUMC Project sponsors will provide a total of $400,000 for the City to
construct these improvements.
( c) Required Approvals
The approvals required by the City as lead agency for implementation of the Project
A. Adoption of Comprehensive Plan Amendments as follows:
1. to redesignate 701 and 703 Welch Road from the Research/Office
Park land use designation to the Major Institution/Special Facilities
land use designation;
2. to apply the Major Institution/Special Facilities land use designation
to the proposed annexation of the 0.75 acre property within Santa
Clara County jurisdiction;
3. to include language that new Hospital zoning would allow buildings
to exceed 50 feet in height;
4. to amend Policy L-8 to clarify that the City-wide cap on non-
residential development does not apply to SUMC hospital, clinic, and
medical. school uses;
B. Acceptance of the Stanford University Medical Center Area Plan, pursuant to
Comprehensive Plan Program L-46;
C. Creation of a new "Hospital District" (HD) Zone for the SUMC Sites in the
Palo Alto Zoning Code that could be applied by the City to land uses
specifically for hospitals, associated medical research, medical office and
support uses;
4
110607 jb 0130719
D. Conditional Use Permits as necessary within the new Hospital District zone;
E. Amendment to Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 8.10 to recognize and cross
reference the Hospital District Ordinance;
F. Annexation and prezoning of a 0.75-acre property at the northwest comer of
the Main SUMC Site to the new zone;
G. Rezoning of701 and 703 Welch Road to the new HD Zone;
H. Architectural review for development of the SUMC Project, including design
guidelines;
I. Approval of a Development Agreement, if one can be mutually agreed upon
by the City and SUMC Project sponsors;
J. Approval of permits to remove or relocate approximately 62 Protected Trees,
in accordance with the requirements of the HD Zone.
K. Issuance of building, grading, and other ministerial permits necessary for
construction of the Project.
The approvals required by the other responsible agencies for implementation of the
Project include:
A. Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), coverage under the
General Construction Permit by preparation of a NOI and SWPPP. Possible
approval of an individual National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES), if major dewatering is required;
B. State of California, Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development
(OSHPD), approval of construction for the acute care portions of the SUMC
Project. SUMC Project plans would also need to be reviewed for compliance
with fire safety codes by the State Fire Marshal;
C. State of California, Department of Health Services (DHS), operating licenses;
D. State of California, Department of Radiological Health Services (DRHS),
design review and operating licenses of shielded areas; and
E. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), approval of
remediation of existing hazardous materials, operational ventilation related to
hazardous materials and permit approvals for emergency generators and any
other stationary sources.
SECTION 3. Record of Proceedings.
5
110607 jb 0130719
(a) For purposes of CEQA, CEQA Guidelines section 15091(e), and these
findings, the Record of Proceedings for the Project consists of the following documents, at a
minimum:
(1) The Final EIR, which consists of the Stanford University Medical Center
Facilities Renewal and Replacement Draft Environmental Impact Report,
published and circulated for public review and comment by the City from
May 20, 2010 through July 27, 2010 (the "Draft EIR") , and the Stanford
University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Final
Environmental Impact Report, published and made available on February 11,
2010, and all appendices, reports, documents, studies, memoranda, maps,
testimony, and other materials related thereto;
(2) All public notices issued by the City in connection with the Project and the
preparation of the Draft EIR and the Final EIR, including but not limited to
public notices for all public workshops held to seek public comments and
input on the Project and the Notice of Preparation, Notice of Completion,
Notice of Availability;
(3) All written and oral communications submitted by agencies or interested
members of the general public during the public review period for the Draft
EIR, including oral communications made at public hearings or meetings
held on the Project approvals;
(4) The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program;
(5) All findings and resolutions adopted by the City Council in connection with
the Project, and all documents cited or referred to therein;
(6) All final reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning
documents relating to the Project prepared by the City of Palo Alto,
consultants, or responsible or trustee agencies with respect to the City of Palo
Alto's compliance with the requirements of CEQA, and with respect to the
City of Palo Alto's actions on the Project, including all staff reports and
attachments to all staff reports for all public meetings held by the City;
(7) Minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all public meetings and/or public
hearings held by the City of Palo Alto in connection with the Project;
(8) Matters of common knowledge to the City of Palo Alto, including, but not
limited to, federal, state, and local laws and regulations;
(9) Any documents expressly cited in these findings, in addition to those cited
above; and
6
110607 jb 0130719
(10) Any other materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public
Resources Code section 21167.6(e).
(b) The custodian of the documents comprising the record of proceedings is the
Director of Planning and Community Environment, City of Palo Alto, 250 Hamilton Avenue,
Palo Alto, California, 94301.
(c) Copies of all of the above-referenced documents, which constitute the record
of proceedings upon which the City of Palo Alto's decision on the Project is based, are and have
been available upon request at the offices of the Planning and Community Environment
Department, City of Palo Alto, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California, 94301, and other
locations in the City of Palo Alto.
(d) The City of Palo Alto has relied upon all of the documents, materials, and
evidence listed above in reaching its decision on the Project.
( e) The City Council hereby finds, determines and declares that the above-
referenced documents, materials, and evidence constitute substantial evidence (as that term is
defined by section 15384 of the CEQA Guidelines) to support each of the findings contained
herein.
SECTION 4. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
(a) CEQA requires the lead agency approving a Project to adopt a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the changes made to the Project that it has
adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. An MMRP has
been prepared and is recommended for adoption by the City Council concurrently with the
adoption of these findings to ensure compliance with mitigation measures during Project
implementation. As required by Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the MMRP designates
responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of the mitigation measures
recommended in the Final EIR. The MMRP will remain available for public review during the
compliance period.
(b) The City Council hereby adopts the MMRP for the Project attached hereto and
incorporated by reference, and finds, determines, and declares that adoption of the MMRP will
ensure enforcement and continued imposition of the mitigation measures recommended in the
Final EIR, and set forth in the MMRP, in order to mitigate or avoid significant impacts on the
environment.
SECTION 5. Impacts Determined to be Less Than Significant.
By these Findings, the City Council ratifies and adopts the Final EIR's conclusions
for the following potential environmental impacts which, based on the analyses in the Final EIR,
this City Council determines to be less than significant, or to have no impact:
3.2 Land Use
7
110607 jb 0130719
LU-2. Conflicts with E~tablished Residential, Recreational, Educational, Religious,
or Scientific Uses in the Area. The SUMC Project would not conflict with residential,
recreational, educational, religious or scientific uses.
LU-3. Physical Division of an Established Community. The SUMC Project would
not physically divide an established community.
LU-4. Farmland Conversion. The SUMC Project would have no impact on
conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses.
LU-6. Cumulative Impacts on Changes to Overall Existing or Planned Land Uses in
the Area. The SUMC Project, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable probable future
development in the area, would have a less-than-significant cumulative impact on overall
existing or planned land uses in the vicinity of the SUMC Sites.
3.3 Visual Quality
VQ-4. Terrain Modifications. The SUMC Project would not require substantial
terrain modifications that would degrade the visual character of the SUMC Sites.
VQ-6. Shadowing of Public Open Space. The SUMC Project would not
substantially shadow public open space (other than public streets and adjacent sidewalks)
between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. from September 21 to March 21.
VQ-7. Cumulative Impacts on Visual Character. The SUMC Project, in combination
with other reasonably foreseeable probable future development in the area, would have a less
than significant cumulative impact on visual character in the vicinity of the SUMC Sites.
VQ-8. Cumulative Impacts on Sensitive Views. The SUMC Project, in combination
with other reasonably foreseeable future development in the area, would have less than
significant cumulative impacts on sensitive views.
VQ-9. Cumulative Light and Glare. The SUMC Project, in combination with other
reasonably foreseeable probable future development in the area, would be subject to
Architectural Review and Municipal Code, and County requirements pertaining to light and
glare. Impacts would therefore be less than significant.
VQ-10. Cumulative Shadows. Shadows from the SUMC Project are not expected to
combine with shadows from other nearby reasonably foreseeable probable future development.
There would be no cumulative impacts'.
3.4 Transportation
TR-S. Freeway Impacts. The SUMC Project would result in less than significant
impacts on freeways.
8
110607 jb 0130719
TR-7. Transit Impacts. Implementation of the SUMC Project would not impede the
operation of the transit system as a result of increased ridership, and thus would not result in a
significant impact.
TR-S. Parking Impacts. The SUMC Project would provide adequate parking for its
demand, and would thus have a less than significant parking impact.
TR-l1. Cumulative Transit Impacts. Cumulative growth would result in a less than
significant cumulative impact on transit services.
3.5 Air Quality
AQ-3. Localized Carbon Monoxide Impacts from Motor Vehicle Traffic. The
SUMC Project would have less than significant localized air emissions resulting from additional
traffic.
AQ-4. Toxic Air Contaminants. Simultaneous exposures to DPM and TACs from the
construction and operational components of the SUMC Project would have a less than significant
impact on air quality.
AQ-5. Objectionable Odors. The SUMC Project would have a less than significant
impact related to exposing the public to objectionable odors that would affect a substantial
number of people.
AQ-S. Cumulative Construction and Operatio~al TAC Emissions. SUMC Project
TAC emissions and TAC emissions from other sources within a 1,000-foot zone of influence of
the Main SUMC site, would have a less-than-significant cumulative impact on air quality under
the criteria set by the BAAQMD's 2010 CEQA Guidelines.
3.6 Climate Change
CC-2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Implementation of the proposed Emissions
Reduction Program along with regulations adopted after the CARB Scoping Plan, would reduce
emissions associated with the Project to more than 30 percent below BAU. Therefore,
greenhouse gas emissions from the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable
contribution to global climate change.
3.7 Noise.
NO-6. Cumulative Construction Vibration Impacts. Vibration during construction
activities under the cumulative scenario would result in a less than significant cumulative impact.
NO-7. Cumulative Operational Transportation Source Noise Impacts. Cumulative
development would result in less than significant cumulative noise impacts.
9
110607 jb 0130719
NO-S. Cumulative Operational Stationary Source Noise Impacts. Cumulative
development would not result in a significant increase in cumulative noise levels from
operational stationary sources at sensitive receptors.
3.9 Biological Resources
BR-2. Loss of Riparian or Other Sensitive Habitats, Including Wetlands as Defined
by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Construction of the SUMC Project would have a less
than significant impact on riparian or other sensitive habitat resources, including wetlands.
BR-S. Conflict with any Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural
Community Conservation Plan. The SUMC Project would have no impact on any applicable
Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan.
BR-6. Cumulative Impacts on Special-Status Wildlife Resources. The SUMC
Project, in combination with other foreseeable development, would have a less than significant
impact on Special-Status Plant Resources.
BR-7. Cumulative Loss of Riparian or Other Sensitive Habitats, Including Wetlands
as Defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Cumulative impacts on riparian or other
sensitive habitats could be significant. However, the SUMC Project's contribution to the
cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
BR-S. Cumulative Interference with the Movement of Any Native Resident or
Migratory Fish or Wildlife Species or With Established Native Resident or Migratory Wildlife
Corridors, or Use of Native Wildlife Nursery Sites. Cumulative interference with movement of
resident or migratory species or with established migratory corridors could be significant.
However, the SUMC Project's contribution to, the cumulative impact would be less than
cumulatively considerable.
3.10 Geology
GS-l. Exposure to Seismic-Related Hazards. The SUMC Project would have a less
than significant potential to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic
ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure (including liquefaction), landslides, expansive
soil, or major geologic hazards that cannot be mitigated through the use of standard engineering
design and seismic safety techniques.
GS-2. Exposure to Other Geotechnical Hazards. The SUMC Project would have a
less than significant potential to be located on geologic units or on soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the Proj ect and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.
GS-3. Cause Substantial Erosion or Siltation. The SUMC Project would have a less
than significant potential to cause substantial erosion or siltation.
10
110607 jb 0130719
GS-4. Cumulative Exposure to Substantial Erosion or Siltation. The SUMC Project,
in combination with other foreseeable development in the San Francisquito Creek Watershed,
would not substantially increase erosion or siltation because of State, federal, and local runoff
and erosion prevention requirements. As a result, the cumulative impact would be less than
significant.
3.11 Hydrology
HW -1. Flood Risk and Flood Flows. The SUMC Project would have no impact on
flood risk or flood flows.
HW -2. Groundwater Recharge and Local Water Table. The SUMC Project would
have a less than significant impact on groundwater recharge and the local groundwater table
level.
HW-4. Stormwater Runoff and Erosion. The SUMC Project would have a less than
significant impact on stormwater runoff and erosion.
HW-S. Flooding and Stormwater Conveyance Capacity. The SUMC Project would
have a less than significant impact on flooding and stormwater conveyance capacity.
HW -6. Streambank Instability. The SUMC Project would have a less than
significant impact on streambank instability.
HW-7. Degradation of Surface Water Quality. The SUMC Project would have a less
than significant impact on degradation of surface water quality.
HW-8. Dam Failure Inundation. The SUMC Project would have a less than
significant impact regarding dam failure inundation.
HW-9. Violation of Any Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements
(WDRs). The SUMC Project would have a less than significant impact regarding water quality
standards or WDRs.
HW -10. Cumulative Groundwater Recharge and Local Water Table. The SUMC
Project, in combination with reasonably foreseeable probable future development, would have a
less than significant cumulative considerable impact on groundwater recharge and the local
groundwater table.
HW-ll. Cumulative Groundwater Quality Impacts. The SUMC Project, in
combination with reasonably foreseeable probable· future development, would have a less than
significant cumulative impact on groundwater quality.
HW-12. Cumulative Stormwater Runoff and Erosion. The SUMC Project, in
combination with reasonably foreseeable probable future development, would have a less than
significant cumulative impact on stormwater runoff and erosion.
11
110607 jb 0130719
HW-13. Cumulative Flooding and Stormwater Conveyance. The SUMC Project, in
combination with reasonably foreseeable probable future development, would have a less than
significant cumulative impact on stormwater runoff and erosion.
HW-14. Streambank Instability. The SUMC Project, in combination with reasonably
foreseeable probable future development, would have a less than significant cumulative impact
on streambank instability.
HW-15. Degradation of Surface Water Quality. The SUMC Project, in combination
with reasonably foreseeable probable future development, would have a less than significant
cumulative impact on degradation of surface water quality. .
HW-16. Dam Failure Inundation. The SUMC Project, in combination with
reasonably foreseeable probable future development, would have a less than significant
cumulative impact regarding dam failure inundation.
HW-17. Violation of Any Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge
Requirements (WDRs). The SUMC Project, in combination with reasonably foreseeable
probable future development, would have a less-than-significant cumulative impact on violation
of water quality standards and WDRs.
3.12 Hazardous Materials
HM-l. Exposure from Hazardous Materials Use, Handling, and Disposal. The
SUMC Project would not substantially increase exposure from hazardous materials use,
handling, and disposal during operation.
HM-4. Hazardous Waste Generation and Disposal Resulting in Increased Exposure
Risk. The SUMC Project would not substantially increase exposure risk related to hazardous
waste generation.
HM-5. Emit Hazardous Emissions or Handle Hazardous Materials Within One-
Quarter Mile of a School. The SUMC Project would not emit or handle hazardous materials
within one-quarter mile of school.
HM-6. Construct a School on a Property that is Subject to Hazards from Hazardous
Materials Contamination, Emissions or Accidental Release. The SUMC Project would not
construct a school that is subject to hazards from hazardous materials contamination, emissions
or accidental release.
HM-S. Wildland Fire Risk. The SUMC Project would not expose people or
structures to a significant risk ofloss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.
HM-9. Occur on a Site Located Within an Airport Land Use Plan or Within Two
Miles of a Public Airport, and Result in a Safety Hazard. The SUMC Project would not be
located within an Airport Land Use Plan or within 2 miles of a Public Airport.
12
110607 jb 0130719
HM-ll. Cumulative Handling, Storage, Disposal, and Transport of Hazardous
Materials. Cumulative development would increase handling, storage, disposal, and transport
within the SUMC Sites and adjacent areas. However, cumulative development would be subject
to applicable federal, State, and local regulations that would govern these activities. As a result,
the cumulative impact would be less than significant.
HM-14. Cumulative Exposure of Schools to Hazardous Materials and Waste.· The
SUMC Project, in combination with reasonably foreseeable probable future development, would
have a less than cumulatively considerable impact on exposure of schools to hazardous materials.
3.13 Population and Housing
PH-I. Population Growth. The SUMC Project would increase on-site employment
and visitors and thus indirectly induce housing demand and population growth; however, the
percentage of regional housing demand resulting from the SUMC Project would be relatively
small in comparison with projected housing growth in the region, and would comprise a less than
significant environmental impact.
PH-2. Displacement of Existing Housing or Residents. The SUMC Project would
not displace existing housing or residents because the SUMC Project would involve infill of
currently developed sites that do not contain housing. Thus, the SUMC Project would result in
no impact with respect to displacement of housing or residents.
PH-3. Impacts on Jobs to Employed Residents Ratio. The SUMC Project would
have an impact on the City's jobs to employed residents ratio, as the Project involves
Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments which would result in a significantly greater
amount of employment-generating uses beyond what the City historically planned for this area,
thus exacerbating the pre-existing imbalance between jobs and housing within the City.
However, as further discussed in Section 3.13, this is not, by itself, an environmental impact.
The environmental consequences of this impact on traffic and air quality are addressed elsewhere
in these findings.
3.14 Public Services
PS-l. Impacts Related to Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Facilities. The
SUMC Project would require an increased level of fire and emergency services. However, the
increased level of fire and emergency services would not be large enough to trigger the need for
construction of new facilities, which could adversely affect the physical environment. Impacts
would be less than significant.
PS-2. Impacts from Police Protection Facilities. The SUMC Project would require
an increased level of police services. However, the increased level of police services would not
be large enough to trigger the need for construction of new facilities, which could adversely
affect the physical environment. Impacts would be less than significant.
PS-3. Impacts Related to School Facilities. An increase in students, which would
require school expansions, would result as a tertiary impact of the SUMC Project, since
13
110607 jb 0130719
increased employment from the SUMC Project could induce additional housing units within the
City. Both the SUMC Project and induced housing projects would be subject to SB 50 School
Impact Fees, which would mitigate impacts to less than significant.
PS-4. Impacts Related to Construction of New or Altered Parks and Recreation
Facilities. The SUMC Project would not result in the construction or expansion of new parks or
fields, which would in turn result in adverse environmental impacts. The SUMC Project would
be required to pay a City Community Facility Fee, which would be used to fund new parks or an
alteration to an existing park, and would mitigate impacts to less than significant.
PS-5. Deterioration of Park and Recreation Facilities. Increased recreational demand
from SUMC Project employees could accelerate the physical deterioration of the City's parks
and fields. The SUMC Project would be required to pay a City Community Facility Fee, which
reduce or avoid any such deterioration, and would mitigate impacts to less than significant.
PS-6. Cumulative Fire Protection Demand and Emergency Medical Facilities.
Cumulative growth would increase demand for fire protection and emergency response services
within the PAFD's service area; however, no new PAFD facilities would need to be constructed.
Cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
PS-7. Cumulative Police Protection Demand. Cumulative growth in the City could
necessitate construction of new or expanded police facilities in order to meet increased demand
for services. Construction of new or expanded police facilities could result in significant
environmental impacts. As such, cumulative impacts related to police service could be
significant. However the SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative need for new or
expanded police facilities would be less than cumulatively considerable.
PS-s. Cumulative School Demand. Cumulative development in the City can be
expected to necessitate expansion of school facilities, which could have adverse physical
environmental impacts. This cumulative impact is conservatively assumed to be significant,
although the SUMC Project's contribution to this cumulative impact would be less than
cumulatively considerable. .
PS-9. Cumulative Demand for Parks and Recreation Facilities, and for New Parks.
Cumulative impacts related to park deterioration would be less than significant due to the City's
Community Facility Fee. Cumulative growth in the City would necessitate acquisition or
development of new parklands, which could result in significant environmental impacts;
however, the contribution of the SUMC Project to this cumulative impact would be less than
cumulatively considerable.
3.15 Utilities
UT -1. Water Demand. The SUMC Project would result in a less than significant
water supply impact because it would not result in the need for new or expanded entitlements for
water supplies, and would not require expansion or construction of water facilities.
14
110607 jb 0130719
UT-2. Wastewater Generation. The SUMC Project would result in a less than
significant wastewater impact because it would not exceed treatment requirements of the
RWQCB, would not significantly increase use of the wastewater disposal system, and would not
require expansion or construction of wastewater collection or treatment facilities.
UT-3. Stormwater Generation. The SUMC Project would have a iess-than-
significant impact related to stormwater collection system capacity because it would not
significantly increase use of the stormwater collection system, and would not require expansion
or construction of new stormwater facilities.
UT-4. Solid Waste Generation. The SUMC Project would result in a less-than-
significant solid waste impact because it would be served by landfills with sufficient capacity
and, thus, would not contribute to the need to expand existing or construct new solid waste
disposal facilities.
UT-5. Energy Demand. Although the SUMC Project is an urban infill project and
would not require the expansion of natural gas facilities and would use existing utility facilities,
it may require the installation of near-site electrical facilities and natural gas pipelines to
accommodate the projected additional demand. However, this installation is included in the
SUMC Project and no additional off-site construction relating to electrical and natural gas
facilities would occur. Therefore, the SUMC Project would have a less than significant impact
related to the construction of energy facilities.
UT-6. Cumulative Water Impacts. Since the City has sufficient water supply to
accommodate water demands for cumulative development up to 2025, new or expanded
entitlements for water supplies are not necessary. Therefore, cumulative development would
have a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to water supply.
UT -7. Cumulative Wastewater Impacts. Since the RWQCP has sufficient capacity to
accommodate wastewater generated by cumulative development up to 2025, implementation of
major facility and infrastructure improvements would not be necessary. In addition, general
replacement and maintenance of old wastewater facilities is expected and would comply with
applicable environmental regulations. Therefore, cumulative development would not have a
significant cumulative impact related to wastewater.
UT-S. Cumulative Stormwater Generation. Cumulative development in the City of
Palo Alto and at Stanford University could increase the amount of stormwater runoff. This
increased level of runoff may trigger the need for the replacement or maintenance of storm drain
facilities. However, general replacement and maintenance of storm drain facilities is included in
City plans and would comply with applicable environmental regulations. Therefore, cumulative
development would have a less than significant cumulative impact related to the capacity or
deterioration of storm drain facilities.
UT -9. Cumulative Solid Waste Impacts. Cumulative development would generate
solid waste within the permitted capacity of the SMART Station and Kirby Canyon Landfill.
Cumulative development would not result in substantial deterioration of solid waste facilities. As
such, cumulative impacts related to solid waste generation would be less than significant.
15
110607 jb 0130719
UT -10. Cumulative Energy Demand. Cumulative development in the City of Palo
Alto would consume additional energy and, therefore, would increase the demand for energy.
The City's electrical and natural gas facilities are projected to have adequate capacity to serve
the City's increased demand for energy. The increased level of energy demand may trigger the
need for the replacement or maintenance of energy facilities. However, general replacement and
maintenance of energy facilities is expected and would comply with applicable environmental
regulations. Therefore, cumulative development would not have a significant cumulative impact
related to energy demand and energy facilities.
SECTION 6. Potentially Significant Impacts to be Mitigated.
The Draft EIR and the Final BIR concluded that the Project would result in
potentially significant environmental impacts in the areas listed below. Through the imposition
of the identified mitigation measures, these identified potentially significant environmental
impacts will be reduced to less-than-significant impacts. All citations to the Draft EIR chapters
below include reference to all revisions to those chapters contained in the Final EIR.
3.2 Land Use
LU-t. Conflicts with Adopted Land Use Plans and Policies. The SUMC Project
could conflict with Comprehensive Plan policies that avoid or reduce impacts related to visual
quality, cultural resources, pedestrian circulation, urban forest resources, groundwater and runoff
pollution, air quality degradation, and noise incompatibility.
a) Potential impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.2 of the Draft BIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The following Mitigation Measures will be adopted
and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and
as further described in the remainder of these findings:
Mitigation Measures VQ-2.1, CR-I.1 through CR-I.5, TR-6.1, BR-4.1 through BR-
4.5, HW-3.1, AQ-I.1 and AQ-I.2, NO-I. 1 and NO-4.1
c) Findings. The above-noted Mitigation Measures will ensure consistency
with Comprehensive Plan Policies as follows:
1) Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1 would require that the City and SUMC Project
sponsors comply with Comprehensive Plan Policy L-3 requirements for
respecting views of the foothills and East Bay hills, and that the Project
would maintain the scale and character of the City and is compatible with
surrounding development and public spaces.
2) Mitigation Measures CR-I.1, CR-I.2, CR-I.3, CR-I.4 and CR-I.5 would
minimize the loss of the historic Edward Durell Stone Building complex, and
protect the Hoover pavilion from vibration impacts, thus furthering the
16
110607 jb 0130719
objectives of Comprehensive Plan Policy L-5l, which encourages
preservation of historic resources.
3) Mitigation Measure TR-6.l requires the Project sponsors to implement
improvements for bicycle and pedestrian safety and access at intersection
affected by Project traffic, consistent with Comprehensive Plan transit
policies encouraging walking and bicycling.
4) Mitigation Measures BR-4.l through BR-4.5, provided in Section 3.9,
Biological Resources, require the preparation of a Tree Preservation Report,
a solar access study, a Tree Relocation Feasibility Plan, a Tree Preservation
Bond/Security Guarantee, and minor site modifications to the current site
plans. While complete preservation of Protected Trees would not occur, this
mitigation would fulfill the City's responsibility set out in Comprehensive
Plan Policy N -14 to protect, revitalize, and expand Palo Alto's urban forest.
5) Mitigation Measure HW-3.l, provided in Section 3.11, Hydrology, requires
the SUMC Project sponsors to develop a work plan for any unknown
contaminated sites. This measure would address environmental impacts
associated with groundwater quality impacts, ensuring consistency with
Comprehensive Plan Policy N-18.
6) Mitigation Measures AQ-l.l and AQ-l.2 would address environmental
impacts associated with particulate emissions by controlling construction
dust and reducing diesel emissions. By requiring these mitigations, the City
would support applicable air quality programs, consistent with
Comprehensive Plan Policy N-26. These mitigation measures would reduce
emissions of particulates from construction and continued implementation of
the ongoing TDM programs would minimize emissions from operation of the
SUMC Project, ensuring consistency with Comprehensive Plan Policy N-27.
7) Mitigation Measure NO-4.l which requi.res shielding or enclosure of HV AC
and emergency generator equipment, and Mitigation Measure NO-l.l which
controls construction noise, would reduce Project noise impacts to less than
significant levels, consistent with Comprehensive Plan Policies N-39 and N-
43.
Impact LU-5: Adverse Changes to Overall Existing or Planned Land Uses in
the Area. Because the Project would increase building intensity and massing within the SUMC
Sites, the Project would have a potentially significant impact pertaining to on-site character and
views.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.2 of the Draft EIR.
17
110607 jb 0130719
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1 will reduce the significant impacts on
overall surroundings to a less than significant level because it requires ARB and City Council
review of the design of the Project and compliance with Council-imposed conditions for final
design. Architectural Review would consider whether the Proj'ect has a coherent composition
and whether its bulk and mass are harmonious with surrounding development.
3.3 Visual Quality
Impact VQ-l: Temporary Degradation of Visual Character During
Construction. The SUMC Project would temporarily but substantially degrade the existing
visual character and quality of the SUMC Sites during construction.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.3 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure VQ-l.l will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure VQ-l.l will reduce this impact to a less than
significant level because it will require the development and implementation of a Construction
Visual Improvements Plan that would aesthetically improve portions of the Project site that
would remain unimproved for an extended period and screen the construction zone from view by
passersby along the public streets and sidewalks.
Impact VQ-2: Permanent Degradation of Visual Character Post Construction.
, The SUMC Project would have a significant and pennanent impact pertaining to degradation of
the existing visual character or quality of the SUMC Sites and their surroundings.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.3 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1 will be adopted and will
_ be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1 will reduce the Project's impact on
the existing visual character of SUMC Sites and their surroundings to a less than significant level
because it will require ARB and City Council review and compliance with Council-imposed
conditions addressing massing, layout, landscaping and architectUral design impacts from the
Project.
18
110607 jb 0130719
Impact VQ-3: Alteration of Public Viewsheds, View Corridors, or Scenic
Resources. The SUMC Project would result in significant impacts on views.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.3 of the DraftEIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1, above, will be adopted
and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1 will reduce impacts on views from
the proposed buildings under the Project to a less than significant level because the Architectural
Review process will make recommendations to the City Council on such issues as whether
natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the Project, on whether the
design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character, and whether the planning and
siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an internal sense of order and
provide a desirable environment for the community.
Impact VQ-5: New Sources of Light and Glare. The SUMC Project could
increase light and glare nuisance from exterior lighting, resulting in a significant impact.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.3 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1, above, is hereby
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure VQ-2.1 will reduce light and glare impacts
from the proposed buildings to a less than significant level because the Architectural Review
process will consider and make recommendations on the issue of whether the Project
incorporates quality materials, harmonious colors, appropriate ancillary features, a cohesive
design with a coherent composition and an appropriate lighting plan.
3.4 Transportation
Impact TR-l: Construction Impacts. Construction activity associated with the
SUMC Project would result in potentially significant traffic impacts.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.4 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures TR-1.1 through TR-1.9 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
19
110607 jb 0130719
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures TR-1.1 through TR-1.9 will reduce
construction-related traffic impacts to a less than significant level because these mitigation
measures (either individually or through the development of a construction impact mitigation
plan pursuant to TR-1.8) will: provide off-street parking for construction-related vehicles;
maintain pedestrian and bicycle access during construction unless given approval by the
Department of Public Works to limit such access; restrict deliveries to the construction site
during morning and afternoon rush hours; require the use of designated truck routes; require the
protection of public roadways from damage during construction; maintain public transit access
and routes; and require additional measures to prevent roadway construction from reducing
roadway capacity during special events.
Impact TR-2: Intersection Levels of Service. Implementation of the SUMC
Project would result in potentially significant impacts to multiple intersections during Peak Hour
conditions.
a) Potential Impact. The impacts identified above are described and discussed
in Section 3.4 ofthe Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures TR-2.1 through TR-2.4 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures TR-2.1 through TR-2.4 will reduce Project
impacts to all intersections to a less than significant level through the installation of traffic
adaptive signal technology, the funding of additional bicycle and pedestrian undercrossings, the
implementation of SUMC's enhanced transportation demand program, and the funding of
additional feasible intersection improvements. The analysis in Section 3.4 of the Draft'EIR, as
amended on pages 6-75 through 6-89 of the Final EIR, demonstrates how the implementation of
these mitigation measures will mitigate impacts at each of the intersections.
Impact TR-4: Local Circulation Impacts. The SUMC Project could result in
significant traffic impa~ts to the local circulation network in the immediate vicinity of the SUMC
Sites.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.4 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure TR-4.2 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation MeasureTR-4.2 will reduce traffic impacts to a less
than significant level because it will require improvements to local roadways to ease traffic flow.
20
110607 jb 0130719
Impact TR-6: Bicycle and Pedestrian Impacts. The SUMC Project could impede
the development or function of planned bicycle or pedestrian facilities, and result in a significant
impact.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.4 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures TR-2.3 and TR-6.1 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures TR-2.3 and TR-6.1 will reduce this impact to
a less than significant level because they would combine enhancement of the SUMC TDM
program, which encourages alternative transportation, with bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure
improvements. These would ensure that the projected increase in on-site employment and
visitorship would not significantly affect planned bicycle or pedestrian facilities.
Impact TR-7: Transit Impacts. Implementation of the SUMC Project could
impede the operation of the transit system as a result of increased ridership, and result in a
significant impact.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.4 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures TR-7.1 and TR-7.2 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures TR-7.1 and TR-7.2 will reduce the potential
impact of the Project on the transportation system to a less than significant level because these
measures will require the enhancement of bus stops on-site to accommodate increased ridership
as well as require Project sponsors to make a fair share financial contribution toward the
expansion of existing transit service to fund increases in capacity on the Marguerite Shuttle and
the AC Transit U Line to serve the Project.
Impact TR-9: Emergency Access. Implementation of the SUMC Project could
potentially result in inadequate emergency access due to increased congestion, a significant
impact.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.4 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure TR-9.1 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
21
110607 jb 0130719
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure TR-9.1 will reduce the impact of Project
generated traffic congestion on emergency service access to a less than significant level because
it will require the Project sponsors to make a fair share financial contribution to the installation
of an emergency vehicle traffic signal priority system at all significantly affected intersections.
Impact TR-IO: Cumulative Construction Impacts. The SUMC Project, in
combination with concurrent construction projects in the vicinity of the SUMC Sites, could result
in a significant construction-period impact. The contribution of the SUMC Project would be
cumulatively considerable.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.4 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure TR-1.1 through TR-1.9 will be
adopted and will be implemented as p~ovided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures TR-1.1 through TR-1.9 will reduce the
Project's contribution to a cumulative construction-period impact on traffic to a less than
significant level because these measures contain transportation-related construction management
programs designed to reduce the impact of construction on existing traffic patterns.
3.6 Climate Change
Impact CC-l: Furthering Policies of the Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan.
The proposed Emissions Reduction Program would minimize greenhouse gas emission increases
associated with the proposed development program. However, the proposed Emissions
Reduction Program would not be sufficient to further som~ of the individual policies of the
City's Climate Protection Plan.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.6 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures CC-1.1 through CC-1.S and TR-
2.3 will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
c) Findings: Mitigation Measures CC-1.1 through CC-1.S and TR-2.3 will
mitigate the Project's impact on the Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan to a less than significant
level by ensuri:qg that the Project will meet all of the individual policies of the Plan.
3.7 Noise
Impact NO-2: Construction Vibration. While the Draft and Final EIR concluded
that any construction vibration from the Project as originally proposed would be less than
22
110607 jb 0130719
significant, the Draft EIR also explained that the Tree Preservation Alternative, which the City is
now adopting, may necessitate the use of pile driving, which could result in potentially
significant vibration impacts on the Blak:e-Wilbur Clinic.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
pages 5-148 and 5-149 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. The Draft EIR identifies two different sets of
Mitigation Measures as "Mitigation Measure NO-I.I." The first such set of me1;iSures is
identified in Section 3.7, and the second set of measures (specifically addressing impacts relating
to use of pile driving equipment) is identified on page 5-149 of the Draft EIR (as revised on page
6-149 of the Final EIR). Both of these sets of measures identified as Mitigation Measure NO-1.1
will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure NO-I.1 will reduce vibration impacts from
pile driving equipment on the Blak:e-Wilbur Clinic by requiring use of sonic pile drivers where
feasible, by relocating patients and workers at the Blak:e-Wilbur Clinic during periods when pile
driving occurs within 75 feet of the clinic, and by requiring engineering assessment of any pile
driVing impacts to the Blak:e-Wilbur Clinic, including any necessary repair. Such measures will
reduce any construction vibration impacts to the Blak:e-Wilber Clinic to a less than significant
level. As explained in the Draft and Final EIR, the Project will not result in any other potentially
significant construction vibration impacts.
Impact NO-4: Operational Stationary Source Noise Impacts. Operational
stationary source noise generated by the SUMC Project could potentially increase ambient noise
levels in the vicinity ofthe SUMC Sites and result in a significant impact.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.7 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure NO-4.1 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure NO-4.1 will reduce operational stationary
noise impacts to a less than significant level because the City Noise Ordinance will require that
noise from mechanical 'equipment shall be minimized through compliance with noise standards
of the Noise Ordinance, as confirmed by an acoustical analysis conducted by a qualified
professional.
3.8 Cultural Resources
Impact CR-2: Impacts on Prehistoric or Archaeological Resources. The SUMC
Project could potentially encounter archaeological resources and result in a significant impact.
23
110607 jb 0130719
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.8 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure CR-2.1 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. '
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure CR-2.1 will reduce impacts on prehistoric and
archaeological resources to a less than significant level because the mitigation measure requires
that (i) construction crews be trained regarding the possible presence and identification of
cultural resources, (ii) that work be stopped within 100 feet of the site if cultural resources are
discovered, (iii) a Stanford University archaeologist be consulted to evaluate the significance of
discovered resources, and (iv) appropriate steps be taken to avoid, protect and preserve such
resources as described in Mitigation Measure CR-2.1 on page 3.8-24 of the Draft EIR.
Impact CR-3: Impacts on Human Remains. The SUMC Project could potentially
encounter human remains and result in a significant impact.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.8 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure CR-3.1 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure CR-3.1 would reduce the impacts relating to
undiscovered human remains to a less-than-significant level because they would require(i) work
stoppage if human remains are discovered, (ii) consultation with the Stanford University
Archaeologist, City of Palo Alto, and the San Mateo County Coroner concerning appropriate
treatment of such remains, and (iii) the implementation of appropriate measures based on
consultation with the Coroner and archaeologist and with the Native American Heritage
commission if the remains are determined to be Native American.
Impact CR-4: Impacts on Paleontological Resources. The SUMC Project could
have a significant impact on unique paleontological resources or unique geologic resources.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.8 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure CR-4.1 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure CR-4.1 will reduce impacts on
paleontological resources to a less than significant level because it requires that if
paleontological resources are encountered on site, Project sponsors shall (i) stop work and notify
the City and Stanford Archaeologist; (ii) consult with a qualified professional paleontologist; (iii)
comply with the paleontologist's recommendations to reduce impacts to paleontological
24
110607 jb 0130719
resources, including avoidance of the area if feasible, or other appropriate measures if avoidance
is not feasible.
Impact CR-6: Cumulative Impacts on Prehistoric and/or Archaeological
Resources and Human Remains. The SUMC Project, in combination with other reasonably
foreseeable probable future development, could cause a substantial change in the significance of
prehistoric andlor archaeological resources or human remains and thus contribute to a
significant cumulative impact. The SUMC Project is conservatively assumed to have a
considerable contribution.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.8 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures CR-2.1 and CR-3.1 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures CR-2.1 and CR-3.1 will reduce the Project's
contributions to cumulative impacts on prehistoric and archaeological resources and human
remains to a less than significant level because the Project is entirely outside of the
archaeologically sensitive zone, making it's impact on such resources unlikely. If such resources
were to be uncovered, the implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the impact of
the Project itself on these resources to a less than significant level.
Impact CR-7: Cumulative Impacts on Paleontological Resources. The SUMC
Project, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable probable future development where
the Pleistocene-age creek bed may occur, could have a significant cumulative impact. Such an
impact. would occur if the buried Pleistocene-age creek bed is exposed in lengths greater than
approximately 100 feet (or a sufficient length to support detailed hydrological study) and if such
deposits contain substantially intact skeletons of extinct species. These conditions would
represent a major find for regional paleontology. In the case that significant paleontological
finds-such as stretches of buried Pleistocene-age creek bed greater than 100 feet in leJ1'gth and
containing intact skeletons of extinct species-are made on the SUMC Site, then the SUMC
Project's contribution to the cumulative impact on paleontological resources could be
cumulatively considerable.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.8 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure CR-4.1 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure CR-4.1 will reduce cumulative impacts to
paleontological resources to a less than significant level because should any paleontological
25
110607 jb 0130719
resources be identified on site, the Mitigation Measure imposes a protocol for the protection of
these resources as described on pages 3.8-25 to 3.8-26 of the Draft EIR.
3.9 Biological Resources
Impact BR-l: Impacts on Special-Status Plant or Wildlife Resources. The
SUMC Project could have a significant impact on special-status wildlife resources.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.9 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures BR-l.l through BR-1.5 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures BR-l.l through BR-1.5 will reduce impacts
on special-status bats and Cooper's hawk to a less than significant level because the measures
require pre-demolition surveys for roosting bats and avoidance of the roosts, or protection of
active maternity roosts if they are found, or the use of bat nest boxes if structures are to be
demolished; and avoiding tree removal during the nesting season for Cooper's Hawks as well as
protection of the hawk as well as its eggs and young if tree removal or pruning is unavoidable
during the nesting season.
Impact BR-3: Interference with the Movement of Any Native Resident or
Migratory Fish or Wildlife Species or with Established Native Resident or Migratory
Wildlife Corridors, or Use of Native Wildlife Nursery Sites. The SUMC Project would have
no impact on the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or use of
native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, but could impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites and thus result in a significant impact.
a) Potential Impact. The· impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.9 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures BR-3.1 and BR-3.2 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures BR-3.1 and BR-3.2 will reduce impacts on
native nesting migratory birds to a less than significant level because they require (i) the
avoidance of tree or shrub removal or pruning during the bird-nesting period, or (ii) if tree or
shrub removal must be conducted during the nesting period, a survey to determine whether nests
are present and if they are found, a delay in the removal of the tree or shrub while the nest is
occupied.
26
110607 jb 0130719
3.11 Hydrology
Impact HW-3: Groundwater Quality. The SUMC Project could have a
significant impact on groundwater quality during construction.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.11 of the Draft ErR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure HW-3.1 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure HW-3.l will reduce impacts on groundwater
quality during construction to a less than significant level because if any source of suspected
contamination is discovered during construction, work shall cease and Project sponsors will be
required to prepare a workplan to assess potential health risks from the contamination and
prepare a Removal Action Workplan pursuant to state law to remove or remediate any identified
source of potential groundwater contamination.
3.12 Hazardous Materials
Impact HM-2: Demolition and Construction-Related Hazardous Materials
Disturbance. The SUMC Project could release hazardous materials in existing buildings.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.12 of the Draft ErR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure HM-2.1 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure HM-2.1 will reduce impacts from the
disturbance of hazardous materials during demolition and construction to a less than significant
level because the Measure requires the conduct of an asbestos survey by an licensed asbestos
abatement contractor, and in the event that asbestos is discovered the material shall be removed
and disposed of by an asbestos abatement contractor. The Measure also requires a site health
and safety plan to be developed in compliance with OSHA requirements to protect worker
health.
Impact HM-3: Exposure to Contaminated Soil and/or Groundwater During
Construction. The SUMC Project could expose construction personnel and public to existing
contaminated groundwater and/or soil.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.12 of the Draft ErR.
27
110607 jb 0130719
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures HM-3.1 through HM-3.4 and
HW-3.1 will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures HM-3.1 through HM-3.4 and Mitigation
Measure HW-3.1 will reduce the impacts of construction personnel or the public being exposed
to contaminated groundwater andlor soil to a less than significant level. Phase I ESAs were
conducted to identify potential hazards within the Project boundaries. Mitigation Measures HM-
3.1 through HM-3.3 address those sites where potential hazards were identified, requiring further
analysis to determine the existence of contamination and remediation if contamination is
discovered. Mitigation Measure HM-3.4 requires specification of measure to prevent hazards
resulting from remediation. Mitigation Measure HW-3.1, which addresses potential
contamination to groundwater, also requires. Project sponsors to develop a work plan for any
unknown contaminated site, which would further reduce the impacts to less than significant.
Impact HM-7: Occur on a Site Included on the Cortese List, a List of
Hazardous Materials Sites. The SUMC Project would result in construction of facilities on a
site included on the Cortese List.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.12 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures HM-3.3 and HM-3.4 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures MH-3.3 and HM-3.4 will reduce impacts
from exposure to hazardous material to a less than significant level because they require the
implementation of a soil vapor program and site management plan to address the known hazards
existing on the Hoover Pavilion site.
Impact HM-IO: Impairment of Emergency Plans. The SUMC Project could
impair implementation or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation
plan.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.12 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures HM-10.1, TR-1.1, TR-1.4
through TR-1.6, TR-1.8 and TR-9.1 will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures HM-10.1, TR-1.1, TR-1.4 through TR-1.6,
TR-1.8 and TR-1.9 will reduce this impact to a less than significant level because they (i) require
advance coordination with the City on construction routes or roadway closures, (ii) impose
28
110607 jb 0130719
construction-period traffic controls to reduce the impact on traffic in general and during special
events scheduled to occur during construction, and (iii) reduce the impact on emergency vehicles
during Project operation by requiring the installation of traffic signals giving priority to
emergency vehicles.
Impact HM-12: Cumulative Disturbance of Hazardous Materials from
Construction. The SUMC Project and adjacent development could result in cumulative release
of hazardous materials during construction, a significant cumulative impact. The SUMC
Project's contribution to the cumulative impact would be considerable.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.12 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure HM-2.1 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measure HM-2.1 will reduce to a less than significant
level the Project's contribution to the cumulative release of hazardous materials during
construction because the Measure will require asbestos abatement for construction during the
Project (as described at pages 3.12-37 to 3.12-38 of the Draft EIR) that will reduce the Project's
individual impact to a less than significant leveL
Impact HM-13: Cumulative Exposure to Contaminated Soil and/or
Groundwatet, and from Cortese List Sites. The SUMC Project and adjacent development
could result in cumulative disturbance of contaminated soils, release of hazardous materials
during construction, a significant cumulative impact.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.12 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures HM-3.1 through HM-3.4 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures HM-3.1 through HM-3.4 will reduce the
Project's contribution to cumulative release of hazardous materials during construction to a less
than significant level because the Measures would require remediation of known site
contamination as well as investigation of other SUMC areas and preparation for remediation
where necessary.
Impact HM-15: Cumulative Impairment of Emergency Plans. Cumulative
development could impair implementation or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response or evacuation plan. The SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact would
be considerable.
29
110607 jb 0130719
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.12 of the Draft EIR.
b)' Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures HM-lO.l, TR-1.1, TR-1.4
through TR-1.6, and TR-1.8 will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Mitigation Measures HM-10.l, TR-1.1, TR-1.4 through TR-1.6
and TR-1.8 will reduce the Project's contribution to cumulative impairment of emergency
response or evacuation plans to a less than significant level because the Measures would require
the implementation 'of construction traffic management procedures as well as other traffic
management measures that would reduced the Project's impact on the emergency vehicle access
to a less than significant level.
SECTION 7. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts.
The Draft EIR and the Final EIR also concluded that the Project would result in
significant and unavoidable environmental impacts which cannot be fully mitigated through the
adoption of mitigation measures. Those impacts, along with measures to partially mitigate them,
are listed below. All citations to the Draft EIR chapters below include reference to all revisions
to those chapters contained in the Final EIR.
Impact TR-3: Impacts on Roadway Segments. The SUMC Project would result
in adverse traffic impacts to roadway segments in the City of Menlo Park.
a) . Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.4 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures TR-2.2, TR-2.3, and TR-7.2
will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level. The implementation of the
mitigation measures identified above will reduce adverse traffic impacts by encouraging the use
of alternative transportation. However, even with the adoption of these measures there will still
be significant and unavoidable traffic impacts on four Menlo Park roadways.
(ii) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to traffic impacts, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations below.
30
110607 jb 0130719
Impact AQ-l: Construction Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions. Construction
activities associated with the SUMC Project would cause emissions of dust and pollutants from
equipment exhaust that could contribute to existing air quality violations or expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.5 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures AQ-l.l and AQ-1.2 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant leveL While the Mitigation Measures
noted above would significantly reduce construction dust emissions as well as construction
equipment emissions, the reduction of these emissions to a less than significant level cannot be
guaranteed. Thus, this impact is ~onsidered significant and unavoidable.
(ii) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to emissions associated with construction activity, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations below.
Impact AQ-2: Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions. Combined mobile
and stationary source emissions during operation of the SUMC Project would exceed the Bay
Area Air Quality Management District's significance threshold of 80 pounds/day of ROG, NOx
and PMlO. Therefore, air emissions would result in a substantial contribution to an existing
regional air quality problem and a significant impact.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.5 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure TR-2.3 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
. available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant leveL There are no mitigation
measures available to address stationary source emissions that will result from the construction
of the Project. Mitigation Measure TR-2.3 will reduce mobile source emissions through the
31
110607 jb 0130719
SUMC program encouraging the use of alternative transportation, reducing VMT. However, this
reduction will not result in a sufficient decrease in mobile source emissions, and therefore the
City considers this impact to be significant and unavoidable. Section 3.13 of the Draft EIR does
identify additional possible mitigation strategies in its discussion of Mitigation Measure PH-3.1.
However, in part for the reasons discussed on pages 3-184 through 3-186 of the Final EIR, the
Council finds that it would not be feasible to impose Mitigation Measure PH-3.1 on the Project.
Specifically, with respect to the suggestion that the City could amend its Zoning Code to permit
additional residential uses within the City, the City it already considering what residential
designations within the City are feasible as part of its update of its ongoing Housing Element and
there is no further mitigation which could feasibly be imposed in the context of this specific
Project. With respect to requiring SUMC to pay the City's affordable housing fee for the
portions of the project that are currently exempt from the City's housing fee, SUMC is already
agreeing to pay its equitable share in an amount equivalent to what the fee would be as part of
the Development Agreement. In addition, the Council has previously made the policy decision
to exempt hospital uses from paying a housing fee. With respect to providing additional housing
sites within the Hospital District itself, the City agrees with SUMC's comment (Comment 22.72
in the Final EIR) that there are no feasible sites within the Hospital District in which new
housing could be required. Finally, it would not be feasible for the City to require the creation of
additional housirig sites in unincorporated areas outside of the City, given the City's lack of
jurisdiction to do so, and given SUMC's opposition to any such requirement.
(ii) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to a reduction in air quality caused by mobile and stationary source emissions, as set forth in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations below.
Impact AQ-6: Cumulative Construction Emissions. Construction equipment
NOx emissions associated with the SUMC Project could contribute considerably to regional air
quality problems.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.5 of the Draft BIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures AQ-1.1 and AQ-l.2 will be
adopted and will be· implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measures AQ-l.l
and AQ-1.2 would reduce the Project's contribution to cumulative construction emissions, but
the contribution to NOx would remain cumulatively considerable, thus making this impact
significant and unavoidable.
32
110607 jb 0130719
(il) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to. a reduction in air quality resulting from construction equipment emissions, as set forth in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations below.
Impact AQ-7: Cumulative Operational Emissions. SUMC Project operation
could contribute considerably to a degradation of regional air quality as defined by the
BAAQMD.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.5 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure TR-2.3 will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure TR-2.3 will
reduce mobile source emissions through the SUMC TDM prograII}. encouraging the use of
alternative transportation. However, this reduction will not result in a sufficient decrease in
emissions to prevent degradation in air quality, and therefore the City considers this impact to be
significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure PH-3.1 is not feasible for the reasons discussed
above.
(il) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to degradation in air quality, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations below.
Impact NO-I: Construction Noise. Construction of the SUMC Project would
create a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels on the SUMC Sites compared to
existing ambient noise levels. The noise increase would be a s,gnificant impact to the sensitive
uses (i.e., patients) on the Main SUMC Site during construction.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.7 and also on pages 5-148 to 5-149 of the Draft EIR. As discussed in those pages of
the Draft EIR (as revised at page 6-149 of the Final EIR), this impact will be potentially greater
with adoption of the Tree Preservation Alternative, since that alternative may necessitate the use
of pile-driving.
b) Mitigation Measures. The Draft EIR identifies two different sets of
Mitigation Measures as "Mitigation Measure NO-1.1." The first such set of measures is
identified in Section 3.7, and the second set of measures (specifically addressing impacts relating
to use of pile driving equipment) is identified on page 5-149 of the Draft EIR (as revised on page
33
110607 jb 0130719
6-149 of the Final EIR). Both of these sets of mitigation measures identified as Mitigation
Measure NO-l.1 will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
available to mitigate this impact to a less than significant level. While the mitigation measures
identified above will reduce the impact by requiring the implementation of best management
practices to reduce construction noise (including noise and vibration from pile driving) and
provide a mechanism for responding to complaints about noise, it will not reduce the impact to a
less than significant level. Therefore this impact remains significant and unavoidable.
(il) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to construction noise as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations below.
Impact NO-3: Operational Noise Impacts from Transportation Sources.
Increased traffic and helicopter noise levels due to implementation of the SUMC Project would
be less than significant. However, noise from ambulances due to implementation of the SUMC
Project would increase along Sand Hill Road west of EI Camino Real, and would increase
roadside noise levels above the thresholds established in the City's Comprehensive Plan, albeit
on an intermittent basis.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.7 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. There is no feasible mitigation measure to reduce this
impact.
c) . Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts: There are no feasible mitigation measures available to
mitigate the impact of ambulance noise to a less-than-significant level. The only available
measure would be to forbid ambulance access to the new emergency room via the Durand Way
access routes, a measure that would be inconsistent with the provision of emergency room
services. Therefore, this ~mpact is significant and unavoidable.
(il) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to noise from ambulances, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations below.
34
110607 jb 0130719
Impact NO-5: Cumulative Construction Noise Impacts. If other foreseeable
construction in the immediate vicinity of the SUMC Sites would occur simultaneously with the
proposed SUMC Project construction, then significant cumulative noise impacts to adjacent
residential and other noise-sensitive uses could occur. The SUMC Project's contribution would
likely be cumulatively considerable.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.7 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measure NO-I.I will be adopted and will
be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level. Although the identified
mitigation measure will less construction noise from the Project, the Project's contribution to
cumulative noise will remain considerable, and therefore this impact is significant and
unavoidable.
(ii) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to its contribution to cumulative construction noise as set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations below.
Impact CR-l: Impacts on Historical Resources. The SUMC Project would have a
significant impact on historical resources.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.8 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures CR-l.I through CR-1.5 will be
adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level. While the identified mitigation
measures will lessen the impact on historical resources by providing protection from construction
damage for the Hoover Pavilion, and historical documentation of the Stone Building Complex
slated for demolition, the remaining impact will be significant and unavoidable due to the
demolition of the Stone Building. However, the Council finds that impacts to the Hoover
Pavilion will be mitigated to a less than significant level.
35
110607 jb 0130719
(ii) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to historical resources as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations below.
Impact CR-5: Cumulative Impacts on Historic Resources. The SUMC Project,
in combination with other past, current, and probable future development in the City, would
cause a substantial change in the significance of the City's historic resources and thus have a
significant cumulative impact. The SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact
would be cumulatively considerable.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.8 of the Draft EIR.
b) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation Measures CR-1.2 through CR-1.4 will be
. adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program. .
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level. The demolition of the Stone
Building Complex means that the Project's contribution to the cumulative impact on historical
resources is considerable. While Mitigation Measures CR-1.2 through CR-1.4 will lessen this
impact by documenting the historical significance of the Complex, the cumulative impact
remains significant and unavoidable.
(ii) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to cumulative impacts on historical resources , as set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations below.
Impact BR-4: Substantial Adverse Effect on any Protected Tree as Dermed by
the City of Palo Alto's Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 8.10). The
SUMC Project could have a significant impact on Protected Trees.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.9 of the Draft EIR, as well as on pages 5-152 through 5-154 of the Draft EIR (as
amended on pages 6-143 and 6-144 of the Final EIR) in its discussion of the Tree Preservation
Alternative.
b) Mitigation Measures/Alternatives. Mitigation Measures BR-4.1 through
BR-4.5 will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program. In addition, as further discussed in the City's finding on alternatives below,
the City is adopting the Tree Preservation Alternative described on pages 5-15 through 5-22 of
36
110607 jb 0130719
the Draft EIR, as amended on pages 6-128 through 6-130 of the Final EIR, to further reduce the
Project's impacts on protected trees. Because the City is adopting the Tree Preservation
Alternative, there is no need to also adopt MitigatiQn Measure BR-4.6, since the Tree
Preservation Alternative already achieves the purpose of that measure.
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BR-4.1 through BR-4.5 and adoption of the Tree Preservation Alternative would
lessen the Project's impact on Protected Trees, and avoid removal (without relocation) of all
biological and aesthetical tree resources Trees. However, the Project would still be able to
remove up to 59 Protected Trees, and 3 Protected Trees that are biological and aesthetic tree
resources would be relocated.
(ii) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to the Project's impact on Protected Trees, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations below.
Impact BR-9: Cumulative Impacts on Protected Tree as de:fmed by the City of
Palo Alto's Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 8.10). Cumulative
impacts on Protected Trees would be significant. Because the SUMC Project would result in the
loss of Protected Trees, the SUMC Project's contribution would be cumulatively considerable.
a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in
Section 3.9 of the Draft EIR, as well as on pages 5-152 through 5-154 of the Draft EIR (as
amended on pages 6-143 and 6-144 of the Final EIR). in its discussion of the Tree Preservation
Alternative.
b) Mitigation Measures/Alternatives. Mitigation Measures BR-4.1 through
BR-4.6 will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program. In addition, as further discussed in the City's finding on alternatives below,
the City is adopting the Tree Preservation Alternative described on pages 5-15 through 5-22 of
the Draft EIR, as amended on pages 6-128 through 6-130 of the Final EIR, to further reduce the
Project's impacts on protected trees.
c) Findings. Based on the Final EIR and the entire record before the City, the
City Council finds that:
(i) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures
available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level. While Mitigation Measures BR-
4.1 through BR-4.6 and the Tree Preservation Alternative will lessen the Project's impact on
Protected Trees, as discussed above, that impact will remain significant and unavoidable, making
the Project's contribution to the cumulative impact on Protected Trees considerable.
37
110607 jb 0130719
(ii) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other
benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating
to the cumulative impact on Protected Trees as set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations below.
SECTION 8. Further Findings Regarding Proposed Mitigation Measures.
The Council further rejects the following mitigation measures proposed at various
stages of the proceedings for the following reasons:
Private Bus Service. For the reasons stated in the Final EIR, provision of the
Caltrain GO Pass to Hospital employees is expected to be an effective measure to reduce Project-
related vehicle trips and associated air pollutant emissions, including greenhouse gases.
Mitigation Measure TR-2.3 also includes steps that would be taken to monitor progress toward
achievement of the required alternative mode splits, and the steps that would be taken if the
SUMC Project sponsors cannot achieve the required alternative mode splits, either because the
Caltrain GO Pass is no longer available in its current form, or because the enhanced TDM
program does not perform as anticipated. The Final EIR evaluates an alternative mitigation
approach under which the City would require the SUMC Project sponsors to provide a private
bus service for their employees, rather than funding the GO Pass Program or other substitute
programs. For the reasons presented in the Final EIR, provision of private bus service would not
be as cost-effective as Mitigation Measure TR-2.3.
Expanded Shuttle Service. In combination, Mitigation Measures TR-2.1, TR-2.2,
TR-2.3 and TR-2.4 would reduce impacts on freeway segments and at intersections to a less-
than-significant level. The Final EIR evaluates the effectiveness of increased shuttle service for
SUMC employees to reduce traffic congestion impacts. The analysis shows that four possible
routes could be provided to serve the local SUMC employees; however, such additional
mitigation is unnecessary to reduce intersection impacts to a less-than-significant level. Further,
such additional mitigation would not substantially reduce the significant and unavoidable impact
from increased average daily trips on four Menlo Park roadway segments.
Remote Parking. Both the Draft EIR and the Final EIR evaluate remote parking as
an alternative to Mitigation Measure TR-2.3, which requires the Hospitals to provide an
enhanced TDM program to address the Project's impacts on intersections and freeway segments.
The analysis identifies potential remote parking locations, all of which would require further
analysis if they were to be selected with the exception of use of the existing Ardenwood Park-n-
Ride lot, which is a component of Mitigation Measure TR-2.3. The analysis also identifies
substantial concerns as to the effectiveness of remote parking. For the reasons presented in the
Final EIR, provision of remote parking would not be as effective as Mitigation Measure TR-2.3.
Further, remote parking would not substantially reduce the significant and unavoidable impact
from increased average daily trips on four Menlo Park roadway segments.
Other TDM Measures. Commentors have suggested a varIety of TDM measures in
addition to the measures described in Mitigation Measure TR-2.3. Mitigation Measure TR-2.3
38
110607 jb 0130719
requires that the SUMC Project sponsors achieve specified alternative mode split targets and
describes a process for evaluating changes to the enhanced TDM program should those targets
not be achieved. The SUMC Project sponsors will adapt their TDM program as needed over
time. Accordingly, it is not necessary to add TDM measures to Mitigation Measure TR-2.3.
No Net New Trips (or Similar) Requirement. The Final EIR explains why it
would not be feasible to impose a No Net New Trips requirement or other cap on the number of
vehicle trips on the Project. Mitigation Measure TR-2.3 differs from such a requirement because
it is based on mode split for employee travel, rather than trip counts. In addition to explaining
why a No Net New Trips requirement would not be feasible, the Final EIR also explains why, for
this Project, it is more practical to measure employee mode split than employee trip counts. The
SUMC facilities will generate both patient and vehicle trips, making measurement of the actual
number of employee trips difficult.
SECTION 9. Findings Regarding Project Alternatives.
Public Resources Code section 21002 prohibits a public agency from approving a
project if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects. When a lead agency
finds, even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, that a project will still cause
one or more significant environmental effects that cannot be substantially lessened or avoided, it
must, prior to approving the project as mitigated, first determine whether there are any project
alternatives that are feasible and that would substantially lessen or avoid the project's significant
impacts. Under CEQA, "feasibility" includes "desirability" to the extent that it is based on a
reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors,
and an alternative may be deemed by the lead agency to be "infeasible" if it fails to adequately
promote the project applicant's andlor the lead agency's primary underlying goals and objectives
for the project. Thus, a lead agency may reject an alternative, even if it would avoid or
substantially lessen one or more significant environmental effects of the project, if it finds that
the alternative's failure to adequately achieve the objectives for the project, or other specific and
identifiable considerations, make the alternative infeasible.
The City Council certifies that the Final EIR describes a reasonable range of
alternatives to the Project, or to its location, which could feasibly obtain the basic objectives of
the Project, and that the City Council has evaluated the comparative merits of the alternatives.
As described below and in Section 2(b) above, the City Council has decided to adopt the Tree
Preservation Alternative and certain components of the Village Concept Alternative and to reject
the remainder of the alternatives, as summarized below.
Section 2.3 of the Draft EIR sets forth a detailed and comprehensive list of both
SUMC Project sponsors' and the City's respective objectives for the Project. That list is
incorporated herein by reference. In light of the Project sponsors' and City's objectives for the
Project, and given that the Project is expected to result in certain significant environmental
effects even after the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, as identified above, the
City hereby makes the following findings with respect to whether one or more of the alternatives
evaluated in the Draft EIR could feasibly accomplish most of the goals and objectives for the
Project and substantially lessen or avoid one or more of its potentially significant effects.
39
110607 jb 0130719
No Project Alternative A: Retrofitting Only
No Project Alternative A: Retrofitting Only is discussed at pages 5-1 to 5-6 of the
Draft EIR. No Project Alternative A is hereby rejected as infeasible because it would not
achieve most of the Project objectives, as explained at page 5-40 of the Draft EIR.
No Project Alternative B: Replace SB 1953 Noncompliant Structures
No Project Alternative B: Replace SB 1953 Noncompliant Structures is discussed at
pages 5-7 to 5-9 of the Draft EIR. No Project Alternative B is hereby rejected as infeasible
because it would not achieve most of the Project objectives, as explained at pages 5-41 and 5-42
of the Draft ElR.
Reduced Intensity Alternative A: Right-size SHC and LPCH . ,
Reduced Intensity Alternative A: Right-size SHC and LPCH is discussed at pages 5-
9 to 5-12 of the Draft EIR. Reduced Intensity Alternative A is hereby rejected as infeasible
because it would not achieve many significant Project objectives, as explained at pages 5-42 and
5-43 of the Draft EIR.
Reduced Intensity Alternative B: Right-size SHC and LPCH plus additional
floor area (in an amount less than the SUMC Project)
Reduced Intensity Alternative B: Right-size SHC and LPCH plus additional floor
area (in an amount less than the SUMC Project) is discussed at pages 5-12 to 5-15 of the Draft
EIR. Reduced Intensity Alternative B is hereby rejected as infeasible because, while it would
achieve many of the short-term Project objectives, it would not achieve most of the long-term
Project objectives, as explained at pages 5-43 and 5-44 of the Draft EIR.
Tree Preservation Alternative
The Tree Preservation Alternative is discussed at pages 5-15 to 5-22 of the Draft
EIR. The Tree Preservation Alternative would attain all of the same Project objectives as would
the Project as originally proposed, as explained at pages 5-44 and 5-45 of the Draft BIR.
Furthermore, as discussed at pages 5-135 through 5-166 of the Draft EIR and pages 6-139
through 6-145 of the Final EIR, it would reduce the Project's impacts on protected trees, without
resulting in any new or increased environmental impacts different than those of the Project as
originally proposed. Thus, the Tree Preservation Alternative would feasibly attain the Project
objectives and would be environmentally superior to the Project as originally proposed. In
approving the Project, the City is therefore adopting the Tree Preservation Alternative, as
explained in Section 2(b) above.
Historic Preservation Alternative
The Historic Preservation Alternative is discussed at pages 5-22 to 5-26 of the Draft
EIR. The Historic Preservation Alternative would not fully attain the Project objectives, and also
40
110607 jb 0130719
has multiple drawbacks, as discussed at pages 5-45 through 5-48 of the Draft EIR. The City
Council finds that this alternative would not accomplish the Project objectives and is not feasible
for the reasons explained at pages 5-45 through 5-48 of the Draft EIR.
Village Concept Alternative
The Village Concept Alternative is discussed at pages 5-26 to 5-38 of the DEIR.
The Village Concept Alternative would attain most of the Project objectives, as discussed at
pages 5-49 of the Draft EIR and 6-132 of the Final EIR. The environmental impacts of the
Village Concept Alternative would be similar to the impacts of the Project as originally
proposed, as discussed at pages 5-195 through 5-222 of the Draft EIR and pages 6-149 through
6-158 of the Final EIR. The City is incorporating into the Project certain components of the
Village Concept Alternative, specifically, the linkage components described in Section 2(b)
above. However, the Village Concept Alternative also includes a housing component which
calls for the dedication of housing for SUMC employees. One of the housing sites, on Pasteur
Drive, already is zoned for housing in the City of Palo Alto. The other two sites (the Quarry
Road sites) are outside of Palo Alto, in unincorporated Santa Clara County. Implementation of
. the housing component, as a whole, would require the cooperation of the SUMC Project
sponsors and land use approvals by Santa Clara County, over which the City has no control or
jurisdiction. Further, according to SUMC Project sponsors, the Quarry Road sites identified in
the Village Concept Alternative are currently projected for use instead by students and
employees of Stanford University. The City and SUMC Project sponsors have engaged in
extensive discussions regarding the potential for implementation of the housing component of
the Village Concept Alternative, but SUMC Project sponsors have consistently expressed
opposition to the dedication of housing to SUMC employees. Based upon the SUMC Project
sponsors' expressed opposition, and the fact that the City does not have jurisdiction over the two
Quarry Road housing sites, the City finds the housing component of the Village Concept
Alternative to be infeasible, but is approving the linkage components of the Village Concept
Alternative as described in Section 2(b) above.
Additional Alternatives
Master Response 8 in the Final EIR (at pages 3-204 to 3-206) explains why various
other alternatives suggested by members of the public would not feasibly attain important Project
objectives. For the reasons set forth in Master Response 8 and elsewhere in the record, the
Council finds that there are no additional feasible alternatives to the Project which could mitigate
the above-identified significant and unavoidable environmental impacts of the Project.
SECTION 10. Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and Section 15093 of the CEQA
Guidelines, this City Council adopts and makes the following Statement of Overriding
Considerations regarding the remaining significant unavoidable impacts of the Project, as
discussed above, and the anticipated economic, social and other benefits of the Project. The City
finds that: (i) the majority of the significant impacts of the Project will be reduced to less-than-
41
110607 jb 0130719
significant and acceptable levels by the mitigation measures described in the Final EIR and
approved and adopted by these Findings; (ii) the City's approval of the Project will result in
certain significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided even with the
incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures into the Project; and (iii) there are no other
feasible mitigation measures or feasible Project alternatives that would further mitigate or avoid
the remaining significant environmental effects. The significant effects that have not been
mitigated to a less-than-significant level and are therefore considered significant and unavoidable
are identified in Section 7 above. Despite these potentially significant impacts, it is the City's
considered judgment that the benefits offered by the Project outwei~ the potentially adverse
effects of these significant impacts. The substantial evidence supporting the following described
benefits of the Project can be found in the preceding findings and in the record of proceedings.
The City Council finds that there are two categories of overriding considerations.
The first category relates to the amenities of the development of the Project itself, and the second
relates to the additional community benefits and other payments negotiated as part of the
Development Agreement for the Project. It should be noted that, as discussed in Master
Response 12 of the Final EIR, the SUMC Project sponsors could have requested City
consideration of the Project itself without approval of the Development Agreement, and thus
without the additional community benefits negotiated as part of the Development Agreement.
The City Council finds that the benefits from the amenities of the Project development itself, as
identified in Section lO(A) below, constitute "overriding considerations" for approval of the
Project, even without the additional community benefits identified in Section 10(B) below. The
City Council further finds that the additional community benefits and other payments serve as
additional overriding considerations which justify approval of the Development Agreement.
A. Project Amenities
The benefits of the Project which the City Council finds serve as "overriding
considerations" justifying its approval are as follows:
a. Health Care
Advancements in medicine that have taken place at the Stanford University Medical
Center include pioneering achievements in transplantation medicine, advancements in cancer
care through the introduction of the linear accelerator and the cyberknife, leadership in prenatal
diagnosis and treatment, discovery of the protein that appears to be the root cure of the type I
diabetes, and discovery of the link between exercise and increased "good" cholesterdllevels.
In addition to world-renowned medical breakthroughs, in 2009 the benefits
provided by the Stanford Hospital and Clinics and the Lucile Salter Packard Children's Hospital
at Stanford equated to the following:
• 36,559 inpatients admitted
• 48,744 emergency department visits
• 4,759 babies delivered
42
110607 jb 0130719
• $262.6 million in uncompensated medical services, charity care, and
community programs.
In addition, the two hospitals at the SUMC served 64 percent of the Palo Alto
residents who required hospitalization in 2009. The Project will enable the SUMC Project
sponsors to continue their important work to provide advancements in medicine, and health care
services to their patients. Further, the addition of more beds for adults and children will alleviate
overcrowding and allow the two hospitals to serve patients who currently must be turned away.
b. Levell Trauma Center
The two hospitals also provide the only Level 1 Trauma Center between San
Francisco and San Jose. The Trauma Center and the Emergency Department ensure critical
community emergency preparedness and response resources for the community in the event of
an earthquake, pandemic, or other major disaster. The expansion of the Emergency Department
and the associated facilities needed to support the ED services will help alleviate the critical
problem of an undersized facility for the volume of people seeking care. .
c. Seismic Safety
Several buildings at the SUMC require structural retrofit or replacement to comply
with SB 1953 and other applicable laws. Also, many of the facilities require nonstructural
renovations or replacement to comply with SB 1953. Portions of the School of Medicine that
currently occupy space in structures used for hospital purposes must be physically separated
from those structures or replaced in order to comply with SB 1953 requirements. In addition,
new or replacement hospital structures must meet current standards specified by the California
building code for hospitals; compliance with these standards necessitates increased square
footage and height to accommodate current seismic structural requirements, patient safety
requirements, air handling systems and mechanical duct work.
The Project has been designed to achieve compliance with the requirements of SB
1953 and other applicable laws, and will improve the seismic safety of the facilities at the
SUMC.
B. Community Benefits and Other Payments
Some of the additional community benefits and other payments negotiated as part of
the Development Agreement are identified below. The City Council finds that these additional
community benefits and other payments serve as overriding considerations which collectively
justify approval of the Development Agreement.
a. Health Care Services Funding
Payment of $3,000,000 paid out over ten years (subject to deferral under the terms
set forth in the Development Agreement) to be used to assist residents of Palo Alto who have
self-payment responsibilities beyond their financial means, to pay health care services.
43
110607 jb 0130719
b. Community Health Programs
One-time payment of $4,000,000 to be used for community based health and
wellness programs. The agreement specifically authorizes the City to use a portion of this
payment as seed money for Project Safety Net.
c. Infrastructure Capital Fund
The SUMC Project sponsors will provide $21,479,512 to be used by the City for
infrastructure, sustainable neighborhood and community development and affordable housing
programs. This fund could be used for a wide variety of important infrastructure projects.
d. Climate ChangelSustainable Communities
The SUMC Project sponsors will contribute $12,000,000 paid m three equal
installments for use in projects and programs for sustainable communities.
e. Cost Neutrality Payment
The SUMC Project sponsors will pay the City $2,417,000 up front to assure City
costs do not exceed City revenues generated by the Project over time. This payment represents
the discounted present value of the projected deficit as calculated by the City's economic
consultant.
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
44
110607 jb 0130719
f. Use Tax Direct Payment Permit
The SUMCProject sponsors will obtain a Use Tax Direct Payment Pennit which is
estimated to result in $750,000 paid over the life of the Project.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED: JUNE 6, 2011
AYES: BURT, ESPINOSA, HOLMAN, PRICE, SCHARFF, SCHMID, SHEPHERD,
YEH
NOES:
ABSENT: KLEIN
ABSTENTIONS:
110607 jb 0130719
45
Director of Planning and Community
Environment
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
the staging area for construction equipment and FIM2
vehicles.
b. The SUMC Project sponsors shall frequently Signature Date
remove construction debris and refuse from the
SUMC Sites. FIM3
c. The SUMC Project sponsors shall install all
landscaping as early as feasible to decrease visual Signature Date
impacts of construction. Existing landscaping
within the SUMC Sites that would not be removed
by the construction shall be maintained.
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project would have a significant impact pertaining to degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the SUMC Sites and
their su"oundings. (vQ-2)
VQ-2.1 Adhere to City's Architectural Review Process Undergo Architectural City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of SHC Hospital
and Recommendations. The SUMC Project sponsors Review; verify building City Council or building permits for
shall submit fmal building and site plans to the ARB permit plan compliance City of Palo Alto each building Signature Date
prior to issuance of any development permits. Director of
Architectural Review shall assess the appropriateness of Planning and SHC Clinics
proposed demolitions, proposed building heights and Community
massing, siting of buildings and structures, architecture Environment Signature Date
and fa~ade treatments, landscaping, circulation plans, and
parking. The ARB may recommend alterations to any of LPCH Hospital/Clinics
the above project features, or the ARB may suggest new
features, such as new landscaping or public art, to Signature Date
improve the proposed SUMC Project design. Any
conditions required by the City Council as a result of the Hoover MOB
Architectural Review process with respect to the design
of the SUMC Project shall be implemented by the SUMC Signature Date
Project sponsors.
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature Date
FIMI
Signature Date
i
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 2
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
TR-l.2 Maintain Pedestrian Access. The SUMC
Project sponsors shall be prohibited from substantially
limiting pedestrian access while constructing the SUMC
Project, without prior approval from the City of Palo
Alto Department of Public Works. Such approval shall
require submittal and approval of specific construction
management plans to mitigate the specific impacts to a
less-than-significant levels. Pedestrian access-limiting
actions would include, but not be limited to, sidewalk
closures, bridge closures, crosswalk closures or
pedestrian re-routing at intersections, placement of
construction-related material within pedestrian pathways
or sidewalks, and other actions which may affect the
mobility or safety of pedestrians during the construction
period. If sidewalks are maintained along the
construction site frontage, covered walkways shall be
provided.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Verify that information
is contained in
construction impact
mitigation plan
pursuant to TR-l.8;
compliance monitoring
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Public Works
Department
Timing
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building;
compliance
monitoring during
construction
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signature/Date Completed
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
SHC Hospital
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
4
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing Signature/Date Completed
Signature Date
FIM3
Signature Date
--------------------------
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 5
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
TR-I.3 Maintain Bicycle Access. The SUMC Project
sponsors shall be prohibited from limiting bicycle access
while constructing the SUMC Project without prior
approval from the City of Palo Alto Department of
Public Works. Such approval shall require submittal and
approval of specific construction management plans that
warn cyclists prior to reaching the impacted bicycle lanes
and provide alternative routing around the construction
sites to mitigate the specific impacts to a less-than-
significant level. Bicycle access-limiting actions would
include, but not be limited to, bicycle lane closures or
narrowing, closing or narrowing of streets that are
designated bicycle routes, bridge closures, the placement
of construction-related materials within designated
bicycle lanes or along bicycle routes, and other actions
which may affect the mobility or safety of bicyclists
during the construction period.
TR-I.4 Restrict Construction Hours. The SUMC
Project sponsors shall be required to prohibit or limit the
number of co nstruction material del iveries fr om 7: 00
a.m. to 9: 00 a.m., and fr om 4: 00 p.m. to 6: 00 p.m. on
weekdays. The SUMC Project sponsors shall be required
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Verify that information
is contained in
construction impact
mitigation plan
pursuant to TR-l.8;
compliance monitoring
Verify that information
is contained in
construction impact
mitigation plan
pursuant to TR-1.8;
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Public Works
Department
City of Palo Alto
Planning and
Community
Environment,
Public Works
Timing
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building;
compliance
monitoring during
construction
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building;
compliance
monitoring during
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project-Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signature/Date Completed
SHe Hospital
Signature Date
SHe Clinics
Signature Date
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature Date
Hoover MOB
Signature Date
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature Date
FIMI
Signature Date
FIM2
Signature Date
FIM3
Signature Date
SHe Hospital
Signature Date
SHC Clinics
6
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility
to Ii mit the nu mber of constru ction em ployees based I compliance monitoring I Department con
upon an approved construction management pi an from
arriving or departing the site from the hours of 4:30 p.m.
to 6 :00 p.m. Alth ough not needed to reduce the impact
to a less-th an-significant level, th e SUMC Proj ect
sponsors also sh all Ii mit t he number of con struction
employees fr om arri ving at the si te fr om 7:00 a.m. to
9:00 a.m ., cont ingent upon t he City's gr anting of an
exception to its co nstruction hours under its no ise
ordinance t 0 allow construction t 0 commence at 7:00
a.m.
TR-l.5 Restrict Construction Truck Routes. The
SUMC Project sponsors shall be required to deliver and
remove all construction-related equipment and materials
on truck routes designated by the cities of Palo Alto, East
Palo Alto and Menlo Park. Heavy construction vehicles
shall be prohibited from accessing the site from other
routes. Figure 3.4-6 and 3.4-7 of the EIR illustrates the
Stanford Area Truck Routes which must be used by all
trucks.
Verify that infonnation
is contained in
construction impact
mitigation plan
pursuant to TR-1.8;
compliance monitoring
City of Palo Alto
Public Works
Department
Timing
struction
Prior to issuance of
building pennits for
each building;
compliance
monitoring during
construction
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SignatureIDate Completed
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
SHC Hospital
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
7
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
Signature Date
Hoover MOB
Signature Date
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature Date
FIMI
Signature Date
FIM2
Signature Date
FIM3
Signature Date
TR-l.6 Protect Public Roadways During Construction. Review before and City of Palo Alto Before construction of "Before" Survey Report
The SUMC Project sponsors shall be required to repair after survey reports to Public Works any portion of the
any structural damage to public roadways, returning any determine the repair to Department SUMC projects Signature Date
damaged sections to original structural condition. The public roadways
SUMC Project sponsors shall survey the condition of the and "After" Survey Report
public roadways along truck routes providing access to
the proposed project site before construction, and shall after SUMC Project Signature . Date
again survey after construction is complete. A before-construction is
and-after survey report shall be completed and submitted completed Road Repair Completed, if necessary
to the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department for
review, indicating the location and extent of any damage. Signature Date
TR-l. 7 Maintain Public Transit Access and Routes. Verify that information City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of SHC Hospital
The SU MC Pr oject sp onsors sh all b e prohibited from is contained in Public Works building permits for
limiting access to public tran sit, a nd from lim iting construction impact Department each building; Signature Date
----------------------
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 8
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
movement 0 f public tran sit vehicles, with out prio r
approval from the Santa Clara C ounty Valley
Transportation Authority (VTA) or other app ropriate
jurisdiction. Such approval sh all requ ire submittal an d
approval of specific measures to reduce impacts to a less-
than-significant level. Po tential actio ns wh ich wo uld
impact access to tra nsit includ e, but are not lim ited to,
relocating or re moving bus s tops, lim iting access to bus
stops or transfer facilities, or 0 therwise restricting 0 r
constraining public transit operations.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
mitigation plan
pursuant to TR-1.8;
compliance monitoring
Responsibility Timing
compliance
moriitoring during
construction
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project-Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signature/Date Completed
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Strncture
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
9
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
TR-1.8 Prepare and Implement Construction Impact Review and approve City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of SHC Hospital
Mitigation Plan. In lieu of the above mitigation construction impact Public Works building permits for
measures, the SUMC Project sponsors shall submit a mitigation plans; Department each building; Signature Date
detailed construction impact mitigation plan to the City compliance compliance
of Palo Alto for approval by the Director of Public monitoring; transmit monitoring throughout SHC Clinics
Works prior to commencing any construction activities construction impact term of the
with potential transportation impacts. This plan shall mitigation plans to the construction impact Signature Date
address in detail the activities to be carried out in each City of Menlo Park and mitigation plan
construction phase, the potential transportation impacts receive comment LPCH Hospital/Clinics
of each activity, and an acceptable method of reducing or
eliminating significant transportation impacts. Details Signature' Date
such as the routing and scheduling of materials
deliveries, construction employee arrival and departure Hoover MOB
schedules, employee parking locations, and emergency
vehicle access shall be described and approved. Prior to Signature Date
its approval ofthe construction impact mitigation plan,
the City of Palo Alto shall provide a copy of the Hoover Parking Structure
construction impact plan to the City of Menlo Park for
review and comment. Signature Date
FIMI
-
Signature Date
FIM2
Signature Date
FIM3
Signature Date
TR-l.9 Conduct Additional Measures During Special Review and approve City of Palo Alto As necessary during Welch Road Improvements
Events. During major at hletic events or other s pecial SUMC Sponsor-Planning and construction
events which attract a substantial number of vi sitors to prepared plan(s) to Community Signature Date
~e campus, the SUMC Proj ect sponsors shall implement minimize traffic effects Environment
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 10
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
a mechanism to prevent roadway construction activities
from reduci ng roa dway cap acity along those roadways
that would be affect ed by the SUMC Project and that
would provide access to the at hletic or othe r special
events. This measure may require a special supplemental
permit to be a pproved by ei ther Sa nta Clara County or
the City of Palo Alto prior to hosting such events during
significant construction phases.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
in advance of major
events near the SUMC
during construction
Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: Implementation of the SUMC Project would result in significant impacts to intersections during Peak Hour conditions. (TR-2)
TR-2.1 Install Traffic-Adaptive Signal Technology. The
SUMC Project sponsors shall contribute to the Palo Alto
Citywide Traffic Impact Fee program, for the installation
of traffic-a daptive signals. In Menlo Pa rk, the SUMC
Project sponsors shall contribute their fair share amount,
which shall bet ied tot he am ount oft raffic ad ded t 0
analyzed intersections by the SUMC Project. The
SUMC Pr oject spo nsors' cont ributions shal I appl y
towards th e installation 0 ftraffic-ad aptive sig nals as
listed below.
• Sand Hill Road (Oak Creek to Shopping Center) - 3
signals
• Arboretum Road (Shopping Center to Palm Drive) -
3 signals
• Embarcadero Road (Bryant to Saint Fra ncis) -7
signals
• University A venue (Palm to Lincoln) -13 signals
• Lytton Avenue (Alma to Middlefield) -10 signals
• Hamilton A venue (Alma to Middlefield) -10
signals
• Middlefield Road (Sa n Ant onio to Hom er) - 9
signals
• Charleston Road (Alma to Middlefield) - 2 signals
Verify payment of
Citywide Traffic
Impact Fee and fair
share contribution
towards traffic-
adaptive signals in Palo
Alto and Menlo Park.
City of Palo Alto
Department of
Planning and
Community
Environment
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SHC Hospital
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
11
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
• EI Camino Real (northern city limits of Palo Alto to
southern city Ii mits 0 f Palo Alto) -signals wo uld
require approval of Caltrans
In addition, the SUMC Project sponsors shall pay a fair
share contribution towards installation of traffic-adaptive
signals at the below significantly-impacted intersections
in Menlo Park. These intersections are am ong those at
which Men 10 Park an ticipates in stalling traffic-ad aptive
signals:
• Middlefield RoadlWillow Road (intersection #18)
• Middlefield RoadlRavenswood Ave
(intersection #46)
nue
TR-2.2 Fund Additional Bicycle and Pedestrian
Undercrossings. The SUMC Project sponsors shall
contribute their fair share to the cost of construction of
the Everett Avenue undercrossing of the Caltrain tracks
in Palo Alto and the Middle Avenue undercrossing in
Menlo Park. In Palo Alto, there is a Citywide Traffic
Impact Fee program that the SUMC Project sponsors
shall contribute to. In Menlo Park, the fair share
contribution shall be tied to the amount of traffic added
to analyzed intersections by the SUMC Project. The
construction ofthe Everett A venue and Middle Avenue
undercrossings would reduce traffic volumes on nearby
streets, such as Ravenswood A venue and University
Avenue.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Verify payment of
Citywide Traffic
Impact Fee and fair
share contribution
towards bicycle and
pedestrian
undercrossings in Palo
Alto and Menlo Park.
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Department of
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SignaturelDate Completed
SHC Hospital
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
12
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
TR-2.3 Enhance Stanford University Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) Program. The S UMC
Project sponso rs sh all en hance th e cu rrently-
implemented IDM program i n orde r t 0 achi eve 3 5.1
percent usage 0 f altern ative tran sportation modes (i.e.,
carpool, va npool, bus, C altrain, bi cycle, a nd walk) by
Hospital employees. Th e initial en hancements to th e
SUMC IDM program shall inclupe the following:
• Commencing on Sept ember 1,2015, the Hospitals
shall purchase annual Caltrain GO Passes (free train
passes) for all existing and new Hospital employees
who work more than 20 hours per week, at a cost of
up to One Million Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars
($1,800,000) per year, which am ount s hall be
adjusted ann ually to reflect any change in the San
Francisco Bay Area Consumer Price Index (the "GO
Pass Am ount"). Th e Hospitals' ob ligation to
provide GO Passes shall continue for fifty-one (51)
years, or until su ch earlier date as: (a) Caltrain
discontinues the GO Pass program , or a
substantially similar program; (b) Caltrain increases
the co st of GO Passes, or a su bstantially si milar
program, su ch th at th e Ho spitals' an nual co sts
would exceed the GO Pass Am ount; or (c) Caltrain
service is reduced by su ch an ex tent that th e
Hospitals and the City mutually determine purchase
of ann ual GO Passes, or a su bstantially si milar
program, wo uld n 0 longer be ef fective i n
substantially redu cing Hospital em ployee p eak
period trips in order to achieve the Alternative Mode
targets in Tab Ie 3 .4-19 A in Section 3 in the Fi nal
EIR. If the cost of obtaining GO Passes exceeds the
GO Pass Amount, th e Hospitals sh all hav e th e
option to elect eith er to purchase th e GO Passes at
the th en applicab Ie p rice, or t 0 term inate the
obligation to provide GO Passes, or a su bstantially
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Review IDM reports
to verify that
enhancements ofIDM
program have been
implemented and
determine whether
interim mode split
targets have been
achieved; transmit
IDM reports to City of
Menlo Park for their
reVIew
City and SUMC
Project sponsors will
meet annually to
discuss effectiveness of
enhanced IDM
program and to identify
potential
improvements. SUMC
Project sponsors may
modify enhanced IDM
program as needed to
improve its
effectiveness.
Verify lease of75
parking spaces at
Ardenwood Park and
Ride lot, or an
equivalent location, at a
cost not to exceed
$45,000 per year.
For V-Line load
factors, verify Initial
Responsibility
City of Palo
Alto
Department of
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
Baseline IDM report
within six months of
SUMC Project
approval
AnnualIDM reports
submitted each Spring
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SignaturelDate Completed
Baseline TDM Report
Signature
Spring 2013
Signature
Spring 2014
Signature
Spring 2015
Signature
Spring 2016
Signature
Spring 2017
Signature
Spring 2018
Signature
Spring 2019
Signature
Spring 2020
Signature
Spring 2021
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
13
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
similar program. Ifth e Ho spitals' obligation to
provide GO Passes, 0 r a substantially similar
program, terminates for any of the reasons specified
in th is measure, t he Hospitals sh all co ntribute th e
GO Pass Am ount to one or m ore substitute
programs to encourage use of tran sit b y Hospital
employees or otherwise re duce peak pe riod traffic
trips in the intersections impacted by the Project as
identified in t he Proj ect EIR, in cluding but no t
limited to reg ional tran sportations syst ems 0 r
solutions. The substitute program or programs shall
be mutually agreed upon by the SUMC Parties and
the City's Di rector of PI anning an d Community
Environment.
• Use all rea sonable efforts to arrange with AC
Transit to lease 75 spaces at the Ardenwood Park &
Ride Lot, or an equivalent facility, to serve SUMC
employees who commute from the East Bay.
• Expand the Marguerite shuttle bus service between
the SUMC and P AITS as needed to accommodate
increased ridership by Hospital employees.
• Use all reas onable effort's to assure that the
controlling transit agency maintains load factors less
than 1.00 on the U-Line.
• Maintain a 10 ad factor less than or equ al to 1.25 on
the Marguerite shuttle.
• Expand a nd improve t he bicycle and pedestrian
networks as specified by Project site plans.
• Provide a fu ll-time 0 n-site TDM coo rdinator b y
2015 fo r th e hospital co mponents. Th e co ordinator
would b e responsible for or ganizing an d
disseminating TDM information primarily t 0
hospital em ployees and also to ho spital patients. A
central location would be made available to provide
information on altern ative travel m odes. Also, the
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Payment offer to AC
transit ($250,000) and
then subsequent annual
payment offers up to
$50,000 totaL
Responsibility
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Timing SignaturelDate Completed
Signature
Spring 2022
Signature
Spring 2023
Signature
Spring 2024
Signature
Spring 2025
Signature
Spring 2062
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
14
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
SUMC or Hospitals' website wo uld cont ain
information on TDM programs.
• Provide a gu aranteed ride home program fo r all
employees w ho u se transit an d other transport
alternatives like carpool and vanpool. The guarantee
ride ho me sh all allo w employees with dependent
children the ability to use alternative modes to travel
to an d fro m work but still b e ab Ie to travel home
mid-day in case of an emergency.
• Provide employees with shower facilities within the
SUMC Sites t 0 en courage bicyclin g to work. Th e
SUMC Pr oject spon sors shall also provide bicycle
storage facilities 0 n the SUMC Sites th at would be
conveniently located near the employee showers.
• Establish, in co njunction with th e GO Pass
implementation, a "Zip Car" (0 r other si milar car-
sharing pr ogram) with Zip Cars availa ble at the
medical complex.
• Perform annual TDM monitoring from the date of
initial project approval through the life ofthe project
(51 year s af ter proj ect appro val) an d su bmit th e
report to th e City 0 fPalo Alto. Th is rep ort also
shall be submitted to the City of Menlo Park for its
reVIew.
• Within si x (6) months of project app roval, an d
annually fo r a peri od of fifty-one ( 51) years from
initial project approval, the SUMC Proj ect sponsors
shall submit to the City's Directo r of PI ann ing and
Community Environment, a Hospital TDM Program
Report that shows the current number of employees
employed 0 ver 20 ho urs per week;, the number of
employees us ing anal temative mode s hare as
documented by a st udy or survey to be completed
by the Hospitals using a method mutually agreeable
to the City and Hospitals; and the efforts used by the
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project-Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Timing Signature/Date Completed
15
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
Hospitals to atte mpt to ac hieve th e Alt ernative
Mode targets.
These enhancements may not imm ediately change the
mode sp lit fo rHo spital emp loyees. Fu rther, because
transit use by employees of the Ho spitals is vo luntary,
and may be influenced by a number of factors outside the
reasonable control of the Hospitals, su ch as gasoline
prices, co sts and availability 0 f altern ative tran sit,
housing co sts and availability, and personal preferences
of employees, the Hospitals cannot guarantee the results
of th eir TDM programs. T he in terim targets in Tab Ie
3.4-19A in Section 3 in the Final EIR shall be used to
measure t he progress toward meeting the desi red mode
split by 2025. These interim targets assume that in the
early pha ses of implementation, there m ay be larger
shifts to alternative modes than the shifts that may occur
in later phases of the TDM program enhancement. For
purposes of calculating alternative mode share, any
mode that does not consti tute drivin gin a single-
occupant vehicle to and fr om the work site shall be
considered an "Alterna tive Mode," including
working rem otely fr om ho me.
For each ofth e in terim targ et years, fo llowing
submission oft he Hospitals TDM Annual Report, the
City sh all determine if th e interi m year targ et has been
met. Ifthe Hospitals have not met the interim target, the
Hospitals and th e City sh all meet to rev iew th e TDM
Program an d to id entify po ssible add itional TDM
Program enhancem ents that th e Hospitals sh ould
consider incorporating into their TDM Program in order
to increase the Program's effectiveness.
If the Hospitals do not meet the applicable interim targets
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project-Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Timing Signature/Date Completed
16
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
for an y two co nsecutive year s prior to 20 25, the
Hospitals shall provide alternative transportation funding
to th e City 0 fPalo Alto in annu al payments in th e
amount of$175,000 per year until the earlier "fthe yea r
2025 or th e year th e Hospitals achieve t he applica ble
interim mode split target, subject to am aximum offive
annual payments. Th e alternative transportation funding
shall be used by the City 0 fPalo Alto for local projects
and programs that enc ourage citywide use of alternative
transportation mode uses or otherwise reduce peak period
traffic trips in the intersections impacted by the Project as
identified in the Proj ect EIR, including but not limited to
regional transportation systems and solutions. The City
of Pal 0 Alto should consider transportation systems and
solutionsth at also help to red uce traffic in th e City 0 f
Menlo Park.
If by 2 025, t he Hospitals have n ot dem onstrated
substantial achievement ofthe 35.1 percent target modal
split fo r alternative tran sportation modes, th e fo llowing
measure shall be required:
• The Ho spitals sh all make a lump su m payment 0 f
$4.0 million to th e City 0 fPalo Alto for 10 cal
projects and program s that encourage a nd im prove
citywide use of alternative transportation mode uses
or otherwise reduce peak period traffic trips in the
intersections impacted by the Project as identified in
the Pro ject EIR, in cluding bu t no t limited to
regional transportation systems and sol utions. The
City of Palo Alto shall identify capital projects and
program enhancements for which the funds may be
applied. Sample projects may include contributions
towards reg ional tran sportation projects of in terest
to th e City of Palo Alto an d th at are id entified
within the Valley Transportation Authority -Valley
Transportation Plan 0 r ot her local pI anning
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Timing Signature/Date Completed
17
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
documents. The City 0 fPalo Alto should consider
transportation systems an d so lutions t hat also help
to redu ce traffic in t he City 0 fMen 10 Park. If
required, said $4.0 million payment shall constitute
funds to b e used by th e City to 0 ffset t rips by
Hospital employees through citywide trip reduction.
The $4.0 million payment sh all no t reliev e th e
Hospitals of any of t heir obligations und er th is
measure, including but no t li mited t 0 th eir
obligations to co ntinue to attempt to ac hieve th e
35.1 percenttarg etmo dal sp litth rough
implementation ofth e GO Pass or su bstantially
similar program, 0 r a sub stitute program mutually
agreed upon by the Hospitals and the City's Director
of PI anning a nd Community Envi ronment, whi ch
shall continue for 51 years from the date of Project
approval. Further, the Ho spitals sh all co ntinue to
implement an enha nced T DM program, monitor
modal sp lits b y Ho spital emp loyees, and strive to
maximize use of alternative comm ute modes by
Hospital employees. In addition, the Hospitals shall
continue to meet with the City on a regular basis to
identify po tential improvements to th e en hanced
TDM program.
TR-2.4 -Fund or Implement those Intersection
Improvements that Have Been Determined to be
Feasible. The SUMC Pro ject sponsors shall implement
the following measures:
• At th e in tersection of Arb oretum Ro adlGalvez
Street, the SUMC Project sponsors sh all in stall a
traffic signal.
• At the intersection of Bay front Expressway/Willow
Road, th e SUMC Pr oject spo nsors sh all pay a fair
share towards providing one more right-tum lane for
eastbound Willow Road.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Verify installation of
Arboretum/Galvez
traffic signal
Verify payment of fair
share contribution for
both Bayfront
intersections
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Director of
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
Prior to Occupancy
Permit for SHC
Hospital
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signature/Date Completed
Arboretum/Galvez traffic signal
Signature Date
Fair Share Payment for both Bayfront
intersections
Signature Date
18
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing Signatureillate Completed
• At t he intersection of Bayfront E xpressway/
University Avenue, the SUMC Project s ponsors
shall pay a fair share towards widening southbound
Bayfront Expressway to in elude an ad ditional
through Ian e an d re-stripe the ex elusive ri ght turn
lane to a shared through right tum lane. As a result,
two a dditional receiving lanes in the sout hbound
direction on Bayfront Expressway would be needed.
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project would result in adverse traffic impacts to roadway segments in the City of Menlo Park. (TR-3)
See Mitigation Measures TR-2.2, TR-2.3, TR-7.2.
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project could result in significant traffic impact to the local circulation network in the immediate vicinity of the SUMC Sites. (TR-
4)
TR-4.2 Fund Signing and Striping Plan and Signal Review signing and City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of Durand Way Improvements
Optimization. In addition to paying for the construction striping plan for Department of building permit for
of the extension of Durand Way from Sand Hill Road to Durand Way extension, Planning and Durand Way Signature Date
Welch Road, the SUMC Project spons ors shall also pay and signal optimization Community
for t he following improvements to ensu re t hat queues plan for Durand Way/ Environment
from the Durand Way/Sand Hill Road intersection do not Sand Hill Road and
spillback onto the Durand Way/Welch Road intersection. Durand Way/ Welch
• A si gning and st riping pI an for t he Durand Way Road
extension, which would maximize t he storage
capacity by creating a four-l ane roadway with a left
and through/right at Sand Hill Road and a right and
through/left at Welch Road;
• The installation and optimization of the two signals
at the intersections of Durand Way/Sand Hill Road
and Durand WaylWelch Road.
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project could impede the development or function of planned bicycle or pedestrian facilities, and result in a significant impact.
(TR-6)
TR-6.1 Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure Verify payment for City of Palo Alto Payments received Funding received for improvements
Improvements. Th e SUMC Project sponsors shall fund connection from Planning and prior to Initial Date
the expa nsion and im provement ofthe bicycle and planned Everett Community (45 days from Notice Signature Date
pedestrian network i n t he immediate vi cinity of t he bike/ped undercrossing Environment of Determination)
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 19
STANFORD UNI,VERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
SUMC Project. The intent of these improvements is to:
• reduce au to related traffic b y prov iding th e
infrastructure for alternative travel modes;
• improve t he bi cycle an d pedestrian linkages
between the SUMC Projec t and Downt own Pal 0
Alto, a nd between t he SUMC Project and t he
surrounding residential neighborhoods; and
• mitigate the safety hazards to pede strians and
cyclists th at will resu It from th e SUMC Proj ect
related inCrease in vehicular traffic and congestion.
The specific improvements to be funded by the SUMC
Project sponsors shall include the following:
• Create a bicycle and pe destrian connection between
the Stanford Shopping Ce nter and SUM C. The
connection shall provide an altern ative route to
Quarry Ro ad, wh ich is auto do minated. Th is
connection shall extend between Vineyard Lane and
Welch Road. Pedestrian traffic signals and
crosswalks shall be placed at the cros sing of
Vineyard Lan e and Welch Road. The cr osswalk
shall be enhanced either by striping or by the use of
contrasting paving.
• Provide a connection from the planne d Everett
Avenue bicycle and pedestrian undercrossing to the
El Ca mino Re al/Quarry Ro ad in tersection. On ce
the tunnelis completed, this linkage shall provide a
direct connection between the SUMC Project and
Downtown North.
• Incorporate in to th e Quar ry Road corr idor, from El
Camino Real t 0 Welch Road, improvements to and
within th e public right-of-way to en hance t he
pedestrian and bicycle connecti on, i neluding urban
design elements and way finding, wider bicycle lanes,
as necessary, on Quarry Road, enhanced transit nodes
for bus and lor shu ttle st ops, and pro minent bicycle
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
to ECRIQuarry
($2,250,000), and
enhancements of
Quarry Road and
intersections
($400,000)
Verify construction of
bicycle/ped connection
between Stanford
Shopping Center and
SUMC
Verify that landscape
plans contain sufficient
Class I and III bicycle
parking spaces and are
located in a manner
consistent with the City
of Palo Alto Municipal
Code
Responsibility Timing
City constructs
improvements prior to
Hospital Occupancy
Pennit
Stanford constructs
bicycle/ped
connection between
Stanford Shopping
Center and SUMC
prior to LPCH
Hospital Occupancy
Pennit.
Bike parking
requirements prior to
issuance of issuance
of building pennits
for each building
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SignatureiDate Completed
Improvements completed by City
Signature Date
Improvements completed by Stanford
Signature Date
SHC Hospital Bike Parking
Signature Date
SHC Clinics Bike Parking
Signature Date
LPCH Hospital/Clinics Bike Parking
Signature Date
Hoover MOB Bike Parking
Signature Date
FIM 1 Bike Parking
Signature Date
FIM 2 Bike Parking
Signature Date
FIM 3 Bike Parking
Signature
20
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
facilities.
• Enhance a II signalized in tersections in th e Project
Vicinity, particu ladyal ong Qu arry Road, Vin eyard,
and Welch R oads t 0 i nelude 12-foot pedestrian
crosswalks on all legs, with textured or colored paving
or diagon al or longitudinal zebra st riping as
detennined by th e City, p edestriail. push bu ttons and
countdown pedestrian signal heads, and other specific
improvements that are detennined as necessary during
the desi gn process, su ch as median refuge islands,
advanced si gning, flashing beacons, in-pavement
lighting, etc.
• Install the appropriate num ber of Class I a nd Class
ill bicycle parking spa ces as required by the City's
Zoning 0 rdinance for the total am ount of existing
and fu ture development. The SUMC Project
sponsors shall install the required number ofbicyele
parking space s equally di stributed throughout t he
SUMC Sites.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignatureiDate Completed
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project would not adversely impact either AM or PM Peak Hour bus service in Palo Alto or Caltrain service. Nonetheless,
mitigation to provide enhanced bus stops and shuttle service is identified here. (TR-7)
TR-7.1 Incorporate Enhanced Bus Stops Into Site Plans. Verify that enhanced City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of I SHC Hospital
The SUMC Project sponsors shal 1 re vise their SUMC bus stops have been Department of building permits for
Project site plan to incorporate two enhanced bus stops to included in site plans Public Works SHC Hospital and I Signature Date
reduce the im pact to transit se rvice ca used by the SUMC and Department Hoover MOB
Project. Th ese enhan ced bus st ops shall be located at of Planning and I Hoover MOB
Hoover Pavilion and at SHC, and shall b e on-street Community
facilities. The enhanced bus stops shall accommodate two Environment I Signature Date
buses simultaneously, and shall have sh elters, seating,
lighting, si gns, maps, bus schedu les, and bicyele park ing.
On-street bus stops along Welch Road and Qu arry Road
shall also b e prov ided, bu t the enhanced bus stops sh all
accommodate t he majority of transit ri ders and shall be
located t 0 max imize t he convenience of em ployees,
patients, and visitors. One enh anced bus stop shall be
located in the vicin ity of Welch Road and Pasteur Drive to
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 21
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
demolition an d con struction phases, th e SUMC Pro ject
sponsors sh all requ ire th e construction co ntractors to
comply with the dust control strategies developed by the
BAAQMD. The SUMC Project sponsors shall include in
construction contracts the following requirements:
a. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose
materials including demolition debris, or req uire all
trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard;
b. Water all activ e con struction areas (exposed 0 r
disturbed soil surfaces) at least twice daily;
c. Use watering to con trol dust generation du ring
demolition of structures or break-up of pavement;
d. Pave, apply water th ree times daily, or apply (n on-
toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved parking areas
and staging areas;
e. Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) all paved
access roads, parking areas and staging areas during
the earthwork phases of construction;
f. Sweep daily (with water sweep ers) if visible so il
material is carried onto adjacent public streets;
g. Hydroseed or appl y (non-toxic) soi 1 st abilizers t 0
inactive construction areas (previously graded areas
inactive for ten days or more);
h. Enclose, co ver, wat er twice dai ly, or ap ply non -
toxic so il binders to exp osed sto ckpiles (d irt, sand,
etc.);
i. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph;
j. Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to
prevent silt runoffto public roadways; and
k. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as
possible.
AQ-I.2 Implement Equipment Exhaust Emission
Reduction Measures. T 0 reduce emissions from
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
construction impact
mitigation plan
pursuant to TR-1.8;
compliance monitoring
Verify that information
is contained in
Responsibility
Public Works
City of Palo Alto
Public Works
Timing
each building;
compliance
monitoring during
construction
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SignaturelDate Completed
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
SHC Hospital
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
23
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
construction equipment duri ng project de molition and construction impact Department each building; Signature Date
construction phases, the SUMC Pr oject sp onsors shall mitigation plan compliance
require th e con struction co ntractors to co mply with th e pursuant to TR-I.8; monitoring during SHC Clinics
following emission reduction strategies to the maximum compliance monitoring construction
feasible exte nt. The SUMC Project sponsors sh all Signature Date
include i nco nstrUction contracts th efo llowing
requirements: LPCH Hospital/Clinics
a. Where possibl e, electrical equipment shall be used
instead offossil-fuel powered equipment, Signature Date
b. The contract or shall inst all te mporary etectrical
service whenever possible to avoid need for fossil-Hoover MOB
fuel powered equipment. Signature Date c. Running eq uipment not be ing act ively use d f or
construction purposes for more t han five minutes Hoover Parking Structure shall be turned off. (e.g., trucks waiting to deliver or
receive soil, aggre gate, or other bulk materials; Signature Date however, rotating-drum conc rete trucks may kee p
their eng ines ru nning con tinuously as 10 ng as th ey FIMI are on site).
d. Trucks shal I be pr ohibited from idling whi Ie on Signature Date
residential streets serving the construction site (also
included in Mitigation Measure NO-I.I). FIM2
e. Diesel-powered construction equi pment s hall be
Tier II I or Tier IV Califo rnia Air Resour ces Bo ard Signature Date
(CARB) certi fied equi pment to th e max imum
feasible extent. FIM3
f. The engine size of construction equipment shall be
the smallest practical to accomplish the task at hand. Signature Date
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: Combined mobile and stationary source emissions during operation of the SUMC Project would exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District's significance threshold of 80 pounds/day of ROG, NOx and PM] o. Therefore, air emissions would result in a substantial contribution to an existing regional air quality
problem and a significant impact (AQ-2)
See Mitigation Measure TR-2.3.
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: Construction equipment NOx emissions associated with the SUMC Project could contribute considerably to regional air quality problems.
(AQ-6)
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 24
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
entered in the Portfolio Manager system and a resu lting
energy effi ciency rat ing i s pr ovided base don sim ilar
facilities (i.e., academic tea ching facility, comm unity
hospital, free-standing surgery center, etc.) This process
would ensure that new an d existing energy system s
would perform interactively accordi ng t 0 construction
documents, t he SUM C Project desi gn intent an d t he
owner's operational needs.
CC-I.2 Participate in a Renewable Energy Program.
The SHC an d LPCH Proj ect sp onsors facilities sh all
participate in a renewable energy program approved by
the City to partially 0 ffset electricity emissions; develop
new renewable generation sources in collaboration with
the CPAU; incorporate a renewable energy source (such
as p hotovoltaics) in to th e SUMC Proj ect, and lor
otherwise promote expansi on 0 f t he us e of renewable
energy by CPAU c ustomers ("Rene wable Energy
Program"). The Rene wable Energy Progra m shall be
approved by the C ity and need n ot di rectly reduc e the
emissions from the SUMC Project facilities, and may be
designed to promote expansion of the use of renewable
energy by CPAU customers, either by providing a ne w
source of renewable energy, educating the public about
use of renewable energy, or contributing to research and
development of renewable energy sources.
CC-I.3 Provide Annual Greenhouse Gas Reporting.
The SHC and LPCH shall perform an annu al inventory
of greenhouse gas em issions associated with Hos pital
and medical facilities on the SUMC Sites. This inventory
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Review and approve
SUMC Project
sponsor's participation
in a Renewable Energy
Program
Review annual
inventory of·
greenhouse gas
emissions
Responsibility Timing Signatureillate Completed
Signature Date
Energy Star Performance Year 3
Signature Date
Energy Star Performance Year 4
Signature Date
Energy Star Performance Year 5
Signature Date
City of Palo Prior to completion of I Participation in Renewable Energy Program
Utilities entire SUMC Project
Department and I Signature Date
Department of
Planning and
Community
Environment
City of Palo Annually 12012
Utilities
Department and I Signature Date
Department of
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 26
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation MeasureS
shall be perfonned accord ing to a common indust ry-
standard em issions reporting protocol, such as t he
approaches re commended by California Air Resources
Board. T he Climate Act ion Registry. or Business
Council for Sustainable Development (BCSD). This
inventory sh all b e sh ared with th e City 0 f Palo Alto to
facilitate th e development 0 f future collaborative
Emissions Reduction Programs. Em issions ass ociated
with energy, water, solid waste, transportation, employee
commute and ot her major sources shall b e rep orted in
this inventory.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility
Planning and
Community
Environment
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Timing SignaturelDate Completed
2013
-Signature
2014
Signature
2015
Signature
2016
Signature
2017
Signature
2018
Signature
2019
Signature
2020
Signature
2021
Signature
2022
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
27
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing Signature/Date Completed
Signature Date
2023
Signature Date
2024
Signature Date
2025
Signature Date
CC-l.4 Prepare Waste Reduction Audit. The S UMC Review waste reduction City of Palo Initial waste reduction Initial Waste Reduction Audit
Project sponsors shall perform a waste reduction audit of audits Department of audit prior to
waste management pract ices at t he hospi tals pri or t 0 Planning and construction Signature Date
construction of new facilities and after completion ofthe Community
SUMC Project to determine post-project diversions. Environment. Final waste reduction Final Waste Reduction Audit
audit after completion
of the entire SUMC Signature Date
I Project.
CC-l.5 Implement Construction Period Emission Verify that information City of Palo Prior to issuance of SHC Hospital I
Reduction Measures. Prior to the issuance of a gradi ng is contained in Public Works grading permits for
permit the SUMC Project sponsors shall incorporate the . construction impact Department each building; Signature Date
following measures in to th e con struction phasing p Ian mitigation plan compliance
and submit to City Planning for approval. pursuant to TR-l. 8; monitoring during SHC Clinics
• Use alternative-fueled (e.g., biodiesel, electric) compliance monitoring construction
construction vehicles/ equi pment of at I east 15 Signature Date
percent of the fleet; LPCH Hospital/Clinics • Use local building materials of at least 1 0 percent;
and Signature Date
• Recycle at Ie ast 50 percent ofc onstruction or
demolition materials. Hoover MOB
Stanford University Medical Center F aGilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 28
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
Signature Date
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature Date
FIMI
Signature Date
FIM2
Signature Date
FIM3
I
Signature Date I
--I
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 29
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
Reduce Construction Noise
The SUMC Project sponsors shall incorporate
the following practices into the cons truction
documents to be im plemented b y the project
contractor:
a. Require construction contractors to use noise-reducing
pile dri ving techniques, i neluding pre-drilling pi Ie
holes (iffeasib Ie, based on so ils) to th e maximum
feasible dept h, ve rify that manufacturer-provided
intake and exhaust mufflers on pile driving equipment
are prese nt, vi brating pile s into place whe n feasible,
and installing shrouds around the pile driving hammer
where feasible .
• Implement Best Management Practices to Reduce
Construction Pile Driving Vibration. The S UMC
Project Sponsors shall use sonic pile drivers to
reduce vibration anno yance and/or damage to on-
site sensitive receptors, if feasible .
• Avoid or Repair Structural Damage to SUMC
Structures. The SUMC Project sponsors shall:
a. Use so nic pile d rivers, if feasible, to avo id potential
vibration damage tot he closest on-site SUM C
structures near the SHC Hospital and garage site; or
b. Blake-Wilbur Clin ic patients an d workers sh all b e
relocated to other, more-distant buildings du ring
periods when pile driving occurs on parts of the SHC
Hospital construction site within 75 feet of the Blake-
Wilbur Clinic. The structural conditions ofthe Blake-
Wilbur Clin ic sh all be assessed before and after p ile
driving by a licensed st ructural en gineer an d any
damage resulting to the Blake-Wilbur Clinic from pile
driving s hall be completely repai red before pat ients
and workers are allowed to return.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
is contained in
construction impact
mitigation plan
pursuant to TR-1.8;
compliance monitoring
Responsibility
Public Works
Department
Timing
building permits for
each building;
compliance
monitoring during
construction
SignaturelDate Completed
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
Date
Date
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: Increased traffic and helicopter noise levels due to implementation of the SUMC Project would be less than significant However, noisefrom
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 31
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT .
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
ambulances due to implementation of the SUMC Project would increase along Sand Hill Road west of El Camino Real, and would increase roadside noise levels by an amount
considered unacceptable under the policies of the City Comprehensive Plan. (NO-3)
No feasible mitigation measures.
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: Operational stationary source noise generated by the SUMC Project could potentially increase ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the SUMC
Sites and result in a significant impact. (NO-4)
NO-4.1 Shield or Enclose HV AC Equipment and SUMC Project City of Palo Prior to issuance of SHC Hospital
Emergency Generators. Noi se levels from mechanical sponsors to prepare Department of building permits for
equipment shall be minimized to the degree required by acoustical analysis; Planning and each building; Signature Date
the City No ise Ordinance by proper siting and selection City to review and Community compliance testing
of such equipment and through installation ofsufficient verify analysis Environment post-construction SHC Clinics
acoustical sh ielding or noise e mission co ntrols. No ise
levels fo r t he em ergency generators near Welch Road Signature Date
shall be reduced such that noise levels do not exceed the
City's General Daytime Exception standard of 70 dBA at LPCH Hospital/Clinics
25 feet. An a coustical anal ysis sh all b e prep ared by a
qualified professional to ensure that the new mechanical Signature Date
equipment is in compliance with noise standards of the
Noise Ordinance. Hoover MOB
Signature Date
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature Date
-
FIMI
Signature Date
FIM2
Signature Date
FIM3 I
Signature Date I
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 32
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
The doc umentation shall be prepare d based on the
National Park Services' HABS standards and include, at
a minimum, the following:
• Site-specific history and appropriate conte xtual
information regarding the Stone Building complex.
This history shall fo cus on th e reasons for th e
buildings' signi ficance: heart transplantation
program and the role ofE.D. Stone in the design of
the complex.
• Accurate mapping of all buildings that are in cluded
in th e Ston e Bu ilding co mplex, scaled to in dicate
size and proportion of th e build ings to surrounding
buildings; if ex isting plans accu rately reflect th ese
relationships these may be reformatted for su bmittal
per HABS guidelines for CAD submittals.
• Architectural descri ptions of the major exterior
features and public rooms within the Stone Building
complex as well as desc riptions 0 f typical pat ient,
office, laboratory, and operating rooms.
• Photographic documentation 0 fth e in terior and
exterior of the Stone Building complex and Thomas
Church-designed landscape features. Either HABS
standard large format or digital photography may be
used. If digital ph otography i s used, t he ink an d
paper com binations f or printing photographs must
be in co mpliance with Nati onal Reg ister-National
Historic Landmark photo expansion policy and have
a perm anency rat ing 0 fa pproximately 115 years.
Digital photographs will betaken as un compressed
. TIF file form at. The size of eac h im age shall be
1600xl200 pixels at 30 0 ppi (p ixels p er in ch) or
larger, color format, and printed in black and white.
The file nam e for each electronic im age shall
correspond wi th t he Index t 0 Ph otographs an d
photograph label.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Timing Signature/Date Completed
34
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
CR-l.3 Distribute Written and Photographic
Documentation to Agencies. The written and
photographic documentation of historic re sources shall
be disseminated on arch ivaI-quality paper to Stanford
University, the Northwest Information Center, and other
local repositories identified by the City of Palo Alto.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Verify distribution of
written and
photographic
documents
Responsibility
City of Palo
Department of
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
Prior to demolition of
any portion of the
Stone Building
complex.
SignaturelDate Completed
SHC Clinics
Signature
FIM'2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
Date
Date
Date
CR-l.4 Prepare Permanent Interpretive
Disp/ays/Signage/P/aques. The SUMC Project spons ors
shall install interpretive displays within the SUMC Sites
that provide in formation to v isitors an d resid ents
regarding t he history of t he St one Building complex.
These displays shall be installed in highly visible public
areas such as the property's open space or in public areas
on the interiors ofbu ildings. Th e displays shall inelude
historical dat a and photographs as weI I as phy sical
remnants of architectural elem ents. Interpretive displays
and the signage/plaques installed on the property shall be
sufficiently du rable to wit hstand typ ical Palo Alto
weather conditions for at lea st five years. Displays and
signage/plaques shall be lighted, installed a t pede strian-
friendly locations, and be of adequate size to attract the
interested. pedestrian. Main tenance of displays and
signage/plaques shal I be i neluded i n t he maintenance
program on the property. Location and materials for the
interpretative displays sh all be subject to review by the
Palo Alto Architectural Rev iew Bo ard and ap proval by
the Planning Director.
Review and approve
location and materials
for the displays; verify
installation
Review by City
of Palo Alto
Architectural
Review Board
and approval by
Director of
Planning and
Community
Environment
Prior to demolition of
entire Stone Building
complex; verify
installation post-
construction
Demolition of entire Stone Building Complex
CR-l.5 Implement Protection Documents for the
Hoover Pavilion. T he S UMC Project sp onsors sh all
ensure t he implementation 0 ft he St anford Hoover
Pavilion Protection Documents (Documents) prepared by
Verify that construction
contracts contain
Hoover Pavilion
protection requirements
City of Palo Alto
Planning and
Community
Environment
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Hoover Pavilion
renovation; monitor
Stanford University Medical Center F aGilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signature
Installation of Permanent Interpretive
Displays
Signature
Hoover Pavilion Renovation
Signature
Date
Date
Date
35
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
ARG and dated September 21,2009. The SUMC Project from ARG report dated compliance during
sponsors sh all co mply with th e sp ecifications for th e September 21,2009; construction
treatment and protection of t he Hoover Pa vilion during compliance monitoring
SUMC Project construction activities that could damage
the historic fab ric of th e building as prov ided in th e
I Documents.
---
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 36
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project could potentially encounter archaeological resources and result in a significant impact. (CR-2)
CR-2.1 Construction Staff Training and Consultation.
Prior to any construction or earth-disturbing activities, a
qualified arch aeologist sh all in form con structjon
supervisors of th e po tential to en counter cu ltural
resources. All construction personnel shall be instructed
to be ob servant fo r prehistoric an d historic-era artifacts,
subsurface archaeological features or deposits, including
accumulations of da rk, fria ble soil ("m idden"), st one
artifacts, animal bone, a nd shell. In the event that any
prehistoric or historic subsurface archaeological features
or cultural deposits are di scovered during const ruction-
related eart h-moving act ivities, al I gro und-disturbing
activity with in 10 0 feet of t he resou rces shall b e halted
and the City shall b e no tified. Th e City sh all co nsult
with th e Stan ford Un iversity Arch eologist to assess th e
significance of the find. If the find is determined to be an
historical resource or a unique archaeological resource as
defined by CEQA, th en representatives of the City an d
the Stanford University Ar chaeologist s hall meet to
determine t he ap propriate co urse of action. All
significant cultural materials recovered 'shall be subject to
scientific an alysis, professional museum c uration, and a
report s hall be pre pared by the qualified archaeologist
according to current professional standards.
SUMC Project
sponsors submit
report from qualified
archaeologist
documenting that
construction
supervisors were
informed about
potential cultural
resource procedures;
City to review report
City of Palo
Department of
Planning and
Community
Environment
Prior to issuance of
grading permits for
each building
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project-Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SHC Hospital
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
Weich Road Improvements
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
37
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project could potentially encounter human remains and result in a significant impact. (CR-3)
CR-3.} Conduct Protocol and Procedures for SUMC Project City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of SHC Hospital
Encountering Human Remains. Ifh uman remains sponsors include Planning and grading permits for
(including di sarticulated or crem ated re mains) are procedures related to Community each building Signature
discovered at any SUMC Project construction site during possible discovery of Environment
any phase of construction, all ground-disturbing activity human remains in SHC Clinics
within 100 feet 0 f th e hu man remains sh ould be halted construction contracts;
and the Stanford University Archaeologist, City 0 fPalo City to verify Signature
Alto, an d th e Co unty co roner notified immed iately,
according to Section 5097.98 of the State Public I I LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Resources C ode an d Se ction 7050.5 ofC alifomia's
Health and Safety Co de. If the rem ains are determined
by the County coroner to be Native American, the Native
American Heritag e Co mmission (NARC) sh all be
notified within 24 hours, and the guidelines of the NARC
adhered t 0 i n t he treatment and di sposition 0 f t he
remains. Th e SUMC Proj ect sp onsors sh all retain a
professional archaeologist with Native Am erican burial
experience to conduct a field investigation of the specific
site and consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any,
identified by the NARC. As necessary, the archaeologist
may provide pr ofessional assi stance to th e City 0 f Palo
Alto, including the excavation and removal of the human
remains. If t he hum an rem ains cann ot be avoided, an d
the Most Likely Descenda nt re quests that t he human
remains be removed from its location, the SUMC Project
sponsors shall implement removal ofthe human remains
by a professional arc haeologist. The City of Palo Alto
shall verify that th em itigation is co mplete before th e
resumption of ground-disturbing activ ities within 100
feet of where the remains were discovered.
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
Weich Road Improvements
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
38
Mitigation Measures
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility Timing Signature/Date Completed
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project could have a significant impact on unique paleontological resources or unique geologic resources. (CR-4)
CR-4.1 Conduct Protocol and Procedures for SUMC Project City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of SHC Hospital
Encountering Paleontological Resources. Should sponsors include Planning and grading pennits for
paleontological resources be id entified during SUMC procedures related to Community each building Signature Date
Projectgro und-disturbing activ ities, th e SUMC Proj ect possible discovery of Environment
sponsors shall notify the City and the Stanford University paleontological SHC Clinics
Archaeologist and ceas e operations in the vicinity of the resources in
potential reso urce until a qu alified professional construction contracts; Signature Date
paleontologist can co mplete the fo llowing actio ns when City to verify
appropriate: LPCH Hospital/Clinics
• Identify and e valuate pal eontological res ources by
intense field survey whe re im pacts are co nsidered
high;
• Assess effects on identified resources; and
• Consult with the City of Palo Alto and the Stanford
University Archaeologist.
Before operations in the vicinity of the potential resource
resume, the SUMC Project sp onsors sh all co mply with
the paleontologist's reco mmendations to address an y
significant adverse effects wh ere detennined by t he City
of Palo Alto to be feasible. In considering any suggested
mitigation proposed by the consulting paleontologist, the
sliMc Project sponsors shall consult with the Stanford
University Arch aeologist an d the City to d etennine
whether a voidance is neces sary and feasi ble in light of
factors such as the nature of the find, project design, cost
policies a nd I and use assum ptions, an d ot her
considerations. If av oidance is in feasible, 0 ther
appropriate measures (e .g. data rec overy) s hall be
instituted to av oid a sign ificant im pact. Work may
proceed i n other parts oft he SUM C Si tes whi Ie
mitigation for paleontological resources is completed.
Stariford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
Welch Road Improvements
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
39
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature Date
FIMI
Signature Date
FIM2
Signature Date
FIM3
Signature Date
Welch Road Improvements
Signature Date
~--~
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 41
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
BR-I.2 Avoid Roosting Areas. Ifnon-breeding bats are
found in a tree or structure to be removed, the individuals
shall be safely evicted, under the direction of a qu alified
bat biologist, b y opening the roo sting area to allo w
airflow thro ugh th e cav ity. Dem olition sho uld th en
follow at least 0 ne night after in itial disturbance for
airflow. Th is actio n shou ld allo w bats to leave du ring
darkness, thus increasing their cha nce 0 f fi nding ne w
roosts with a minimum of pot ential pre dation during
daylight.
If active maternity roosts are found in structures that will
be removed as part ofproject construction, demolition of
that structure shall commence before maternity colonies
form (generally before March 1) or after young are flying
(generally by July 31).
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Verify that construction
contracts contain
procedures related to
avoidance of roosting
bat areas; SUMC
Project sponsor to
provide qualified bat
biologist compliance
monitoring reports.
BR-I.3 Develop and Employ Bat Nest Box Plan. If I Review bat nest box
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building;
compliance
monitoring during
construction during
site disturbance period
City of Palo Alto I Prior to issuance of
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project-Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SignaturelDate Completed
SHC Hospital
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
Welch Road Improvements
Signature
SHC Hospital
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
42
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
special-status bats are found in structures to be removed, plan, if special-status Planning and building pennits for
the SUMC Project sponsors shall develop a bat nest box bats are found in Community each building, if Signature Date
plan for the S UMC Sites employing state-of-the-art bat structures to be Environment required; compliance
nest box technology. T he design and placement of nest developed; SUMC monitoring during site SHC Clinics
boxes shall be reviewed by a qualified bat biologist. Project sponsor to disturbance period
provide qualified bat Signature Date
biologist compliance
monitoring reports LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature Date
Hoover MOB
Signature Date
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature Date
FIMI
Signature Date
FIM2
Signature Date
FIM3
Signature Date
Welch Road Improvements
Signature Date
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 43
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing Signature/Date Completed
BR-l.4 Avoid Tree Removal During Nesting Season. Verify that construction City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of SHC Hospital
Tree removal or pruning shall be avoided from February contracts contain Planning and building permits for
I through Au gust 31, the nesting peri od fo r Cooper's procedures related to Community each building Signature Date
hawk, to the ex tent feasi ble. 1fno tree rem ovalo r avoidance of Cooper's Environment
pruning is proposed during the nesting period, no surveys Hawk nesting SHC Clinics
are required.
Signature Date
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature Date
Hoover MOB
Signature Date
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature Date
FIMI
Signature Date
FIM2
Signature Date
FIM3
Signature Date
Welch Road Improvements
Signature Date
J!R-l-! Protect Cooper's Hawk in the Event of Nest Verify that construction City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of SHC Hospital
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 44
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
Discovery. If tree rem oval or pruning i s una voidable
during t he nesting seas on, the SUMC Project spons ors
shall h ire a qualified biologist to con duct a surv ey fo r
nesting Cooper's ha wk wi thin fi ve day s prior tot he
proposed st art of construction. If act ive Cooper's hawk
nests are not present, proj ect activities can take place as
scheduled. The qu alified biologist shall vi sit the site
daily to search for nests until all nesting substrates are
removed. This will avoid impacts to Cooper's hawk that
may have moved into the site an d initiated nest-building
after the start 0 ftree rem oval activities. A dditionally, if
more th an 5 days elap se between th e in itial n est search
and the tree removal, it is possible for new birds to move
into the construction area and begin building a nest. If
there is suc h a delay, anothe r nest survey shall be
conducted. If an y active Cooper's hawk ne sts are
detected, the SUMC Project sponsors shall delay removal
of the applicable tree or sh rub while the nest is occupied
with eg gs 0 r young who have not fl edged. A qualified
biologist sh all monitor an y occupied n est to determine
when the Cooper's hawk nest is no longer used.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
contracts contain
procedures related to
timing and
requirements for
Cooper's hawk
surveys; SUMC Project
sponsor to provide
qualified biologist
compliance monitoring
reports
Responsibility
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
building permits for
each building;
compliance
monitoring during site
disturbance period
Signature/Date Completed
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
Welch Road Improvements
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project would have no impact on the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or Wildlife species, or use of native resident
or migratory Wildlife corridors, but could impede the use of native Wildlife nursery sites and thus result in a significant impact. (BR-3)
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 45
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
BR-3.1 Avoid Tree Removal During Nesting Season.
Tree or shrub removal or pruning shall be a voided from
February 1 through August 31, the bird-nesting period, to
the ex tent feasib Ie. If no tree or shrub rem oval or
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Verify that construction
contracts contain
procedures related to
avoidance of bird
pruning is proposed during the nesting period. no surveys I nesting
are required.
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signature/Date Completed
SHC Hospital
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
Welch Road Improvements
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
46
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
BR-3.2 Protect Birds in the Event of Nest Discovery. If
tree and shrub removal or pruning is unavoidable during
the nesting season, the SUMC Project sponsors shall hire
a qualified biologist to co nduct asurv ey fo r nesting
raptors a nd other birds wi thin fi ve day s pri or tot he
proposed st art of co nstruction. If act ive nest s are n ot
present, SUMC Proj ect activities can ta ke place as
scheduled. The qu alified biologist shall vi sit the site
daily to search for nests until all nesting substrates are
removed. The se procedures would avoid impacts to any
birds th at m ay have moved into th e sites and in itiated
nest-building after t he st art of tree an d shr ub rem oval
activities. Add itionally, if more th an fi ve days elap ses
between th e initial n est search and the vegetation
removal, it i s possible for new bi rds tom ove into the
construction area and begin building a nest. 1ft here is
such a delay, another nest survey shall be conducted. If
any active nests are detected, the SUMC Project sponsors
shall delay removal ofthe applicable tree or shrub while
the nest i s occ upied wi th eggs 0 r young who h ave not
fledged. A qu alified biologist sh all monitor any
occupied ne st to dete rmine whe n t he nest is no longer
used.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Verify that construction
contracts contain
procedures related to
protection of nesting
birds; SUMC Project
sponsor to provide
qualified biologist
compliance monitoring
reports
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building;
compliance
monitoring during site
disturbance period
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project could have a significant impact on Protected Trees. (BR-4)
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SignaturelDate Completed
SHC Hospital
Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
FIM2
Signature
FIM3
Signature
Welch Road Improvements
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
47
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
BR-4.1 Prepare a Tree Preservation Report for all
Trees to be Retained An update d tree survey and tree
preservation report (TPR) prepared by a certified arborist
shall be su bmitted f or re view a nd a pproval by t he
Director of PI anning and Community Envi ronment i n
consultation with th e City Arb orist. For reference
clarity, the tree survey shall include (list and field tag) all
existing trees within the SUMC Sites, including adjacent
trees overhanging the SUMC Sites. The approved TPR
shall b e im plemented in full, in c1uding mandatory
inspections and monthly reporting to City Arborist. The
TPR shall be based on latest SUMC plans and amended
as needed to address activity within the dripline area of
any exi sting Protected Tree to be preserved, including
incidental work (utilities trenching, street work, lighting,
irrigation, etc.) that may affect the health of a prese rved
Protected Tree. Th e TPR sh all b e con sistent with th e
criteria set forth in the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Palo
Alto Municipal Code Section 8.10.030, and the City Tree
Technical Manual, Section 3.00, 4.00 and 6.30. To avoid
improvements th at may bed etrimental to th e health 0 f
Protected Trees, the Di rector of Planning and
Community Environment, in co nsultation with th e City
Arborist shall revie w th e SU MC Pr oject sp onsors'
landscape plan to ensure the new landscape is consistent
with Tree Technical Manual, Section 5.45 and Appendix
L, Landscaping under Native Oaks.
BR-4.2 Prepare a Solar Access Study (SAS) of Short
and Long Term Effects on Protected Oaks. The SUMC
Project sponsors shall prepare a SAS of Short and Long
Term Effects on Protected Oaks that are aesthetic tree
resources fo r review an d ap proval by the Director of
Planning an d Community Envi ronment i n co nsultation
with the City Arborist. The SAS shall be prepared by a
qualified expert team (horticulturalist, architect designer,
consulting arbo rist) capab Ie 0 f determining effects, if
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
SUMC Project
sponsors to prepare
TPR; City to review
and approve TPR
Review and approve
Solar Access Study, if
project design changes
and would affect
biological and aesthetic
tree resources
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Director of
Planning and
Community
Environment
City of Palo Alto
Director of
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building
Prior to issuance of
building permit for
each building, if
project design changes
and would affect
biological and
aesthetic tree
resources
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SignaturelDate Completed
SHC Hospital
. Signature
SHC Clinics
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
Welch Road Improvements
Signature
SHC Hospital
Signature
FIMI
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
48
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
any, to fo liage, health; disease su sceptibility an d also
prognosis for longevity. The SAS shall contain the same
information as the SAS for FIM 1 trees that are aesthetic
tree res ources su bmitted Se ptember 23, 2010. 1ft he
Director of PI anning and Community Envi ronment, in
consultation with th e City Arbo rist, determin es th at th e
SUMC Project wo uld have an adverse effed 0 n solar
access to a Protected Tree that is a n aesthetic tree
resource such that the tree is unlikely to survive, then the
SUMC Project sponsors shall relocate the Protected Tree
to a site with sufficient solar access, as determined by the
DirectOr of PI anning a nd Community Envi ronment, in
consultation with the City Arbo rist. The SAS has been
completed and acce pted by the City for trees #608,
Kaplan Lawn ( trees #33 thr ough 41), and FI M (trees
#317 through 320 and #322).
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Timing SignaturelDate Completed
49
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
BR-4.3 Prepare a Tree Relocation Feasibility Plan for
Any Protected Tree Proposed for Relocation and
Retention. Relocation of Protected Trees with the SUMC
Sites shall be allowed only upon issuance ofa Protected
Tree relocation permit from the Director of Planning and
Community Environment in co nsultation with th e City
Arborist. Becau se of inherent mortality as sociated with
the process of moving mature trees, the SUMC Projec t
sponsors sh all prepare a Tree ReI ocation and
Maintenance Plan (TRMP) to be reviewed in connection
with th e Pro tected Tree relocation permit. Th e TRMP
shall evaluate th e feasibility 0 f moving the Pro tected
Trees to an appropriate location on site. Feasibility shall
consider current site an d tree conditions, a tree's ab ility
to to lerate moving, relocation measures, optimum needs
for the new location, aftercare, irrigation, and other long-
term needs.
The tree relocation permit sh all sp ecify th at ifth e
relocated trees do not survive after a period of five years,
the relocated tree or trees shall be replaced with trees or a
combination of trees and Tree Value Standards consistent
with Section 3.20, Table 3-1 Tree Canopy Replacement,
oft he Tree Technical Ma nual. T he TRMP shall be
inclusive ofth e fo llowing minimum in . formation:
appropriate irrigation, monitoring inspections, post
relocation tree maintenance, and for an annual arboris t
report ofthe condition of the relocated trees. If a tree is
disfigured, leaning with supports needed, in decline with
a dead top or dieback of more than 25 percent, the tree
shall be considered a total loss and replaced as described
above ..
BR-4.4A Enter into a Memorandum of Understanding for
Tree Maintenance. As a security measure, the SUMC
Project sponsors shall be subject to a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between the City of Palo Alto and
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Review and approve
Tree Relocation
Feasibility Plans, and
Tree Relocation and
Maintenance Plans
Issue Protected Tree
Relocation Permit
Sign Memorandum of
Understanding and
security guarantee for
trees to be retained
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Director of
Planning and
Community
Environment
City of Palo Alto
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signature/Date Completed
SHC Hospital
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
SHC Hospital
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
50
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
the SUMC Project sponsors describing a tree retention
amount, the list of trees to be retained, an appraised value
for each listed tree, a five-year tree growth and
establishment, timeline for return of security, and
conditions of approval related to Protected Trees, as cited
in the Conditional Use Permit for the SUMC Project.
The SUMC Project sponsors and SUMC Projectarborist
shall coordinate with the City Arborist to determine the
conditions required to guarantee the protection and/or
replacement of the regulated trees on the site during
construction and within five years after occupancy. The
SUMC Project sponsors shall provide a security
guarantee for the trees, as determined by the Director of
Planning and Community Environment; in consultation
with the City Arborist, in an amount consistent with the
City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual.
BR 4.4B Replace Protected Trees in Accordance with
the Tree Technical Manual. Removal of Protected Trees
shall be allowed only upon issuance of a Protected Tree
removal perm it from the Directo r 0 f Planning a nd
Community Environment, in co nsultation with th e City
Arborist. Protected Trees that are removed without being
relocated shall be replaced in accordance with the ratios
set forth in Tab Ie 3-1 ofthe City 0 fPalo Alto Tree
Technical Man ual in th e fo llowing way, in 0 rder to
maintain the appropriate landsca pe approac h at the
SUMC Sites, which has limited opportunities to plant the
required replacement of trees:
• The Protected Tree rem oval perm it issued shall
stipulate the tree replacem ent requirem ents for the
removed tree, including n umber of trees, location,
and irrigation;
• The number and size of trees required for
replacement would be calculated in accordance with
Table 3-1; and
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
Review and approve
Tree Removal Plans
Issue Protected Tree
Removal Permit
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Director of
Planning and
Community
Environment
Timing
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each building
Stanford University Medical Center F aGilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
SignaturelDate Completed
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
SHC Hospital
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
FIMI
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
51
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
• The di fference betwee n the required tree
replacement and the number of trees plant ed at the
SUMC Si tes wo uld be mitigated through
contribution to the Forestry Fund in the City of Palo
Alto. Payment to the Forestry Fund would be in the
amount representing t he val ue 0 f t he replacement
trees that wo uld b e re quired under t he TIM
standard.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
BR-4.5 Provide Optimum Tree Replacement for Loss of Review landscape
Publicly-Owned Trees Regulated Tree Category. There are plans submitted as part
many pub licly own ed trees growing i nt he right-of-way of building permit
along various frontages (Welch Road, Pasteur Drive, Quarry applications for impact
Road, Sand Hill Road, etc.). Th ese trees prov ide an to publicly owned trees
important visual and ae sthetic val ue to t he streetscape and
represent a si gnificant investment fro m years of public
resources to maintain them. As mitigation to offset the net
benefits loss from removal of mature trees, and to minimize
the future y ears t 0 ac hieve pari ty wit h vis ual a nd
infrastructure service benefits (C O2 r eduction, ex tended
asphalt life, w aterrunof fm anagement, etc.) currently
provided by the trees, the new public trees on all roadway
frontages shall be prov ided with best practices design and
materials, including, but not lim ited to, t he following
elements:
• Consistency with t he City of Pal 0 Alto Pub lic
Works Department Street Tree Management Plan, in
consultation with Canopy, Inc.
• Provide ade quate room for natural tree canopy
growth an d adequate root growing v olume. For
large trees, at arget goal of 1,200 cu bic feet of so il
shall be used.
• For pedestrian and roadway areas that are to include
tree planting 0 r ad jacent to ex isting trees to b e
retained, utilize City-ap proved best management
practices for su stainability products, such as
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Department of
Public Works
Timing
Prior to issuance of
building permits for
each project
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signatureillate Completed
SHC Hospital
Signature
LPCH Hospital/Clinics
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
FIMI
Signature
Welch Road Improvements
Signature
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
52
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
Monitoring or
Reporting Action Responsibility Timing SignaturelDate Completed
Signature
East, West, Core, Boswell, Grant
Signature
Core Expansion
Signature
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project could expose construction personnel and public to existing contaminated groundwater and/or soiL (HM-3)
HM-3.1 Perform a Phase II ESAfor the 701 Welch Site.
A Pha se II E SA shall be pe rformed at 701 Welch Si te
Building B. The Ph ase II ESA sh all in clude sam pIing
and a nalysis of s oil, groundwater, wastewater, a nd
residues on surfaces such as laboratories countertops,
fume hoods, sinks, s.umps, floors, and drain lines. The
County Departinent of Environmental Health (DEH) and
Palo Alto Fire Dep artment (PAFD) shall be notified by
the Project sponsors if contamination is discovered. If
contamination is discovered, the SUMC Project sponsors
shall prepare a site re mediation assessmen t th at (a)
specifies measures to prot ect workers and the public
from expos ure to pote ntial site hazards and (b) ce rtifies
that the proposed remediation measures would clean up
contaminants, dispose ofthe wastes, and protect public
health in accorda nce with fe deral, Stat e, and local
requirements. Site excavation activities shall not proceed
until th e site rem ediation h as been ap proved b y the
County DEH and implemented by t he S UMC Pr oject
sponsors. Ad ditionally, th e site re mediation assessm ent
shall be su bject t 0 revi ew and a pproval by t he Sa n
Francisco Bay Reg ional Water Qu ality Control Bo ard
(RWQCB). All appropriate agencies shall be notified.
Receive notification if
contamination is
discovered during
Phase II ESA at 701
Welch Site Building B
Verify that County
DEH has approved a
site remediation plan, if
necessary
Compliance monitoring
HM-3.2 Excavate Contaminated Soil from the 703 I Receive notification if
Welch Site. For the 4-to 9-square -foot area near eve ry contamination is
City of Palo Alto
Fire Department
As necessary
City of Palo Alto I As necessary
Fire Department
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
701 Welch Road
Signature
703 Welch Road
Date
Date
Date
Date
55
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Mitigation Measures
discharge point from the building, soil samples shall be
performed and contam inated soil excavated, rem oved,
and tran sported to an appro ved disposal facility in
compliance with OSHA requirem ents .. The County DEH
and th e P AFD sh all b e no tified by the SUMC Proj ect
sponsors if con tamination is en countered dur ing
construction.
HM-3.3 Conduct a Soil Excavation Program at the
Hoover Pavilion Site. A qualified consultant, under the
SUMC Project sp onsors' direction, shall undertake the
following activities:
• Remove all buried underground storage tanks from
the property after sheds and storage buildings on the
Hoover Pavilion Site have been demolished;
• To th e extent necessary, add itional so il sa mpling
shall b e co llected to determine health risks and to
develop disposal criteria;
• Ifwarranted based on soil sampling, contaminated
soil shall be excavated, removed, and transported to
an app roved disposal facility in co mpliance with
OSHA requirements;
• To the extent required based upon the results of soil
sampling and the results of a health risk assessment,
a Site Health and Sa fety Plan to ens ure worker
safety in compliance with OSHA requirements shall
be developed by the Project sponsors, and in places
prior t 0 com mencing work on any contaminated
site; and
• The S UMC Pr oject sp onsors shall su bmit
documents to th e Coun ty DEH to proceed with
closure of the Hoover Pavilion Site.
Monitoring or
Reporting Action
discovered during
construction at 703
Welch
Verify that SUMC
Project sponsors have
removed buried
underground storage
tanks and conducted
soil sampling, if
necessary
Verify that SUMC
Project sponsors have
prepared a site health
and safety plan, if
warranted
Verify that SUMC
Project sponsors have
submitted closure
documents to County
DEH
Compliance monitoring
Responsibility
City of Palo Alto
Fire Department
Timing
As necessary
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Signature/Date Completed
Signature
Hoover MOB
Signature
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature
Date
Date
Date
56
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or .
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing Signatureffiate Completed
HM-3.4 Develop a Site Management Plan for the Verify that SUMC City of Palo Alto Prior to excavation at Hoover MOB
Hoover Pavilion Site. The SUMC Project sponsors shall Project sponsors have Fire Department the Hoover site
prepare a site remediation assessm ent that (a) specifies prepared and submitted Signature Date
measures t 0 protect workers a nd t he public f rom a site management plan
exposure t 0 potential site hazards , including hazards to County DEH Hoover Parking Structure
from re mediation itself, an d (b ) certifies th atth e
proposed re mediation m easures would cl ean u p Signature Date
contaminants, dispose of the wastes, and protect public
health in accorda nce with fe deral, Stat e, and local
requirements. Site excavation activities shall not proceed
until th e site rem ediation h as been ap proved b y the
County DEH and implemented by t he S UMC Pr oject
sponsors. Add itionally, the site re mediation assessment
shall be su bject t 0 revi ew and a pproval by t he Sa n
Francisco Bay R WQCB. All appropriate agencies shall
be notified.
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project would result in construction offacilities on a site included on the Cortese List. (HM-7)
See Mitigation Measures HM-3.3 and HM-3.4.
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project could impair implementation or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. (HM-tO)
See Mitigation Measures HM-IO.l, TR-l.l, TR-l.4 through TR-1.6, TR-1.8, and TR-9.1.
HM-10.l Coordinate Construction Activities with the Coordinate SUMC City of Palo Alto At least two weeks SHC Hospital
City of Palo Alto. The SUMC Project spons ors shall Project information on Fire Department prior to scheduled
provide to the City planned construction routes, roadway planned construction and Department roadways closures Signature Date
closures, a nd access and closures sche dules. This routes, and roadway of Planning and
information shall b e prov ided to t he City at least two closures to affected Community SHC Clinics
weeks in a dvance of the planned access a nd cl osures. emergency service Environment,
The City shall co ordinate th is informatio n am ong providers and Public Signature Date
affected em ergency se rvice providers, including th e Works
City's Fi re and Police Departments, and private Department LPCH Hospital/Clinics
ambulance se rvices, s 0 that alternative routes coul d be
planned and announced prior to the scheduled access and Signature Date
closures, as deemed necessary by the City.
Hoover MOB
Signature Date
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 57
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER FACILITIES RENEWAL AND REPLACEMENT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
Monitoring or
Mitigation Measures Reporting Action Responsibility Timing Signatureillate Completed
Hoover Parking Structure
Signature Date
FIMI
Signature Date
FIM2
Signature Date
FIM3
Signature Date
Welch Road Improvements
Signature Date
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project and adjacent development could result in cumulative release of hazardous materials during construction, a significant
cumulative impact. The SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact would be considerable. (HM-12)
See Mitigation Measure HM-2.1.
IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: The SUMC Project and adjacent development could result in cumulative disturbance of contaminated soils, release of hazardous materials
during construction, a significant cumulative impact. The SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact would be considerable. (HM-13)
See Mitigation Measures HM-3.l, HM-3.2, HM-3.3, and HM-3.4.
I IMPACT BEING ADDRESSED: Cumulative development could impair implementation or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. The
SUMC Project's contribution to the cumulative impact would be considerable. (HM-IS)
See Mitigation Measures HM-IO.I, TR-l.1, TR-I.4 through TR-1.6, and TR-1.8.
Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project -Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 58