McLaughlin, Eileen Scoping Comments Vallco Specific Plan EIREileelt A Afe4wgh&
March 12, 2018
Piu Ghosh, Principal Planner
Community Development Department
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Via Email to planning@cupertino.orR
Via Email
RE: Scoping Comments for the Preparation of the DEIR for the Vallco Special Area Specific Plan
Dear Ms. Ghosh:
This letter provides comments submitted to aid Cupertino (City) in its work defining the content and
analysis of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) of the Vallco Special Area Specific Plan (Plan).
I am a long-term resident of a neighborhood adjoining Cupertino and live just one and a half miles from
the Project Boundary, just off Miller Avenue. My comments arise from resident experience and also on
substantive experience commenting to many jurisdictions and agencies regarding California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and regulatory documents. These activities are done as an advocate
member of a volunteer, grass-roots organization, Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge.
But to be clear, in this letter I speak solely for myself. In public comment at the City's scoping meeting on
02/22/2018, 1 mentioned some topics that needed attention. I expand and add to those comments here.
CEQA category of this Plan EIR: A "Specific" Plan EIR is a "Program" EIR, an information basis for tiering
of future, project -specific CEQA analysis as may be needed prior to any build out within the Project
Boundaries.' The degree of environmental review and of mitigation required of those documents is set
in good part by the quality, content and project standards (mitigations) of the program EIR. As such, a
well-prepared Program EIR will provide environmental guidelines that must be met in tiered projects.
Doing so may also reduce or streamline tiered CEQA documents, pending objectives and proposals of
those individual projects. l am hopeful that the City both values and invests in production of a fully
comprehensive program EIR
Purpose of an EIR: This Plan EIR is intended to inform.' Failure to meet that objective can be caused by
poorly -organized documents and lack of clarity such as: overuse of technical terms, acronyms or jargon;
omission of clarifying charts or graphics; omission of relevant information (description facts, impacts or
analysis). As a program EIR, it is anticipated that it will be a lengthy document, making it even more
important that attention is placed on avoiding these pitfalls. 1 hope that the Project EIR will be one that
adequately informs.
' CEQA Guidelines §15385, Tiering: "(a) From a general plan, policy, or program EIR to a program, plan, or policy
EIR of lesser scope or to a site-specific EIR;"
' CEQA Guidelines §15002 General Concepts: "(a) Basic Purposes of CEQA. The basic purposes of CEQA are to:
(1) Inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of
proposed activities."
Regional Impacts of the EIR: The considerations of an EIR don't end at the Project Boundary.
The location of this project lies in a City panhandle defined by major roadways and nearby adjacency
with the cities of San Jose, Sunnyvale and Santa Clara. The City of Saratoga lies just beyond San Jose's
panhandle, "3 miles away. It is important that any impact on the region be adequately considered and
mitigated.3 Toward that end and because major regional impacts to traffic and transportation are
anticipated, I recommend that Figure 2, Vicinity Map in the Notice of Preparation (NOP) be replaced in
the EIR with a vicinity map that is broadened to include and acknowledge the key transportation
corridor and municipal jurisdictions.
Alternatives of the EIR: For this Plan EIR, the City must consider a reasonable range of alternatives' such
that it is possible for decision makers and the public to understand the comparative merits of each
alternative. In reference to alternatives other than "no action" (leaving the Project site as is) and given
that (1) it is not necessary for each alternative to attain all of the objectives of the EIR but rather to
provide adequate comparison of impacts and (2) this Project has substantial complexity, 1 recommend
that the City provide three Alternatives. The presentation at the public meeting included an Alternative
of full build -out per the City's General Plan (GP) stipulations. This EIR, through impact analysis, gives the
City the opportunity to test those GP stipulations through variations in Alternatives. The other two
Alternatives can be determined from development values provided from public comment during
scoping. As I suggested at my public comment, Alternatives could be versions of reduced density and/or
of reapportioned land use.
For Program EIRs, additional alternatives are particularly valuable. Within the document, cumulative
tables showing side-by-side comparison for all significant impacts for each of the Alternatives is an
effective, informative tool. I have seen multiple occasions when doing so enabled Lead Agencies, at the
time of findings of the Final EIR, to blend the most beneficial characteristics (identified through
comparison) into a new, composite, Final Alternative.
Service to Regional Transit: Admittedly, I have not at this time read applicable sections of the City
General Plan or other City code so cannot know if the City has already established commitments to
integrate its actions with regional transit services. Nonetheless, I was disappointed that the Project
Description in the NOP lacked any mention of public transit services that must be provided by the Plan.
Along Wolfe Road and for decades, the existing Plan site includes substantial roadside cutouts serving
mass transit. The Plan site immediately adjoins a major freeway and a major regional roadway. Existing
3 CEQA Guidelines §15125, Environmental Setting: (c) Knowledge of the regional setting is critical to the
assessment of environmental impacts. Special emphasis should be placed on environmental resources that are
rare or unique to that region and would be affected by the project. The EIR must demonstrate that the significant
environmental impacts of the proposed project were adequately investigated and discussed and it must permit the
significant effects of the project to be considered in the full environmental context.
' CEQA Guidelines §15126.6. Consideration and Discussion of Alternatives to the Proposed Project: (a) Alternatives
to the Proposed Project. An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternativesto the project, or to the location of
the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basicobjectives of the project but would avoid or substantially
lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR
need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of
potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision making and public participation. An EIR is not
required to consider alternatives which are infeasible. The lead agency is responsible for selecting a range of
project alternatives for examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those alternatives. There
is no ironclad rule governing the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of reason.
E. McLaughlin, Scoping Comments, Vallco Specific Plan, 03/12/18 Page 2
transit services serve major bus routes. Existing conditions include the dramatic expansion of Apple and
its traffic, just on the other side of the freeway, and connecting to this site along Vallco Parkway/Tantau
Avenue and via Wolfe Road.
I anticipate that there will be an Alternative that represents full build -out per GP LU -1 that would allow
extraordinary alteration of the types and density of uses of the site potentially inclusive of office,
entertainment, hotel and residential. Every one of those new or expanded uses would substantially
impact traffic and, for impacts of greenhouse gases, air quality, and traffic congestion, trigger the need
for mass transit mitigations.
As we who live locally know too well, traffic congestion is irreparably getting worse, such that it also is
realistic to anticipate that short-sighted actions of today will have consequences all too soon. Such a
situation is reinforced in CEQA's Mandatory Findings of Significance "...potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals."s
Given local transportation demand, known and proposed, it is helpful to observe that the location of this
panhandle Project is ideal for incorporation and allocation of land for service as an expanded Transit
Hub, potentially serving multiple forms of mass transit. For that reason, l recommend that the
preparation of the OR include consultation with VTA and impacted municipalities such that the Final
Alternative and its mitigations accommodate provision of this Project site as an expanded transit hub.
Traffic analysis of the EIR: At the public scoping meeting, there was poster with a map of the region
showing locations of intersections that would be included in traffic studies. It struck me as not
understandable why the intersection of Miller Avenue and Prospect Road was not included for study.
Given my long term residency in this area, I find this to be a significant omission. Traffic is significant
between that location and U.S. Route 280. Further, Prospect is a major roadway interconnecting with
other major roadways. Will increased traffic on Miller Avenue/Wolfe Road impact Prospect Road
traffic? 1 ask that the Miller/Prospect intersection be included in traffic studies.
Biological Resource analysis of the EIR: As an environmental advocate, I am well aware of the
devastating impacts that poorly planned buildings and land management have on birds, whether they
are year-round resident, seasonal nesters or on migration. For that reason, both bird -safe design of
buildings and on-site predator management should be considered and incorporated as mitigations.
Fortunately, the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society has substantial expertise on bird safe design and
should be consulted. I recommend that mitigation should include a management plan that will limit
the presence of mammalian pests and predators (rats, mice, raccoons, skunks, opossums, roaming
cats) including control of food waste, avoiding creating locations where pests and predators might
hide or den and outlawing feeding of any mammals outdoors. Pest management needs to require that
no poisons be used for control, given that birds may be poisoned by consuming dying mammals.
I CEQA Guidelines §15065, Mandatory Findings of Significance, (a)(2),(3)&(4) : "(a) A lead agency shall find that a
project may have a significant effect on the environment andthereby require an EIR to be prepared for the project
where there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record, that any of the following conditions may occur:"
"(2) The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantageof long-term
environmental goals. (3) The project has possible environmental effects that are individually limited but
cumulatively considerable. "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effectsof an individual project
are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects. (4) The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly."
E. McLaughlin, Scoping Comments, Vallco Specific Plan, 03/12/18 Page 3
Finally, a recommendation to consider in any Alternative that includes residential units: I suggest that
land be set aside for community gardens and space be retained for use for the Farmer's Market. As it
appears that residential units will be, by type, apartments, adequate garden space would be a welcome
amenity and consistent with encouraging local, healthy, family -production of vegetables. Similarly,
returning the Farmer's Market to this site, perhaps in a Vallco Commons area, would be a valuable
benefit to both apartment dwellers and employees of site businesses and easily accessible by residents
of surrounding neighborhoods.
It is my hope that my comments will be applied in developing a substantive and informative Plan
through the EIR. Thank you for your considerations toward that end.
Sincerely,
e5—Eileen P. McLaughlin
E. McLaughlin, Scoping Comments, Vallco Specific Plan, 03/12/18 Page 4