The URL can be used to link to this page

B. AestheticsLSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS B. AESTHETICS This section evaluates the effects of the proposed project on the aesthetics of the project site and its surroundings. This analysis also considers the consistency of the proposed project with applicable visual resources -related policies. Photographs are included to illustrate the site's visual qualities. Visual simulations that show "before" and "after" representations of views around the site have been prepared for six representative viewpoints. The visual simulations and analysis in this section are based on the project plans and diagrams prepared by Apple in November 2012 and April 2013. 1. Setting The following section describes the visual character of the project site and its surroundings, as well as views in the vicinity of the site. Views of the project site are provided in Figures V.B-2 through V.B- 9. These photographs correspond to the viewpoint locations (1 through 8) identified on Figure V.B-1. For a detailed description of the physical characteristics of the project site, refer to Section V.A, Land Use. a. Existing Visual Character of the Project Site. The approximately 176 -acre project site is generally flat' and consists of 26 buildings ranging in height from one to four stories, surface parking lots, and associated landscaping. Pruneridge Avenue divides the northern and southern portions of the site (Pruneridge Campus and Ridgeview Court, respectively). Buildings on the site were developed starting in the late -1960s (with most development being completed by the early 1980s) and feature architecture that is characteristic of suburban office parks and corporate campuses of the era. Build- ings are characterized by box -shaped masses with minimal architectural detail, large windows, and flat rooflines. Fencing, where it exists, is generally visually unobtrusive and is integrated with landscaping. The visual quality of the site is influenced by expansive surface parking lots; dense landscaping around buildings, parking lots, interior roadways, and the perimeter of the site; and substantial setbacks between buildings and streets (averaging 150 to 200 feet throughout the site). Landscaped berms are located along the north, east, and west boundaries of the site. However, there are distinc- tions between the visual character of the northern (Pruneridge Campus) and southern (Ridgeview Court) portions of the site, as described below. (1) Pruneridge Campus. The Pruneridge Campus in the portion of the site north of Prune - ridge Avenue has design features that are more characteristic of larger -scale corporate campuses. The design of this portion of the site is characterized by a cluster of buildings within the central portion of the site. Because individual buildings are not as widely spaced as in the southern portion of the site, the Pruneridge Campus contains interior courtyards, tree -lined walkways, and small pocket parks, conveying a park -like visual quality to the built environment. The large surface parking lots to the north and south of the collection of buildings in the Pruneridge Campus are distinct from the cluster of buildings. Glendenning Barn, which is visible from Pruneridge Avenue (although obscured by multiple rows of trees), is a notable feature within the interior of the site and is located along the southern margin of 1 There is an approximately 20 -foot decrease in elevation from the intersection of Pruneridge Avenue and North Wolfe Road to the intersection of East Homestead Road and North Taman Avenue, but the gradual loss of elevation over the project site is not highly visible. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 193 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS the Pruneridge Campus, north of Pruneridge Avenue. The Barn, which contains one story and a loft, features a rectangular plan that is capped by a front -gable roof with overhanging eaves and wood shingles. The structure is clad with brown -painted vertical wood board and batten siding, and contains board and batten hatches (windows) on the east and west facades. The building contains sliding doors and pedestrian entrances. A grassy area, patio, and parking lot are located adjacent to the barn. According to the Historic Resource Evaluation of the Barn prepared by Page & Turnbull, the "Glendenning Barn features an English barn design, which was typical at the turn of the twentieth century. English barns feature a tripartite plan, with central doors that open onto a threshing floor flanked by two mows (hay storage areas) or stock aisles parallel to the gable ends. English barns typically contained post and beam construction and were clad with weatherboard or board and batten siding."2 However, because the Glendenning Barn is setback approximately 300 feet north of Pruneridge Avenue and is mostly obscured by multiple rows of mature trees, most of the character - defining features described in this paragraph are not visible from Pruneridge Avenue. (2) Ridgeview Court. Unlike the Pruneridge Campus, where the buildings are clustered in the interior of the site, Ridgeview Court, which is south of Pruneridge Avenue, is characterized by more of an office park design aesthetic, in that structures are widely spaced across the site and surrounded by expansive surface parking lots. No fencing extends along the street fronts of Ridge - view Court and Pruneridge Avenue, allowing for a close visual relationship between the campus and adjacent roads. Landscaping is generally located along the exteriors of buildings, around parking lots, and along the periphery of the site and roadways. A landscaped berm along the street fronts physi- cally and visually separates the campus from the adjacent roads. Fewer courtyards or pocket parks are located in this area compared to the Pruneridge Campus. Ridgeview Court thus has a less unified visual appearance than the Pruneridge Campus and has fewer private open spaces of usable size. The portion of the project site located east of North Tantau Avenue, while distinct from the Pruneridge Campus and Ridgeview Court, exhibits design characteristics that are similar to Ridgeview Court (including a lack of fencing adjacent to North Tantau Avenue). Buildings are generally one to three stories in height and are individually spaced within surface parking lots. These parking lots are land- scaped, as is the eastern boundary of the area, adjacent to the predominantly single-family residential neighborhoods to the east. Calabazas Creek, which extends through the southeastern corner of the project site, is a notable visual feature of Ridgeview Court. As the site's only natural water feature, the creek is distinct from the rest of the suburban -style corporate campus in visual appearance. However, the visual quality of the creek is diminished due to adjacent chain-link fencing, and vegetation and a creek channel that have been much altered from their natural state. As part of the Calabazas Creek Capacity Improvement Project, which was completed in 2007 3 the creek banks within the project site were reconstructed with brick - filled gabions (wirework containers) to accommodate flood flows and allow vegetation growth. 2 Page & Turnbull, Inc., 2011. Draft Historic Resource Evaluation, Glendenning Barn. July 15. 3 Santa. Clara Valley Water District, 2011. Calabazas Creek Capacity Improvement Project. Website: www.valleywater.ori/CalabazasCreekCapacitylmprovement.aspx (accessed December 9). P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 194 L S A FIGURE V.B—I -4 Photo Viewpoint Apple Campus 2 Project Site 0 300 600 FEET SOURCES: GOOGLE EARTH, 2011, LSAASSOCIATES, INC., 2012. I:ACOC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures\Fig VB I.ai (6/3/13) Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Photo Viewpoint Map Existing view of the project site Visual simulation of the proposed project with lines Visual simulation of the proposed project Main Building Top of Grade SOURCE: APPLE, MAY 2013. I:ACOC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures\Figs VB2-VB9.indd (5/21/13) FIGURE V.13-2 Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Visual Simulations, Viewpoint 1 Wolfe Road Entrance Existing view of the project site Visual simulation of the proposed project with lines Visual simulation of the proposed project LS A FIGURE V.13-3 Parking Building, Phase 2 Building, Central Plant Top of Grade Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Visual Simulations, Viewpoint 2 SOURCE: APPLE, MAY 2013. I-280 Westbound I:ACOC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures\Figs VB2-VB9.indd (5/21/13) Existing view of the project site Visual simulation of the proposed project with lines Visual simulation of the proposed project LS A FIGURE V.13-4 Main Building Top ofGrade Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Visual Simulations, Viewpoint 3 SOURCE: APPLE, MAY 2013. East Pruneridge Avenue I:ACOC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures\Figs VB2-VB9.indd (5/21/13) Existing view of the project site Visual simulation of the proposed project with lines Visual simulation of the proposed project L FIGURE V.13-5 Main Building Top ofGrade Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Visual Simulations, Viewpoint 4 SOURCE: APPLE, MAY 2013. East Homestead Road and North Tantau Avenue I:ACOC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures\Figs VB2-VB9.indd (5/21/13) Existing view of the project site Visual simulation of the proposed project with lines Visual simulation of the proposed project LSA Main Building Corporate Fitness Center Top of Grade SOURCE: APPLE, MAY 2013. I:ACOC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures\Figs VB2-VB9.indd (5/21/13) FIGURE V.13-6 Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Visual Simulations, Viewpoint 5 East Homestead Road and North Wolfe Road Existing view of the project site Visual simulation of the proposed project with lines Visual simulation of the proposed project Main Building Top of Grade SOURCE: APPLE, MAY 2013. I:ACOC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures\Figs VB2-VB9.indd (5/21/13) FIGURE V.13-7 Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Visual Simulations, Viewpoint 6 Peacock Avenue M11r, INN ........... S Existing view of the proJect site K Visual simulation of the proposed proJect with lines "u, Visual simulation of the proposed proJect LS A Main Building FIGURE V.13-8 Parking Building and Central Plant Apple Campus -9 Project EIR Top of Grade Visual Simulations, Viewpoint 7 SOURCE: APPLE, MAY 2013. Tantau Avenue Overpass I 1COC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures',Figs VB2-VB9.indd (5/21/13) Parking Building, Phase 2 Building, and Central Plant Top of Grade SOURCE: APPLE, MAY 2013. I:ACOC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures\Figs VB2-VB9.indd (5/21/13) FIGURE V.13-9 Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Visual Simulations, Viewpoint 8 I-280 Eastbound h II�f�� // �� Id"�r�l�)Y;kIf4O1,M�r,�at;// ffff✓//fia�,/ii %///% mT fiG, i�il/%vi�Iilll /Mr / F " V / l h /A p r(� ��/��/�mrr'. m.✓.., if �4l�IJgL'�di1141N'��0�1�(�115��1'il %/%/,(N+� //�(�401/��'� (app ��/ sIF// If//ff r///////i /%l%////,Gi%/%l(lf✓�Il�f �� l: f �t F i / r )di✓>� r � / It l/Ioylrur✓lllnf ,%fr„ w 'W! I !420 w Parking Building, Phase 2 Building, and Central Plant Top of Grade SOURCE: APPLE, MAY 2013. I:ACOC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures\Figs VB2-VB9.indd (5/21/13) FIGURE V.13-9 Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Visual Simulations, Viewpoint 8 I-280 Eastbound LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 This page intentionally left blank. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 204 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS b. View From the Project Site. Views from the project site to adjacent neighborhoods are generally limited due to existing development (both on- and off-site) and the large number of trees on the site, particularly along the site perimeter. Slight topographical changes, including berms along portions of the site perimeter, also obstruct views out of the site. In addition, I-280 functions as a visual barrier to the south of the site. Even though the site contains numerous features that block or partially obstruct outside views, views to the north, east, and west are available in portions of the project site occupied by surface parking lots. Where larger, open areas exist within the project site, limited views are available of the Santa Cruz Mountains, to the west and south of Cupertino. Such mountain views are also available from East Homestead Road, North Tantau Avenue, I-280, and North Wolfe Road, adjacent to the project site. In general, Pruneridge Avenue contains limited long- range views because of the roadway's curvilinear design and adjacent vegetation (including mature trees). C. Views of the Project Site. Although the project site comprises a distinctive land use in the North Vallco area of the City (in that it is surrounded by primarily single-family residential neighbor- hoods to the north, east, and west), its lack of landmarks or tall buildings and its heavily -landscaped perimeter diminish the visual perception of the site as a distinct place in the City. The mature trees along the perimeter of the site and the topographical variation along the site edge work to reduce views into the interior of the site. Following is a description of views into the site from key public viewpoints in the vicinity of the site. Figure V.B-1 shows the location of these existing views. Figures V.13-2 through Figure V.13-9 illustrates these existing views (along with visual simulations of the proposed project). (1) Views from North Wolfe Road (Viewpoint 1; Figure V.13-2). Views from North Wolfe Road (north of the North Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue intersection, at the proposed main entry to the project) are characterized by a small open landscaped berm area, which contains ornamental trees, shrubs, and a sign in the center, surrounded by larger trees. Beyond the larger trees, views into the site are generally limited with glimpses of fencing and a parking lot to the south. (2) Views from I-280 Westbound (Viewpoint 2; Figure V.13-3). Views westbound along I- 280 southeast of the project site are characterized by vehicles traveling on both the eastbound and westbound freeway travel lanes, freeway dividers, and dense tree plantings to the north (along the southern perimeter of the site). The segment of I-280 south of the project site is not an officially designated State Scenic Highway, but is considered to be part of an eligible State Scenic Highway. This eligible State Scenic Highway extends from the Santa Clara County line on the west to I-880 on the east.4 (3) Views from East Pruneridge Avenue (Viewpoint 3; Figure V.134). Views from this location are characterized by dense tree plantings along the north and south sides of Pruneridge Avenue. Because Pruneridge Avenue is curvilinear, views into the site along the roadway are generally limited to a few hundred feet. Beyond the trees and landscaped berm, glimpses of office buildings and surface parking lots are available. A limited view of the Santa Cruz Mountains is also apparent in the background. 4 California Department of Transportation, 2011. California Scenic Highway Mapping System. Website: www.dot.ca.govjN/LandArch/scenic highways/index.htm. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 205 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS (4) Views from East Homestead Road and North Tantau Avenue (Viewpoint 4; Figure V.13-5). Views from the intersection of North Tantau Avenue and East Homestead Road are similar to views of the site along East Homestead Road. These views are characterized by dense tree plantings adjacent to the roadway and a landscaped berm. The surface parking lot is only partially visible through the trees, which include evergreen conifers (almost completely blocking interior views). Views into the site are similarly limited further south on North Tantau Avenue, except where driveways provide western -facing views into the site. (5) Views from East Homestead Road and North Wolfe Road (Viewpoint 5; Figure V.13-6). Views from the intersection of East Homestead Road and North Wolfe Road are typical of near - perimeter views into the site. These views are characterized by dense tree plantings, including evergreen conifers along the perimeter and landscaped berms. Tree plantings partially obstruct the buildings in the Pruneridge Campus. A small pocket park/landscaped area within the northwest corner of the project site adds to the park -like visual quality of this view. (6) Views from Peacock Avenue (Viewpoint 6; Figure V.13-7). From the intersection of East Homestead Road and Peacock Avenue (in the City of Sunnyvale), the northeastern -most building in the project site (located at 10955 North Tantau Avenue) is visible in the background. In the foreground, the heavily -landscaped buffer south of East Homestead Road is visible, including mature trees on the planting strip. These trees, and others planted around the parking lot in the northern portion of the site, indicate the site is a heavily -landscaped corporate campus. (7) Views from the Tantau Avenue Overpass of I-280 (Viewpoint 7; Figure V.13-8). Views into the site from the I-280 overpass are obstructed by dense tree planting along the southern perimeter of the project site. Surface parking lots and lower -rise buildings that are spaced throughout the southern portion of the site are barely visible from the viewpoint. Calabazas Creek is not a distinct visual element from this vantage point, namely because vegetation located within the creek area blends with the dense tree plantings along the southern perimeter of the site. (8) Views from I-280 Eastbound (Viewpoint 8; Figure V.13-9). Views from the eastbound direction of I-280 are similar to the views from the westbound direction, which are characterized by vehicles traveling on both the east and westbound freeway travel lanes, freeway dividers, and dense tree plantings along the southern perimeter of the project site. As previously described, the segment of I-280 south of the project site is not an officially designated State Scenic Highway, but is considered to be an eligible State Scenic Highway. d. Regulatory Framework. The Land Use/Community Design Element of the City of Cupertino General Plan and the North Vallco Master Plan (which was never formally adopted by the City Council), are the planning documents that are most applicable to aesthetics issues associated with the proposed project and are discussed below. Please refer to Chapter IV, Planning Policy, for a discus- sion of the land use planning policies of these documents. (1) City of Cupertino General Plan. The Land Use/Community Design Element of the General Plan is intended to shape the aesthetic character of the City by promoting the development of a "cohesive community with an identifiable center with well-defined edges." Because the project site is located adjacent to the City's jurisdictional boundaries with the cities of Santa Clara and Sunnyvale, policies related to gateways are particularly applicable to the proposed project. The General Plan includes policies intended to create gateways into the City that are distinct, and incorporate formal P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 206 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS elements (where appropriate), such as buildings, arches, special lighting, and public art. The General Plan also requires buildings to be designed with sensitivity to surrounding neighborhoods (while emphasizing urban character, where appropriate), and for parking lots to be hidden from view. Applicable aesthetics policies in the General Plan, and the consistency of the proposed project with these policies, are summarized in Table IV. I. (2) North Vallco Master Plan. The North Vallco Master Plan has not been formally adopted by the City Council and thus the proposed project is not bound by its objectives and policies. The North Vallco Master Plan is discussed here for informational purposes only. One of the key objec- tives of the North Vallco Master Plan is to enhance the urban design of the North Vallco area such that it is more cohesive and recognizable. Similar to the General Plan, the Master Plan seeks to develop distinctive gateways around the edges of the Master Plan area while preserving the mature trees that are located along the major roads in the area. Sustainable landscaping and public art are also promoted as means to enhance the aesthetic character of the area. Applicable aesthetics policies from the Master Plan, and the general consistency of the proposed project with these policies, are summa- rized in Table V.B-1 for informational purposes. 2. Impacts and Mitigation Measures This section includes an analysis of impacts related to visual quality that could result from the proposed project. The subsection begins with the criteria of significance, which establish the thresh- olds for determining whether an impact is significant. The latter part of this section presents the impacts associated with the proposed project. Criteria of Significance. The proposed project would have a significant impact if it would: • Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista; • Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway; • Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings; or • Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. b. Less -Than -Significant Impacts. The following discussion describes the less -than -significant aesthetics impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project. (1) Scenic Vistas. Scenic vistas in the vicinity of the project site are primarily limited to views of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Such views are primarily limited to roadways in the vicinity of the site. As discussed above, views of the mountains from Pruneridge Avenue are limited due to the curvilinear alignment of the road and adjacent vegetation. In addition, no west -facing scenic views of the mountains are available from Jenny Strand Park (to the east of the site) due to the existence of mature trees along the park's western boundary. The proposed project would not block views of the Santa Cruz Mountains along East Homestead Road and I-280. As shown in Figure V.134, the removal of Pruneridge Road (and associated campus development) would block already limited views of the Santa Cruz Mountains from North Tantau P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 207 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS Avenue. However, this obstruction would not be significant, as the view is constrained in the existing condition, and other similar views are available along east/west streets in the area. The 57 -foot -tall Main Building would be set back at least 240 feet from East Homestead Road and thus would not substantially change the viewshed available along that road. Similarly, the 48 -foot -tall Central Plant and Main Parking Structure would be set back at least 100 feet from I-280 (similar to existing buildings on the site) and thus would not interfere with scenic views available from the freeway. Earthen berms would be built around the perimeter of the project site, and would be most pronounced adjacent to East Homestead Road and I-280. In close proximity, these berms may block more of the sky than under existing conditions, but would not substantially obstruct scenic views (which are limited in the vicinity of these two roads due to existing landscaping). In consultation with City staff, eight viewpoint locations were chosen for visual simulations of the proposed project. These viewpoint locations were selected based on project site visibility and the locations that provide the most representative views of the project site. The analysis of impacts to existing views of the project site focuses on site views from public locations such as roadways. Figure V.B-1 shows the viewpoint locations. Figures V.13-2 through V.13-9 show existing views of the project site (upper photographs), visual simulations of the proposed project with lines representing project buildings (middle photographs), and visual simulations of the proposed project (lower photographs) from each of the selected viewpoints. Views from North Wolfe Road (Viewpoint 1). Figure V.13-2 depicts the view from the proposed North Wolfe Road entrance to the project, located approximately 277 feet north of the intersection of North Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue. The existing view from this location includes mature trees and landscaping, and portions of a parking lot with fencing. The visual simula- tion of the proposed project shows a multi -lane roadway leading into the project site, apedestrian crosswalk on North Wolfe Road and one on Pruneridge Avenue, and sidewalks, associated landscaping, berms and fencing on both sides of the new multi -lane roadway proposed as part of the project. The middle photograph shows the location of the proposed Main Building, which would not be visible from this vantage point. No scenic views are available from this location. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less -than -significant impact on scenic vistas from North Wolfe Road facing east. Views from I-280 Westbound (Viewpoint 2). Figure V.13-3 depicts the view from the westbound travel lanes of the I-280 freeway, looking northwest. The existing view from this location includes cars traveling on the eastbound and westbound freeway travel lanes, a freeway divider and dense tree plantings along the southern perimeter of the project site. The visual simulation of the proposed project shows that the project would not change the existing view. The middle photograph shows the location of the proposed above -grade parking structure, which would not be visible from this vantage point. No scenic views are available from this location. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less -than -significant impact on scenic vistas from the south side of I-280. Views from East Pruneridge Avenue (Viewpoint 3). Figure V.134 depicts the view from Pruneridge Avenue, at the intersection of North Tantau Avenue, looking west. The existing fore- ground view from this location includes the roadway intersection of Pruneridge Avenue and North Tantau Road. The existing view contains a view of travel lanes on Pruneridge Avenue with mature trees and a landscaped berm partially obstructing views of office building and parking lots, on both sides of the road. The Santa Cruz Mountains are visible in the background of the view due to the open expanse of the Pruneridge Avenue right-of-way. The visual simulation of the proposed project shows P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 208 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS a pedestrian and bicycle entrance to the Corporate Auditorium and security reception. The proposed entrance includes an entry opening in the center, ornamental trees, lighting poles, and associated landscaping. Views to the west of the Santa Cruz Mountains from East Pruneridge Avenue would be obstructed by the ornamental trees at the gateway. In the foreground of the proposed project views, a conceptual design for aplanted median and narrowed roadway is shown. The middle photograph shows the outline of the proposed security reception and the southeastern portion of the Main Building. While the proposed landscaping and berms would obstruct existing views of the mountains, they would not result in a significant impact to scenic resources as views of the Santa Cruz Mountains are already partially obstructed from this viewpoint by existing trees (and similar views would continue to be available along other east/west streets in the area). Therefore, the proposed project would have a less -than -significant impact on scenic vistas from Pruneridge Avenue facing west. Views from East Homestead Road and North Tantau Avenue (Viewpoint 4). Figure V.13-5 depicts the view from the intersection of North Tantau Avenue and East Homestead Road, looking southwest. The existing view from this location includes mature trees, a landscaping berm, a small portion of a parking lot, and the roadway intersection. This view would remain virtually unchanged with implementation of the proposed project. The visual simulation of the proposed project shows the same mature trees, landscaping berm, the roadway intersection, and additional vegetation and fencing. The middle photograph shows the location of the proposed Main Building, which would not be visible from this vantage point (due primarily to the berm and landscaping). No scenic views are available from this location. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less -than -significant impact on scenic vistas from this viewpoint. Views from East Homestead Road and North Wolfe Road (Viewpoint 5). Figure V.13-6 depicts the view from the intersection of East Homestead Road and North Wolfe Road, looking southeast. The existing view from this location includes mature trees, a landscaped berm, a small pocket park/landscaped area, and the roadway intersection. The visual simulation of the proposed project shows the same mature trees, landscaped berm, pocketpark/landscaped area, the roadway intersection, and additional vegetation and fencing. Additionally, a valley oak tree planted as a memorial to a former Hewlett-Packard employee will be transplanted to this publically visible location. The middle photograph shows the location of the proposed Corporate Fitness Center, which would not be highly visible from this vantage point (it would be blocked by the berm and vegetation). No scenic views are available from this location. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less - than -significant impact on scenic vistas from the East Homestead Road and North Wolfe Road intersection, looking southeast. Views from Peacock Avenue (Viewpoint 6). Figure V.13-7 depicts the view from the intersection of East Homestead Road and Peacock Avenue, looking south. The existing view from this location includes a very small portion of the northeastern -most building and its associated parking lot on the project site, heavily landscaped buffer consisting of shrubs and trees of varying sizes, and the roadway intersection. The visual simulation of the proposed project shows green open space behind perimeter fencing that includes associated landscaping. The middle photograph shows the location of the proposed Main Building, which would not be visible from this vantage point. No scenic views are available from this location. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less -than - significant impact on scenic vistas from the intersection of East Homestead Road and Peacock Avenue, looking south. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) P UBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 209 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS Views from the Tantau Avenue Overpass of I-280 (Viewpoint 7). Figure V.13-8 depicts the view from the Tantau Avenue overpass of I-280, looking northeast. The existing view from this location includes cars traveling on the eastbound and westbound freeway travel lanes, a freeway divider and dense tree plantings along the southern perimeter of the project site. This view would be virtually unchanged with implementation of the project, as the parking garage near the southern boundary of the site would be obscured by trees. No scenic views are available from this location. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less -than -significant impact on scenic vistas from the Tantau Avenue overpass, looking northeast. Views from I-280 Eastbound (Viewpoint 8). Figure V.13-9 depicts the view from the eastbound travel lanes of the I-280 freeway, looking northeast. The existing view from this location includes cars traveling on the westbound freeway travel lanes, portions of cars traveling on the eastbound freeway travel lanes, a freeway divider and dense tree plantings along the southern perimeter of the project site. The visual simulation of the proposed project shows the existing view would be generally unchanged. No scenic views are available from this location. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less -than -significant impact on scenic vistas from I-280 facing northeast. (2) Scenic Resources. As discussed above, the segment of I-280 south of the project site is not an officially designated State Scenic Highway but is considered to be eligible for such a designa- tion. Implementation of the proposed project has the potential to affect two scenic resources that are visible from I-280 (although only fleetingly): trees and Calabazas Creek (and its existing riparian area). The Glendenning Barn is not visible from I-280; therefore, views of the barn would not be affected by implementation of the proposed project. Trees. The project site currently contains 4,506 trees, of which 1,116 (25 percent) are native species and 3,390 (75 percent) are non-native species .s With implementation of the project, a minimum of 800 trees would be retained in-place on the project site, a minimum of 90 trees would be transplanted, and a maximum of 3,620 trees would be removed. The trees that would be preserved are primarily located on the periphery of the site and along the Calabazas Creek riparian corridor. Transplanted trees include a Valley oak tree dedicated as a memorial to a former Hewlett-Packard employee (which is currently located near Glendenning Barn and would be transplanted to a publicly -visible location near the intersection of North Wolfe Road and East Homestead Road. In addition, at least 6,200 trees would be planted on the site (see Figure III -3), resulting in a net increase of at least 2,494 trees (to a total of at least 7,000 trees). Of the at least 6,200 trees planted on the site, 2,140 trees (35 percent) would be native to the Bay Area, 704 trees (I I percent) would be native to California but not to the Bay Area, 2,756 trees (44 percent) would be non-native and non -fruiting, and 600 trees (10 percent) would be fruit trees. The selected tree species are intended to reference the site's native vegetation and agricultural past. The selected tree species are intended to reference the site's native vegetation and agricultural past. The selected tree species are intended to reference the site's native vegetation and agricultural past. The replacement trees that would be planted on the site would restore a park -like quality to the site, and along with other landscaping would enhance the visual quality of the site compared to its current condition. Therefore, the removal of trees within the viewshed of I-280 would not be considered a significant impact. 5 Since collection of data on existing conditions in 2011, a small number of trees on the project site have been removed due to poor health. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 210 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS Calabazas Creek. As part of the project, Calabazas Creek would be preserved in its current condition and the existing planted riparian corridor would be enhanced with native riparian plantings. Proposed buildings would be set back at least 50 feet from the creek and would not obstruct the visibility of the creek and adjacent riparian area from I-280 or other locations (including North Tantau Avenue). It should be noted that the riparian zone immediately adjacent to Calabazas Creek is only fleetingly visible from I-280. Therefore, the project would not substantially damage Calabazas Creek and its adjacent riparian area within the viewshed of I-280. Glendenning Barn. The Glendenning Barn is considered a scenic resource by nature of its historic significance (it is identified as a Historic Site in the General Plan and is considered a historic resource pursuant to CEQA), but it is not located within the viewshed of I-280. In addition, as discussed in detail in Section V.E, Cultural Resources, the historic integrity of the Glendenning Barn has been substantially compromised due to its urbanized setting, which does not evoke the historic agricultural association of the barn. Although the project would remove the barn from its current site and relocate it elsewhere on-site or to a to -be - determined off-site location, this removal of a scenic resource from its current site would not be considered significant because the structure is not visible from I-280. (3) Visual Character. Implementation of the proposed project would change the visual character and public views of the site by demolishing all existing buildings on the site, vacating Pruneridge Avenue east of the entrance to The Hamptons, and developing a new fenced and secure corporate campus with dedicated access points, primarily via new intersections along North Wolfe Road and North Tantau Avenue. Compared to existing conditions, building space would be highly consolidated, with approximately two-thirds of the proposed occupied building space (taking into account Phase 2 of the project) located in the Main Building, and other occupied building space located primarily around the periphery of the site. This consolidation of building space would allow for approximately 102 acres of the site to be converted to landscaped area (currently approximately 43 acres of the site consist of landscaped areas, most of which is located along the edges of parking lots and buildings). The landscape plan for the project suggests a naturalistic design characterized by open meadows, native plantings, and clusters of fruit trees. Compared to the existing landscape setting of the site, which is characterized by expansive parking lots and highly divided open spaces, the landscape plan proposed as part of the project would benefit the visual character of the area within the campus and views through the security fence of the campus. Security fencing is currently installed along the periphery of the Pruneridge Campus but not along other portions of the site. With the exception of the southern portion of the site (where the site is only fleetingly visible from I- 280), the gateway along North Tantau Avenue to the Corporate Auditorium, and the east of North Tantau Avenue portion of the site, buildings would be clustered away from the periphery of the site. In addition, the perimeter of the site would incorporate design techniques intended to preserve and enhance the existing public views of the landscaped character of the site. For example, a vast majority of existing trees along the periphery of the site would be preserved as part of the project, and would help obscure the proposed buildings. In addition, berms would be extended around the periphery of the site and would be extensively planted. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 211 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS According to preliminary design details, the proposed security fence around the project site would be 7 feet high and would be a metal, powder -coated picket -style fence that would be visually permeable. The fencing would be located approximately 30 to 50 feet from the public sidewalk; landscaping would be planted (or preserved) between the fence and public right-of-way. As a result, the fence would be inconspicuous and proposed buildings would be largely obscured by trees (when mature). As noted above, Calabazas Creek is an important visual element of the southeastern portion of the project site, specifically Ridgeview Court (although it is primarily visible from North Tantau Avenue). As part of the project, the creek would be preserved in its current state, with enhancements to the existing riparian plantings along a 50 -foot swath of Apple property on either side of the Santa Clara Valley Water District's right-of-way. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially adversely affect the existing visual character of Calabazas Creek. As summarized in Table IV. 1, the project would be generally consistent with the aesthetics policies in the General Plan and North Vallco Master Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not substan- tially degrade the existing visual quality of the site and its surroundings. (4) Light and Glare. Currently, the exterior lighting at the project site consists primarily of street lighting and parking lot lighting fixtures. Vehicle headlights are also visible from streets and parking lots in the area. Because the perimeter of the project site is lined with trees with dense foliage, spillover light from the project site is limited .6 The proposed project would introduce new sources of light and glare to the project site. New interior and exterior lighting would be installed throughout the project site to highlight architectural elements of the project, and provide for employee comfort and safety. New anticipated light sources would include the following: 1) architectural and facade lighting; 2) parking garage lighting; 3) entryway lighting; 4) landscape lighting; 5) roadway lighting within the project site; and 6) illuminated signage. The proposed project would include design features that would control light trespass at the project site boundary and at residential property lines.' These features would include limitations to building facade and other outdoor lighting, and the application of exterior screening to the proposed parking structure in order to minimize views and potential glare of vehicle headlights. 6 Arup, 2012. fipple Campus 2 Project Environmental Impact Report Lighting Technical Report. October 29. Spillover light is light emitted from a lighting source that falls outside the boundaries of the property on which the lighting source is located. The conceptual design of Phase 2 development has changed slightly since preparation of the Lighting Technical Report, but the slight changes in design would not alter the key results of the lighting analysis. 7 Light trespass is light that strays from the intended purpose onto an adjacent property. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 212 L S A FIGURE V.B-10 (ivl 0 Receptor Locations Not to Scale SOURCE: APPLE, APRIL 2013. I:ACOC1101 Apple Campus 21,figures\Fig VB l0.ai (5/3/13) Apple Campus 2 Project EIR Illuminance Calculations for Receptor Locations LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 This page intentionally left blank. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 214 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) provides classification for outdoor lighting zones and establishes limitations of light trespass from exterior architectural lighting with a recommendation for maximum illuminance. According to measurement procedures outlined by the IESNA, spillover light beyond a measurement of 0.8 footcandle (fc) from architectural lighting components would be considered significant.' As shown in Table V.B-1 and Figure V.13-10, under the proposed project, all illuminance values at eight identified receptor locations would not exceed the 0.8 fc threshold. In three of the locations, illuminance values would be reduced with implementation of the proposed project; in other tested locations, illuminance values would increase, but by modest values well below the 0.8 fc threshold. Therefore, new lighting introduced to the site would not compromise nighttime views, and would result in a less -than -significant impact. The proposed Main Building would include extensive glazing. However, the building would be buffered from off-site areas by at least 240 feet of open space. Therefore, the building would be unlikely to generate off-site glare. The design of other proposed buildings and adjacent landscaping would be such that these buildings would not generate substantial amounts of off-site glare. Such glare would be reduced by the heavily -planted site perimeter. Table V.B-I: Illuminance Assessment of Receptor Locations Receptor Illuminance Value (fc) Existing Proposed Net Increase Label Address for Receptor Location The Hamptons 1 19500 Pruneridge Avenue 0.033 0.232 0.199 California Hospital Medical Center 2 southwest corner of N. Wolfe Road and 0.294 0.055 -0.239 Prunerid e Avenue Private residence 3 909 E. Homestead Road 0.089 0.150 0.061 Private residence 4 947 E. Homestead Road 0.076 0.206 0.130 Private residence 5 995 E. Homestead Road 0.200 0.169 -0.031 Private residence 6 1023 E. Homestead Road 0.106 0.086 -0.020 Sidewalk 7 10900 N. Tantau Avenue 0.027 0.198 0.171 Sidewalk 8 10500 N. Tantau Avenue 0.063 0.192 0.129 a The significance thresholds for light trespass from the project site is 0.8 fc at the property line. The predicted illuminance value as calculated in the analysis model is checked against this threshold. Source: Arup, 2013. Project Design Feature Update for Parking Structures East of Tantau and Updated Calculations. April 5. C. Significant Impacts. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in any signifi- cant aesthetics impacts. 8 Arup, 2012. op. cit. A footcandle (fc) is a common unit of measurement used to calculate adequate lighting levels of workspace in buildings or outdoor space. It is used to describe the light level that a lamp is expected to provide over the long-term. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 215 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 V. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES B. AESTHETICS d. Cumulative Impacts. As discussed above, the project would not obstruct scenic views, and by expanding the amount of cohesive open space on the site, would enhance the visual quality of the site. In addition, the visual integrity of Calabazas Creek would be preserved. Significant impacts to visual resources (including those associated with increased nighttime lighting) would be site-specific and would generally not contribute to cumulative impacts after implementation of the mitigation measure identified above. Other foreseeable projects in Cupertino would be designed or conditioned, in accordance with City policies, to avoid significant adverse effects on visual quality or other elements of the aesthetic environment. Therefore, past, present, and future projects in the area are not expected to result in a significant cumulative impact to aesthetic resources, and the project would not make a significant contribution to such an impact. P:\COC 1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\5b-Aesthetics.doc (06/03/13) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 216