Loading...
VII. Other CEQA ConsiderationsVII. OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this chapter discusses the following types of impacts that could result from implementation of the Apple Campus 2 Project: effects found not to be significant; growth -inducing impacts; unavoidable significant environmental impacts; and significant irreversible changes. A. EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT Based on preliminary research and discussions with City staff, the project was determined to not have a significant adverse effect on agriculture, forestry, and mineral resources. Although the project site was historically farmed, it has not been actively farmed since the 1960s, is currently covered with urban uses (including office buildings) and is not suitable for farming. In addition, although the site contains trees, the types of trees and coverage of such trees are not characteristic of forest land. The site also has not been used for mining and the urban development pattern of the area would preclude the establishment of commercial mining operations. Therefore, the proposed project would result in less -than -significant effects related to agriculture, forestry, and mineral resources, and these topics are not discussed further in the EIR. B. GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS This section summarizes the project's growth -inducing impacts on the surrounding community. According to CEQA, a project is typically considered growth -inducing if it would foster substantial economic or population growth. Examples of projects likely to have significant growth -inducing impacts include extensions or expansions of infrastructure systems beyond what is needed to serve project -specific demand, and development of new residential subdivisions or industrial parks in areas that are currently only sparsely developed or are undeveloped. Typically, projects on infill sites that are surrounded by existing urban uses are not considered growth -inducing because the re -use of land by itself usually does not facilitate development intensification on adjacent sites. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in direct population growth because the proposed project does not include the development of new housing units. However, as discussed in Section V.C, Population, Employment, and Housing, the project could indirectly increase the area's population through an expansion of employment. Nevertheless, overall indirect population growth associated with the project would not be considered significant when evaluated on a regional or sub - regional level. Assuming every new employee associated with the project would move to the area from elsewhere (which would substantially overestimate the likely number of new residents generated by the project), the project would indirectly generate 9,356 new residents. RTOC1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\Public\7-CEQAReq.docx (6/3/2013) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 629 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 VII. OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS This employment-related population growth would be a relatively small percentage (approximately 7.9 percent) of the population growth expected in Santa Clara County between 2015 and 2020 (117,800).' In addition, the actual number of new residents generated by the project would be sub- stantially lower than 9,356, as that number does not account for new employees that currently live in the area (and thus would not increase the population by filling a job on the project site). Therefore, the impact of the project on regional and sub -regional population growth would be even further reduced. The total population growth associated with the project (assuming every new employee moves to the region from elsewhere) would comprise 2.7 percent of the population growth expected in the Bay Area region between 2015 and 2020 (340,500) This growth would be considered less than significant because the project site is an appropriate place for employment growth. As described in Chapter IV, Planning Policy, the City's General Plan policies support retaining and intensifying employment at the project site (Policies 2-1, 2-13, 2-35 and 2-44, and Strategy 3 of Policy 2-20). Because the project site is located within an existing urban- ized area and would be served by an enhanced TDM Program, including the Apple transit system, anticipated employment growth could be associated with reduced regional environmental impacts compared to a similar project in a location on the urban fringe (where commute distances may be longer, and where a similar range of transit options may not be available). In addition, growth on the project site would be accommodated with substantial provision of private open space and the development of a campus that would result in no net increase in greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, the growth that would occur as a result of the proposed project would not be considered substantial or adverse. C. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Implementation of the proposed project would result in significant unavoidable impacts in the following topical areas. Significant unavoidable impacts are those that cannot be mitigated to a less - than -significant level with feasible mitigation measures. • Would not fully implement some provisions of the Land Use/Community Design, Circula- tion, and Environmental Resources/Sustainability Elements of the General Plan related to bike and pedestrian access due to the proposed vacation of a segment of Pruneridge Avenue, and lack of provision of a trail segment along Calabazas Creek, and these inconsistencies would result in an environmental impact. • Generate air pollutant emissions during the construction and operational periods that could violate air quality standards at the project and cumulative levels. • Under Existing plus Project conditions, Background plus Project conditions, and/or Cumulative plus Project conditions, cause unacceptable conditions at five intersections, ten mixed flow freeway segments, one High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) segment of a freeway, and cause excessive queuing on I-280 off ramps at Wolfe Road. 1 Association of Bay Area Governments, 2009. Building Momentum, San Francisco Bay Area Population, Household, and Job Forecasts. 2 Ibid. P:\COC1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\PublicV-CEQAReq.docx (6/3/2013) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 630 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 VII. OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS • Create new challenging conditions for pedestrians and interfere with pedestrian and bicyclist accessibility to the site and surrounding areas due to proposed modifications to the roadway network and high project -related traffic volumes. • Impact residents of The Hamptons due to the closure of Pruneridge Avenue by reducing transit access due to the reroute of Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Route 81, affecting access to areas east of North Tantau Avenue. All other impacts of the proposed project would be mitigated to a less -than -significant level with the incorporation of the mitigation measures identified in this EIR. D. SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE CHANGES An EIR must identify any significant irreversible environmental changes that could result from implementation of a proposed project. These may include current or future uses of non-renewable resources and secondary or growth -inducing impacts that commit future generations to similar uses. CEQA dictates that irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified.' The CEQA Guidelines describe three distinct categories of signifi- cant irreversible changes: 1) changes in land use that would commit future generations; 2) irreversible changes from environmental actions; and 3) consumption of non-renewable resources. 1. Changes In Land Use Which Commit Future Generations The proposed project would be implemented on a site that already contains office and research and development uses, and the uses that would be developed on the project site would reflect these existing land uses and similar uses in the area. As noted above, the intensification of employment within the site is a goal of the General Plan. The project would result in several benefits to the land use pattern of the project site, including the expansion of open space and landscaping by approxi- mately 59 acres (to a total of 102 acres); the concentration of building space in the site; the provision of most site parking in parking garages (including sub -grade storage areas); the provision of an extensive network of interlinked internal pathways; and the enhancement of bike and pedestrian infrastructure along streets around the project site. These beneficial changes in land use patterns would be paired with numerous sustainability features that would be implemented as part of the project, including a comprehensive TDM Program, the generation of renewable energy, and the construction of energy-efficient buildings. The internal land use pattern of the project site, coupled with the green features of the project, would be environmentally sound. However, the proposed project would convert a segment of Pruneridge Avenue — a publicly -accessi- ble right-of-way — to private property (with no equivalent replacement public access). In doing so, the project would reinforce the super -block land use pattern of the area, which would tend to discourage walking and biking, and increase commute times for some of those dependent on transit, walking, and biking, and could increase the use of private motor vehicles. While the project would improve circulation within the project site for Apple employees, the closure of a segment of Pruneridge Avenue (with no equivalent replacement public access) would represent an adverse change to the land use pattern of the public realm. 3 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.2(c). P:\COC1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\PublicV-CEQAReq.docx (6/3/2013) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 631 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR JUNE 2015 VII. OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS As discussed in Chapter IV, Planning Policy, Pruneridge Avenue currently functions as a motor vehicle, transit, bike, and pedestrian route between North Tantau Avenue and North Wolfe Road (both of which contain bike facilities). It functions as the western segment of a longer -distance bike route that starts in the City of Santa Clara and allows cyclists to bypass busier, higher -volume road- ways. The removal of the segment of Pruneridge Avenue within the project site would require cyclists and pedestrians (traveling from the vicinity of North Tantau Avenue and Pruneridge Avenue to points west of the project site) to either proceed along North Tantau Avenue, East Homestead Road, and North Wolfe Road, the latter two of which are high-volume, multi -lane roadways, or proceed on North Tantau Avenue to the south, connecting to Vallco Parkway and North Wolfe Road. For a bicyclist or pedestrian wishing to reach the intersection of North Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue from points to the east of the project site, this detour would increase travel distance by approximately 0.5 mile over current conditions. The removal of Pruneridge Avenue would affect bicyclists and pedestrians differently, depending on their ultimate destination, but would adversely affect mobility in the area and would be inconsistent with the City's initiatives to reduce driving and increase the use of alternate means of transportation. It would also conflict with Policy 4-3 in the Circulation Element, which seeks to enhance the pedes- trian grid in the City, including a'/4 -mile grid of sidewalks and paths. Therefore, the conversion of Pruneridge Avenue to a private land use would change bicycle and pedestrian routing in the area and would commit future generations to a different land use pattern than currently exists. 2. Irreversible Damage from Environmental Accidents No significant irreversible environmental damage, such as what could occur as a result of an acciden- tal spill or explosion of hazardous materials, is anticipated due to development of the proposed project. Compliance with federal, State, and local regulations and the mitigation measures identified in Section V.H, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, would reduce to a less -than -significant level the possibility that hazardous substances within the project site would cause significant environmental damage. The project has no design or operational features that would lead to irreversible damage associated with environmental accidents. 3. Consumption of Nonrenewable Resources Consumption of nonrenewable resources includes conversion of agricultural lands, loss of access to mining reserves, and non-renewable energy use. The project site is located within an urbanized area in Cupertino. No agricultural lands exist on the project site; therefore none would be converted to non-agricultural uses. As discussed in Section V.F, Geology, Seismicity, and Soils, the project site is within an area classified as MRZ-1, "[a]reas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence .i4 The project would therefore not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value locally or to the region or State. In addition, the project site is not identified in aplanning document as being a locally -important mineral resource recovery site. Sustainability, and the use of renewable energy, is a major design theme of the project. To that effect, the project would include numerous features that would reduce the energy demand of the project, as described in Chapter III, Project Description. A summarized list of these features follows: 4 California Department of Mines and Geology, 1987. Updated 1996. P:\COC1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\PublicV-CEQAReq.docx (6/3/2013) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 632 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR VII. OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS • Energy-efficient building systems, such as high -efficiency radiant conditioning systems; light -emitting diode (LED) electric lighting; and natural ventilation. • Provision of 100 percent of the project's overall energy needs through renewable sources, including on-site photovoltaics and fuel cells, participation in the State of California Direct Access Program, and, if needed, market purchase of renewable energy credits from new sources that are Green e -certified. 300 electrical vehicle charging stations would be provided on-site (with built-in expansion potential for 1,000 charging stations). Building design for passive heating and cooling. A comprehensive TDM Program to reduce the use of single -occupancy motor vehicles and overall vehicle trips. Extensive on-site green space to reduce cooling needs. Although additional motor vehicle trips generated by the project (and construction activities) would incrementally increase the use of non-renewable fuel sources, the project's sustainability features (particularly the use of renewable energy to power project buildings and activities) would minimize the use of non-renewable energy sources. As discussed in Chapter V.K, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sustainability, the substantial use of renewable energy resources on the site would benefit the project's effects on global climate change. Operation of the proposed project would result in a net reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from existing conditions and would represent a very efficient use of energy. P:\COC1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\PublicV-CEQAReq.docx (6/3/2013) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 633 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. JUNE 2015 This page intentionally left blank. APPLE CAMPUS 2 PROJECT EIR VII. OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS P:\COC1101 Apple 2 Campus\PRODUCTS\DEIR\PublicV-CEQAReq.docx (6/3/2013) PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 634