REPORT IN BRIEF

The purpose of this public hearing is to consider the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Arques Campus Specific Plan. The FEIR serves as the environmental documentation for the proposed project, which includes the following elements:

• Approximately a 593,600 gross square foot addition to the existing 521,000 gross square feet on the 35.46 acre site.
• The development includes office space, research, and laboratory, including testing areas and support amenities (e.g. cafeteria, recreation center, conference center, and training rooms).
• Demolition of all or part of at least two of the six existing buildings.
• Construction of three new office/prototype laboratory buildings, amenity space, and a parking garage.
• A development agreement between the City of Sunnyvale and Applied Materials has been prepared.

The Draft EIR (DEIR) was prepared and circulated for a 45-day public review and comment period (April 2, 1999 through May 17, 1999). Four letters were received commenting on the EIR. Copies of those letters and responses to the comments were prepared. In addition clarifications and corrections to the Draft EIR have been prepared. These items are contained in a freestanding document titled the Final EIR. The Final EIR includes, by reference, the document titled Draft EIR. The proposed Statement of Overriding Considerations is Attachment 1. The responses to the comments on the DEIR are included in Response to Comments Section in Attachment 2.

In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the FEIR must be certified as a complete and accurate assessment of environmental impacts before action can be taken on the actual project. The Planning Commission and City Council are asked to consider the content of the FEIR to determine the adequacy of the analysis, mitigation measures and overriding considerations for the topics discussed.

The FEIR is not a discussion of the project merits. The FEIR consists of the Draft EIR; comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR; a list of persons, organizations and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR; and a response of the

Lead Agency (the City) to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process. If it is determined that the content of the FEIR is adequate, the City Council may certify the document. If it is determined that the FEIR is not adequate, the Planning Commission or City Council may state those areas of discussion where the document is deficient and recommend or require that additional analysis be prepared prior to certification.

The Planning Commission considered the FEIR on June 7, 1999 and recommended 6-0 to certify the Final EIR.

Staff recommends certification of the FEIR for the Arques Campus Specific Plan.

On August 27, 1998, an Initial Study prepared for the project determined that significant environmental impacts might result from project development and required that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be prepared. The consulting services of EIP Associates were secured for the preparation of the EIR. Areas of potential impact to be considered in the document included:

A Notice of Preparation was prepared and was mailed to the neighboring cities, state and other public agencies requesting input on the scope of the EIR. No input was received. The Draft EIR was prepared and was issued for public review and comment on April 2, 1999. During the 45-day review that followed, public agencies and members of the public submitted written comments on the DEIR. The Planning Commission and City Council each had two Study Sessions regarding the EIR and the proposed project. The publics review and comment period closed May 17, 1999. Four letters were received during the 45-day comment period.

The Planning Commission recommended 6-0 to certify the Final EIR at their meeting on June 7, 1999.

Section 21061 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) defines an EIR as "an information document…the purpose of an EIR is to provide public agencies and the public in general with detailed information about the effect which a proposed project is likely to have on the environment; to list ways in which the significant effects of such a project might be minimized; and, to indicate alternatives to such a project". The FEIR is designed to identify all environmental impacts and recommend mitigation for those impacts that are considered unavoidable and significant. The mitigation must render the impact less than significant. The FEIR for the Arques Campus Specific Plan has determined that significant environmental impacts remain in two topic (traffic, and air quality) areas after application of mitigation measures. The following discussion includes a brief summary of the project proposal and highlights the environmental impacts associated with the project and mitigation measures proposed by the FEIR. A more detailed analysis is in the FEIR.

The applicant, Applied Materials, is proposing the Arques Campus Specific Plan on a 35.46 acre site that includes the following:

• Approximately a 593,600 gross square foot addition to the existing 521,00 gross square feet on the 35.46 acre site.
• The development includes office space, research, and labs, including testing areas and support amenities (e.g. cafeteria, recreation center, conference center, and training rooms).
• Demolition of all or part of at least two of the six existing buildings.
• Construction of three new office/prototype laboratory buildings, amenity space, and parking garage.

A development agreement between the City of Sunnyvale and Applied Materials has also been prepared.

As noted in the EIR, an impact can either be categorized as:

• Significant/Potentially Significant Impact
• Significant Cumulative Impact
• Less than Significant Impact

The criteria used in this EIR to determine whether an impact is or is not "significant" are based on:

• CEQA-stipulated "mandatory findings of significance":i.e., where any of the specific conditions have determined to constitute a potentially significant effect on the environment, which are listed in CEQA Guidelines section 15065
• The relationship of the project effect to the adopted policies, ordinances and standards of the City of Sunnyvale and of responsible agencies; and/or
• Commonly accepted practice and the professional judgement of the EIR authors (EIP Associates) and City staff.

Specific criteria are discussed and included for each of the sections (e.g.: Land Use, Aesthetics, Transportation, Air Quality, etc.) in the EIR for the Arques Campus Specific Plan.

The EIR identifies those impacts that are expected to be "significant" and corresponding mitigation measures warranted to eliminate or reduce those impacts to less than significant levels. If a particular impact cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level, the EIR identifies that impact as "unavoidable."

The Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures of the Arques Campus Specific Plan EIR is Table S-1 (Page S-10) of the EIR. Detail discussion of these impacts and mitigation measures are located in the related sections of the EIR. A copy of the Mitigation Monitoring Program is Attachment 3.

The following section includes a discussion only on the significant unavoidable impacts.

The FEIR determines that certain elements of the transportation and air quality effects are the only environmental factors found to have significant unavoidable impacts that cannot be mitigated to have less-than-significant impacts.

The project sponsor retained Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. to identify existing transportation conditions and to evaluate the effects of the proposed Specific Plan on the transportation network. Both City staff and CCS Planning and Engineering Incorporated, a transportation consultant on the EIR team, independently reviewed the Barton-Aschman Associates' documentation for its adequacy, validity, and conformance with City and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) guidelines. The analysis was determined to be acceptable for use in the Environmental Impact Report.

The results noted that the proposed project would increase average delays at intersections surrounding the project site, however, none of the changes were considered to add significantly to the background levels of congestion. The second finding, was that the proposed project would significantly affect three freeway segments along U.S. 101 during the PM peak hour. Several mitigations were identified, including a Transportation Demand Management Program.

The following impacts, even as mitigated, are environmental impacts related to the project that remain significant and unavoidable. The fact that this impact remains significant requires the preparation of and approval of a Statement of Overriding Considerations if any component of the project is to be approved.

• The proposed project would significantly affect three freeway segments along U.S. 101 during the PM peak hour.

• Northbound U.S. 101, from Mathilda to SR 237 (PM peak hour)
• Southbound U.S. 101, from Great America Parkway to Montague Expressway (PM peak hour)
• Southbound U.S. 101, south of Montague Expressway (PM Peak Hour).

• Contributions to Northbound U.S. 101 Traffic Improvements. Make a fair share monetary contribution to the City of Sunnyvale (for the VTA Congestion Management Program) of 1.9% of the unfunded portion of the SR 85/U.S. 101 improvement project as mitigation of impacts on northbound U.S. 101 traffic.

• Contribution to Southbound U.S. 101 Traffic Improvements. Make a fair share monetary contribution of 3% of the project costs to the VTA Congestion Management Program for the I-880 widening project (which affects the performance of U.S. 101).

• Transportation Demand Management. Project sponsor currently implements transportation demand management programs at this and other locations. Continue to implement TDM measures to achieve a minimum 15% reduction of automobile trips. Techniques that can be continued, enhanced, or initiated include informing employees of transit options; eliminating free parking or implementing parking cash-out at the Arques Campus; subsidizing transit passes; participating in VTA’s Eco Pass program, commuter checks, or other alternative mode subsidies; providing shuttle services to bus and rail stops and transit centers; promoting vanpooling and ridesharing; and promoting bicycle use. Submit Transportation Demand Management Plan and progress report to City Community Development Department on an annual basis.

The EIR notes that along the freeway segments affected by the project, there are not physical improvements that can be feasibly undertaken by a single development proposal to significantly improve traffic operations. Therefore, measures to both increase capacity and reduce vehicle trips are necessary. If all of the mitigation measures could be implemented, the freeway segment impacts would be reduced to less than significant. However, because the improvements (contributions to North and South-bound U.S.101 traffic improvements) are not fully funded and may not be constructed, a possibility remains for the effect to be significant. The City of Sunnyvale does not have authority or jurisdiction over these mitigations, and cannot ensure that they would be implemented. There is a possibility, therefore, that the environmental impacts may be significant. The fact that this impact may remain significant requires the preparation and approval of a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

The EIR analyzed potential project related air quality impacts with respect to carbon monoxide, ozone precursors, and particulates. Project generated traffic would not result in local carbon monoxide concentrations that would exceed state or federal standards. The project, in combination with other development and growth in the region, however, would have air quality impacts resulting from the release (principally from vehicular emissions) of precursor compounds (hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides) to the production of ozone or smog. To address the potentially significant impact of emissions of particulate matter during construction the EIR recommends the implementation of on-site Construction Best Management Practices to control dust during construction.

The following impact, even as mitigated, is an environmental impact related to the project that remains significant and unavoidable. The fact that this impact remains significant requires the preparation of and approval of a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

• Project-generated increases in emissions of certain criteria pollutants would adversely affect regional air quality.

Vehicular Trip Reduction: See discussion of mitigation measure in Transportation section above.

The EIR notes that the buildout of the Arques Campus will generate emissions of air contaminants that would be associated with vehicular travel. Therefore, the project, together with other development and growth in the region, would result in a significant air quality impact.

CEQA requires that alternatives to the proposed project be incorporated into the document. The basic intent of this section of the document is to consider alternatives that would reduce or eliminate significant impacts caused by the proposed project. The alternative project section should address minimizing or eliminating the unavoidable impacts on air quality (unavoidable impact of construction noise could be considered temporary).

This section of the FEIR considers the following four alternatives:

• No Project
• Reduced Development
• Stage 1 Development
• Off-Site Development

Table 5-2 (Project Alternative Trip Generation Estimates-Net Added) on Page 5-9 of the EIR provides summary information about the floor-area ratio (FAR), size, and estimated daily trip generation of each of the alternatives. Table 5-3 (Alternative Analysis-Satisfaction of Project Objectives) on Page 5-21 of the EIR provides a comparative matrix of how the alternatives satisfy project objectives of the Arques Campus Specific Plan.

If the decision-makers prefer one of the project alternatives or a modified project alternative, that preference would occur by action on the Specific Plan and not through certification of the EIR. Other alternatives may be considered provided the scope of environmental review sufficiently addresses the new alternative.

The Arques Campus Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Significant Impact is required by CEQA to ensure implementation and monitoring of all mitigation measures. A Monitoring Program identifies the mitigation measures, who is responsible for implementation, monitoring schedule and who is responsible to do the monitoring. All of the monitoring responsibilities will be handled by Department of Community Development and the Department of Public Works. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan is Attachment 1.

Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines defines the three requirements that relate to overriding considerations (Attachment 1).

• CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
• When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. This statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
• If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the Notice of Determination (NOD). This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to section 15091.

The EIR identifies significant unavoidable impacts related to regional air emissions of nitrogen oxides, and possibly project-related and cumulative traffic impacts on the U.S. 101 freeway. These impacts remain significant and have been incorporated into the draft Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment 1). Staff finds there are overriding benefits of the project density and intensity of land use, including consistency with previously adopted City policy, economic benefits to the City and its residents through the addition of short-term construction and long-term research and development jobs, and contributions to the tax base through sales tax revenues and property tax revenues. These benefits outweigh each of the unavoidable adverse consequences identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report.

Testimony is sometimes received during the public hearing process relating to "significant new information." For the purposes of an EIR, new information is considered "significant" when the following would apply:

• A new substantial environmental impact resulting from the project is identified;
• A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact is identified;
• A new feasible project alternative or mitigation measure is identified but that the project proponent refuses to adopt.
• The Draft EIR is so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that public comment of the draft was, in effect, meaningless.

The "rule of reason standard" is applied to judicial review and EIR contents. The courts do not hold an agency to a standard of absolute perfection, but rather require only that an EIR show that an agency has made an objective, good-faith attempt at full disclosure. The scope of judicial review does not extend to correctness of an EIR’s conclusion, but only the EIR’s sufficiency as an informative document for decision-makers and the public. Legal adequacy is characterized by:

• All required contents must be included;
• Objective, good-faith effort at full disclosure;
• Perfection is not required;
• Exhaustive treatment of issues is not required;
• Minor technical defects are not necessarily fatal;
• Disagreement among experts is acceptable.

Staff believes that the proposed FEIR, consisting of the Draft EIR comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR, a list of persons, organizations and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR and, a response to comments received, meets the requirements of CEQA both in content and format. Should it be determined that the FEIR is not adequate, the Planning Commission or City Council may state those areas of discussion where the document is deficient and recommend that additional analysis be prepared prior to certification.

Any changes to the mitigation measures in the FEIR may affect the accompanying determination of significance. The deletion or alteration of a mitigation measure may result in a determination of a significant unavoidable impact where a less than significant impact was determined as originally mitigated. Should there be an action to certify the document with changes to mitigation measures proposed by the FEIR, then revised findings to the Statement of Overriding Considerations may need to be prepared.

Notification of the public on this EIR included the following:

Notice of Preparation

• This notice is required by CEQA to inform agencies of the intent to prepare an EIR and was mailed on September 18, 1998 to Responsible Agencies and other public agencies.

Notice of Completion

• This notice is required by CEQA announcing the completion of the Draft EIR and was delivered to State of California Office of Planning and Research on April 2, 1999.

Notice of Availability of Draft EIR

• This notice announces the 45-day public review and comment period to run from April 2, 1999 to May 17, 1999.
• This notice was mailed to 31 properties in the vicinity of the site, bounded by Central Expressway on the south, Arques Avenue on the north, and California Avenue access to the site from the west.
• Reference copies of the Draft EIR were available at the Library, the Community Center and the One-Stop Permit Center at City Hall. Copies were also available for purchase.

Distribution of Draft EIR

• Copies of the report were sent to neighboring cities, state and other public agencies

Distribution of Final EIR

• Copies of the FEIR were mailed or delivered sent to neighboring cities, state and other public agencies and anyone who commented on the Draft EIR.

Planning Commission Public Hearing on June 7, 1999

City Council Public Hearing on June 15, 1999

• Notices of these hearings were published in the Sun newspaper 20 days prior to the scheduled hearings
• Notices of these hearings were mailed to 31 properties in the vicinity of the proposed project site
• Notices of these hearing were posted on the project site.
• The Planning Commission held a hearing on June 7, 1999 and voted 6-0 to recommend to certification of the Final EIR.

The decision-maker’s role is to determine if the format, analysis and comment of the FEIR is adequate. A Statement of Overriding Considerations accompanies the FEIR. No separate action is required on these documents.

1. Certify the FEIR for the Arques Campus Specific Plan.
2. Determine that the FEIR is not adequate, state those areas of discussion where the document is deficient and recommend that additional analysis be prepared prior to certification. The Planning Commission may proceed with recommendations on other actions even if the Commission recommends additional work on the FEIR. No project related actions shall be taken (by the Council) until the FEIR is certified. As noted earlier, certification does not approve or deny any element of the project.

Alternative #1.

Prepared By:

Gail A. Price
Principal Planner

Reviewed By:

Trudi Ryan
Planning Officer

Reviewed By:

David S. Boesch, Jr., Director
Community Development

Approved by:

Robert S. LaSala
City Manager

Attachments:

1. Draft Resolution with Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program
2. Final Environmental Impact Report/Response to Comments