15. SCC Master Plan
CITY OF
CUPEIUINO
Parks and Recreation Department
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Number J 5'"
Agenda Date: October 3, 2006
ISSUE
Certify the addendum and mitigated negative declaration for the Stevens Creek Corridor
Park Master Plan and Restoration Plan (SCCP) per CEQA Guideline 15164, CEQA
analysis and proposed conclusions pertaining to the environmental effects of certain
revisions to the SCCP.
Approve proposed revisions to the SCCP to further reduce traffic, noise, and related
effects on nearby neighborhood, and the proposed acceptance of the terms of the
litigation settlement Memorandum of Agreement, Fry v. City of Cupertino,
BACKGROUND
The attached documents represent the items agreed upon in the settlement conference
relative to Fry v. City of Cupertino.
RECOMMENDATION
Certify the addendum and mitigated negative declaration for the Stevens Creek Corridor
Park Master Plan and Restoration Plan (SCCP) per CEQA Guideline 15164, CEQA
analysis and proposed conclusions pertaining to the environmental effects of certain
revisions to the SCCP.
Approve proposed revisions to the seep to further reduce traffic, noise, and related
effects on nearby neighborhood, and the proposed acceptance of the terms of the
litigation settlement Memorandum of Agreement, Fry v. City of Cupertino,
I JtA-1
Printed on Recycled Paper
October 3, 2006
Page 2 of2
Respectfully submitted:
-- /~
Therese ~mbrosi Smith, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
Approved for submission to City Council:
p~~Kn~~~a~cf
g:\parks and recreation admin\templates- masters\staff report. doc
I)CL-c2
Stevens Creek Corridor Park Master Plan and Restoration Plan
Initial Study
Addendum to reflect Project Changes; September 2006
City of Cupertino - September 2006
Mitigated Negative Declaration
DA TE: 9/27/2006
SUBJECT: Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration
Pursuant to the California State Public Resources Code and the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, as amended to date, the City of Cupertino (City)
submits a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Stevens Creek Corridor Park Project
(Project).
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The City of Cupertino (City) has developed a Park Master Plan and Conceptual
Restoration Plan for a proposed 60-acre Stevens Creek Corridor Park. The Stevens Creek
Corridor Park would be 5,900 feet in length bordered by Stevens Creek Boulevard to the
north, McClellan Road to the south and residential neighborhoods to the east and west.
Plans include converting the City-owned Blackberry Farm picnic grounds into a
community park, realigning the creek and restoring in-stream and riparian habitat along
sections of Stevens Creek within the 100-year floodplain, enhancing adjacent upland oak
woodland habitat, constructing a 5,900-foot all weather trail, developing new park and
golf maintenance facilities at Blackberry Farm and an environmental education center at
McClellan Ranch.
The Stevens Creek Corridor Park was the subject of a Mitigated Negative Declaration
prepared pursuant to CEQA and approved, along with the Stevens Creek Corridor Park
Master Plan, by the City Council on July 20, 2006. Certain clarification and revisions to
the Project were made in September 2006. These Project Changes are the subject of this
Addendum.
This Initial Study has been prepared for the City of Cupertino, pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines 15162, 15164, to review the environmental impacts associated with the
proposed revisions to the Stevens Creek Corridor Park project and to allow an informed
decision regarding approval of the revised project based on this additional environmental
reVIew.
FINDINGS
The City, having reviewed the Initial Study for the proposed project finds that:
1. The proposed project will provide recreational opportunities in the 60-acre Stevens
Creek Corridor Park. For the reasons set forth in detail in this Addendum, all potentially
significant adverse environmental impacts can be either avoided or reduced through
implementation of the mitigation measures listed in this document.
2. The Project will not affect the following environmental effects identified in the Initial
Study Checklist as exceeding significance thresholds. All significant effects can either be
1
Ija.- ]
avoided or reduced through the implementation of mitigation measures found in this
document and in the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) attached as
Appendix I of this document.
3. In addition to the mitigation measures described in the Initial Study, the design
features of the project which include mitigation measures and Best Management
Practices (BMPs) directly incorporated into the project description either avoid,
minimize, or reduce environmental effects to a point of less-than-significance; and
4. A Mitigated Negative Declaration, augmented by this Addendum, will be filed as the
appropriate CEQA compliance document for the Project.
5. None of the Project Changes September 2006 involve new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
BASIS OF FINDINGS
Based on the environmental evaluation presented herein, the Project will not cause
significant adverse effects related to aesthetics, agricultural resources, cultural resources,
geology/soils, hazards and hazardous materials, land use/planning, mineral resources,
population/housing, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic, and utilities/service
systems. In addition, substantial adverse effects on humans, either direct or indirect, will
not occur. The Project does not affect any important examples of the major periods of
California prehistory or history. Nor will the Project cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. Along
with the designs of the trail components, BMPs incorporated into the project descriptions
for the Project avoid, minimize, and reduce impacts to air quality, biological resources,
including fisheries, hydrology/water quality, and noise to less-than-significant levels.
Based on the Initial Study, the project designs and incorporated BMPs avoid, minimize,
and reduce impacts to listed environmental effects to a less than significant level.
Attached is the Addendum to the Initial Study prepared for the Project. The public can
review documents used in preparation of the Addendum and the original Initial Study at
the City of Cupertino, Department of Parks and Recreation, 10300 Torre A venue,
Cupertino, California 95014.
Addendum to the Initial Study
1. Introduction
The City of Cupertino has prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS/MND) for the Stevens Creek Corridor Park Master Plan and Restoration Plan. The
City of Cupertino is the Lead Agency for the project. The Santa Clara Valley Water
District is a Responsible Agency for the project.
The findings for this project state that:
. The proposed project will provide enhanced riparian habitat for the federally-
listed Steelhead trout, and
2
I )~ -y
. The project's negative effects can be avoided or reduced through the
implementation of mitigation measures as listed in the IS/MND.
A public review period for the IS/MND was from April 28, 2006 to May 30, 2006.
Although respond to comments on a Negative Declaration is not required, the City added
Responses to CEQA comments generated during the Stevens Creek Corridor Park Master
Plan and Restoration Plan Initial Study public review, dated June 13, 2006 to the public
record.
The whole of the environmental record which was before the Cupertino City Council
when it approved the Negative Declaration is referred to as the "Adopted IS/MND".
The Stevens Creek Corridor Park Master Plan and Restoration Plan is now subject to the
certain clarifications and additions which expand on the existing project description.
Collectively these are referred to as "Proiect Changes September 2006".
City staff and the City environmental consultant evaluated the substance of Project
Changes September 2006 to determine the appropriate manner for the City to comply
with CEQA.
The Project Changes September 2006 either do not affect the physical environment or
have a less than significant effect. Several changes serve to reduce impact or to further
mitigate impacts identified previously. None of the changes reduces mitigation
previously incorporated in the project.
The Project Changes September 2006 were evaluated under Title 14. California Code of
Regulations, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
Article 11. Types ofEIRs, Section 15162. Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations.
It was determined based on careful study that Project Changes September 2006 involve
only minor revisions to the MND, and they are attributed to proposed alterations in
operations, minor physical changes in Project details and phasing of improvements,
rather than "major revisions" within the meaning ofCEQA Guideline 15162. In
particular, the Project revisions cause no new significant environmental effects and no
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant adverse
environmental effects and that none of the conditions in Section 15162 requiring a
subsequent EIR apply:
"(a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a
project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead
agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole
record, one or more of the following:
"(I) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major
revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of
new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects;
3
I JCZ-S-
"(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or
Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
effects; or
"(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could
not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the
previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted,
shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would
in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects
of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure
or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from
those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt
the mitigation measure or alternative." Title 14. CCR Section 15162
As described in detail herein, the Project Changes September 2006 are characterized as
"minor technical changes" within the meaning of CEQA Guideline 15164, due to the fact
that they cause no significant adverse environmental effects not discussed in the MND,
and the potentially significant effects previously examined will not be more severe than
denoted in the original MND. Therefore it was determined that the appropriate course of
action was to prepare an addendum to the Adopted Negative Declaration as described in
Title 14. CCR Section 15164. Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration:
"(a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a
previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of
the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent
EIR have occurred.
"(b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only
minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions
described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or
negative declaration have occurred.
"(c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in
or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
("d) The decision making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or
adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.
4
r S-a.-t,
"(e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant
to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's
findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be
supported by substantial evidence." Title 14. CCR Section 15164.
2. Addendum to Project Description
A. Clarifications.
I. Basketball Courts in the Blackberry Farm ("BBF") Recreational Area.
Two (2) new half-court basketball courts, in west bank group picnic area, are proposed in
the master plan for use by fee based customers during 100-day operation only. The
existing softball, basketball and volleyball areas on the east bank will continue to
function until the small parking area is constructed. At the time this parking area is
constructed, the basketball and volleyball facilities would be eliminated. The softball
field will remain. A single replacement sport facility (volleyball or basketball) may be
rebuilt if space and/or interest exist.
2. Operational Features of Blackberry Farm Picnic area Use.
Blackberry Farm picnic area facilities, including Swimming pools, will be for use by all
fee-based customers during 100-day operation for recreational swim. No fee-use
activities will be allowed outside the 100-day period.
3. Rationale for Capacity and Operational Features ofBBF and Steven Creek
Parking Lots.
The Council decided on a program that retained the golf course, reduced the picnic area
to an 800-person size and provided for a healthy amount of habitat restoration. It is
important to note that the minimum size necessary to keep the big Cupertino community
picnics in Cupertino like the Lions Club and Cupertino Community Service barbeques is
500. The 350 vehicle festival-style parking spaces for the picnic grounds were derived
by the use of auto occupancy (2.5 people per vehicle) and projections of parking
requirements based on planned activities at the activity sites within the Corridor.
4. Definition ofBBF Snack Bar Use.
Currently there is an existing snack bar with a window that opens towards to the pool and
operates during the 100-day operation. The project proposes adding an outside window
so that people using the trail can purchase beverages and snacks without having to enter
the fee-based pool area.
5. Access to "West Bank" Picnic Area.
A new 14-foot wide pedestrianlbicyclellight duty vehicle bridge is proposed from festival
parking area and pool complex to the west bank picnic area and is to be used only for the
100-day operation. During the "off season" period, the West Bank picnic area will be
accessible to pedestrians only (except for city maintenance vehicles).
B. Additions
5
1){L -7
1. Task Force. Promptly following completion and official opening of the
planned trail connecting Stevens Creek Boulevard to BBF, as described in the MND, City
will form and convene an official "Task Force" charged with responsibility to consider
and recommend to the City Council potential future changes to the Project's design,
operations and implementation schedule.
a.. In particular, the Task Force will consider the advisability, features
and implementation of a program to replace some or all of the existing
infrastructure, commercial operations and other improvements presently
comprising the Blackberry Farm picnic area, parking lot, snack bar and basketball
courts.
b. In particular, the Task Force will develop a proposal for long term
use of the park..
c. The membership of the Task Force shall be open to all
"stakeholders" and shall include residents from the immediate vicinity of the
Blackberry Farm picnic area.
2. Noise. City will implement a program for reducing noise generated by
maintenance machinery on the Blackberry Farm Golf CoUrse, with the goal of not
increasing the present ambient noise level attributable to the combination of park and
golf course maintenance machinery. Construction noise will be regulated by the
standards contained in City ordinances which regulate construction noise. City will
remove speed bumps on all streets near the park, used by Project construction traffic, for
the duration of construction, and will design post-construction speed bumps so as to
reduce ambient noise.
3. Parking Increase. City will provide for up to fifteen (15) curbside public
parking spaces along Stevens Creek Boulevard adjacent to the Blue Pheasant Restaurant.
City will eliminate all signage on the northern and southern ends of the corridor that
directs park users to the BBF parking areas. During the 265-day "off season" City will
reduce public parking in the BBF parking lot to no more than a total of 100 spaces. When
the trail is fully open, meaning connected from BBF to Stevens Creek Blvd., busses and
shuttles, excepting vehicles for handicapped persons, will be prohibited from using the
San Fernando entrance. The existence of these 100 parking spaces shall not be promoted
by the City as being available for overflow or additional parking for other uses within the
corridor by means of signs, flyers, or other publicly distributed information (i.e., Web
sites, etc..).
4. Shuttle and Trail Connection Usage into BBF. City will allow (and
encourage) busses and shuttles serving BBF to drop off and pick up park users at the bus
pull outs located at Stevens Creek Boulevard (existing) and at McCellan Road (planned).
5. Trail Use Restrictions. City will prohibit all motorized vehicles, including
electric scooters on park trails.
~ r-tt -t
6. Tree Protection. Prior to the start of construction, the City will identify
and mark all trees to be removed during construction for the Project. The City will hire
an outside arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture or American
Society of Consulting Arborist to observe tree health throughout construction. The
arborist will provide regular recommendations to the City to ensure the health of trees
intended to remain after construction. The City will install protective chain link fencing
and/or orange construction fencing around the drip line of all trees in the proximity of the
construction zones to ensure that construction does not harm trees intended to remain in
the corridor.
7. Corridor Patrol. City will hire a Parks Service Officer that will provide patrol
and maintenance functions throughout the corridor.
8. Alcohol Restrictions. The City will enforce Ordinance Code Section
13.04.130a, which limits alcohol consumption to beer and wine and only in conjunction
with food.
9. Implement a Neighborhood Litter Control Program.
10. Implement Neighborhood Permit Parking if the neighbors wish it and the City
Council approves it (see Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 11.27)
3. Addendum to Environmental Assessment
A. Summary of environmental effect
The Project Changes September 2006 contain Clarifications and Additions. The
"Clarifications" are expansion of existing elements of the project and therefore have
already been subject to environmental evaluation in the adopted IS/MND. The
"Additions" are generally neutral or beneficial changes which result in no new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects.
1. Task Force. This addition has no potential to affect the physical environment.
The City routinely invited citizen participation in planning. The Task Force would be
integrated with normal City governmental practice.
2. Noise. This addition provides more specific noise reduction. In the Adopted
IS/MND, Best Management Practices (BMPs) incorporated into the project
were found sufficient to avoid, minimize, and reduce impacts to noise to less-than-
significant levels. The additional restrictions on noise generated by maintenance
machinery on the Blackberry Farm Golf Course are consistent with the established
BMPs.
The City already regulates construction noise by ordinance. In addition, the City will
remove speed bumps on all streets near the park, used by Project construction traffic, for
7(fa.. -1
the duration of construction, and will design post-construction speed bumps so as to
reduce ambient noise. This will further reduce noise in the affected neighborhood.
3. Parking Increase. The adopted IS/MND determined that the Project will not
cause significant adverse effects related to transportation/traffic. This project addition
provides more parking thereby further reducing parking impact. The City will provide
for up to 15 curbside public parking spaces along Stevens Creek Boulevard adjacent to
the Blue Pheasant Restaurant by marking existing pavement where the street width is
sufficient to add parking safely. There will be no new construction.
The other additions are parking management through signage, directing traffic, and
blocking off parking spaces during the 265-day "off season". The net effect will be a
reduction in traffic attracted to the San Fernando entrance.
4. Shuttle and Trail Connection Usage into BBF. This addition will reduce traffic
congestion during certain events which could result in overflow parking.
5. Trail Use Restrictions. This addition will reduce noise and public safety
impacts on trail users and trail neighbors.
6. Tree Protection. This addition expands the BMPs already identified for
protecting and retaining trees on the restoration site.
7. Corridor Patrol. This addition will improve public safety.
8. Alcohol Restrictions. This addition will improve public safety.
9. Implement a Neighborhood Litter Control Program. The adopted IS/MND
determined that the Project will not cause significant adverse effects related to aesthetics.
This addition will help reduce annoying litter around the park.
10. Implement Neighborhood Permit Parking. This addition would be adopted
through the established City petition process if the majority of affected residents want to
install a parking permit requirement for their neighborhood. If adopted, it would
presumably be a benefit to control on-street parking by visitors.
B. Environmental Checklist and Responses
The Project Changes September 2006 will not result in any change in the Environmental
Checklist and Responses as presented in the Adopted IS/MND (April 2006, as amended).
The Environmental Checklist and Responses is incorporated by reference.
##
81s-a-(O