ERC 10-02-2014Community Development Department
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
APPROVED (AS AMMENDED) MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW COMMITTEE HELD ON OCTOBER 2, 2014
Committee Members: David Brandt
Timm Borden
Aarti Shrivastava
Paul Brophy
Barry Chang
Committee Members absent: none
Staff present: Piu Ghosh
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
August 21, 2014
The minutes of the August 21, 2014 meeting were approved
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
(Reserved for persons wishing to address the Committee on issues that are not already included in the regular
Order of Business)
NEW ITEMS:
1. Application No. (s) GPA -2013-01, Z-2013-01, GPA -2013-02, MCA -2014-01, SPA -2014-01 (EA -
2013 -03)
Applicant: City of Cupertino
Location: citywide
Certification of Environmental Impact Report for a General Plan Amendment, Housing Element
Update and Associated Rezoning;
General Plan Amendment to establish citywide development allocations for commercial, office,
hotel and residential uses and development parameters for key study areas (including the Vallco
Shopping district);
General Plan Amendment for the 2014-2022 Housing Element as required by State Law;
Rezoning of certain parcels in conjunction with the citywide General Plan Amendment;
Specific Plan Amendment to the Heart of the City Specific Plan related to maximum residential
yield calculations;
Municipal Code Amendment to comply with State Housing Law and the Housing Element of the
General Plan and other zoning code amendments for clean-up and consistency
The Environmental Impact Report studied the environmental impacts of three different growth
alternatives in long range planning for the City. All three alternatives found the same types of
impacts: None or Less Than Significant, Less Than Significant with Mitigations or Significant and
Unavoidable. In each of, the three alternatives, the environmental items studied had the same
impacts, just in varying degrees.
❑ None or Less Than Significant
o Aesthetics (visual impacts)
o Green House Emissions
o Demographics, housing needs and economic growths
o Soils and Geology
❑ Less Than Significant with Mitigations
o Cultural/ Archeological - A Stop Work Order will be enforced should any remains or
artifacts be discovered during construction
o Biological Resources - Preventative mitigation efforts are required ( ie; construction
outside of nesting season)
o Noise - Some impacts will be less than significant with standard mitigations during
construction and operations —project specific
o Air Quality - Some impacts will be less than significant with standard mitigations
during construction and operations —project specific
o Seismic- Less than significant impacts with continued compliance to City and State
development and building regulations
o Flood Plain/dam emendation — Less than significant impacts with continued compliance
to City and State development and building regulations
o Urban Fire - Less than significant impacts with continued compliance to City and State
development and building regulations
o Hazardous Materials storage - Less than significant impacts with continued compliance
to City and State development and building regulations
o Public Services/Utilities - Mitigation methods have been identified to reduce the impacts
to Fire Services, Police Services, schools, parks and recreation areas and water services
o Waste Water Treatment and landfills — new sites or expansion sites will need to be
identified as part of a Regional effort over the 26 year span
❑ Significant and Unavoidable
o Noise - Some significant impacts were identified due to long term growth and other
projected impacts from the surrounding region — increased traffic, regional growth
• Air Quality - Some significant impacts were identified due to long term growth and
other projected impacts from the surrounding region — increased traffic, regional growth
o Traffic - A number of intersections cannot be mitigated as they aren't 'multi -modal' or
the need to take private property for expansion or are outside the City's jurisdiction
❑ Additional Discussion
o The different project alternative were studied in the Environmental Impact Report
No project alternative proposed is viewed as the most environmentally sound of the alternatives
facing us, but Alternative A prescribes the least amount of growth
o Comments were received mostly regarding the project, rather than the adequacy of the
EIR
o The number of housing sites are required by RENA
o Different housing sites have different densities — from 25 sites to 65 sites in various
locations around the city, higher density locations are closer to major traffic corridors
ACTION: Recommend that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report (EA -2013-03)
MOTION: David Brandt
SECOND: Barry Chang
NOES: none
VOTE: 5-0-0
OLD BUSINESS
None
Respectfully submitted,
�u
Beth Ebben
Administrative Clerk