The Final EIR finds that the Project would contribute to a shortage of park facilities for City residents by precluding the development of an open space trail through the project site.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure PSU-2, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and made a condition of project approval, would reduce these impacts, but not to a less-than-significant level. This mitigation measure would provide for specific ways to minimize the potential for impacts to the availability of future facilities for City residents; however, impacts could still occur. Therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measure PSU-2:
Implement Mitigation Measures PLAN-1 and PLAN-3.
VI. SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL EIR THAT ARE REDUCED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL BY MITIGATION MEASURES MADE CONDITIONS OF PROJECT APPROVAL
The Final EIR identifies the following significant impacts associated with the Project. It is hereby determined that the impacts addressed by these mitigation measures will be mitigated to a less than significant level or avoided by making these mitigation measures conditions of project approval. Pub. Resources Code § 21081(a)(1).) As explained in Section X, below, the findings in this Section are based on the Final EIR, the discussion and analysis in which is hereby incorporated in full by this reference.
A. Impact PLAN-1: The proposed project would change the designation of a 1.1-acre portion of the site designed Parks and Open Space, and would reduce the acreage of land designated for future parks in the City.
The Final EIR finds that the Project would change the designation of a portion of the site from Parks and Open Space, which would ultimately reduce the acreage of land designated for future parks in the City.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure PLAN-1, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and made a condition of project approval, would avoid or reduce these impacts to less-than-significant levels.
Mitigation Measure PLAN-1:
The project sponsor shall implement one of the following options:
a. Provide sufficient funds for the acquisition of 1.1 acres of property by the City for future park development; or
b. Agree to purchase (unless other property currently owned by Apple is proposed), designate, and dedicate to the City 1.1 acres elsewhere in the City as Parks and Open Space, subject to the satisfaction of the City, provided the land would be publicly accessible.
B. Impact PLAN-4: The proposed project would not be consistent with the identification of the Glendenning Barn as a Historic Site in the General Plan.
The Final EIR finds that the Project would not be consistent with the identification of the Glendenning Barn as a Historic Site in the General Plan.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure PLAN-4, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and made a condition of project approval, would avoid or reduce these impacts to less-than-significant levels.
Mitigation Measure PLAN-4:
Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1.
C. Impact BIO-1: The proposed project may result in the destruction or abandonment of nests occupied by special-status or non-special-status bird species that are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Fish and Game Code.
The Final EIR finds that the Project could result in the destruction or abandonment of nests occupied by bird species that are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Fish and Game Code due to the construction and operation of the Project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and made a condition of project approval, would avoid or reduce these impacts to less-than-significant levels.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1:
A qualified biologist shall conduct surveys prior to tree pruning, tree removal,
transplantation, ground disturbing activities, or construction activities on the site to locate active nests containing either viable eggs or young birds. Preconstruction surveys are not required for tree removal, tree pruning, or construction activities outside the nesting period.
If construction would occur during the nesting season (February 1 to August 31), preconstruction surveys shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of pruning, construction, or ground disturbing activities. Preconstruction surveys shall be repeated at 14-day intervals until construction has been initiated in the area after which surveys can be stopped. Locations of active nests containing viable eggs or young birds shall be described and protective measures implemented until the nests no longer contain eggs or young birds. Protective measures shall include establishment of clearly delineated exclusion zones (i.e., demarcated by uniquely identifiable fencing, such as orange construction fencing or equivalent) around each nest site as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist, taking into account the species of birds nesting on-site and tolerance for disturbance. In general, exclusion zones shall be a minimum of 300 feet from the drip line of the nest tree or nest for raptors and 50 feet for passerines and other species. The active nest sites within an exclusion zone shall be monitored on a weekly basis throughout the nesting season to identify signs of disturbance or to determine if each nest no longer contains eggs or young birds.
The radius of an exclusion zone may be increased by the project biologist if project activities are determined to be adversely affecting the nesting birds. Exclusion zones may be reduced by the project biologist only in consultation with CDFW. The protection measures shall remain in effect until the young have left the nest and are foraging independently or the nest is no longer active. For any project-related activities involving the removal of trees during the nesting season, a report shall be submitted to the City of Cupertino and CDFW once per year documenting the observations and actions implemented to comply with this mitigation measure.
D. Impact BIO-2: New buildings that would be developed as part of the project could result in bird collisions.
The Final EIR finds that the Project could result in bird collisions due to the construction of new buildings at the project site.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and made a condition of Project approval, would avoid or reduce these impacts to less-than-significant levels.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2:
The project sponsor shall incorporate the following design features (developed through a
Main Building and North Tantau Structures
• From outside most buildings, glass often appears highly reflective, reproducing habitat and appearing attractive to some birds. To limit reflectivity and prevent exterior glass from attracting birds, the project shall utilize low-reflectivity glass (7 percent reflectivity, 0 percent ultra-violet transmittance). This low-reflectivity glass shall be used for the entirety of the building’s glass surface (not just the lower levels nearest trees where bird collisions may be the most common) to provide additional avian safety.
• The Main Building shall include 10-foot-wide awnings at each story (or a similar feature) to create “visual noise” by covering windows and muting image reflections.
• All indoor potted plants shall be placed away from the glass perimeter so that birds do not attempt to fly into the vegetation.
• All roof mechanical equipment shall be covered by low-profile angled roofing so that obstacles to bird flight are minimized.
• Interior light “pollution” shall be reduced during evening hours through the use of a lighting control system.
Main Parking Structure and North Tantau Parking Structures
• The above-grade parking structures shall be designed with open-air façades. No glass shall be utilized so birds can access open through-passages.
Corporate Auditorium/Corporate Fitness Center
• To limit reflectivity and prevent exterior glass from attracting birds, the project shall utilize low-reflectivity glass (7 percent reflectivity, 0 percent ultra-violet transmittance).
• Interior light “pollution” shall be reduced during evening hours through the use of a lighting control system.
• The Corporate Fitness Center shall include 5-foot-wide awnings (or a similar feature) to create “visual noise” by covering windows and muting image reflections
E. Impact BIO-3: The proposed project would result in the removal of trees that are protected under the City of Cupertino’s Tree Protection Ordinance, and could thus conflict with a local policy or ordinance protecting biological resources.
The Final EIR finds that the Project could conflict with a local policy which protects biological resources due to the removal of trees that are protected under the City’s Tree Protection Ordinance.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and made a condition of project approval, would avoid or reduce these impacts to
less-than-significant levels.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3:
Replacement/compensation of all protected trees shall be undertaken in accordance with the review of the Consolidated Arborist Report for the Apple Campus 2 Project and City
Municipal Code requirements, prior to the initiation of construction. Recommendations noted within the review of the Consolidated Arborist Report for the Apple Campus 2 Project, as modified by the adjustments to response to the review of the Consolidated Arborist Report per EIR Plan revision and a review of the trees recommended for transplant at the Apple Campus 2 Project shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Protected trees that are damaged or removed during construction or roadway improvements shall be subject to replacement/compensation according to the City’s tree protection ordinance. However, replacement for removed trees subject to the City’s Protected Tree Ordinance shall be consistent with the requirements of Chapter 14.18 of the Protected Tree Ordinance. Trees that have been identified as being suitable for transplantation shall be relocated in accordance with the Tree Transplant Schedule approved by the Community Development Director.
F. Impact CULT-1: The project would relocate the Glendenning Barn, a designated Historic Site under the City of Cupertino General Plan and a historical resource under CEQA.
The Final EIR finds that the Project would cause the relocation of Glendenning Barn, a designated Historic Site under the City’s General Plan.
Implementation of either Mitigation Measure CULT-1a or Mitigation Measure CULT-1b, depending on whether Apple elects to relocate the barn on-site or off-site, as set forth below, which are hereby adopted and made a condition of project approval, would avoid or reduce this impact to less-than-significant levels.
Mitigation Measure CULT-1a (on-site relocation):
The Glendenning Barn shall be relocated to one of the following two sites within the Apple Campus 2 project site, subject to the approval of the City: 1) to the northeast of the
Corporate Fitness Center, south of East Homestead Road or 2) at the proposed eastern termination of Pruneridge Avenue, near The Hamptons. The barn shall not be relocated to the second potential relocation site identified by Apple, to the west of the Central Plant, near the southwestern property line of the project site. This site is unacceptable to the City
because it would be difficult to allow for the barn to be visible from a public right-of-way.
The lead agency shall ensure that any adopted measures to mitigate or avoid significant adverse changes to the resource are fully enforceable through permit conditions,
agreements, or other measures. The following stipulations shall apply to the barn’s on-site
relocation:
• The following character-defining architectural elements of the barn shall be substantially visible from a public right-of-way, per the discretion of City staff: 1) size/scale of barn; 2) board and batten siding (including windows, if possible); and 3) roofline.
• The new site for the Glendenning Barn shall include open space and/or land that can be converted to such use. The amount of open space shall be sufficient to reference the area’s historic agricultural roots.
• The Glendenning Barn shall be relocated by a qualified structure-moving company with experience moving historic buildings.
• Relocation of the Glendenning Barn shall be overseen by a qualified historical architect.
The architect shall ensure that the barn retains its significant character-defining features at its new location, including its form, proportion, structure, plan, style, and materials.
The historian shall be responsible for documenting relocation of the barn from its current, historic site to its new site. Documentation shall include production of a report that includes photographic documentation of the move and a historical context for the barn that describes the resource’s significance in local history. Copies of this
documentation shall be offered to local libraries and local historical societies, and submitted to the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University.
• The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
(Standards) shall be applied to the barn at its new location. The Standards consist of four possible treatments for historic properties: preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction. Depending on the nature of the barn’s use at its new location and its current condition, one or more of these treatments shall apply.
• The applicant shall provide a plaque, reader board and/or other educational tools to explain the historic significance of the barn on the project site. The plaque shall include the City seal, name of the resource, date it was built, a written description, and
photograph, and shall be placed in a location where the public can view the information, not necessarily on the barn.
Mitigation Measure CULT-1b (off-site relocation):
The Glendenning Barn shall be relocated off the project site to a new site within Cupertino, subject to the approval of the City. The lead agency shall ensure that any adopted measures to mitigate or avoid significant adverse changes to the resource are fully enforceable
through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. The following stipulations shall apply to the barn’s relocation:
• The new site for the Glendenning Barn shall include open space and/or land that can be converted to such use. The amount of open space shall be sufficient to reference the area’s historic agricultural roots. Appropriate uses of the new site could include
educational uses determined by the City. Public access could be permitted and is encouraged, but is not required to reduce impacts to the resource.
• If located on private property, the following character-defining architectural elements of the barn shall be substantially visible from a public right-of-way or (if the barn and/or its surroundings are publicly-accessible) a public viewpoint, per the discretion of City staff:
1) size/scale of barn; 2) board and batten siding (including windows, if possible); and 3) roofline.
• The Glendenning Barn shall be relocated by a qualified structure-moving company with experience moving historic buildings.
• Relocation of the Glendenning Barn shall be overseen by a qualified historical architect.
The architect shall ensure that the barn retains its significant character-defining features at its new location, including its form, proportion, structure, plan, style, and materials.
The historian shall be responsible for documenting relocation of the barn from its current, historic site to its new site. Documentation shall include production of a report that includes photographic documentation of the move and a historical context for the barn that describes the resource’s significance in local history. Copies of this
documentation shall be offered to local libraries and local historical societies, and submitted to the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University.
• The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
(Standards) shall be applied to the barn at its new location. The Standards consist of four possible treatments for historic properties: preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction. Depending on the nature of the barn’s use at its new location and its current condition, one or more of these treatments shall apply.
• The applicant shall provide a plaque, reader board and/or other educational tools to explain the historic significance of the barn, both on the off-site location and on the project site. The plaques shall include the City seal, name of the resource, date it was built, a written description, and photograph, and shall be placed in a location where the public can view the information, not necessarily on the barn.
G. Impact CULT-2: Ground-disturbing activities associated with site preparation and the construction of building foundations and underground utilities could adversely affect archaeological resources.
The Final EIR finds that the Project could adversely affect archaeological resources due to ground-disturbing activities associated with site preparation and the construction of building foundations and underground utilities.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures CULT-2a and CULT-2b set forth and adopted below, which are hereby adopted and made conditions of project approval, would avoid or reduce these impacts to less-than-significant levels.
Mitigation Measure CULT-2a:
The project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor project ground-disturbing activities. Prior to project ground-ground-disturbing activities, the archaeologist shall prepare a Monitoring Plan for the project. The Monitoring Plan shall include: (1) a review of historical maps, photographs, soil inventories, and geotechnical reports to identify those locations where subsurface historical features may occur and areas of prehistoric sensitivity;
and (2) a Discovery Plan that describes the specific methods and procedures that will be used in the event that archaeological deposits are identified.
Archaeological monitors shall be empowered to halt construction activities at the location of a discovery to review possible archaeological material and to protect the resource while the finds are being evaluated. Monitoring shall continue until, in the archaeologist’s judgment, cultural resources are not likely to be encountered.
If deposits of prehistoric or historical archaeological materials are encountered during project activities, all work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected until the archaeologist assesses the finds, consults with agencies as appropriate, and makes recommendations for the treatment of the discovery. If avoidance of the archaeological deposit is not feasible, the archaeological deposits shall be evaluated for eligibility for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. If the deposits are not eligible, mitigation is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, adverse effects on the deposits shall be
mitigated. Mitigation may include excavation of the archaeological deposit in accordance with a data recovery plan (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(b)(3)(C)) and standard archaeological field methods and procedures; laboratory and technical analyses of recovered archaeological materials; preparation of a report detailing the methods, findings, and
significance of the archaeological site and associated materials; and accessioning of archaeological materials and a technical data recovery report at a curation facility.
Upon completion of the assessment, the archaeologist shall prepare a report to document the methods and results of the assessment. The report shall be submitted to the City of Cupertino and the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University upon completion of the resource assessment.
Mitigation Measure CULT-2b: If archaeological deposits are encountered during project subsurface construction when an archaeological monitor is not present, all ground-disturbing activities within 25 feet shall be redirected and a qualified archaeologist contacted to assess the situation, consult with agencies as appropriate, and make
recommendations for the treatment of the discovery. The project applicant shall inform its contractor(s) of the sensitivity of the project area for archaeological deposits. The City shall verify that the following directive has been included in the appropriate contract documents:
“If prehistoric or historical archaeological deposits are discovered during project activities,
“If prehistoric or historical archaeological deposits are discovered during project activities,