Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS October 28, 1998 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: PROPOSED CIRCULATION AND SCENIC ROADWAYS ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN; AND PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION. FROM: Curtis Williams, Planning Director RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission: Consider the attached draft Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element, discuss, recommend changes, and forward a recommendation to the City Council, including a recommendation to adopt the Negative Declaration. BACKGROUND The 1997-98 City Council goals and objectives included, as a high priority, the update of the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The Council's priority on the Circulation Element derived from the need to address several circulation issues which were of increasing concern, - including ownership and maintenance of private roads, driveway standards, and roadway right- of-way and standards. The Circulation Element would provide the framework for developing subsequent policies and standards to address those issues. On January 21, 1998,the Council approved a contract with Crawford Multari & Clark Associates to prepare the update. The Council also appointed a General Plan Committee to work with the consultants and staff to prepare the plan. The Committee is comprised of representatives of the City Council (Bill Siegel), the Planning Commission (Carol Gottlieb), the Finance Committee (Art Bernstein), the Safety Committee (Berin Fank), the Environmental Design Committee (Jean Struthers), and the Pathways Committee (Bob Stutz). The Committee met monthly from March through June, reviewing numerous circulation and scenic roadway issues and commenting on several versions of the draft update. On September 17, 1998, the Committee sponsored a public "informational" meeting, attended by about 15 members of the public, and at which the consultant (Chris Clark) and staff presented a brief overview of the draft and responded to questions. The discussion focused primarily on private roadway issues of concern to those in attendance. Circulation Element: October 28, 1998 Page 2 General Plan Requirements California Government Code Section 65300 requires every city and county to draw up and adopt a"comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development" of the community. The Circulation Element is one of seven mandatory elements of a General Plan, which also include Land Use, Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Safety, and Noise. Communities may include additional elements if they so choose, such as the. Town's current Pathways, Recreation, and Scenic Roadways elements. Most of the Town's General Plan is quite outdated, having been adopted in 1975. Exceptions are the Pathways Element, which was revised in 1996, and the Housing Element, which was updated and adopted in August of 1998. State law specifies that all General Plans shall include a circulation plan intended to designate the "location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utilities and facilities." The Town's circulation system is somewhat unique in that there is no commercial or industrial development to be served and there are no major roadways, other than at the perimeter of the Town. Instead, local roadway design_ and alternative modes such as the Town's pathways play a more critical role in the transportation system. Because of the focus on the scenic nature of the Town's roadways and overlapping policies of the two elements, the Council directed that the Circulation Element and the Scenic Roadways Element of the General Plan be combined in this effort. Due to the recent updating of the Pathway s Element and its importance as a stand-alone document, it was determined not to incorporate that element into the Circulation Element. There are, however, numerous references in the draft element to pathways and the policies of the.Pathways Element. DISCUSSION The Draft Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element initially sets forth several general goals and objectives for circulation, and then discusses in more detail nine specific issues important to the Town's circulation system: roadway classifications, private roadways, driveways, traffic safety, scenic roadway design, emergency vehicle access, drainage and utilities, alternative transportation modes, and regional coordination. Each of these issues is discussed briefly, and goals, objectives, policies, and implementation measures are outlined for each. The policies and implementation measures, while useful for assuring that Town actions are consistent with the General Plan, remain at a broad policy level, and implementation will usually require subsequent studies, standards, policies, ordinances, CIP projects, etc. to be adopted. Background Report The draft Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element also includes a Technical Background Report, which was used to support much of the discussion and policies set forth in the Element. The Background Report will not be included in the final element, but is provided for the Commission's and public's information only. Revisions will not be made to the report unless substantive errors are noted which might affect the policies outlined. Circulation Element: October 28, 1998 • Page 3 The Town's Goal and General Objectives The framework for all of the goals, objectives, policies, and implementation measures in the element is set forth in the Town's Goal on page 2 and the subsequent General Objectives. In particular: "The Town's Goal is to maintain our quiet residential roads: • In good repair; • In a visually pleasing manner; • In a safe condition; • To discourage through traffic; and • To assume responsibility for private roads only when they have met Town standards. The circulation system should be compatible with the rural nature of the community - a system that makes-the community relatively impermeable to motor vehicles and open and safe to those on foot,bicycle and horseback." These principles - maintaining the rural, scenic nature of the roadways, safety and repair, discouraging through traffic, and responsibility for private roadways, form the basis for virtually all of the policies which follow. Issues This report will not discuss all of the topics reviewed in the element, as the document provides relatively concise overviews of each. Staff has, however, identified three issues which probably deserve Commission scrutiny and comment and which were discussed at some length by the General Plan Committee: • Roadway Classifications - The classifications on figure C-3 set forth a hierarchy of street types in Town. While these classifications do not imply any widening of roads (in fact, policies in that section discourage that), they may have a bearing on maintenance priorities. Also, the lack of arterials will hopefully assist the Town in limiting through traffic from outside of Town. The Commission should discuss whether there are any classifications of concern. • Right-of-Way - A figure on page 7 outlines the Town's concept for right-of-way, encompassing an area wide enough to minimize slope alteration and to accommodate the roadway pavement, pathways, utilities and drainage, and adjacent vegetation. An implementation measure on page 8 suggests that 60 feet is a typical right-of-way width, although that would vary depending on conditions. The Commission should discuss the adequacy of the proposed right-of-way concept. Circulation Element: October 28, 1998 Page 4 • Private Roadways - As noted, approximately 50 percent of the Town's roadways are privately owned and maintained. The element suggests, on page 9, two alternative policies regarding private roadways: A) dedication of private roadways to public when upgraded to Town standards and all necessary dedications have been offered by adjacent property owners; or B) private roads remain private, except where private "through" roads should be made public to connect to other public roads. This is a fundamental difference in approach, with alternative A representing the Town's current policy to encourage the conversion of private roads to public. The Commission should offer a recommendation as to which alternative is preferred. In addition, staff has attached a list of suggested corrections and minor changes to the document which have been identified and will be incorporated into the final element. If Commission members would like to indicate additional such changes, they may do so at the meeting or may provide their notes to staff. - Environmental Review Any amendment or update to a General Plan constitutes a "project", as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Initial Study has been prepared which evaluates the potential environmental effects of the proposed element, and a draft Negative Declaration has been prepared based on the findings of the Initial Study. The Negative Declaration, dated October 8, 1998, indicates that no significant environmental impacts are anticipated due to the proposed Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element goals, objectives, and policies, and that no mitigation measures are required. - General Plan Review Process State law specifies that amendment and adoption of General Plan elements requires public hearing and recommendation by the community's advisory agency (Planning Commission), and public hearing and adoption by the City Council. Public notice in a local newspaper is mandated at least 10 days prior to each public hearing. The Planning Commission's action on the Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element is, therefore, a recommendation to the City Council. It is anticipated that the entire General Plan will be updated in this way over the next two years, and the elements will utilize a similar format for consistency (with the exception of the Housing Element,which has a very specific format required by State law). Staff is available to respond to questions from the Commission or from the public. ATTACHMENTS Corrections and Minor Modifications Negative Declaration Draft Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element(separate cover • Circulation Element: October 28, 1998 Page 5 Circulation and Scenic Roadways Element Minor Corrections and Errata 1. p. 1, 2nd paragraph, last sentence: capitalize Town. 2. p. 1, last paragraph(Existing Conditions), 1st sentence,revise to read: "The Town is generally dependent on other parts of the San Francisco Bay Region for a variety of commercial, cultural and recreational facilities. Employment opportunities are similarly scattered throughout the region within the commute distance of working residents of the community." 3. Figure C-2: add Stanford Industrial Park and the Page Mill/I-280 park-and-ride to the map of non-residential destinations. 4. Figure C-3: clarify that Moon Lane is not connected to Saddle Mountain Road, and that East and West Sunset Drives are not connected. NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND INITIAL STUDY FOR THE LOS ALTOS HILLS - CIRCULATION & SCENIC ROADWAYS ELEMENT Prepared for: Town of Los Altos Hills Prepared by: Crawford Multari and Clark Associates 641 Higuera Street,Suite 202 San Luis Obispo,California 93401 Contact: Chris Wm. Clark,AICP October 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS Sections P Introduction 3 Purpose of Initial Study _ 3 Project Location 4 Project Characteristics 4 Initial Study Environmental Checklist 6 I. Land Use and Planning 8 II. Population and Housing 9 III. • Geologic Problems. 10 IV. Water 11 V. Air Quality _ 13 VI. Transportation and Circulation 14 VII. Biological Resources 16 VIII. Energy and Mineral Resources 17 IX. Hazards 18 • X. Noise 19 XI. Public Services - 20 XII. Utilities and Service Systems 21 XIII, Aesthetics 22 XIV. Cultural Resources 23 XV. Recreation 24 XVI. Mandatory Findings of Significance 25 • Determination 26 • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 2 INTRODUCTION Los Altos Hills is proposing to review and adopt the Los Altos Hills Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element for its General Plan. The Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element is the official statement of the Town setting forth goals, objectives, policies, assumptions, guidelines, and implementation measures intended to designate the"location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utilities and facilities" (Section 65302 (b) of the California Government Code). This negative declaration and initial study(ND/IS)analyzes the anticipated impacts of the proposed Los Altos Hills Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element adoption. PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY This initial study has been prepared by the Town of Los Altos Hills,the lead agency,pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA);the State CEQA Guidelines. CEQA requires that all state and local government agencies consider the environmental consequences of projects over which they have discretionary authority. Approval of the Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element constitutes a"project" under CEQA. The Town of Los Altos Hills(Town)has initiated its environmental review process to disclose the potential impacts that could be associated with the Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element as described in this initial study. Through this documentation process, the Town ensures that all of the possible -environmental effects associated with the proposed project are fully disclosed according to the requirements of CEQA. An initial study is an informational document used in the local planning and decision-making process. This initial study is not intended to recommend approval or denial of the project. The purposes of the initial study are to: • provide the lead agency.with information to use in deciding whether to prepare an environmental impact report(EIR) or negative declaration; •. enable the lead agency to modify the project to mitigate adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a negative declaration; and • document the factual basis for the finding, in a negative declaration, that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment. As lead agency, the Town is required to circulate a negative declaration for public review before adopting it. This document is being circulated for a 30-day review period. If comments on this document do not identify any significant environmental concerns,the Town intends to adopt a negative declaration for the project. If other environmental concerns are identified during the review process, the document may be revised to serve as a notice of preparation(NOP)for an EIR. Before approval of the project,the Town must consider the proposed negative declaration along with any comments received during the public review process. If the Town finds,on the basis of the initial study and any comments received,that the initial study adequately addresses the environmental issues associated Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 3 • with the project and that no substantial evidence indicates that the project would have a significant effect on the environment, the negative declaration will be approved. PROJECT LOCATION • The Town of Los Altos Hills is located south of the City of Palo Alto and west of the City of Los Altos in the northwestern portion of Santa Clara County(Figure 1). Los Altos Hills is unique in character and is composed primarily of low-density residential development. In contrast,areas surrounding Los Altos Hills are more intensely developed urban areas. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The primary purpose of the Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element is to reinforce and maintain the rural residential nature of the circulation system. The existing Circulation Element was adopted in 1975. In June 1997, the City Council established as a high priority the completion of an updated Circulation Element that would also incorporate the Town's Scenic Roadways Element and closely relate to the Town's adopted Pathways Element. By implementing the proposed project, the Town of Los Altos Hills intends to fulfill three main objectives: • Develop roadway classifications,and levels of service for each classification,appropriate to the rural and winding nature of Town roads. These classifications should be developed with an understanding of the origin; destination and mode of transportation of the user,reflecting the residential character of streets in Los Altos Hills; ' • • Develop and maintain corridors for travel through Town in which the user can enjoy and view the natural environment and open spaces that provide a buffer from adjacent land uses. These corridors include pathways proposed or existing in the Pathways Element; and • Work with surrounding communities and agencies to reduce impacts from the regional transportation system. The focus of the planning process is an update of the existing Circulation and Scenic Highways Elements. The updated plan primarily retains existing circulation and scenic highway policies and includes technical refinements required to bring the Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element into conformance with state law. The new circulation & scenic highway element focuses on updating the text goals, objectives, policies, and implementation measures, adding scenic & highway goals and policies, and generally modernizing other portions of the element. It should be noted that subsequent activities resulting from implementation of the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element policies must be examined to determine whether additional documentation must be prepared. If a later activity would have effects that were not examined in this initial study, a new initial study would need to be prepared leading to either an environmental impact report (EIR) or a negative declaration. Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 - 4 • m 0 4 y 'r ti` 4F f' Oaklandz;° m �y . 4alb'� a��qt ^ . ii•} X `,s•.;-C ')-1';4'. Fat,' . ,' , ‘••fA'-:•-• ...'"4,g,s, U9D\Alit;-., ,,o'417:7,74,‘ ik:i.„4.,,,s,..,,t5‘,,,,,,;;;,,',..e: 0 —,..0, z 0 „.„ ,..1,:iat.rt„tkv..,,,, ,,,,. .n. JS.v^���.'Fab + ), ' ."ec Lt`,y,. rt, • & $ LLL viii m HI/ 411, an Jose :Scab Miles t g CD • =h Figure 1 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST This section discusses potential environmental impacts associated with approval of the proposed project. The following guidance, adapted from Appendix I of the State CEQA Guidelines,was followed in. answering the checklist questions: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the discussion. A"No Impact"answer is adequately supported if the discussion shows that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained when it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards(e.g.,the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. • 3. All analyses must be based on a comparison between conditions-that would occur if the project were implemented and existing conditions(also known as baseline conditions). 4. "Potentially Significant Impact"is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 5. "Potentially Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated"applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures hasreduced an effect from"Potentially Significant Impact"to a"Less- Than-Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less-than-significant level (mitigation measures from earlier analyses may be cross-referenced). 6. Earlier analyses may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15063[c][D]). Earlier analyses are discussed in the project description above under "Previous Environmental Documents and Site-Specific Information". • The discussion that follows each section of checklist questions: • analyzes previously certified environmental analysis and/or mitigation relevant to the issue, including the potential for each effect to be significant and adverse and standard requirements 'and measures that will preclude adverse impacts; • describes proposed measures that will preclude adverse impacts; Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 6 • • analyzes the potential for residual or remaining significant adverse impacts following implementation of the project and all previously identified,standard,and proposed requirements and measures; and • • summarizes the applicable mitigation measures established by the various support documents and project-specific measures that will reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level. Identification of the potential for residual significant adverse environmental impacts would trigger the need for preparation of an EIR. For issue areas in which no significant adverse impact would result or impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level by mitigation, further analysis is not required. • • • • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 7 Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. • Would the proposal: a. Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? - ❑ 0 ❑ ■ b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies ❑ 0 ❑ ■ adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c. Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? 0 ❑ ❑ ■ d. Affect agricultural resources or operations(e.g.,impacts on 0 ❑ 0 ■ soils or farmlands,or impacts from incompatible land uses)? . • e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an 0 0 0 • established community(including a low-income or - minority community)? - Setting • The primary land uses in Los Altos Hills are single family residences and open space. No agricultural resources exist within the town planning area. Other land uses in the town include public and - private facilities such as schools'and Foothill College, churches, and parks and recreational facilities. The Land Use Element for the Town's General Plan provides a description of the basic framework for the physical development of the planning area and establishes guidelines for the general distribution and extent of the land uses. Discussion of Checklist Answers a-c. Project implementation would not result in a conflict with general plan or zoning designations, environmental plans or policies, or with existing adjacent land uses because these policies are consistent with the underlying principles that form the goals and policies of the existing land use plans, goals, and policies of the General Plan for Los Altos Hills. As discussed in the "Project Characteristics",general objectives in the Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element include the need for roadway classifications and roadway corridor be consistent with the residential character of the community and develop and maintain corridors for travel through Town in which the user can enjoy and view the natural environment and open spaces that provide a buffer from adjacent land uses. d. Project implementation would not affect agricultural operations or resources because no agricultural resources exist within the planning area. e. Project implementation would not disrupt or divide physically established communities because the planning area is largely developed and the circulation system in the community has been established. Conclusion No land use impacts would occur as a result of implementing the Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element. Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 8 • Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a. Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ projections? b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or ❑ 0 ❑ ■ indirectly(e.g.,through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? c. Displace existing housing,especially affordable housing? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ • Setting - The estimated population for the Town of Los Altos Hills is 7,985 (1995 Dept. Of Finance estimate).The Town has approximately 2,700 households. There are few developable areas remaining in the Town. • Discussion of Checklist Answers a-c. The project is consistent with the General Plan. The project implementation would not exceed regional or local population, induce substantial growth, or displace existing housing because the project does not provide, create a demand, or displace housing. The project would not induce • substantial growth the project area because the planning area is near build out capacity and the goals and policies of the Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element would support the existing and planned development in the area. Conclusion No population or housing impactswould occur as a result of implementing the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element. Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 9 Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a. Fault rupture? 0 ❑ 0 • b. Seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ 0 • c. Seismic ground failure,including liquefaction? ❑ 0 ❑ U d. Seiche,tsunami,or volcanic hazard? ❑ ❑ 0 • e. Landslides or mudflows? ❑ 0 ❑ • f. Erosion,changes in topography or unstable soil conditions 0 0 • 0 from excavation,grading,or fill? g. Subsidence of the land? ❑ ❑ ❑ • • h. Expansive soils? 0 ❑ ❑ • i._ Unique geologic or physical features? 0 0 0 • Setting • The project area is located in a seismically active region in California. There are active faults on the peninsula. Geological features include low-lying hills and valleys. The planning area has moderately steep terrain, natural vegetation, and several creeks and tributary drainage channels. Discussion of Checklist Answers a-e. Project implementation would not result in fault rupture, seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure or liquefaction,seiche,tsunami,or volcanic hazard,or landslides because no new circulation systems are proposed in the element. In addition,the appropriate town agencies shall review plans and designs to ensure improvements made to the roadways as a result of policy implementation would meet required standards. f. Project implementation would not result in substantial changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from erosion due to excavation, grading, or fill. This impact is considered less than significant. g. Because no expansion of the roadway system is proposed, implementation of the proposed project would not result in subsidence,expansive soils,or change in unique geological or physical features. Conclusion• Geological impacts associated with the Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element are considered less than significant. • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 10 Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in: a. Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the rate 0 0 ■ 0 and amount of surface runoff? b. Exposure of people or property to water-related hazards 0 0 0 ■ such as flooding? c. Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface ❑ 0 0 ■ water quality(e.g.,temperature,dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? d. Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? 0 0 0 ■ e. Changes in currents,or the course or direction of water 0 ❑ 0 ■ movements? f. Change in the quantity of ground waters,either through 0 0 0 ■ direct additions or withdrawals,or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial _ loss of groundwater recharge capability? g. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? 0 0 0 ■ h. Impacts on groundwater quality? 0 0 0 U i. Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater 0 0 0 ■ otherwise available for public water supplies? Setting • Los Altos Hills lies in the foothill of the'San Francisco peninsula. It does not lie over any large aquifer or other water source. Drainages from the Town flow into the Santa Clara Valley. Discussion of Checklist Answers a. Project implementation would not result in substantial changes to absorption rates,drainage patterns, or increased in surface runoff because no substantial increases in impervious surfaces are anticipated. Policies for driveways, drainage, and utilities include use of proper design to accommodate drainage for driveways and utilizing natural channels and topographical contours rather than man-made materials to provide effective drainage away from properties in order to preserve the rural residential character of the Town. This effect is considered less than significant. b. The project would not expose people or property to water-related hazards. See response"a"above. c-e. The project would not result in substantial increases in surface waters,changes to current course or direction of water movements, or changes in surface water quality. Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 11 f-i. The project would not change the quantity of groundwater, alter the direction or rate of flow of groundwater or affect groundwater quality. Conclusion Water-related impacts as a result of implementation of the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element are considered less than significant. • • • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 • 12 • Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing 0 ❑ ■ ❑ or projected air quality violation? b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? 0 0 ■ 0 c. Alter air movement,moisture,or temperature,or cause any 0 0 0 ■ change in climate? d. Create objectionable odors? . 0 ❑ ❑ ■ Setting Los Altos Hills is participating in the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Program. Discussion of Checklist Answers - a. Implementation of the Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element would not substantially degrade air quality beyond existing conditions because no changes are proposed in the existing roadway system. • • b. Project implementation would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants beyond existing conditions. Goals and policies under this element promote"more efficient use of Town roadways, easements, and public lands to accommodate all modes of travel". This impact is considered less than significant. c. The project would not have the potential to change air movement,moisture,or temperature, either locally or regionally. d. Project implementation would not create objectionable odors. Conclusion Air quality impacts associated with implementing the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element are considered less than significant. • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 13 Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Would the proposal result in: a. Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ❑ ❑ • 0 b. Hazards to safety from design features(e.g.,sharp curves ❑ ❑ 0 • or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? c. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ❑ 0 ❑ • d. Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite? ❑ ❑ 0 • e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? 0 0 ❑ • f. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative 0 ❑ 0 • transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? g. Rail,waterborne,or air traffic impacts? 0 0 ❑ • Setting The circulation system is described in the introduction of this report. Discussion of Checklist Answers a. Project implementation would not result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion beyond existing conditions. One of the goals of this element is to promote "more efficient use of Town roadways, easements, and public lands to accommodate all modes of travel". Another goal of the element is to"minimize traffic impacts from present and future activities beyond the control of Los Altos Hills". Policies under this element which address increased traffic and congestion include supporting efforts to provide mass transit opportunities to residents,for school buses,and park-and- ride facilities, and providing bike paths and adequate road shoulders for bicyclists. Other policies include working with regional transportation agencies to coordinate roadway planning and working with cities and other agencies to review environmental impacts for projects, especially circulation, on the Town. This impact is considered less than significant. b. Project implementation would not result in hazards to safety from design features. Goals and - policies in the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element include providing safe roadways for all travelers, and driveways compatible with natural terrain designed for safe access to and from the individual parcels. This impact is considered beneficial. c. Implementation of the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element would not result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. One of the goals of this element is to provide for the most efficient use of roadways,for emergency vehicles. Some policies include roadways and Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 14 driveways conforming to minimum standards for emergency vehicles,road accessibility and visible • signage from intersecting roadways, and emergency access road availability from neighborhoods. This impact is considered beneficial. d. Project implementation would not result in insufficient parking capacity because policies in this element include ensuring that development of land uses (schools, homes, churches, etc.) provide adequate parking. This impact is considered less than significant. e-f. Implementation of the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element would not result in hazards for pedestrians or bicyclists or conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation because the goals and policies of this element promote efficient use of the Town roadways to accommodate all modes of travel and safe roadways for all travelers. This impact is considered beneficial. g. Project implementation would not result in rail,waterborne,or air traffic impacts because the Town is rural residential and the Town does not maintain rail,waterborne, or air traffic facilities. Conclusion Transportation and Circulation impacts associated with the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element are considered less than significant. • • • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 15 • Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts on: a. Endangered,threatened or rare species or their habitats 0 0 ❑ ■ (including,but not limited to,plants,fish,insects, animals,and birds)? b. Locally designated species(e.g.,heritage trees)? 0 ❑ ❑ ■ c. Locally designated natural communities(e.g.,oak forest)? 0 ❑ 0 ■ d. Wetland habitat(e.g.,marsh,riparian,and vernal pool)? ❑ 0 e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 0 ❑ 0 • Setting Los Altos Hills is a residential community with many areas of native-vegetation. The Circulation Element provides measures designed to protect native vegetation from development and destruction. Discussion of Checklist Answers a-c. Project implementation would not result in impacts to endangered, threatened ,or rare species or locally designated species or habitats because no additions are proposed to the circulation system. d. Policies included in the element are designed to protect watercourses and wetlands. e. Implementation of the project would not affect wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. Conclusion No impacts to biological resources would occur as a result of implementing the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element. • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 16 Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No • Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in: a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ b. Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ manner? c. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 0 ❑ ❑ ■ resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the state? Setting Los Altos Hills is a residential community with no significant mineral resources. Discussion of Checklist Answers - a. _ The project does not conflict with any adopted energy conservation principles. b. The project would not require substantial amounts of fuel or energy, will not increase demand on existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy, and will not use resources in a wasteful or inefficient manner. c. The'project will not result in the los of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the state. Conclusions No energy impacts would occur from implementation of the Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element. • • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 17 • • Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a. A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous ❑ 0 0 substances(including,but not limited to,oil,pesticides, chemicals,or radiation)? b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or 0 ❑ 0 ■ emergency evacuation plan? c. The creation of any health hazard or potential health 0 ❑ 0 hazard? d. Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health 0 ❑ 0 ■ hazards? e. Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,grass, ❑ ❑ ❑ • or trees? • Discussion of Checklist Answers a. The project will not have an impact related to hazards. b. The project will not have an adverse effect on the City's emergency response plans. c. The project will not have an adverse effect on human health. d. The project will not expose people to health hazards. e. Implementation of the Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element will not increase any fire hazard. Conclusion No fire hazard impacts would occur as a result of implementing the Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element. • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 18 • • Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No • Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? ❑ - ❑ ■ 0 b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 0 0 ■ ❑ Setting Primary noise generators in the community are I-280 and larger regional roadways. Discussion of Checklist Answers a-b. The Noise Element of the General Plan is used as a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses that minimizes the exposure of residents to unwanted or excessive noise. The Town is currently near build-out. -Project implementation would not substantially increase noise levels beyond existing conditions or expose people to severe noise levels. Although there are no current plans to widen I-280,the ever-growing traffic demands in the County and the region may ultimately reach a point that widening the freeway is considered. In the meantime,the Town occasionally receives complaints regarding noise from I-280,particularly from residents of properties abutting the freeway. One of the goals for the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element is to "minimize traffic impacts from present and future activities beyond the control of Los Altos Hills". Policies under this element include working with regional transportation agencies to coordinate roadway planning and working neighboring cities and other agencies to review environmental impacts of proposed projects in terms of circulation,on the Town. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant. Conclusion . Noise impacts associated with project implementation are considered less than significant. • • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 19 Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon,or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? ❑ 0 ❑ b. Police protection? ❑ ❑ 0 • c. Schools? ❑ 0 0 U d. Maintenance of public facilities,including roads? 0 ❑ ❑ ■ e. Other governmental services? 0 0 0 U Discussion of Checklist Answers a-b. Project implementation would not have adverse effects on police or fire protection. c-e. The project would not require schools and would have no adverse impacts on schools,maintenance on public facilities, or governmental services. Conclusion Because no change is proposed in the existing circulation system,no public services impacts would occur as a result of the Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element. Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 20 • Potentially Significant • Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for'new systems or supplies,or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ b. Communications systems? 0 0 0 ■ c. Local or regional water treatment or distribution ❑ 0 0 ■ facilities? d. Sewer or septic tanks? 0 ❑ ❑ ■ e. Stormwater drainage? 0 ❑ 0 ■ f. Solid waste disposal? 0 0 ❑ ■ g. Local or regional water supplies? 0 0 0 ■ Setting The Town of Los Altos Hills is served by sewer, water and other standard utilities. No changes are contemplated in these systems by the Circulation Element. Discussion of Checklist Answers a. The project will not require power or natural gas. b. The Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element will not affect communications systems. c. The project would not affect local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities. d. The project will not affect the sanitary sewer system. e. The Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element will not affect storm drain systems. f. The project will not affect the solid waste and disposal system. g. The Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element will not affect local or regional water supplies. Conclusion No utilities impacts would result from implementing the Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element. Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 21 Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? 0 ❑ 0 ■ b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? 0 ❑ ❑ ■ c. Create light or glare? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ Setting The Town is rural and scenic. The hills are an aesthetic resource. The many winding roadways are recognized as a scenic asset for the Town. Many of the policies in the element are directed at protecting those qualities. Discussion of Checklist Answer a. Implementation of the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element would not adversely affect the scenic vistas or scenic highways in Los Altos Hills. One of the goals in the element states that"The roadways of Los Altos Hills are scenic and rural. The design and maintenance of the roadways should preserve these qualities". Policies associated with this goal include use of landscaping, preservation of mature street trees, use of conservation easements, and appropriate placement of street signage. This effect is considered beneficial. b. Implementation of the project would not have a negative aesthetic effect; see response in"a"above in this section. c. Project implementation would not create light or glare. Streetlights are discouraged by the element. Conclusion Aesthetic impacts under project implementation are considered beneficial. • • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 _ 22 • • Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a. Disturb paleontological resources? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ b. Disturb archaeological resources? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ c. Affect historical resources? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ d. Have the potential to cause a physical change which ❑ ❑ ■ 0 would affect unique ethnic cultural,values? e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the ❑ 0 ■ 0 potential impact area? Setting See Project Location, above. Discussion of Checklist Answers a. Because changes are not proposed to the circulation,no paleontological resources will be impacted by the project. b-c. Because changes are not proposed to the circulation,no archaelogical resources will be impacted by the project. d. The project does not have the potential to cause a physical change that would affect unique ethnic cultural values. e. Because changes are not proposed to the circulation,no religious or sacred uses will be impacted by the project. Conclusion Implementation of the Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element would not result in cultural resources impacts. • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 23 • Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a. Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or ❑ 0 ❑ ■ other recreational facilities? b. Affect existing recreational opportunities? 0 0 ❑ • Setting Los Altos Hills has a country club,riding facility, and numerous pathways. - Discussion of Checklist Answers a-b. Project implementationS would not have an adverse impact on parks, recreational facilities, or recreational opportunities. The element supports the policies of the Pathways Element. Conclusion Implementation of the Circulation& Scenic Roadways Element would not result in recreation impacts. • • • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 24 Y' Potentially Potentially Significant unless Less-Than- Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNI>iICANCE. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ quality of the environment,substantially reduce the - habitat of a fish or wildlife species,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,or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ short-term,to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c. Does the project have impacts that are individually ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ limited,but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects,and the effects of probable future projects.) d. Does the project have environmental effects that 0 ❑ ❑ ■ will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? - Discussion of Checklist Answers a. The project would not result in degradation of the quality of the environment, reduction of fish or wildlife species, or threaten to eliminate plant or animal community because the Los Altos Hills planning area is near build-out capacity and no threatened or endangered plant or animal community exists in the area. b. The project goals and policies have been planned by the Town and are intended to accommodate long-range goals of the area. c. The project does not have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively significant. d. The Circulation & Scenic Roadways Element does not have impacts that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 • 25 • • DETERMINATION Pursuant to Sections 15152 and 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines, this initial study has been prepared to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed project. On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the initial study. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL.IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s)on the environment,but at least one effect 1)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by.mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a"potentially significant impact" or"potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. k �� l Curtis Williams, Los Altos Hills Planning Director Date • • Initial Study for the Los Altos Hills-Circulation&Scenic Roadways Element October 1998 26