1. Facebook Campus Expansion Project EIR
Good evening council and members of the public.
Thank you for coming to the public hearing for the Facebook Campus Expansion Project EIR.
My name is Kirsten Chapman and I work for the environmental consulting firm ICF.
We prepared the EIR for this project.
I am the Project Manager.
Also here tonight is the Project Director, Erin Efner, the transportation subconsultant, Colin Burgett from TJKM, and David Doezema from KMA, who specializes in demographic analyses.
Should you have any questions after the presentation regarding environmental review, we will respond to them.
Menlo Park City Council
Final EIR Public Hearing
November 1, 2016

2. Presentation Topics Purpose of Hearing
Introduction to EIR Project Team
CEQA Process to Date
Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
Final EIR
Master Responses
My presentation will cover the environmental process.
I will also provide overview of the proposed project, the master responses in the Final EIR, and describe the next steps.

3. Introduction to EIR Project Team
City of Menlo Park – Lead Agency ICF – Lead EIR Consultant TJKM – Transportation Consultant Bay Area Economics – Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA) BASELINE – Hazardous Materials Keyser Marston – Housing Needs Assessment
The EIR team consists of:
the City of Menlo Park is the Lead Agency, meaning they have principal responsibility for carrying out the project.
ICF is lead EIR consultant and prepared all sections of the EIR with assistance from TJKM for the transportation analysis and BASELINE for the Hazardous Materials section of the EIR
Bay Area Economics prepared the Fiscal Impact Analysis
and Keyser Marston and Associates prepared the Housing Needs Assessment, which was incorporated into the Population and Housing section of the EIR. Keyser Marston also prepared the Displacement Analysis, which is separate from the EIR.

4. EIR Process Notice of Preparation – June 18, 2015
Scoping Meeting – July 13, 2015
Draft EIR – May 26, 2016
Draft EIR Public Hearing – June 20, 2016
Final EIR – September 15, 2016
Final EIR Hearings – Fall 2016
Notice of Determination – Fall 2016
This slide shows the general steps involved with EIR preparation.
The NOP was released last summer in June 2015.
Following the close of the NOP scoping period, we prepared the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR was released last month on May 26th. The comment period for the Draft EIR closed on July 11th.
The Final EIR was then prepared that addresses all of the comments received during the Draft EIR review period. A certification hearing for the Final EIR will be held before City Council in the fall.
After the EIR is certified, the project can then be approved. Following approval of the project, a Notice of Determination would be issued.

5. Draft EIR
Required by CEQA for projects that may have significant environmental impacts
Identifies potential physical environmental impacts of project
Informs the public and public agency decision-makers prior to project approval/disapproval
Recommends ways to reduce significant effects
Considers project alternatives that may lessen potential impacts
Because the project involves discretionary actions by the City, it is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA.
In accordance with CEQA, because this project may have a significant effect on the environment, an EIR has been prepared. As previously stated, the Draft EIR was released on May 26, 2016
The EIR is a tool for identifying physical impacts to the environment by using the analysis conducted by our EIR team.
The EIR is also used to inform the public and decision makers:
about a project prior to project approval,
Identify direct, indirect, and cumulative physical environmental impacts of the Project
recommend ways to reduce impacts, and
consider alternatives to lessen identified physical impacts.
Released May 26, 2016 for a 45-day review period

6. Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The Draft EIR identifies and classifies the environmental impacts as:
Significant
Less than Significant
No Impact
Mitigation measures are provided to reduce, eliminate, or avoid the adverse effects.
Impacts where mitigation measures cannot reduce impacts are considered significant and unavoidable.
The Draft EIR identifies and classifies the environmental impacts as “Significant,” “Less than Significant,” or “No Impact.”
For each impact identified as being significant, the Draft EIR provides mitigation measures to reduce, eliminate, or avoid the adverse effect. If the mitigation measures would successfully reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level, this is stated in this Draft EIR.
However, if the mitigation measures would not diminish these effects to less-than-significant levels, then the Draft EIR classifies the impacts as significant and unavoidable. Consequently, the City will need to determine whether to approve the Project as proposed and, if so, provide its rationale in a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project include transportation impacts and greenhouse gas emission impacts.

7. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
Peak-hour traffic at study intersections (TRA-1/TRA-10)
Peak-hour traffic on routes of regional significance (TRA-2/TRA-11)
Daily traffic on roadway segments (TRA-3/TRA-12)
Increased delay to transit vehicles (TRA-8)
Conflicts with applicable plans and policies (GHG-2)
As shown here, the Project would result in the following significant and unavoidable impacts:
Peak-hour motor vehicle traffic at study intersections during both the Project and cumulative conditions
Peak-hour motor vehicle traffic on routes of regional significance during both the Project and cumulative conditions
Daily motor vehicle traffic on roadway segments during both the Project and cumulative conditions
Increased delay to transit vehicles under Project conditions
And conflicts with applicant plans and policies adopted for the purpose of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.

8. Final EIR Released September 15, 2016
Comments from 10 Agencies, 8 Organizations, and 43 Individuals
Master Responses included for major issues raised by commenters
Item-by-item responses to unique comments
Revisions to the Draft EIR, as needed
Revisions do not substantially change conclusions of the Draft EIR
The Responses to Comment document, which was released on September 15, 2016, responds to written and oral comments on the Draft EIR that were raised during the public review period.
Comments were received from 10 agencies, 8 organizations, and 43 individuals.
The document responds to comments with Master Responses, which respond to comments that were raised in multiple comment letters and warrant comprehensive responses.
The document also responds to each individual comment, which has been assigned a discrete number. Responses to each comment follow the original comment letter.
As needed, the document contains revisions to the Draft EIR intended to correct, clarify, and amplify the Draft EIR.
No new significant environmental impacts, no new mitigation measures, and no substantial increase in the severity of an earlier identified impact have resulted from responding to the comments.
Together, the previously released Draft EIR and the responses to comments document constitute the Final EIR.

9. Master Responses Notification and CEQA Review Process
ConnectMenlo and Facebook
Adjustment to Baseline Conditions
Population and Housing
Transportation Analysis
Master Response 1 addresses concerns about the city’s noticing procedures, public outreach, and the CEQA process, which was discussed earlier this this presentation.
Master Response 2 provides a background on the ConnectMenlo Project and discusses the relationship between ConnectMenlo and pending applications in the City.
As also discussed earlier in this presentation, the baseline normally consists of physical conditions that exist at the time the NOP is published, but some exceptions can be made. Therefore, Master Response 3 discusses the baseline conditions assumed in the Draft EIR.
Several of the comments received relate to the social and economic effects related to the Project, including population and housing growth, housing affordability, the jobs/housing balance, displacement in Belle Haven and East Palo Alto, and others. Master Response 4 covers these topics.
Master Response 5 covers repeat comments submitted related to transportation, including the vehicle trip generation, the proposed trip cap and required trip cap reduction, trip cap monitoring and compliance, the travel demand model, dynamic traffic assignment (DTA), and cut-through traffic in residential neighborhoods.