Agenda packet, first session — Los Altos City Council, January 24, 2023 (part 3 of 3)

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? For the same reasons outlined above under checklist question (a), development under the proposed HEU would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan or other land use plan. Therefore, there would be no impacts related to mineral resources.

NO IMPACT
567
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
116
This page intentionally left blank.
568
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Noise
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 117
13 Noise
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project result in:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies? □ ■ □ □
b. Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? □ ■ □ □
c. For a project located within the vicinity of
a private airstrip or an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive
noise levels? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Overview of Noise
Sound is a vibratory disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source, which is capable of being detected by the hearing organs. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds. The effects of noise on people can include general annoyance, interference with speech communication, sleep disturbance, and, in the extreme, hearing impairment (California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 2013).

HUMAN PERCEPTION OF SOUND
Noise levels are commonly measured in decibels (dB) using the A-weighted sound pressure level (dBA). The A-weighting scale is an adjustment to the actual sound pressure levels so that they are consistent with the human hearing response. Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale that quantifies sound intensity in a manner similar to the Richter scale used to measure earthquake magnitudes. A doubling of the energy of a noise source, such as doubling of traffic volume, would increase the noise level by 3 dB; dividing the energy in half would result in a 3 dB decrease (Caltrans 2013).
569
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
118
Human perception of noise has no simple correlation with sound energy: the perception of sound is not linear in terms of dBA or in terms of sound energy. Two sources do not “sound twice as loud” as one source. It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear can barely perceive changes of 3 dBA, increase or decrease (i.e., twice the sound energy); that a change of 5 dBA is readily perceptible (8 times the sound energy); and that an increase (or decrease) of 10 dBA sounds twice (half) as loud (10.5 times the sound energy) (Caltrans 2013).

SOUND PROPAGATION AND SHIELDING
Sound changes in both level and frequency spectrum as it travels from the source to the receiver.

The most obvious change is the decrease in the noise level as the distance from the source increases. The manner by which noise reduces with distance depends on factors such as the type of sources (e.g., point or line), the path the sound will travel, site conditions, and obstructions.

Sound levels are described as either a “sound power level” or a “sound pressure level,” which are two distinct characteristics of sound. Both share the same unit of measurement, the dB. However, sound power (expressed as Lpw) is the energy converted into sound by the source. As sound energy travels through the air, it creates a sound wave that exerts pressure on receivers, such as an eardrum or microphone, which is the sound pressure level. Sound measurement instruments only measure sound pressure, and noise level limits are typically expressed as sound pressure levels.

Noise levels from a point source (e.g., construction, industrial machinery, air conditioning units) typically attenuate, or drop off, at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise from a line source (e.g., roadway, pipeline, railroad) typically attenuates at about 3 dBA per doubling of distance (Caltrans 2013). Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures; the amount of attenuation provided by this “shielding” depends on the size of the object and the frequencies of the noise levels. Natural terrain features, such as hills and dense woods, and man-made features, such as buildings and walls, can significantly alter noise levels. Generally, any large structure blocking the line of sight will provide at least a 5-dBA reduction in source noise levels at the receiver (Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] 2011). Structures can substantially reduce exposure to noise as well. The FHWA’s guidance indicates that modern building construction generally provides an exterior-to-interior noise level reduction of 10 dBA with open windows and an exterior-tointerior noise level reduction of 20 to 35 dBA with closed windows (FHWA 2011).

NOISE DESCRIPTORS
The impact of noise is not a function of loudness alone. The time of day when noise occurs and the duration of the noise are also important factors of project noise impact. Most noise that lasts for more than a few seconds is variable in its intensity. Consequently, a variety of noise descriptors have been developed. The noise descriptors used for this study are the equivalent noise level (Leq), and the Day-Night Average Level (DNL; may also be symbolized as Ldn).

Leq is one of the most frequently used noise metrics; it considers both duration and sound power level. The Leq is defined as the single steady-state A-weighted sound level equal to the average sound energy over a period. When no period is specified, a 1-hour period is assumed. The Lmax is the highest noise level within the sampling period, and the Lmin is the lowest noise level within the measuring period. Normal conversational levels are in the 60 to 65-dBA Leq range; ambient noise levels greater than 65 dBA Leq can interrupt conversations (Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2018).
570
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Noise
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 119
Noise that occurs at night tends to be more disturbing than that occurring during the day.

Community noise is usually measured using Day-Night Average Level (DNL or Ldn), which is the 24-hour average noise level with a +10 dBA penalty for noise occurring during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.).12 The relationship between the peak-hour Leq value and the Ldn depends on the distribution of noise during the day, evening, and night. Quiet suburban areas typically have Ldn noise levels in the range of 40 to 50 dBA, while areas near arterial streets are in the 50 to 60+ dBA Ldn range (FTA 2018).

Overview of Vibration
Groundborne vibration of concern in environmental analysis consists of the oscillatory waves that move from a source through the ground to adjacent buildings or structures and vibration energy may propagate through the buildings or structures. Vibration may be felt, may manifest as an audible low-frequency rumbling noise (referred to as groundborne noise), and may cause windows, items on shelves, and pictures on walls to rattle. Although groundborne vibration is sometimes noticeable in outdoor environments, it is almost never annoying to people who are outdoors. The primary concern from vibration is that it can be intrusive and annoying to building occupants at vibration-sensitive land uses and may cause structural damage.

Typically, ground-borne vibration generated by manmade activities attenuates rapidly as distance from the source of the vibration increases. Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV) or root mean squared (RMS) vibration velocity. The PPV and RMS velocity are normally described in inches per second (in/sec). PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal. PPV is often used as it corresponds to the stresses that are experienced by buildings (Caltrans 2020).

High levels of groundborne vibration may cause damage to nearby building or structures; at lower levels, groundborne vibration may cause minor cosmetic (i.e., non-structural damage) such as cracks. These vibration levels are nearly exclusively associated with high impact activities such as blasting, pile-driving, vibratory compaction, demolition, drilling, or excavation. As shown in Table 17 and Table 18, the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (2020) identifies guideline impact criteria for damage to buildings and additional impact criteria for annoyance to humans from transient and continuous/frequent sources. 12 Because DNL is typically used to assess human exposure to noise, the use of A-weighted sound pressure level (dBA) is implicit.

Therefore, when expressing noise levels in terms of DNL, the dBA unit is not included. 571
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
120
Table 17 Building Vibration Damage Potential
Maximum PPV (in./sec.)
Structure and Condition Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient mountains 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.20 0.10
Historic and similar old buildings 0.50 0.25
Older residential structures 0.50 0.30
New residential structures 1.00 0.50
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.00 0.50
Notes: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls (i.e., a loose steel ball that is dropped onto structures or rock to reduce them to a manageable size). Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

PPV = peak particle velocity; in./sec. = inches per second Source: Caltrans 2020
Table 18 Vibration Annoyance Potential
Maximum PPV (in./sec.)
Human Response Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Barely perceptible 0.04 0.01
Distinctly perceptible 0.25 0.04
Strongly perceptible 0.90 0.10
Severe 2.00 0.40
Notes: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls (i.e., a loose steel ball that is dropped onto structures or rock to reduce them to a manageable size). Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

PPV = peak particle velocity; in./sec. = inches per second Source: Caltrans 2020
Noise in Los Altos
Noise in Los Altos is primarily generated by vehicular traffic from cars and trucks. The greatest contributor to noise is traffic on I-280, El Camino Real, and Foothill Expressway. Other surface streets that experience significant increases in ambient noise levels include San Antonio Road, Fremont Avenue, Grant Road, and Springer Road. Land uses adjacent to these roadways in Los Altos are affected by motor vehicle-generated noise. Secondary sources of noise in Los Altos include construction, landscaping activities, and mechanical and stationary equipment. As shown in Figure 10, noisy urban areas or commercial areas (e.g., commercial districts with major arterial roadways and transit routes) can commonly reach noise levels between 60 dBA Leq and 80 dBA Leq during the daytime, whereas a common outdoor noise level associated with a quiet urban area (e.g., residential neighborhood with local or collector streets) is 50 dBA Leq during the daytime. These noise levels typically decrease during nighttime hours as traffic activity slows, such that quiet urban areas commonly experience nighttime noise levels of 40 dBA Leq. 572
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Noise
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 121
Figure 10 Examples of Typical Noise Levels
Noise Level
(dBA)
Common Indoor
Noise Levels
Common Outdoor
Noise Levels
Rock band
Inside subway train
Food blender at 3 ft.

Garbage disposal at 3 ft.

Shouting at 3 ft.

Vacuum cleaner at 10 ft.

Normal speech at 3 ft.

Large business office
Dishwasher next room
Small theater, conference
room (background)
Library
Bedroom at night
Concert hall (background)
Broadcast and
recording studio
Threshold of hearing
Jet flyover at 1,000 ft.

Gas lawnmower at 3 ft.

Diesel truck at 50 ft.

Noisy urban daytime
Gas lawnmower at 100 ft.

Commercial area
Heavy traffic 300 ft.

Quiet urban daytime
Quiet urban nighttime
Quiet suburban nighttime
Quiet rural nighttime
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 20
10 0
573
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
122
Sensitive Receivers
Noise exposure goals for various types of land uses reflect the varying noise sensitivities associated with those uses. Noise-sensitive land uses are those that may be subject to stress and/or interference from excessive noise. Noise-sensitive land uses include residential uses, schools and daycare facilities, hospitals, and institutional uses such as places of worship and museums. Vibration sensitive receivers are similar to noise-sensitive receivers and also include historical, fragile buildings.

Potential sensitive receivers that may be impacted by development facilitated by the proposed HEU would primarily be residential uses and schools. Residential uses would mainly include single- or multi-family residences near or adjacent to housing inventory sites, and schools would include the Almond Elementary School, Covington Elementary School, Gardner Bullis School, Loyola Elementary School, Oak Avenue School, Santa Rita Elementary School, Springer Elementary School, Blach Intermediate School, and Egan Junior High School.

Regulatory Setting
City of Los Altos General Plan
The Natural Environment & Hazards Element of the City of Los Altos' General Plan contains Noise and Land Use Compatibility Standards policies that are applicable to the project. Residential land uses are considered “normally acceptable” when sites are exposed to noise levels below 60 dBA Ldn, “conditionally acceptable” when exposed to noise levels between 60 and 70 dBA Ldn, “normally unacceptable" when exposed to noise levels of between 70 and 75 dBA Ldn and “clearly unacceptable” when exposed to noise levels above 75 dBA Ldn.

City of Los Altos Municipal Code
The City’s Noise Control Ordinance was adopted to control unnecessary, excessive, and annoying noise and vibration within Los Altos. Specifically, Chapter 6.16.50 of the Los Altos Municipal Code establishes exterior noise limits for various zoning districts, as shown in Table 19. The City also has interior noise standards for multi-family residential dwellings at 45 dBA from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and 35 dBA from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m.

Table 19 City of Los Altos Municipal Code Exterior Noise Limits by Zone Zone Time
Exterior Noise Limit (dBA)
(levels not to be exceeded more than 30 minutes every hour) All R1 Zoning Districts 10 PM to 7 AM
7 AM to 10 PM
45 55
All R3 and PCF Zoning Districts 10 PM to 7 AM
7 AM to 10 PM
50 55
All OA Zoning Districts 10 PM to 7 AM
7 AM to 10 PM
55 60
All C Zoning Districts 10 PM to 7 AM
7 AM to 10 PM
60 65
Source: LAMC Section 6.16.050
574
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Noise
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 123
The LAMC prohibits the production of noise on one property that would (i) exceed the noise standard on any other property for a cumulative period of more than thirty minutes in any hour; (ii) exceed the noise standard plus five dB on any other property for a cumulative period of more than fifteen minutes in any hour; (iii) exceed the noise standard plus 10 dB on any other property for a cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour; (iv) exceed the noise standard plus 15 dB on any other property for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour; or (vi) exceed the noise standard plus 20 dB or the maximum measured ambient on any other property for any period of time. The LAMC also states that if the measured ambient level exceeds the maximum permissible noise level within any of the first four noise limit categories, the allowable noise exposure standard shall be increased in five dB increments in each category as appropriate to encompass or reflect such ambient noise level. In the event the ambient noise level exceeds the fifth noise limit category, the maximum allowable noise level under said category shall be increased to reflect the maximum ambient noise level. If the noise measurement occurs on a property adjacent to a zone boundary, the noise level limit applicable to the lower noise zone, plus five dB is the applicable noise limit.

To ensure that unnecessary or excessive noise disturbances from specific activities and equipment are avoided, the Noise Control Ordinance sets noise thresholds for musical instruments, loudspeakers, loading and unloading, construction and demolition, and air-conditioning equipment (LAMC Section 6.16.070). Exceeding those thresholds is considered a prohibited act and would constitute a violation of the Ordinance.

LAMC Section 6.16.070 establishes allowable hours of construction within residentially zoned properties. In these areas, construction is permitted between 7:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction in all other zoning districts (excluding single-family districts) is permissible between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction activities are not permitted on Sundays or the City observed holidays of New Year’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veterans’ Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day.

In addition, according to LAMC Section 6.16.070(6)(b), where technically and economically feasible, maximum noise levels for nonscheduled, intermittent, short-term operation (less than 10 days) of mobile equipment should not exceed those levels listed in Table 20 and maximum noise levels for the respectively scheduled and relatively long-term operation (periods of 10 days or more) of stationary equipment should not exceed noise levels listed in Table 21.

Table 20 City of Los Altos Maximum Mobile Equipment Noise Levels All R1 Zoning Districts
(dBA)
All PCF and R3 Zoning
Districts (dBA)
All OA and C Zoning
Districts (dBA)
Daily, except Sundays and legal
holidays 7:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m.
75 80 85
Daily, 7:00 p.m. — 7:00 a.m. and all day
Sundays and legal holidays
50 55 60
Source: Table 3 in LAMC Chapter 6.16.070
575
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
124
Table 21 City of Los Altos Maximum Stationary Equipment Noise Levels All R1 Zoning Districts
(dBA)
All PCF and R3 Zoning
Districts (dBA)
All OA and C Zoning
Districts (dBA)
Daily, except Sundays and legal
holidays 7:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m.
75 80 85
Daily, 7:00 p.m. — 7:00 a.m. and all
day Sundays and legal holidays
50 55 60
Source: Table 4 in LAMC Chapter 6.16.070
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Construction Noise
Future construction activity would require the use of a variety of noise-generating equipment that would result in temporary increases in ambient noise levels on an intermittent basis. Noise levels would fluctuate depending on the construction phase, equipment type and duration of use, distance between the noise source and receiver, and presence or absence of noise attenuation barriers.

Typical noise levels at 50 feet from various types of equipment that may be used during construction are listed in Table 22. The loudest noise levels are typically generated by impact equipment (e.g., pile drivers) and heavy-duty equipment (e.g., cranes, scrapers, and graders).

Construction noise would occur intermittently throughout construction, and in some instances, multiple pieces of equipment may operate simultaneously, generating overall noise levels that are incrementally higher than what is shown in Table 22.
576
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Noise
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 125
Table 22 Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Equipment
Typical Noise Level (dBA)
at 50 Feet from Source
Air Compressor 80
Backhoe 80
Compactor 82
Concrete Mixer 85
Concrete Pump 82
Concrete Vibrator 76
Crane, Derrick 88
Crane, Mobile 83
Dozer 85
Generator 82
Grader 85
Jackhammer 88
Loader 80
Paver 85
Pile-driver (Impact) 101
Pile-driver (Sonic) 95
Pneumatic Tool 85
Pump 77
Roller 85
Saw 76
Scarifier 83
Scraper 85
Shovel 82
Truck 84
Source: FTA 2018
Sensitive receivers are located throughout Los Altos and could be exposed to noise associated with construction activities from reasonably foreseeable development under the proposed Housing Element Update. As discussed in the Environmental Setting, sensitive receivers in Los Altos mainly consist of residences and schools. Based on the location of sites shown on Figures 3 and 4 of the Project Description, this analysis assumes that construction activities for most projects under the proposed HEU would occur within 50 feet of sensitive receivers. As shown in Table 22, sensitive receivers would be exposed to noise levels ranging from 76 to 88 dBA at 50 feet from typical construction equipment and could reach as high as 101 dBA through the use of pile drivers.

However, a typical construction day includes the operation of multiple pieces of equipment at once with noise levels averaged over the construction day. For assessment purposes, a construction noise level at 50 feet from the source was estimated using RCNM and was based on an excavator, dozer, and jackhammer operating simultaneously. In addition, a separate scenario was also analyzed with these pieces of equipment and an impact pile driver. These pieces of equipment generate some of the highest noise levels during demolition and grading phases of construction. As shown in Table 23, 577
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
126
the combined noise level (dBA Leq) from these pieces of equipment is estimated at 84 dBA Leq at 50 feet without a pile driver, and 95 dBA Leq at 50 feet with a pile driver.

Table 23 Typical Construction Noise Level at 50 Feet
Equipment dBA Leq at 50 Feet
Excavator, Dozer, Jackhammer without Impact Pile Driver 84 Excavator, Dozer, Jackhammer with Impact Pile Driver 95 See Appendix D for RCNM results.

Construction noise levels would vary depending on the type of equipment, the duration of use, the distance to receivers, and the potential for pile driving. Engine noise reduction technology, including silencers, continues to improve, but heavy construction equipment still generates noise exceeding ambient levels that could cause intermittent annoyance to nearby receivers. Noise associated with construction of most development under the proposed HEU would be typical of residential construction in urban areas.

However, construction noise could exceed the 75 or 80 dBA Leq standard for maximum construction noise levels for residential districts shown in Table 20 and Table 21. These standard are included in the LAMC and are required when technically and economically feasible. Future development would be required to comply with construction and demolition noise limits for mobile and stationary equipment pursuant to Section 6.16.070(B)(6) of the LAMC, as well as allowed construction hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturdays for all zoning districts excluding single-family zoning districts, and 7 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. on weekends for single-family zoning districts pursuant to Chapter 6.16 of the LAMC. Nonetheless, construction noise impacts could still be potentially significant and mitigation is required.

Operational Noise

ON-SITE OPERATIONAL NOISE
Noise generated by on-site activities for new development would be subject to the City’s exterior noise limits listed in Table 19. On-site operational noise for residential uses would include air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, stationary heating, ventilation, on-site vehicle movement (e.g., trash handling), and outdoor activities. To analyze potential HVAC noise impacts, a typical to largersized residential condenser such as a Carrier 38HDR060 split system condenser was used. The manufacturer’s noise data lists the unit as having an A-weighted sound power level of 72 dBA and a sound pressure level of 57 dBA at a distance of 5 feet (Carrier 2011). For large buildings, such units are typically located on the roof, where operational noise is greatly reduced by distance and the intervening building itself; however, for smaller buildings including smaller multi-family residential units, large HVAC units are often placed at ground level on a concrete pad adjacent to the building.

Existing noise sensitive receivers could be affected by operational noise occurring on-site at properties developed under proposed HEU. However, noise levels from HVAC equipment associated with the proposed HEU would be comparable to noise levels of HVAC equipment associated with the existing urban environment. Additionally, future development would be required to comply with Table 6 of LAMC Section 6.16.070(B)(12) which lists noise limits for HVAC equipment. Therefore, operation of HVAC equipment would have a less than significant noise impact.

Future residential development may increase the number of delivery and trash hauling trucks traveling through the city to individual development sites. Increased delivery and trash hauling 578
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Noise
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 127
trucks could intermittently expose various sensitive receivers to increased truck noise. Section 23130 of the California Motor Vehicle Code establishes maximum sound levels of 86 dBA Leq at 50 feet for trucks operating at speeds less than 35 miles per hour. While individual delivery truck and/or loading or trash pick-up operations would likely be audible at properties adjacent to individual development, such operations are already a common occurrence in the urban environment. In addition, solid waste pick-up operations are typically scheduled during daytime hours when people tend to be less sensitive to noise. Furthermore, these noise events from trucks are typically transient and intermittent, and do not occur for a sustained period of time. Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels from trash and delivery trucks due their prevalence in the city, resulting in a less than significant impact.

Housing developments would generate noise from conversations, music, television, or other outdoor sound-generating equipment (e.g., leaf blowers), particularly in the event future residents maintain open windows or such activities take place on balconies. However, these noise-generating activities would be similar to those of the existing urban environment. Section 6.16.070(11) of the LAMC restricts operation of lawn and garden tools from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. from Monday to Friday and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. from Saturday to Sunday; and restricts the use of portable electric powered blowers from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. from Monday to Sunday. Furthermore, Section 6.16.070(B)(15)(b) of the LAMC prohibits the use of portable gasoline-powered leaf blowers which would further reduce noise levels within Los Altos. Additionally, Section 12.10.010 of the LAMC includes the 2019 California Residential Code, as adopted in Title 24 Part 2.5 of the California Code of Regulations. Required compliance with code enforcement would reduce operational noise impacts related to conversations and sound-generating equipment to a less than significant level.

Off-Site Operational Noise
The project allows for higher density/intensity land uses in some areas of Los Altos than currently permitted, leading to additional vehicle trips on area roadways. Under full buildout of the project, an estimated 1,648 new units would be added to Los Altos. By generating new vehicle trips, new development would incrementally increase the exposure of land uses along roadways to traffic noise.

Development facilitated by the project would increase vehicle trips and VMT in Los Altos, depending on the location and intensity of individual projects. As discussed under Section 3, Air Quality, the proposed HEU would increase residential VMT from 2015 conditions by 17 percent. It is unlikely that a VMT growth of 17 percent would result in a 100 percent increase in traffic volumes on a given roadway segment. As discussed in the Environmental Setting, a 3 dBA increase is considered noticeable. A 40 percent increase in trips equates to a noise increase of less than 1.5 decibels. A 1.5 dBA increase in noise would not be perceptible, and the increase in traffic volumes on any given roadway segment is expected to be below 40 percent. A doubling of traffic volumes would be required to reach the threshold of noticeability (a 3-dba increase in noise levels). A doubling of traffic volumes on a roadway (i.e., a 100 percent increase) is not anticipated under the project, considering VMT is only anticipated to increase by 17 percent.

Traffic volumes on streets would not increase by 40 percent on average, and therefore increases in traffic noise would be less than perceptible. Increases in roadway noise would be less than significant.
579
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
128
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure is required:

NOI-1 Construction Noise Reduction Measures
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

For development projects involving construction within 50 feet of sensitive receivers, the applicant shall develop a site-specific Construction Noise Reduction Program prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant to reduce construction noise impacts to the maximum extent feasible, subject to review and approval of the Planning Director in advance of issuance of building permits. The following measures to minimize exposure to construction noise shall be included:

1. Mufflers. During excavation and grading construction phases, all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards.

2. Air compressors. Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources to the greatest extent practicable. Select hydraulically or electrically powered equipment and avoid pneumatically powered equipment where feasible.

3. Pile driving. If pile driving is required, pre-drill foundation pile holes to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile. Examine whether the use of sonic pile driving is feasible and quieter. If so, utilize that method.

4. Stationary Equipment. All stationary construction equipment shall be placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest sensitive receivers. Construct temporary noise barriers or partial enclosures to acoustically shield such equipment to the maximum extent feasible.

5. Equipment Staging Areas. Equipment staging shall be located in areas that will create the greatest distance feasible between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receivers.

6. Smart Back-up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels.

Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction.

7. Perimeter Noise Reduction. Construct solid plywood fences around construction sites adjacent to operational business, residences or other noise-sensitive land uses where the noise control plan analysis determines that a barrier would be effective at reducing noise.

8. Signage. For the duration of construction, the applicant or contractor shall post a sign in a construction zone that includes contact information for any individual who desires to file a noise complaint.

Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1 would reduce construction noise levels by an estimated 10-20 dBA. Temporary noise barriers would provide up to 10 dBA of noise reduction and eliminating traditional back-up alarms, locating stationary equipment as far as possible or within an 580
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Noise
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 129
enclosure, shielding impact tools, and limiting idling time would provide an additional 5-10 dBA reduction. Therefore, with mitigation, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
b. Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
It is not anticipated that operation of residential housing development would involve activities that would result in substantial vibration levels, such as use of heavy equipment or machinery.

Operational groundborne vibration in the vicinity of development associated with the proposed HEU would be primarily generated by vehicular travel on the local roadways. According to the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (2018) guidance document, rubber tires and suspension systems dampen vibration levels from trucks to a level that is rarely perceptible.

Therefore, traffic vibration levels associated with the expected additional trips from the proposed HEU would not be perceptible by sensitive receivers. Impacts related to operational groundborne vibration would be less than significant. The remainder of this analysis focuses on impacts relate to construction activities associated with future housing development.

Construction activities associated with housing development accommodated by the proposed HEU would result in varying degrees of groundborne vibration depending on the equipment and methods employed. Construction equipment causes vibration that spreads through the ground and diminishes in strength with distance. Buildings with foundations in the soil in the vicinity of a construction site respond to these vibrations with varying results ranging from no perceptible effects at the lowest levels, low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, and slight damage at the highest levels. Construction vibration is a localized event and is typically only perceptible to a receiver that is in close proximity to the vibration source.

Construction for housing development would require heavy equipment, particularly development with certain geologic conditions that may require pile driving. Pile driving would be required if the project engineer determined that it was necessary and pile driving alternatives were not feasible.

Pile driving more often occurs for buildings with subterranean parking garages or tall buildings (e.g., six or more stories). Such heavy equipment could potentially operate within 25 feet of nearby buildings when accounting for equipment setbacks. As shown in Table 24, general construction equipment such as a vibratory roller would generate vibration levels up to 0.21 in./sec. PPV at 25 feet, while more intensive equipment such as pile driving could generate a vibration level of approximately 0.64 in./sec. PPV at 25 feet.
581
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
130
Table 24 Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Levels Equipment
PPV (in./sec.)
25 Feet 50 Feet 75 Feet 100 Feet 125 Feet
Pile Driver (Impact) 0.6441,2,3,4 0.3001,4 0.1921 0.1401 0.1101 Pile Driver (Sonic) 0.1701 0.079 0.051 0.037 0.029
Vibratory Roller 0.2101 0.098 0.063 0.046 0.036
Hoe Ram 0.089 0.042 0.027 0.019 0.015
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.042 0.027 0.019 0.015
Caisson Drilling 0.089 0.042 0.027 0.019 0.015
Loaded Truck 0.076 0.036 0.023 0.017 0.013
Jackhammer 0.035 0.016 0.011 0.008 0.006
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Notes: Vibration levels shown in bolded and underlined text exceed one or more of the Caltrans criteria shown in Table 4.11-1 and Table 4.11-2. Superscripts specify the threshold exceeded by each piece of equipment. 1 Exceeds the 0.1 in./sec. Caltrans damage threshold for historic sites (and other critical locations). 2 Exceeds the 0.5 in./sec. Caltrans damage threshold for historic and other/similar old buildings. 3 Exceeds the 0.5 in./sec. Caltrans damage threshold for older residential structures. 4 Exceeds the 0.25 in./sec. Caltrans human annoyance threshold.

Sources: FTA 2018; Caltrans 2020
The City has not adopted a significance threshold to assess vibration impacts during construction and operation. Therefore, the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (2020) was used to evaluate potential construction vibration impacts related to both potential building damage and human annoyance. Construction vibration impacts from housing development would be significant if vibration levels exceed the Caltrans criteria shown in Table 17 and Table 18, using the lower range of the thresholds. For example, impacts would normally be significant if vibration levels exceed 0.2 in./sec. PPV for residential structures and 0.5 in./sec. PPV for commercial structures. This is the limit where minor cosmetic (i.e., non-structural) damage may occur to these buildings. However, groundborne vibration would also have the potential to impact structures with historic significance at much lower levels. Therefore, for a conservative analysis of potential impacts to such buildings, construction vibration impacts would be significant if vibration levels exceed 0.12 in./sec. PPV for extremely fragile historic buildings, as shown in Table 17. In addition, construction vibration impacts would cause human annoyance at nearby receivers if vibration levels exceed 0.25 in./sec. PPV, which is the limit where vibration becomes distinctly perceptible to most humans, as shown in Table 18. Vibration levels shown in bolded and underlined text in Table 24, exceed one or more of the Caltrans criteria shown in Table 17 and Table 18.

As shown in Table 24, groundborne vibration from hoe rams, bulldozers, caisson drilling, loaded trucks, and jackhammers would not exceed the 0.12 in./sec. PPV threshold. While groundborne vibration from vibratory rollers would only exceed the threshold for building damage for historic sites at 25 feet from the source, vibration levels from pile driving would exceed one or more of the building damage thresholds shown in Table 17 for historic sites, general old buildings, and older and newer residential structures. Furthermore, vibration levels associated with pile driving would also exceed the threshold of 0.25 in./sec. PPV for human annoyance at various distances up to 75 feet, as shown in Table 24. Therefore, vibration impacts could be potentially significant and mitigation measure NOI-2 would be required.
582
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Noise
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 131
Mitigation Measure
The following mitigation measure is required:

NOI-2 Vibration Control Plan
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

At the conclusion of vibration causing activities, the qualified structural engineer hired by the applicant shall issue a follow-up letter describing damage, if any, to impacted buildings. The letter shall include recommendations for repair, as may be necessary, in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Repairs shall be undertaken and completed by the contractor and monitored by a qualified structural engineer in conformance with all applicable codes including the California Historical Building Code (Part 8 of Title 24).

A Statement of Compliance signed by the applicant and owner is required to be submitted to the City Building Department at plan check and prior to the issuance of any permit. The Vibration Control Plan, prepared as outlined above, shall be documented by a qualified structural engineer, and shall be provided to the City upon request. A Preservation Director shall be designated, and this person’s contact information shall be posted in a location near the project site that it is clearly visible to the nearby receivers most likely to be disturbed. The Director will manage complaints and concerns resulting from activities that cause vibrations. The severity of the vibration concern should be assessed by the Director, and if necessary, evaluated by a qualified noise and vibration control consultant.

Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-2 would require a vibration control plan to reduce impacts associated with vibration from vibratory rollers or pile driving to below thresholds. With mitigation, this impact would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION
583
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
132
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The City of Los Altos is not located within 2 miles of a public airport or a private airstrip. The closest airport is the San Jose International Airport, located approximately 7 miles east of the City limits.

Development facilitated under the proposed HEU would not increase exposure of residents to excessive noise levels from an airport and there would be no impacts related to aviation-related noise exposure.

NO IMPACT
584
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Population and Housing
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 133
14 Population and Housing
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)? □ □ □ ■
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Table 25 provides 2022 estimates of population and housing for Los Altos. Los Altos has an estimated 2022 population of 31,526 people and 11,841 housing units, with an average household size of 2.78 people (California Department of Finance 2022).

Table 25 Current Population and Housing Stock for Los Altos City of Los Altos Santa Clara County
Population (# of people) 31,526 1,894,783
Average Household Size (persons/household) 2.78 2.81
Total Housing Units (# of units) 11,841 696,489
Vacant Housing Units 578 (4.9%) 34,855 (5.0%)
Source: California Department of Finance 2022
Plan Bay Area 2050 is the most recent regional long-range plan and regional growth forecast for the Bay Area (ABAG and MTC 2021). Though it does not include projections by city, it does include employment and housing projections for Northwest Santa Clara County which includes Los Altos Hills, Los Altos, part of Palo Alto, and part of Mountain View. These projections are shown in Table 26.

Table 26 2050 Plan Bay Area Population, Housing, and Employment Projections for Northwest Santa Clara County
2015 2050 (Projected)
Projected Growth
(Percent Increase)
Housing (# of units) 74,000 102,000 28,000 (38%)
Employment (# of jobs) 180,000 207,000 27,000 (15%)
Source: ABAB and MTC 2021
585
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
134
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
For the purposes of this analysis, buildout under the proposed HEU would add up to 1,648 additional residential units to the city by the year 2031. Based on an estimated number of 2.78 residents per household as shown in Table 25, this additional housing would lead to an increase of approximately 4,582 residents in the city during the housing element cycle 2023 to 2031 assuming all of the estimated 1,648 units are built.

In the unlikely event that all potential buildout that is proposed in the HEU occurs, and assuming the growth is all new and not already accounted for under existing projections, the total population of the city in 2031 would be 36,108 (31,526 current population + 4,582 new residents), or a population increase of approximately 14.5%. In addition, the total housing of units in Los Altos would be an estimated 13,489 (11,841 current housing units + 1,648 units), or a housing increase of approximately 13.9 percent. The proposed project would be consistent with State requirements for the RHNA and would be within the growth forecasts for Northwest Santa Clara County in Plan Bay Area 2050, which projects a 38 percent increase in housing for Northwest Santa Clara County.

Further, growth under the proposed HEU would be concentrated in locations where such development is encouraged by adopted plans due to their proximity to transit and transportation corridors. All the baseline units are proposed in areas that are currently used for residential purposes and are therefore connected to commonly used transportation corridors. Additionally, the rezoned sites are mostly centered around the Downtown and major transportation corridors.

In addition, the State requires that all local governments adequately plan to meet the housing needs of their communities. Given that the State is currently in an ongoing housing crisis due to an insufficient housing supply, the additional units under the proposed project would further assist in addressing the existing crisis and meeting the housing needs of the City’s communities.

Furthermore, the proposed HEU would first be submitted to the HCD for review and approval to ensure that it would adequately address the housing needs and demands of the city. Approval by the HCD would ensure that population and housing growth under the 2023-2031 Housing Element would not be substantial or unplanned.

Lastly, this analysis is conservative because it assumes a maximum buildout scenario and includes sites already planned for development and maximum buildout under the proposed zoning changes.

The project’s actual contribution to population growth may be less than estimated. In addition, the project would not involve the extension of roads or other infrastructure that could indirectly lead to population growth. The city is mostly developed and is supported by existing public services and infrastructure which are sufficient to serve the additional housing units. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial unplanned population growth, either directly or indirectly. There would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
586
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Population and Housing
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 135
b. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
“Substantial” displacement would occur if the proposed project would displace more residences than would be accommodated through growth facilitated by the project. The goal of the proposed project is to accommodate and encourage new residential development in Los Altos. A portion of the housing units would be developed at a density range that could accommodate low and very lowincome housing as required to meet the 6th Cycle RHNA. Development under the proposed HEU could result in up to an estimated 1,648 new housing units developed by 2031. The proposed buildout, in addition to existing and planned housing projects, would result in an overall increase in available housing which exceeds the City’s RHNA requirements. Therefore, overall, the proposed HEU would add to the City’s housing stock to meet housing goals.

On an individual site basis, it is possible that some redevelopment projects could result in displacement of current residents. However, the proposed HEU includes policies and programs to reduce displacement impacts. For example, Program 5.C. restricts commercial use in residential areas to protect residents against displacement. Further, the HEU includes Program 6.E. which outlines the City’s plan to produce and distribute anti-displacement information in multiple languages to ensure residents are educated on their rights and connect them to relevant resources.

Distributing this information in multiple languages through community organizations and local groups will allow the city to reach those groups that may be at the greatest risk of displacement.

Additionally, the HEU includes Policy 6.4 which implements anti-displacement measures in accordance with Government Code §66300(d)(2)(D)(ii).

In summary, the proposed project would facilitate the development of 1,648 additional dwelling units throughout Los Altos. Proposed residential units would provide additional housing opportunities in excess of the RHNA requirement for residents and there are policies in place to reduce displacement resulting from the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the net loss or displacement of housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. There would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
587
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
136
This page intentionally left blank.
588
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Public Services
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 137
15 Public Services
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, or the need for
new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the
public services:
1 Fire protection? □ □ ■ □
2 Police protection? □ □ ■ □
3 Schools? □ □ ■ □
4 Parks? □ □ ■ □
5 Other public facilities? □ □ ■ □
Regulatory Setting
Los Altos General Plan
The Open Space, Conservation, and Community Facilities Element of the Los Altos General Plan includes the following goals and policies related to public services:

Goal 6.0: Ensure an adequate level of fire protection and police protection within Los Altos.

Policy 6.1: Promote community order by preventing criminal activity, enforcing laws, and meeting community service demands.

Policy 6.2: Provide community-oriented policing services that are responsive to citizen needs.

Policy 6.3: Provide response times for police and fire protection services emergencies that are comparable to similar jurisdictions in Santa Clara County.

Policy 6.4: Continue cooperative mutual aid agreements with nearby jurisdictions to ensure rapid and sufficient response to emergency situations.

Policy 6.5: Prevent or mitigate hazardous situations.
589
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
138
Goal 7.0: Work with local school districts and other educational organizations to ensure a highquality public education system.

Policy 7.1: Continue to work with the Los Altos and Cupertino Union Elementary School Districts, Mountain View-Los Altos Union and Fremont Union High School Districts, and Foothill and De Anza Community College to provide a high-quality educational system to residents.

Methodology
This analysis considers the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G thresholds in determining whether the proposed HEU, including future development accommodated by the proposed HEU, would result in impacts related to the provision of public services. Public services information was acquired through review of relevant documents and communications with City staff and public service providers. The determination that the proposed HEU would or would not result in “substantial” adverse effects concerning public services considers the relevant policies and regulations established by local and regional agencies, the proposed HEU’s compliance with such policies, and whether the HEU would create the need for new or expanded facilities, the construction of which could result in environmental impacts.

In City of Hayward v. Trustees of California State University (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 833, the Court of Appeal held that significant impacts under CEQA consist of adverse changes in the physical conditions within the area of a project, and potential impacts on public safety services are not an environmental impact that CEQA requires a project applicant to mitigate: “[T]he obligation to provide adequate fire and emergency medical services is the responsibility of the city. (Cal. Const., art. XIII, § 35, subd. (a)(2) [“The protection of the public safety is the first responsibility of local government and local officials have an obligation to give priority to the provision of adequate public safety services.”].) Thus, the need for additional fire and police protection services is not an environmental impact that CEQA requires a project proponent to mitigate.

Impact Analysis
a.1. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
The City of Los Altos contracts with the Santa Clara County Fire District for fire and emergency medical services. There are two fire stations in Los Altos: Almond Fire Station located at 10 Almond Avenue; and Loyola Fire Station located at 765 Fremont Avenue.

The proposed HEU would not expand the current fire service area but would result in an increased population within the existing service area, as described in Section 14, Population and Housing.

Currently, the Santa Clara Fire District has response time goals of 5 minutes 30 seconds for urban areas and 7 minutes 30 seconds for rural areas (SCCFD 2020). The increase in residents associated with the project could increase demand for fire protection and emergency medical services such that additional staff, equipment or facilities would be needed to meet these response time goals.

The continued implementation of policies and actions in the Los Altos General Plan would allow the fire protection facilities to serve this future development. Los Altos Open Space, Conservation, and 590
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Public Services
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 139
Community Facilities Implementation Program 10 (OCC 10) calls for promoting fire prevention including continuing to provide fire protection services, increasing fire prevention education, and coordinating with local water districts to ensure there is an adequate amount of water available to fight fire. Additionally, Policy 6.3 and 6.4 of the Open Space, Conservation, and Community Facilities Element ensure there is an adequate level of fire protection for all residents of Los Altos.

Further, under the proposed HEU future development would be required to comply with Chapter

12.24 of the Los Altos Municipal Code, which includes minimum fire safety and fire prevention standards. Future development under the proposed HEU would also be required to comply with abatement of fire-related hazards and pre-fire management prescriptions as outlined under the California Health and Safety Code and the California Fire Plan. A list of fire-related requirements included in these codes and that would apply to typical residential projects allowed by the proposed HEU includes:
a. Adequate marking of exterior building openings
b. Openings and fire escape stairs and balconies
c. Internal access, including via hallways and doorways d. Manual and automatic fire alarm systems
e. Fire Fighter Air Replenishment Systems
f. Internal building sprinkler systems
g. New fire hydrants
h. External fire protection (setbacks, fire-resistant materials, etc.) New residential projects allowed by the proposed HEU would be reviewed for compliance with these requirements and compliance with other building and safety regulations several times during different phases of project development. Compliance with these safety standards would reduce the demand for fire protection services and thereby reduce the need for new fire stations.

Should the County determine that new or expanded facilities are needed to provide fire protection services to Los Altos, it is not known where such facilities would be located. No location has been identified for a new fire station as part of the proposed HEU. Nonetheless, this IS-MND analyzes the impact associated with development on vacant and underutilized sites throughout the city. A potential future facility would likely be developed on the same site as the current fire station or as infill development on one of the inventory sites. As infill development, it is not anticipated that the construction of a new fire station would cause additional significant environmental impacts beyond those identified in this IS-MND. The environmental effects of constructing a fire station would be consistent with the impacts determined in other sections of this IS-MND, which would be less than significant or less than significant with mitigation. When the Fire Department proposes a new station and identifies an appropriate site and funding, the city will conduct a complete evaluation of the station’s environmental impacts under CEQA. Therefore, the proposed HEU would not result in substantial adverse physical environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities. This impact would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
591
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
140
a.2. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
Police protection services for the project site are provided by the Los Altos Police Department, headquartered at 1 North San Antonio Road. The Department has 32 sworn officers and 17 professional civilian staff (City of Los Altos 2019)
The Police Department has a goal to maintain a ratio of 2 officers per 1,000 residents. Currently, the officer ratio is approximately 1 officer per 1,000 residents. As described in Section 2, Population and Housing, implementation of the proposed HEU would increase the population served by the Los Altos Police Department to 36,107 people. To meet the departments’ goal would require an increase of 40 officers. Policies in the City’s General Plan such as OCC 10 aim to ensure that there are adequate budget allocations for staffing and crime prevention programs. Police protection service levels would continue to be evaluated and maintained by Los Altos PD in accordance with existing policies, procedures and practices as development occurs over the lifetime of the HEU.

While police protection services are not typically “facility-driven,” meaning such services are not as reliant on facilities in order to effectively patrol a beat, the Police Department has indicated that expanded facilities would be needed should the department provide full staffing to meet the department’s ratio of 2 officers per 1,000 residents. The Los Altos Police Department has not gone through a facility planning process and no location has been identified for a new police station as part of the proposed HEU (Chief Angela Averiett 2022). Nonetheless, this IS-MND analyzes the impact associated with development on vacant and underutilized sites throughout the city. A potential future facility would likely be developed on the same site as the current police station or as infill development on one of the inventory sites. As infill development, it is not anticipated that the construction of a new police station would cause additional significant environmental impacts beyond those identified in this IS-MND. The environmental effects of constructing a police station would be consistent with the impacts determined in other sections of this IS-MND, which would be less than significant or less than significant with mitigation. When the Police Department proposes a new station and identifies an appropriate site and funding, the city will conduct a complete evaluation of the station’s environmental impacts under CEQA.

Therefore, the proposed HEU would not result in substantial adverse physical environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities. This impact would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
a.3. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools, or the need for new or physically altered schools, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives? Los Altos is served by five school districts: Los Altos Elementary School District, Cupertino Union Elementary School District, Mountain View-Los Altos Union High School District, and Fremont Union High School District.

Development under the proposed project could generate new students entering all five districts serving Los Altos. These students would be distributed throughout the schools that serve Los Altos 592
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Public Services
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 141
depending on their grade level and on their location. Although the proposed HEU would result in an increase in enrollment at schools that serve the city, most of the districts report net declines in enrollment projected over the next 10 years.

Cupertino Union Elementary School District reports a projected decline in enrollment for all grade levels over the next 10 years even when accounting for increased housing development occurring over the same time period. Therefore, there is no planned improvements or expansions to schools in this district (CUSD Annual Enrollment Projection Report 2022).

Mountain View-Los Altos Union High School District reports a projected increase in enrollment and then a subsequent decline by the 2025-2026 school year. To accommodate the initial significant increase in enrollment that is projected, the district is advised to increase facility capacity and add additional classrooms to existing schools. The plan to expand these facilities is not included in the proposed HEU and would undergo an independent CEQA review (MVLASD Demographic Analysis and Enrollment Projections 2017).

Most schools in the Fremont Union High School District report there is a decline in enrollment which is projected to decline further through 2024. The projected increase in enrollment from new housing developments such as those proposed by the HEU would not be sufficient to substantially offset the reduction in enrollment from existing dwellings. The district has no plans to expand or build new facilities (FUHSD Forecast Report 2019).

The only district serving Los Altos that projects a steady net increase in enrollment is the Los Altos Elementary School District. The district reports that it has experienced a 23 percent increase in public school enrollment over the last decade and many schools in the district area at or near peak enrollment. They expect enrollment will continue to increase into the future. Because of the LASD Board’s desire to keep schools close to neighborhoods and to keep enrollment at each school in the district below 600 students, the Superintendent’s Enrollment Growth Task Force identified a need for two additional school sites, one for Bullis Charter School which operates outside the Los Altos School District and the other to support Los Altos Elementary School District students. While a specific site for these facilities has not been chosen, the Enrollment Growth Task Force recommended that sites near the El Camino Corridor or otherwise in the center of the District be chosen due to the increase in housing in these areas. In 2018, four sites were selected for further review (LASD 2013).

As discussed in Regulatory Setting, to offset a project’s potential impact to schools Government Code 65995 (b) establishes the base amount of allowable developer fees a school district can collect from development projects located within its boundaries. The fees obtained by school districts that serve Los Altos are used for construction or reconstruction of school facilities. Future development facilitated by the proposed project would be required to pay school impact fees which, pursuant to Section 65995 (3) (h) of the California Government Code (Senate Bill 50, chaptered August 27, 1998), are “deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization.” For the facility expansions in Los Altos Elementary School District and Mountain View-Los Altos Union High School District the construction of facilities will require a project-specific environmental analysis under CEQA to address site-specific environmental concerns. As described above, existing laws and regulations require funding for the provision or expansion of new school facilities to offset impacts from new residential development and therefore impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
593
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
142
a.4. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks, or the need for new or physically altered parks, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives? See Section 16, Recreation.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
a.5. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of other new or physically altered public facilities, or the need for other new or physically altered public facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
Impacts related to other public facilities such as water, wastewater, storm water systems, and landfills are addressed in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Section 19, Utilities and Service Systems.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
594
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Recreation
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 143
16 Recreation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated? □ □ ■ □
b. Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment? □ □ ■ □
Environmental Setting
Los Altos is home to 18 parks and recreation facilities which make up approximately 47.5 acres of City land (Los Altos Facility and Parks 2020). Based on the current population of 31,526 (see Table 25), Los Altos currently maintains a ratio of 1.5 acres of City-owned parkland per 1,000 residents. In addition to the public open space managed by the City’s Department of Recreation and Community Services, there are multiple County Parks and open space preserves such as Rancho San Antonio County Park & Open Space Preserve (165 acres of designated park space), Byrne Preserve (88 acres), and Foothills Nature Preserve (212 acres) near Los Altos. When considering parkland adjacent, the ratio of parkland per resident is approximately 16.3acres per 1,000 residents.

According to the Los Altos General Plan, the City has adopted a park dedication requirement for new subdivisions of 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents is implementing programs under its General Plan to increase purchase of land for parks as well as encouraging the development of parkland by public and private landowners.

Regulatory Setting
Los Altos General Plan
The Open Space, Conservation, and Community Facilities Element of the Los Altos General Plan includes the following goals and policies related to parks and recreation:

Goal 1.0: Preserve and expand the amount of open space in and around Los Altos.

Policy 1.1: Preserve existing parks and establish new neighborhood parks to enhance neighbor- hood identity within Los Altos.

Policy 1.2: Continue to identify and acquire additional land for parks and recreational uses.

Policy 1.3: Maintain dedicated parkland in public ownership. 595
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
144
Policy 1.4: Require Park dedication, public open space, or require fees in lieu thereof, for all new subdivisions and multi- family residential development in Los Altos.

Policy 1.5: Retain and update appropriate building regulations to preserve community identity.

Goal 3.0: Expand recreation programs and facilities for all ages using City and non- City sites.

Policy 3.1: Encourage development of a comprehensive Recreation Plan for existing and future park facilities and recreation services.

Policy 3.2: Continue to seek cooperative use of school facilities for recreation programs.

Policy 3.3: Provide and expand continuing support for children and teen facilities and programs.

Policy 3.4: Promote and provide programs and recreation facilities for seniors.

Policy 3.5: Ensure the availability of community pool facilities.

Goal 4.0: Ensure proper maintenance of parks, open space, and public facilities.

Policy 4.1: Provide adequate level of maintenance for City parks, open space, and public property to ensure safety, aesthetics, and recreational enjoyment for Los Altos residents.

Policy 4.2: Provide opportunity to create assessment districts for unique or maintenance needs.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
The proposed HEU does not include the provision of new parks or the physical alteration of existing parks or recreation centers. As described in Section 14, Population and Housing, full buildout under the proposed HEU would increase the population in Los Altos by 4,582 new residents by 2031, which would increase the demand and use of parks and recreational facilities. The additional demand could cause physical deterioration of existing parks and recreational facilities. With the proposed HEU, the ratio of parks to residents in the city would decrease from 1.5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents to 1.3 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. When considering the nearby parks and open space preserves, the ratio of parkland per resident would decrease to approximately 14.2 acres per 1,000 residents.

Policies and actions in Los Altos’ Open Space, Conservation, and Community Facilities Element referenced above are designed to ensure that adequate parks and recreational facilities are provided to accommodate increases in new residents. In accordance with General Plan policies, the City continually evaluates and plans for expansion or renovations of parks and recreation facilities as need to accommodate demand. Policy 1.1-1.3 of the Open Space, Conservation, and Community Facilities Element of the General Plan ensure the City actively seeks to preserve and expand parks to meet the needs of Los Altos residents. Further, the City of Los Altos has established a Parkland Dedication Ordinance (Chapter 13.24.010 of the Municipal Code) along with policy 1.4 of the Open Space, Conservation, and Community Facilities Element of the General Plan requiring residential 596
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Recreation
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 145
subdivisions to dedicate land for park or recreational purposes, or pay a fee in-lieu thereof, as a condition of approval for the final subdivision or parcel map. The intent of these policies is to allow development to occur within the city in a manner that meets the city’s parks and recreation goals.

The city provides and maintains developed parkland and open space to serve its residents. Residents of Los Altos are served by community park facilities, neighborhood parks, playing fields and community centers. The City’s Department of Recreation and Community Services is responsible for development, operation, and maintenance of all city park facilities. In accordance with the City of Los Altos Parkland Dedication Ordinance (Chapter 13.24.010 of the Municipal Code) and Policy 1.4, future project applicants will be required to pay the applicable parkland dedication in-lieu fee as a condition of project approval.

Adherence to City of Los Altos General Plan goals and policies as well as the LAMC would ensure that substantial physical deterioration of the city’s parks and recreational facilities would not occur or be accelerated. This impact would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? As discussed under checklist question (a), policies and actions in the Open Space, Conservation, and Community Facilities Element of the city’s General Plan as well as Chapter 13.24.010 of the LAMC would ensure that the city provides and maintains developed parkland and open space to serve its residents and that development would occur in a manner that meets the city’s parks and recreation goals. Should future park or recreational facilities be identified for construction, it is not known where such facilities would be located. No location has been identified for new facilities of the proposed HEU. Nonetheless, this document analyzes the impact associated with development on vacant and underutilized sites throughout Los Altos. A potential future facility would likely be developed as infill development on one of the inventory sites. As infill development, it is not anticipated that the construction of facilities in would cause additional significant environmental impacts beyond those identified in this analysis. The environmental effects of constructing facilities would be consistent with the impacts determined in other sections of this document, which would be less than significant or less than significant with mitigation with the exception of impacts related to historical resources and construction noise. When and if the Parks Department proposes new facilities and identifies an appropriate site and funding, the City will conduct a complete evaluation of the station’s environmental impacts under CEQA. Adherence to City of Los Altos General Plan goals and policies as well as the LAMC would ensure that impacts from construction of new parks and enhancements to existing parks are reduced to the extent feasible. Impacts to parks and recreation would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
597
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
146
This page intentionally left blank.
598
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Transportation
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 147
17 Transportation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance
or policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit, roadway,
bicycle and pedestrian facilities? □ □ ■ □
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)? □ ■ □ □
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)? □ □ ■ □
d. Result in inadequate emergency access? □ □ ■ □
Environmental Setting
Los Altos is immediately adjacent to I-280 and SR 85 and is served by two subregional facilities:

Foothill Expressway and El Camino Real (SR 82). El Camino Real is a major arterial roadway within Los Altos, and San Antonio Road and El Monte Avenue are the minor arterials. The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) operates bus, light rail transit, and paratransit throughout Santa Clara County. Bus transit service within Los Altos includes six fixed routes (Routes 22, 23, 34, 51, 52, and 300), and paratransit service (dial-a-ride service for qualified individuals). VTA light rail service can be accessed at the Downtown Mountain View Transit Center, and Caltrain provides heavy rail passenger service between Gilroy in Santa Clara County, through San Mateo County, to San Francisco. The closest Caltrain stations to Los Altos are located on Central Expressway near San Antonio Road and also near Castro Street at the Downtown Mountain View Transit Center. Los Altos also contains Class I, II, and III bicycle lanes on most transportation corridors such as San Antonio Road, Foothill Expressway, and University Avenue, as well as bicycle parking facilities scattered around the city.

Regulatory Setting
State Senate Bill 743
Senate Bill (SB) 743 was signed into law by Governor Brown in 2013 and tasked the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) with establishing new criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SB 743 requires the new criteria to “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” It also states that alternative 599
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
148
measures of transportation impacts may include “vehicle miles traveled, vehicle miles traveled per capita, automobile trip generation rates, or automobile trips generated.” On September 27, 2013, California Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 743 into law and started a process that changes transportation impact analysis as part of CEQA compliance. SB 743 requires the Governor’s OPR to identify new metrics for identifying and mitigating transportation impacts within CEQA. In January 2018, OPR transmitted its proposed CEQA Guidelines implementing SB 743 to the California Natural Resources Agency for adoption, and in January 2019 the Natural Resources Agency finalized updates to the CEQA Guidelines, which incorporated SB 743 modifications, and are now in effect. SB 743 changed the way that public agencies evaluate the transportation impacts of projects under CEQA, recognizing that roadway congestion, while an inconvenience to drivers, is not itself an environmental impact (Public Resource Code, § 21099 (b)(2)). In addition to new exemptions for projects consistent with specific plans, the CEQA Guidelines replaced congestionbased metrics, such as auto delay and level of service (LOS), with VMT as the basis for determining significant impacts, unless the Guidelines provide specific exceptions.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? The city’s Circulation Element of the Los Altos General Plan addresses circulation improvements needed to provide adequate capacity for future land uses. The Circulation Element uses level of service (LOS) as its performance criteria while analyzing the city’s roadway system. However, as described in Regulatory Setting, to implement SB 743, the CEQA Guidelines have been updated to change the criteria for determining what constitutes a significant traffic related environmental impact to rely upon quantification of VMT instead of LOS. Nonetheless, the project would be consistent with the Circulation Element since it would place housing near transit, services, and jobs, which would reduce the usage of single-occupancy vehicles and encourage walking, bicycling, and using alternative modes of transportation.

Bicycling would be encouraged through the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan (City of Los Altos 2012) which aims to improve bicycling conditions and increase bicycling rates within Los Altos.

Additionally, the City recently adopted its Complete Streets Master Plan (City of Los Altos 2022d) which aims to provide a long-term vision for improving walking and bicycling in Los Altos as well as access to transit, schools, and Downtown. Future residents would be able to benefit from goals, policies, and improvements associated with the Bicycle Transportation Plan and the Complete Streets Master Plan which would reduce VMT and reliance on single-occupancy vehicles.

Future multi-family development facilitated under the project would be subject to design and transportation review pursuant to LAMC Section 14.78.090 and would be assessed for potential project impacts to various modes of transportation such as bicycle, pedestrian, parking, traffic impacts on public streets, and/or public transportation. Development proposals for individual projects would be subject to adopted development guidelines, including standards that govern VMT, transportation, GHG, and associated issues. Impacts identified for development facilitated by the plan would be addressed through the project approval process, including design review specific to potential impacts of that project. Because the proposed HEU does not include modifications to the existing transportation network and individual future developments would be designed consistent with applicable bicycle and pedestrian facility requirements, the proposed HEU would 600
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Transportation
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 149
not conflict with the City’s existing circulation, bicycle, or pedestrian plans. Impacts to transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) require specific considerations of a plan or project’s transportation impacts based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT). This implements SB 743, which eliminates level of service as a basis for determining significant transportation impacts under CEQA and requires a different performance metric: VMT. With this change, the State shifted the focus from measuring a plan or project’s impact upon drivers (LOS) to measuring the impact of driving (VMT) on achieving its goals of reducing GHG emissions, encouraging infill development, and improving public health through active transportation.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. prepared a transportation study (Appendix A) for the proposed HEU to conduct a VMT analysis consistent with CEQA guidelines to determine whether the proposed HEU project would generate a VMT impact. Given that the City of Los Altos has not formally adopted a local VMT policy, the HEU was analyzed according to the City’s interim VMT policy. The Interim VMT Policy sets a threshold of significance for residential VMT per capita at 15 percent below the regional average of 13.95 VMT per capita. Therefore, the threshold is 11.86 daily VMT per capita. Any project above the threshold would need to mitigate its impacts to less than significant.

To determine whether a project would result in CEQA transportation impacts related to VMT, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) travel demand forecasting (TDF) model was used.

VTA also has developed the Santa Clara County map-based VMT Evaluation Tool, based on the model forecasts, to streamline the analysis for development projects located within the County. The TDF model and the map based VMT evaluation tool were used to estimate VMT for the proposed housing sites and determine whether the location of the housing sites would result in significant VMT impacts. In addition to the location based VMT evaluation methodology using the County VMT Evaluation Tool, HEU sites planned for affordable housing or sites that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day (considered as small projects) would be screened out from further VMT analysis per the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) guidelines.

As discussed in Appendix A, of the housing inventory sites, 954 units within the sites are located in areas below the City’s residential VMT threshold of 11.86 VMT per capita; 388 units are located on parcels with existing VMT between the City’s residential threshold and the regional average of 13.95 VMT per capita; 292 units are located on parcels with existing VMT greater than the regional average; and 14 units are located on parcels with existing VMT greater than the residential threshold. Projects located in areas where the existing VMT is above the established threshold are referred to as being in “high-VMT areas.” Projects in high-VMT areas are required to include a set of VMT reduction measures that would reduce the project VMT to the greatest extent possible. The VMT evaluation tool evaluates a list of selected VMT reduction measures that can be applied to a project to reduce the project VMT.

For the housing inventory sites that are located in areas with residential VMT over the 11.86 VMT per capita threshold, the proposed developments identified in these areas would likely be singlefamily or multi-family developments that would generate fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips.

Pursuant to OPR guidelines, these housing sites would be screened out from further VMT analysis 601
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
150
and would be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact. Further, it should be noted that most of these inventory sites are baseline sites that do not involve rezoning and could be built out to this density under current zoning.

However, two sites (APN #18956014 and #31801036) located on parcels with existing VMT between the City’s residential threshold and the regional average of 13.95 VMT per capita and four sites (APN #31816022, #32601052, #32601053, and #33609018) located on parcels with existing VMT greater than the regional average are located in “high-VMT” areas and wound not be screened out and would need to implement further mitigation strategies. Therefore, this impact is potentially significant.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants also prepared a cumulative analysis that calculates the change in citywide VMT as a result of the proposed HEU (Table 1 in Appendix A). VMT forecasts were developed using the VTA Travel Demand Forecasting Model. Two future land use scenarios were evaluated: Cumulative (2040) No Project Conditions and Cumulative (2040) Conditions with the HEU. The Cumulative (2040) No Project scenario includes local and regional roadway improvements and land use projections consistent with ABAG Projections 2017 in the rest of the region but assumes no growth in housing units in Los Altos. The Cumulative (2040) conditions with the HEU assumes the addition of 1,648 residential units to the City’s housing inventory. Table 27 presents the results of the VMT analysis. The table shows that the VMT per resident would decrease by 0.17, from 13.08 under cumulative (2040) no project conditions to 12.90 with the HEU. Since the HEU buildout year is 2031, the VMT forecasts for the cumulative (2031) no project and cumulative (2031) with HEU scenarios were extrapolated using the existing and cumulative 2040 VMT forecasts from the VTA model. As shown in Table 27, the VMT per resident under cumulative (2031) with HEU would decrease by 0.14, from 12.85 under cumulative (2031) no project conditions to 12.71 with the HEU resulting in a less-than-significant VMT impact. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Table 27 Cumulative Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
Scenario Residential VMT1 Housing Units Population VMT Per Resident2 Cumulative (2031) No Project 415,472 11,847 32,322 12.85 Cumulative (2031) Plus HEU 467,012 13,495 36,756 12.71
Cumulative (2040) No Project 424,782 11,905 32,478 13.08 Cumulative (2040) Plus HEU 476,322 13,553 36,912 12.90
1 Residential VMT = daily home-based vehicle trips x travel distance 2 VMT per resident = residential VMT/population
Source: Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc 2022 (Appendix A) Mitigation Measures
The Santa Clara County VMT Evaluation Tool evaluates a list of selected VMT reduction measures that can be applied to a project to reduce the project VMT. There are four strategy tiers whose effects on VMT can be calculated with the VMT evaluation tool:
 Tier 1: Project characteristics that encourage walking, biking, and transit uses.  Tier 2: Multimodal network improvements that increase accessibility for transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians. These improvements include:
 Increase bike access
602
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Transportation
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 151
 Improve connectivity by increasing intersection density  Increase transit accessibility
 Traffic calming measures beyond the project frontage
 Pedestrian network improvements beyond the project frontage  Tier 3: Parking measures that discourage personal motorized vehicle trips. These improvements include:
 Limit parking supply
 Provide bike facilities
 Tier 4: Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures that provide incentives and services to encourage alternatives to personal motorized vehicle trips. These measures for residential developments include:
 School pool programs
 Bike share programs
 Car share programs
 Subsidized transit program
 Unbundle parking costs from property costs
 Voluntary travel behavior change program
The first three strategies – land use characteristics, multimodal network improvements, and parking – are physical design strategies that can be incorporated into project design. TDM includes programmatic measures that aim to reduce VMT by decreasing personal motorized vehicle mode share and by encouraging more walking, biking, and riding transit. When required, TDM measures shall be enforced through annual trip monitoring to assess a project’s status in meeting the VMT reduction goals.

TRA-1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Reduction Mitigation for APN #18956014 and #31801036
The City shall require the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects on APN #18956014 and #31801036:

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
152
 Tier 3: Parking measures that discourage personal motorized vehicle trips. These improvements include:
 Limit parking supply
 Provide bike facilities
The City of Los Altos shall review project plans to ensure that the appropriate VMT mitigation measures are implemented prior to project approval.

TRA-2 VMT Reduction Mitigation for APN #31816022, #32601052, #32601053, and #33609018
The City shall require the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects on #31816022, #32601052, #32601053, and #33609018:

Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall demonstrate VMT reduction using the Santa Clara County VMT Evaluation Tool for implementing Tier 1 through Tier 4 VMT mitigation measures:
 Tier 1: Project characteristics that encourage walking, biking, and transit uses.  Tier 2: Multimodal network improvements that increase accessibility for transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians. These improvements include:
 Increase bike access
 Improve connectivity by increasing intersection density  Increase transit accessibility
 Traffic calming measures beyond the project frontage
 Pedestrian network improvements beyond the project frontage  Tier 3: Parking measures that discourage personal motorized vehicle trips. These improvements include:
 Limit parking supply
 Provide bike facilities
 Tier 4: Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures that provide incentives and services to encourage alternatives to personal motorized vehicle trips. These measures for residential developments include:
 School pool programs
 Bike share programs
 Car share programs
 Subsidized transit program
 Unbundle parking costs from property costs
 Voluntary travel behavior change program
The City of Los Altos shall review project plans to ensure that the appropriate VMT mitigation measures are implemented prior to project approval. TDM measures shall be enforced through annual trip monitoring to assess the project’s status in meeting the VMT reduction goals. 604
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Transportation
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 153
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of mitigation measures TRA-1 and TRA-2 would reduce VMT in “high-VMT” areas to a less than significant level which would ensure consistency with the City’s interim VMT policy.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
c. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)? In the absence of specific project applications to review, analyzing impacts based on project design features would be wholly speculative. CEQA does not require public agencies to speculate. Adoption of the proposed HEU analyzes the amount of new housing units the City will accommodate during the 2023-2031 planning period and sets goals and policies for how this housing is implemented. It does not grant entitlements for any specific project or future development. Thus, the plan for new housing and the goals and policies needed to achieve that housing do not have a specific transportation safety impact or hazard. The proposed project would not include hazardous geometric design features or incompatible uses. Each housing application would be evaluated at the project specific level and undergo design review which would ensure design features would be in accordance with all applicable City standards to minimize design hazards. Furthermore, future projects facilitated would be infill projects or would include increasing density and height of existing sites, and therefore would not involve the creation of new roadways or intersections or incompatible uses within Los Altos. While new intersections of existing local streets with proposed new streets internal to these sites may be created if these sites would be developed, they would be subject to the project-level review processes described above to ensure hazards from design features or incompatible uses are not created. Therefore, impacts from hazardous design features or incompatible uses would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Adoption of the proposed HEU analyzes the amount of new housing units the City will accommodate during the 2023-2031 planning period and sets goals and policies for how this housing is implemented. It does not grant entitlements for any specific project or future development. Thus, the plan for new housing and the goals and policies needed to achieve that housing do not have a specific emergency access impact. At the project specific level, future development would be required to comply with comply with basic building designs and standards for residential buildings as mandated by the Los Altos Fire Code, under LAMC Chapter 12.24. Future projects would be required to incorporate all applicable design and safety requirements as set forth in the most current adopted building codes and fire and life safety standards. Compliance with these standards is ensured through the City review and building plan check process. Additionally, as discussed under Section 9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the proposed HEU would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
605
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
154
This page intentionally left blank.
606
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Tribal Cultural Resources
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 155
18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in a Public Resources Code
Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
or cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native American
tribe, and that is:
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? □ ■ □ □
b. A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of
the resource to a California Native
American tribe. □ ■ □ □
Regulatory Setting
Assembly Bill 52 of 2014
As of July 1, 2015, California Assembly Bill 52 of 2014 (AB 52) was enacted and expands CEQA by defining a new resource category, “tribal cultural resources.” AB 52 establishes that “A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment” (PRC Section 21084.2). It further states that the lead agency shall establish measures to avoid impacts that would alter the significant characteristics of a tribal cultural resource, when feasible (PRC Section 21084.3).

PRC Section 21074 (a)(1)(A) and (B) defines tribal cultural resources as “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe” and is:
607
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
156

1. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or

2. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying these criteria, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

AB 52 also establishes a formal consultation process for California tribes regarding those resources.

The consultation process must be completed before a CEQA document can be certified. Under AB 52, lead agencies are required to “begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project.” Native American tribes to be included in the process are those that have requested notice of projects proposed within the jurisdiction of the lead agency.

California Senate Bill 18 of 2004
California Government Code Section 65352.3 (adopted pursuant to the requirements of Senate Bill [SB] 18) requires local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with tribal organizations prior to making a decision to adopt or amend a general or specific plan. The tribal organizations eligible to consult have traditional lands in a local government’s jurisdiction, and are identified, upon request, by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). As noted in the California Office of Planning and Research’s Tribal Consultation Guidelines (2005); “The intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places.” SB 18 refers to PRC Section 5097.9 and 5097.995 to define cultural places as:
 Native American sanctified cemetery, place of worship, religious or ceremonial site, or sacred shrine (PRC Section 5097.9)
 Native American historic, cultural, or sacred site, that is listed or may be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources pursuant to Section 5024.1, including any historic or prehistoric ruins, any burial ground, any archaeological or historic site (PRC Section 5097.995).

Consultation Results
As part of its tribal cultural resources consultation process under AB 52 and SB 18, the City of Los Altos sent letters via certified mail on March 9, 2022, to the following ten Native American tribes that that were identified by the NAHC as being traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area:
 Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
 Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista
 Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan
 Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area
 North Valley Yokuts Tribe
 Rumsen Am:a Tur:ataj Ohlone
 Tamien Nation
 The Ohlone Indian Tribe
 Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band
608
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Tribal Cultural Resources
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 157
 The Confederated Villages of Lisjan
Under AB 52 and SB 18, Native American tribes typically have 30 days and 90 days, respectively, to respond and request further project information and formal consultation. To date, the City of Los Altos has not received any responses requesting consultation under AB 52 or SB 18 from the Tribes.

Correspondence is included in Appendix E.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?
No specific tribal cultural resources were identified in the City of Los Altos as a result of consultation with the Tribes. Further, the proposed HEU does not involve physical development. Nonetheless, ground-disturbing activities associated with individual development projects during the planning period of the HEU could expose previously unidentified subsurface archaeological resources that may qualify as tribal cultural resources and could be adversely affected by construction.

Adherence to the requirements of AB 52 would require Tribal consultation with local California Native American Tribes prior to implementation of project activities subject to CEQA. AB 168 would require Tribal consultation with local California Native American Tribes prior to implementation of project activities subject to SB 35. In compliance with AB 52, a determination of whether projectspecific substantial adverse effects on tribal cultural resources would occur along with identification of appropriate project-specific avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures would be required.

Due to the programmatic nature of the proposed HEU it is not possible to fully determine impacts of specific projects on specific sites; however, no tribal cultural resources were identified during consultation. Future projects subject to CEQA and SB 35 would require project-specific tribal cultural resource identification and consultation, and the appropriate avoidance, minimization, or mitigation would be incorporated. Project-specific tribal cultural resource consultation will occur when specific projects are implemented, and consultation conducted pursuant to the requirements of AB 52.

Nonetheless, tribal cultural resources are common throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, and their locations often are unknown or confidential. Projects associated with the proposed HEU therefore have the potential to significantly impact tribal cultural resources through ground disturbance.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure TCR-1 would ensure that any unanticipated discoveries of tribal cultural resources are avoided or, where avoidance is infeasible, mitigated to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure
The following mitigation measure is required. Other mitigation may also be required for future projects as determined through the tribal consultation process.

TCR-1 Suspension of Work Around Potential Tribal Cultural Resources The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:
609
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
158
In the event that archaeological resources of Native American origin are identified during implementation of the proposed project, all earth-disturbing work within 50 feet of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find as a cultural resource and an appropriate local Native American representative is consulted. If the City of Los Altos, in consultation with local Native Americans, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with local Native American group(s). The plan shall include avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, the plan shall outline the appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the appropriate local Native American tribal representative and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist. Examples of appropriate mitigation for tribal cultural resources include, but are not limited to, protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource, protecting traditional use of the resource, protecting the confidentiality of the resource, or heritage recovery. The City of Los Altos Community Development Director or designee shall review and approve the plan prior to implementation.

Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure TCR-1 would protect tribal cultural resources in the event of their discovery during implementation of the proposed project, reducing the potential impact on such resources to a less-than-significant level.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code 21074 that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? As described under checklist question (a), no specific tribal cultural resources were identified in the City of Los Altos as a result of consultation with the Tribes. Further, no tribal cultural resources have been identified by the lead agency. Nonetheless, tribal cultural resources are common throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, and their locations often are unknown or confidential. Projects associated with the proposed HEU therefore have the potential to significantly impact tribal cultural resources through ground disturbance. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TCR-1 would ensure that any unanticipated discoveries of tribal cultural resources are avoided or, where avoidance is infeasible, mitigated to a less than significant level. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
610
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Utilities and Service Systems
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 159
19 Utilities and Service Systems
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects? □ □ □ ■
b. Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years? □ □ ■ □
c. Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing commitments? □ □ ■ □
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals? □ □ ■ □
e. Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? □ □ ■ □
Environmental Setting
Water
All domestic and commercial water in Los Altos is supplied by Cal Water, and financially supported by user fees. The City of Los Altos is part of Cal Water’s Los Altos Suburban District. Cal Water’s water supply is derived from purchased surface water from the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), groundwater from the Santa Clara Subbasin, and small amounts of recycled water.

Treated surface water is delivered to the Los Altos Suburban District from the Rinconada water treatment plant (WTP) through a large-diameter high pressure pipeline that runs through Cupertino and along Foothill Expressway (Cal Water 2021). When surface water supplies are scarce, SCVWD 611
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
160
imposes voluntary and mandatory reductions in the overall use of water. In addition, because surplus surface water supplies are stored underground by SCVWD directly or through in-lieu recharge, during shortages, the Los Altos Suburban District increases groundwater production and reduces its purchases from SCVWD (Cal Water 2021). According to Cal Water’s Los Altos Suburban District 2020 UWMP, in the year 2020, Cal Water supplied 10,294 acre-feet (AF) of purchased or imported water from SCVWD, 2,729 AF of groundwater from the Santa Clara Subbasin, and 64 AF of recycled water from the Sunnyvale water pollution control plant (WPCP), for a total of 13,087 AF.

The UWMP projects water supply to increase to 13,103 AF by 2030 and 14,197 AF by 2045, and water demand to increase to 13,103 AF by 2030 and 14,197 AF by 2045 (Cal Water 2021).

Wastewater
The City provides sanitary sewer services to most residents within Los Altos, with the exception of a few homes with septic systems. Wastewater is conveyed to the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) for treatment and disposal, which has a dry-weather capacity of 39 million gallons per day (mgd). The City has rights to discharge up to 3.6 million gallons per day average annual dry weather flow to the WPCP. The City owns and maintains the collection system within the City and its sphere of influence which includes approximately 140 miles of sewer pipes of which most is 6-inch and 8-inch vitrified clay pipe. The City’s Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update was prepared in February 2013 to improve hydraulic capacity and reliability of the sewer collection system (City of Los Altos 2013).

Stormwater
The City has adopted a Stormwater Master Plan in April 2016 to establish a capital improvement program to mitigate the impacts of stormwater runoff and reduce flooding impacts. According to the Stormwater Master Plan, the City has five major drainage areas based on the City’s pipe network: Hale Creek (17.6 mile pipes), Adobe Creek (18.6 mile pipes), Permanente/Stevens Creek (14.3 mile pipes), Permanente Creek (2.9 mile pipes), and Stevens Creek (1.7 mile pipes) (City of Los Altos 2016). Runoff generated is conveyed through the City owned stormwater system that drains directly to four creeks (Hale, Permanente, Adobe, and Stevens), then to the San Francisco Bay.

Portions of the City’s watersheds drain directly to creek channels while a portion of the runoff ponds along rural streets. To create a rural aesthetic, many streets in Los Altos do not have traditional suburban curb and gutter, and instead have unpaved areas along the street shoulder.

This layout allows some runoff to soak into the ground before it reaches a catch basin and enters a conventional storm drain system.

The City also adopted its Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan on July 9, 2019, which aims to transform the City’s traditional storm drainage infrastructure to green stormwater infrastructure, which uses plants and soils to mimic natural watershed processes, capture stormwater, and create healthier environments (City of Los Altos 2019).

Solid Waste
There are no existing or planned solid waste facilities in the City. Solid waste is collected by Mission Trail Waste Systems, a franchised hauler, which provides residential collection services for trash, recycling, and organics. Solid wastes are transferred to Newby Island landfill in San Jose, which has a remaining capacity of 16,400,000 cubic yards and a maximum permitted capacity of 57,500,000. The estimated cease operation date for the landfill is January 1, 2041 (CalRecycle 2019). 612
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Utilities and Service Systems
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 161
Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications
SVCE supplies electricity to Los Altos using transmission infrastructure operated and maintained by PG&E. PG&E also provides natural gas to the City. Natural gas and electricity are also addressed in Section 4.5, Energy. As the City’s main electricity provider, SVCE enrolls new customers in their GreenStart program, which sources 50 percent of electricity from renewable energy sources and 50 percent from carbon-free sources. Customers have the option to upgrade to SVCE’s GreenPrime program which sources 100 percent of electricity from renewable energy sources (SVCE 2022).

Telecommunications services in Los Altos are provided by private companies, including AT&T, Comcast Cable, and DISH, which provides internet, phone, and television.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Water
Construction activities associated with development under the proposed HEU would require recycled water for dust suppression, concrete manufacturing, and such activities as washing wheels and equipment. Temporary construction recycled water would be trucked to active construction sites or produced from existing fire hydrants near the applicable site(s), with City approval. As such, construction water demands would not require new connections or conveyance facilities, as existing or mobile facilities would be used.

New water supply connections and associated facilities would be required for future development accommodated under the proposed HEU to convey potable water supply. Such upgrades would occur within existing utility easements and would be located underground, primarily within existing roadways. Development under the proposed HEU would primarily be located on previously developed sites or infill sites within the city that are currently zoned for residential development; the HEU would also involve rezoning existing sites to increase allowed density and height. New water service connections would be consistent with utility connections in urbanized areas, such that minimal areas of new disturbance would occur. Developers are responsible for funding infrastructure improvements that are required to serve future projects and have not been previously identified as part of a capital improvement program covered by the development impact fees. Consistent with applicable State law, the City’s development fees ensure that the developers pay the cost attributable to the increased demand for the affected public facilities reasonably related to the development project in order to refurbish the existing facilities to maintain the existing level of service and achieve an adopted level of service that is consistent with the City’s General Plan (California Government Code Section 66001(g)).

Due to the existing built-up nature of the city, it is reasonably anticipated that future improvements for water supply and fire flow requirements would not disturb previously undisturbed areas and would be situated within existing utility rights-of-way such as, but not limited to, within public roadways. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause significant environmental effects associated with construction or relocation of new water infrastructure. No impact would occur. 613
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
162
The availability and reliability of water supply for the proposed project is addressed below, under checklist question (b). There would be no impacts related to relocation or construction of water supply facilities.

Wastewater
The Palo Alto RWQCP treats and disposes wastewater transported from Los Altos. As discussed below under Impact c, the RWQCP would have sufficient wastewater treatment capacity to accommodate the anticipated residential development, and the proposed HEU would not result in the need to expand the capacity of the RWQCP. Since development facilitated by the proposed HEU would be located in urbanized area served by existing wastewater infrastructure, the project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. There would be no impact.

Stormwater
Los Altos is an urbanized city that is currently developed and served by existing stormwater infrastructure. The 2023-2031 Housing Element would facilitate development of residential units within urban infill areas that are already developed or vacant and surrounded by development.

Future development would be required to comply with the California Construction General Permit which requires the development and implementation of a SWPPP, the NPDES MRP, the SCVURPPP, and Section 10.16.030 of the LAMC which requires permanent stormwater pollution prevention measures to reduce stormwater pollution. Additionally, future development would be required to adhere to applicable policies within the Infrastructure and Waste Disposal Element of the Los Altos General Plan, such as Policy 3.3, which would require the minimization of impervious surfaces in new development and maximization of on-site infiltration of stormwater runoff; Policy 3.4, which would require the implementation of pollution prevention methods supplemented by pollutant source controls and treatment; and Policy 3.7, which would require the avoidance of development in areas susceptible to erosion and sediment loss. The City would continue to routinely maintain and improve deficiencies in the stormwater system, and developers would be responsible for funding infrastructure improvements that are required to serve future projects and have not been previously identified as part of a capital improvement program covered by the development impact fees. Therefore, the project would not require construction or expansion of stormwater drainage facilities and infrastructure, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects. No impact would occur.

Telecommunications
Project implementation would require connections to existing adjacent utility infrastructure to meet the needs of site residents and tenants. Based on the availability of existing telecommunications infrastructure, construction of new telephone and cable lines would not be required, and all sites would be able to connect to existing infrastructure. Development facilitated by the project would be required to adhere to applicable laws and regulations related to the connection to existing telecommunication infrastructure. Therefore, there would be adequate telecommunications facilities to serve the development facilitated by the project. The proposed project would not result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. There would be no impact. 614
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Utilities and Service Systems
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 163
Electricity and Natural Gas
The project would require connections to existing electrical transmission and distribution systems to serve development facilitated by the project. This service would be provided in accordance with the rules and regulations of SVCE, and PG&E on file with and approved by CPUC. Based on the availability of existing electrical infrastructure, it is not anticipated that the construction of new electrical transmission and distribution lines would be required, and all sites would be able to connect to existing infrastructure. Therefore, there would be adequate electrical facilities to serve development facilitated by the project. The proposed project would not result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded electrical facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. No impact would occur.

Development facilitated by the project would connect to existing natural gas infrastructure to meet the needs of site residents and tenants. Based on the availability of existing natural gas infrastructure, construction of new natural gas pipelines would not be required, and all sites would be able to connect to existing infrastructure. Therefore, there would be adequate natural gas facilities to serve the development facilitated by the project. The proposed project would not result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded natural gas facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Los Altos is served by existing Cal Water facilities. According to the 2020 UWMP, Cal Water’s Los Altos Suburban District anticipates adequate supply in normal years, single dry years, and multiple dry years (Cal Water 2021). As shown on Table 28, the additional 1,648 units facilitated by the proposed HEU would increase water demand by approximately 107,900 gallons per day or 145.2 acre-feet per year (AFY) in 2031 assuming full buildout. Therefore, overall, the project could increase demand in Los Altos by an approximately 1 percent over Cal Water’s estimated 2030 normal-year water demand of 13,103 AFY.

Table 28 Estimated Water Use for the Proposed HEU
Potential Buildout
Development/Land Use
Water Generation
Factor (gpd/unit) 1
Projected Number of
Housing Units
Projected Water
Demand in 2031
(gpd)
Projected Water
Demand in 2031
(AFY)
Single-family residential 70 1562 10,920 14.7
Multi-family residential 65 1,4922 96,980 130.5
Total 107,900 145.2
1 Per unit water demand factors from Cal Water are not available, therefore, this analysis is based water use factors provided by the East Bay Municipal Utilities District, 70 gpd/unit for a typical home and 65 gpd/unit for a low-rise apartment. 2 Assumed 156 single-family residences and the rest multi-family consistent with the assumptions in the traffic analysis (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2022)
gpd =gallons per day. AFY = acre-feet per year
615
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
164
According to the Cal Water UWMP, the combination of groundwater, recycled water, and purchased imported water supplies are expected to be sufficient to support the Los Altos Suburban District’s projected water demands in all hydrologic conditions, including a five-year drought period, through 2045. The project’s increase of 1 percent from the projected 2030 water demand in the UWMP would not substantially affect Cal Water’s water supplies. Furthermore, future development would be required to comply with water conservation regulations and policies in order to maintain sufficient supplies. The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 11 (CALGreen) requires a 20 percent reduction in residential indoor water use that would lower potential water demand. New development would be subject to the CCR concerning water-efficient landscapes (Division 2, Title 23, CCR, Chapter 2.7, Sections 490 through 495). Implementation of the WELO would encourage water conservation for new development and in landscaped areas. The WELO, which reinforces landscape irrigation and water conservation best practices also would encourage the use of drought-tolerant landscaping and low-flow irrigation systems. New development would also be subject to other green building and water conservation requirements described in the Water Supply Regulatory Setting. Therefore, sufficient water supplies are available to serve reasonably foreseeable development under the proposed HEU such that potential impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
c. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
The Palo Alto RWQCP treats and disposes wastewater transported from Los Altos and has a dryweather capacity of 39 mgd. The City has rights to discharge up to 3.6 mgd average annual dry weather flow to the WPCP. Assuming that wastewater generation is 80 percent of water use13, the proposed HEU would increase wastewater generation by approximately 86,320 gallons per day. This would constitute approximately 2.4 percent of the City’s daily discharge rights and would be within the remaining capacity of the RWQCP. Therefore, the plant’s existing wastewater treatment capacity would be sufficient to accommodate the anticipated residential development under the proposed HEU. Development facilitated by the proposed project would not result in the need to expand the capacity of the RWQCP. This impact would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
d. Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Projected buildout under the proposed HEU would be 1,648 additional residential units through 2031. CalRecycle estimates that multi-family residential uses generate an average of four pounds of solid waste per unit per day (CalRecycle 2022). As shown in Table 29, prior to implementation of State-mandated diversion requirements, development associated with the proposed HEU would generate an estimated 6,592 pounds per day of solid waste, which equates to 3.3 tons or 29.3 cubic yards per day. In accordance with California’s Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), cities and counties are required to divert 50 percent of all solid wastes from landfills. Additionally, pursuant to AB 341 adopted in 2012, all businesses that generate four cubic yards or more of 13 166 GPCD times 0.8 = 132.8 gpd.
616
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Utilities and Service Systems
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 165
commercial solid waste per week including multi-family dwelling that consists of five units or more would be required to divert 75 percent of all solid wastes. The City of Los Altos has achieved a diversion rate of 71 percent, which substantially exceeds AB 939 State requirement (City of Los Altos 2017). Assuming that this diversion rate continues to apply to new development on the project sites, implementation of the project would generate approximately 1 ton or 8.5 cubic yards per day of solid waste for disposal at landfills.

Table 29 Estimated Solid Waste Generation
Potential Buildout
Development/
Land Use Quantity Units
Generation
Rate1
Solid Waste
(pounds per day)
Solid Waste
(tons per
day)
Solid Waste
(cubic yards
per day)2
Residential 1,648 dwellin
g units
4 pounds/
unit/day
6,592 3.3 29.3
Total Assuming 71% Diversion Rate 1,912 1.0 8.5
1 CalRecycle 2022
2 RecycleMania/USEPA 2022, assumes 225 pounds per cubic yard of residential waste As discussed in the Solid Waste Setting, the Newby Island landfill in San Jose is an active landfill that can accommodate solid waste from Los Altos. This landfill has a combined remaining capacity of approximately 16.4 million cubic yards. With development facilitated by the proposed HEU, it is estimated that the project sites would generate approximately 8.5 cubic yards per day, or 3,103 cubic yards per year of solid waste disposal at landfills. This represents 0.0002 percent of the current total remaining landfill capacity.

Continued compliance with applicable regulations and policies 5.2 and 5.4 of the Los Altos General Plan Infrastructure and Waste Disposal Element would ensure that development facilitated by the project complies with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste and would lead to increased recycling and waste diversion. Development facilitated by the project would be required to comply with these policies, including paying a fair share for solid waste services and achieving greater diversion rates than required by AB 939. AB 939 requires the City to divert 50 percent of solid waste from landfills. Local infrastructure would have the capacity to accommodate solid waste generated by the project. Development facilitated by the project would also be required to demonstrate compliance with all applicable regulations. Therefore, anticipated rates of solid waste disposal from the proposed HEU would have a less than significant impact related to solid waste disposal facilities.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
e. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
As discussed under checklist question (d) above, the project would be required to comply with applicable regulations and policies 5.2 and 5.4 of the Los Altos General Plan Infrastructure and Waste Disposal Element, which would ensure that development facilitated by the project complies with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste and would lead to increased recycling and waste diversion. Development facilitated by the project would be required to comply with these policies, including paying a fair share for solid waste services and achieving greater diversion rates than required by AB 939. AB 939 requires the City to divert 50 percent of solid waste from landfills. Local infrastructure would have the capacity to accommodate solid waste generated by the project. Additionally, future development would be required to comply with SB 617
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
166
1838 which would require mandatory organic waste recycling. Therefore, the project would comply with federal, State, and local regulations related to solid wastes, and impacts would be less than significant.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
618
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Wildfire
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 167
20 Wildfire
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas
or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:
a. Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan? □ □ □ ■
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and
thereby expose project occupants to
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? □ □ □ ■
c. Require the installation or maintenance
of associated infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities)
that may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing impacts
to the environment? □ □ □ ■
d. Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslopes or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope instability,
or drainage changes? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
According to maps prepared by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), Los Altos is not located in a state responsibility area (SRA) or local responsibility area (LRA) fire hazard severity zones (FHSZs) (CAL FIRE 2007). A small portion of the southwestern border is adjacent to a high fire hazard severity zone (HFHSZ), and the closest very high fire hazard severity zone is located approximately 1 mile southwest of the city. 619
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
168
Impact Analysis
a. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Los Altos is not located in or immediately adjacent to a VHFHSZ, with the closest VHFHSZ located approximately 1 mile southwest and separated by existing structures and natural landscape. The City of Los Altos is mainly urbanized with most natural vegetation isolated in small areas; therefore, wildfire hazards are not a major concern in the city. Future development facilitated under the proposed HEU would be required to be constructed in accordance with the City’s Fire Code pursuant to Chapter 12.24 of the LAMC. Additionally, Program OCC 10 of the Los Altos General Plan’s Open Space Element aims to promote fire prevention through fire hazard education and fire prevention program, and coordination with local water districts to ensure water pressure for new development is adequate for firefighting purposes. The City’s Emergency Preparedness Plan and evacuation routes would also prepare future residents for emergencies and reduce impacts from wildfire to a less than significant level. Additionally, the proposed HEU would facilitate residential development primarily on infill sites, and would not require the construction of additional roads, power lines, or other utilities that would exacerbate existing fire risk. Housing sites that require utility connections would likely install underground connections, and development within underground utility districts would be required to install new utility connections underground. Therefore, the proposed HEU would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
b. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
For the same reasons outlined above under checklist question (a), with compliance with existing regulations, development that could be facilitated by the proposed HEU would not exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. There would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
c. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? Development that could be facilitated by the proposed HEU would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. For the same reasons outlined above under checklist question (a), with compliance with existing regulations, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
620
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Wildfire
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 169
d. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslopes or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
For the same reasons outlined above under checklist question (a), with compliance with existing regulations, the project would not increase the risk of flooding or landslides, as site topography and designated flood zones would not be modified substantially from existing conditions. There would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
621
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
170
This page intentionally left blank.
622
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 171
21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Does the project:
a. Have the potential to substantially
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, substantially 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. 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)? □ ■ □ □
c. Have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or
indirectly? □ ■ □ □
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially 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, substantially 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? Construction activities associated with development facilitated by the proposed HEU could potentially degrade the quality of the environment, eliminate or threaten wildlife habitats, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. However, compliance with federal, State, and local regulatory requirements; Los Altos General Plan policies; and LAMC requirements would reduce impacts to status species, cultural resources, and tribal cultural resources. Additionally, as discussed in Sections 4, Biological Resources, 5, Cultural Resources, 7, Geology and Soils, and 18, Tribal Cultural Resources, implementation of mitigation 623
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
172
measures BIO-1 though BIO-5, CUL-1, CUL-2, GEO-1, and TCR-1 would ensure protection of specialstatus species, nesting birds, roosting bats, and State and federally protected waters and wetlands, as well as historical, paleontological, and tribal resources, and would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
b. 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)? CEQA defines “cumulative impacts” as two or more individual impacts that, when considered together, are substantial or will compound other environmental impacts. Cumulative impacts are the combined changes in the environment that result from the incremental impact of development of the proposed project and other nearby projects. For example, noise impacts of two nearby projects may be less than significant when analyzed separately but could have a significant impact when analyzed together. Cumulative impact analysis provides a reasonable forecast of future environmental conditions and can more accurately gauge the effects of a series of projects.

This analysis is cumulative in nature in that it analyzes future development under the proposed HEU throughout Los Altos and takes into consideration the effects associated with development of multiple projects in the housing element cycle through 2031. For analyses that may have more localized or neighborhood implications (aesthetics, agriculture, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, public services, recreation, utilities, tribal cultural resources, wildfire), the geographic scope for cumulative impacts includes the City of Los Altos. For these issue areas, generally, impacts are site specific and would not result in overall cumulative impacts. Future development projects would be reviewed by the City pursuant to CEQA to identify potential impacts to on a project-by-project basis. While there is the potential for significant cumulative impacts, it is anticipated that potential impacts associated with individual development projects would be addressed on a case-by-case basis and would be subject to the mitigation measures outlined in this IS-MND, City policies, and local and State regulations regarding the protection of such resources. With compliance with the existing policies and regulations, and mitigation measures, future development would be required to avoid or mitigate impacts.

Therefore, the proposed project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts associated with aesthetics, agriculture, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, public services, recreation, utilities, tribal cultural resources, wildfire would not be cumulatively considerable, and cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

Some analyses including air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, transportation, and population and housing, rely on much larger geographic areas such as the Bay Area region. For issues that may have regional cumulative implications, the cumulative impact analysis for this EIR is based on Plan Bay Area 2050, the Bay Area’s most recent Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).

As discussed in sections 3, Air Quality, the project would be consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan control measures as development facilitated by the project would comply with the latest Title 24 regulations and would increase density in urban areas in proximity to transit, allowing for greater use of alternative modes of transportation. Additionally, the increase in VMT would not exceed the 624
Agenda Item # 3.

Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 173
projected population increase per the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines for operational emissions from plans. Discussion of these impacts considers the cumulative nature of criteria pollutants in the region. Therefore, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to an air quality impact.

As discussed in Section 6, Energy, development facilitated by the project would not result in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, and operation of the new residential structures would not result in potentially significant environmental effects due to the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy. Development facilitated by the project would be consistent with the energy-related goals, policies, and actions of the Statewide plans and the City’s General Plan; therefore, the project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact with respect to consistency with renewable energy and energy efficiency plans. Projects throughout the Bay Area are required to adhere to applicable renewable energy and energy efficiency laws, programs, and policies such as California’s RPS, AB 2076, and Title 24 standards to avoid the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy.

As discussed in Section 8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the impact of GHG emissions generated by development facilitated by the proposed HEU is inherently cumulative. GHG emissions from one project cannot, on their own, result in changes in climatic conditions; therefore, the emissions from any project must be considered in the context of their contribution to cumulative global emissions, which is the basis for determining a significant cumulative impact. This is determined through the project’s consistency with applicable GHG emission thresholds and applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. GHG emissions from development facilitated by the project would not exceed the BAAQMD interpolated 2031 plan-level threshold. In addition, development facilitated by the project would be consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan, Plan Bay Area 2050, City General Plan, and the City CAP. Therefore, the project would not result in a significant cumulative impact related to GHG emissions.

As discussed in Section 14, Population and Housing, the proposed HEU would result in an housing increase in Los Altos of approximately 14 percent. The proposed project would be consistent with State requirements for the RHNA and would be within the growth forecasts for Northwest Santa Clara County in Plan Bay Area 2050, which projects a 38 percent increase in housing for Northwest Santa Clara County. Therefore, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a GHG impact.

As discussed in Section 17, Transportation, and shown in Table 27, the proposed HEU would not result in a significant cumulative VMT impact. Therefore, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a transportation impact.

Therefore, with implementation of mitigation measures included in this IS-MND, impacts of the proposed HEU would not be cumulatively considerable.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
625
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
174
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
In general, impacts to human beings are associated with air quality, geologic hazards, GHGs, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and traffic safety impacts. As discussed in this IS-MND, impacts related to the above-mentioned areas would all be less than significant or less than significant with incorporation of mitigation measures AQ-1 through AQ-3, NOI-1, and NOI-2. Therefore, the proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, and impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
626
Agenda Item # 3.

References
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 175
References
Bibliography
Association of Bay Area Governments/Metropolitan Transportation Commission (ABAG/MTC). 2021.

Transit Priority Area Map.
https://opendata.mtc.ca.gov/datasets/370de9dc4d65402d992a769bf6ac8ef5_1/explore?lo cation=37.396021%2C-122.116840%2C14.37
______. 2022. Priority Development Areas. https://abag.ca.gov/our-work/land-use/pda-prioritydevelopment-areas Averiett, Angela, Chief of Police. Los Altos Police Department. Email Communication. September 9, 2022 and September 16, 2022.

BAAQMD. 2017a. California Environmental Quality Act: Air Quality Guidelines. San Francisco, CA.

May 2017. https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-andresearch/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en ______. 2017b. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 19, 2017. https://ww.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-airplan/attachment-a_-proposed-final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en ______. 2017c. Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. http://www.baaqmd.gov/researchand-data/air-quality-standards-and-attainment-status ______. 2019. Bay Area Air Pollution Summary – 2019. Available: https://www.baaqmd.gov/aboutair-quality/air-quality-summaries California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2021. Overview: Diesel Exhaust & Health. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-and-health California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2002. California Geomorphic Provinces. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/CGS-Notes/CGS-Note36.pdf ______. 2016a. Santa Clara County Important Farmland.
https://santaclaralafco.org/sites/default/files/scl16.pdf ______. 2016b. Williamson Map. State of California Williamson Act Contract Land. https://planning.lacity.org/eir/HollywoodCenter/Deir/ELDP/(E)%20Initial%20Study/Initial%2 0Study/Attachment%20B%20References/California%20Department%20of%20Conservation %20Williamson%20Map%202016.pdf
______. 2022a. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/
______. 2022b. Santa Clara County Tsunami Hazard Areas. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/santa-clara California Department of Finance. 2022. City/County Population and Housing Estimates. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housingestimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2022/ 627
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
176
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (FWS). 2015. California Forests and Timberlands in California Department of Fish and Wildlife Regions.
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Timber
______. 2022. IPaC.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/A4CGQOH6V5CTVF4WU7EHVNIBH4/resources California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. (CT-HWANP-RT-13-069.25.2) September. https://dot.ca.gov/- /media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tens-sep2013- a11y.pdf
______. 2019. California State Scenic Highway System Map. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e 8057116f1aacaa
______. 2020. Caltrans Vibration Guidance Manual. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/environmentalanalysis/noise-vibration/guidance-manuals California Energy Commission (CEC). 2020. 2020 Total System Electric Generation. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2020- total-system-electric-generation (accessed July 2022).
______. 2022a. Electricity Consumption by County.
http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx
______. 2022b. Natural Gas Consumption by County.
http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2007. Santa Clara County Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6766/fhszs_map43.pdf CalRecycle. 2019. Newby Island Sanitary Landfill.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1362?siteID=3388 ______. 2022. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates California Water Service (Cal Water). 2021. Los Altos Suburban District 2020 Urban Water Management Plan.
https://www.calwater.com/docs/uwmp2020/LAS_2020_UWMP_FINAL.pdf Cupertino Union Elementary School District (CUSD). 2022. Annual Enrollment Report. https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1647958851/cusdk8org/u0ng5fsb9hbodfyrc7ud/Fin alReportCprtnUnn22Mar4.pdf
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2011. Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance. December 2011.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/regulations_and_guidance/analysis_and_ab atement_guidance/revguidance.pdf
Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no0123_0.pdf 628
Agenda Item # 3.

References
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 177
Fremont Union High School District (FUHSD). 2019. Forecast Report. https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1579818920/fuhsdorg/wiiuer0pgplywdmx4sqd/201 9-20ForecastUpdateReportforFremontUHSD.pdf
Hexagon Transportation Consultants. 2022a. Los Altos Housing Element Update Transportation Study. Dated October 3, 2022. (Included in Appendix A)
______. 2022b. Intersection Level of Service Analysis for the Los Altos Housing Element Update in Los Altos, CA. Dated September 1, 2022.

Los Altos, City of. 2002. City of Los Altos General Plan 2002-2020. https://www.losaltosca.gov/communitydevelopment/page/adopted-plans ______. 2012. Bicycle Transportation Plan.
https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/bicycle_and_pedestrian_ad visory_commission/page/31581/2012_los_altos_bicycle_transportation_plan.pdf ______. 2013. Final Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update.
https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/public_works/page/18641/fi nal_sanitary_sewer_master_plan_update_4.25.13._for_action.pdf ______. 2016. Stormwater Master Plan.
https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/public_works/page/31841/s wmp_4.27.16.pdf
______. 2017. Waste Slide.
https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/environmental_commission /page/39631/waste_slide_for_dashboard_3-8-17.pdf
______. 2019. Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan.
https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/public_works/page/32901/l os_altos_gsi_plan_july9_2019_-_final_combined.pdf
______. 2019. Los Altos Police Department. https://www.losaltosca.gov/police/page/about-losaltos-police-department ______. 2020. Facility and Parks.
https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/recreation_amp_communit y_services/page/41751/03_inside_back_cover_summer_v2.pdf ______. 2022a. Los Altos Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/community_development/p age/59951/los_altos_caap_final_combined.pdf
______. 2022b. Los Altos Evacuation Routes. https://www.losaltosca.gov/police/page/los-altosevacuation-routes ______. 2022c. Commercial and Multi-Family Design Review. https://www.losaltosca.gov/communitydevelopment/page/commercial-and-multi-familydesign-review ______. 2022d. Complete Streets Master Plan. https://losaltoscompletestreets.com/ Los Altos Elementary School District (LASD). 2013. Superintendent’s Enrollment Growth Task Force Final Report.
https://www.lasdschools.org/files/user/1/file/enrollment_growth_task_force_report.pdf 629
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
178
Mountainview Los Altos Union High School District (MVLASD).2017. Demographic analysis and Enrollment Projections.
https://www.mvla.net/documents/Business/Facilities/Sub/MVLA%20Demographic%20Anal ysis%20%20Enrollment%20Projections%202015-16%20w%20REVISED%20SGR.pdf Office of Emergency Services. 2017. Santa Clara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://emergencymanagement.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb261/files/For%20Partners/Lo cal-Hazard-Mitigation-Plan-LHMP-Vol-1.pdf
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. https://oehha.ca.gov/air/crnr/noticeadoption-air-toxics-hot-spots-program-guidance-manual-preparation-health-risk-0 RecycleMania. 2022. Volume-To-Weight Conversion Chart.
https://archive.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/tools/rogo/web/pdf/volume-weightconversions.pdf Santa Clara Fire District (SCCFD). 2020. Strategic Plan. https://www.sccfd.org/wpcontent/uploads/documents/key_reports_documents/SCCFD_2020-2022_StrategicPlan.pdf Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). 2021. Proposed Budget. https://www.vta.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/VTA_ProposedBudget_FY22_23.pdf ______. 2022. 2021 Transit Service Plan. https://www.vta.org/projects/2021-transit-service-plan Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP). 2016. C.3 Stormwater Handbook. https://cleanwater.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb461/files/SCVURPPP_C.pdf Santa Clara Valley Water Resources Protection Collaborative’s (Water Collaborative). 2007.

Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams: A Manual of Tools, Standards, and Procedures to Protect Streams and Streamside Resources in Santa Clara County. https://www.valleywater.org/contractors/doing-businesses-with-the-district/permitsworking-district-land-or-easement/guidelines-and-standards-land-use-near-streams Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE). 2022. What are My Energy Choices. https://www.svcleanenergy.org/#:~:text=Since%202017%2C%20SVCE%20has%20committe d,lines%20to%20homes%20and%20businesses.

Unite States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2022. Web Soil Survey. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2015.

Guidelines for the Visual Impact Assessment of Highway Projects. https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/env_topics/other_topics/VIA_Guidelines_for_High way_Projects.aspx
United States Energy Information Administration. 2021. California State Profile and Energy Estimates.
https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#:~:text=Profile%20Overview&text=California%20is%20t he%20largest%20consumer,motor%20gasoline%20consumption%20in%202020. (accessed July 2022).
630
Agenda Item # 3.

References
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration 179
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022. Critical Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species Map.
https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265ad4fe0989 3cf75b8dbfb77
United States Geological Survey (USGS). N.d. Earthquake Glossary. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/glossary/?term=active%20fault ______. 2022. What is a Quaternary Fault. https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-quaternaryfault#:~:text=A%20Quaternary%20fault%20is%20one,the%20last%202.6%20million%20year s.

University of California, Davis. 2022. SoilWeb.
https://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/soil_web/ssurgo.php?action=list_mapunits&areasy mbol=ca641
Valley Water. 2021. Groundwater Management Plan for the Santa Clara and Llagas Subbasins. https://s3.us-west2.amazonaws.com/assets.valleywater.org/2021_GWMP_web_version.pdf List of Preparers
Rincon Consultants, Inc. prepared this IS-MND under contract to the City of Los Altos. Persons involved in data gathering analysis, project management, and quality control are listed below.

RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.

Abe Leider, AICP CEP, Principal
Karly Kaufman, MESM, Project Manager
Heather Dubois, Senior Air Quality Specialist
Bill Vosti, Program Manager – Air Quality, GHG Emissions, and Noise JulieAnn Murphy, Architectural Historian
Leanna L. Flaherty, RPA, Archaeologist
Andrew McGrath, Ph.D., Paleontologist
Nichole Yee, Environmental Planner
Hannah Bireschi, Environmental Planner
Kat Castanon, GIS Analyst
Debra Jane Seltzer, Publishing Specialist
631
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
180
This page intentionally left blank.
632
Agenda Item # 3.

Appendix A
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Memorandum
633
Agenda Item # 3.

P a g e | 1
Memorandum
Date: November 11, 2022
To: Ms. Jennifer Murillo, Lisa Wise Consulting
From: Shikha Jain, Gary Black
Subject: Los Altos Housing Element Update Transportation Study Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. has completed a transportation study for the proposed Los Altos Housing Element Update (HEU) project. The purpose of this study is to conduct a vehiclemiles travelled (VMT) analysis consistent with CEQA guidelines to determine whether the proposed HEU project would generate a VMT impact. The HEU has identified 1,648 dwelling units distributed in parcels across the City (see Figure 1).

Background
SB 743, which was signed into law in 2013, initiated a change in how public agencies evaluate transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Traditionally, transportation impacts have been evaluated by examining whether the project is likely to cause automobile delay at intersections and congestion on nearby individual highway segments, and whether this delay will exceed local or regionally-defined thresholds of significance (this is known as Level of Service or LOS analysis).

Starting on July 1, 2020, agencies must analyze transportation impacts using a new metric known as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) instead of LOS. VMT is a metric that captures how much auto travel (additional miles driven) a proposed project would create on California roads. If the project adds excessive car travel onto our roads, the project may cause a significant transportation impact.

VMT Analysis Methodology and Criteria
VMT is the total miles of travel by personal motorized vehicles a project is expected to generate in a day. VMT is calculated using the Origin-Destination VMT method, which measures the full distance of personal motorized vehicle-trips with one end within the project. A project’s VMT is compared to established thresholds of significance based on the project location and type of development.

Typically, development projects that are farther from other, complementary land uses (such as a business park far from housing) and in areas without transit or active transportation infrastructure (bike lanes, sidewalks, etc.) generate more driving than development near complementary land uses with more robust transportation options. Therefore, developments located in a central business district with high density and diversity of complementary land uses and frequent transit services are expected to internalize trips and generate shorter and fewer vehicle trips than developments located in a suburban area with low density of residential developments and no transit serve in the project vicinity.

When assessing a residential project, the project’s VMT is divided by the number of residents expected to occupy the project to determine the VMT per capita. 634
Agenda Item # 3.

Los Altos Housing Element Update VMT Analysis November 11, 2022 P a g e | 2
VMT Evaluation
Given that the City of Los Altos has not formally adopted a local VMT policy, the HEU has been analyzed according to the City’s interim VMT policy. The Interim VMT Policy sets a threshold of significance for residential VMT per capita at 15 percent below the regional average of 13.95 VMT per capita. Therefore, the threshold is 11.86 daily VMT per capita. Any project above the threshold would need to mitigate its impacts to less than significant.

To determine whether a project would result in CEQA transportation impacts related to VMT, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) travel demand forecasting (TDF) model was used. VTA also has developed the Santa Clara County map-based VMT Evaluation Tool, based on the model forecasts, to streamline the analysis for development projects located within the County.

The TDF model and the map based VMT evaluation tool were used to estimate VMT for the proposed housing sites and determine whether the location of the housing sites would result in significant VMT impacts.

In addition to the location based VMT evaluation methodology using the County VMT Evaluation Tool, HEU sites that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day are considered as small projects and would be screened out from further VMT analysis per the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) guidelines.

Figure 1 shows the current VMT levels estimated by VTA’s TDF model for residents in Los Altos and the location of the proposed housing sites. Areas are color-coded based on the level of existing VMT:
• Green-filled areas are parcels with existing VMT less than the City’s residential threshold of

11.86 VMT per capita. HEU sites (954 units) that are located in these areas are assumed to have a less-than-significant VMT impact.
• Yellow-filled areas are parcels with existing VMT between the residential threshold and the regional average of 13.95 VMT per capita. HEU sites (388 units) that are located in these areas are assumed to have a potentially significant VMT impact. However, the VMT impact can be mitigated by implementing VMT-reducing measures. • Orange-filled areas are parcels with existing VMT greater than the regional average. HEU sites (292 units) that are located in these areas are assumed to have a potentially significant VMT impact. However, the VMT impact can be mitigated by implementing VMTreducing measures. • Red-filled areas (14 units) are parcels with existing VMT greater than the residential thresholds. HEU sites that are located in these areas are assumed to have a significant VMT impact. However, the potential HEU developments identified in these areas all propose single family or multifamily developments that would generate fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips. Per OPR guidelines, these HEU sites would be screened out from further VMT analysis and would be presumed to have a less-than-significant VMT impact.

VMT Mitigation
Projects located in areas where the existing VMT is above the established threshold are referred to as being in “high-VMT areas”. Projects in high-VMT areas are required to include a set of VMT reduction measures that would reduce the project VMT to the greatest extent possible. The evaluation tool evaluates a list of selected VMT reduction measures that can be applied to a project to reduce the project VMT. There are four strategy tiers whose effects on VMT can be calculated with the VMT evaluation tool:

1. Tier 1: Project characteristics (e.g. density, diversity of uses, design, and affordability of housing) that encourage walking, biking and transit uses; 635
Agenda Item # 3.

Los Altos Housing Element Update VMT Analysis November 11, 2022 P a g e | 3

2. Tier 2: Multimodal network improvements that increase accessibility for transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians. These improvements include:
o Increase bike access
o Improve connectivity by increasing intersection density o Increase transit accessibility
o Traffic calming measures beyond the project frontage
o Pedestrian network improvements beyond the project frontage

3. Tier 3: Parking measures that discourage personal motorized vehicle-trips. These improvements include:
o Limit parking supply
o Provide bike facilities

4. Tier 4: Transportation demand management (TDM) measures that provide incentives and services to encourage alternatives to personal motorized vehicle-trips. These measures for residential developments include:
o School pool programs
o Bike share programs
o Car share programs
o Subsidized transit program
o Unbundle parking costs from property costs
o Voluntary travel behavior change program
The first three strategies – land use characteristics, multimodal network improvements, and parking – are physical design strategies that can be incorporated into the project design. TDM includes programmatic measures that aim to reduce VMT by decreasing personal motorized vehicle mode share and by encouraging more walking, biking, and riding transit. TDM measures should be enforced through annual trip monitoring to assess the project’s status in meeting the VMT reduction goals.

VMT of HEU Sites in Yellow Areas (higher than the Residential Threshold but below the Regional Average)
The HEU proposes 388 units located in these areas. Most potential developments would generate fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips. Per OPR guidelines, these HEU sites would be screened out from further VMT analysis and would be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact. Two parcels (APN#18956014, APN#31801036) would not be screened out from the VMT analysis and would need to implement Tier 1-3 mitigation measures for the VMT impact to be less-thansignificant.

VMT of HEU Sites in Orange Areas (higher than the Regional Average, but Mitigatable) The HEU proposes 292 units located in these areas. Some potential developments would generate fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips and would be screened out from further VMT analysis. Four parcels (APN#31816022, APN#32601052, APN#32601053, APN#33609018) would not be screened out from VMT analysis and would need to implement Tier 1-4 mitigation measures for the VMT impact to be less-than-significant.

Since there are no specific development projects associated with the HEU, specific housing sites developed under the HEU cannot be analyzed for VMT mitigation measures at this time. See Appendix A for example VMT reductions for a parcel located in yellow areas and a parcel located in orange areas.

The City requires that driveway trips for projects located in the yellow and above tiers be monitored with automatic driveway count equipment. The counts would automatically be uploaded to a City account for continuous monitoring, and VMT assumptions would be compared against actual 636
Agenda Item # 3.

Los Altos Housing Element Update VMT Analysis November 11, 2022 P a g e | 4
conditions as projects come online. The City will identify the driveway count technology as part of project approvals.

Cumulative VMT Analysis
A cumulative analysis that calculates the change in citywide VMT as a result of the housing element was conducted. VMT forecasts were developed using the VTA Travel Demand Forecasting Model.

Two future land use scenarios were evaluated: Cumulative (2040) No Project Conditions and Cumulative (2040) Conditions with the HEU. The Cumulative (2040) No Project scenario includes local and regional roadway improvements and land use projections consistent with ABAG Projections 2017 in the rest of the region but assumes no growth in housing units in Los Altos. The Cumulative (2040) conditions with the HEU assumes the addition of 1,648 residential units to the City’s housing inventory. Table 1 presents the results of the VMT analysis. The table shows that the VMT per resident would decrease by 0.17, from 13.08 under cumulative (2040) no project conditions to 12.90 with the HEU.

Since the HEU buildout year is 2031, the VMT forecasts for the cumulative (2031) no project and cumulative (2031) with HEU scenarios were extrapolated using the existing and cumulative 2040 VMT forecasts from the VTA model. As shown in Table 1, the VMT per resident under cumulative (2031) with HEU would decrease by 0.14, from 12.85 under cumulative (2031) no project conditions to 12.71 with the HEU resulting in a less-than-significant VMT impact.

Table 1
Los Altos Cumulative VMT Analysis
Scenario Residential VMT 1 Housing Units Population VMT per Resident 2 Cumulative (2031) No Project 415,472 11,847 32,322 12.85 Cumulative (2040) No Project 424,782 11,905 32,478 13.08 Cumulative (2031) Plus HEU 467,012 13,495 36,756 12.71
Cumulative (2040) Plus HEU 476,322 13,553 36,912 12.90
1 Residential VMT = Daily Home-Based Vehicle Trips * Travel Distance 2 VMT per Resident = Residential VMT / Population
637
Agenda Item # 3.

Los Altos Housing Element Update VMT Analysis November 11, 2022 P a g e | 5
Figure 1
Los Altos HEU Sites and VMT Heat Map
638
Agenda Item # 3.

Los Altos Housing Element Update VMT Analysis November 11, 2022 P a g e | 6

APPENDIX A
VMT Screening Reports
639
Agenda Item # 3.

Santa Clara Countywide VMT Evaluation Tool - Version 2 - Report Project Details
Timestamp of
Analysis
November 16, 2022, 12:37:14
PM
Project Name Los Altos HEU
Project Description Housing in Yellow Area
Project Location Map
Jurisdiction:

Los Altos

APN TAZ
18956014 214
Analysis Details
Data Version VTA Countywide Model December
2019
Analysis
Methodology
Parcel Buffer Method
Baseline Year 2015
Project Land Use
Residential:

Single Family DU:

Multifamily DU: 82
Total DUs: 82
Non-Residential:

Office KSF:

Local Serving Retail KSF:

Industrial KSF:

Residential Affordability (percent of all
units):

Extremely Low Income: 0 %
Very Low Income: 0 %
Low Income: 25 %
Parking:

Motor Vehicle Parking:

Bicycle Parking:

Proximity to Transit Screening
Inside a transit priority area? No (Fail)
640
Agenda Item # 3.

Santa Clara Countywide VMT Evaluation Tool - Version 2 - Report Residential Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Results Land Use Type 1: Residential
VMT Metric 1: Home-based VMT per Capita
VMT Baseline Description 1: Bay Area Regional Average
VMT Baseline Value 1: 13.95
VMT Threshold Description 1 / Threshold Value 1: -15% / 11.86 Land Use 1 has been Pre-Screened by the Local Jurisdiction: N/A Without Project With Project & Tier 1-3
VMT Reductions
With Project & All VMT
Reductions
Project Generated Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) Rate

12.44 11.45 11.45
Low VMT Screening
Analysis
No (Fail) Yes (Pass) Yes (Pass)
641
Agenda Item # 3.

Santa Clara Countywide VMT Evaluation Tool - Version 2 - Report Tier 1 Project Characteristics
PC01 Increase Residential Density
Existing Residential Density: 2.87
With Project Residential Density: 3.13
PC02 Increase Residential Diversity
Existing Residential Diversity Index: 0.67
With Project Residential Diversity Index: 0.65
PC03 Affordable Housing
Low Income: 25 %
PC04 Increase Employment Density
Existing Employment Density: 28.03
With Project Employment Density: 28.03
Tier 2 Multimodal Infrastructure
MI01 Increase Bike Access
Distance to Nearest Existing Bike Facility: ft
MI02 Improve Connectivity
MI03 Increase Transit Accessibility
MI04 Traffic Calming
Traffic Calming Added Beyond
Development Frontage:

Yes
MI05 Pedestrian Networks
Pedestrian Improvements Beyond
Development Frontage:

Yes
Tier 3 Parking
PK01 Limit Parking Supply
Minimum Parking Required by City Code: 82
Is the Surrounding Street Parking
Restricted?:

PK02 Provide Bike Facilities
Project End-of-trip Bike Facilities: Yes
642
Agenda Item # 3.

Santa Clara Countywide VMT Evaluation Tool - Version 2 - Report Project Details
Timestamp of
Analysis
November 16, 2022, 12:52:57
PM
Project Name Los Altos HEU
Project Description Housing in Orange Area
Project Location Map
Jurisdiction:

Los Altos

APN TAZ
32601053 204
Analysis Details
Data Version VTA Countywide Model December
2019
Analysis
Methodology
Parcel Buffer Method
Baseline Year 2015
Project Land Use
Residential:

Single Family DU:

Multifamily DU: 80
Total DUs: 80
Non-Residential:

Office KSF:

Local Serving Retail KSF:

Industrial KSF:

Residential Affordability (percent of all
units):

Extremely Low Income: 0 %
Very Low Income: 0 %
Low Income: 50 %
Parking:

Motor Vehicle Parking:

Bicycle Parking:

Proximity to Transit Screening
Inside a transit priority area? No (Fail)
643
Agenda Item # 3.

14.99 13.45 11.69
Low VMT Screening
Analysis
No (Fail) No (Fail) Yes (Pass)
644
Agenda Item # 3.

Santa Clara Countywide VMT Evaluation Tool - Version 2 - Report Tier 1 Project Characteristics
PC01 Increase Residential Density
Existing Residential Density: 4.56
With Project Residential Density: 4.83
PC02 Increase Residential Diversity
Existing Residential Diversity Index: 0.36
With Project Residential Diversity Index: 0.34
PC03 Affordable Housing
Low Income: 50 %
PC04 Increase Employment Density
Existing Employment Density: 31.95
With Project Employment Density: 31.95
Tier 2 Multimodal Infrastructure
MI01 Increase Bike Access
Distance to Nearest Existing Bike Facility
With Project:
50 ft
MI04 Traffic Calming
Traffic Calming Added Beyond
Development Frontage:

Yes
MI05 Pedestrian Networks
Pedestrian Improvements Beyond
Development Frontage:

Yes
Tier 3 Parking
PK01 Limit Parking Supply
Minimum Parking Required by City Code: 80
Is the Surrounding Street Parking
Restricted?:

PK02 Provide Bike Facilities
Project End-of-trip Bike Facilities: Yes 645
Agenda Item # 3.

Santa Clara Countywide VMT Evaluation Tool - Version 2 - Report Tier 4 TDM Programs
TP01 School Pool Programs
School Pool Program Percent of Expected
Participant Households:
100 %
TP03 Car Share Programs
Car Share Program Percent of Eligible
Residents/Employees:
100 %
TP07 Subsidized Transit Program
Percent of Transit Subsidy: 100 %
TP12 Neighborhood Schools
Type of School Served By the Project: Neighborhood
School
Families With School-Aged Children
in the Project:
20 Families
TP13 Ride-Sharing Programs
Expected Percent of Ride-Sharing
Participants:
10 %
TP16 Unbundle Parking Costs from Property
Cost (On Site Parking)
Is the Surrounding Street Parking
Restricted?:

Monthly Parking Cost: 100
$USD
TP18 Voluntary Travel Behavior Change
Program
Percent of Behavior Program Participants : 100 %
646
Agenda Item # 3.

Appendix B
Age-Eligible Housing Inventory Sites
647
Agenda Item # 3.

Age-Eligible Housing Inventory Sites
B-1
Table B-1 Age-Eligible Housing Inventory Sites
Address APN
Date Of
Construction 5
th Cycle Site
B Street 18915088 1900 No
El Camino Real 17003084 Circa 1968 Yes
N San Antonio Road
(Near 1067)
17001035 Circa 1968 No
1000 Fremont Avenue 31801036 1960 No
1005 Acacia Avenue 17001045 1940 Yes
1031 N San Antonio Road 17001032 1946 No
1188 Los Altos Avenue 16710094 1956 No
1276 Montclaire Wy 34209045 1900 No
133 Main Street 16738013 1955 No
139 1street Street 16739043 1949 No
141 Main Street 16738012 1952 No
145 1street Street 16739041 1950 No
146 Main Street 16738020 Circa 1948 No
147 Main Street 16738011 1954 No
151 1street Street 16739040 1974 No
151 Main Street 16738010 1954 No
1530 Miramonte Avenue 18915042 1947 No
1534 Carob Lane 18915038 1950 No
1564 Miramonte Avenue 18915090 1954 No
160 Main Street 16738021 1955 No
168 Main Street 16738024 1957 No
169 Main Street 16738008 1952 No
179 Main Street 16738052 1952 No
189 Main Street 16738053 1960 No
195 S San Antonio Road 17041068 1977 No
2050 Longden Cl 34210088 1900 No
2057 Grant Road 31816020 1959 No
2073 Grant Road 31816015 1959 No
2100 Woods Lane 34204089 1971 No
22310 Homestead Road 32601053 1973 No
2235 Grant Road 31816011 1961 No
22350 Homestead Road 32601052 1969 No
2249 Grant Road 31816009 1962 No
2251 Grant Road 31816008 1975 No
241 S San Antonio Road 17041065 1953 No
648
Agenda Item # 3.

Age-Eligible Housing Inventory Sites
B-2
Address APN
Date Of
Construction 5
th Cycle Site
242 State Street 16739011 1960 No
244 State Street 16739012 1920 No
248 Main Street 16739074 1948 No
252 Main Street 16739075 1951 No
252 State Street 16739097 1939 No
262 Main Street 16739076 1950 No
275 3road Street 16738065 1977 No
285 State Street 16739064 1953 No
289 S San Antonio Road 17041086 1977 No
290 Main Street 16739105 1940 No
301 2nd Street 16740056 1963 No
301 S San Antonio Road 17040072 1972 No
309 1street Street 16740052 1924 No
317 1street Street 16740051 1962 No
32 Loucks Avenue 16716018 1900 Yes
325 1street Street 16740050 1954 No
330 2nd Street 16741046 1964 No
334 Main Street 16739084 1959 No
342 1street Street 16741003 1966 No
346 Main Street 16739085 1910 No
351 Main Street 16740004 1925 No
355 State Street 16739060 1962 No
357 Main Street 16740003 1936 No
366 1street Street 16741051 1955 No
369 S San Antonio Road 17040062 1973 No
380 Main Street 16739089 1950 No
392 1stStreet 16741007 1958 No
395 1st Street 16741022 1954 No
399 1st street 16741021 1951 No
399 S San Antonio Road 17040082 Circa 1956 No
416 2nd Street 16741072 1950 No
435 1street Street 16741018 1946 No
4500 El Camino Real 16712045 1976 No
4500 El Camino Real 16712045 1976 No
4546 El Camino Real 16712042 1964 Yes
4546 X El Camino Real 16712047 1964 Yes
649
Agenda Item # 3.

Age-Eligible Housing Inventory Sites
B-3
Address APN
Date Of
Construction 5
th Cycle Site
4546 X El Camino Real 16712047 1964 Yes
4598 El Camino Real 17001036 1960 No
4646 El Camino Real 17001088 1958 No
475 S San Antonio Road 17039053 1973 No
4926 El Camino Real 17003073 1968 No
495 S San Antonio Road 17039058 1970 No
5000 El Camino Real 17004050 1974 Yes
5084 El Camino Real 17004065 1950 No
60 Main Street 16738057 1963 No
600 Foothill Ex 18956014 1900 No
625 Magdalena Avenue 33609018 Circa 1968 No
655 Magdalena Avenue 33609023 Circa 1960 No
718 Ronald Ct 18919003 Circa 1956 No
730 Altos Oaks Dr 18916003 1958 No
731 Altos Oaks Dr 18916018 1957 No
745 Distel Dr 17004045 1963 No
746 Altos Oaks Dr 18916004 1959 No
747 Altos Oaks Dr 18916017 1960 No
762 Altos Oaks Dr 18916005 1959 No
763 Altos Oaks Dr 18916016 1962 No
775 Edge Lane 18918102 1938 No
778 Altos Oaks Dr 18916006 1957 No
795 Altos Oaks Dr 18916014 1960 No
802 Altos Oaks Dr 18916008 1958 No
811 Altos Oaks Dr 18916013 1961 No
826 Altos Oaks Dr 18916009 1958 No
827 Altos Oaks Dr 18916012 1960 No
842 Altos Oaks Dr 18916010 1957 No
851 Fremont Avenue 18914081 1970 No
895 Sherwood Avenue 17001055 1973 No
900 N San Antonio Road 16716022 1900 No
901 Fremont Avenue 18915106 1961 No
905 N San Antonio Road 17001023 1955 No
915 N San Antonio Road 17001025 1930 No
925 N San Antonio Road 17001026 1961 No
942 Acacia Avenue 17001051 1950 Yes
650
Agenda Item # 3.

Age-Eligible Housing Inventory Sites
B-4
Address APN
Date Of
Construction 5
th Cycle Site
948 Dolores Avenue 18915103 1950 No
949 Fremont Avenue 18915063 1953 No
952 Acacia Avenue 17001049 1947 Yes
971 N San Antonio Road 17001027 1953 No
979 Fremont Avenue 18915059 1956 No
981 Fremont Avenue 18915102 1945 No
982 Dolores Avenue 18915041 1950 No
987 Acacia Avenue 17001043 1945 Yes
988 Sherwood Avenue 17001042 1900 Yes
991 N San Antonio Road 17001029 1942 No
994 Acacia Avenue 17001047 1924 Yes
994 Sherwood Avenue 17001086 1900 Yes
Table B- 2 Housing Inventory Sites that Will Become Age-Eligible Address APN
Date Of
Construction 5
th Cycle Site
101 1st Street 16739127 1980 No
701 Catalina Way 17012042 Circa 1980 No
4844 El Camino Real 17002023 Circa 1980 Yes
4906 El Camino Real 17003077 1984 No
4970 El Camino Real 17064120 1985 No
4988 El Camino Real 17064119 1981 No
4988 El Camino Real 17064119 1981 No
129 Fremont Avenue 17038062 1978 Yes
40 Hawthorne Avenue 17041014 1978 No
170 Main Street 16738025 Circa 1980 No
161 S San Antonio Road 17042028 1979 No
211 S San Antonio Road 17041079 Circa 1980 No
651
Agenda Item # 3.

Appendix C
Greenhouse Gas Modeling Results
652
Agenda Item # 3.

Los Altos HE - GHG
Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - IS-MND envisions growth of 156 single family units, 1,027 low rise units, and 465 mid rise units. Population adjusted to match Pop and Housing estimate of 4,581 new residents.

Construction Phase - Operational model, no construction Off-road Equipment - Operational model, no construction Vehicle Trips - Default trip generation rates used
Woodstoves - BAAQMD Regulation 6 Rule 3, no woodburning devices. All-electric appliances pursuant to City's Reach Code.

Area Coating - BAAQMD Regulation 8 Rule 3, Nonflat coating Energy Use - City's all-electric ordinance pursuant to Reach Code Water And Wastewater - Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant 100% aerobic

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Single Family Housing 156.00 Dwelling Unit 50.65 280,800.00 446 Apartments Low Rise 1,027.00 Dwelling Unit 64.19 1,027,000.00 2805 Apartments Mid Rise 465.00 Dwelling Unit 12.24 465,000.00 1330

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 64

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Silicon Valley Clean Energy
Operational Year 2031
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
2 CH4 Intensity 0
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0
(lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 653
Agenda Item # 3.

Area Mitigation -
Energy Mitigation - Pursuant to Section 150.1(c)(14) of the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, low-rise residential up to 3 stories must install PV systems. Percentage is proportional to types of units.

Water Mitigation - Pursuant to CALGreen 20% indoor water use reduction Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 150 100
tblAreaCoating Area_EF_Residential_Exterior 150 100
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExteriorV alue
100 150
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintResidentialExteriorValu e
100 150
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 220.00 1.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 9/15/2038 11/12/2037
tblEnergyUse NT24E 3,172.76 4,097.39
tblEnergyUse NT24E 3,054.10 3,978.73
tblEnergyUse NT24E 6,155.97 7,080.60
tblEnergyUse NT24NG 3,155.00 0.00
tblEnergyUse NT24NG 3,155.00 0.00
tblEnergyUse NT24NG 3,155.00 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24E 77.89 2,045.21
tblEnergyUse T24E 70.89 1,602.67
tblEnergyUse T24E 68.41 6,948.12
tblEnergyUse T24NG 6,712.79 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24NG 5,226.68 0.00
tblEnergyUse T24NG 23,474.54 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceDayYear 11.14 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceDayYear 11.14 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceDayYear 11.14 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceHourDay 3.50 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceHourDay 3.50 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 654
Agenda Item # 3.
tblFireplaces FireplaceHourDay 3.50 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 228.80 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 228.80 0.00
tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 228.80 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberGas 154.05 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberGas 69.75 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberGas 39.00 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace 41.08 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace 18.60 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace 12.48 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 174.59 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 79.05 0.00
tblFireplaces NumberWood 67.08 0.00
tblLandUse Population 2,937.00 2,805.00
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00
tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 100.00
tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPercent 2.21 0.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPercent 2.21 0.00 tblWater AnaerobicandFacultativeLagoonsPercent 2.21 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 20.54 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 9.30 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 6.24 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 20.54 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 9.30 0.00
tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 6.24 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 655
Agenda Item # 3.

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 14.12 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 14.12 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 21.06 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 582.40 0.00
tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 956.80 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 656
Agenda Item # 3.

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2037 0.0000 0.6997 0.6997 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.7036
Maximum 0.0000 0.6997 0.6997 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.7036 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2037 0.0000 0.6997 0.6997 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.7036
Maximum 0.0000 0.6997 0.6997 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.7036 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 657
Agenda Item # 3.

Highest

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.0000 19.9883 19.9883 0.0190 0.0000 20.4644
Energy 0.0000 11.3582 11.3582 0.0000 0.0000 11.3582
Mobile 0.0000 7,369.877
4 7,369.877
4 0.4412 0.3366 7,481.216
3 Waste 177.3410 0.0000 177.3410 10.4806 0.0000 439.3549 Water 37.9890 0.7420 38.7310 0.1308 0.0826 66.6188
Total 215.3301 7,401.965
8 7,617.295
9 11.0716 0.4192 8,019.012
6 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 658
Agenda Item # 3.

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 11/12/2037 11/12/2037 5 1 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.10 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 659
Agenda Item # 3.

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Architectural Coating 1 226.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Residential Indoor: 3,589,920; Residential Outdoor: 1,196,640; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 660
Agenda Item # 3.

3.2 Architectural Coating - 2037
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.5720 0.5720 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.5758 Total 0.0000 0.5720 0.5720 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.5758 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.1277 0.1277 0.0000 0.0000 0.1278
Total 0.0000 0.1277 0.1277 0.0000 0.0000 0.1278
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 661
Agenda Item # 3.

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 662
Agenda Item # 3.

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 7,369.877
4 7,369.877
4 0.4412 0.3366 7,481.216
3 Unmitigated 0.0000 7,369.877
4 7,369.877
4 0.4412 0.3366 7,481.216
3 4.2 Trip Summary Information

4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Low Rise 7,517.64 8,359.78 6449.56 17,288,249 17,288,249 Apartments Mid Rise 2,529.60 2,283.15 1901.85 5,553,946 5,553,946 Single Family Housing 1,472.64 1,488.24 1333.80 3,360,558 3,360,558 Total 11,519.88 12,131.17 9,685.21 26,202,752 26,202,752 Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Apartments Low Rise 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3 Apartments Mid Rise 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3 Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Apartments Low Rise 0.555274 0.059572 0.187289 0.120548 0.022031 0.005855 0.011319 0.007376 0.000945 0.000497 0.025792 0.000881 0.002622 Apartments Mid Rise 0.555274 0.059572 0.187289 0.120548 0.022031 0.005855 0.011319 0.007376 0.000945 0.000497 0.025792 0.000881 0.002622 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 663
Agenda Item # 3.

Single Family Housing 0.555274 0.059572 0.187289 0.120548 0.022031 0.005855 0.011319 0.007376 0.000945 0.000497 0.025792 0.000881 0.002622

5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated

0.0000 3.1803 3.1803 0.0000 0.0000 3.1803
Electricity
Unmitigated

0.0000 11.3582 11.3582 0.0000 0.0000 11.3582
NaturalGas
Mitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Percent of Electricity Use Generated with Renewable Energy Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 664
Agenda Item # 3.

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Apartments Mid
Rise
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 665
Agenda Item # 3.

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Apartments Mid
Rise
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Single Family
Housing
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 666
Agenda Item # 3.

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise

7.14069e
+006

6.4779 0.0000 0.0000 6.4779
Apartments Mid
Rise

2.94012e
+006

2.6672 0.0000 0.0000 2.6672
Single Family
Housing

2.43946e
+006

2.2130 0.0000 0.0000 2.2130
Total 11.3582 0.0000 0.0000 11.3582
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 667
Agenda Item # 3.

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

6.0 Area Detail

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise

1.99939e
+006

1.8138 0.0000 0.0000 1.8138
Apartments Mid
Rise
823234 0.7468 0.0000 0.0000 0.7468
Single Family
Housing
683049 0.6197 0.0000 0.0000 0.6197
Total 3.1803 0.0000 0.0000 3.1803
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 668
Agenda Item # 3.

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 19.9883 19.9883 0.0190 0.0000 20.4644
Unmitigated 0.0000 19.9883 19.9883 0.0190 0.0000 20.4644

6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0000 19.9883 19.9883 0.0190 0.0000 20.4644 Total 0.0000 19.9883 19.9883 0.0190 0.0000 20.4644
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 669
Agenda Item # 3.

Apply Water Conservation Strategy

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

7.0 Water Detail

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0000 19.9883 19.9883 0.0190 0.0000 20.4644 Total 0.0000 19.9883 19.9883 0.0190 0.0000 20.4644
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 670
Agenda Item # 3.

Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 38.6881 0.1308 0.0826 66.5758
Unmitigated 38.7310 0.1308 0.0826 66.6188

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise

66.9132 /

42.1844

24.1364 0.0815 0.0515 41.5155
Apartments Mid
Rise

30.2966 /

19.1 10.9284 0.0369 0.0233 18.7972
Single Family
Housing

10.164 /

6.40776

3.6663 0.0124 7.8200e0036.3062
Total 38.7310 0.1308 0.0826 66.6188
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 671
Agenda Item # 3.

7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise

66.9132 /

33.7475

24.1096 0.0815 0.0515 41.4887
Apartments Mid
Rise

30.2966 /

15.28 10.9162 0.0369 0.0233 18.7850
Single Family
Housing

10.164 /

5.12621

3.6622 0.0124 7.8200e0036.3021
Total 38.6881 0.1308 0.0826 66.5758
Mitigated

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 672
Agenda Item # 3.

Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 177.3410 10.4806 0.0000 439.3549
Unmitigated 177.3410 10.4806 0.0000 439.3549
Category/Year

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Apartments Low
Rise
472.42 95.8970 5.6674 0.0000 237.5807
Apartments Mid
Rise
213.9 43.4198 2.5660 0.0000 107.5706
Single Family
Housing
187.32 38.0243 2.2472 0.0000 94.2035
Total 177.3410 10.4806 0.0000 439.3549
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 673
Agenda Item # 3.

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 674
Agenda Item # 3.

11.0 Vegetation
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 23 Date: 9/22/2022 4:40 PM Los Altos HE - GHG - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 675
Agenda Item # 3.

Appendix D
Construction Noise Modeling Results
676
Agenda Item # 3.

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date:9/30/2022
Case Description: San Leandro HE
---- Receptor #1 ----
Baselines (dBA)
DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night
50 Feet from Construction Residential 65 60 55
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Excavator No 40 80.7 50 0
Dozer No 40 81.7 50 0
Jackhammer Yes 20 88.9 50 0
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Excavator 80.7 76.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 81.7 77.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Jackhammer 88.9 81.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 88.9 84.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
677
Agenda Item # 3.

Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date:9/30/2022
Case Description: Los Altos Housing Element with Pile Driver ---- Receptor #1 ----
Baselines (dBA)
DescriptionLand Use Daytime Evening Night
50 Feet from Construction Residential 65 60 55
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Excavator No 40 80.7 50 0
Dozer No 40 81.7 50 0
Jackhammer Yes 20 88.9 50 0
Impact Pile Driver Yes 20 101.3 50 0
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Excavator 80.7 76.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 81.7 77.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Jackhammer 88.9 81.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Impact Pile Driver 101.3 94.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 101.3 94.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
678
Agenda Item # 3.

Appendix E
AB 52 Correspondence
679
Agenda Item # 3.

D
2QH1RUWK6DQQWRQLR5RDG
/RVOWRVDOLIRUQLD
0DUFK
PDK0WVQ7ULEDODQG
9DOHQWLQ/RSH]KDLUSHUVRQ
32R[
DOW
9LD(PDLOYORSH]DPDKPWVQRUJ
5( VVHPEOLOODQG6HQDWHLOORQVOWDWLRQ/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW
8SGDWH LWRI/RVOWRV6DQWDODUDRQWDOLIRUQLD
HDU KDLUSHUVRQ/RSH]
7KH LWRI/RVOWRVLVSUHSDULQJDQ(,5 IRUWKHSURSRVHG/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW8SGDWH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRQVLVWVRIDQSGDWHRIWKHLWRI/RVOWRVHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ (OHPHQWIRUWKHWK FOHSODQQLQJSHULRGZKLFKLQFOGHVQHFHVVDUUH]RQHVDQG SGDWHVWRRWKHUHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWV6SHFLILFDOOWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQW6LWHVVHVVPHQWZLOO

LGHQWLIVLWHVWKDWFDQDFFRPPRGDWHGHQVLWUHTLUHPHQWVDQGDGGLWLRQDOQLWVDQGDVQHFHVVDU SURSHUWLHVZLOOEHUH]RQHG7KHKRVLQJVLWHVLQYHQWRUDQGVSHFLILFODQGVHFKDQJHVWKDWZROG

RFFUQGHUWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQWSGDWHKDYHQRWHWEHHQGHYHORSHGDQGZLOOEHDYDLODEOHSRQ UHTHVWDIWHUFRPSOHWLRQ7KHSURMHFWDOVRLQFOGHVDQQHFHVVDUDPHQGPHQWVWRWKHHQHUDO 3ODQWRPDLQWDLQFRQVLVWHQFHDPRQJHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWVDQGZLWKWKHPQLFLSDOFRGH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWPVWFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH VVHPEOLOO@RIZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIO FRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYHPHULFDQWULEHVWKDWKDYHUHTHVWHGWREHQRWLILHGEOHDG

DJHQFLHVRISURSRVHGSURMHFWVLQWKHJHRJUDSKLFDUHDZLWKZKLFKWKHWULEHLVWUDGLWLRQDOODQG

FOWUDOODIILOLDWHG
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOGHV DQSGDWHWRWKHHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ(OHPHQW DQGWKHUHIRUH PVWDOVRFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHV RGH 6HQDWHLOO
ZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIOFRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYH PHULFDQWULEHVRQWKHFRQWDFWOLVWPDLQWDLQHGEWKH1DWLYHPHULFDQHULWDJHRPPLVVLRQ

SULRUWRWKHDGRSWLRQRUDPHQGPHQWRIDFLWRUFRQWJHQHUDOSODQIRUWKHSUSRVHRISURWHFWLQJ

FOWUDOSODFHVRQODQGVDIIHFWHGEWKHSURSRVDO
RUWULEHV LQSWLVLPSRUWDQWWRWKHLWRI/RVOWRV SODQQLQJSURFHVV:HUHTHVWWKDWR DGYLVHVDVHDUODVSRVVLEOHLIRZLVK WRFRQVOWRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW8QGHUR KDYHGDVDQGQGHUWKHSURYLVLRQVRI6KDYH GDVIURPWKHGDWHRIUHFHLSWRIWKLV

QRWLFHWRDGYLVHWKH LW LIRDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQIUWKHUFRQVOWDWLRQ,IRUHTLUHDQ 680
Agenda Item # 3.

DGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQRUKDYHDQTHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDW RUYLDHPDLO DWOVLPSVRQORVDOWRVFDJRY7KDQNRIRURUDVVLVWDQFH
6LQFHUHO
/DUD6LPSVRQ
,QWHULP3ODQQLQJLUHFWRU

LWRI/RVOWRV
(QFORVHG
0DSRI/RVOWRV
681
Agenda Item # 3.

D
2QH1RUWK6DQQWRQLR5RDG
/RVOWRVDOLIRUQLD
0DUFK
PDK0WVQ7ULEDODQGRI0LVVLRQ6DQ-DQDWLVWD
,UHQHZLHUOHLQKDLUSHUVRQ
6RGDD5RDG
/DNHSRUW
9LD(PDLODPDKPWVQWULEDOJPDLOFRP
5( VVHPEOLOODQG6HQDWHLOORQVOWDWLRQ/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW
8SGDWHLWRI/RVOWRV6DQWDODUDRQWDOLIRUQLD

HDUKDLUSHUVRQZLHUOHLQ
7KHLWRI/RVOWRVLVSUHSDULQJDQ(,5IRUWKHSURSRVHG/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW8SGDWH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRQVLVWVRIDQSGDWHRIWKHLWRI/RVOWRVHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ (OHPHQWIRUWKHWK FOHSODQQLQJSHULRGZKLFKLQFOGHVQHFHVVDUUH]RQHVDQG SGDWHVWRRWKHUHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWV6SHFLILFDOOWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQW6LWHVVHVVPHQWZLOO

LGHQWLIVLWHVWKDWFDQDFFRPPRGDWHGHQVLWUHTLUHPHQWVDQGDGGLWLRQDOQLWVDQGDVQHFHVVDU SURSHUWLHVZLOOEHUH]RQHG7KHKRVLQJVLWHVLQYHQWRUDQGVSHFLILFODQGVHFKDQJHVWKDWZROG

RFFUQGHUWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQWSGDWHKDYHQRWHWEHHQGHYHORSHGDQGZLOOEH DYDLODEOHSRQ UHTHVWDIWHUFRPSOHWLRQ7KHSURMHFWDOVRLQFOGHVDQQHFHVVDUDPHQGPHQWVWRWKHHQHUDO 3ODQWRPDLQWDLQFRQVLVWHQFHDPRQJHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWVDQGZLWKWKHPQLFLSDOFRGH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWPVWFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH VVHPEOLOO@RIZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIO FRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYHPHULFDQWULEHVWKDWKDYHUHTHVWHGWREHQRWLILHGEOHDG

DJHQFLHVRISURSRVHGSURMHFWVLQWKHJHRJUDSKLFDUHDZLWKZKLFKWKHWULEHLVWUDGLWLRQDOODQG

FOWUDOODIILOLDWHG
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOGHVDQSGDWHWRWKHHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ(OHPHQWDQGWKHUHIRUH PVWDOVRFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH 6HQDWHLOO
ZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIOFRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYH PHULFDQWULEHVRQWKHFRQWDFWOLVWPDLQWDLQHGEWKH1DWLYHPHULFDQHULWDJHRPPLVVLRQ

SULRUWRWKHDGRSWLRQRUDPHQGPHQWRIDFLWRUFRQWJHQHUDOSODQIRUWKHSUSRVHRISURWHFWLQJ

FOWUDOSODFHVRQODQGVDIIHFWHGEWKHSURSRVDO
RUWULEHVLQSWLVLPSRUWDQWWRWKHLWRI/RVOWRVSODQQLQJSURFHVV:HUHTHVWWKDWR DGYLVHVDVHDUODVSRVVLEOHLIRZLVKWRFRQVOWRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW8QGHUR KDYHGDVDQGQGHUWKHSURYLVLRQVRI6KDYHGDVIURPWKHGDWHRIUHFHLSWRIWKLV

QRWLFHWRDGYLVHWKHLWLIRDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQIUWKHUFRQVOWDWLRQ,IRUHTLUHDQ 682
Agenda Item # 3.

DGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQRUKDYHDQTHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDWRUYLDHPDLO DWOVLPSVRQORVDOWRVFDJRY7KDQNRIRURUDVVLVWDQFH
6LQFHUHO
/DUD6LPSVRQ
,QWHULP3ODQQLQJLUHFWRU

LWRI/RVOWRV
(QFORVHG
0DSRI/RVOWRV
683
Agenda Item # 3.

D
2QH1RUWK6DQQWRQLR5RDG
/RVOWRVDOLIRUQLD
0DUFK
,QGLDQDQRQ0WVQ DQGRIRVWDQRDQ
QQ0DULH6DHUVKDLUSHUVRQ
32R[

ROOLVWHU
9LD(PDLODPVLQGLDQFDQRQVRUJ
5( VVHPEOLOODQG6HQDWHLOORQVOWDWLRQ/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW
8SGDWHLWRI/RVOWRV6DQWDODUDRQWDOLIRUQLD
HDUKDLUSHUVRQ6DHUV
7KHLWRI/RVOWRVLVSUHSDULQJDQ(,5IRUWKHSURSRVHG/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW8SGDWH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRQVLVWVRIDQSGDWHRIWKHLWRI/RVOWRVHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ (OHPHQWIRUWKHWK FOHSODQQLQJSHULRGZKLFKLQFOGHVQHFHVVDUUH]RQHVDQG SGDWHVWRRWKHUHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWV6SHFLILFDOOWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQW6LWHVVHVVPHQWZLOO

LGHQWLIVLWHVWKDWFDQDFFRPPRGDWHGHQVLWUHTLUHPHQWVDQGDGGLWLRQDOQLWVDQGDVQHFHVVDU SURSHUWLHVZLOOEHUH]RQHG7KHKRVLQJVLWHVLQYHQWRUDQGVSHFLILFODQGVHFKDQJHVWKDWZROG

DJHQFLHVRISURSRVHGSURMHFWVLQWKHJHRJUDSKLFDUHDZLWKZKLFKWKHWULEHLVWUDGLWLRQDOODQG

FOWUDOODIILOLDWHG
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOGHVDQSGDWHWRWKHHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ(OHPHQWDQGWKHUHIRUH PVWDOVRFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH 6HQDWHLOO
ZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIOFRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYH PHULFDQWULEHVRQWKHFRQWDFWOLVWPDLQWDLQHGEWKH1DWLYHPHULFDQHULWDJHRPPLVVLRQ

SULRUWRWKHDGRSWLRQRUDPHQGPHQWRIDFLWRUFRQWJHQHUDOSODQIRUWKHSUSRVHRISURWHFWLQJ

FOWUDOSODFHVRQODQGVDIIHFWHGEWKH SURSRVDO
RUWULEHVLQSWLVLPSRUWDQWWRWKHLWRI/RVOWRVSODQQLQJSURFHVV:HUHTHVWWKDWR DGYLVHVDVHDUODVSRVVLEOHLIRZLVKWRFRQVOWRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW8QGHUR KDYHGDVDQGQGHUWKHSURYLVLRQVRI6KDYHGDVIURPWKHGDWHRIUHFHLSWRIWKLV

QRWLFHWRDGYLVHWKHLWLIRDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQIUWKHUFRQVOWDWLRQ,IRUHTLUHDQ 684
Agenda Item # 3.

DGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQRUKDYHDQTHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDWRUYLDHPDLO DWOVLPSVRQORVDOWRVFDJRY7KDQNRIRURUDVVLVWDQFH
6LQFHUHO
/DUD6LPSVRQ
,QWHULP3ODQQLQJLUHFWRU

LWRI/RVOWRV
(QFORVHG
0DSRI/RVOWRV
685
Agenda Item # 3.

D
2QH1RUWK6DQQWRQLR5RDG
/RVOWRVDOLIRUQLD
0DUFK
0ZHNPD2KORQH,QGLDQ7ULEHRIWKH6)DUHD
KDUOHQH1LMPHKKDLUSHUVRQ
5HGZRRG5RDG6LWH
DVWUR9DOOH
9LD(PDLOFQLMPHKPZHNPDRUJ
5( VVHPEOLOODQG6HQDWHLOORQVOWDWLRQ/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW
8SGDWHLWRI/RVOWRV6DQWDODUDRQWDOLIRUQLD
HDUKDLUSHUVRQ1LMPHK
7KHLWRI/RVOWRVLVSUHSDULQJDQ(,5IRUWKHSURSRVHG/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW8SGDWH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRQVLVWVRIDQSGDWHRIWKHLWRI/RVOWRVHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ (OHPHQWIRUWKHWK FOHSODQQLQJSHULRGZKLFKLQFOGHVQHFHVVDUUH]RQHVDQG SGDWHVWRRWKHUHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWV6SHFLILFDOOWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQW6LWHVVHVVPHQWZLOO

LGHQWLIVLWHVWKDWFDQDFFRPPRGDWHGHQVLWUHTLUHPHQWVDQGDGGLWLRQDOQLWVDQGDVQHFHVVDU SURSHUWLHVZLOOEHUH]RQHG7KHKRVLQJVLWHVLQYHQWRUDQGVSHFLILFODQGVHFKDQJHVWKDWZROG

DJHQFLHVRISURSRVHGSURMHFWVLQWKHJHRJUDSKLFDUHDZLWKZKLFKWKHWULEHLVWUDGLWLRQDOODQG

FOWUDOODIILOLDWHG
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOGHVDQSGDWHWRWKHHQHUDO 3ODQRVLQJ(OHPHQWDQGWKHUHIRUH PVWDOVRFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH 6HQDWHLOO
ZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIOFRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYH PHULFDQWULEHVRQWKHFRQWDFWOLVWPDLQWDLQHGEWKH1DWLYHPHULFDQHULWDJHRPPLVVLRQ

SULRUWRWKHDGRSWLRQRUDPHQGPHQWRIDFLWRUFRQWJHQHUDOSODQIRUWKHSUSRVHRISURWHFWLQJ

FOWUDOSODFHVRQODQGVDIIHFWHGEWKHSURSRVDO
RUWULEHVLQSWLVLPSRUWDQWWRWKHLWRI/RV OWRVSODQQLQJSURFHVV:HUHTHVWWKDWR DGYLVHVDVHDUODVSRVVLEOHLIRZLVKWRFRQVOWRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW8QGHUR KDYHGDVDQGQGHUWKHSURYLVLRQVRI6KDYHGDVIURPWKHGDWHRIUHFHLSWRIWKLV

QRWLFHWRDGYLVHWKHLWLIRDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQIUWKHUFRQVOWDWLRQ,IRUHTLUHDQ 686
Agenda Item # 3.

DGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQRUKDYHDQTHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDWRUYLDHPDLO DWOVLPSVRQORVDOWRVFDJRY7KDQNRIRURUDVVLVWDQFH
6LQFHUHO
/DUD6LPSVRQ
,QWHULP3ODQQLQJLUHFWRU

LWRI/RVOWRV
(QFORVHG
0DSRI/RVOWRV
687
Agenda Item # 3.

D
2QH1RUWK6DQQWRQLR5RDG
/RVOWRVDOLIRUQLD
0DUFK
1RUWK9DOOHRNWV7ULEH
.DWKHULQH(UROLQGD3HUH]KDLUSHUVRQ
32R[
/LQGHQ
9LD(PDLOFDQWHVYHUL]RQQHW
5( VVHPEOLOODQG6HQDWHLOORQVOWDWLRQ/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW
8SGDWHLWRI/RVOWRV6DQWDODUDRQWDOLIRUQLD
HDUKDLUSHUVRQ3HUH]
7KHLWRI/RVOWRVLVSUHSDULQJDQ(,5IRUWKHSURSRVHG/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW8SGDWH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRQVLVWVRIDQSGDWHRIWKHLWRI/RVOWRVHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ (OHPHQWIRUWKHWK FOHSODQQLQJSHULRGZKLFKLQFOGHVQHFHVVDUUH]RQHVDQG SGDWHVWRRWKHUHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWV6SHFLILFDOOWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQW6LWHVVHVVPHQWZLOO

LGHQWLIVLWHVWKDWFDQDFFRPPRGDWHGHQVLWUHTLUHPHQWVDQGDGGLWLRQDOQLWVDQGDVQHFHVVDU SURSHUWLHVZLOOEHUH]RQHG7KHKRVLQJVLWHVLQYHQWRUDQGVSHFLILFODQGVHFKDQJHVWKDWZROG

DJHQFLHVRISURSRVHGSURMHFWVLQWKHJHRJUDSKLFDUHDZLWKZKLFKWKHWULEHLVWUDGLWLRQDOODQG

FOWUDOODIILOLDWHG
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOGHVDQSGDWHWRWKHHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ(OHPHQWDQGWKHUHIRUH PVWDOVRFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH 6HQDWHLOO
ZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIOFRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYH PHULFDQWULEHVRQWKHFRQWDFWOLVWPDLQWDLQHGEWKH1DWLYHPHULFDQHULWDJHRPPLVVLRQ

SULRUWRWKHDGRSWLRQRUDPHQGPHQWRIDFLWRUFRQWJHQHUDOSODQIRUWKHSUSRVHRISURWHFWLQJ

FOWUDOSODFHVRQODQGVDIIHFWHGEWKHSURSRVDO
RUWULEHV LQSWLVLPSRUWDQWWRWKHLWRI/RVOWRVSODQQLQJSURFHVV:HUHTHVWWKDWR DGYLVHVDVHDUODVSRVVLEOHLIRZLVKWRFRQVOWRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW8QGHUR KDYHGDVDQGQGHUWKHSURYLVLRQVRI6KDYHGDVIURPWKHGDWHRI UHFHLSWRIWKLV

QRWLFHWRDGYLVHWKHLWLIRDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQIUWKHUFRQVOWDWLRQ,IRUHTLUHDQ 688
Agenda Item # 3.

DGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQRUKDYHDQTHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDWRUYLDHPDLO DWOVLPSVRQORVDOWRVFDJRY7KDQNRIRURUDVVLVWDQFH
6LQFHUHO
/DUD6LPSVRQ
,QWHULP3ODQQLQJLUHFWRU

LWRI/RVOWRV
(QFORVHG
0DSRI/RVOWRV
689
Agenda Item # 3.

D
2QH1RUWK6DQQWRQLR5RDG
/RVOWRVDOLIRUQLD
0DUFK
5PVHQPD7UDWDM2KORQH
HHHH0DQ]DQDUHVEDUUDKDLUSHUVRQ
)DUPLQJWRQ6WUHHW

HUSHULD
9LD(PDLOUPVHQDPDJPDLOFRP
5( VVHPEOLOODQG6HQDWHLOORQVOWDWLRQ/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW
8SGDWHLWRI/RVOWRV6DQWDODUDRQWDOLIRUQLD

HDUKDLUSHUVRQEDUUD
7KHLWRI/RVOWRVLVSUHSDULQJDQ(,5IRUWKHSURSRVHG/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW8SGDWH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRQVLVWVRIDQSGDWHRIWKHLWRI/RVOWRVHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ (OHPHQWIRUWKHWK FOHSODQQLQJSHULRGZKLFKLQFOGHVQHFHVVDUUH]RQHVDQG SGDWHVWRRWKHUHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWV6SHFLILFDOOWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQW6LWHVVHVVPHQWZLOO

LGHQWLIVLWHVWKDWFDQDFFRPPRGDWHGHQVLWUHTLUHPHQWVDQGDGGLWLRQDOQLWVDQGDVQHFHVVDU SURSHUWLHVZLOOEHUH]RQHG7KHKRVLQJVLWHVLQYHQWRUDQGVSHFLILFODQGVHFKDQJHVWKDWZROG

DJHQFLHVRISURSRVHGSURMHFWVLQWKHJHRJUDSKLFDUHDZLWKZKLFKWKHWULEHLVWUDGLWLRQDOODQG

FOWUDOODIILOLDWHG
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOGHVDQSGDWHWRWKHHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ(OHPHQWDQGWKHUHIRUH PVWDOVRFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH 6HQDWHLOO
ZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIOFRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYH PHULFDQWULEHVRQWKHFRQWDFWOLVWPDLQWDLQHGEWKH1DWLYHPHULFDQHULWDJHRPPLVVLRQ

SULRUWRWKHDGRSWLRQRUDPHQGPHQWRIDFLWRUFRQWJHQHUDOSODQIRUWKHSUSRVHRISURWHFWLQJ

FOWUDOSODFHVRQODQGVDIIHFWHGEWKHSURSRVDO
RUWULEHVLQSWLVLPSRUWDQWWRWKHLWRI/RVOWRVSODQQLQJSURFHVV:HUHTHVWWKDWR DGYLVHVDVHDUODVSRVVLEOHLIRZLVKWRFRQVOWRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW8QGHUR KDYHGDVDQGQGHUWKHSURYLVLRQVRI6KDYHGDVIURPWKHGDWHRIUHFHLSWRIWKLV

QRWLFHWRDGYLVHWKHLWLIRDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQIUWKHUFRQVOWDWLRQ,IRUHTLUHDQ 690
Agenda Item # 3.

DGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQRUKDYHDQTHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDWRUYLDHPDLO DWOVLPSVRQORVDOWRVFDJRY7KDQNRIRURUDVVLVWDQFH
6LQFHUHO
/DUD6LPSVRQ
,QWHULP3ODQQLQJLUHFWRU

LWRI/RVOWRV
(QFORVHG
0DSRI/RVOWRV
691
Agenda Item # 3.

D
2QH1RUWK6DQQWRQLR5RDG
/RVOWRVDOLIRUQLD
0DUFK
7DPLHQ1DWLRQ
4LULQD/QDHDUKDLUSHUVRQ
32R[
6DQ-RVH
9LD(PDLOTJHDUWDPLHQRUJ
5( VVHPEOLOODQG6HQDWHLOORQVOWDWLRQ/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW
8SGDWHLWRI/RVOWRV6DQWDODUDRQWDOLIRUQLD

HDUKDLUSHUVRQHDU
7KHLWRI/RVOWRVLVSUHSDULQJDQ(,5IRUWKHSURSRVHG/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW8SGDWH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRQVLVWVRIDQSGDWHRIWKHLWRI/RVOWRVHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ (OHPHQWIRUWKHWK FOHSODQQLQJSHULRGZKLFKLQFOGHVQHFHVVDUUH]RQHVDQG SGDWHVWRRWKHUHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWV6SHFLILFDOOWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQW6LWHVVHVVPHQWZLOO

LGHQWLIVLWHVWKDWFDQDFFRPPRGDWHGHQVLWUHTLUHPHQWVDQGDGGLWLRQDOQLWVDQGDVQHFHVVDU SURSHUWLHVZLOOEHUH]RQHG7KHKRVLQJVLWHVLQYHQWRUDQGVSHFLILFODQGVHFKDQJHVWKDWZROG

RFFUQGHUWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQWSGDWHKDYHQRWHWEHHQGHYHORSHGDQGZLOOEHDYDLODEOHSRQ UHTHVWDIWHUFRPSOHWLRQ7KHSURMHFWDOVRLQFOGHVDQQHFHVVDUDPHQGPHQWVWRWKHHQHUDO 3ODQWRPDLQWDLQFRQVLVWHQFHDPRQJHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWVDQGZLWKWKHPQLFLSDOFRGH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWPVWFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHV RGH VVHPEOLOO@RIZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIO FRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYHPHULFDQWULEHVWKDWKDYHUHTHVWHGWREHQRWLILHGEOHDG

DJHQFLHVRISURSRVHGSURMHFWVLQWKHJHRJUDSKLFDUHDZLWKZKLFKWKHWULEHLVWUDGLWLRQDOODQG

FOWUDOODIILOLDWHG
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOGHVDQSGDWHWRWKHHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ(OHPHQWDQGWKHUHIRUH PVWDOVRFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH 6HQDWHLOO
ZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIOFRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYH PHULFDQWULEHVRQWKHFRQWDFWOLVWPDLQWDLQHGEWKH1DWLYHPHULFDQHULWDJHRPPLVVLRQ

SULRUWRWKHDGRSWLRQRUDPHQGPHQWRIDFLWRUFRQWJHQHUDOSODQIRUWKHSUSRVH RISURWHFWLQJ

FOWUDOSODFHVRQODQGVDIIHFWHGEWKHSURSRVDO
RUWULEHVLQSWLVLPSRUWDQWWRWKHLWRI/RVOWRVSODQQLQJSURFHVV:HUHTHVWWKDWR DGYLVHVDVHDUODVSRVVLEOHLIRZLVKWRFRQVOWRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW8QGHUR KDYHGDVDQGQGHUWKHSURYLVLRQVRI6KDYHGDVIURPWKHGDWHRIUHFHLSWRIWKLV

QRWLFHWRDGYLVHWKHLWLIRDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQIUWKHUFRQVOWDWLRQ,IRUHTLUHDQ 692
Agenda Item # 3.

DGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQRUKDYHDQTHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDWRUYLDHPDLO DWOVLPSVRQORVDOWRVFDJRY7KDQNRIRURUDVVLVWDQFH
6LQFHUHO
/DUD6LPSVRQ
,QWHULP3ODQQLQJLUHFWRU

LWRI/RVOWRV
(QFORVHG
0DSRI/RVOWRV
693
Agenda Item # 3.

D
2QH1RUWK6DQQWRQLR5RDG
/RVOWRVDOLIRUQLD
0DUFK
7KHRQIHGHUDWHG9LOODJHVRI/LVMDQ

RUULQDROGKDLUSHUVRQ
(GHVYHQH
2DNODQG
9LD(PDLOFYOWULEHJPDLOFRP
5( VVHPEOLOODQG6HQDWHLOORQVOWDWLRQ/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW
8SGDWHLWRI/RVOWRV6DQWDODUDRQWDOLIRUQLD

HDUKDLUSHUVRQROG
7KHLWRI/RVOWRVLVSUHSDULQJDQ(,5IRUWKHSURSRVHG/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW8SGDWH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRQVLVWVRIDQSGDWHRIWKHLWRI/RVOWRVHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ (OHPHQWIRUWKHWK FOHSODQQLQJSHULRGZKLFKLQFOGHVQHFHVVDUUH]RQHVDQG SGDWHVWRRWKHUHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWV6SHFLILFDOOWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQW6LWHVVHVVPHQWZLOO

LGHQWLIVLWHVWKDWFDQDFFRPPRGDWHGHQVLWUHTLUHPHQWVDQGDGGLWLRQDOQLWVDQGDVQHFHVVDU SURSHUWLHVZLOOEHUH]RQHG7KHKRVLQJVLWHVLQYHQWRUDQGVSHFLILFODQGVHFKDQJHVWKDWZROG

DJHQFLHVRISURSRVHGSURMHFWVLQWKHJHRJUDSKLFDUHDZLWKZKLFKWKHWULEHLVWUDGLWLRQDOODQG

FOWUDOODIILOLDWHG
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOGHVDQSGDWHWRWKHHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ(OHPHQWDQGWKHUHIRUH PVWDOVRFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH 6HQDWHLOO
ZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIOFRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYH PHULFDQWULEHVRQWKHFRQWDFWOLVWPDLQWDLQHGEWKH1DWLYHPHULFDQHULWDJHRPPLVVLRQ

SULRUWRWKHDGRSWLRQRUDPHQGPHQWRIDFLWRUFRQWJHQHUDOSODQIRUWKHSUSRVHRISURWHFWLQJ

FOWUDOSODFHVRQODQGVDIIHFWHGEWKHSURSRVDO
RUWULEHV LQSWLVLPSRUWDQWWRWKHLWRI/RVOWRVSODQQLQJSURFHVV:HUHTHVWWKDWR DGYLVHVDVHDUODVSRVVLEOHLIRZLVKWRFRQVOWRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW8QGHUR KDYHGDVDQGQGHUWKHSURYLVLRQVRI6KDYHGDVIURPWKHGDWHRI UHFHLSWRIWKLV

QRWLFHWRDGYLVHWKHLWLIRDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQIUWKHUFRQVOWDWLRQ,IRUHTLUHDQ 694
Agenda Item # 3.

DGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQRUKDYHDQTHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDWRUYLDHPDLO DWOVLPSVRQORVDOWRVFDJRY7KDQNRIRURUDVVLVWDQFH
6LQFHUHO
/DUD6LPSVRQ
,QWHULP3ODQQLQJLUHFWRU

LWRI/RVOWRV
(QFORVHG
0DSRI/RVOWRV
695
Agenda Item # 3.

D
2QH1RUWK6DQQWRQLR5RDG
/RVOWRVDOLIRUQLD
0DUFK
7KH 2KORQH,QGLDQ7ULEH

QGUHZDOYDQ
32R[
)UHPRQW
9LD(PDLOFKRFKHQRDROFRP
5( VVHPEOLOODQG6HQDWHLOORQVOWDWLRQ/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW
8SGDWHLWRI/RVOWRV6DQWDODUDRQWDOLIRUQLD
HDU0UDOYDQ
7KHLWRI/RVOWRVLVSUHSDULQJDQ(,5IRUWKHSURSRVHG/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW8SGDWH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRQVLVWVRIDQSGDWHRIWKHLWRI/RVOWRVHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ (OHPHQWIRUWKHWK FOHSODQQLQJSHULRGZKLFKLQFOGHVQHFHVVDUUH]RQHVDQG SGDWHVWRRWKHUHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWV6SHFLILFDOOWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQW6LWHVVHVVPHQWZLOO

LGHQWLIVLWHVWKDWFDQDFFRPPRGDWHGHQVLWUHTLUHPHQWVDQGDGGLWLRQDOQLWVDQGDVQHFHVVDU SURSHUWLHVZLOOEHUH]RQHG7KHKRVLQJVLWHVLQYHQWRUDQGVSHFLILFODQGVHFKDQJHVWKDWZROG

DJHQFLHVRISURSRVHGSURMHFWVLQWKHJHRJUDSKLFDUHDZLWKZKLFKWKHWULEHLVWUDGLWLRQDOODQG

FOWUDOODIILOLDWHG
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOGHVDQSGDWHWRWKHHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ(OHPHQWDQGWKHUHIRUH PVWDOVRFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH 6HQDWHLOO
ZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIOFRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYH PHULFDQWULEHVRQWKHFRQWDFWOLVWPDLQWDLQHGEWKH1DWLYHPHULFDQHULWDJHRPPLVVLRQ

SULRUWRWKHDGRSWLRQRUDPHQGPHQWRIDFLWRUFRQWJHQHUDOSODQIRUWKHSUSRVHRISURWHFWLQJ

FOWUDOSODFHVRQODQGVDIIHFWHGEWKHSURSRVDO
RUWULEHVLQSWLVLPSRUWDQWWRWKHLWRI/RVOWRVSODQQLQJSURFHVV:HUHTHVWWKDWR DGYLVHVDVHDUODVSRVVLEOHLI RZLVKWRFRQVOWRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW8QGHUR KDYHGDVDQGQGHUWKHSURYLVLRQVRI6KDYHGDVIURPWKHGDWHRIUHFHLSWRIWKLV

QRWLFHWRDGYLVHWKHLWLIRDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQIUWKHUFRQVOWDWLRQ,IRUHTLUHDQ 696
Agenda Item # 3.

DGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQRUKDYHDQTHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDWRUYLDHPDLO DWOVLPSVRQORVDOWRVFDJRY7KDQNRIRURUDVVLVWDQFH
6LQFHUHO
/DUD6LPSVRQ
,QWHULP3ODQQLQJLUHFWRU

LWRI/RVOWRV
(QFORVHG
0DSRI/RVOWRV
697
Agenda Item # 3.

D
2QH1RUWK6DQQWRQLR5RDG
/RVOWRVDOLIRUQLD
0DUFK
:NVDFKH,QGLDQ7ULEH(VKRP9DOOHDQG
.HQQHWK:RRGURZKDLUSHUVRQ
5RFNDYHQW
6DOLQDV
9LD(PDLONZRRGDROFRP
5( VVHPEOLOODQG6HQDWHLOORQVOWDWLRQ/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW
8SGDWHLWRI/RVOWRV6DQWDODUDRQWDOLIRUQLD
HDUKDLUSHUVRQ:RRGURZ
7KHLWRI/RVOWRVLVSUHSDULQJDQ(,5IRUWKHSURSRVHG/RVOWRVRVLQJ(OHPHQW8SGDWH 7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWFRQVLVWVRIDQSGDWHRIWKHLWRI/RVOWRVHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ (OHPHQWIRUWKHWK FOHSODQQLQJSHULRGZKLFKLQFOGHVQHFHVVDUUH]RQHVDQG SGDWHVWRRWKHUHQHUDO3ODQHOHPHQWV6SHFLILFDOOWKHRVLQJ(OHPHQW6LWHVVHVVPHQWZLOO

LGHQWLIVLWHVWKDWFDQDFFRPPRGDWHGHQVLWUHTLUHPHQWVDQGDGGLWLRQDOQLWVDQGDVQHFHVVDU SURSHUWLHVZLOOEHUH]RQHG7KHKRVLQJVLWHVLQYHQWRUDQGVSHFLILFODQGVHFKDQJHVWKDWZROG

DJHQFLHVRISURSRVHGSURMHFWVLQWKHJHRJUDSKLFDUHDZLWKZKLFKWKHWULEHLVWUDGLWLRQDOODQG

FOWUDOODIILOLDWHG
7KHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOGHVDQSGDWHWRWKHHQHUDO3ODQRVLQJ(OHPHQWDQGWKHUHIRUH PVWDOVRFRPSOZLWKDOLIRUQLD3EOLF5HVRUFHVRGH 6HQDWHLOO
ZKLFKUHTLUHVORFDOJRYHUQPHQWVWRFRQGFWPHDQLQJIOFRQVOWDWLRQZLWKDOLIRUQLD1DWLYH PHULFDQWULEHVRQWKHFRQWDFWOLVWPDLQWDLQHGEWKH1DWLYHPHULFDQHULWDJHRPPLVVLRQ

SULRUWRWKHDGRSWLRQRUDPHQGPHQWRIDFLWRUFRQWJHQHUDOSODQIRUWKHSUSRVHRISURWHFWLQJ

FOWUDOSODFHVRQODQGVDIIHFWHGEWKHSURSRVDO
RUWULEHVLQSWLVLPSRUWDQWWRWKHLWRI/RVOWRVSODQQLQJSURFHVV:HUHTHVWWKDWR DGYLVHVDVHDUODVSRVVLEOHLIRZLVKWRFRQVOWRQWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFW8QGHUR KDYHGDVDQGQGHUWKHSURYLVLRQVRI6KDYHGDVIURPWKHGDWHRIUHFHLSWRIWKLV

QRWLFHWRDGYLVHWKHLWLIRDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQIUWKHUFRQVOWDWLRQ,IRUHTLUHDQ 698
Agenda Item # 3.

DGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQRUKDYHDQTHVWLRQVSOHDVHFRQWDFWPHDWRUYLDHPDLO DWOVLPSVRQORVDOWRVFDJRY7KDQNRIRURUDVVLVWDQFH
6LQFHUHO
/DUD6LPSVRQ
,QWHULP3ODQQLQJLUHFWRU

LWRI/RVOWRV
(QFORVHG
0DSRI/RVOWRV
699
Agenda Item # 3.

NativeAmericanTribesLettersforSB18AB52
CombinedLetterforLosAltosHousingElement
FinalAuditReport 2022-03-09
Created: 2022-03-09
By: YvonneDupont([email protected])
Status: Signed
TransactionID: CBJCHBCAABAAhWeuAXt0P4cmVXILiOLYn90kSuq67vjM "NativeAmericanTribesLettersforSB18AB52CombinedLett
erforLosAltosHousingElement"History
DocumentcreatedbyYvonneDupont([email protected])
2022-03-09-9:43:09PMGMT-IPaddress:207.140.44.2
DocumentemailedtoLauraSimpson([email protected])forsignature 2022-03-09-9:45:24PMGMT
EmailviewedbyLauraSimpson([email protected])
2022-03-09-9:52:10PMGMT-IPaddress:207.140.44.2
Documente-signedbyLauraSimpson([email protected]) SignatureDate:2022-03-09-9:53:39PMGMT-TimeSource:server-IPaddress:207.140.44.2 Agreementcompleted.
2022-03-09-9:53:39PMGMT
700
Agenda Item # 3.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
November 10, 2022
Nick Zornes, Director
Development Services
City of Los Altos
1 North San Antonio Rd
Los Altos, CA 94022
Dear Nick Zornes:

RE: City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of Los Altos’ (City) draft housing element received for review on August 12, 2022. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (b), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. Our review was facilitated by a conversation on October 26, 2022 with yourself, and consultants Jennifer Murillo, Stefano Richichi, David Bergman, and Erik Ramakrishnan. HCD also considered public comments from Anne Paulson pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c).

The draft element addresses many statutory requirements; however, revisions will be necessary to comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code).

The enclosed Appendix describes the revisions needed to comply with State Housing Element Law.

For your information, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021), if a local government fails to adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline (January 31, 2023), then any rezoning to make prior identified sites available or accommodate the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA), including for lower-income households, shall be completed no later than one year from the statutory deadline. Otherwise, the local government’s housing element will no longer comply with State Housing Element Law, and HCD may revoke its finding of substantial compliance pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i). Please be aware, if the City fails to adopt a compliant housing element within one year from the statutory deadline, the element cannot be found in substantial compliance until rezones to accommodate a shortfall of sites pursuant to Government Code section 65583, subdivision (c) (1) (A) and Government Code section 65583.2, subdivision (c) are completed.
701
Agenda Item # 3.

Nick Zornes, Director

Page 2 ends

Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element process, the City should continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available and considering and incorporating comments where appropriate. Please be aware, any revisions to the element must be posted on the local government’s website and to email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting to HCD.

Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant; the Strategic Growth Council and HCD’s Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs; and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the City meets housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.

For your information, some general plan element updates are triggered by housing element adoption. HCD reminds the City to consider timing provisions and welcomes the opportunity to provide assistance. For information, please see the Technical Advisories issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research at:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html.

HCD appreciates the cooperation the housing element team provided during the review.

We are committed to assist the City in addressing all statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Anthony Errichetto, of our staff, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Paul McDougall
Senior Program Manager
Enclosure
702
Agenda Item # 3.

Review of the City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 1 November 10, 2022

APPENDIX

CITY OF LOS ALTOS
The following changes are necessary to bring the City’s housing element into compliance with Article 10.6 of the Government Code. Accompanying each recommended change, we cite the supporting section of the Government Code.

Housing element technical assistance information is available on HCD’s website at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/hcd-memos. Among other resources, the housing element section contains HCD’s latest technical assistance tool, Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements (Building Blocks), available at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/building-blocks and includes the Government Code addressing State Housing Element Law and other resources.

A. Review and Revision
the previous element to evaluate the appropriateness, effectiveness, and Review progress in implementation, and reflect the results of this review in the revised element. (Gov. Code, § 65588 (a) and (b).)
As part of the review of programs in the past cycle, the element must provide an evaluation of the effectiveness of goals, policies, and related actions in meeting the housing needs of special needs populations (e.g., elderly, persons with disabilities, large households, female headed households, farmworkers, and persons experiencing homelessness).

B. Housing Needs, Resources, and Constraints

1. Affirmatively further[ing] fair housing in accordance with Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 8899.50) of Division 1 of Title 2…shall include an assessment of fair housing in the jurisdiction. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A).) Outreach and Enforcement: The element generally satisfies this requirement; however, annual outreach should be added to the programs section.

Integration and Segregation: To assist in meeting this requirement, the element should provide local data not captured in regional, state, or federal data analysis to help describes what contributes to the higher concentration of nonwhite residents in the southern part of the City. In addition, the element generally describes local patterns and trends related to integration and segregation but must also analyze the City relative to the rest of the region regarding familial status.

Racial/Ethnic Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAA): The element briefly mentions HCD’s recent data related to RCAAs within the City, but generally should also evaluate 703
Agenda Item # 3.

Review of the City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 2 November 10, 2022
the patterns and changes over time at a local (e.g., neighborhood to neighborhood) and regional level (e.g., city to region).

Disparities in Access to Opportunity: The element provides information on the access to opportunity through the TCAC opportunity maps but must also provide a complete local and regional analysis of patterns and trends for all components of the assessment of fair housing. A comprehensive analysis should include the local and regional disparities of the educational, environmental, and economic scores through local, federal, and/or state data. It should also analyze persons with disabilities as well as access to transit.

Please refer to page 35 of the AFFH guidebook (https://www.hcd.ca.gov/communitydevelopment/affh/index.shtml#guidance) for specific factors that should be considered when analyzing access to opportunities as it pertains to educational, employment, environmental, transportation, and any factors that are unique to the City. Specifically, the element should analyze what contributes to the City’s low economic resource score, what contributes to the one area with a higher educational score, include local information to describe what contributes to environmental conditions, and describe the quality of transit access within the City and regionally.

Disproportionate Housing Needs: The element includes some local and county data on cost burdened households (overpayment) and substandard housing. However, the element must relate the concentration of cost burden to other factors and discuss what contributes to the differences within the City and regionally. The element should also discuss whether there are any concentrations of substandard housing within the City and relate those conditions to the region. As well, the discussion regarding displacement should address risk and disproportionate impacts on protected characteristics due to natural disaster.

Identified Sites and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH): While the element includes some AFFH requirements it generally does not address this requirement. The analysis must identify whether sites improve or exacerbate conditions and whether sites are isolated by income group. A full analysis should address the income categories of identified sites with respect to location, the number of sites and units by all income groups and how that affects the existing patterns for all components of the assessment of fair housing (e.g., segregation and integration, access to opportunity). The element should also discuss whether the distribution of sites improves or exacerbates conditions. If sites exacerbate conditions, the element should identify further program actions that will be taken to promote equitable quality of life throughout the community (e.g., anti-displacement and place-based community revitalization strategies).

2. Include an analysis and documentation of household characteristics, including level of payment compared to ability to pay, housing characteristics, including overcrowding, and housing stock condition. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(2).) Overpayment: While the element identifies the total number of households overpaying for housing, it must quantify and analyze the number of lower-income households 704
Agenda Item # 3.

Review of the City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 3 November 10, 2022
overpaying for housing by tenure (i.e., renter and owner) and add or modify policies and programs as appropriate.

Housing Costs: While the element includes information on sales prices, rental information from the American Community Survey does not fully reflect market conditions and the element should include additional data sources.

3. An inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for a designated income level, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(3).)
Progress in Meeting the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA): The element relies on pipeline projects to meet its RHNA, specifically, the element has identified 587 units that are either pending, approved, or under construction. First, to count these units as progress towards RHNA, the element must demonstrate these units are expected to be constructed during the planning period. To demonstrate the availability of units within the planning period, the element could analyze infrastructure schedules, City’s past completion rates on pipeline projects, outreach with project developers, and should describe any expiration dates on entitlements, anticipated timelines for final approvals, and any remaining steps for projects to receive final entitlements. Additionally, given the element’s reliance on pipeline projects, the element should include programs that commit to facilitating development and monitoring approvals of the projects (e.g., coordination with applicants to approve remaining entitlements, supporting funding applications, expediating approvals, rezoning or identification of additional sites should the applications not be approved).

Realistic Capacity: While the element provides assumptions of buildout for sites included in the inventory, it must also provide support for these assumptions. The element should provide additional examples of typical densities of existing or approved projects at similar income levels. Table B-5 on pages B-8 and B-9 should be related to the sites inventory and include affordability levels for the projects listed. In addition, the element appears to assume residential development on sites with zoning that allow 100 percent nonresidential uses. While the element mentions strong market demand for residential uses within nonresidential zones, it must still account for the likelihood of nonresidential uses. For example, the element could analyze all development activity in these nonresidential zones, how often residential development occurs and adjust residential capacity calculations, policies, and programs accordingly. For additional information, see the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/communitydevelopment/building-blocks/site-inventory-analysis/analysis-of-sites-andzoning.shtml#zoning.

Suitability of Nonvacant Sites: The element must include an analysis demonstrating the potential for redevelopment of nonvacant sites. To address this requirement, the element generally describes the existing use of nonvacant sites. This alone is not 705
Agenda Item # 3.

Review of the City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 4 November 10, 2022
adequate to demonstrate the potential for redevelopment in the planning period. The description of existing uses should be sufficiently detailed to facilitate an analysis demonstrating the potential for additional development in the planning period for each specific parcel. In addition, the element must analyze the extent that existing uses may impede additional residential development, including analysis of existing leases or contracts that would perpetuate the existing use or prevent additional residential development and include current information on development trends and market conditions in the City and relate those trends to the sites identified. Finally, the analysis should address public comment related to the identified sites and potential for redevelopment and add or remove sites as appropriate.

In addition, if the housing element relies upon nonvacant sites to accommodate more than 50 percent of the RHNA for lower-income households, the housing element must demonstrate that the existing use is not an impediment to additional residential development in the planning period (Gov. Code, § 65583.2, subd. (g)(2).). This can be demonstrated by providing substantial evidence that the existing use is likely to be discontinued during the planning period. Absent findings (e.g., adoption resolution) based on substantial evidence, the existing uses will be presumed to impede additional residential development and will not be utilized toward demonstrating adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA.

Environmental Constraints: While the element generally describes a few environmental conditions within the City (p. C-38), it must describe how these conditions relate to identified sites including environmental constraints within the City that could impact housing development in the planning period such as seismic activity and wildfire threats.

The element should also discuss any other known conditions that may impede or preclude development on identified sites in the planning period (e.g., parcel shape, easements, contamination). For additional information and sample analysis, see the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/siteinventory-analysis/analysis-of-sites-and-zoning.shtml#environmental.

Electronic Sites Inventory: For your information, pursuant to Government Code section 65583.3, the City must submit an electronic sites inventory with its adopted housing element. The City must utilize standards, forms, and definitions adopted by HCD.

Please see HCD’s housing element webpage at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/communitydevelopment/housing-element/index.shtml#element for a copy of the form and instructions. The City can reach out to HCD at [email protected] for technical assistance.

Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types:
• Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): The element indicates the City modifies its zoning code to ease barriers to the development of ADU’s. However, after a cursory review of the City’s ordinance, HCD discovered several areas which are not consistent with State ADU Law. HCD will provide a complete listing of ADU noncompliance issues under a separate cover. As a result, the element should 706
Agenda Item # 3.

Review of the City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 5 November 10, 2022
add a program to update the City’s ADU ordinance in order to comply with state law.
• Emergency Shelters: The element mentions emergency shelters are permitted in the PUD/C zone; however this zone is not listed in Table C-5 or Table C-6. The element should describe the development standards of the PUD/C zone or other zones that allows emergency shelters by-right (without discretionary action) and should provide an analysis of capacity, including potential for reuse and proximity to transportation and services and any conditions inappropriate for human habitability. The element should also clarify shelters are permitted without discretionary action and discuss available acreage in the overlay zone, including typical parcel sizes and the presence of reuse opportunities. In addition, the element should describe how emergency shelter parking requirements comply with AB139/Government Code section 65583, subdivision (a)(4)(A) or include a program to comply with this requirement. Lastly, the element should clarify the exact total capacity for emergency shelters. For additional information and a sample analysis, see the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/communitydevelopment/housing-element/housing-elementemos/docs/sb2_memo050708.pdf. • Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Units: The element should describe whether the City has any procedures to encourage and facilitate SRO development in the allowable zoning districts.
• Manufactured Housing: Manufactured homes that are built on a permanent foundation must be allowed in the same manner and in the same zones as conventional or stick-built structures. Specifically, manufactured homes on a permanent structure should only be subject to the same development standards that a conventional single-family residential dwelling would be subject to. The element must demonstrate consistency with this requirement or add or modify programs as appropriate.

4. An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the types of housing identified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c), and for persons with disabilities as identified in the analysis pursuant to paragraph (7), including land use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(5).)
Land Use Controls: The element must identify and analyze all relevant land use controls impacts as potential constraints on a variety of housing types. For example, the analysis must analyze maximum lot coverage, height limits, setbacks in all zones allowing residential uses, particularly higher density. The analyses should address any impacts on cost, supply, housing choice, affordability, timing, approval certainty and ability to achieve maximum densities and include programs to address identified constraints.

Minimum Unit Sizes: The element mentions minimum unit size requirements that would preclude smaller units (e.g., “affordable by design” apartments), these requirements 707
Agenda Item # 3.

Review of the City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 6 November 10, 2022
should be described and analyzed as a potential constraint, and programs should be added to address identified constraints.

Parking Requirements: The element provides a brief discussion regarding the City’s high parking requirements and provides Program 3.A (Prepare a Downtown parking plan and update parking requirements); however the program should provide a specific commitment to study and update parking requirements throughout the entire City to remove all potential constraints. In addition, Program 3.A should commit to revising parking standards for commercial and high-density residential zoning districts including, parking requirements that exceed a sliding scale for commercial and high-density residential zoning districts, covered versus underground parking requirements, and guest parking requirements.

Fees and Exactions: The element must describe all required fees for single family and multifamily housing development (i.e., zoning change, general plan change, lot splits, in lieu fees, impact fees, etc.) and analyze their impact as potential constraints on housing supply and affordability. For example, the analysis could identify the total amount of fees and their proportion to the development costs for both single family and multifamily housing. In addition, the City’s fees should be analyzed relative to other jurisdictions in the county, which currently are significantly greater than surrounding jurisdictions, and add a program to address any potential constraints. In addition, the element indicates that fees for multifamily projects are significantly greater than those for single-family projects, an uncommon observation not found in other comparable jurisdictions.

Excessive fees for multifamily projects have significant impacts on housing affordability and production. The element should include an evaluation of these fees and add programs to address the constraint as appropriate.

Zoning and Fees Transparency: The element must clarify compliance with new transparency requirements for posting all zoning, development standards and fees on the City’s website and add a program to address these requirements, if necessary.

Local Processing and Permit Procedures: While the element includes information about processing times in Table C-8, it should clarify the typical average time for single family and multifamily processing times. The element should also describe and evaluate the process for a typical development complying with zoning including approval body, number of public hearings, approval findings and any other relevant factors for impacts on housing cost, timing, feasibility and approval certainty. Lastly, the element should clearly describe whether the Planned Development process, including subsequent use permit, is required or optional to applicants. If required, the element should include specific analysis of the impacts of absence of fixed development standards on housing supply (number of units), cost, timing, feasibility, and approval certainty. 708
Agenda Item # 3.

Review of the City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 7 November 10, 2022
C. Housing Programs

1. Include a program which sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation, which may recognize that certain programs are ongoing, such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period, that the local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the Housing Element... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c).)
To have a beneficial impact and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element, programs must have specific commitments and discrete timing (e.g., at least annually, by a specific date). Programs that should be revised include:
• Program 1.B (Higher Density in CT District): The program should provide commitments to specific actions and the timeline should occur earlier in the planning period for accountability, tracking, and potential modification. • Program 1.C (Housing in OA District): The timeline for the program should occur earlier in the planning period for more significant impact. • Program 1.D (Housing on Church Lands): The timeline for the program should occur earlier in the planning period for more significant impact. • Program 1.E (Update Specific Plan): The program should provide a specific commitment to remove objective design standards (i.e., “landscape and beautification”). As well, the timeline for the program should occur earlier in the planning period for more significant impact.
• Program 1.H (City-Owned Sites): The program should commit to provide specific incentives.
• Program 1.I (Downtown Lot Consolidation Incentive): The program should provide a specific commitment to establishing lot consolidation incentives beyond evaluating.
• Program 2.A (Enhance Inclusionary Housing Requirements): The program should provide a specific commitment to modifying fees to address constraints. • Program 2.C (Affordable Housing Funding): The program should include outreach to developers to promote incentives. Also clarify whether incentives are currently in place, if not then include timelines for their implementation. • Program 3.A (Prepare a Downtown parking plan and update parking requirements): As mentioned earlier, the program should provide a specific commitment to study and update parking requirements throughout the entire City and address all constraints.
• Program 3.B (Building Heights in Mixed-Use Zones): The program should specify how many stories will be allowed. In addition, the program should be revised to address height constraints for the entire City.
• Program 3.H (Design Review Process Update): The specific commitments provided in the program are likely insignificant to reducing the design review constraint (i.e., persistence of the planning commission and city council vote during the event of an appeal which is very likely given the elements admissions 709
Agenda Item # 3.

Review of the City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 8 November 10, 2022
to “community resistance to housing (page C-38). In addition, the program should also remove other subjective design review bodies such as the third-party independent architect review. Furthermore, the program must commit to further evaluate midcycle progress and commit to making changes if necessary to address the constraint.
• Program 4.C (Low Barrier Navigation Centers): The timeline for the program should occur earlier in the planning period. because it is a carryover program from the previous planning cycle – no later than 1 year. • Program 4.D (Transitional and Supportive Housing): The program must specifically commit to comply with AB 2162. In addition, the timeline for the program should occur earlier in the planning period.
• Program 4.E (Employee/Farmworker Housing): The timeline for the program should occur earlier in the planning period because it is a carryover program from the previous planning cycle – no later than 1 year.
• Program 4.F (Reasonable Accommodations): The timeline for the program should occur earlier in the planning period because it is a carryover program from the previous planning cycle – no later than 1 year.

2. Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory completed pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) without rezoning, and to comply with the requirements of Government Code section 65584.09. Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(1).)
As noted in Finding B3, the element does not include a complete site analysis; therefore, the adequacy of sites and zoning were not established. Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the City may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types. In addition, the element should be revised, as follows:
• Prior Identified Sites: Program 1.G (Rezone Sites from Previous Housing Element) should commit to rezone sites at appropriate densities (e.g., allow at least 30 units per acre).
• Density Bonus: The element should include a program to ensure the City will update to meet State Density Bonus Law.
• SB 9: The element should include a program to implement SB9 in compliance with State law.
710
Agenda Item # 3.

Review of the City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 9 November 10, 2022

3. Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental and nongovernmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities. The program shall remove constraints to, and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(3).) As noted in Finding B4, the element requires a complete analysis of potential governmental and nongovernmental constraints. Depending upon the results of that analysis, the City may need to revise or add programs and address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints.

4. Promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other characteristics... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(5).)
As noted in Finding B1, the element must include a complete analysis of AFFH. The element must be revised to add goals and actions based on the outcomes of a complete analysis. Goals and actions must specifically respond to the analysis and to the identified and prioritized contributing factors to fair housing issues and must be significant and meaningful enough to overcome identified patterns and trends. Actions must have specific commitment, metrics, milestones, and geographic targeting as appropriate and must address housing mobility enhancement (more choices and affordability across geographies), new housing choices and affordability in higher opportunity and income areas (e.g., missing middle housing types), place-based strategies for community preservation and revitalization and displacement protection.

Housing mobility and new opportunities in higher resource areas should not be limited to the RHNA and, instead, target meaningful change in terms of fair housing issues. In addition, the element should be revised as follows:
• Program 2.D (ADU Streamlining): The program should geographically target outreach to single family households.
• Program 4.J (Alternative Transportation Incentive): The program should geographically target actions toward unsafe, lower resource, and underdeveloped infrastructure (i.e., sidewalks, protected bike lanes, etc.). • Program 6.C (Housing in Highest Resource Areas): The program should also disseminate information on the City website.
• Program 6.D (Section 8 Vouchers): The program should implement geographic targeting as well as track and modify actions as necessary to accomplish a desirable metric.
• Program 6.E (Anti-Displacement Outreach): The timeline for the program should occur earlier in the planning period for more significant impact. 711
Agenda Item # 3.

Review of the City of Los Altos’ 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 10 November 10, 2022

5. Develop a plan that incentivizes and promotes the creation of accessory dwelling units that can be offered at affordable rent.. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(7).) The element should be revised as follows:
• Program 2.D (ADU Streamlining): The program must be modified to include necessary revisions to the City’s ADU ordinance to comply with State law.

The program should also provide specific commitments to remove barriers to the review process and clarify what incentives (i.e., processing and fees) will be implemented as well as how often outreach will occur.

D. Public Participation
Local governments shall make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the Housing Element, and the element shall describe this effort. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(9).) While the element includes a general summary of the public participation process, the element should also demonstrate diligent efforts were made to involve all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, including who attended and what feedback was provided. In addition, the element should describe additional methods for public outreach efforts in the future, particularly to include lowerincome and special needs households. 712
Agenda Item # 3.

Printed on Recycled Paper

SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
December 28, 2022
Mr. Nick Zornes
City of Los Altos
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, CA 94022
[email protected]
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR CITY OF LOS ALTOS 2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE – DATED NOVEMBER 2022
(STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER: 2022110605)
Dear Mr. Zornes:

The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) received a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the City of Los Altos 2023-2031 Housing Element Update (Project). The Lead Agency is receiving this notice from DTSC because the Project includes one or more of the following: groundbreaking activities, work in close proximity to a roadway, presence of site buildings that may require demolition or modifications, importation of backfill soil, and/or work on or in close proximity to an agricultural or former agricultural site.

DTSC recommends that the following issues be evaluated in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the MND:

1. A State of California environmental regulatory agency such as DTSC, a Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), or a local agency that meets the requirements of Health and Safety Code section 101480 should provide regulatory concurrence that project sites are safe for construction and the proposed use.

2. The MND acknowledges the potential for historic or future activities on or near the project site to result in the release of hazardous wastes/substances on the project site. In instances in which releases have occurred or may occur, further studies should be carried out to delineate the nature and extent of the 713
Agenda Item # 3.

Mr. Nick Zornes
December 28, 2022

Page 2 ends

contamination, and the potential threat to public health and/or the environment should be evaluated. The MND should also identify the mechanism(s) to initiate any required investigation and/or remediation and the government agency who will be responsible for providing appropriate regulatory oversight.

3. Refiners in the United States started adding lead compounds to gasoline in the 1920s in order to boost octane levels and improve engine performance.

This practice did not officially end until 1992 when lead was banned as a fuel additive in California. Tailpipe emissions from automobiles using leaded gasoline contained lead and resulted in aerially deposited lead (ADL) being deposited in and along roadways throughout the state. ADL-contaminated soils still exist along roadsides and medians and can also be found underneath some existing road surfaces due to past construction activities. Due to the potential for ADL-contaminated soil DTSC, recommends collecting soil samples for lead analysis prior to performing any intrusive activities for the project described in the MND.

4. If buildings or other structures are to be demolished on any project sites included in the proposed project, surveys should be conducted for the presence of lead-based paints or products, mercury, asbestos containing materials, and polychlorinated biphenyl caulk. Removal, demolition and disposal of any of the above-mentioned chemicals should be conducted in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies. In addition, sampling near current and/or former buildings should be conducted in accordance with DTSC’s 2006 Interim Guidance Evaluation of School Sites with Potential Contamination from Lead Based Paint, Termiticides, and Electrical Transformers.

5. If any projects initiated as part of the proposed project require the importation of soil to backfill any excavated areas, proper sampling should be conducted to ensure that the imported soil is free of contamination. DTSC recommends the imported materials be characterized according to DTSC’s 2001 Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material.

6. If any sites included as part of the proposed project have been used for agricultural, weed abatement or related activities, proper investigation for organochlorinated pesticides should be discussed in the MND. DTSC recommends the current and former agricultural lands be evaluated in accordance with DTSC’s 2008 Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties (Third Revision).
714
Agenda Item # 3.

Mr. Nick Zornes
December 28, 2022

Page 3 ends

DTSC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the MND. Should you need any assistance with an environmental investigation, please visit DTSC’s Site Mitigation and Restoration Program page to apply for lead agency oversight. Additional information regarding voluntary agreements with DTSC can be found at DTSC’s Brownfield website.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (916) 255-3710 or via email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Gavin McCreary
Project Manager
Site Evaluation and Remediation Unit
Site Mitigation and Restoration Program
Department of Toxic Substances Control
cc: (via email)
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
State Clearinghouse
[email protected]
Mr. Dave Kereazis
Office of Planning & Environmental Analysis
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
715
Agenda Item # 3.

From: Shree Dharasker
To: Nick Zornes
Cc: Michael Martin
Subject: [External Sender]Notice of Intent to Adopt the draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Date: Thursday, December 29, 2022 6:24:02 PM
Dear Mr. Zornes,
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) has reviewed the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the City of Los Altos (City) 2023-2031 Housing Element Update, and has the following comments:

1. The Draft Housing Elements states that water supply for residential growth required by the City’s share of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment is accounted for in Cal Water’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. The Urban Water Management Plan assumes a substantial increase in water conservation to meet this goal. Valley Water encourages the City to help meet this goal by requiring all available water conservation measures in new development and redevelopment. Valley Water has been working with jurisdictions throughout the county on a Model Water Efficient New Development Ordinance that the City may consider to ensure there are sufficient water supplies into the future.

2. In addition to water conservation, another element of the county’s water supply portfolio is natural groundwater recharge, which is precipitation that infiltrates into the groundwater in the recharge areas of the basin. Within these areas, water from the surface passes through permeable sands and gravels to benefit water supply aquifers. Los Altos is in the recharge area of the Santa Clara Subbasin. Natural groundwater recharge has declined over the last 100 years as impermeable surfaces within the built environment have increase stormwater runoff and limit infiltration of precipitation. Precipitation that once supported the groundwater basin through natural recharge is now removed through stormwater infrastructure to San Francisco Bay. As noted in the Hydrology section, most new development and redevelopment is subject to stormwater quality requirements. Some of the methods used to meet these requirements work by retaining stormwater on the site for infiltration, which can support natural groundwater recharge. However, other methods focus primarily on stormwater quality and do not necessarily support recharge. To address the longterm cumulative impact to natural groundwater recharge, Los Altos should require development to include stormwater measures that retention stormwater on-site to maintain, and in where possible cases, increase natural groundwater recharge and protect groundwater quality.

3. Ensuring an adequate water supply to support existing and future development is one of the key priorities for Valley Water. To help achieve this common goal, Valley Water is available to coordinate with Los Altos regarding water conservation efforts, updated water demand management opportunities, flood protection, and understanding the impacts from anticipated growth.
716
Agenda Item # 3.

4. The City Housing Element Update lists proposed sites for redevelopment.

Development Plans should be consistent with Valley Water’s Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams. Elements to consider are setbacks for environmental purposes, including enhancements for trail purposes and for flood protection benefits Valley Water strongly advocates for maximizing vegetation area to enhance the riparian corridor by increasing setback from creek top of bank to any hardscape, roadways, or parking areas associated with the development.

5. Sites selected for redevelopment should be outside FEMA Flood Zones to provide adequate flood protection.

Please forward future environmental documents when available for public comment and review. If you have any questions or need further information, you can reach me by email at [email protected] or by phone at (408)630-3037. Please reference File # 27532 with any correspondence.

Shree Dharasker
Associate Engineer Civil
Community Projects Review Unit
(408)630-3037
717
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
The Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) identifies the applicable mitigation measures that will be implemented to reduce the impacts associated with the City of Los Altos 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Project. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a public agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program for assessing and ensuring compliance with any required mitigation measures applied to proposed development. As stated in section 21081.6(a)(1) of the Public Resources Code:
...the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment.

Section 21081.6 also provides general guidelines for implementing mitigation monitoring programs and indicates that specific reporting and/or monitoring requirements, to be enforced during project implementation, shall be defined as part of adopting a mitigated negative declaration.

To ensure that the mitigation measures are properly implemented, a monitoring program has been devised which identifies the timing and responsibility for monitoring each measure. Future project applicants will have the responsibility for implementing the measures that apply to development activity, and the various City of Los Altos departments will have the primary responsibility for monitoring and reporting the implementation of the mitigation measures.

The first column identifies mitigation measures that were identified in the IS-MND. The second column, entitled “Implementation Procedures,” identifies the procedures for implementing the mitigation measure. The third column “Monitoring and Reporting Actions,” refers to the monitoring action that must be taken to ensure the mitigation measure’s implementation. The fourth column, entitled “Monitoring Timing,” refers to when the monitoring will occur to ensure that the mitigation action is complete. The fifth column, “Responsible Agency,” refers to the agency responsible for oversight or ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented. The “Compliance Verification” column is where the Responsible Agency verifies that the measures have been implemented. 718
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
2 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
Air Quality
AQ-1: Individual Air Quality Analysis
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

For individual projects subject to CEQA that do not meet the BAAQMD construction and/or operational screening criteria under Table 6, individual air quality analysis shall be conducted to determine project significance.

Where individual projects exceed BAAQMD significance thresholds detailed under Table 7, mitigation measures shall be incorporated to reduce emissions to below thresholds. Construction mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to, incorporation of Tier 4 and/or alternative fueled equipment, use of onsite power sources instead of generators, and use of low/no-VOC content architectural coatings. Operational mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to, increased incorporation of photovoltaic systems (PV) beyond regulatory requirements, increased incorporation of EV charging stations and/or infrastructure beyond regulatory requirements, incorporation of a development-wide ride-share system, or elimination of natural gas usage within residential developments. Individual project analysis and accompanying emissionreduction measures shall be approved by the City prior to issuance of a permit to construct or permit to operate.

The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval requiring
individual air quality
analysis for projects
that do not meet
BAAQMD
construction and/or
operational
screening criteria.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
individual air
quality analysis is
completed for
projects that do
not meet BAAQMD
construction
and/or operational
screening criteria.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
AQ-2: Construction Emissions Measures
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

Project applicants shall comply with the current Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s basic control measures for reducing construction emissions of PM10 (Table 8-2, Basic Construction Mitigation Measures Recommended for All Proposed Projects, of the May 2017 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines), outlined below.

The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval requiring
the reduction of
construction
emissions.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
the project
applicant complies
with the current
Bay Area Air
Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
719
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
3 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times a day.

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour.

5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California Airborne Toxics Control Measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.

7. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacture’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper conditions prior to operation. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. BAAQMD’s number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Quality
Management
District’s basic
control measures
for reducing
construction
emissions of PM10.

AQ-3: Construction Health Risk Assessment
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

For individual projects where construction activities would last longer than two months and where construction would occur within 1,000 feet of The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval to
require Tier 4
equipment and or
Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
Tier 4 equipment
Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
720
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
4 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
sensitive receptors, Tier 4 equipment and/or alternative fuel construction equipment shall be used.
alternative fuel
equipment be used
for projects lasting
longer than two
months and where
construction would
occur within 1,000
feet of sensitive
receptors.
and or alternative
fuel equipment is
used for projects
lasting longer than
two months and
where construction
would occur within
1,000 feet of
sensitive receptors.

Biological Resources
BIO-1: Special-status Bat Species Avoidance and Minimization The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring approval:

For projects that involve demolition of uninhabited buildings or removal of mature trees large enough to contain crevices and hollows that could support bat roosting, focused surveys to determine the presence/absence of roosting bats shall be conducted prior to demolition or tree removal. If active maternity roosts are identified, a qualified biologist shall establish avoidance buffers applicable to the species, the roost location and exposure, and the proposed construction activity in the area. If active nonmaternity day or night roosts are found on the project site, measures shall be implemented to passively relocate bats from the roosts prior to the onset of construction activities. Such measures may include removal of roosting site during the time of day the roost is unoccupied or the installation of oneway doors, allowing the bats to leave the roost but not to re-enter. These measures shall be presented in a Bat Passive Relocation Plan that shall be submitted to, and approved by, CDFW.

The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval to avoid
and minimize effects
to special-status bat
species.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
focused bat
surveys are
conducted by a
qualified biologist
to determine the
presence/absence
of special status
bat species.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
BIO-2: Biological Resources Screening and Assessment
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring approval:

The city shall
establish and apply a
Verify that the
standard condition
Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
721
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
5 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
For projects on sites located on or adjacent to a creek, the project applicant shall hire a qualified biologist to perform a preliminary biological resources screening, for the City’s review and approval, to determine whether the project has the potential to impact special status biological resources, inclusive of special status plants and animals, sensitive vegetation communities, jurisdictional waters (including creeks, drainages, streams, ponds, vernal pools, riparian areas and other wetlands), critical habitat, wildlife movement area, or biological resources protected under local or regional ordinances or an existing HCP or NCCP. If it is determined that the project has no potential to impact biological resources, no further action is required.

If the project would have the potential to impact biological resources, prior to construction, a qualified biologist shall conduct a project-specific biological analysis to document the existing biological resources within a project footprint plus a minimum buffer of 50 feet around the project footprint, as is feasible, and to determine the potential impacts to those resources, as approved by the City. The project-specific biological analysis shall evaluate the potential for impacts to all biological resources including, but not limited to special status species, nesting birds, wildlife movement, sensitive plant communities, critical habitats, and other resources judged to be sensitive by local, State, and/or federal agencies. If the project would have the potential to impact these resources, recommendations developed to enhance wildlife movement (e.g., installation of wildlife friendly fencing), as applicable, to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Pending the results of the project-specific biological analysis, City review, design alterations, further technical studies (e.g., protocol surveys) and consultations with the USFWS, NMFS, CDFW, and/or other local, State, and federal agencies may be required.
standard condition
of approval to screen
for biological
resources on the
project site for
projects requiring
approval.
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
for projects on
sites located on or
adjacent to a creek,
the project
applicant has hired
a qualified biologist
to perform a
preliminary
biological
resources
screening.
. Planning
Division
BIO-3: Jurisdictional Delineation
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring approval:

The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
722
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
6 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
If potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands are identified by the project-specific analysis (as required by Mitigation Measure BIO-3), for projects on sites that are on or adjacent (within 200 feet) to a creek, a qualified biologist shall complete a jurisdictional delineation to determine the extent of the jurisdictions for CDFW, USACE, and/or RWQCB. This delineation shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements set forth by each agency. The result shall be a preliminary jurisdictional delineation report that shall be submitted to the City, USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW, as appropriate, for review and approval. Jurisdictional areas shall be avoided. If jurisdictional areas are expected to be impacted, then the RWQCB would require a Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) permit and/or Section 401 Water Quality Certification (depending upon whether the feature falls under federal jurisdiction). If CDFW asserts its jurisdictional authority, then a Streambed Alteration Agreement pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the CFGC would also be required prior to construction within the areas of CDFW jurisdiction. If the USACE asserts its authority, then a permit pursuant to CWA Section 404 would likely be required. Furthermore, a compensatory mitigation program shall be implemented in accordance with Mitigation Measure BIO-4 and the measures set forth by the aforementioned regulatory agencies during the permitting process.

Compensatory mitigations for all permanent impacts to waters of the U.S. and waters of the state shall be completed at a ratio as required in applicable permits but shall not be less than a minimum ratio of 1:1. All temporary impacts to waters of the U.S. and waters of the State shall be fully restored to natural condition. The project applicant shall submit the report documenting restoration activities and monitoring to the City for review and approval.
of approval requiring
a qualified biologist
to complete a
jurisdictional
delineation for
projects which have
potentially
jurisdictional waters
and/or wetlands or a
creek on site.
established and
applied; verify that
a qualified biologist
completes a
jurisdictional
delineation if
necessary.

Planning
Division
BIO-4: General Avoidance and Minimization
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring approval:

Potential jurisdictional features on sites identified in jurisdictional delineation reports shall be avoided. Projects that may impact jurisdictional features shall include a report detailing how all identified jurisdictional The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval requiring
the avoidance of
Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
723
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
7 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
features will be avoided, including groundwater draw down. The project applicant shall submit this report to the City for review and approval prior to construction.
• Material/spoils generated from project activities shall be located away from jurisdictional areas or special-status habitat and protected from storm water run-off using temporary perimeter sediment barriers such as berms, silt fences, fiber rolls (non- monofilament), covers, sand/gravel bags, and straw bale barriers, as appropriate. • Materials shall be stored on impervious surfaces or plastic ground covers to prevent any spills or leakage from contaminating the ground and generally at least 50 feet from the top of bank.

Any spillage of material will be stopped if it can be done safely. The contaminated area will be cleaned, and any contaminated materials properly disposed. For all spills, the project foreman or designated environmental representative will be notified.
potential
jurisdictional
features identified in
jurisdictional
delineation reports.
that jurisdictional
features are
avoided on site.

BIO-5: Preconstruction Surveys for Nesting Birds
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

For projects that would involve native or naturalized vegetation or tree removal, a general pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 14 days prior to the initiation of construction activities. If construction is stopped for more than 14 days during the nesting season, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted prior to the restart of construction activities. Surveys shall include the disturbance area plus a 50-foot buffer for passerine species, and a 500-foot buffer for raptors.

If active nests are located, an appropriate avoidance buffer shall be established within which no work activity would be allowed that would impact these nests. The avoidance buffer shall be established by the qualified biologist on a case-by-case basis based on the species and site conditions. Larger buffers may be required depending upon the status of The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval to avoid
and minimize
impacts to nesting
birds that may be on
the project site
through surveying by
a qualified biologist
and the
establishment of an
avoidance buffer if
active nests are
found.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
a bird survey is
conducted by a
qualified biologist
on the project site.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
724
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
8 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
the nest and the construction activities occurring in the vicinity of the nest.

The buffer area(s) shall be closed to all construction personnel and equipment until juveniles have fledged and/or the nest is inactive. A qualified biologist shall confirm that breeding/nesting is complete, and the nest is no longer active prior to removal of the buffer. If work within a buffer area cannot be avoided, then a qualified biologist shall be present to monitor all project activities that occur within the buffer. The biological monitor shall evaluate the nesting avian species for signs of disturbance and shall have the ability to stop work.

Cultural Resources
CUL-1: Archaeological Resources Assessment
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

Prior to approval of any individual development projects under the 2023- 2031 Housing Element that will involve ground disturbance activities that may include, but are not limited to, grading and excavation, an archaeological resources assessment shall be performed under the supervision of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in either prehistoric or historic archaeology. Assessments shall include a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) and a Sacred Lands File Search maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The records searches shall characterize the results of previous cultural resource surveys and disclose any cultural resources that have been recorded and/or evaluated in and around the project site. A Phase I pedestrian survey shall be undertaken in proposed project sites that are undeveloped to identify the presence or absence of any surface cultural materials. By performing a records search, a Sacred Lands File search, and a Phase I survey, a qualified archaeologist will classify the project site as having high, medium, or low sensitivity for archaeological resources.

The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval requiring
an archeological
resources
assessment be
conducted on the
proposed project
site.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
an archaeological
assessment of the
proposed project
site is conducted.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
725
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
9 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
If the Phase I archaeological survey identifies resources that may be affected by the project, the archaeological resources assessment shall also include Phase II testing and evaluation. If resources are determined significant or unique through Phase II testing and site avoidance is not possible, appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be identified in the Phase II evaluation. These measures may include, but would not be limited to, a Phase III Data Recovery Program, avoidance, or other appropriate actions to be determined by a qualified archaeologist. If significant archaeological resources cannot be avoided, impacts may be reduced to less than significant by adding fill soils on top of the resources rather than cutting into the cultural deposits. Alternatively, and/or in addition, a data collection program may be warranted, including mapping the location of artifacts, surface collection of artifacts, or excavation of the cultural deposit to characterize the nature of the buried portions of sites.

Curation of the excavated artifacts or samples would occur as specified by the archaeologist in consultation with the City of Los Altos and with other relevant parties.

CUL-2: Unanticipated Discoveries of Archaeological Resources The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

In the event that archaeological resources are unexpectedly encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the 2023-2031 Housing Element, work within 50 feet of the find shall halt and an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology (National Park Service 1983) shall be contacted immediately to evaluate the resource. If the resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to be prehistoric, then a Native American representative shall also be contacted to participate in the evaluation of the resource. If the qualified archaeologist and/or Native American representative determines it to be appropriate, archaeological testing for CRHR eligibility shall be completed. If the resource proves to be eligible for the CRHR and significant impacts to the resource cannot be avoided via project redesign, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare a data recovery The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval to
provide guidance in
the case that
archaeological
resources are
unexpectedly
encountered during
ground-disturbing
activities.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
all grounddisturbing activities
are halted in the
case that
archeological
resources are
discovered on the
project site.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
726
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
10 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
plan tailored to the physical nature and characteristics of the resource, per the requirements of California Code of Regulations (CCR) Guidelines Section 15126.4(b)(3)(C). The data recovery plan shall identify data recovery excavation methods, measurable objectives, and data thresholds to reduce any significant impacts to cultural resources related to the resource.

Pursuant to the data recovery plan, the qualified archaeologist and Native American representative, as appropriate, shall recover and document the scientifically consequential information that justifies the resource’s significance. The City of Los Altos shall review and approve the treatment plan and archaeological testing as appropriate, and the resulting documentation shall be submitted to the regional repository of the California Historical Resources Information System, per CCR Guidelines Section 15126.4(b)(3)(C).

Geology and Soils
GEO-1: Protection of Paleontological Resources
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring approval in areas of high paleontological sensitivity (Quaternary (Pleistocene) alluvial fan and fluvial deposits and Santa Clara Formation) and that involve ground disturbance below the level of past disturbance:

Paleontological Resources Assessment
Prior to initial ground disturbance, the applicant shall retain a Qualified Professional Paleontologist, as defined by the SVP (2010), to conduct a paleontological resources assessment (PRA). The PRA shall determine the age and paleontological sensitivity of geologic formations underlying the proposed disturbance area, consistent with SVP (2010) guidelines for categorizing paleontological sensitivity of geologic units within a project area.

If underlying formations are found to have a high potential for paleontological resources, the Qualified Professional Paleontologist shall create a Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Program, which will be approved by the City and contain the following elements:

The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval to
protect
paleontological
resources.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
a paleontological
resources
assessment is
completed and a
Paleontological
Worker
Environmental
Awareness
Program is carried
out.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
727
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
11 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
Paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) Prior to the start of construction, the Qualified Professional Paleontologist or their designee shall conduct a paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training for construction personnel regarding the appearance of fossils and procedures for notifying paleontological staff should fossils be discovered by construction staff.

Paleontological Monitoring
Full-time paleontological monitoring shall be conducted during ground disturbing construction activities (i.e., grading, trenching, foundation work) in sediments assigned a high paleontological sensitivity. Paleontological monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified Paleontological Resources Monitor, as defined by the SVP (2010). The duration and timing of the monitoring will be determined by the Qualified Professional Paleontologist based on the observation of the geologic setting from initial ground disturbance, and subject to the review and approval by the City. If the Qualified Professional Paleontologist determines that full-time monitoring is no longer warranted, based on the specific geologic conditions once the full depth of excavations has been reached, they may recommend that monitoring be reduced to periodic spot-checking or ceased entirely.

Monitoring shall be reinstated if any new ground disturbances are required, and reduction or suspension shall be reconsidered by the Qualified Professional Paleontologist at that time. In the event of a fossil discovery by the paleontological monitor or construction personnel, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease. A Qualified Professional Paleontologist shall evaluate the find before restarting construction activity in the area. If it is determined that the fossil is scientifically significant, then it shall be salvaged, identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, and curated in a scientific institution with a permanent paleontological collection along with all pertinent field notes, photos, data, and maps.

Upon completion of ground disturbing activity (and curation of fossils if necessary) the Qualified Professional Paleontologist shall prepare a final report describing the results of the paleontological monitoring efforts associated with the project. The report shall include a summary of the field and laboratory methods, an overview of the project geology and paleontology, a list of taxa recovered (if any), an analysis of fossils 728
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
12 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
recovered (if any) and their scientific significance, and recommendations.

The report shall be submitted to the City. If the monitoring efforts produced fossils, then a copy of the report shall also be submitted to the designated museum repository.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-1: Database Review and Investigation
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring approval:

Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the SWRCB’s GeoTracker database and DTSC’s EnviroStor database shall be consulted by City staff or consultant to determine whether or not the site to be graded is within 500 feet of an identified active hazardous material site.

If the site is identified in the GeoTracker or EnviroStor databases within 500 feet of an identified active hazardous material site, or if the site to be graded is located on a site that:
• Was currently and/or historically used for railroad, agricultural, or industrial uses.
• Was previously or is currently utilized to store, handle, and/or generate hazardous materials.
• Has unknown previous site uses; and/or
• Was previously or is currently utilized as a manufacturing facility, a gasoline station, automobile repair shop (or similar), or dry cleaner, The following process shall be followed prior to issuance of a grading permit:
• The project applicant shall retain a qualified environmental professional (Professional Geologist or Professional Civil Engineer) to prepare a Phase I ESA in accordance with current ASTM standards. • If the Phase I ESA identifies any potential contamination sources, the project applicant shall retain a qualified environmental consultant to prepare a Phase II ESA (subsurface investigation) to determine whether the identified potential sources have resulted in soil, The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval outlining
the process that shall
be followed prior to
issuance of a grading
permit including the
requirement that the
GeoTracker and
EnviroStar databases
are consulted.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
evidence of
regulatory
database review
and investigation
has been provided
by the project
applicant.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
729
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
13 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
groundwater, or soil vapor contamination exceeding regulatory action levels.
• If the Phase II ESA identifies contamination exceeding applicable regulatory screening levels for construction workers and future site users published by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and/or Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a Soil Management Plan shall be prepared (see HAZ-2).
• If the Phase II ESA identifies contamination exceeding hazardous waste screening thresholds for contaminants in soil (California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 22, Section 66261.24), remediation shall be conducted (see HAZ-3).

The project applicant shall provide written evidence of regulatory database review and investigation. The City of Los Altos shall ensure that evidence of regulatory database review and investigation has been provided by the project applicant prior to project approval.

HAZ-2: Soil Management Plan for Impacted Soils
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

If impacted soils or other impacted wastes are present at the project site, the project applicant shall retain a qualified environmental professional to prepare a Soil Management Plan (SMP) prior to construction. The SMP, or equivalent document, shall be prepared to address onsite handling and management of impacted soils or other impacted wastes and reduce hazards to construction workers and offsite receptors during construction.

The plan must establish remedial measures and/or soil management practices to ensure construction worker safety, the health of future workers and visitors, and the off-site migration of contaminants from the site. These measures and practices may include, but are not limited to:
• Stockpile management including stormwater pollution prevention and the installation of BMPs
The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval requiring
a Soil Management
Plan for sites that
have impacted soils
or other impacted
wastes.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
a soil management
plan is established
by a qualified
environmental
professional If
impacted soils or
other impacted
wastes are present
at the project site.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
730
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
14 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
• Guidance regarding proper disposal procedures of contaminated materials
• Guidance regarding monitoring, reporting, and regulatory agency notification
• A health and safety plan (HASP) for contractors working at the site that addresses the safety and health hazards of each phase of site construction activities with the requirements and procedures for employee protection
• The HASP shall also outline proper soil handling procedures and health and safety requirements to minimize worker and public exposure to hazardous materials during construction.

The project applicant shall prepare and implement a written Soil Management Plan and ensure that an appropriate regulatory oversight agency, such as Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health, reviews and approves the development site Soil Management Plan, HASP, and remedial measures for impacted soils.

The City of Los Altos shall ensure that a written Soil Management Plan, HASP, and remedial measures for impacted soils has been prepared and approved prior to issuance of a grading permit.

HAZ-3: Remediation
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

If soil present within the construction envelope at the development site contains chemicals at concentrations exceeding hazardous waste screening thresholds for contaminants in soil (California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 22, Section 66261.24), the project applicant shall retain a qualified environmental consultant (PG or PE), to conduct additional analytical testing and recommend soil disposal recommendations, or consider other remedial engineering controls, as necessary.

The qualified environmental consultant shall use the development site analytical results for waste characterization purposes prior to offsite transportation or disposal of potentially impacted soils or other impacted The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval requiring
a Soil Management
Plan for sites that
have impacted soils
or other impacted
wastes.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
the project
applicant has
retained a qualified
environmental
professional to
create a Soil
Management Plan
for sites that have
Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
731
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
15 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
wastes. The qualified environmental consultant shall provide disposal recommendations and arrange for proper disposal of the waste soils or other impacted wastes (as necessary), and/or provide recommendations for remedial engineering controls, if appropriate.

The project applicant or their contractors shall provide evidence that remediation reduced contaminant levels to below applicable federal, State, and local regulations for human and environmental health, and below hazardous materials threshold concentrations. Evidence of compliance may include, but is not limited to, notifying the appropriate oversight agency (e.g., SCCDEH) of the contamination, hiring a qualified environmental professional to conduct the necessary assessments and abatement (including soil sampling, preparing a remediation plan to adequately abate the hazardous materials, and ultimately obtaining necessary clearance letters from the oversight agency), and issuance of a No Further Action letter, if applicable.

City of Los Altos shall ensure that evidence of remediation compliance has been provided by the project applicant, prior to issuing an occupancy permit.
impacted soils or
other impacted
wastes.

Noise
NOI-1: Construction Noise Reduction Measures
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

Mufflers. During excavation and grading construction phases, all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be operated with closed The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval requiring
a Construction Noise
Reduction Program
for projects involving
construction within
50 feet of sensitive
receivers.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
the project
applicant develops
a Construction
Noise Reduction
Program.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
732
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
16 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
engine doors and shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards.

Air compressors. Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources to the greatest extent practicable. Select hydraulically or electrically powered equipment and avoid pneumatically powered equipment where feasible.

Pile driving. If pile driving is required, pre-drill foundation pile holes to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile. Examine whether the use of sonic pile driving is feasible and quieter. If so, utilize that method.

Stationary Equipment. All stationary construction equipment shall be placed so that emitted noise is directed away from the nearest sensitive receivers. Construct temporary noise barriers or partial enclosures to acoustically shield such equipment to the maximum extent feasible.

Equipment Staging Areas. Equipment staging shall be located in areas that will create the greatest distance feasible between constructionrelated noise sources and noise-sensitive receivers.

Smart Back-up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels. Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction.

Perimeter Noise Reduction. Construct solid plywood fences around construction sites adjacent to operational business, residences or other noise-sensitive land uses where the noise control plan analysis determines that a barrier would be effective at reducing noise.

Signage. For the duration of construction, the applicant or contractor shall post a sign in a construction zone that includes contact information for any individual who desires to file a noise complaint. 733
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
17 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
NOI-2: Vibration Control Plan
The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

For projects involving vibratory rollers within 25 feet of a historic structure, and/or the use of pile drivers, the applicant shall prepare a Vibration Control Plan prior to the commencement of construction activities. The Vibration Control Plan shall be prepared by a licensed structural engineer and shall include methods to minimize vibration, including, but not limited to:
• Use of drilled piles or similar method (e.g., cast-in-place systems) rather than pile driving
• Use of resonance-free vibratory pile drivers/rollers
• Avoiding the use of vibrating equipment when allowed by best engineering practices
The Vibration Control Plan shall include a pre-construction survey letter establishing baseline conditions of buildings within a 50-foot radius as well as at potentially affected extremely fragile buildings/historical resources and/or residential structures within the vicinity of the construction site. The condition of existing potentially affected properties shall be documented by photos and description of existing condition of building facades, noting existing cracks. The survey letter shall provide a shoring design to protect such buildings and structures from potential damage. At the conclusion of vibration causing activities, the qualified structural engineer hired by the applicant shall issue a follow-up letter describing damage, if any, to impacted buildings. The letter shall include recommendations for repair, as may be necessary, in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Repairs shall be undertaken and completed by the contractor and monitored by a qualified structural engineer in conformance with all applicable codes including the California Historical Building Code (Part 8 of Title 24).

A Statement of Compliance signed by the applicant and owner is required to be submitted to the City Building Department at plan check and prior to The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval requiring
the applicant to
prepare a vibration
control plan prior to
the commencement
of construction
activities.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
the project
applicant prepares
a vibration control
plan.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
734
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
18 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
the issuance of any permit. The Vibration Control Plan, prepared as outlined above, shall be documented by a qualified structural engineer, and shall be provided to the City upon request. A Preservation Director shall be designated, and this person’s contact information shall be posted in a location near the project site that it is clearly visible to the nearby receivers most likely to be disturbed. The Director will manage complaints and concerns resulting from activities that cause vibrations. The severity of the vibration concern should be assessed by the Director, and if necessary, evaluated by a qualified noise and vibration control consultant.

Transportation
TRA-1: Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Reduction Mitigation for APN #18956014 and #31801036 The City shall require the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects on APN #18956014 and #31801036:

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
the project
applicant reduces
VMT for projects
on APN #18956014
and #31801036
Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
735
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
19 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
o Provide bike facilities
The City of Los Altos shall review project plans to ensure that the appropriate VMT mitigation measures are implemented prior to project approval.

TRA-2: VMT Reduction Mitigation for APN #31816022, #32601052, #32601053, and #33609018 The City shall require the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects on #31816022, #32601052, #32601053, and #33609018:

Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall demonstrate VMT reduction using the Santa Clara County VMT Evaluation Tool for implementing Tier 1 through Tier 4 VMT mitigation measures:
▪ Tier 1: Project characteristics that encourage walking, biking, and transit uses.
▪ Tier 2: Multimodal network improvements that increase accessibility for transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians. These improvements include:
o Increase bike access
o Improve connectivity by increasing intersection density o Increase transit accessibility
o Traffic calming measures beyond the project frontage
o Pedestrian network improvements beyond the project frontage ▪ Tier 3: Parking measures that discourage personal motorized vehicle trips. These improvements include:
o Limit parking supply
o Provide bike facilities
▪ Tier 4: Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures that provide incentives and services to encourage alternatives to personal motorized vehicle trips. These measures for residential developments include:
o School pool programs
o Bike share programs
The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval requiring
the project applicant
to demonstrate VMT
reduction using the
Santa Clara County
VMT Evaluation Tool
for implementing
Tier 1 through Tier 4
VMT mitigation
measures.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
the project
applicant reduced
VMT for projects
on APN
#31816022,
#32601052,
#32601053, and
#33609018.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
736
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos
2023-2031 Housing Element Update
20 Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Procedures
Monitoring and
Reporting Action
Monitoring
Timing
Monitoring
Responsibility
Compliance
Verification
(Initial, Date,
Comments)
o Car share programs
o Subsidized transit program
o Unbundle parking costs from property costs
o Voluntary travel behavior change program
The City of Los Altos shall review project plans to ensure that the appropriate VMT mitigation measures are implemented prior to project approval. TDM measures shall be enforced through annual trip monitoring to assess the project’s status in meeting the VMT reduction goals.

Tribal Cultural Resources
TCR-1: Suspension of Work Around Potential Tribal Cultural Resources The City shall establish the following Standard Condition of Approval for projects requiring City approval:

In the event that archaeological resources of Native American origin are identified during implementation of the proposed project, all earthdisturbing work within 50 feet of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find as a cultural resource and an appropriate local Native American representative is consulted. If the City of Los Altos, in consultation with local Native Americans, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with local Native American group(s). The plan shall include avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, the plan shall outline the appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the appropriate local Native American tribal representative and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist. Examples of appropriate mitigation for tribal cultural resources include, but are not limited to, protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource, protecting traditional use of the resource, protecting the confidentiality of the resource, or heritage recovery. The City of Los Altos Community Development Director or designee shall review and approve the plan prior to implementation.

The City shall
establish and apply a
standard condition
of approval requiring
the suspension of all
earth-disturbing
work in the case that
archaeological
resources of Native
American origin are
identified during
implementation of
the proposed
project.

Verify that the
standard condition
of approval is
established and
applied; verify that
all earth-disturbing
work is suspended
if archaeological
resources of Native
American origin are
identified during
implementation of
the proposed
project.

Prior to project
approval.

City of Los
Altos
Planning
Division
737
Agenda Item # 3.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
21 This page intentionally left blank.
738
Agenda Item # 3.
739
Agenda Item # 3.
740
Agenda Item # 3.
741
Agenda Item # 3.

January 3, 2023
Chair Mensinger and Members of the Los Altos Planning Commission Re: Agenda Item # 2 – Sixth Cycle Housing Element 2023-2031 Dear Chair Mensinger and Members of the Planning Commission:

As we have written earlier, the LWV supports a comprehensive plan to address housing that follows State law, and we commend the Staff and LWC for recommending changes to the Draft Housing Element (HE) that hopefully will lead to having a compliant HE. The LWV also supports policies and programs to provide a decent home for every American and Californian, including subsidies at all government levels to produce this housing.

Our greatest concern with the proposed revisions is Program 1.H. We are pleased that the timeline for implementing a program to encourage housing on City-owned Parking Plazas 7 and 8 has been expedited. Nonetheless, the program as described in the current HE does not prioritize the development of affordable housing on these sites, which we believe is important.

Because Los Altos has no affordable housing funds, unlike neighboring cities, the main contribution our City can make to incentivize affordable housing is to make the land free, or nearly free, for a term of 55 years or more, long enough to make a tax credit project feasible, as this is the main financing mechanism for most current affordable housing. The offer of a zero-cost land lease for 20 years to a market-rate developer providing 20% of the units to lower-income households does not incentivize more affordable housing than baseline inclusionary zoning requirements. Our below-market-rate (BMR) ordinance already requires a market-rate developer to provide 20% of the units as BMRs if they are rentals, (or 15% very low-income) so there is no added benefit to the City in this scenario.

We agree that the City should waive development impact fees for an all-affordable project, as it did with 330 Distel Circle, but it’s not clear why the City should waive applicable permit fees for a market-rate development on the Parking Plazas that includes the number of BMRs required by our ordinance already. We also do not think the City should be prioritizing housing for seniors, persons with disabilities and veterans without having completed a survey of what the needs are for various housing types.
742
Agenda Item # 3.

We are pleased to see that the revised HE proposes amending SB 9 and ADU ordinances ASAP to be compliant with State law. And we support earlier timelines for many programs, as HCD suggested. We commend the specific height increases for the CT and mixed-use zones.

We support zoning changes for the OA District, although we prefer consistency, rather than the spot zoning recommended.

We commend the simplification of the permitting process but would prefer to see some type of metrics/measurement built into the program to monitor how much the process is actually streamlined, instead of the proposed language in 3.H, “the time...will be shortened….” We believe that the State-mandated upzoning due to AB 2011 will allow more housing, but we would like the City to provide evidence of the impact of AB 2011. Nonetheless, this along with the zoning changes recommended in this HE version, the City’s site inventory should be sufficient, although we think that Foothill Crossings, See’s Candy site on El Camino Real, and perhaps other parcels, should be removed due to indications from the property owners that they have no interest in developing housing.

Finally, we acknowledge that the revised HE attempts to satisfy the requirements of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, particularly in the future by hiring a Housing Manager, but we believe the City has not really met the intent of this new statutory requirement (to “overcome patterns of segregation” already extant in our City), just as many cities have not. Building an all-affordable housing development for low-income households on a Parking Plaza in the center of our downtown would be great step forward in Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. (Please send any questions about this email to Sue Russell at [email protected]) Karin Bricker, President LWV of Los Altos/Mountain View Area Cc: Gabe Engeland Nick Zornes Angel Rodriguez
743
Agenda Item # 3.

From: Anne Paulson
To: Public Comment - PC
Cc: Nick Zornes; Stephanie Williams
Subject: 1/5/23 meeting: Comment on Item 2, Housing Element Date: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 8:51:46 PM
January 3, 2023
To the Planning Commission:

The Los Altos Affordable Housing Alliance supports housing for all ages and all life stages in our community. We applaud City staff for their prompt turnaround of the new draft Housing Element. We appreciate that staff and our consultant have attempted to address HCD’s comments. A couple of issues still need to be dealt with.

Program 1.H, Housing on the parking plazas
Our chief concern is the new language with respect to the parking plazas. The revised Housing Element draft proposes an RFP for housing on plaza 7 or 8. The successful applicant, either a for-profit developer or an applicant proposing an all-affordable project, would receive a free lease of city land for 20 years. The draft mentions all-affordable projects, senior housing or veterans’ housing as being candidates for parking plaza housing.

First of all, we believe the first parking plaza project should be an all-affordable housing project. The City needs affordable housing, but affordable developers are unlikely to be able to buy land in Los Altos. As with 330 Distel, an affordable developer is going to need the land to be donated. The City of Los Altos doesn’t have much public land; a parking plaza is our best chance for another affordable project.

In addition to providing desperately needed affordable housing in our community, an allaffordable project on a parking plaza would satisfy several legal requirements. We are required by law to ameliorate past segregation, and there would be no better way to do that than putting an affordable project in the heart of the city. The affordable project would satisfy a solid chunk of our RHNA at whatever income levels were chosen. Lower-income households have fewer cars, and do less driving, than higher-income households, so we would be satisfying our VTA goals as well.
744
Agenda Item # 3.

But a twenty-year free lease plus fee waivers is not enough to make an affordable project feasible. An affordable project would need at least 55 years with very favorable terms. After all, the only all-affordable project in our City, 330 Distel, was given their land for free.

Meanwhile, giving free use of City land to a market-rate developer for any length of time is unnecessarily generous. As we see from the many projects being approved and built on First Street, developers can build market-rate housing downtown without any financial help from the City. If a market-rate developer is to use our parking plaza for a housing development, they should have to buy or lease the land at market rate. We think the city should prioritize all-affordable housing developments on parking plazas, but if there is a market-rate development there, it should not get special concessions.

Program 1.C, OA zoning
The original draft of the Housing Element called for upzoning all of the OA zone, which includes the commercial area on San Antonio across from downtown, as well as the small offices on Altos Oaks Drive and a few parcels on Fremont Avenue near El Monte. The draft submitted to HCD changed this, so that only the parcels in the site inventory would be upzoned.

We do not support spot upzoning. Spot upzoning makes the zoning code more complex, at a time when the city is supposed to be removing constraints to housing production rather than introducing more of them. Moreover, the sites in the OA zone that front on San Antonio but are not listed on the site inventory are going to be upzoned in July anyway, as a result of AB 2011, no matter what the city does, and the sites on Altos Oaks that are ripe for development are listed on the site inventory and will be upzoned. Thus, spot upzoning instead of upzoning the whole OA zone would add complexity to our zoning code, without any advantage to the city. We believe the City should return to the initial plan of upzoning all of OA.

We are confident that staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council can deal with these issues, as well other minor issues, and promptly get the Housing Element revised, adopted and sent to HCD.

Respectfully,
The Los Altos Affordable Housing Alliance Steering Committee 745
Agenda Item # 3.

CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALTOS,

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REPEAL THE 2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT AND ADOPT THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE PERIOD OF 2023-2031 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE

DECLARATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE HOUSING ELEMENT LAW AND THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.

WHEREAS, the California Legislature has found that “California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the state’s environmental and climate objectives” (Gov. Code Section 65589.5.); and
WHEREAS, the Legislature has further found that “Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration” (Gov. Code Section 65589.5.); and WHEREAS, the Legislature recently adopted the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) which states that “In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita… California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over 7 years”; and WHEREAS, State Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65580 et seq.) requires that the City Council adopt a Housing Element for the eight-year period 2023-2031 to accommodate the City of Los Altos, California regional housing need allocation (RHNA) of 1,958 housing units, comprised of 501 very-low-income units, 288 low-income units, 326 moderateincome units, and 843 above moderate-income units; and WHEREAS, to comply with State Housing Element Law, the City of Los Altos, California has prepared Housing Element 2023-2031 (the Housing Element) in compliance with State Housing Element Law and has identified sites that can accommodate housing units meeting the City’s RHNA; and
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 65350 et. seq., adoption of the Housing Element constitutes a General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 2023-2031 Housing Element was prepared pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et esq., CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, and the City of Los Altos local process for implementing CEQA, assessing the potential environmental impacts that might 746
Agenda Item # 3.
result from the adoption of the 2023-2031 Housing Element, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared to address potential environmental impacts; WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Sections 65352 – 65352.5 the City mailed a public notice to all California Native American tribes provided by the Native American Heritage Commission and to other entities listed; and
WHEREAS, No California Native American tribe requested consultation; and WHEREAS, the City conducted substantial and broad public engagement using a methodical process including 1) the establishment of a Housing Element page on the City’s website, through which the city has received input directly from residents and businesses; 2) six Housing Element pop-up events; 3) ongoing small group virtual meetings on the Housing Element, ranging from 2 to 10 attendee; 4) two double page ads in the Town Crier; 5) Housing Element newsletters and alerts for over 200 persons; 6) two Community Workshops, over two hundred attendees; 7) informational flier sent to every household in Los Altos; and five banners (8’ by 3’) posted on varies City Buildings and street corners advertising the Housing Element Update website and opportunity for continued public input; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 65585 (b), on June 22, 2022 the Housing Element was posted, the City posted the draft Housing Element and requested public comment for a 30-day review period, and on August 12, 2022 the draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD, after responding to public comments, the City submitted the draft Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for its review; and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the City received a letter from HCD providing its findings regarding the draft Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2022, the City released the draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for a public comment period of 30-days; and WHEREAS, on December 29, 2022, the City published a revised draft Housing Element responding to HCD’s findings and requested public comment on the draft; and WHEREAS, on December 30, 2022, the City closed the public comment period for the draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and considered all public comments received; and
WHEREAS, on January 5, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly and properly noticed public hearing and recommended that the City Council adopt the Housing Element and Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
747
Agenda Item # 3.

WHEREAS, on January 10, 2023, the City Council held a duly and properly noticed public hearing to take public testimony and consider this Resolution regarding the proposed Housing Element, reviewed the Housing Element and all pertinent maps, documents and exhibits, including HCD’s findings, the City’s response to HCD’s findings, the staff report and all attachments, and oral and written public comments; and
WHEREAS, on January 10, 2023, the City Council at a duly and properly noticed public hearing directed the Development Services Director to make necessary changes to the draft housing element based on public testimony received, and City Council direction; and WHEREAS, on January 10, 2023, the City Council continued the housing element agenda time to a separately noticed public hearing on January 24, 2023 to provide staff with the necessary time to revise the draft housing element and return to the City Council for final consideration; and WHEREAS, on January 24, 2023, the City Council held a duly and properly noticed public hearing to take public testimony and consider this Resolution regarding the proposed Housing Element, reviewed the Housing Element and all pertinent maps, documents and exhibits, including HCD’s findings, the City’s response to HCD’s findings, the staff report and all attachments, and oral and written public comments;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby finds that, based on substantial evidence in the record:

SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated by reference into this action.

SECTION 2. The Housing Element substantially complies with Housing Element Law, as provided in Government Code 65580 et seq., and contains all provisions required by State Housing Element Law, as shown in Attachment A to this resolution, incorporated herein.

SECTION 3. Based on substantial evidence in the record, based on the age, and in some cases, the declining or deteriorating conditions of primarily non-residential structures located on non-vacant sites, as well as the likelihood of commercial uses on non-vacant sites converting to mixed-use residential development due to the continued decline of existing retail-only uses, as well as the currently moderate commercial use vacancy rates in the City; together with recent regional development trends (where conversion of non-residential uses on non-vacant sites to housing development to accommodate a range of household types such as multi-family and smaller unit sizes), the documented interest in recent years from developers and land owners; the lack of developable vacant sites in the City; and the existing uses on the sites identified in the site inventory to accommodate RHNA are likely to integrate with new residential uses, or discontinue during the planning period; the existing uses on the non-vacant sites identified in the site inventory to accommodate the RHNA are likely to be discontinued during the planning period and therefore 748
Agenda Item # 3.
do not constitute an impediment to planned residential development on the site during the planning period.

SECTION 4. As required by Government Code Section 65585(e), the Los Altos City Council has considered the findings made by the Department of Housing and Community Development included in the Department’s letter to the City of Los Altos dated November 10, 2022, consistent with Government Code Section 65585(f), and as described in Attachment B to this resolution, incorporated herein, the Los Altos City Council has changed the Housing Element in response to the findings of the Department to substantially comply with the requirements of State Housing Element Law as interpreted by HCD.

SECTION 5. That exercising its independent judgement, the City Council approves the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 2023-2031 Housing Element Attachment D and IS-MND Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachment E.

SECTION 6. The City of Los Altos 2015-2023 Housing Element is hereby repealed in its entirety, and the City of Los Altos 6
th Cycle Housing Element 2023-2031, as shown in Attachment C to this Resolution, incorporated herein, is adopted.

SECTION 7. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption by the Los Altos City Council.

SECTION 8. The Development Services Director, Nick Zornes is hereby directed to file all necessary material with the Department of Housing and Community Development for the Department to find that the Housing Element is in conformance with State Housing Element Law and is further directed and authorized to make all non-substantive changes to the Housing Element to make it internally consistent or to address any non-substantive changes or amendments requested by the Department to achieve certification.

SECTION 9. The Development Services Director, Nick Zornes is hereby directed to distribute copies of the Housing Element in the manner provided in Government Code Sections 65357 and 65589.7.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a Resolution passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Los Altos at a meeting thereof on the ___ day of ____, 2021 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
749
Agenda Item # 3.
___________________________
Sally Meadows, Mayor
Attest:
____________________________
Angel Rodriguez, Interim City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Compliance with Statutory Provisions.

Attachment B: Findings Responding to Letter from Department of Housing and Community Development dated November 10, 2022.

Attachment C: 2023 – 2031 Housing Element.

Attachment D: Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.

Attachment E: IS-MND Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 750
Agenda Item # 3.
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, California 94022-3087

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 9, 2023
TO: Los Altos City Council
FROM: Nick Zornes, Development Services Director
SUBJECT: 6
TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT (2023-2031)
JANUARY 5, 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
This memo shall serve as informational to provide clarification to the Los Altos City Council on information contained within the January 10, 2023, City Council Agenda Report and attachments therein.

On January 5, 2023, the Los Altos Planning Commission considered the City’s Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023-2031). During the Public Hearing a presentation was given, staff responded to questions of the commission, public testimony was received, followed by discussion of the commission where staff provided additional clarification.

The Planning Commission unanimously recommended adoption of the Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element as prepared with one revision to Program 3.H. If accepted by the Los Altos City Council the recommendation of the Planning Commission would revise the Draft Housing Element as follows (Planning Commission Recommendation are notated in Red, Bold, Underlined, and strikethrough font below):
• Clarify that decisions on appeals of housing developments must be based on objective standards consistent with State law and any appeal filed with the City shall be done within 10 14 calendar days post project approval; and
Conclusion
The Planning Commission Recommendation would provide 14 calendar days instead of 10 calendar days. Staff feels that this is reasonable, and still provides a level of certainty to applicants post project approval.
751
Agenda Item # 3.
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, California 94022-3087

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 9, 2023
TO: Los Altos City Council
FROM: Nick Zornes, Development Services Director
SUBJECT: 6
TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT (2023-2031)
OFFICE ADMINISTRATIVE (OA) DISTRICT SITES & PROGRAM 1.C This memo shall serve as informational to provide clarification to the Los Altos City Council on information contained within the January 10, 2023, City Council Agenda Report and attachments therein.

Public testimony that was received commented on the Office Administrative (OA) District originally up zoning all sites within the OA District. Written public testimony received further clarified this comment stating, “The original draft of the Housing Element called for upzoning all of the OA zone”, “The draft submitted to HCD changed this, so that only the parcels in the site inventory would be upzoned.”
Following the January 5, 2023, Planning Commission hearing staff has reviewed and confirmed that the Site Inventory Matrix (comparison of the Public Review Draft and Current Draft) has NO changes to the sites list. The comparison confirms that no sites were removed, added, or modified from the inventory list for OA zoned parcels.

Program 1.C clarifications were added in August 2022 prior to submittal to HCD after the Public Review Draft comment period had closed. The following language shows the changes made only to Program 1.C:
752
Agenda Item # 3.

June 2022 (Public Review Draft)
Program 1.C: Allow housing in the Office Administrative (OA) District.

Residential uses will be allowed at a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre and a maximum density of 30 dwelling units per acre.

Responsible Body: Development Services Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Time Frame: Fourth quarter of 2025
Objective: Permit at least three (3) new housing units in the OA District during the planning period.

August 2022 (First Submittal sent to HCD)
*Revisions made to the Draft Housing Element after the 30-day Public Review Draft in June 2022 are notated in Red, Bold, and Underlined font below.

The Office Administrative (OA) District, primarily located along South San Antonio Road (east of Downtown), does not currently allow residential uses. However, given the high demand for housing in Los Altos and the opportunity to provide for housing in a mixed-use environment with access to transit, the sites identified in the OA District (Appendix B, Table B-11) will be amended to allow multi-family development. Residential uses will be allowed at a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre and a maximum density of 30 dwelling units per acre.

December 2022 (Revisions Post 90-day HCD Review)
*Revisions made to the Draft Housing Element after the 90-day HCD First Review since November 2022 are notated in Red, Bold, Underlined, and strikethrough font below.

Program 1.C: Allow housing in the Office Administrative (OA) District.

The Office Administrative (OA) District, primarily located along South San Antonio Road (east of Downtown), does not currently allow residential uses. However, given the high demand for housing in Los Altos and the opportunity to provide for housing in a mixed-use environment with access to transit, the sites identified in the OA District (Appendix B, Table B-11) will be 753
Agenda Item # 3.
amended to allow multi-family development. Residential uses will be allowed at a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre and a maximum density of 30 dwelling units per acre.

Responsible Body: Development Services Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Time Frame: Forth quarter of 2025 December 2024
Objective: Permit housing on at least three (3) OA District parcels during the planning period comprising at least 30 total housing units with at least five low-income units in the highest resource areas of the city.

Conclusion
The City did not remove any parcels from the Site Inventory, or the OA District rezone program.

The City did provide clarification in Program 1.C after the 30-day Public Review Draft in August 2022 which referenced the Site Inventory only located in Appendix B. Furthermore, the City provided revisions necessary based on HCD’s November 10, 2022 Findings Letter, which required the City to heighten the time frame for when Program 1.C would be completed, which has resulted with a targeted completion 1-year sooner that initially proposed. Lastly, the City provided quantified objectives for Program 1.C based on the capacity and reliance of housing production included within the housing element, the City anticipates the construction of at least 30 units within the OA District with at least 5 units for low-income households. 754
Agenda Item # 3.
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, California 94022-3087

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 10, 2023
TO: Los Altos City Council
FROM: Nick Zornes, Development Services Director
SUBJECT: 6
TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT (2023-2031)
PROGRAM 1.F REZONE VILLAGE COURT PARCEL
This memo shall serve as informational to provide clarification to the Los Altos City Council on information contained within the January 10, 2023, City Council Agenda Report and attachments therein.

On January 9, 2023, the City received written public comment regarding Program 1.F Rezone Village Court Parcel from ViNA.

On November 13, 1962, the Los Altos City Council approved 62-PUD/C-7 a request to construct and operate a planned unit development on a parcel just over 5 acres in size. As included in the original project approval the Maximum Height for 62-PUD/C-7 zoning is “2 story or 30’, 1 story if within 100’ of R-1”.

Staff has reviewed the records provided to City late last night (January 9, 2023) that can also be found here:
https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/community_development/page/390 21/background_records_for_village_corner_-_el_camino_real_at_san_antonio_road.pdf Additionally, staff has reviewed the Los Altos Municipal Code that was in effect at the original date of approval in 1962 and can confirm that the height requirements placed on 62-PUD/C-7 are standard pursuant to Sec. 10-2.1807 and have not changed since the adoption of Ordinance No. 146 titled Zoning Ordinance, effective March 6, 1958.

14.62.070 - Height of structures adjacent to single-family districts (PUD).

A. In all PUD/R, PUD/OA, and PUD/C Districts, the maximum height of commercial, professional-administrative, and multiple-family structures shall be one story or fifteen (15) feet within one hundred (100) feet of the R1-10 District. 755
Agenda Item # 3.

A copy of the Los Altos Municipal Code Chapter 14.62 can be found here:
https://library.municode.com/ca/los_altos/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT14ZO_CH14.6 2PUPLUNDE_14.62.070HESTADSIMIDIPU
Draft Housing Element as Proposed
Program 1.F: Rezone Village Court parcel.

To facilitate housing, the Village Court parcel at 4546 El Camino Real (APN 16712042) will be rezoned from R1-10 to Commercial Thoroughfare (CT), and modifications made to the Planned Unit Development (62-PUD/C7), as necessary for consistency with the CT District. The City will consult with adjacent property owners and interested parties throughout the Village Court rezone program.

Responsible Body: Development Services Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Time Frame: December 2025
Summary of Program 1.F
Program 1.F was developed in tandem with Program 1.G (Rezone housing sites from previous Housing Elements). Under AB 1397, certain rezoning requiring apply if a lower income housing site identified in the sites inventory was identified as a housing site (for any income level) in a previous housing element’s site inventory. The identification of the Village Court site was previously identified in the 5th Cycle Housing Element (2015-2023) and was not successfully rezoned as previously indicated thus necessitating the inclusion of the site again in the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023-2031). Additional requirements can be found in Program 1.G as follows:

Program 1.G: Rezone housing sites from previous Housing Elements.

Under AB 1397, certain rezoning requirements apply if a lower income housing site identified in the sites inventory (Appendix B) was identified as a housing site (for any income level) in a previous housing element’s site inventory. The following vacant and nonvacant lower income sites are subject to the rezoning requirements:
• Vacant lower income sites that have been included in at least two consecutive housing element sites inventories.
• Nonvacant lower income sites that have been included in a prior housing element sites inventory.

The City will make necessary zoning amendments to allow development by right pursuant to Government Code §65583.2(i) when 20 percent or more of the units are affordable to lower income households on sites identified in Table IV-1.
756
Agenda Item # 3.

Responsible Body: Development Services Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Time Frame: January 2024
Los Altos Zoning Map for Village Court
757
Agenda Item # 3.
*The Zoning Designation Legend provided above shows the R1-10 Zoning District, CT Zoning District, and Planned Unit Development (PUD) which is graphically displayed accurately on the zoomed in sections of the Zoning Map.

Public comment regarding the City of Los Altos Zoning map for Village Court asserts that map incorrectly identifies the placement of R1 and CT Zoning at the Parcel. The City has verified and provided zoomed in sections of the City’s adopted Zoning Map for reference. It is important to note that the Affidavit of Publication being reference is dated 10/4/1962, and with the vast improvements of technology the graphical depiction of the Zoning lines have been corrected over time. Additionally, the following links are provided for further transparency purposes, however the City confirms that these maps have been on the City’s website for several years:

Location of Page where Maps are available:
https://www.losaltosca.gov/development-services/page/adopted-plans City of Los Altos Zoning Map:
https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/community_development/page/390 21/los_altos-zoning_final_w_labels-24x36-20181026.pdf
City of Los Altos Land Use Map (General Plan Designation):
https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/community_development/page/390 21/los_altos-land_use_final_w_labels-24x36-20181026.pdf 758
Agenda Item # 3.

Conclusion
The Village Court parcel was identified and determined to be an underutilized site in the 2015- 2023 Housing Element adopted on May 26, 2015. Since the site was previously identified in a prior Housing Element the rezoning included in Program 1.F is applicable under AB 1397. The proposed Program 1.F is a Rezone of from R1-10 to Commercial Thoroughfare (CT), and any necessary modifications to 62-PUS/C7 for consistency with the CT District. Under existing zoning, and circumstances development other than what exists today onsite at Village Court would not be permitted. However, Program 1.F identifies the need to modify the existing zoning.

Lastly, as provided graphically above the City has verified the adopted Zoning Map for Village Court is accurate and reflects the zoning designations noted on the October 4, 1962 Affidavit of Publication referenced in public comment.
759
Agenda Item # 3.
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, California 94022-3087

During the Planning Commission Meeting Public Testimony provided comment regarding Program 1.H which commits the City of Los Altos to facilitate the development of housing on its City-owned sites, specifically Parking Plaza 7 and 8. Concern was raised by Anne Paulson of the Los Altos Affordable Housing Alliance, and Sue Russell of the League of Women Voters during oral public comments, and in writing prior to the January 5, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting.

In general, the concern raised by the two groups was regarding the number of affordable units that would be required of a Housing Developer in the future on city-owned sites. Both groups have advocated for the city-owned parking plazas to be built and used for 100% affordable projects with generous land lease terms. Furthermore, the League of Women Voters does not believe the City should be prioritizing housing for seniors, persons with disabilities and veterans without having completed a survey to determine the type of housing needed. 760
Agenda Item # 3.

Draft Housing Element as Proposed
Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites.

The City will facilitate development of housing on City-owned sites through public-private partnerships during the planning period. City-owned Downtown Parking Plazas 7 and 8 were identified as opportunity sites that could accommodate new development, including affordable housing, in the Downtown Vision Plan. The City will offer a minimum of 20 years of a zero cost land lease to a housing development providing a minimum of 20 percent of all dwelling units to lower income households. The City will encourage the development of senior housing, housing for persons with disabilities, and veteran housing on the City-owned Parking Plazas 7 and 8. In the event the development includes market-rate housing, the City will waive all applicable permit fees. In the event the development is constructed as 100 percent affordable, the City will waive all applicable development impact fees. The City will comply with all Surplus Land Act requirements during these efforts. The City will provide a dedicated project planner to facilitate an expedited project review process.

Responsible Body: Development Services Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund, State or federal grant funds (if available).

Time Frame: Release request for proposals by December 2023; complete entitlements within one (1) year of application if not sooner (by December 2026) Objective: The City will enter into a public-private partnership for development of housing on at least one of the City’s Downtown parking plazas.

Proposed Changes by League of Women Voters to Program 1.H *Changes proposed by the League of Women Voters are notated in Red, Bold, Underlined, and strikethrough font below.

The City will facilitate development of housing on City-owned sites through public-private partnerships during the planning period. City-owned Downtown Parking Plazas 7 and 8 were identified as opportunity sites that could accommodate new development, including affordable housing, in the Downtown Vision Plan. The first RFP issued by the City for housing on either Parking Plaza 7 or 8 will be offer a minimum of 20 years of a zero cost land lease to affordable housing and the City will commit to selecting the development proposal that maximizes public benefit providing a minimum of 20 percent of all dwelling units to lower income households. Prior to the RFP issuance, Tthe City shall hire a third-party to analyze what the minimum financially feasible affordable housing production could be, based upon a minimum of 20 years of a zero-cost land lease and a commitment to provide a minimum 55-year lease. will encourage the development of senior housing, housing for persons with disabilities, and veteran housing on the City-owned Parking Plazas 7 and 8. In the event the development includes market-rate housing, the City will waive all applicable permit fees. In the event the development is constructed as 100% percent affordable, the City will waive all applicable development impact fees per Program 2.C. The City will comply with all Surplus 761
Agenda Item # 3.

Land Act requirements during these efforts. The City will provide a dedicated project planner to facilitate an expedited project review process.

Proposed Changes by League of Women Voters to Program 2.C Program 2.C: Assist in securing funding for affordable housing projects. *Changes proposed by the League of Women Voters are notated in Red, Bold, Underlined, and strikethrough font below.

To promote the development of affordable housing projects, and when requested by the project sponsor, the City will continue to assist in securing funding for low- and moderate-income housing developments through the following actions (all of the incentives below are currently in place except for providing funding for multi-jurisdictional housing finance programs):
• Apply for State and federal funding on behalf of a nonprofit, under a specific program to construct affordable housing including persons with physical disabilities or developmental disabilities.
• Provide financial incentive such as waiving City fees for 100 percent affordable housing projects within the City of Los Altos.
• Provide a dedicated project planner for 100 percent affordable housing projects. • Transfer the City’s annual CDBG allocation to the County for projects that serve the Los Altos community.
• Allocate a portion of CDBG funds toward affordable housing development. • Provide funding to participate in a multi-jurisdictional housing finance program (such as a Mortgage Revenue Bond or Mortgage Credit Certification Program). The City will continue to coordinate with Santa Clara County and other agencies on multi-jurisdictional housing finance programs.

Conclusion
Staff requests formal direction from the City Council to revise Program 1.H based on the Public Testimony received.
762
Agenda Item # 3.

PROGRAM SUB PROJECT INITIATION DATE COMPLETION DATE STATUS Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Budget & Hire Planning
Technician December 31, 2022 COMPLETED
Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Amend ADU Ordinance
based upon HCD's letter 6 months or less
Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements.

Eliminate 3rd Party
Architectural Review February 28, 2023
Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements.

Dismiss Design Review
Commission February 28, 2023
Program 3.L: Eliminate the requirement of story poles. March 31, 2023 Program 2.E: Conduct annual ADU rental income surveys. Budget & Hire Housing March 31, 2023 Program 4.J: Facilitate alternate modes of transportation Adopt VMT Policy & June 30, 2023 Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

RFP-Permit Ready ADU
Plans July 31, 2023
Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Financial Analysis July 1, 2023 December 31, 2023 Program 3.D: Evaluate and adjust impact fees. August 1, 2023 December 31, 2024 Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Release RFP December 31, 2023 Program 6.C: Target housing development in highest
resource areas. Initial Outreach September 31, 2023
Program 6.D: Promote Housing Choice (Section 8) rental
assistance program. September 31, 2023
Program 2.A: Continue to implement and enhance
inclusionary housing requirements. December 31, 2023
Program 2.B: Establish an affordable housing in-lieu fee and commercial linkage fee. Housing in-lieu fee. December 31, 2023 Program 2.F: Water and Sewer Service Providers. December 31, 2023 Program 3.B: Modify building height in mixed-use zoning districts. Downtown Districts December 31, 2023
Program 3.E: Ensure that the density bonus ordinance
remains consistent with State law. December 31, 2023
Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements. Code Amendments December 31, 2023
763
Agenda Item # 3.

Program 3.K: Standardize multimodal transportation
requirements. December 31, 2023
Program 4.C: Allow Low Barrier Navigation Centers
consistent with AB 101. December 31, 2023
Program 4.D: Allow transitional and supportive housing
consistent with State law. December 31, 2023
Program 4.E: Allow employee/farmworker housing
consistent with State law. December 31, 2023
Program 4.F: Reasonably accommodate disabled persons’
housing needs. December 31, 2023
Program 6.B: Maintain and expand an inventory of
affordable housing funding sources. Prepare Inventory. December 31, 2023 Program 6.E: Prepare and distribute anti-displacement
information. December 31, 2023
Program 1.A: Rezone for RHNA shortfall. January 31, 2024 Program 1.G: Rezone housing sites from previous Housing Elements. January 31, 2024
Program 3.G: Amend Conditional Use Permits findings
applicable to housing developments. March 31, 2024
Program 3.I: Allow residential care facilities consistent with State law. March 31, 2024
Program 3.J: Explicitly allow manufactured homes
consistent with State law. March 31, 2024
Program 3.F: Reduce Conditional Use Permit requirement
for residential mixed-use and
multi-family. September 31, 2024
Program 1.B: Facilitate higher density housing in the
Commercial Thoroughfare (CT) District. December 31, 2024 Program 1.C: Allow housing in the Office Administrative (OA) District. December 31, 2024
Program 1.E: Update the Loyola Corners Specific Plan. December 31, 2024 Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Adopt-Permit Ready ADU
Plans December 31, 2024
764
Agenda Item # 3.

Program 3.A: Prepare a Downtown parking plan and update citywide parking requirements. December 31, 2024
Program 3.B: Modify building height in mixed-use zoning districts.

Commercial
Neighborhood (CN)
District December 31, 2024
Program 3.C: Remove floor-to-area ratio (FAR) restriction at Rancho Shopping Center and
Woodland Plaza. December 31, 2024
Program 3.M: Modify parking requirements for emergency
shelters consistent with State
law. December 31, 2024
Program 2.B: Establish an affordable housing in-lieu fee and commercial linkage fee. Commercial linkage fee. December 31, 2025 Program 1.D: Allow housing on certain Public and
Community Facilities District sites and
facilitate housing on religious institution properties. December 31, 2025 Program 1.F: Rezone Village Court parcel. December 31, 2025 Program 4.H: Provide additional density bonuses and
incentives for housing that accommodates special needs
groups. December 31, 2025
Program 4.I: Allow senior housing with extended care
facilities in multi-family and mixed-use zoning districts. December 31, 2025 Program 1.I: Incentivize Downtown lot consolidation. July 31, 2026 Program 4.G: Assist seniors to maintain and rehabilitate their homes. July 31, 2026
Program 6.C: Target housing development in highest
resource areas. Follow-up Outreach September 31, 2026
Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Entitlement Review December 31, 2026 Program 3.N: Modify standards in the R3 zoning districts. December 31, 2026 765
Agenda Item # 3.

Program 4.J: Facilitate alternate modes of transportation for residents.

Capital Improvement
Project for above head
pedestrian crossing
signals on San Antonio
Road near Downtown Los December 31, 2027
Program 5.F: Incentivize the creation of play areas for multifamily housing projects. December 31, 2027 Program 1.K: Participate in regional housing needs planning efforts. Ongoing
Program 1.L: General Plan amendments. Ongoing
Program 1.M: SB 9 implementation. Ongoing
Program 1.N: Facilitate and monitor pipeline housing
projects. Ongoing
Program 2.C: Assist in securing funding for affordable
housing projects. Ongoing
Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Ongoing
Program 2.E: Conduct annual ADU rental income surveys. Annual Survey Annually Program 4.A: Support efforts to fund homeless services. Ongoing Program 4.B: Continue to participate in local and regional forums for homelessness,
supportive, and transitional housing. Ongoing
Program 5.A: Monitor condominium conversions. Ongoing
Program 5.B: Continue to administer the City’s affordable housing programs. Ongoing
Program 5.C: Restrict commercial uses from displacing
residential neighborhoods. Ongoing
Program 5.D: Implement voluntary code inspection
program. Ongoing
Program 5.E: Help secure funding for housing rehabilitation and assistance programs. Ongoing
766
Agenda Item # 3.

Program 6.A: Assist residents with housing discrimination and landlord-tenant
complaints. Ongoing
Program 6.B: Maintain and expand an inventory of
affordable housing funding sources.

Inform, Evaluate
Apply/Submit Ongoing
Program 6.F: Affirmatively market physically accessible units. Ongoing
Program 7.A: Promote energy and water conservation and
greenhouse gas reduction
through education and awareness campaigns. Ongoing
Program 7.B: Monitor and implement thresholds and
statutory requirements of climate change legislation. Ongoing 767
Agenda Item # 3.
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, California 94022-3087

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 20, 2023
TO: Los Altos City Council
FROM: Nick Zornes, Development Services Director
SUBJECT: 6
TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT (2023-2031)
JANUARY 10, 2023 CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION ON REVISIONS
This memo shall serve as informational to provide clarification to the Los Altos City Council on information contained within the January 24, 2023, City Council Agenda Report and attachments therein.

On January 10, 2023, the Los Altos City Council considered the City’s Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023-2031). During the Public Hearing a presentation was given, staff responded to questions of the City Council, public testimony was received, followed by discussion of the City Council where staff provided additional clarification.

The City Council provided direction regarding necessary revisions to the Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element to the Development Services Director, which would then return to the City Council for consideration of adoption of the document on January 24, 2023. The City Council directed revisions to five (5) areas of the housing element, and gave the Development Services Director authority to recommend the removal of one (1) site should it be appropriate. The following covers the City Council direction:
• Program 1.B – replace the word “targeting” with “anticipating”. o This change is reflected in the objective section of Program 1.B. • Program 1.H – revise program based upon public comment received by the League of Women Voters.
o This change is reflected in the body and timeframe section of Program 1.H. • Program 2.C – add language to Program 2.C based upon HCD’s November 10, 2022, findings letter that commits the City to conducting outreach to the development community. Additionally, the City Council wanted language which supports the City to partner with nonprofit housing developers on affordable housing. o This change is reflected in the body and timeframe section of Program 2.C. 768
Agenda Item # 3.
• Program 3.H – revise the program consistent with the recommendation of the Los Altos Planning Commission; providing 14 calendar days for an appeal to be filed instead of 10 calendar days.
o This change is reflected in the body section Program 3.H. • Appendix C: Housing Constraints - Development Standards Analysis – revise language on housing element pages C-13 and C-14 to clarify the correct information included in draft.
o This change is reflected in the body of the constraints section of the housing element on pages C-13 and C-14.
• 2100 Woods Lane – the City Council after receiving public testimony which spoke against the redevelopment of 2100 Woods Lane, provided the Development Services Director with the authority to recommend removal of the site should it be in the best interest of the City, comply with State Housing Law and appropriate consistent with the overall housing element.
o The revised Housing Element does not remove 2100 Woods Lane from the site inventory.
o It is of the professional recommendation that this site remain within the Housing Element based on multiple factors.
▪ First, the existing Zoning designation supports the development of the site for residential units.
▪ Second, removal of the site would result in the city only having a buffer of one (1) moderate unit only.
▪ Third, previous and recent developer interest in developing the site with residential units.
▪ Fourth, the conservative capacity assumption that was included in the housing element of eleven (11) units; the maximum capacity under existing zoning designation is forty (40) units. The conversative capacity assumption was utilized after analysis was conducted which evaluated the topographical, environmental and infrastructure constraints of the site that could impact the maximum unit development. The issue raised in public comment regarding the site was extensively analyzed which determined the realistic and conservative capacity of the site.
▪ Fifth, as discussed at the City Council meeting, the inclusion of this site in the housing element does not prevent any development from occurring in the future. Additionally, it is important to note that the existing zoning designation supports the creation of housing, and with the limitations of SB-330 (The Housing Crisis Act of 2019), and Government Code Section 65863 (No Net Loss Law) the City is limited with any future changes in land use designation of the subject site.

Conclusion
Revisions to the 6th Cycle Housing Element have been made consistent with the direction provided by the City Council from the January 10, 2023 public hearing. 769
Agenda Item # 3.

PROGRAM SUB PROJECT INITIATION DATE COMPLETION DATE STATUS Program 1.A: Rezone for RHNA shortfall. January 31, 2024 Program 1.B: Facilitate higher density housing in the
Commercial Thoroughfare (CT) District. December 31, 2024 Program 1.C: Allow housing in the Office
Administrative (OA) District. December 31, 2024
Program 1.D: Allow housing on certain Public and
Community Facilities District sites and
facilitate housing on religious institution properties. December 31, 2025 Program 1.E: Update the Loyola Corners Specific
Plan. December 31, 2024
Program 1.F: Rezone Village Court parcel. December 31, 2025 Program 1.G: Rezone housing sites from previous
Housing Elements. January 31, 2024
Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Financial Analysis July 1, 2023 December 31, 2023 Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Release RFP December 31, 2023 Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Entitlement Review December 31, 2026 Program 1.I: Incentivize Downtown lot consolidation. July 31, 2026 Program 1.J: Produce annual housing status reports. April 1 (Annually) Program 1.K: Participate in regional housing needs
planning efforts. Ongoing
Program 1.L: General Plan amendments. Ongoing
Program 1.M: SB 9 implementation. Ongoing
Program 1.N: Facilitate and monitor pipeline housing
projects. Ongoing
Program 2.A: Continue to implement and enhance
inclusionary housing requirements. December 31, 2023
770
Agenda Item # 3.

Program 2.B: Establish an affordable housing in-lieu
fee and commercial linkage fee. Housing in-lieu fee. December 31, 2023 Program 2.B: Establish an affordable housing in-lieu
fee and commercial linkage fee. Commercial linkage fee. December 31, 2025 Program 2.C: Assist in securing funding for affordable
housing projects. Ongoing
Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory
Dwelling Units (ADUs). Ongoing
Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory
Dwelling Units (ADUs). Budget & Hire Planning Technician December 31, 2022 COMPLETED Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory
Dwelling Units (ADUs). RFP-Permit Ready ADU Plans July 31, 2023 Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory
Dwelling Units (ADUs). Adopt-Permit Ready ADU Plans December 31, 2024 Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory
Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Amend ADU Ordinance based
upon HCD's letter 6 months or less
Program 2.E: Conduct annual ADU rental income
surveys. Annual Survey Annually
Program 2.E: Conduct annual ADU rental income
surveys. Budget & Hire Housing Manager March 31, 2023
Program 2.F: Water and Sewer Service Providers. December 31, 2023 Program 3.A: Prepare a Downtown parking plan and
update citywide parking requirements. December 31, 2024 Program 3.B: Modify building height in mixed-use
zoning districts. Downtown Districts December 31, 2023
Program 3.B: Modify building height in mixed-use
zoning districts.

Commercial Neighborhood (CN)
District December 31, 2024
Program 3.C: Remove floor-to-area ratio (FAR)
restriction at Rancho Shopping Center and
Woodland Plaza. December 31, 2024
Program 3.D: Evaluate and adjust impact fees. August 1, 2023 December 31, 2024 Program 3.E: Ensure that the density bonus
ordinance remains consistent with State law. December 31, 2023 771
Agenda Item # 3.

Program 3.F: Reduce Conditional Use Permit
requirement for residential mixed-use and
multi-family. September 31, 2024
Program 3.G: Amend Conditional Use Permits
findings applicable to housing
developments. March 31, 2024
Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements. Code Amendments December 31, 2023
Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements.

Eliminate 3rd Party Architectural
Review February 28, 2023
Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements.

Dismiss Design Review
Commission February 28, 2023
Program 3.I: Allow residential care facilities
consistent with State law. March 31, 2024
Program 3.J: Explicitly allow manufactured homes
consistent with State law. March 31, 2024
Program 3.K: Standardize multimodal transportation
requirements. December 31, 2023
Program 3.L: Eliminate the requirement of story
poles. March 31, 2023
Program 3.M: Modify parking requirements for
emergency shelters consistent with State
law. December 31, 2024
Program 3.N: Modify standards in the R3 zoning
districts. December 31, 2026
Program 4.A: Support efforts to fund homeless
services. Ongoing
Program 4.B: Continue to participate in local and
regional forums for homelessness,
supportive, and transitional housing. Ongoing
Program 4.C: Allow Low Barrier Navigation Centers
consistent with AB 101. December 31, 2023
Program 4.D: Allow transitional and supportive
housing consistent with State law. December 31, 2023
772
Agenda Item # 3.

Program 4.E: Allow employee/farmworker housing
consistent with State law. December 31, 2023
Program 4.F: Reasonably accommodate disabled
persons’ housing needs. December 31, 2023
Program 4.G: Assist seniors to maintain and
rehabilitate their homes. July 31, 2026
Program 4.H: Provide additional density bonuses and
incentives for housing that
accommodates special needs groups. December 31, 2025
Program 4.I: Allow senior housing with extended
care facilities in multi-family and mixed-use zoning
districts. December 31, 2025
Program 4.J: Facilitate alternate modes of
transportation for residents.

Adopt VMT Policy &
Transportation Demand
Management Plan June 30, 2023
Program 4.J: Facilitate alternate modes of
transportation for residents.

Capital Improvement Project for
above head pedestrian crossing
signals on San Antonio Road near
Downtown Los Altos December 31, 2027
Program 5.A: Monitor condominium conversions. Ongoing
Program 5.B: Continue to administer the City’s
affordable housing programs. Ongoing
Program 5.C: Restrict commercial uses from
displacing residential neighborhoods. Ongoing
Program 5.D: Implement voluntary code inspection
program. Ongoing
Program 5.E: Help secure funding for housing
rehabilitation and assistance programs. Ongoing
Program 5.F: Incentivize the creation of play areas
for multi-family housing projects. December 31, 2027
Program 6.A: Assist residents with housing
discrimination and landlord-tenant
complaints. Ongoing
773
Agenda Item # 3.

Program 6.B: Maintain and expand an inventory of
affordable housing funding sources. Prepare Inventory. December 31, 2023 Program 6.B: Maintain and expand an inventory of
affordable housing funding sources. Inform, Evaluate Apply/Submit Ongoing Program 6.C: Target housing development in highest
resource areas. Initial Outreach September 31, 2023
Program 6.C: Target housing development in highest
resource areas. Follow-up Outreach September 31, 2026
Program 6.D: Promote Housing Choice (Section 8)
rental assistance program. September 31, 2023
Program 6.E: Prepare and distribute antidisplacement information. December 31, 2023 Program 6.F: Affirmatively market physically
accessible units. Ongoing
Program 7.A: Promote energy and water
conservation and greenhouse gas reduction
through education and awareness campaigns. Ongoing
Program 7.B: Monitor and implement thresholds and
statutory requirements of climate change legislation. Ongoing 774
Agenda Item # 3.

PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE

The following is public correspondence received by the City Clerk’s Office after the posting of the original agenda. Individual contact information has been redacted for privacy. This may not be a comprehensive collection of the public correspondence, but staff makes its best effort to include all correspondence received to date.

To send correspondence to the City Council, on matters listed on the agenda please email [email protected]
775
Agenda Item # 3.

January 17, 2023
Dear Mayor Meadows, Vice Mayor Weinberg and Members of the Los Altos City Council, On behalf of Los Altos Community Voices (LACV), the Steering Committee wishes to express our support of the revisions to the draft Housing Element and encourages you to approve its submission to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

We very much appreciate the hard work of Nick Zornes and his team, representatives of Lisa Wise Consulting, the Planning Commission, and each of you for the many hours of hard work you’ve contributed to creating a plan that not only addresses our critical need for housing, especially affordable housing, but also is sensitive to the concerns of current residents of Los Altos, and is likely to be found substantially compliant with state law by HCD.

Thank you for all you’ve done and will continue to do to ensure that our community does its fair share to address the housing crisis by implementing various aspects of the 6th cycle housing element in the coming years.

With gratitude and best wishes for a happy New Year,
Robin Abrams, Kim Cranston, Cathy Lazarus, Bill Sheppard, Marie Young LACV Steering Committee
776
Agenda Item # 3.

PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM #3 – JANUARY 24, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 18, 2023
Nick Zornes
Development Services Director
City of Los Altos
1 North San Antonio Road,
Los Altos, CA 94022
Re: Draft Housing Element
Dear Director Zornes:

We would like to thank you and the City Manager, Gabe Engeland, for meeting with members of Los Altos Residents (LAR) in person on December 16, 2022 to discuss the Housing Element and the HCD Review Letter comments.

The LAR team has been participated in many of the community outreach opportunities since the initiation of work on the Los Altos Housing Element. We have kept abreast of all the discussions by our City Council. We had several questions about the location of affordable housing units in the inventory site map, actual availability of some sites for residential development in the 6th cycle, the parking plazas downtown and the plan for replacement parking, the city’s ability to comply with certain aspects of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Act (AFFH) and other matters. We forwarded our questions to you a week in advance to allow for a thorough discussion at our meeting.

We came away from our meeting with you and City Manager Engeland confident that the city has fulfilled its obligation to find suitable sites that could be developed to meet our RHNA requirements. We are also confident that the city will fulfill its obligations pursuant to AFFH in part by hiring a Housing Manager and by way of the Programs included in the Revised Housing Element which we understand will be evolving as the city collects data.

Members of the LAR team were also able to attend the Los Altos Community Coalition Zoom meeting that you conducted Director Zornes. This meeting was also informative and gave all the attendees an opportunity to ask questions.
777
Agenda Item # 3.

As a member of the League of Women Voters’ Housing Committee of the Los Altos/Mountain View Area chapter, I was able to meet with you together with other LWV members who are residents of Los Altos. We provided you with questions in advance for this meeting and, like the meeting with LAR members, you answered our questions and provided a good deal of additional information which we found very useful.

We are very pleased with the number of community outreach meetings you have attended to educate the community and, most importantly, receive our input regarding the Housing Element. Thank you for all your hard work for the City of Los Altos.

Best regards,
Freddie Wheeler
Co-founder, Steering Committee member
www.LosAltosResidents.org

778
Agenda Item # 3.

PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE

To send correspondence to the City Council, on matters listed on the agenda please email [email protected]
779
Agenda Item # 3.

January 22, 2023
Re: Agenda Item # 3 – Sixth Cycle Housing Element 2023-2031 Dear Mayor Meadows and Members of the Los Altos City Council:

The LWV was pleased to see that at its January 10th meeting the Council was supportive of the language we suggested for Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites and Program 2.C Assist in securing funding for affordable housing projects by waiving City fees. We urge the Council to formally adopt the Housing Element presented by Staff. We are optimistic that the Revised 6th Cycle Housing Element will be substantially compliant with State law and will provide a roadmap for production of much-needed housing in Los Altos. (Please send any questions about this email to Sue Russell at Karin Bricker, President LWV of Los Altos/Mountain View Area Cc: Gabe Engeland Nick Zornes Angel Rodriguez
[email protected]
780
Agenda Item # 3.

January 22, 2023
Dear Mayor Meadows and Councilmembers,
Thank you for your hard work as well as that of the Staff to ensure that our Housing Element fulfills the requirements from the State and creates a plan for our city for development. We urge you to adopt the update to the Housing Element, which will allow submission to HCD before the deadline of January 31st.

The process to update the Housing Element, which of course started more than a year ago with a different Council and many different staff members, has been thorough. We have observed the coordination, collaboration, and much detail-oriented work to create the current document. At LAAHA we are excited about the document that has been created. It lays out a plan for the future of development in our city that will allow more housing, particularly more housing of various types and various costs.

There is still much work ahead and an ambitious timeline to complete it, but we look forward to developments in the next 8 years that lead to continued vibrancy in Los Altos. Please adopt the Housing Element and let’s get on with the work.

Respectfully,
LAAHA Steering Committee
Los Altos Affordable Housing Alliance
Committed to educating and inspiring the Los Altos community to build housing that is affordable for those who live and work in Los Altos
https://losaltosaffordablehousing.org/
781
Agenda Item # 3.

PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE

To send correspondence to the City Council, on matters listed on the agenda please email [email protected]
782
Agenda Item # 3.

From: Janet Hurt
To: Public Comment
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT AGENDA ITEM 3-1/24
Date: Monday, January 23, 2023 8:07:46 PM
I want to provide comment regarding the medical offices along Altos Oaks and my understanding that they will be converted to multi-family residence. I am very concerned about this transition. We moved to Golden Way so our son can attend Loyola Grammar school and take part in building relationships with the Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, PT Works for physical therapy, and Altos Eye Physicians community. My understanding is these doctor offices will be converted to multifamily residence that will include up to 100 living units. Why would the city close these multiinstitutional medical offices and replace them with residential homes? These practices have been around for many decades and serve so many families who depend on these local offices. Where will local residence go once these offices are closed, I would guess that some of the doctor offices will close for good leaving many residences without care as many new doctor offices in Los Altos are not accepting new patients. One of the many reasons we chose to move to Los Altos (Golden Way) was the charm and location of Loyola and a variety of local doctor offices and specialties. This will significantly impact our health care and our reason for living where we do.

The other major concern is the impact to traffic with adding up to 100 living spaces in such a small street – I understand these dwellings can be up to 3 stories which will significantly impact (negatively) living and traveling in and around this area (we live on Golden Way) which will impact parking in and round our house. Given the traffic for Loyola and the local doctor offices, the traffic is manageable as well as parking, I see that significantly changing with the addition of the 100 housing units. This will be a nightmare for all of us living on Golden Way and Altos Oaks – I believe these roads will be a nightmare for all local residents.

I urge you to reconsider and allow the Altos Oaks doctor offices/dentists/specialists to remain on Alto Oaks and that you find a new place to build these housing units. The damage that will be done to this area, the loss of these beloved medical practices, the traffic, noise, and charm will be lost forever. I urge you to stop this plan of closing the beloved medical offices on Altos Oaks and move the 100-unit residential plan to another location in Los Altos.

Kind Regards,
Janet Hurt
Golden Way
Los Altos
Confidentiality Notice. This email (including all attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may include information that is confidential, privileged and/or attorney work product. Any review, disclosure, distribution or reliance upon this email by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies including any attachments.
783
Agenda Item # 3.

From: Payal B
To: Public Comment
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT AGENDA ITEM 3 - 1/24/23
Date: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:30:03 AM
The OA district on Altos Oaks Dr should not be rezoned to allow multifamily residential for reasons stated below:
-It will be unsafe for children to access Mckenzie park as the road will be a lot busier. -Each office is proposed to be zoned for 6-7 units, which would mean it could be a multistory.

This is a privacy concern for nearby residences.
-The OA district on Altos Oaks Dr doesn’t have the infrastructure in terms of roads that lead to it to support the high traffic density that the multifamily residential will cause. -Payal
784
Agenda Item # 3.

From: Anirban Ray
To: Public Comment
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT AGENDA ITEM 3 - 1/24/23
Date: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 11:35:06 AM
Hello,
Requesting the City Council to reconsider rezoning of the medical practices along Altos Oaks Dr as part of the Housing Element update. This rezoning not only is a privacy concern for abutting houses but also is a safety issue for children in our neighborhood walking to access Mckenzie park and Loyola Elementary school due to the increased traffic. The traffic currently at Altos Oaks Dr medical offices is just about at a level that is not disruptive to nearby residential areas. Zoning this for multifamily residential or mixed use of offices along with residential will cause huge traffic disruptions. It will make the traffic unmanageable on Altos Oaks Dr and the service road on the other side.

While I truly support affordable housing, urging the City Council to carefully consider the implications of this rezoning and do what is best for the safety of our community. Higher density construction in the downtown areas will allow us to meet the numbers required by the state without causing disruptions
to residential neighborhoods.
-Anirban
785
Agenda Item # 3.

From: Shani Kleinhaus
To: City Council; Public Comment
Cc: Planning Services; Nick Zornes
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT AGENDA ITEM 3 - January 24, 2023 Date: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 12:13:41 PM
Attachments: Los Altos Housing element 1-24-23 (2).pdf
RB2 Comments PreliminaryProjectReview 2100WoodsLane PPR21-0007withAttachment (4) (1).pdf Dear Mayor Meadows and Los Altos City Council,
The Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society promotes the enjoyment, understanding, and protection of birds and other wildlife by engaging people of all ages in birding, education, and conservation. We work in open space and urban landscape to protect species and their habitats.

Because of the great importance of waterways and wetlands to our species, these natural resources are of great importance to our members. As we have previously highlighted, the 2100 Woods Lane property is an important natural feature in Los Altos. It is a place where special status species can be found and is therefore treasured by the community.

We respectfully asks that the City of Los Altos:

Identify in the Mitigated Negative Declaration all waters of the United States, as delineated by the Army Corps of Engineers in the attached letter from Mr. Brian Wines, Water Board Water Resource Control Engineer, Watershed Division, to the City of Los Altos Planning Department.

That Mr. Brian Wines’ letter and additional information from the Army Corps of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Wildlife for the creek, wetlands and riparian watershed located on APN 34204089 & 34204078 be included in the City Planning file and shared with people who inquire with City Planning about the 2100 Woods Lane property.

In addition, we ask to be notified of any project applications or CEQA documents that pertain to the 2100 Woods Lane property, at address below.

Thank you,
Shani Kleinhaus, Ph.D.

Environmental Advocate
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
22221 McClellan Rd.

Cupertino, CA 95014
g
786
Agenda Item # 3.

To: Mayor Meadows and Los Altos City Council
January 24, 2023
Re: Item 3 on tonight’s Agenda: Sixth Cycle Housing Element 2023-2031 Dear Mayor Meadow and Council members,
The Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society promotes the enjoyment, understanding, and protection of birds and other wildlife by engaging people of all ages in birding, education, and conservation. We work in open space and urban landscape to protect species and their habitats. Because of the great importance of waterways and wetlands to our species, these natural resources are of great importance to our members. As we have previously highlighted, the 2100 Woods Lane property is an important natural feature in Los Altos. It is a place where special status species can be found and is therefore treasured by the community.

We respectfully asks that the City of Los Altos:
1) Identify in the Mitigated Negative Declaration all waters of the United States, as delineated by the Army Corps of Engineers in the attached letter from Mr. Brian Wines, Water Board Water Resource Control Engineer, Watershed Division, to the City of Los Altos Planning Department. 2) That Mr. Brian Wines’ letter and additional information from the Army Corps of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Wildlife for the creek, wetlands and riparian watershed located on APN 34204089 & 34204078 be included in the City Planning file and shared with people who inquire with City Planning about the 2100 Woods Lane property.

In addition, we ask to be notified of any project applications or CEQA documents that pertain to the 2100 Woods Lane property, at address below.

Thank you,
Shani Kleinhaus, Ph.D.

Environmental Advocate
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
22221 McClellan Rd.

Cupertino, CA 95014
787
Agenda Item # 3.

San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
March 2, 2022
City of Los Altos
Planning Department
Attn: Sean Gallegos, Senior Planner ([email protected]) Subject: Comments on the Preliminary Project Review, 2100 Woods Lane, Application No. PPR21-0007
Dear Mr. Gallegos,
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) staff appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the preliminary project review for a three story, 177-unit, Residential Care Facility for the Elderly that is proposed for construction at 2100 Woods Lane in the City of Los Altos. We are concerned that the plans for the proposed project that are posted on the City of Los Altos Planning Department website do not acknowledge the presence of a creek channel and freshwater wetlands on the Project site. On April 9, 2019, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers provided a delineation of waters of the U.S. at the property at 2100 Woods Lane in the City of Los Altos (See Attachment). This delineation identified more than 300 linear feet of a creek channel on the project site and 0.17 acres of associated freshwater wetlands. Please note that, while federal jurisdiction extends to the ordinary high water mark, Water Board jurisdiction extends to the top of bank and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdiction extends to the outer dripline of riparian vegetation at the top of bank.

The Water Board has regulatory authority over wetlands and stream channels under both the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and the State of California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (California Water Code, Division 7). Under the CWA, the Water Board has regulatory authority over actions in waters of the United States, through the issuance of water quality certifications (Certifications) under Section 401 of the CWA, which are issued in conjunction with permits issued by the Corps, under Section 404 of the CWA. When the Water Board issues Section 401 Certifications, it simultaneously issues general Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for the project, under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Activities in areas that are outside of the jurisdiction of the Corps (e.g., isolated wetlands, vernal pools, seasonal streams, intermittent streams, channels that lack a nexus to navigable waters, or stream banks above the ordinary high water mark) are regulated by the Water Board, under the authority of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Activities that lie outside of Corps jurisdiction may require the issuance of either individual or general WDRs.

Under the authority of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act, the Water Board has developed, and implements, the San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan 788
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos Planning Department - 2 - PPR21-0007
(Basin Plan), which defines the Beneficial Uses of waters of the State within the San Francisco Bay Region. Any permit action taken by the Water Board must be consistent with maintaining Beneficial Uses of waters of the State.

The project proponent should not assume that the Water Board will issue permits for the culverting of several hundred linear feet of a creek channel at the project site. When the Water Board receives an application for Certification and/or WDRs, staff reviews the project to verify that the project proponent has taken all feasible measures to avoid impacts to waters of the State (these impacts usually consist of the placement of fill in waters of the State). Where impacts to waters of the State cannot be avoided, projects are required to minimize impacts to waters of the State to the maximum extent practicable (i.e., the footprint of the project in waters of the State is to be reduced as much as possible). Compensatory mitigation is then required for those impacts to waters of the State that cannot be avoided or minimized. Avoidance and minimization of impacts is a prerequisite to developing an acceptable project and identifying appropriate compensatory mitigation for an approved project’s impacts. Avoidance and minimization cannot be used as compensatory mitigation. After avoidance and minimization of direct impacts to waters of the State have been maximized for the proposed project, the necessary type and quantity of compensatory mitigation for the remaining impacts to waters of the State are assessed on a case-by-case basis.

Under both the Clean Water Act and the San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), projects are required to demonstrate avoidance of impacts to waters of the U.S. and waters of the State, in conformance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s CWA 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines). The Guidelines provide guidance in evaluating the circumstances under which the filling of wetlands or other waters may be permitted. Projects must first exhaust all opportunities, to the maximum extent practicable, to avoid, and then to minimize impacts to jurisdictional waters. For non-water dependent projects, the Guidelines presume that alternatives that do not impact wetlands or other jurisdictional waters are available. Only after all options for avoidance and minimization of impacts have been exhausted, including implementing the project at an alternative location, is it appropriate to develop mitigation for adverse impacts to waters of the U.S. and waters of the State. The project proposes to fill more than 300 linear feet of a creek channel and associated freshwater wetlands for a nonwater dependent project (senior housing). Review consistent with the Guidelines is not likely to support the issuance Certification and/or WDRs for the proposed fill of all jurisdictional waters at the project site.

Even if the Corps, CDFW, and the Water Board were to issue permits for the proposed culverting of the creek and fill of wetlands at the project site, it will be difficult for the project to provide mitigation for the amount of proposed fill of waters of the State.

Mitigation for impacts to waters of the State should be “in-kind” mitigation. In other words, fill of creek channels should be mitigated by the creation or restoration of a creek channel. In-kind mitigation for the loss of the creek channel at the project site requires the creation of a minimum of more than 300 linear feet of new creek channel. However, due to the significant uncertainties associated with the creation of a new creek channel, 789
Agenda Item # 3.

City of Los Altos Planning Department - 3 - PPR21-0007
the actual required amount of linear feet of restored creek channel are likely to be significantly greater than 300 linear feet.

The project will not be able to purchase mitigation credits from a mitigation bank or an in-lieu-fee program. There are currently no mitigation banks with available riparian credits or freshwater wetland mitigation credits that have service areas that include Los Altos. Therefore, permittee-responsible mitigation will be required for fill of waters of the State at the project site.

Acceptable mitigation for fill of waters of the State at the Project site will probably be expensive, including the purchase of a mitigation site with the appropriate size and hydrology to support the creation of a mitigation creek channel. The resource agencies will require that a conservation easement, deed restriction, or other form of restrictive covenant be placed over the property on which the mitigation channel is created.

The design of a geomorphically stable mitigation creek channel is a complex process.

Designs acceptable to the resource agencies should be based on the collection of sitespecific data, including, but not limited to: sediment load; bankfull flow elevations and channel cross-section dimensions; and thalweg stability. Such data will be essential to developing a design that could be submitted to the resource agencies for review and approval. Any channel creation would also require significant post-creation maintenance and monitoring. Ten to twenty years of post-construction monitoring may be necessary to properly evaluate the post-creation stability of a 300-foot long, or longer, mitigation creek channel. In addition, contingency measures must be developed so that corrective measures can be rapidly implemented in the event that the created channel proves to be unstable. The project would also need to ensure that adequate funding for contingency measures was available. Any permits issued for the proposed channel fill would probably require that the project proponents provide the resource agencies with a bond containing sufficient funding for the implementation and long-term monitoring and maintenance of contingency measures. And the project proponent would remain financially liable for the mitigation project until the mitigation feature had achieved all of its success criteria. In the event that the mitigation site proves to be unable to meet its success criteria, then the project proponent would be financially responsible for designing, implementing, maintaining, and monitoring an alternate mitigation site.

Please contact me at if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Brian Wines
Water Resource Control Engineer
Watershed Division
790
Agenda Item # 3.
791
Agenda Item # 3.
792
Agenda Item # 3.
793
Agenda Item # 3.
794
Agenda Item # 3.
795
Agenda Item # 3.
796
Agenda Item # 3.
797
Agenda Item # 3.
798
Agenda Item # 3.

Reviewed By:

City Manager City Attorney
GE
Finance Director
JH JF

AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
Meeting Date: January 24, 2023
Subject Affirm 2023 Council Commission and Committee Assignments: Pursuant to City Council Norms and Procedures, Affirm Mayor appointment to the Santa Clara County Library District JPA
Prepared by: Angel Rodriguez, Interim City Clerk
Reviewed by: Jon Maginot, Assistant City Manger
Approved by: Gabriel Engeland, City Manager
Attachment(s):

1. 2023 Council Assignments

2. Councilmembers Assignment Preferences

3. City Council Norms and Procedures
Initiated by:

City Council
Previous Council Consideration:

None
Fiscal Impact:

None
Environmental Review:

Not applicable
Policy Question(s) for Council Consideration:
 Does the Council wish to affirm the Mayor’s appointments to the Santa Clara County Library District JPA?
Summary:
 The Mayor annually appoints Councilmembers to serve on local, regional boards and Council committees and commissions for 2023
 The Mayor’s appointments were affirmed at the January 10, 2023 Regular Council meeting with the exception of the Santa Clara County Library District JPA 799
Agenda Item # 4.

Subject: Affirm 2023 Council Commission and Committee Assignments: Pursuant to City Council Norms and Procedures, Affirm Mayor appointment to the Santa Clara County Library District JPA
1/24/23 Page 2
Staff Recommendation:

Pursuant to City Council Norms and Procedures, affirm the Mayor’s appointment to the Santa Clara County Library District JPA.

Purpose
Affirm the Mayor’s appointments to the Santa Clara County Library District JPA.

Background
Per the City’s Council Norms and Procedures, the Mayor appoints Councilmembers to serve on various local, regional Council Committees and regional boards. These appointments are done at the beginning of each year with the exception of certain, multi-year appointments. The appointments are subject to affirmation by the full Council. The Mayor’s appointments were affirmed at the January 10, 2023 Regular Council meeting with the exception of the Santa Clara County Library District JPA.

Discussion/Analysis
For calendar year 2023, Mayor Meadows assignments can be referenced in Attachment 1.

Recommendation
Pursuant to City Council Norms and Procedures, affirm the Mayor’s appointments to the Santa Clara County Library District JPA
800
Agenda Item # 4.
2023 City Council Assignments
Confirmed at the January 10, 2023 Regular Council meeting *Designated Filer for Form 700
**Will be discussed as future City Council agenda item
***No Councilmember interest
January 2023
Council Standing Committees
Council Legislative Subcommittee** see footnote
City/LASD Schools Issues Lee Eng, Dailey
City/MVLA High School Issues Meadows, Weinberg
City/CUSD/FUSD Schools Issues Lee Eng, Fligor
Open Government Meadows, Weinberg
Youth Commission Interview Weinberg, Fligor
Community Organizations
CHAC Meadows
Los Altos/Los Altos Hills Joint Community
Volunteer Awards Committee
Fligor
County and Regional Organizations
*Association of Bay Area Governments Fligor Weinberg
Santa Clara County Cities Association – Board Meadows Weinberg Santa Clara County Cities Association – Legislative
Action Committee
Fligor Meadows
Santa Clara County Cities Association – Selection
Committee
Meadows Weinberg
*Santa Clara County Library District JPA No Appointment made on 1/10/23 – Lee Eng to
Continue until
appointment is made
*North County Library Authority (2 year term) Meadows, Dailey Valley Transportation Authority - Policy Advisory
Committee
Weinberg Fligor
Valley Transportation Authority - State Route 85
Corridor Policy Advisory Board
Fligor Weinberg
*Santa Clara Valley Water Commission (2-year term) Fligor Dailey County Housing & Community Development Advisory
Committee (HCDAC)
Dailey 0
Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority
(SVRIA) (3-year term)
Weinberg Dailey
Grand Boulevard Initiative Task Force Dailey Meadows
Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority Board Meadows Dailey Santa Clara County Expressway Policy Advisory
Board
Fligor 0
Commissions
Complete Streets Fligor
Design Review Meadows
Environmental Dailey
Financial Weinberg
Historical Meadows
Library Meadows
Parks and Recreation Fligor
Planning Weinberg
Public Arts Dailey
Senior Lee Eng
Youth Lee Eng
Primary Alternate (if any)
801
Agenda Item # 4.
2023 City Council Assignments Preferences
Preferences Identified by each Councilmember: High, Medium, Low *Designated Filer for Form 700
 currently assigned to committee
Council Standing Committees
Council Legislative Subcommittee 2 0 M M M
City/LASD Schools Issues 2 0 H L M L
City/MVLA High School Issues 2 0 H L M M
City/CUSD/FUSD Schools Issues 2 0 L H H M
Open Government 2 0 L H M M
Youth Commission Interview 2 0 L H H H
Community Organizations
CHAC 1 0 H L L L
Los Altos/Los Altos Hills Joint Community
Volunteer Awards Committee
1 0 M M L L
County and Regional Organizations
*Association of Bay Area Governments 1 1 H H M H
Santa Clara County Cities Association – Board
(Mayor is primary)
1 1 H L L H
Santa Clara County Cities Association –
Legislative Action Committee
1 1 L L L M
Santa Clara County Cities Association – Selection
Committee
1 1 H L M L
*Santa Clara County Library District JPA 1 1 L H H L
*North County Library Authority (2 year term) 2 0 M L L Valley Transportation Authority - Policy
Advisory Committee
1 1 L H H H
Valley Transportation Authority - State Route 85
Corridor Policy Advisory Board
1 1 L H L M
*Santa Clara Valley Water Commission (2-year
term)
1 1 H H H M
County Housing & Community
Development Advisory Committee (HCDAC)
1 0 H M M L
Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority
(SVRIA) (3-year term)
0 1 M L L X
(Appointe
d 2021,
term ends
12/ 2023)
Grand Boulevard Initiative Task Force 1 1 M L L L
Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority Board 1 1 H L L L Santa Clara County Expressway Policy Advisory
Board
1 0 M H L M
Commissions
Complete Streets 1 0 M H M H
Design Review 1 0 M H L L
Environmental 1 0 H M L L
Financial 1 0 H M H H
Historical 1 0 H L M L
Library 1 0 M M M L
Parks and Recreation 1 0 M M L M
Planning 1 0 M L M H
Public Arts 1 0 M L M L
Senior 1 0 L H H L
Youth 1 0 L L H M
Primary Alternate Dailey Fligor Lee Eng Meadows Weinberg Primary Alternate Dailey Fligor Lee Eng Meadows Weinberg 802
Agenda Item # 4.

Council Norms and Procedures
Last Amended/Adopted – September 14, 2021

CITY COUNCIL

NORMS AND PROCEDURES

COUNCILMEMBERS
Anita Enander
Neysa Fligor
Lynette Lee Eng
Sally Meadows
Jonathan Weinberg
803
Agenda Item # 4.
2 COUNCIL NORMS AND PROCEDURES

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1: GENERAL

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Values

1.3 Review

1.4 Compliance with Applicable Laws
SECTION 2: MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR SELECTION PROCESS

2.1 Reorganization

2.2 Election of Mayor

2.3 Election of Vice Mayor

2.4 Councilmembers Serving After a Break in Service

2.5 Appointment of Vacancy
SECTION 3: COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEES

3.1 Responsibility

3.2 Instructions and Expectations

3.3 Reporting

3.4 Standing Subcommittees
SECTION 4: COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES

4.1 Responsibility

4.2 Governing

4.3 Commission Liaisons

4.4 Attendance Requirement for Commissioners

4.5 Discipline or Removal of a Commissioner
SECTION 5: AD HOC COMMITTEES AND TASK FORCES

5.1 Instructions and Expectations

5.2 Reports

5.3 Redirection

5.4 Noticing
SECTION 6: ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

6.1 Attendance

6.2 Correspondence

6.3 Regional Boards

6.4 Response to Public

6.5 Proclamations

6.6 Reimbursement

6.7 Training

6.8 Limited Use of Electronic Devices during Council meetings

6.9 City Mission and City Seal

6.10 Use of email
SECTION 7: COUNCIL RELATIONSHIP WITH STAFF

7.1 City Manager

7.2 Agenda Item Questions

7.3 Complaints

7.4 Staff
SECTION 8: MEETINGS

8.1 Open to Public

8.2 Broadcasting of City Council Meetings
804
Agenda Item # 4.
3 8.3 Regular Meetings

8.4 Cancelling Meetings

8.5 Special Meetings

8.6 Virtual Meetings

8.7 Closed Sessions

8.8 Annual Retreat

8.9 Quorum

8.10 Minutes

8.11 Adjourned Meetings
SECTION 9: POSTING NOTICE AND AGENDA

9.1 Posting of Notice and Agenda

9.2 Location of Posting
SECTION 10: AGENDA CONTENTS

10.1 Setting the Agenda

10.2 Description of Matters

10.3 Availability to the Public

10.4 Limitation to Act Only on Items on the Agenda

10.5 Order of Agenda

10.6 Change in Order of the Agenda

10.7 Consent Calendar

10.8 Tentative Council Calendar

10.9 Placing items on a future agenda

10.10 Council questions

10.11 Emergency Meetings
SECTION 11: PROCEDURES FOR THE CONDUCT OF PUBLIC MEETINGS

11.1 Role of Mayor

11.2 Rules of Order

11.3 Appeal Procedures

11.4 Public Hearing Procedures

11.5 Staff and Consultant Reports

11.6 Public Comment

11.7 Motions

11.8 Reconsideration of a Council Action

11.9 Council Discussions and Deliberations

11.10 Councilmember Respect

11.11 Council and Staff Reports and Directions on Future Agenda Items

11.12 Conflict of Interest
SECTION 12: CLOSED SESSIONS

12.1 Purpose

12.2 Rule of Confidentiality

12.3 Breach of Rule of Confidentiality

12.4 Agenda

12.5 Permissible Topics

12.6 Rules of Decorum

12.7 Conduct of Meeting

12.8 Public Disclosure After Final Action
SECTION 13: DECORUM

13.1 Councilmembers

13.2 City Employees

13.3 Public

13.4 Noise in the Chambers
805
Agenda Item # 4.
4 SECTION 14: VIOLATIONS OF PROCEDURES
APPENDIX A: ROSENBERG’S RULES OF ORDER (SIMPLE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURES FOR THE 21st CENTURY)
806
Agenda Item # 4.
5 SECTION 1. GENERAL

1.1 Purpose. The purpose of these Norms and Procedures is to promote communication, understanding, fairness, and trust among the members of the City Council, staff, and members of the public concerning their roles, responsibilities, and expectations for management of the business of the City of Los Altos. The Norms also inform the public about what to expect from their elected representatives while performing their duties.

1.2 Values. Councilmembers shall represent the best interests of the City and community at large. Councilmembers shall treat fellow Councilmembers, members of the public, Commission and Committee members, and staff and consultants with respect, civility, and courtesy. All Councilmembers shall respect each other’s individual points of view and right to disagree. When addressing the public in any way, all Councilmembers shall make certain their opinions are expressed solely as their own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of any other Councilmember. Councilmembers shall respect and abide by the decisions of the majority of the Council at all times.

1.3 Review. The City Council shall conduct a review of this document biennially, or whenever a new Councilmember has been seated or Council deems necessary, to assist Councilmembers in being more productive in management of the business of the City. A new Council will consider the document within three months of its first regular meeting.

1.4 Compliance with Applicable Laws. All conduct of the City Council, Commissions, Committees and Subcommittees shall be in full compliance with all applicable laws, including but not limited to State laws such as the Ralph M. Brown Act, the California Public Records Act, and the Political Reform Act, as amended. If there is a conflict between the Norms and Procedures and an applicable law, the applicable law shall govern.

SECTION 2. MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR SELECTION PROCESS

2.1 Reorganization. The reorganization of the Council and the seating of new Councilmembers shall occur at a special meeting held on the earliest available Tuesday following the certification of election results, which is typically on the first Tuesday of December. If the certification is delayed because of a recount or other reason, the Council will wait until the certification is final before holding its reorganization special meeting.

Seating preferences on the dais shall be made by the Mayor, Vice Mayor and then by seniority of the rest of the members, in that order. If two members have equal seniority based on year elected, then the member with the higher vote count in their most recent election is considered to have higher seniority.

A community reception honoring the incoming and outgoing Mayor and Councilmembers will be held immediately following the reorganization meeting.

CITY OF LOS ALTOS

CITY COUNCIL NORMS AND PROCEDURES
807
Agenda Item # 4.
6 2.2 Election of Mayor. Only Councilmembers elected by the voters or appointed to the City Council due to the cancelation of an election may serve as Mayor.

The term of office shall be one year. The Councilmember must have served at least 23 months to be eligible for Mayor. A majority vote of the Council is necessary to designate the Mayor. If there is at least one elected Councilmember with a minimum of 23 months of service who has not served as Mayor, he or she shall be designated Mayor before those who have already served as Mayor.

If there are two or more such members who have served more than 23 months and have never served as Mayor, the one having served the longest time on the Council shall be designated as Mayor.

In the event there are two or more members who have never served as Mayor and have served the same length of time, the one who received the greatest number of votes at his/her/their election or re-election to the Council shall become Mayor.

In the event there are two or more members who have served as Mayor, who have served the same continuous length of time, and who have been re-elected to the Council, the one who received the greatest number of votes at his/her/their re-election to the Council shall become Mayor.

In the event three new members are elected to the Council, then an exception to Sections 2.2 and 2.3 will apply, allowing the immediate appointment of a Vice Mayor without the normal 11 months of prior service, and the following year such person may be appointed as the Mayor without the normal 23 months of prior service. Any member re-elected to the Council after a break in service will be treated in the normal sequence for appointment as Vice Mayor and Mayor, without regard to such person’s service prior to the break in service.

The Mayor may be removed from office, for cause, by a 4/5ths affirmative vote of the members. The person is to be advised of the proposed cause for removal at least 72 hours before the action is taken. Requests for an agenda item to consider removal of the Mayor should be made to the City Manager.

2.3 Election of Vice Mayor. Only Councilmembers elected by the voters or appointed to the City Council due to the cancelation of an election may serve as Vice Mayor.

The selection process for determining who shall serve as Vice Mayor will follow that of Mayor, except the Councilmember must have served at least 11 months to be eligible to serve as Vice Mayor.

The Vice Mayor may be removed from office, for cause, by a 4/5ths affirmative vote of the members. The person is to be advised of the proposed cause for removal at least 72 hours before the action is taken. Requests for an agenda item to consider removal of the Vice Mayor should be made to the City Manager.

2.4 Councilmembers Serving After a Break in Service. The time of continuous service for any elected member of the Council who previously served on the Council prior to a break in service shall be considered to have started at his/her/their election after their break in service.

2.5 Appointment of Vacancy. In the event of a vacancy of office by the death or resignation of any Councilmember, the Council shall appoint a new Councilmember within sixty (60) days 808
Agenda Item # 4.
7 after a vacancy becomes effective in compliance with the California Elections Code, unless the Council, by resolution, decides to instead call a special election. In the event of appointment, the Council shall determine the process for appointment prior to the application process and in accordance with State law.

SECTION 3. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEES

3.1 Responsibility. The Mayor shall appoint Councilmembers to standing and ad hoc subcommittees as required to accomplish the work of the Council, subject to affirmation by the Council at its next regular meeting. It will be the responsibility of these subcommittees to inform and make recommendations to the Council and submit them to the Council for a vote. Staff shall work with, and support, Council subcommittees as required.

3.2 Instructions and Expectations. The Council shall make certain that all Council subcommittees are properly instructed in their assigned scope of work and responsibilities.

The expected outcome of the committee’s efforts shall be defined in writing and approved by a majority of the City Council.

3.3 Reporting. Council subcommittee members are to keep the Council informed of the work and progress of their subcommittee. These reports or minutes shall be made in writing whenever a recommendation is made to the Council.

3.4 Standing Subcommittees. From time to time, the City Council may vote to establish standing subcommittees. These include: the Council Youth Commission Interview Committee, the Open Government Committee, and joint committees with the different school districts that serve Los Altos residents.

The Council Youth Commission Interview Committee consists of two members of the City Council and is responsible for conducting interviews of applicants for the Youth Commission and making recommendations to the City Council regarding the appointments. The Committee meets as needed.

The City/ School District Committees consist of two members of the City Council and two members of the Board of Trustees of the applicable School District. The purpose of the subcommittee is to facilitate communication between the two bodies on issues of mutual concern by both legislative bodies, as directed by the City Council and/or School Board.

Meetings are open to the public and are generally held at least bi-annually.

The Open Government Committee consists of two members of the City Council and advises the City Council and provides information to the City Manager on potential ways to implement the Open Government Policy. The Committee develops appropriate goals to ensure practical and timely implementation of the Open Government Policy and proposes any amendments to the Policy.

SECTION 4. COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES

4.1 Responsibility. The Council may appoint residents of the community to the City’s nonCouncil standing commissions and committees. Commission and committee members shall represent the interests of the community at-large when serving on these bodies. These commissions and committees will respect the public and staff and shall take seriously their responsibility for reporting to the Council. Each commission is to keep a rotation schedule 809
Agenda Item # 4.
8 for representation at City Council meetings by one of its members. Attendance is required when a commission has an item of interest on the Council agenda, so as to be available to answer Council questions.

4.2 Governing. The City’s Commissions and Committees are governed by the Commission Handbook as adopted and amended by the City Council. If there is a conflict between the Commission Handbook and the Norms and Procedures, the Commission Handbook shall control as to the Commissions and Committees.

4.3 Commission Liaisons. To facilitate the exchange of information between the Council and its Commissions, the Mayor will at least annually make liaison appointments to the Commissions. These appointments shall be ratified by the Council. Councilmembers shall respect the separation between policy making and advisory Commissions by: A) not attempting to lobby or influence Commissions on any item under their consideration; B) attending meetings of assigned Commissions, but not taking a position on an item before the Commission; C) not voting at the Commission’s meeting on any item; and D) assisting the Commission in scheduling recommendations to be heard by the Council.

If an issue arises regarding a member of any Commission, staff may work with the assigned Council Liaison to resolve the issue.

4.4 Attendance Requirement for Commissioners. Commissioners are expected to attend meetings in accordance with the Commissioner Handbook. If a Commissioner is not meeting the attendance requirement, the Commission Chair will first address the issue by talking with the Commissioner and will give the Commissioner an opportunity to meet the requirements. If the Commissioner continues to not meet the attendance requirement, the Chair can give the Commissioner an opportunity to resign from the Commission. If the Commissioner does not want to resign and continues to not meet the attendance requirement, the Chair should discuss with the staff liaison and Council liaison the appropriate action to address it.

4.5 Discipline or Removal of a Commissioner. Commissioners serve at the pleasure of the City Council. The City Council may discipline or remove a Commissioner at any time solely at the discretion of the Council. Any proposed removal can be with or without cause. A Councilmember who wishes to discipline or remove a Commissioner shall indicate their desire to place the discipline or removal on a future agenda at the end of a regular Council meeting. If three or more Councilmembers wish to agendize the discipline or removal of a certain Commissioner, the item will be placed on a Council agenda.

SECTION 5. AD HOC COMMITTEES AND TASK FORCES

5.1 Instructions and Expectations. The Council shall make certain that all Council-appointed Ad Hoc Committees and Task Forces are properly instructed in their assigned scope of work and responsibilities. The expected outcome of the Committee’s or Task Force’s efforts shall be defined in writing and formally approved by a majority of the City Council.

5.2 Reports. Ad Hoc Committees and Task Forces are responsible for keeping the Council informed about issues being considered, and their progress. This is to be accomplished by meeting minutes distributed in the Council meeting packets or through oral reports to Council. Ad Hoc Committees and Task Forces are responsible for advising the Council of any need for information or more specific instructions. 810
Agenda Item # 4.
9 5.3 Redirection. Ad Hoc Committees and Task Forces shall obtain Council concurrence before they proceed in any direction different from the original instructions of the Council.

5.4 Noticing. Per Resolution No. 2015-09, Ad Hoc Committees and Task Forces that are created by the City Council and are composed of less than a quorum of the Council and have members of City Commissions and/or members of the public on the committee are subject to the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act.

SECTION 6. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

6.1 Attendance. City Councilmembers acknowledge that attendance at lawful meetings of the City Council is part of their official duty. Councilmembers shall make a good faith effort to attend all such meetings unless unable. Councilmembers will notify the Mayor or the City Clerk if they will be absent from a meeting.

6.2 Correspondence. With some exceptions, proposed correspondence (including electronic) from individual Councilmembers/Mayor on City stationery shall be reviewed by the Council in draft form prior to release. On occasion, there are urgent requests for correspondence concerning legislation directly affecting municipalities. The Mayor may send a letter without first obtaining Council review if the content of the letter aligns with the Council’s position on the subject issue. A copy of the letter should be sent to all Councilmembers.

City letterhead will be made available for routine, discretionary correspondence (i.e., thank you notes, etc.), or such correspondence will be prepared by staff for signature, without prior consent of the Council. E-mails from Councilmembers should be respectful, professional, and consistent with the City’s Electronic Use Policy.

6.3 Regional Boards. The Mayor shall appoint Councilmembers to Regional Committees/Commissions/Boards as required by the governing bodies. These appointments are subject to affirmation by the Council. The role of the Council on regional boards will vary depending on the nature of the appointment. Representing the interests of Los Altos is appropriate on some boards; this is generally the case when other local governments have their own representation.

The positions taken by the appointed representatives are to be in alignment with the positions that the Council has taken on issues that directly impact the City of Los Altos. If an issue should arise that is specific to Los Altos, and the Council has not taken a position, the issue should be discussed by the Council prior to taking a formal position at a regional board meeting, to assure that it is in alignment with the Council’s position.

Council representatives to such boards shall keep the Council informed of ongoing business through brief oral or written reports to the Council.

Councilmembers shall make a good faith effort to attend all regional meetings that require a quorum of the appointed members to convene a meeting. If a Councilmember is unable to attend, he/she should notify his/her/their alternate as far in advance of the meeting as possible so as to allow the alternate to attend.
811
Agenda Item # 4.
10 Appointments to regional boards shall terminate upon the expiration of Councilmember’s term unless: 1) the Councilmember is reelected and can serve the full term on the regional board; or 2) action is taken by the Council to reappoint the individual to the regional board, and such appointment is consistent with the regional board’s policies.

6.4 Response to Public. It will be the responsibility of the City Manager to ensure a response is provided to all public correspondence for informational requests addressed to the Council.

Staff shall respond to all requests for services and provide a copy of such correspondence to the City Council, as appropriate.

6.5 Proclamations. Proclamations are discretionary public announcements directing attention to a local resident, organization, or event. The Mayor, without formal action of the Council, may issue proclamations. Requests for proclamations should be submitted at least one week in advance. This allows the Mayor to decide if a proclamation should be issued.

Alternatively, the Mayor, at his/her/their discretion, may refer a request to Council.

6.6 Reimbursement. City Councilmembers may be reimbursed for personal expenses for travel to and lodging at conferences or meetings related to their role as a Councilmember.

Reimbursements shall be subject to the City’s Travel and Expense Policy.

Brief reports must be given on any outside meeting attended at the expense of the City at the next regular Council meeting. Reimbursement is conditioned on the submission of this report to the City Council.

6.7 Training.

Ethics: Members of the City Council and commissions shall receive at least two hours of ethics training in general ethics principles and ethics laws relevant to his/her/their public service every two years. New members must receive this training within their first year of service. Members shall attend training sessions that are offered locally in the immediate vicinity of Santa Clara County or by completing online a state-approved public service ethics education program.

An individual who serves on multiple legislative bodies need only receive two hours of ethics training every two years to satisfy this requirement for all applicable public service positions.

Sexual Harassment: In addition, Councilmembers shall receive two hours of sexual harassment prevention training every two years, per State law. New members must receive this training within their first six months of service.

Brown Act: Members of the City Council and those individuals appointed by the City Council to serve on a commission or advisory committee will receive training on the requirements of the Brown Act at the time they begin their service and again when there is a scheduled Commission training.

Anti-Bias: At least every 2 years, Councilmembers and Commissioners will receive anti-bias training organized by the City.

Other Training. From time to time, the City Council may direct that Members of the City Council and Commissions receive training on different topics. 812
Agenda Item # 4.
11 The City Clerk is required to keep training records for five years to document and prove that these continuing education requirements have been satisfied. These documents are public records subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act.

6.8 Use of Electronic Devices during Council Meetings. The City Council permits and promotes the utilization of technology to ensure efficient and effective conduct of the people’s business, in accordance with applicable open meetings and records laws, due process rights of interested parties, and other applicable law and city policies. i. Councilmembers’ use of electronic communications and data devices (including – but not limited to – laptop computers, cell phones, tablet computers, pagers, wearable technology, and similar devices), at a meeting during which the Councilmember is subject to the provisions of the Brown Act shall be limited to personal use (note taking, etc.) and to access documents only available to the member (e.g., personal files stored on the cloud) or documents available to the public (e.g. documents on the City’s website, websites available to the public, etc.). ii. At a meeting during which a Councilmember is subject to the provisions of the Brown Act, the Councilmember may not use electronic devices to read electronic communications from, or send electronic communications to, members of the public, other Councilmembers, and parties to city proceedings. If a Councilmember receives an electronic communication which the member believes to be a family emergency, the Councilmember should ask the Mayor to take a break so the Councilmember may address the issue. The Councilmember should not read the electronic communication during the meeting.

6.9 City Mission and City Seal. The Mission of the City of Los Altos is a statement that reflects the values of our residents. The City Seal is an important symbol of the City of Los Altos.

No change to the City Mission and/or City Seal shall be made without Council approval.

Use of the City Seal shall be by permission of the City Clerk.

6.10 Use of email. City Councilmembers shall strive to use only their City email account for City business.

SECTION 7. COUNCIL RELATIONSHIP WITH STAFF

7.1 City Manager. City Councilmembers are always free to go to the City Manager to discuss any subject. Issues concerning the performance of a Department, or any employee must be directed to the City Manager. City Councilmembers shall not meet with groups of management employees for the purpose of discussing terms of employment or establishing employee policy. Direction to City employees, other than the City Manager or City Attorney, is the prerogative of the City Manager. In passing along critical information, the City Manager will be responsible for contacting all Councilmembers. The City Manager may delegate this responsibility to Department Heads.

7.2 Agenda Item Questions. The Council shall not abuse, embarrass, or harass staff. If a Councilmember has a question on a subject, the Councilmember should contact the City 813
Agenda Item # 4.
12 Manager prior to any meeting at which the subject may be discussed. This does not restrict Councilmembers from asking questions during a Council meeting.

7.3 Complaints. Councilmembers shall encourage people to file all complaints related to work or services provided by City staff directly with the City Manager and the appropriate staff member. The City manager and staff shall ensure that all people receive a response. If a Councilmember receives a complaint directly, the Councilmember should forward the complaint to the City Manager. If all Councilmembers are copied on the same complaint and the City Manager is not copied, the Mayor is responsible for forwarding the complaint to the City Manager.

7.4 Staff. Councilmembers may ask Department Heads for information. This informal system of direct communication is not to be abused.

SECTION 8. MEETINGS

8.1 Open to Public. All meetings of the City Council, except for closed sessions as authorized by law, shall be open to the public. All meetings shall be noticed as required to allow action to be taken by the Council.

8.2 Broadcasting of City Council Meetings. All regular Council meetings and study sessions shall be scheduled in the Community Meeting Chambers to allow for web streaming and simulcast on the City’s Government Access Channel, unless the number of participants exceeds room capacity. The final decision shall be the responsibility of the Mayor. All regular City Council meetings and study sessions shall be video-recorded, unless the City is unable to do so due to unforeseen circumstances or circumstances beyond the City’s control in which case the meeting shall be audio-recorded.

8.3 Regular Meetings. The City Council shall conduct its regular meetings at the time and place established by ordinance. At the first regular meeting in December, the City Council will approve the schedule of meetings for the next calendar year, which shall be the Council’s adopted regular meeting schedule. This practice does not, however, preclude the Mayor or a majority of the members of the City Council from calling additional meetings pursuant to Section 8.5, if necessary. If the Council schedules a meeting that is not part of the adopted regular meeting schedule, that meeting shall be a special meeting or a study session.

It will be the custom to have a recess at approximately 9:00 p.m. Prior to the recess, the Mayor shall announce whether any items will be carried over to the next meeting. The established hour after which no new items will be started is 11:00 p.m. Remaining items, however, may be considered by consensus of the Council.

8.4 Cancelling Meetings. Any meeting of the City Council may be cancelled in advance by majority vote of the Council. The Mayor may cancel a meeting in the case of an emergency or when a majority of members have confirmed in writing to the City Manager their unavailability to attend a meeting or agreement to cancel a meeting.

8.5 Special Meetings. A special meeting may be called at any time by the Mayor or by a majority of the City Council in accordance with the Brown Act. Written notice of any such meeting must specify the purpose of the meeting and the identities of members making the call.

Notice of the meeting must be given in accordance with law. Public comments at special meetings shall be limited to only those items described on the special meeting notice/agenda. 814
Agenda Item # 4.
13 The City Council may hold study sessions or joint meetings with other boards, commissions, committees, or agencies as deemed necessary to attend to City business. These meetings will be coordinated by the City Clerk. Study sessions are scheduled to provide Councilmembers the opportunity to better understand a particular item. While Council may legally take action at any noticed meeting, generally no formal action is taken at study sessions. If action is to be taken at a study session, then the agenda will state that action may be taken.

8.6 Virtual Meetings. If, pursuant to applicable laws or orders, the City Council holds a virtual special or regular meeting, the requirements set forth in the Norms and Procedures shall still apply, to the extent these requirements are feasible. Any feature on the platform hosting the virtual meeting that allows members of the public and/or Councilmembers to communicate outside of the approved methods of communication for the meeting, for example a “chat” feature, shall be disabled during the meeting.

8.7 Closed Sessions. The City Council may hold closed sessions at any time authorized by law (and in consultation with the City Attorney), to consider or hear any matter, which is authorized by law. The Mayor or a majority of the City Council may call closed session meetings at any time. Requests for a closed session should be made to the City Manager.

8.8 Annual Retreat. The City Council shall hold an annual retreat following the reorganization of the Council (typically in December or January). The primary purpose of the retreat shall be to review accomplishments for the past calendar year and to discuss and set priorities for the City Council for the following calendar year. The Mayor may also work with the City Manager to organize other activities for the annual retreat such as team building exercises and having guest speaker(s). The retreat may be held over multiple days.

8.9 Quorum. Three (3) members of the City Council shall constitute a quorum and shall be sufficient to transact business. If less than three Councilmembers appear at a regular meeting, the Mayor, Vice Mayor in the absence of the Mayor, any Councilmember in the absence of the Mayor and Vice Mayor, or in the absence of all Councilmembers, the City Clerk or Deputy City Clerk, shall adjourn the meeting to a stated day and hour.

Business of the City Council may be conducted with a minimum of three members being present; however, pursuant to the California Government Code, matters requiring the expenditure of City funds and all resolutions and non-urgency ordinances must receive three affirmative votes for approval.

8.10 Minutes. Staff shall prepare minutes of all public meetings of the City Council. Copies shall be distributed to each Councilmember. Closed session minutes, if any, shall be approved by all Councilmembers and kept in strict confidence.

8.11 Adjourned Meetings. The City Council may adjourn any regular, adjourned regular, special, or closed session meeting to a time and place specified in the order of adjournment and permitted by law. Similar to all sections in the Norms and Procedures, this section is subject to section 14 of the Norms and Procedures.

SECTION 9. POSTING NOTICE AND AGENDA

9.1 Posting of Notice and Agenda. For every regular, special, or study session meeting, the City Clerk or other authorized person shall post a notice of the meeting, specifying the time and 815
Agenda Item # 4.
14 place at which the meeting will be held, and an agenda containing a brief description of all items of business to be discussed at the meeting. This notice and agenda may be combined in a single document. Posting is to be according to the City’s Open Government Policy and State law.

9.2 Location of Posting. The notice and agenda shall be posted at City Hall and at the meeting location, if located away from City Hall, in a place to which the public has unrestricted access and where the notice and agenda are not likely to be removed or obscured by other posted material, and to the City website. Similar to all sections in the Norms and Procedures, this section is subject to Section 14 of the Norms and Procedures.

SECTION 10. AGENDA CONTENTS

10.1 Setting the Agenda. The Mayor, in consultation with the City Manager or his/her/their designee, and the City Clerk shall organize the agenda.

10.2 Description of Matters. All items of business to be discussed at a meeting of the City Council shall be briefly described on the agenda. The description should set forth the proposed action to be considered so that members of the public will know the nature of the action under review and consideration.

10.3 Availability to the Public. The agenda for any regular, special, or study session meeting, shall be made available to the general public as required by law.

10.4 Limitation to Act Only on Items on the Agenda. No action shall be taken by the City Council on any item not on the posted agenda, subject only to the exceptions listed below:

A. Upon a majority determination that an “emergency exception” (as defined by State Law) exists; or
B. Upon determination by a 4/5 vote of the full City Council, or a unanimous vote if less than a full Council, that an “urgency exception” (as defined by State Law) exists and the Council needs to take immediate action and that the need to take the action came to the attention of the City Council subsequent to posting of the agenda.

C. Two Councilmembers are required to request an item be placed on the agenda for the full Council to determine if the item meets the urgency or emergency exception. This determination is done in accordance with Section 10.4A or 10.4B above and occurs soon after the Council meeting begins. If the Council votes to hear the emergency or urgency item, the item would then be placed as a discussion item on that Council meeting’s agenda.

10.5 Order of Agenda. The prescribed order of the agenda for Regular Meetings of the Council will be as follows: Establish Quorum, Pledge of Allegiance, Closed Session Announcement (if needed), Changes to the Order of the Agenda, Special Items, Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda, Consent Calendar, Public Hearings, Discussion Items, Informational Items, City Council Reports, Future Agenda Items, and Adjournment.

10.6 Changes to the Order of the Agenda. “Changes to the Order of the Agenda” will be an agenda item that is heard soon after the Council meeting begins whereby the Mayor, Councilmembers and/or City staff may request a change to the order in which agenda items are to be considered. The Mayor will ask if there are any changes to the order of the agenda.

Any requested changes will be made in the form of a motion and a vote will be taken. If there are no requests for changes, the agenda will be taken in the prescribed order. 816
Agenda Item # 4.
15 10.7 Consent Calendar. A Councilmember or any member of the public may request an item be removed from the Consent Calendar. At the Mayor’s discretion, items removed from the Consent Calendar may be considered immediately after approval of the balance of the Consent Calendar or elsewhere in the agenda. Councilmembers shall be given the opportunity to ask a clarifying question about a consent item or make a brief comment about an item without having to remove the item from the Consent Calendar.

10.8 Tentative Council Calendar. The Tentative Council Calendar shall list items pending to come before Council within the next 12 months period and will be included as part of each Council Meeting’s Agenda Packet. City Staff will post the Tentative Council Calendar on the City’s website and make updates to the Tentative Council Calendar, as necessary.

The Tentative Council Calendar shall be included in each City Council regular meeting agenda packet as an Informational Item. Each quarter, the Tentative Council Calendar should be brought to Council as a Discussion Item for Council's review, discussion and possible action. At this time, Councilmembers may request new items be added with the required support from other Councilmembers depending on whether a staff report is required. The Councilmember requesting the item shall state the topic and which Council priority the request aligns to. Council and staff shall agree as to where the new item shall be placed on the Tentative Council Calendar.

10.9 Placing items on a future agenda. Members of the City Council may have any matter that can be legally agendized placed on the agenda of the City Council by indicating their desire to do so under that portion of the City Council agenda designated, “Future City Council Agenda Items.” Placing an item on a future agenda requires two Councilmembers to support the item if no staff work is required and three Councilmembers if staff work is required.

Unless an item is deemed an urgency exception or emergency exception, as defined in the Norms, Councilmembers shall request the placement of items on future agendas at a public Council meeting.

10.10 Council questions. Councilmembers shall strive to provide questions to city staff on agenda items as early as possible before a council meeting to allow adequate time to respond to the questions. Staff will provide all questions and answers to Council questions to all Councilmembers prior to the subject Council meeting, and, excepting attorney-client communications, to the public as soon as possible. Councilmembers shall strive to notify staff if they plan to raise a specific question at the Council meeting. If a Councilmember feels they need additional information to make a decision on an item, and the item is not time sensitive, the Councilmember may request the item be continued to a future meeting during Changes to the Order of the Agenda.

10.11 Emergency Meetings. The City Council may hold an emergency meeting (as defined in State Law) without complying with either the 24-hour notice requirement, or the 24-hour posting requirement, or both of the notice and posting requirements.

SECTION 11. PROCEDURES FOR THE CONDUCT OF PUBLIC MEETINGS

11.1 Role of Mayor.

A. The Mayor is responsible for running the meeting. If the Mayor is unavailable to run a Council meeting, the Vice Mayor shall run the meeting. The Mayor shall be responsible for 817
Agenda Item # 4.
16 maintaining the order and decorum of meetings. It shall be the duty and responsibility of the Mayor to ensure that the rules of operation and decorum contained herein are observed. The Mayor shall maintain control of communication between Councilmembers and among Council, staff and public. The Mayor has the prerogative to be the last Councilmember to vote on an item. The Mayor and Councilmembers are responsible to self-monitor their own conduct and speaking time to ensure a timely meeting.

B. Communication with Councilmembers

1. Councilmembers shall request the floor from the Mayor before speaking.

2. When one member of the Council has the floor and is speaking, other Councilmembers shall not interrupt or otherwise disturb the speaker.

C. Communication with Members of the Public Addressing the Council

1. The Mayor shall open the floor for public comment as appropriate.

2. Councilmembers may question a person addressing the Council at the conclusion of the person’s comments or upon expiration of the person’s time to speak.

3. Any staff member with an item on the agenda will be available to the City Council to answer questions arising during discussions between Councilmembers and among Councilmembers and members of the public.

4. Members of the public shall direct their questions and comments to the Council.

11.2 Rules of Order. The City Council adopts no specific rules of order except those listed herein.

The City Council shall refer to Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, as a guide for the conduct of meetings, with the following modifications:

A. Although permitted, a motion is not required prior to a general discussion on an agenda item. A pre-motion discussion allows the members to share their thoughts on the agendized item so that a motion can more easily be made that takes into account what appears to be the majority position.

B. All motions, except nominations, require a second.

C. A motion may be amended at the request of the maker and the consent of the person who seconded the motion. Such a procedure is often used to accommodate concerns expressed by other members.

D. A motion to amend may still be used.

The Mayor has the discretion to impose reasonable rules at any particular meeting based upon facts and circumstances found at any particular meeting. These latter rules will be followed unless objected to by a majority of the City Councilmembers present.

11.3 Appeal Procedures. Appellants shall be given the opportunity to speak first. Appellants and applicants responding to appeals may be given a total of up to 10 minutes each to present their positions to the City Council prior to hearing public comments. Appellants shall be given up to 5 minutes of rebuttal time after public comments are heard.

11.4 Public Hearing Procedures. All land use public hearing items shall follow the following procedures:

A. Staff presentation and/or report followed by clarifying questions from the Council B. Disclosure of communications: Councilmembers shall disclose all personal communications with any individual, including, but not limited to, the project applicant, 818
Agenda Item # 4.
17 prospective project applicants, neighboring property owners, residents, or any other party regarding development projects. These disclosures shall include a full description of the nature of the discussion, and in particular, any information not presented as part of the public record
C. The Mayor shall open the public hearing
a. Applicant presentation; the applicant shall be given a total of up to 10 minutes to present to the City Council
b. The Council shall take public comments
c. Applicant rebuttal period; the applicant shall be given a total of up to 5 minutes rebuttal time. If there are no public comments, the applicant shall not be given time for rebuttal
D. The Mayor shall close the public hearing
E. Council discussion, consideration, and decision

11.5 Staff and Consultant Reports. Staff and consultant reports will be given a limit of up to 10 minutes. Staff is to assume that the Council has read all materials submitted. Council shall be given an opportunity to ask questions of staff prior to hearing public comments.

11.6 Public Comment.

A. Persons present at meetings of the City Council may comment on individual items on the agenda. During Regular City Council meetings, comments may be offered on items not on the agenda under that portion of the agenda identified for Public Comment.

B. The limit for speakers will be 1 to 3 minutes, depending on the number of speakers, and the number of items that the Council is discussing at that meeting.

A group of speakers may designate a single speaker to represent the group. The designated speaker would be given the time which would have been allocated to others (to a maximum of 10 minutes) to speak. Individuals wanting to delegate time to another must be present at the meeting and must indicate their desire to cede time to a single individual by noting on a speaker card they are doing so. Persons who have ceded their time will not be permitted to speak on the topic at that meeting. Members of the public are not permitted to cede their time during quasi-judicial proceedings.

C. In order to facilitate an orderly meeting, anyone wishing to address the City Council is asked to fill out a Request to Speak card, indicating their name, address, and agenda item number/topic. A separate card is requested for each item. The request to speak cards shall be turned into the City Clerk before the item is heard by the City Council.

D. Upon addressing the Council, each speaker is requested, but not required, to first state his/her/their/their name, whom they represent and/or city of residence.

E. After the speaker has completed their remarks, Councilmembers may ask questions of the speaker after being acknowledged by the Mayor. Councilmembers shall be respectful of the speakers and shall not enter into a debate with any member of the public.

F. Upon conclusion of the Public Comment section for any item, the Mayor may provide Councilmembers and/or staff with an opportunity to respond to statements made by the public.

G. All Councilmembers shall listen to all public discussion as part of the Council’s community responsibility. Individual Councilmembers should remain open-minded to comments made by the public.
819
Agenda Item # 4.
18 H. The Mayor has the right to ask a member of the public to step down if over the allotted time or if comments are not germane.

11.7 Motions. It will be the practice of the City Council for the Mayor to provide Councilmembers an opportunity to ask questions of staff, comment on, and discuss any agendized item in order to help form a consensus before a motion is offered. After such discussion, the Mayor or any Councilmember may make a motion. Before the motion can be considered or discussed, it must be seconded. Once a motion has been properly made and seconded, the Mayor shall open the matter to full discussion offering the first opportunity to speak to the moving party, and thereafter, to any Councilmember recognized by the Mayor. Customarily, the Mayor will take the floor after all other Councilmembers have been given the opportunity to speak.

If a motion clearly contains divisible parts, any Councilmember may request the Mayor or moving party divide the motion into separate motions to provide Councilmembers an opportunity for more specific consideration.

Tie Votes: Tie votes shall be lost motions. When all Councilmembers are present, a tie vote on whether to grant an appeal from official action shall be considered a denial of such appeal, unless the Council takes other action to further consider the matter.

If a tie vote results at a time when less than all members of the Council, who may legally participate in the matter, are present, the matter shall be automatically continued to the agenda of the next regular meeting of the Council, unless otherwise ordered by the Council.

11.8 Reconsideration of a Council Action.

A. Request for Reconsideration by a member of the public.

Any member of the public may request that a member of the City Council that voted in the majority request reconsideration. In order for that member of Council to take action, such request must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on the third day following the decision. The requestor should specify in writing the reason for the request to reconsider. The Councilmember would then need to follow the procedure described in Section B below.

B. Request for Reconsideration by a Councilmember

1. Request by a member of the City Council.

Only a member of the City Council who voted in the majority may request reconsideration. The request may be made at the same meeting, or 24 hours in advance of the posting of the agenda for the next regular meeting. The request needs to be supported by two (2) Councilmembers, including the requesting Councilmember, for it to be added to the agenda. A request added to an agenda shall be structured in a manner that a motion for reconsideration may be considered immediately following approval of the request for reconsideration. 820
Agenda Item # 4.
19 In presenting a request for reconsideration, the City Councilmember making the request should state orally or in writing the reason for the request, without dwelling on the specific details or setting forth various arguments.

2. Motion for Reconsideration.

A motion to reconsider an action taken by the City Council may be made at the same meeting at which the action was taken (including an adjourned or continued meeting), or in accordance with Section 11.8B1. A motion to reconsider an action may be made only by a Councilmember who voted in the majority but may be seconded by any Councilmember and is debatable.

The motion must be approved by a majority of the entire City Council. At the time such motion for reconsideration is heard, testimony shall be limited to the facts giving rise to the motion.

C. Effect of Approval of Motion.

Upon approval of a motion to reconsider, and at such time as the matter is heard, the City Council shall only consider any new evidence or facts not presented previously with regard to the item or a claim of error in applying the facts.

If the motion to reconsider is made and approved at the same meeting at which the initial action was taken and all interested persons (including applicants, owners, supporters, and opponents) are still present, the matter may be reconsidered at that meeting or at the next regular meeting or intervening special meeting (subject to the discretion of the maker of the motion) and no further public notice is required.

If the motion to reconsider is made and approved at the same meeting at which the initial action was taken but all interested persons are not still present, or if the motion is made and approved at the next regular meeting or intervening special meeting, the item shall be scheduled for consideration at the earliest feasible City Council meeting and shall be re-noticed in accordance with the Government Code, the City Municipal Code and the Council Norms and Procedures. The Clerk shall provide notice to all interested parties as soon as possible when a matter becomes the subject of a motion to reconsider.

11.9 Council Discussions and Deliberations.

A. The discussion and deliberations at meetings of the City Council are to secure the mature judgment of Councilmembers on proposals submitted for decision. This purpose is best served by the exchange of thought through discussion and debate.

To the extent possible, Councilmembers should disclose any ex parte communication prior to discussion on an item.

Discussion and deliberation are regulated by these rules in order to assure every member a reasonable and equal opportunity to be heard.

B. Obtaining the Floor for Discussion.
821
Agenda Item # 4.
20 After the Council has commented on an issue, and a motion has been stated to the Council and seconded, any member of the Council has a right to discuss it after obtaining the floor. The member obtains the floor by seeking recognition from the Mayor. A member who has been recognized should limit his/her/their time to 3 minutes.

C. Speaking More Than Once.

To encourage the full participation of all members of the Council, no member or members shall be permitted to monopolize the discussion of the question. If a Councilmember has already spoken, other Councilmembers wishing to speak shall then be recognized. No Councilmember shall be allowed to speak a second time until after all other Councilmembers have had an opportunity to speak.

D. Relevancy of Discussion.

All discussion must be relevant to the issue before the City Council. A Councilmember is given the floor only for the purpose of discussing the pending question; discussion which departs is out of order. Councilmembers shall avoid repetition and strive to move the discussion along. Arguments, for or against a measure, should be stated as concisely as possible.

A motion, its nature, or consequences, may be debated vigorously. It is never permissible to attack the motives, character, or personality of a member either directly or by innuendo or implication. It is the duty of the Mayor to instantly rule out of order any Councilmember who engages in personal attacks. It is the motion, not its proposer, that is subject to debate.

It is the responsibility of each Councilmember to maintain an open mind on all issues during discussion and deliberation. It is not necessary for all City Councilmembers to speak or give their viewpoints if another Councilmember has already addressed their concerns.
822
Agenda Item # 4.
21 E. Mayor’s Duties During Discussion.

The Mayor has the responsibility of controlling and expediting the discussion. A Councilmember who has been recognized to speak on a question has a right to the undivided attention of the Council.

It is the duty of the Mayor to keep the subject clearly before the members, to rule out irrelevant discussion, and to restate the question whenever necessary.

F. After the Vote.

Once a majority of the Council has approved a motion, no further discussion shall be made unless the item is brought for reconsideration as described previously.

11.10 Councilmember Respect. Councilmembers shall abide by the majority decision of the Council, even if in the minority. Councilmembers appointed to serve on regional boards and committees shall maintain the Council’s position on an item, even if the Councilmember disagrees with that position.

11.11 Council and Staff Reports and Directions on Future Agenda Items. Council and staff reports at the end of Council meetings shall be limited to announcing Council, Regional Board activities on which Councilmembers serve, City and City-sponsored activities.

Community groups may announce their activities during Public Comments at the beginning of Council meetings.

11.12 Conflict of Interest. If a Councilmember becomes aware of a potential conflict of interest that would require the Councilmember to not participate in a discussion or vote on an agenda item before the City Council, the Councilmember should discuss with the City Attorney prior to agenda item being heard by the City Council. The Councilmember is expected to follow the direction of the City Attorney. If the Councilmember decides to request an opinion from the California Fair Political Practices Commission (“FPPC”), the Councilmember shall disclose at the next scheduled Council Meeting that such a request has been made. If the Councilmember is still waiting for the FPPC opinion at the time the agenda item will be heard by the City Council, the Councilmember may abstain from participating until the FPPC opinion is received. Upon receiving the FPPC opinion, the Councilmember shall share the opinion with the City Council and public at the next scheduled Council meeting.

SECTION 12. CLOSED SESSIONS

12.1 Purpose. It is the policy of the City Council to conduct its business in public to the greatest extent possible. However, state law recognizes that, in certain circumstances, public discussion could potentially jeopardize the public interest, compromise the City’s position, and could cost the taxpayers of Los Altos financially. Therefore, closed sessions shall be held from time to time as allowed by law. The procedures for the conduct of these meetings shall be the same as for public meetings, except that the public will be excluded for the closed session portion of the meeting.

Prior to convening the closed session portion of the meeting, the Mayor or City Clerk shall publicly announce the closed session items and ask for public input regarding any items on the closed session agenda.
823
Agenda Item # 4.
22 City Councilmembers shall keep all written materials and verbal information provided to them in closed session in complete confidence to ensure that the City’s position is not compromised. No mention of information in these materials shall be made to anyone other than Councilmembers, the City Attorney or City Manager, except where authorized by a majority of the City Council.

12.2 Rule of Confidentiality. The City Council recognizes that breaches in confidentiality can severely prejudice the City’s position in litigation, labor relations and real estate negotiations. Further, breaches of confidentiality can create a climate of distrust among Councilmembers and can harm the Council’s ability to communicate openly in closed sessions, thereby impairing the Council’s ability to perform its official duties.

The City Council further recognizes that confidentiality of discussions and documents are at the core of a closed session. Confidentiality is essential if the closed session is to serve its purpose. Therefore, the City Council will adhere to a strict policy of confidentiality for closed sessions.

12.3 Breach of Rule of Confidentiality. No person who attends a closed session may disclose any statements, discussions, or documents used in a closed session except where specifically authorized by State law. Any authorized disclosure shall be in strict compliance with these rules and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Violation of this rule shall be considered a breach of this rule of confidentiality.

12.4 Agenda. The agenda for a closed session will contain that information required to be disclosed pursuant to the Ralph M. Brown Act.

12.5 Permissible Topics. All closed sessions will be held in strict compliance with the Ralph M.

Brown Act. The City Attorney, or his/her/their designee, will advise in advance on topics that may be discussed in a closed session.

12.6 Rules of Decorum.

A. The same high standard of respect and decorum as apply to public meetings shall apply to closed sessions. There shall be courtesy, respect and tolerance for all viewpoints and for the right of Councilmembers to disagree. Councilmembers shall strive to make each other feel comfortable and safe to express their points of view. All Councilmembers have the right to insist upon strict adherence to this rule.

B. Prior to a vote, the Mayor shall ensure that the motion is clearly stated and clearly understood by all Councilmembers.

C. The Mayor shall keep the discussion moving forward so that debate and a vote can occur in the time allotted for the closed session. The Mayor will determine the order of debate in a fair manner.

12.7 Conduct of Meeting.

A. The Mayor will call the closed session to order promptly at its scheduled time.

B. The Mayor will keep discussion focused on the permissible topics.

C. The use of handouts and visual aids such as charts is encouraged to focus debate and promote understanding of the topic. All such materials are strictly confidential.

D. If the City Council in closed session has provided direction to City staff on proposed terms and conditions for any type of negotiations, whether it be related to property acquisitions or disposal, a proposed or pending claim or litigation, or employee 824
Agenda Item # 4.
23 negotiations, all contact with the other party will be through the designated City person(s) representing the City in the handling of the matter. A Councilmember, not so designated by the Council, will not under any circumstances have any contact or discussion with the other party or its representative concerning the matter, which was discussed in the closed session, and will not communicate any discussions conducted in closed session to such party.

12.8 Public Disclosure After Final Action.

A. The Ralph M. Brown Act requires that, as a body, the City Council make certain public disclosure of closed session decisions when those actions have become final.

Accordingly, the Mayor or the City Attorney shall publicly report any final action taken in closed session, and the vote, including abstentions, as directed by the Ralph M. Brown Act.

B. The report may be oral or written. The report will state any reportable action taken by the Council and how each Councilmember voted, if applicable. All other closed session discussions will remain confidential. Unless authorized by the majority of the City Council and if permitted under applicable law, the report will not state the debate or discussion that occurred.

SECTION 13. DECORUM

13.1 Councilmembers. Members of the City Council value and recognize the importance of the trust invested in them by the public to accomplish the business of the City. Councilmembers shall accord the utmost courtesy to each other, City employees, and the public appearing before the City Council. When speaking, a Councilmember’s tone should remain neutral and non-verbal communication aspects should be considerate and polite. Formal business attire is required only when Council meetings, workshops, or study sessions are held in Community Meeting Chambers and/or televised.

13.2 City Employees. Members of the City staff shall observe the same rules of order and decorum applicable to the City Council. City staff shall act at all times in a business and professional manner towards Councilmembers and members of the public.

13.3 Public. Members of the public attending City Council meetings shall observe the same rules of order and decorum applicable to the City Council. City Code Chapter 2.05, Public Meeting Rules for Conduct, shall apply to all City Council Meetings.

13.4 Noise in the Chambers. Noise emanating from the audience, whether expressing opposition or support within the Community Meeting Chambers or lobby area, which disrupts City Council meetings, shall not be permitted. All cellular phones and other consumer electronic devices shall be muted while in the chambers. Refusal is grounds for removal.

SECTION 14. VIOLATIONS OF PROCEDURES
Unless otherwise approved by at least a majority of Councilmembers or prohibited by law or due to circumstances beyond the City’s control, for example, a declared state of emergency, all Councilmembers are required to comply with these Norms and Procedures.

Nothing in these Norms and Procedures shall invalidate a properly noticed and acted upon action of the City Council in accordance with State Law.
825
Agenda Item # 4.
24 This document shall remain in effect until modified by the City Council.

AMENDED AND APPROVED: September 14, 2021.
826
Agenda Item # 4.
25 APPENDIX A
ROSENBERG’S RULES OF ORDER
827
Agenda Item # 4.

City of Los Altos 2023 Tentative Council Agenda Calendar All items and dates are tentative and subject to change unless a specific date has been noticed for a legally required Public Hearing. Items may be added or removed from the shown date at any time and for any reason prior to the publication of the agenda eight days prior to the next Council meeting.

Date Agenda Item
(Date identified by Council)
Agenda Section
(Consent,
Discussion Item -
note in red if
Public Hearing)
Dept/
Date of
request
to add.

February 14, 2023 STUDY SESSION - City Council Priority #9: Business Communities – 5:30 pm Start time
Study Session Anthony

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Design Contract for S 1st Street scape Consent Jim
Acceptance of the Council Chamber AV project Consent Aida Contract Amd for Bear Electric Consent Jim
Housing Element Implementing Resolutions Public Hearing Nick Commission Appointment recommendations Discussion Anthony Acceptance of the on-call sewer spot repair project Consent Aida Commission Handbook/Commission Meeting updates Discussion Jon Emergency Declaration – Ending emergency Consent Jon
Mid-Year Budget FY23 Discussion June
February 21, 2023 COUNCIL RETREAT – 5 PM START
February 28, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
March to be YOUTH ARTS MONTH - Proclamation Special Item Assembly Bill AB 1276 Public Hearing Aida
Restriction of Firearms on Public Property (JW/NF/AE 7/12) Discussion Angela Treasury Report Consent June
License Plate Readers Discussion Angela
Military Equipment Use Report Consent Katie/
Angela
828
Agenda Item # 5.

City of Los Altos Tentative Council Agenda Calendar
All items and dates are tentative and subject to change unless a specific date has been noticed for a legally required Public Hearing. Items may be added or removed from the shown date at any time and for any reason prior to the publication of the agenda eight days prior to the next Council meeting.

Date Agenda Item
(Date identified by Council)
Agenda Section
(Consent,
Discussion Item -
note in red if
Public Hearing)
Dept.

Future Agenda Item Policy Update Discussion Anthony
March 14, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Downtown Theater Study Update Discussion Anthony
Reach Codes Public Hearing Nick
Prop 218 Process Info Aida
Award the sewer system repair program project Consent Aida Acceptance of the CCTV Video Inspection; Project WW01011 Consent Aida March 28, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Reach Codes Public Hearing
Treasury Report Consent June
Investment Policy Consent June
SCVURPPP MOA Consent Aida
April 11, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
April 25, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Treasury Report Consent June
May 9, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
3rd Quarter Report
May 23, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Treasury Report Consent June
June 13, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
829
Agenda Item # 5.

Date Agenda Item
(Date identified by Council)
Agenda Section
(Consent,
Discussion Item -
note in red if
Public Hearing)
Dept.

Adopt Resolution No. 2022-XX approving the Report of Sewer Service Charges and directing the Filing of Charges for Collection by the Tax Collector
2 Printed Public
Hearing -
- not less than 10
days - published
once a week for
two consecutive
weeks 5/11/2022
& 5/18/2022
Adopt 2024 Budget Public Hearing June
June 27, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Treasury Report Consent June
Adopt 2024 Budget Consent June
July 11, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
August 22, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Treasury Report Consent June
September 12, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
September 26, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Year End tentative report – September (if needed)
Treasury Report Consent June
830
Agenda Item # 5.

Date Agenda Item
(Date identified by Council)
Agenda Section
(Consent,
Discussion Item -
note in red if
Public Hearing)
Dept.

Future Agenda Topics To Be Scheduled….

Proposed City policy that modifies the environmental analysis standard for circulation impacts from a Level of Service (LOS) analysis to a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis.

Public Hearing
League of California Cities – Role and Representation Presentation/Disc ussion
Council
Initiated
October 10, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
October 24, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Treasury Report Consent June
November 14, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
1st Quarter report FY 2021/2022
November 28, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Treasury Report Consent June
December 5, 2023 Council Reorganization
December 12, 2023 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
CAFR and Year End – 1st meeting December
831
Agenda Item # 5.

Date Agenda Item
(Date identified by Council)
Agenda Section
(Consent,
Discussion Item -
note in red if
Public Hearing)
Dept.

Subcommittee on Grants NF

03.25.20 22
Comprehensive multi-modal traffic study (analysis of recent projects projected parking, trip generation, & traffic impacts to actuals; ECR impacts should include adjacent streets) ES
PCI Report
Funding mechanisms for housing and housing programs – Nick Open Government Cmte
MWENDO – Council
Dark Skies Ordinance (LLE/AE/NF 7/12)
Update to personnel rules– HR Consent HR
Cities Association JPA – Council Discussion Angel
Compassion Training (LLE, AE) Discussion Council
Noise Ordinance Discussion Council
Airplane Noise Subcommittee Discussion NF and
SM
Flag Policy Pilot, 2nd Nov Meeting 2023 Discussion Council Sewer Rate Study Discussion Aida
832
Agenda Item # 5.

Date Agenda Item
(Date identified by Council)
Agenda Section
(Consent,
Discussion Item -
note in red if
Public Hearing)
Dept.

Ceding Time Discussion Anthony
Legislative Subcommittee Discussion
City Council Norms and Procedures Discussion
Leaf Blower Enforcement Discussion
SVCE Electrification Grant Consent Aida
HEU Implementation, Study Session Study Session
Council Accountability Policy (JW, SM, PD) Discussion
Bicycle parking ratio ordinance Discussion Nick
833
Agenda Item # 5.

Reviewed By:

City Manager City Attorney
GE
Finance Director
JH JF

AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
Meeting Date: January 24, 2023
Subject Independent Intake Official (IIO) Yearly Report Prepared by: Katie Krauss, Captain
Reviewed by: Angela Averiett, Chief of Police
Approved by: Gabriel Engeland, City Manager
Attachment(s):

1. Los Altos Council Report

2. 2022 Table of Formal Complaints

3. 2022 Table of Informal Complaints
Initiated by:

Stephanie Atigh, Independent Intake Official
Previous Council Consideration:
3/8/22, 2021 Yearly Report prepared for Council on Consent Calendar Fiscal Impact:

None
Environmental Review:

Not applicable
Policy Question(s) for Council Consideration:

Not applicable
Summary:
 In November 2020, in response to recommendations from the Citizens’ Police Task Force, the City Council directed the Police Department to initiate changes to the police complaint intake process including submitting complaints to an Independent Intake Official (IIO).  The IIO prepares an annual report on complaints for Council review.

Staff Recommendation:

None
834
Agenda Item # 6.

Subject: Independent Intake Official (IIO) Yearly Report Date Page 2
Purpose
To inform Council of the informal and formal complaints for calendar year 2022 Background
In November 2020, in response to recommendations from the Citizens’ Police Task Force, the City Council directed the Police Department to initiate changes to the police complaint intake process including submitting complaints to an Independent Intake Official (IIO). The IIO prepares an annual report on complaints for Council review.

Discussion/Analysis
IIO Council Report and Tables included as attachments for Council review.

Recommendation
None
835
Agenda Item # 6.
1 | P a g e

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL

BACKGROUND
In November 2020, in response to recommendations from the Citizens’ Police Task Force, the City Council directed the Police Department to initiate changes to the police complaint intake process including submitting complaints to an Independent Intake Official (IIO).

For the past two years, Stephanie Atigh, Attorney at Law, has been serving as the Independent Intake Official.

INDEPENDENT INTAKE OFFICIAL
The Independent Intake Official provides the following services:

Contracts with the city of Los Altos
Accepts complaints from the public
Shares complaints with the Police Department so that the administration can process the complaint
Accepts and logs complaints that were initially sent to the Police Department Monitors the progress of complaints to ensure timely processing Holds names of complainants confidential from the Police Department if requested
Generates an annual report to the city summarizing all police complaints received. The IIO Annual Report will not include personal identifying information about complainants or Department member.

The Independent Intake Official does not provide the following:

The IIO does not work for the Los Altos Police Department.

The IIO does not conduct investigations.

The IIO has no authority to change the result of an investigation.

The IIO will not release a complainant’s name to the Police Department if the complainant wishes to remain anonymous. 836
Agenda Item # 6.
2 | P a g e
INDEPENDENT INTAKE OFFICIAL’S ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2022
Personnel complaints are classified in 5 categories: Informal, formal, incomplete, decline to investigate, and exceptional clearance. This report summarizes complaints received in 2022.

A complaint can be classified as incomplete if the complaining party either refuses to cooperate or becomes unavailable after diligent follow-up investigation. At the discretion of the assigned supervisor or the Internal Affairs Unit, such matters may be further investigated depending on the seriousness of the complaint and the availability of sufficient information.

A complaint may be classified as decline to investigate when (1) the alleged incident could not have occurred based on the details the complainant provides that could best be described as hallucinatory in nature; (2) a reasonably objective person would assume the complainant’s description of the circumstances is based upon information that is clearly made up or imaginary; (3) the complainant’s description of the incident is based on what a reasonably objective person would describe as an implausible conspiracy theory; or (4) the complainant previously made the same complaint against a Department member and that complaint has previously been investigated and a disposition reached.

An exceptional clearance complaint is one in which the initial investigation of the complaint reveals that the misconduct alleged in the complaint did not occur, based on immediately available evidence and/or recorded media. Complaint investigators will complete formal written documentation of the incident using the Internal Affairs Investigation Report Format to explain why the case cleared exceptionally.

FORMAL COMPLAINTS
A formal complaint is a matter in which the complaining party requests further investigation or in which a Department supervisor determines that further action is warranted. Such complaints may be investigated by a Department supervisor of rank greater than the reported employee or referred to the Operations Commander depending on the seriousness and complexity of the investigation. If an investigation of a formal complaint discloses misconduct or improper job performance that was not alleged in the original complaint, the investigator will respond appropriately to those additional allegations.

The disposition of a formal complaint is classified in one of the following:
837
Agenda Item # 6.
3 | P a g e
Unfounded: when the investigation discloses that the alleged acts did not occur or did not involve Department members. Complaints that are determined to be frivolous will fall within the classification of unfounded (Penal Code § 832.8).

Exonerated: When the investigation discloses that the alleged act occurred but that the act was justified, lawful, and/or proper.

Not sustained: When the investigation discloses that there is insufficient evidence to sustain the complaint or fully exonerate the officer.

Sustained: A final determination by an investigating agency, commission, board, hearing officer, or arbitrator, as applicable, following an investigation and opportunity for an administrative appeal pursuant to Government Code § 3304 and Government Code § 3304.5 that the actions of a Department member were found to violate law or department policy (Penal Code § 832.8).

No Finding: When the complainant fails to provide information promised or necessary to complete the investigation, the complainant is no longer available to clarify details needed to make a finding in the case, or the complainant has advised that he or she is no longer willing to cooperate in the investigation.

Complaint Withdrawn: When the complainant affirmatively indicates the desire to withdraw his/her complaint.

A summary of four (4) formal complaints received in 2022 is provided in Table 1 attached to this report. In 2021 two (2) formal complaints were received.

INFORMAL COMPLAINTS
An informal complaint is a matter in which the complaining party is satisfied that appropriate action has been taken by a Department supervisor of rank greater than the reported employee. Informal complaints need not be documented on a personnel complaint form, and the responsible supervisor shall have the discretion to handle the complaint in any matter consistent with this policy.

An informal complaint is considered “resolved” when the complainant expresses satisfaction to the Department’s representative about the Department’s response to the complaint, and the complainant does not ask for further action by the Department. An informal complaint is considered “closed” when the concerns articulated in the complaint have been addressed by Department personnel, but the complainant is unable to be reached to discuss their level of satisfaction.
838
Agenda Item # 6.
4 | P a g e
A summary of fourteen (14) informal complaints received in 2022 is provided in Table 2 attached to this report. The Department received 14 informal complaints in 2021.

COMPLAINTS WHERE IDENTITY OF COMPLAINANT IS KEPT

CONFIDENTIAL BY INDEPENDENT INTAKE OFFICIAL
A complainant can request that his/her identity be maintained only by the Independent Intake Official and not shared with members of the Department. In 2022, the IIO did not receive any such complaints while in 2021, the IIO received two (2).

In 2022, the Independent Intake Official also received six complaints relating to activities of civilians, not Los Altos Police Department personnel. In each case, the complainant was notified that the Independent Intake Official could not assist with the complaint, and the complainant was directed to contact the appropriate city department, if any. 839
Agenda Item # 6.

Table 1
FORMAL COMPLAINTS 2022
Reporting
Date
Complaint
Number
Complaint
Type
Community
or Dept
Initiated
Racial
or Bias
Related
Use of
Force
Related
General
Description
Reporting
Method
Disposition
2/26/22 22-006 Formal Community No No Insufficient
investigation
Phone call to
Department
Sustained
6/5/22 22-017 Formal Community No No Rudeness Written
complaint
Pending;
Currently
under
investigation
6/24/22 22-018 Formal Department
Initiated
No No Violation of
standards of
conduct off
duty
Department
Initiated
Pending;
Currently
under
investigation
9/19/22 22-016 Formal Community No No Insufficient
investigation
In Person Exceptional
clearance
840
Agenda Item # 6.

INFORMAL COMPLAINTS 2022
Reporting
Date
Complaint
Number
Complaint
Type
Community
or Dept
Initiated
Racial
Bias
Use of
Force
Related
General
Description
Reporting
Method
Disposition
1/7/22 22-001 Informal Community Yes No Unfairly asked
to leave
vaccination
clinic
Email to
Police
Feedback
Incomplete
1/19/22 22-002 Informal Community No No Poor listening
skills; lack of
empathy
Email to
Police
Feedback
Incomplete
1/19/22 22-004 Informal Community No No Insufficient
Investigation
Email to
Police
Feedback
Resolved
2/2/22 22-012 Informal Community No No Insufficient
Investigation
Phone call to
Department
Resolved
2/14/22 22-003 Informal Community No No Improper
placement of
radar trailer
Email to
Police
Feedback
Resolved
3/22/22 22-007 Informal Community No No Rudeness In Person Visit to
Department
Resolved
3/29/22 22-008 Informal Community No No Insufficient
response; no
arrest made
Email to
Police
Feedback
Exceptional
Clearance
841
Agenda Item # 6.
4/15/22 22-009 Informal Community Yes No Rudeness Email to Police
Feedback
Resolved
5/24/22 22-010 Informal Community No No Insufficient
response
Email to
Police
Feedback
Exceptional
Clearance
6/1/22 22-011 Informal Community No No Stalking, theft, vandalism by
officer
Phone call to
City Manager
Unfounded
6/13/22 22-014 Informal Community No No Insufficient
Investigation
Email to City
Council
member
Exceptional
Clearance
6/14/22 22-013 Informal Community No No Insufficient
Investigation
Email to
Police
Feedback
Resolved
8/1/22 22-015 Informal Community No No Rudeness Email to PoliceWeb
None
(complaint
involved exemployee)
11/27/22 22-019 Informal Community No No Rudeness Phone call to Department
Resolved
842
Agenda Item # 6.

Los Altos City CouncilJanuary 24, 2023

Los Altos City Council
January 24, 2023