Agenda packet — Milpitas City Council, February 7, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

REGULAR MEETING OF THE MILPITAS

CITY COUNCIL

February 7, 2023 Milpitas City Council Agenda Page 1

AG E N D A
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2023
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 455 E CALAVERAS BLVD, MILPITAS, CA 7:00 PM (PUBLIC BUSINESS)

For assistance in the following languages, you may call:

Đối với Việt Nam, gọi 408-586-2400
Para sa Tagalog, tumawag sa 408-586-3051
Para español, llame 408-586-3072
The City Council meeting is held in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 455 E. Calaveras Blvd., Milpitas and via teleconference/Zoom webinar.

You may watch the Council meeting without providing public comment by accessing it via links here.

Meeting shall be livestreamed - Go to:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CityofMilpitas/
YouTube: https://www.milpitas.gov/youtube
Web Streaming: https://www.milpitas.gov/webstreaming

PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS
Oral public comments may be provided live during the City Council meeting in person or by registering for the zoom meeting in advance. To register you will need to provide an email address (not disclosed) and a name. To minimize technical difficulties, please make sure that you have the latest version of the Zoom Application. Below is the link to register for this meeting only:
https://ci-milpitas-ca-gov.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_6cLgCTvJQVOCYIqzXtUJWA After you register a link will be sent to you to join the City Council meeting in order to give your comments. All Zoom meeting attendees who wish to speak must click on the “raise hand” icon when the Mayor calls for public comments. If participating via phone, dial *9 to use the “raise hand” feature, and when called to speak, dial *6 to unmute your phone. Your phone number will be displayed in the live meeting. The Mayor will call speakers by name to address the City Council.

All comments provided shall be limited to three minutes or less as determined by the Mayor. All members of the public will be limited to one comment per agenda item, and one comment for non-agenda items.

NOTE: If a member of the public wishes to share any presentation materials for Council consideration, they must be submitted to the Clerk’s Office by email to [email protected] by 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. No presentations will be accepted in person in the Council Chambers .

MILPITAS CITY COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT
 Be respectful and courteous (words, tone, and body language).  Model civility.
 Avoid surprises.
 Praise publicly and criticize privately.
 Focus on the issue, not the person.
 Refrain from using electronic devices while on the Council dais.  Disclose conflicts of interest and affiliations related to agenda items.  Separate governing from campaigning.
 The Council speaks with one voice after making policy on issues.  Respect the line between policy and administration.
 Council will hold one another accountable to comply with this Code of Conduct.

1 February 7, 2023 Milpitas City Council Agenda Page 2

CALL MEETING TO ORDER by Mayor and ROLL CALL by City Clerk (7:00 PM) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Councilmember Barbadillo)
INVOCATION (Councilmember Lien)
PRESENTATIONS (7:05 PM)
 Black History Month
PUBLIC FORUM (7:10 PM)
Members of the public are invited to speak on any item that does not appear on today’s agenda. Comments will be limited to three minutes or less at the Mayor’s discretion. When called to speak, you are encouraged to state your name for the record.

As an item not listed on the agenda, no action can be taken, however the City Council may instruct the City Manager to place the item on a future meeting agenda.

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS

READING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT

APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR (7:15 PM)
Consent calendar items are considered to be routine and will be considered for adoption by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a City Councilmember, member of the audience or staff requests the Council to remove an item from (or be added to) the consent calendar. Any person desiring to speak on any item on the consent calendar should ask to have that item removed from the consent calendar.

C1. Receive City Council Calendar of Meetings for February 2023 (Staff Contact: Suzanne Guzzetta, City Clerk, 408-586-3001)
Recommendation: Receive City Council Calendar of Meetings for February 2023.

C2. Approve City Council City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of January 17, 2023, and Special Meeting Minutes of January 24, January 26, and January 31, 2023 (Staff Contact: Suzanne Guzzetta, City Clerk, 408-586-3001)
Recommendation: Approve City Council Regular Meeting minutes of January 17, 2023, and Special Meeting Minutes of January 24, January 26, and January 31, 2023.

C3. Receive the Preview List of Anticipated Items for the Next Regular City Council Meeting (Staff Contact: Suzanne Guzzetta, City Clerk, 408-586-3001)
Recommendation: Receive the list of anticipated agenda items for the next regular City Council meeting.

C4. Reconfirm Findings and Determinations Under Resolution No. 9165 and Assembly Bill 361 for the Continuation of Virtual Meetings of the City Council and Legislative Bodies (Staff Contact:

Michael Mutalipassi, City Attorney, 408-586-3040)
Recommendation: Move to reconfirm findings and determinations under Resolution No. 9165 and Assembly Bill 361 for the continuation of virtual meetings of the City Council and Legislative Bodies.

C5. Adopt a Resolution Declaring Weeds on Certain Properties to be a Public Nuisance and Set a Public Hearing for March 7, 2023 (Staff Contact: Arthur Belton, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshal, 408- 586-3384)
2 February 7, 2023 Milpitas City Council Agenda Page 3

Recommendation: Adopt a resolution declaring weeds on specific properties to be public nuisances and set a public hearing for March 7, 2023 and find a CEQA exemption.

C6. Receive a Report on the Local Emergency Related to the Severe Weather Event on January 4-5, 2023 (Staff Contact: Ashwini Kantak, Assistant City Manager, 408-586-3053) Recommendation: Receive a report on the local emergency relating to the severe weather event on January 4-5, 2023.

PUBLIC HEARINGS (7:20 PM)
Members of the public may be allotted up to three (3) minutes or less at the Mayor’s discretion, to comment on any public hearing item. Applicants/Appellants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of ten (10) minutes for opening statements and up to a total of five (5) minutes maximum for closing statements. Items requested/recommended for continuance are subject to Council’s consent at the meeting.

7. Adopt a Resolution Approving a Site Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus Permit, Tree Removal Permit, and Environmental Assessment to allow the development of 78 townhome condominiums and 12 accessory dwelling units and associated site improvements on an approximately 4.1-acre site located in the High-Density Mixed-Use (R3-TOD) Zoning District with a Transit Oriented Development Overlay at 675 Trade zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court, and find a CEQA exemption. The Project is located within the Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP) area and submitted under California Senate Bill 330 (Housing Crisis Act of 2019) (Staff Contact: Ned Thomas, Planning Director, 408-586-3273) Recommendation: Adopt a resolution to approve Site Development Permit No. SD22-0006, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0002, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0002, Density Bonus Permit No. DB22- 0001, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0006, and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0003, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and find a CEQA exemption.

8. Adopt a Resolution Certifying Milpitas Metro Specific Plan Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) (SCH#:2006032091) and adopting the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (updating the 2008 Transit Area Specific Plan) (Staff Contact: Ned Thomas, Planning Director, 408-586-3273; and Kevin Riley, TASP (Metro) Manager, 408-586-3292) Recommendation: Adopt a resolution to certify the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) and adopt the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan.

LEADERSHIP AND SUPPORT SERVICES (8:50 PM)

9. Review the List of Agenda Item Requests From Individual Councilmembers and Provide Direction to Staff, Through the Prioritization Process, on Groups 1 Items; Provide Additional Clarification to Staff, If Any, on Group 2 Items (Staff Contact: Ashwini Kantak, Assistant City Manager, 408-586-3053; Matt Cano, Deputy City Manager, 408-586-3012) Recommendation: (1) Review list of agenda item requests from individual Councilmembers and provide direction to staff, through the prioritization process, on which Group 1 items should be advanced; (2) Provide additional input to staff, if any, on Group 1 items that received Council direction to advance and all Group 2 items
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS (9:15 PM)
Members of the City Council or City Manager may make brief announcements at this time. Members of the City Council may also suggest future agenda items. For future agenda items, the City Council shall not debate the topic or engage in discussion but shall simply state a “yes” or “no” as whether to move the item forward. If a majority of the City Council agrees to move the item forward, the City Manager shall place the item on a future agenda.

ADJOURNMENT (9:20 PM)

3 February 7, 2023 Milpitas City Council Agenda Page 4

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE OPEN GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE
Government’s duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions and other City agencies exist to conduct the people’s business. This ordinance assures th at deliberations are conducted before the people and City operations are open to the people’s review. For more information on your rights under the Open Government Ordinance or to report a violation, contact the City Attorney’s office at Milpitas City Hall, 455 E. Calaveras Blvd., Milpitas, CA 95035 e-mail:[email protected] / Phone: 408-586-3040

The Open Government Ordinance is codified in the Milpitas Municipal Code as Title I Chapter 310 and is available online at the City’s website www.milpitas.gov by selecting the Milpitas Municipal Code link.

Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the City Council after initia l distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s office at Milpitas City Hall, 3rd floor 455 E. Calaveras Blvd., Milpitas and on City website. City Council agendas and related materials can be viewed online: www.milpitas.gov/government/council/agenda_minutes.asp (select meeting date)

APPLY TO SERVE ON A CITY COMMISSION
Commission application forms are available online at www.milpitas.gov or at Milpitas City Hall.

Contact the City Clerk’s Office at 408-586-3001 for more information.

If you need assistance, per the Americans with Disabilities Act, for any City of Milpitas public meeting, please call the City Clerk at 408-586-3001 or send an e-mail to [email protected] prior to the meeting. You may request a larger font agenda.

4 Milpitas City Council Calendar
February 2023

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

1 2:00 PM-Santa Clara VTA Monthly
Briefing - Northeast Group (CM)
(Santa Clara)
5:30 PM-Veterans Commission (CM)
7:00 PM-Community Advisory
Commission (AP)

2 9:00 AM-City Council Special Meeting
5:30 PM-Milpitas Chamber of
Commerce Board (GB)
5:30 PM-Santa Clara VTA Board of
Directors (CM)

3 4

5 6
7:00 PM-Parks, Recreation & Cultural
Resources Commission (HL)

7 7:00 PM-City Council

8 7:00 PM-Silicon Valley Clean Energy
Board of Directors (EC) (Cupertino)
7:00 PM-Planning Commission

9 4:00 PM-Treatment Plant Advisory
Committee (CM) (San Jose)
4:00 PM-Santa Clara VTA Policy
Advisory Committee (EC)
5:30 PM-Cities Association City
Selection Committee Special Mtg (CM)
{Los Altos Community Center}
7:00 PM-Youth Advisory Commission
(HL)
7:00 PM-Cities Assoc of SCC (CM)
{Los Altos Community Center}

10 11

12 13
4:30 PM-Economic Development and
Trade Commission (CM)
6:00 PM-Gateway/Main St. Specific
Plan Community Workshop (Virtual)

14 4:00 PM-HOPE Task Force
15 TENT: 6:00 PM-In-Person
Community Outreach: FY2023-24
Budget
6:00 PM-Energy and Environmental
Sustainability Commission (EC)

16 17

18 19

20 PRESIDENT’S DAY

CITY HALL CLOSED
21 6:00 PM-Closed Session
7:00 PM-City Council

22 7:00 PM-Planning Commission

23 1:30 PM-Santa Clara County
Emergency Operational Area Council
Meeting (CM) (San Jose)
24 25

26 27
7:00 PM-Science, Technology &
Innovation Commission (GB)

28 1:30 PM-Senior Advisory Commission
(AP)
5:30 PM- Special City Council
Meeting: CIP Study Session (Senior
Center, Room 140/141)

March 2023

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31

January 2023

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31

5 Item # C1.

REGULAR MEETING OF THE MILPITAS

CITY COUNCIL

January 17, 2023 Milpitas City Council Agenda Page 1

M I NU TE S
TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 2023
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 455 E CALAVERAS BLVD, MILPITAS, CA

The City Council of the City of Milpitas convened in a Regular Meeting of the Milpitas City Council on January 17, 2023, in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 455 E. Calaveras Blvd., Milpitas, and via teleconference/ Zoom webinar.

MEETING TO ORDER by Mayor and ROLL CALL by City Clerk
Mayor Montano called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:00 PM. Roll Call was taken by City Clerk Guzzetta.

PRESENT: Mayor Montano, Vice Mayor Chua, Councilmembers Barbadillo, and Lien, and Phan (6:02 PM).

ABSENT: None.

City Attorney Mutalipassi announced the closed session items.

The City Council adjourned to Closed Session at 6:03 PM.

ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION
(a) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
City as Defendant
Anil Kumar Bhatnagar v. City of Milpitas, et al. Santa Clara Superior Court case no. 20CV369408

(b) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
City as Plaintiff
County Sanitation District 2-3, et al. v. The City of San Jose, et al. Santa Clara Superior Court case no. 18CV325480

(c) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
City as Defendant
Gene Smith v. City of Milpitas, WCAB nos. ADJ9910212, ADJ10230698, ADJ10230699, and ADJ12410959

The City Council reconvened in regular session at 7:15 PM

CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT:

City Attorney Mutalipassi reported out the following actions regarding Item (c) on the Closed Session:
 Gene Smith v. City of Milpitas, WCAB case number ADJ9910212, unanimous approval of settlement in the amount of $40,000.00.
 Gene Smith v. City of Milpitas, WCAB case number ADJ10230698, unanimous approval of settlement in the amount of $50,000.00 plus $19,720.00 in attorney fees. 6 Item # C2.

January 17, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 2

 Gene Smith v. City of Milpitas, WCAB case number ADJ10230699, unanimous approval of settlement in the amount of $10,847.75 plus $6,561.25 in attorney fees.  Gene Smith v. City of Milpitas, WCAB case number ADJ12410959, unanimous approval of settlement in the amount of $50,000.00 plus $2,218.75 in attorney fees.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Lien led the Pledge of Allegiance.

INVOCATION
Vice Mayor Chua presented the invocation.

PRESENTATIONS
Mayor Montano, joined by the City Council, presented a proclamation in recognition of Martin Luther King, Jr.

Day. The proclamation was accepted by Tom Patterson, Vice President of the Social Equity Initiative.

PUBLIC FORUM
There were the following public speakers:

1. Rob Means

2. Inderjit Mundra

3. Voltaire Montemayor

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS City Attorney Mutalipassi asked the Mayor and City Councilmembers if they had any personal conflicts of interest. By roll call, there were no conflicts of interest. City Attorney Mutalipassi asked the Mayor and City Councilmembers if they had any reportable campaign contributions. Mayor Montano reported out that she received a campaign donation of $250.00 from SCCAOR. There were no other reportable campaign contributions.

READING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT
Councilmember Lien read the Code of Conduct.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion: to approve the January 17, 2023 Regular Meeting Agenda.

Motion/Second: Vice Mayor Chua / Councilmember Barbadillo Motion carried by the following:

AYES: Councilmembers Barbadillo, Lien, Phan, Vice Mayor Chua, and Mayor Montano NOES: None

CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion: to approve the consent calendar, pulling Item C9.

Motion/Second: Vice Mayor Chua / Councilmember Barbadillo Motion carried by the following:

AYES: Councilmembers Barbadillo, Lien, Phan, Vice Mayor Chua, and Mayor Montano NOES: None
7 Item # C2.

January 17, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 3

C1. Receive City Council Calendar of Meetings for January and February 2023 Received City Council Calendar of Meetings for January and February 2023.

C2. Approve City Council City Council Special Meeting Minutes of January 10, 2022 Approved City Council Special Meeting minutes of January 10, 2022.

C3. Receive the Preview List of Anticipated Items for the Next Regular City Council Meeting Received the list of anticipated agenda items for the next regular City Council meeting.

C4. Receive and Review the List of Agenda Items Requested by City Councilmembers Reviewed the list of items that have been requested by City Councilmembers and provided direction to staff as necessary.

C5. Reconfirm Findings and Determinations Under Resolution No. 9165 and Assembly Bill 361 for the Continuation of Virtual Meetings of the City Council and Legislative Bodies Reconfirmed findings and determinations under Resolution No. 9165 and Assembly Bill 361 for the continuation of virtual meetings of the City Council and Legislative Bodies.

C6. Adopt a Resolution Granting Acceptance of Public Improvements and Approve a Reduction of the Faithful Performance Bond for Parkside – Tarob Court Project, Phase 1 Residential Project and Grant Authorization to the City Engineer to Release the Performance Bond after the One- Year Warranty Period
Adopted Resolution No. 9211 granting acceptance of the completed public improvements for the Parkside – Tarob Court Project, Phase 1 Residential Project as shown on Public Improvement Plans No. 2-1234; and approve a reduction in the faithful performance bond to $35,900.00, which is 10% of the security’s original value which shall be in effect for the duration of the warranty period; and grant authorization to the City Engineer to release the performance bond after the one-year warranty period without further City Council action provided all required warranty work is completed to the satisfaction of the Engineering Director/City Engineer and find a CEQA exemption.

C7. Adopt a Resolution Granting Acceptance of Public Improvements and Approve a Reduction of the Faithful Performance Bond for the Finch Hollow Residential Project and Grant Authorization to the City Engineer to Release the Performance Bond after the One-year Warranty Period Adopted Resolution No. 9212 granting acceptance of the completed public improvements for the Finch Hollow Residential Project as shown on Public Improvement Plans No. 2-1336; and approve a reduction in the faithful performance bond to $122,000.00, which is 10% of the security’s original value which shall be in effect for the duration of the warranty period; grant authorization to the City Engineer to release the performance bond after the one-year warranty period without further City Council action provided that all required warranty work is completed to the satisfaction of the Engineering Director/City Engineer; and find a CEQA exemption.

C8. Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 38.852 Amending Section 13 of Chapter 10, Title XI of the Milpitas Municipal Code Relating to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) for consistency with recent changes to state ADU law (Assembly Bill 2221 and Senate Bill 897)
8 Item # C2.

January 17, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 4

Waived the second reading and adopted Ordinance No. 38.852 amending Section 13 of Chapter 10, Title XI of the Milpitas Municipal Code Relating to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) for consistency with recent changes to state ADU law (Assembly Bill 2221 and Senate Bill 897), and found a CEQA exemption.

C9. Approve and Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement with Lisa Wise Consulting, Inc. for Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Update Services for the Not-to- Exceed Amount of $879,515.00
Pulled from Consent Calendar.

C10. Consider Kiwanis Club of Milpitas Fee Waiver Request Approved a Fee Waiver of $900.00 for the Kiwanis Club of Milpitas Foundation’s 19th Annual MUSD Crab Feed and Auction Event scheduled for February 3, 2023.

C11. Authorize and Approve Travel to Carlsbad, CA for City Manager Steve McHarris to Attend the Annual League of California Cities City Managers Conference to be held on February 8 – 10, 2023
Authorized and approved travel to Carlsbad, CA for City Manager Steve McHarris to attend the Annual League of California Cities City Managers Conference scheduled on February 8 – 10, 2023 for an estimated not-to-exceed amount of $1,700.00 budgeted under Conferences/Trainings allocation for the City Manager’s Office.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

12. Conduct a Public Hearing and Adopt Ordinance No. 65.153 Adopting by Reference the 2022 California Energy Code; and Adopt Ordinance No. 65.154 Adopting by Reference the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code with Amendments Building Official Tott presented the report.

Mayor Montano opened the public hearing.

There were the following public speakers:

1. Linda Hutchins-Knowles

2. Patti Sexton

3. Voltaire Montemayor

4. Esther Duong read into the record by Linda Hutchins-Knowles

5. Jared Johnson

6. Jenny Green

7. Robert Whitehair

8. Satvika Ayer

9. Sean Armstrong

10. Julia Zeitlin

11. Allysson McDonald

12. Moria Merriweather

13. Hoai-An Truong

14. Birgitte Rasine

15. Enrique Navarro

16. Felix Mbuga

17. Lilian Koenig

18. Dashiell Leeds
9 Item # C2.

January 17, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 5

19. Rob Means

20. Mel Vieira
Mayor Montano closed the public hearing.

Building Official Tott, Deputy Director of Public Works Marshall, Farhad Farahmand from TRC Companies, PG&E Local Government Affairs Representative Christina Ramos, PG&E Codes & Standards Program Manager Kelly Cunningham, and Silicon Valley Clean Energy Deputy Director of Decarbonization Programs and Policy Zoe Elizabeth responded to questions from the City Council.

Vice Mayor Chua made a motion: to waive the second reading, find a CEQA exemption, and adopt Ordinance No. 65.153 amending Chapter 11 of Title II of the Milpitas Municipal Code adopting by reference the 2022 California Energy Code.

City Attorney Mutalipassi read the title of the ordinance.

Motion/Second: Vice Mayor Chua / Councilmember Lien
Motion carried by the following:

AYES: Councilmembers Barbadillo, Lien, Phan, Vice Mayor Chua, and Mayor Montano NOES: none.

Vice Mayor Chua made a motion: to waive the second reading, find a CEQA exemption, and adopt Ordinance No. 65.154 amending Chapter 19 of Title II of the Milpitas Municipal Code adopting by reference the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code with amendments recommended by staff.

Motion/Second: Vice Mayor Chua / Councilmember Barbadillo

City Attorney Mutalipassi read the title of the ordinance.

Councilmember Phan asked to make a friendly amendment to strike out Section 4.106.5.1 specifically pertaining to residential alteration projects. Vice Mayor Chua did not accept the amendment.

Councilmember Phan followed up by making a substitute motion: to waive the second reading, find a CEQA exemption, and adopt Ordinance No. 65.154 amending Chapter 19 of Title II of the Milpitas Municipal Code adopting by reference the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code with amendments recommended by staff and to strike out parts of Section 4.106.5.1 reading:

- “Alterations that include replacement or addition of over 50 percent of the existing foundation for purposes other than a repair or reinforcement as defined in California Existing Building Code Section 202; or where over 50 percent of the existing framing above the sill plate is removed or replaced for purposes other than repair, shall be all-electric buildings. If either of these criteria are met within a three-year period, measured from the date of the most recent previously obtained permit final date, the project shall be subject to the all-electric building’s requirements.

Tenant improvements shall not be considered new construction. The final determination whether a project meets the definition of substantial reconstruction/alteration shall be made by the local enforcing agency.”

AND

10 Item # C2.

January 17, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 6

- Exception No 1 “Multifamily residential building projects that have approved entitlements before the effective date of this ordinance may install fuel gas for water heating systems serving multiple dwelling units. The applicant shall comply with Section 4.106.5.2.”

Councilmember Barbadillo seconded the motion.

Substitute Motion/Second: Councilmember Phan / Councilmember Barbadillo Upon a call for the question, the substitute motion carried by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Barbadillo, Lien, Phan
NOES: Chua, Montano

LEADERSHIP AND SUPPORT SERVICES

13. Receive Report on 2023 Citywide Community Engagement Survey Public Information Officer Angelo introduced the item and FM3 Representative Curt Below presented the report.

There were the following public speakers:

1. Voltaire Montemayor
Councilmember Lien suggested staff and the City Manager look into assisting new businesses with license and permits.

The City Council received the report on results of the 2023 Citywide Community Engagement Survey.

14. Adopt a Resolution Appointing Glen Campi as Extra Help Public Works Manager Interim Human Resources Director Brown presented the report.

There were the following public speakers:

1. Voltaire Montemayor
Public Works Director Di Renzo and Deputy Public Works Director Marshall responded to questions from the City Council.

After discussion, motion: to adopt Resolution No. 9213 appointing Glen Campi as Extra Help Public Works Manager in accordance with California Government Code Sections 7522.56 and 21224 and approve and authorize the City Manager to execute an employment agreement with Glen Campi.

Motion/Second: Mayor Montano / Vice Mayor Chua
Motion carried by the following:

AYES: Councilmembers, Lien, Phan, Vice Mayor Chua, Mayor Montano NOES: Barbadillo

ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR
C9. Approve and Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement with Lisa Wise Consulting, Inc. for Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Update Services for the Not-to- Exceed Amount of $879,515.00
Planning Director Thomas responded to questions from the City Council.

The City Council recessed at 10:51 pm. The City Council reconvened at 11:16 pm 11 Item # C2.

January 17, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 7

There were the following public speakers:

1. Voltaire Montemayor
After discussion, motion: to approve and authorize the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Lisa Wise Consulting, Inc., for Comprehensive Zoning Update Services for the not-to- exceed amount of $879,515.00 and find a CEQA exemption.

Motion/Second: Vice Mayor Chua / Councilmember Barbadillo Motion carried by the following:

AYES: Councilmembers Barbadillo, Lien, Phan, Vice Mayor Chua, Montano NOES: None.

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Lien announced that Lunar New Year occurs on Sunday and offered New Year’s wishes.

ADJOURNMENT

Mayor Montano adjourned the meeting at 11:19 PM.

Draft meeting minutes submitted by City Clerk, Suzanne Guzzetta

12 Item # C2.

SPECIAL MEETING OF THE

MILPITAS CITY COUNCIL

January 24, 2023 Milpitas City Council Revised Minutes Page 1

M I NU TE S
TUESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2023
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 455 E CALAVERAS BLVD, MILPITAS, CA

The City Council of the City of Milpitas convened in a Special Meeting of the Milpitas City Council on January 24, 2023, in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 455 E. Calaveras Blvd., Milpitas, and via teleconference/ Zoom webinar.

CALL MEETING TO ORDER by Mayor and ROLL CALL by City Clerk Mayor Montano called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 5:30 PM. Roll Call was taken by City Clerk Guzzetta.

PRESENT: Mayor Montano, Vice Mayor Chua, Councilmembers Barbadillo, and Lien, and Phan.

ABSENT: None.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Montano led the Pledge of Allegiance.

PRESENTATIONS
Mayor Montano, joined by the Milpitas City Council, issued proclamations recognizing Tet / Vietnamese Lunar New Year and the Chinese Lunar New Year.

PUBLIC FORUM
There were the following public speakers:

1. Allysson McDonald

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS City Attorney Mutalipassi asked the Mayor and City Councilmembers if they had any personal conflicts of interest. By roll call, there were no conflicts of interest. City Attorney Mutalipassi stated there no items on the agenda that would require a disclosure of campaign contributions.

READING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT
Mayor Montano read the Code of Conduct.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion: to approve the January 24, 2023 Regular Meeting Agenda

Motion/Second: Vice Mayor Chua / Councilmember Phan
Motion carried by the following:

AYES: Councilmembers Barbadillo, Lien, Phan, Vice Mayor Chua, and Mayor Montano NOES: None

13 Item # C2.

January 24, 2023 Milpitas City Council Revised Minutes Page 2

AGENDA ITEMS

1. Adopt the Milpitas Housing Element Update – 6th Cycle (2023-2031), General Plan Resolution, and Addendum to the Milpitas General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (1) Conducted a public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 9214 pertaining to the 6th Cycle draft Housing Element; (2) Approved an Addendum to the Milpitas 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH#: 2020070348); (3) Adopted General Plan Amendment GP23-0001 to update the Housing Element for the 6th Cycle period of 2023-2031; and (4) Adopted the 6th Cycle Draft Milpitas General Plan Housing Element Update (2023-2031) as substantially compliant by state law, and authorized the City Manager, or designee, to respond to California Department of Housing and Community Development (HDC) findings letter dated January 10, 2023, and submit to HCD for compliance and certification on or before January 31, 2023.

Assistant City Manager Kantak introduced the item. Economic Development Director Andrade presented the report joined by Housing Authority Administrator Musallam, Senior Special Projects Associate Hom, and Raimi & Associates Consultants Eric Yurkovich and Antara Tandon.

Mayor Montano opened the public hearing.

There were the following speakers:

1. Allysson McDonald

2. Jaime Vasquez
Mayor Montano closed the public hearing.

Vice Mayor Chua asked to add a clause to Program 22 – Supportive Housing to include language to state the item is dependent upon issues being resolved at 1000 Hillview. She asked for Program 4 to reflect that City already has implemented a streamlined permitting process related to ADUs, but that it can be improved by revisiting the ARPA funding for ADU incentives.

Councilmember Phan asked about the letters other cities have received from HCD regarding their housing elements, and if Milpitas had received any similar letters. Senior Special Projects Associate Hom replied that HCD had been cooperative with the city, meeting with representatives several times prior to the deadline letter. Councilmember Phan asked to see an analysis in the future of what Milpitas included in their Housing Element and how that correlates to the housing numbers when it is later reviewed.

Vice Mayor Chua requested language be added to Program 11 regarding a plan or strategy to notify Sunnyhills residents of vacancies in Terrace Gardens.

Mayor Montano voiced support for including a navigation center to assist the unhoused. She also spoke on increasing the BMR from 15% below market to 20% below market. She advised on the importance of maintaining a balance between residential and commercial properties.

Vice Mayor Chua made a motion: to adopt Resolution No. 9214 pertaining to the 6th Cycle draft Housing Element; approve an Addendum to the Milpitas 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH#: 2020070348); adopt General Plan Amendment GP23-0001 to update the Housing Element for the 6th Cycle period of 2023-2031; and adopt the 6th Cycle Draft Milpitas General Plan Housing Element Update (2023-2031) as substantially compliant by state law, and authorized the City Manager, or designee, to respond to California Department of Housing and Community Development (HDC) findings letter dated January 10, 2023, and submit to HCD for compliance and certification on or before January 31, 2023, with recommendations to add a clause to Program 22 – Supportive Housing to include language to state the item is dependent upon issues being resolved at 1000 Hillview. She 14 Item # C2.

January 24, 2023 Milpitas City Council Revised Minutes Page 3

asked for Program 4 to reflect that City already has implemented a streamlined permitting process related to ADUs, but that it can be improved by revisiting the ARPA funding for ADU incentives. Vice Mayor Chua requested language be added to Program 11 regarding a plan or strategy to notify Sunnyhills residents of vacancies in Terrace Gardens.

City Attorney Mutalipassi restated the motion with updates to the Housing Element as stated by Vice Mayor Chua
Motion/Second: Vice Mayor Chua / Councilmember Phan
Motion carried by the following:

AYES: Councilmembers Barbadillo, Lien, Phan, Vice Mayor Chua, and Mayor Montano NOES: none.

ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember Lien called for the Council to have a moment of silence in honor of the victims of the Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay shootings. Mayor Montano invited Councilmember Lien to lead the moment of silence for the adjournment.

Mayor Montano asked what occurred with the car wash. City Manager McHarris responded that the city was not aware of a permit application having been received for a car wash.

Councilmember Barbadillo asked for a report of crime statistics related to car break-ins in the city. Mayor Montano noted that the Police Department provides updates on crime statistics every three months.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Montano adjourned the meeting at 7:17 PM and Councilmember Lien led a moment of silence for the victims of the Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay shootings.

Draft meeting minutes submitted by City Clerk, Suzanne Guzzetta

15 Item # C2.

SPECIAL MEETING OF THE

MILPITAS CITY COUNCIL

January 26, 2023 Milpitas Special City Council Minutes Page 1

M I NU TE S
THURSDAY, JANUARY 26, 2023
SONESTA SAN JOSE – MILPITAS HOTEL, 2ND FLOOR, KORBELL ROOM 777 BELLEW DRIVE, MILPITAS, CA

The City Council of the City of Milpitas convened in a Special Meeting of the Milpitas City Council on January 26, 2023, in the Korbell Room at Sonesta San Jose-Milpitas Hotel, 2nd Floor, 777 Bellew Drive, Milpitas, CA.

WELCOME AND CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Montano called the Special City Council meeting to order at 9:00 AM.

PRESENT: Mayor Montano, Vice Mayor Chua, Councilmembers Barbadillo (9:05 AM), and Lien, and Phan (9:15 AM).

ABSENT: None.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Montano led the Pledge of Allegiance.

PUBLIC FORUM

There were no public speakers.

READING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT
Mayor Montano read the Code of Conduct.

RETREAT
Councilmembers met together with the staff and consultant to discuss working relationships, meeting management and City Council goals.

ADJOURNMENT

Mayor Montano adjourned the meeting at 1:44 PM.

Draft meeting minutes submitted by City Clerk, Suzanne Guzzetta

16 Item # C2.

SPECIAL MEETING OF THE

MILPITAS CITY COUNCIL

January 31, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 1

M I NU TE S
TUESDAY, JANUARY 31, 2023
BARBARA LEE SENIOR CENTER, 40 N MILPITAS BOULEVARD, ROOM 140/141, MILPITAS, CA

The City Council of the City of Milpitas convened in a Special Meeting of the Milpitas City Council on January 31, 2023, in the Barbara Lee Senior Center, 40 N. Milpitas Blvd, Milpitas, and via teleconference/ Zoom webinar.

CALL MEETING TO ORDER by Mayor and ROLL CALL by City Clerk Mayor Montano called the Special City Council meeting to order at 5:31 PM. Roll Call was taken by City Clerk Guzzetta.

PRESENT: Mayor Montano, Vice Mayor Chua, Councilmembers Barbadillo, and Lien, and Phan.

ABSENT: None.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Montano led the Pledge of Allegiance.

PUBLIC FORUM
There were no public speakers.

ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS City Attorney Mutalipassi asked the Mayor and City Councilmembers if they had any personal conflicts of interest. By roll call, there were no conflicts of interest. City Attorney Mutalipassi stated there no items on the agenda that would require a disclosure of campaign contributions.

READING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT
Mayor Montano read the Code of Conduct.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion: to approve the January 31, 2023 Special Meeting Agenda

Motion/Second: Vice Mayor Chua / Councilmember Lien
Motion carried by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Barbadillo, Lien, Phan, Vice Mayor Chua, and Mayor Montano NOES: None

AGENDA ITEMS

1. Receive a Staff Presentation on the Preliminary FY 2024-33 Ten-Year General Fund Financial Forecast and Request Feedback on Prioritization of Council Referrals and Desired Service Levels to Inform the FY 2023-24 Budget Development
17 Item # C2.

January 31, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 2

The City Council received a staff presentation on the Preliminary FY 2024-33 Ten-Year General Fund Financial Forecast and provide feedback on prioritization of Council referrals and desired service levels to inform the FY 2023-24 Budget development.

City Manager McHarris provided opening remarks. Assistant City Manager Kantak and Finance Director Lai presented the report and responded to questions from Council joined by City department heads.

Councilmember Lien thanked staff for the presentation and asked for the status of the ADUs permitted by the City including if they are for rent or sale, low income, very low income. Assistant City Manager Kantak noted that there are no deed restrictions associated with ADUs. Councilmember Lien asked for additional details regarding the Emergency Operations Plan. Fire Chief Stelling spoke on the process of updating the Annexes to the plan. Assistant City Manager Kantak offered to send information on the Plan.

Mayor Montano asked for clarification on the definition of business engagements as referred to in the FY 22-23 Key Accomplishments. Economic Development Director Andrade noted that the metric is a combination of factors and that engagements with businesses or development teams don’t always result in a permit. Mayor Montano spoke on the unhoused and suggested writing a letter to the County to address the unmet needs of unhoused Milpitas residents. She asked for future Milpitas SMART fleet cars to be electric. Regarding Traffic Safety, the Mayor asked to monitor the traffic exiting I-680 to see if the City could qualify for federal grants.

Finance Director Lai continued with the presentation.

Mayor Montano emphasized the importance of the City having a plan in place to address the ¼ cent tax that will expire. Finance Director Lai said that 2028 was the last year the City could take a replacement measure to the voters to continue the tax.

Councilmember Barbadillo questioned if property tax and sales tax being the top two revenue generators are standard for cities. Finance Director Lai responded that it varies. He also asked about the revenue and cost savings related to measures taken during the pandemic to make up for lost revenue. Assistant City Manager Kantak responded that staff would send him additional information about this. Councilmember Barbadillo asked what would be an ideal revenue source. Finance Director Lai indicated it’s important to have a diversity of sources and to look at the economic diversity of the community. The Councilmember questioned the percentage of budget going to personnel and asked how much of it was for the community. Assistant City Manager Kantak replied that over three quarters of the budget is for personnel but emphasized that the funding for all City staff is to enable them to provide services to the community. Councilmember Barbadillo continued that he wanted to know how much goes to salaries and benefits and how much is personnel in the department budget allocations.

Assistant City Manager Kantak noted that the budget book provides a breakdown of budget allocations.

Assistant City Manager Kantak continued with the presentation.

Council recessed for a break at 7:50 pm. The Council reconvened at 8:00 pm.

There were the following public speakers:

1. Sonia Medina-Ashby
Council Referrals
Item No. 1 City Hall Address on building facade
Mayor Montano requested this be removed due to cost.
18 Item # C2.

January 31, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 3

Item No. 2 Solar Panels at City Facilities
Vice Mayor Chua asked to put the item aside but asked for staff to look into ways to fund the feasibility study. She emphasized that she didn’t want to use General Fund dollars for the project. Assistant City Manager Kantak responded that staff would research grants to continue the project. The project will be deferred until the City can identify and acquire the funds to move forward.

Item No. 3 SPAR Fund
Councilmember Phan emphasized the importance of a SPAR fund due to looming budget restraints.

Councilmember Lien and Mayor Montano both voiced their support for a SPAR fund. Mayor Montano moved to bring the item forward in the budget.

Motion/Second: Mayor Montano / Councilmember Barbadillo Vote: 5-0
Item No. 4 Lease for Vacant Land near library
Mayor Montano noted that City should be focused on buying land rather than leasing. After discussion, Council directed staff to revise the item from Purchase or Lease. City Manager McHarris asked if the Council wanted for the land to be purchased without encumbrance. Mayor Montano agreed that the property should be owned by the City with no strings attached. Councilmember Phan suggested it might be time to move on and not waste additional time pursuing the project. Councilmember Barbadillo and Mayor Montano agreed.

Item No. 5 Youth Skateboarder Plaque at Skate Park
Mayor Montano spoke in support of the item. Vice Mayor Chua moved to bring the item forward in the budget.

Motion/Second: Vice Mayor Chua / Councilmember Lien
Vote: 5-0
Item No. 6 Vision Zero Action Plan
Vice Mayor Chua voiced concerns with the cost and ongoing maintenance. She noted feedback that existing City programs/policies are already filling this role. The Vice Mayor did not support the program moving forward. Councilmember Lien agreed.

Item No. 7 Saturday Senior Center Hours
Vice Mayor Chua spoke in support of the item and moved to bring the item forward in the budget.

Motion/Second: Vice Mayor Chua / Councilmember Lien
Vote: 5-0
Item No. 8 Crossing Guards Program
Police Chief Hernandez provided additional background information on the Milpitas Crossing Guards Program. Vice Mayor Chua questioned if the benefits the contract company provides are comparable to the ones provided by the City. Police Chief Hernandez clarified that there would be no loss of compensation in transitioning to the contract service.

Vice Mayor Chua suggested the contract include terms that the City crossing guards should not be in the roaming guards. Police Chief Hernandez noted that roaming guards were already discussed with the company, it is the employee’s choice to become a roving guard. Vice Mayor Chua proposed crossing guard salaries be raised as an incentive.

Councilmember Barbadillo asked how many locations are we currently staffing and voiced support for Option B. Councilmember Lien agreed that Option B makes sense. 19 Item # C2.

January 31, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 4

Mayor Montano voiced concerns with outsourcing the crossing guards, citing that it’s not about pay and that crossing guards are proud to be part of the Police Department. She noted her preference for Option A and suggesting giving the crossing guards a larger raise to attract more people to the program.

Vice Mayor Chua indicated concerns with recruitment. She voiced support for Option B with the caveat that the Police Chief make sure crossing guards are still in touch with the Police Department.

Councilmember Phan made a motion to move forward with Option B. Vice Mayor Chua seconded the motion, but asked for a friendly amendment to raise the hourly rate to $25 with the same compensation structure the city has now. Councilmember Phan did not accept the amendment. Vice Mayor Chua withdrew the second. Councilmember Barbadillo seconded the motion.

Vice Mayor Chua made an alternative motion to move forward with Option B with the addendum of increasing the hourly rate of current crossing guards to a competitive rate. There was no second. The alternative motion failed.

Motion: Councilmember Phan / Councilmember Barbadillo
Vote: 3-2 (Noes: Vice Mayor Chua, Mayor Montano)
City Attorney Mutalipassi noted that the Police Chief needed feedback on the number of sites.

Councilmember Phan supported the option for 36 guards at 34 sites.

Item No. 9 Establish Funding source for Urgent Items Identified through Prioritization Process Vice Mayor Chua withdrew the item.

Assistant City Manager Kantak asked if there were any additional items that Council would want to consider:
- Vice Mayor Chua asked to consider the following items:
o Explore community feedback on which parks are suitable for permanent pickleball locations. o Explore public safety enhancement to ALPR (Automated License Plate Readers). o Ensure staffing relating to the program supported by the $3 million from Ro Khanna - Councilmember Barbadillo asked to explore a senior discount ordinance. - Mayor Montano asked to bring back all items that had previously dropped from consideration including the consulate office and EDC Corporation. She also asked to consider the following items:
o The City negotiate with the church next door to Alviso Adobe for improved parking. o Adding a phone number for the City Clerk’s office on the first floor of City Hall so constituents don’t have to speak with the cashier.
o Infrastructure for Beautify Milpitas for roads and maintenance of parks. o Main Street Revitalization infrastructure to underground utilities to put lights on trees. o Police Substation in the southern part of Milpitas.
o Navigation Center for the unhoused.
o Prioritize Selwyn Park.
o Create a public safety task force to brainstorm methods to keep the public safe. - Councilmember Phan asked to consider:
o Continue building a positive reputation for future employees to work here by providing a housing platform for employees to live in this city and explore workforce housing opportunities for prospective and existing employees.
o Explore public banking in the form of a credit union that City employees can utilize. o As a perk of working in Milpitas, transit passes for employees that commute. - Councilmember Lien asked for Council to consider:
o Contacting the library and place Narcan in the library. 20 Item # C2.

January 31, 2023 Milpitas City Council Minutes Page 5

ANNOUNCEMENTS
Vice Mayor Chua thanked staff for the meeting.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Montano adjourned the meeting at 9:30 PM.

Draft meeting minutes submitted by City Clerk, Suzanne Guzzetta

21 Item # C2.

TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM LIST
as of 1/31/2023

February 21, 2023 – Regular Meeting

CLOSED SESSION

INVOCATION (Councilmember Lien)

PRESENTATION

CONSENT CALENDAR

1. Receive City Council calendar for February 2023 (City Clerk)

2. Approve City Council Meeting minutes of January 17, 2023 (City Clerk)

3. Preview list of items for February 21, 2023 (City Clerk)

4. Councilmember Request List (City Clerk)

5. Appointments to Commissions (City Clerk)

6. Resolution Accepting Alviso Adobe Renovation (Engineering)

7. Crown Castle Fiber LLC License Agreement for Installation of Small Cell Facilities on Municipal Facilities (Engineering)

8. Adopt a Resolution Granting Acceptance of Public Improvements and Approve a Reduction of the Faithful Performance Bond for the Lantana Apartments Residential Project and Grant Authorization to the City Engineer to Release the Performance Bond after the One-year warranty period (Engineering)

9. 531 Vista Ridge Side Development Permit (Planning)

PUBLIC HEARING

10. Intro and First Reading – Tobacco Retail Permit Ordinance (Planning)

PUBLIC SAFETY

11. Receive a presentation for AB 481 (Police)

LEADERSHIP

12. FY23 Mid-Year Budget Amendment (Finance)

13. ARPA Quarterly Report

REPORTS
22 Item # C3.

CITY OF MILPITAS

AGENDA REPORT
(AR)

Item Title: Reconfirm Findings and Determinations Under Resolution No. 9165 and Assembly Bill 361 for the Continuation of Virtual Meetings of the City Council and Legislative Bodies (Staff Contact: Michael Mutalipassi, City Attorney, 408-586-3040) Category: Consent Calendar-Leadership and Support Services Meeting Date: 2/7/2023
Recommendation: Move to reconfirm findings and determinations under Resolution No. 9165 and Assembly Bill 361 for the continuation of virtual meetings of the City Council and Legislative Bodies.

Background:

On March 17, 2020, in the face of the COVID -19 pandemic, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act in order to allow for local legislative bodies to conduct their meetings completely telephonically or by other electronic means.

The provisions in the Brown Act that were suspended by the Governor’s Executive Order are contained at Government Code Section 54953(b)(3) and require that when teleconferencing is used, outside of a statewide emergency, that the following occur:
 An agenda is required to be posted at all locations, including any teleconference locations  Each teleconference location must be identified on the actual agenda  Each teleconference location shall be accessible to the public  A quorum of the legislative body must be in the jurisdiction With the Governor’s Executive Order, the four above requirements were suspended, allowing Councilmembers to not have to post an agenda at their teleconference location, not have to identify their location on the meeting agenda, not have to ensure public accessibility at the teleconference location, and the legislative body did not need a quorum present in the jurisdiction. As the Council is well aware, this allowed all City Council meetings and other meetings of legislative bodies of the City to be conducted by Zoom with councilmembers, commission members, committee members, and staff all joining from remote virtual locations.

The suspension of certain provisions of the Brown Act was further extended by the Governor on June 11, 2021 by the issuance of Executive Order N -08-21 which continued to allow for complete virtual meetings until September 30, 2021.

With the expiration of the Governor’s Executive Order and the uncertainty that surrounded the Governor’s potential recall, the State Legislature also took the remote meeting issue into its own hands through the adoption of Assembly Bill 361, which is explained in more depth in the Analysis section below.

On May 17. 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 9156, making findings that there is an existing State of Emergency and that state or local officials continue to recommend social distancing measures to prevent the spread of COVID -19. In particular, the r esolution included reference to Cal -OSHA regulation 3205, which recommends physical distancing in the workplace. By motion and majority vote, the City Council may reconfirm the findings of Resolution No. 9156 and continue to hold virtual meetings pursuant to AB 361. 23 Item # C4.

Analysis:

On September 16, 2021, the Governor signed AB 361, which allows legislative bodies to meet virtually provided there is a state of emergency declared by the Governor, and either (1) state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; or (2) the legislative body determines by majority vote that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees. The Governor by executive order signed on September 20, 2021, suspended the effective date of AB 361 to October 1, 2021. As a result, if the City desires to have virtual meetings on or after October 1, 2021, it must do so consistent with the requirements of AB 361.

AB 361 preserves many of the provisions of the earlier executive orders , including the suspension of the four teleconferencing requirements noted above, while also adding new requirements to the management of remote and teleconference public meetings in order to better achieve the levels of transparency that the Brown Act demands. Specifically, AB 361 imposes two new rules on remote public meetings:

1. Local governments and agencies hosting teleconference meetings in lieu of traditional in -person public meetings must permit direct public comment during the teleconference and must leave open the opportunity for public comment until the comment period for a given item is closed during the ordinary course of the meeting. The opportunity to make public comment must b e of a sufficient duration so as to allow actual public participation.

2. Any action by the governing body during a public teleconference meeting must occur while the agency is actively and successfully broadcasting to members of the public through a call -in option or an internet-based service option. If a technical disruption within the agency’s control prevents members of the public from either viewing the meeting of the public agency or prevents members of the public from offering public comment, the agency must cease all action on the meeting agenda until the disruption ends and the broadcast is restored. Action taken during an agency-caused disruption may be challenged as a violation of the Brown Act.

In order to continue to qualify for AB 361’s waiver of in -person meeting requirements, the City Council must, within thirty (30) days of its first meeting under AB 361, and every thirty (30) days thereafter, make findings that (a) state or local officials continue to recommend measures to promote social distancing, or that (b) an in-person meeting would constitute an imminent risk to the safety of attendees.

The above conditions continue to exist at this time, and staff recommends that the City Council by motion reconfirm the findings made in Resolution No. 9156 so that the City Council and all other subordinate legislative bodies may continue to meet virtually.

Lastly, it is important to note that AB 361 is optional. If the City Council wishes, it may meet in person. In addition, hybrid meetings are permissible.

Policy Alternatives:

Alternative 1: Do not by motion reconfirm the findings made in the resolution making findings and determinations under Assembly Bill 361 for the continuation of virtual meetings.

Pros: None
Cons: Many of the existing Commission, Committee, and Task Force meetings will not be able to meet virtually or through a hybrid format forcing all staff, commission or committee members, and the public to attend meetings in person.

Reason not recommended: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be a global health issue and by forcing commission, committee, and task force meetings to be in person, public health may be put at risk.

Fiscal Impact:

The City Council’s reconfirmation of the findings made in the resolution to continue with virtual meetings will maintain the status quo and no financial impact is anticipated by the reconfirmation of the findings. 24 Item # C4.

California Environmental Quality Act:

The City Council’s reconfirmation of the find ings made in the resolution is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guideline 15378 (b)(5) as it constitutes an organizational or administrative activity of the government that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. Further, virtual meetings are likely to reduce certain impacts associated with vehicular travel related to in-person public meetings.

Recommendation:

Move to reconfirm findings and determinations under Resolution No. 9105 and Assembly Bill 361 for the continuation of virtual meetings of the City Council and Legislative Bodies.

Attachment

1. Resolution 9165
25 Item # C4.
26 Item # C4.
27 Item # C4.

CITY OF MILPITAS

AGENDA REPORT
(AR)

Item Title: Adopt a Resolution Declaring Weeds on Certain Properties to be a Public Nuisance and Set a Public Hearing for March 7, 2023 (Staff Contact: Arthur Belton, Deputy Chief/Fire Marshal, 408- 586-3384)
Category: Consent Calendar-Public Safety

Meeting Date: 2/7/2023
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution declaring weeds on specific properties to be public nuisances and set a public hearing for March 7, 2023 and find a CEQA exemption.

BACKGROUND:

On February 2, 1976, an Agreement was established and approved to abate weeds by the County of Santa Clara for the City of Milpitas. On June 21, 2022, City Council approved an amended and restated agreement, authorizing the City Manager to execute and sign the updated agreement. The purpose of the Agreement is to promote the efficiency and economy of operations in the abatement of weeds by the City and the County. The major procedural functions to be performed by the County and / or City shall include but not limited to: The County shall prepare the list of parcels requiring abatement of weeds in the City and transmit the said list to the City for review and approval for processing. The County shall prepare the notice of weed abatement and cause such notice to be mailed to the owners of the parcels requiring weed abatement. The City Council shall conduct public hearings on the proposed removal of weeds pursuant to the provisions of the City Ordinance when the City Fire Marshal presents such appropriate resolutions for adoption. The City Council may by resolution declare the weeds on the respective parcels of the land as nuisance, and make the determination to proceed with the abatement of weeds, and authorize the performance of the service to remove the weeds in accordance with the aforementioned Agreement. Upon proper authorization by the City, the County shall remove the weeds on the designated properties. The County shall render to the City an itemized assessment report for the cost of the weed abatement services performed per the respective parcels. The City Council, after a public hearing, shall require the County Assessor’s Office to include the costs of the weed abatement services performed for the City for the current year, as a special assessment on bills for taxes levied against the affected parcels. Such special assessments shall be liens on the respective properties. Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code 14915, a copy of the report, as confirmed, shall be turned over to the auditor of the county, on or before the tenth day of August following such confirmation, and the auditor shall enter the amounts of the assessments against the respective parcels of land as they appear on the current assessment roll, (Amended by Stats. 1939, Ch. 354).

ANALYSIS:

The County of Santa Clara Consumer and Environmental Protection Agency - Weed Abatement Program has notified the City of Milpitas that it is commencing its Hazardous Vegetation Abatement (weed abatement) Program for the 2022 season. In order for the County to proceed with its annual abatement process, the City must adopt a resolution declaring weeds to be a public nuisance and to schedule a public hearing to hear objections to the proposed destruction and/or removal of weeds. The Milpitas City Council public hearing is scheduled for March 7, 2023.

POLICY ALTERNATIVE(S):

Alternative 1: Not pass a resolution
Pros: None
Cons: This would reverse a long-standing agreement with Santa Clara County to provide weed abatement service within the City of Milpitas.
28 Item # C5.

Reason for Not Recommending: Without a resolution, property owners will not be notified and weed abatement will not be conducted. Weeds covered under this program, classified as “light flashy fuels” are prone to easy ignition and contribute significantly to rapid fire growth. Left unmitigated, these weeds pose a significant public safety issue it terms of fire potential.

FISCAL IMPACT:

At the first City Council meeting in August of each year during a public hearing, the City’s municipal code provides that the City Council hear the assessment report for the list of weeds abated within the City, together with any objections of the property owners liable to be assessed, and to make such modifications on the proposed assessment as it deems necessary. Following adoption by the City Council, the resolution will be recorded and charges thereon become a lien on the land involved to be collected in the same manner as property taxes.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):

The action being considered has no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution declaring weeds on specific properties to be public nuisances and setting the public hearing date on March 7, 2023.

Attachment(s):

Resolution with attached Exhibit A - 2023 Weed Abatement Program Commencement Report (list of parcels) for the City of Milpitas

29 Item # C5.

RESOLUTION NO. _________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILPITAS DECLARING

CERTAIN PROPERTIES TO CONSTITUTE A PUBLIC NUISANCE DUE TO THE OVERGROWTH OF

WEEDS AND/OR ACCUMULATION OF RUBBISH, REFUSE OR DIRT AND FIXING THE TIME AND

PLACE FOR OBJECTIONS TO ABATEMENT

WHEREAS, the County of Santa Clara Consumer and Environmental Protection Agency - Weed Abatement Program has compiled its annual list of properties which constitute a public nuisance due to an overgrowth of weeds and/or the accumulation of rubbish, refuse or dirt; and

WHEREAS, it is requested that the County of Santa Clara Consumer and Environmental Protection Agency - Weed Abatement Program will individually notify the owners of those properties of its intent to abate said public nuisance and assess the cost as a special assessment against said propert ies if the owners do not abate the nuisance themselves; and

WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to fix a time and place where the said property owners can object to the proposed abatement.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council hereby finds, determines, and resolves as follows:

1. The City Council has considered the full record before it, which may include but is not limited to such things as the staff report, testimony by staff and the public, and other materials and evidence submitted or provided to i t. Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to be true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

2. The City Council declares that the properties listed on the annual list of properties , attached hereto as Exhibit A, constitute a public nuisance due to an overgrowth of weeds and/or the accumulation of rubbish, refuse or dirt.

3. March 7, 2023 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers at City Hall, Milpitas, California, shall be the time and place set aside for all owners of property listed on Exhibit A or any other person having any objections to the proposed removal of the weeds, rubbish, refuse and dirt to voice any objections they may have to the proposed nuisance abatement by the County of Santa Clara Consumer and Environmental Protection Agency - Weed Abatement Program.

4. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to cause notice of this Resolution be given to the County of Santa Clara Consumer and Environmental Protection Agency - Weed Abatement Program.

5. The City Council requests that the County of Santa Clara Consumer and Environmental Protection Agency - Weed Abatement Program notify the owners of those properties included on Exhibit A in accordance with Milpitas Municipal Code, Title V, Chapter 202, of its intent to abate said nuisance and assess the cost as a special assessment against said properties unless such weeds, rubbish, refuse or dirt are removed by the owner.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of February 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

30 Item # C5.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

_________________________________ ________________________________ Suzanne Guzzetta, City Clerk Carmen Montano, Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________________
Michael Mutalipassi, City Attorney
31 Item # C5.
1 634 N ST 022-06-010
2 7280 DR 022-07-007
3 549 ST 022-09-028
4 99 S ST 022-24-017
5 111 ST 022-24-040
6 1735 CL 022-37-002
7 1301 CL 022-38-002
8 81 RD 026-05-021
9 RD 026-05-023
10 1878 A N BL 026-05-024
11 51 RD 026-05-053
12 0 026-06-012
13 1720 AV 026-07-016
14 1750 AV 026-07-044
15 1840 AV 026-07-051
16 0 LN 028-23-017
17 0 028-24-006
18 1301 029-05-012
19 880 RD 029-06-003
20 666 RD 029-06-008
21 860 RD 029-06-016
22 826 DR 029-06-031
23 898 DR 029-06-038
24 322 DR 029-16-006
25 1220 DR 029-52-014
26 1039 CT 029-52-015
27 673 LN 029-59-014
28 517 DR 042-30-009
29 519 DR 042-30-010
30 529 DR 042-30-015
31 410 DR 042-30-024
ABEL
MAIN
MAIN
2023 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM

COMMENCEMENT REPORT

CITY OF MILPITAS
Exhibit A
Situs APN ABEL

MARYLINN
DIXON

MILPITAS
DIXON

CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA
DIXON

ARIZONA

BOTHELO
(PARKING LOT)

ARIZONA

ARIZONA
EVANS

CALAVERAS

CALAVERAS
CALLE
EVANS
EVANS

COUNTRY

CAMARILLO
PARK

VISTA RIDGE

VISTA RIDGE
QUINCE

VISTA RIDGE

VISTA RIDGE
32 Item # C5.
32 350 DR 042-30-025
33 531 DR 042-30-029
34 ST 083-07-015
35 540 ST 083-13-013
36 91 W EX 083-42-002
37 526 ST 086-25-011
38 0 086-25-018
39 S ST 086-25-028
40 086-25-030
41 808 ST 086-25-051
42 086-26-039
43 086-26-040
44 086-26-042
45 0 BL 086-28-006
46 0 WY 086-29-005
47 WY 086-29-036
48 DR 086-29-047
49 876 DR 086-30-047
50 DR 086-30-048
51 AV 086-30-060
52 0 086-31-003
53 0 086-32-084
54 1646 DR 086-33-110
55 0 086-41-014
56 375 RD 088-01-002
57 335 S DR 088-03-019
58 0 RD 088-04-060
59 S DR 088-04-062
60 0 RD 088-04-076
61 534 S DR 088-06-039
62 2013 DR 088-20-023
63 575 ST 088-20-102
64 632 ST 088-20-125
65 1966 DR 088-26-149
66 0 RD 092-34-008

VISTA RIDGE

MONTAGUE
MAIN

VISTA RIDGE
MAIN
ABEL

NO SITUS

NO SITUS
MAIN

YOSEMITE

MILPITAS
VISTA

WRIGLEY

YOSEMITE
AMES

YOSEMITE

DEMPSEY
PARK

DEMPSEY
CENTRE

YOSEMITE

CARLSBAD

CARLSBAD
PARK

DEMPSEY
PARK

YOSEMITE
OLD
33 Item # C5.
67 1250 RD 092-34-014
68 2235 RD 092-37-050URIDIAS
68 records of 68

PIEDMONT
34 Item # C5.

CITY OF MILPITAS

AGENDA REPORT
(AR)

Item Title: Receive a Report on the Local Emergency Related to the Severe Weather Event on January 4-5, 2023 (Staff Contact: Ashwini Kantak, Assistant City Manager, 408-586- 3053)

Category: Consent Calendar-Leadership and Support Services Meeting Date: 2/7/2023
Recommendation: Receive a report on the local emergency relating to the severe weather event on January 4-5, 2023.

Background:

On January 3, 2023 the Milpitas Emergency Operations Center was activated. This was the result of prolonged storms which caused significant damage in the City of Milpitas. On January 4, 2023, Milpitas City Manager McHarris proclaimed an emergency declaration. This declaration was ratified by City Council on January 10, 2023. Santa Clara County also proclaimed a disaster and incurred over $6 million in damages. The estimated damage assessments were provided by Santa Clara County jurisdictions which included the City of Milpitas.

On February 2, 2023, FEMA included Santa Clara County into the Major Disaster Declaration, DR-4683- CA. This declaration made the city of Milpitas eligible to request expense reimbursements for permanent repairs to a portion of East Calaveras Road that was significantly damaged due to a landslide.

The next step for the City is to submit the Request for Public Assistance form with the City's intent to for federal reimbursement funding related to the permanent rebuild of the East Calaveras hillside roadway. Since Santa Clara County was added to FEMA's Major Disaster Declaration, DR-4683-CA, Milpitas will also be included into this Federal Declaration.

Recommendation:

Receive a report on the local emergency relating to the severe weather event on January 4-5, 2023.

35 Item # C6.

CITY OF MILPITAS

AGENDA REPORT
(AR)

Item Title: Adopt a Resolution Approving a Site Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus Permit, Tree Removal Permit, and Environmental Assessment to allow the development of 78 townhome condominiums and 12 accessory dwelling units and associated site improvements on an approximately 4.1-acre site located in the High-Density Mixed-Use (R3-TOD) Zoning District with a Transit Oriented Development Overlay at 675 Trade zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court, and find a CEQA exemption. The Project is located within the Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP) area and submitted under California Senate Bill 330 (Housing Crisis Act of 2019). (Staff Contact: Ned Thomas, Planning Director, 408-586-3273)

Category: Public Hearings-Community Development
Meeting Date: 2/7/2023
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution to approve Site Development Permit No. SD2 2- 0006, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2 2-0002, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0002, Density Bonus Permit No. DB2 2-0001, Tree Removal Permit No. TR2 2-0006, and Environmental Assessment No. EA2 2-0003, subject to the Conditions of Approval , and find a CEQA exemption.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Milpitas received an application from Toll Brothers (applicant) requesting a Site Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus Permit, Tree Removal Permit, and Environmental Assessment to allow the development of a 78-unit townhome condominium subdivision, comprised of 13 multi- family buildings up to 37 feet in height, with 191 parking spaces and associated site improvements , on a 4.1- acre site located at 675 Trade Zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Cou rt in the Trade Zone/Montague Subdistrict of the Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP) area. The application w as submitted in accordance with California Senate Bill 330, also known as the Housing Crisis Act of 2019.

The Project consists of eight two-bedroom, 18 three-bedroom, 52 four-bedroom townhome condominium units.

All 78 townhome units will have an attached two-car garage. 12 of the four-bedroom units will also have a ground-floor, attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU). All ADUs will be studio units. Twelve of the townhome condominiums (one two-bedroom, three three-bedroom, and eight four-bedroom townhomes) will be reserved for moderate-income households (below 80% Avg. Median Income) to fully comply with the City's Affordable Housing Ordinance. Since the applicant is restricting the sale of more than 10% of the housing units to moderate-income residents, the Project qualifies for concessions, waivers, and parking reductions under the State Density Bonus Law.

The proposed Project requires approval of five entitlements, as follows:

1. Site Development Permit No. SD2 2-0006: To allow the development of 13 multi-family buildings, up to three stories in height, with up to 78 townhouse condominiums and 12 accessory dwelling units on the

4.1-acre site; and

2. Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0002: To allow for condominium use and associated subdivision; and

3. Vesting Tentative Map No. MT2 2-0002: To establish 78 residential condominium spaces, related common areas, and associated easements; and 36
Item # 7.

4. Density Bonus Permit No. DB2 2-0001: To ensure compliance with State Density Bonus law and regulations; and

5. Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0006: To remove 55 ordinance-sized trees and replace them with 196 new trees.

Although not an entitlement, Environmental Assessment No. EA2 2-0003 was prepared to comply with the environmental review requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

California Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) is a statewide bill intended to reduce the time to approve housing developments in California. It became effective on January 1, 2020, and Senate Bill 8 (SB 8) recently extended the Act through January 1, 2030. Under SB 330, eligible projects receive enhanced streamlining and vesting opportunities by filing a preliminary application. Those benefits include:

• Freezes the ability of local governments to downzone, adopt new development standards, or change land use in residential and mixed-use areas if the change results in less-intensive uses.

• Allows developers to request approval of housing developments that exceed density and design controls of the underlying zoning if the existing zoning conflicts with the General Plan or a Specific Plan.

• Expedites the permitting process for all housing development and limits the list of application materials that cities can review.

Through the Housing Accountability Act, the State requires a local jurisdiction to approve housing consistent with applicable, objective land use standards. Under the State Density Bonus Law, the state also requires a local jurisdiction to approve waivers and concessions for projects that meet certain affordability requirement s.

Consistent with state law, Planning staff has determined that the Project is consistent with applicable, objective design standards and qualifies for certain waivers, incentives, or concessions under the State Density Bonus Law. As provided under SB 330, a local government agency can deny an eligible housing project only if there is strong evidence that denial is the only way to avoid an adverse impact on public health and safety.

On December 14, 2022, the City of Milpitas Planning Commission voted unanimously (six ayes, one absent) recommended the City Council approve the Project, subject to the Conditions of approval.

Staff has found the required entitlements comply with the policies, standards, and processes outlined in the Senate Bill 330, State Density Bonus Law, the City of Milpitas 2040 General Plan, the Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP), the Zoning Ordinance, the Subdivision Ordinance, and other provisions of the Milpitas Municipal Code (MMC), and recommends that the City Council open and close t he public hearing, consider the exemptions in accordance with CEQA and adopt the Resolution subject to the conditions of approval.

ANALYSIS:

This analysis will evaluate elements of the proposed Project for conformance with the Milpitas 2040 General Plan, the 2008 Transit Area Specific Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and other provisions of the Milpitas Municipal Code, Senate Bill 330, and State Density Bonus Law.

Milpitas 2040 General Plan Conformance
The General Plan designation for the project site is Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (MMSP), but since City Council has not yet formally adopted the MMSP, the TASP development standards currently apply. In addition, the proposed project qualifies for streamlined review under California Senate Bill 330 (Housing Crisis Act of 2019), so the project is subject only to those ordinances and policies in effect when the completed preliminary application was submitted. The project is consistent with the development standards of both the MMSP and TASP, which are intended to facilitate the development of higher intensity, mixed -use neighborhoods near the Milpitas Transit Center and encourage walking, biking, and alternative modes of transportation for residents and employees in the immediate area.
37 Item # 7.

The Project is in conformance with the applicable policies and standards in the City's General Plan, as shown in Table 1 on the following page.

Table 1: General Plan Consistency
Policy Conformance
Policy LU 1-4: Continue to provide for a
variety of housing types and densities that
meet the needs of individuals and families
and offer residents of all income levels, age
groups, and special needs sufficient housing
opportunities and choices for locating in
Milpitas.

Consistent. The Project provides townhome condominiums
and accessory dwelling units. This variety of housing types will meet the needs of individuals, families, and residents of all demographics and income levels. The project, as
proposed, consists of 78 townhome condominiums and 12
ADUs, ranging from studios to four bedrooms. 12 of the
residential units will be reserved for moderate -income households.

Policy LU 5-1: Require new development
and redevelopment to be compatible,
complementary and, where appropriate, well
integrated with existing residential areas.

Integrate new large-scale development
projects into the fabric of the existing
community rather than allowing projects to be
insular and self-contained, walled off, or
physically divided from surrounding uses.

Improve connectivity between neighborhoods
and services with new development. Tie
circulation systems and open spaces into
existing streets and open spaces. Reduce
unnecessary barriers and improve
connections between neighborhoods and
services by retrofitting existing development
over time as area improvements or
redevelopment occurs.

Additionally, the project will gain ingress and egress from both Tarob Court and Journey Street via new driveway curb cuts, and as a result, t he project will blend seamlessly into the fabric of the existing community. The project will also be compatible and complementary to future high -density
residential development planned for other parcels on Tarob Court which are currently developed with light industrial uses but are zoned for redevelopment as similar high -density residential uses. The project is consistent with the
development standards and design guidelines of the Milpitas Transit Area Specific Plan, which includes provisions for neighborhood development that ties circulation systems and open spaces into existing streets and open space s and
creates connectivity to nearby transit and other amenities.

Policy LU 5-3: Ensure new development is
consistent with specific height limits
established within the City's Zoning
Ordinance as applied through the zoning
district for all properties within the City.

Consistent. The Project meets the height standards by
proposing three-story buildings, up to 37-feet in height, in a zoning district that allows a maximum height of 50 feet. The Project's height is consistent with the recently entitled townhome project at 2001 Tarob Court, which will have
buildings up to 50 feet in height.

Transit Area Specific Plan Conformance
The TASP/MMSP land use designation for the Project is High -Density, Transit -Oriented Residential . This designation provides for medium-density residential uses within the Trade Zone/Montague Subdistrict. As demonstrated in Table 2, the Project is consistent with the applicable TASP/MMSP land use policies.

Table 2: TASP/MMSP Consistency
Policy Conformance
Policy 3.4: Provide a variety of housing types for
different types of house holds, different income
levels, different age groups, and different life -
styles.

Policy Conformance
Policy 3.2: Affordable housing units should be
provided with new housing developments.

Consistent. The Project conforms to the City’s
Affordable Housing Ordinance and will designate 12 out
of the 78 townhome units, or fifteen percent (15%) of the base number of units, for moderate-income level
individuals or households.

Policy 3.3: Affordable housing should be
integrated into all residential projects.

Consistent. The Project will provide affordable housing through inclusion and design. The applicant will restrict 12 residential units for sale to moderate-income
individuals or households and integrate accessory
dwelling units into 12 townhome condominiums,
providing options in housing.

Zoning Conformance
The project site is zoned R3 Multiple -Family High Density Residential with a Transit -Oriented Development (- TOD) Overlay. As demonstrated in Tables 3 and 4, the project is consistent with most of the applicable development standards for the R3 Multiple -Family High Density Residential Zoning District and T ASP/MMSP area. Where the project is not in compliance with objective standards, the State Density Bonus Law requires the City to grant appropriate concessions, waivers, and parking reductions for qualifying projects.

Table 3: Summary of R3-TOD Development Standards
Standard
(R3-TOD) Required Proposed Conformance
Density 21-40 du/ac 22 du/ac; 90 units total Yes
Front yard
Setback
8 foot-15 foot (max.) from back of
sidewalk 15 feet Yes

Side Yard
Setback
15 foot (min.), 20 foot over three
stories when abutting residential
15 feet

Yes

Rear Yard
Setback
15 foot (min.), 20 foot over three
stories when abutting residential 15 feet Yes
Height 75 feet 37 feet Yes
Landscaping
A minimum of twenty-five percent
(25%) of the total lot area shall be
landscaped or recreational open
space, exclusive of parking and
vehicular traffic area.

25% x 4.1 = 1.03 acres/44,295 SF
required
52,870 SF or 1.2 acres
(29%) Yes
39 Item # 7.

Standard
(R3-TOD) Required Proposed Conformance
Private Open
Space
An average of 200 sq. ft. of usable
open space shall be provided for each
dwelling unit.

200 x 78 = 15,600 sq.ft. = 0.36 acres

Each dwelling unit shall be provided
with private open space as follows:
- Balconies and porches (above
ground level): minimum 60 SF; or
- Patios (at ground level): minimum
one hundred square feet
Private open space
(balconies) = 22,330 sq.ft.
= 30% of 44,295 + 11,250
sq. ft. decks and porches

Total private open space
= 286.3 SF/ unit

Private balconies
provided for each unit.

Yes

In addition, projects located in the TASP/MMSP area must comply with the additional development and design standards outlined in Table 4:

Table 4: Additional Development Standards Applicable in the TASP/MMSP Standard Proposed Conformance
Projections into
Required Yards
Porches, stairs, balconies, bay
windows, and awnings may project
up to six feet into required setbacks.

Porches, stairs, balconies,
bay windows and awnings
project under 6’ into
required setbacks
Yes
Building
Orientation and
Entrances
Building must face the street, and
primary building entrances must be
oriented toward the street.

Buildings generally face
Tarob Court which is the
Project’s primary street
frontage
Yes
Vehicle Parking
Two to Three Bedroom – 42 spaces
Four+ Bedroom – 135 spaces
Guest Parking – 35 spaces
Total – 212 spaces
(146 covered, 66 uncovered)
156 resident spaces
35 guest spaces
191 Total
(156 covered, 35
uncovered)
Yes, with
approval of a
Density Bonus
waiver
Bicycle Parking
On-street guest racks equivalent to
five percent (5%) of the parking
requirement.

Ten (10) bicycle parking spaces
Ten (10) bicycle parking
spaces Yes
Parking Location Parking must be located so that it is
not visible from the street.
78 private garage
entrances face the interior
drive aisle
Yes
Parking Garages
attached to
individual units
Garages may not occupy more than
50% of Ground Level Frontage
facing street.

No parking garage is
facing the street frontage. Yes
40 Item # 7.

Standard Proposed Conformance
Parking Access
and Curb Cuts
Maximum two curb cuts per lot per
street frontage
Two curb cuts along
Journey Street and one
on Tarob Court
Yes
Park Acreage
Requirements

0.08 acres (after payment of
TASP/MMSP fee) 0.34 acres Yes

State Density Bonus Law
To encourage affordable housing production, the State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code § 65915 et seq.) allows developers to receive a density bonus and other incentives, such as concessions, waivers, and parking reductions, when affordable housing is incorporated within a project. The Density Bonus is a state mandate, and any Project that meets the requirements of the state law is entitled to receive the incentives associated with it.

The applicant may request waivers and concessions under the State Density Bonus Law because the Project reserves more than 10 percent of total units as below-market-rate (“ affordable”) units for moderate -income households. The Project includes 12 affordabl e units, which satisfies the 15 percent minimum required under the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance. The City must grant any waivers and concessions requested by the applicant for a qualifying project under the State Density Bonus Law.

Table 5 outlines the waivers and parking reductions requested for the proposed Project.

Table 5: State Density Bonus – Concessions, Waivers, and Incentives Type of
Modification Standard Applicant Request Justification Discretion Waiver Number of
Compact
Parking
Spaces
A request to construct
17 of the 35 onsite
guest spaces (49%)
as compact stalls,
when a maximum of
40% (14 stalls) is
allowed per MMC.

A greater number of
compact stalls is
necessary in order to
provide the required
number of guest
spaces.

This waiver is allowed
under State Density
Bonus Law and must be
granted by the City.

Waiver 90-Degree
Stall Depth
To construct 90-
degree guest parking
stalls with a stall width
of 9 feet and stall
depth of 16 feet,
where 9 feet and 18
feet are required
A reduction in the 90-
degree guest parking
stall depth is necessary
in order to physically
construct the proposed
development.

This waiver is allowed
under State Density
Bonus Law and must be
granted by the City.

Parking
Waiver
Vehicle
Parking
Reduction
To provide 191
vehicle parking
spaces where 212
vehicle parking
spaces are required
per MMC.

The State Density
Bonus Law provides a
reduction in the
minimum parking
requirements for
qualifying projects
The State Density Bonus
Waiver allows a waiver of
minimum parking
standards, which must
be granted by the City

41 Item # 7.

Off-Street Parking Standard Waivers
For multi-family residential uses within the R3 Zoning District, MMC Section XI-10-53.07(B) allows up to 40% of the required parking stalls, located in parking areas and garages containing ten (10) or more stalls , to be designated as compact stalls. For the proposed project, this equates to a maximum number of 14 compact stalls.

MMC Section XI -10-53.13(B)(2)(b) also states that compact parking stalls shall be dispersed thr oughout the parking lot and not concentrated to discourage oversized vehicles from using the stalls. However, the applicant has proposed 17 compact guest stalls, with 14 of the stalls clustered together in a row along Court C. A greater proportion of compact stalls, as well as the grouping of the stalls together, are necessary in order to provide the required number of guest spaces and facilitate the physical layout of the proposed development.

Additionally, MMC Table XI-10-53.13-1 requires 90-degree parking stalls to be nine-feet wide and 18-feet deep.

However, the applicant has proposed to construct the 90-degree parking stalls at a stall width of nine-feet wide and 16-feet deep. A reduction in the 90 -degree guest parking stall depth is necessary in or der to physically construct the proposed development and provide the required number of guest spaces.

Parking Incentives
Under the State Density Bonus Law, an applicant who qualifies for a density bonus may propose reduced parking standards. Projects located in the TASP area typically require 1.6 to 2.0 vehicle parking spaces for each two - and three-bedroom unit. The project must also provide an additional 20% vehicle parking for guests. However, under State Density Bonus Law and upon a developer's reques t, the City must allow a reduction in vehicle parking, as shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Maximum Parking Requirements (under State Density Bonus Law) Type of Unit (or Guest Parking) Number of Vehicle Parking Spaces Accessory Dwelling Units No parking required if located within one- half mile of public transit
Studio and One Bedroom One space
Two-Bedroom and Three-Bedroom 1.5 spaces
Four-Bedroom 2.5 spaces
Guest Parking No guest parking required

The applicant has requested reduced parking standards and has proposed to provide the following, as demonstrated in Table 7.

Table 7: Parking Analysis (under State Density Bonus Law) Land Use Unit Count Rate Spaces
Required
Spaces
Provided Notes
Two and Three -
bedroom 26 1.5 / unit 39 52
Four- bedroom 52 2.5 / unit 135 104
ADU 12 0 / unit 0 0 Bicycle parking provided
Guest Parking N/A 0 35
Included as part of the total
number of parking spaces
required under the State
Density Bonus Law
Total 174 191

42 Item # 7.

As noted in the Project Description, each two -bedroom and three-bedroom unit will include a two -car garage, and each four-bedroom unit will also include a two-car garage. In addition, 35 additional surface parking spaces will be provided for guests along internal Street B, Street C, and Court C, making a total of 191 vehicle spaces and consistent with the reduced parking standard under the State Density Bonus Law.

Subdivision Ordinance
The Project's form, content, and dedications of the proposed tract map have been reviewed by the City of Milpitas Engineering and Planning Department and deemed consistent with the provisions of MMC Section XI -1-4 (Tentative Maps), as outlined in the attached Resolution. Tentative Maps require approval of a Resolution by the Planning Commission prior to final approval by the City Council.

Architectural Design
The Project's design concept includes three -story building heights consistent with existing and planned residential development along Tarob Court and Journey Street. The contemporary design includes the following design accents and materials:
 Roof: Composition Shingle
 Exterior: Stucco Finish with Fiber Cement and Hardee Siding  Accents: El Dorado Stone and Metal Railings
 Window/Door Trim: Fiber Cement Trim
 Entry Door: Contemporary Front Entry Door with Sidelights  Garage Door: Cloplay Steel Garage Door with Contemporary Slim Windows

The Project conforms to the Transit Area Specific Plan design guidelines, which require orientation of the building to the street, well-articulated exterior walls with consistent style and materials, muted colors for primary building walls with richer accent colors, and integrated parking. Furthermore, the Project has a similar architectural style to the Parkside development located across the street on Tarob Court. The applicant has provided an exhibit with proposed colors and materials for review by City staff and the City Council, as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Color/Materials Board

43 Item # 7.

Figure 2 is a rendering of a typical elevation of the proposed Project.

Figure 2: Project Elevation Facing South toward Trade Zone Boulevard

Tree Removal and Landscaping Requirements
The Project includes removal of 95 existing trees, including 55 protected trees, from the project site. Pursuant to MMC Title X, Chapter 2 (Tree Maintenance and Protection), the project must plant two replacement trees for every one protected tree that is removed, or 110 new trees planted on the site. The Project will be planting 196 new trees on site. Other new landscaping will include various shrubs, grasses, and vines (New Zealand Flax, Manzanita, Reed Grass, and Creeping Fig) as demonstrated in Figure 5.

Figure 3 – Landscape Plan

Parkland and Open Space Requirements
The TASP requires all new developments to provide 3.5 acres of parkland for every 1,000 persons or payment of park in-lieu fees, as allowed by MMC Section XI -1-9 (Improvements: Dedication of Land or Payment of Fee or Both, for Recreational Purposes). The Parkland Fee is based upon the estimated number of persons expected to reside in the development (per U.S. Census definitions) and the estimated value of parkland in the City of Milpitas (currently $2,787,840 per acre).

Based on data from the 2020 U.S. Census and the State of California, the City estimates 2.49 people will occupy each unit. The Project proposes 78 units, resulting in an estimated population of 1 94 persons. Based on this population estimate, the applicant must provide 0.68 acres of parkland, equivalent to approximately $1,895,090. 44 Item # 7.

All projects in the TASP area are required to pay a Transit Area Development Impact Fee (TADIF). A portion of that fee pays for parkland. The park portion of the TASP fee for this project is valued at $1,682,023.98, equivalent to 0.6 acres of parkland . This amount will be applied to the Project's parkland requirement, leaving a delta of

0.08 acres to be satisfied.

To satisfy the 0.08-acre delta, the applicant has incorporated 0.34 acres as private recreation space on-site, as permitted by MMC Section XI -1-9. For example, each townhome has private balconies totaling 22,330 square feet. In addition, the Project includes an a dditional 52,870 square feet of on -site residential open space. The parkland requirement is met by designing these elements into the project, as demonstrated in Table 8 below.

Table 8: Parkland Requirement Analysis
Toll Brothers Townhomes Proposed 78
Toll Brothers Townhomes Population Estimate
(2.49 persons/unit per Census) 194 persons
TASP Parkland Requirement 3.5 acres/1,000 people or equivalent fees-in-lieu
Total Parkland Acreage or In-Lieu Fee Required 0.68 acres / $1,895,090 Amount Satisfied Through TASP Fees (Acreage/Dollars) 0.60 acres / $1,682,024 Remaining Parkland Acreage or In-Lieu Fee Required 0.08 acres / $231,066 Private Recreation/Open Space Included in the Project 0.34 acres Balance of Parkland Acreage or In-Lieu Fees Due 0.00 acres / $0

Accessory Dwelling Units
The Project includes 12 attached ADUs located on the ground floor of 12 four -bedroom townhome condominiums. Each integrated ADU is designed as a studio unit with a living/sleeping area, bathroom, kitchenette, and separate front door entrance, as demonstrated in Figure 4 below.

Figure 4 – Townhome/ADU Floor Plans

45 Item # 7.

Although the proposed ADUs are considered residential units (for density purposes), their integral design limits the City’s ability to charge development fees (such as TADIF or Park -In Lieu Fees). Per Government Code Section 65852.2. (f)(3)(A), A local agency, special district, or water corporation shall not impose any impact fee upon the development of an accessory dwelling unit less than 750 square feet. Six of the proposed ADUs will be approximately 287 square feet in size , and the other six proposed ADUs will be approximately 362 square feet in size, thus qualifying for the impact fee exception under State law.

Affordable Housing Ordinance
According to MMC Section XII-1-3.00 (Affordable Housing), the applicant must reserve fifteen percent (15%) of the total number of dwelling units within the development as affordable units. The applicant proposes to meet the City’s affordable housing requirement by reserving twelve units on-site for moderate-income households.

The project has been conditioned to execute an agreement imposing appropriate ownership controls on the affordable units. The applicant has also demonstrated where such units will be cited on the property, as demonstrated in Figure 5.

Figure 4 – Affordable Units

46 Item # 7.

Traffic and Access
Vehicular access to the project site will be provided two driveways with direct ingress/egress from Journey Street and one driveway with direct ingress/egress from Tarob Court. An internal private street grid will provide access to 78 private residential garages with a total of 156 vehicle parking spaces. In addition, 35 guest parking spaces will be provided along Street B, Street C, and Court C, including two ADA -compliant spaces and three electric vehicle (EV) parking spaces. The EV parking spaces will provide full charging facilities.

Grading
The proposed Project would result in the demolition of all existing non-residential structures, paving, and landscaping on the subject site. In addition, the applicant would import 16,100 cubic yards of fill to pad the site and increase the finish grade heights to meet flood zone requirements.

Utilities
The project site is in an urban area and is currently served by existing utilities, including water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, electricity, and telecommunications infrastructure. All public utilities will be provided to the Project site.

Climate Action Plan
The City of Milpitas Climate Action Plan (CAP) was adopted in 2013 and included Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction goals, policies, and actions for new and existing development projects. The Project would follow these goals and policies by locating future residents near public transportation, jobs, restaurants, and serv ices. The City recently adopted the Climate Action Plan Update on August 9, 2022. In addition, the Project would incorporate green building measures in compliance with CAL Green standard building measures for residential buildings and Title 24 requirements to reduce energy usage.

POLICY ALTERNATIVE:

Alternative 1: Deny the applicant’s request for a Site Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus Permit, Tree Removal Permit, and Environmental Assessment.

Pros: Denial of the Project would allow the site to remain legal non-conforming industrial uses, with the possibility a higher density residential project would be submitted. A higher density project would generate more impact fees to pay for needed infrastructure.

Cons: Denial of the Project would deprive the City of 90 new residential units, twelve of which are reserved for below market rate households. The Project would further support affordable housing needs within the region, including the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Denial of the project would also be contrary to the goals and objectives of State and local density bonus laws.

Reason for Not Recommending: The proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Plan, Transit A rea Specific Plan (Metro Plan), and zoning, all of which support the development of affordable housing within proximity to transit. The Project includes twelve townhomes reserved for moderate -income households in addition to 12 attached accessory dwelling units, which are designed with affordability in mind, increasing the number of affordable units in the City of Milpitas and providing more options of housing for its residents. The project complies with the affordability provisions of the State Density Bon us Law and qualifies for the waivers and parking reductions requested by the applicant. The project complements nearby residential projects.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Project is subject to the following impact fees:

 TASP (TADIF) Impact Fee - The TASP impact fee is currently set at $47,550/unit for residential uses for the Fiscal Year 2022-2023. Based on the development of 78 residential units, the estimated TASP impact fee for this Project is $3,708.900 ($47,550/unit x 78 units). This fee is automatically adjusted each fiscal year in conjunction with the City's annual budget process. The applicant must pay the fee before the issuance of building permits.
47 Item # 7.

 Parkland Impact Fee - A portion of the TASP impact fee includes a portion of the parkland in-lieu fee.

Therefore, by paying the TASP impact fee and developing 0.34 acres of public and private open space, the applicant will meet the parkland fee requirement without paying additional parkland fees.

 Public Art Fee - The Project will comply with the City's Public Art Requirements for Private Development, as set forth in Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-14. This fee is currently set at one- half of one percent of building development costs. The proposed Project will pay the fee based on the construction valuation at the building permit issuance.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

The City prepared a n environmental assessmen t in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended, and state and local guidelines implementing CEQA. The proposed project is exempt from further environmental reveiw pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3(b) (Residential Infill). Exhibit 2 of Attachment A of the Resolution for the proposed Project is a memorandum demonstrating compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3(b). As a separate and independent basis, the project is also exempt from further CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182 (Projec ts Consistent with a Specific Plan) . The proposed project is generally consistent with the Milpitas Transit Area Specific Plan.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution to approve Site Development Permit No. SD22-0006, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22- 0002, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0002, Density Bonus Permit No. DB21-0001, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0006, and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0003, subject to the Conditions of Approval.

Attachment(s):

Attachment A: City Council Resolution (with COA’s and CEQA exemption memorandum) Attachment B: Planning Commission Staff report dated December 14, 2022 Attachment C: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for December 14, 2022 Attachment D: Project Plans

48 Item # 7.
1 Resolution No. _____

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILPITAS APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. SD22-0006, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. UP22-0002, VESTING TENTATIVE MAP NO. MT22-0002 DENSITY BONUS PERMIT NO. DB22-0001, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. TR22-0006, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. EA22-0003 TO ALLOW DEMOLITION OF TWO INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS, REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF 55 ORDINANCE-SIZE TREES, AND DEVELOPMENT OF 78 TOWNHOME CONDOMINIUMS AND 12 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, CONSISTING OF THIRTEEN MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS UP TO 37 FEET IN HEIGHT (THREE STORIES), WITH 191 VEHICLE PARKING SPACES AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS ON A 4.1-ACRE SITE LOCATED WITHIN THE TRANSIT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN / MILPITAS METRO SPECIFIC PLAN AREA AT 675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD AND 1951 TAROB COURT (APN 086-36- 045,033) AND MAKING FINDINGS OF CEQA EXEMPTION

WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, title 14, § 15000 et seq.) (collectively, “CEQA”), the City of Milpitas is the lead agency for the proposed project described below; and

WHEREAS, on June 3, 2008, the City Council of the Ci ty of Milpitas certified an Environmental Impact Report prepared to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the proposed Transit Area Specific Plan (the “EIR,” State Clearinghouse No. 2006032091), and subsequently adopted the Transit Area Specific Plan (the “TASP”); and

WHEREAS, the Transit Area Specific Plan encompasses some 437 acres and envisions the development of 7,109 dwelling units, 287,075 square feet of retail space, and 993,843 square feet of office space and industrial, and includes development standards, goals and policies guiding development within the Plan area. Due to the physical characteristics of the area, including major streets, railroads and creeks, the Transit Area Specific Plan also established sub -districts with specific goals and policies to accommodate those unique characteristics; and

WHEREAS, on May 12, 2022, Toll Brothers (the “Applicant”) submitted an application to the City of Milpitas for the entitlements necessary to allow the development of a 78-unit townhome condominium subdivision, comprised of thirteen multi-family buildings up to 3 7 feet in height, 191 parking spaces, and associated site improvements on a 4.1 -acre site located at 675 Trade Zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court in the Trade Zone/Monta gue Subdistrict of the Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP) area (the “Project”). The Project requires approvals of the following entitlements:

a. Site Development Permit (SD22-0006) to allow the development of thirteen multi-family buildings, up to three stories in height, with up to 78 townhouse condominiums and 12 accessory dwelling units on the 4.1-acre site.

b. Conditional Use Permit (UP22-0002) to allow for condominium use and associated subdivision.

c. Vesting Tentative Map (MT22-0002) to establish 78 residential condominium spaces, related common areas, and associated easements.

d. Density Bonus Permit (DB22-0001) to ensure compliance with State Density Bonus law and regulations.

e. Tree Removal Permit (TR22-0006) to remove 55 ordinance-sized trees and replace them with 196 new trees.

WHEREAS, the Planning Department completed Environmental Assessment No. EA 22-0003 for the Project in accordance with CEQA, and recommends that the City Council determine this Project is covered under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3(b) (Residential Infill) as discussed within a memorandum (the “Memorandum,” a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit 2 to Exhibit A); and

WHEREAS, the Project site is located within the TASP area and is therefore further exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182 (Residential Projects Pursuant to a Specific Plan); and 49 Item # 7.
2 Resolution No. _____

WHEREAS, the proposed Project is found to be consistent with the goals, policies, and regulations of the California Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915 et seq.), Milpitas General Plan 2040, Transit Area Specific Plan (Milpitas Metro Specific Plan) and Milpitas Zoning Ordinance, specifically Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-54.15 (Density Bonus for Affordable Housing Developments), which permits concessions and waivers and modifications of development standards, as analyzed and documented in the staff report; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council pursuant to Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-64.03 (Consideration of Concurrent Applications), where, as here, due to the application for a Tentative Map pursuant to Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI -1-4.03 and a density bonus pursuant to Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-54.15, the City Council is the highest review authority for the Project, and, accordingly, all review by other bodies with approval authority over the application shall be in the form of a recommendation to the City Council; and

WHEREAS, on December 14, 2022, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, during which meeting the Planning Commission considered the CEQA exemption findings as well as Site Development Permit No. SD22- 0006, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0002, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0002, Density Bonus Permit No. DB22- 0001, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0006 and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0003 for 675 Trade Zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court, heard a presentation from staff, and had the opportunity to hear from members of the public and closed the public hearing on the item; and

WHEREAS, by adoption of Resolution No. 22-029, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve Site Development Permit No. SD2 2-0006, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2 2-0002, Vesting Tentative Map No.

MT22-0002, Density Bonus Permit No. DB22-0001, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0006 and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0003 for 675 Trade Zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court; and

WHEREAS, the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council bases the recommendation and the findings contained within this Resolution are available and may be reviewed at Milpitas City Hall, located at 455 E. Calaveras Boulevard, Milpitas, California 95035; and

WHEREAS, on February 7, 2023, the City Council held a duly-noticed public hearing, during which meeting the City Council considered the CEQA exemption findings as well as Site Development Permit No. SD22-0006, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0002, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0002, Density Bonus Permit No. DB22-0001, Tree Removal Permit No. TR2 2-0006 and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0003 for 675 Trade Zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court, heard a presentation from staff, and had the opportunity to hear from members of the public; and

WHEREAS, the findings and conclusions made by the City Council pursuant to this Resolution are based upon the oral and written evidence before it as a whole; and

WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Milpitas hereby finds, determines, and resolves as follows:

SECTION 1. Recitals

The City Council has considered the full record before it, which includes, but is not limited to, such things as all published staff reports, oral and written testimony by staff, the Planning Commission, City Council and the public, and all other relevant materials and evidence submitted or provided to it. Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to be true and correct and incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 2. California Environmental Quality Act Findings

The proposed Project is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3(b) (Residential Infill) in that the project is located in an urban area that has either been previously developed or that adjoins existing qualified urban uses on at least 75 percent of the site’s perimeter; satisfies the performance standards 50 Item # 7.
3 Resolution No. _____

provided in CEQA Guidelines Appendix M; and is consistent with the general use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the project area in either a sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning strategy. Furthermore, there is no reasonable possibility the project will have a significant effect on the existing environment due to unusual circumstances, no substantial changes with respect to residential infill in the immediate area have occurred since community-level environmental review was certified (June 3, 2008), and no new information has become available regarding any residential infill project has become known, and could not have been known at the time that community-level environmental review was certified and adopted. As a separate and independent basis, the Project is also exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15182 (Projects Pursuant to a Specific Plan).

SECTION 3. Vesting Tentative Map Findings (Section XI-1-20.01)

The City Council makes the following findings based on the evidence in the administrative record in support of Vesting Tentative Map No. MT21-0002:

a. The tentative subdivision map is consistent with the General Plan.

The General Plan designation for the project site references MMSP, but since the City Council has not formally adopted the MMSP, the TASP development standards currently apply. Both the MMSP and TASP standards intend to facilitate the development of higher intensity, mixed -use neighborhoods near the Milpitas Transit Center and encourage walking, biking, and alternative modes of transportation.

The TASP designates this project site as High Density, Transit Oriented Development (HD-TOD). The intent of this designation is to provide high-density housing at a density range of 21-40 dwelling units/acre, and this project proposes 22 dwelling units/acre. The Project is further consistent with the General Plan as outlined in Table 1.

Table 1: General Plan Consistency
Policy Conformance
Policy LU 1-4: Continue to provide for a variety of
housing types and densities that meet the needs of
individuals and families and offer residents of all
income levels, age groups, and special needs
sufficient housing opportunities and choices for
locating in Milpitas.

Consistent. The Project provides townhome
condominiums and accessory dwelling units. This
variety of housing types will meet the needs of
individuals, families, and residents of all
demographics and income levels. The project, as
proposed, consists of 78 townhome condominiums and
12 ADUs, ranging from studios to four bedrooms.

Twelve of the primary residential units will be
reserved for moderate-income households.

Policy LU 5-1: Require new development and
redevelopment to be compatible, complementary and,
where appropriate, well integrated with existing
residential areas. Integrate new large-scale
development projects into the fabric of the existing
community rather than allowing projects to be insular
and self-contained, walled off, or physically divided
from surrounding uses. Improve connectivity between
neighborhoods and services with new development.

Tie circulation systems and open spaces into existing
streets and open spaces. Reduce unnecessary barriers
and improve connections between neighborhoods and
services by retrofitting existing development over time as area improvements or redevelopment occurs.

Consistent. The Project, as proposed, is well
integrated with the existing residential developments
along Lundy Place and Tarob Court, as the project has
a similar architectural style, building height, multi - family product, and site layout. Additionally, the
project will gain ingress and egress from both Tarob
Court and Journey Street via new driveway curb cuts,
and as a result, the project will blend seamlessly into the fabric of the existing community. The project will
also be compatible and complementary to future high-
density residential development planned for other
parcels on Tarob Court which are currently developed
with light industrial uses bu t are zoned for
redevelopment as similar high-density residential uses
Policy LU 5-3: Ensure new development is consistent
with specific height limits established within the City's Consistent. The Project meets the height standards by
proposing three-story buildings, up to 37 feet in height, 51 Item # 7.
4 Resolution No. _____

Policy Conformance
Zoning Ordinance as applied through the zoning
district for all properties within the City.
in a zoning district that allows a maximum height of 50 feet. The Project's height is consistent with the recently entitled townhome project at 2001 Tarob Court, which
will have buildings up to 50 feet in height.

b. None of the conditions identified in California Government Code Section 66474 exist, to wit:

1) That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Government Code Section 65451.

As outlined above, the Project includes the development of 78 residential condominium units at a density of 22 dwelling units/acre. The General Plan and Milpitas Metro Specific Plan/Transit Area Specific Plan land use designation applicable to the site (Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (MMSP), and High Density, Transit -Oriented Residential (HD-TOR)) permits residential development at densities of 21 to 40 dwelling units/acre. The map is therefore consistent with the General Plan and Milpitas Metro Specific Plan/Transit Area Specific Plan.

2) That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.

The Project proposes 22 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the 21-40 dwelling units per acre allowed by the general plan and corresponding specific plans. Additionally, the Project is consistent with the policies associated with the MMSP/TASP, as identified in Tables 3 and 5, except for vehicle parking, which is allowed per State Density Bonus Law.

3) That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.

The site is surrounded by property designated for high density, transit -oriented residential development under the City’s General Plan and zoned for this type of development under the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan/Transit Area Specific Plan. In addition, this site is suitable for the higher density development based on the location, physical attributes, and proposed infrastructure improvements.

4) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

The project site is within the MMSP/TASP designation of High Density, Transit Oriented Residential (HD - TOR), permitting residential development at 21 to 40 dwelling units/acre. The design will physically suit th e site by providing required utilities, sufficient open space, and adequate residential living facilities.

5) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

The Project, including the subdivision and its associated improvements, is located in an urbanized area and was previously developed as two industrial buildings. Therefore, it will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

6) That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.

The Project, including the subdivision and its associated improvements, has been designed in a manner that will not cause serious public health problems. The Project has been reviewed by Building, Fire, Land Development, Traffic, Water, and Solid Waste Departments. As a result, it has been determined that it can be adequately serviced to preserve public health and wellness.

52 Item # 7.
5 Resolution No. _____

7) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision.

Upon review of the subdivision map, it has been determined that the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. The subdivision does not involve the vacation of easements ; however, the existing right -of-way will be abandoned, and portions of the area will be retained for a Public Services Utility Easement (PSUE).

SECTION 4. Site Development Permit Findings (Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-57.03(F))

The City Council makes the following findings based on the evidence in the public record in support of Site Development Permit No. SD22-0006:

a. The layout of the site and design of the proposed buildings, structures and landscaping are compatible and aesthetically harmonious with adjacent and surrounding development.

The project’s site design is consistent with the MMSP/TASP development standards for the Trade Zone/Montague Sub-district. The project consists of 78 condominium units and associated site amenities on a 4.1 -acre site. The building’s contemporary architectural design visually relates to and is compatible with the adjacent townhome projects along Tarob Court and Journey Street. Colors are earth tone shades of browns and grays with portions of yellow vertical siding. In addition, future residents will access garages via private alleyways, similar to nearby residential developments.

b. The Project is consistent with the Milpitas Zoning Ordinance.

The proposed Project is consistent with the Milpitas Zoning Ordinance, as demonstrated in Table 2. The proposed multi-family residential building is permitted in the R3-TOD Multiple-Family, High Density Residential Zoning District with a Transit Oriented Development Overlay. The project design conforms to the site and development standards of the R3-TOD zone.

The Project also conforms to MMC Section XI-10-54.015 (Density Bonus for Affordable Housing Developments) and XI-10-57.05 (Density Bonus Permits). Where exceptions from the R3-TOD standards are needed, the applicant has requested waivers and parking exceptions under the State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code § 65915 et seq.). The requested waivers and parking exception will support the development of affordable housing on a site where it would not otherwise be possible through a strict application of the specified standard.

Table 2: Summary of TASP R3-TOD Zoning District
Standard
(R3-TOD) Required Proposed Conformance
Density 21-40 du/ac 22 du/ac; 90 units total Yes
Front yard
Setback 8 foot-15 foot (max.) from back of sidewalk 15 feet Yes

Side Yard
Setback
15 foot (min.), 20 foot over three stories
when abutting residential
15 feet

Yes

Rear Yard
Setback
15 foot (min.), 20 foot over three stories
when abutting residential 15 feet Yes
53 Item # 7.
6 Resolution No. _____

Standard
(R3-TOD) Required Proposed Conformance
Height 75 feet 37 feet Yes
Landscaping
A minimum of twenty-five percent (25%) of
the total lot area shall be landscaped or
recreational open space, exclusive of
parking and vehicular traffic area.

25% x 4.1 = 1.03 acres/44,295 SF required
52,870 SF or 1.2 acres
(29%) Yes
Private Open
Space
An average of 200 sq. ft. of usable open
space shall be provided for each dwelling
unit.

200 x 78 = 15,600 sq.ft. = 0.36 acres

Each dwelling unit shall be provided with
private open space as follows:
- Balconies and porches (above ground
level): minimum 60 SF; or
- Patios (at ground level): minimum one
hundred square feet
Private open space
(balconies) = 22,330
sq.ft. = 30% of 44,295 +
11,250 sq. ft. decks and
porches

Total private open space
= 286.3 SF/ unit

Private balconies
provided for each unit.

Yes

c. The Project is consistent with the General Plan.

The proposed Project is consistent with the Milpitas General Plan, as demonstrated and outlined in Table 1, above.

d. The Project is consistent with the Transit Area Specific Plan (Milpitas Metro Specific Plan).

The proposed Project is consistent with the applicable policies and design guidelines of the TASP/MMSP, as demonstrated in Tables 3 and 4, below.

Table 3: TASP/MMSP Consistency
Policy Conformance
Policy 3.4: Provide a variety of housing types
for different types of house holds, different
income levels, different age groups, and
different lifestyles.

Policy 3.2: Affordable housing units should be
provided with new housing developments.

Determine affordable unit requirements on a
project-by project basis, considering the size of
the project, the location of the site, and the mix
of affordable units in the Midtown Area. Allow
Consistent. The Project conforms to the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance and will designate 12 out of the 78
townhome units, or fifteen percent (15%) of the base number of units, for moderate-income level individuals or households. 54 Item # 7.
7 Resolution No. _____

Policy Conformance
housing developments of 12 units or less to pay
a fee in lieu of providing affordable units.

Policy 3.3: Affordable housing should be
integrated into all residential projects.

Consistent. The Project will provide affordable housing through inclusion and design. The applicant will restrict 12 residential units for sale to moderate-income individuals or households and integrate accessory dwelling units into 12 townhome condominiums, providing options in housing.

Porches, stairs, balconies, bay
windows and awnings project
under 6’ into required setbacks
Yes
Building
Orientation and
Entrances
Building must face the street, and
primary building entrances must be
oriented toward the street.

Buildings generally face Tarob
Court which is the Project’s
primary street frontage
Yes
Vehicle Parking
Two to Three Bedroom – 42 spaces
Four+ Bedroom – 135 spaces
Guest Parking – 35 spaces
Total – 212 spaces
(146 covered, 66 uncovered)
156 resident spaces
35 guest spaces
191 Total
(156 covered, 35 uncovered)
Yes, with
approval of a
Density Bonus
waiver
Bicycle Parking
On-street guest racks equivalent to
five percent (5%) of the parking
requirement.

Ten (10) bicycle parking spaces
Ten (10) bicycle parking spaces Yes
Parking Location Parking must be located so that it is
not visible from the street.
78 private garage entrances face
the interior drive aisle Yes
Parking Garages
attached to
individual units
Garages may not occupy more than
50% of Ground Level Frontage
facing street.

No parking garage is facing the
street frontage. Yes
Parking Access
and Curb Cuts
Maximum two curb cuts per lot per
street frontage
Two curb cuts along Journey
Street and one on Tarob Court Yes
Park Acreage
Requirements

0.08 acres (after payment of
TASP/MMSP fee) 0.34 acres Yes

55 Item # 7.
8 Resolution No. _____

Furthermore, as the Project is an eligible housing project under the State Density Bonus Law, Government Code Section 65915(p)(5), the Project is entitled to waivers and reduced parking requirements. The requested waivers and parking exception will support the development of affordable housing units on a site where it would not otherwise be possible through a strict application of the specified standard.

SECTION 5. Conditional Use Permit Findings (Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-57.04(F))

The City Council makes the following findings based on the evidence in the public record in support of Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0002:

a. The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity nor to the public health, safety and general welfare.

The Project will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or public health, safety, or general welfare. The Project is consistent with other multi -family residential projects within the TASP and conditioned to preserve the health and wellness of future residents. In addition, the condominium pro ject creates housing opportunities and increases the diversity of housing types in the TASP area by utilizing accessory dwelling unit provisions.

b. The Project is consistent with the Milpitas Zoning Ordinance.

The proposed Project is consistent with the Milpitas Zoning Ordinance, as demonstrated in Table 2, above. The proposed multi-family residential building is permitted in the R3-TOD Multiple-Family, High Density Residential Zoning District with a Transit Oriented Development Overlay. The project design conforms to the site and development standards of the R3-TOD zone. Therefore, a conditional use permit is required to allow the subdivision of the proposed townhome units.

The Project also conforms to MMC Section XI-10-54.015 (Density Bonus for Affordable Housing Developments) and XI-10-57.05 (Density Bonus Permits). Where exceptions from the MXD3 standards are needed, the applicant has requested waivers and parking exceptions pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code § 65915 et seq.). The requested waivers and parking exception will support the development of affordable housing on a site where it would not otherwise be possible through a strict application of the specified standard.

c. The Project is consistent with the Milpitas General Plan.

The proposed Project is consistent with the Milpitas General Plan, as demonstrated and outlined in Table 1, above.

d. The Project is consistent with the Transit Area Specific Plan (Milpitas Metro Specific Plan).

The proposed Project is consistent with the applicable policies and design guidelines of the TASP/MMSP, as demonstrated in Tables 3 and 4, above. As the Project is an eligible housing project under the State Density Bonus Law, Government Code Section 65915(p)(5), the Project is entitled to waivers a nd reduced parking requirements.

The requested waivers and parking exception will support the development of affordable housing units on a site where it would not otherwise be possible through a strict application of the specified standard.

SECTION 6. Density Bonus Permit (Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-54.15(D))

The City Council makes the following findings based on the evidence in the public record in support of Density Bonus Permit No. DB22-0001:

1. The maximum allowable base density specified in the General Plan, including any other permitted increases to density.
56 Item # 7.
9 Resolution No. _____

The proposed Project includes 78 townhome condominiums and 12 accessory dwelling units, equaling to 22 dwelling units per acre, meeting the General Plan density allowed in the immediate area.

2. All affordable units shall be reasonably dispersed throughout the project, shall contain on average the same number of bedrooms as the non -affordable units in the project, and shall be comparable with the non -affordable units in terms of appearance, materials and finished quality. The Planning Commission may recommend to the City Council and/or Redevelopment Agency modifying the requirements as to unit size or type, if it is found that such a modification would better serve the affordable housing need of Milpitas.

The applicant has proposed one two-bedroom, three three-bedroom, six four-bedroom, and two four-bedroom with ADUs as affordable units reserved for moderate -income households, in order to meet the requirement to develop fifteen percent (15%) of the total residential units into affordable units, which equates to 12 units. The approximate locations for the proposed 12 units have been identified and approved by the Housing Department as being adequately dispersed throughout the site.

3. Prior to final building inspection and occupancy for a project containing affordable units, the applicant shall execute and record at the Santa Clara County Recorder's Office the City's Agreement Imposing Restrictions on Real Property, which Agreement shall explain the affordability requirements. The agreement shall be approved by the Milpitas City Attorney prior to recordation.

The Project has been conditioned to provide an agreement to the City of Milpitas explaining the affordability requirements, processes and procedures, to the satisfaction of the Milpitas City Attorney prior to the release of any Certificate of Occupancy.

4. Retaining Affordability. A developer shall agree to, and the City shall insure continued affordability of, all lower- or very low-income density bonus units for thirty (30) years or a longer period of time, if required by the construction or mortgage financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program.

Prior to final building inspection and occupancy for the Project containing affordable units, the applicant shall execute and record at the Santa Clara County Recorder’s Office the City’s Agreement Imposing Restrictions on Real Property, which Agreement shall explain the affordability requirements, including continued affordability for moderate-income households. The agreement shall be approved by the Milpitas City Attorney prior to recordation.

5. Affordable Rents. Those units targeted for lower -income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 o f the Health and Safety Code shall be affordable at a rent that does not exceed thirty (30%) of sixty (60%) percent of the Santa Clara County median income. Those units targeted for very low-income households, as defined in Section 50105 of the Health and Safety Code, shall be affordable at a rent that does not exceed thirty (30%) of fifty (50%) percent of County median income.

The standard is not applicable to the Project, as the Project is creating townhome condominiums for sale, rather than for rent. Affordability provisions will be assessed on the sale of the individual condominium.

6. Relation to Statute. Density bonus requirements not specified in these regulations shall be governed by the State Density Bonus Law, Government Code section 65915, et seq.

Any density bonus requirements not specified in the City’s Municipal Code shall be governed by the State Density Bonus Law, Government Code Section 65915, et seq.

Density Bonus Concessions, Incentives and Waivers

57 Item # 7.
10 Resolution No. _____

In accordance with California Government Code Section 65915 and MMC Section X-10-54.15, the City must grant the requested incentives/concessions unless the City can make either of the following findings in writing and based on substantial evidence:

a. The concession is not required in order to provide for affordable housing costs as defined in State Health and Safety Section 50052.2 or for rents for the affordable units pursuant to Section XI -10-54.15(D)(5), Standards, of Chapter 10 (Zoning) of the Milpitas Municipal Code.

b. The concession would have a specific adverse impact as defined in State Government Code Section 65589.5(d) (2) upon the public health and safety or the physical environment, or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and fo r which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households.

If findings cannot be made, then the proposed concessions /incentives and waivers must be granted, based on the requirements of the City’s Municipal Code and California Government Code Sections 65915 – 65918.

The City does not have substantial evidence to demonstrate that the concessions /incentives and waivers described in Table 5 would fail to result in actual and identifiable cost savings, and/or that these savings are unnecessary to provide the level of affordability proposed. Moreover, the City has no substantial evidence that any of the requested concessions, incentives or waivers would result in any specific, adverse impacts to public health, safety, the physical environment, or historical resources. Accordingly, the City Council hereby approves such requested concessions/incentives and waivers.

Table 5: State Density Bonus – Concessions, Waivers, and Incentives Type of
Modification Standard Applicant Request Justification Discretion Waiver
Number of
Compact
Parking
Spaces
A request to construct 17
of the 35 onsite guest
spaces (49%) as compact
stalls, when a maximum
of 40% (14 stalls) is
allowed per MMC.

A greater number of
compact stalls is
necessary in order to
provide the required
number of guest spaces.

This waiver is
allowed under State
Density Bonus Law
and must be granted
by the City.

Waiver 90-Degree
Stall Depth
To construct 90-degree
guest parking stalls with
a stall width of 9 feet and
stall depth of 16 feet,
where 9 feet and 18 feet
are required
A reduction in the 90-
degree guest parking
stall depth is necessary
in order to physically
construct the proposed
development.

This waiver is
allowed under State
Density Bonus Law
and must be granted
by the City.

Parking
Waiver
Vehicle
Parking
Reduction
To provide 191 vehicle
parking spaces where 212
vehicle parking spaces
are required per MMC.

The State Density Bonus
Law provides a
reduction in the
minimum parking
requirements for
qualifying projects
The State Density
Bonus Waiver allows
a waiver of minimum
parking standards,
which must be
granted by the City

58 Item # 7.
11 Resolution No. _____

SECTION 7. Severability

If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held incorrect, invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, phrase, or clause thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, phrases or clauses be declared incorrect, invalid, illegal, or unenforceable.

SECTION 8. City Council Approval

The City Council hereby approves Site Development Permit No. SD2 2-0006, Conditional Use Permit No. UP2 2- 0002, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT2 2-0002, Density Bonus Permit No. DB2 2-0001, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22- 0006, and Environmental Assessment No. EA2 2-0003 (subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit 1 and CEQA Exemption Memorandum incorporated as Exhibit 2), based on the above findings.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of___________ 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

________________________________
Suzanne Guzzetta, City Clerk
APPROVED:

Carmen Montano, Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Michael Mutalipassi, City Attorney

59 Item # 7.
12 Resolution No. _____

EXHIBIT 1

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

TOLL BROTHERS TOWNHOMES RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. SD22-0006
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. UP22-0002
VESTING TENTATIVE MAP NO. MT22-0002
DENSITY BONUS PERMIT NO. DB22-0001
TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. TR22-0006
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. EA22-0003

GENERAL CONDITIONS

1. General Compliance: The Permittee and owner, including all successors in interest (collectively "Permittee") shall comply with each and every condition set forth in this Permit. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT SD2 2-0006, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UP2 2-0002 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP MT2 2-0002, DENSITY BONUS PERMIT NO. DB2 2-0001, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. TR2 2-0006 and ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA22-0003 (collectively "Permit") shall have no force or effect and no building permit shall be issued unless and until all things required by the below-enumerated precedent conditions have been performed or caused to be performed. The Permittee shall develop the site in accordance with the approved Attachments and as modified by these Conditions of Approval.

2. Effective Date: Unless there is a timely appeal filed in accordance with the Milpitas Zoning Code, the date of approval of this Permit is the date on which the City Council approved this Permit.

3. Acceptance of Permit : Should Permittee fail to file a timely appeal within twelve (12) calendar days of the date of approval of this Permit, inaction by Permittee shall be deemed to constitute each of the following:
a. Acceptance of this Permit by Permittee; and
b. Agreement by the Permittee to be bound by, comply with, and to do all things required of or by Permittee pursuant to all of the terms, obligations, and conditions of this Permit.

4. Permit Expiration: Pursuant to Section XI-10-64-06 of the Milpitas Municipal Code, this Permit shall become null and void if the activity permitted by this Permit is not c ommenced within two (2) years from the date of approval, or for a project submitted with a tentative map, within the time limits of the approved tentative map. Pursuant to Section XI-10-

64.06(B) of the Milpitas Municipal Code, an activity permitted by this Permit shall be deemed to have commenced when the Project:
a. Completes a foundation associated with the Project; or b. Dedicates any land or easement as required from the zoning action; or c. Complies with all legal requirements necessary to commence the use, or obtains an occupancy permit, whichever is sooner.

5. Time Extension: Pursuant to Section XI-10-64.07 of the Milpitas Municipal Code, unless otherwise provided by State law, Permittee shall have the right to request a one-time extension of the Permit if the request is made in writing to the Planning Division prior to the expiration date of the approval. (P)

6. Project Job Account: If Permittee's project job account is at any time delinquent or below the required deposit amount, City will not continue to review or process the application until Permittee's project job account is paid in full and the required deposit has been made. Additionally, prior to the issuance of any building permit or occupancy permit as applicable, Permittee shall pay in full the Project account balance and establish a remaining balance of at least twenty- five percent (25%) of the required initial deposit. (P/E) 60 Item # 7.
13 Resolution No. _____

7. Notice: Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66020, any protest filed in court relating to the imposition of fees, dedication, reservations, or other exactions to be imposed on the development project shall be filed within ninety (90) days after the date of the adoption of this Resolution. This provision serves as notice from the local agency to the Permittee that the ninety (90) day period in which the Permittee may file a protest has begun under California Government Code Section 66020(d)(1).

8. Cost and Approval: Permittee shall fully complete and satisfy each and every condition set forth in this Resolution and any other condition applicable to the Project to the sole satisfaction of the City. Additionally, Permittee shall be solely responsible and liable for the cost to satisfy each and every condition. (ALL)

9. Conditions: Each and every condition set forth in this Exhibit shall apply to the Project and continue to apply to the Project so long as the Project is operating under the permits and approvals in this Resolution. (ALL)

10. Compliance with Laws: The construction, use, and all related activity authorized under this Permit shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules, regulations, guidelines, requirements and policies. (CAO/P/E/B)

11. Indemnification: To the fullest extent permitted by law, Permittee shall indemnify, defend with counsel of the City's choosing, and hold harmless City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitati on, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to (i) City's approval of the project, including, but not limited to, the approval of the discreti onary permits, maps under the Subdivision Map Act, and/or the City's related determinations or actions under the California Environmental Quality Act, and (ii) Permittee's construction, operation, use or related activity under this Permit. This indemnifica tion shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by Permittee, City and/or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. Permittee shall indemnify the City for all of City's costs, attorneys' fees and damages, which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this condition.

Permittee shall pay to the City upon demand or, as applicable, to counsel of City's choosing, any amount owed pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition. The above indemnification is intended to be as broad as permitted by applicable law. To the extent the above indemnification is limited by Government Code Section 66474.9, any limitations shall only apply to Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0002, and the balance of the Permit shall be unaffected by Government Code Section 66474.9.

12. Certificate of Insurance: Permittee shall provide certificate of insurance and name City as an additional insured in its insurance policies for the Project.

13. Revocation, Suspension, Modification: This Permit may be suspended, revoked or modified in accordance with Section XI-10-63.06 of the Milpitas Municipal Code.

14. Severability: If any term, provision, or condition of this Permit is held to be illegal or unenforceable by the Court, such term, provision or condition shall be severed and shall be inoperative, and the remainder of this Permit shall remain operative, binding and fully enforceable.

15. Response to Conditions of Approval: Permittee shall provide a written response to comments upon submittal for building permit application. The responses should clearly indicate how each condition of approval has been addressed in the plans and shall note the appropriate plan sheet. (P)

16. Compliance with Fire Department and California Fire Code : The project shall comply with the requirements of the Milpitas Fire Department and the California Fire Code, as adopted by the City. Changes to the site plan and/or buildings requires review and re-approval by the Fire Department. (F)

61 Item # 7.
14 Resolution No. _____

17. Development in Conformance with Approved Plans: Permittee shall develop the approved Project in conformance with the plans dated October 7, 2022 and approved by the City Council on February 7, 2023. in accordance with th ese Conditions of Approval. Any deviation from the approved site plan, elevations, materials, colors, landscape plan or other approved submittal shall require that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the Permittee shall submit modified plans and an y other applicable materials as required by the City for review, and obtain the approval of the Planning Director or Designee. If the Planning Director or designee determines that the deviation is significant, the owner or designee shall be required to app ly for review and obtain approval of the Planning Commission or City Council, as applicable, in accordance with the Milpitas Zoning Code. (P)

PLANNING CONDITIONS

18. Landscape: All approved landscaping shall be permanently maintained and replaced with substa ntially similar plant material as necessary to provide a permanent, attractive and effective appearance.

19. Street Lights: Permittee shall provide or relocate street lighting along all street frontages subject to the review and approval of the Planning Department. Permittee shall likewise install pedestrian scale lights along all public and private street frontages. The Permittee shall submit a photometric plan to determine appropriate light levels with submittal of on-site improvement plans.

20. Parking: Parking shall be provided as depicted on the Site Plan approved by the City Council and shall consist of the following:

a. RESIDENT: A total of 156 vehicle spaces within unit parking garages. b. GUEST: A total of 35 vehicle spaces are to be provided on site.

21. Bicycle Racks: A total of ten (10) short-term bicycle parking spaces shall be installed on the site.

22. Trees: The project will remove 55 ordinance-sized trees and replace with approximately 196 trees, in conformance with the plans approved by City Council on February 7, 2023.

23. Public Art Requirement: Permittee shall comply with the City’s Public Art Requirements for Private Development, as set forth in Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI -10-14. Fee shall be no less than one -half of one percent of building development costs and shall be payable at time of building permit issuance.

24. Affordable Housing Requirement: Permittee shall comply with the City’s Affo rdable Housing Ordinance, as set forth in Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-1-3.00. All new residential development projects of ten units or more designed and intended for permanent occupancy shall construct 15 percent of the total number of dwelling unit s within the development as affordable units, unless otherwise remedied by the City Council.

25. Affordable Housing Agreement: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for an affordable unit, resale restrictions or rental controls, or both, as the case may be, shall be set forth in an agreement between the City and the applicant, which agreement shall be recorded against the affordable units. The agreement shall be executed by the City Manager or designee, and its requirements shall run with the land and bind the applicant's successors. Covenants on the affordable units shall not be less than 55 years.

PLANNING & BUILDING PROJECT-RELATED TASP MITIGATION MEASURES &

REQUIRED PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES

Biological Resources (TASP Policy 5.26)

26. Nesting Birds: To mitigate impacts on non -listed special-status nesting raptors and other nesting birds, a qualified biologist will survey the site for nesting raptors and other nesting birds within 14 days prior t o any ground disturbing activity or vegetation removal. If active nests are found, the results of the surveys will be forwarded to the U.S. Fish 62 Item # 7.
15 Resolution No. _____

and Wildlife Services (USFWS) and CDFG (as appropriate) and, on a case -by-case basis, avoidance procedures adopted. These can include construction buffer areas (several hundred feet in the case of raptors) or seasonal avoidance.

However, if construction activities occur only during the non -breeding season between August 31 and February 1, no surveys will be required. (P)

Noise (TASP Policy 5.10))

27. Noise Insulation: Prior to issuance of any building permit, Permittee shall demonstrate that the Project will meet the required 45 dBA maximum interior noise standard.

Air Quality (TASP Policy 5.16)

28. Dust Control Emissions: During the construction of the Project, Permittee shall comply with all of the following:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g. parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas and unpaved roads) shall be watered two times per day.
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand or other loose material off the site shall be covered. c. 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 or more often if determined necessary by City Engineer or designee. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 MPH. e. 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. f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five (5) minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.
g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mecha nic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the City regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. (B)

29. ROG Emissions: Prior to issuance of any building permit, Permittee shall develop, submit and obtain approval from the City of a plan to reduce ROG emissions by 17 percent or greater during the architectural coating phase of the construction. Acceptable measures to achieve this goal include, but are not limited to, using paint that contains 125 grams per liter of VOC or less, the use of prefabricated building materials, or a combination of both. The plan shall be implemented as approved by the City. (B)

ENGINEERING CONDITIONS

PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION PLAN SUBMITTALS
The following conditions shall be met prior to any detailed construction plan check submittals (Building or Engineering, except demolition and rough grade plans), unless otherwise approved by the Director of Engineering/City Engineer. City reserves the right to reject any plan check submittal if any of the following conditions are not met. (E)

32. Modifications: The Site Development Plan dated October 7, 2022 is subject to change during the plan check stage based upon City’s previous comments and conditions stated herein.

33. Solid Waste and Recycling Handling Plan: Permittee shall submit final Solid Waste and Recycling Handling Plan based upon City’s previous comments for City’s review and approval by the Solid Waste Program. The Plan shall show calculations of waste generation volumes and how materials will be transferred from the waste generation areas to the trash enclosure/external collection point; demonstrate how recycling, food waste, and yard trimmings shall have 63 Item # 7.
16 Resolution No. _____

a separately maintained process from garbage handling; address other requirements such as waste generation and compactor sizing, chute shut-off and property management responsibility for bin management and litter control; outreach and education to tenants/occupants, and procure sufficient service frequency based upon waste generation calculation volumes.

34. Stormwater Control Plan: Permittee shall submit City approved final Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) that complies with the latest Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, including Low Impact Development (LID) Section C3.c.i.(2)(b) measures for harvesting and reuse, infiltration, or evapo-transpiration, for City’s review and approval by the Engineering Department.

35. Photometric Analysis: Permittee shall submit streetlight photometric analysis for City’s review and approval by the Engineering Department along Tarob Court, Journey Street and Trade Zone Boulevard that meet the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA), RP8, for roadway and sidewalk lighting standards and City standard design guidelines.

36. Recycle Water Cross-Connection Specialist: In order to comply with the California Code of Regulations Title 17 and 22, and for timely plan approval by the California State Water Resources Control Board/Division of Drinking Water as well as by the South Bay Water Recycling, Permittee must hire a certified cross-connection specialist for their consultation as to irrigation water system design and construction phasing. The name and contact information of the certified cross-connection specialist shall be provided on all landscape submittal plans.

37. Submittal Requirements: Permittee to ensure that all plan check submittals are in accordance with City’s submittal check list for each permit type, including but not limited to, payment of permit fees and/or fee deposit at the time of the submittal.

38. Project Job Account/Fee Deposit: Permittee shall open a new PJ account as a deposit to cover the costs for Engineering Department’s services for review and inspection of the project. The amount shall be determined based on the public improvement cost estimates as prepared by the Permittee’s engineer.

39. Coordination with other Projects: Permittee shall coordinate designs with 2001 Tarob Court in advance prior to any plan submittal.

40. Coordination with other Jurisdictions: Permittee shall coordinate designs, particularly along Trade Zone Boulevard, with City of San Jose in advance prior to any plan submittal.

PRIOR TO FINAL MAP APPROVAL/RECORDATION
The following conditions shall be addressed during the final map plan check process and shall be met prior to any final approval/recordation (except demolition permit and rough grade permit), unless otherwise approved by the Director of Engineering/City Engineer. (E)

38. Dedication on the Final Map: Permittee shall dedicate necessary emergency vehicle access easements, public service utility easements, street easements, public access easement and other public easements deemed necessary for the project.

39. Abandonment/Quitclaim Easements: Permittee shall abandon/quit claim existing easements that are in conflict with or unnecessary for the project.

40. Partial Street Vacation: This project is subject to and contingent upon partial vacation on Tarob Court.

41. Easements on the Final Map : Permittee shall depict all existing easements to remain based upon current preliminary title report and depict new easements on the final map.

64 Item # 7.
17 Resolution No. _____

42. Concurrent Off-site Plan Reviews: Permittee shall submit separate off -site improvement plans for City’s review and approval by the Engineering Department.

43. Street Name Approval : Permittee shall obtain approval from the City Council for all new street names based upon recommendation from the Planning Commission and City guidelines.

44. Utility Company Approval: Permittee shall obtain written approval from utility companies (PG&E, AT&T, Comcast) for abandonment of existing and dedication of new public service utilities easements.

45. Demolition of Existing Building: Permittee shall demolish existing buildings/facilities that are in conflict with the new property lines.

46. Covenant, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs) : Permittee shall provide CC&Rs for City’s review and approval for perpetual maintenance of private roadways, private utilities, stormwater management facilities in acco rdance with a separately recorded Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement. There shall be provisions in the CC&Rs to retain a recycled water site supervisor with annual re-certification report to the City’s Public Works Department.

47. Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Securities : Permittee shall execute a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and provide improvement securities in accordance with MMC Title XI, Section 17, and submit all other supplemental documents as stipulated in the Improvement Agreement (such as certificate of insurance).

48. Annexation to the Community Facilities District: Permittee shall submit an executed petition affirmatively consenting to annex the subject property to the Community Facilities Dis trict (CFD) 2008 -1, and agree to pay the special taxes levied by the CFD 2008 -1 for the purpose of maintaining the public services. The CFD annexation process shall be completed prior to final map approval. Permittee shall comply with all rules, regulatio ns, policies and practices established by the State Law and/or by the City with respect to the CFD including, without limitation, requirements for notice and disclosure to future owners and/or residents. This condition of approval is nonseverable from the Permit and invalidation or limitation of this condition invalidates the Permit, condition 42 notwithstanding.

PRIOR TO OFF-SITE PLAN APPROVAL/ENCROACHMENT PERMIT ISSUANCE The following conditions shall be addressed as part of the off-site improvement plan review and shall be met prior to encroachment permit issuance, unless otherwise approved by the Director of Engineering/City Engineer. (E)

49. Public Improvement Design Standards: All public improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with all applicable public improvement design standards, including but not limited to:
a. Milpitas Design Guidelines: (http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/milpitas/departments/engineering/design- guidelines/);
b. Standard details and specifications:
(http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/milpitas/departments/engineering/standard-details-and-specifications/); c. Transit Area Specific Plan design guidelines:
(http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_pdfs/engDesignGuidelines/en_dg_vi_transitAreaSpecific.pdf); and d. Santa Clara County Roads and Airports (SCCRA) design guidelines (for improvements along Montague Expressway); and
e. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, where applicable.

50. Sanitary Sewer Calculations: Permittee shall submit a completed “Sewer Needs Questionnaire” form and sanitary sewer calculations to justify lateral size design, allocation of discharge for each of the lateral, and impact to the existing main. Permittee shall be responsible to implement any necessary improvements if there is any identified deficiency to the existing main as a result of the project.

51. Storm Drain Design: Permittee shall submit storm drain hydrology and hydraulic calculations based upon a 10-year storm event to justify the size of the storm drain lateral flowing full, without surcharging the main line pipe, and to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department.
65 Item # 7.
18 Resolution No. _____

52. Domestic Water and Fire Service Calculations: Permittee shall submit potable water and fire service calculations to confirm adequacy of lateral size, pressure and flow, to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department and Fire Department. Hydraulic modeling analysis by the City and paid by the Permittee may be required as needed.

Permittee shall be responsible to implement any necessary improvements if there is any identified deficiency to the existing main as a result of the project.

53. Specific Improvements: In addition to standard public improvements required under Milpitas Municipal Code (MMC) Title XI, Chapter 1, Section 7, Permittee shall install other specific improvements listed below including incidental improvements as required by the City as part of the encroachment permit, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer or his Designee.

a) Underground any existing overhead facilities along the frontage of Trade Zone Blvd per MMC Title XI, Chapter 1, Section 7.02-2.
b) Installation of separate water service tap and meter for each of the following services: residential, irrigation, and fire.
c) Installation of separate utility service lines (domestic water, fire service, sanitary sewer) for residential. d) Installation of radio-transmitted water meters with a meter antenna, any repeaters or transmitters as needed with dedicated power supplies at no cost to the City at locations acceptable to the City to ensure accurate and timely reception of meter readings. Permittee shall execute a recorded instrument providing dedicated space, access rights and dedicated power supplies to the City for operation/maintenance/repair/replacement of subject radio antenna. e) Removal and installation of new curb, gutter and sidewalk, signage and striping, and street lights along Tarob Court, Trade Zone Boulevard and Journey Street shall comply with the applicable TASP design standards and details.
f) Installation of Half street width grind and overlay along the project street frontage and extents of proposed Utility Work on Tarob Court with spot base repair as needed. g) Provide base repair for all failed pavement areas and micro surface along the project frontage on Trade Zone Boulevard to the City Engineer’s satisfaction.
h) Relocate the existing 12” Water Main along the frontage to avoid conflicts with the new street alignment. The permittee shall connect the new 12” water main to the existing 12” water main at both ends per City Standards. The existing water main shall be abandoned per the City’s Abandonment Notes and to the City’s satisfaction.
i) The project frontage along Trade Zone Blvd shall match the Traverse Development street section for consistency.

54. Abandonment of Existing City Utilities: Permittee shall cap, abandon or remove any unused existing public utilities based upon City’s Abandonment Notes and to the City’s satisfaction.

55. Relocation and Adjustment of Existing Public Utilities: Permittee shall relocate and/or adjust existing public utilities as needed that are in conflict with the proposed improvements.

56. Water Service Agreement: Permittee shall complete a water service agreement to obtain water service.

57. Encroachment Permit: Prior to any work in the public right-of-way and/or public easement, obtain an encroachment permit with insurance requirements for all public improvements including a traffic control plan per the latest California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department.

66 Item # 7.
19 Resolution No. _____

58. Pothole Encroachment Permit: Due to multiple new utility service connections along the project frontage, Permittee shall pothole and verify all potential utility crossing conflict as part of the public improvement plan during the design stage.

PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE
The following conditions shall be addressed during the building plan check process and shall be met prior to any building permit issuance (except demolition permit and rough grade permit), unless otherwise approved by the Director of Engineering/City Engineer). (E)

59. Final Map Recordation: Permittee shall record the final map.

60. Easements on the Building Permit Plans: Permittee shall depict all existing easements to remain based upon current preliminary title report and depict new easements on applicable building permit plans.

61. Stormwater Facility Operation & Maintenance Plan: Permittee shall incorporate design details into applicable construction plans in accordance with City approved Storm Water Control Plan (SWCP). Permittee shall also submit Stormwater Facility Operation & Maintenance Plan that describes operation and maintenance procedures needed to ensure that treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs) and other storm water control measures continue to work as intended and do not create a nuisance (including vector control).

62. Stormwater Management Facilities O&M Agreement: Permittee shall execute and record a Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement associated with the SWCP O&M Plan, including perpetual maintenance of treatment areas/units, as reviewed and accepted by the Engineering Department. The subject O&M Agreement shall be referenced in the CC&Rs, if applicable.

63. Water Supply and Force Majeure. The City reserves the right to suspend the issuance of building permits in case of an emergency declaration of water supply in the case of a major catastrophic event that restricts City’s assurance to provide water supply.

64. Recycle Water Approval: Permittee shall use recycled water for landscape irrigation purpose, except for the interior courtyard/podium areas within the building footprint where the potable water shall be used for irrigation. Permittee shall comply with California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 3, titled “Water Recycling Criteria”, CCR, Title 17, Division 1, Chapter 5, Subchapter 1 titled “Drinking Water Supply” and all other recycled water regulations as listed under the publication titled “California Department of Public Health Regulations Related to Recycled Water June 18, 2014”. Permittee shall obtain approval from the California State Water Resources Control Board/Division of Drinking Water, South Bay Water Recycling and the City for recycled water design, including but not limited to on-site irrigation design, based upon South Bay Water Recycling Guidelines and City of Milpitas Supplemental Guidelines. All landscape plants shall be compatible with recycled water.

65. Water Efficient Landscapes: Permittee shall comply with Milpitas Municipal Code Title VIII, Chapter 5 (Water Efficient Landscapes) for landscape design, including but not limited to, providing separate water meters for domestic water service and irrigation service and providing applicable landscape documentation package.

66. Solid Waste and Recycling Facility Design: Permittee shall comply with all applicable City design guidelines/details associated with haul route, turning radius, vertical and horizontal clearance, trash enclosure, staging area, storage area, etc.

67. Recycling Report Prior to Demolition Permit Issuance: Permittee shall submit Part I of a Recycling Report on business letterhead to the Building Department, for forwarding to the Engineering Department for review and approval. The report shall describe the following resource recovery activities:
a. What materials will be salvaged.
b. How materials will be processed during demolition.
c. Intended locations or businesses for reuse or recycling. 67 Item # 7.
20 Resolution No. _____

d. Quantity estimates in tons (both recyclable and for landfill disposal). Estimates for recycling and disposal tonnage amounts by material type shall be included as separate items in all reports to the Building Division before demolition begins.

Permittee shall make every effort to salvage materials for reuse and recycling, and shall comply with the City’s demolition and construction debris recycling ordinance.

68. Recycling Report Prior to Building Permit Issuance: Permittee shall submit Part II of the Recycling Report to the Building Department, for forwarding to the Engineering Department. Part II of the Recycling Report shall be supported by copies of weight tags and/or receipts of “end dumps.” Actual reuse, recycling and disposal tonnage amounts (and estimates for “end dumps”) shall be submitted to the Building Department for approval by the Engineering Department prior to inspection by the Building Department.

69. Flood Plain Management: This project is in the Flood Zone “AO” with 1’ average flood depth, therefore, Permittee shall comply with all applicable flood protection criterion required by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and MMC Title XI, Chapter 15. Permittee shall also submit a Flood Study for the Project demonstrating, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, that the proposed development has no adverse impact to the surrounding flood plain within the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) and to the flood carrying capacity of the area. The study should include cumulative effects of existing and proposed developments demonstrating the combined effects will not increase the water surface elevation of the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) more than one foot at any point. For the AO Flood Zone, the flood study is required to establish the BFE, and set the building elevation accordingly. The flood study shall be consistent with the requirements in accordance with Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations by establishing a hydraulic model and HEC-RAS. The study shall clearly identify the lowest floor elevation as being either the bottom of garage, bottom of first floor residential units, bottom of elevator pit, etc. and shall be completely elevated out of the SFHA.

70. Mailboxes: The Permittee shall obtain information from the US Postal Services regarding placement of required mailboxes. Structures to protect mailboxes may require Building, Engineering and Planning Department review

71. Development Fees: Permittee shall pay the following development fees. The information listed in items “a” through “i” are based upon current fee rates; however, those fee rates are subject to change. The exact fee amount shall be determined at the time of building permit fee payment.

a. Transit Area Specific Plan Development Fee at $47,550/unit for residential uses. Based on approval for development of 78 units, the estimated Transit Area Specific Plan Development Impact Fee for this project is $3,708,900 ($47,550/unit x 78 units). TASP fees shall be paid prior to issuance of Building permit.

b. Parkland Impact Fee

1. The project is required to dedicate 0.68 acres of parkland, equivalent to $1,895,090 fees-in-lieu.

2. The park portion of the TASP fee is valued at $1,682,023.98, equivalent to 0.60 acres. This will be applied to the project parkland requirement.

3. The applicant will receive credit for 0.08 acres of private recreation space on site. Upon demonstration of provision of this private recreation space to the satisfaction of the Direction of Planning or his/her designee, no additional parkland fees will be due, per table below.

68 Item # 7.
21 Resolution No. _____

Toll Brothers Townhomes Proposed 78
Population Estimate
(2.49 persons/unit) 194 persons
TASP Parkland Requirement 3.5 acres/1,000 people or equivalent fees-in-lieu
Total Parkland Acreage or In-Lieu Fee Required 0.68 acres / $1,895,090 Amount Satisfied Through TASP Fees (Acreage/Dollars) 0.60 acres / $1,682,023.98 Remaining Parkland Acreage or In-Lieu Fee Required 0.08 acres / $231,066.02 Private Recreation/Open Space Included in the Project 0.34 acres Balance of Parkland Acreage or In-Lieu Feed Due 0.00 acres / $0

c. Storm water connection fee at $16,771/acre for residential.

d. Water connection fee at $1,164/unit for residential, based upon increased water usage.

e. Sewer connection fee at $1,406/unit for residential, based upon increased average wastewater flow.

f. 3.8% of applicable fees in accordance with City Resolution No. 8969 as Permitting Automation Fee.

g. FEMA Flood Zone Designation Letter fee in the amount of $100.00 each.

h. Public Art Fee, as set forth in Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-14.

DURING CONSTRUCTION
The following conditions shall be complied with at all times during the construction phase of the project, unless otherwise approved by the Director of Engineering/City Engineer. (E)

72. Dewatering: If dewatering is needed during construction, Permittee shall obtain a Short-Term Industrial Wastewater Permit from the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant for discharging the groundwater to a sanitary sewer system.

73. On-site Recycle Water Coordination: Permittee’s cross-connection specialist shall coordinate the phasing of the construction; facilitate the cross-connection testing in order to minimize the impact for occupied buildings during cross-connection testing; sign-off before the water meter set; coordinate on-site construction inspection; complete the site inspection; fill out required paperwork/questionnaire; and provide them to the City for forwarding to South Bay Water Recycling.

74. Prohibition of Potable Water Usage: Permittee shall use recycled water for construction purposes, including dust control and compaction. Permittee shall comply with MMC VIII-6-5.00 and 6-6.00 where potable water usage is prohibited, unless otherwise approved by the City Council.

75. Construction Staging and Employee Parking: Permittee shall place all construction related materials, equipment, and arrange construction workers parking on-site and not located in the public rights-of-way or public easements.

69 Item # 7.
22 Resolution No. _____

76. Water Shut-down Plan: Permittee shall provide a water shut-down plan at least seven days in advance of the shut- down in coordination with the Engineering Inspector and notify affected property owners/tenants when cut-in tee(s) is/are required.

PRIOR TO FIRST OCCUPANCY
The following conditions shall be met prior to first building occupancy on either lot, unless otherwise approved the Director of Engineering/City Engineer.

77. Completion of Public Improvements: Permittee shall complete all public improvements, including but not limited to Tarob Court, Journey Street and Trade Zone Boulevard, frontage improvements, and bicycle path, as shown on City approved plans.

78. LOMR-F: Permittee shall submit the FEMA approved LOMR-F for each unit/building associated with the requested occupancy, if project is located in the SFHA.

79. Elevation and/or Flood Proofing Certificate: Permittee's civil engineer shall submit Elevation and/or Flood Proofing Certificate for the lowest finished floor elevation of each building for City record.

80. Landscape Certificate of Completion: Permittee shall submit a Certificate of Substantial Completion that complies with the Milpitas Municipal Code Water Efficient Landscapes ordinance.

81. Certificate of Cross-Connection: Permittee shall ensure that the cross-connection specialist complete the required recycled water construction inspection checklist, cross connection test results and any special inspection checklist as required by the South Bay Recycling Program http://www.sanjoseca.gov/index.aspx?NID=1595 and forward them to the City.

82. Record Drawings: Permittee shall submit record drawings in AutoCAD, Tiff, and PDF formats for City records.

Record drawings shall include all public improvements. Additionally, if the project uses recycled water, the permittee shall also submit record drawings of on-site irrigation facilities.

83. Private Job (PJ) Balance: Permittee shall pay for any remaining balance from the Private Job deposit.

LEGEND
P = Planning Department
B = Building Department
E = Engineering Department
F = Fire Department
CAO = City Attorney’s Office
ALL = All Reviewing Departments

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO PROTEST
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90 -day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), began on date of adoption of this resolution. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions.

70 Item # 7.
23 Resolution No. _____

AGREEMENT
Permittee/Property Owner
The undersigned agrees to each and every condition of approval and acknowledges the NOTICE OF RIGHT TO PROTEST and hereby agrees to use the Project property on the terms and conditions set forth in this resolution.

Dated: _________________ ______________________________________ Signature of Permittee
71 Item # 7.

Resolution No. _____

EXHIBIT 2

CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM

72 Item # 7.

December 2022

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

MILPITAS , CALIFORNIA
73 Item # 7.

This page intentionally left blank
74 Item # 7.

December 2022

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

MILPITAS , CALIFORNIA

Submitted to:

City of Milpitas
455 E Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035

Prepared by:

LSA
157 Park Place
Pt. Richmond, California 94801
510.236.6810

Project No. MLP1902.12
75 Item # 7.

This page intentionally left blank
76 Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
FIGURES AND TABLES ............................................................................................................................. ii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................................................ iii

1.0 INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ................................................................. 1-1

2.0 INFILL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .................................................................. 2-1

2.1 CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183.3(B)(1) CRITERIA ........................................................ 2-1

2.2 CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183.3(B)(2) ....................................................................... 2-1

2.3 CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183.3(b)(3) ....................................................................... 2-3

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 PROJECT SITE ..................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 PROPOSED PROJECT .......................................................................................................... 3-2

3.3 AMENDMENTS AND PERMITS ........................................................................................... 3-4

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ........................................ 3-1

4.1 DETERMINATION ............................................................................................................... 3-1

5.0 STREAMLINING PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183.3 .................................. 5-1

5.1 PREVIOUS CEQA DOCUMENTS .......................................................................................... 5-2

6.0 INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ................................................................. 6-4

7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS .......................................................................................... 7-1 77 Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) ii

FIGURES AND TABLES

FIGURES
Figure 3-1: Regional Location and Project Vicinity Map ..................................................................... 3-1 Figure 3-2: Aerial Photograph of the Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses .................................. 3-2 Figure 3-3: Proposed Conceptual Site Plan ......................................................................................... 3-3 Figure 3-4: Proposed Conceptual Typical Elevations .......................................................................... 3-4 Figure 3-5: Proposed Conceptual Typical Building Section ................................................................. 3-5 Figure 3-6: Proposed Landscape Plan ................................................................................................. 3-6

TABLES
Table 3.A: Existing and Proposed Housing Units and Population within the TASP Area ................... 3-3

78 Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) iii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ADU accessory dwelling units
APN Assessor’s Parcel Numbers
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit
BMPs Best Management Practices
CAP Climate Action Plan
CBC California Building Code
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CGP Construction General Permit
City City of Milpitas
CLOMR-F Conditional Letter of Map Revision
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
General Plan EIR The City of Milpitas’ 2040 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report GHG Greenhouse Gas
I-680 Interstate 680
I-880 Interstate 880
LID Low Impact Development
LOMR-F Letter of Map Revision
MMSP Milpitas Metro Specific Plan
MRP Bay Area Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit
79 Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) iv NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NWIC Northwest Information Center
OPR Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls
PDA Priority Development Area
R3 Multi-Family High Density Residential
SCVWD Santa Clara Valley Water District
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
TAC toxic air contaminant
TASP Transit Area Specific Plan
TOD Transit Oriented Development
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VTA Valley Transportation Authority

80 Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) v This page intentionally left blank

81 Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 1-1

1.0 INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Sections 21083.3, 21094.5, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3.

1. Project Title:
675 Trade Zone Boulevard Project

2. Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of Milpitas
455 E Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035

3. Contact Person and Phone Number:

Lillian VanHua, Senior Planner
(408) 586-3073

4. Project Location:
675 Trade Zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court
Milpitas, CA 95035

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:

Toll Brothers
6800 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 320
Pleasanton, CA 94566

6. General Plan Designation:

Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (MMSP)

7. Zoning:

Multi-Family High Density Residential (R3), Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay

8. Prior Environmental Document(s):
• Draft Environmental Impact Report – 2040 Milpitas General Plan (SCH No. 2020070348), November 2020.
• Draft Environmental Impact Report, Milpitas Transit Area Specific Plan (SCH No. 2006032091), October 2007.
82 Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 1-2

9. Location of Prior Environmental Document(s):

City of Milpitas, Planning Department
455 E. Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035

10. Description of Project:

The proposed project would include the demolition of the existing buildings and improvements on the project site and the construction of 13- three-story buildings that would contain 78 townhomes units with 12 accessory dwelling units (ADUs), for a total of 90 residential units. A total of 12 townhome-style condominium units would be affordable to moderate incomes, as determined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. See Section

3.0, Project Description, for a complete description of the proposed project.

11. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

The approximately 4.1-acre project site is located at 675 Trade Zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court in the southern portion of the City of Milpitas. The project site is located within a light industrial area bordered to the north by commercial uses and Tarob Court, to the west by Journey Street, to the south by Trade Zone Boulevard, and to the east by Tarob Court and Lundy Avenue. The Milpitas Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station and Montague Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) light rail station are approximately 0.35 miles north of the project site. See Section 3.0, Project Description, for a complete description of the project site and surrounding land uses.

12. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required:

None

83 Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 2-1

2.0 INFILL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15183.3(b) and CEQA Guidelines Appendix M establish eligibility requirements for projects to qualify as infill projects for streamlined environmental review. The below information demonstrates that the proposed infill project satisfies the eligibility criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3(b) as well as the performance standards in Appendix M. Therefore, the Infill Environmental Checklist may be used to evaluate the potential project impacts under CEQA.

2.1 CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183.3(B)(1) CRITERIA
Be located in an urban area on a site that either has been previously developed or that adjoins existing qualified urban uses on at least 75 percent of the site’s perimeter. For the purpose of this subdivision, “adjoin” means the infill project is immediately adjacent to qualified urban uses, or is only separated from such uses by an improved right-of-way.

A “qualified urban use” is defined in PRC Section 21072 as “any residential, commercial, public institutional, transit or transportation passenger facility, or retail use, or any combination of those uses.” The project site is currently developed with industrial buildings that include manufacturing, warehouse and office space, loading docks, surface parking, and landscaped areas with mature trees. The site is located in an urban area, has been previously developed, and is surrounded by development on all sides.

2.2 CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183.3(B)(2)
Satisfy the performance standards in Appendix M, as documented on the Infill Checklist N.

1. Does the non-residential infill project include a renewable energy feature? If so, describe below.

If not, explain below why it is not feasible to do so.

The only use included in the proposed project is residential which, although not required, is encouraged to provide renewable energy features. The buildings would be all-electric and solar- ready.

2. If the project site is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, either provide documentation of remediation or describe the recommendations provided in a preliminary endangerment assessment or comparable document that will be implemented as part of the project.

The project site is not included on any list of facilities or sites compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code (i.e., the Cortese List).
1 The project site does not have any known
contamination.

1 California Environmental Protection Agency. 2022. Cortese List Data Resources. Website:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ (accessed October 27, 2022). 84 Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 2-2

3. If the infill project includes residential units located within 500 feet, or such distance that the local agency or local air district has determined is appropriate based on local conditions, of a high volume roadway or other significant source of air pollution, as defined in Appendix M, describe the measures that the project will implement to protect public health. Such measures may include policies and standards identified in the local general plan, specific plans, zoning code or community risk reduction plan, or measures recommended in a health risk assessment, to promote the protection of public health. Identify the policies or standards, or refer to the site- specific analysis, below.

The project would not include residential units located within 500 feet, or such distance that the local agency or local air district has determined is appropriate based on local conditions, of a high- volume roadway or other significant source of air pollution. High-volume roadways are defined as freeways, highways, or urban roads with traffic volumes of at least 100,000 vehicles per day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per day. There are no major roadways with volumes greater than 100,000 vehicles per day within 500 feet of the project site. The project site is approximately 3,800 feet west of Interstate 680 and 4,900 feet east of Interstate 880, which are the closest roadways that would qualify. Additionally, none of the roadways within the vicinity of the project site are designated as rural roadways in the City’s General Plan.

4. For residential projects, the project satisfies which of the following?  Located within a low vehicle travel area, as defined in Appendix M.  Located within ½-mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high- quality transit corridor.
 Consists of 100 or fewer units that are each affordable to low income households. (Attach evidence of legal commitment to ensure the continued availability and use of the housing units for lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, for a period of at least 30 years, at monthly housing costs, as determined pursuant to Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.)
Appendix M of the CEQA Guidelines defines a “Major Transit Stop” as a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two of more major bus routes with frequencies of service intervals of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. The project site is located approximately 0.3 mile south of the Milpitas Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station and Montague Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) light rail station. Therefore, the project site is located within one half mile of a major transit stop.

5. For commercial projects with a single building floor-plate below 50,000 square feet, the project satisfies which of the following?
 Located within a low vehicle travel area, as defined in Appendix M.  The project is within ½-mile of 1,800 dwelling units. 85 Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 2-3 This performance standard is not applicable. The proposed project does not include any commercial uses.

6. For office building projects, the project satisfies which of the following?  Located within a low vehicle travel area, as defined in Appendix M.  Located within ¼-mile of an existing major transit stop.

This performance standard is not applicable. The proposed project does not include any office uses.

7. For school projects, the project does all of the following:
 The project complies with the requirements in Sections 17213, 17213.1, and 17213.2 of the California Education Code.
 The project is an elementary school and is within 1 mile of 50 percent of the student population, or is a middle school or high school and is within 2 miles of 50 percent of the student population. Alternatively, the school is within ½-mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor. (Attach map and methodology.)  The project provides parking and storage for bicycles and scooters.

This performance standard is not applicable. The proposed project is not a school project.

8. For small walkable community projects, the project must be a residential project that has a density of at least eight units to the acre or a commercial project with a floor area ratio of at least 0.5, or both.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3(f)(5) defines a “Small Walkable Community Project” as a project that is all of the following: 1) In an incorporated city that is not within the boundary of a metropolitan planning organization; 2) Within an area of approximately one-quarter mile diameter of contiguous land that includes a residential area adjacent to a retail downtown area and that is designated by the city for infill development consisting of residential and commercial uses. A city may designate such an area within its general plan, zoning code, or by any legislative act creating such a designation, and may make such designation concurrently with project approval; and 3) either a residential project that has a density of at least eight units to the acre or a commercial project with a floor area ratio of at least 0.5, or both. The project site is located within the boundary of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, which is the metropolitan planning organization for the nine-county Bay Area. Therefore, the proposed project is not a small walkable community project, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3(f)(5), and this performance standard is not applicable.

2.3 CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183.3(b)(3)
Be consistent with the general use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the project area in either a sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning 86 Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 2-4 strategy, except as provided in [the following] subdivisions […]. (The subdivisions have been omitted as they are not applicable to the proposed project.)
The adopted Plan Bay Area (2050) serves as the Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Bay Area, per Senate Bill 375. Plan Bay Area’s core strategy is to focus growth within existing communities along the existing transportation network. The project site is located within a Priority Development Area (PDA) in Plan Bay Area, which are areas identified for housing and job growth. As noted above, the proposed project would consist of redevelopment of the project site with residential uses along the existing transportation network. The proposed project is consistent with the 2040 Milpitas General Plan and Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP) as discussed in Section 6.11, Land Use and Planning of this Infill Environmental Checklist.
87 Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 3-1

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The following describes the proposed 675 Trade Zone Boulevard Project (project). The project site is located within the planning area for the Milpitas Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP).2 In addition to the description of the proposed project itself, this section includes a summary description of the proposed project’s location, existing site characteristics, required approvals, and entitlements.

This attachment is part of the preparation of an Infill Environmental Checklist prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to allow development of the proposed project. The City of Milpitas (City) is the CEQA lead agency for the project.

3.1 PROJECT SITE
The following section describes the project location, existing conditions, surrounding land uses, and the regulatory setting.

3.1.1 Project Location
The project site is located in the southern portion of the City of Milpitas, just north of the border with the City of San José. The approximately 4.1-acre project site is located at 675 Trade Zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APN’s] 086-36-033 and 086-36-045).

Regional vehicular access to the project site is provided by Interstate 880 (I-880) to the west and Interstate 680 (I-680) to the east of the project site. The Milpitas BART station and VTA light rail station are approximately 0.35 miles north of the project site. Figure 1 shows the regional and local context of the project site. Figure 2 depicts an aerial photograph of the project site and surrounding land uses (all figures are provided at the end of this Attachment A).

3.1.2 Existing Conditions
The generally level project site is currently developed with two single-story industrial buildings that include manufacturing, warehouse and office space, loading docks, surface parking, and landscaped areas with mature trees.

3.1.3 Surrounding Land Uses
The project site is located within a light industrial area of Milpitas that was previously predominantly developed with commercial office parks and other buildings for industrial and commercial uses. The project site is bordered to the north by commercial uses and Tarob Court, to the west by Journey Street, to the south by Trade Zone Boulevard, and to the east by Tarob Court and Lundy Avenue.

The project site is in close proximity to the Great Mall shopping center in Milpitas, approximately 0.5 miles north of the project site.

2 Milpitas, City of. 2008. Milpitas Transit Area Specific Plan. June. Amended December 2011. 88 Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 3-2

3.1.4 Regulatory Framework
The City adopted the 2040 Milpitas General Plan on March 9, 2021, which replaced the General Plan adopted in 1994. The 2040 General Plan Land Use Map designates the project site as Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (MMSP), which is intended to create a structure for a walkable, transit-oriented area with a mix of land uses. The project site is zoned Multi-Family High Density Residential (R3) with a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay. The purpose of the R3 zone is to stabilize and protect the residential characteristics of the District and to promote, insofar as compatible with the intensity of land use, a suitable environment for family life. The R3 zone allows residential uses at a density of 12-20 units per acre. The TOD Overlay District is intended to provide for land uses, land use densities and intensities and development standards that act to enhance and support transit and to locate such uses near rail transit stations.

The project site is also located within the TASP. The TASP is a guide for development and redevelopment of the southern, light industrial corridor of Milpitas that is located in the vicinity of the BART station. The goal of the TASP is to create an attractive and livable neighborhood that is within walking distance to BART and to transform the older, light industrial district to meet high demand for housing, offices and shopping in Milpitas. The TASP was designed to accommodate substantial growth, minimize impacts on local roadways, and reduce urban sprawl at the periphery of the region. The proposed project would be located near the Milpitas BART station and supports the objectives of the TASP. The TASP FEIR was certified in 2008 and evaluates the environmental impacts of 7,100 units of residential development, a population increase of 18,000 new residents, the creation of 4,200 new jobs and development of 1 million square feet of office space, 285,000 square feet of retail space, and 175,000 square feet of hotels.

The TASP planning area is nearing the planned buildout identified in the TASP FEIR. The public review draft of the MMSP was made available for comment in late 2021, and is anticipated to be adopted by February 2023, at which point the MMSP would supersede the TASP.

3.2 PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed project would include a tentative map to subdivide the entire project site into 14 separate lots. The project sponsor, Toll Brothers, proposes to demolish the existing buildings and improvements on the site and construct 13 three-story buildings that would contain 78 townhome units with 12 accessory dwelling units (ADUs), for a total of 90 residential units on the project site.

Each building would be a maximum of 34 feet and 6 inches in height to the top of the roof.

Associated circulation, parking, landscaping, and infrastructure improvements would also be developed. The buildings would be all-electric and solar-ready. To allow for development of the proposed project, the City would vacate an approximately 743-square-foot portion of Tarob Court.

Figure 3 shows a conceptual site plan, Figure 4 shows typical conceptual building elevations, Figure 5 shows typical conceptual building sections, and Figure 6 shows the proposed landscape plan.

Table A.1 shows the housing units and population assumptions evaluated within the TASP FEIR, the number of approved units and under construction units and inclusion of the proposed project. As shown, the development associated with the proposed project is within the amount of growth evaluated and cleared within the TASP FEIR.
89 Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 3-3 Table 3.A: Existing and Proposed Housing Units and Population within the TASP Area Evaluated Within the

TASP FEIR
Approved and
Pending Proposed Project
Remaining
Development
Available
Housing Units 7,109a 6,863 90 156
Population 17,915a 17,295b 227b 393b
Source: Riley, Kevin, 2022. Metro Plan (TASP) Manager, Planning Department, City of Milpitas. February 7. a Milpitas, City of, 2008. Final Transit Area Specific Plan EIR. This total does not include the 468 units associated with The Crossings. b Estimated population associated with approved units, under construction units, and the proposed project was determine d by using the residents per unit evaluated within the TASP FEIR (17,915 residents/7,109 units = 2.52 residents per unit).

3.2.1 Building Program
As noted above, the proposed project would consist of 13 three-story buildings that would contain 78 townhome units with 12 accessory dwelling units (ADUs), for a total of 90 residential units on the project site. The proposed project would consist of eight two-bedroom units that would be approximately 1,256 square feet in size, 24 three-bedroom units that would be approximately 1,901 square feet in size, and 52 four-bedroom units that would range from 1,905 to 2,211 square feet in size. The 12 ADUs would be located within the four-bedroom units and would range from 287 to 632 square feet in size. A total of 12 townhome-style condominium units would be affordable to moderate incomes, as determined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, specifically based on Santa Clara County median income levels (adjusted for family size). Prior to building permit issuance, an executed agreement imposing appropriate rental restrictions on the affordable units would be required.

3.2.2 Landscaping and Open Space
The proposed project would include a total of 52,870 square feet of common open spaces and 11,250 square feet of private open space. Common open space on the project site would consist of walkways, community dining areas, and seating areas with turf. Private open space would consist of useable decks. Landscaping and bio-retention areas would also be provided around the site’s perimeter and throughout the site between buildings, as shown in Figure 3. A total of 82 trees would be removed during construction of the proposed project, and up to 136 new trees would be planted.

3.2.3 Access, Circulation and Parking
As shown in Figure 3, vehicular access to the project site would be provided at five entry points, three of which would be located along Journey Street on the west side of the site, one at Tarob Court at the northeastern side of the site, and one at Trade Zone Boulevard on the south side of the site. Interior streets would provide vehicular access to each of the residential units. Each of the townhome units would have a two-car garage, for a total of 156 covered parking spaces, all of which would be accessible from the internal roadway. An additional 35 street parking spaces would be provided throughout the site for a total of 191 parking spaces. The proposed project would also include 10 short-term bicycle parking spaces through the site. 90 Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 3-4

3.2.4 Utilities and Infrastructure
The proposed project would require utility services including water, wastewater, storm drain, gas, electrical, and telecommunications. The proposed project would connect to existing utilities via tie- ins on Tarob Court, Journey Street, and Trade Zone Boulevard, including connections to 10- and 12- inch water lines; 8- and 10-inch wastewater lines; 18-, 24-, and 54-inch storm drain lines; and a connection to the existing joint utility trench for gas and electrical service.

The project site currently includes a total of 141,900 square feet of impervious surface area (80 percent). The proposed project would result in a decrease in impervious surface area on the project site of 10,700 square feet. Roofs, roads, concrete driveways and other infrastructure would result in a total of 147,023 square feet of impervious surfaces (82 percent of the site). The project site will include 30 drainage management areas with 30 bio-retention areas that will treat and handle stormwater flows prior to discharge to the City’s stormwater drainage system.

3.2.5 Project Construction
Subsurface excavations for the foundations and utilities would likely occur to a depth of feet. It is anticipated that a total of 5,500 cubic yards of soil would be cut and 16,100 cubic yards would be used for fill. A total of approximately 7,000 tons of construction debris are anticipated to be removed from the project site during demolition of the existing buildings. The construction period is anticipated to begin in by date and would occur over an approximately 48-month period. Occupancy of the units could occur as early as Spring 2025.

3.3 AMENDMENTS AND PERMITS
As previously discussed, the proposed project involves an application for a specific development proposal for 675 Trade Zone Boulevard. As part of the proposed project evaluated in this Infill Environmental Checklist, the following approvals and permits would be required:
• Site Development Permit
• Conditional Use Permit
• Vesting Tentative Map
• Density Bonus Application
• Tree Removal Permit
• Demolition Permit
• Building Permit
The project applicant is also requesting use of the density bonus to reduce the amount of parking required. In addition, the project applicant is requesting a waiver to exceed the maximum of 40- percent compact stalls and reduce the stall depth of 90-degree guest parking stalls. 91 Item # 7.

SOURCE: Esri Street Base (2022)
I:\MLP1902.12\GIS\MXD\Regional Location.mxd (10/19/2022) FIGURE 3-1
675 Trade Zone Boulevard Project
Regional Location and Project Vicinity Map
Project Location
Project Site
LEGEND
Project Site
0 500 1000
FEET
92 Item # 7.

MULTI-FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL

MULTI-FAMILY

RESIDENTIAL

COMMERCIAL
USES

COMMERCIAL
USES Trade Zone Blvd
Lundy Ave
Journey St
Willow Ave
Momentum Dr
SOURCE: Google Imagery (2022)
I:\MLP1902.12\GIS\MXD\Project Site.mxd (10/19/2022)
FIGURE 3-2
675 Trade Zone Boulevard Project
Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses
LEGEND
Project Site
0 125 250
FEET
93 Item # 7.

FEET
8040 0
SOURCES: Tarob - Geomax, July 21, 2022
I:\MLP1902.12\G\Proposed Conceptual Site Plan.ai (10/18/2022) FIGURE 3-3
675 Trade Zone Boulevard Project
Proposed Conceptual Site Plan
94 Item # 7.

FEET
1608
SOURCES: Tarob - Geomax, July 21, 2022
I:\MLP1902.12\G\Proposed Conceptual Typical Eleva Ɵons.ai (10/18/2022) FIGURE 3-4
675 Trade Zone Boulevard Project
Proposed Conceptual Typical ElevaƟons
95 Item # 7.
7<3,&$/%8,/',1*6(&7,21
7<3,&$/%8,/',1*6(&7,21
FEET
804
SOURCES: Tarob - Geomax, July 21, 2022
I:\MLP1902.12\G\Proposed Conceptual Typical Bldg Sec Ɵon.ai (10/18/2022) FIGURE 3-5
675 Trade Zone Boulevard Project
Proposed Conceptual Typical Building Sec Ɵon
96 Item # 7.

FEET
12006 0
SOURCES: Tarob - Geomax, July 21, 2022
I:\MLP1902.12\G\Proposed Landscape Plan.ai (10/18/2022) FIGURE 3-6
675 Trade Zone Boulevard Project
Proposed Landscape Plan
97 Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 3-1

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist in Chapter 6.0.

Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance

4.1 DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed infill project WOULD NOT have any significant effects on the environment that either have not already been analyzed in a prior EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially mitigate. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21094.5, CEQA does not apply to such effects. A Notice of Determination (Section 15094) will be filed.

I find that the proposed infill project will have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or are more significant than described in the prior EIR, and that no uniformly applicable development policies would substantially mitigate such effects. With respect to those effects that are subject to CEQA, I find that such effects WOULD NOT be significant and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION, or if the project is a Transit Priority Project a SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, will be prepared
I find that the proposed infill project will have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or are more significant than described in the prior EIR, and that no uniformly applicable development policies would substantially mitigate such effects. I find that although those effects could be significant, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the infill project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, or if the project is a Transit Priority Project a SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, will be prepared.

I find that the proposed infill project would have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or are more significant than described in the prior EIR, and that no uniformly applicable development policies would substantially mitigate such effects. I find that those effects WOULD be significant, and an infill ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required to analyze those effects that are subject to CEQA.

Signature Date
98 Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 3-2 This page intentionally left blank
99 Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 5-1

5.0 STREAMLINING PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183.3
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3 allows lead agencies to streamline the environmental review process for eligible infill projects by limiting the topics subject to environmental review at the project level as follows:

1. If an effect was addressed as a significant effect in a prior EIR for a planning level decision (such as the General Plan, Development Code Project, or Housing Element), then, with some exceptions, that effect need not be analyzed again for an individual infill project even when that effect was not reduced to a less than significant level in the prior EIR.

2. An effect need not be analyzed, even if it was not analyzed in a prior EIR or is more significant than previously analyzed, if the lead agency makes a finding that uniformly applicable development policies or standards, adopted by the lead agency or a city or county, apply to the infill project and would substantially mitigate that effect.

The City of Milpitas’ 2040 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (General Plan EIR), 3 which was certified in 2021 and the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Milpitas Transit Area Specific Plan,4 which was certified in 2008 both analyzed environmental impacts associated with adoption and implementation of associated buildout projections at a programmatic level. Both documents (which are herein collectively referred to as the “Previous CEQA Documents”) are incorporated by reference in their entirety into this Infill Checklist pursuant to Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines and available on the City’s website at:
https://www.milpitas.gov/milpitas/departments/environmentaldocuments/#1629996709619- 7934a6ef-4561.

The Previous CEQA Documents are “planning level decisions” as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3(f)(2), i.e., an “enactment or amendment of a general plan or any general plan element, community plan, specific plan, or zoning code.” Accordingly, the General Plan and TASP are the planning level decisions that are the basis for the use of the Infill Exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3 with regard to the environmental analysis of the proposed project.

Public Resources Code Section 21094.5 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3 (Streamlining for Infill Projects) allow streamlining for certain qualified infill projects by limiting the topics subject to review at the project level, if the effects of infill development have been addressed in a planning level decision, or by uniformly applicable development policies. As described in Section 2.2, Appendix M Checklist Performance Standards, an infill project is eligible if the project: (1) is located in an urban area on a site that either has been previously developed or that adjoins existing qualified urban uses on at least 75 percent of the site’s perimeter; (2) satisfies the performance standards provided in CEQA Guidelines Appendix M, as documented on the Infill Project Checklist in Appendix N; and (3) is consistent with the general use designation, density, building intensity, and

3 Milpitas, City of, 2020. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Milpitas General Plan Update.

November 2.
4 Milpitas, City of, 2007. Draft Environmental Impact Report, Milpitas Transit Area Specific Plan. October. 100
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 5-2 applicable policies specified for the project area in either a sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning strategy.

No additional environmental review is required if the infill project would not cause any new specific effects or more significant effects, or if uniformly applicable development policies or standards would substantially mitigate such effects. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3, which allows streamlining for qualified infill projects, this Infill Checklist is limited to topics applicable to project-level review only. The analysis in the Previous CEQA Documents, described below, is applicable to the project. Therefore, the proposed project meets the requirements for an infill exemption.

5.1 PREVIOUS CEQA DOCUMENTS
The 2040 General Plan identifies goals, policies, a land use diagram and other graphics and maps (e.g., open space systems, a transportation network and public facilities) to guide future development within the city’s boundaries through the year 2040. The General Plan EIR is designated a “Program EIR” under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15183 and 15183.3. As such, subsequent activities under the 2040 General Plan are subject to requirements under each of the EIR CEQA Sections, which are described further in Section 6.0 of this document.

The TASP sets the framework for land use, streets, and open space for the redevelopment of an approximately 437-acre area in the southern portion of the city that currently includes a number of industrial uses with 7,109 dwelling units, 993,843 square feet of office space, 340 hotel rooms, and 287,075 square feet of retail space centered around the Milpitas BART station and the VTA Light Rail System. The TASP EIR is designated a “Program EIR” under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15183 and 15183.3. As such, subsequent activities under the TASP are subject to requirements under each of the EIR CEQA Sections, which are described further in Section 6.0 of this document.

The proposed project is within the development assumptions envisioned by the General Plan and TASP (herein referred to collectively as the Previous CEQA Documents’). The proposed project would include 13 three-story buildings that would contain 78 townhome units with 12 accessible dwelling units (ADUs), for a total of 90 residential units on the project site. The Infill Environmental Checklist below cites the specific portions of the previous EIRs that contain the programmatic analysis of the project’s potential significant effects.
101
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 5-3 This page intentionally left blank
102
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-4

6.0 INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
This Infill Environmental Checklist is based on the CEQA Guidelines Appendix N Infill Environmental Checklist form. That form and this Infill Environmental Checklist are intended to document a qualifying infill project’s eligibility for streamlining pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3 and to assist in making the determinations required by Section 15183.3, including whether the infill project’s effects have been addressed in a planning level decision or by uniformly applicable development policies. (See Section I, Introduction, of Appendix M: Performance Standards for Infill Projects Eligible for Streamlined Review, of the CEQA Guidelines).

Aesthetics. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to aesthetics in Section 3.1, Aesthetics and Visual Resources. The General Plan EIR determined that there are no officially designated scenic vista points within the city and no officially designated State Scenic Highways in the vicinity of Milpitas. Additionally, Milpitas and the immediate surrounding areas are not visible from the officially designated and eligible State Scenic Highway corridors within Santa Clara County. The General Plan EIR stated that new development consistent with the General Plan would be designed in a way that enhances the visual quality of the community and would primarily be located in and around existing urbanized areas to ensure that new development would not obstruct or interfere with views of visual features surrounding the city. Additionally, the General Plan EIR discussed that future development would be required to be consistent with lighting and design requirements in the Milpitas Municipal Code and General Plan policies which would ensure that new developments would not result in adverse impacts to daytime glare and nighttime lighting.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to aesthetics in Section 3.2, Visual Resources. As discussed in the TASP EIR, the only scenic resources located within the TASP Area are street trees located on McCandless Drive, approximately 0.3 mile west of the project site. The TASP EIR concluded that implementation of the TASP would generally enhance the visual character of the Planning Area through design standards that create a unified appearance, consistent setbacks, landscaped buffers, street trees, and parks. Additionally, the City’s Tree and Planting Ordinance would ensure that redevelopment associated with the TASP would not result in significant visual impacts due to the removal of existing mature trees.

Potential impacts to visual resources associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The project site is not located within an area considered to be within view of a scenic vista or State Scenic Highway and development of the proposed project would not obscure any views of scenic vistas from surrounding public vantage points. Existing development policies and requirements of the General Plan, TASP, and Milpitas Municipal Code would ensure that the proposed project would not result in significant impacts to visual resources. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to aesthetics and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Agriculture and Forestry Resources. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to agriculture and forestry resources in Section 3.2, Agricultural and Forest Resources. The General Plan EIR stated that there are no lands within the city that are designated for agricultural use on the Milpitas General Plan Land Use Map, no lands that are currently under a Williamson Act contract, and no agricultural 103
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-5 lands identified by the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program within the city. Additionally, the General Plan EIR stated that there are no forest lands or timber lands located within the city.

The TASP FEIR did not analyze impacts to agricultural resources as the TASP Area is urban without any agricultural or forest land uses in the area or vicinity.

Potential impacts to agriculture and forestry resources associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2012 map designates lands within the TASP Area, including the project site, as “Urban and Built-Up Land.” There are no existing agricultural or forest land uses within or adjacent to the project site and the proposed project would have no impacts on agriculture or forestry resources.

The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to agriculture and forestry resources and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Air Quality. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to air quality in Section 3.3, Air Quality. The General Plan includes an extensive list of policies and actions that are specifically aimed at improving air quality to cover the full breadth of air quality issues as recommended in the 2017 Clean Air Plan. These policies and actions promote a compact urban development form, emphasizing infill development, and ensure that land use patterns do not expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations. The Circulation Element of the General Plan also includes a wide range of policies and actions that would reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per service population throughout the Planning Area through the use of complete streets and multi-modal transportation systems. The Land Use, Community Design, and Conservation Elements of the General Plan contain policies and actions that would reduce criteria pollutant emissions, odors, health risks, and other emissions specifically aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions/climate change. The General Plan EIR concluded that the General Plan would be consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan.

Additionally, the General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would not cause the disruption, delay, or otherwise hinder the implementation of any air quality plan control, would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants, would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to air quality in Section 3.6, Air Quality. The TASP EIR determined short-term impacts due to construction and long-term impacts due to increases in population and additional development could affect local particulate concentrations and other criteria pollutant emissions. The TASP and General Plan include an extensive list of policies and actions aimed at improving air quality to reduce this impact. However, the TASP EIR concluded that implementation would add to the regional pollution burden, further contributing to the exceedance of regional air pollutant emissions for State and federal ambient air quality standards, and would conflict with the implementation of the 2005 Bay Area Ozone Strategy, resulting in significant and unavoidable impacts. The TASP EIR determined that implementation of the TASP would be consistent with the Transportation Control Measures in the 2005 Bay Area Ozone Strategy due to the availability of transit options within the Plan Area and the implementation of various policies and actions in the General Plan and TASP. Additionally, air quality impacts associated with construction would be less than significant due to the implementation of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s 104
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-6 (BAAQMD’s) basic construction mitigation measures, as required by TASP Policy 5.16. The TASP EIR also determined that implementation of BAAQMD’s construction BMP’s, along with additional TASP polices would ensure that implementation of the Plan would not expose sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants.

Potential impacts to air quality associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The proposed project would develop high-density, transit-oriented residential development and would result in a building density at the project site that is consistent with what was evaluated in the Previous CEQA Documents. The proposed project would be subject to BAAQMD’s basic construction mitigation measures and TASP and General Plan policies as discussed above. Therefore, construction of the proposed project would result in similar construction-related, short-term air quality impacts as those impacts identified in the Previous CEQA Documents. The population and housing units included in the proposed project would fall within the total development anticipated by the TASP EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not substantially increase population, vehicle trips, or vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and the conclusions regarding compliance with the Clean Air Plan, effects on regional air quality, and localized carbon monoxide impacts in the Previous CEQA Documents remain applicable to the proposed project. The proposed project does not include additional toxic air contaminant (TAC) sources at the project site; therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to air quality and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Biological Resources. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to biological resources in Section 3.4, Biological Resources. The General Plan EIR concluded that development under the General Plan could result in the direct and indirect loss of habitat areas associated with special status species and sensitive natural communities. However, the General Plan includes a variety of policies and actions that would protect special status plant and animal species and sensitive natural communities from adverse effects associated with future development and improvement projects. Additionally, development projects would be subject to existing federal and State laws and regulations such as the California Endangered Species Act, Federal Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Clean Water Act, Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, California Oak Woodland Conservation Act, and California Wetlands Conservation Policy. The General Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts to biological resources due to the implementation of General Plan policies and actions and compliance with existing federal and State regulations.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to biological resources in Section 3.8, Biological Resources. The TASP EIR determined that development in the Planning Area would result in the removal of landscaping and disturbance to habitat, which could affect wildlife including burrowing owl, nesting birds, and common wildlife species. However, there is minimal potential for special-status species to occur within the Planning Area due to the history of development in the TASP Area. The TASP EIR concluded that the implementation policies and regulations in the General Pan, TASP, and existing federal and State laws and regulations would ensure that development associated with the TASP would not result in significant impacts to biological resources. 105
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-7 Potential impacts to biological resources associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The project site and neighboring parcels are currently developed, and therefore do not contain any special-status species habitat, federally protected wetlands, or riparian habitat. Many bird species use the existing ornamental trees for cover, nesting, or stop-over locations during migration. Removal of large, mature trees can cause direct mortality to nesting birds and their young and construction disturbance can cause nest abandonment resulting in indirect loss to avian species. The proposed project would implement TASP Policy 5.26 which would require a qualified biologist to conduct a survey that would be considered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) as appropriate, to determine whether a project would require avoidance procedures. Implementation of General Plan Policies 4.b-I-4 and 4.b-I-5 and TASP Policy 5.26 would reduce potential impacts to nesting raptors and other birds to less-than-significant levels. The proposed project would result in the removal of 82 trees on the project site and the planting of approximately 136 new trees. The proposed project would be subject to the Tree and Planting Ordinance of the City of Milpitas which protects significant trees and requires compensation for lost trees. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to biological resources that are new or more significant than those analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to biological resources and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Cultural Resources. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to cultural resources in Section 3.5, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources. The General Plan EIR stated that 33 cultural resources from both the prehistoric and historic periods have been identified within the city and 25 buildings are identified on the Santa Clara County Historic Property Data File Directory, 23 of which are also included on the list of resources on file with the Northwest Information Center (NWIC). The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) conducted a records search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File for the area, which yielded negative results, and the City received no responses to SB 18 tribal consultation letters. The General Plan EIR concluded that although the General Plan does not directly propose any adverse changes to any known historic or archaeological resources, future development could affect historical and archaeological resources which have not yet been identified. However, the General Plan includes a variety of policies and actions that would reduce impacts to potential cultural resources to a less than significant level.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to cultural resources in Section 3.13, Cultural Resources. The TASP EIR stated that the only historic resource in the TASP Area that is listed in the City’s Register of Cultural Resources is the Old Ford Motor Assembly Plant now known as the Great Mall, which is located approximately 0.5 mile north of the project site. Additionally, one Native American archaeological resource, CA-SCL-593, and a prehistoric archaeological site are located adjacent to the TASP Area. The TASP EIR discussed that the primary impact that could occur to cultural resources within the Plan Area would be the disturbance of cultural resources during grading and/or development of property. The TASP EIR also identified a reasonable possibility of uncovering archaeological deposits and paleontological resources within the Plan Area during construction of new development. However, the TASP EIR concluded that existing national, State, and local laws as well as policies contained in the General Plan and TASP would reduce potential impacts on cultural resources to less than significant levels.
106
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-8 Potential impacts to cultural resources associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The project site is fully developed with two light- industrial buildings, neither of which are considered significant historic resources under the State or federal standards for historic resources. While subsurface cultural resources are not anticipated to be encountered with demolition and grading of the site, there is a chance that construction activities could affect previously-unidentified archaeological resources on the project site. The TASP EIR identifies Policy 5.31 to reduce the impacts to previously unidentified archaeological resources to a less-than-significant level through construction monitoring, and if remains are found, temporary halting of construction until development and implementation of a mitigation plan. Implementation of Policy 5.31 from the TASP would reduce impacts to previously unidentified archaeological resources to a less-than-significant level. Implementing the proposed project would not lead to new or more severe impacts to cultural resources that would occur beyond those already identified in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to cultural resources and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Energy. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to energy in Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gases, Climate Change, and Energy. The General Plan EIR found that buildout of the General Plan would result in the use of energy resources for the operation of buildings, for on-road vehicle trips, and from off- road construction activities. However, buildout of the General Plan would be completed in compliance with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations governing energy usage including State Title 24 building energy efficiency standards and those intended to improve the energy efficiency of the Statewide passenger and heavy-duty truck vehicle fleet. Additionally, project- specific sustainable features would be implemented in individual development projects and pedestrian and bicycle pathways and public transit access within the city would reduce the need for local motor vehicle traffic. The General Plan EIR determined that the electricity and natural gas providers for the City maintain sufficient capacity to serve the Planning Area and implementation of the General Plan would not result in any significant adverse impacts related to project energy requirements and energy use inefficiencies.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to energy in Section 3.12, Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change.

The TASP EIR determined that buildout under the TASP would increase the total demand for electrical energy within the Plan Area but energy efficient building standards and energy efficient appliance standards would result in improvements to energy efficiency and reductions in energy consumption. The TASP EIR determined implementation of TASP policies and compliance with existing State requirements would ensure that the additional energy that homes and businesses consume would not impede achievement of the Statewide reduction in emissions mandated by the California Climate Solutions Act of 2006.

Potential impacts to energy associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. Construction of the proposed project would require energy for the manufacture and transportation of building materials, preparation of the site for demolition and grading activities, and building construction. In order to increase energy efficiency on the site during project construction, equipment idling times would be restricted to 5 minutes or less and construction workers would be required to shut off idle equipment, as required by the BAAQMD 107
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-9 Basic Construction Mitigation Measures. Energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the State’s available energy sources. Therefore, construction energy impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

The proposed project would result in the development of high-density, transit-oriented residential uses on the site. Therefore, the proposed project would support the ability to use alternative modes of transportation, would promote initiatives to reduce vehicle trips and VMT, and would increase the use of alternate means of transportation, which would allow for a decreased dependence on nonrenewable energy resources. In addition, the proposed project would be required to be constructed to CALGreen standards, which would help to reduce energy and natural gas consumption. The TASP EIR identifies Policy 5.6 which requires the use of Energy Star appliances and equipment in new residential and commercial development, and Policy 5.7 which requires at least 50 percent of all new residential development to be pre-wired for optional photovoltaic roof energy systems and/or solar water heating. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of fuel or energy or conflict with California’s green energy conservation plans and would incorporate renewable energy or energy efficiency measures into building design, equipment use, and transportation. Implementing the proposed project would not lead to new or more severe impacts to energy that would occur beyond those already identified in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to energy and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Geology and Soils. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to geology and soils in Section 3.6, Geology and Soils. The General Plan EIR stated that there are known active faults within the city and the area could experience considerable ground shaking generated by these faults. The city also contains areas mapped for liquefaction and earthquake induced landslide hazards, primarily along Coyote Creek. Additionally, unstable geologic units and expansive soil could be present within the city. However, the General Plan EIR determined that development projects would be required to comply with provisions of the California Building Standards Code (CBC), which requires the completion of geotechnical investigations and engineered improvements to address potential seismic and ground failure issues. Additionally, development projects would be subject to policies and actions included in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance that would prevent adverse impacts due to seismic and/or geologic hazards.

The General Plan EIR determined that new development could involve land clearing, grading, and other ground-disturbing activities that could temporarily increase soil erosion rates during and shortly after construction. However, erosion potential is considered low in the city since it is primarily developed with urban uses and development projects would be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and would be subject to requirements of the CBC, General Plan, and Zoning Ordinance aimed to reduce soil erosion that would reduce erosion impacts to less than significant levels. The General Plan EIR identified the potential for development to result in impacts to undiscovered fossils and other geologic features of potential significance. However, the General Plan includes policies and actions such as the completion of an archaeological survey 108
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-10 and halting of ground disturbing activities upon the discovery of any unique paleontological resources that reduce this potential impact to less than significant levels.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to geology and soils in Section 3.5, Geology, Soils and Seismic Hazards. The TASP EIR concluded that the Plan Area is not located within an Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone and, because surface topography is relatively level in the Plan Area, potential slope instability hazards are minimal. The TASP EIR found that ground shaking and associated ground failure (e.g., liquefaction), soil expansion, settlement, and erosion could result in structural damage within the Plan Area. However, potential impacts would be less than significant because development projects would be subject to requirements of the CBC; policies and actions of the General Plan, TASP, and Zoning Ordinance; and the Construction General Permit. Additionally, development projects would be required to implement recommendations included in a site-specific geotechnical investigation and SWPPP. The TASP EIR determined that adverse impacts on paleontological resources could occur during earthwork activities such as mass excavation. The TASP EIR determined that implementation of TASP Policy 5.32, which requires project-specific evaluation, monitoring during construction, temporary suspension of grading, and fossil recovery in the event fossils are discovered, would reduce the potential impact to such resources to less-than-significant levels.

Potential impacts to geology and soils associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The project site is located within the Plan Area of the TASP and is therefore not located within an Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone and potential slope instability hazards are minimal as discussed above. The proposed project would be required to comply with the CBC; policies and actions of the General Plan, TASP, and Zoning Ordinance; and the Construction General Permit, and would be required to implement recommendations included in a geotechnical investigation and SWPPP. Compliance with these existing regulatory requirements would ensure the proposed project would not result in any significant impacts related to ground shaking and associated ground failure, soil expansion, settlement, erosion, and paleontological resources. The proposed project would not result in new impacts related to geologic hazards, erosion, or paleontological resources, or substantially increase the severity of impacts than those analyzed in Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to geology and soils and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to greenhouse gas emissions in Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gases, Climate Change, and Energy. The General Plan EIR found that development associated with implementation of the General Plan would include activities that emit greenhouse gas emissions over the short and long term. However, construction activities would be subject to State requirements for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as required by the Milpitas Climate Action Plan (CAP) and the BAAQMD. The CAP identifies strategies, reduction measures, and implementation strategies the City may use to achieve the State-recommended GHG emission reduction targets in a manner consistent with Assembly Bill 32. The General Plan also includes numerous policies and actions intended to reduce GHG emissions associated with future development and improvement projects. The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of 109
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-11 the General Plan would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to greenhouse gas emissions in Section 3.12, Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change. The TASP EIR determined that the primary sources of GHG emissions related to urban development in the Plan Area are anticipated to be from motor vehicles and electric power generation as well as short-term impacts from construction activity. However, the TASP promotes development patterns that will reduce the vehicle miles traveled per capita and proposes a variety of other actions that can reduce emissions, including tree planting. The TASP EIR determined that implementation of the TASP would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly that may have a significant impact on the environment.

Potential impacts to greenhouse gas emissions associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The proposed project would adhere to the building guidelines of the TASP, would be consistent with the Milpitas Climate Action Plan, and would promote reductions in GHG emissions through high-density development in close proximity to transit. To reduce energy usage, the project would incorporate green building measures in compliance with CALGreen standard building measures for residential buildings and Title 24 requirements. Additionally, the proposed project would include a total of 1.2 acres of common open space and landscaped areas, following the City’s standards, which would help offset GHG emissions.

The proposed project would not result in any new or more severe impacts related to GHG emissions than analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to GHG emissions and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to hazards and hazardous materials in Section 3.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The General Plan EIR determined that impacts associated with the routine use, transport, storage, or disposal or accidental release of hazardous materials would be less than significant with the implementation of General Plan policies and compliance with federal and State regulations including the Clean Water Act, Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, California Code of Regulations, and the California Health and Safety Code as monitored by local fire departments, Certified Unified Program Agencies, California Occupational Safety and Health Administration, BAAQMD, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. The General Plan EIR determined that there are no airport facilities located within the Planning Area and the City of Milpitas is not located within one of the Airport Safety Zones for the San Jose International Airport. Additionally, no portions of the Planning Area are categorized as a “Very High” fire hazard severity zone by CalFire; however, the hilly terrain to the east of the city limits is designated as “high” and “moderate” fire hazard severity zone by CalFire. The General Plan includes requirements for adequate water supply and water flow availability, ensuring adequate emergency access, adequate fire protection services, fire safe design site standards, and ensuring public awareness regarding fire safety.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to hazards and hazardous materials in Section 3.4, Safety and Hazardous Materials. The TASP EIR determined that, due to historical land uses and reported hazardous material releases and spills, potential impacts associated with existing soil and groundwater contamination in portions of the Plan Area could occur. Potential impacts include risk 110
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-12 of upset during demolition and construction activities and potential risks to human health and the environment. However, future development would be subject to existing hazardous materials regulations for the use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials as discussed above. The TASP EIR determined that compliance with these existing regulatory requirements as well as the policies in the General Plan and TASP would ensure that no significant impacts involving hazardous materials would occur.

Potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials release sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.5 The proposed land use would not involve transport, use, or disposal of significant quantities of hazardous materials. Generally, small quantities of hazardous materials such as paints and cleaning products would be used for routine maintenance. Therefore, a significant hazard to the public or environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would not occur.

TASP Policy 5.20 requires parcels with no identified contamination to complete a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) to determine the potential for ground water, soil, or other contamination related to previous land uses. If any potential for contamination is determined to exist that could adversely affect human health for residential uses, a Phase II ESA would be required.

If appropriate, engineering controls and design measures would be required to be implemented to mitigate the potential risk of post-development vapor intrusion into buildings. The project site does not have any known contamination. Consistent with TASP Policy 5.20, the project sponsor would be required to prepare a Phase 1 ESA, and a Phase II ESA if necessary, prior to the issuance of any demolition or building permits.

Policy 5.21 of the TASP addresses hazardous materials that may be present in existing buildings such as asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), or lead. The project would also be required to comply with Section 19827.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, which requires that local agencies not issue demolition or alteration permits until an applicant has demonstrated compliance with notification requirements under applicable federal regulations regarding hazardous air pollutants, including asbestos. Also required is full compliance with Title 17 and Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, which includes work practice standards related to the evaluation and abatement of lead.

The project site is not located within the Airport Safety Zones or Airport Influence Area of the San Jose International Airport,
6 and is not located in the vicinity of a private air strip. Additionally, the project site is not located in a designated high or very high fire hazard severity zone.

Consistent with the findings of the Previous CEQA Documents, continued compliance with applicable local, State, and federal regulations and General Plan/TASP policies would reduce

5 California Environmental Protection Agency. 2022. Cortese List Data Resources. Website:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ (accessed November 1, 2022). 6 Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission, 2016. Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Santa Clara County, Norma Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport. May 25. 111
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-13 potential exposure of people and the environment to hazardous materials associated with development of a contaminated property and demolition of older structures to a less-than significant level. The proposed project would not result in any new or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to hazards and hazardous materials and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Hydrology and Water Quality. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to hydrology and water quality in Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality. The General Plan EIR determined that construction activities associated with new development within the city would result in less than significant impacts to water quality because construction activities for any projects that disturb an area one acre or larger would be required to comply with the Construction General Permit (CGP) and prepare a SWPPP which would include project specific best management measures that are designed to control drainage and erosion. After the completion of construction activities, projects would be subject to the Bay Area Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, which requires the installation and maintenance of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for site design and stormwater treatment. Additionally, the City’s Municipal Code and General Plan provide further regulations and policies intended to protect water quality. The General Plan EIR determined that the City will have adequate water supply to serve the buildout of the General Plan land uses and that future development projects under the General Plan would not significantly affect infiltration due to the highly developed nature of the city.

The General Plan EIR identified that portions of the city are located within flood hazard zones and dam inundation zones; however, compliance with existing regulatory requirements would ensure that proposed development would not release pollutants due to project inundation. The General Plan EIR determined that tsunamis and seiches are not a concern within the Planning area.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to hydrology and water quality in Section 3.10, Hydrology and Water Quality. The TASP EIR concluded that impacts to stormwater runoff and water quality would be less than significant with implementation of the existing regulatory requirements discussed above and additional policies within the TASP. The TASP determined that groundwater levels and recharge would not be substantially impacted by implementation of the TASP and that existing drainage patterns would generally be maintained. The TASP EIR determined that stormwater runoff would decrease with the buildout of the TASP Area due to the addition of more landscaped areas and parks which would allow more precipitation to infiltrate into the ground compared with the current condition of nearly complete coverage of impervious pavement. Developers are required to fund a Storm Drainage Plan for each subdistrict within the TASP Area that includes measures to reduce runoff pollutants and control pollutant sources to the maximum extent practical. Full compliance with the Santa Clara County NPDES permit guidelines for stormwater discharges and General Plan Policy 4.d.-G-1 would ensure that long-term water quality impacts would not be significant.

Potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The proposed project would disturb greater than one acre of land, and therefore would be subject to the CGP and development and implementation of a SWPPP would be required. Dewatering may be performed during construction 112
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-14 activities involving excavation; however, if performed, construction-related dewatering would be temporary and limited to areas of excavation on the project site and would not substantially contribute to depletion of groundwater supplies. The proposed project would replace over 10,000 square feet of existing impervious surface area, and would therefore be required to comply with the MRP. The proposed project would result in alteration of over 50 percent of the existing impervious surface of the project site, and therefore all new and replaced impervious surfaces would require treatment under the MRP. The low-impact development (LID) stormwater controls for the proposed project would include permeable pavement, bio-retention areas, and self-treating landscape areas.

Operation of the proposed project would not involve dewatering or the use of groundwater as potable water, because potable water would be supplied to the project site by the City. Additionally, the proposed project would not substantially interfere with infiltration compared to existing conditions due to the incorporation of the LID stormwater controls discussed above.

The project site is located in an area designated as “Special Flood Hazard Areas Subject to Inundation By the 1 percent Annual Chance Flood” Zone AO on the current Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 7 The Zone AO
designation indicates areas that are subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood (also known as a 100-year flood) event with an established base flood elevation8 or depth, and the flood depth at the project site is indicated to be 1-foot. TASP Policy 6.1 requires projects to minimize damage associated with flooding events and comply with regulations stipulated by FEMA and the National Flood Insurance Program. TASP Policy 6.2 requires new development within a FEMA- designated flood hazard zone to follow the City’s construction standards for such areas, as currently laid out in Section XI-15 ‘Floodplain Management Regulations’ of the Milpitas Municipal Code. The project sponsor would be required to apply for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR-F) and Letter of Map Revision (LOMR-F) based on area removal or structure removal from the effective FEMA floodplain and subsequently comply with all City floodplain ordinances.

Consistent with the findings of the Previous CEQA Documents, continued compliance with applicable local, State, and federal regulations and General Plan/TASP policies would reduce potential impacts to hydrology and water quality. The proposed project would not result in any new or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to hydrology and water quality and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Land Use and Planning. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to land use and planning in Section

3.10, Land use and Planning and Population/Housing. The General Plan EIR concluded that the General Plan Land Use Map associated with the General Plan did not include any new areas designated for urbanization or new roadways, infrastructure, or other features that would divide existing communities. Additionally, the General Plan includes policies to ensure that development is compatible with adjacent communities and land uses. The General Plan EIR determined that the General Plan would require modifications to the City’s Zoning Ordinance to provide consistency;

7 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2009. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) #06085C0069H. May

18. 8 Base flood elevation is the regulatory requirement for the elevation or flood proofing of structures. 113
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-15 however, these modifications would not remove or adversely modify portions of the Milpitas Municipal Code.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to land use and planning in Section 3.1, Land Use. The TASP EIR determined that implementation of the TASP would not divide an established community and stated there are no habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans within the Planning Area. However, the TASP EIR discussed that implementation of the TASP would significantly change the land use designations and pattern of development within the area because new residential uses would be built within an existing industrial area. Therefore, there may be periods of time when incompatible uses are adjacent to each other; however, the TASP includes policies and programs that would reduce this impact to less than significant levels at final buildout.

Potential impacts related to land use and planning associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The proposed project would develop a new residential use on a site within the TASP that currently contains two single-story industrial buildings that include manufacturing, warehouse and office space, loading docks, surface parking, and landscaped areas with mature trees. The proposed project would not inhibit public connectivity, and would not physically divide a community. The proposed project would be consistent with the existing land use and zoning designations of the project site. The development associated with the proposed project is within the amount of growth evaluated within the TASP EIR and is compatible with existing and future residential uses in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the density and intensity of the proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts regarding conformance with land use plans than those already identified in the Previous CEQA Documents.

The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to land use and planning and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Mineral Resources. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to mineral resources in Section 3.11, Mineral Resources. The General Plan EIR states that there are four areas identified by the State Geologist as containing Regionally Significant Construction Aggregate Resources within the Planning Area, which are located in the foothills outside of city limits and are all currently being quarried. The TASP EIR did not analyze impacts to mineral resources as the TASP Area is located in a developed urban area that does not have mineral exploration or extraction occurring in the vicinity. The TASP Area is not designated as containing mineral resource deposits of regional importance.

Potential impacts related to mineral resources associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The project site is located within the TASP Area in a developed urban area with no mineral exploration or extraction occurring in the vicinity of the project site. As such, the proposed project would have no impacts on mineral resources and would not result in impacts to mineral resources that are new or more significant than those analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to mineral resources and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Noise. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to noise in Section 3.12, Noise. The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan may contribute to an exceedance of the City’s transportation noise standards and/or result in significant increases in traffic noise levels at existing 114
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-16 sensitive receptors. The General Plan identifies numerous policies and actions that are intended to minimize exposure to excessive noise, including noise associated with traffic such as placing noise- compatible land uses in the vicinity of traffic noise sources, requiring new development projects to be reviewed for consistency with established noise standards, and incorporating noise control treatments as necessary to achieve acceptable noise levels. However, the General Plan EIR determined that traffic noise increases associated with the General Plan would still exceed the applicable noise exposure criteria and a significant and unavoidable impact would occur relative to traffic noise on existing noise-sensitive uses in the city. The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would not result in exposure to excessive railroad noise sources, the generation of excessive stationary noise sources, or an increase in construction noise or vibration sources and includes a variety of policies and actions to reduce these impacts to less than significant levels.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to noise in Section 3.7, Noise. The TASP EIR determined that implementation of the TASP would result in temporary and intermittent construction noise impacts as well as long-term operational noise impacts from the increase in roadside noise levels due to the increase in population to the area. Additionally, due to the transit-oriented and mixed-use nature of development proposed under the TASP, receptors could also be exposed to ground borne noise and vibration from nearby train and BART activity. However, The TASP EIR determined that the implementation of various policies and actions in the General Plan and TASP would reduce all potential impacts related to noise and vibration to less than significant levels.

Potential impacts related to noise associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. Construction of the project would be required to adhere to the noise standards and requirements set forth in the City’s Municipal Code and General Plan. The proposed project would implement the measures identified in the TASP for addressing noise, including providing disclosures to future residents per Policy 5.17. The City’s Noise Abatement Ordinance would restrict construction hours to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The City’s General Plan Policy 6-I-13 would minimize construction noise impacts by restricting the hours of operation, technique, and equipment used. Additionally, TASP Policy 5.15 would require the project sponsor to demonstrate that noise and vibration exposure to sensitive receptors from construction activities has been mitigated to the extent feasible pursuant to the City’s Noise Abatement Ordinance.

The proposed project is a residential land use and would not be considered a significant source of noise within the community that could adversely affect other nearby residential land uses.

Intermittent audible sounds produced by the proposed residential project would primarily be associated with human voices, vehicles, and mechanical ventilation equipment. Such intermittent sounds would be expected in a residential area. Therefore, the proposed project would not increase stationary source noise impacts above those analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents. As described previously, the proposed project would be consistent with the TASP and within the development capacity analyzed in the TASP EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would also result in a less-than-significant impact with regard to traffic noise increases in the community.

Consistent with the findings of the Previous CEQA Documents, continued compliance with applicable regulations and General Plan and TASP policies, as described above, would ensure that the proposed project would not result in new impacts or substantially increase the severity of 115
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-17 impacts than those analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to noise and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Population and Housing. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to population and housing in Section 3.10, Land use and Planning and Population/Housing. The General Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would not induce substantial unplanned population growth, either directly or indirectly. The General Plan EIR includes policies and actions intended to guide growth to appropriate areas and provide services necessary to accommodate growth. Additionally, the General Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The General Plan Land Use Map was developed to preserve existing neighborhoods and implementation of the General Plan would result in an increase the overall number of dwelling units in the city. The General Plan includes policies that would ensure that a range of housing types are provided in the city and that housing conditions are evaluated as the housing supply ages.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to population and housing in Section 5, CEQA Required Conclusions.

The TASP EIR evaluated potential environmental impacts associated with approximately 7,100 residential units and 18,000 new residents within the TASP Area. The TASP EIR determined that implementation of the TASP would result in an increase the City’s total housing stock by 39 percent and total population by 27 percent. The TASP EIR did not identify any significant impacts to population and housing that would occur from implementation of the TASP.

Potential impacts related to population and housing associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The proposed project would include the development of the project site with high-density residential buildings with up to 90 residential units and approximately 227 new residents.
9 The population and housing units included in the
proposed project would fall within the total development anticipated by the TASP EIR, as previously mentioned. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in new or more significant population growth and/or housing impacts than were analyzed and described in the Previous CEQA Documents.

The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to population and housing and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Public Services. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to public services in Section 3.13, Public Services and Recreation. The General Plan EIR determined that development under the General Plan would result in additional residents and businesses in the city, including new residential, industrial, office, and commercial uses. New development and growth would result in increased demand for public services, including fire protection, law enforcement, schools, parks, libraries, and other public and governmental services. The General Plan includes a Public Facilities land use designation to accommodate the necessary expansion or development of new public facilities required to maintain acceptable performance standards. Furthermore, the General Plan EIR determined that any future

9 This analysis assumes a household population of 2.52 persons per dwelling unit, as determined by using the residents per unit evaluated within the TASP FEIR (17,915 residents/7,109 units = 2.52 residents per unit).
116
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-18 development would be analyzed for potential environmental impacts, consistent with the requirements of CEQA. The General Plan includes a range of policies and actions to ensure that public services adequately accommodate growth, that community services and facilities are maintained, and that new development funds its fair share of services.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to public services in Section 3.9, Public Services. The TASP EIR determined that buildout of the TASP would require at least one new elementary school and expansions of existing school facilities, expansion of an existing fire station or construction of a new one, and additional staff and equipment for police services. The TASP determined that enough park space was incorporated into the Specific Plan to meet the expected requirements for the Planning Area given the population at buildout. The TASP includes policies to reduce the potential impacts to school facilities, fire protection services, police services, and parks such as hiring of additional staff and payment of development impact fees. The TASP concluded that the policies within the General Plan and TASP would reduce impacts to fire protections services, police services, and parks to less than significant levels but that implementation of the TASP would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to school facilities.

Potential impacts related to public services associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The project sponsor would be required to construct the proposed project in conformance with current building codes, which require features to reduce potential fire hazards. The Milpitas Police Department would also review project design to ensure that it incorporates appropriate safety features to minimize criminal activity. As previously described, the population and housing units included in the proposed project would fall within the total development anticipated by the TASP EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the need for new or expanded fire or police facilities beyond those that were already analyzed and described in the TASP EIR.

The proposed project would include 90 residential units within the TASP Area, which would directly increase the demand for school facilities. Polices in the General Plan and TASP would reduce the impact and include coordination with the school districts to update their comprehensive facilities plans, update school fees for developers, and consider joining use agreements for potential shared facilities. Impacts to schools are significant and unavoidable and the proposed project would not affect this conclusion as the number of proposed residential units and resulting students is within the amount evaluated in the TASP EIR. The proposed project would not result in any new or more significant school impacts beyond those identified in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to public services and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Recreation. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to recreation in Section 3.13, Public Services and Recreation. The General Plan EIR determined that growth under the General Plan would include a range of uses that could increase the population of the city and attract additional workers and tourists which would result in an increased demand for parks and recreation facilities. The General Plan includes a range of policies and actions to ensure that parks and recreational facilities are adequately funded, and that new development funds its fair share of services needed. 117
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-19 The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to recreation in Section 3.9, Public Services. The TASP EIR determined that the recreation areas proposed as part of the TASP would meet the City’s adopted public park land ratio of 2.0 acres per 1,000 residents and would provide an adequate level of park and open space for residents. The TASP also contains numerous policies and standards to ensure that less than significant impacts on parkland and recreational facilities would occur.

Potential impacts related to recreation associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The proposed project would include a total of 52,870 square feet of common open spaces and 11,250 square feet of private open space. Common open space on the project site would consist of walkways, community dining areas, and seating areas with turf. Private open space would consist of useable decks. The project sponsor would also be required to pay an in-lieu parks fee consistent with TASP Policy 3.38. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to existing neighborhood or regional park facilities beyond those identified in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to recreation and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Transportation. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to transportation in Section 3.14, Transportation. The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The General Plan includes policies focused on the development of a multimodal transportation network in Milpitas that places an increased emphasis on the enhancement of facilities to improve walking, bicycling and transit use. The General Plan EIR determined that the projected VMT per employee for the city is 31 percent higher than the significance threshold and although the General Plan includes policies and land use patterns that will reduce VMT, it is not possible to fully mitigate at a citywide level. Therefore, the VMT impacts associated with employment-based uses allowed by the General Plan were considered significant and unavoidable. The General Plan EIR determined that an increase in emergency response times could occur due to increased vehicle delay at intersections and along roadway segments; however, future development would be subject to the requirements of the City’s Design and Construction Standards, which include requirements for emergency access, and would be reviewed by public safety officials as part of the City’s entitlement process.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to transportation in Section 3.3, Transportation. The TASP EIR determined that implementation of the TASP would result in a significant and unavoidable impact to operations at various intersections, freeway segments, and roadway segments. The TASP includes policies and proposed roadway improvements to reduce potential impacts but impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The TASP EIR discusses that implementation of the TASP would improve pedestrian and bicycle access within the Plan Area as well as access to transit services.

Potential transportation impacts related to VMT were not evaluated in the TASP EIR as it was not required at the time the TASP EIR was certified. The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) allows lead agencies to screen out projects with potential VMT impacts by using maps and transit availability. Specifically, OPR suggests that residential and office projects that locate in areas 118
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-20 with low VMT, and that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT.10
Potential impacts related to transportation associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. As previously described, the proposed project would include high-density residential uses on the project site. In addition, the project site is located within the TASP area and located less than half a mile from the Milpitas Transit Center, which includes the Milpitas BART Station and bus stops for up to nine different VTA bus lines. The City, as Lead Agency, has determined that the project site is located within a low residential VMT area.
11 Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any new impacts related to VMT.

According to the Valley Transit Authority (who administers the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Plan) Transportation Impact Analysis Technical Guidelines, a project would create an impact on pedestrian and bike circulation if: 1) it would reduce, sever or eliminate existing or planned bike/pedestrian access and circulation in the area; 2) it would preclude, modify, or otherwise affect proposed bicycle and pedestrian projects and/or policies identified in the Lead Agency’s adopted bicycle/pedestrian plan, or the plans of other agencies such as the Countywide Bicycle Plan or adjacent Cities’ bicycle/pedestrian plans; or 3) it would cause a change to existing bike paths such as alignment, width of the trail right of way, or length of the trail.

The proposed project would generate pedestrian trips to/from transit stops, recreation areas, and employment centers. Overall, the volume of pedestrian trips generated by the project is expected to be relatively low and not exceed the carrying capacity of the sidewalks and crosswalks nearby. U.S.

Census data indicate that bicycle trips comprise less than one percent of the total commute mode share in the City of Milpitas. For the proposed project, this would equate to approximately one new bike trip during each of the AM and PM peak hours. The low volume of bicycle trips generated by the project would not exceed the bicycle-carrying capacity of streets surrounding the site, and the increase in bicycle trips would not by itself require new off-site bicycle facilities.

Overall, the proposed project would not result in new impacts or substantially increase the severity of impacts than those analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to transportation and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Tribal Cultural Resources. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to tribal cultural resources in Section 3.5, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources. The General Plan EIR stated that Native American consultations were conducted as required under Senate Bill 18, which requires local governments to consult with Tribes prior to making certain planning decisions and requires consultation and notice for a general and specific plan adoption or amendments in order to preserve, or mitigate impacts to, cultural places that may be affected. No responses were received and no specific resources were identified through consultation. However, it is possible that unknown tribal cultural resources may

10 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. December.
11 Milpitas, City of. 2021. City of Milpitas Transportation Analysis Policy. Attachment C: City of Milpitas Countywide Residential Average VMT. May.
119
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-21 be present within the city that could be adversely affected by implementation of the General Plan.

Development projects would be subject to State and local guidelines which would provide an opportunity to identify, disclose, and avoid or minimize the disturbance of and impacts to a tribal resource and the General Plan includes various actions and policies that would reduce this impact to less than significant levels.

The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to cultural resources in Section 3.13. The TASP EIR determined that impacts to cultural and historic resources would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with implementation of Policy 5.34 which requires construction monitoring, and if remains are found, temporary halting of construction until development of a mitigation plan and its implementation.

This finding also applies to tribal cultural resources.

Potential impacts related to tribal cultural resources associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. There are no known tribal cultural resources at the project site and implementation of actions and policies within the General Plan and TASP, and compliance with State and local guidelines would ensure that no significant impacts to unknown tribal cultural resources would occur. The proposed project would not result in any new or more severe impacts to tribal cultural resources than were identified in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to tribal cultural resources and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Utilities and Service Systems. The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to utilities and service systems in Section 3.15, Utilities and Service Systems. The General Plan EIR determined that although implementation of the General Plan would result in increased population and employment growth and thereby result in an increased demand for water supplies, the City will have adequate water supply to serve the full buildout of the General Plan. Furthermore, the General Plan includes various policies designed to ensure an adequate water supply is available and to minimize the potential adverse effects that could result from increased water use. The General Plan EIR found that future development projects may be required to implement site specific and limited off-site improvements to the water distribution system to connect new project sites to the existing water infrastructure network; however, the environmental impacts of this would likely be similar to those associated with the new development or redevelopment and would not be significant in and of themselves. The General Plan EIR discussed that although wastewater generation volumes would slightly increase the treatment demand at the districts’ treatment plants, the General Plan includes various policies designed to ensure adequate wastewater treatment capacity for development.

The General Plan EIR found that new development may increase areas of impervious surfaces that could impact existing storm water drainage facilities; however, the General Plan includes policies and actions to ensure adequate drainage infrastructure is available to serve development and minimize potential adverse effects of stormwater conveyance. The General Plan EIR determined that the City’s projected increase in solid waste generation associated with buildout of the General Plan is well within the permitted capacity of the nearby Newby Island Landfill. Additionally, future projects would be required to comply with applicable state and local requirements including those pertaining to solid waste, construction waste diversion, and recycling. 120
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-22 The TASP EIR evaluated impacts to utilities and service systems in Section 3.11, Utilities and Service Systems. The TASP EIR discussed potential impacts to utilities from population growth within the Plan Area including additional demand for water and sewage treatment capacity and the need for new water, sewer, and recycle water lines. The TASP EIR determined that the City has adequate water supply to support development associated with the TASP. The TASP discussed that buildout would require water distribution improvements and sewer line improvements; however, The TASP includes policies requiring the installation of pipes within existing roads or existing easements to ensure these improvements would not result in significant environmental effects. The TASP determined that the City’s contracted Water Pollution Control Plant has adequate capacity to treat the additional wastewater flows that would occur with buildout of the TASP and that nearby landfills have adequate capacity to accommodate the additional waste that would be generated with buildout of the plan.

Potential impacts related to utilities and service systems associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The proposed project would include connections to existing utility lines via tie-ins on Tarob Court, Journey Street, and Trade Zone Boulevard. The potential impacts associated with utility line improvements for the proposed project would not be greater than or more severe than those identified in the Previous CEQA Documents.

The TASP EIR concluded that water demand at buildout would be adequately served by water supplies from current sources in addition to offsets by the supplies available from the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), the ability to run emergency wells, and an increased use of recycled water. The TASP includes policies which require the use of recycled water. The TASP EIR concluded that there is sufficient capacity in the existing solid waste disposal facilities serving the TASP Area, including the project site, for at least 30 more years.

Consistent with the findings of the Previous CEQA Documents, continued compliance with applicable local, State, and federal regulations and General Plan/TASP policies would reduce potential impacts associated with utilities and service systems to a less-than significant level. The proposed project would not result in any new or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to utilities and service systems and no new mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

Wildfire.The General Plan EIR evaluated impacts to wildfire in Section 3.16, Wildfire. The General Plan EIR stated that future projects are not anticipated to remove or impede evacuation routes, and the General Plan does not include land uses, policies, or other components that conflict with adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. Additionally, future development would be subject to all applicable City regulations, reviews, and requirements pertaining to emergency response, emergency access, and maintaining emergency evacuation routes. The General Plan EIR states that implementation of the General Plan would not substantially alter the slope, prevailing winds, or other factors that would increase exposure to Milpitas residents, employees or visitors to increased pollutant concentrations from wildfire or result in the uncontrollable spread of a wildfire.

Nonetheless, the General Plan includes policies and actions related to minimizing wildfire risk.

Furthermore, development would be required to comply with applicable provisions of the California 121
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
NOVEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-23 Building Code and CA Fire Code. The General Plan EIR concluded that all impacts associated with wildfire would be less than significant.

Potential transportation impacts related to wildfire were not evaluated in the TASP EIR as it was not required at the time the TASP EIR was certified. However, Section 3.4, Safety and Hazardous Materials, of the TASP EIR did determine that there were no Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones within the TASP Area.

Potential impacts related to wildfire associated with the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The project site is not located in a High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and the project site is not located in or near any State responsibility areas.

The proposed project would not result in any new impacts related to wildfire hazards than those analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents. The Previous CEQA Documents did not identify any mitigation measures related to wildfire and no mitigation measures would be required for the proposed project.

122
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 6-24 This page intentionally left blank

123
Item # 7.

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022
675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 7-1

7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS
LSA Associates, Inc.
157 Park Place
Pt. Richmond, CA 94801
Theresa Wallace, AICP, Principal in Charge
Matthew Wiswell, AICP, Project Manager
Ashley Honer, Environmental Planner
Patty Linder, Graphics and Production
124
Item # 7.

675 TRADE ZONE BOULEVARD PROJECT

MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA

INFILL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
DECEMBER 2022

P:\MLP1902.12 675 Trade Zone Blvd\PRODUCTS\Memo\Final\675 Trade Zone Final Memo.docx (12/05/22) 7-2 This page intentionally left blank
125
Item # 7.

AGENDA ITEM: IX-2

MILPITAS PLANNING COMMISSION

STAFF REPORT

December 14, 2022

APPLICATION: TOLL BROTHERS TOWNHOMES & ADUs – 675 TRADE ZONE BOULVEARD AND 1951 TAROB COURT – P-SD22-
0006, P-UP22-0002, P-MT22-0002, P-DB22-0001, P -TR22-
0006, AND P-EA22-0003. A Site Development Permit,
Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus Permit, Tree Removal Permit, and Environmental Assessment to allow demolition of two industrial buildings, removal and replacement of 55 ordinance-sized trees, and deve lopment of a multi-family residential project with 78 townhomes and 12 accessory dwelling units. The residential development will consist of 13 multi-family residential buildings up to 36-feet-4-inches in height ( three stories), with 191 vehicle parking spaces and associated site improvements on a 4.1-acre site located in the High- Density Residential (R3-TOD) Zoning District with a Transit Oriented Development Overlay at 675 Trade Zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court. The Project is locate d within the Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP) area and submitted under California Senate Bill 330 (Housing Crisis Act of 2019).

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open and close the public hearing, consider the exemptions in accordance with CEQA, and adopt Resolution No. 22-029, recommending that the City Council approve Site Development Permit No. SD2 2- 0006, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0002, Vesting Tentative Map MT22-0002, Density Bonus Permit No. DB2 2-0001, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0006 and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0003, subject to the Conditions of Approval.

PROJECT LOCATION:

Addresses and Assessor's
Parcel Number (APN): 675 Trade Zone Boulevard and 1951 Tarob Court (086-36-045, 033) Area of City: Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP): Trade Zone/Montague Subdistrict

PEOPLE:

Project Applicant: Nick Kosla, Land Entitlement Director Toll Brothers, Pleasanton, CA

Consultant(s): Architect: SDG Architects, Inc., Brentwood, CA Civil Engineer: Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar, Pleasanton, CA
Landscape Architect: R3 Studios, Oakland, CA

Property Owner: Geomax, Santa Clara, CA

126
Item # 7.

Page 2 of 24 ends

Milpitas City CouncilFebruary 7, 2023

Milpitas City Council
February 7, 2023