Milpitas City Council
April 4, 2023

1. PURPOSE

1.1. The City recognizes the value of partnership with other agencies and organizations in providing services that benefit the community and its residents.

1.2. The City may provide a donation or grant a reduction and/or waiver of fees to intergovernmental agencies or non-profit organizations that provide Milpitas community benefit.

2. POLICY

2.1. The City shall have the sole authority and the City Council shall have the final authority to approve Donations and Fee Waiver/Reduction requests.

2.2. The City Council shall evaluate donation and fee waiver/reduction requests at a scheduled City Council meeting.

2.3. Any requests for donation or fee waiver/reduction must be submitted in writing using the provided application form by the Recreation and Community Services Department.

2.4. In order for an organization to be eligible for a donation or fee waiver / reduction, the following criteria have to be met:

2.4.1. The applying organization must be:

2.4.1.1 A non-profit organization as described by the Internal Revenue Section such as 501(c)(3) or an intergovernmental agency;

2.4.1.2 Non-discriminatory, and non-political in nature;

2.4.2. Events must provide a community benefit within the City of Milpitas proper.

2.5. If the event requested for fee waiver is a fundraiser, the organization must demonstrate that at least 60% of fund raised will be of general benefit to the Milpitas community.

2.6. If the request for donation or fee waiver/reduction is for a community event, the event must be advertised, open to the public and no entrance fee shall be charged for the event.

2.7. Fee waivers/reductions only apply to services provided by the City during its regular course of business. Such fees may include rental fees for the City’s facilities or equipment, building permit fees or fire permit fees. Any deposits and/or City staff overtime costs required due to the event cannot be waived.

2.8. The City Council may grant donation or fee waiver/reduction to each organization once annually, regardless of how many branches or affiliations it may have.

Policy No:

Click or tap here to enter
text.

DONATION AND FEE WAIVER/

REDUCTION POLICY
Effective Date:
6/21/2022
Revision No:
1 Policy Administrator:

Recreation and Community Services
Next Review Due:

As needed
Related Policies and
Procedures:

Click or tap here to enter
text.

Approved by:

Click or tap here to enter text.

Council meeting date, agenda item #, and
vote
Date Approved:
6/21/2022
161
Item # C15.

CITY OF MILPITAS
Revision Date
Original 04/21/2006
6/21/2022
CITY COUNCIL DONATION AND FEE WAIVER/REDUCTION POLICY / POLICY #

2.9. The fee waiver/reduction amount is subject to $1,500 maximum per fiscal year and the donation amount is subject to $500 maximum annually for each organization. A fee waiver/reduction request cannot be combined with a donation request.

2.10. To the extent possible, the City’s contribution should be recognized in the event fliers and/or advertising with the following statement, “This event made possible, in part, by the City of Milpitas.”

2.11. Within 60 days after completion of the event in which a donation was received or a fee waiver/reduction was granted by the City, the organization will provide a written report to the Director of Recreation and Community Services to include at minimum: number of participants, copies of all publicity of the event, any benefit to the community, amount of funds raised and an accounting of how the proceeds of the event will be dispersed.

2.12. Failure to abide by the rules and procedures as set forth in this document will result in the organization being denied for funding and/or fee waiver/reduction in the future.

3. PROCEDURE

3.1. The Recreation and Community Services Department shall maintain an application for Donation and Fee Waiver/Reduction Requests.

3.2. Upon receipt of an application, the Recreation and Community Services Department shall determine eligibility for a Donation and/or Fee Waiver/Reduction consistent with this Policy and inform the applicant of its determination in writing.

3.3. If eligibility is determined, the Director of Recreation and Community Services shall bring requests for donation or fee waiver/reductions to Council for approval at any regular or special meeting.

3.4. If ineligibility is determined, the applicant can appeal the Director of Recreation and Community Services’ determination to the City Manager. A request for appeal must be made, in writing, and delivered to the City Manager’s Office within seven (7) days of the applicant’s receipt of the determination of ineligibility. The request for appeal must state, in writing, the basis for the appeal and must contain all written documentation supporting each basis for appeal. The City Manager shall issue a decision, in writing, without hearing based on the documents presented.

3.5. Donation and Fee Waiver Budget

3.5.1. With each budget cycle, the City Council will establish an annual budget amount for donations or fee waivers/ reductions for unspecified community events. Except for extraordinary circumstances, donations and or fee waivers/reductions will not be granted once the budgeted amount has been allocated.
162
Item # C15.

CITY OF MILPITAS

AGENDA REPORT
(AR)
Item Title: Approve the addition of Names to City Naming Lists and Name a New City Park the Delano Manongs Park (Staff Contact: Renee Lorentzen, Recreation and Community Services Director, 408-586-3409)
Category: Consent Calendar-Community Services and Sustainable Infrastructure Meeting Date: 4/4/2023
Recommendation:
1) Approve adding Muwekma to the Influential People Naming List 2) Approve adding Delano Manongs to the Influential People Naming List 3) Approve naming a new park in the Metro Area the “Delano Manongs Park” BACKGROUND:

On June 21, 2022, the City Council approved the City Streets, Parks and Facilities Naming Policy (Policy). Per the updated Policy, the City Council is to form an Ad Hoc City Council Naming Subcommittee (Subcommittee) to make recommendations to City Council on the naming of City streets, parks and facilities. On January 10, 2023, the Ad Hoc Naming Subcommittee was formed to review and recommend the naming of City streets, parks and facilities for final City Council approval.

On March 2, 2023 the Subcommittee reviewed and recommended two (2) new names for the “Influential People” Naming List and one (1) Park name for final City Council approval.

ANALYSIS:

Naming Lists
On March 2, 2023, the Subcommittee recommended adding “Muwekma” to the Influential People Naming List.

Per the City Streets, Parks and Facilities Naming Policy, the name qualifies under the following Policy sections:
 2.7.3. Historical or cultural significance: the name of a historical figure can be considered, if the figure had a significant and extraordinary historical influence on the area, state, national, or international level;  2.7.7. A name should represent community values and consider future generations and ethnic diversity;
The aboriginal homeland of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe includes Milpitas. Comprehensive genealogical analysis of the Mission Baptism, Death and Marriage Records from the three Bay Area Missions traces the surviving Muwekma lineages of the late 19th century through today back to their aboriginal villages. The present-day tribally enrolled Muwekma lineages are represented by the Armija/Thompson, the Santos-piñosJuarez/Colos/Armija, the Guzman/Nonessa, and the Marine-Guzman-Peralta, Marine-Alvarez/Galvan, MarineSanchez, Marine-Munoz, Munoz-Guzman, Marine-Arellano, and Marine-Elston/Thompson/Ruano descended families. The City of Milpitas collaborates with Muwekma Tribal leadership on City Cultural Flag raisings and the recent project, “If These Walls Could Talk,” history tours at the Alviso Adobe, where the Muwekma are featured and give a land acknowledgment for each historical tour.

The Subcommittee recommended adding “Delano Manongs” to the Influential People Naming List. Per the City Streets, Parks and Facilities Naming Policy, the name qualifies under the following Policy sections:
 2.7.3. Historical or cultural significance: the name of a historical figure can be considered, if the figure had a significant and extraordinary historical influence on the area, state, national, or international level; 163 Item # C16.
 2.7.7. A name should represent community values and consider future generations and ethnic diversity;
In 1965, the Filipino laborer leader, Larry Itliong, led California grape pickers on a strike that resulted in a modern farmworker movement. Filipino farmworkers were the first to walk out of central valley vineyards, prompting the Delano Grape Strike. They would join forces with Mexican laborers led by Cesar Chavez to form the United Farm Workers. The strike was nationally notable and received support because of its boycotts, marches, and nonviolent resistance. “Manong” is a term of respect and is best translated as “older brother” or “uncle.” The term is often used for the wave of Filipino immigrants who came to the United States in the 1920s and 1930s. “Delano Manongs” has become synonymous with the movement.

Park Name
The Subcommittee has recommended a new City park in the Metro Area on McCandless Drive be named “Delano Manongs.” Per the Subcommittee, the park name would show respect and give appreciation to the Filipino American farmworkers and the Mexican American farmworkers who contributed to the worker’s rights movement, thusly honoring the importance of laborers to the County and to Milpitas.

POLICY ALTERNATIVE(S):

Alternative 1: Not Approve the addition of names to the Influential People Naming List Pros: None
Cons: Both proposed names, Muwekma and Delano Manongs, qualify under the Policy and represent Milpitas residents of Native American, Filipino and Mexican heritage.

Reason for Not Recommending: Both proposed names, Muwekma and Delano Manongs, qualify under the Policy and represent Milpitas residents of Native American, Filipino and Mexican heritage.

Alternative: Not Approve the naming of a new City park as Delano Manongs Park Pros: By not approving the Naming Subcommittee recommendation, another qualifying name on the City’s Naming Lists could be recommended for this new City park.

Cons: Names on the Influential People Naming List are eligible for Street, Park and Facility Naming. Delano Manongs qualifies under the Policy to be on the Influential People Naming List and represents Milpitas residents of Filipino and Mexican heritage.

Reason for Not Recommending: Names on the Influential People Naming List are eligible for Street, Park and Facility Naming. Delano Manongs qualifies under the Policy to be on the Influential People Naming List and represents Milpitas residents of Filipino and Mexican heritage.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with adding the names Muwekma and Delano Manongs to the Influential People Naming List. Naming the new City park in the Metro Area on McCandless Drive for Delano Manongs will result in the ordering of a new park sign and park dedication plaque, for approximately $15,000. Park signage and dedication plaques are standard in new City parks and funding for this signage is included in the existing capital project, CP5102, for these planned park fixtures.

California Environmental Quality Act:

By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378, this action does not qualify as a “project” for the purpose of CEQA.

RECOMMENDATION:
1) Approve adding “Muwekma” to the Influential People Naming List 164 Item # C16.
2) Approve adding “Delano Manongs” to the Influential People Naming List 3) Approve naming a new park in the Metro Area the “Delano Manongs Park” Attachment(s):

City Streets, Parks, and Facilities Naming Policy
Influential People Naming List
165
Item # C16.

CITY OF MILPITAS Revision Date
Original 04/21/2006
6/21/2022

CITY COUNCIL POLICY

1. PURPOSE

1.1. This Policy establishes the guidelines, criteria, and processes for naming City streets, parks, and other facilities.

1.2. This Policy is consistent with Milpitas Municipal Code, Title XI-1000 and Government Code Section 34093.

2. POLICY

2.1. The City shall have the sole authority and the City Council shall have the final authority to approve names of City Streets, Parks, and other Facilities.

2.2. The City Council Ad Hoc Naming Subcommittee shall evaluate names of City streets, parks and facilities, and shall make recommendations to the City Council.

2.3. Although the City will have full control and final decision-making authority on any names selected, public input will be received, and other names may be raised and requested to be considered by the City Council.

2.4. From time to time, the City Council shall approve names to be added to a list(s) of names suitable for streets, parks, and facilities.

2.5. No duplication of names within an asset type (i.e., park, facility, plaza) will be approved.

2.6. A deliberative process by City staff will be conducted to ensure that renaming of a street, park, and facility will not diminish the original justification for the name of the prior contributors. Parks and facilities named after individuals shall not be changed unless it is found that because of the individual’s character the continued use of their name would not be in the best interest of the community. Parks that have been named by deed restriction shall not be considered for renaming.

2.7. The following criteria and factors shall be considered with naming or renaming a street, park, or facility:

2.7.1. Neighborhood or geographical identification, such as street, school, or other descriptive names;

2.7.2. Natural or geological features of the area;

2.7.3. Historical or cultural significance: the name of a historical figure can be considered, if the figure had a significant and extraordinary historical influence on the area, state, national, or international level;
Policy No:

Click or tap here to enter
text.

CITY STREETS, PARKS AND

FACILITIES NAMING POLICY
Effective Date:
6/21/2022
Revision No:
1 Policy Administrator:

Recreation and Community Services
Next Review Due:

As needed
Related Policies and
Procedures:

Incorporates and
replaces SOP 1.3
Approved by:

Click or tap here to enter text.

Council meeting date, agenda item #, and
vote
Date Approved:
6/21/2022
166
Item # C16.

CITY OF MILPITAS Revision Date
Original 04/21/2006
CITY STREETS, PARKS, AND FACILITIES NAMING POLICY / POLICY #

2.7.4. The name of any person or family that has made a significant impact in the community and/or in development of the street, park, or facility;

2.7.5. An individual or organization that contributed significantly to the acquisition or development of the park or facility to be named. This can include either a deed or substantial monetary contribution, or contribution toward the acquisition, and/or development of the park of facility. (Naming rights are not guaranteed if the donation is a dedication as required by the subdivision.)

2.7.6. The articulated preference of residents of the neighborhood surrounding the street, park, facility;

2.7.7. A name should represent community values and consider future generations and ethnic diversity;

2.7.8. If the name of an individual or family is to be considered, the use of such name shall have the approval of the individual (or his/her surviving family) or family when reasonably possible;

2.7.9. No seated elected official shall have their name added to a naming list or have a street, park or facility named after them while serving on the City Council.

2.7.10. Avoid confusing or similar sounding names (Public Safety Dispatch test);

2.7.11. Avoid changing street names along any continuous alignment (Continuity test).

2.8. Naming of parks and facilities near schools shall be coordinated with the Milpitas Unified School District as much as possible.

2.9. All naming and/or renaming of a park or facility will be set forth by a Council Resolution.

2.10. Should policy conflict with any City Ordinance, Code or other laws and regulations, the respective City Ordinance, Code or other laws and regulations shall prevail.

3. PROCEDURE

3.1. Maintaining a List of Names for Naming Streets, Parks, and Facilities.

3.1.1. The Recreation and Community Services Department shall maintain a List of Names for Naming Streets, Parks, and Facilities.

3.1.2. As needed, the Director of Recreation and Community Services shall bring additions to the List of Names for Naming Streets, Parks, and Facilities to Council for approval at any regular or special meeting.

3.2. Naming of Streets, Parks, and Facilities

3.2.1. City street, park and facilities naming recommendations shall be brought to the City Council Ad Hoc Naming Subcommittee for recommendation to the City Council and may be considered at any regular or special City Council meeting.”.

3.2.2. Naming recommendations shall be from the City Council approved List of Names available from the Director of Recreation and Community Services.

3.3. Proposed names for new City streets, parks, and facilities should be considered during the entitlement process prior to the final map approval.

3.4. Names being considered for streets shall be reviewed by the City and County emergency services dispatch and Post Office to discourage names that are too similar or confusing that may hinder emergency response; or are otherwise inappropriate for public safety purposes. 167
Item # C16.

CITY OF MILPITAS
Revision Date
Original 04/21/2006
CITY STREETS, PARKS, AND FACILITIES NAMING POLICY / POLICY #

3.5. The following City Departments will contribute to the establishment and maintenance of databases for named streets, parks, and facilities:

3.5.1. Information and Technology Department – Maintain database of all City assets (streets, parks, and facilities)

3.5.2. Recreation and Community Services Department – Maintain Naming Lists, information about historical references, person’s full names, ancestry, dates of birth and death, and other information of interest about the person or group, and the significance of their name to Milpitas’ history and/or to that particular named asset.

3.5.3. Planning Department – Coordinate Street Naming related to new development, prepare, and maintain GIS databases for mapping of new facilities.

3.6. Renaming of a street, park, or facility

3.6.1. The renaming of a street, park, or facility may be initiated by City Council, City Commission, City staff, a group, or individuals.

3.6.2. The initiation of renaming by non-City organizations or individuals shall be made by participating during Public Forum at the appropriate advisory City Commission or City Council meeting.

3.6.3. The City Commission may place the request on the agenda for review of the proposed name(s), taking of public comment, and discussion of the renaming proposal consistent with this Policy.

3.6.4. When a City Commission considers the renaming proposal of a street, park, or facility, staff shall notify the surrounding neighborhood in a ¼ mile radius.

3.6.5. If the City Commission supports the renaming proposal, it will make a recommendation to the City Council for Council consideration.

3.7. The name of a park or facility that is sold, transferred to non-city ownership, or otherwise deemed to no longer be a City of Milpitas property, should be transferred to another location eligible for naming. Should there not be an appropriate location, the name shall be added to the appropriate Naming List for future use.
168
Item # C16.

City of Milpitas
Facilities, Streets & Park Naming Subcommittee
Naming List - Influential People
Approved for: Streets & Parks
Trailblazers
Christopher Columbus Columbus Cir./Russell Ln.

Henry Hudson
Amerigo Vespucci
Giovanni da Verrazzano
John Smith Smith Ln./Pimentel Cir.

John Muir
Meriwether Lewis
William Clark
Sacagawea
Neil Armstrong
John Wesley Powell
Ohlone
Muwekma
Civil Leaders
Martin Luther King Jr. King Ct./Sinclair Frontage Rd.

Robert E. Lee Lee Way/DeLong Dr.

Mohandas Gandhi
Thomas Paine
John Brown
Frederick Douglass
Susan B. Anthony
W.E.B. Du Bois
Tecumseh
Sitting Bull
Elizabeth Cady Stanton
Larry Itliong
Cesar Chavez Milpitas Community Garden
Delano Manongs Park at McCandless Drive
First Women
Pocahontas

NAME DEDICATION LOCATION
169
Item # C16.

Eleanor Roosevelt
Martha Washington Washington Dr./Square Dr.

Hellen Keller
Sojourner Truth
Jane Addams
Edith Wharton
Artists
Ansel Adams Adams Ave./N. Temple Dr.

Frank Lloyd Wright
Andy Warhol
Frederick Law Olmsted
James Abbott MacNeill Whistler
Jackson Pollock
John James Audubon
Georgia O’Keeffe
Thomas Eakins
Thomas Nast
Alfred Stieglitz
Mark Twain
Empire-builders
Andrew Carnegie Carnegie Dr./E. Calaveras Blvd.

John D. Rockefeller
J.P. Morgan
Walt Disney
Thomas Alva Edison
William Randolph Hearst
Howard Hughes
Bill Gates
Cornelius Vanderbilt
Steve Jobs
Athletes
Babe Ruth
Muhammad Ali
Jackie Robinson
James Naismith
Ty Cobb
Jim Thorpe
Billie Jean King King Ct./Sinclair Frontage Rd.

NAME DEDICATION LOCATION
170
Item # C16.

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 57 townhome condominiums and associated site improvements on an approximately 2.35-acre site located in the Mixed-Use (MXD) Zoning District at 612 South Main Street (APNs 086-25-027, 028). The Project is located within the Midtown Specific Plan 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: 4/4/2023
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution to approve Site Development Permit No. SD22- 0007, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0003, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0003, Density Bonus Permit No. DB22-0002, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0014, and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0005, subject to the Conditions of Approval.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Milpitas received an application from The True Life Companies (TTLC, 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 57-unit townhome condominium subdivision, comprised of nine multi-family buildings up to 37-feet (three stories) in height, 123 parking spaces, and associated site improvements on 2.35-acre site located at 612 South Main Street (APNs 086-25-027, 028) in the Midtown Specific Plan area. The application was submitted in accordance with California Senate Bill 330, also known as the Housing Crisis Act of 2019.

The Project consists of 57 three-bedroom townhome condominium units. All 57 townhome units are three-stories in height with attached two-car garages. Nine of the condominiums will be reserved for moderate-income households (to comply with the City's Affordable Housing Ordinance). A moderate-income household is a family or persons whose incomes are between 80 percent and 95 percent of median area income of Santa Clara County. Since the applicant will reserve 15% of the housing units for purchase by moderate-income households, the Project also 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. SD22-0007: To allow the development of nine multi-family buildings, up to three stories in height, with up to 57 townhouse condominiums on the 2.35-acre site; and

2. Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0003: To allow residential units as condominiums and associated subdivision; and

3. Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0003: To establish 57 residential condominium spaces, related common areas, and associated easements; and

4. Density Bonus Permit No. DB22-0002: To ensure compliance with State Density Bonus law and regulations; and
171
Item # 17.

5. Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0014: To remove 13 ordinance-size trees and replace them with 157 new trees on the same site.

In addition to the above entitlements, the City has prepared Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0005 to establish compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for this Project.

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 requirements.

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 February 22, 2023, a majority of the Milpitas Planning Commission voted affirmatively (four ayes, two nays, and one absent) to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed townhome Project, subject to the attached conditions of approval. Based on public comment received during the hearing, the Milpitas Planning Commission also made a separate recommendation that the City Council consider the need for a parking study for this area of South Main Street.

Staff has found that the required entitlements comply with the policies, standards, and processes outlined in Senate Bill 330 and the State Density Bonus Law, City of Milpitas 2040 General Plan, Midtown Specific Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, and other provisions of the Milpitas Municipal Code (MMC). Staff recommends that the City Council open and close the public hearing, consider the exemptions in accordance with CEQA and adopt a Resolution approving the development project 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 Midtown 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 Gateway Specific Plan (MGSP), but since City Council has not yet formally adopted the MGSP, the development standards in the Midtown Specific Plan currently apply.

The Project is in conformance with the applicable policies and standards in the City's General Plan, as outlined in Table 1:
172
Item # 17.

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 57 new threebedroom townhome condominiums in three types of unit type floor plans with modern design elements such as
including a minimum of three bathrooms and private
balconies in each unit. The Project will also provide
housing opportunities with those with special needs by
providing at least 10% of the total units (six units) as accessible (ADA) units. The proposed family-sized
housing type will meet the needs of individuals, families, and residents of all demographics and income levels as
they may need more space for family, professional, or
personal needs as compared to studio, one-bedroom, or
two-bedroom units. Additionally, nine 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.

Consistent. The Project, as proposed, is well integrated with the existing residential, commercial, and mixed-use developments along South Main Street. The Project is
located in an area already served by existing
infrastructure and utilities and would incorporate an
underutilized lot (600 S. Main St.) that has remained
vacant and undeveloped for many years. The smaller
size of this lot (approximately 150-ft width and 203-ft depth) would be challenging to develop into an efficient mixed-use project individually in the future due to site constraints. As such, the proposed Project would
improve connectivity within the surrounding
neighborhood by integrating both parcels. Additionally, the Project will gain ingress and egress from two new
access points along South Main Street via new driveway
curb cuts, and as a result, the Project will blend
seamlessly into the fabric of the existing community that also have curb cuts along this street frontage. The
Project will be compatible and complementary to the
future higher-density mixed-use and residential
development planned for other parcels along South Main
Street and the Midtown Specific Plan area which are
mostly developed with commercial or light industrial uses but are zoned for redevelopment as higher intensity and density mixed-uses.

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 nine buildings that are three stories each, up to a maximum 37-feet in height in a zoning district that allows a maximum height of 45 feet.

Midtown Specific Plan Conformance
The Midtown Specific Plan land use designation for the Project is MXD Mixed Use. This designation encourages a compatible mix of residential, retail, entertainment, office and commercial service uses within the framework of a pedestrian-oriented streetscape. As demonstrated in Table 2, the Project is consistent with the applicable Midtown Specific Plan land use policies. 173
Item # 17.

Table 2: Midtown Specific Plan Consistency
Policy Conformance
Policy 3.10: Designate parcels
along the Main Street and Abel
Street corridor mixed-use and allow
a mixture of retail, office, housing,
service, and public/quasi-public uses
in this area.

Consistent. The Project will be located on Main Street and is designed as mixed-use and will provide new housing opportunities with 57 townhome condominiums with private outdoor amenity areas. Landscaping improvements will be made within the development and along the South Main Street streetscape to improve the existing condition and encourage pedestrian and other multi-modal activity to utilize the surrounding retail, office, service, and public/quasi-public uses in the area.

Policy 3.12: Encourage housing as
the principal upper-level use along
Main Street.

Consistent. The Project is fully residential with each of the 57-units as a three-story, three-bedroom attached unit separated in nine buildings. Therefore, housing is a principal use of the Project site along Main Street. As the Project was submitted under SB 330 and complies with all development standards in effect at the time the preliminary application was reviewed from April - May 2022, the City may not require additional changes to the Project proposal or design unless such changes are necessary to address health, life, or safety risks. All reviewing City Departments including Planning, Building and Housing, Fire, Engineering, and Police have not found any such concerns related to the Project as designed to warrant alterations to the current proposal. Furthermore, the project site and the immediate surrounding parcels were not identified to specifically require ground floor commercial uses per the Midtown Specific Plan study area.

Policy 3.13: Adopt development
standards and design guidelines for
the Mixed-Use District that will
create a lively pedestrian
environment.

Consistent. The proposed Project follows the development standards of the Mixed-Use (MXD) Zoning District and the Midtown Specific Plan and creates a pedestrian scale streetscape on Main Street by remaining three stories and up to a maximum height of 37- feet. The Project will also activate a formerly vacant and undeveloped parcel at 600 S. Main Street and will connect the uses along the street. Furthermore, the introduction of new residents in the area may utilize the existing commercial and retail land uses in Midtown area and help encourage a lively pedestrian environment.

Policy 3.14: Limit the establishment
of new quasi-public uses within the
mixed-use designation in order to
create a more active street
environment.

Consistent. The proposed Project consists of residential uses only.

Policy 3.24: Require new residential
development to provide public parks
at a ratio of 3.5 acres per 1,000
persons, of which up to 1.5 acres per
Consistent. The developer of the Project will comply by paying a park-in-lieu fee as described in the staff report and conditioned in the attached Resolution. The current park-in-lieu fee is established in Milpitas City Council Resolution No. 8437.
174
Item # 17.

Policy Conformance
1,000 persons can be developed as
private or common open space.

Policy 4.16: Provide secure and
weather protected bicycle parking
facilities at the transit stations and
within new residential, retail and
employment destinations.

Consistent. The Project provides bicycle parking facilities within the new residential development in the private outdoor amenity area with six bicycle racks, providing capacity for up to 12 bicycle parking stalls.

Policy 4.17: Ensure that new
development complies with City of
Milpitas Zoning Ordinance
requirements for off-street parking.

Consider reductions on a case-bycase basis.

Consistent. The Project complies with the Midtown Specific Plan zoning regulations for off-street parking requirements by providing the minimum two covered stalls for each three-bedroom unit in an attached garage, for a total of 114 covered stalls. Guest parking requirements for the Project are approximately 17 stalls, or 15 percent of the total required parking as required by the zoning ordinance. The Project qualifies for waivers and concessions under the affordability provisions of the State Density Bonus Law, which allows minimum parking ratios that are less than the City’s standard zoning requirements. Such waivers and parking
incentives must be granted unless there is a specific finding of a significant health, life, or safety risk.

Policy 5.4: Implement a program of
streetscape improvements
(Sidewalks, landscaping, bike lanes,
benches, lighting) along Main and
Abel Streets and Great Mall
Parkway.

Consistent. The proposed Project provides street trees and landscaping improvements to the streetscape along Main Street.

Some private improvements may be limited due to an existing 10- foot wide public utility easement within the front setback of the project site. No permanent structures, such as benches, can be placed over such easements.

Policy 6.11: Incorporate energy
saving devices into new
development in order to promote
energy conservation.

Consistent. The proposed development will be constructed with the latest adopted California Building Code (CBC) standards which encourages the latest statewide energy efficiency standards in new construction projects. The Project is required to show compliance with the CBC Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24) during the building permit review process. Additionally, technological improvements and energy efficiency in appliances and devices have historically and continuously improved over time and the Project anticipated to install modern energy saving devices compared to older developments.

Zoning Conformance
The project site is located in the MXD Mixed-Use Zoning District. Per the Zoning Ordinance, the MXD Zoning District encourages a compatible mix of residential, retail, entertainment, office and commercial service uses within the framework of a pedestrian-oriented streetscape. It is intended that the residential and commercial uses allowed in the MXD Zoning District combine to provide for an "around-the-clock-environment" with urban open areas (i.e. plazas, squares) that serve multiple purposes and can be used for special events.

As demonstrated in Tables 4 and 5, the proposed Project conforms to all the development standards in the Zoning Ordinance and the Midtown Specific Plan for MXD. Where the Project is not in compliance with objective 175 Item # 17.
standards, the State Density Bonus Law requires the City to grant appropriate concessions, waivers, and parking reductions for qualifying projects.

Table 4: Summary of MXD and Midtown Specific Plan Development Standards Development
Standard (MXD) Required Proposed Conformance
Density 21-30 du/ac 24.2 du/ac; 57 units total Yes
Front Yard
Setback
8 ft. (min.) - 15 foot (max.)
from back of sidewalk
Buildings 7, 8, and 9 front S.

Main St:

Bldg 7: 19.9 ft.

Bldg 8: 20.4 ft.

Bldg 9: 20.7 ft.

Yes,
with approval of
a Density Bonus
waiver
Side Yard
Setback 10 ft. (min.) 10-15.1 ft. Yes
Rear Yard
Setback 10 (min.) 5 feet
Yes,
with approval of
a Density Bonus
waiver
Height 45 ft. and three stories 36 ft. 11-in. (three stories) Yes Private Open
Space
Each dwelling unit shall be
provided with private open
space as follows:

Balconies and porches
(above ground level – min.
dimension of 4.5-ft):
minimum 60 sq. ft.

Or
Patios (at ground level):
minimum one hundred
square feet.

Private open space balconies
in each unit type will have at
least one private balcony with
an average size as follows:
 Unit Type 1 (28 units): 86 sq.
ft – one balcony on 2nd floor
 Unit Type 2 (28 units): Total
100 SF (two balconies at 50
sq. ft each on 2nd and 3rd
floors
 Unit Type 3 (1 unit): 62 sq. ft
– one balcony on 2nd floor
Yes
Residential
Open Space
A minimum of 25% of the
total site shall be usable
open space or recreational
facilities. Balconies, porches,
or roof decks may be
considered usable open
space when properly
developed for work, play, or
outdoor living areas.

Residential Open Space
(OS) Provided:

Usable OS = 0.45 acres
Private Rec. Areas = 0.24
acres
Total Residential OS = 0.69
acres
Yes
176
Item # 17.

Development
Standard (MXD) Required Proposed Conformance
25% x 2.35-acre project site
= 0.59 acres required
In addition, projects located in the Midtown Specific Plan area must comply with the additional development and design standards outlined in Table 5:

Table 5: Additional Development Standards Applicable in the Midtown Specific Plan Standard Proposed Conformance
Projections
into Required
Yards
Balconies, bay windows,
porches, stoops and awnings
may project into the setbacks
provided at least 60% of the
required setback area is
landscaping.

Balconies and porches
project into setback areas
where more than 60% of
the required setback area
is landscaping
Yes
Building
Orientation
and Entrances
All buildings must face onto the
street they front upon.

Buildings generally face
South Main Street which
is the Project’s primary
street frontage
Yes
Vehicle
Parking
Three Bedroom – 2 covered
stalls per unit x 57 units = 114
covered stalls
Guest Parking – 15% of required
stalls = 17 stalls
Total Required – 131 spaces
 114 resident covered
spaces
 nine guest spaces
123 total
(114 covered, nine
uncovered)
Yes, parking
reduction is
allowed under
State Density
Bonus Law
Bicycle
Parking
Bicycle parking equivalent to five
percent (5%) of the parking
requirement.

Seven (7) bicycle parking
spaces
12 bicycle parking spaces Yes
Parking
Location
Parking is prohibited in the front
setback and should be at the
rear of the buildings.
57 private garage
entrances face the interior
drive aisle
Yes
Parking
Garage Type
Tandem parking may be allowed
with a Conditional Use Permit
(CUP).
28 units proposed with
tandem parking garages
Yes, tandem
parking is allowed
under the State
Density Bonus
Law as a parking
incentive 177
Item # 17.

Standard Proposed Conformance
Parking
Access and
Curb Cuts
Shared driveways shall be
considered wherever possible to
minimize curb cuts.

Project proposes two curb
cuts on South Main Street
only
Yes
Park Acreage
Requirements

0.22 acres (after Park-In Lieu
Fee) 0.24 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 density bonuses 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 waivers and incentives associated with it.

The proposed Project qualifies for waivers, concessions, and parking reductions under the State Density Bonus Law because more than 10 percent of total units will be reserved as affordable units for moderate-income households. The Project includes nine affordable units, which satisfies the 15 percent total units required under the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance. The City must grant waivers, concessions and parking reductions requested by the applicant for a qualifying project under the State Density Bonus Law.

Table 6 outlines the waivers and parking reductions requested for the proposed Project.

Table 6: State Density Bonus – Concessions, Waivers, and Incentives Standard Applicant Request Justification Discretion
Front
Setback
Waiver
Minimum:
8 feet
Maximum:
15 feet.

To provide a front
setback of
approximately 20-
feet for Buildings 7,
8, and 9 as noted in
Table 4.

The project site includes
existing Public Service
Easements located within
the first 10-feet of the front
setback, and no structures
or projections are allowed
on or above the easement.

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

Rear
Setback
Waiver
Minimum:
10 feet
To provide a rear
setback of
approximately 5-
feet for Buildings 1,
2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 as
noted in Table 4.

A reduction in the rear
setback is necessary in
order to physically
construct the proposed
development.

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

Parking
Reduction
17 guest
vehicle
parking
spaces
Nine guest vehicle
parking spaces
Guest parking is not
required under the State
Density Bonus Law.

Parking reductions
allowed under State
Density Bonus Lay
must be granted by
the City.

Front and Rear Yard Setback Waivers
The Midtown Specific Plan provides unique front, side, and rear setback requirements for MXD developments.

The Project, as designed, satisfies the minimum 10-feet side setbacks on both sides of the property; but the developer is requesting State Density Bonus waivers for altering the maximum front setback and the minimum 178 Item # 17.
rear yard setback. As part of the SB 330 submittal process, all applications must undergo a preliminary application review that is reviewed by various City Departments, including but not limited to Planning, Engineering, Fire, Building and Housing, and Police.

The Midtown Specific Plan requires MXD proposals to have a front yard setback ranging from a minimum of 8- feet to a maximum of 15-feet, and a minimum rear yard setback of 10-feet. The applicant has requested Buildings 7, 8, and 9 which face South Main Street to have front yard setbacks ranging from 19.9-feet to 20.7-feet, and the rear yard setback for Buildings 1-6 to be 5-feet. Both front and rear setback waivers requesting differences in approximately 5-feet of the standard requirements are necessary in order to facilitate the physical development of the proposed Project. All reviewing City Departments confirmed the proposed setbacks do not cause a public health or safety problem. As such, both waivers must be granted per State Density Bonus Law.

Parking Incentives Under State Density Bonus Laws
Under the affordability provisions of the State Density Bonus Law, any project that reserves more than 10% of total units as affordable is eligible for reduced parking standards. Projects located in the Midtown Specific Plan area typically require two vehicle parking spaces for each three-bedroom unit, and an additional 15% of required vehicle parking stalls for guests. However, upon a developer's request, the State Density Bonus Law reduces maximum parking ratios for projects that may be applied instead of City thresholds. As such, the City can only require the maximum number of vehicle parking spaces per State Density Bonus Law parking incentives, as shown in Table 7.

Table 7: 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 onehalf 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 satisfied the Midtown Specific Plan three-bedroom parking space requirements but has requested a reduction in required guest parking spaces as part of the State Density Bonus Law parking incentives. The applicant has proposed to provide the following, as demonstrated in Table 8.

Table 8: Project Parking Analysis (under State Density Bonus Law) Land Use Unit
Count Rate
Maximum
Spaces
Required
Spaces
Provided
Onsite
Notes
Three-bedroom 57 1.5 / unit 85.5 114
Guest Parking N/A1 0 9 See footnote 1
Total 85.5 123
1 Zero guest parking spaces are required under the State Density Bonus Law. Without the mandated parking reductions, the Project would require approximately 17 guest parking stalls based on the Midtown Specific Plan ratio of two stalls for each three-bedroom unit (totaling 114 stalls) and a guest parking requirement of 15% of the total number of required stalls.

As noted in the Project Description, all 57 three-bedroom units will include a two-car garage, and up to 28 units will include tandem parking. Per the State Density Bonus law, onsite parking spaces may be provided through tandem or uncovered parking, but not on-street parking. Requesting these parking standards does not count as 179 Item # 17.
an incentive or concession. Furthermore, nine additional surface parking spaces will be provided for guests along internal Street B, making a total of 123 onsite parking spaces, which is consistent with the total reduced maximum parking standard of 85.5 parking spaces 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 Department and deemed consistent with the provisions of MMC Section XI-1-4 (Tentative Maps), as outlined in Resolution No. 23-004. Tentative Maps require approval by Resolution by the Planning Commission that recommends final approval or denial by the City Council.

Architectural Design
The Project's design concept includes three-story buildings with heights consistent with existing residential development along South Main Street. The contemporary design includes the following design accents and materials:
 Roof: Composition Shingle
 Exterior: Stucco Finish with Fiber Cement Siding, Hardie Panel Siding in Fiber Cement Textured Panel and Horizontal Shiplap Siding, Metal Siding, and Muddox Thin Brick/Brick  Trim/Accents: Bronze Metal, Metal Railings with Panel Siding  Entry Door: Contemporary Front Entry Door with Sidelite  Garage Door: Cloplay Steel Garage Door with Contemporary Slim Windows The Project conforms to the Midtown 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 Milpa Village Townhome development north at 260 South Main Street, built out in 2019. 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
180
Item # 17.

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

Figure 2: Project Elevation Facing South Main Street
Tree Removal and Landscaping Requirements
The Project includes removal of 26 existing trees, including 13 ordinance sized trees, from the site. Pursuant to MMC Title X, Chapter 2 (Tree Maintenance and Protection), the Project must plant a minimum of two replacement trees for every one ordinance sized tree that is removed, The Project will include 157 new trees on the same site. Additional landscaping will include the installation of various shrubs, grasses, and vines (New Zealand Flax, Manzanita, Reed Grass, and Creeping Fig) as demonstrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3 – Landscape Plan 181
Item # 17.

Parkland and Open Space Requirements
The Midtown Specific Plan 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 Milpitas (currently $2,787,840 per acre).

In the Midtown Specific Plan Area at least, two (2) of every three and a half (3 ½) acres (57.4%) shall be provided as public park land. The remaining acreage can be provided as private park land (42.6%).

Estimates show 2.49 people will occupy each unit for multi-family developments with 5 units or more.

The Project proposes 57 units, resulting in an estimated population of 142 persons and a parkland requirement of 0.50 acres, equivalent to approximately $1,384,873.46.

The applicant has proposed to pay for public park land and provide private park land space. The City has determined the applicant must pay to provide 0.28 acres of parkland, equivalent to $789,377.87.

The remaining 0.22 acres will be provided onsite with a mixture of a playground area with a pergola, playground equipment, bicycle racks, picnic tables and chairs, and a synthetic turf lawn for play. A full analysis for the parkland requirement is demonstrated in Table 9 below.

Table 9: Parkland Requirement Analysis
TTLC Townhomes Proposed 57
TTLC Townhomes Population Estimate
(2.49 persons/unit per Census) 142 persons
Midtown Parkland Requirement 3.5 acres/1,000 people or
equivalent fees-in-lieu
Total Parkland Acreage or In-Lieu Fee Required 0.50 acres / $1,384,873.46 Amount Satisfied Through Park-In Lieu Fees (Acreage/Dollars) 0.28 acres / $789,377.87 Remaining Parkland Acreage Required 0.22 acres
Private Recreation/Open Space Included in the Project 0.24 acres 182
Item # 17.

Total Parkland Acreage due 0.00 acres
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 nine of the 57 units on-site for moderate-income households, which meets the minimum 15 percent requirement of the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance. The developer is required to execute an agreement imposing appropriate ownership controls on the affordable units and all other requirements per MMC Section XII-1-3.04 (Design and distribution of affordable units).

The Project’s proposed unit type and building distribution is shown in Table 10 and the distribution of affordable units is shown in Figure 4. As shown in Table 10, the Project will include 28 units as Type 1 and 2, and one unit as Type 3.

Table 10: Proposed Project Unit Type and Building Totals Building #
Unit
Type 1
(3 bed/3
bath)
1,423 S.F.

Unit
Type 2
(3 bed/3
bath)
1,689 S.F.

Unit
Type 3
(3 bed/3.5
bath)
2,092 S.F.

Total
Building 1 3 3 0 6
Building 2 2 2 1 5
Building 3 3 3 0 6
Building 4 3 3 0 6
Building 5 3 3 0 6
Building 6 3 3 0 6
Building 7 3 3 0 6
Building 8 4 4 0 8
Building 9 4 4 0 8
Total Unit Count 28 28 1 57
Required Affordable
Unit Type Distribution
per City’s Affordable
Housing Ordinance
5 4 0 9
The Housing Division within the City’s Building Safety and Housing Department reviewed the proposed Project for compliance with the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance. In accordance with the distribution of the unit types shown in Table 10 above, the applicant has agreed to distribute the number of affordable unit types as outlined below and as shown to be dispersed throughout the Project as identified by the red dots in Figure 4:
 Five (5) Affordable Units: Unit Type 1 (3 bedroom/1,423-square feet)  Four (4) Affordable Units: Unit Type 2 (3 bedroom/1,689-square feet) Figure 4 – Location and Distribution of Affordable Units 183
Item # 17.

Traffic and Access
Vehicular access will be provided by two driveways with direct ingress/egress from South Main Street. An internal private street and alley grid will provide access to 57 private residential garages with a total of 114 covered vehicle parking spaces. In addition, nine guest parking spaces will be provided along Street B, including one ADA-compliant space, one electric vehicle (EV) parking space, and two compact spaces. The EV parking space will provide full charging facilities.

Grading
The subject site is relatively flat. The proposed Project would result in the demolition of all existing structures, paving, and landscaping on the subject site in order to construct the new development. The applicant would import approximately 600 cubic yards of fill to pad the site and increase the finish grade heights to meet flood zone requirements and support the proposed drainage and utility improvements.

Utilities
The project site is located 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. The proposed Project improvements to infrastructure include:
 Water: A new 8-inch internal water loop connecting to the existing 8-inch water line along S. Main Street.  Sewer: A new 8-inch internal sewer line connecting to the existing 18-inch sewer line along S. Main Street.
 Stormwater: an existing storm drain line (12-inch and 18-inch) runs along the property frontage within a storm drain easement parallel to S. Main Street. The Project proposes to upsize all the 12-inch storm drainpipes to 15-inch pipes and tie the treated 12-inch line from the site to the new upsized 15-inch line. 184 Item # 17.

The Project will have an internal storm drain system, routed through a bio-retention basin to meet water quality requirements, before connecting back to the public storm drain system along S. Main St.  Gas Lines: The project site will be all-electric; no gas will be installed, and any existing gas services will be abandoned if feasible per PG&E requirements.
 Existing Overhead Utility Lines: The Project will underground the overhead utility lines along the site frontage along S. Main Street.

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 services. 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.

PUBLIC COMMENT/OUTREACH
Staff provided public notice of the proposed Project in accordance with City (MMC XI-10-64.04) and State public noticing requirements. A notice for the City Council public hearing was published in the Milpitas Post on March 24, 2023. In addition, postcards with information about the Planning Commission public hearing and City Council public hearing were sent to all owners and occupants within 1,000 feet of the project site. Public notices for both hearings were also posted at the project site, on the City's Website, www.milpitas.gov, and at City Hall. Lastly, a project description and copies of project plans were posted under the “Online Public Forum” on the Planning Department page of the City’s Website. At the time of publishing this report, one public comment has been received in opposition to the Project. The public comments are included as Attachment G. The applicant also hosted a neighborhood meeting on March 15, 2023, to provide detailed information about the Project and respond to questions from members of the community.

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 with one vacant lot and one lot with underutilized land uses, with the possibility a higher density residential or mixed-use Project would be submitted. A higher density or higher intensity mixed-use Project would generate more impact fees to pay for needed infrastructure.

Cons: Denial of the Project would deprive the City of 57 new residential units, nine 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, Midtown Specific Plan, and zoning, all of which support the development of affordable housing within proximity to transit and a mixed-use neighborhood. The Project includes nine townhomes reserved for moderate-income households, 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 Bonus Law and qualifies for the setback waivers and parking reductions requested by the applicant. The Project complements nearby residential projects and other commercial and mixed-use land uses.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Project is subject to the following impact fees:
185
Item # 17.
 Parkland Impact Fee - The requirements are detailed above in the Parkland and Open Space Requirements section and in Table 9 per MMC Section XI-1-9. The applicant will pay the estimated $789,377.87 park in-lieu fee prior to building permit issuance.  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 REVIEW:

The City conducted an environmental assessment in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), as amended. The proposed Project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-fill Development Projects). An exemption is the appropriate CEQA determination for the proposed Project. For additional details, see Exhibit 2 of the Resolution (Attachment B) for the proposed Project memorandum demonstrating compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15332. Exhibit 3 of the Resolution (Attachment C) includes the supporting technical reports as substantial evidence for the CEQA memorandum.

As a separate and independent basis, the Project is also exempt from further CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 (Program EIR) because the Project is a residential project that is generally consistent with the buildout projections of the updated 2010 Midtown Specific Plan. Therefore, no further environmental review is required.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolution to approve Site Development Permit No. SD22-0007, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22- 0003, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0003, Density Bonus Permit No. DB22-0002, Tree Removal Permit No.

TR22-0014, and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0005, subject to the Conditions of Approval.

Attachment(s):

Attachment A: City Council Resolution, including Exhibit 1 to the Resolution: Conditions of Approval Attachment B: Exhibit 2 to the Resolution: CEQA Exemption Memorandum Attachment C: Exhibit 3 to the Resolution: CEQA Exemption Supporting Technical Studies Attachment D: Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 22, 2023 Attachment E: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for February 22, 2023 Attachment F: Project Plans
Attachment G: Public Comments received prior to the City Council Public Hearing 186
Item # 17.

Resolution No. _____
RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILPITAS APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. SD22-0007, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. UP22-0003, VESTING TENTATIVE MAP NO. MT22-0003, DENSITY BONUS PERMIT NO. DB22-0002, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. TR22-0014, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. EA22-0005

TO ALLOW DEMOLITION OF ONE MULTI-TENANT COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE BUILDING, REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF 13 ORDINANCE-SIZE TREES, AND DEVELOPMENT OF 57 TOWNHOME CONDOMINIUMS, CONSISTING OF NINE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS UP TO 37 FEET IN HEIGHT (THREE STORIES), WITH 123 VEHICLE PARKING SPACES AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS ON A 2.35- ACRE SITE LOCATED WITHIN THE MIDTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA AT 612 SOUTH MAIN STREET (APN 086-25-027, 028) AND MAKING FINDINGS OF CEQA EXEMPTION WHEREAS, the City of Milpitas, California (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the constitution and laws of the State of California; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 2002, the Milpitas City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared to analyze the environmental impacts associated with the proposed Midtown Specific Plan (State Clearinghouse “SCH” No. 2000092027) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), and subsequently adopted the Midtown Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 2008, the Milpitas City Council certified the Milpitas Transit Area Specific Plan EIR (SCH No. 2006032091) and subsequently adopted the Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP), a specific plan developed in response to Policy 7.5 of the Midtown Specific Plan that reduced the scope of the Midtown Specific Plan by removing some of the boundaries and areas designated therein and placing them within the planning provisions of the TASP; and
WHEREAS, the Milpitas City Council adopted Resolution No. 7796 approving amendments to a revised 2008 Midtown Specific Plan to acknowledge the TASP, deleted the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay in the northern area of the Midtown Specific Plan, and updated other outdated text, references, and figures. The resolution determined the proposed amendments to the 2008 Midtown Specific Plan are exempt from further CEQA review pursuant to (a) CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, since all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in the Midtown Specific Plan EIR (SCH No. 2000092027) and the Transit Area Specific Plan EIR (SCH No. 2006032091) and (b) CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) since there was no possibility that the proposed amendments could have a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, on October 7, 2008, the Milpitas City Council certified the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the Midtown Specific Plan Transportation Element Update dated January 2008 (SCH No. 2000092027) per a City Council request at its November 7, 2006 meeting to study potential traffic improvements and impacts within portions of the Midtown Specific Plan area; and WHEREAS, the Milpitas City Council adopted Resolution No. 8044 on November 16, 2010, approving the aforementioned minor amendments and text edits to the General Plan and Milpitas Specific Plan, resulting in the updated 2010 Midtown Specific Plan, the latest adopted version of this specific plan to date. Resolution No. 8044 determined no further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 (Program EIR) and Section 15162(b) (Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations) was required as no new information or circumstances have arisen with regards to the proposed land use, zoning, and other changes reflected in the 2010 187
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
2 Midtown Specific Plan amendments that were not previously considered in the 2002 Midtown Specific Plan EIR or the 2008 Midtown Specific Plan Transportation Update SEIR; and WHEREAS, the 2010 Midtown Specific Plan encompasses a 589-acre area and envisions the development of up to 1,472 new dwelling units, 51,000-square feet of retail space, 720,000-square feet of office space, 326,000-square feet of commercial and industrial space, and 49-acres of parks and open space, and includes development standards, goals and policies guiding development within the Plan area. Due to the existing land use patterns and the physical characteristics of the area, including major streets and railroads, the Midtown Specific Plan also established sub-areas with specific goals and policies to accommodate those unique characteristics; and WHEREAS, on July 26, 2022, The True Life Companies (the “Applicant”) submitted an application to the City of Milpitas for the entitlements necessary to allow the development of a 57-unit townhome condominium subdivision, comprised of nine multi-family buildings up to 37-feet (three stories) in height, 123 parking spaces, and associated site improvements on a 2.35-acre site located at 612 South Main Street in the Midtown Specific Plan area (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department completed Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0005 for the Project in accordance with the CEQA, and recommends that the City Council determine this Project is covered under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-fill Development Projects) as discussed within a memorandum (the “Memorandum,”), a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein, as Exhibit 2 to the Resolution. Exhibit 3 to the Resolution includes the CEQA Memorandum supporting technical studies), and the Project is located within the Midtown Specific Plan area and is therefore exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 (Program EIR); and WHEREAS, the proposed Project is found to be consistent with the goals, policies, and regulations of the California Density Bonus Law (Government Code sections 65915 et seq.), Milpitas 2040 General Plan, Midtown Specific Plan, and Milpitas Zoning Ordinance, specifically Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-54.15 (Density Bonus for Affordable Housing Developments), which permits waivers and concessions to 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 February 22, 2023, 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. SD22-0007, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0003, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0003, Density Bonus Permit No. DB22-0002, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0014 and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0005 for 612 South Main Street, heard a presentation from staff, offered the applicant the opportunity to present evidence, and had the opportunity to hear from members of the public; and WHEREAS, by adoption of Resolution No. 23-004, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve Site Development Permit No. SD22-0007, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0002, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0002, Density Bonus Permit No. DB22-0002, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0014, and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0005 for 612 South Main Street; and 188
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
3 WHEREAS, the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission bases its recommendation and the findings contained within this Resolution are available as part of the agenda packet posting on the City of Milpitas website and may be reviewed at Milpitas City Hall, located at 455 E. Calaveras Boulevard, Milpitas, California 95035; and WHEREAS, on April 4, 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. SD22-0007, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0003, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0003, Density Bonus Permit No.

DB22-0002, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0014 and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0005 for 612 South Main Street, 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 presented before it as a whole.

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

SECTION 1. Recitals.

The City Council has duly considered the full record before it, which may include but is not limited to such things as all published staff reports, oral and written testimony by staff, the Planning Commission, and the public, and all other relevant materials and evidence submitted or provided to the Planning Commission.

Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to be true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 2. California Environmental Quality Act
The City conducted an environmental assessment (memorialized in the attached memorandum, dated February 14, 2023) for the proposed Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The proposed Project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-fill Development Projects) in that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning designation while invoking the State Density Bonus Law waivers from development standards and reduced parking requirements, is located in an urban area that has either been previously developed or adjoins existing qualified urban uses on all of the site’s perimeter and is under five-acres in size, has no value to endangered, rare, or threatened species, would not result in any significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality, and the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. A CEQA Exemption Memorandum demonstrating compliance with the categorical exemption is included as Exhibit 2 of the Resolution, and the CEQA Exemption Supporting Technical Studies is included as Exhibit 3 of the Resolution.

As a separate and independent basis, the Project is also exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 (Program EIR) per the Midtown Specific Plan EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2000092027) adopted by the City Council in March 2002, as amended.

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. MT22-0003:

1. The tentative subdivision map is consistent with the General Plan. 189
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
4 The General Plan designation for the project site references MGSP, but since City Council has not formally adopted the MGSP as the study and environmental review is currently underway, the Midtown Specific Plan development standards currently apply. Both the MGSP and Midtown Specific Plan standards intend to facilitate the development of compatible land uses for a mixed-use community that includes high-density, transit-oriented housing and a central community cultural hub, as well as encourage walking, biking, and alternative modes of transportation.

The Midtown Specific Plan designates the project site as Mixed Use (MXD). The intent of this designation is to provide a compatible mix of land uses with residential density proposals at a range of 21-30 dwelling units/acre. As this Project proposes 24.2 dwelling units/acre, it is consistent with both the intended land use of the General Plan and the relevant density requirement. In addition, the newly adopted 2023-2031 Housing Element already identified the project site as a pipeline site. As such, the project site has been incorporated into projections for affordable housing opportunities.

Furthermore, the Project is consistent with the Milpitas General Plan, as demonstrated and outlined in Table 1, below.

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 57 new threebedroom townhome condominiums in three types of unit type floor plans with modern design
elements such as including a minimum of three
bathrooms and private balconies in each unit. The
Project will also provide housing opportunities
with those with special needs by providing at least
10% of the total units (six units) as accessible
(ADA) units. The proposed family-sized housing
type will meet the needs of individuals, families,
and residents of all demographics and income
levels as they may need more space for family,
professional, or personal needs as compared to
studio, one-bedroom, or two-bedroom units.

Additionally, nine 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 largescale 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
Consistent. The Project, as proposed, is well
integrated with the existing residential,
commercial, and mixed-use developments along
South Main Street. The Project is located in an
area already served by existing infrastructure and
utilities and would incorporate an underutilized lot
(600 S. Main St.) that has remained vacant and
undeveloped for many years. The smaller size of
this lot (approximately 150-ft width and 203-ft
depth) would be challenging to develop into an
efficient mixed-use project individually in the
future due to site constraints. As such, the
proposed Project would improve connectivity
190
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
5 Policy Conformance
services by retrofitting existing development over
time as area improvements or redevelopment
occurs.
within the surrounding neighborhood by
integrating both parcels. Additionally, the Project
will gain ingress and egress from two new access
points along South Main Street via new driveway
curb cuts, and as a result, the Project will blend
seamlessly into the fabric of the existing
community that also have curb cuts along this
street frontage. The Project will be compatible and
complementary to the future higher-density
mixed-use and residential development planned
for other parcels along South Main Street and the
Midtown Specific Plan area which are mostly
developed with commercial or light industrial uses
but are zoned for redevelopment as higher
intensity and density mixed-uses.

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 nine buildings that are
three stories each, up to a maximum 37-feet in
height in a zoning district that allows a maximum
height of 45 feet.

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

A. 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 57 residential condominium units at a density of 24.2 dwelling units/acre. The General Plan and MGSP/Midtown Specific Plan designations and the MXD zoning district permits residential development at intensities of 21 to 30 dwelling units/acre. The map is therefore consistent with the General Plan and MGSP/Midtown Specific Plan.

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

The Project proposes 24.2 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the 21-30 dwelling units per acre allowed by the general plan and corresponding specific plans. Additionally, the Project is consistent with the policies associated with the MGSP/Midtown Specific Plan, as identified in Tables 3 and 5, except for front and rear setbacks and guest vehicle parking, which is allowed per State Density Bonus Law.

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

The site is surrounded by property designated for mixed use development under the City’s General Plan and zoned for this type of development under the MGSP/Midtown Specific Plan. In addition, this site is suitable for the higher density development based on the location, physical attributes, and proposed infrastructure improvements.

D. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 191
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
6 The project site is within the MGSP/Midtown Specific Plan designation of Mixed Use (MXD) permitting residential development at 21 to 30 dwelling units/acre. The design will physically suit the site by providing required utilities and improvements, ample open space, and adequate residential living facilities.

E. 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 with a multi-tenant commercial and office building. Therefore, it will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

F. 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 and Housing, 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.

G. 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 may involve the vacation of gas easements per PG&E requirements.

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. SD22-0007:

1. 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 Midtown Specific Plan development standards. The Project consists of 57 condominium units and associated site amenities on a 2.35-acre site. The building’s contemporary architectural design visually relates to and is compatible with the similar townhome projects along Main Street. Colors are earth tone shades of grays and browns with portions of muted green and yellow vertical siding. In addition, residents will access garages via private alleyways, similar to nearby residential developments.

2. 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 Mixed Use (MXD) Zoning District. The Project design conforms to the site and development standards of the MXD 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 MXD standards 192
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
7 are needed, the applicant has requested waivers and guest 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 MXD and Midtown Specific Plan Development Standards Development
Standard (MXD) Required Proposed Conformance
Density 21-30 du/ac 24.2 du/ac; 57 units total Yes
Front Yard
Setback
8 ft. (min.) - 15 foot (max.)
from back of sidewalk
Buildings 7, 8, and 9 front S.

Main St:

Bldg 7: 19.9 ft.

Bldg 8: 20.4 ft.

Bldg 9: 20.7 ft.

Yes, with approval of
a Density Bonus
waiver
Side Yard
Setback 10 ft. (min.) 10-15.1 ft. Yes
Rear Yard
Setback 10 (min.) 5 feet Yes, with approval of
Density Bonus waiver
Height 45 ft. and three stories 36 ft. 11-in. (three stories) Yes Private Open
Space
Each dwelling unit shall be
provided with private open
space as follows:
 Balconies and porches
(above ground level –
min. dimension of 4.5-
ft): minimum 60 sq. ft.

Or
 Patios (at ground
level): minimum one
hundred square feet.

Private open space balconies in
each unit type will have at
least one private balcony with
an average size as follows:
 Unit Type 1 (28 units): 86 sq.
ft – one balcony on 2nd floor
 Unit Type 2 (28 units): Total
100 SF (two balconies at 50
sq. ft each on 2nd and 3rd floors
 Unit Type 3 (1 unit): 62 sq. ft
– one balcony on 2nd floor
Yes
Residential Open
Space
25% of total site shall be
usable open space or
recreational facilities.

Balconies, porches, or roof
decks may be considered
usable open space when
developed for work, play, or
outdoor living areas.
25% x 2.35-acre project site
= 0.59 acres required
Residential Open Space (OS)
Provided:

Usable OS = 0.45 acres
Private Rec. Areas = 0.24 acres
Total Residential OS = 0.69
acres
Yes
193
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
8 3. 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.

4. The Project is consistent with the Midtown Specific Plan.

The proposed Project is consistent with the applicable policies and design guidelines of the Midtown Specific Plan, as demonstrated in Tables 3 and 4, below. As the Project is eligible under the State Density Bonus Law, Government Code section 65915(p)(5), the Project is entitled to waivers and parking incentives. The requested front and rear yard setback waivers and guest parking reduction 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.

Table 3: Midtown Specific Plan Consistency
Policy Conformance
Policy 3.10: Designate parcels along the Main
Street and Abel Street corridor mixed-use and
allow a mixture of retail, office, housing, service,
and public/quasi-public uses in this area.

Consistent. The Project will be located on Main Street and is designed as mixed-use and will provide new housing
opportunities with 57 townhome condominiums with
private outdoor amenity areas. Landscaping improvements will be made within the development and along the South Main Street streetscape to improve the existing condition and encourage pedestrian and other multi-modal activity to utilize the surrounding retail, office, service, and
public/quasi-public uses in the area.

Policy 3.12: Encourage housing as the principal
upper-level use along Main Street.

Consistent. The Project is fully residential with each of the 57-units as a three-story, three-bedroom attached unit
separated in nine buildings. Therefore, housing is a
principal use of the project site along Main Street. As the Project was submitted under SB 330 and complies with all development standards in effect at the time the preliminary application was reviewed from April - May 2022, the City may not require additional changes to the Project proposal or design unless such changes are necessary to address
health, life, or safety risks. All reviewing City Departments including Planning, Building and Housing, Fire,
Engineering, and Police have not found any such concerns related to the Project as designed to warrant alterations to the current proposal. Furthermore, the project site and the immediate surrounding parcels were not identified to
specifically require ground floor commercial uses per the Midtown Specific Plan study area.
194
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
9 Policy Conformance
Policy 3.13: Adopt development standards and
design guidelines for the Mixed-Use District that
will create a lively pedestrian environment.

Consistent. The proposed Project follows the development standards of the Mixed-Use (MXD) Zoning District and the Midtown Specific Plan and creates a pedestrian scale
streetscape on Main Street by remaining three stories and up to a maximum height of 37-feet. The Project will also activate a formerly vacant and undeveloped parcel at 600 S. Main Street and will connect the uses along the street.

Furthermore, the introduction of new residents in the area may utilize the existing commercial and retail land uses in Midtown area and help encourage a lively pedestrian
environment.

Policy 3.14: Limit the establishment of new quasipublic uses within the mixed-use designation in order to create a more active street environment.

Consistent. The proposed Project consists of residential uses only.

Policy 3.24: Require new residential development
to provide public parks at a ratio of 3.5 acres per
1,000 persons, of which up to 1.5 acres per 1,000
persons can be developed as private or common
open space.

Consistent. The developer of the Project will comply by paying a park-in-lieu fee as described in the staff report and conditioned in the attached Resolution. The current parkin-lieu fee is established in Milpitas City Council Resolution No. 8437.

Policy 4.16: Provide secure and weather
protected bicycle parking facilities at the transit
stations and within new residential, retail and
employment destinations.

Consistent. The Project provides bicycle parking facilities within the new residential development in the private
outdoor amenity area with six bicycle racks, providing
capacity for up to 12 bicycle parking stalls.

Policy 4.17: Ensure that new development
complies with City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance
requirements for off-street parking. Consider
reductions on a case-by-case basis.

Consistent. The Project complies with the Midtown
Specific Plan zoning regulations for off-street parking requirements by providing the minimum two covered stalls for each three-bedroom unit in an attached garage, for a total of 114 covered stalls. Guest parking requirements for the Project are approximately 17 stalls, or 15 percent of the total required parking as required by the zoning ordinance.

The Project qualifies for waivers and concessions under the affordability provisions of the State Density Bonus Law, which allows minimum parking ratios that are less than the City’s standard zoning requirements. Such waivers and
parking incentives must be granted unless there is a specific finding of a significant health, life, or safety risk.

Policy 5.4: Implement a program of streetscape
improvements (Sidewalks, landscaping, bike
lanes, benches, lighting) along Main and Abel
Streets and Great Mall Parkway.

Consistent. The proposed Project provides street trees and landscaping improvements to the streetscape along Main
Street. Some private improvements may be limited due to an existing 10-foot wide public utility easement within the front setback of the project site. No permanent structures, such as benches, can be placed over such easements.

Policy 6.11: Incorporate energy saving devices
into new development in order to promote energy
conservation.

Consistent. The proposed development will be constructed with the latest adopted California Building Code (CBC)
standards which encourages the latest statewide energy
efficiency standards in new construction projects. The
195
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
10 Policy Conformance
Project is required to show compliance with the CBC
Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24) during the building permit review process. Additionally,
technological improvements and energy efficiency in
appliances and devices have historically and continuously improved over time and the Project anticipated to install modern energy saving devices compared to older
developments.

Table 4: Additional Development Standards Applicable in the Midtown Specific Plan Standard Proposed Conformance
Projections
into Required
Yards
Balconies, bay windows,
porches, stoops and awnings
may project into the
setbacks provided at least
60% of the required setback
area is landscaping.

Balconies and porches project
into setback areas where more
than 60% of the required setback
area is landscaping
Yes
Building
Orientation
and Entrances
All buildings must face onto
the street they front upon.

Buildings generally face South
Main Street which is the Project’s
primary street frontage
Yes
Vehicle
Parking
Three Bedroom – 2 covered
stalls per unit x 57 units =
114 covered stalls
Guest Parking – 15% of
required stalls = 17 stalls
Total Required – 131 spaces
 114 resident covered spaces
 nine guest spaces
123 total
(114 covered, nine uncovered)
Yes, parking
reduction is
allowed under
State Density
Bonus Law
Bicycle
Parking
Bicycle parking equivalent
to five percent (5%) of the
parking requirement.

Seven (7) bicycle parking
spaces
12 bicycle parking spaces Yes
Parking
Location
Parking is prohibited in the
front setback and should be
at the rear of the buildings.
57 private garage entrances face
the interior drive aisle Yes
Parking
Garage Type
Tandem parking may be
allowed with a Conditional
Use Permit (CUP).
28 units proposed with tandem
parking garages
Yes, tandem
parking is
allowed under
the State Density
Bonus Law as a
parking incentive
196
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
11 Standard Proposed Conformance
Parking
Access and
Curb Cuts
Shared driveways shall be
considered where possible
to minimize curb cuts.

Project proposes two curb cuts on
South Main Street only Yes
Park Acreage
Requirements

0.22 acres (after Park-In
Lieu Fee) 0.24 acres Yes
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. UP22-0003:

1. 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 Midtown Specific Plan area and conditioned to preserve the health and wellness of future residents. In addition, the condominium Project creates housing opportunities and increases the diversity of housing types in the Midtown area.

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

The proposed Project is consistent with most of the Milpitas Zoning Ordinance after utilizing mandated State Density Bonus waivers, as demonstrated in Table 4. The proposed multi-family residential Project is permitted in the Mixed Use (MXD) Zoning District. The Project design conforms to most of the site and development standards of the MXD zone as noted. 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 MXD 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 front and rear yard setback waivers and guest 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.

3. 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.

4. The Project is consistent with the Midtown Specific Plan (Milpitas Gateway Specific Plan). 197
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
12 The proposed Project is consistent with the applicable policies and design guidelines of the Midtown Specific Plan, 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 and reduced parking requirements. The requested front and rear yard setback 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. DB22-0002:

1. The maximum allowable base density specified in the General Plan, including any other permitted increases to density.

The proposed Project includes 57 townhome condominiums, equaling to 24.2 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 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 nine three-bedroom units 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. Each unit will have a two-car attached garages. Five of these affordable units will include the tandem parking stalls and approximately 1,423-square feet of habitable space. The other four units will include traditional zipper parking and approximately 1,689-square feet of habitable space.

All units will be three-stories in height and include private balconies. The locations of the affordable units have been identified and approved by the Housing Division as consistent with the Affordable Housing Ordinance (AHO).

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 198
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
13 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 of 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
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 for 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 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 Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the requested concessions/incentives and waivers in accordance with the State Density Bonus Law.

Table 5: State Density Bonus – Concessions, Waivers, and Incentives 199
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
14 Type of
Modification Standard Applicant Request Justification Discretion Front
Setback
Waiver
A minimum
front setback
of 8-feet and a
maximum of
15-feet.

To provide a
front setback of
approximately
20-feet for
Buildings 7, 8,
and 9.

The project site
includes existing
Public Service
Easements located
within the first 10-
feet of the front
setback, and no
structures or
projections are
allowed on or above
the easement.

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

Rear Setback
Waiver
Rear setback
must be a
minimum of
10 feet.

To provide a rear
setback of
approximately 5-
feet for
Buildings 1, 2, 3,
4, 5, and 6.

A reduction in the
rear setback 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
Incentive
17 guest
vehicle
parking
spaces
Nine guest
vehicle parking
spaces
Guest parking is not
required under the
State Density Bonus
Law.

Parking reductions are
allowed under State
Density Bonus Law and
must be granted by the
City.

SECTION 7: The City Council hereby approves Site Development Permit No. SD22-0007, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0003, Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0003, Density Bonus Permit No. DB22-0002, Tree Removal Permit No. TR22-0014, and Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0005, based on the above Findings and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit 1, the CEQA Exemption Memorandum attached hereto as Exhibit 2, and the CEQA Exemption Supporting Technical Studies attached hereto as Exhibit 3.
200
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
15 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
EXHIBIT 1
201
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
16 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
612 SOUTH MAIN STREET

TRUE LIFE TOWNHOME RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. SD22-0007
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. UP22-0003
VESTING TENTATIVE MAP NO. MT22-0003
DENSITY BONUS PERMIT NO. DB22-0002
TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. TR22-0014
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. EA22-0005

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 SD22-0007, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UP22-0003, VESTING TENTATIVE MAP MT22-0003, DENSITY BONUS PERMIT NO. DB22-0002, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT NO. TR22-0014, and ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA22-0005 (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 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 commenced 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 202
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
17 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)

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 limitation, 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 discretionary 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 indemnification 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. MT22-0003, 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. 203
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
18 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)

17. Compliance with Land Development Department. The Project/development shall comply with the requirements of the Engineering Division, as may be amended by the City of Milpitas. (E)

18. Compliance with Milpitas Police Department. The Project/development shall comply with the requirements of the Police Department, as may be amended by the City of Milpitas. (POL)

19. Mitigation Monitoring. The Project shall comply with the applicable mitigation measures from the certified Midtown Specific Plan EIR. The mitigation measures are compiled in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as adopted with the Final EIR.

20. Conditions of Approval. As part of the issuance of building permits, the Permittee shall include within the first four pages of the working drawings for a plan check, a list of all conditions of approval imposed by the final approval of the Project. (P)

21. Development in Conformance with Approved Plans: Permittee shall develop the approved Project in conformance with the plans dated December 20, 2022 and approved by the City Council on the date of the signed City Council Resolution, in accordance with these 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 any 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 apply for review and obtain approval of the Planning Commission or City Council, as applicable, in accordance with the Milpitas Zoning Code. (P)

PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS

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

23. Streetlights: 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 consistent with the Midtown Specific Plan lighting design standard. The Permittee shall submit a photometric plan to determine appropriate light levels with submittal of on-site improvement plans.

24. Lighting Plan. Prior to issuance of any building permit, Permittee shall submit a lighting and isoillumination plan that shall demonstrate 1) safe and adequate lighting of the project site and 2) lighting is contained and does not spill over onto adjacent properties or create unwanted glare. Permittee shall provide detail, elevations and manufacturer’s specifications on proposed light fixture for, light standards, and wall sconces subject to Planning Director for approval. Proposed light fixtures shall be high quality and complement the architectural style of each townhome. Light fixtures over garage doors shall be of highquality, residential scale, architectural design, subject to final approval by the Planning Director. 204
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
19 The proposed lighting plan shall also incorporate the Midtown Specific Plan lighting design standards as follows:
a. Lights should be designed and placed to direct lighting to direct lighting to appropriate surfaces and minimize glare into adjacent areas.
b. The light source used in outdoor lighting should provide a white light for better color representation to create a more pedestrian-friendly environment. c. Low pressure sodium lamps are prohibited.
d. To reinforce the pedestrian character of the area, light standards along sidewalks should not exceed 12 to 16 feet in height.
e. The use of uplighting to accent interesting architectural features or landscaping is encouraged.

25. Signage. Any future proposed signage and/or sign program for the Project shall receive a separate planning permit per the latest City adopted zoning regulations for signs in the City and shall incorporate signage design standards in the Midtown Specific Plan as applicable. The Midtown Specific Plan signage standards are as follows:
a. A coordinated signage plan should be included for all multi-tenant buildings. b. Freestanding signs are discouraged, except at a single major site entry. c. Animated, moving, flashing, blinking, reflecting and revolving signs are prohibited. d. Cabinet signs are prohibited.
e. All signs should be designed to complement the architectural style and setting of the structure or use it is adjacent to. Building wall and fascia signs should be compatible with the predominant visual elements of the building.
f. Signs should be an integral part of the design of the storefronts in mixed-use buildings. g. The size of signs and sign letters should be proportional to the space they are located in, with the letters typically 6 and 16-inches high.
h. Sign letters and materials should be professionally designed and fabricated. Primary signs should contain only the name of the business and/or its logo.
i. Signs should be constructed using high quality materials such as metal, stone, wood. j. Exposed conduit and tubing are prohibited. All transformers and other equipment should be concealed.
k. Projecting signs mounted perpendicular to the façade of the building should be located at least 8 feet above the sidewalk. The outside edge should be no more than 5 feet from the face of the building.
l. Window signs should not exceed 15% of the window area. Signs should not obstruct visibility into and out of the window.
m. Window signs may include one “open” or “closed” sign less than 2 square-feet. n. While bilingual signs are allowed, the size of English lettering should be at least equal to the size of letters of another language.
205
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
20 26. Utilities. Project shall comply with Special Development Standards in Mixed-Use Zones per MMC XI-10-

6.06 as applicable:

1. Utilities shall be placed in underground or subsurface conduits.

2. All mechanical equipment, ground transformers and meters shall be located and screened to minimize visual impacts.

3. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed form street level views through roof designs that area architecturally integrated with the building, such as equipment wells and parapets.

4. Public utility distribution meters, vaults, and similar installations shall be consolidated in a single area whenever possible and located away from highly visible areas such as street corners and public open spaces.

5. Backflow preventors shall be located within landscaped setback areas and painted black or dark green to minimize visual impact. Where no landscaped setback areas exist the backflow preventors shall be incorporated into the front of the building to minimize visual obtrusiveness.

6. Refuse and recycling containers shall not be visible from a public or private street. Such containers shall be stored either within the parking facility of the building or within a vehicular accessway with screening designed to meet the requirements of this section.

7. Trash enclosure walls shall incorporate building materials and colors that match the architecture of the building and be well landscaped.

8. All telecommunications antennas shall be building façade or roof mounted and screened appropriately.

9. On Main Street only telecommunication facilities that are disguised to appear as a part of the building architecture (i.e. “stealth” antennas) may be used.

27. CC&Rs. Permittee shall submit proposed covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) to the City for approval prior to submission to the Department of Real Estate. The CC&Rs shall include disclosure statements informing future residents of noise due to trash enclosure collection; potential noise, traffic, as well as the use and/or storage of any hazardous material associated with normal operations of the railroad and commercial business activity and development; noise from the Union Pacific Railroads; and potential graffiti problems towards the tracks. Furthermore, the CC&Rs shall restrict the use of gasoline powered landscape equipment (blowers and string trimmers).

28. Site Improvement. Onsite water and sewer mains and laterals shall be City owned, operated, and maintained.

All proposed streets and all other utilities within the project site shall be private and owned, operated, and maintained by Permittee or any Homeowners Association that may subsequently be established. The main entries and driveways shall have vertical curbs in all areas including parking areas; rolled curbs may be allowed in the alleys.

29. 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 114 vehicle spaces within unit parking garages. b. GUEST: A total of nine (9) vehicle spaces are to be provided on site. 206
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
21 c. COMPACT: A total of two (2) guest parking spaces will be designated as compact spaces. No additional spaces shall be compact without written approval from the Planning Director or his/her designee.

30. Bicycle Racks: A total of twelve (12) short-term bicycle parking spaces shall be installed on the site.

31. Trees: The project will remove 13 ordinance-sized trees and replace with approximately 157 trees, in conformance with the plans dated December 20, 2022 and approved by City Council on the date of the signed City Council Resolution for the Project.

32. Site Improvement. Prior to issuance of any building permit, Permittee must pay all applicable development fees, including but not limited to, connection fees (water, sewer and storm), plan check and inspection deposit, and 3.8% building permit automation fee. These fees are collected as part of the secured public improvement agreement. The agreement shall be secured for an amount of 100% of the engineer’s estimate of the construction cost for faithful performance and 100% of the engineer’s estimate of the construction cost for labor & materials.

33. Park in Lieu Fee. Permittee shall be subject to Park-in-lieu fee per the requirements of the Milpitas Midtown Specific Plan. Prior to issuance of Building Permit, Permittee shall pay park-in-lieu fees as set forth per Resolution No. 8437.

34. 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.

MIDTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) MITIGATION

MEASURES
The following are the mitigation measures from the certified Midtown Specific Plan EIR that apply to this Project with each mitigation measure being imposed as a condition of approval as follows:

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

35. Mitigation Measure HazMat-1: A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be conducted in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) guidelines prior to the approval of development that would involve soil disturbance within 100 feet of any parcel that has been identified on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, or which has had previous land uses associated with hazardous materials (e.g., industrial sites, gas stations, etc.). Additional investigation may not be necessary for sites have no record of hazardous materials, past history of land uses associated with hazardous materials, adjacency to such sites, nor surface indications of possible hazardous materials conditions. Figure 3.3-1 located in the Midtown Milpitas Specific Plan EIR, dated October 2001, provides the general location of reported hazardous materials sites as of August 2000. For more detail, refer to the Environmental Records Search, on file with the Planning Division (EDR 2000).

The Phase I ESA will include the findings of a site reconnaissance and investigation of prior uses of the property that could have resulted in contamination. If a significant likelihood of contamination is revealed by the Phase I ESA, a Phase II and/or III assessment may be required, which would involve soil and/or water quality sampling and could result in remediation requirements in accordance with State and Federal regulations.
207
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
22 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

36. Mitigation Measure Bio-1: Undeveloped areas proposed for development during the nesting season (April 15 to July 15) shall be surveyed for burrowing owls. The survey must follow the California Department of Fish and Game (now Department of Fish and Wildlife) protocol. The survey report shall be submitted to Milpitas Planning Division for review and approval. If owls are observed during the surveys, or if a burrowing owl nest has been documented on the site within the last three years, a burrowing owl habitat map and mitigation plan must be prepared by a qualified ornithologist and submitted to the City for approval.

37. Mitigation Measure Bio-2: Most hawks build bulky nests of twigs, bark, and leaves high in trees. Redshouldered hawks (the species observed in the project area) nest in deciduous or coniferous trees, usually 20- 60 feet above the ground. The birds construct well-made cupped nests of sticks and twigs, lined with bark, mosses, leaves, feathers and down. A red-shouldered hawk nest is approximately 2 feet wide and 1 foot deep.

For proposed projects that would remove any large tree with a potential raptor nest during the raptor-nesting season (February 1 to August 31), the following mitigation measures shall be implemented. a. If construction or large tree (i.e., 20 feet or more in height) removal is proposed during the raptor-nesting season (February 1 to August 31), Planning Division staff shall conduct a site visit to determine whether any nest structure is visible in the trees to be removed. b. If a nest is observed, a focused survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist during the nesting season to identify if they are active. The survey shall be conducted no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of construction or tree removal. c. If nesting raptors are found during the focused survey, no construction or tree removal will occur within 500 feet of an active nest (or an alternative distance deemed appropriate by the California Department of Fish and Game (now California Department of Fish and Wildlife), depending on the existing degree of disturbance in the vicinity of the nest) until the young have fledged (as determined by a qualified biologist). If next trees are unavoidable, they shall be removed during the non-breeding season.

38. Mitigation Measure Bio-3: If a project in the planning area has the potential to result in discharge of dredged or fill material into Waters of the United States, including wetlands, the following measures shall be implemented. Waterways in the planning area that could be Waters of the United States are Berryessa Creek, Lower Wrigley Ford Creek, and East Penitencia Creek.
a. Prior to implementation of a project in the vicinity of known waterways in the planning area, qualified biologists shall make a determination as to whether Waters of the United States, including jurisdictional wetlands, are present in the development area. If no Waters of the United States, including jurisdictional wetlands, would be filled or degraded as a result of the proposed project, no further mitigation will be required.
b. If Waters of the United States would be filled or degraded as a result of the proposed project, authorization for the fills shall be secured from USACE via the Section 404 permitting process. c. The acreage of Waters of the United States would be filled or degraded as result or rehabilitated on a “nonet-loss” basis in accordance with USACE regulations. Habitat restoration, rehabilitation and/or replacement shall be at a location and by methods agreeable to USACE. d. Measures to minimize erosion and runoff into drainage channels shall be included in all drainage plans and implemented during construction adjacent to creeks.

CULTURAL RESOURCES
208
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
23 39. Mitigation Measure Cult-1: The following mitigation measures shall be implemented to ensure that substantial adverse changes do not occur to historical resources within the planning area. These measures shall be implemented when modification or demolition is proposed for any of the sites identified on Figure

3.8-1 of the Midtown Milpitas Specific Plan EIR, dated October 2001. a. Where maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of the historic resource would be conducted in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstruction Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, the project’s impact on the historic resource shall be considered mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

This is the preferred mitigation approach.
b. If removal or modification of any potentially significant resource is proposed and is not consistent with the Standards described in (a), the resource shall be evaluated for its integrity and structural values pursuant to the California Register criteria by a licensed architect specialized in historic buildings.

This shall occur prior to the approval of any proposed modification or demolition. c. If these resources are determined ineligible for the California Register of Historic Resources, no further mitigation is required. However, if a resource is listed or determined eligible for the California Register of Historic Resources, documentation of the structure’s architectural values by a licensed architect specialized in historic buildings shall be completed prior to demolition or alteration. At least one additional mitigation measure also will be implemented at the recommendation of the architect in consultation with the City of Milpitas; this might include on-site interpretation of the lost resource or documentation of the resource to Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American Engineering Recordation (HABS/HAER) standards.

40. Mitigation Measure Cult-2: When proposed for development, the planned bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the vicinity of the Penitencia Creek and development of vacant lands in the vicinity of Penitencia Creek (Within 100 feet of the creek bank) shall be reviewed for their potential to adversely affect archaeological site CA-SCL-38. Mitigation, including site avoidance, data recovery and/or construction monitoring may be necessary, depending on the nature of the site, and the project’s potential impact to it. A qualified archaeologist shall make project-specific recommendations, which shall be implemented prior to the development of the path or construction on these vacant lands.

41. Mitigation Measure Cult-3: Project developers shall be required to implement provisions for historical or unique archaeological resources accidentally discovered during construction in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 (e)(f). This requirement shall be specified in all building and grading permits.

These provisions require the immediate evaluation of the find by a qualified archaeologist or historic archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards. If the find is determined to be a historical or unique archaeological resource, funding will be made available by the project developer and a schedule identified for implementing avoidance measures or appropriate mitigation. Work could continue on other parts of the building site while historical or unique archaeological resource mitigation takes place.

42. Mitigation Measure Cult-4: In the event that human remains are encountered, City planning staff will be contacted and excavation or disturbance activities at the site or at any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human will be halted. This requirement shall be specified in all building and grading permits.

The Santa Clara County coroner will be contacted and appropriate measures implemented. These actions would be consistent with the State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, which prohibits disinterring, disturbing, or removing human remains from any location other than a dedicated cemetery. If the County coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the coroner shall contact the Native American 209
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
24 Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be most likely deceased from the deceased Native American.

AIR QUALITY

43. Measure Air-1: The following basic control measures are required to be implemented at all construction sites in the Midtown area. These measures shall be incorporated into construction contracts for projects in the Midtown area.
a. Water all active construction areas twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to existing land uses shall be kept damp at all times, or shall be treated with no toxic stabilizers or dust palliatives.
b. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials, or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
c. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.
d. Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.
e. Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried on to adjacent public streets.
f. Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas. g. Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.)
h. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. i. Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. j. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. k. Suspend excavation and grading activity whenever the wind is so high that it results in visible dust plumes despite control efforts.

44. Mitigation Measure Air-2: The Specific Plan contains Policies directed at reducing vehicle miles traveled.

The Specific Plan encourages a compatible mixture of land uses, provides for a land-use mix that supports major transit facilities, locates higher density development around hubs and commercial centers, provides for the continuation of pedestrian-oriented retail development, and provides pedestrian connections between the transit stations and important destinations.

Though these policies would help to reduce emissions, they would not reduce them to a level of insignificance.

Due to the intensity of the development proposed, the proposed Specific Plan could not be feasibly developed without an increase in air emissions above the significance thresholds of 15 tons per year for RO, NOx, and PM10.

45. Mitigation Measure Air-3: Due to the intensity of the development proposed, the Specific Plan could not be feasibly developed without causing an increase in regional emissions, and all feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Specific Plan as policies (e.g., policies directed at encouraging nonautomotive transportation). 210
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
25 BUILDING SAFETY AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS

BUILDING

46. Compliance with California Code of Regulations. The Project shall comply with the requirements of the Building Safety and Housing Department and the California Code of Regulations Title 24 and the Milpitas Municipal Code as adopted by the City. Building permits shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Safety and Housing Department prior to start of construction. All California Code of Regulations Title 24 and Milpitas Municipal Code requirements applicable at the time of building permit application must be met in advance of any building permit approvals or related construction. Changes to the site plan and/or building plan require review and approval by the Building Safety and Housing Department.

HOUSING

47. Provide the following information on Sheet A01 of the plans: Per MMC XII-1-3.02 – Conditions of Approval, provide the habitable square feet for residential units, and net residential square feet of the total project, affordable units, and market rate units.

48. Affordable Housing Requirement: Permittee shall comply with the City’s Affordable 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 units within the development as affordable units, unless otherwise remedied by the City Council.

49. 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.

50. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE. The project shall comply with the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance. The aforementioned conditions including but not limited to compliance with MMC XII1-3.02 and XII-1-3.04 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 Building Safety and Housing.

FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS

51. To determine the acceptability of technologies, processes, products, facilities, materials, and uses attending the design, operation or use of a building or premises subject to inspection by the Fire Code Official, the Fire Code Official is authorized to require the owner or agent to provide, without charge to the jurisdiction, a technical opinion(s), plan review(s) and/or report(s). CFC Section 104.7.2

52. Fire Department Access: Fire Department apparatus and staff access shall be provided to all buildings and site. Detailed review will be done during construction permit process. CFC Section 503 a. Fire apparatus access roads shall meet the Milpitas Fire Department turning radii guidelines and shall provide continuous apparatus travel. Turning radii for fire apparatus access roads shall be a minimum net clearance of 48 feet-6 inches for the outside radius and 28 feet-0 inches for the inside radius. The 211
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
26 layout for the outside and the inside radius shall be from the same reference point (center). CFC Section 503
b. Fire apparatus access shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of exterior walls of the building/structure per the California Fire Code Section 503.1. When there is a dead-end condition, means for fire apparatus turn-around shall be provided. c. Adjacent Access. No source of access from lands adjoining a property to be developed shall be considered unless there is obtained the irrevocable and unobstructed right to use same. CFC Section 503.7, added by MMC V-300-2.56
d. Fire access roads shall be paved (concrete and/or asphalt cement, or other concrete type pavement approved by the Fire Dept.). Fire apparatus access roads/lanes and emergency vehicle roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather capabilities. Design criteria shall be based on the City of Milpitas fire apparatus Sutphen S95 Aerial Platform unit. Please contact the Fire Prevention Division if specifications are needed. CFC Section 503.2.3
e. Ground structures (including landscape) and building projections shall not encroach or impede the fire apparatus access requirements. CFC Section 503.4
f. Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) roads, when required, shall meet the fire department site access requirements specified herein this document. CFC Section 503 g. No parking in fire access roads. The required access road shall be designated and clearly marked as a fire lane. The designated fire lane shall be identified as set forth in Section 22500.1 of the Vehicle Code.

The designation shall be indicated (1) by a sign posted immediately adjacent to, and visible from, the designated place clearly stating in letters not less than one inch in height that the place is a fire lane, (2) by outlining or painting the place in red and, in contrasting color, marking the place with the words "FIRE LANE", which are clearly visible from a vehicle, or (3) by a red curb or red paint on the edge of the roadway upon which is clearly marked the words "FIRE LANE". CFC Section 503.3 h. Minimum marking shall be pole signage and red curb with “FIRE LANE – CVC 22500.1” stencil.

Signage and red curbs shall be done throughout and as needed to clearly identify the no parking zones. i. Fire Protection. When fire apparatus access roads or a water supply for fire protection is required to be installed, such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. Combustible construction shall not begin until water mains and hydrants are operational and fire apparatus access roads are installed (paved). CFC Section 501.4 j. The Fire Department reserves the right to request site design changes as needed to meet the requirements of the CFC, and/or make the request for additional fire protection measures in conformance with the CFC Section 102.9.

53. Fire Protection Water Supply (hydrants, on-site and public) a. An approved water supply (hydrants on-site and public) capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided upon which facilities, buildings, or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. Water supply shall meet the Fire Code and the City of Milpitas Engineering Division water supply guidelines and the CFC Section 507, Appendix B and Appendix C. Fire flow reduction as noted in the Appendix B of the Fire Code is not permitted, CFC Section B103.2.
b. Water System Calculations Requirements. Private fire service mains and appurtenances shall be designed and installed in accordance with the City of Milpitas Engineering design guideline requirements and the NFPA 24. Design calculations and all the necessary design information for the water system to meet the 212
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
27 domestic and fire flow requirements as per the City of Milpitas Engineer Division water design requirements shall be provided as part of the construction permit process. CFC Section 507 The minimum water flow at the worst-case hydrant outlet within the private system shall be not less than 2,500 gpm.
c. Hydrant for automatic fire sprinkler and or standpipe systems. Buildings equipped with an automatic fire sprinkler system and or a standpipe system installed in accordance with Sections 903 and or 905 shall have a fire hydrant within 50 feet of the fire department connections. CFC Section 507.1.1, amended by MMC Section V-300-2.61
d. Private hydrants shall have the bottom 6 inches of the hydrant painted, with a weather resistive paint, white in color. CFC Section 507.5.7, added by MMC V-300-2.62 e. No parking is permitted in front of fire hydrants. Hydrants located on streets (Public or Private Street) shall have an unobstructed clearance of not less than 30 feet per CA Vehicle Code 22514. Provide stripping per CA Vehicle Code 22500.1. CFC Section 507.5.4

54. Fire service water laterals for building sprinkler systems. a. Each building shall have a fire service water laterals for the automatic fire sprinkler system and shall meet the California Fire Code requirements, Chapter 9, and the NFPA 13 and other applicable Standards. Note that the utilities drawings provided with the plan set for entitlement are not reviewed nor approved for construction. CFC Section 912.1
b. The location of the FDC’s/PIV’s (fire department connection/post indicator valve) shall be at a readily visible and accessible location off the fire access road and approved by the Fire Code Official.

FDC’s/PIV’s shall not be located behind parking stalls nor behind any other obstruction. Final review for location for the FDC’s/PIV’s will be conducted during the construction permit process. CFC Section 912.2 c. FDC/PIV Signage. A metal sign with raised letters at least 1 inch in size shall be mounted on all fire department connections. Signage shall be reflective, weather resistive and approved by the Fire Code Official. CFC Section 912.5
d. Backflow Protection. Potable water supply to the automatic sprinkler and/or the standpipe systems shall be protected against backflow as required by the Health and Safety Code section 13114.7 and the City of Milpitas Utilities Engineering Division. CFC Section 912.6 e. Automatic fire sprinkler riser location. The fire sprinkler system riser shall not be located within electrical rooms or storage closets and shall be provided with clear access and working clearance. California Fire Code Section 903.3.5.5, added by MMC Section V-300-2.66

55. Access Control Devices. When access control devices including bars, grates, gates, electric or magnetic locks or similar devices, which would inhibit rapid fire department emergency access to the building, are installed, such devices shall be approved by the Fire Code Official. All access control devices shall be provided with an approved means for deactivation or unlocking by the fire department. Access control devices shall also comply with Chapter 10 Egress. CFC Section 504.6, added by MMC Section V-300-2.59

56. Premises Identification. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Address numbers shall be Arabic numerals or alphabet letters and shall be consistent with Milpitas standardized addressing guidelines.

CFC Section 505
213
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
28 The Fire Dept. may require the installation of address numbers at multiple building locations. CFC Section 102.9

57. All required addresses shall be illuminated. CFC Section 505.3, added by MMC V-300-2.60

58. Fire Dept. emergency Key Box (Knox Box, Knox locks, Knox electric switches, etc.). The Fire Code Official is authorized to require a key box(es) to be installed in an approved location(s) if necessary for lifesaving or fire-fighting purposes. Quantify and location shall be as directed by the Fire Code Official. CFC Section 506 Locked mechanical closets, electrical closets, fire alarm closets, sprinkler riser closets, etc. will need a Fire Dept. approved lock or “Knox” key box.

59. Building/Structure Requirements.
a. The buildings shall be provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system in conformance with the NFPA 13 or NFPA 13D Standards. System type will depend on building/structure construction type and area analysis. California Fire Code Section 903.3
b. All new installations of sprinkler systems shall preclude sprinkler test and system drain water from discharging into the storm drain; provisions to direct water to the sanitary sewer or landscape or other approved means shall be provided. Sprinkler system design shall include the proposed method for drainage of sprinkler system discharge. Storm Water Pollution Regulations

60. Landscape sheets. The proposed landscaping may be impacted by the comments above and the requirements for fire access, fire systems and devices (such as apparatus access, hydrants, fire service lines, fire department connections valves, etc.). The Fire Dept. reserves the right to relocate, delete or change the proposed landscaping when in conflict with fire systems and devices. CFC 507.5.4

61. Complete plans and specifications for all aspects of fire protection systems shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to system installation. CFC Section 901.2

POLICE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS

TRAFFIC

62. The entrance to the complex shall be posted with appropriate signage such as “No Trespassing/ Loitering” and applicable towing advisements such as 22658(a) CVC to assist in the removal of unauthorized person and vehicles from the private premises.

63. The curb-line of South Main St. along the frontage of the proposed complex is a designated “No Parking” zone clearly marked with signage. Due to the small amount of guest parking spaces, and the lack of street parking, vehicles may use neighboring commercial business lots for additional parking. Parking restrictions, requirements and rules, shall be clearly communicated to future residents at the time of property sale.

64. Signage shall be posted at the exit to the complex advising outgoing traffic to turn right (northbound) onto S.

Main St. to reduce the impact on traffic and reduce the risk of collisions.

ADDRESSING

65. Address numbers shall be illuminated during hours of darkness and should be strategically positioned as to be readily visible from the street. Address numbers should have a minimum height of 12 inches. If numerous 214
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
29 alarm zones are utilized then zone numbers should be clearly marked above appropriate common doorways (i.e. fitness/recreational center, laundry room, etc.). All other housing alarms shall be directly linked to specific housing unit (if installed).

PARKING

66. Parking issues presented by the facility could create concerns if adjacent parking lots belonging to surroundings businesses are utilized. The parking procedures need to be clearly understood and followed by residents and guests of the proposed property. The parking stalls within the property shall be clearly marked for resident and guest parking and include disabled parking spaces as required by law.

ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 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)

67. Modifications: The Site Development Plans dated December 20, 2022, is subject to change during the plan check stage based upon City’s previous comments and conditions stated herein.

68. 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 Engineering Department Solid Waste Program. The subject 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 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.

69. 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.

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

71. 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.

72. 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.

73. Coordination with other Projects: Permittee shall coordinate designs with the Extra Shine Car Wash project at 554 South Main Street in advance prior to any plan submittal. 215
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
30 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)

74. 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.

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

76. 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.

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

78. 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.

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

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

81. 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 accordance with a separately recorded Stormwater Management Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, etc.

82. 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).

83. Annexation to the Community Facilities District: Permittee shall submit an executed petition affirmatively consenting to annex the subject property to the Community Facilities District (CFD) 2005-1 and agree to pay the special taxes levied by the CFD 2005-1 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, regulations, 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 non-severable from the Permit, and invalidation or limitation of this condition invalidates the Permit, condition 14 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)
216
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
31 84. 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/designguidelines/); b. Standard details and specifications:
(http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/milpitas/departments/engineering/standard-details-and-specifications/); c. Midtown Specific Plan design guidelines:
(http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_pdfs/plan_plan_midtown.pdf); and d. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, where applicable.

85. 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.

86. 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.

87. 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.

88. 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. a. Underground existing overhead facilities along the frontage of South Main Street per MMC Title XI, Chapter 1, Section 7.02-2 and as approved by the City and PG&E. b. Installation of public (City-maintained) water and sewer mains within on-site private streets and public easements. Please ensure all horizontal and vertical separations meet the CCR title 22 requirements. c. Installation of separate utility service lines (domestic water, fire service, sanitary sewer) for each residential building at minimum.
d. Upsizing of the undersized segments of the existing City storm drain main located within the public service and utility easement behind the public sidewalk to 15” at minimum. e. Installation of separate water meters for each of the following services: residential, irrigation and fire.

Water meters shall be radio-transmitted with a meter antenna and 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. f. Remove and replace curb, gutter and sidewalk along the project street frontage on South Main Street.

All sidewalk design shall comply with applicable City standards and details, including Midtown Specific Plan design details.
217
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
32 g. Installation of new street tree wells along the project frontage. The locations, spacing of tree wells, tree species, and tree well grates shall comply with the applicable City standards and details, including Midtown Specific Plan design details.
h. Installation of Type II slurry seal and pavement striping along full width of South Main Street project frontage.
i. Installation of City Streetlights per Mid-Town Specific Plan guidelines and standard. Permittee shall coordinate with City’s Midtown Street Light Project during the design phase to ensure consistency of new street light design and location along project frontage. Salvage existing City Streetlights.

89. 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.

90. Relocation and Adjustment of Existing Public Utilities: Permittee shall relocate and/or adjust existing public utilities, as needed, to remove any and all conflicts with the proposed improvements. Relocation or adjustments shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Public Works Director or an assigned utilities engineer.

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

92. 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.

93. 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)

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

95. 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.

96. 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).

97. 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&R. 218
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
33 98. NPDES Compliance: The project shall comply with the requirements of the National Pollution Elimination Discharge System (NPDES) permit as administered by the California State Water Resources Control Board and the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. The project is required to meet the performance standards within the permit. Specifically, the project shall incorporate, at a minimum, stormwater treatment measures that meet the numeric sizing requirements for pollutant removal.

99. 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.
100.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.
101.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.
102.Reuse and Recycling: 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. 103.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. 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.
104.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. 105.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 obtain a CLOMR-F from FEMA for the development prior to building permit application submittal and a LOMR-F prior to occupancy release. 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 219
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
34 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. 106.Development Fees: Permittee shall pay the following development fees. The information listed in items “a” through “g” are based upon fee rates in effect at the time of the initial planning application submittal per SB 330 requirements. The exact fee amount shall be determined using these rates at the time of building permit fee payment.
a. Storm water connection fee at $16,771/acre for residential and $21,562/acre for commercial. b. Water connection fee at $1,164/unit for residential and $5.97/gpd for commercial, based upon increased water usage.
c. Sewer connection fee at $1,406/unit for residential and $8.52/gpd for commercial, based upon increased average wastewater flow.
d. Wastewater Treatment Plant fee per MMC VIII, Chapter 2, Section 7.04. e. Calaveras Boulevard Widening Traffic Impact fee per Resolution No. 7894. 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.

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) 107.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.
108.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. 109.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.
110.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.
111.Completion of Public Improvements: Permittee shall complete all public improvements, including but not limited to frontage improvements and facilities along South Main Street, as shown on City approved plans. 112.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. 220
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
35 113.Elevation Certificate: Permittee's civil engineer shall submit Elevation Certificate for the lowest finished floor elevation of each building for City record.
114.Landscape Certificate of Completion: Permittee shall submit a Certificate of Substantial Completion that complies with the Milpitas Municipal Code Water Efficient Landscapes Ordinance. 115.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. 116.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
POL = Police 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.
221
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
36 EXHIBIT 2

CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM
222
Item # 17.

Resolution No. ____
37 EXHIBIT 3

CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM SUPPORTING TECHNICAL STUDIES
Part 1: Biological Constraints Analysis for 612-630 South Main Street Project, Milpitas, California, prepared by First Carbon Solutions dated May 20, 2022.

Part 2: Trip Generation Study for 612 South Main Street, Milpitas, California, prepared by TJKM dated April 2, 2022.

Part 3: Noise Impacts Constraints Analysis for the South Main Street Project in Milpitas, California, prepared by First Carbon Solutions dated May 17, 2022.

Part 4: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Constraints Analysis for the South Main Street Project in Milpitas, California prepared by First Carbon Solutions dated May 27, 2022.

Part 5: Preliminary Stormwater Quality Control Plan for South Main Street Milpitas 600 & 612 South Main Street prepared by MacKay & Somps dated June 2022.
223
Item # 17.

EXHIBIT 2

CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM
224
Item # 17.
1 MEMORANDUM
Planning Department
To: Ned Thomas, AICP, Planning Director, City of Milpitas From: Kristina Phung, Associate Planner, City of Milpitas Subject: 612 South Main Street Project Categorical Exemption Date: February 14, 2023
This memorandum supports the finding that the proposed project at 612 South Main Street “Project” would be exempt from further review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects). The Project site located at 612 South Main Street is a combination of two adjacent parcels:
600 South Main Street (APN 086-25-028) and 612-650 South Main Street (APN 086-25- 027) in the City of Milpitas, Santa Clara County. The proposed Project is described in the attached staff report. All supporting technical studies referenced herein are included as Exhibit 3.

Class 32 Infill Exemption, Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 Article 19 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines Section 15300 to Section 15333) includes a list of classes of projects that have been determined to not have a significant effect on the environment and as a result, are exempt from review under CEQA. Among the classes of projects that are exempt from CEQA review are those projects that are specifically identified as urban in‐fill development. CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32) consists of projects characterized as in‐fill development when meeting the following conditions:
• (a) The Project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations; and
• (b) The proposed Project occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; and • (c) The Project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; and
• (d) Approval of the proposed Project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality, and • (e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

The analysis presented in the following section provides substantial evidence that the proposed Project qualifies for an exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 as a Class 32 urban in‐fill development, and would not have a significant effect on the environment. Section 15183(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 225
Item # 17.

February 16, 2023
2 Guidelines states that “…projects which are consistent with the development density established by the existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as may be necessary to examine whether there are project‐specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site.” Section 15332 (a): General Plan & Zoning Consistency
Yes No The Project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and all applicable planning policies and is consistent with the applicable zoning designation and regulations. X
As described in the staff report and in Table 1 of Exhibit A, the Project is consistent with the Milpitas 2040 General Plan and policies and meets the majority of the Mixed Use (MXD) zoning designation and regulations under the Midtown Specific Plan. The Project was submitted under SB 330 (Housing Crisis Act of 2019) and as the Project is restricting the sale of more than 10 percent of the housing units to moderate-income residents, the Project qualifies for concessions, waivers, and parking reductions under the mandated State Density Bonus Law. Therefore, the City must grant the requested Project waivers to the front and rear yard setback development standards and allow for parking reductions if those development standards would physically preclude the development from construction and do not cause a public health or safety problem.

Section 15332 (b): Project Location, Size, and Context
Yes No The proposed Project occurs within city limits on a project site of no X more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.

The Project is on a site less than five acres at approximately 2.35-acres and is entirely surrounded by urban uses with existing developed lots including a car wash, assembly place, self-storage business, commercial shopping plaza, streets, landscaping, and associated existing infrastructure and utilities.

Section 15332 (c): Endangered, Rare or Threatened Species Yes No The Project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or X threatened species.
226
Item # 17.

February 16, 2023
3 The Project site includes one lot that is vacant and undeveloped and one paved lot with an existing two-story commercial and office building located within a developed urban area. The Project site has no significant riparian corridors, estuaries, marshes, wetlands, or any other potential wildlife habitat that might contain endangered, rare or threatened species as documented by the Biological Constraints Analysis for the 612- 630 South Main Street Project prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions dated May 20, 2022.

The Project will remove 13 Ordinance-sized trees and will be subject to all bird nesting mitigation measures within the adopted Midtown Specific Plan EIR, as included in the Conditions of Approval. Thus, the Project site has no value as habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered species.

Section 15332 (d): Traffic, Noise, Air Quality, or Water Quality Yes No Approval of the proposed Project would not result in any significant X effects related to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality.

Traffic: The proposed Project will result in an increase of 57 units which will have a negligible effect on traffic based on the International Traffic Engineers (ITE) estimates for the Project and credit for the existing school/day care use and gymnastics center use, since the Project would result in a decrease in traffic impacts (changing from commercial and office to residential). As demonstrated by the Trip Generation Study for the Project prepared by TJKM dated April 2, 2022, the proposed Project would not generate any new trips during the daily, a.m. peak hour trips or p.m. peak hour trips and the total net daily trips would be reduced by 115 from its existing condition.

Noise: As substantiated by the Noise Impacts Constraints Analysis for the Project prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions dated May 17, 2022, the introduction of 57 new housing units on the Project site would not result in significant noise impacts upon adjacent uses, because noise emanating from the proposed residences would be typical of the neighborhood and would not result in a significant change or increase in the existing noise environment. The Project will be required to comply with Section 1207 of the California Building Code which requires that the interior noise levels of multifamily units have an interior noise levels of 45 dB DNL or lower. The Project would also have to comply with the City’s noise ordinance per Milpitas Municipal Code Chapter V213-3, restricting construction noise to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekday sand weekends and shall be prohibited on federal holidays.
227
Item # 17.

February 16, 2023
4 Air Quality: The impact of dust and exhaust generated by grading and excavation of future construction activities is temporary in nature and limited to site preparation and future construction of the new townhomes. The Applicant provided the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Constraints Analysis for the Project prepared by FirstCarbon Solutions dated May 27, 2022, that confirmed the Project will not conflict with the 2017 Clean Air Plan by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and the proposed residential land use is below BAAQMD’s construction and operational screening levels for requiring further quantitative criteria air pollutant analysis and would not introduce a new source of odors. Furthermore, the Midtown Specific Plan EIR identified air quality mitigation measures that have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval the Project must adhere to. As such, the Project would not result in any significant effects related to air quality.

Water Quality: The Project will not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements because it will be required to comply with the standard Best Management Practices per the C.3 Stormwater Handbook by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program which regulates discharge into the City’s storm drainage system; and the increase in runoff would not be large enough to cause flooding on- or off-site. All projects of this nature are required to comply with these standards and will be reviewed for compliance by the City’s Engineering Department during the building permit review process. Furthermore, the Applicant prepared a Preliminary Stormwater Quality Control Plan dated June 2022 by consultants MacKay & Somps for the Project.

Section 15332 (e): Utilities and Public Services
Yes No The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public X services.

The Project site is located in an area surrounded completely by existing development and infrastructure and has been reviewed by all major reviewing Departments including but not limited to Building, Fire, Police, Land Development, Traffic, Water, and Solid Waste Departments. As a result, it has been determined that the site can be adequately serviced to preserve public health, safety, and wellness. The Applicant has also agreed to a number of onsite utility improvements as included in the Conditions of Approval. 228
Item # 17.

EXHIBIT 3

CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM SUPPORTING TECHNICAL STUDIES
Part 1: Biological Constraints Analysis for 612-630 South Main Street Project, Milpitas, California, prepared by First Carbon Solutions dated May 20, 2022.

Part 2: Trip Generation Study for 612 South Main Street, Milpitas, California, prepared by TJKM dated April 2, 2022.

Part 3: Noise Impacts Constraints Analysis for the South Main Street Project in Milpitas, California, prepared by First Carbon Solutions dated May 17, 2022.

Part 4: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Constraints Analysis for the South Main Street Project in Milpitas, California prepared by First Carbon Solutions dated May 27, 2022.

Part 5: Preliminary Stormwater Quality Control Plan for South Main Street Milpitas 600 & 612 South Main Street prepared by MacKay & Somps dated June 2022. 229
Item # 17.

Exhibit 3, Part 1:

Biological Constraints Analysis for 612-630 South Main Street Project, Milpitas, California, prepared by First Carbon Solutions dated May 20, 2022.
230
Item # 17.

NORTH AMERICA | EUROPE | AFRICA | AUSTRALIA | ASIA
WWW.FIRSTCARBONSOLUTIONS.COM
Biological Constraints Analysis
612-630 South Main Street Project
City of Milpitas, Santa Clara County, California
Project Applicant:

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC
12647 Alcosta Boulevard, Suite 470
San Ramon, CA 94583
Contact: Hassan Naboulsi, Project Manager
925.380.1210
Prepared by:

FirstCarbon Solutions
1350 Treat Boulevard, Suite 380
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
888.826.5814
Contact: Robert Carroll, Biologist
Date: May 20, 2022
231
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
232
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Table of Contents
FirstCarbon Solutions iii
Table of Contents
Section 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 - Project Location ............................................................................................................ 1

1.2 - Project Description........................................................................................................ 1 Section 2: Regulatory Setting............................................................................................................ 7

2.1 - Federal.......................................................................................................................... 7

2.2 - State ............................................................................................................................. 8

2.3 - Regional and Local ...................................................................................................... 11 Section 3: Methods......................................................................................................................... 13

3.1 - Literature Review........................................................................................................ 13

3.2 - Field Survey ................................................................................................................ 14 Section 4: Results............................................................................................................................ 17

4.1 - Existing Conditions...................................................................................................... 17

4.2 - Special-status Species ................................................................................................. 18

4.3 - Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands............................................................................. 27

4.4 - Wildlife Movement Corridors...................................................................................... 27

4.5 - Protected Trees........................................................................................................... 27

4.6 - Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan.................................................................................... 27 Section 5: Biological Constraints And Recommendations............................................................... 33

5.1 - Avoidance of Impacts to Burrowing Owl...................................................................... 33

5.2 - Avoidance of Impacts to Nesting Birds ........................................................................ 33

5.3 - Avoidance of Impacts to Roosting Bats........................................................................ 34

5.4 - Tree Preservation........................................................................................................ 34 Appendix A: Site Photographs
Appendix B: Database Searches
Appendix C: Tree Inventory Report
List of Tables
Table 1: Trees Evaluated by Tree Inventory Report........................................................................... 18 List of Exhibits
Exhibit 1: Regional Location Map....................................................................................................... 3 Exhibit 2: Local Vicinity Map.............................................................................................................. 5 Exhibit 3: Soils Map ......................................................................................................................... 29 Exhibit 4: Landcover and Vegetation................................................................................................ 31 233
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
234
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Introduction
FirstCarbon Solutions 1
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS) has prepared this Biological Constraints Analysis for the proposed 612-630 South Main Street Project (proposed project) located in Milpitas, California. The purpose of the Biological Constraints Analysis is to identify any potential development constraints related to sensitive or protected biological resources that are present or have potential to occur on-site and to identify any potential impacts that the development of the project site could have on these resources. Recommended measures to avoid or minimize potential project-related impacts to sensitive and protected biological resources on-site are included as appropriate.

1.1 - Project Location
The project site is located in the City of Milpitas, in Santa Clara County, California (Exhibit 1).

Specifically, the project site is located just east of Main Street between West Curtis Avenue and Corning Avenue (Exhibit 2). The project site’s Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) is 086-25-027. The project site is composed of vacant land and an active Montessori school with associated surface parking.

1.2 - Project Description
The proposed project would include the development of vacant land and the demolition of the existing approximate 29,000-square-foot Montessori school structure. Project construction consists of 57 attached, three-story townhome dwelling units and associated amenities on the approximately

2.3-acre site. The proposed project would also include 20,368 square feet of open space, including private open space areas. The proposed project would include 124 total parking spaces, including 114 garage unit parking spaces (two spaces per unit), and 10 guest surface parking spaces. 235
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
236
Item # 17.
82 35
9 9
17 Santa Clara County
Santa Cruz County
85 Alameda County
Santa Clara County
92 880
680
237
280
84 280
Forest Of
Nisene Marks
St Park
Henry Cowell
Redwoods
St Park
Castle Rock
State Park
Big Basin
Redwoods
State Park
Portola
Redwoods
State Park
Lake Del Valle
State Rec Area
101
101
Lake Del
Valle
San Antonio
Reservoir
Calaveras
Reservoir
Anderson Lake
Calero
Reservoir
Chesbro
Reservoir
Uvas
Reservoir
Hayward
Redwood City Newark
Menlo Park North
Fair Oaks
East Palo
Alto
Milpitas Stanford
Palo Alto Mountain View
Sunnyvale East
Foothills
Los Altos Santa Clara
Cupertino
San Jose
Campbell
Saratoga
Los Gatos
Morgan Hill
Fremont
Exhibit 1
Regional Location Map
5 2.5 0 5
Miles
Text
Project Site
Source: Census 2000 Data, The California Spatial Information Library (CaSIL).

TTLC MANAGEMENT INC., AN ARIZONA COMPANY

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

BIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
56470001 • 04/2022 | 1_regional.mxd
Project Site
87 237
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
238
Item # 17.
56470001 • 04/2022 | 2_local_vicinity.mxd
Exhibit 2
Local Vicinity Map
Source: Bing Aerial Imagery. Santa Clara County.

TTLC MANAGEMENT INC., AN ARIZONA COMPANY

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

BIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
1,000 500 0 1,000
Feet
Legend
Project Site
239
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
240
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Regulatory Setting
FirstCarbon Solutions 7
SECTION 2: REGULATORY SETTING

2.1 - Federal

2.1.1 - Endangered Species Act
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has jurisdiction over species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act protects listed species from “take,” which is broadly defined as actions taken to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” The Endangered Species Act protects threatened and endangered plants and animals and their critical habitat. Candidate species are those proposed for listing; during the environmental review process these species are usually treated by resource agencies as if they were actually listed as threatened or endangered.

2.1.2 - Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) implements international treaties between the United States and other nations devised to protect migratory birds, their parts, eggs, and nests from activities such as hunting, pursuing, capturing, killing, selling, and shipping, unless expressly authorized in the regulations or by permit. All migratory birds and their nests are protected from take and other impacts under the MBTA (16 United States Code [USC] § 703, et seq.).

2.1.3 - Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
The golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) are afforded additional protection under the Eagle Protection Act, amended in 1973 (16 USC § 669, et seq.) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC §§ 668–668d).

2.1.4 - Clean Water Act
Section 404
The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) administers Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), which regulates the discharge of dredge and fill material into waters of the United States. On April 21, 2020, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the USACE (collectively “Agencies”) published a new definition of waters of the United States in the Federal Register. This new definition, called the 2020 Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR), went into effect on June 22, 2020. Under the 2020 NWPR, the Code of Federal Regulations (33 CFR § 328.3(a); 40 CFR § 230.3(s)) currently defines waters of the United States as:
a) The territorial seas, and traditional navigable waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
b) Perennial and intermittent tributaries that contribute surface water flow to such waters; c) Certain ponds, lakes, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters; and 241
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Regulatory Setting Biological Constraints Analysis
8 FirstCarbon Solutions
d) Adjacent wetlands to other jurisdictional features.

Section 404 jurisdiction regarding “other waters” refers to features such as ponds, lakes, and streams which extend to the upward limit of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The OHWM is defined as the “line on shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear natural line impressed on the bank; shelving; changes in the character of soil; destruction of terrestrial vegetation; the presence of litter or debris; or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas” (33 CFR § 328.3(7)).

Section 401
As stated in Section 401 of the CWA, “any applicant for a federal permit for activities that involve a discharge to waters of the State, shall provide the federal permitting agency a certification from the State in which the discharge is proposed that states that the discharge will comply with the applicable provisions under the Federal Clean Water Act.” Therefore, before the USACE will issue a valid Section 404 permit, applicants must obtain a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).

2.2 - State

2.2.1 - CEQA Guidelines
The following California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G checklist questions serve as thresholds of significance when evaluating the potential impacts of a proposed project on biological resources. Impacts are considered significant if a project would:
• Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as being a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or USFWS. • Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. • Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the CWA (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. • Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
• Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
• Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. 242
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Regulatory Setting
FirstCarbon Solutions 9

2.2.2 - California Endangered Species Act
The State of California enacted the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) in 1984. CESA is similar to the Endangered Species Act but pertains to State-listed endangered and threatened species. CESA requires State agencies to consult with the CDFW when preparing CEQA documents to ensure that the State lead agency actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat essential to the continued existence of those species if there are reasonable and prudent alternatives available (Fish and Game Code [FGC] § 2080). CESA directs agencies to consult with the CDFW on projects or actions that could affect listed species, directs the CDFW to determine whether jeopardy would occur, and allows the CDFW to identify “reasonable and prudent alternatives” to the proposed project consistent with conserving the species. CESA allows the CDFW to authorize exceptions to the State’s prohibition against take of a listed species if the take of a listed species is incidental to carrying out an otherwise lawful project that has been approved under CEQA (FGC § 2081).

2.2.3 - California Fish and Game Code
Under CESA, the CDFW has the responsibility for maintaining a list of endangered and threatened species (FGC § 2070). Fish and Game Code Sections 2050–2098 outline the protection provided to California’s rare, endangered, and threatened species. Fish and Game Code Section 2080 prohibits the taking of plants and animals listed under the CESA. Fish and Game Code Section 2081 established an incidental take permit program for State-listed species. The CDFW maintains a list of “candidate species,” which it formally notices as being under review for addition to the list of endangered or threatened species.

In addition, the Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 (NPPA) (FGC § 1900, et seq.) prohibits the take, possession, or sale within the State of any plants with a State designation of rare, threatened, or endangered (as defined by the CDFW). An exception to this prohibition in the NPPA allows landowners to take listed plant species under specified circumstances, provided that the owners first notify the CDFW and give the agency at least 10 days to retrieve (and presumably replant) the plants before they are plowed under or otherwise destroyed. Fish and Game Code Section 1913 exempts from the take prohibition “the removal of endangered or rare native plants from a canal, lateral ditch, building site, or road, or other right-of-way.” Project impacts to these species are not considered significant unless the species are known to have a high potential to occur within the area of disturbance associated with construction of the proposed project.

In addition to formal listing under the Endangered Species Act and CESA, some species receive additional consideration by the CDFW and local lead agencies during the CEQA process. Species that may be considered for review are those listed as a “Species of Special Concern.” The CDFW maintains lists of Species of Special Concern that serve as species “watch lists.” Species with this status may have limited distributions or limited populations and/or the extent of their habitats has been reduced substantially, such that their populations may be threatened. Thus, their populations are monitored and they may receive special attention during environmental review. While they do not have statutory protection, they may be considered rare under CEQA and specific protection measures may be warranted. In addition to Species of Special Concern, the CDFW Special Animals List identifies animals that are tracked by the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and may be potentially vulnerable but warrant no federal interest and no legal protection. 243
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Regulatory Setting Biological Constraints Analysis
10 FirstCarbon Solutions
Sensitive species that would qualify for listing but are not currently listed are afforded protection under CEQA. CEQA Guidelines Section 15065 (Mandatory Findings of Significance) requires that a substantial reduction in numbers of a rare or endangered species be considered a significant effect.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15380 (Rare or Endangered Species) provides for the assessment of unlisted species as Rare or Endangered under CEQA if the species can be shown to meet the criteria for listing. Unlisted plant species on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) List ranked 1A, 1B, or 2 would typically require evaluation under CEQA.

Fish and Game Code Sections 3500 to 5500 outline protection for fully protected species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish. Species fully protected by these sections may not be taken or possessed at any time. The CDFW cannot issue permits or licenses that authorize the take of any fully protected species except under certain circumstances such as scientific research and live capture and relocation of such species pursuant to a permit for the protection of livestock.

Under Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5, it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders of Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto. To comply with the requirements of CESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any State-listed endangered or threatened species may be present in the project study area and determine whether the proposed project will have a potentially significant impact on such species. In addition, the CDFW encourages informal consultation on any proposed project that may impact a candidate species.

Project-related impacts to species on the CESA endangered or threatened list would be considered significant. State-listed species are fully protected under the mandates of CESA. “Take” of protected species incidental to otherwise lawful management activities may be authorized under Fish and Game Code Section 206.591. Authorization from the CDFW would be in the form of an Incidental Take Permit.

Fish and Game Code Section 1602 requires any entity to notify the CDFW before beginning any activity that “may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake” or “deposit debris, waste, or other materials that could pass into any river, stream, or lake.” “River, stream, or lake” includes waters that are episodic and perennial and ephemeral streams, desert washes, and watercourses with a subsurface flow. A Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement will be required if the CDFW determines that project activities may substantially adversely affect fish or wildlife resources through alterations to a covered body of water.

2.2.4 - California Department of Fish and Wildlife Species of Concern In addition to formal listing under the Endangered Species Act and CESA, species receive additional consideration by the CDFW and local lead agencies during the CEQA process. Species that may be considered for review are included on a list of “Species of Special Concern” developed by the CDFW.

It tracks species in California whose numbers, reproductive success, or habitat may be threatened. In addition to Species of Special Concern, the CDFW identifies animals that are tracked by the CNDDB but warrant no federal interest and no legal protection. These species are identified as California Special Animals.
244
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Regulatory Setting
FirstCarbon Solutions 11

2.2.5 - California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act The RWQCB regulates actions that would involve “discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, within any region that could affect the water of the State” (Water Code § 13260(a)) pursuant to provisions of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act. “Waters of the State” are defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the State” (Water Code § 13050(e)).

2.2.6 - California Native Plant Society
The CNPS maintains a rank of plant species that are native to California and that have low population numbers, limited distribution, or are otherwise threatened with extinction. This information is published in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Following are the definitions of the CNPS ranks:
• Rank 1A: Plants presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere • Rank 1B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere • Rank 2A: Plants presumed extirpated in California but common elsewhere • Rank 2B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere • Rank 3: Plants about which more information is needed • Rank 4: Watch List: Plants of limited distribution
Potential impacts to populations of CNPS-ranked plants receive consideration under CEQA review. All plants appearing on the CNPS List ranked 1 or 2 are considered to meet the CEQA Guidelines Section 15380 criteria. While only some of the plants ranked 3 or 4 meet the definitions of threatened or endangered species, potential impacts to these species or their habitats should be analyzed during the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to CEQA as they may meet the definition of Rare or Endangered under the CEQA Guidelines Section 15380 criteria.

2.3 - Regional and Local
Milpitas, California, Municipal Code
Chapter 2 Section 7, Tree Protection and Heritage Tree Program.

The City of Milpitas requires a Tree Removal Permit for the removal of any trees meeting the following characteristics:
• All trees which have a 56-inch or greater circumference of any trunk measured 4.5 feet from the ground and located on developed residential property; or • All trees which have a 37-inch or greater circumference of any trunk measured 4.5 feet from the ground and located on developed commercial or industrial property; or • All trees which have a 37-inch or greater circumference of any trunk measured 4.5 feet from the ground, when removal relates to any transaction for which zoning approval or subdivision approval is required; or
• Any tree existing at the time of a zoning or subdivision approval and which was a specific subject of such approval or otherwise covered by subsection (b) above; or 245
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Regulatory Setting Biological Constraints Analysis
12 FirstCarbon Solutions
• All trees which have a 37-inch or greater circumference of any trunk measured 4.5 feet from the ground and located on a vacant, undeveloped, or underdeveloped property; or • All heritage trees or groves of trees meeting the following characteristics:
- One of the largest or oldest trees or grove of trees in Milpitas; or - A tree or grove of trees possessing distinctive form, size, age, location, and/or historical significance.
246
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Methods
FirstCarbon Solutions 13
SECTION 3: METHODS

3.1 - Literature Review
This literature review provides a baseline from which to evaluate project impacts on biological resources potentially occurring on the project site and in the surrounding area.

3.1.1 - Existing Documentation
As part of the literature review, an FCS Biologist examined existing environmental documentation for the project site and vicinity. This documentation included literature pertaining to the habitat requirements of special-status species with the potential to occur in the project vicinity and federal register listings, protocols, and species data provided by the USFWS and CDFW.

3.1.2 - Topographic Maps and Aerial Photographs
An FCS Biologist reviewed current United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map(s) and aerial photographs as a preliminary analysis of the existing conditions within the project site and immediate vicinity.1 Information obtained from the topographic maps included elevation, general watershed information, and potential drainage feature locations using Google Earth in conjunction with the EPA Watershed Assessment, Tracking, and Environmental Results System (WATERS).2 Aerial photographs provided a perspective of the current site conditions relative to on-site and off-site land use, plant community locations, and potential locations of wildlife movement corridors.

3.1.3 - Soil Surveys
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has published soil surveys that describe the soil series (i.e., group of soils with similar profiles) occurring within a particular area. 3 These profiles
include major horizons with similar thickness, arrangement, and other important characteristics.

These series are further subdivided into soil mapping units that provide specific information regarding soil characteristics. Many special-status plant species have a limited distribution based exclusively on soil type. Therefore, pertinent USDA soil survey maps were reviewed to determine the existing soil mapping units within the project site and to establish whether the soil conditions on-site are suitable for any special-status plant species.

3.1.4 - Special-status Species Database Search
An FCS Biologist compiled a list of threatened, endangered, and otherwise special-status species previously recorded within the project vicinity based on a search of the CNDDB and the CNPS 1 United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2022. National Geospatial Program. Website: https://www.usgs.gov/core-sciencesystems/national-geospatial-program/us-topo-maps-america?qt-science_support_page_related_con=4#qtscience_support_page_related_con. Accessed April 27, 2022. 2 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. Watershed Assessment, Tracking, and Environmental Results System (WATERS). Website: https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/waters-watershed-assessment-tracking-environmental-results-system.

Accessed April 27, 2022. 3 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Web Soil Survey (WSS). United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Website: https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed April 27, 2022. 247
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Methods Biological Constraints Analysis
14 FirstCarbon Solutions
Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California for the Milpitas, California, USGS 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Map and the eight surrounding quadrangles. 4,5
The CNDDB Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS 5) database was used to determine the distance between the known occurrences of special-status species and the project site.6

3.1.5 - Trees
Prior to conducting the reconnaissance-level field survey, an FCS Biologist reviewed applicable City ordinances pertaining to tree preservation and protection and ascertained whether tree replacement measures or permits for the removal of protected trees are required. Additionally, FCS reviewed the Preliminary Tree Inventory Report prepared by HortScience in May 2022. The findings of the report informed the Results and Biological Constraints sections of this report. The Tree Inventory Report is included as Appendix C to this report.

3.1.6 - Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands
Prior to conducting the reconnaissance-level survey, an FCS Biologist reviewed EPA WATERS and aerial photography to identify potential natural drainage features and water bodies.7 In general, all surface drainage features identified as blue-line streams on USGS and USFWS maps are potentially State or federally protected waters or wetlands.

3.1.7 - Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan
Prior to conducting the reconnaissance-level survey, an FCS Biologist reviewed the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Geobrowser interactive web tool to determine biological constraints applicable to the project site related to the requirements of the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan (SCVHP).8 Additionally, FCS reviewed applicable habitat-type definitions provided in the SCVHP.

3.2 - Field Survey
On April 6, 2022, FCS Biologist Robert Carroll conducted a general biological field survey of the project site and its immediate vicinity, where accessible. The objective of the survey was to assess and characterize the biological conditions on and adjacent to the site, including identification of plant and wildlife species and their habitats. During the survey, Mr. Carroll searched for evidence of any habitat for special-status species and other sensitive biological resources, including those that were identified in the literature review.
4 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. CNDDB RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for SpecialStatus Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed April 27, 2022. 5 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2022. California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory. Website:
http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Accessed April 27, 2022. 6 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS 5). Website:
https://map.dfg.ca.gov/bios/. Accessed April 27, 2022. 7 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. Watershed Assessment, Tracking and Environmental Results System (WATERS). Website: https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/waters-watershed-assessment-tracking-environmental-results-system.

Accessed April 27, 2022. 8 Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency. 2021. Habitat Agency Geobrowser. Website: http://www.hcpmaps.com/habitat/. Accessed April 27, 2022.
248
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Methods
FirstCarbon Solutions 15

3.2.1 - Vegetation
Common plant species observed during the reconnaissance-level survey were identified by visual characteristics and morphology in the field and recorded. Uncommon and less familiar plants were identified with the use of taxonomical guides, including Jepson eFlora and Calflora.9,10 Taxonomic nomenclature used in this study follows The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California.11 Common plant names, when not available from The Jepson Manual, were taken from other regionally specific references. Vegetation types and boundaries were noted on aerial photos, verified through field observation, and digitized using ESRI ArcGIS software® ArcMap 10.8. By incorporating collected field data and interpreting aerial photography, a map of habitat types, land cover types, and other biological resources within the project site was prepared.

3.2.2 - Wildlife
Wildlife species detected during the reconnaissance-level survey by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other signs were recorded. Notations were made regarding suitable habitat for those special-status species determined to have the potential to occur within the project site.12 If necessary, appropriate field guides were used to assist in species identification during surveys, such as Peterson, Reid, and Stebbins.13,14,15 Online resources such as eBird and California Herps were also consulted, as necessary. 16,17

3.2.3 - Wildlife Movement Corridors
Wildlife movement corridors link areas of suitable wildlife habitat that are otherwise separated by rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. Urbanization and the resulting fragmentation of open space areas create isolated “islands” of wildlife habitat, forming separated populations. Corridors act as an effective link between populations.

The project site was evaluated for evidence of a wildlife movement corridor during the reconnaissance-level survey. The scope of the biological resource assessment did not include a formal wildlife movement corridor study utilizing track plates, camera stations, scent stations, or snares. Rather, the focus of this study was to determine whether a change in land use at the project site could have significant impacts on the regional movement of wildlife. Conclusions are based on the information compiled during the literature review, including aerial photographs, USGS topographic maps, and resource maps for the vicinity; the field survey; and professional experience with the desired topography, habitat, and resource requirements of the special-status species potentially utilizing the project site and vicinity.
9 Jepson Flora Project (eds.) 2022. Jepson eFlora, https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/. Accessed on April 27, 2022. 10 Calflora. 2022. Calflora: Information on California plants for education, research, and conservation. Website:
http://www.calflora.org/. April 27, 2022. 11 Baldwin, B. et al. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California. Berkeley: University of California Press. County of San Bernardino (Bernardino). 2007 (amended 2015). 12 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. CNDDB RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for SpecialStatus Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed April 27, 2022. 13 Peterson, T.R. 2010. A Field Guide to Birds of Western North America, Fourth Edition. 14 Reid, F. 2006. A Field Guide to Mammals of North America, Fourth Edition. 15 Stebbins, R.C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, Third Edition. 16 eBird. 2022. Online bird occurrence database. Website: http://ebird.org/content/ebird/. April 27, 2022. 17 California Herps. 2021. A Guide to the Amphibians and Reptiles of California. Website: http://www.californiaherps.com/. Accessed April 27, 2022.
249
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Methods Biological Constraints Analysis
16 FirstCarbon Solutions

3.2.4 - Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands
The project site was surveyed for presence of wetland indicators during the reconnaissance-level survey on April 6, 2022, based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. 250
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Results
FirstCarbon Solutions 17
SECTION 4: RESULTS
This section summarizes the results of the literature search, database review, and field survey.

4.1 - Existing Conditions
Weather conditions during the April 6, 2022, field survey were sunny, with an approximate temperature of 78°F (degrees Fahrenheit). Wind speeds were 2 to 5 miles per hour. Photos of the site are provided in Appendix A.

4.1.1 - Soils
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) web soil survey identifies one soil unit for the project site: Urban land–Newpark complex (0 to 2 percent slopes) (Exhibit 3).18 No signs of serpentine outcrops, serpentine-derived soils, or other indicators of presence of serpentine (e.g., serpentine-associated plant communities) were observed on-site.

4.1.2 - Vegetation Communities and Land Cover
Exhibit 4 depicts the vegetation and landcover types present on the project site.

Ruderal–0.73 Acres
Ruderal habitat is classified as areas that have been physically altered by previous anthropogenic activities and are no longer recognizable as a native or naturalized vegetation but continue to retain a soil substrate. Past aerial photography indicate that this area of the project site was developed between 1993 and 1999 and was eventually razed in 2000. 19 This area is dominated by a mix of nonnative annual grasses and forbs, including cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), Italian thistle (Carduus pycneocephalus), wild oats (Avena spp.), English plantain (Plantago lanceolata), salsify (Tragopgon porrifolius), redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium), burclover (Medicago polymorpha), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), and others. Ornamental trees in this area included Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis), elderberry (Sambucus sp.), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), Brisbane box (Lophostemon confertus), Mediterranean fan palm (Chamaerops humilis), crape myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica), Chinese hackberry (Celtis sinesis), and silk tree (Albizia julibrissin).

Urban/Developed–1.61 Acres
Developed land is characterized by permanent or semi-permanent structures, pavement, or hardscape, and landscaped areas that often require irrigation. The urban/developed vegetation community includes land that has been constructed upon or otherwise covered with a permanent man-made surface. Vegetation within the urban/developed land usually consists of maintained ornamental vegetation. This portion of the project site has been developed with commercial uses including an active Montessori school and associated surface parking. Ornamental trees in this area 18 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). United States Department of Agriculture. 2022. Web Soil Survey. Website:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed April 27, 2022. 19 Google Earth Pro, 1999. 37° 25' 21.54"N, 121° 54' 14.38"W, Eye alt 1,376 ft. Accessed April 27, 2022. 251
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Results Biological Constraints Analysis
18 FirstCarbon Solutions
included Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis), lemon-scented gum (Eucalyptus citriodora), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), Brisbane box (Lophostemon confertus), and crape myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica).

The Tree Inventory Report prepared for the project evaluated a total of 33 trees, including nine street trees representing nine different species.
20 Table 1 below summarizes the findings of the Tree
Inventory Report.

Table 1: Trees Evaluated by Tree Inventory Report
Common Name Scientific Name Total
Silk tree Albizia julibrissin 1
Chinese hackberry Celtis sinesis 2
Mediterranean fan palm Chamaerops humilis 2
Lemon-scented gum Eucalyptus citriodora 2
Crape myrtle Lagerstroemia indica 7
Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua 13
Brisbane box Lophostemon confertus 4
Canary Island date palm Phoenix canariensis 1
Elderberry Sambucus sp. 1
Total 33

4.1.3 - Wildlife
The project site may provide habitat for generalist and opportunistic wildlife species that are able to tolerate high levels of habitat disturbance, including skunk (Mephitis mephitis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), house sparrow, (Passer domesticus), and Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), among others.

Many trees that surround the project site could provide suitable habitat for migratory or resident nesting birds. No signs of bat roosts were observed during the field survey; however, many small crevices in the existing structures on-site could provide roosting habitat for bats. Three California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) burrows were also observed on-site.

4.2 - Special-status Species
A review of the CNDDB and CNPS Inventory determined that 33 special-status plant species and 53 special-status animal species have been recorded in the greater vicinity of the project site (Appendix 20 HortScience│Bartlett Consulting Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company. 2022. Tree Inventory Report 612 South Main Street Milpitas, CA. May 2022.
252
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Results
FirstCarbon Solutions 19
B).21,22 The parameters of these search queries included an area consisting of the Milpitas, California, USGS 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Map and the eight surrounding quadrangles (regional vicinity). The likelihood and rationale for these species to occur are discussed in the paragraphs below. No special-status plants or animal species were observed during the field survey.

4.2.1 - Special-status Plants
A total of 33 special-status plant species have been recorded on undeveloped land in the regional vicinity. The following species have been recorded within a 5-mile radius of the project site and are evaluated below in Table 2.

Table 2: Special-status Plants Evaluated
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status
USFWS1 CDFW2 CNPS3 Habitat Description4 Occurrence Determination Alkali milk-vetch
Astragalus tener var.
tener
— — 1B.2 Alkali playa, valley and foothill
grassland, vernal pools. Low ground,
alkali flats, and flooded lands; in
annual grassland or in playas or
vernal pools
Elevation: 0–170 m.

Blooming period: March–June
Not present. Disturbed and
managed ruderal grassland
present on-site does not
provide suitable habitat for
this species. Species was not
observed during the April 6,
2022, survey.

Congdon's tarplant
Centromadia parryi
ssp. congdonii
FE ST 1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland.

Alkaline soils sometimes described
as heavy white clay.

Elevation: 0–245 m.

Blooming period: May–October
Not present. Disturbed and
managed ruderal grassland
present on-site does not
provide suitable habitat for
this species. Species was not
observed during the April 6,
2022, survey.

Point Reyes salty
bird's-beak
Chloropyron
maritimum ssp.
palustre
— — 1B.2 Coastal salt marsh. Usually in
coastal salt marsh with Salicornia,
Distichlis, Jaumea, Spartina, etc
Elevation: 0–115 m.

Blooming period: June–October
Not present. Disturbed and
managed ruderal grassland
present on-site does not
provide suitable habitat for
this species. Species was not
observed during the April 6,
2022, survey.
robust spineflower
Chorizanthe robusta
var. robusta
FE — 1B.1 Cismontane woodland, coastal
dunes, coastal scrub, chaparral.

Sandy terraces and bluffs or in loose
sand.

Elevation: 5–245 m.

Blooming period: April–September
Not present. Disturbed and
managed ruderal grassland
present on-site does not
provide suitable habitat for
this species. Species was not
observed during the April 6,
2022, survey.
21 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. CNDDB RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for SpecialStatus Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed April 27, 2022. 22 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2022. California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory. Website:
http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Accessed April 27, 2022 253
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Results Biological Constraints Analysis
20 FirstCarbon Solutions
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status
USFWS1 CDFW2 CNPS3 Habitat Description4 Occurrence Determination Hoover's buttoncelery
Eryngium
aristulatum var.
hooveri
— — 1B.1 Vernal pools. Alkaline depressions,
vernal pools, roadside ditches and
other wet places near the coast.

Elevation: 1–150 m.

Blooming period: June
Not present. Disturbed and
managed ruderal grassland
present on-site does not
provide suitable habitat for
this species. Species was not
observed during the April 6,
2022, survey.

San Joaquin
spearscale
Extriplex joaquinana
— — 1B.2 Chenopod scrub, alkali meadow,
playas, valley and foothill grassland.

In seasonal alkali wetlands or alkali
sink scrub with Distichlis spicata,
Frankenia, etc.

Elevation: 0–800 m.

Blooming period: April–September
Not present. Disturbed and
managed ruderal grassland
present on-site does not
provide suitable habitat for
this species. Species was not
observed during the April 6,
2022, survey.
arcuate bush-mallow
Malacothamnus
arcuatus
— — 1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland.

Gravelly alluvium.

Elevation: 1–735 m.

Blooming period: April–September
Not present. Disturbed and
managed ruderal grassland
present on-site does not
provide suitable habitat for
this species. Species was not
observed during the April 6,
2022, survey.

Hall's bush-mallow
Malacothamnus
hallii
— — 1B.2 Chaparral, coastal scrub. Some
populations on serpentine.

Elevation: 10–735 m.

Blooming period: May–September
Not present. Disturbed and
managed non-serpentine
ruderal grassland present onsite does not provide suitable habitat for this species.

Species was not observed
during the April 6, 2022,
survey.
hairless
popcornflower
Plagiobothrys glaber
— — 1A Meadows and seeps, marshes and
swamps. Coastal salt marshes and
alkaline meadows.

Elevation: 5–125 m.

Blooming period: March–May
Not present. Disturbed and
managed ruderal grassland
present on-site does not
provide suitable habitat for
this species. Species was not
observed during the April 6,
2022, survey.

California seablite
Suaeda californica
FE — 1B.1 Marshes and swamps. Margins of
coastal salt marshes. Elevation: 0–5
m.

Blooming period: July–October
Not present. Disturbed and
managed ruderal grassland
present on-site does not
provide suitable habitat for
this species. Species was not
observed during the April 6,
2022, survey.
saline clover
Trifolium
hydrophilum
— — 1B.2 Marshes and swamps, valley and
foothill grassland, vernal pools.

Mesic, alkaline sites.

Elevation: 1–335 m.

Blooming period: April–June
Not present. Disturbed and
managed ruderal grassland
present on-site does not
provide suitable habitat for
this species. Species was not
observed during the April 6,
2022, survey.
254
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Results
FirstCarbon Solutions 21
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status
USFWS1 CDFW2 CNPS3 Habitat Description4 Occurrence Determination Code Designations
1 Federal Status: 2022 USFWS Listing 2 State Status: 2022 CDFW Listing 3 CNPS: 2022 CNPS Listing ESU = Evolutionary Significant Unit is a
distinctive population.

FE = Listed as endangered under the
Endangered Species Act.

FT = Listed as threatened under the
Endangered Species Act.

FC = Candidate for listing (threatened or
endangered) under the Endangered
Species Act.

FD = Delisted in accordance with the
Endangered Species Act.

FPD = Federally Proposed to be Delisted.

MBTA = protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act
— = Not federally listed
SE = Listed as endangered under
the CESA.

ST = Listed as threatened under
the CESA.

SSC = Species of Special
Concern as identified by
the CDFW.

FP = Listed as fully protected
under FGC.

CFG = FGC = protected by Fish and
Game Code 3503.5
CR = Rare in California.
— = Not State listed
Rank 1A = Plants presumed
extirpated in
California and
either rare or
extinct
elsewhere.

Rank 1B = Plant species
that are rare,
threatened, or
endangered in
California and
elsewhere.

Rank 2 = Plant species
that are rare,
threatened, or
endangered in
California, but
more common
elsewhere.

Rank 3 = Plants about
which more
information is
needed
Rank 4 = Watch List:

Plants of limited
distribution
Blooming period: Months in
parentheses are
uncommon.

Notes:
4 Habitat Description: Habitat description adapted from CNDDB and CNPS online inventory or other specified source.

Sources:

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2021. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS 5).

Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/bios/. Accessed April 28, 2022.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. CNDDB RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for Special-Status Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed April 28, 2022.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2022. California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory.

Website: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Accessed April 28, 2022.

The ruderal grassland community on the project site is substantially disturbed by past and continuous anthropogenic activities (including vegetation management, trespassing, parking, etc.) and is heavily invaded by non-native invasive species (see Section 4.1.2 Vegetation Communities).

Furthermore, the site does not contain serpentine-derived substrate or outcrops, marshes, or vernal pools and is cut off from regionally occurring special-status species populations by concentrated surrounding development. No special-status plant species or vegetation communities or other 255
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Results Biological Constraints Analysis
22 FirstCarbon Solutions
conditions supporting sensitive plant species were observed. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that no special-status plant species occur on the project site.

4.2.2 - Special-status Wildlife
The database results included 53 special-status wildlife species that are known to occur within the regional vicinity of the project site (Appendix B). The following species have been recorded within a 5-mile radius of the project site and are evaluated below in Table 3.

Table 3: Special-status Wildlife Species Evaluated
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status
Habitat Description3 Potential to Occur and Rationale USFWS1 CDFW2 4 Amphibians
California tiger
salamander
Ambystoma
californiense
FT ST Lives in vacant or mammal-occupied
burrows throughout most of the year;
in grassland, savanna, or open
woodland habitats. Need underground
refuges, especially ground squirrel
burrows, and vernal pools or other
seasonal water sources for breeding.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable aquatic habitat to
support this species. While the
portions of the project site contain
burrows, dense commercial
development separate the project
site from suitable aquatic habitat.
foothill yellowlegged frog
Rana boylii
— SE
SSC
Partly shaded, shallow streams and
riffles with a rocky substrate in a
variety of habitats. Needs at least
some cobble-sized substrate for egglaying. Needs at least 15 weeks to attain metamorphosis.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable aquatic habitat to
support this species.

California redlegged frog
Rana draytonii
FT —
SSC
Lowlands and foothills in or near
permanent sources of deep water with
dense, shrubby, or emergent riparian
vegetation. Requires 11–20 weeks of
permanent water for larval
development. Must have access to
estivation habitat.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable aquatic habitat to
support this species.

Birds
Tricolored
blackbird
Agelaius tricolor
—
MBTA
ST
SSC
Highly colonial species, most
numerous in Central Valley and
vicinity. Largely endemic to California.

Requires open water, protected
nesting substrate, and foraging area
with insect prey within a few km of
the colony.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable aquatic habitat to
support this species.
golden eagle
Aquila chrysaetos
—
MBTA
—
FP
WL
Rolling foothills, mountain areas, sagejuniper flats, and desert. Cliff-walled canyons provide nesting habitat in
most parts of range; also, large trees
in open areas.

Low. The project site does not
contain suitable nesting habitat for
this species. Eagles may fly over the
site while foraging. Nearest
recorded occurrences is located
approximately 3.25 miles northeast
of the project site.
256
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Results
FirstCarbon Solutions 23
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status
Habitat Description3 Potential to Occur and Rationale USFWS1 CDFW2 4 Great blue heron
Ardea Herodias
—
MBTA
— Colonial nester in tall trees, cliffsides,
and sequestered spots on marshes.

Rookery sites in close proximity to
foraging areas: marshes, lake margins,
tide-flats, rivers and streams, wet
meadows. Nesting colonies considered
sensitive by CDFW.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable aquatic habitat to
support this species.

Athene
cunicularia
burrowing owl
—
MBTA
—
SSC
Found in open, dry annual or perennial
grasslands, deserts, and scrublands
characterized by low-growing
vegetation. A subterranean nester,
dependent upon burrowing mammals,
most notably the California ground
squirrel.

Low. Species or signs of species
presence were not observed during
survey. The project site does
contain grassland suitable for
foraging after mowing. Burrows
suitable for nesting were observed.

Three occurrences within 1 mile of
the project site.

Swainson’s hawk
Buteo swainsoni
—
MBTA
ST Breeds in grasslands with scattered
trees, juniper-sage flats, riparian
areas, savannahs, and agricultural or
ranch lands with groves or lines of
trees. Requires adjacent suitable
foraging areas such as grasslands or
alfalfa or grain fields supporting
rodent populations.

Low. Suitable nesting trees are
present on-site. The project site
contains marginal foraging habitat
due to habitat fragmentation from
development.
western snowy
plover
Charadrius
nivosus nivosus
FT
MBTA
—
SSC
Sandy beaches, salt pond levees and
shores of large alkali lakes. Needs
sandy, gravelly, or friable soils for
nesting.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable habitat to support
this species.
western yellowbilled cuckoo
Coccyzus
americanus
occidentalis
FT
MBTA
SE Riparian forest nester along the broad,
lower flood-bottoms of larger river
systems. Nests in riparian jungles of
willow, often mixed with
cottonwoods, with lower story of
blackberry, nettles, or wild grape.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable habitat to support
this species.

Yellow rail
Coturnicops
noveboracensis
—
MBTA
—
SSC
Freshwater marshlands. None. The project site does not
contain suitable aquatic habitat to
support this species.

Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
—
MBTA
—
FP
Often found near foothills and valley
margins with scattered oaks and river
bottomlands or marshes next to
deciduous woodland or isolated
dense-topped trees for nesting and
perching. Forages in open grasslands,
meadows, or marshes.

Low. Suitable nesting trees are
present on-site. The project site
contains marginal foraging habitat
due to habitat fragmentation from
development.

American
peregrine falcon
Falco peregrinus
anatum
—
MBTA
FP
SSC
Near wetlands, lakes, rivers, or other
water; on cliffs, banks, dunes,
mounds; also, human-made
structures. Nest consists of a scrape or
a depression or ledge in an open site.

Low. The project site does not
contain suitable nesting habitat for
this species. Falcons may fly over
the site while foraging.
257
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Results Biological Constraints Analysis
24 FirstCarbon Solutions
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status
Habitat Description3 Potential to Occur and Rationale USFWS1 CDFW2 4 Saltmarsh
common
yellowthroat
Geothlypis trichas
sinuosa
—
MBTA
—
SSC
Resident of the San Francisco Bay
region, in fresh and saltwater marshes.

Requires thick, continuous cover down
to water surface for foraging; tall
grasses, tule patches, willows for
nesting
None. The project site does not
contain suitable aquatic habitat to
support this species.

California black
rail
Laterallus
jamaicensis
coturniculus
—
MBTA
ST
FP
Inhabits freshwater marshes, wet
meadows, and shallow margins of
saltwater marshes bordering larger
bays. Needs water depths of about 1
inch that do not fluctuate during the
year and dense vegetation for nesting
habitat.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable aquatic habitat to
support this species.

Alameda song
sparrow
Melospiza
melodia pusillula
—
MBTA
—
SSC
Resident of salt marshes bordering
south arm of San Francisco Bay.

Inhabits Salicornia marshes; nests low
in Grindelia bushes (high enough to
escape high tides) and in Salicornia.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable habitat to support
this species.

California
Ridgway's rail
Rallus obsoletus
obsoletus
FE
MBTA
SE
FP
Salt water and brackish marshes
traversed by tidal sloughs in the
vicinity of San Francisco Bay.

Associated with abundant growths of
pickleweed, but feeds away from
cover on invertebrates from mudbottomed sloughs.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable habitat to support
this species.

Fish
Steelhead–
central California
coast DPS
Oncorhynchus
mykiss irideus
pop. 8
FT — DPS includes all naturally spawned
populations of steelhead (and their
progeny) in streams from the Russian
River to Aptos Creek, Santa Cruz
County, California (inclusive). Also
includes the drainages of San
Francisco and San Pablo Bays.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable aquatic habitat to
support this species.

Mammals
Pallid bat
Antrozous
pallidus
— SSC Inhabits low elevation (below 1,830
m./6,000 feet) rocky arid deserts and
canyonlands, shrub-steppe grasslands,
karst formations, and higher elevation
coniferous forests (below 2,100
m./7,000 feet). Day and night roosts
include crevices in rocky outcrops and
cliffs, caves, mines, trees, and various
human structures such as bridges,
barns, porches, bat boxes, and humanoccupied as well as vacant buildings.

Low. The project site
does contain man-made structures
and trees that may support roosting.

Townsend's bigeared bat
Corynorhinus
townsendii
— SSC Throughout California in a wide variety
of habitats. Most common in mesic
sites. Roosts in the open, hanging from
walls and ceilings. Roosting sites
limiting. Extremely sensitive to human
disturbance
Low. The project site
does contain man-made structures
and trees that may support roosting.
258
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Results
FirstCarbon Solutions 25
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status
Habitat Description3 Potential to Occur and Rationale USFWS1 CDFW2 4 salt-marsh
harvest mouse
Reithrodontomys
raviventris
FE SE
FP
Only in the saline emergent wetlands
of San Francisco Bay and its
tributaries. Pickleweed is primary
habitat, but may occur in other marsh
vegetation types and in adjacent
upland areas. Does not burrow; builds
loosely organized nests. Requires
higher areas for flood escape.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable habitat to support
this species.

Salt-marsh
wandering shrew
Sorex vagrans
halicoetes
— —
SSC
Salt marshes of the south arm of San
Francisco Bay. Medium high marsh 6–
8 ft above sea level where abundant
driftwood is scattered among
Salicornia.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable habitat to support
this species.

Reptiles
Northern
California legless
lizard
Anniella pulchra
— —
SSC
Sandy or loose loamy soils under
sparse vegetation. Soil moisture is
essential. Prefers soils with a high
moisture content.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable habitat to support
this species.

Phrynosoma
blainvillii
coast horned
lizard
— —
SSC
Inhabits open areas of sandy soil and
low vegetation in valleys, foothills, and
semiarid mountains. Found in
grasslands, coniferous forests,
woodlands, and chaparral, with open
areas and patches of loose soil. Often
found in lowlands along sandy washes
with scattered shrubs and along dirt
roads. Often found near ant hills
feeding on ants.

None. The project site does not
contain suitable habitat to support
this species.

Code Designations
1 Federal Status: 2022 USFWS Listing 2 State Status: 2022 CDFW Listing ESU = Evolutionary Significant Unit is a distinctive
population.

FE = Listed as endangered under the Endangered
Species Act.

FT = Listed as threatened under the Endangered
Species Act.

FC = Candidate for listing (threatened or
endangered) under the Endangered Species
Act.

FD = Delisted in accordance with the Endangered
Species Act.

FPD = Federally Proposed to be Delisted.

MBTA = protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
— = Not federally listed
SE = Listed as endangered under the CESA.

ST = Listed as threatened under the CESA.

SSC = Species of Special Concern as identified by the CDFW.

FP = Listed as fully protected under the Fish and Game
Code.

CFG = FGC =protected by Fish and Game code 3503.5
CE = Candidate endangered under the CESA.
— = Not State listed
259
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Results Biological Constraints Analysis
26 FirstCarbon Solutions
Scientific Name
Common Name
Status
Habitat Description3 Potential to Occur and Rationale USFWS1 CDFW2 4 Notes:
3 Habitat Description: Habitat description adapted from CNDDB or other specified source 4 Potential to Occur and Rationale: Location of recorded species occurrences determined by geospatial information from BIOS 5 or other specified source.

Sources:

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. CNDDB RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for Special-Status Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed April 28, 2022.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS 5).

Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/bios/. Accessed April 28, 2022.

Most of the species discussed in Table 3 are not expected to occur on the project site due to the lack of suitable habitat on the project site and/or the fact that the project site is situated outside of the species’ known geographic range. Many of the special-status species that were recorded in the CNDDB are unlikely to occur on-site given the relatively high level of past and present anthropogenic disturbance, its small size, its urban setting, and the presence of man-made barriers which limit dispersal onto the site. Species whose potential to occur on-site could not be immediately ruled out are discussed in more detail below.

Burrowing Owl
Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is designated as a Species of Special Concern by the CDFW.

CNDDB records shows three occurrences of burrowing owl within 1 mile of the project site. 23 The
presence of burrows and suitable ruderal grassland habitat on-site leaves open the possibility that burrowing owl may inhabit the project site under certain conditions (e.g., after vegetation has been mowed). Burrowing owl are known to overwinter in disturbed sites and sites near frequent human use. No burrowing owl or signs of burrowing owl were observed during the field survey; however, they could colonize the site in the future, such as before start of project construction. Therefore, burrowing owl has potential to occur on-site, albeit low potential.

Nesting birds
The project site contains several mature ornamental trees which could provide suitable nesting habitat for native resident and migratory bird species, including birds of prey (raptors) protected under federal and State regulations while nesting.

Special-status raptors, such as Swainson’s hawk, American peregrine falcon, golden eagle, and whitetailed kite, are unlikely to nest on-site as more suitable nesting sites and foraging habitat that is not subject to man-made disturbances is present outside the urban setting of the City of Milpitas. It is possible that these species may fly over the project site while foraging; however, potential for these species to occur on-site is low.
23 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. CNDDB RareFind 5 California Natural Diversity Database Query for SpecialStatus Species. Website: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed April 28, 2022. 260
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Results
FirstCarbon Solutions 27
Roosting bats
The trees and buildings found on-site contain crevices that are large enough to potentially be inhabited by roosting special-status bat species, including pallid bat and Townsend's big-eared bat.

However, the developed nature of the site and surrounding areas (including anthropogenic disturbance and lack of foraging opportunities) would limit the likelihood of bat use of the project site; the potential for these species to occur on-site is low.

4.3 - Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands
No wetlands or other hydrological features that meet criteria as waters of the United States or waters of the State were observed within the proposed project site during the field survey.

4.4 - Wildlife Movement Corridors
Most of the site consists of developed hardscaped areas in addition to disturbed/ruderal annual grassland habitat. The project site is also surrounded by roads, highways, and urban development that limits wildlife movement.

4.5 - Protected Trees
As identified in the Tree Inventory Report (dated May 2022) prepared by HortScience, there are a total of 33 trees on the project site (including nine street trees), and of these 20 meet the City’s criteria as a protected tree.

4.6 - Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan
The project site does not lie within the boundaries of the any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or any other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. The project site is located just outside the boundaries of the SCVHP.24 24 Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency. 2022. Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Geobrowser. Website:
http://www.hcpmaps.com/habitat/. Accessed April 28, 2022. 261
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
262
Item # 17.
56470001 • 04/2022 | 3_soils.mxd
Exhibit 3
Soils Map
Source: Google Earth Aerial Imagery. USDA Soils Data Mart, Santa Clara County Western Area.

TTLC MANAGEMENT INC., AN ARIZONA COMPANY

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

BIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
M
ain
St
180
100 50 0 100
Feet
Legend
Project Site
Soil Classification
180 - Urbanland-Newpark complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes 2.34 acres U
P - Warm
S
prin
gs
263
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
264
Item # 17.
56470001 • 04/2022 | 4_land_cover_veg.mxd
Exhibit 4
Land Cover and Vegetation Map
Source: Google Earth Aerial Imagery.

TTLC MANAGEMENT INC., AN ARIZONA COMPANY

SOUTH MAIN STREET MILPITAS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

BIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS
M
ain
St
100 50 0 100
Feet
Legend
Project Site
Land Cover and Vegetation
Ruderal 0.73 acre
Urban/Developed 1.61 acres
U
P - Warm
S
prin
gs
Ornamental Trees
265
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
266
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Biological Constraints and Recommendations FirstCarbon Solutions 33
SECTION 5: BIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In conclusion, the Biological Constraints Analysis determined that:
• The project site does not contain suitable habitat for special-status plants. • The project site does not contain suitable habitat for any special-status wildlife species aside from a potential for nesting birds and roosting bats and a low probability for burrowing owl. • The project site does not contain potentially jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the United States or waters of the State.
• The proposed project would not directly impact any known wildlife corridors. • The proposed project has the potential to impact trees protected under the City of Milpitas Municipal Code and/or subject to the City’s tree removal permit requirements. • The project is not within the SCVHP permit area.

The following section recommends project design features, conditions of approval, and/or best management practices (BMPs) that would result in avoidance or minimization of potential projectrelated impacts to regulated biological resources.

5.1 - Avoidance of Impacts to Burrowing Owl
Burrowing owl, a California Species of Special Concern, was assessed as having low potential to occur on the project site. Though no burrowing owl or signs of burrowing owl were observed on-site, and the species is currently not expected to breed or nest on the project site due to the site’s low-quality habitat, burrowing owl may use the site for short periods during migratory movements through the area. Therefore, it is recommended that the project implement measures to avoid potential impacts to burrowing owl. Recommended avoidance and minimization measures include the following:
• Conduct pre-construction survey for burrowing owl prior to the start of construction. • If active burrows are detected, establish construction exclusion (buffer) zones around active burrows in coordination with CDFW.

5.2 - Avoidance of Impacts to Nesting Birds
Several native migratory or resident birds that are protected under the MBTA and/or Fish and Game Code may nest in the trees and shrubs that are found on and adjacent to the project site. During nesting season, the development of the proposed project has the potential to impact protected bird nests due to the removal of this vegetation or to indirectly harm birds though the generation of noise, light, and other disturbances that could result in the abandonment of eggs or young.

Therefore, if work takes place during nesting season, it is recommended that the project implement measures to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds. Recommended avoidance and minimization measures include the following:
267
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints amd Recommendations Biological Constraints Analysis 34 FirstCarbon Solutions
• Limit tree and vegetation removal to outside the nesting season (generally February 1 to August 31).
• During the nesting season, conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting birds prior to the start of construction.
• If active nests are found, establish construction exclusion (buffer) zones around active nests regulated by the Fish and Game Code and/or MBTA.

5.3 - Avoidance of Impacts to Roosting Bats
The trees and buildings found on-site have potential to be inhabited by roosting bats including potentially special-status bat species, which could be disturbed or even harmed during the demolition of these structures. Additionally, many bat species are sensitive to disturbances such as light and noise that may result from the development of the proposed project. These disturbances could awaken torpid bats (if during winter hibernation period) and cause them to abandon their roosts. Therefore, the following actions are recommended to avoid potential impacts to roosting bats:
• Conduct pre-construction surveys for roosting bats prior to that start of construction. • Limit the demolition of structures containing roosting bats or that exhibit signs of past or present use to between March 1 and April 31 to avoid take of torpid overwintering bats and between September 1 and November 15 to prevent take of young that are not yet selfsufficiently volant. Establish construction exclusion (buffer) zones around occupied roost in coordination with CDFW.

5.4 - Tree Preservation
Project construction may require the removal of trees present on-site, including protected trees. If construction requires the removal of City protected trees, the project applicant would be required to apply to the City for a tree removal permit prior the removal of any protected trees. The project applicant would also be required to comply with the Tree Preservation Guidelines as described in the Tree Inventory Report to avoid unnecessary impacts to any trees found on-site or on adjacent properties.
268
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC—612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis
FirstCarbon Solutions
Appendix A:

Site Photographs
269
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
270
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC–612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Appendix A
FirstCarbon Solutions
Photograph 1: Eastern border, looking south. Photograph 2: Eastern border, looking west.

Photograph 3: Western border, looking north. Photograph 4: Northeastern border, looking south. 271
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC–612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis Appendix A
FirstCarbon Solutions
Photograph 5: Northeastern border, looking southeast. Photograph 6: Southeastern border, looking north.

Photograph 7: Southeastern border, looking west.
272
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC —612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis
FirstCarbon Solutions
Appendix B:

Database Searches
273
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
274
Item # 17.

Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Accipiter cooperii
Cooper's hawk
ABNKC12040 None None G5 S4 WL
Accipiter striatus
sharp-shinned hawk
ABNKC12020 None None G5 S4 WL
Adela oplerella
Opler's longhorn moth
IILEE0G040 None None G2 S2
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
ABPBXB0020 None Threatened G1G2 S1S2 SSC
Ambystoma californiense pop. 1
California tiger salamander - central California DPS
AAAAA01181 Threatened Threatened G2G3T3 S3 WL
Aneides niger
Santa Cruz black salamander
AAAAD01070 None None G3 S3 SSC
Anniella pulchra
Northern California legless lizard
ARACC01020 None None G3 S3 SSC
Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
AMACC10010 None None G4 S3 SSC
Aquila chrysaetos
golden eagle
ABNKC22010 None None G5 S3 FP
Ardea herodias
great blue heron
ABNGA04010 None None G5 S4
Astragalus tener var. tener
alkali milk-vetch
PDFAB0F8R1 None None G2T1 S1 1B.2
Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
ABNSB10010 None None G4 S3 SSC
Atriplex depressa
brittlescale
PDCHE042L0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Atriplex minuscula
lesser saltscale
PDCHE042M0 None None G2 S2 1B.1
Balsamorhiza macrolepis
big-scale balsamroot
PDAST11061 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Bombus caliginosus
obscure bumble bee
IIHYM24380 None None G2G3 S1S2
Bombus crotchii
Crotch bumble bee
IIHYM24480 None None G2 S1S2
Bombus occidentalis
western bumble bee
IIHYM24250 None None G2G3 S1
Quad<span style='color:Red'> IS </span>(San Jose East (3712137)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>San Jose West (3712138)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Calaveras Reservoir (3712147)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>La Costa Valley (3712157)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Mountain View (3712241)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Niles (3712158)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Newark (3712251)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Cupertino (3712231)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Milpitas (3712148))
Query Criteria:

Report Printed on Friday, April 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 5 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
275
Item # 17.

Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
ABNKC19070 None Threatened G5 S3
Campanula exigua
chaparral harebell
PDCAM020A0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii
Congdon's tarplant
PDAST4R0P1 None None G3T1T2 S1S2 1B.1
Charadrius nivosus nivosus
western snowy plover
ABNNB03031 Threatened None G3T3 S2 SSC
Chloropyron maritimum ssp. palustre
Point Reyes salty bird's-beak
PDSCR0J0C3 None None G4?T2 S2 1B.2
Chorizanthe robusta var. robusta
robust spineflower
PDPGN040Q2 Endangered None G2T1 S1 1B.1
Circus hudsonius
northern harrier
ABNKC11011 None None G5 S3 SSC
Cirsium fontinale var. campylon
Mt. Hamilton thistle
PDAST2E163 None None G2T2 S2 1B.2
Clarkia concinna ssp. automixa
Santa Clara red ribbons
PDONA050A1 None None G5?T3 S3 4.3
Coccyzus americanus occidentalis
western yellow-billed cuckoo
ABNRB02022 Threatened Endangered G5T2T3 S1
Collinsia multicolor
San Francisco collinsia
PDSCR0H0B0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Corynorhinus townsendii
Townsend's big-eared bat
AMACC08010 None None G4 S2 SSC
Coturnicops noveboracensis
yellow rail
ABNME01010 None None G4 S1S2 SSC
Danaus plexippus pop. 1
monarch - California overwintering population
IILEPP2012 Candidate None G4T2T3 S2S3
Delphinium californicum ssp. interius
Hospital Canyon larkspur
PDRAN0B0A2 None None G3T3 S3 1B.2
Dicamptodon ensatus
California giant salamander
AAAAH01020 None None G3 S2S3 SSC
Dipodomys heermanni berkeleyensis
Berkeley kangaroo rat
AMAFD03061 None None G4T1 S1
Dipodomys venustus venustus
Santa Cruz kangaroo rat
AMAFD03042 None None G4T1 S1
Dirca occidentalis
western leatherwood
PDTHY03010 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Dudleya abramsii ssp. setchellii
Santa Clara Valley dudleya
PDCRA040Z0 Endangered None G4T2 S2 1B.1
Egretta thula
snowy egret
ABNGA06030 None None G5 S4
Report Printed on Friday, April 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 5 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
276
Item # 17.

Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
ABNKC06010 None None G5 S3S4 FP
Emys marmorata
western pond turtle
ARAAD02030 None None G3G4 S3 SSC
Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri
Hoover's button-celery
PDAPI0Z043 None None G5T1 S1 1B.1
Euphydryas editha bayensis
Bay checkerspot butterfly
IILEPK4055 Threatened None G5T1 S1
Extriplex joaquinana
San Joaquin spearscale
PDCHE041F3 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Falco mexicanus
prairie falcon
ABNKD06090 None None G5 S4 WL
Falco peregrinus anatum
American peregrine falcon
ABNKD06071 Delisted Delisted G4T4 S3S4 FP
Fritillaria liliacea
fragrant fritillary
PMLIL0V0C0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
saltmarsh common yellowthroat
ABPBX1201A None None G5T3 S3 SSC
Gonidea angulata
western ridged mussel
IMBIV19010 None None G3 S1S2
Hoita strobilina
Loma Prieta hoita
PDFAB5Z030 None None G2? S2? 1B.1
Lasiurus cinereus
hoary bat
AMACC05030 None None G3G4 S4
Lasthenia conjugens
Contra Costa goldfields
PDAST5L040 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1
Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus
California black rail
ABNME03041 None Threatened G3T1 S1 FP
Lepidurus packardi
vernal pool tadpole shrimp
ICBRA10010 Endangered None G4 S3S4
Lessingia micradenia var. glabrata
smooth lessingia
PDAST5S062 None None G2T2 S2 1B.2
Linderiella occidentalis
California linderiella
ICBRA06010 None None G2G3 S2S3
Malacothamnus arcuatus
arcuate bush-mallow
PDMAL0Q0E0 None None G2Q S2 1B.2
Malacothamnus hallii
Hall's bush-mallow
PDMAL0Q0F0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus
Alameda whipsnake
ARADB21031 Threatened Threatened G4T2 S2
Melospiza melodia pusillula
Alameda song sparrow
ABPBXA301S None None G5T2? S2S3 SSC
Report Printed on Friday, April 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 5 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
277
Item # 17.

Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Microcina homi
Hom's micro-blind harvestman
ILARA47020 None None G1 S2
Monolopia gracilens
woodland woollythreads
PDAST6G010 None None G3 S3 1B.2
Myotis evotis
long-eared myotis
AMACC01070 None None G5 S3
Myotis yumanensis
Yuma myotis
AMACC01020 None None G5 S4
Navarretia prostrata
prostrate vernal pool navarretia
PDPLM0C0Q0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Neotoma fuscipes annectens
San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat
AMAFF08082 None None G5T2T3 S2S3 SSC
Northern Coastal Salt Marsh
Northern Coastal Salt Marsh
CTT52110CA None None G3 S3.2
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 8
steelhead - central California coast DPS
AFCHA0209G Threatened None G5T2T3Q S2S3
Plagiobothrys glaber
hairless popcornflower
PDBOR0V0B0 None None GX SX 1A
Puccinellia simplex
California alkali grass
PMPOA53110 None None G3 S2 1B.2
Rallus obsoletus obsoletus
California Ridgway's rail
ABNME05011 Endangered Endangered G3T1 S1 FP
Rana boylii
foothill yellow-legged frog
AAABH01050 None Endangered G3 S3 SSC
Rana draytonii
California red-legged frog
AAABH01022 Threatened None G2G3 S2S3 SSC
Reithrodontomys raviventris
salt-marsh harvest mouse
AMAFF02040 Endangered Endangered G1G2 S1S2 FP
Riparia riparia
bank swallow
ABPAU08010 None Threatened G5 S2
Rynchops niger
black skimmer
ABNNM14010 None None G5 S2 SSC
Senecio aphanactis
chaparral ragwort
PDAST8H060 None None G3 S2 2B.2
Sidalcea malachroides
maple-leaved checkerbloom
PDMAL110E0 None None G3 S3 4.2
Sorex vagrans halicoetes
salt-marsh wandering shrew
AMABA01071 None None G5T1 S1 SSC
Spergularia macrotheca var. longistyla
long-styled sand-spurrey
PDCAR0W062 None None G5T2 S2 1B.2
Spirinchus thaleichthys
longfin smelt
AFCHB03010 Candidate Threatened G5 S1
Report Printed on Friday, April 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 4 of 5 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
278
Item # 17.

Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Sternula antillarum browni
California least tern
ABNNM08103 Endangered Endangered G4T2T3Q S2 FP
Streptanthus albidus ssp. albidus
Metcalf Canyon jewelflower
PDBRA2G011 Endangered None G2T1 S1 1B.1
Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus
most beautiful jewelflower
PDBRA2G012 None None G2T2 S2 1B.2
Stuckenia filiformis ssp. alpina
northern slender pondweed
PMPOT03091 None None G5T5 S2S3 2B.2
Suaeda californica
California seablite
PDCHE0P020 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1
Sycamore Alluvial Woodland
Sycamore Alluvial Woodland
CTT62100CA None None G1 S1.1
Trifolium hydrophilum
saline clover
PDFAB400R5 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Tryonia imitator
mimic tryonia (=California brackishwater snail)
IMGASJ7040 None None G2 S2
Record Count: 89
Report Printed on Friday, April 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated April, 1 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 5 of 5 Information Expires 10/1/2022
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
279
Item # 17.
4/22/22, 1:31 PM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&crpr=1A:1B:2A:2B:3:4&fesa=FE:FT:FC&cesa=CE:CT:CR:CE:CT&fsao=or&qsl=9&quad=3712137:3712138:3712147:3712157:3712241:3712158:3712251:3712231:37… 1/1 Search Results
CNPS Rare Plant Inventory
5 matches found. Click on scientific name for details
Search Criteria: CRPR is one of [1A:1B:2A:2B:3:4] Fed List is one of [FE:FT:FC] or State List is one of [CE:CT:CR:CE:CT] , 9-Quad include [3712137:3712138:3712147:3712157:3712241:3712158:3712251:3712231:3712148] ▲ SCIENTIFIC
NAME
COMMON

NAME FAMILY LIFEFORM

BLOOMING
PERIOD
FED
LIST
STATE
LIST
GLOBAL
RANK
STATE
RANK

CA RARE
PLANT

RANK PHOTO
Chorizanthe
robusta var.
robusta
robust
spineflower
Polygonaceae annual herb Apr-Sep FE None G2T1 S1 1B.1
No Photo
Available
Dudleya abramsii
ssp. setchellii
Santa Clara
Valley dudleya
Crassulaceae perennial herb Apr-Oct FE None G4T2 S2 1B.1 No Photo
Available
Lasthenia
conjugens
Contra Costa
goldfields
Asteraceae annual herb Mar-Jun FE None G1 S1 1B.1
© 2013 Neal
Kramer
Streptanthus
albidus ssp.
albidus
Metcalf Canyon
jewelflower
Brassicaceae annual herb Apr-Jul FE None G2T1 S1 1B.1
© 2015
Aaron
Schusteff
Suaeda californica California
seablite
Chenopodiaceae perennial
evergreen
shrub
Jul-Oct FE None G1 S1 1B.1
No Photo
Available
Showing 1 to 5 of 5 entries
Suggested Citation:

California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2022. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9-01 1.5). Website https://www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed 22 April 2022].

CONTACT US
Send questions and comments
to [email protected].

ABOUT THIS WEBSITE
About the Inventory
Release Notes
Advanced Search
Glossary

ABOUT CNPS
About the Rare Plant Program
CNPS Home Page
About CNPS
Join CNPS

CONTRIBUTORS
The Calflora Database
The California Lichen Society
California Natural Diversity
Database
The Jepson Flora Project
The Consortium of California
Herbaria
CalPhotos
Copyright © 2010-2022 California Native Plant Society. All rights reserved. 280
Item # 17.

TTLC Milpitas-Main Street LLC —612-630 South Main Street Project Biological Constraints Analysis
FirstCarbon Solutions
Appendix C:

Tree Inventory Report
281
Item # 17.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
282
Item # 17.

HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Tree Inventory Report
612 South Main Street
Milpitas, CA
PREPARED FOR:

TTLC Management Inc.

An Arizona Corporation
12647 Alcosta Blvd. Suite 470
San Ramon CA 94583
PREPARED BY:

HortScience | Bartlett Consulting
325 Ray Street
Pleasanton, CA 94566
May 2022
283
Item # 17.

HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Tree Inventory Report
612 South Main Street
Milpitas, CA
Table of Contents
Page
Introduction and Overview 1
Tree Assessment Methods 1
Description of Trees 2
Milpitas Tree Ordinance 4
Suitability for Preservation 5
Preliminary Tree Preservation Guidelines 7
List of Tables
Table 1. Condition ratings and frequency of occurrence of trees 2 Table 2. Tree suitability for preservation 6
Exhibits
Tree Assessment Plan
Tree Assessment Form
284
Item # 17.

HortScience | Bartlett Consulting, Divisions of The F. A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Tree Inventory Report
612 South Main Street
Milpitas, CA
Introduction and Overview
TTLC Management Inc. is proposing to redevelop the subject property at 612 South Main Street in Milpitas. HortScience | Bartlett Consulting, Divisions of The F. A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company, was asked to prepare a Tree Inventory Report for the trees on the property as part of the application to the City of Milpitas.

This report provides the following information:

1. An assessment of each tree’s health, structure, suitability for preservation and protected status within and adjacent to the proposed project area.

2. Preliminary guidelines for tree preservation during the design, construction and maintenance phases of development.

Assessment Methods
Twenty-eight trees were assessed on September 24, 2021. Five additional trees on an adjacent lot to the north (APN #086-25-028) were added to the inventory on April 29, 2022. The assessment included all trees within or adjacent to the properties with a diameter of 2 inches or greater. Tree tag numbers were #315 – 342 and #381 – 385. The assessment procedure consisted of the following steps:

1. Identifying the tree species.

2. Tagging or confirming the presence of a metal numerical tag and confirming its location on a map.

3. Measuring the trunk diameter at a point 54 inches above grade; for off-site trees diameters were estimated.

4. Evaluating the health and structural condition using a scale of 1 – 5:
5 - A healthy, vigorous tree, reasonably free of signs and symptoms of disease, with good structure and form typical of the species.
4 - Tree with slight decline in vigor, small amount of twig dieback, minor structural defects that could be corrected.
3 - Tree with moderate vigor, moderate twig and small branch dieback, thinning of crown, poor leaf color, moderate structural defects that might be mitigated with regular care.
2 - Tree in decline, epicormic growth, extensive dieback of medium to large branches, significant structural defects that cannot be abated. 1 - Tree in severe decline, dieback of scaffold branches and/or trunk; most of foliage from epicormics; extensive structural defects that cannot be abated.

5. Rating the suitability for preservation as "high”, “moderate” or “low”. Suitability for preservation considers the health, age and structural condition of the tree species, and its potential to remain an asset to the site.

High: Trees with good health and structural stability that have the potential for longevity at the site.

Moderate: Trees with somewhat declining health and/or structural defects than can be abated with treatment. The tree will require more intense management and monitoring, and may have shorter life span than those in ‘high’ category.

Low: Trees in poor health or with significant structural defects that cannot be mitigated. Tree is expected to continue to decline, regardless of treatment. The species or individual tree may have characteristics that are undesirable for landscapes, and generally are unsuited for use areas.
285
Item # 17.

Tree Inventory Report – TTLC. 612 S. Main Street. Milpitas, CA.

May 2022 Page 2
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Description of Trees
Thirty-three (33) trees representing 9 species were evaluated. Nineteen (19, or 58%) trees were in fair condition and nine (12, or 36%) were poor. Trees #315 and 325 were in good condition.

Tree condition varied by species. Nine street trees were included in the assessment.

Descriptions of each tree are found in the Tree Assessment Form and locations are plotted on the Tree Assessment Plan (see Exhibits).

Table 1. Tree condition and frequency of occurrence. 612 S. Main Street, Milpitas, CA.

Common Name Scientific Name Condition Total
Poor
(1-2)
Fair
(3)
Good
(4-5)
Silk tree Albizia julibrissin 1 - - 1
Chinese hackberry Celtis sinesis 1 1 - 2
Mediterranean fan palm Chamaerops humilis 1 1 - 2
Lemon-scented gum Eucalyptus citriodora - 1 1 2
Crape myrtle Lagerstroemia indica - 7 - 7
Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua 6 6 1 13
Brisbane box Lophostemon confertus 1 3 - 4
Canary Island date palm Phoenix canariensis 1 - - 1
Elderberry Sambucus sp. 1 - - 1
Total 12 19 2 33
The site consisted of two adjacent lots. The south lot had one building that was surrounded on three sides by parking. Trees were growing at the edges of the parking lot and in front of the building. The north lot was undeveloped, with shrubs and small trees growing along the fence separating the two lots.

Sweetgum was the most common species assessed, with almost half the population (13 trees, or 39%). Most were growing along the southern edges of the property or near the building (Photo 1). Condition was divided between fair and poor (6 trees each), with tree #315 in good condition.

The sweetgums had codominant or multiple attachments and varied form. A few had sparse crowns. Many were crowded together or close to the building.

Seven (7) crape myrtles were assessed (Photo 1). All were street trees growing in planting wells of varying sizes along South Main Street. All were in fair condition, with multiple attachments.

Several had full, rounded crowns. Upper branches of crape myrtles #336 and 341 extended into overhead utility lines.

Four (4) Brisbane boxes were growing in narrow planters near the property fences (Photo 2).

Three were in fair condition and #320 was in poor. None of the Brisbane boxes was in good condition. All had multiple attachments and most were engulfed in ivy or crowded by shrubs.

Two mature lemon-scented gums were present, at the east and south fences. Gum #319 had multiple attachments with trunks ranging from 14 to 24 inches in diameter. It was in fair condition.

Gum #325 was the largest tree assessed, with a diameter of 38 inches (Photo 2). Its base was raised and filled the space between fence and curb. Trunk texture was smooth and yellow.

Overall tree condition was good.
286
Item # 17.

Tree Inventory Report – TTLC. 612 S. Main Street. Milpitas, CA.

May 2022 Page 3
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Photo 1 (left). Sweetgums #322 – 324
were growing at the southwest corner
of the school building. Young crape
myrtles #337 and 338 are visible at left
(red arrow).

Photo 2 (right). Lemon-scented
gum #325 was the largest tree
on site, growing at the south
fence. Brisbane box #326 is at
right (yellow arrow).

Photo 3 (left). Elderberry #317
(green arrow) and Canary Island
date palm #318 (red arrow) were
growing at the northeast corner
of the parking lot.
287
Item # 17.

Tree Inventory Report – TTLC. 612 S. Main Street. Milpitas, CA.

May 2022 Page 4
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Two Chinese hackberries were street trees growing in 4-foot square tree wells across from the vacant lot. Hackberry #382 was leaning slightly southeast and was in fair condition. Hackberry #383 had a deflected central leader and scorched leaf tips. It was in poor condition. Both were growing beneath overhead utility lines.

Mediterranean fan palm #342 was in fair condition and had a diameter of 17 inches. Its brown trunk height was approximately 4 feet and fronds were sprouting at the base. Palm #385 was growing at the base of the fence dividing the two lots and was crowded by surrounding shrubs and ivy. It had brown trunk height of approximately 2 feet and was in poor condition.

None of the remaining three species were represented by more than a single tree. Included in this group were:
 Elderberry #317 had multiple attachments from 4 to 15 inches in diameter and was growing against the north fence (Photo
3). It had a history of limb
removal and was engulfed in
shrubs. It was in poor
condition.
 Young Canary Island date
palm #318 had a 10-inch
diameter and approximately 1
foot of brown trunk height. It
growing next to the curb near
tree #317 and was in poor
condition (Photo 3).
 Silk tree #384 was growing at
the north edge of the northern
lot. It had two codominant 10-
inch stems and leaned west.

It was in poor condition (Photo
4).

Milpitas Tree Ordinance
The City of Milpitas Municipal Code (Chapter 2, Section 7 - Tree Protection and Heritage Tree Program) defines a Protected tree on a developed commercial property as any tree with a circumference of 37 inches or greater (about 11.78 inches in diameter). Street trees of any size are Protected. Twenty (20) of the 33 assessed trees met this criterion. Protected Trees are identified on the Tree Assessment Form (see Exhibits). Permits and replacement tree planting at a ratio of 2:1 are required for the removal of Protected trees.

Removal of protected trees on already improved commercial properties may be subject to replacement trees as determined by the Director of Planning or an arborist’s recommendation approved by the Director. Tree replacement ratio may depend on the ability of the property to accommodate replacement trees, as determined by the Director or an arborist’s recommendation approved by the Director.

Photo 4. Silk tree #384 was growing near an
adjacent car wash (left side of image).
288
Item # 17.

Tree Inventory Report – TTLC. 612 S. Main Street. Milpitas, CA.

May 2022 Page 5
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Suitability for Preservation
Before evaluating the impacts that will occur during development, it is important to consider the quality of the tree resource itself, and the potential for individual trees to function well over an extended length of time. Trees that are preserved on development sites must be carefully selected to make sure that they may survive development impacts, adapt to a new environment and perform well in the landscape. Our goal is to identify trees that have the potential for longterm health, structural stability and longevity within the proposed development.

Evaluation of suitability for preservation considers several factors:
 Tree health
Healthy, vigorous trees are better able to tolerate impacts such as root injury, demolition of existing structures, changes in soil grade and moisture, and soil compaction than are non-vigorous trees. For example, sweetgum #322 was in very poor health with a slight lean and sparse foliage; it would not make a good candidate for preservation.  Structural integrity
Trees with significant amounts of wood decay and other structural defects that cannot be corrected are likely to fail. Elderberry #317 had multiple attachments at 2 feet and was growing in a crowded area at the north fence. I do not recommend attempting to preserve this tree.
 Species response
There is a wide variation in the response of individual species to construction impacts and changes in the environment. Brisbane box are generally tolerant of construction impacts depending upon age and condition of the trees, while sweetgum have moderate tolerance of construction impacts, and require irrigation post-construction to mitigate impacts. Silk tree is intolerant of construction impacts.  Tree age and longevity
Old trees, while having significant emotional and aesthetic appeal, have limited physiological capacity to adjust to an altered environment. Young trees are better able to generate new tissue and respond to change.
 Invasiveness
Species that spread across a site and displace desired vegetation are not always appropriate for retention. This is particularly true when indigenous species are displaced.

The California Invasive Plant Inventory Database (http://www.cal-ipc.org/paf/) lists species identified as being invasive. Milpitas is part of the Central West Floristic Province. Canary Island date palm is considered invasive on a limited basis.

Each tree was rated for suitability for preservation based upon its age, health, structural condition and ability to safely coexist within a development environment (Table 2, below). We consider trees with high suitability for preservation to be the best candidates for preservation. We do not recommend retention of trees with low suitability for preservation in areas where people or property will be present. Retention of trees with moderate suitability for preservation depends upon the intensity of proposed site changes.
289
Item # 17.

Tree Inventory Report – TTLC. 612 S. Main Street. Milpitas, CA.

May 2022 Page 6
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Table 2: Tree suitability for preservation. 612 S. Main Street, Milpitas, CA.

High Trees in this category had good health and structural stability that have the potential for longevity at the site. Trees #315 and 325 had high suitability for preservation.

Moderate Trees in this category have fair health and/or structural defects that may be abated with treatment. Trees in this category require more intense management and monitoring and may have shorter lifespans than those in the “high” category. Eighteen (18) trees had moderate suitability for preservation including seven crape myrtles and six sweetgums.

Low Trees in this category are in poor health or have significant defects in structure that cannot be abated with treatment. These trees can be expected to decline regardless of management. The species or individual tree may possess either characteristics that are undesirable in landscape settings or be unsuited for use areas. Thirteen (13) trees had low suitability for preservation including six sweetgums.
290
Item # 17.

Tree Inventory Report – TTLC. 612 S. Main Street. Milpitas, CA.

May 2022 Page 7
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Preliminary Tree Preservation Guidelines
The goal of tree preservation is not merely tree survival during development but maintenance of tree health and beauty for many years. Trees retained on sites that are either subject to extensive injury during construction or are inadequately maintained become a liability rather than an asset. The response of individual trees will depend on the amount of excavation and grading, the care with which demolition is undertaken, and the construction methods. Coordinating any construction activity inside the TREE PROTECTION ZONE can minimize these impacts. Trees with high suitability for preservation should be preserved where possible.

The following recommendations will help reduce impacts to trees from development as well as maintain and improve their health and vitality through the clearing, grading and construction phases. The key elements of a tree preservation plan for the 612 S. Main Street property would include:
 Focus efforts at tree preservation on those trees with high or moderate suitability for preservation. Examples include: sweetgum #315, lemon-scented gum #325 and street trees #336 – 341 and 381 (crape myrtle); and #382 (Chinese hackberry).  Establish TREE PROTECTION ZONES for each tree to be preserved. TREE PROTECTION ZONES are identified by the Consulting Arborist based on species tolerances, tree condition, trunk diameters and the nature and proximity of the proposed disturbance.  Provide supplemental irrigation prior to and during the demolition and construction phases.

Trees should be preserved in groups with minimal grading within the critical root zone, where possible. The following are recommendations for design and construction phases that will assist in successful tree preservation.

Design recommendations

1. Plan for tree preservation by designing adequate space around trees to be preserved.

This area is called the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. No grading, excavation, construction or storage of materials should occur within that zone. Route underground services including utilities, sub-drains, water or sewer around the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. For design purposes, the tree protection zone is ten times the trunk diameter or the entire dripline whichever is larger. Areas of the Tree Protection Zone should be fenced to minimize impacts and staging in the TREE PROTECTION ZONE.

2. Any changes to the plans affecting the trees should be reviewed by the Project Arborist with regard to tree impacts. These include, but are not limited to, site plans, improvement plans, utility and drainage plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and demolition plans.

3. Irrigation systems must be designed so that no trenching severs roots larger than 1 inch in diameter within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE.

4. Tree Preservation Guidelines prepared by the Project Arborist, which include specifications for tree protection during demolition and construction, should be included on all plans.

5. Any herbicides placed under paving materials must be safe for use around trees and labeled for that use.

6. Do not lime the subsoil within 50 feet of any tree. Lime is toxic to tree roots.

7. Ensure adequate but not excessive water is supplied to trees; in most cases, occasional irrigation will be required. Avoid directing runoff toward trees. 291
Item # 17.

Tree Inventory Report – TTLC. 612 S. Main Street. Milpitas, CA.

May 2022 Page 8
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Pre-demolition and pre-construction treatments and recommendations

1. The demolition and construction superintendents shall meet with the Project Arborist before beginning work to review all work procedures, access routes, storage areas, and tree protection measures.

2. Fence the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. Trees adjacent to demolition may require limb and trunk protections. This may be accomplished using foam wrapped with wattle and orange snow fencing to protect the areas where the limb (or trunk) is exposed to incidental contact.

3. Trees to be preserved may require pruning to clean the crown of dead branches 1 inch and larger in diameter, raise canopies as needed for construction activities. All pruning shall be done by a State of California Licensed Tree Contractor (C61/D49). All pruning shall be done by Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker in accordance with the Best Management Practices for Pruning (International Society of Arboriculture, 2002) and adhere to the most recent editions of the American National Standard for Tree Care Operations (Z133.1) and Pruning (A300). The Project Arborist will provide pruning specifications prior to site demolition.

4. Structures and underground features to be removed within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE shall use equipment that will minimize damage to trees above and below ground, and operate from outside the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. The Project Arborist shall be on site during all operations within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE to monitor demolition activity.

5. All tree work shall comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act as well as California Fish and Wildlife code 3503-3513 to not disturb nesting birds. To the extent feasible, tree pruning and removal should be scheduled outside of the breeding season. Breeding bird surveys should be conducted prior to tree work. Qualified biologists should be involved in establishing work buffers for active nests.

6. Apply and maintain 4-6” of wood chip mulch within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE.

Recommendations for tree protection during construction

1. Any approved grading, construction, demolition or other work within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE should be monitored by the Project Arborist.

2. All contractors shall conduct operations in a manner that will prevent damage to trees to be preserved.

3. Tree protection devices are to remain until all site work has been completed within the work area. Fences or other protection devices may not be relocated or removed without permission of the Project Arborist.

4. Construction trailers, traffic and storage areas must remain outside TREE PROTECTION ZONE at all times.

5. Any root pruning required for construction purposes shall receive the prior approval of and be supervised by the Project Arborist. Roots should be cut with a saw to provide a flat and smooth cut. Removal of roots larger than 2 inches in diameter should be avoided.

6. If roots 1 inches and greater in diameter are encountered during site work and must be cut to complete the construction, the Project Arborist must be consulted to evaluate effects on the health and stability of the tree and recommend treatment.

7. Spoil from trench, footing, utility or other excavation shall not be placed within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE, neither temporarily nor permanently.

8. All grading within the dripline of trees shall be done using the smallest equipment possible. The equipment shall operate perpendicular to the tree and operate from 292
Item # 17.

Tree Inventory Report – TTLC. 612 S. Main Street. Milpitas, CA.

May 2022 Page 9
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company outside the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. Any modifications must be approved and monitored by the Project Arborist.

9. All trees shall be irrigated on a schedule to be determined by the Project Arborist (every 3 to 6 weeks is typical). Each irrigation shall wet the soil within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE to a depth of 18-24 inches.

10. If injury should occur to any tree during construction, it should be evaluated as soon as possible by the Project Arborist so that appropriate treatments can be applied.

11. No excess soil, chemicals, debris, equipment or other materials shall be dumped or stored within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE.

12. Any additional tree pruning needed for clearance during construction must be performed by a Certified Arborist and not by construction personnel or certified tree climber.

13. Trees that accumulate a sufficient quantity of dust on their leaves, limbs and trunk as judged by the Project Arborist shall be spray-washed at the direction of the Project Arborist.

Maintenance of impacted trees
Trees should be monitored and inspected annually and after major storms to identify conditions requiring treatment to manage risk associated with tree failure.

Preserved trees will experience a physical environment different from that pre-development. As a result, tree health and structural stability should be monitored. Occasional pruning, fertilization, mulch, pest management, replanting and irrigation may be required. In addition, provisions for monitoring both tree health and structural stability following construction must be made a priority.

Inspect trees annually and following major storms to identify conditions requiring treatment to manage risk associated with tree failure.

Our procedures included assessing trees for observable defects in structure. This is not to say that trees without significant defects will not fail. Failure of apparently defect-free trees does occur, especially during storm events. Wind forces, for example, can exceed the strength of defect-free wood causing branches and trunks to break. Wind forces coupled with rain can saturate soils, reducing their ability to hold roots, and blow over defect-free trees. Although we cannot predict all failures, identifying those trees with observable defects is a critical component of enhancing public safety.

Furthermore, trees change over time. Our inspections represent the condition of the tree at the time of inspection. As trees age, the likelihood of failure of branches or entire trees increases.

Annual tree inspections are recommended to identify changes to tree health and structure. In addition, trees should be inspected after storms of unusual severity to evaluate damage and structural changes. Initiating these inspections is the responsibility of the client and/or tree owner.

If you have any questions regarding my observations or recommendations, please contact me.

HortScience | Bartlett Consulting
Pam Nagle
Consulting Arborist and Urban Forester
Certified Arborist #WE-9617A
ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
293
Item # 17.

Tree Inventory Report – TTLC. 612 S. Main Street. Milpitas, CA.

May 2022 Page 10
HortScience│Bartlett Consulting ● Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company Exhibits
Tree Assessment Plan
Tree Assessment Form
294
Item # 17.
9 Tree Assessment Plan 612 South Main Street Milpitas, CA Prepared for: The True Life Companies San Ramon, CA September 2021 / May 2022 No Scale Notes:  Base map provided by: Muir Consulting, Inc. Oakdale, CA  Numbered tree locations are approximate. 325 Ray Street Pleasanton, California 94566 Phone 925.484.0211 Fax 925.484.0596 39 315
316
317
318
328
330 329 331
336
342
337
334
333 332
341 340 339 338
335
327
326
325
320
323
324
319 321 322
328
330 329
331
336
315
316
317
318
342
383 382 381
384
385
South Main Street
295
Item # 17.

Tree No. Species Trunk
Diameter
(in.)
Protected
Tree?
Condition
1=poor
5=excellent
Suitability for
Preservation
Comments
315 Sweetgum 7 No 4 High Growing in shrubs; good form and structure; 2' from curb.316 Brisbane box 7,6,5,4,3 No 3 Moderate 1' from fence; engulfed in ivy; vase form; rounded crown; slightly sparse; multiple attachments at 3.5'.
317 Elderberry 15,4,4 Yes 2 Low Against fence; multiple attachments at 2'; history of limb removal; thin crown; engulfed in shrubs.
318 Canary Island date
palm
10 No 2 Low 1' BTH; wide arching fronds; at curb.
319 Lemon-scented gum 24,19,18,1
7,14
Yes 3 Low Multiple attachments at 2'; in 4' bed between curb/fence; large vigorous tree.
320 Brisbane box 9,8,6,6 No 2 Low In 4' bed between curb/fence; multiple attachments at 3'; growing against fence; engulfed in ivy; slightly sparse.
321 Sweetgum 8 No 2 Low Multiple attachments at 8'; vase form; sparse.322 Sweetgum 6 No 1 Low Slight lean S; codominant stems at 9'; very sparse.323 Sweetgum 11 No 2 Low Buried root crown; multiple attachments at 6'; branch dieback; sparse.
324 Sweetgum 8 No 2 Low Buried root crown; slight lean S.; codominant stems at 9'; some branch dieback.
325 Lemon-scented gum 38 Yes 4 High Between curb and fence; raised base; good form and structure; large gorgeous tree.
326 Brisbane box 12 Yes 3 Moderate Near fence; engulfed in ivy; multiple attachments at 9'; oval crown.
327 Brisbane box 9 No 3 Moderate Near fence; in shrubs; engulfed in ivy; multiple attachments at 9'.328 Sweetgum 13 Yes 3 Moderate Roots squared from former planter; multiple attachments at 7'; history of limb removal; conc. border S. side at trunk; 2' from electric box. 329 Sweetgum 13 Yes 2 Low At fence; engulfed in ivy; codominant stems at 7'; narrow crown.

Tree Assessment
612 South Main StreetMilpitas, CASeptember 2021 / April 2022 296
Item # 17.

Tree No. Species Trunk
Diameter
(in.)
Protected
Tree?
Condition
1=poor
5=excellent
Suitability for
Preservation
Comments
Tree Assessment
612 South Main StreetMilpitas, CASeptember 2021 / April 2022 330 Sweetgum 9 No 2 Low In shrub planting bed; codominant stems at 5'; vase form; history of limb removal; slightly sparse.
331 Sweetgum 10 No 3 Moderate In shrub planting bed; trunk divides at 6 and 8'; vase form; history of limb removal; slightly sparse.
332 Sweetgum 14 Yes 3 Moderate 2' from sidewalk; codominant stems at 8' ; upright vase form; utility lines W. edge crown.
333 Sweetgum 14 Yes 3 Moderate Large surface roots N. side w/ 2" girdling root; growing against drainage basin N.E. side; codominant stems at 6'.
334 Sweetgum 13 Yes 3 Moderate Multiple attachments at 10'; raised berm 2' from conc. walk; some branch dieback; history of limb removal.
335 Sweetgum 15 Yes 3 Moderate Large surface roots in lawn; slight correcting lean W.; history of limb removal; crowded by bldg.; narrow upright form.
336 Crape myrtle 9 Yes 3 Moderate Street tree. In 4x6' well; root pruned; multiple attachments at 6'; some branch dieback; upper crown in utility lines.
337 Crape myrtle 2 Yes 3 Moderate Street tree. In 4.5' square well; multiple attachments at 5'; slightly drought stressed; good young tree.
338 Crape myrtle 5 Yes 3 Moderate Street tree. In 5' wide extended planting bed; multiple attachments at 7'; rounded crown.
339 Crape myrtle 5 Yes 3 Moderate Street tree. In 5' wide extended planting bed; multiple attachments at 6 and 8'; compact upright crown.
340 Crape myrtle 2 Yes 3 Moderate Street tree. In 5' wide extended planting bed; slightly 1-sided to W.; suppressed by sweetgum; narrow form.
341 Crape myrtle 9 Yes 3 Moderate Street tree. In 4.5' square well; root pruned; multiple attachments at 7'; 5" lateral to N.E. turns upward; upper crown in utility lines. 342 Mediterranean fan
palm
17 Yes 3 Moderate Tag on frond; 4' BTH; multiple sprouts at base; low shrubby form. 381 Crape myrtle 7 Yes 3 Moderate Street tree. In 4' square well; correcting lean N.; multiple attachments at 7'; vigorous; under utility lines.
297
Item # 17.

Tree No. Species Trunk
Diameter
(in.)
Protected
Tree?
Condition
1=poor
5=excellent
Suitability for
Preservation
Comments
Tree Assessment
612 South Main StreetMilpitas, CASeptember 2021 / April 2022 382 Chinese hackberry 5 Yes 3 Moderate Street tree. In 4' square well; slight lean S.E.; under utility lines. 383 Chinese hackberry 6 Yes 2 Low Street tree. In 4' square well; multiple attachments at 9'; leader deflects sharply W. at attachment; scorched foliage tips; under utility lines. 384 Silk tree 10,10 No 2 Low At edge of asphalt of property to N.; codominant at 2'; leans W.; wide flat-topped crown; sparse; overhangs property ~21'. 385 Mediterranean fan
palm
10 No 2 Low No tag. At S. fence; approx. 2' brown trunk height; leans N.; engulfed in ivy; crowded and suppressed by shrubs.
298
Item # 17.

Exhibit 3, Part 2:

Trip Generation Study for 612 South Main Street, Milpitas, California, prepared by TJKM dated April 2, 2022.
299
Item # 17.

April 2, 2022
Leah Beniston
Vice President‐Entitlements
The True Life Companies
12657 Alcosta Boulevard, Suite 470
San Ramon, CA 94583
Re: Trip Generation Study for 612 South Main Street, Milpitas, California Dear Ms. Beniston:

At your request, TJKM has prepared this trip generation analysis of the proposed development located at 612 South Main Street in Milpitas, California. The site is currently occupied by a 6,413 square feet (sf) Montessori School for preschool aged students and an 11,700 gymnastics facility.  The project also incorporates an adjacent vacant lot. The project site will consist of 57 three‐story townhouse style dwelling units with two‐car garage and seven on‐site guest parking spaces.

To determine the proposed project trips, the following trip rates are applicable, based on the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) Trip Generation, 11th Edition. The land use for Multi‐ family Housing, Mid‐Rise (code 221) was used because it has three or more stories and are connected by three or more dwelling units. Trip Generation for the school is based on the number of students.  Because there is no ITE land use for the gymnastics facility, trip generation was estimated based on information provided by the tenant.   The net trips for proposed use is shown in the table below:

Land Use (ITE Code) Size
Daily A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
Rate Trips Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total
Proposed
Multifamily Housing,
Mid‐  Rise (221) 57 DU 4.54 259 0.37 4 17 21 0.39 13 10 23 Existing
Montessori
School/Day Care
(565)
72 Students 4.09 294 0.78 30 26 56 0.79 27 30 57
Gymnastics    11.7 ksf   80 12 12 24
Net Total Trips ‐115 ‐26 ‐9 ‐35 ‐26 ‐32 ‐58
Notes: DU‐ Dwelling Units; ksf: thousand square feet
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021, Gymnastics tenant operations The proposed project will not generate any net new trips during the daily, a.m. peak hour (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) trips or p.m. peak hour (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.). 300
Item # 17.
612 South Main Street
April 2, 2022