Agenda packet — Milpitas City Council, November 7, 2023 (part 4 of 6)

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.311355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
of Mitigation Measure MM BIO-1, direct and indirect impacts to protected nesting birds would be reduced to less than significant levels. (Final EIR 3.3-24 to 3.3-25) Cultural, Tribal Cultural and Paleontological Resources Threshold CUL-2 Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM CUL-1The Project Applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology to conduct Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training for archaeological sensitivity for all construction personnel prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities. If archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area shall be halted and the archaeologist shall evaluate the find. If the resources are Native American human remains, the County Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted as mandated by law. If necessary, the evaluation may require preparation of archaeological testing for California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility. Results of the archaeological testing shall be reviewed and approved by the qualified archaeologist. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA and cannot be avoided by the Project, additional work may be warranted, such as data recovery excavation, and, if so, shall be identified by the archaeologist to mitigate any such significant impacts to cultural resources, if identified.

Finding
The City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.

Supporting Explanation: In the event that archaeological resources are encountered during Project construction, Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would require all construction efforts associated with the Project to halt immediately until a qualified archaeologist examines the site, identifies the archaeological significance of the find, and recommends a course of action. If the archaeologist determines the resource constitutes a “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation would be made available to the

Page 383 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.321355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
Applicant. With implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource or site pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, and impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. (Final EIR 3.4-18 to 3.4-20) Threshold TRC-1 Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in the local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
Refer to Mitigation Measure MM CUL-1 above.

Supporting Explanation: Project excavation could encounter native soils which has the potential to support undiscovered tribal cultural resources. If tribal cultural resources are encountered during Project construction, Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would require all construction efforts associated with the Project to halt until an archaeologist examines the site, identifies the archaeological significance of the find, and recommends a course of action which must be implemented. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL- 1 would ensure that appropriate protocols are in place in the event unknown cultural resources, including archaeological and tribal cultural resources, are discovered during ground-disturbing activities. As such,

Page 384 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.331355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
impacts to tribal cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant levels. (Final EIR, pp. 3.4-21 to 3.4-22)
Geology and Soils
Threshold GEO-9 Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM GEO-1In the event a potentially significant paleontological resource is encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work within 100 feet of the discovery shall halt and a professional paleontologist who meets the qualification standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology shall be retained by the Project Applicant immediately to evaluate the significance of the discovery. The City of Milpitas Planning Department shall be notified immediately. If the resource is found to be significant, the professional paleontologist shall systematically remove it from the site for laboratory preparation.

Following laboratory preparation, the resource would be identified, cataloged, and inventoried in anticipation of curation. All collected and prepared resources would be curated and stored in an accredited repository.

Supporting Explanation: Due to the present surface soils on-site and the historically developed nature of the Project Site and its immediate surrounding areas, the surface of the Project Site has a low potential for paleontological sensitivity. However, the soil conditions at the subsurface and bgs of the Project Site have an undetermined potential for paleontological sensitivity. In the event that a potentially significant paleontological resource is encountered during ground-disturbing activities, Mitigation Measure MM GEO-1 would require all work within 100 feet of the discovery to halt and a qualified professional paleontologist to be retained to evaluate the find in consultation with the City. With implementation of Mitigation Measure MM GEO-1, impacts pertaining to paleontological resources would be reduced to a less than significant level. (Final EIR 3.6-25 to 3.6-26)

Page 385 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.341355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
Greenhouse Gas
Threshold GHG-1 Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Threshold GHG-2 Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gas emissions? Significance Before Mitigation: Less than significant
Mitigation Measure
MM GHG-1Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate compliance with relevant and applicable measures of the Climate Action Plan (CAP) Update by preparing and implementing a project-specific consistency review checklist.

The City shall review this consistency review checklist as part of the Project plan review.

The consistency review checklist shall outline feasible, effective and applicable measures that will be required for the Project. Applicable and effective measures in reducing Project GHG emissions include, but are not limited to, the following:
•Utilize the latest energy-efficient construction equipment, when feasible; •Install Energy Star appliances;
•Install on-site renewable energy, such as solar panels; •Provide on-site electric vehicle charging stations and associated infrastructure; and •Install water-efficient irrigation systems capable of using reclaimed water, when available.

Supporting Explanation: While impacts would be less than significant without mitigation, Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would demonstrate the Project’s compliance with applicable goals and measures set forth

Page 386 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.351355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
in the Milpitas 2022 CAP Update. As such, the Project would comply with BAAQMD threshold “B” which states that projects must be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy. (Final EIR 3.7-27 to 3.7-30) Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Threshold HAZ-2 Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM HAZ-1Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) and Health and Safety Plan (HSP) shall be prepared by a qualified environmental professional with Phase II/Site Characterization experience to establish appropriate management practices for handling impacted soil, soil vapor and ground water if encountered during construction activities.

These documents shall include the following:
•Site control procedures to control the flow of personnel, vehicles and materials in and out of the Site.
•Measures to minimize dust generation, storm water runoff and tracking of soil off-Site. •If excavation de-watering is required, protocols to evaluate water quality and discharge/disposal alternatives shall be described.
•Protocols for soil removal and subsequent subsurface soil sampling and evaluation. •Protocols for conducting earthwork activities in areas where impacted soil, soil vapor and/or ground water are present or suspected. Worker training requirements, health and safety measures and soil handing procedures should be described. •Protocols to be implemented if buried structures, wells, debris, or unidentified areas of impacted soil are encountered during construction activities. •Protocols to evaluate the quality of soil suspected of being contaminated so that appropriate mitigation, disposal or reuse alternatives, if necessary, can be determined. •Procedures to evaluate and document the quality of any soil imported to the Site.

Page 387 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.361355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
•Soil containing chemicals exceeding residential (unrestricted use) screening levels or typical background concentrations of metals should not be accepted. •Methods to monitor excavations for the potential presence of volatile chemical vapors.

Supporting Explanation: Adherence to applicable federal and state regulations related to hazards and hazardous materials would ensure safety impacts pertaining to the potential for accidental conditions during Project operations would be less than significant. Subsequent to this removal, groundwater and soil vapor samples should be collected from this area to determine if elevated petroleum hydrocarbons or Volatile Organic Compounds remain. Additional vapor mitigation controls may be required based on the post-removal soil vapor concentrations. This area would be required to be backfilled with compacted clean fill material. Further, the Project would be subject to Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-1 which would require a Soil Management Plan (SMP) to be prepared and implemented during grading and excavation activities.

The SMP would detail the best management practices to properly manage impacted soil in a manner protective of human health and consistent with applicable Federal, State, and local laws. Subsequent to the subsurface evaluation previously discuss, the SMP would implement protocols for the removal of impacted soil. Further, the SMP would require all excavated soil generated from the Project Site that requires off-site disposal to be required to be characterized prior to disposal at a licensed disposal facility or other commercial property, as appropriate in consultation with a Phase II/Site Characterization specialist.

Nevertheless, adherence to applicable federal and state laws and regulations and the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-1 would reduce impacts resulting from the construction-related accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials to less than significant levels. (Final EIR 3.8-22 to

3.8-24)
Transportation
Threshold TRA-1 Would the Project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant

Page 388 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.371355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
Mitigation Measure
MM TRA-1Prior to project construction initiation, the respective Applicants shall prepare a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for approval by the City Traffic Engineer. The TMP shall specify that one direction of travel in each direction on adjacent roadways must always be maintained during project construction activities. If full lane closures are required and one direction of travel in each direction cannot be maintained, the TMP shall identify planned detours. The TMP shall include measures such as construction signage, limitations on timing for lane closures to avoid peak hours, temporary striping plans, and use of construction flag person(s) to direct traffic during heavy equipment use. The TMP shall include signage, lane closures, flag persons, etc., and shall specify that one lane of travel in each direction shall be maintained along City rights-of-way. Bicycle lanes and pedestrian sidewalks shall remain open and accessible, to the greatest extent feasible, during construction or shall be re-routed to ensure continued connectivity. Lastly the TMP shall detail plans that the Applicant would take to ensure that the Project Site would provide adequate emergency access. The TMP shall be incorporated into project specifications for verification prior to final plan approval.

Supporting Explanation: Construction activities associated with the Project would require the demolition and reconstruction of the existing driveways within the eastern perimeter of the Project Site. These activities, such as demolition, minor excavation, and grading, may require temporary partial lane closure within the California Circle right-of-way, resulting in partial lane closures for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Accordingly, Mitigation Measure MM TRA-1 would require the Project Applicant to implement a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) to maintain vehicular and bicycle traffic circulation along California Circle and to the Project Site emergency access during construction activities. The TMP would include information detailing proposed signage, lane closures, flag persons, etc., and require that bicycle lanes, pedestrian sidewalks, and bus stops remain open and accessible, to the great extent feasible, during construction or be re-routed to ensure continued connectivity. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM TRA-1, the Project would not conflict with existing bicycle facilities, and impacts would be less than significant. (Final EIR 3.14-22 to 3.14-24)

Page 389 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.381355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
Threshold TRA-4 Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
Refer to Mitigation Measure MM TRA-1 above.

Supporting Explanation: Project construction activities would not result in inadequate emergency access during construction. However, short term construction activities may result in temporary lane closures along California Circle. As discussed above, implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-TRA-1 would require the Project Applicant to implement a TMP to maintain emergency access during the construction process and minimize congestion. Additionally, The Project would not implement any offsite roadway network changes and therefore would not adversely affect emergency vehicle circulation on surrounding roadways. Thus, impacts concerning emergency access would be reduced to less than significant levels with mitigation incorporated. (Final EIR 3.14-30 to 3.14-31) E.4 Findings Regarding Impacts Analyzed in the EIR and Determined to be Significant and Unavoidable
This section includes findings for project impacts which are determined to be significant even with the imposition of mitigation measures. These impacts cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level and therefore remain unavoidable. Although the City Council finds that all significant impacts of this project listed below cannot be substantially lessened or avoided by the imposition of mitigation measures or alternatives, the mitigation measures found in the EIR and listed below will be implemented to lessen the Project’s impact. Specific findings of this City Council for each impact are set forth below in this section.

Aesthetics
Threshold AQ-2 Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially Significant

Page 390 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.391355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
Mitigation Measure
No feasible mitigation measures are available.

Findings
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible mitigation measures or Project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

Supporting Explanation: The Project would develop multiple structures at a maximum building height that is greater than the existing building structures on-site. Accordingly, this increase in height would result in significant view blockages of public scenic resources (i.e., the eastern open hillsides) from public viewpoints, specifically for bicyclists travelling northbound along Coyote Creek Trail, and motorists travelling southbound along McCarthy Boulevard. As such, the Project would result in substantial adverse effects to scenic vistas, and the impact would be significant and unavoidable.

E.5 Other CEQA Required Analysis in the EIR
Cumulative Impact Analysis
Cumulative impacts are defined in State CEQA Guidelines §15355(b) as:
“The change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time.”
Aesthetics
Threshold AES-1 Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially Significant Mitigation Measure
No feasible mitigation measures are available.

Page 391 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.401355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
Findings
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible mitigation measures or Project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

Supporting Explanation: Public views of both the Project Site and the open hillsides located east of the City are provided from McCarthy Boulevard (Key View 1), I-880 (Key View 2), and the Coyote Creek Trail (Key View 3). Due to the proposed height of the development, the Project would significantly obstruct public views of the hillsides from Key Views 2 and 3 and would completely block any view of the hillsides from Key View 1. Therefore, Project implementation would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts to scenic vistas. (Final EIR 3.1-27 to 3.1-28) Biological Resources
Threshold BIO-1 Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulation, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM BIO-1In the event that ground-disturbing activities or removal of any trees, shrubs, or any other potential nesting habitat that are associated with the Project are scheduled to occur within the avian nesting season (from January 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist retained by the City shall conduct a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds within three days prior to any ground disturbing activities.

The biologist conducting the clearance survey shall document the negative results if no active bird nests are observed on the Project Site during the clearance survey with a brief letter report indicating that no impacts to active bird nests would occur before construction can proceed. If an active bird nest is discovered during the pre-construction clearance survey, construction activities shall stay outside of a 100-foot buffer around the active nest.

Encroachment into the buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist.

Any activities requiring the removal of a tree with an active bird nest shall halt until nesting activity seasons, which would be determined by the qualified biologist.

Page 392 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.411355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
The biologist shall be present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer area and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity. Results of the pre-construction survey and any subsequent monitoring shall be provided to the City of Milpitas, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and other appropriate agencies. This requirement shall be indicated on the site improvement plan and specifications for verification by the City of Milpitas prior to the initiation of construction activities.

Supporting Explanation: Existing policies and regulations, in combination with Mitigation Measure MM BIO-1, will reduce impacts to sensitive habitats and biological resources to a less than significant level. As such, the Project would not substantially contribute to cumulative impacts on sensitive habitats and biological resources. (Final EIR 3.3-27 to 3.3-28)
Geology and Soils
Threshold GEO-9 Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM GEO-1In the event a potentially significant paleontological resource is encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work within 100 feet of the discovery shall halt and a professional paleontologist who meets the qualification standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology shall be retained by the Project Applicant immediately to evaluate the significance of the discovery. The City of Milpitas Planning Department shall be notified immediately. If the resource is found to be significant, the professional paleontologist shall systematically remove it from the site for laboratory preparation.

Page 393 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.421355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
Finding
The City Council finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.

Supporting Explanation: Cumulative development throughout the City of Milpitas could potentially disturb unknown paleontological resources that could be present in the City. It is anticipated that Citywide development would have the potential to disturb paleontological resources. Potentially significant cumulative paleontological resource impacts could, however, be mitigated to below a level of significance through resource avoidance or recovery on a case by-case basis. As discussed under Impact GEO-9, the Project is not anticipated to disturb paleontological resources and Mitigation Measure GEO-1 has been included to ensure that the impacts would not be cumulatively considerable as they would ensure on-site resources are protected or recovered. (Final EIR 3.6-26) Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Threshold HAZ-2 Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM HAZ-1Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) and Health and Safety Plan (HSP) shall be prepared by a qualified environmental professional with Phase II/Site Characterization experience to establish appropriate management practices for handling impacted soil, soil vapor and ground water if encountered during construction activities.

Page 394 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.431355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
•Protocols for conducting earthwork activities in areas where impacted soil, soil vapor and/or ground water are present or suspected. Worker training requirements, health and safety measures and soil handing procedures should be described. •Protocols to be implemented if buried structures, wells, debris, or unidentified areas of impacted soil are encountered during construction activities. •Protocols to evaluate the quality of soil suspected of being contaminated so that appropriate mitigation, disposal or reuse alternatives, if necessary, can be determined. •Procedures to evaluate and document the quality of any soil imported to the Site. •Soil containing chemicals exceeding residential (unrestricted use) screening levels or typical background concentrations of metals should not be accepted. •Methods to monitor excavations for the potential presence of volatile chemical vapors.

Supporting Explanation: Cumulative projects would be required to evaluate their project’s likelihood and severity of accidental releases of hazardous materials on a project-by-project basis. Cumulative projects would also be required to comply with all applicable laws and regulations as appropriate; including Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP), California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHLs) and requirements outlined by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and the California Fire Code(CFC). The Project would result in a potentially significant impact reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials. However, the Project Applicant would adhere to all applicable regulations and regulatory requirements. Further, implementation of Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-1 would require the preparation of a Soil Management Plan (SMP) prior to the initiation of excavating activities. Therefore, adherence to regulatory requirements and Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-1 would minimize impacts to be less than cumulatively considerable. (Final EIR 3.8-28 to 3.8-31)

Page 395 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.441355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
Transportation
Threshold TRA-1 Would the Project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Significance Before Mitigation: Potentially significant Mitigation Measure
MM TRA-1Prior to project construction initiation, the respective Applicants shall prepare a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for approval by the City Traffic Engineer. The TMP shall specify that one direction of travel in each direction on adjacent roadways must always be maintained during project construction activities. If full lane closures are required and one direction of travel in each direction cannot be maintained, the TMP shall identify planned detours. The TMP shall include measures such as construction signage, limitations on timing for lane closures to avoid peak hours, temporary striping plans, and use of construction flag person(s) to direct traffic during heavy equipment use. The TMP shall include signage, lane closures, flag persons, etc., and shall specify that one lane of travel in each direction shall be maintained along City rights-of-way. Bicycle lanes and pedestrian sidewalks shall remain open and accessible, to the greatest extent feasible, during construction or shall be re-routed to ensure continued connectivity. Lastly the TMP shall detail plans that the Applicant would take to ensure that the Project Site would provide adequate emergency access. The TMP shall be incorporated into project specifications for verification prior to final plan approval.

Supporting Explanation: The Project would result in less than significant impacts upon implementation of Mitigation Measure MM TRA-1, which would require the Project Applicant to implement a TMP to ensure continued bicycle and pedestrian circulation during the construction activities. Planned development projects that are adjacent to Class II Bicycle Lanes would also be required to implement this mitigation measure to reduce potential impacts to existing bicycle circulation. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM TRA-1, cumulative impacts would be less than significant (Final EIR 3.14-22 to 3.14-24)

Page 396 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.451355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
F. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
State CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(a) requires an evaluation of “a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.” The objectives of the Project are identified in Section 2.0, Project Description, of the DEIR, and in Section B of these Findings. Alternatives are used to determine whether or not a variation of the Project would reduce or eliminate significant project impacts within the basic framework of the objectives.

State CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e) requires that, among other alternatives, a “no project” alternative be evaluated in comparison to the Project. State CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e)(2) requires that the “no project” analysis “discuss the existing conditions … as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services.”
The project alternatives evaluated in detail in the EIR were the following:
•No Project Alternative
•Specific Plan Alternative
F.1 Project Objectives and Legal Requirements
At the time of project approval, the lead agency’s decision-making body must determine whether the alternatives are feasible or not. The lead agency must consider whether specific “economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations ...make infeasible mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.” (Pub. Res. Code, § 21081(a)(3); State CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3)).

Importantly, CEQA gives lead agencies the authority to approve a project notwithstanding its significant environmental impacts, if the agency determines it is not “feasible” to lessen or avoid the significant effects. (Pub. Res. Code, § 21002). If specifically identified benefits of the project outweigh the significant unavoidable environmental impacts, the adverse impacts may be considered “acceptable,” thereby allowing for lead agency approval of the project, notwithstanding such adverse impacts, provided the agency adopts a statement of overriding considerations. (Pub. Res. Code, § 21081.1(b); State CEQA Guidelines § 15093).

Page 397 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.461355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
As called for by the State CEQA Guidelines, the achievement of project objectives must be balanced by the ability of an alternative to reduce the significant impacts of the project. The objectives of the 1355 California Circle project are as follows:
• Increase affordable housing opportunities, including housing designated for all MUSD staff, and help meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA); • Redevelop underutilized and vacated land; and
• Implement sustainable building practices to showcase energy efficiency and low water use.

CEQA does not require adoption of an alternative that does not adequately meet most of the basic project objectives as determined by the lead agency decision makers.

F.2 Findings Regarding Alternatives Considered in the EIR Alternative 1 - No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative is required by Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines and assumes that the Project would not be implemented. The No Project Alternative allows decision-makers to compare the impacts of approving the Project with the impacts of not approving the Project. However, “no project” does not necessarily mean that development will be prohibited. The No Project Alternative includes “what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services.”1 For purposes of this EIR, the No Project Alternative (Alternative 1) assumes the development of the proposed seven plex and twelve plex townhomes and apartment complex would not occur. The existing 90,000 square foot industrial office building, surface parking lot, and landscaping would remain, and no physical changes would be implemented.

Consideration of the No Project Alternative
As demonstrated in Table 5.0-1, Alternative 1 Relationship to the Project Objectives, Alternative 1 would not achieve any of the Project objectives. Alternative 1 would not redevelop the existing parcel or provide new housing in the City. No changes to the Project Site would occur under Alternative 1. Accordingly, impact areas driven by population would be determined to be less than significant, including energy, public services and utilities, including fire, police, school and library services, electricity, and natural gas consumption, as well as solid waste and wastewater generation, and water consumption, would be less 1 CEQA § 15126.6[e][2]

Page 398 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.471355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
than the Project. Furthermore, impact areas determined to be less than significant with mitigation or result in unavoidable and significant impacts such as aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and traffic/circulation would be reduced.

Findings
The Council finds that while the No Project Alternative results in less significant impacts to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and traffic/circulation impacts compared to the Project, the alternative would not meet many of the key project objectives, and is environmentally and socially undesirable, and is therefore rejected.

Alternative 2 – Specific Plan Alternative
The Specific Plan Alternative (Alternative 2) would include the adoption and implementation of a California Circle Specific Plan bound by the I-880/California Circle on-and-off ramp, Dixon Landing Road, Lower Penitencia Creek, Fairview Avenue, and Cadillac Court (Plan Area),4 which includes the Project Site. The Specific Plan would serve both planning and regulatory functions, including land use regulations, circulation patterns, building and streetscape design standards, and development standards. Alternative 2 assumes that the Project could be implemented as a development project under the Specific Plan.

Alternative 2 would accommodate mixed use developments with opportunities for residential development. Individual development projects under the Specific Plan would also be subject to recent local and State affordable housing requirements. Existing and new commercial and industrial uses along the I- 880 frontage would be supported, and ensure land use compatibility between the residential, commercial and industrial buildout within the Specific Plan Area. Additionally, the Specific Plan would identify and implement circulation and street improvements as needed within the Plan Area and the vicinity of the Project Site.

Consideration of the Specific Plan Alternative
As shown in Table 5.0-2, Alternative 2 would achieve all three of the Project objectives. Furthermore, most of the objectives would be met to a greater degree than the Project because the Specific Plan Area would be able to accommodate a greater amount of mixed-use development, thus providing greater opportunities for housing development and increased development intensity. The Specific Plan Alternative would eliminate the significant impact of the Project (aesthetics-visual impacts to scenic resources). Additionally, the Specific Plan Alternative would achieve all Project objectives to a greater degree. However, Alternative 2 could increase the amount of residential development compared to the Project. Thus, the Alternative would potentially increase the City's population and the demand for public services, recreational spaces,

Page 399 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.481355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
and utility services (i.e., water, wastewater, and solid waste). Future development and redevelopment projects resulting from the Specific Plan Alternative would introduce additional commercial, industrial, and mixed-use development that would increase the development of the Project Site and uses surrounding the Project Site (Specific Plan Area).

Findings
The City Council finds that implementation of Alternative 2 could potentially result in similar environmental impacts to the Project but to a greater degree. Therefore, the Specific Plan Alternative would result in greater impacts than the Project and would ultimately be the inferior alternative. Thus, the alternative is environmentally and socially undesirable, and is therefore rejected.

G STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Milpitas City Council hereby adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations concerning the unavoidable significant impacts of the 1355 California Circle Project to explain why the benefits of the Project outweigh and override its unavoidable impacts.

The Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the 1355 California Circle Project identifies and discusses significant environmental impacts that could occur as a result of implementation of the Project.

The City Council made specific Findings pursuant to CEQA, on each of the significant environmental impacts of the Project and on mitigation measures and alternatives. Nevertheless, even with implementation of feasible mitigation measures, certain significant and unavoidable impacts related to aesthetics still remain.

In accordance with Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council hereby finds that following economic, legal, social, environmental, and other benefits of the 1355 California Circle Project outweigh its unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts discussed in the Findings, based on the considerations set forth herein:

G.1 Benefits of the 1355 California Circle Project

1. The Project will provide affordable housing opportunities, which will assist the City in meeting its share of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for new and affordable residential units.

2. The Project’s 206 multi-family housing units will help address the statewide housing crises

3. The Project will redevelop an underutilized and vacated parcel.

Page 400 of 707 ends

1355 California Circle Final EIR Findings
Impact Sciences, Inc.491355 California Circle Final EIR 1451.001 September 2023
For the above-mentioned reasons, the City Council hereby finds that the benefits of the Project outweigh and override any adverse environmental impacts associated with the 1355 California Circle Project.

H. ADOPTION OF A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE

CEQA MITIGATION MEASURES
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires this City Council to adopt a monitoring or reporting program regarding the changes in the Project and mitigation measures imposed to lessen or avoid significant effects on the environment. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP), included as Chapter 3.0 in the Final EIR, is hereby adopted.

Page 401 of 707 ends

Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.0-1 1355 California Circle FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM

4.1 INTRODUCTION
The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared in conformance with Section 21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It is the intent of this program to: (1) verify satisfaction of the required mitigation measures of the EIR (EIR); (2) provide a methodology to document implementation of the required mitigation measures; (3) provide a record of the Monitoring Program; ( 4) identify monitoring responsibility; (5) establish administrative procedures for the clearance of mitigation measures; (6) establish the frequency and duration of monitoring; and (7) use existing review processes wherever feasible.

This MMP describes the procedures for the implementation of the mitigation measures adopted for the Project. The City of Milpitas Planning Department and staff of other City Departments shall be responsible for administering the MMP activities or delegating them to consultants, or contractors. The Monitoring or Enforcing Agencies identified herein, at their discretion, may require a project applicant or operator to pay for one or more independent environmental monitor(s) to be responsible for monitoring implementation of mitiga tion measures (e.g., City building inspector, project contractor, certified professionals, etc., depending on the requirements of the mitigation measures) required of project applicants or operators.

Monitors would be hired by the City or by the applicant or operator at the City’s discretion.

Each mitigation measure is identified in Table 4.0- 1, Mitigation Monitoring Program Matrix, and is categorized by environmental topic and corresponding number with identification of:
• The Implementing Party or Agency – this is in most cases, the applicant for individual projects who will be required to implement most of the measures.
• The Enforcement and Monitoring Entity – this is the entity or entities that will monitor each measure and ensure that it is implemented in accordance with this MMP. • Monitoring Phase and Monitoring Actions – this is the timeframe that monitoring would occur and the criteria that would determine when the measure has been accomplished and/or the monitoring actions to be undertaken to ensure the measure is implemented.

Page 402 of 707 ends

4.0 Mitigation Monitoring Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.0-2 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

Table 4.0-1
Mitigation Monitoring Program Matrix

Mitigation Measure Monitoring Phase and
Monitoring Actions
Implementing
Party
Enforcement and
Monitoring Entity
Impact – Air Quality
MM AQ-1: The following BAAQMD Basic Best Management Practices for Construction- Related Fugitive Dust Emissions shall be implemented:
• All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
• All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph.
• All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.
• Unpaved roads providing access to sites located 100 feet or further from a paved road shall be treated with a 6- to 12-inch layer of compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
• Publicly visible signs shall be posted with the telephone number and name of the person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s General Air Pollution Complaints number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Prior to issuance of grading
permits
Project Applicant City of Milpitas
Building Safety and
Housing Department.

Impact - Biological Resources
MM BIO-1: In the event that ground-disturbing activities or removal of any trees, shrubs, or any other potential nesting habitat that are associated with the Project are scheduled to occur within the avian nesting season (from January 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist retained by the Applicant shall conduct a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds within three days prior to any ground disturbing activities.

The biologist conducting the clearance survey shall document the negative results if no Prior to issuance of grading or
building permits
Project Applicant City of Milpitas
Planning Department.

Page 403 of 707 ends

4.0 Mitigation Monitoring Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.0-3 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
Mitigation Measure Monitoring Phase and
Monitoring Actions
Implementing
Party
Enforcement and
Monitoring Entity
active bird nests are observed on the Project Site during the clearance survey with a brief letter report indicating that no impacts to active bird nests would occur before construction can proceed. If an active bird nest is discovered during the pre-construction clearance survey, construction activities shall stay outside of a 100-foot buffer around the active nest.

Encroachment into the buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist.

Any activities requiring the removal of a tree with an active bird nest shall halt until nesting activity seasons, which would be determined by the qualified biologist.

The biologist shall be present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer area and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity. Results of the pre-construction survey and any subsequent monitoring shall be provided to the City of Milpitas, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and other appropriate agencies. This requirement shall be indicated on the site improvement plan and specifications for verification by the City of Milpitas prior to the initiation of construction activities
Impact – Cultural Resources
MM CR-1: The Project Applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology to conduct Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training for archaeological sensitivity for all construction personnel prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities. If archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area shall be halted and the archaeologist shall evaluate the find. If the resources are Native American human remains, the County Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted as mandated by law. If necessary, the evaluation may require preparation of archaeological testing for California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility. Results of the archaeological testing shall be reviewed and approved by the qualified archaeologist. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA and cannot be avoided by the Project, additional work may be warranted, such as data recovery excavation, and, if so, shall be identified by the archaeologist to mitigate any such significant impacts to cultural resources, if identified.

Prior to project approval. Project Applicant City of Milpitas Planning Department.

Impact – Geology and Soils
MM GEO-1: In the event a potentially significant paleontological resource is encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work within 100 feet of the discovery shall halt and a professional paleontologist who meets the qualification standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology shall be retained by the Project Applicant immediately to evaluate the significance of the discovery. The City of Milpitas Planning Department shall be notified immediately. If the resource is found to be significant, the professional paleontologist shall systematically remove it from the site for laboratory preparation. Following laboratory preparation, the resource would be identified, cataloged, and inventoried in anticipation of curation. All collected and prepared resources would be curated and stored in an accredited repository.

Prior to project approval. Project Applicant City of Milpitas PlanningDepartment.

Page 404 of 707 ends

4.0 Mitigation Monitoring Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.0-4 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
Mitigation Measure Monitoring Phase and
Monitoring Actions
Implementing
Party
Enforcement and
Monitoring Entity
Impact – Greenhouse Gases
MM GHG-1: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate compliance with relevant and applicable measures of the CAP Update by preparing and implementing a project-specific consistency review checklist. The City shall review this consistency review checklist as part of the Project plan review.

The consistency review checklist shall outline feasible, effective and applicable measures that will be required for the Project. Applicable and effective measures in reducing Project GHG emissions include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Utilize the latest energy-efficient construction equipment, when feasible; • Install Energy Star appliances;
• Install on-site renewable energy, such as solar panels; • Provide on-site electric vehicle charging stations and associated infrastructure; and • Install water-efficient irrigation systems capable of using reclaimed water, when available.

Prior to issuance of grading and
building permits
City of Milpitas City of Milpitas
Planning Department
Impact - Hazards and Hazardous Material
MM HAZ-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) and Health and Safety Plan (HSP) shall be prepared by a qualified environmental professional with Phase II/Site Characterization experience to establish appropriate management practices for handling impacted soil, soil vapor and ground water if encountered during construction activities. These documents shall include the following:
• Site control procedures to control the flow of personnel, vehicles and materials in and out of the Site.
• Measures to minimize dust generation, storm water runoff and tracking of soil off- Site.
• If excavation de-watering is required, protocols to evaluate water quality and discharge/disposal alternatives shall be described.
• Protocols for soil removal and subsequent subsurface soil sampling and evaluation. • Protocols for conducting earthwork activities in areas where impacted soil, soil vapor and/or ground water are present or suspected. Worker training requirements, health and safety measures and soil handing procedures should be described. • Protocols to be implemented if buried structures, wells, debris, or unidentified areas of impacted soil are encountered during construction activities. • Protocols to evaluate the quality of soil suspected of being contaminated so that appropriate mitigation, disposal or reuse alternatives, if necessary, can be determined. • Procedures to evaluate and document the quality of any soil imported to the Site.

Prior to issuance of grading and
building permits.

Project Applicant City of Milpitas
Building Safety
Department

Page 405 of 707 ends

4.0 Mitigation Monitoring Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.0-5 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
Mitigation Measure Monitoring Phase and
Monitoring Actions
Implementing
Party
Enforcement and
Monitoring Entity
• Soil containing chemicals exceeding residential (unrestricted use) screening levels or typical background concentrations of metals should not be accepted. • Methods to monitor excavations for the potential presence of volatile chemical vapors.

Impact - Transportation
MM TRA-1: Prior to project construction initiation, the respective Applicants shall prepare a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) for approval by the City Traffic Engineer. The TMP shall specify that one direction of travel in each direction on adjacent roadways must always be maintained during project construction activities. If full lane closures are required and one direction of travel in each direction cannot be maintained, the TMP shall identify planned detours. The TMP shall include measures such as construction signage, limitations on timing for lane closures to avoid peak hours, temporary striping plans, and use of construction flag person(s) to direct traffic during heavy equipment use. The TMP shall include signage, lane closures, flag persons, etc., and shall specify that one lane of travel in each direction shall be maintained along City rights-of-way. Bicycle lanes and pedestrian sidewalks shall remain open and accessible, to the greatest extent feasible, during construction or shall be re-routed to ensure continued connectivity. Lastly the TMP shall detail plans that the Applicant would take to ensure that the Project Site would provide adequate emergency access. The TMP shall be incorporated into project specifications for verification prior to final plan approval.

Prior to grading and building
permit issuance.

Project Applicant City of Milpitas
Building Safety
Department

City of Milpitas
Engineering
Department

Page 406 of 707 ends

CITY OF MILPITAS
Prepared for:

City of Milpitas
Planning & Neighborhood Services
455 E. Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035
Prepared by:
811 W. 7th Street
Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90017
September 2023
1355 California Circle Project
Final Environmental Impact Report

Page 407 of 707 ends

CITY OF MILPITAS
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLE PROJECT
Final Environmental Impact Report
Prepared for:

City of Milpitas
Planning Department
455 E. Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, California 95035
Prepared by:

Impact Sciences, Inc.
811 W. 7th Street, Suite 200
Los Angeles, California 90017
September 2023

Page 408 of 707 ends

City of Los Angeles i 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................1.0 -1

2.0 Corrections and Additions ....................................................................................................................2.0 -1

3.0 Responses to Comments ........................................................................................................................3 .0-1

4.0 Mitigation Monitoring Program ...........................................................................................................4 .0-1

5.0 List of Preparers and Persons Consulted ............................................................................................5.0 -1 Appendix

3.9 Stormwater and Water Quality Analysis
List of Tables
Table Page

3.0-1 List of Commenters on the DEIR ..........................................................................................................3.0 -2

4.0-1 Mitigation Monitoring Program Matrix ..............................................................................................4.0 -2

Page 409 of 707 ends

Impact Sciences, Inc. 1.0-1 1355 California Circle FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Final Environmental Impact Report ( ‘Final EIR’ or ‘FEIR’ ) has been prepared by the City of Milpitas (City) for the proposed residential development project located at 1355 California Circle (referred to as the ‘Project’). This FEIR complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes (Cal. Pub. Res. Code, Section 21000 et. seq.) and implementing guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq.) (the “State CEQA Guidelines”).

1.1 CEQA REQUIREMENTS
Before approving a project that may cause a significant environmental impact, CEQA requires the lead agency to prepare and certify a FEIR. According to the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15132, the FEIR shall consist of:

1. The Draft EIR (DEIR) or a revision of the DEIR;

2. Comments and recommendations received on the DEIR, either verbatim or in summary;

3. A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the DEIR;

4. The responses of the lead agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; and

5. Any other information added by the lead agency.

As shown, under the State CEQA Guidelines, the FEIR includes the D EIR as well as the other items listed.

For purposes of clarity, the term “Final EIR” in this document refers to everything contained in this document and not the DEIR. The term “EIR” in this document refers to the FEIR and the DEIR.

1.2 PUBLIC REVIEW PROCESS
At the outset of the environmental review process, the City prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2022110251). The NOP was published and distributed to the State Clearinghouse, trustee agencies, responsible agencies, and other interested parties for a 30- day public review period from November 14, 20 23, to December 14 , 20 22. A public scoping meeting was held on November 30, 2022. The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review period July 7, 2023, to August 21, 2023.

Page 410 of 707 ends

1.0 Introduction
Impact Sciences, Inc. 1.0-2 1355 California Circle FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

1.3 CONTENT OF THE FEIR
As discussed above, the primary intent of the FEIR is to provide a forum to air and address comments pertaining to the analysis contained within the DEIR. Pursuant to Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has reviewed and addressed all comments raising environmental issues on the DEIR, which the City received by the comment period deadline. Included in the FEIR are all the written comments that were submitted during the public comment period.

To adequately address the comments provided by interested agencies and the public in an organized manner, this FEIR includes the following chapters and appendices:
• Section 1.0, Introduction. This chapter summarizes the contents of the F EIR and the environmen tal review process.
• Section 2.0, Corrections and Additions. This chapter provides a list of changes that were made to the DEIR. These revisions are shown in strikeout and additions are shown in underline text. • Section 3.0, Responses to Comments. The City received three comment letters during the DEIR public review period. Of these, one letter is directed exclusively at the Pr oject rather than the DEIR. This chapter contains summaries of these comment letters and the City’s responses to those comments that raise significant environmental points. A list of individuals, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the DEIR is provided. All comment letters, including those that did not raise significant environmental points, are included in Section 3.0 Responses to Comments.

In addition, the City received two comment letters after the DEIR public review period. Under CEQA, a lead agency is required to con sider comments on the DEIR and to prepare a written response, if a comment is received within the public comment period. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21091, subd. (d); CEQA Guidelines, § 15088.) When a comment letter is received after the close of the public c omment period, however, a lead agency does not have an obligation to respond. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21091, subd. (d)(1); Pub. Resources Code, § 21092.5, subd. (c)(“Nothing in this section requires the lead agency to respond to comments not received within the comment periods specified in this division, to reopen comment periods, or to delay acting on a negative declaration or environmental impact report.”).) Although a lead agency is not required to respond to late comments, it may choose to do so. (Gra y v.

County of Madera (2008) 167 Cal. App. 4th 1099, 1110 (Gray), citing Pub. Resources Code, § 21091, subd. (d)(1); CEQA Guidelines, § 15088; Gilroy Citizens for Responsible Planning v. City of Gilroy (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 911, 925, fn. 10 (Gilroy Citizens).)

Page 411 of 707 ends

1.0 Introduction
Impact Sciences, Inc. 1.0-3 1355 California Circle FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
• Section 4.0, Mitigation Monitoring Program . This chapter includes the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) prepared in compliance with the requirements of Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15091(d) and 15097 of the State CEQA Guidelines.

1.4 REVIEW AND CERTIFICATION OF THE FEIR
Consistent with CEQA (Public Resource Code Section 21092.5), responses to agency comments are being forwarded to each commenting agency prior to certificati on of the F EIR. In addition, responses are also being distributed to all commenters via email. The FEIR can be downloaded at:
https://www.milpitas.gov/379/Environmental-Documents-CEQA

1.5 SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The Project is comprised of five (5) seven -plex townhomes, eight (8) twelve- plex townhomes, and an apartment building. The Project would provide a total of 206 multi- family housing units:
• Seven-Plex Townhomes: 35 dwelling units.
• Twelve-Plex Townhomes: 96 dwelling units.
• Apartment Building: 75 dwelling units

1.5.1 Proposed Townhomes
The proposed seven -plex and twelve -plex townhomes would be located next to each other and would encompass the majority of the Project Site.

Seven-Plex Townhomes
The Project would construct five three-storied townhome buildings containing seven units per building for a total of 35 dwelling units. All 35 dwelling units would be offered as “market rate” for sale units, ranging in size between 1,534 and 1,850 square feet. The seven -plex townhomes would encompass building numbers 1 thr ough 5. Buildings 1 and 2 would have frontage onto California Circle. The seven- plex townhomes would have a total gross floor area of 16,954 square feet. These townhomes would utilize four different floor plans that consist of three and four-bedroom units, each varying in size and garage type.

Twelve-Plex Townhomes
The Project would also construct eight four -storied townhome buildings containing twelve units per building for a total of 96 dwelling units. All 96 dwelling units would be offered as “market ra te” for sale

Page 412 of 707 ends

1.0 Introduction
Impact Sciences, Inc. 1.0-4 1355 California Circle FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
units, ranging in size from 1,518 to 2,175 square feet. The twelve- plex townhomes would encompass building numbers 6 through 13. The townhomes would have a total gross floor area of 28,677 square feet.

Additionally, the twelve-plex townhomes would utilize seven different plans that consist of predominantly three-bedroom units with either two or three bathrooms. A portion of these units have an option to create a fourth bedroom loft.

The twelve-plex townhomes would range in size between 1,518 and 2,175 square feet. Approximately 14 units of the twelve -plex townhomes are adaptable multi -story dwelling units on an accessible route that complies with the California Building Code (CBC).

1.5.2 Proposed Apartment Complex
The Project would devel op a six -story apartment complex and associated parking facilities at the northeastern corner of the Project Site; refer to Figure 2.0- 5, Apartment Site Plan , of the DEIR . The proposed apartment building would be located within the northeastern corner of the Project Site. Plans for the apartment building would range between studios to two -bedroom units. The proposed apartment complex would provide 75 units that would be of fered at “below market rate” (BMR) rental prices. It is anticipated that, of the 75 BMR units, a minimum of 20 units would be offered at the City’s established “low-income rental rate”, while the remaining 55 units would be offered at a “moderate rental rate” (MRR) rental prices. The proposed apartment complex would have a gross floor area of approximately 66,844 square feet, and a floor area ratio of 1.63. The ground floor, level R0, would be reserved for 60 covered parking spaces, an apartment leasing off ice, and maintenance rooms. Starting at the second floor of the building, levels R1 through R5 would consist of several studios, one bedroom, and two-bedroom units that range in size between 411 to 840 square feet.

1.5.3 Project Objectives
In accordance wi th State CEQA Guidelines Section 15124, the specific project objectives identified below support the underlying purpose of the Project , assist the City as Lead Agency in developing a reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in this EIR, and will ultima tely aid the decision maker in preparing findings and overriding considerations, if necessary.

The objectives of the Project are as follows:
• Increase affordable housing opportunities, including housing designated for all Milpitas Unified School District staff, and help meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA);

Page 413 of 707 ends

1.0 Introduction
Impact Sciences, Inc. 1.0-5 1355 California Circle FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
• Redevelop underutilized and vacated land; and
• Implement sustainable building practices to showcase energy efficiency and low water use.

1.6 SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IMPACTS
Section 15382 of the State CEQA Guidelines defines a significant impact on the environment as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within an area affected by the project, including land, air, w ater, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance.” To approve a project with significant and unavoidable impacts, the lead agency must adopt a written Statement of Overriding Considerations (in accordance with Section 15 093 of the State CEQA Guidelines) demonstrating that the decisionmaker has found that on balance the benefits of approving the Project outweigh the negative environmental consequences.

Impacts found to be significant and unavoidable are the P roject and cumulative impacts to aesthetics, specifically to the existing scenic vistas that surround the Project Site . Impacts found to be potentially significant but able to be reduced to less than significant with the imposition of proposed mitigation include habitat modifications, movement of native animal species, archaeological resources, tribal resources, paleontological resources, transportation regulations, and emergency access.

Page 414 of 707 ends

Impact Sciences, Inc. 2.0-1 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

2.0 CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS
As required by California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15088, this chapter provides corrections or clarifications of certain statements in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The correction(s) and/or addition(s) do not constitute significant new information, because none of the defined criteria in 15088.5(a) would be met, including that the correction(s) or addition(s) would not result in new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any impact already identified in the DEIR. Specifically, Section 15088.5(a) defines significant new information which requires recirculation to be any of the following:

1. A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.

2. A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance.

3. A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it.

4. The DEIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.

Corrections or information has been added to the DEIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, as part of the preparation of the Final EIR (FEIR). Additions to the text of the DEIR are shown by underline and deletions from the text of the DEIR are shown by strikethrough unless otherwise described. Where mitigation measures are replaced or revised, the replacement or revised measures are listed under the relevant impact section; however, the revisions also a pply to mitigation measure s listed in the Executive Summary. As noted above, the following corrections and additions included herein involve minor modifications that clarify or amplify information contained in the DEIR and none would result in new or more severe significant impacts from those identified in the DEIR impact analysis or conclusions.

Page 415 of 707 ends

2.0 Corrections and Additions
Impact Sciences, Inc. 2.0-2 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

2.0 Project Description

Page 2 ends

• Increase affordable housin g opportunities, including housing designated for teachers all Milpitas Unified School District staff, and help meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA);

3.3 Biological Resources

Page 3 ends

Except for the existing adjacent storm drain channel west of the Project Site, there are no riparian habitats in the Project Site or its immediate vicinity. 9 Additionally, T he adjacent storm drain channel is not an identifiable jurisdictional waters or wetlands. Rather, the channel is identified as a Riverine Habitat R4SBAx, which is characterized as a man -made storm channel that serves a larger deepwater system and contains surface water for brief p eriods of time. However, the Riverine includes all wetlands within the channel. Thus, the adjacent channel may be considered as a jurisdictional Waters of the United States and is thereby considered a jurisdictional Waters of the State.

Page 3 ends

There are no natural hydrologic features that are present on-site. As mentioned above, there are no riparian habitats within the Project Site or in its immediate vicinity. There is an existing storm drain channel, located west of the Project Site. However, As discussed in Section 3.3.1.3, Sensitive Plant Communities, the storm drain channel is not identified as a Riverine Habitat R4SBAx and is considered to be an identifiable jurisdictional waters or wetlands. Rather, the channel is identified as a Riverine Habitat R4SBAx, which is characterized as a man -made storm channel that serves a larger deepwater system and contains surface water for brief periods of time. Furthermore However, the Project’s drainage plan and compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System p ermit will ensure that the channel would not be disturbed by Project construction or operation activities (s ee Appendix 3.9 Stormwater and Water Quality Analysis ).

Although Coyote Creek is located approximately 630 feet west of the Project Site, developed properties and I -880 serve as a barrier between the riverine and the Project Site. Thus, Project implementation would have less than significant impacts on to the riverine.

Page 416 of 707 ends

2.0 Corrections and Additions
Impact Sciences, Inc. 2.0-3 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
As shown in Table 3-2, Summary of the Potentially Occurring Special- Status Plant and Animal Species, one natural community has historically been observed within the same USGS Quadrangle as the Project Site: the Northern Coastal Salt Marsh. However, the Project Site is a developed property with minimal non -native vegetation and is not adjacent to a bay, harbor, or inlet. Thus, the Project Site would not provide a suitable habitat for the natural community.

In conclusion, the Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, and no less than significant impacts would occur.

Significance Before Mitigation
No Less than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Significance After Mitigation
No Less than Significant Impact.

Page 3 ends

As discussed above, the Project Site is developed and located within an urbanized area of Milpitas.

Additionally, the Project Site does not contain any natural hydrologic or drainage features .

Although the Project Site is adjacent to a channelized Waters of the State, the channel would not be disturbed by the Project . Further, there no State or Federally protected wetlands on -site.

Therefore, Project implementation would not have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands. No Less than Significant impacts to protected wetlands would occur.

Significance Before Mitigation
No Less than Significant Impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Significance After Mitigation
No Less than Significant Impact.

Page 417 of 707 ends

2.0 Corrections and Additions
Impact Sciences, Inc. 2.0-4 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality

Page 3 ends

Watersheds
The City of Milpitas is located within the Coyote Watershed,1 the largest watershed in Santa Clara County (County) encompassing approximate ly 322 square miles. 2 Coyote Creek, the main waterway for the watershed, is the longest creek in the County. The Coyote Watershed is home to the Penitencia Water Treatment Plant, which provides drinking water for 270,000 residential and commercial users.3 An existing storm drain channel is located immediately west of the Project Site.

Page 3 ends

Santa Clara Valley Water District Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan Valley Water’s One Water Plan
The SCVWD’s Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan is organized in the following elements: Water Supply, Natural Flood Protection, and Water Resources Stewardship. Each element includes an informational overview that describes overarching goals and related objectives on a broad level and places them in a countywide context. At the heart of the plan are the goals, objectives, and strategies that serve as the district’s framework and provide information for partner agenci es. The SCVWD is involved in water management at varying levels of involvement. In some instances, it plays a primary role; in others, the district collaborates with other agencies and/or partners; in still other cases, the SCVWD serves as an informational resource and public advocate. The Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan clarifies these degrees of involvement. Valley Water's One Water Plan is a long range integrated water resources master plan that includes goals for Water Supply, Natural Floo d Protection, and Environmental Stewardship. This planning effort acts as Valley Water's flood management plan and stream stewardship plan, while also providing a nexus to water supply planning. Each One Water goal is described in terms of measurable objectives and priority actions on a per watershed basis. One Water's five watershed plans (1 complete, 2 pending, 2 to be developed) will identify those actions needed to improve watershed health and water resources management throughout Santa Clara County. Much of the work needed can only be accomplished through partnerships with local government and non-profit organizations.

Page 418 of 707 ends

2.0 Corrections and Additions
Impact Sciences, Inc. 2.0-5 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

Page 3 ends

Santa Clara Valley 2016 Groundwater Management Plan 2021 G roundwater Management Plan
The SCVWD’s Groundwater Management Plan (GWMP) describes the District’s comprehensive groundwater management framework, including existing and potential actions to achieve basin sustainability goals and ensure continued sustainab le groundwater management. The GWMP covers the Santa Clara and Llagas subbasins, located entirely in Santa Clara County. The SCVWD’s prior Groundwater Management Plan was adopted by the Board in 2012 and described the District’s comprehensive groundwater m anagement framework, including basin management objectives, strategies, groundwater management programs, and outcome measures. The 2016 GWMP updates and expands on technical information in the 2012 GWMP and is prepared as an alternative to a Groundwater Sustainability Plan under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). In addition, the District prepared a five- year groundwater management plan as required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

Page 3 ends

The proposed Drainage Plan under the Project would divide the Project Site into 38 drainage management areas (DMAs , see Appendix 3.9 , Stormwater and Water Quality Analysis for the complete drainage plan of the Project ). As discussed in Appendix 3.9 , the majority of these drainage areas would be LID treated using bio -treatment basins, while one DMA is considered to be a self-retaining drainage area. In recognition of the potential for development to cause potential stormwater pollutant impacts, the Project would be required to implement Source Control and Treatment Control BMPs to reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable.

These control BMPs would include buildings with disconnected downspo uts, self-retaining areas, beneficial landscaping, inlets with flows- to-bay labels, pavement sweeping, catch basin cleaning, and good housekeeping. These BMPs, as well as the proposed bio -treatment basins would be designed in Treatment Control BMPs would also be required to be incorporated into the design of onsite storm drain systems to treat runoff in accordance with the Standard Urban Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) standards and as required by the City.

Chapter 16 of the City’s Municipal Code provides regulations and gives legal effect to certain requirements of the Waste Discharge Requirements and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit for the discharge of stormwater runoff from the City's municipal separate storm

Page 419 of 707 ends

2.0 Corrections and Additions
Impact Sciences, Inc. 2.0-6 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
sewer (MS4), issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Region to the City of Milpitas. These regulations include the following:
• Section XI-16-5 makes it unlawful to discharge non- stormwater or contaminated stormwater into any City storm drain or watercourse.
• Section X-16-6 requires regulated projects to design and construct Low Impact Development source control, site design, and stormwater treatment measures in order to reduce water quality impacts of urban runoff from the entire project site for the life of the project. • Section XI -16-7 requires that property owners, its administrators, or any other persons, including homeowners’ associations, take the necessary actions to ensure that permanent stormwater treatment measures are properly maintained so that they continue to operate as originally designed and approved for the life of the development.

As shown in Project’s D rainage Plan, Appendix 3.9, the Project would reduce the existing on -site impervious surface area from 224,153 square feet to 207,849 square feet of impervious area.

Accordingly, the Project would increase the existing on-site from 67,395 square feet to 83,669 square feet, providing additional area for rainfall to naturally infiltrate rather than produce stormwater discharge. Lastly, implementation of the proposed treatment basins would provide more than 1,000 square feet of treatment than what is required under City standards.

Implementation of these site-specific source control and treatment control BMPs would be in accordance with Chapter 16 of the City code and the County construction and Santa Clara Valley stormwater management codes policies, and the SWMP would reduce these potential impacts related to stormwater quality. Applicable Furthermore, these BMPs would be implemented in accordance with regional and local regulatory requirements, including the MRP . Because the Project would not violate any water quality or wast e discharge requirements Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Page 3 ends

Groundwater levels are managed by the California Department of Water Resources to maint ain a safe operating yield of groundwater, which includes a sustainable pumping rate that does not exceed the total recharge into the basin. Further, t The SCVWD’s Groundwater Management Plan describes the District’s comprehensive groundwater management fra mework, including existing and potential actions to achieve basin sustainability goals and ensure continued sustainable groundwater management.

Page 420 of 707 ends

2.0 Corrections and Additions
Impact Sciences, Inc. 2.0-7 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
As discussed above, T the Project would reduce the result in comparable amounts of impervious surfaces and increase the pervious surfaces on-site as compared to existing conditions. Further, the Project Site is not located within a local groundwater recharge area and no groundwater extraction would occur as part of the Project.

Page 3 ends

The Project would implement a new on -site drainage system that would be LID and include the use of bio-treatment basins (see Appendix 3.9). These bio-treatment basins would be designed to be consistent with local and regional drainage requirements. The Project is not anticipated to substantially change the drainage patterns within the Project Site. At completion, the Project Site would be developed with buildings, landscaped areas, roads, and other hardscape improvements; no bare areas of soil would be left vulnerable to erosion. Chapter 16 of the City’s Municipal Code provides regulations and gives legal effect to certain requirements of the Waste Discharge Requirements and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit for the discharge of stormwater runoff from the City’s municipal separate storm sewer (MS4), issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Region to the City of Milpitas. These regulations include Section XI 16 -5 through Section XI -16-7, as detailed above. Compliance with existing State and local regulations would ensure impacts are reduced and impacts would be less than significant.

Page 3 ends

follows:

Storm water runoff is influenced by rainfall intensity, ground surface permeability, watershed size and shape, and physical barriers. In addition, paved surfaces and drainage conduits can accelerate the velocity of runoff, concentrating peak flows in downstream areas faster than under natural conditions. Significant increases to runoff and peak flow could overwhelm drainage systems and alter flood elevations in downstream l ocations. Increased runoff velocity can promote scouring of existing drainage facilities, reducing system reliability, and safety. The Project would decrease the number and area of impervious surfaces and increase the number and area of pervious surfaces on-site compared to the existing conditions result in comparable amounts of impervious surfaces as existing conditions. Therefore, the Project is not anticipated to increase demand for the existing stormwater drainage systems. Impacts would be less than significant.

Page 421 of 707 ends

2.0 Corrections and Additions
Impact Sciences, Inc. 2.0-8 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

Page 3 ends

During operation of the Project, much of the site would remain impervious (similar to existing conditions) Compared to existing conditions, implementa tion of the Project would result in a reduction in impervious surfaces due to the presence of parking areas, walkways, hardscape, and building roofs and roadways. Landscaped areas of the Project would introduce opportunities for infiltration of stormwater runoff and roof discharges, thereby minimizing potential impacts associated with stormwater runoff exiting the area, and potentially improving conditions compared to existing conditions. For these reasons, potential impacts to drainage pattern alterations, including how drainage pattern alterations could affect surface water runoff, erosion/siltation, flooding, and stormwater conveyance facilities would be less than significant.

3.10 Land Use and Planning

Page 3 ends

Consistent with the new General Plan NCMU land use designation, the Project Site and adjacent parcels will be rezoned to Mixed Use (MXD) to allow a multifamily residential development with a density of 21 to 30 units per acre. Other parcels in the California Circle area will be rezoned MXD Mixed-Use to the newly created Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use (N CMU), consistent with current land uses and the NCMU designation under the General Plan.

Appendix 3.14, Transportation Analysis

Page 1 ends

• California Circle and I-880 NB Ramps (South of Dixon Landing Road) • California Circle and Dixon Landing Road (North of Dixon Landing Road) • Dixon Landing Road and Milmont Drive

Page 422 of 707 ends

Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-1 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

3.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
This section includes comments received during the circulation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR” or “Draft EIR”) prepared for the 1355 California Circle Project (hereafter referred to as “Project”).

The comment letters were submitted to the City of Milpitas by public agencies and private citizens.

Responses to written comments received have been prepared to address the environmental concerns raised by the commenters and to indicate where and how the Draft EIR addresses pertinent environmental issues.

Any changes made to the text of the DEIR correcting information, data, or intent, other than minor typographical corrections or minor working changes, are noted in Section 2.0, Corrections and Additions.

The DEIR was submitted to the State Clearinghouse Office of Planning and Research and circulated for 45- day public review, beginning on July 07, 2023, and ending on August 21, 2023.

The City received three comment letters during the DEIR public review period. Of these, one letter is directed exclusively at the logistics of proposed discretionary approvals of the Project rather than the DEIR.

A list of commenters on the DEIR is shown in Table 3.0-1, List of Commenters on the DEIR.

The City also received two additional comment letters after the DEIR public review period. While the City is not obligated to respond, the City may choose to do so.

The original bracketed comment letters are provided followed by a numbered response to each bracketed comment. Individual comments within each letter are numbered and the response is given a matching number. For the letters that pertain to the DEIR, each separate DEIR comment, if more than one, has been assigned a number. The responses to each DEIR comment identify first the number of the comment letter, and then the number assigned to each issue (Response 1 -1, for example, indicates that the response is for the first issue raised in comment Letter No. 1).

Page 423 of 707 ends

3.0 Responses to Comments
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-2 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

Table 3.0-1
List of Commenters on the DEIR

Letter
Number Organization Commenter Name Comment Date Response Page Number
1 California Department of
Transportation, District 4
Laurel Sears August 18, 2023 3.0-6
2 San Francisco Bay Regional
Water Quality Control Board
Brian Wines July 14, 2023 3.0-9
3 True Life Companies Leah Beniston July 19, 2023 3.0-17 Comments Received After the DEIR Public Review Period
4 California Department of
Transportation, District 4
Yunsheng Luo September 12, 2023 3.0-20
5 Santa Clara Valley Water
District
Jason Miguel September 11, 2023 3.0-25

3.1 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE DRAFT PEIR
The original bracketed comment letters and numbered responses are provided on the following pages.

Individual comments within each letter are numbered and the response is given a matching number.

Page 424 of 707 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” DISTRICT 4

OFFICE OF REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY PLANNING
P.O. BOX 23660, MS–10D | OAKLAND, CA 94623-0660
www.dot.ca.gov

August 18, 2023 SCH #: 2022110251
GTS #: 04-SCL-2022-01215
GTS ID: 28215
Co/Rt/Pm: SC/880/10.006

Lillian VanHua, Senior Planner
City of Milpitas
455 E. Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035

Re: Pulte Homes Residential Development at 1355 California Circle – Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
Dear Lillian VanHua:

Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the Pulte Homes Residential Development at 1355 California Circle. We are committed to ensuring that impacts to the State’s multimodal transportation system and to our natural environment are identified and mitigated to support a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system.

The Local Development Review (LDR) Program reviews land use projects and plans to ensure consistency with our mission and state planning priorities. The following comments are based on our review of the July 2023 DEIR.

Project Understanding
The proposed project would demolish the existing vacant office building and replace it with a residential townhome development with up to two hundred and six (206) new units on a 6.69-acre site located at 1355 California Circle.

Travel Demand Analysis
With the enactment of Senate Bill (SB) 743, Caltrans is focused on maximizing efficient development patterns, innovative travel demand reduction strategies, and multimodal improvements. For more information on how Caltrans assesses Transportation Impact Studies, please review Caltrans’ Transportation Impact Study Guide (link).

2 1
Letter 1

Page 425 of 707 ends

Lillian VanHua, Senior Planner
August 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” Caltrans commends the Lead Agency regarding the reduced Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) generation for the proposed land use stated in the Transportation Analysis. The project VMT analysis and significance determination are undertaken in a manner consistent with the Office of Planning and Research’s (OPR) Technical Advisory. This project supports the State’s goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve multimodal transportation options for land use development.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning
Based upon the project’s location adjacent to Interstate-880, Caltrans supports the proposed bicycle and pedestrian recommendations in Section 2.0, Project Description that recommend new pedestrian walkways on-site and would provide bike racks for residents. To be consistent with Policy CD 2-7 of the Community Design Element stated in the DEIR, Caltrans recommends any short or long term bike parking should provide safe and secure bicycle storage in compliance with the Federal Highway Administration(FHWA)- Bicycle Parking & Storage (link). Any proposed sidewalk improvements within the State Right of Way must be consistent with the Highway Design Manual (HDM).

Transportation Impact Fees
Please identify project-generated travel demand and estimate the costs of transit and active transportation improvements necessitated by the proposed project; viable funding sources such as development and/or transportation impact fees should also be identified. We encourage a sufficient allocation of fair share contributions toward multi-modal and regional transit improvements to fully mitigate cumulative impacts to regional transportation. We also strongly support measures to increase sustainable mode shares, thereby reducing VMT.

Utilities
Any utilities that are proposed, moved or modified within Caltrans’ Right-of-Way (ROW) shall be discussed. If utilities are impacted by the project, provide site plans that show the location of existing and/or proposed utilities. These modifications require a Caltrans-issued encroachment permit.

Lead Agency
As the Lead Agency, the City of Milpitas is responsible for all project mitigation, including any needed improvements to the State Transportation Network (STN). The project’s fair share contribution, financing, scheduling, implementation responsibilities and lead agency monitoring should be fully discussed for all proposed mitigation measures.

Equitable Access
If any Caltrans facilities are impacted by the project, those facilities must meet American Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards after project completion. As well, the 4 3
2 5
6 7
Letter 1

Page 426 of 707 ends

Lillian VanHua, Senior Planner
August 18, 2023

Page 3 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” project must maintain bicycle and pedestrian access during construction. These access considerations support Caltrans’ equity mission to provide a safe, sustainable, and equitable transportation network for all users.

Encroachment Permit
Please be advised that any permanent work or temporary traffic control that encroaches onto Caltrans’ ROW requires a Caltrans-issued encroachment permit. As part of the encroachment permit submittal process, you may be asked by the Office of Encroachment Permits to submit a completed encroachment permit application package, digital set of plans clearly delineating Caltrans’ ROW, digital copy of signed, dated and stamped (include stamp expiration date) traffic control plans, this comment letter, your response to the comment letter, and where applicable, the following items: new or amended Maintenance Agreement (MA), approved Design Standard Decision Document (DSDD), approved encroachment exception request, and/or airspace lease agreement. Your application package may be emailed to [email protected].

To obtain information about the most current encroachment permit process and to download the permit application, please visit Caltrans Encroachment Permits (link).

Thank you again for including Caltrans in the environmental review process. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Marley Mathews, Transportation Planner via [email protected].

For future early coordination opportunities or project referrals, please contact LDR- [email protected].

Sincerely,

LAUREL SEARS
Acting District Branch Chief
Local Development Review
c: State Clearinghouse

8 7
Letter 1

Page 427 of 707 ends

3.0 Responses to Comments
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-6 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1264.003 August 2023
Letter 1 California Department of Transportation
Laurel Sears, Acting District Branch Chief
P.O. BOX 23660, MS–10D
Oakland, CA 94623-0660
August 18, 2023
Response 1-1
The comment provides an introduction to Cal ifornia Department of T ransportation’s (Caltrans) detailed comments, which are addressed below. The comment also provides an overview of t he Project. This comment is noted. No further response is required.

Response 1-2
The commenter concurs with the Project’s VMT analysis and significance determination methodology. The commenter states that the Project would support the State’s goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve multimodal transportation options for land use development. This comment is noted. No further response is required.

Response 1-3
The commenter supports the proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities included in the Project. Caltrans recommends that any short- or long-term bike parking include safe and secure bicycle storage , and any proposed sidewalk improvements under the Project be consistent with the Highway Design Manual (HDM). As discussed in Section 2.0, Project Description, the Project would provide on-site bicycle storage in the form of bike racks and are subject to design review and approval as part of the Project’s site plan review by the City. No sidewalk improvements are proposed under the Project.

Response 1-4
The commenter requests the identification of the project-generated travel demand for transit and active transportation improvements, as well as the appropriate development and/or transportation impact fees for the Project. The estimated costs of transit necessitated by the Project and any transportation impact fees or developer fees will be determined by the City prior to the issuance of construction and building permits.

Thus, the determination of the Project’s development and/or transportation impact fees is beyond the scope of the Project’s CEQA analysis. This comment is noted. No further response is required.

Response 1-5
The commenter requires any utilities within Caltrans’ Right-of-Way (ROW) to be noted within the DEIR.

The Project does not include any off-site utility lines located within Caltrans ROW.

Page 428 of 707 ends

3.0 Responses to Comments
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-7 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
Response 1-6
The commenter identifies the City of Milpitas, as the Lead Agency, as the responsible party for any improvements to the State Transportation Network . This comment is noted. No further response is required.

Response 1-7
The commenter requires all Caltrans facilities that are impacted by the Project to meet American Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards after Project completion and recommends that the existing bicycle and pedestrian access to be maintained during construction. As stated in Response 1 -6, the Project would not im pact existing facilities within Caltrans ROW. As discussed in Section 4.1 4, Transportation, of the DEIR, Project operations would not significantly impact the existing off -site bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Rather, the Project would introduce new bicy cle facilities within the Project Site, including bike racks. However, construction activities associated with the Project may result in partial lane closures for bicyclists and sidewalk closures for pedestrians . Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM TRA -1 would require bicycle lanes and pedestrian sidewalks to remain open and accessible, to the greatest extent feasible, during construction or shall be re-routed to ensure continued connectivity. Implementation of MM TRA-1 would be consistent with Caltrans’ equity mission.

Response 1-8
The commenter advises to obtain a Caltrans- issued encroachment permit prior to any encroachment onto Caltrans ROW. The commenter further provides additional details regarding Caltrans’ encroa chment permit application materials. Project -related permitting activities will occur after the City Council’s approval of the Project and prior to the initiation of construction activities. Nevertheless, requirements related to the issuance of encroachment permits are beyond the scope of the Project’s CEQA analysis. This comment is noted. No further response is required.

Page 429 of 707 ends

San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
July 14, 2023
Sent via electronic mail: No hardcopy to follow
City of Milpitas, Planning Department
ATTN: Lillian VanHua, Senior Planner ([email protected]) 455 East Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035
Subject: San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Pulte Homes Residential Development at 1355 California Circle, City of Milpitas Santa Clara County, California
SCH No. 2022110251
Dear Ms. VanHua:

San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) staff appreciates the opportunity to review the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Pulte Homes Residential Development at 1355 California Circle (DEIR). The DEIR evaluates the potential environmental impacts associated with implementing the Pulte Homes Residential Development at 1355 California Circle Project (Project). The Project Site is located at 1355 California Circle between Interstate 880 (I-880) and California Circle. The 6.69-acre Project Site is located in the northwestern portion of the City of Milpitas. The Project site is bound by commercial and industrial uses to the north, multi- family residential uses and a religious assembly use to the east, a vacant industrial parcel to the south, and I-880 to the west. A City-owned storm drain channel is also located immediately west, between the Project Site and I-880. The Project is comprised of five seven-plex townhomes, eight twelve-plex townhomes, and an apartment building.

The Project would provide a total of 206 multi-family housing units. We have the following comments on the Project’s potential impacts to waters of the State.

Summary
As is discussed below, the DEIR does not provide sufficient information to determine if the storm drain channel is a jurisdictional water of the State. If the channel is determined to be a water of the State, the DEIR should be revised to include an alternatives analysis for proposed impacts to the channel and specific mitigation measures for any unavoidable impacts to the channel.
1 2
Letter 2

Page 430 of 707 ends

Santa Clara County - 2 - NOP for Stevens Creek Quarry Reclamation Plan C
omment 1. The Project site may contain a jurisdictional water of the State.

The discussion of Biological Resources in Section 3.3 of the DEIR includes the following text in the discussion of Impact BIO-2:

However, the storm drain channel is not an identifiable jurisdictional waters or wetlands. Rather, the channel is identified as a Riverine Habitat R4SBAx, which is characterized as a manmade storm channel that serves a larger deepwater system and contains surface water for brief periods of time.

The DEIR does not provide sufficient information to support the assertion that the storm drain channel is not a jurisdictional water of the State. Constructed storm channels may be regulated as waters of the State if they replace an impacted water of the State and/or they become a feature of the local watershed. If the storm channel has a bed and bank and receives runoff from a local watershed, it is likely to be regulated as a water of the State. In addition, it is possible that portions of the storm channel may have sufficient hydrology to be regulated as isolated wetlands. While isolated wetlands are not regulated as waters of the U.S., they are regulated as waters of the State. The DEIR should be revised to include more detailed information about the dimensions, vegetation, and hydrology of the storm channel. The DEIR should also include the dimensions of any proposed impacts to the storm channel.

Comment 2. If the storm channel is a water of the State, any impacts to the channel must be supported by an alternatives analysis.

As is noted above, even if the channel was created by excavation, if it has persisted for decades and is supported by a local watershed, it is regulated as a water of the State, pursuant to the State’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act. If the channel is not subject to federal jurisdiction, fill of the channel will require the issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) from the Water Board. Issuance of WDRs will require public noticing of the proposed WDRs and approval by a vote of the Board at one of our monthly Board meetings.

When the Water Board receives an application for certification and/or WDRs, staff reviews the project to verify that the project proponent has taken all feasible measures to avoid impacts to waters of the State (these impacts usually consist of the placement of fill in waters of the State). Where impacts to waters of the State cannot be avoided, projects are required to minimize impacts to waters of the State to the maximum extent practicable (i.e., the footprint of the project in waters of the state is reduced as much as possible). Compensatory mitigation is then required for those impacts to waters of the state that cannot be avoided or minimized. Avoidance and minimization of impacts is a prerequisite to developing an acceptable project and identifying appropriate compensatory mitigation for an approved project’s impacts. Avoidance and minimization cannot be used as compensatory mitigation. After avoidance and minimization of direct impacts to waters of the State have been maximized for the 3 4
Letter 2

Page 431 of 707 ends

Santa Clara County - 3 - NOP for Stevens Creek Quarry Reclamation Plan pr
oposed project, the necessary type and quantity of compensatory mitigation for the remaining impacts to waters of the State are assessed on a case-by-case basis.

Under the San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), projects are required to avoid impacts to waters of the State, in conformance with U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency’s CWA 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines). The Guidelines provide guidance in evaluating the circumstances under which the fill of jurisdictional waters may be permitted. Projects must first exhaust all opportunities, to the maximum extent practicable, to avoid, and then to minimize impacts to jurisdictional waters. Only after all options for avoidance and minimization of impacts have been exhausted, is it appropriate to develop mitigation for adverse impacts to waters of State.

Since residential development is not a water dependent project, it is assumed that impacts to waters of the State can be avoided.

The Water Boards only allow compensatory mitigation to be implemented for those impacts to waters of the State that cannot be avoided and/or minimized; “avoidance and minimization” in the context of reviewing applications for WDRs refers to minimizing the proposed project’s footprint in waters of the State. The current Project appears to propose the fill of all potential waters of the State that are present at the Project site. It is unusual for the Water Board to issue permits for projects that include no avoidance or minimization of impacts to waters of the State. The Project applicant is encouraged to revise the DEIR to fully explore an alternative that completely avoids fill of the storm channel and incorporates the channel into the Project’s landscaping and open space areas.

Comment 3. The DEIR does not describe acceptable mitigation for the proposed fill of waters of the State at the Project site.

If the storm channel is determined to be a water of the State, the DEIR should be revised to provide mitigation for any impacts to the storm channel. Please note that the required amount of mitigation will depend on the similarity of the impacted water of the State to the provided mitigation water of the State, the uncertainty associated with successful implementation of the mitigation project, and the distance between the site of the impact and the site of the mitigation water. In-kind mitigation for the fill of a channel consists of the creation of a new channel. If the mitigation consists of restoration or enhancement of open waters, the amount of mitigation will be greater than if the mitigation consists of the creation of open waters. If there are uncertainties with respect to the availability of sufficient water to support a mitigation water, then the amount of mitigation would also have to be greater. Finally, the amount of required mitigation increases as the distance between the impact site and the mitigation site increases.

A mitigation ratio of 1:1 may be acceptable if a mitigation channel is established on the Project site. For mitigation projects that are offsite and/or out-of-kind, the required mitigation ratio will increase with distance from the Project site and any differences between the type of water body that is impacted and the type of water body that is provide at the mitigation site. For an off-site mitigation project, the applicant will need to acquire fee title to a property with the proper hydrology to support an appropriately- 4 5
Letter 2

Page 432 of 707 ends

Santa Clara County - 4 - NOP for Stevens Creek Quarry Reclamation Plan s
ized mitigation feature. In addition, the applicant will need to monitor and maintain the mitigation feature for at least ten years, until final performance criteria are attained. The applicant will also need to place a conservation easement or deed restriction over the property and establish an endowment for the long-term maintenance of the mitigation feature.

Without a description of a viable mitigation project, the DEIR does not demonstrate that the Project’s impacts to waters of the State can be mitigated to a less than significant level. In a CEQA document, a project’s potential impacts and proposed mitigation measures should be presented in sufficient detail for readers of the CEQA document to evaluate the likelihood that the proposed remedy will actually reduce impacts to a less than significant level. CEQA requires that mitigation measures for each significant environmental effect be adequate, timely, and resolved by the lead agency. In an adequate CEQA document, mitigation measures must be feasible and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally binding instruments (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4). Mitigation measures to be identified at some future time are not acceptable. It has been determined by court ruling that such mitigation measures would be improperly exempted from the process of public and governmental scrutiny which is required under the California Environmental Quality Act. The current text of the DEIR does not demonstrate that it is feasible to mitigate all potentially significant impacts to waters of the State that may result from project implementation to a less than significant level. Impacts to the jurisdictional waters at the project site, as well as proposed mitigation measures for such impacts, will require review under CEQA before the Water Board can issue permits for those proposed impacts.

Comment 4, Hydrology and Water Quality, Mitigation Measure MM Hydro 2: NPDES Permit (pg. 118) and MM Hydro 3-3 (page 122).

Section 3.9.3 of the DEIR acknowledges that the Project must comply with the C.3 Provisions of the Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit (MRP) (Water Board Order No. R2-2022-001874; NPDES Permit No. CAS612008). The MRP requires that stormwater treatment be provided through Low Impact Development (LID) measures. At the Project site, LID measures will consist of bioretention areas. Properly-sized bioretention areas require that sufficient surface area at the Project site be reserved for bioretention areas. The information provided in the DEIR is insufficient to determine if sufficient surface area has been set aside for MRP compliance. At sites that require WDRs from the Water Board, review of proposed stormwater treatment infrastructure is a component of preparing the WDRs for the Project. We encourage early coordination with the Water Board in the development of stormwater treatment measures to ensure that the proposed treatment is consistent with the requirements of the MRP.

Conclusion
The DEIR does not provide sufficient detail to establish the jurisdictional status of the storm channel at the Project site. If the storm channel is determined to be a water of the State, the DEIR should be revised to provide specific mitigation measures for all impacts to waters of the State. These mitigation measures should be in-kind and on-site 5 6
7 Letter 2

Page 433 of 707 ends

Santa Clara County - 5 - NOP for Stevens Creek Quarry Reclamation Plan m
itigation measures to the maximum extent possible. The amount of proposed mitigation should include mitigation for temporal losses of any impacted waters of the State. If mitigation is out-of-kind and/or off-site, then the amount of the proposed mitigation should be increased. Proposed mitigation measures should include designs with sufficient detail to show that any created waters will have sufficient hydrology to sustain hydrology and vegetation without human intervention. A proposed program for monitoring the success of the mitigation features should also be included with the mitigation proposal(s). In addition, before the Water Board issues a permit that authorizes the fill of waters of the State, we must be provided with an alternatives analysis that demonstrates that avoidance of some or all of the waters of the State at the Project site is infeasible.

If the DEIR is adopted without providing concrete mitigation proposals for impacts to waters of the State, it is likely that the DEIR will not be adequate to support the issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements for the Project.

If you have any questions about this comment, please contact me at (510) 622-5680, or via e-mail at [email protected].

S
incerely,
Brian Wines
Water Resources Control Engineer
South and East Bay Watershed Section
cc: State Clearinghouse ([email protected]) 7 Letter 2

Page 434 of 707 ends

3.0 Responses to Comments
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-13 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
Letter 2 San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board Jimmy Kim, Water Resources Control Engineer, South and East Bay Watershed Section 1515 Clay Street, Suite 1400
Oakland, CA 94612
July 14, 2023
Response 2-1
The comment provides an introduction to the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board’s (SFBRWQCB) detailed comments, which are addressed below. This comment also provides an overview of the Project. This comment is noted. No further response is required.

Response 2-2
The comment provides a summary of SFBWQCB’s detailed comments, which are addressed below. This comment is noted. No further response is required.

Response 2-3
The commenter notes that t he existing storm channel may be a jurisdictional water that is regulated as Waters of the State. See Chapter 2.0 , Corrections and Additions, for this revision made to Section 3.3, Biological Resources, of the DEIR and Appendix 3.9, Stormwater and Water Quality Analysis , that has been added to the DEIR. The existing storm channel is labeled as “Maintenance 1” in Stormwater Control Narrative under Appendix 3.9. Accordingly, these corrections would change the analysis of Impact BIO- 3, and its determined impacts under this threshold would be revised from no impact to less than significant.

However, these revisions would not result in additional mitigation measures, nor would the Project result in any additional significant and unavoidable impacts that were not already discussed in the DEIR.

Response 2-4
The commenter requires an alternative analysis of the Project’s environmental impacts to the existing storm channel, if the channel is a Water of the State. See Chapter 2.0 Corrections and Additions, for revisions made to Section 3.3 , Biological Resources, and Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality , of the DEIR and Appendix 3.9, Stormwater and Water Quality Analysis, that has been added to the DEIR. Appendix

3.9 analyzes the construction and operational activities associated with the Project, and the potential impacts to the existing channel. As summarized in Appendix 3.9, the existing channel would be preserved and protected throughout the duration of the Project construction and operation. Therefore, Project activities would not impact the existing storm channel. No further alternative analysis is necessary.

Response 2-5
The commenter states that, if the existing storm channel is determined to be a Waters of the State, the DEIR must be revised to provide mitigation for any impacts to the storm channel . The commenter details

Page 435 of 707 ends

3.0 Responses to Comments
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-14 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
potential mitigation measures that are recommended for the Proj ect. See Chapter 2.0 , Corrections and Additions, for this revision made to Section 3.3 , Biological Resources , of the DEIR and Appendix 3.9, Stormwater and Water Quality Analysis, that has been added to the DEIR. As summarized in Appendix

3.9, the Project would not disturb the existing storm channel. The Project’s Drainage Plan and compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit requirements will ensure that the channel would not be disturbed by the Project construction or operation activities. Therefore, additional mitigation measures regarding the storm channel protection are not necessary.

Response 2-6
The commenter states that the DEIR provides insufficient information to determine if sufficient surface area under the Project has been set aside to determine if the Project would meet MRP compliance . The commenter also recommends early coordination with the SFBRWQCB in the development of stormwater treatment measures. Corrections have been included to provide the calculated impervious surface area, pervious surface area, and bio -treatment area under the Project. See Chapter 2.0 , Corrections and Additions, for the revisions made to Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality. The revisions do not raise new environmental information or directly challenge information provided in the DEIR. The City of Milpitas decision makers will consider all comments on the Project. For the purposes of CEQA, no further response is necessary.

Response 2-7
The commenter concludes that DEIR does not provide sufficient detail to establish the jurisdictional status of the storm channel at the Project Site, and that additional mitigation measures are needed to address the concerns outlined in this comment letter. While revisions have been made to Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, the revisions do not raise new environmental information or directly challenge information provided in the DEIR. The City of Milpitas decision makers will consider all comments on the Project. For the purposes of CEQA, no further response is necessary.

Page 436 of 707 ends

unauthorized use or transmission of this message or associated files is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message and deleting all contents from your computer.

From: Lillian VanHua <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2023 at 2:39 PM
To: Leah Beniston <[email protected]>, Kristina Phung <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Pulte EIR for 1355 Cal Circle
Hi Leah, Residential is allowed under the NCMU general plan land use designation. When the project was originally proposed, it was thought that the only instance where a 100% residential projec sophospsmartbannerend
Hi Leah,
Residential is allowed under the NCMU general plan land use designation. When the project was originally proposed, it was thought that the only instance where a 100% residential project would be permitted is if it were made 100% affordable (per the general plan language). After further consideration of the proposed density and the project area, MXD Mixed Use Zoning District is one of the possible zoning districts under the NCMU general plan land use designation. Moreover, a zoning designation of MXD allows a 100% multifamily project without any additional stipulation of affordable units (outside of the City’s AHO). The project application is now proposing a zone change to MXD, with a PUD overlay, to allow for its unique development standards.

The PUD is basically the tentative map.

I’ll have to get back to you on the application, as we haven’t shared the initial application package in recent years. It’s worth noting that the initial proposal is different than what is being considered now so I’m not sure if you want the original application.

Best,
Lillian
From: Leah Beniston <[email protected] >
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2023 1:24 PM
To: Lillian VanHua <[email protected]>; Kristina Phung <[email protected]> Subject: Pulte EIR for 1355 Cal Circle
CAUTION: EXTERNAL SENDER
This email originated from outside the organization. Do NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report suspicious messages to the IT Helpdesk.

Hi Ladies,
I have reviewed the Pulte EIR and signed up for the community meeting Aug. 3. I have a few questions that I hope one of you can answer.
1 . The GPA looks to be a text amendment to remove the Specific Plan requirement and not a land use designation changing the NCMU. Curious why the NCMU isn’t being changed to any GP specific residential designation? 2 . The zoning is changing from Industrial to PUD.

How does the PUD intertwine with the NCMU? I would assume that by now the application is public record. Can I get a copy of the application? Thanks,
Leah
/HDK%HQLVWRQ

Senior Vice President
1 2
3 Letter 3

Page 437 of 707 ends

1 2
3 Letter 3
We create attainable housing so that our children, and grandchildren, can live and prosper where we do. $OFRVWD%RXOHYDUG6XLWH
6DQ5DPRQ&$

'

&

OEHQLVWRQ#WKHWUXHOLIHFRPSDQLHVFRP
Confidentiality Disclosure: This message and all associated files are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential or privileged information. Any unauthorized use or transmission of this message or associated files is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message and deleting all contents from your computer.

Page 438 of 707 ends

From: Lillian VanHua
To: Michael Fossati
Subject: FW: Pulte EIR for 1355 Cal Circle
Date: Wednesday, July 19, 2023 5:12:01 PM
Attachments: image004.png
For when you come back. FYI. Let’s discuss because I think my brain keeps going in circles.

From: Leah Beniston <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2023 3:04 PM
To: Lillian VanHua <[email protected]>; Kristina Phung <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Pulte EIR for 1355 Cal Circle

CAUTION: EXTERNAL SENDER
This email originated from outside the organization. Do NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report suspicious messages to the IT Helpdesk.

Hi Lillian,
Thank you for the explanation. Will there be a separate action in regards to the 1 unit/1500 SF commercial threshold in the NCMU? Per the project description, I only see the text amendment for removal of the Specific Plan language. Per the Land Use section there is a statement that the 1 unit/1500SF of commercial has been found to be infeasible. If that language isn’t in the Project Description when and how will that amendment to the NCMU take place? The screen shot below states that the “ NCMU requirements are currently being revised”, is that per this Pulte application or via a City initiated action prior to the Pulte application being heard?

$FORVHXSRIDGRFXPHQW'HVFULSWLRQDXWRPDWLFDOO\JHQHUDWHG

/HDK%HQLVWRQ
Senior Vice President
We create attainable housing so that our children, and grandchildren, can live and prosper where we do.

$OFRVWD%RXOHYDUG6XLWH
6DQ5DPRQ&$

'

Page 439 of 707 ends

3.0 Responses to Comments
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-17 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
Letter 3 True Life Companies
Leah Beniston
12647 Alcosta Boulevard, Suite 470
San Ramon, CA 94583
July 19, 2023
Response 3-1
The comment provides an introduction to the True Life Companies comments, which are addressed below.

This comment is noted. No further response is required.

Response 3-2
The commenter provides an inquiry regarding the use of a General Plan Text Amendment i nstead of redesignating the site to a specific residential designation. The comment is not related to significant environmental issues associated with the Project. Responses are not provided for comments that do not relate to significant environmental issu es. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088 provides guidance on the preparation of response to comments and indicates that while lead agencies must evaluate all comments received on a DEIR, they need only respond to comments related to significant environmental issues.

Therefore, no further response is required.

Response 3-3
The commenter provides an inquiry regarding Planned Unit Development application. The comment is not related to significant environmental issues associated with the Project. Responses are not provided for comments that do not relate to significant environmental issues. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088 provides guidance on the preparation of response to comments and indicates that while lead agencies must evaluate all comments received on a DEIR, they need only re spond to comments related to significant environmental issues. Therefore, no further response is required.

Response 3-4
The commenter provides an inquiry regarding the commercial requirements under the Neighborhood Commercial Mixed use designation. The comment is not related to significant environmental issues associated with the Project. Responses are not provided for comments that do not relate to significant environmental issues. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088 provides guidance on the preparation of response to comments and indicates that while lead agencies must evaluate all comments received on a DEIR, they need only respond to comments related to significant environmental issues. Therefore, no further response is required.

Page 440 of 707 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” DISTRICT 4

OFFICE OF REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY PLANNING
P.O. BOX 23660, MS–10D | OAKLAND, CA 94623-0660
www.dot.ca.gov

September 12, 2023 SCH #: 2022110251
GTS #: 04-SCL-2022-01215
GTS ID: 28215
Co/Rt/Pm: SCL/880/10.006

Lillian VanHua, Senior Planner
City of Milpitas
455 E. Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035

Supplemental letter for Pulte Homes Residential Development at 1355 California Circle – Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
Dear Lillian VanHua:

Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the Pulte Homes Residential Development at 1355 California Circle. This letter is supplemental to the original one previously submitted on August 18, 2023. Please see the comments below for the DEIR Appendix 3.14 – Transportation Analysis.

Highway Operations

Page 1 of 26 ends

x “California Circle and I-880 NB Ramps" should be revised as ""California Circle and I-880 NB Ramps (South of Dixon Landing Road)” as this is a T-intersection connecting to the freeway.

x "California Circle and Dixon Landing Road" should be revised as "California Circle, Dixon Landing Road and NB Ramps (North of Dixon Landing Road) as this is a four-leg intersection connecting to the freeway.

Page 1 of 26 ends

extending the AM and PM peak periods between 06:30 AM and 9:30 AM, and 03:00 PM and 6:00 PM as the subject ramps are within a highly congested segment of I-880.

Letter 4

Page 441 of 707 ends

Letter 4Lillian VanHua, Senior Planner
September 12, 2023

Page 2 ends

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment”

Page 14 of 26 ends

intersections have been established. An Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) should be done in accordance with the Traffic Operations Policy Directive #13-02 (link).

For future early coordination opportunities or project referrals, please contact LDR- [email protected].

Sincerely,

YUNSHENG LUO
Acting District Branch Chief
Local Development Review
c: State Clearinghouse

Page 442 of 707 ends

3.0 Responses to Comments
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-20 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
Letter 4 California Department of Transportation
Yunsheng, Luo, Acting District Branch Chief
P.O. BOX 23660, MS–10D
Oakland, CA 94623-0660
September 12, 2023
Comment 4-1

The commenter provides recommendations to modify the description of the study intersections included in Appendix 3.14, Transportation Analysis. See Chapter 2.0, Corrections and Additions, for this revision made to Appendix 3.14, that has been added to the DEIR.

The commenter also recommends expanding the AM and PM peak hours. However, as Appendix 3.14 states, the AM peak hour of traffic is typically between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM and the PM peak hour is typically between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM. The comment is not related t o significant environmental issues associated with the Project. Responses are not provided for comments that do not relate to significant environmental issues. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088 provides guidance on the preparation of response to comments and indicates that while lead agencies must evaluate all comments received on a DEIR, they need only respond to comments related to significant environmental issues. Therefore, no further response is required.

The commenter also recommends the completion of an Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE). However, the ICE is required to justify the installation of traffic signal systems, yield -control (roundabouts), and multi-way stop control at state highway intersections and interchanges. The proposed signals a re not located at a state highway intersection or interchange. The comment is not related to significant environmental issues associated with the Project. Responses are not provided for comments that do not relate to significant environmental issues. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088 provides guidance on the preparation of response to comments and indicates that while lead agencies must evaluate all comments received on a DEIR, they need only respond to comments related to significant environmental issues.

Therefore, no further response is required.

Page 443 of 707 ends

Letter 5
From: Jason Miguel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2023 1:42 PM
To: Planning Department <[email protected]> Cc: Kevin Thai <[email protected]>; Brian Mendenhall <[email protected]>; Vanessa De La Piedra <[email protected]>; Michael Martin <[email protected]>
Subject: Pulte Homes Residential Project DEIR
CAUTION: EXTERNAL SENDER
This email originated from outside the organization. Do NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report suspicious messages to the IT Helpdesk.

Hi Lillian,
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) has reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), received on July 19, 2023 for the proposed Pulte Home Residential Project. Valley Water has the following comments:

Specific Comments

1. Section 3.8.5 Environmental Impacts construction Activities (Page 3.8-20) Regarding an Underground Storage Tank (UST) presumably removed from the site, the DEIR notes that: "Prior to initiation of construction activities, the Project Applicant would be required to coordinate with the City and Milpitas Fire Department (MFD) in determining if appropriate site remediation as a condition of approval is required." This coordination should also include the Santa Clara County Department of

Page 444 of 707 ends

Letter 5
Environmental Health, who serves as the local oversight agency for investigations and cleanup of UST releases for all areas within the County of Santa Clara. The following paragraph includes the statement: "As discussed, it is unlikely that certain hazardous substances, such as ACMs and PCBs, are likely present on the Project Site." which is unclear and should be revised.

2. Section 3.9.2.3 Region Santa Clara Valley Water District Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan (Page 3.9-14)
The following sub-section describing the Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan should be removed and replaced with Valley Water's One Water Plan.

Valley Water recommends relabeling the sub-section to: Valley Water's One Water Plan, with the following description:
"Valley Water's One Water Plan is a long range integrated water resources master plan that includes goals for Water Supply, Natural Flood Protection, and Environmental Stewardship. This planning effort acts as Valley Water's flood management plan and stream stewardship plan, while also providing a nexus to water supply planning. Each One Water goal is described in terms of measurable objectives and priority actions on a per watershed basis. One Water's five watershed plans (1 complete, 2 pending, 2 to be developed) will identify those actions needed to improve watershed health and water resources management throughout Santa Clara County. Much of the work needed can only be accomplished through partnerships with local government and non-profit organizations."

3. Section 3.9.2.3 Regional Santa Clara Valley 2016 Groundwater Management Plan (Page

3.9-14)
Please note the 2016 Groundwater Management Plan was approved by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) as an Alternative to a Groundwater Sustainability Plan in 2019. As required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management

Page 445 of 707 ends

Letter 5
(SGMA), Valley Water prepared a five-year (the 2021 Groundwater Management Plan) so the DEIR reference should be updated accordingly. The 2021 Groundwater Management Plan is available at: https://www.valleywater.org/your-water/where- your-water-comes/groundwater/sustainable.

4. Section 3.9.5 Environmental Impacts (Page 3.9-21)
The following statement under "Impact HYD-2" is inaccurate and Valley Water recommends it being removed: "Groundwater levels are managed by the California Department of Water Resources to maintain a safe operating yield of groundwater, which includes a sustainable pumping rate that does not exceed the total recharge into the basin." DWR has regulatory oversight in assessing groundwater sustainability plans (and alternatives) developed by local groundwater sustainability agencies but does not manage groundwater directly. As the groundwater sustainability agency for the Santa Clara Subbasin, Valley Water manages groundwater through managed aquifer recharge and other activities to achieve outcome measures described in the 2021 Groundwater Management Plan.

5. Section 3.9.1.2 Floodplain Mapping Hydraulic Modeling (Page 3.9-3) Valley Water's comments on the NOP regarding Flood Zone AG has not been included in the DEIR and should be reflected as:
"Current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Federal Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 06085C0058J, effective February 19, 2014, shows the Pulte Homes Residential Development site is located within a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) Zone AH, which would be subject to a base flood elevation (BFE) of 15 feet (NAVD 88). The EIR should assess flooding impacts at the Pulte Homes Residential Development and ensure that it does not adversely impact flooding, both in terms of depth and lateral extent."
General Comment

6. The EIR concludes that the project is consistent with planned growth for Milpitas. The project of future water supply and availability assumes increases in water conservation

Page 446 of 707 ends

Letter 5
and demand management measures (City of Milpitas Urban Water Management Plan).

For the proposed project to meet its fair share to these water conservation assumptions, Valley Water suggests that all available water conservations measures be required of the project including all multi-family residential units be required to install a submeter to encourage efficient water use. Studies have shown that adding submeters can reduce water use 15 to 30 percent.

Valley Water appreciates your consideration for the review of the DEIR. Please send a copy of the Final EIR at your earliest convenience.

If you have any questions, or need further information, you can reach me at (408) 630-2976, or by email at [email protected].

Please reference Valley Water File No. 34818 on future correspondence regarding this project.

Thanks,

JASON MIGUEL

ASSISTANT ENGINEER I - CIVIL
Community Projects Review Unit
Tel. (408) 630-2976 / Cell. (408) 761-5789
Santa Clara Valley Water District is now known as:

Clean Water • Healthy Environment • Flood Protection
5750 Almaden Expressway, San Jose CA 95118
www.valleywater.org

Page 447 of 707 ends

3.0 Responses to Comments
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-25 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
Letter 5 Santa Clara Valley Water District
Jason Miguel, Assistant Engineer I – Civil
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118
September 11, 2023
Comment 5-1

The commenter requests clarification regarding the site remediation and coordination with the Milpitas Fire Department for the previous underground storage tank , and the connection to the presence of ACM and PCBs. ACM and PCBs are not related to the site remediation and coordination with the Milpitas Fire Department. Further, given the date of construction of the existing building on-site, building materials and infrastructure are unlikely to contain ACM and/or PCBs. The presence of these hazardous materials will be subject to testing by the demolition contractor and if they are found to be present , appropriate health & safety will be required as a prior to the issuance of the NTP for demolition and these measures will be undertaken and enforced during demolition activities.

The commenter recommends replacing the description of the Santa Clara Valley Water Distric t Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan . See Chapter 2.0, Corrections and Additions, for this revision made to Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, that has been added to the DEIR.

The commenter recommends updating the reference to the 2016 Groundwater Management Plan to the 2021 Groundwater Management Plan. See Chapter 2.0, Corrections and Additions, for this revision made to Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, that has been added to the DEIR.

The commenter recommends removal of the following statement: "Groundwater levels are managed by the California Department of Water Resources to maintain a safe operating yield of groundwater, which includes a sustainable pumping rate that does not exceed t he total recharge into the basin." See Chapter

2.0, Corrections and Additions, for this revision made to Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, that has been added to the DEIR.

The commenter requests that the Project evaluate flooding impacts at the Pro ject Site. As discussed under Impact HYD-4, the Project is located within a Special Flood Hazard Areas and would be required to comply with applicable regulations relating to the floodplain management regulations which would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

The commenter recommends that all available water conservation measures be required of the project, including submeters. The comment is not related to significant environmental issues associated with the Project. Responses are not provided for comments that do not relate to significant environmental issues.

Page 448 of 707 ends

3.0 Responses to Comments
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3.0-26 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088 provides guidance on the preparation of response to comments and indicates that while lead agencies must evaluate all comments received on a DEIR, they need only respond to comments related to significant environmental issues. Therefore, no further response is required.

Page 449 of 707 ends

Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.0-1 1355 California Circle FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM

Monitors would be hired by the City or by the applicant or operator at the City’s discretion.

Page 450 of 707 ends

4.0 Mitigation Monitoring Program
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.0-2 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

Table 4.0-1
Mitigation Monitoring Program Matrix

Prior to issuance of grading
permits
Project Applicant City of Milpitas
Building Safety and
Housing Department.

The biologist conducting the clearance survey shall document the negative results if no Prior to issuance of grading or
building permits
Project Applicant City of Milpitas
Planning Department.

Page 451 of 707 ends

Encroachment into the buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist.

Any activities requiring the removal of a tree with an active bird nest shall halt until nesting activity seasons, which would be determined by the qualified biologist.

Prior to project approval. Project Applicant City of Milpitas Planning Department.

Prior to project approval. Project Applicant City of Milpitas PlanningDepartment.

Page 452 of 707 ends

The consistency review checklist shall outline feasible, effective and applicable measures that will be required for the Project. Applicable and effective measures in reducing Project GHG emissions include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Utilize the latest energy-efficient construction equipment, when feasible; • Install Energy Star appliances;
• Install on-site renewable energy, such as solar panels; • Provide on-site electric vehicle charging stations and associated infrastructure; and • Install water-efficient irrigation systems capable of using reclaimed water, when available.

Prior to issuance of grading and
building permits.

Project Applicant City of Milpitas
Building Safety
Department

Page 453 of 707 ends

Prior to grading and building
permit issuance.

Project Applicant City of Milpitas
Building Safety
Department

City of Milpitas
Engineering
Department

Page 454 of 707 ends

Impact Sciences, Inc. 5.0-1 1355 California Circle Project FEIR 1451.001 September 2023

5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND PERSONS CONSULTED
This Environmental Impact Report was prepared by the City of Milpitas with the assistance of environmental staff listed below from Impact Sciences , PreVision Design, Albion Environmental, and Hexagon Transportation Consultants.

5.1 LEAD AGENCY
City of Milpitas Department of Planning
Milpitas Planning Team:

Ned P. Thomas, AICP, Planning Director
Lillian VanHua, AICP, Senior Planner
Michael Fossati, AICP, Senior Planner
Kristina Phung, Associate Planner

5.2 EIR PREPARERS
Impact Sciences, Inc.
811 W. 7th Street, Suite 200
Los Angeles, California 90017
John R. Anderson, Principal-in-Charge
Brett Pomeroy, Associate Principal
Margaret Lin, Senior Project Manager
Eleni Getachew, ENV SP, Planner
Annalie Sarrieddine, Associate Planner
Kara Yates Hines, Director of Operations & Publications Manager PreVision Design (Aesthetics)
Adam Phillips, LEED AP, Principal & Founder
Albion Environmental (Cultural Resources)
Sarah Peelo, Ph.D., RPA, Lead Investigator
Hexagon Transportation Consultants (Transportation/VMT Analysis) Eric Tse, T.E., Lead Transportation Engineer

Page 455 of 707 ends

APPENDIX 3.9
Stormwater and Water Quality Analysis

Page 456 of 707 ends

Civil
Engineering
Associates
Civil Engineers • Planners • Surveyors
28 Railway Ave
Campbell, CA 95008
Phone: (408) 453-1066
Fax: (408) 453-1060
Web: www.ceainc.net

June 2, 2023
20-158

CITY OF MILPITAS
Engineering Department
455 E. Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035

SUBJECT: STORMWATER CONTROL NARRATIVE
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLE

MILPITAS, CA

Dear City of Milpitas,

This project, located at 1355 California Circle, is approximately 6.7 acres and comprises 13 condominium buildings and 1 six-story apartment building. The site is divided into 38 drainage management areas (DMA); see sheets C6 & C7 in the Planned Development set. These 38 drainage management areas include DMA 1-36, Maintenance 1, and Maintenance 2.

LID Design Measures
DMA 1-16 and 18-36 will be LID treated using bio-treatment basins. These basins were sized using the 4% rule of thumb method described in the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Plan (SCVURPPP) handbook. DMA 17 does not exceed a 2:1 ratio of impervious to receiving pervious area and is considered self-retaining, as described in the SCVURPPP handbook.

Maintenance 1 encompasses an existing channel that will be preserved and protected throughout the duration of the project. Maintenance 1 will not be disturbed, and treatment will not be required or provided. Maintenance 2 encompasses a 16'-wide Public Service & Utility Easement PSUE that will include a public sidewalk. This public walk will slope toward California Circle, and untreated runoff from this area will flow to the downstream public catch basin and be collected by the City of Milpitas storm collection system.

Site Design Measures & Source Control Measures
The project will implement several site design and source control measures outlined in the City of Milpitas Stormwater Requirements C.3 Data Form. The site design and source control measures being implemented include the reduction of impervious surfaces, buildings with disconnected downspouts, self-retaining areas, beneficial landscaping, inlets with flows-to-bay labels, pavement sweeping, catch basin cleaning, and good housekeeping.

Page 457 of 707 ends

Civil Engineers • Planners • Surveyors
Stormwater Facility Maintenance Requirements
The proposed bio-treatment basins will require routine maintenance, and the developer, Pulte Homes, is the responsible entity for all private stormwater treatment/hydromodification control operations and maintenance. A detailed maintenance plan and inspection checklists will be provided in the Operation & Maintenance Agreement, not part of this narrative.

Sincerely,

John Gaylord
Principal Engineer
Civil Engineering Associates

Page 458 of 707 ends

DMA 1
DMA 2
DMA 3
DMA 4
DMA 5
DMA 6
DMA 7
DMA 11
DMA 12
DMA 10
DMA 13 DMA 14
DMA 16DMA 15
DMA 17
DMA 29 DMA 30
DMA 27
DMA 24
DMA 23
DMA 25
DMA 26
DMA 28 DMA 32
DMA 33
DMA 31
DMA 9
DMA 34
DMA 21
DMA 19
DMA 20DMA 18
DMA 22
DMA 8
MAINTENANCE 1 MAINTENANCE 2
DMA 36
DMA 35
GYM
CLUBT
DN UP
DN
UP
UP
TRASH
PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS
Civil
Engineering
Associates
• •
Pleasanton, California 94588
Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-0291
4511 Willow Road, Suite 8
Feet
0 30 60
LEGEND

SITE INFORMATION AND NOTES

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
C6
----
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

Page 459 of 707 ends

BIOTREATMENT BASIN DETAIL
NOTES

TYPICAL BIOTREATMENT BASIN PLAN

DEPRESSED LANDSCAPE AREAS DETAIL
NOTES
PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS
Civil
Engineering
Associates
• •
Pleasanton, California 94588
Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-0291
4511 Willow Road, Suite 8

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DETAILS
C7
----
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

Page 460 of 707 ends

AGENDA ITEM: IX-1

MILPITAS PLANNING COMMISSION

STAFF REPORT

October 11, 2023

APPLICATION: PULTE HOMES RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOMES AND
APARTMENTS – 1355 CALIFORNIA CIR – P-GP22-0001, P-
ZA22-0001, P -SD22-0003, P -UP22-0001, P -MT22-0001, P - DB23-0003, P -TR23-0021, P -EA22-0002: A General Plan Text Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Site Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus Permit, Tree Removal Permit, and Environmental Assessment to allow demolition of one industrial building, removal and replacement of 27 ordinance -sized trees, and the development of a multi-family residential project consisting of 13 residential buildings, up to 51 -feet in height, and one residential apartment building, up to 78-feet in height, for a total of 206 residential units.

The project will also include 393 vehicle parking spaces, a 0.32-acre internal park, and associated site improvements on a 6.7-acre site at 1355 California Circle.

RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open and close the public hearing; consider the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the proposed project pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21080(d) and 2108.2(d) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064, adopt Resolution No. 23 -017, recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Text Amendment No. GP22 -0001, Zoning Map Amendme nt No.

ZA22-0001, Site Development Permit No. SD2 2-0003,
Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0001, Vesting Tentative Map MT22-0001, Density Bonus Permit No. DB2 3-0003, Tree
Removal Permit No. TR2 3-0021, and Environmental
Assessment No. EA 22-0002, subject to the findings and
Conditions of Approval , and adopt Resolution No. 23 -018 certifying the Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(d) and 21082.2(d) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.

PROJECT LOCATION:

Addresses and Assessor's
Parcel Number (APN): 1355 California Circle (022-38-007) Area of City: Northwestern portion of the City of Milpitas, east of Interstate 880, south of Dixon Road, west of Milmont Drive, north of Cadillac Court

PEOPLE:

Project Applicant: Jennifer Vo, Pulte Homes Company LLC, Pleasanton, CA

Page 461 of 707 ends

Page 2 of 35 ends

Consultant(s): Land Use Consultant: Sullivan Land Development, Campbell, CA Architects: AO Architects, Orange, CA
WHA Architects, Newport Beach, CA
Civil Engineer: Civil Engineering Assoc., Inc., San Jose, CA Landscape Architect: Vandertoolen Assoc., Napa, CA

Property Owner: Mathew Property 1 LLC, San Jose, CA

Project Planner: Lillian VanHua, AICP, Senior Planner

LAND USE:

General Plan Designation: Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use (NCMU) Existing Zoning District : Industrial Park (MP)
Proposed Zoning District: Mixed-Use (MXD)

ENVIRONMENTAL: An Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2022110251) was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21080(d) and 21082.2(d) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Milpitas received an application from Pulte Homes (applicant) requesting a General Plan Text Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Site Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus Permit, Tree Removal Permit, and Environmental Assessment to allow the development of a multi-family residential project consisting of 13 residential buildings, up to 51 feet in height, and one residential apartment building, up to 78 feet in height, for a total of 206 residential units. The project will also include 393 vehicle parking spaces, a 0.32 -acre internal park, and associated site improvements on a 6.7 -acre site at 1355 California Circle.

The Project consists of 35 townhome units, 96 stacked townhome units, and 75 apartment units.

All 131 townhome units will have an attached two-car garage. 21 of the units will have side -by- side two -car garage configuration, with the rest of the units fe aturing tandem two -car garage configuration. 31 of the apartment units will be reserved for lower-income (31-60 percent Area Medium Income) households, and the remaining 44 apartment units will be reserved for moderate- income households (81-120 percent Area Median Income) to satisfy the City's Affordable Housing Ordinance.

Since the applicant is offering 15 percent of its housing units to lower-income residents, the Project qualifies for concessions, waivers, and parking reductions under the State Density Bonus Law.

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

1. General Plan Text Amendment No. GP22 -0001: To remove language associated with the California Circle Specific Plan within the General Plan 2040. This includes amending the Neighborhood Commercial Mixed-Use (NCMU) designation (pg. LU-6), the “California Circle Specific Plan Overlay” statement (pg. LU-8) and removing Action LU-2b (pg. LU- 17).

Page 462 of 707 ends

Page 3 of 35 ends

2. Zoning Map Amendment No. ZA22 -0001: To amend the Zoning Map to change the property zoning designation from Industrial Park (MP) to Mixed-Use District (MXD); and

3. Site Development Permit No. SD22-0003: To allow the development of a multi-family residential project consisting of 13 residential buildings, up to 51 feet in height, and one residential apartment building, up to 78 feet in height, for a total of 206 residential units on a 6.7-acre site; and

4. Conditional Use Permit No. UP22-0001: To allow residential units as condominiums and associated subdivision, and tandem parking configuration; and

5. Vesting Tentative Map No. MT22-0001: To establish 14 lots, 131 residential condominium spaces, and related common areas; and

6. Density Bonus Permit No . DB22-0003: To ensure compliance with State Density Bonus law and regulations and grant a modification of the distribution requirement so affordable units can be constructed in the apartment building only; and

7. Tree Removal Permit No . TR23-0021: To remove 27 ordinance-sized trees and replace them with 269 new trees.

Although not an entitlement, Environmental Assessment No. EA22-0002 was prepared to establish CEQA compliance. Additionally, the Project is also requesting an alternate method of compliance with the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance (AHO).

Staff has found the required entitlements comply with the policies, standards, and processes outlined in the State Density Bonus Law, the City of Milpitas 2040 General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and other provisions of the Milpitas Municipal Code (MMC), and recommends that the Planning Commission open and close the public hearing, consider the Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21080(d) and 2108.2(d) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064, adopt Resolution No. 23 -017, recommending that the City Council appro ve the above applications, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval, and Resolution No. 23 - 018, recommending that the City Council certify an Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(d) and 21082.2(d) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064 .

The balance of this report provides specific details regarding the Project.

BACKGROUND
History
On March 9, 2021, the City of Milpitas adopte d “General Plan 2040,” a long -range planning document that “ identifies the community’s vision for the future and provides a framework that guides decisions on growth, development, and conservation of open space and resources in a manner that is consistent with the quality of life desired by the city’s residences an d businesses.´ General Plan 2040 is comprised of land use goals, policies and actions in an effort to provide information to make informed decisions on the City’s future development. One of the actions within General Plan 2040 is LU -2B, which states “seek to prepare and adopt a specific plan for the California Circle area.” The General Plan continues to provide several priorities and objectives to consider when the specific plan is created, which include the following:

Page 463 of 707 ends

Page 4 of 35 ends

• The Specific Plan Land Use Map should include a mix of commercial, office, and industrial park uses, with opportunities for additional residential development in a primarily mixed - use format.
• Establish incentives and provisions for residential density inc reases for projects with significant affordable housing components.
• Identify improvements to the circulation network, including improved ingress and egress, improved bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, and improved access to trails and linear parkways.
• The provision of new parks and community amenities, including additional open spaces and trails.
• Design standards for improved landscaping, lighting and streetscapes. • Funding mechanisms to ensure implementation of roadway, infrastructure, and other public improvements shall be established.
• Potential risks to infrastructure and public safety due to flooding or other natural disasters.

On September 21, 2021, the City Council received a presentation from Jim Sullivan, on behalf of Pulte Homes (applicant), t o develop a property within the future California Circle Specific Plan area. The proposed project included between 203 – 206 residential units, with 75 units designated for below market rate (BMR) individuals and households. Furthermore, the applicant proposed to proactively market the BMR units to teachers and employees of the Milpitas United School District. City staff had concerns with the propos ed residential project because the subject site is located adjacent to the I -880 freeway and is a prime econ omic development opportunity for the City. The site is also within proximity to the Newby Island regional landfill, and nearby neighborhoods often experience odors from the landfill and a nearby regional wastewater treatment facility. In addition, the exis ting Industrial Park zoning of the proposed location is not compatible with residential projects. The City Council directed staff to allow the applicant to pursue the necessary entitlements to develop their project without the preparation of a specific plan to address land use and transportation issues in the larger area.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Overview
The Project consists of 131 townhome condominium units, 75 apartment units, and associated site improvements, including private alleyways, a 0.32 -acre park, and outdoor amenit y spaces. The townhomes range from 1,518 to 2,175-square feet in size. The apartment building is comprised of studios, one-bedroom, and two-bedroom units ranging from 411 to 840-square feet in size . The Project also provides 393 vehicle parking spaces (192 spaces within a garage, 46 uncovered guest parking spaces , 56 spaces within the podium parking structure, and 29 spaces adjacent to the podium). The applicant will also dedicate 31 of the apartment units for lower income ( 31-60 percent Area Medium Income) households and the remaining 44 apartment units for moderate - income households (81-120 percent Area Median Income) to satisfy the City's Affordable Housing Ordinance.

The Project is eligible for certain concessions, waivers, and parking incentives under State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code § 65915 et seq. ) because more than ten percent (10%) of the total units will be reserved for lower-income households, making the units affordable. The “Project Analysis”

Page 464 of 707 ends

Page 5 of 35 ends

section of this staff report includes a full discussion of the State Density Bonus provisions related to this Project.

Location and Context
The Project is located on a 6.7-acre site on the west side of California Circle between Cadillac Court and Dixon Landing Road. Figure 1 shows the location of the proposed Project:

Figure 1 – 1355 California Circle

The property is zoned Industrial Park (MP) and within Planned Unit Development (PUD) 31. PUD 31 was established for the Cadillac -Fairview Business Park and Villages, a 131 -acre mixed-use industrial and residential project. Table 1 and Figure 2 below summarize the land use designation and surrounding uses of nearby properties:

Table 1: Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
General Plan Zoning Existing Uses
Subject
Site
Neighborhood
Commercial Mixed
Use (NCMU)
Industrial Park (MP)
With amendment: Mixed Use
(MXD)
Vacant (Existing
Light Industrial
Building)
North
Neighborhood
Commercial Mixed
Use (NCMU)
Industrial Park (MP)
Wholesale
Furniture
Showroom (KZ
Kitchen Cabinet
and Stone)
N
Project Site

Page 465 of 707 ends

Page 6 of 35 ends

General Plan Zoning Existing Uses
South
Neighborhood
Commercial Mixed
Use (NCMU)
Industrial Park (MP) Vacant
East
Neighborhood
Commercial Mixed
Use (NCMU)
Industrial Park (MP)
Place of
Assembly
(BAPS Shri
Swaminarayan
Mandir)
West N/A N/A Interstate 880

Figure 2 – 1355 California Circle (Zoning Map)

PROJECT ANALYSIS
This section will evaluate elements of the proposed Project for conformance with the Milpitas 2040 General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance , and other provisions of the Milpitas Municipal Code, and State Density Bonus Law.

General Plan Text Amendment
The applicant proposes to remove any language from the Milpitas General Plan that requires the preparation or adoption of a specific plan for the California Circle area (General Plan Policy LU - 2B); and reclassify the zoning designation from Industrial Park (MP) to Mixed -Use (MXD).

N
Project Site

Page 466 of 707 ends

Page 7 of 35 ends

Therefore, the following language will be deleted (as shown as red and strikenthrough below) from the General Plan.

NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL MIXED -USE (NCMU) (FAR UP
TO 0.75 , AND UP TO 1 UNIT PER 1, 500 SQUARE FEET OF
NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT). The Neighborhood Commercial Mixed-Use (NCMU) designation is intended to accommodate a mix of commercial and residential uses with an emphasis on commercial activity as the primary use, and residential uses, h otel, and office development allowed on a limited basis. The NCMU designation encourages active neighborhood serving uses at the ground level, including grocery stores, specialty retail, restaurants, plazas, or walk -in personal services such as banks and salons at FARs up to 0.75.

This designation also provides opportunities for vertical or horizontal mixed-use residential development to provide for area vibrancy and to encourage the redevelopment of aging commercial centers by allowing Multifamily dwelling units at a rate of 1 unit per 1,500 square feet of new or rehabilitated neighborhood-serving retail and commercial services . The City Council may consider the approval of residential -only projects in the NCMU land use designation, provided the project is 100% affordable to the “low” and “very low” income categories, in order to increase the stock of affordable housing in Milpitas.

Projects with a residential component are subject to additional policy direction (Policy LU 6-1) to ensure that NCMU areas continue to primarily serve surrounding neighborhoods with commercial services . (see Milpitas General Plan, pg. LU-6)

Furthermore, language stating CALIFORNIA CIRCLE SPECIFIC PLAN OVERLAY under SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATIO NS (see Milpitas General Plan, pg. LU -8) will be removed, as shown below:

CALIFORNIA CIRCLE SPECIFIC PLAN OVERLAY. This future
specific plan area is located along California Circle, east of the I -880 corridor, and west of the Penitencia Creek corridor, as shown on the Land Use Map (Figure LU-1). The policy guidance and framework for this area is included in Action LU-2b

Lastly, Action LU -2b (see Milpitas General Plan, pg. LU -17 and LU -18) will be modified, as shown below:

Develop and adopt new specific plans in areas where special development standards or guidelines, beyond those identified in the underlying land use designations and zoning standards, are needed or desired in order to carry out a specific vision or goal for the area. Specifically, the City should:

Page 467 of 707 ends

Page 8 of 35 ends

• Seek to prepare and adopt a specific plan for the California Circle area, as shown on the Land Use Map. Development of the California Circle Specific Plan should address the following priorities and objectives:

• The Specific Plan Land Use Map should include a mix of commercial, office, and industrial park uses, with opportunities for additional residential development in a primarily mixed-use format.

• Establish incentives and provisions for residential density increases for projects with significant affordable housing components.

• Identify improvements to the circulation network, including improved ingress and egress, improved bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, and improved access to trails and linear parkways.

• The provision of new park s and community amenities, including additional open spaces and trails.

• Design standards for improved landscaping, lighting and streetscapes.

• Funding mechanisms to ensure implementation of roadway, infrastructure, and other public improvements shall be established.

• Potential risks to infrastructure and public safety due to flooding or other natural disasters.

By approving the General Plan Text Amendment and associated project, the City Council will be given the flexibility to consider a multi-family residential development project at the subject site that provides public benefit exceeding the inclusionary affordable housing requirements in the current Milpitas Municipal Code.

Zoning Map Amendment
The Project Site is zoned Industrial Park, which is intended to accommodate, in a park-like setting, a limited group of research, professional, packaging and distribution facilities and uses which may have unusual requirements for space, light, and air. The Project site will be rezoned to Mixed Use (MXD) to allow a 100 percent multifamily residential development with a density of 21 to 30 units per acre. Furthermore, the MXD district is an implementing zoning district of the General Plan NCMU land use designation. As such, t he proposed zoning map amendment will provide consistency with the General Plan designation.

General Plan Conformance
The Project (excluding the General Plan Text Amendment and Zoning Amendment) is consistent with General Plan policies, as demonstrated within Table 2.

Page 468 of 707 ends

Page 9 of 35 ends

Table 2: 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 would develop a total
of 206 new housing units within the 6. 7-acre
Project Site, which would result in a housing
density of 30. 8 dwelling units per-acre.

Approximately 75 units would be rental units
offered at a below -market rate. Additionally,
the Project would qualify for a State Density
Bonus, which would allow for an increase in
density.

Policy LU 4-4: Encourage new development
to facilitate pedestrian, bicycle and transit
access through techniques such as minimizing
building separation from public sidewalks;
providing safe, direct, accessible, convenient,
and pleasant pedestrian connections;
including secure and convenient bike storage;
and orienting building entrances to transit
service.

Consistent. The Project would maintain the
existing sidewalks at the Project Site and
would also provide bike racks on -site to
accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists. The
Project Site has also been designed to retain an
existing pedestrian crosswalk on California
Circle, which will provide pedestrian access to
nearby walking trails and a future public park.

Policy CD 2-7: Include design elements
during the development review process that
address security, aesthetics and safety. Safety
issues include, but are not limited to,
minimum clearance around buildings, fire
protection measures such as peak load water
requirements, construction techniques, and
minimum standards for vehicular, bicycle,
and pedestrian facilities and other standards
set forth in local, state, and federal
regulations.

Consistent. The development includes
internal private streets within the proposed
townhome community for vehicular
circulation and to provide access to each
townhome. These private streets would be able
to accommodate emergency service vehicles,
such as fire trucks owned by the City. The
proposed apartment parking structure would
also provide adequate and safe circulation for
vehicles. On-site p arking spaces would be
provided per residential unit in accordance
with the City’s parking requirements .

Additionally, patterned walkways would also
be provided within the townhome community
to provide clear and easy access among the
different components of the site.

The proposed townhomes would install
external lighting structures that would be
mounted to each building to provide lighting
and security to the proposed paseos, outdoor
recreation area and outdoor parking spaces.

The proposed apartment complex would also
install mounted lighting structures.

Furthermore, site plans for the Project would

Page 469 of 707 ends

Page 10 of 35 ends

Policy Conformance
be reviewed by the City and the Milpitas Fire
Department (MFD) to ensure that fire
protection measures and building safety
measures would be implemented.

Policy LU 2-3: Allow densities and intensities
which exceed the generally allowed ranges
defined by the underlying land use for
projects utilizing Density Bonus provisions
(included within the Milpitas Affordable
Housing Ordinance Title XII - HOUSING
Chapter 1 - AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ORDINANCE) including bonuses for senior
housing, affordable housing, and for projects
within designated overlay districts included
in Milpitas Municipal Code Section 12 -
Overlay Districts and Standards
Consistent. The Project includes an apartment
complex with over 15 percent of the proposed
units being made available at a low -income
rental rate. Furthermore, the Project w ould
adhere to all applicable requirements with
Title XII of the Milpitas Affordable Housing
Ordinance. No proposed Overlay District is
included as part of the Project.

Policy LU-1-7: Recognize that the Land Use
Map may be amended in accordance with
State law in order to ensure that there is an
adequate supply of commercial, business
park, industrial, public facility, parks,
residential, and other desired land uses to
serve the City’s needs.

Consistent. The applicant proposes to amend
the Land Use Zoning Map to replace
industrial/employment uses with multi-family
residential uses that include affordable
housing above the inclusionary standards. The
increase of market rate and affordable housing
will serve the City’s needs in creating housing
stock to meet the Regional Housing Needs
Allocation (RHNA) required by the State
Department of Housing and Community
Development.

Policy CD-10: Design multi-family
residential, mixed use, commercial, and
employment-generating development in
neighborhoods, districts, and centers to:
a.) Include open space and/or recreational
amenities to provide visual relief from
development, form pedestrian and bicyclist
linkages to adjacent uses and other portions
of the neighborhood, district, or center, and
serve as buffers between uses, where
necessary;
b.) Locate building access points along
sidewalks, pedestrian areas, and bicycle
routes, and include amenities that encourage
pedestrian activity;
Consistent. The Project would provide open
space and recreational amenities on -site with
an outdoor recreational area that consists of an
outdoor playground, two turf areas, picnic
tables with a sail structure providing shad e, a
bench, and bike racks for bicyclists. The
proposed outdoor recreational area would be
visible for pedestrians, bicyclists, and
motorists travelling along California Circle.

The Project would also include several
walkways and two walking paseos that provide
pedestrian amenities (i.e., benches). Pedestrian
and bicycle access to the Project Site would be
provided along California Circle. Pedestrian
access on -site would be provided to each
townhome building and the proposed
apartment complex. Additionally, pedestrian

Page 470 of 707 ends

Page 11 of 35 ends

Policy Conformance

c.) Create a human-scale ground-floor
environment that includes public open areas
that separate pedestrian space from auto
traffic or where thes intersect, give special
regard to pedestrian safety; and
d.) Provide comfortable pedestrian amenities,
such as quality seating areas, lighting, and
wide, shaded paths, along with specialized
and engaging design features, such as
interesting fountains or public art to draw
and maintain people's attention
and bicycle routes would be provided via
walkways and sidewalks.

Refer to response to Policy CD 2 -7 regarding
the proposed lighting fixtures for the Project.

The Project will include a direct connection to
an existing pedestrian crosswalk on California
Circle, and the primary driveway will be
located away from the crosswalk to enhance
pedestrian safety. The existing pedestrian
sidewalk connects through an existing
residential neighborhood to the City’s trail
system along nearby waterways.

Zoning Conformance
The project site is currently zoned MP Industrial Park and within Planned Unit Development no. 31 (PUD 31) . The proposed zoning map amendment will change the existing zoning from MP Industrial Park to MXD Mi xed Use and remove the site fr om PUD 31 . The zone change is necessary in order to facilitate the Project’s proposed residential density under the Project site’s current General Plan designation of Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use (NCMU). The MXD zoning district allow s a 100 percent re sidential project . This would bring the Project site into conformance with the General Plan, as the MXD zoning district is an implementing zoning district under the General Plan land use designation of NCMU. Moreover, PUD 31 was created to facilitate industrial development. Since the proposed Project consists of a residential development, PUD 31 conditions are no longer applicable.

As demonstrated in Table 4, the project is consistent with most of the applicable development standards for the MXD Mixed Use Zoning District. Where the project is not in compliance with objective standards , t he State Density Bonus Law requires the City to grant appropriate concessions, waivers, and parking reductions for qualifying projects.

Page 471 of 707 ends

Page 12 of 35 ends

Table 4: Summary of MXD Development Standards

Development
Standard
(MXD)
Required Proposed Conformance
Density 21-30 du/ac 30.8 du/acre Yes, with
Density Bonus
Front Yard
Setback

Minimum of 8 feet and a maximum of
15 feet from back of sidewalk. The
sidewalk is based on either the
existing sidewalk or assumed 10-foot-
wide sidewalk, whichever is wider
Townhomes and
stacked flats:

12.5 feet from
back of sidewalk

Apartment
building: 18-
foot-10-inches
Yes

Yes, with
Density Bonus

Side Yard
Setback
(Minimum)

10 feet 15 feet

Yes

Rear Yard
Setback
(Minimum)

10 feet 40 feet Yes
Height Principal building: 3 stories and 45
feet
12-plex: 4 stories
and 51 feet

7-plex: 3 stories
and 39-feet-6-
inches

Podium: 6
stories and 77-
feet-4-inches
Yes, with
Density Bonus
Landscaping
All required front and street setback
areas shall be landscaped or paved to
allow for outdoor seating, display or
goods, or street furniture
All required
front and street
setback areas are
landscaped or
paved
Yes
Parking
Studio: 1 covered per unit
1 bedroom: 1.5 covered per unit
2-3 bedrooms: 2 covered per unit
Guest: Projects with parking
structures: 15 percent of the total
required, may be uncovered

393 Yes, with
Density Bonus

Page 472 of 707 ends

Page 13 of 35 ends

Development
Standard
(MXD)
Required Proposed Conformance
Projects with private garages: 20
percent of the total required, may be
uncovered
Total: 445
Bicycle
Parking
5 percent of the total required
Total: 22 22 Yes

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

The City Council, after recommendation by the Planning Commission, may authorize an increase in allowable dwelling unit density for those residential projects that assist in meeting the lower income or senior housing needs of the community. When the Planni ng Commission and Council make a finding that a developer has complied with the requirements of MMC Sections XI-10-

54.15(D)(4), Standards, and XI -10-54.15(E), Density Bonus Conditions, the City Council may award a density increase, with the approval of the project. Moreover, MMC Section XI -10-

54.15(D)(2) states that 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 comparabl e 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.

Since the Project reserves 10 percent or more of the total housing units for lower income households, the density bonus shall be an increase of 20 percent over the maximum allowable residential density under the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The applicant may also request waivers and concessions under the State Density Bonus Law . The Project proposes to satisfy its affordability requirement by reserving all of the apartment units as affordable, with 31 apartm ent units at the lower-income rental level and 44 apartment units at the moderate -income, rather than disperse the affordable units across the Project site. If granted the modification, the overall total number of affordable units at the lower -income leve l satisfies both the 15 percent total units required under the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance and the State Density Bonus .

Furthermore, the City must grant any waivers and concessions requested by the applicant for a qualifying project under the State Density Bonus Law.

Page 473 of 707 ends

Page 14 of 35 ends

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

Table 5: State Density Bonus – Concessions, Waivers, and Incentives

Type of
Modification Standard Applicant
Request Justification Discretion
Density
Bonus
21-30 du/ac 30.8 du/ac By allowing
additional density,
more affordable
units will be
provided to meet
the City’s Regional
Housing Needs
Allocation
(RHNA)
obligation.

The density
bonus is allowed
under State
Density Bonus
Law and must be
granted by the
City.

Waiver(s) Front Setback:

Minimum 8
feet, Maximum
15 feet
Apartment
Building: 18-
foot-10-inches
A greater front
yard setback is
needed to create a
better streetscape
along the project
frontage and
incorporate ADA
accessible ramps
leading to the
leasing office.

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

Waiver(s)
Building
Height: 3
stories and 45
feet
12-plex: 4 stories
and 51 feet

7-plex: 3 stories
and 39-feet-6-
inches

Podium: 6 stories
and 77-feet-4-
inches
The proposed
building heights
are necessary to
achieve the
proposed density
and the open space
areas. The podium
apartment building
would not be
financially feasible
to build with less
units or at a lower
height.

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

Parking
Reduction
Studio: 1
covered per unit
Studio: 1 covered
per unit
The Project is
providing the
maximum number
This waiver is
allowed under
State Density

Page 474 of 707 ends

Page 15 of 35 ends

Type of
Modification Standard Applicant
Request Justification Discretion
1 bedroom: 1.5
covered per unit
2-3 bedrooms: 2
covered per unit
(Pursuant to
MMC Section
XI-10-53.09)
1 bedroom: 1 per
unit
2 bedrooms: 1.5
per unit
(Maximum,
pursuant to State
Density Bonus
law)
Total: Podium -
85 spaces
of required parking
spaces under State
Density Bonus
Law.

Bonus Law and
must be granted
by the City.

Parking
Waiver
Guest Vehicle
Parking
requirement:

Projects with
parking
structures: 15
percent of the
total required,
may be
uncovered;
Projects with
private garages:
20 percent of
the total
required, may
be uncovered.

Townhomes:

52.4 guest
spaces
To provide 46
guest vehicle
parking spaces
when 52.4
vehicle parking
spaces are
required per
MMC.

By relocating the
main entrance to
the
condo/townhome
and creating a more
optimal trash
pickup area for the
apartment building,
the Project was
unable to provide 6
additional guest
spaces. The State
Density Bonus
Law provides a
reduction in the
minimum parking
requirements for
qualifying projects.

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

Parking
Waiver
Compact stalls
shall be used
only in Projects
within R3, R4,
and R5 zones.

Compacts stalls
dispersed
throughout the
proposed MXD
zoned site.

The dispersal and
design of compact
stalls are necessary
to provide adequate
parking for the
Project.

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

Off-Street Parking Standard Waivers
MMC Section XI-10-53.07(B) allows parking areas and garages containing ten (10) or more stalls serving multi-family residential uses within the R3 zones up to 40 percent of the required and non-

Page 475 of 707 ends

Page 16 of 35 ends

required stalls to be designated as compact stalls. Since the Project site will be rezoned to MXD Mixed Use, the Project is not permitted to have compact parking stalls. However, compact stalls are necessary in order to provide as much of the required number of guest spaces as possible and facilitate the physical construction of the proposed development.

Parking Incentives
Under the State Density Bonus Law, an applicant who qualifies for a density bonus may propose reduced parking standards. The project must also provide 15 percent of the total required parking as guest parking within the parking structure and an additional 20 percent of the total required vehicle parking as guest parking for the portion of the project with private garages. However, under State Density Bonus Law and upon a developer's request, the City must allow a reduction in vehicle parking, as shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Maximum Parking Requirements (under State Density Bonus Law)

Type of Unit (or Guest Parking) Number of Vehicle Parking Spaces Studio and One Bedroom One space
Two-Bedroom and Three-Bedroom 1.5 spaces
Guest Parking Zero spaces

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

Table 7: Parking Analysis (under State Density Bonus Law)

Land Use Unit
Count Rate
Maximum
Spaces
Required
Spaces
Provided Notes
Podium
Studio and 1
bedroom 56 1 / unit 56 56
Two bedrooms 19 1.5 / unit 29 29
Townhomes
Three bedrooms 131 1.5 / unit 196.5 262
Guest Parking N/A 0 46
Included as part of the total
number of parking spaces
required under the State
Density Bonus Law
Total 282 393

As noted in the Project Description, each three-bedroom townhome unit will include a two-car garage; 21 will be side-by-side garages and the remaining will be tandem garages . There will be 56 parking spaces within the parking structure of the podium building and 29 uncovered spaces.

Page 476 of 707 ends

Page 17 of 35 ends

In addition, 46 additional surface parking spaces will be provided for gue sts along the internal private streets , making a total of 393 vehicle spaces and consistent with the reduced parking standard under the State Density Bonus Law.

Subdivision Ordinance
The Project's form, content, and dedications of the proposed tract map have been reviewed by the City of Milpitas Engineering Department and deemed consistent with the provisions of MMC Section XI-1-4 (Tentative Map s), as outlined in Resolution No. 23-017. Tentative Maps require approval of a Resolution by the Planning Commission recommending final approval by the City Council.

Architectural Design
The Project's design concept includes six three-story seven-plex residential buildings and eight four-story 12-plex residential buildings, and a six-story apartment building consistent with existing residential development along California Circle. The contemporary design includes the following design accents and materials:

Townhomes
• Roof: Composition Shingle
• Exterior: Stucco Finish and Panel Siding
• Accents: El Dorado Stone, and Metal Railings
• Window/Door Trim: Vinyl frame
• Entry Door: Contemporary Front Entry Door
• Garage Door: Sectional Garage Door

The renderings of the two townhome products are shown in Figure s 3 and 4 . The colors and materials board are shown on Figures 5 and 6.

Figure 3 – 7-plex Townhomes

Page 477 of 707 ends

Page 18 of 35 ends

Figure 4 – 12-plex Townhomes

Figure 5 – 7-plex Colors and Materials Board

Page 478 of 707 ends

Page 19 of 35 ends

Figure 6 – 12-plex Colors and Materials Board

Apartment Building
The proposed six-story multi-family residential building maintains a strong relationship to the street in that its primary entrance is oriented toward the street. The east exterior walls and roof top include architectural relief in the form of fenestration alo ng the front and massing differentiation along the roof segments. The building’s design features exterior plaster walls, vinyl windows, accented with stone veneer and wood frame canop ies along the ground floor, along with an aluminum storefront system. The color for the materials proposed are neutral grays and earth tones with white and darker colors used to break up the massing of the building. The building has a well-defined base consisting of storefront windows with aluminum horizontal and vertical dividers, a canopy and a change in color and material. There is also a change in roof heights that highlight various portions of the building.

The rendering of the apartment building is shown on Figure 7 and the colors and materials board is on Figure 8.

Page 479 of 707 ends

Page 20 of 35 ends

Figure 7 – Apartment Building Facing East towards California Circle

Figure 8 – Apartment Colors and Materials Board

Tree Removal and Landscaping Requirements
The Project includes removal of 49 existing trees, including 27 protected trees, from the project site. Pursuant to MMC Title X, Chapter 2 (Tree Maintenance and Protection), the project will plant two replacement trees for every one protected tree that is removed, or 54 new trees planted on the site. The Project will be planting 269 new trees on site , as demonstrated in Figure 9 . Other new landscaping will include various shrubs, grasses, and perennials.

Page 480 of 707 ends

Page 21 of 35 ends

Figure 9 – Landscape Plan

Parkland and Open Space Requirements
The City’s Subdivision Ordinance requires new subdivisions to dedicate five 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 ).

Additionally, at least 60 percent of the parkland requirement must be provided as public park lands.

The Parkland Fee is based upon the estimated number of persons expected to reside in the development (per U.S. Census definitions) and the estimated value of parkland in the City of Milpitas (currently $2,787,840 per acre).

The City estimates 2.49 people will occupy each unit. The Project proposes 206 units, resulting in an estimated population of 513 persons. Based on this population estimate, the applicant must provide 1.8 acres of parkland, equivalent to approximately $5,004,981.27.

To satisfy the parkland requirement , the Project includes 80,506 square feet of open space and private recreation on site. Each townhome has private balconies, totaling 11,166 square feet. The apartment building has two decks, totaling 4,720 square feet. There is also an internal 0.32 -acre park with facilities for both passive and active recreation . Where private open space for park and recreational purposes is provided in a proposed subdivision and such space is to be privately owned and maintained by the future residents of the subdivision, such areas shall be credited against the requirement of dedication for park and recreation purposes. Since MMC Section XI -1-9.06

Page 481 of 707 ends

Page 22 of 35 ends

requires that 60 percent of the parkland requirement must be provided as public parklands, and no public parkland is proposed, the Project must pay the required 60 percent , as the Project will receive credit for the remaining 40 percent for its private open space . Table 8 demonstrates how the Project will meet its parkland requirement.

Table 8: Parkland Requirements Analysis

Pulte Townhomes and Apartments Proposed 206
Pulte Townhomes and Apartments Population Estimate
(2.49 persons/unit per Census) 513 persons
Citywide Parkland Requirement 5 acres/1,000 people or
equivalent fees-in-lieu
Total Parkland Acreage or In-Lieu Fee Required 1.8 acres / $5,004,981.27 Private Recreation / Open Space provided

1.8 acres (only 0.72 acres
can be counted for Park-
In Lieu fee purposes)
Public Recreation / Public Park Land provided 0.0 acres Balance of Parkland Acreage or In-Lieu Fee Due $3,002,988.76

Affordable Housing Ordinance
According to MMC Section XII -1-3.00 (Affordable Housing), the applicant must reserve fifteen percent (15 percent) of the total number of dwelling units within the development as affordable units. As part of the development application, the applic ant may request and the City Council, at its discretion, may waive, wholly or partially, the requirements of this Chapter and approve alternate methods of compliance if the applicant demonstrates, and the City Council finds, that such alternate methods meet the purposes of the AHO and the Council can make the findings for such alternative methods as set forth in Section MMC XII-1-4.A.

The City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance (AHO) requires the following of affordable units:
• The bedroom mix of the affordable units should be proportionate to the bedroom mix of the market rate units, provided that the City may allow a different unit mix to meet other City goals as determined by the City Council.
• The square footage of the affordable housing units must be reasonably consistent with the market rate units in the development although smaller unit sizes may be allowed by the Director or Building Safety and Housing if the developer provides adequate justification and reasons why the provision of small unit sizes would further the City’s housing goals and the AHO.
• All affordable units shall be reasonably comparable in terms of floor plan and base finish amenities to market rate units in the proposed development. • The quality of the exterior design, landscaping, and construction of the affordable units shall be consistent with the other units in the proposed development. • Affordable units shall have the same access to common entrances from the exterior as market rate units.

Page 482 of 707 ends

Page 23 of 35 ends

• Affordable units shall have the same access to all project amenities and recreational facilities available to market rate units.
• All affordable units shall be reasonably dispersed throughout the project and for residential structures higher than eight stor ies, the affordable units shall be evenly distributed throughout the bottom 60 percent of the floors or higher.

The breakdown of unit types required to satisfy the ordinance is provided in the Table 9 below.

Table 9: AHO Requirements

Unit Type Units
Developed
AHO
Requirement
Units
Required
Townhome 131 15 percent 19.65
Apartment 75 15 percent 11.25

In order to comply with this section, the ordinance requires the applicant to provide 20 townhomes and 11 apartment units for affordable housing, for a total of 31 affordable housing units.

The applicant proposes to meet the City’s affordable housing requirement by reserving 31 of the apartment units on-site for lower-income households, meeting the 15 percent requirement of the total number of dwelling units . The applicant will also reserve the remaining 44 apartment units for moderate-income households.

By granting this exception to the City’s AHO, the Project would add 75 deed restricted units, or 44 additional units, to its affordable housing stock and help the City meet its RHNA obligation.

It is important to note that the apartment units are designed for rental occupancy. As such, the moderate-income units would not qualify towards the 15 percent affordability requirement, as rental units that qualify for the 15 percent must be at or below low-income or 80 percent AMI.

Additionally, the total number of bedrooms under the applicant’s deviation would be 94, whereas the standard ordinance would only require 74 bedrooms. Moreover, the total square footage of living space under the standard ordinance is approximately 41,548 square feet, whereas the Project would be providing 45,661 square feet (or ten percent more).

Implementation
Prior to the City allowing occupancy 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 property containing 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.

Pursuant to MMC Section XII-1-6.03, eligible potential occupants of affordable units will be qualified on the basis of household income, the median combined household income statistics for Santa Clara County published periodically by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), all sources of household income and assets, the relationship between household size and the size of available units, and any further criteria required by law.

The applicant shall use an equitable selection method established in conformance with the terms of the AHO and subject to approval by the City. The selection criteria may not distinguish

Page 483 of 707 ends

Page 24 of 35 ends

between adults and children. Subject to the requirements of state and federal fair housing laws and regulations, the City shall endeavor to make housing available for Milpitas residents, former Milpitas residents who have been displaced, households with children enrolled in the Milpitas Unified School District that have inadequate housing as defined in the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, and employees employed within the boundaries of the City of Milpitas, and may develop selection criteria to implement these goals. The applicant will pursue active marketing, conduct affordable housing workshops, extensive advertising and other measures to ensure that residents and employees are informed and educated about the availability of affordable units.

Traffic and Access
Vehicular access to the proposed townhomes will be provided via two driveways; the existing driveway on the southeastern end of the Project site, along California Circle, will be maintained and the existing northeastern driveway will be moved south towards the middle of the Project site.

Internal private streets will be constructed on-site to provide access to each townhome garage and associated 46 surface guest parking spaces. The proposed private streets will also serve as vehicular circulation on-site. For pedestrian access and circulation, the Project will include internal sidewalks and curbs along each private street.

Vehicular access to the proposed apartment complex will be provided via one new driveway located on the northeastern corner of the Project site, along California Ci rcle. A 150 -foot long drive aisle will be provided at the ground level of the apartment complex for vehicular circulation through the apartment’s proposed surface parking lot and access to the parking structure. The apartment parking structure will provide a separate, internal circulation for vehicles to enter, park, and/or exit. The parking structure will provide a total of 56 residential parking spaces, and the on- site surface parking lot would provide an additional 29 spaces, for a total of 85 spaces. Ten spaces will be utilized as electric vehicle (EV) charging stations. No additional guest parking will be provided onsite.

Grading
The proposed Project would result in the demolition of all existing structures , paving, and landscaping on the subject site. In addition, the applicant proposes to fill the site to raise the finish grade heights to meet flood zone requirements.

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.

Climate Action Plan
The City of Milpitas Climate Action Plan (CAP) was adopted in 2013 and include d 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

Page 484 of 707 ends

Page 25 of 35 ends

compliance with CAL Green standard building measures for residential buildings and Title 24 requirements to reduce energy usage.

Development Fees
The Project is subject to the following impact fees:

Parkland Impact Fee
As shown on Table 8, the Project will comply with the City’s Parkland requirement by paying the Park-In-Lieu fee in the amount of $3,002,988.76.

Public Art Fee
The Project will comply with the City's Public Art Requirements for Private Development, as set forth in MMC Section XI-10-14. This fee/obligation is currently set at one-half of one percent of building development costs. The proposed Project will either install Publicly Accessible Art on the development site or pay the fee based on the construction valuation at the building permit issuance. The Public Art to be installed will be reviewed and approved by the Art Commission.

FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
A finding is a statement of fact relating to the information that the Planning Commission has considered in making a decision. Findings shall iden tify the rationale behind the decision to take a certain action.

General Plan Text Amendment
To approve the General Plan Text Amendment, the following findings must be made pursuant to Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-57.02:

1. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with those portions of the General Plan which are not being amended.

The proposed General Plan Text Amendment is remaining consistent with those portions of the General Plan not being amended because the existing general plan designation (which contemplates the future development) will remain intact, and therefore will not affect other elements of the general plan. The General Plan Text amendment is removing language about the creation of the California Circle Specific Plan. By rem oving this language, the City Council will have the flexibility to consider development projects within the California Circle area that provide public benefit above and beyond what the zoning ordinance requires, without compromising the integrity of the remaining elements of the general plan.

2. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare.

The proposed General Plan Text Amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare because the proposed language has no direct effect on public health, welfare and safety. The amendment is to enable the City Council to modify their current decision making framewor k for land use decisions for projects that support citywide community goals, such as increasing affordable housing stock and partnering with community groups such as Milpitas Unified School District, in order to enhance the Milpitas community character.

Zoning Map Amendment

Page 485 of 707 ends

Page 26 of 35 ends

To approve the Zoning Map Amendment , the following findings must be made pursuant to Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-57.02 (G)(3):

1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan.

The proposed map amendment is consistent with the General Plan because the proposed zoning (MXD) is an implementing zoning district of the existing Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use (NCMU) general plan designation.

2. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare.

The proposed map amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare because the zoning map amendment will implement a land use designation that is consistent with the permitted general plan land use designation . An environmental consultant has reviewed the project and that traffic, environmental impacts, access to essential services, and community well-being will not be impacted in a manner that would significantly affect public health, safety and welfare. If the project is developed, it has been conditioned to comply with federal, state, and local laws and regulations related to public health, safety, and welfare. T his includes zoning ordinances, building codes, environmental regulations, and safety standards.

Vesting Tentative Map
To approve the Major Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, the following findings must be made pursuant to Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-1-20.01:

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

The Project is requesting a General Plan Text Amendment to remove language associated with the California Circle Specific Plan within the General Plan 2040 . With the approval of a General Plan Text Amendment, t he proposed Project is consistent with the Milpitas General Plan, as demonstrated and outlined in Table 2.

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

A. 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 131 residential condominium units and 75 apartment units at a density of 30.8 dwelling units/acre. The General Plan land use designation applicable to the site ( Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use (NCMU ), and with the zoning map amendment to Mixed Use (MXD)) permits residential development at densities of 21 to 30 dwelling units/acre. Given that the Project also qualifies for a Density Bonus, the map is therefore consistent with the General Plan.

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

Page 486 of 707 ends

Page 27 of 35 ends

The Project proposes 30.8 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the 21-30 dwelling units per acre allowed by the General Plan, the proposed rezoning, and the State Density Bonus Law.

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

The site is adjacent to other residential properties that have been recently rezoned to high density multi-family (R3) and single-family residential (R1-2.5). 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.

The project site is within the Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use NCMU General Plan designation, and is being rezoned to Mixed Use MXD, which permits residential development at 21 to 30 dwelling units per acre. The design will physically suit the site by providing required utilities, sufficient open space, and adequate residential living facilities.

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

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

F. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.

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

G. 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.

Site Development Permit

Page 487 of 707 ends

Page 28 of 35 ends

To approve the Site Development Permit, the following findings must be made pursuant to Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-57.03(F):

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 consists of 131 townhome condominium units and 75 apartment units and associated site amenities on a 6.7-acre site. Overall, t he Project’s contemporary architectural design visually relates to and is compatible with the adjacent townhome projects along California Circle. Colors are earth tone shades of browns , blues, and reds.

In addition, future residents of the townhomes will access garages via private alleyways, similar to nearby residential developments. The proposed buildings’ heights ranges from

39.5 feet to 77 -feet-4-inches. The proposed six -story multi -family residential building maintains a strong relationship to the street in that its primary entrance is oriented toward the street. The east exterior walls and roof top include architectural relief in the form of fenestration along the front and massing differentiation along the roof segments. The building’s design features exterior plaster walls, vinyl windows, accented with stone veneer and wood frame canopies along the ground floor, along with an aluminum storefront system. The Project as built will further strengthen the identity of the existing neighborhood and a chieve compatibility and aesthetic harmony with the surrounding development.

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

The proposed Project is generally consistent with the Milpitas Zoning Ordinance, as demonstrated in Table 4 and will be fully consistent if granted approval of the Zoning Map Amendment to adjust the property from MP to MXD. The proposed multi -family residential buildings are permitted in the 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 are needed, the applicant has requested waivers and parking exceptions pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code § 65915 et seq.). The requested waivers and parking exception will support the development of affordable housing on a site where it would not otherwise be possible through a strict application of the specified standard.

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

The proposed Project is consistent with the Milpitas General Plan, with the proposed General Plan Text Amendment, as demonstrated and outlined in Table 2.

Conditional Use Permit
To approve the Conditional Use Permit, the following findings must be made pursuant to Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-57.04(F):

Page 488 of 707 ends

Page 29 of 35 ends

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 California Circle vicinity and conditioned to preserve the health and wellness of future residents. By allowing tandem parking in private garages throughout the development, the Project will be able to offer more parking spaces f or its residents. In addition, the condominium project creates housing opportunities and increases the diversity of housing types in the California Circle area by offering both apartments and for-sale townhomes.

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

The proposed Project is generally consistent with the Milpitas Zoning Ordinance, as demonstrated in Table 4 and will be fully consistent if granted approval of the Zoning Map Amendment to adjust the property from MP to MXD . The proposed multi -family residential buildings are permitted in the MXD zoning district. The project design conforms to the site and development standards of the MXD zone. Therefore, a conditional use permit is required to allow the subdivision of the proposed townhome units.

The Project also conforms to MMC Section XI -10-54.015 (Density Bonus for Affordable Housing Developments) and XI -10-57.05 (Density Bonus Permits). Where exceptions from the MXD standards are needed, the applicant has requested waivers an d parking exceptions pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code § 65915 et seq.). The requested waivers and parking exception will support the development of affordable housing on a site where it would not otherwise be possible through a strict app lication 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 amended by the General Plan Text Amendment, as demonstrated and outlined in Table 2.

Density Bonus Permit
To qualify for a Density Bonus Permit, the following standards must be met pursuant to Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-10-54.15(D):

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

The proposed Project includes 131 townhome condominiums and 75 apartment units, equaling to 30.8 dwelling units per acre. Since the Project site will be rezoned to Mixed Use (MXD) to allow a 100 percent multifamily residential development, and the MXD district is an implementing zoning district of the General Plan NCMU land use designation, the Project is in conformance with the allowable base density specified in the General Plan.

Page 489 of 707 ends

Page 30 of 35 ends

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

The applicant has proposed seven studios, 16 one-bedroom, and eight two-bedroom units as affordable units reserved for lower-income households. The remaining 44 apartment units would be reserved for moderate-income households.

By granting this modification to the City’s AHO, the Project would add 44 additional deed restricted units to its affordable housing stock and help the City meet its RHNA obligation.

While the affordable units are not reasonably dispersed throughout the project, pursuant to Milpitas Municipal Code section XI-10-54.15(D)(2), modification of this requirement only for this project only is justified to allow the placement of the affordable units in the proposed apartment units only because under the unique circumstances of this case for this project only, this modification would better serve the affordable housing needs of Milpitas.

The project shall otherwise comply with the standards for density bonuses specific in the Milpitas Municipal Code, including the requirement in Milpitas Municipal Code section IX-10-54.15(D)(2) that the aff ordable units contain, on average, the same number of bedrooms as the non-affordable units and be comparable with the non -affordable units in terms of appearance, materials, and finished quality.

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 shal l 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 sh all execute and record at the Santa Clara County Recorder’s Office the City’s Agreement Imposing Restrictions on Real Property, which Agreement shall explain the affordability requirements, including continued affordability for low and/or moderate-

Page 490 of 707 ends

Page 31 of 35 ends

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 tha t 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 excee d thirty (30%) of fifty (50%) percent of County median income.

The Project’s 31 apartment rental units will be targeted for lower -income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, which states that lower-income households shall be affordable at a rent that does not exceed thirty (30%) of sixty (60%) percent of the Santa Clara County median income.

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.

The developer has identified and requested bonus incentives held within the State Density Bonus Law, and the Planning Department supports this request.

Affordable Housing Ordinance Exception
The City may allow an exception to the requirement to construct on -site affordable units for a residential ownership project when the applicant contributes to the City's affordable housing needs through one of the alternatives set forth in MMC Sections XII-1-4.00-XII-1-4.02, provided that prior to City Council approval to the requested exception, the City Council must make the following findings:

1. The development as proposed with the exception as provided pursuant to this Section would further the City's low and/or moderate income housing goals as contained in the Housing Element; and

In order to comply with this section, the ordinance requires the Project to provide 20 townhomes, as moderate -income, and 11 apartment units, as low -income, for affordable housing, for a total of 31 affordable housing units. The applicant proposes to deviate from the ordinance and meet the City’s affordable housing requirement by reserving 31 of the apartment units on-site for lower-income households, meeting the 15 percent requirement of the total number of dwelling units. The Project will also reserve the remaining 44 apartment units for moderate-income households,. By granting an exception to the design and distribution requirements of the City’s AHO, the Project would add 75 deed restricted units, or 44 additional units, to its affordable housing stock and help the City meet its RHNA obligation.

2. The development with the exception either (i) will result in at least two of the following:
a. The development of a larger number of deed-restricted affordable units than would be created under the on-site requirement;
b. The development of a larger number of deed -restricted affordable bedrooms than would be created under the on-site requirement;

Page 491 of 707 ends

Page 32 of 35 ends

c. The development of a larger amount of deed restricted affordable living area than would be created under the on-site requirement;
d. The development of deed -restricted affordable units at a lower average income target as compared to the affordable units that would be created under the on-site requirement;
or (ii) will provide other community benefits that exceed the benefit of constructing on-site affordable units.

The Project, with the exception to the design and distribution requirements of the City’s AHO, will result in a larger number of deed -restricted affordable units than would be created under the standard ordinance. Additionally, the total number of bedrooms under the applicant’s deviation would be 94, whereas the standard ordinance would only require 74 bed rooms. Moreover, the total square footage of living space under the standard ordinance is approximately 41,548 square feet, whereas the Project would be providing 45,661 square feet (or ten percent more). Lastly, the developer has committed to working with Milpitas Unified School District to provide housing opportunities for their employees.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An environmental assessment (EA22-0002) was conducted according to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended, and state guidelines implementing CEQA. A “project,” under CEQA, is defined as “the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378.) Given that the demolition and construction of a multifamily residential development at the Project site would require a General Plan Text Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Site Development Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Conditional Use Permit, and these are all discretionary entitlements, and that the Project would result in the alteration of existing buildings and landscaping, it is a “project” under CEQA.

Notice of Preparation
Upon review of the application for the proposed Project, the City determined that the project has the potential to result in potentially significant environmental impacts and, there fore, an EIR should be prepared. In accordance with Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Draft EIR (DEIR) to determine which environmental topics should be analyzed under an Environmental Impact Report. The NOP was circulated on November 14, 2022 to local, state, and federal agencies, and nearby property owners within 1,000 feet or the Project for a 30-day review period that ended on December 14, 2022. A scoping session was held on November 30, 2022 to solicit comment on potential topics to be analyzed under the DEIR.

Draft Environmental Impact Report
The City prepared the DEIR and circulated this document for the required 45-day public review on July 7, 2023. The public review period ended on August 21, 2023. A public comment meeting on the DEIR was held on August 3, 2023.

Other than the impacts discussed below, all the environmental impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels thro ugh implementation of standard conditions of approval or recommended mitigation measures or no impact and requiring no mitigation.

Page 492 of 707 ends

Page 33 of 35 ends

The DEIR identifies the following significant and unavoidable environmental impacts related to aesthetics:

• Impact AES-1: The Project would develop multiple structures at a maximum building height that is greater than the existing building structures on-site. Accordingly, this increase in height would result in significant view blockages of public scenic resources (i.e., the eastern open hillsides) from public viewpoints, specifically for bicyclists travelling northbound along Coyote Creek Trail, and motorists travelling southbound along McCarthy Boulevard. As such, the Project would result in substantial adverse effects to scenic vistas, and the impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Project Alternatives
Section 15123 of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to identify each significant effect with proposed mitigation measures and alternatives that would reduce or avoid that effect. The CEQA Guidelines further require EIRs to include the identification and evaluation of a reasonable range of alternatives that are designed to reduce the significant environmental impacts of the Project while still meeting the general project objectives.

The two alternatives considered were the “No Project” alternative and “ Specific Plan Project” alternative. The “No Project” alternative assumes the continuation of existing physical conditions on the site, as well as development of the related projects. While the “No Project” alternative would have less-than-significant environmental impacts in most topic areas, the alternative would not meet any of the key project objectives and is environmentally and socially undesirable.

The “Specific Plan Project” alternative would include the adoption and implementation of a California Circle Specific Plan bound by the I -880/California Circle on -and-off ramp, Dixon Landing Road, Lower Penitencia Creek, Fairview Avenue, and Cadillac Court (Plan Area), which includes the Project Site. The Specific Plan would serve both planning and regula tory functions, including land use regulations, circulation patterns, building and streetscape design standards, and development standards. This alternative assumes that the Project could be implemented as a development project under the Specific Plan.

This “Specific Plan Project” would achieve all three of the Project objectives. Furthermore, most of the objectives would be met to a greater degree than the Project because the Specific Plan Area would be able to accommodate a greater amount of mixed-use development, thus providing greater opportunities for housing development and increased development intensity. The Specific Plan Alternative would eliminate the significant impact of the Project (aesthetics -visual impacts to scenic resources). Additionally, the Specific Plan Alternative would achieve all Project objectives to a greater degree. However, this Alternative could increase the amount of residential development compared to the Project. Thus, the Specific Plan Alternative would potentially increase the City's population and the demand for public services, recreational spaces, and utility services (i.e., water, wastewater, and solid waste). Future development and redevelopment projects resulting from the Specific Plan Alter native would introduce additional commercial, industrial, and mixed -use development that would increase the development of the Project Site and uses surrounding the Project Site . Implementation of the Specific Plan Alternative could potentially result in s imilar environmental impacts to the Project but to a greater degree. Therefore, the alternative would result in greater impacts than the Project and would ultimately be the inferior alternative.

Page 493 of 707 ends

Page 34 of 35 ends

Final EIR
The contents of the Final EIR include the Draft EI R, comments received during the public comment period on the Draft EIR, and responses to comments. The Final EIR includes Findings of Fact along with a Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) for the Project. In accordance with CEQA, if specific economic, legal, social, technical, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable” and the decision - making agency may adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations to address these impacts.

Should the City Council consider approval of the Project, the Council must also take action to certify the Final EIR and adopt the Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and MMRP. Should the City Council deny the Project, staff would recommend that no action be taken on the Final EIR as a CEQA determination does not need to be made for a project that has been denied.

Given that significant and unavoidable impacts would remain with respect to aesthetics, a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared. The CEQA findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations are included in Attachment B, which recommends that the City Council certify the EIR, approve a Mitigation Monitoring Program, and make findings that while there are significant unavoidable impacts, there are other economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, and other considerations that outweigh these impacts and warrant approv ing the Project.

PUBLIC COMMENT/OUTREACH
The applicant held a joint virtual community meeting i n conjunction with the Draft EIR Public Meeting on August 3, 2023. The meeting was designed to discuss the CEQA process and answer any questions regarding the Draft EIR, as well as informally present the project, answer any questions regarding impacts, and provide answers to any concerns. The meeting was noticed to individuals within 1,000 feet of the project site and was attended by several members of the community and local developers. The meeting was also attended by City staff.

Staff provided public notice of the application in accordance with City and State public noticing requirements. At the time of publishing this report, no public comments have been received. A notice was published in the Milpitas Post on September 29, 2023. In addition, notices were sent to all owners and occupants within 1000 feet of the project site. A public notice was also posted at the project site, on the City's Website, www.milpitas.gov, and at City Hall.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:

1. Open the Public Hearing to receive comments;

2. Close the Public Hearing;

3. Adopted Resolution No. 23 -018 recommending that the City Council certify an Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21080(d) and 21082.2(d) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064; and

4. Adopt Resolution No. 23-017, recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Text Amendment No. GP22 -0001, Zoning Map Amendment No. ZA22 -0001, Site Development Permit No. SD22 -0003, Conditional Use Permit No. UP22 -0001, Vesting

Page 494 of 707 ends

Page 35 of 35 ends

Tentative Map MT22-0001, Density Bonus Permit No. DB23-0003, Tree Removal Permit No. TR23-0021, and Environmental Assessment No. EA22 -0002, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval.

ATTACHMENTS
A: Resolution No. 23-017 with Conditions of Approval, draft General Plan Text Amendment, and draft Ordinance
B: Resolution No. 28-018 with CEQA Findings and Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) C: Project Narratives
D: Project Plans
E: Vesting Tentative Map

Page 495 of 707 ends

CITY OF MILPITAS
Planning Commission

October 11, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 1

MEETING MINUTES
7:00pm
Wednesday, October 11, 2023

CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
455 E CALAVERAS BLVD, MILPITAS, CA
and
via TELECONFERENCE (Zoom Webinar)

CALL TO ORDER Chair Chuan called the meeting to order at 7:04pm.

PLEDGE OF

ALLEGIANCE
Chair Chuan led the pledge of allegiance.

ROLL CALL Recording Secretary Elizabeth Medina called the roll.

PRESENT: Chair Chuan, Vice Chair Ciardella, Commissioners Albana, Awasthi, Galang, and Medina-Ashby

ABSENT: None

STAFF: Jay Lee, Christopher Creech, Michael Fossati, Ned Thomas, and Elizabeth Medina

CONFLICT OF

INTEREST/CAMPAIGN

CONTRIBUTION

DECLARATION

Assistant City Attorney Christopher Creech asked if any member of the commission had any personal or financial conflict of interest related to any of the items on the agenda and there were none.

APPROVAL OF THE

MEETING AGENDA

By motion, approve the meeting agenda for August 23, 2023.

Motion/Second Medina-Ashby/Ciardella
Motion carried by a vote of AYES: 6 NOES: 0

APPROVAL OF THE

MEETING MINUTES

By motion, approve the meeting minutes for August 30, 2023.

Motion/Second Awasthi/Medina-Ashby
Motion carried by a vote of AYES: 6 NOES: 0

By motion, approve the meeting minutes for September 27, 2023.

Motion/Second Albana/Ciardella
Motion carried by a vote of AYES: 4 NOES: 0 ABSTAIN: 2 (Chuan, Galang)

By motion, approve the meeting minutes for August 23, 2023.

Motion/Second Galang/Ciardella
Motion carried by a vote of AYES: 6 NOES: 0

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Chair Chuan followed up with an email sent to all commissioners from the City Attorney’s Office that regarded Ethics Training. Chair Chuan also shared the

Page 496 of 707 ends

October 11, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 2

City’s announcement that the City will temporariry discontinue Zoom public comments; public comments will be received in -person or via emai. Tonight’s meeting wi ll be an exception since the agenda was posted prior to this announcement.

Vice Chair Ciadella congratulated Ned Thomas on being appointed City Manager.

Assistant City Attorney Christopher Creech clari fied that the Ethics Training is required by the State law and is a regular/annual training that the City helps ensure compliance with.

PUBLIC FORUM Chair Chuan invited members of the public to address the commission and there were none.

PUBLIC HEARING

PULTE HOMES RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOMES AND APARTMENTS – 1355 CALIFORNIA CIR – P-GP22-0001, P-ZA22-0001, P-SD22-0003, P-UP22-0001, P-MT22-0001, P -DB23-0003, P -PD22-0001, P -TR23-0021, P -EA22-0002: A General Plan Text Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Site Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Vesting Tentative Map, Density Bonus Permit, Planned Unit Development Permit, Tree Removal Permit, and Environmental Assessment to allow demolition of one industrial building, removal and replacement of 27 ordinance-sized trees, and the development of a multi-family residential project consisting of 13 residential buildings, up to 51 feet in height, and one residential apartment building, up to 78-feet in height, for a total of 206 residential units. The project will also include 323 vehicle parking spaces, a 0.32- acre internal park, and associated site improvements on a 6.7-acre site at 1355 California Circle. As Lead Agency, the City has prepared an Envir onmental Impact Report (SCH #2022110251) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21080(d) and 21082.2(d) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.

Project Planner Lillian VanHua, the applicant team member, Jim Sullivan, and CEQA consultant, John Anderson, addressed commissioners’ clarifying questions related to price point of the units that will be sold, possible consideration of a dog park, if this is the first project proposed in Milpitas t hat includes townhomes/condominiums/apartments, project parking, street parking, traffic congestion, public transportation in the area, description of a stack -flat type condo, covered/garage/guest parking, who will manage the apartment complex, rent control/affordability for apartments, possibly consider to raise the amount of affordable units (low -income, moderate income), alternate off -site parking for guests, affordable units allocated for MUSD employees, number of public comment received prior to meeting, height/density waiver, how this proposed project will impact our RHNA numbers, clarification of development fees that will received, and concerns of fire prevention and access.

Chair Chuan invited members of the public to address the commission and there were none.

Motion to close the Public Forum.

Motion/Second Ciardella/Awasthi
Motion carried by a vote of AYES: 6 NOES: 0

Page 497 of 707 ends

October 11, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 3

Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open and close the public hearing, consider Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21080(d) and 2108.2(d) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064, adopt Resolution No. 23 -017, recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Text Amendment No. GP22 -0001, Zoning Map Amendment No. ZA22 -0001, Site Development Permit No. SD22 -0003, Conditional Use Permi t No. UP22 -0001, Vesting Tentative Map MT22 -0001, Density Bonus Permit No. DB23 -0003, Tree Removal Permit No. TR23 -0021, and Environmental Assessment No. EA22 -0002, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval, and Resolution No. 23 -018 certifying an Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(d) and 21082.2(d) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.

*The commission received public comment and voted to approve the proposed project with the following changes: that the fin dings and conditions of approval be amended throughout Resolution No. 23 -017 such that the 31 lower -income rental units and the 44 moderate -income rental units be made minimums and that the 44 moderate-income rental units can also be reserved for lower income households, and separately, recommend to the City Council that the dog park be incorporated into the proposed parkland, that the townhomes be made with affordable units, and that the project applicant work with MUSD to form an agreement to provide housing for its employees.

Motion/Second Albana/Ciardella
Motion carried by a vote of AYES: 6 NOES: 0

NEW BUSINESS NO ITEMS

ADJOURNMENT Chair Chuan adjourned the meeting at 9:25 pm

Motion/Second Mohsin/Awasthi
Motion carried by a vote of AYES: 6 NOES: 0

Meeting Minutes submitted by
Planning Commission Secretary Elizabeth Medina

Page 498 of 707 ends

MAILELEC RM
BOILER RMTERMINATION RM.

UP
UP
ELEV. RM
UP

LEASINGUP
LOBBYSTOR.MOVE-INMAINT.APARTMENTBUILDING
SITE

DESCRIPTIONEXISTINGLEGENDTO BE CONSTRUCTED

ABBREVIATIONS

KEY MAP
PROJECT TEAMDEVELOPER:

CIVIL ENGINEER:BENCHMARK:BASIS OF BEARINGS:

PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8

SHEET INDEXCIVIL

ARCHITECTLANDSCAPE

PHOTOMETRICS
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEMILPITASCALIFORNIA

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTCOVER SHEET
C11355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT

VICINITY MAP
SITE880

DIXON LANDING RD

PENITENCIA CREEKCALIFORNIA CIR
COYOTE CREEKMcCARTHY BLVDMILMONT DRCADILLAC CT

CALIFORNIA CIRCLE
PROJECT TEAMTOWNHOUSE ARCHITECT:

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:

PROJECT TEAMAPARTMENT ARCHITECT:

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:

PROJECT INFORMATION:

PARKING TABULATIONS:

AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLIANCE:

Page 499 of 707 ends

238
237235276234233232
230
229228227226225224222223220219220
218217
216215
214213
212211210
231
239
258 257256255254253252251
240241242243248249247
244245246
250
PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8 Feet0 3060
LEGEND

ABBREVIATIONS
NOTES

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTEXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC, TREE SURVEY
C21355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT& DEMOLITION PLAN 258

Page 500 of 707 ends

MAILELEC RM
BOILER RMTERMINATION RM.

UP
UP
ELEV. RM
UP

LEASINGUP
LOBBYSTOR.MOVE-IN

EVEVEVEVEVEV
MAINT.

PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8 Feet0 3060

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTPRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
C31355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT

SETBACK TABLE

Page 501 of 707 ends

MAILELEC RM
BOILER RMTERMINATION RM.

UP
UP
ELEV. RM
UP

LEASINGUP
LOBBYSTOR.MOVE-IN

EVEVEVEVEVEV
MAINT.

FF 16.2PAD 15.2
CC C8C8
FF 16.2PAD 15.2
FF 16.2PAD 15.2
FF 16.2PAD 15.2
FF 16.2PAD 15.2
FF 16.2PAD 15.2
FF 16.2PAD 15.2FF 16.2PAD 15.2
FF 16.2PAD 15.2
FF 16.2PAD 15.2
FF 16.2PAD 15.2
FF 16.2PAD 15.2
FF 16.2PAD 15.2 FF 16.1PAD 15.1
BB C8C8
AA C8C8
DD C8C8
FF 15.5
PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8 Feet0 3060

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTPRELIMINARY GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN
C4----
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT

Page 502 of 707 ends

MAILELEC RM
BOILER RMTERMINATION RM.

UP
UP
ELEV. RM
UP

LEASINGUP
LOBBYSTOR.MOVE-IN

EVEVEVEVEVEV
MAINT.

PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8 Feet0 3060

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTPRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN
C5----
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT

Page 503 of 707 ends

DMA 1
DMA 2DMA 3
DMA 4
DMA 5DMA 6
DMA 7
DMA 11
DMA 12DMA 10DMA 13DMA 14DMA 16DMA 15
DMA 17
DMA 29DMA 30DMA 27DMA 24DMA 23DMA 25DMA 26DMA 28DMA 32DMA 33 DMA 31
DMA 9
DMA 34
DMA 21
DMA 19
DMA 20DMA 18DMA 22
DMA 8
MAINTENANCE 1DMA 38
DMA 36
DMA 35

GYMCLUBT
DNUP
DN
UP
UP
TRASH
DMA 37
PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8 Feet0 3060
LEGEND

SITE INFORMATION AND NOTES

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTSTORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
C6----
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT

Page 504 of 707 ends

BIOTREATMENT BASIN DETAILNOTES TYPICAL BIOTREATMENT BASIN PLAN

DEPRESSED LANDSCAPE AREAS DETAILNOTES
PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTSTORMWATER MANAGEMENT DETAILS
C7----
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT

Page 505 of 707 ends

SECTION D-DTYPICAL PRIVATE STREETSECTION A-ASECTION B-BSECTION C-C PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTSECTIONS & DETAILS
C8----
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT

Page 506 of 707 ends

MAILELEC RM
BOILER RMTERMINATION RM.

UP
UP
ELEV. RM
UP

LEASINGUP
LOBBYSTOR.MOVE-IN

EVEVEVEVEVEV
MAINT.APARTMENTBUILDING
PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8 Feet0 3060
64-GALLON CART DETAILLEGENDAPARTMENT BUILDING TRASH PICKUP

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTSOLID WASTE HANDLING PLAN
C9----
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT

Page 507 of 707 ends

MAILELEC RM
BOILER RMTERMINATION RM.

UP
UP
ELEV. RM
UP

LEASINGUP
LOBBYSTOR.MOVE-IN

EVEVEVEVEVEV
MAINT.

MILPITAS FIRE TRUCK TURNING TEMPLATE
PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8 Feet0 3060

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTFIRE TRUCK ACCESS PLAN
C10----
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT
LEGEND

Page 508 of 707 ends

PREPARED FOR:

CALIFORNIAMILPITAS CivilEngineeringAssociates• •Pleasanton, California 94588Phone 925/249-3200 Fax 925/485-02914511 Willow Road, Suite 8

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTBLUEPRINT FOR A CLEAN BAY
C11----
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLEPLANNED DEVELOPMENT

Page 509 of 707 ends

PRODUCT NAME PRODUCT TYPE DESCRIPTION GARAGE TYPE TOTAL AMOUNT

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

TOTAL GARAGE
SQ. FOOTAGE DECK TOTAL
PLAN 2 CONDO 3 BED + 2 BATH COMPACT 2-CAR
TANDEM 2 1518 439 201
PLAN 3 CONDO 3 BED + 2 BATH COMPACT 2-CAR
TANDEM 2 1685 439 203
PLAN 5 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH COMPACT 2-CAR
TANDEM 2 1595 434 115
PLAN 6 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH COMPACT 2-CAR
TANDEM 2 1756 435 170
PLAN 7 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH COMPACT 2-CAR
TANDEM 2 1949 434 116
PLAN 8 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH +
LOFT/OPT. BED 4
COMPACT 2-CAR
TANDEM 1 2175 469 148
PLAN 8X CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH +
LOFT/OPT. BED 4
COMPACT 2-CAR
TANDEM 1 2175 469 148
12 FIRST FLOOR GROSS AREA 7843
SECOND FLOOR GROSS AREA 6899
THIRD FLOOR GROSS AREA 7207
FOURTH FLOOR GROSS AREA 6728
TOTAL 28677
8 4-Story Buildings
96 Dwelling units
+/-51'-0" (To top of roof)
Construction: R2, VA
Sprinkler System: NFPA 13

SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE
TO METHOD OF CALCULATION.
12-PLEX
Total Gross Floor Area

PRODUCT NAME PRODUCT TYPE DESCRIPTION GARAGE TYPE TOTAL AMOUNT

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

TOTAL GARAGE
SQ. FOOTAGE DECK TOTAL
PLAN 1 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH COMPACT 2-CAR
TANDEM 3 1534 536 73
PLAN 1X CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH COMPACT 2-CAR
TANDEM 1 1548 578 70
PLAN 2 CONDO 3 BED + 3.5 BATH 2-CAR S X S 2 1850 422 64 PLAN 2X CONDO 3 BED + 3.5 BATH 2-CAR S X S 1 1765 422 151 7 FIRST FLOOR GROSS AREA 5680
SECOND FLOOR GROSS AREA 5706
THIRD FLOOR GROSS AREA 5568
TOTAL 16954
5 3-Story Buildings
35 Dwelling units
+/-39'-6" (To top of roof)
Construction: R2, VB
Sprinkler System: NFPA 13

SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE
TO METHOD OF CALCULATION.
7-PLEX
Total Gross Floor Area
1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLE
MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA WHA INC. 2022050 | 2022061

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
APRIL 03, 2023

BUILDING FLOOR PLANS

PRODUCT NAME PRODUCT TYPE DESCRIPTION GARAGE TYPE TOTAL AMOUNT

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

TOTAL GARAGE
SQ. FOOTAGE DECK TOTAL
PLAN 1 CONDO 2 BED + 2.5 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 1 1320 426 50 PLAN 1X CONDO 2 BED + 2.5 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 1 1320 426 50 PLAN 2 CONDO 3 BED + 2 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1448 405 173 PLAN 4 CONDO 3 BED + 2 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1409 407 50
PLAN 5 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1495 407 124 PLAN 7 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1838 407 100 10 PRODUCT NAME PRODUCT TYPE DESCRIPTION GARAGE TYPE TOTAL AMOUNT

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

TOTAL GARAGE
SQ. FOOTAGE DECK TOTAL
PLAN 2 CONDO 3 BED + 2 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1448 405 173 PLAN 3 CONDO 3 BED + 2 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1508 405 105 PLAN 5 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1495 407 124 PLAN 6 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1604 407 158 PLAN 7 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1838 407 100 PLAN 8 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH +
LOFT/OPT. BED 4 TANDEM 2-CAR 1 2015 455 100
PLAN 8X CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH +
LOFT/OPT. BED 4 TANDEM 2-CAR 1 2015 455 100
12 PRODUCT NAME PRODUCT TYPE DESCRIPTION GARAGE TYPE TOTAL AMOUNT

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

TOTAL GARAGE
SQ. FOOTAGE DECK TOTAL
PLAN 1 ALT. CONDO 2 BED + 2.5 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 1 1320 415 50 PLAN 2 CONDO 3 BED + 2 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1448 405 173 PLAN 3 CONDO 3 BED + 2 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1508 405 105 PLAN 4 CONDO 3 BED + 2 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1409 407 50
PLAN 5 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1495 407 124 PLAN 6 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1604 407 158 PLAN 7 CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH TANDEM 2-CAR 2 1838 407 100 PLAN 8X CONDO 3 BED + 3 BATH +
LOFT/OPT. BED 4 TANDEM 2-CAR 1 2015 455 100
14 WINCHESTER RANCH - CONDOS
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA WHA #2019104

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
June 4, 2019
C 2019 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA.

Revised August 22, 2019
CONDOS

PROJECT INFORMATION
SCALE: 1" = 60'-0"

WINCHESTER RANCH - CONDOS
10-PLEX
2 4-Story Buildings
20 Dwelling units
+/-51'-0" (To top of roof)

SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE
TO METHOD OF CALCULATION.

Construction: R2, VA
Sprinkler System: NFPA 13
8 4-Story Buildings
96 Dwelling units
+/-51'-0" (To top of roof)
Construction: R2, VA
Sprinkler System: NFPA 13
3 4-Story Buildings
42 Dwelling units
+/-51'-0" (To top of roof)
Construction: R2, VA
Sprinkler System: NFPA 13
Largest Building Area per Story:
8,500 S.F (R2); 6,100 (U)
158 Dwelling units
NOTES:

1. REFER TO CIVIL SHEETS FOR ALL PROPERTY

LINES, EASEMENTS, SITE DIMENSIONS,
ACCESSIBLE UNIT LOCATIONS, ETC.

2. REFER TO LANDSCAPE SHEETS FOR

LANDSCAPE DESIGN, DIMENSIONS AND
DETAILED INFORMATION.

SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE
TO METHOD OF CALCULATION.
158 x 10% = 15.8 = 16 Adaptable Dwelling Units required; 16 provided

DENOTES ADAPTABLE MULTI-STORY DWELLING

UNIT ON AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE COMPLYING
WITH C.B.C. SEC. 1102A.3.
12-PLEX 14-PLEX
U, VA: 27,000 SF/STORY
(FIRE WALLS ARE NOT REQUIRED, AS AREA

LIMITATIONS WITHIN EACH BUILDING ARE WITHIN
CODE ALLOWANCES. LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FIRE

WALLS FOR THE PURPOSES OF COMBINING BUILDINGS

ON THE SAME LOT ARE TO BE EVALUATED DURING
THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE.)
PLAN 1 AND PLAN 4 ARE NOT PART OF THIS BUILDING UNIT MIX A0.1

COVER SHEET SITE PLAN

Page 510 of 707 ends

1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLE
MILPITAS, CALIFORNIA WHA INC. 2022050 | 2022061

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
MARCH 17, 2022
STACKED HOMES 12 PLEX

BUILDING FLOOR PLANSSITE PLAN & PROJECT DATA &

CODE ANALYSIS

PRODUCT NAME PRODUCT TYPE DESCRIPTION GARAGE TYPE TOTAL AMOUNT

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
June 4, 2019
C 2019 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA.

Revised August 22, 2019
CONDOS

PROJECT INFORMATION
SCALE: 1" = 60'-0"

WINCHESTER RANCH - CONDOS
10-PLEX
2 4-Story Buildings
20 Dwelling units
+/-51'-0" (To top of roof)

SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE
TO METHOD OF CALCULATION.

1. REFER TO CIVIL SHEETS FOR ALL PROPERTY

LINES, EASEMENTS, SITE DIMENSIONS,
ACCESSIBLE UNIT LOCATIONS, ETC.

2. REFER TO LANDSCAPE SHEETS FOR

LANDSCAPE DESIGN, DIMENSIONS AND
DETAILED INFORMATION.

SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE
TO METHOD OF CALCULATION.
158 x 10% = 15.8 = 16 Adaptable Dwelling Units required; 16 provided

DENOTES ADAPTABLE MULTI-STORY DWELLING

UNIT ON AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE COMPLYING
WITH C.B.C. SEC. 1102A.3.

ALLOWABLE NUMBER OF STORIES: 4
(C.B.C. TABLE 504.4)
ALLOWABLE BUILDING HEIGHT: 70'
(WITHOUT AREA INCREASE)
(C.B.C. TABLE 506.2)
(C.B.C. TABLE 504.3)
12-PLEX 14-PLEX
R2, VA: 36,000 SF/STORY
U, VA: 27,000 SF/STORY
ALLOWABLE BUILDING AREA:
(FIRE WALLS ARE NOT REQUIRED, AS AREA

LIMITATIONS WITHIN EACH BUILDING ARE WITHIN
CODE ALLOWANCES. LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FIRE

WALLS FOR THE PURPOSES OF COMBINING BUILDINGS

ON THE SAME LOT ARE TO BE EVALUATED DURING
THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE.)

PRODUCT NAME PRODUCT TYPE DESCRIPTION GARAGE TYPE TOTAL AMOUNT

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

OF UNITS
TOTAL

CONDITIONED
SQ. FOOTAGE

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
June 4, 2019
C 2019 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA.

Revised August 22, 2019
CONDOS

PROJECT INFORMATION
SCALE: 1" = 60'-0"

WINCHESTER RANCH - CONDOS
10-PLEX
2 4-Story Buildings
20 Dwelling units
+/-51'-0" (To top of roof)

SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE
TO METHOD OF CALCULATION.

1. REFER TO CIVIL SHEETS FOR ALL PROPERTY

LINES, EASEMENTS, SITE DIMENSIONS,
ACCESSIBLE UNIT LOCATIONS, ETC.

2. REFER TO LANDSCAPE SHEETS FOR

LANDSCAPE DESIGN, DIMENSIONS AND
DETAILED INFORMATION.

SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE
TO METHOD OF CALCULATION.
158 x 10% = 15.8 = 16 Adaptable Dwelling Units required; 16 provided

DENOTES ADAPTABLE MULTI-STORY DWELLING

UNIT ON AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE COMPLYING
WITH C.B.C. SEC. 1102A.3.

LIMITATIONS WITHIN EACH BUILDING ARE WITHIN
CODE ALLOWANCES. LOCATIONS OF POTENTIAL FIRE

WALLS FOR THE PURPOSES OF COMBINING BUILDINGS

ON THE SAME LOT ARE TO BE EVALUATED DURING
THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE.)
PLAN 1- AND PLAN 4 ARE NOT PART OF THIS BUILDING

UNIT MIX
CONDOS
CONDOS
R-2: BUILDINGS CONTAINING MORE THAN TWO DWELLING UNITS
U: PRIVATE GARAGES

USE & OCCUPANCY
(CBC SECTION 310.4 & 312.1)

IN R OCCUPANCIES WITH NOT MORE THAN THREE STORIES ABOVE GRADE PLANE, THE

AGGREGATE SUN OF THE RATIOS FOR PORTIONS OF MIXED-OCCUPANCY MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE(1)

IN R OCCUPANCIES WITH MORE THAT THREE STORIES ABOVE GRADE PLANE, THE AGGREGATE

SUM OF THE RATIOS FOR PORTIONS OF MIXED-OCCUPANCY MULTT-STORY BUILDINGS SHALL NOT EXCEED TWO(2)
GROUP U IS PERMITTED TO BE 1,000 SQ. FT. PER GARAGE WHEN PROVIDING 1-HOUR FIRE BARRIERS BETWEEN GARAGES. MULTIPLE PRIVATE GARAGES ARE PERMITTED IN A BUILDING WHERE EACH PRIVATE GARAGE IS SEPARATE BY A 1-HR FIRE BARRIER FIRE SPRINKLER: NFPA 13
TYPE VB, 3-STORY: NOT REQUIRED
UNPROTECTED SPRINKLERED - PER C.B.C. TABLE 705.8
SEE SITE PLAN FOR FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE AND SHEET A0.50 FOR ACTUAL AREA OF OPENINGS IN EXTERIOR WALLS.

TYPE VB, 3-STORY
SEPARATIONS:
(CBC SECTION 420)
WALLS SEPARATING DWELLING UNITS (R2) SHALL BE 1-HOUR FIRE PARTITIONS COMPLYING WITH CBC SECTION 708.

WALLS SEPARATING PRIVATE GARAGES (U) FROM DWELLING UNIT (R2) SHALL BE SEPARATED BY NOT LESS THAN 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD APPLIED TO THE GARAGE SIDE PER 406.3.4.1. DOORS SHALL BE 20 MIN RATED.

FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLIES SEPARATING DWELLING UNITS (R2) AND DWELLING UNITS (R2) / GARAGES (U) SHALL BE 1-HR RATED HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLIES COMPLYING WITH CBC SECTION 711.

DOOR BETWEEN PRIVATE GARAGE (U) AND ITS OWN DWELLING UNIT (R2) SHALL BE 20MIN RATED -

SELF-CLOSING, SELF-LATCHING, SOLID WOOD DOOR OR SOLID OR HONEYCOMB CORE STEEL DOOR, MINIMUM 1-3/8 INCHES (34.9 MM) THICK.

DOORS IN RATED CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH CBC SEC 716.5 FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE > 10' FOR TYPE VB CONSTRUCTION AND R3 OCCUPANCY SHALL BE ZERO (0) (NON-RATED)
FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE < 10' FOR TYPE VB CONSTRUCTION AND R2 OCCUPANCY SHALL BE ONE (1) - (1 HOUR)

CODE INFORMATION
THIS PROJECT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES ADOPTED BY JURISDICTION HAVING AUTHORITY.

APPLICABLE CODES:
2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC)
2016 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (CEC)
2016 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (CMC)
2016 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (CPC)
2016 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE (CFC)
2016 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARD CODE (CAL GREEN) 2016 BUILDING ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:

FIRE SPRINKLERS:

ALLOWABLE HEIGHT:
(CBC TABLE 504.3 & SECTION
504)
ACTUAL HEIGHT:

ALLOWABLE STORIES:
(CBC TABLE 504.4 & SEC 504.4)
ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA:
(CBC SEC 406 & SEC 508)

RATED EXTERIOR WALLS
(CBC TABLE 601)

FIRE RESISTIVE RATING

REQUIREMENTS FOR

EXTERIOR WALLS BASED ON
FIRE SEPARTION DISTANCE:
(TABLE 602)

ALLOWABLE OPENINGS
(CBC TABLE 705.8)
ACCESSIBILITY:

R-2, TYPE V-B: 3 STORIES (2 STORIES BASE ALLOWABLE + 1 STORY SPRINKLER INCREASE FOR NFPA 13)
U, TYPE V-B: 2 STORIES
TYPE V-B: (WITH NFPA 13) 60 FEET MAXIMUM (WITHOUT AREA INCREASE) 40 FEET MAXIMUM (WITH

AREA INCREASE)
65' FEET PER PROJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
< 40 FEET - SEE ELEVATIONS
SHALL COMPLY WITH CBC CHAPTER 1102A.3 MULTI-STORY DWELLINGS

CODE SUMMARY

CODE SUMMARY
7 PLEX TOWNHOME
CONDOS
2019
2019
2019
2019
2019
2019
2019
12 PLEX STACKED

TOWNHOME CONDOS

CODE SUMMARY
OCCUPANCY GROUP:
(CBC SECTION 310)
SEPARATIONS:
(CBC SECTION 420)
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:

FIRE SPRINKLERS:

ALLOWABLE HEIGHT:
(CBC TABLE 504.3)
ACTUAL HEIGHT:

ALLOWABLE STORIES:
(CBC TABLE 504.4 & SEC 504.4)
ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA:
(CBC SEC 406 & SEC 508)

FIRE RESISTANCE RATING

REQUIREMENTS
(CBC TABLE 601)

FIRE RESISTANCE RATING

REQUIREMENTS FOR

STRUCTURAL MEMBERS
(CBC SEC 704)

FIRE RESISTANCE RATING

REQUIREMENTS FOR

EXTERIOR WALLS
(CBC SEC 705)

MAXIMUM AREA OF EXTERIOR
WALL OPENINGS:
(CBC SEC 705.8)
ACCESSIBILITY:

GROUP R-2 / U (SEE AMMR FOR U OCCUPANCY UTILIZING THE 2016 CBC INTERPRETATION OF PRIVATE GARAGES PER SECTION 406.3.1)
WALLS SEPARATING DWELLING UNITS (R2) SHALL BE 1-HOUR FIRE PARTITIONS COMPLYING WITH CBC SECTION 708.

WALLS SEPARATING PRIVATE GARAGES (U) FROM DWELLING UNIT (R2) SHALL BE 1-HOUR FIRE BARRIERS COMPLYING WITH CBC SECTION 709. DOORS SHALL BE 20 MIN RATED.

WALL SEPARATING PRIVATE GARAGES (U) FROM CORRIDORS AND COMMON USE SPACES SHALL BE 1HR RATED FIRE BARRIERS COMPLYING WITH CBC SECTION 708. DOORS SHALL BE 20 MIN RATED.

WALLS SEPARATING ELEVATOR,STAIR AND SHAFT ENCLOSURES FROM OTHER USES SHALL BE 2-HOUR FIRE BARRIERS, COMPLYING WITH CBC SECTION 707. DOORS SHALL BE 90 MIN RATED.

ALL FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLIES ARE REQUIRED TO BE 1-HR RATED HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLIES COMPLYING WITH CBC SECTION 711.

DOOR BETWEEN PRIVATE GARAGE (U) AND ITS OWN DWELLING UNIT (R2) SHALL BE 20 MIN RATED - SELF-CLOSING, SELF-LATCHING, SOLID WOOD DOOR OR SOLID OR HONEYCOMB CORE STEEL DOOR, MINIMUM 1-3/8 INCHES (34.9 MM) THICK.

DOORS IN RATED CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH CBC SECTION 716

ALL COVERED MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS SHALL BE ADAPTABLE AND ACCESSIBLE INTO AND THROUGHOUT THE DWELLING UNIT PER PROVISIONS DESCRIBED IN CHAPTER 11A - DIVISION IV.

IN BUILDINGS WITH ONE OR MORE ELEVATOR, ALL ROOMS OR SPACES LOCATED ON THE PRIMARY ENTRY LEVEL SHALL BE SERVED BY AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE AND SHALL COMPLY WITH DIVISION IV.

ALL BUILDINGS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE AN ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE PER CBC 1106A.

TYPE V-A
NFPA 13 PER CBC SECTION 903.3.1.1
70 FEET MAXIMUM
<70 FEET (VARIES, SEE ELEVATIONS)
4 STORIES

IN R OCCUPANCIES WITH NOT MORE THAN THREE STORIES ABOVE GRADE PLANE, THE AGGREGATE SUM OF THE RATIOS FOR PORTIONS OF MIXED-OCCUPANCY MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE(1)

IN R OCCUPANCIES WITH MORE THAT THREE STORIES ABOVE GRADE PLANE, THE AGGREGATE SUM OF THE RATIOS FOR PORTIONS OF MIXED-OCCUPANCY MULTT-STORY BUILDINGS SHALL NOT EXCEED TWO(2) GROUP U IS PERMITTED TO BE 1,000 SQ. FT. PER GARAGE WHEN PROVIDING 1-HOUR FIRE BARRIERS BETWEEN GARAGES. MULTIPLE PRIVATE GARAGES ARE PERMITTED IN A BUILDING WHERE EACH PRIVATE GARAGE IS SEPARATE BY A 1-HR FIRE BARRIER
1-HOUR RATED CONSTRUCTION IS REQUIRED FOR PRIMARY STRUCTURAL FRAME, EXTERIOR WALLS AND INTERIOR BEARING WALLS, FLOOR ASSEMBLIES AND ASSOCIATED SECONDARY MEMBERS, AND ROOF CONSTRUCTION.

COLUMNS, BEARING WALLS, AND PRIMARY STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS SHALL BE PROTECTED COMPLYING WITH CBC SECTION 704.

ALL EXTERIOR WALLS, BEARING AND NON-BEARING, ARE REQUIRED TO BE 1-HOUR RATED COMPLYING WITH CBC SECTION 705.

UNPROTECTED SPRINKLERED - PER CBC TABLE 705.8
SEE SITE PLAN FOR FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE AND ACTUAL AREA OF OPENINGS IN EXTERIOR WALLS.

EXITING
(CBC SECTION 1006.2.1
EXCEPTION 1, CBC TABLE
1006.2.1 & 1006.3.2(1))
125 FEET MAXIMUM EXIT TRAVEL DISTANCE FOR A SINGLE EXIT IN 4-STORY R-2 DWELLING UNIT.

EMERGENCY ESCAPE AND RESCUE OPENINGS (EGRESS WINDOWS) ARE REQUIRED IN ALL SLEEPING ROOMS BELOW THE FOURTH STORY. SEE EXITING DIAGRAMS.

ROOF ACCESS
(CBC SECTION 1011.12)
STAIRWAY TO THE ROOF NOT REQUIRED ON 4-STORY BUILDINGS WITH ROOF SLOPES > 4:12

CODE INFORMATION
THIS PROJECT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES ADOPTED BY JURISDICTION HAVING AUTHORITY.

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
MARCH 21, 2022

CODE SUMMARY
7 PLEX TOWNHOME
CONDOS
12 PLEX STACKED TOWNHOME
CONDOS
A0.2

Page 511 of 707 ends

PROJECT SITE KEY MAP
141'-111
2"
55'-0"
141'-111
2"
55'-0"
Plan 3Plan 8
2-CAR TANDEM
TELE.

ENTRY ELECTRICAL
ENTRY
ENTRY
Plan 6 Plan 7 Plan 2 Plan 5 Plan 5 Plan 2 Plan 6Plan 7

PORCH PORCH
UP
UP
UP
Plan 8xPlan 3
UP UP
UP
ENTRY

PORCHPORCH PORCH PORCH
UP
UP
ENTRY
9'-0" x 36'-0" MIN. CLR.
2-CAR TANDEM
9'-0" x 36'-0" MIN. CLR.
2-CAR TANDEM
9'-0" x 36'-0" MIN. CLR.
2-CAR TANDEM
9'-0" x 36'-0" MIN. CLR.
2-CAR TANDEM
9'-0" x 36'-0" MIN. CLR.
2-CAR TANDEM
9'-0" x 36'-0" MIN. CLR.

FIRE
RISER
(ACs TO BE SCREENED

BY LANDSCAPE)
AC
AC AC
ENTRY
LADDER
PAD,
TYP.

AC
AC

DEN DEN
UP

COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT
141'-111
2"
55'-0"
141'-111
2"
55'-0"
LAUND.

KITCHEN12'-4"9'-3"x
CAFE

OWNER'S
BATH
12'-6"12'-1"x

OWNER'S SUITE
BATH 2
10'-10"7'-8"x
DECK
10'-2"10'-3"x
BEDROOM 2
13'-8"13'-7"x
GATHERING RM.

W.I.C.
11'-3"10'-2"x
BEDROOM 2
6'-0"10'-9"x
DECK
W.I.C.

W.I.C.
9'-11"10'-0"x
BEDROOM 2
LAUND.

BATH 2
9'-11"10'-0"x
BEDROOM 3
9'-5"10'-10"x
CAFE
11'-3"13'-7"x
GATHERING RM.

KITCHEN
13'-6"12'-6"x

OWNER'S SUITE

OWNER'S
BATH
W.I.C.

DN
UP
Plan 6 Plan 7
Plan 2Plan 3
Plan 8
68 S.F
83 S.F
5'-6"18'-4"x
DECK
100 S.F
DN
DN
DN
UP
5'-6"18'-4"x
DECK
105 S.F
UP
DNDN
UP
Plan 6Plan 7
Plan 2 Plan 3
Plan 8
BUILDING TYPE 200 & 201:

FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR

COMPOSITE PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"

18026-A1.10
A1.211
2 DATE

REVISIONS
NO. DESCRIPTION
PROJECT MANAGER :

DESIGNER :

DRAWN BY :

REVIEWED BY :
1ST BLDG. DEPT. SUBMITTAL :

ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION :

JOB NUMBER :

CAD FILE NAME :

DATE: SHEET:

SHEET SCALE:

KMH
-
-
2022050
3/29/2022 1355 CALIFORNIA CIRCLE

ATTACHED DWELLING UNITS

MILPITAS, CA

PULTE GROUP

PLEASANTON, CA

DO NOT SCALE PLANS
2021 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. dba WHA

WHA EXPRESSLY RESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE PLANS. THESE PLANS ARE NOT TO BE

REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER

WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO A THIRD PARTY

WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT

OF WHA IN THE EVENT OF UNAUTHORIZED REUSE OF THESE PLANS BY A THIRD PARTY, THE THIRD PARTY SHALL HOLD WHA HARMLESS.

C
BUILDING TYPE 200 & 201: FIRST FLOOR PLAN

CONSTRUCTION NOTES (TYPE VA)
KEY
NOTE
RATING
(IN HRS)
DETAIL

REFERENCEDESCRIPTION & NOTES
A

INTERIOR

NON-BEARING
WALL &

PARTITIONS

CONSTRUCTION

ASSEMBLY
0 C
E
F
FIRE BARRIERS 1
VERTICAL ASSEMBLIES:

HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLIES (FLOOR/CEILING):

K
J
EXT. to INT.
(Deck over
Living/Garage)
H EXT. to EXT.
(Deck over Exterior) 1
1 1
B 1
D

INTERIOR

BEARING WALL
(HOUSE/GARAGE)
1 AAD1.1
1INTERIOR NON-BEARING WALLS AND PARTITIONS SHALL BE
OF NON-RATED CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. TABLE 601.

REFER TO STRUCTURAL PLANS FOR NON-BEARING WALLS.

PRIVATE GARAGE SHALL BE SEPARATED FROM THE
DWELLING UNIT AND ITS ATTIC AREA WITH MIN. 1/2" GYPSUM
BOARD APPLIED TO THE GARAGE SIDE PER C.B.C. TABLE
508.4, SUBNOTE C AND SEC. 406.3.2. VERIFY LOCATIONS OF
BEARING WALLS PER THE STRUCTURAL PLANS.

FIRE BARRIERS SHALL BE OF 1-HOUR RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 707. MULTIPLE
PRIVATE GARAGES SEPARATED BY 1-HR FIRE BARRIERS
PER C.B.C. SEC. 406.3.2.1. (MIN. STC 50 REQUIRED)
FIRE PARTITIONS 1
FIRE PARTITIONS SHALL BE OF 1-HOUR FIRE RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 708. (MIN. STC 50 REQ.) HORIZONTAL (FLOOR/CEILING) ASSEMBLY OF 1-HOUR RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 711.2. AAD1.1
11 L
INTERIOR to INTERIOR
(Living over Living
within same unit)
M
INTERIOR to

INTERIOR
(Living over Garage
within same unit)
1 HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLIES (ROOF/CEILING):

Q ROOF over
INTERIOR SPACE 1
HORIZONTAL (ROOF/CEILING) ASSEMBLY OF 1-HOUR RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 711.2. AAD1.1
12 PENETRATIONS AT RATED

ASSEMBLIES

RECESSED FIXTURES IN

RATED WALLS/ CEILINGS

PENETRATIONS AT FIRE-RESISTIVE RATED WALLS,

FLOOR/CEILINGS, AND ROOF/CEILINGS SHALL BE
PROTECTED PER C.B.C. SECTION 714.

RECESSED FIXTURES AT FIRE RESISTIVE-RATED
WALLS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER C.B.C. SECTION
714.4.2 SO THAT THE REQUIRED RATING OF THE
WALL IS NOT REDUCED.

TUB/SHOWER ENCLOSURE
AT 1-HOUR RATED WALL
INTERSECTIONS of VERTICAL ASSEMBLIES:

INTERSECTING WALLS TO FIRE BARRIER SHALL NOT

INTERRUPT THE REQUIRED RATING OF THE FIRE BARRIER
PER C.B.C. SECTION 707.

AAD1.1
9 INTERSECTING WALLS TO FIRE PARTITION SHALL NOT

INTERRUPT THE REQUIRED RATING OF THE FIRE PARTITION
PER C.B.C. SECTION 708.

FIRE PARTITION / FIRE
BARRIER to

RATED EXTERIOR WALL

CONTINUITY OF INTERSECTING FIRE PARTITIONS/FIRE

BARRIERS AND RATED EXTERIOR WALL SHALL BOTH BE
MAINTAINED PER C.B.C. SECTIONS 705, 707 & 708. AAD1.1
5 CONDITIONS AT RATED CONSTRUCTION:

SOFFIT FRAMING AT

RATED FLOOR/CEILING

SOFFIT FRAMING SHALL BE OF NON-COMBUSTIBLE

MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTED AFTER ONE-HOUR

FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLY IS CONSTRUCTED
AAD1.1
28 GENERAL NOTES

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION

COMPOSITE PLAN LEGEND

1. REFER TO UNIT FLOOR PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES AND DIMENSIONS.

2. REFER TO SHEET A0.11 FOR BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE CALCULATIONS.

3. FIRE DAMPERS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER C.B.C. SEC. 717.5 AT ALL DUCT AND AIR TRANSFER

OPENINGS WITHIN FIRE WALLS, FIRE BARRIERS AND FIRE-RESISTIVE-RATED FLOOR-CEILING ASSEMBLIES OR ROOF-CEILING ASSEMBLIES, EXCEPT AS ALLOWED PER C.B.C. SECTIONS 717.5.1 THROUGH 717.5.7 AND 717.6.

4. PENETRATIONS OF FIRE-RESISTIVE WALLS, FLOOR-CEILINGS AND ROOF-CEILINGS SHALL BE PROTECTED AS REQUIRED IN C.B.C. SECTION 714.

5. STUDS, COLUMNS AND BOUNDARY ELEMENTS THAT ARE INTEGRAL ELEMENTS IN WALLS OF

LIGHT-FRAME CONSTRUCTION AND ARE LOCATED ENTIRELY BETWEEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM

PLATES OR TRACKS SHALL BE PERMITTED TO HAVE REQUIRED FIRE-RESISTANCE RATINGS PROVIDED BY THE MEMBRANE PROTECTION PROVIDED FOR THE WALL PER C.B.C. SEC.704.4.1.

6. THE FIRE-RESISTANCE RATING OF HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE NOT LESS THAN THAT REQUIRED BY THE BUILDING TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL COMPLY WITH C.B.C. SECTIONS 711.2.4.1 THROUGH 711.2.4.6.

7. SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR ALL ENTRY PORCHES, PATIOS, STOOPS, STAIRS, HANDRAILS,

WALLS, DRIVEWAYS, STEPS, LANDSCAPE WALLS, FENCES, TRELLIS, AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

8. ACCESSIBLE CONCEALED FLOOR, FLOOR-CEILING OR ATTIC SPACE, FIRE WALLS, FIRE BARRIERS,

FIRE PARTITIONS, SMOKE BARRIERS AND SMOKE PARTITIONS OR ANY OTHER WALL REQUIRED TO

HAVE PROTECTED OPENINGS OR PENETRATIONS SHALL BE EFFECTIVELY AND PERMANENTLY IDENTIFIED WITH SIGNS OR STENCILING IN THE CONCEALED SPACE, PER C.B.C. SECTION 703.7.

SUCH IDENTIFICATION SHALL:

8.1. BE LOCATED WITHIN 15 FEET OF THE END OF EACH WALL AND AT INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 30 FEET MEASURED HORIZONTALLY ALONG THE WALL OR PARTITION.

8.2. INCLUDE LETTERING NOT LESS THAN 3 INCHES IN HEIGHT WITH A MINIMUM 3/8-INCH STROKE IN A CONTRASTING COLOR INCORPORATING THE SUGGESTED WORDING: "FIRE AND/OR SMOKE BARRIER - PROTECT ALL OPENINGS," OR OTHER WORDING.

9. REFER TO SHEETS APD1, APD2, APD3, APD4, APD5 & APD6 FOR TYPICAL RATED PENETRATION ASSEMBLY DETAILS.

10. CONTRACTORS SHALL CONTINUE RATED WALL/CEILING CONDITION AS NECESSARY TO OBTAIN AN EVEN SURFACE. RATED AREAS INDICATED ARE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS PER THE C.B.C.

11. REFER TO EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR EXTERIOR FINISH APPLICATION.

12. PER C.B.C. SECTION 406.3.1, MULTIPLE PRIVATE GARAGES ARE PERMITTED IN A BUILDING WHERE EACH PRIVATE GARAGE IS SEPARATED FROM THE OTHER PRIVATE GARAGES BY 1-HOUR FIRE BARRIERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH C.B.C. SECTION 707, OR 1-HOUR HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH C.B.C. SECTION 711, OR BOTH.

EXTERIOR WALLS SHALL BE OF 1-HOUR RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. TABLE 602 AND SECTION 705,
U.N.O. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES #10 & 11 BELOW.

EXTERIOR RATED

WALLS -

TYPICAL
1 DWELLING UNIT

SEPARATION
(Living over Living)
SHEETS APD1,
APD2, APD3, APD4,
APD5 & APD6
HORIZONTAL (FLOOR/CEILING) ASSEMBLY OF 1-HOUR RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 711.2. PRIVATE

GARAGES BENEATH HABITABLE ROOMS SHALL BE
SEPARATED FROM HABITABLE ROOMS WITH 5/8" TYPE-X
GYPSUM BOARD MINIMUM PER C.B.C. SECTION 406.3.2.1.

AAD1.1
24N 1

HORIZONTAL (FLOOR/CEILING) ASSEMBLY SHALL BE
1-HOUR RATED CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 711.2.
(MIN. STC 50 & IIC 50 REQUIRED)
AAD1.1
7 AAD1.1
23 AAD1.1
9 STAIR FRAMING AT
1-HOUR RATED WALL
AAD1.2
1CONTINUITY OF FIRE-RESISTANCE RATED WALLS
SHALL BE MAINTAINED.

CONTINUITY OF FIRE-RESISTANCE RATED WALLS
SHALL BE MAINTAINED.

AAD1.1
23 INTERIOR

BEARING WALLS
INTERIOR BEARING WALLS SHALL BE OF 1-HOUR RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. TABLE 601. VERIFY LOCATIONS
OF BEARING WALLS PER THE STRUCTURAL PLANS.

AAD1.1
2 AAD1.1
4 AAD1.1
7 HORIZONTAL (FLOOR/CEILING) ASSEMBLY SHALL BE 1-HOUR
RATED CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 711.2.

HORIZONTAL (FLOOR/CEILING) ASSEMBLY OF 1-HOUR RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 711.2. PRIVATE

GARAGES BENEATH HABITABLE ROOMS SHALL BE
SEPARATED FROM HABITABLE ROOMS WITH 5/8" TYPE-X
GYPSUM BOARD MINIMUM PER C.B.C. SECTION 406.3.2.1.
1 HORIZONTAL (FLOOR/CEILING) ASSEMBLY OF 1-HOUR RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 711.2. PRIVATE

GARAGES BENEATH HABITABLE ROOMS SHALL BE
SEPARATED FROM HABITABLE ROOMS WITH 5/8" TYPE-X
GYPSUM BOARD MINIMUM PER C.B.C. SECTION 406.3.2.1.
(MIN. STC 50 REQUIRED)

DWELLING UNIT

SEPARATION
(Living over Garage)
AAD1.1
24 INTERIOR WALL to

FIRE BARRIER
AAD1.2
18 R ROOF over
EXTERIOR SPACE 1
HORIZONTAL (ROOF/CEILING) ASSEMBLY OF 1-HOUR RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 711.2.

AAD1.2
191-HOUR RATED

DUCT CHASE
AAD1.1
19 SHAFT ENCLOSURES SHALL BE OF 1-HOUR FIRE RATED
CONSTRUCTION PER C.B.C. SECTION 713 WHERE SHAFT
CONNECTS LESS THAN FOUR (4) STORIES.

G SHAFT
ENCLOSURES 1
AAD1.2
20 AAD1.2
30 AAD1.2
9P 1
STAIR ASSEMBLY SHALL BE 1-HOUR RATED CONSTRUCTION

TO MAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF FIRE-RATED FLOOR/CEILING

ASSEMBLY

DWELLING UNIT

SEPARATION
(Stair over Living)

PENETRATIONS BY DUCTS OF HORIZONTAL

ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE PROTECTED BY A SHAFT
ENCLOSURE PER C.B.C. SECTION 717.6. REFER

TO MECHANICAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS FOR

LOCATIONS OF RATED DUCT CHASE WITHIN THE
HORIZONTAL FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLY.

AAD1.2
3 AAD1.2
4 1-HOUR RATED FIRE BARRIER WALL - SEE CONSTRUCTION NOTE "E" 1-HOUR RATED EXTERIOR WALL - SEE CONSTRUCTION NOTE "C"
1-HOUR RATED INTERIOR BEARING WALL - SEE CONSTRUCTION NOTE "B" -

VERIFY LOCATIONS PER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
1-HOUR RATED SHAFT - SEE CONSTRUCTION NOTE "G" - VERIFY LOCATIONS

PER MECHANICAL DRAWINGS
1-HOUR RATED FIRE PARTITION WALL - SEE CONSTRUCTION NOTE "F" AAD1.1
2 AAD1.1
13 INTERIOR WALL to

FIRE PARTITION
AAD1.1
10 AAD1.1
3 & 8

INDICATES ONE-HOUR RATED HORIZONTAL FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLY AT DWELLING UNITS ABOVE GARAGES - SEE CONSTRUCTION NOTES "L" & "M" NOTE: CONCRETE TOPPING AT THE FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLY IS NOT

REQUIRED FOR FIRE OR ACOUSTICAL PROTECTION BUT HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO ACHIEVE IMPROVED ACOUSTICAL PERFORMANCE. EXTEND

FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLY AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE A LEVEL SURFACE WITHIN THE DWELLING UNIT.

INDICATES ONE-HOUR RATED HORIZONTAL DWELLING UNIT SEPARATION (FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLY) - SEE CONSTRUCTION NOTE "N"
NOTE: CONCRETE TOPPING AT THE FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLY IS REQUIRED FOR ACOUSTICAL PROTECTION. THE MINIMUM REQUIRED AREA IS INDICATED. EXTEND THE FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLY AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE A LEVEL FLOOR SURFACE WITHIN THE DWELLING UNIT.

AAD1.1
24 INDICATES DROPPED CEILING OR SOFFIT AREA - SEE DETAIL 19/AAD1.1 SEE DETAIL 28/AAD1.1 FOR DROPPED UTILITY SOFFIT AT GARAGE AAD1.2
11 UP
DN UP
OPT. PPC OPT. PPC
141'-111
2"
55'-0"
141'-111
2"
55'-0"
Plan 3Plan 8
2-CAR TANDEM
TELE.