Agenda packet — Milpitas City Council, February 6, 2024 (part 3 of 3)

7 10.0 Administrative Costs. If Developer fails to construct and install all or any part of the Public Improvements within the time required by this Agreement, or if Developer fails to comply with any other obligation contained herein, Developer and its surety shall be jointly and severally liable to City for all administrative expenses, fees, and costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, incurred in obtaining compliance with this Agreement or in processing any legal action or for any other remedies permitted by law.

11.0 Acceptance of Improvements by City Council; As-Built or Record Drawings.

If the Public Improvements are properly completed by Developer and approved by the City Engineer, and if they comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, codes, standards, and other requirements, the City Council shall be authorized to accept the Public Improvements. The City Council may, in its sole and absolute discretion, accept fully completed portions of the Public Improvements prior to such time as all of the Public Improvements are complete and reduce the requirement Security amount pursuant to Section 13.0 et seq., which shall not release or modify Developer’s obligation to complete the remainder of the Public Improvements within the time required by this Agreement. Upon the total or partial acceptance of the Public Improvements by City, Developer shall file with the Recorder’s Office of the County of SANTA CLARA a notice of completion for the accepted Public Improvements in accordance with California Civil Code section 9204, at which time the accepted Public Improvements shall become the sole and exclusive property of City without payment therefor. If the Project was approved and recorded as a single phase map, City shall not accept any one or more of the improvements until all of the Public Improvements are completed by Developer and approved by City. Issuance by City of occupancy permits for any buildings or structures located on the Property shall not be construed in any manner to constitute City’s acceptance or approval of any Public Improvements. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City may not accept any Public Improvements unless and until Developer provides one (1) set of “as-built” or record drawings or plans to the City Engineer for all such Public Improvements. The drawings shall be certified and shall reflect the condition of the Public Improvements as constructed, with all changes incorporated therein.

12.0 Warranty and Guarantee. Developer hereby warrants and guarantees all Public Improvements against any defective work or labor done, or defective materials furnished in the performance of this Agreement, including the maintenance of all landscaping within the Property in a vigorous and thriving condition reasonably acceptable to City, for a period of one (1) year following completion of the Public Improvements and acceptance of them by the City Council (“Warranty”). During the Warranty, Developer shall repair, replace, or reconstruct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory portion of the Public Improvements, in accordance with the current ordinances, resolutions, regulations, codes, standards, or other requirements of City, and subject to the approval of the City Engineer. All repairs, replacements, or reconstruction during the Warranty shall be at the sole cost, expense, and liability of Developer and its surety. As to any Public Improvements which have been repaired, replaced, or reconstructed during the Warranty, Developer and its surety hereby agree to extend the Warranty for an additional one (1) year period following the City’s acceptance of the repaired, replaced, or reconstructed Public Improvements.

Nothing herein shall relieve Developer from any other liability it may have under federal, state, or local law to repair, replace, or reconstruct any Public Improvement following expiration of the Warranty or any extension thereof. Developer’s warranty obligation under this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.

Page 207 of 283 ends

8 13.0 Improvement Security; Surety Bonds. Prior to this Agreement taking effect as set forth in Section 1.0 above, Developer shall provide City with surety bonds in the amounts and under the terms set forth below (“Security”). The amount of the Security shall be based on the City Engineer’s approximation of the actual cost to construct the Public Improvements, including the replacement cost for all landscaping (“Estimated Costs”). If City determines, in its sole and absolute discretion, that the Estimated Costs have changed, Developer shall adjust the Security in the amount requested by City. Developer’s compliance with this provision (Section 13.0 et seq.) shall in no way limit or modify Developer’s indemnification obligation provided in Section 16.0 of this Agreement.

13.1 Performance Bond. To guarantee the faithful performance of the Public Improvements and all the provisions of this Agreement, to protect City if Developer is in default as set forth in Section 9.0 et seq. of this Agreement, and to secure Developer’s one-year guarantee and warranty of the Public Improvements, including the maintenance of all landscaping in a vigorous and thriving condition, Developer shall provide City a faithful performance bond in the amount of Eighty six thousand Dollars ($86,000.00), which sum shall be not less than one hundred percent (100%) of the Estimated Costs. The City Council may, in its sole and absolute discretion and upon recommendation of the City Engineer, partially release a portion or portions of the security provided under this section as portions of the Public Improvements are completed and accepted by the City Council, provided that Developer is not in default on any provision of this Agreement or condition of approval for The Project, and the total remaining security is not less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the Estimated Costs. All security provided under this section shall be released at the end of the Warranty period, or any extension thereof as provided in Section 12.0 of this Agreement, provided that Developer is not in default on any provision of this Agreement or condition of approval for The Project.

13.2 Labor & Material Bond. To secure payment to the contractors, subcontractors, laborers, material men, and other persons furnishing labor, materials, or equipment for performance of the Public Improvements and this Agreement, Developer shall provide City a labor and materials bond in the amount of Eighty six thousand Dollars ($86,000.00), which sum shall be less than one hundred percent (100%) of the Estimated Costs. The security provided under this section may be released by written authorization of the City Engineer after six (6) months from the date City accepts the final Public Improvements. The amount of such security shall be reduced by the total of all stop notice or mechanic’s lien claims of which City is aware, plus an amount equal to twenty percent (20%) of such claims for reimbursement of City’s anticipated administrative and legal expenses arising out of such claims.

13.3 Additional Requirements. The surety for any surety bonds provided as Security shall have a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VIII, shall be licensed to do business in California, and shall be satisfactory to City. As part of the obligation secured by the Security and in addition to the face amount of the Security, the Developer or its surety shall secure the costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, incurred by City in enforcing the obligations of this Agreement. The Developer and its surety stipulate and agree that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of this Agreement, the Public Improvements, or the plans and specifications for the Public Improvements shall in any way affect its obligation on the Security.

Page 208 of 283 ends

9 13.4 Evidence and Incorporation of Security. Evidence of the Security shall be provided on the forms set forth in Exhibit “C,” unless other forms are deemed acceptable by the City Engineer and the City Attorney, and when such forms are completed to the satisfaction of City, the forms and evidence of the Security shall be attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and incorporated herein by this reference.

14.0 Monument Security. (N/A).

15.0 Lien. To secure the timely performance of Developer’s obligations under this Agreement, including those obligations for which security has been provided pursuant to Sections 13 et seq. and 14 of this Agreement, Developer hereby creates in favor of City a lien against all portions of the Property not dedicated to City or some other governmental agency for a public purpose. As to Developer’s default on those obligations for which security has been provided pursuant to Sections 13 et seq. and 14 of this Agreement, City shall first attempt to collect against such security prior to exercising its rights as a contract lienholder under this section.

16.0 Indemnification. Developer shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its elected officials, officers, employees, and agents from any and all actual or alleged claims, demands, causes of action, liability, loss, damage, or injury, to property or persons, including wrongful death, whether imposed by a court of law or by administrative action of any federal, state, or local governmental body or agency, arising out of or incident to any acts, omissions, negligence, or willful misconduct of Developer, its personnel, employees, agents, or contractors in connection with or arising out of construction or maintenance of the Public Improvements, or performance of this Agreement. This indemnification includes, without limitation, the payment of all penalties, fines, judgments, awards, decrees, attorneys fees, and related costs or expenses, and the reimbursement of City, its elected officials, officers, employees, and/or agents for all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them. This indemnification excludes only such portion of any claim, demand, cause of action, liability, loss, damage, penalty, fine, or injury, to property or persons, including wrongful death, which is caused solely and exclusively by the negligence or willful misconduct of Agency as determined by a court or administrative body of competent jurisdiction. Developer’s obligation to indemnify shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement, and shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by City, its elected officials, officers, employees, or agents.

16.1 Public Works Determination. Developer has been alerted to the requirements of California Labor Code section 1770 et seq., including, without limitation S.B. 975, which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements if it is determined that this Agreement constitutes a public works contract. It shall be the sole responsibility of Developer to determine whether to pay prevailing wages for any or all work required by this Agreement. As a material part of this Agreement, Developer agrees to assume all risk of liability arising from any decision not to pay prevailing wages for work required by this Agreement.

17.0 Insurance.

17.1 Types; Amounts. Developer shall procure and maintain, and shall require its contractors to procure and maintain, during construction of any Public Improvement pursuant

Page 209 of 283 ends

10 to this Agreement, insurance of the types and in the amounts described below (“Required Insurance”). If any of the Required Insurance contains a general aggregate limit, such insurance shall apply separately to this Agreement or be no less than two times the specified occurrence limit.

17.1.1 General Liability. Developer and its contractors shall procure and maintain occurrence version general liability insurance, or equivalent form, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage.

17.1.2 Business Automobile Liability. Developer and its contractors shall procure and maintain business automobile liability insurance, or equivalent form, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading, or unloading of any vehicle owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the insured or for which the insured is responsible.

17.1.3 Workers’ Compensation. Developer and its contractors shall procure and maintain workers’ compensation insurance with limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and employers’ liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, at all times during which insured retains employees.

17.1.4 Professional Liability. For any consultant or other professional who will engineer or design the Public Improvements, liability insurance for errors and omissions with limits not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, shall be procured and maintained for a period of five (5) years following completion of the Public Improvements. Such insurance shall be endorsed to include contractual liability.

17.2 Deductibles. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. At the option of City, either: (a) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers; or (b) Developer and its contractors shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims, and administrative and defense expenses.

17.3 Additional Insured; Separation of Insureds. The Required Insurance shall name City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds with respect to work performed by or on behalf of Developer or its contractors, including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection therewith. The Required Insurance shall contain standard separation of insureds provisions, and shall contain no special limitations on the scope of its protection to City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.

17.4 Primary Insurance; Waiver of Subrogation. The Required Insurance shall be primary with respect to any insurance or self-insurance programs covering City, its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. All policies for the Required Insurance shall provide that the insurance company waives all right of recovery by way of subrogation against City in connection with any damage or harm covered by such policy.

Page 210 of 283 ends

11 17.5 Certificates; Verification. Developer and its contractors shall furnish City with original certificates of insurance and endorsements effecting coverage for the Required Insurance. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All certificates and endorsements must be received and approved by City before work pursuant to this Agreement can begin. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.

17.6 Term; Cancellation Notice. Developer and its contractors shall maintain the Required Insurance for the term of this Agreement and shall replace any certificate, policy, or endorsement which will expire prior to that date. All policies shall be endorsed to provide that the Required Insurance shall not be suspended, voided, reduced, canceled, or allowed to expire except on 30 days prior written notice to City.

17.7 Insurer Rating. Unless approved in writing by City, all Required Insurance shall be placed with insurers licensed to do business in the State of California and with a current A.M. Best rating of at least A:VIII.

18.0 Signs and Advertising. Developer understands and agrees to City’s ordinances, regulations, and requirements governing signs and advertising structures. Developer hereby agrees with and consents to the removal by City of all signs or other advertising structures erected, placed, or situated in violation of any City ordinance, regulation, or other requirement. Removal shall be at the expense of Developer and its surety. Developer and its surety shall indemnify and hold City free and harmless from any claim or demand arising out of or incident to signs, advertising structures, or their removal.

19.0 Relationship Between the Parties. The Parties hereby mutually agree that neither this Agreement, any map related to The Project, nor any other related entitlement, permit, or approval issued by City for the Property shall operate to create the relationship of partnership, joint venture, or agency between City and Developer. Developer’s contractors and subcontractors are exclusively and solely under the control and dominion of Developer. Nothing herein shall be deemed to make Developer or its contractors an agent or contractor of City.

20.0 General Provisions.

20.1 Authority to Enter Agreement. Each Party warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement have the legal power, right, and authority make this Agreement and bind each respective Party.

20.2 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate, or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement.

20.3 Construction; References; Captions. It being agreed the Parties or their agents have participated in the preparation of this Agreement, the language of this Agreement shall be construed simply, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any Party. Any term referencing time, days, or period for performance shall be deemed calendar days and not work days. All references to Developer include all personnel, employees, agents, and subcontractors of Developer, except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. All references to City include its

Page 211 of 283 ends

12 elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. The captions of the various articles and paragraphs are for convenience and ease of reference only, and do not define, limit, augment, or describe the scope, content, or intent of this Agreement.

20.4 Notices. All notices, demands, invoices, and written communications shall be in writing and delivered to the following addresses or such other addresses as the Parties may designate by written notice:

CITY OF MILPITAS RAJYOGA MEDITATION & RESEARCH CENTER
455 E. Calaveras Blvd 540 S Abel St
MILPITAS, CA 92236 MILPITAS, CA 95035
Attn: MATT CANO. PE Attn: KUSUM KEJRIWAL
Assistant City Manager/Acting City Engineer Director
_________________________________ _________________________________ Depending upon the method of transmittal, notice shall be deemed received as follows: by facsimile, as of the date and time sent; by messenger, as of the date delivered; and by U.S. Mail first class postage prepaid, as of 72 hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail.

20.5 Amendment; Modification. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by both Parties.

20.6 Waiver. City’s failure to insist upon strict compliance with any provision of this Agreement or to exercise any right or privilege provided herein, or City’s waiver of any breach of this Agreement, shall not relieve Developer of any of its obligations under this Agreement, whether of the same or similar type. The foregoing shall be true whether City’s actions are intentional or unintentional. Developer agrees to waive, as a defense, counterclaim or set off, any and all defects, irregularities or deficiencies in the authorization, execution or performance of the Public Improvements or this Agreement, as well as the laws, rules, regulations, ordinances or resolutions of City with regards to the authorization, execution or performance of the Public Improvements or this Agreement.

20.7 Assignment or Transfer of Agreement. Developer shall not assign, hypothecate, or transfer, either directly or by operation of law, this Agreement or any interest herein without prior written consent of City. Any attempt to do so shall be null and void, and any assignee, hypothecatee, or transferee shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation, or transfer. Unless specifically stated to the contrary in City’s written consent, any assignment, hypothecation, or transfer shall not release or discharge Developer from any duty or responsibility under this Agreement.

20.8 Binding Effect. Each and all of the covenants and conditions shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties, and their successors, heirs, personal representatives, or assigns. This section shall not be construed as an authorization for any Party to assign any right or obligation.

Page 212 of 283 ends

13 20.9 No Third Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties.

20.10 Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.

20.11 Consent to Jurisdiction and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. Any legal action or proceeding brought to interpret or enforce this Agreement, or which in any way arises out of the Parties’ activities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement, shall be filed and prosecuted in the appropriate California State Court in the County of SANTA CLARA, California. Each Party waives the benefit of any provision of state or federal law providing for a change of venue to any other court or jurisdiction including, without limitation, a change of venue based on the fact that a governmental entity is a party to the action or proceeding, or that a federal right or question is involved or alleged to be involved in the action or proceeding. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing waiver, Developer expressly waives any right to have venue transferred pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 394.

20.12 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterpart originals, which taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument.

Page 213 of 283 ends

14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement, the day and year first above written.

CITY OF MILPITAS RAJYOGA MEDITATION &

RESEARCH CENTER
By: ___________________________ By: _____________________________ (signature) (signature)
______Ned Thomas ____ ________ Kusum Kejriwal _______
(print name) (print name)
City Manager Director
City of MILPITAS RAJYOGA MEDITATION &

RESEARCH CENTER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: ___________________________
(signature)
Michael Mutalipassi
(print name)
City Attorney
City of MILPITAS
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

By: ___________________________
(signature)
Lauren Lai, CPA, MPA
(print name)
Finance Director/Risk Manager
City of MILPITAS
APPROVED AS TO SUFFICIENCY:

By: ___________________________
(signature)
Matt Cano, PE
(print name)
Assistant City Manager/Acting City Manager
City of MILPITAS

Page 214 of 283 ends

15 NOTE: DEVELOPER’S SIGNATURES SHALL BE DULY NOTARIZED, AND

APPROPRIATE ATTESTATIONS SHALL BE INCLUDED AS MAY BE

REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS, ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, OR
OTHER RULES OR REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO DEVELOPER’S
BUSINESS ENTITY.

Page 215 of 283 ends

16 All Capacity Acknowledgment
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ______________
On , 20___, before me, _______________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature of Notary Public

OPTIONAL
Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document.

CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT D Individual
D Corporate Officer
Title(s) Title or Type of Document
D Partner
(s)
D Limited
D General Number of Pages
D Attorney-In-Fact
D Trustee(s)
D Guardian/Conservator Date of Document
D Other:

Signer is representing:

Name Of Person(s) Or Entity(ies)
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above

Page 216 of 283 ends

17 All Capacity Acknowledgment
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature of Notary Public

Signer is representing:

Name Of Person(s) Or Entity(ies)
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above

Page 217 of 283 ends

EXHIBIT “A”

LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
APN 086-42-033

Page 218 of 283 ends

EXHIBIT “B”

LIST OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
APN 086-42-033

Page 219 of 283 ends

EXHIBIT “C”

SURETY BONDS AND OTHER SECURITY
APN 086-42-033
As evidence of understanding the provisions contained in this Agreement, and of the Developer’s intent to comply with same, the Developer has submitted the below described security in the amounts required by this Agreement, and has affixed the appropriate signatures thereto:

PERFORMANCE BOND PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: $86,000.00
Surety: _______________________________________
Attorney-in-fact: ________________________________
Address: ______________________________________
______________________________________________
______________________________________________
MATERIAL AND LABOR BOND PRINCIPAL AMOUNT: $86,000.00
Surety: _______________________________________
Attorney-in-fact: ________________________________
Address: ______________________________________
______________________________________________
______________________________________________
CASH MONUMENT SECURITY:
$_______________
Amount deposited per Cash Receipt No. _______________ Date: _________________

Page 220 of 283 ends

BOND NO. ___________________
INITIAL PREMIUM: ___________________

SUBJECT TO RENEWAL

CITY OF MILPITAS
PARCEL/TRACT MAP NO. 086-42-033 IMPROVEMENTS

PERFORMANCE BOND
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:

WHEREAS the City of MILPITAS, California (“City”) and Rajyoga Meditation and Research Center (“Developer”), have executed an agreement for work consisting of, but not limited to, the furnishing all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidentals for all grading, roads, paving, curbs and gutters, pathways, storm drains, sanitary sewers, utilities, drainage facilities, traffic controls, landscaping, street lights, and all other required facilities for Parcel/Tract Map No. ________________ (“Public Improvements”) to be constructed by (“Principal”);
WHEREAS, the Public Improvements to be performed by Developer and Principal are more particularly set forth in that certain Agreement for Completion of Pubic Improvements dated _______________________, ________ (“Improvement Agreement”); WHEREAS, the Improvement Agreement is hereby referred to and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, Developer is required by the Improvement Agreement to provide a good and sufficient bond for performance of the Improvement Agreement, and to guarantee and warranty the Public Improvements constructed thereunder.

NOW, THEREFORE, Principal and ______________________________ (“Surety”), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of ______________________, and duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, are held and firmly bound unto City in the sum of _____________ dollars ($___________________), said sum being not less than one hundred percent (100%) of the total cost of the Public Improvements as set forth in the Improvement Agreement, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such, that if Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions, agreements, guarantees, and warranties in the Improvement Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified and in all respects according to their intent and meaning, and to indemnify and save harmless City, its officers, employees, and agents,

Page 221 of 283 ends

as stipulated in the Improvement Agreement, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.

As part of the obligation secured hereby, and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney’s fees, incurred by City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered.

Surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Improvement Agreement, or to any plans, profiles, and specifications related thereto, or to the Public Improvements to be constructed thereunder, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition.

This bond is executed and filed to comply with Section 66499 et seq. of the Government Code of California as security for performance of the Improvement Agreement and security for the one-year guarantee and warranty of the Public Improvements.

Page 222 of 283 ends

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the seal and signature of the Principal is hereto affixed, and the corporate seal and the name of the Surety is hereto affixed and attested by its duly authorized Attorney-in-Fact at _______________________, this _____ day of _______________, ______.
(Corporate Seal)
Principal
By
Title
(Corporate Seal)
Surety
By
Attorney-in-Fact
(Attach Attorney-in-Fact Certificate) Title
The rate of premium on this bond is ____________ per thousand. The total amount of premium charges is $_______________________________.
(The above must be filled in by corporate attorney.)

THIS IS A REQUIRED FORM
Any claims under this bond may be addressed to:
(Name and Address of Surety) ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________
___________________________________________
(Name and Address of Agent or ___________________________________________ Representative for service of ___________________________________________ process in California, if different ___________________________________________ from above)
(Telephone number of Surety ___________________________________________ and Agent or Representative for
service of process in California)

Page 223 of 283 ends

BOND NO. ___________________
INITIAL PREMIUM: ___________________

SUBJECT TO RENEWAL

CITY OF MILPITAS

PARCEL/TRACT MAP IMPROVEMENTS

LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:

WHEREAS the City of MILPITAS, California (“City”) and Rajyoga Meditation and Research Center (“Developer”), have executed an agreement for work consisting of, but not limited to, the furnishing all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidentals for all grading, roads, paving, curbs and gutters, pathways, storm drains, sanitary sewers, utilities, drainage facilities, traffic controls, landscaping, street lights, and all other required facilities for the Project (“Public Improvements”) to be constructed by (“Principal”); WHEREAS, the Public Improvements to be performed by Principal are more particularly set forth in that certain Agreement for Completion of Pubic Improvements dated _______________________, ________ (“Improvement Agreement”); WHEREAS, the Improvement Agreement is hereby referred to and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, Developer is required to obtain a bond from Principal in connection with the Improvement Agreement providing that if Principal or any of its subcontractors shall fail to pay for any materials, provisions, or other supplies, or terms used in, upon, for, or about the performance of the Public Improvements, or for any work or labor done thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the provisions of Title 3 (commencing with section 9000) of Part 6 of Division 4 of the California Civil Code, with respect to such work or labor, that the Surety on this bond will pay the same together with a reasonable attorney’s fee in case suit is brought on the bond.

NOW, THEREFORE, Principal and _________________________ (“Surety”), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of ______________________, and duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, are held and firmly bound unto City and to any and all contractors, subcontractors, material suppliers, persons, companies or corporations furnishing materials, provisions, and other supplies used in, upon, for or about the performance of the Public Improvements, and all persons, companies or corporations renting or hiring teams, or implements or machinery, for or contributing to the Public Improvements to be done, and all persons performing work or labor upon the same and all persons supplying both work and materials as aforesaid excepting the Principal, the sum of ____________________ dollars, ($______________), said sum being not less than 100% of the total cost of the Public Improvements under the terms of the Improvement Agreement, we bind

Page 224 of 283 ends

ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors and assigns jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH that if the Principal, his or its subcontractors, heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall fail to pay for any materials, provisions, or other supplies or machinery used in, upon, for or about the performance of the Public Improvements, or for work or labor thereon of any kind, or fail to pay any of the persons named herein, or amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to work or labor performed by any such claimant, or for any amounts required to be deducted, withheld, and paid over to the Employment Development Department from the wages of employees of the contractor and his subcontractors pursuant to Section 13020 of the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to such work and labor, and all other applicable laws of the State of California and rules and regulations of its agencies, then said Surety will pay the same in or to an amount not exceeding the sum specified herein.

This bond is executed and filed to comply with Section 66499 et seq. of the California Government Code as security for payment to contractors, subcontractors, and persons furnishing labor, materials, or equipment for construction of the Public Improvements or performance of the Improvement Agreement. It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 3 (commencing with Section 9000) of Part 6 of Division 4 of the California Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond.

Page 225 of 283 ends

Page 226 of 283 ends

All Capacity Acknowledgment
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature of Notary Public

Signer is representing:

Name Of Person(s) Or Entity(ies)
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above

Page 227 of 283 ends

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature of Notary Public

Signer is representing:

Name Of Person(s) Or Entity(ies)
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above

Page 228 of 283 ends

CITY OF MILPITAS

AGENDA REPORT
(AR)
Item Title: Review Applications Received for the 2024-2025 Community Development Block Grant Annual Action Plan (Staff Contact: Alex Andrade, Director of Economic Development, 408-586-3046; Robert Musallam, Housing Division Manager, 408- 586-3275)
Category: Public Hearings-Community Development
Meeting Date: 2/6/2024
Recommendation: (1) Conduct a public hearing; and
(2) Provide feedback and/or direction to staff on CDBG priority areas or specific applications that the City Council seeks to fund.

BACKGROUND:

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides annual grants through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program to local entitlement cities and counties. The CDBG program provides resources to the most vulnerable low- and moderate-income communities to address community development needs through investment in capital projects and public services. The amount of funds that Milpitas receives is determined by a formula based on population and other factors.

On December 8, 2023, the City announced the opening of the FY2024-25 CDBG application period. The application period opened on December 8, 2023 and remained available through January 8, 2024. The announcement was made via a Notice for Availability of Funding. The public notice was distributed to current CDBG subgrantees, the CDBG interest email list, and other community members. Additionally, the public notice and the application were physically available at City Hall’s Permit Center and the Milpitas Library for the public. Lastly, the public notice was published in the Milpitas Post on December 8, 2023. The application was accessible via our Federal Program webpage.

Per the City’s Citizen Participation Plan, the City must hold two Public Hearings to allow the community to participate in an advisory role in the planning, implementation, and assessment of the programs and projects. The City Council’s role during this First Public Hearing is to provide staff with feedback and/or direction on CDBG priority areas the City Council seeks to fund. Specific funding amounts, services or projects to be funded will not be determined until the Second Public Hearing.

Staff used a simplified application to streamline and increase the efficiency of the process. A total of twenty (20) simplified applications were received during the application period. The total dollar amount of grant requests received during the application period totaled $1,005,607. A full breakdown of these simplified applications is provided in the Analysis section below.

Eligible and Ineligible Uses
HUD sets restrictions on how CDBG can be used. CDBG activities must be on HUD’s list of eligible uses. A summary of eligible and ineligible activities is included in Attachment 1.

Meeting National Objectives
CDBG activities must meet one of the following National Objectives:

1. Provides a benefit to low- and moderate-income persons;

Page 229 of 283 ends

2. Eliminates or prevents slum or blight; or

3. Meets other community development needs having an urgency because existing conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community and other financial resources are not available to meet such needs, often referred to as “urgent need.” The City of Milpitas has historically used its CDBG allocation to benefit low- and moderate-income persons. To meet the slum or blight National Objective, the City would have to identify areas that meet the definition of a slum, blighted, deteriorated, or deteriorating area under state or local law. Milpitas has not identified significantly blighted conditions within its boundaries. As such, CDBG formula funds must benefit low- and moderate-income persons.

The table below displays the FY2023 income limits determined by HUD to be low- and moderate-income for Santa Clara County. FY2024 income limits have not been released but will be used to determine eligibility once available.

Person(s) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
(50% AMI)* $62,450 $71,400 $80,300 $89,200 $96,350 $103,500 $110,650 $117,750 (80% AMI)* $96,000 $109,700 $123,400 $137,100 $148,100 $159,050 $170,050 $181,000 *HUD Definition of low income is 50% Area Medium Income (AMI); moderate income is 80% AMI ANALYSIS:

The City has not received its annual entitlement amount for FY2024-25 however it is important to begin the application process while this amount is being determined. The purpose of the Public Hearing is to obtain direction from the public and the City Council on priorities and activities desired to fund in the upcoming Annual Action Plan. The FY2024-25 Annual Action Plan is the City’s plan to accomplish the third and final year of goals and priorities laid out by the Consolidated Plan. Staff will present the draft FY2024-25 Annual Action Plan at the second public hearing meeting.

Available Funds
The City projects the FY2024-25 formula from HUD to be approximately $650,000. The calculations below are based on this projected amount and are subject to change upon receipt of entitlement allocation from HUD.

HUD allows a maximum of:
• 15% of total funds for public services
• 65% of total funds for capital services
• 20% of total funds for planning and administration
• Economic development activities do not apply to any of the program caps Based on the projected allocation of $650,000, the maximum funding allowed in each category is as follows:

Allocation Public Services (15%) Capital Projects (65%) Program Administration (20%) $650,000.00 $97,500.00 $422,500.00 $130,000.00
Twenty (20) simplified applications were received during the application period. Four (4) of the applicants are new organizations that have not been funded by the City in recent years. The combined total of all requests is $1,005,607, with the breakdown of the applications as follows:
• Public Service Requests = $378,607.00

Page 230 of 283 ends

• Capital Improvement Requests = $506,000.00
• Economic Development Requests = $100,000.00
• Program Administration Request = $21,000.00
The City received requests for funding that exceeded the available formula amount it can allocate.

In addition to the FY2024-25 entitlement allocation, the City has a total of $215,338.75 in prior unused allocation funds that can be used to allocate funding in addition to the FY2024-25 formula allocation. These funds will be added to the total funding available for this grant cycle.

Approximate
Total Allocation Public Services Capital Projects Program Administration CDBG Funds
Available $650,000.00 $97,500.00 $422,500.00 $130,000.00 Total Application
Requests* $1,005,607.00 $378,607.00 $506,000.00 $21,000.00 *Economic Development activity does not apply to any of the program caps.

As noted in the table above, there are more applicant requests for funding than there is funding available.

Likely, some of the applicants will not receive an allocation in the amount they have requested or any funding at all.

Applications
A full list of the applicants, their proposed activity, requested amount, and proposed residents served is displayed below.

Page 231 of 283 ends

Organization Name Project Description CDBG Fund
Request
Proposed
Residents
Served
Catholic Charities of
Santa Clara County
The mission of the Long-Term Care Ombudsman
Program is to seek the resolution of problems and
advocate for the rights and well-being of residents
of long-term care facilities.
$11,000.00 4
Child Advocates of
Silicon Valley
Child Advocates’ mission is to be there for every
foster child in Santa Clara County who has
experienced abuse, neglect and/or abandonment.

They accomplish this by operating the Court
Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) program in
Santa Clara County. CASAs are trained
community volunteers who are appointed by a
judge’s order to advocate for the best interests of
foster children.
$14,000.00 4
CityTeam
CityTeam in the Neighborhood is an outreach
program that helps unhoused populations by
providing individuals with necessities such as a
hot meal or other essential items.
$10,000.00 1,650
Healthier Kids
Foundation Santa
Clara County
Healthier Kids Foundation works with Milpitas
Unified School District to remove health barriers
impacting the learning and life success of their
students, newcomers, and refugees. The request
is to partially fund a Refugee and Immigrant
School Linked Services Manager for Milpitas
Unified that will support affected families in the
Milpitas community.
$50,000.00 400
Hope for Unhoused
This mobile service center would be providing a
weekly (Sunday, in conjunction with Showers and
Laundry) one-stop shop for the unhoused to get
food, water, clothing, essentials (tents, sleeping
bags), hygiene kit, device recharging, etc. It would
also provide the unhoused the ability to get
assessed (VI_SPDAT), request additional support
such as medical issues (Valley Med Backpack
Team), request or get status on case
management items (e.g. ID, Social Security, EBT,
GA/VA benefits, etc.)
$15,000.00 100
India Community
Center (ICC)
ICC supports over 150 Seniors at our center in
Milpitas who participate in a variety of activities
between Monday to Friday which includes lunch
supported by Santa Clara County.
$50,000.00 100
Knights of Columbus Annual free Thanksgiving dinner on Thanksgiving Day for the homeless, seniors, and low-income. $5,000.00 500 Next Door Solutions
to Domestic Violence
(NDS)
Next Door Solutions provides Milpitas residents
who self-identify as victims of domestic violence
(including children) with comprehensive, SurvivorDefined services. $20,000.00 45
Public Service
Pragnya
Support children, youth, and adults from the
Neurodiverse community by extending the Social
Recreational programming to be inclusive of larger
groups and longer sessions to create socialemotional connections. $68,000.00 300

Page 232 of 283 ends

Project Sentinel
Project Sentinel will assist Milpitas Residents with
tenant/landlord disputes through counseling
sessions and comprehensive education.
$42,000.00 125
Senior Adults Legal
Assistance (SALA)
SALA will provide free Legal Services to Milpitas
seniors 62 or older with appointments at Barbara
Lee Senior Center, at other SALA intake sites, and
by phone, targeting clients that are low-income
and at-risk.
$12,500.00 20
Silicon Valley
Independent Living
Center (SVILC)
SVILC will provide education, resources, and
advocacy about affordable, accessible housing to
Milpitas residents with disabilities, older adults
with chronic health conditions, and local landlords.

Most consumers requesting and receiving housing
assistance, rent relief, and/or other emergency
services.
$15,107.00 48
Sourcewise
Sourcewise will serve 30 unduplicated Milpitas
seniors aged 60 and older, who qualify for
nutritious home-delivered meals. Clients receive
14 meals delivered once a week to their homes at
no cost to the seniors.
$25,000.00 30
The Health Trust
The Health Trust Meals on Wheels program
provides home-delivered meals to seniors in
Santa Clara County. We will serve 45 Milpitas
clients and provide approximately 10,000 meals to
home-bound, nutritionally at-risk, low-income
seniors.
$11,000.00 45
YWCA Golden Gate
Silicon Valley
YWCA Golden Gate Silicon Valley will provide 30
Milpitas residents with a multiservice continuum of
crisis response and prevention services for
survivors of domestic violence.
$30,000.00 30
Public Service Cont.

Subtotal $378,607.00 3,401

Page 233 of 283 ends

Organization Name Project Description CDBG Fund
Request
Proposed
Residents
Served
Milpitas Library Roof
Repair – City of
Milpitas
The Milpitas Library is one of the busiest libraries
in Santa Clara County with thousands of visitors
each year. The roof of the Library is 15 years old
and in disrepair and needs repairing and
replacement.
$100,000.00 1000+
Rebuilding Together
Silicon Valley (RTSV)
Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley’s mission is
repairing homes, revitalizing communities,
rebuilding lives, and our vision is safe homes and
communities for every person. We preserve
affordable housing by providing critical home
repairs and accessibility modifications for lowincome residents, at no cost to the recipient. $156,000.00 26
Terrace Gardens
Senior Housing
The roofs of the "Community Building", and "E”
and "F" Buildings need repair. Terrace Gardens is
requesting funds to replace the roofs.
$250,000.00 148
Capital Projects
Subtotal $506,000.00 1,174

Page 234 of 283 ends

Organization Name Project Description CDBG Fund
Request
Proposed
Residents
Served
Economic
Development
Microenterprise
Assistance Grant
Program – City of
Milpitas
The City requests funding to assist local
microenterprises, specifically those on Main
Street. A grant program designed to assist Main
Street microenterprise will help economic vitality
and keep businesses thriving in the downtown.
$100,000.00 50
Project Sentinel
Milpitas residents and prospective residents will
receive robust protection of their civil rights
through a comprehensive suite of fair housing
services.
$21,000.00 20
Program
Administration
Program
Administration
Staff time in administering the program, including
all public noticing, and publishing. TBD N/A
Subtotal $121,000.00 70
Total of proposed funded applications $1,005,607.00 4,645

Page 235 of 283 ends

CONSIDERATIONS:

Staff has identified the following potential considerations for the City Council to assist in providing feedback on areas to fund.

Strategic Plan
The Consolidated Plan is a three-year plan that outlines the City’s strategies used to meet a variety of housing and non-housing community needs. The following table depicts the accomplishments of CDBG’s strategic plan to date. Since FY2024-25 is the third and final year in the Consolidated Plan, this is the City’s last opportunity to meet these goals.

Goal Indicator Unit of
Measure
Expected
–
Strategic
Plan
Affordable Housing
Rental Rehabilitation Rental units rehabilitated Household Housing Unit 148 Assist Microenterprises
and Small Businesses Businesses assisted Businesses Assisted 50 Community
Funding/Public Services
Public service activities other than
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 500
Fair Housing
Public service activities other than
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 60
Maintain and Preserve
Existing Housing
Homeowner Housing
Rehabilitated
Household
Housing Unit 150
New Affordable Housing* Rental units constructed Household Housing Unit 50
Public Improvements -
Accessibility & Public
Fac.

Public Facility or Infrastructure
Activities other than
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 1000
Public services -
Residents at risk of
eviction
Public service activities for
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit
Households
Assisted 20
Public Services for
Children and Youth
Public service activities other than
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 50
Public Services for
Domestic Violence
support
Public service activities other than
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 80
Public Services for
Seniors
Public service activities other than
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 1250
*Goal is not feasible to accomplish in this program year Applicant Experience, Eligibility, and Funds Requested
There are four applicants with limited or no prior history with the City of Milpitas’ CDBG program: CityTeam, Healthier Kids Foundation Santa Clara County, Hope for the Unhoused, and Knights of Columbus. All the proposed activities in these applications are eligible activities and meet a national objective. However, to be eligible, an applicant must demonstrate that they have the systems in place to capture the HUD-required data to prove their activity meets a national objective.

All applications are subject to the HUD-imposed cap guidelines. Typically, a majority of the applications are for Public Services. Given that the 15% public service cap projected this year is $97,500, a single CDBG applicant could exhaust the available funding. The City must be judicious in selecting applicants that request a fair

Page 236 of 283 ends

amount for the services rendered, while not reducing the funding request significantly resulting in the applicant rejecting the allocation. Due to HUD’s stringent reporting requirements, it may not be worth the agency’s resources to accept a lower amount of funding. City staff’s objective is to select a wide range of service providers who offer residents the most beneficial services per the Consolidated Plan and City Council goals.

FISCAL IMPACT:

At this time, there is no fiscal impact associated with this item to conduct a public hearing to discuss and provide input beyond staff time.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):

The actions being considered have no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). Further, this action does not meet the definition of a project under CEQA Guideline 15378 as it is a government fiscal activity which does not commit to any project that would result in a potentially significant impact on the environment.

RECOMMENDATION:
(1) Conduct a public hearing; and
(2) Provide feedback and/or direction to staff on CDBG priority areas or specific applications that the City Council seeks to fund.

Attachment(s):
(a) Eligible and Ineligible CDBG Activities

Page 237 of 283 ends

Eligible and Ineligible CDBG Activities
Eligible CDBG Activities

1. Acquisition of Real Property

2. Disposition

3. Public Facilities and Improvements

4. Clearance and Remediation

5. Public Services

6. Interim Assistance

7. Relocation

8. Loss of Rental Income

9. Housing Services

10. Privately-Owned Utilities

11. Rehabilitation and preservation

12. Construction of Housing

13. Code Enforcement

14. Special Economic Development Activities

15. Microenterprise Assistance

16. Special Activities by Community-Based Development Organizations

17. Homeownership Assistance

18. Planning and Capacity Building

19. Program Administration Costs

20. Miscellaneous Other Activities
Ineligible CDBG Activities

1. Buildings or portions thereof, used for the general conduct of government may not be assisted with CDBG funds. This does not include, however, the removal of architectural barriers involving any such building, which may be assisted under the category of Public Facilities and Improvements.

2. General government expenses. Expenses required to carry out the regular responsibilities of the unit of general local government are not eligible for assistance under this part.

3. Political activities. CDBG funds may not be used to finance the use of facilities or equipment for political purposes or to engage in other partisan political activities, such as candidate forums, voter transportation, or voter registration.

4. Purchase of equipment. The purchase of equipment with CDBG funds is generally ineligible – construction equipment, fire protection equipment, furnishings and personal property.

5. Operating and maintenance expenses. The general rule is that any expense associated with repairing, operating, or maintaining public facilities, improvements, and services is ineligible.

6. New housing construction.

7. Income payments. The general rule is that CDBG funds may not be used for income payments.

Adapted from HUD booklet, Community Development Block Grant Program; A guide to National Objectives & Eligible Activities for Entitlement Communities.

Page 238 of 283 ends

CITY OF MILPITAS

AGENDA REPORT
(AR)
Item Title: Receive Report on Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study; and Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study (Staff Contact: Christian Di Renzo, Public Works Director, 408-586-2602) Category: Community Services and Sustainable Infrastructure Meeting Date: 2/6/2024
Recommendation: (1) Conduct a public hearing on the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study; and (2) Adopt a resolution adopting the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Milpitas owns and maintains an extensive storm drain system network, consisting of 112 miles of pipeline ranging from 12-inches to 36-inches, approximately 1,400 manholes and 3,500 storm drain inlets.

This system of inlets, pipes, and 13 pump stations is critical infrastructure that protects our community during rain events and prevents flooding of our streets and neighborhoods. While the City owns, operates, and maintains the underground pipes and culverts, most major waterways and downstream creeks are owned, operated, and maintained by Valley Water.

In 1987, the California State Legislature enacted the Mitigation Fee Act, authorizing cities to impose Development Impact Fees (DIF) to mitigate the impacts new development projects may have on existing infrastructure. DIF are not a tax or special assessment but are a funding tool for the City to recover infrastructure costs related to growth. These impact fees are a one-time charge for new development that will impact existing storm drain infrastructure or create the need for new storm drain infrastructure. In establishing, increasing, or imposing a fee as a condition for the approval of a development project, Government Code 66001(a) and (b) require a local agency to:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee;

2. Identify how the fee will be used;

3. Determine that a reasonable relationship exists between the fee use and type of development project for which the fee is being used;

4. Determine how the need for the public facility relates to the type of development project for which the fee is imposed; and

5. Show the relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility.

In 2021, California adopted Assembly Bill (AB) 602, outlining new nexus study requirements for the development and implementation of impact fee programs under the Mitigation Fee Act. The Mitigation Fee Act now requires adoption of a nexus study prior to the adoption of new or updated DIF. A nexus study is based on the premise that new development should pay for its proportionate share of public improvement costs. Impact fees are only applied to new development or redevelopment projects and collected by the City prior to the issuance of the building permit.

The City collects three distinct DIF including the Calaveras Boulevard Widening Traffic Impact Fee, Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP) Impact Fee and Storm Drain Impact Fees. The existing 2003 Storm Drain Impact Fees (2003 SDIF) were adopted by City Council on October 7, 2003, via Ordinance 239.9. The 2003 Financial

Page 239 of 283 ends

Utility Master Plan was the nexus for the 2003 SDIF, which is still in use today. The total cost used in development of the 2003 SDIF calculation is in 2002 dollars and based on the Storm Drain Master Plan developed by Schaff & Wheeler in 2001.

Due to the passage of AB 602, and adoption of the 2021 Storm Drain Master Plan (2021 SDMP), and to remain in compliance with applicable laws, standards and procedures, the City entered into an agreement with West Yost in 2022 to conduct a Storm Drain Impact Fee Nexus Study (Nexus Study) with the intended purpose of evaluating the existing 2003 SDIF, the reasonable relationship between the fee and facility or project(s) for which the fee is imposed and to recommend new and/or updated fees within the Development Impact Fee Program. Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, the Nexus Study (Attachment B) was designed to provide the City with the necessary analysis to support an update to the Storm Drainage Impact Fee (SDIF) including the associated fee calculations for the maximum fees the City can charge.

ANALYSIS:

The Nexus Study was prepared in compliance with the regulations set forth under the Mitigation Fee Act and AB 602 and employed a methodology which ensures a rational nexus exists between future development and the use and need of the proposed storm drain infrastructure improvements as identified in the 2021 SDMP.

The major changes from the 2003 SDIF and this Nexus Study may be summarized accordingly:
 Changes in the City's current planned development areas and planning horizon. The future development area for this Nexus Study, which include the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan Area (MMSP), Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area (GSP), and the remaining urban service area. This Nexus Study recommends implementing a separate impact fee for each of the three development areas.  Changes from the 2021 SDMP, which evaluated the Milpitas’s storm drain system and floodplains using tools developed in conjunction with Valley Water as part of the Cooperating Technical Partner program sponsored by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to complete updated flood hazard mapping. The City’s storm drainage Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that remedies identified system deficiencies was prepared and updated as part of the 2021 SDMP.  Changes to the Mitigation Fee Act under AB 602, which requires a local agency to conduct an impact fee study following specific standards and practices. These changes include, but are not limited to, adoption of a nexus study prior to the adoption of associated development fees and use of a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.

Storm Drain Development Impact Fee Calculation
Table 1 details the City's current 2003 SDIF. The 2003 SDIF was based on a buy-in methodology calculated by dividing the value of existing infrastructure plus anticipated capital and equipment cost, by the total citywide stormwater runoff acreage. The 2003 SDIF was assessed per parcel for single-family land use types and per acre for all other land use types.

Table 1. Current Storm Drainage Impact Fees
Land Use Parcel Size Unit Fee
Single-Family Medium
Density
Equal or Smaller than
8,710 square feet
Per parcel $1,100
Single-Family Low Density Between 8,711 and
43,560 square feet
Per parcel $1,916
Single-Family Between 1 acre and
4 acres
Per parcel $3,594
Single-Family Between 4 acres and
9 acres
Per parcel $4,792
Single-Family Greater than 9 acres Per parcel $6,469

Page 240 of 283 ends

Multiple-Family Per acre $16,771
Commercial, Industrial,
Institutional, or Mixed-Use
Sites
Per acre $21,562
Schools with Athletic Fields Per acre $7,187
Parks Per acre $4,792
Table 2 includes the proposed SDIF developed by the Nexus Study. The proposed fees reflect significant reductions for residential and nonresidential land uses compared to the City’s current fee structure. The Nexus Study developed a separate and unique impact fee for each study area, which includes the MMSP, GSP and remaining Urban Service Area. The SDIF was calculated by dividing the total cost of 2021 SDMP improvements for each study area (attributable to an impact as defined by AB 602) by the total runoff acreage for that study area. Components of the SDIF were developed using the following criteria:
 Total runoff acreage was calculated multiplying the total area for each land use category in the study area by the runoff factor assigned to that land use category.  The total cost of the CIPs that are directly related to new development is identified for each study area based on the 2021 SDMP.

Tailored Development Impact Fees (DIFs) were created for the City's three future development zones: MMSP, GSP, and the remaining Urban Service Area. The MMSP is a plan for redevelopment of approximately 437 acres in the southern portion of the city, centered around the new Milpitas BART station and the VTA Light Rail system. The GSP area encompasses approximately 600 acres and is focused on development and redevelopment in the City’s downtown area to revitalize historic Main Street and the Calaveras gateway to become the cultural hub of the city.

The Nexus Study identified 23 CIPs from the 2021 SDMP directly linked to new or redeveloping projects, eligible for DIF application. The MMSP area is almost entirely built out and has adequate storm drain capacity during the 10-year storm event based on the 2021 SDMP, with no identified stormwater CIP projects. Within the GSP area, three low-priority CIPs and four CIPs targeting the extension of the storm drain system to proposed development areas were identified. The remaining Urban Service Area includes nine high-priority CIPs and seven low-priority CIPs. Projects identified in the Nexus Study include improvements to city facilities such as extending storm drain infrastructure within the GSP along Main Street. The attached Nexus Study provides a comprehensive breakdown of CIPs for each study area, including associated costs.

Table 2. Proposed Storm Drainage Impact Fees
Milpitas Metro Specific
Plan Area
Gateway-Main Street
Specific Plan Area
Remaining Urban
Service Area
Connection Fee per Runoff Acre $ - $ 48,768.00 $ 240,000.00 Connection Fee per 100 sf of
Runoff Surface $ - $ 112.00 $ 551.00
The GSP is currently in the planning process, and work is underway with the Planning Department to address future land uses and evaluate additional infrastructure needs beyond what was identified in the 2021 SDMP.

City staff is working with the GSP consultant to identify required storm drain improvements unique to the GSP.

An independent assessment of the storm drainage system within the GSP area will develop specific plan development impact fees to pay for storm drainage improvements separate from this study.

Public Noticing
The Mitigation Fee Act outlines specific requirements regarding the noticing of nexus studies. Notice of the time and place of the meeting, including a general explanation of the matters to be considered and a statement that required data is available was noticed at least thirty (30) days prior to the public hearing. A notice of a

Page 241 of 283 ends

public hearing including the time and place of the meeting was noticed as a published ad in the Sunday Mercury News on January 7, 2024. The same public hearing notice was published again in the Milpitas Post on January 26, 2024, to comply with the ten (10) day noticing requirement. The Mitigation Fee Act requires the complete study be posted and made available at a minimum 10 days prior to the hearing. The Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study was posted to the City website on December 15, 2023.

POLICY ALTERNATIVE(S):

Alternative: Do not adopt the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study Pros: There are no identified benefits to this alternative.

Cons: By not adopting the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study, the City cannot move forward with adopting the updated Storm Drainage Impact Fee resulting in the collection of fees that may not align with the guidelines outlined in the Mitigation Fee Act.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Upon completion of the projects, no additional Storm Drain Impact Fees will be collected.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA):

The Nexus Study and SDIF being considered does not constitute a "Project" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378 (b), which excludes items involving the general creation of governmental funding mechanisms or fiscal activities. The proposed fee update and fee structure modification enables the collection and allocation of fees for the continued improvement and rehabilitation City storm drain facilities. The capital projects described in the Nexus Study will maintain the level of service currently provided by the City's existing storm drain infrastructure by ensuring that new development will not negatively impact existing service levels.

RECOMMENDATION:
(1) Conduct a public hearing on the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study; and (2) Adopt a resolution adopting the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study.

ATTACHMENT(S):
(a) Resolution
(b) Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study

Page 242 of 283 ends

RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILPITAS ADOPTING THE

STORM DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, AB 1600 was adopted and codified in California Government Code Section 66000 et seq. Allowing the establishing, increasing, or imposing of a development fee as a condition of approval where the purpose and use of the fee were identified, and reasonable relationship to the development project was demonstrated; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the current storm drainage impact fee program on June 3, 2003, by their Resolution No. ---; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to change the Storm Drainage Impact Fees upon development projects to ensure that new development contributes its fair share to public facilities in the City consistent with the City’s standards; and
WHEREAS, the City contracted with West Yost to perform a nexus study analysis demonstrating the reasonable relationship between the need for each fee and the type of development on which each fee will be imposed and has determined amounts for each fee based on the reasonable relationship between each fee and the type of development project on which the fee will be imposed; and WHEREAS, West Yost prepared and submitted a Storm Drainage Impact Fee Analysis, dated June 2023, attached to the Agenda Report, and incorporated by reference (the “Nexus Study”); and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study substantiates a methodology that will charge each new development project only for the costs necessary to mitigate the impacts expected to be caused by that development project; and
WHEREAS, the Nexus Study establishes proposed amounts and provides an evaluation of the need for new Impact Fees and establishes the nexus between the imposition of the new Fees and the estimated reasonable costs of providing the services for which the Fees are charged; and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study includes information that supports the City’s actions, as required by subdivision (a) of Section 66001 of the Government Code.

WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Sections 66019 and 66016.5, notice of the time and place of the meeting, including a general explanation of the matters to be considered and a statement that required data is available was mailed at least thirty (30) days prior to the meeting to those members of the public who filed a written request with the City; and
WHEREAS, at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing referenced above, the City made available for public inspection information required under Government Code Section 66000, et seq.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Milpitas hereby finds, determines, and

Page 243 of 283 ends

resolves as follows:

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

2. The City Council finds the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Analysis being considered does not constitute a "Project" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378 (b), which excludes items involving the general creation of governmental funding mechanisms or fiscal activities, and no environmental assessment is required.

3. The Storm Drainage Impact Fee Analysis is hereby adopted and ordered filed with the City Clerk.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this _______ day of ________, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Suzanne Guzzetta, City Clerk Carmen Montano, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Page 244 of 283 ends

Michael Mutalipassi, City Attorney

Page 245 of 283 ends

2020 Research Park Drive
Suite 100
Davis CA 95618
530.756.5905 phone
530.756.5991 fax
westyost.com

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 30, 2023 Project No.: 270-60-22-20
SENT VIA: EMAIL
TO: Harris Siddiqui
City of Milpitas Department of Public Works
FROM: Melissa Duffy, PE, RCE #87217
REVIEWED BY: Doug Moore, PE, RCE #58122
SUBJECT: Preliminary Storm Drainage Improvement Impact Fee Analysis West Yost is pleased to provide the City of Milpitas (City) with this Technical Memorandum (TM) to summarize this Preliminary Storm Drainage Improvement Impact Fee Analysis. Key topics include:
• Background
• Impact Fee Evaluation
• Proposed Impact Fee
• Nexus Summary
While this preliminary analysis provides an estimate and framework for a proposed impact fee based on data available at this time, additional data will be required to provide an adequate impact fee assessment.

The Gateway – Main Street Specific Plan (GSP) is currently being developed, which may require additional storm drain infrastructure to be included in the calculation of a proposed impact fee. In addition, the proposed impact fee should be based on providing 100-year flood protection to the City. The Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) identified in the 2021 Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP) are based on the 10-year design storm.

BACKGROUND
Stormwater runoff in the City is collected in a system of gutters, underground pipes, and open channels flowing to Coyote Creek and ultimately discharging to the San Francisco Bay. The City is experiencing rapid growth, placing strain on the critical aging stormwater infrastructure. Storm Drainage Improvement Impact Fees are a funding tool for the City to recover infrastructure costs related to growth. Impact fees are a one-time charge for new development or redevelopment of property that will impact existing infrastructure or create the need for new infrastructure.

Assembly Bill (AB) 1600 became effective on January 1, 1989, regulating the way that impact fees are imposed on development projects. Based on AB 1600, the agency imposing the impact fees are responsible for the following:

Identifying the purpose of the fee
Identifying how the fee will be used

Page 246 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 2 ends

N-270-60-22-20-WP
Showing a reasonable relationship (nexus) between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed
Showing a reasonable relationship between the public facility to be constructed and the type of development on which the fee is imposed
Accounting for and spending the fees collected only for the purposes and projects specifically used in calculating the fees
In 2021, Schaaf & Wheeler prepared the Milpitas SDMP. The SDMP evaluated the existing storm drain system performance for the 10-year design storm, and CIPs were proposed to alleviate identified flooding problems. The SDMP was used in this preliminary analysis to understand the performance of the existing system and identify the proposed CIP costs for estimating an updated impact fee.

The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) is the City’s primary partner in managing local stormwater issues. While the City owns, operates, and maintains the underground pipes and culverts, most major waterways and downstream creeks are owned, operated, and maintained by Valley Water.

The City also owns, operates, and maintains 13 stormwater pumping stations.

Specific Plan Areas
The City currently includes two Specific Plan areas: the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (MMSP) area and the GSP area, each further discussed below.

The public draft MMSP was released in April 2022. The MMSP is a plan for redevelopment of approximately 437 acres in the southern portion of the city, centered around the new Milpitas BART station and the VTA Light Rail system. The MMSP area is almost entirely built out and has adequate storm drain capacity during the 10-year storm event based on the 2021 SDMP, with no identified stormwater CIP projects. However, as stated in the public draft MMSP, the area is subject to flooding during the 100-year storm event due to low ground elevations and flows from upstream areas that cannot be mitigated without major channel improvements. The open channels are owned, operated, and maintained by the Valley Water.

The GSP is currently being developed, with adoption anticipated for late 2023. The GSP area encompasses approximately 600 acres and is focused on infill development and redevelopment in the City’s downtown area to revitalize historic Main Street and the Calaveras gateway to become the cultural hub of the city.

The GSP area was identified in the 2021 SDMP to be prone to flooding due to high creek levels in the downstream system. These downstream open channels are owned, operated, and maintained by Valley Water. The GSP area includes three low-priority CIP projects and four CIP projects identified to extend the storm drain system to proposed development areas. These extension projects will need to be completed before the construction of the development they will serve.

Land Use Evaluation
During a workshop in May 2022, West Yost and City staff reviewed available land use data from the 2020 Water Master Plan, the 2021 General Plan, the 2021 SDMP, and the zoning provided in GIS format from the City in April 2022. It was confirmed during the workshop that the zoning provided by the City, as shown on Figure 1, should be used as the proposed conditions land uses. West Yost used the proposed conditions land uses and made modifications based on available aerial imagery and data in the City’s GIS files for vacant parcels to reflect existing conditions. The City reviewed and approved the existing conditions land uses to be used in this study, as shown on Figure 2. The changes in land use acreage between existing and proposed conditions is summarized in Table 1.

Page 247 of 283 ends

Table 1. Land Use Summary
Existing Conditions
Proposed
Conditions Difference(a)
Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (MMSP) Area
Agriculture 20% 0.0 0.0 0.0
Commercial 90% 130.7 130.7 0.0
Highway Services 95% 0.0 0.0 0.0
Transportation 95% 13.1 13.1 0.0
Industrial 90% 0.1 0.1 0.0
Institutional 90% 6.1 6.1 0.0
Mixed Use 50% 63.2 63.2 0.0
Multi Family Residential 70% 140.6 144.3 3.6
Park Open Space 20% 25.4 21.7 -3.6
Single Family Residential 40% 0.0 0.0 0.0
Town Center 90% 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waterways 0% 0.0 0.0 0.0
Subtotal 379.2 379.2 0.0
Gateway - Main Street Specific Plan (GSP) Area
Agriculture 20% 0.0 0.0 0.0
Commercial 90% 70.7 77.1 6.4
Highway Services 95% 0.0 0.0 0.0
Transportation 95% 18.4 18.4 0.0
Industrial 90% 154.6 108.3 -46.3
Institutional 90% 72.1 72.1 0.0
Mixed Use 50% 60.4 65.1 4.7
Multi Family Residential 70% 93.3 139.6 46.3
Park Open Space 20% 22.7 11.5 -11.1
Single Family Residential 40% 0.8 0.8 0.0
Town Center 90% 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waterways 0% 10.8 10.8 0.0
Subtotal 503.7 503.7 0.0
Remaining City Urban Service Area
Agriculture 20% 6.7 6.7 0.0
Commercial 90% 219.2 222.6 3.4
Highway Services 95% 113.1 113.1 0.0
Transportation 95% 36.5 36.5 0.0
Industrial 90% 1287.2 1335.3 48.0
Institutional 90% 224.1 224.1 0.0
Mixed Use 50% 3.0 3.4 0.4
Multi Family Residential 70% 384.2 384.8 0.7
Park Open Space 20% 724.7 393.0 -331.7
Single Family Residential 40% 1972.1 2251.4 279.2
Town Center 90% 132.1 132.1 0.0
Waterways 0% 45.2 45.2 0.0
Subtotal 5148.1 5148.1 0.0
Land Use Type
Impervious
Percentage
(a) A negative value indicates a reduction from the existing condition to the proposed condition.

Area, Acres
N-270-60-22-20-WP
City of Milpitals
Preliminary Storm Drainage Improvement Impact Fee
Last Revised: 09-02-22

Page 248 of 283 ends

PIEDMONT
RD
N PARK
VI
CTO
RIA DR
MO
NTA
GU
EE
X

S PARK VICTORIA DR
CALAV
ERAS
RD

N ABEL ST
W

CALAVE RAS BL

ESCUELA PK E CALAVERA
S
B
L
DIXON
LA
N
D
IN
G
RD

W MONTAG
UE
EX
GREAT
MALL
DR
TASMAN
DR
YOSEM
ITE
DR

S ABEL ST

N MILPITAS BL
G
R
E
AT
M
A
L
L
P
K

S MILPITAS
BL
Figure1
ProposedConditionsLandUses
CityofMilpitas
PreliminaryStormDrainage
ImprovementImpactFeeAnalysis
CityofMilpitasBoundary
MilpitasUrbanServiceArea
MilpitasMetroSpecificPlan(MMSP)Area
Gateway-MainStreetSpecificPlan(GSP)
Area
ProposedConditionsLandUseType
Agriculture
Commercial
HighwayServices;Transportation
Industrial
Institutional
MixedUse
MultiFamilyResidential
ParkOpenSpace
SingleFamilyResidential
TownCenter
Waterways
WEST YOST - N:\Clients\270 City of Milpitas\60-22-20 SW Nexus Study\GIS\MXD\Figures\Figure 1. Proposed Land Use.mxd - mduffy - 9/1/2022

Page 249 of 283 ends

PIEDMONT
RD
N PARK
VI
CTO
RIA DR
MO
NTA
GU
EE
X

S PARK VICTORIA DR
CALAV
ERAS
RD

N ABEL ST
W

CALAVE RAS BL

ESCUELA PK E CALAVERA
S
B
L
DIXON
LA
N
D
IN
G
RD

W MONTAG
UE
EX
GREAT
MALL
DR
TASMAN
DR
YOSEM
ITE
DR

S ABEL ST

N MILPITAS BL
G
R
E
AT
M
A
L
L
P
K

S MILPITAS
BL
Figure2
ExistingConditionsLandUses
CityofMilpitas
PreliminaryStormDrainage
ImprovementImpactFeeAnalysis
CityofMilpitasBoundary
MilpitasUrbanServiceArea
MilpitasMetroSpecificPlan(MMSP)Area
Gateway-MainStreetSpecificPlan(GSP)
Area
ExistingConditionsLandUseType
Agriculture
Commercial
HighwayServices;Transportation
Industrial
Institutional
MixedUse
MultiFamilyResidential
ParkOpenSpace
SingleFamilyResidential
TownCenter
Waterways
WEST YOST - N:\Clients\270 City of Milpitas\60-22-20 SW Nexus Study\GIS\MXD\Figures\Figure 2. Existing Land Use.mxd - mduffy - 9/1/2022

Page 250 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 6 ends

N-270-60-22-20-WP

IMPACT FEE EVALUATION
The study area boundary is the City’s urban service area. The City’s urban growth boundary was established in 1998, limiting development in the eastern hill areas. The initiative was set to expire in 2018 but was extended through the passage of Measure I in November 2016. The urban service area is contiguous with the urban growth area, and restricts the extension of public services and infrastructure to new development in eastern areas of the City Limits and sphere of influence. West Yost split the urban services boundary into three smaller study areas for this analysis: the MMSP area, the GSP area, and the remainder of the City’s urban service area, as shown on Figures 1 and 2.

Existing Impact Fee
The basis of the current storm drain connection fee is summarized in Chapter 7 of the City’s 2003 Financial Utility Plan. The development impact fees proposed in the 2003 Financial Utility Plan are still being used today. The fee is based on a standard buy-in methodology and is calculated by dividing the value of existing infrastructure plus additional anticipated capital project and equipment costs, by the total potential citywide stormwater runoff acreage.

Value of Existing Facilities and Master Plan Improvements The cost of existing infrastructure used in the fee calculation was estimated to be $91,157,871 (in 2002 dollars). The cost of the storm drain capacity improvements and near-term equipment was estimated to be $24,913,000, based on the SDMP developed by Schaaf & Wheeler in July 2001. The combined cost of $116,070,871 was used as the total cost to be divided across the City in the impact fee calculation.

Existing Runoff Acreage
The potential city-wide stormwater runoff acreage was calculated based on the area of land that may eventually be developed under each land use category by assigning a runoff factor to each land use category.

Runoff factors used for each land use type in the existing fee calculation are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2. Existing Fee Runoff Factors
Land Use Category Runoff Factor
Single Family Residential 0.40
Multi-Family Residential 0.70
Commercial/Industrial 0.90
Agricultural 0.20
Open Space 0.00
Existing Impact Fee Calculation
By combining the value of the existing facilities and the master plan improvements and spreading the cost across the entire City based on the land use category and runoff factor, the fee calculation results in the current storm drainage impact fee of $23,880 per acre of impervious surface, or $55 per 100 square feet (sf).

Page 251 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 7 ends

N-270-60-22-20-WP
Proposed Impact Fee Analysis
West Yost conducted this preliminary storm drainage improvement impact fee analysis to estimate an updated fee based on the Capital Improvement Projects identified in the 2021 Storm Drain Master Plan and to comply with the impact fee regulations in AB 1600. Because the necessary infrastructure improvements vary throughout the City, West Yost recommends implementing a different fee for each of the three study areas: the MMSP area, the GSP area, and the remainder of the City’s urban service area.

Impact fees are based on the idea that development should pay for the cost associated with the facilities necessary to accommodate growth. Impact fees are not intended to be used for operational expenses, to pay for city-wide capital improvements, or to correct an existing deficiency or shortfall. For this reason, the proposed impact fee will not include the value of existing infrastructure or the CIP projects that are not directly related to proposed development.

Cost of Master Plan Improvements
The total cost of the CIPs that are directly related to proposed development or redevelopment was identified for each study area, based on the 2021 SDMP. A breakdown of the CIP costs is summarized in Table 3. There are no CIPs identified in the MMSP area. The total cost of the CIPs associated with new development or redevelopment in the GSP area is $1,980,000. The total cost of the CIPs for new development in the City’s remaining urban service area is $960,000. Figure 3 shows the CIP project locations and the parcels identified for proposed new development or redevelopment.

Figure 3-3 of the 2021 SDMP (Attachment A) shows locations within the GSP area that are inundated during the 10-year design storm event after incorporating the identified CIP projects. The flooding within the GSP area is due to high creek levels downstream of the storm drain network and can only be resolved by major creek projects. However, most of the major creeks within the City are owned by Valley Water, including Lower Penitencia Creek, which drains a portion of the GSP area. The inundated areas are mostly in streets and empty lots, but there is also minor flooding on residential and commercial properties.

Due to the high creek levels downstream of the GSP area, proposed development will need to mitigate any increases in peak runoff to avoid worsening the flooding in existing inundated areas. Additional infrastructure needed to serve development proposed in the GSP area will be identified with the finalization and adoption of the GSP. In addition, hydraulic modeling of the 10-year and 100-year design storms will be needed to verify the location and sizing of the required infrastructure and show that flooding will not increase.

Proposed Runoff Factors
Runoff factors used in developing the proposed impact fee are summarized in Table 4. Updates were made from the runoff factors used in the existing impact fee calculations to include additional land use categories and to account for the fact that open space parcels will still have a small amount of runoff. The runoff factors were estimated based on the typical runoff coefficient “C Values” in the City’s Design Guidelines.

Page 252 of 283 ends

Table 3. 2021 SDMP CIP Project Cost Summary
Improvement ID Improvement Name CIP Category
Percent of
Project for
Existing City
Percent of Project for
New Development Construction Cost(a)
Engineering /
Inspection Cost(a) CIP Total Cost(a)
Portion of CIP Cost
Due to New
Development Notes
Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (MMSP) Area
No CIP Projects Identified
Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $0
Gateway - Main Street Specific Plan (GSP) Area
LP_15 Main Street - Tom Evatt Park Storm Drain Extension 100% $150,000 $30,000 $180,000 $180,000 Storm drain extension to area of proposed development LP_16 Main Street Storm Drain Extension 100% $130,000 $30,000 $160,000 $160,000 Storm drain extension to area of proposed development LP_17 Main Street - Sinnott Ln Storm Drain Extension 100% $50,000 $10,000 $60,000 $60,000 Storm drain extension to area of proposed development LP_18 Main Street - Carlo St Storm Drain Extension 100% $90,000 $20,000 $110,000 $110,000 Storm drain extension to area of proposed development LP_12 Main St - Serra Way Low Priority 100% $240,000 $50,000 $290,000 $290,000 Storm drain extension to area of proposed development WF_11 Comet Drive Low Priority 100% $160,000 $30,000 $190,000 $0 WF_13 Railroad Avenue Low Priority 50% 50% $1,970,000 $390,000 $2,360,000 $1,180,000 Only a portion of this improvement drains the proposed
development area
Subtotal $2,790,000 $560,000 $3,350,000 $1,980,000
Remaining City Urban Service Area
BERRY_10 Ames Avenue High Priority 100% $1,390,000 $280,000 $1,670,000 $0 CAL_2 Jacklin Road High Priority 0% 100% $800,000 $160,000 $960,000 $960,000 Because this is considered to be built-out in the SDMP
analysis, unable to determine if it is existing deficiency or due to development - it was assumed to be deficient due to development
CAL_3 Bayview Park Drive High Priority 100% $180,000 $40,000 $220,000 $0 COCHES_5 S Park Victoria Drive High Priority 100% $9,640,000 $1,930,000 $11,570,000 $0 INLETS Inlet Replacements High Priority 100% $1,170,000 $230,000 $1,400,000 $0 JURGENS Jurgens Pump Station High Priority 100% $12,500,000 $2,500,000 $15,000,000 $0 MURPHY Murphy Pump Station High Priority 100% $250,000 - $250,000 $0 PENITENCIA Penitencia Pump Station High Priority 100% $8,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000 $0 OAK Oak Creek Pump Station High Priority 100% $250,000 - $250,000 $0 ABBOTT Abbott Pump Station Low Priority 100% $1,200,000 $200,000 $1,400,000 $0 CAL_1 Tice Drive Low Priority 100% $280,000 $60,000 $340,000 $0 CAL_4 Wool Drive Low Priority 100% $1,930,000 $390,000 $2,320,000 $0 COCHES_8 Foothill Park Low Priority 100% $860,000 $170,000 $1,030,000 $0 LP_14 North Abel Street Low Priority 100% $4,250,000 $850,000 $5,100,000 $0 SPENCE Spence Creek PS Low Priority 100% $620,000 $130,000 $750,000 $0 WFC
Wrigley-Ford Creek
Maintenance Low Priority 100% $600,000 $200,000 $800,000 $0 Subtotal $43,920,000 $9,140,000 $53,060,000 $960,000
Total $46,710,000 $9,700,000 $56,410,000 $2,940,000
(a) Cost estimates are from the 2021 Milpitas Storm Drainage Master Plan and are in 2021 dollars (ENR Index = 13,500) N-270-60-22-20-WP
City of Milpitas
Preliminary Storm Drainage Improvement Impact Fee
Last Revised: 09-02-22

Page 253 of 283 ends

0 1,2502,500
ScaleinFeet
Wrigley-Ford Creek
Coyote
Creek
Ford Creek
Berryessa Creek
Piedmont
Creek
Tularcitos Creek
Calera Creek Wrigley Ditch
Penitencia Creek
Los Coches Creek
Figure3
CIPMap
CityofMilpitas
PreliminaryStormDrainage
ImprovementImpactFeeAnalysis
CityofMilpitasBoundary
MilpitasUrbanServiceArea
OpenChannels
StormDrains
ParcelswithLandUseChangefrom
ExistingtoProposed
MilpitasMetroSpecificPlan(MMSP)Area
Gateway-MainStreetSpecificPlan(GSP)
Area
CIPProjectCategory
High
Low
SpecificPlanExtension
WEST YOST - N:\Clients\270 City of Milpitas\60-22-20 SW Nexus Study\GIS\MXD\Figures\Figure 3. CIP Map.mxd - mduffy - 9/1/2022 CIPName
JacklinRoad
TiceDrive
Bayview
ParkDrive
WoolDrive
Cochesand
PiedmontCreek
FoothillPark
RailroadAvenue
NorthAbelStreet
CometDrive
MainStreet-
TomEvattPark
MainStreet
MainStreet-SerraWay
MainStreet-SinnottLn
MainStreet-
CarloStreet
AmesAvenue

Page 254 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 10 ends

N-270-60-22-20-WP
Table 4. Proposed Fee Runoff Factors
Land Use Category Runoff Factor
Single Family Residential 0.40
Multi-Family Residential 0.70
Commercial/Industrial 0.90
Mixed Use 0.50
Transportation/Highway Services 0.95
Town Center 0.90
Institutional 0.90
Agriculture 0.20
Park Open Space 0.20
Waterways 0.00

PROPOSED IMPACT FEE
The proposed impact fee for each study area is summarized in Table 5 and described below. The impact fee is estimated by dividing the total cost of master plan improvements for each study area by the total runoff acreage for that study area. The total runoff acreage is calculated by multiplying the total area for each land use category in the study area by the runoff factor assigned to that land use category. Runoff factors used for the proposed impact fee are shown in Table 4.

Table 5. Storm Drain Improvement Fee Calculation Summary Existing
City-Wide
Storm Drain
Connection Fee
Proposed Impact Fee
Milpitas
Metro
Specific Plan
Area
GatewayMain Street
Specific Plan
Area
Remaining
Urban
Service Area
Value of Existing Facilities(a) (2002 Value) $91,157,871 - - - Cost of Master Plan Improvements (2021 Value) $24,913,000 $0 $1,980,000 $960,000 Total Infrastructure Cost $116,070,871 $0 $1,980,000 $960,000 Acreage(b) 8,660 0 57.5 10.0
Total Runoff Acres(c) 4,863 0 40.6 4.0
Connection Fee per Runoff Acre $23,868 $0 $48,768 $240,000 Connection Fee per 100 sf of Runoff Surface $55 $0 $112 $551 (a) The value of existing facilities was not included in the calculation for the proposed impact fee in accordance with AB 1600. (b) Acreage for the existing storm drain connection fee includes the entire city. Acreage for the proposed impact fee in the Gateway Specific Plan area includes parcels proposed to be developed or re-developed. Acreage for the proposed impact fee in the remaining urban service area includes only the area of proposed development that is tributary to a CIP project. (c) Runoff acreage is calculated by multiplying the total acres for each land use category in the study area by the runoff factor assigned to that land use category. Runoff factors are shown in Table 2 for the existing fee and Table 4 for the proposed fee.

Page 255 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 11 ends

N-270-60-22-20-WP
Milpitas Metro Specific Plan Area
Because there are no CIP projects identified in the MMSP area, there will not be a proposed impact fee for the study area. If an analysis of the 100-year storm event does identify necessary improvements in the MMSP area, the impact fee will need to be updated.

Gateway – Main Street Specific Plan Area
Based on the City’s direction during a meeting on July 1, 2022, all parcels being developed or redeveloped within the GSP area will be assessed with an impact fee, including 46.3 acres that will be redeveloped.

Although the imperviousness will decrease with the change from an industrial land use to a multi-family residential land use, the City’s storm drain infrastructure will need to be extended to serve this area of redevelopment. The reduction in imperviousness will reduce the total volume of runoff, but the change from sheet flow to piped flow will affect the shape and peak of the runoff hydrograph. In addition, due to the high creek levels downstream of the specific plan area, any changesto land use or infrastructure within the GSP area can impact flooding. The GSP area also includes 11.1 acres of new development, which will convert the existing open space areas to 6.4 acres of commercial development and 4.7 acres of mixed use development. This will increase the imperviousness, resulting in increased runoff.

The GSP area includes 57.5 acres of proposed development or redevelopment. Multiplying the area for each land use category by the associated runoff factor results in 40.6 runoff acres. The cost of the CIP projects that will serve new development and redevelopment in the GSP area is $1,980,000, resulting in an estimated proposed development impact fee of $48,768 per runoff acre, or $112 per 100 sf of runoff surface. Once the GSP is finalized and adopted and the value of additional infrastructure needed for proposed development is determined, the impact fee will need to be recalculated. If an analysis of the 100-year storm event identifies additional improvements needed in the GSP area, the cost of the improvements will also be used to update the impact fee.

Remaining Urban Service Area
The impact fee in the remaining urban service area will apply only to the parcels tributary to CIP projects identified in the 2021 SDMP. In the remaining urban service area, a 10.0-acre site tributary to the Jacklin Road CIP project is proposed to develop from open space to single family residential, increasing the impervious percentage and resulting in 4.0 runoff acres. Distributing the $960,000 in CIP costs across

4.0 runoff acres results in a proposed impact fee of $240,000 per runoff acre, or $551 per 100 sf of runoff surface. If an analysis of the 100-year storm event identifies necessary improvements in the remaining urban service area, the impact fee will need to be updated.

NEXUS SUMMARY
It is recommended that the impact fee be re-evaluated with the adoption of any specific plans or the identification of any new CIP projects that will benefit new development. A summary of how a proposed impact fee can meet the guidelines established in AB 1600 is below. • Identify the purpose of the fee. The purpose of the fee is to provide a source of funding that can be used to construct new storm drainage facilities or improve existing facilities that have been identified as necessary to serve new development and redevelopment in the City.

New development in the City will increase impervious surfaces, increasing storm drain runoff and triggering the need for improvements to the existing storm drain system.

Page 256 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 12 ends

N-270-60-22-20-WP
• Identify how the fee will be used. Fees collected through new development and redevelopment will be used to fund storm drainage infrastructure necessary to serve the development and mitigate impacts downstream or upstream of the new development. This includes extending storm drain pipes to underserved areas of proposed development and CIP projects downstream of proposed development. The CIP projects identified by the 2021 SDMP are shown on Figure 3, along with areas identified for new development and redevelopment. The CIP projects that will drain the development areas and the associated costs are summarized in Table 3. The storm drain impact fee will need to be updated with the adoption of the GSP and identification of additional storm drain infrastructure needed for development.
• Show a reasonable relationship (nexus) between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. As outlined in Table 1 and shown on Figures 1 and 2, new development and redevelopment are proposed throughout the City. All new development is proposed at locations currently identified as open space, meaning that development will increase the impervious coverage. Increasing the impervious coverage will generate additional runoff, creating demand for additional storm drainage infrastructure or improvements. Redevelopment in the GSP area will change the land use type from industrial to multi-family residential. While the land use change does reduce the impervious coverage, reducing the total runoff volume redevelopment will require the addition of storm drain pipes in an area previously drained by sheet flow. This will impact the shape of the runoff hydrograph and affect the peak flow to the downstream facilities. The storm drain infrastructure needs in the GSP area will be identified with the finalization and adoption of the GSP, and the impact fee will be updated at that time. • Show a reasonable relationship between the public facility to be constructed and the type of development on which the fee is imposed. New development will increase the impervious percentage of a project site and generate additional runoff. Figure 3 shows the parcels that are proposed to change land use, and the CIP projects that they are tributary to.

The cost of the CIP projects allocated to new development is summarized in Table 3.

Development in the GSP area will require the addition of storm drain infrastructure. Once the GSP is finalized and the required storm drain facilities are identified, the impact fee will be updated.
• Account for and spend the fees collected only for the purposes and projects specifically used in calculating the fees. Table 3 provides a summary of the CIP costs that are directly related to new development and used for calculating the proposed impact fee for each study area. Once the GSP is finalized and adopted, and the additional storm drain infrastructure is identified, the impact fee will be updated.

To complete an adequate storm drain impact fee assessment that complies with the requirements of AB 1600, specific plans and hydraulic studies should address both the 10-year and 100-year design storm events. CIP projects should identify improvements needed to the storm drain infrastructure, including pump stations and creeks, to ensure that 100-year flood protection is provided. The total cost of the 100-year CIPs will be used to revise the proposed impact fees. To address high water levels in the City’s downstream creek system, the City and Valley Water should jointly identify how funds will be collected to construct necessary improvements. Development in specific plan areas may need to contribute to the funding of downstream creek improvements to accommodate growth.

Page 257 of 283 ends

Inundation Map
Attachment A

Page 258 of 283 ends

Figure3-3

Page 259 of 283 ends

CITY OF MILPITAS

AGENDA REPORT
(AR)
Item Title: Adopt a Resolution and Consider an Ordinance Amending the Proposed Storm Drainage Impact Fee (Staff Contact: Christian Di Renzo, Public Works Director, 408-586-2602)
Category: Community Services and Sustainable Infrastructure Meeting Date: 2/6/2024
Recommendation: (1) Conduct a public hearing;
(2) Adopt a resolution amending the City’s Storm Drainage Impact Fee consistent with the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study;
(3) Following the City Attorney’s reading of the title, move to waive the first reading beyond the title and introduce an ordinance amending Section 16 of Chapter 16 (“Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control”) of Title XI (“Zoning, Planning and Annexation”) of the Milpitas Municipal Code to be consistent with the newly adopted Storm Drainage Impact Fee and the City’s Development Impact Fee Program.

BACKGROUND:

The Mitigation Fee Act requires agencies to identify a reasonable relationship between an impact fee and the type of development project(s) on which the fee is imposed. Local agencies taking any action establishing, increasing or imposing a fee shall make findings regarding: (1) the purpose of the fee; (2) the mitigation projects for which the fee will be used; (3) a reasonable relationship (nexus) between the fee’s use and type of development for which the fee will be imposed; and (4) nexus between the need for the public facility and type of development for which the fee will be imposed.

The existing Storm Drain Impact Fees (2003 SDIF) were adopted by City Council on October 7, 2003, via Ordinance 239.3. The 2003 Financial Utility Master Plan served as the nexus for the 2003 SDIF, which are still in use today. The 2003 SDIF is based on the standard buy-in methodology and was calculated by dividing the value of existing infrastructure plus additional anticipated capital project and equipment costs, by the total potential citywide stormwater runoff acreage.

Following completion of the 2021 Storm Drain Master Plan (2021 SDMP), the City entered into an agreement with West Yost to develop the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study (Nexus Study). The Nexus Study provided the necessary technical analysis to support the updated Storm Drainage Impact Fee (SDIF). It is important to note that the fees calculated by the Nexus Study serve to justify the SDIF that can be charged by the City based on projected new development and the needs and corresponding costs of the capital facilities and improvements needed to accommodate them. The Nexus Study framework ensures both, that existing ratepayers are not paying the cost of infrastructure to support new development and to establish the basis for determining a reasonable relationship between the amount of the SDIF and the cost of refurbishing or constructing storm infrastructure attributable to particular development projects, taking into account anticipated growth and the costs of designing, constructing, installing, improving and acquiring public facilities. The 2021 SDMP was used to inform the Nexus Study of the existing system and identify the proposed CIP costs for estimating an updated SDIF.

In addition to a resolution approving the SDIF, staff recommends introducing an ordinance to change the municipal code so that it is consistent with this newly adopted SDIF. The 2003 SDIF was originally adopted by ordinance instead of resolution before the Development Impact Fee Program was passed by City Council. The current Section XI-16-16 of the Milpitas Municipal Code spells out the amounts that can be charged for this fee.

Amending this provision of the code makes it so that the amount of the fee is set by resolution of the City Council so the City does not need to pass an ordinance every time a fee change is adopted. The ordinance will bring

Page 260 of 283 ends

section XI-16-16 of the Milpitas Municipal Code into conformity with the way all other City development impact fees are adopted.

ANALYSIS:

SDIF are a funding tool for the City to recover costs related to growth to be used specifically for storm drainage infrastructure. SDIF are a one-time charge applied to new developments or redevelopment of properties that impact existing infrastructure or create the need for new infrastructure. Connection fees shall not be used for operational expenses, to pay for city-wide capital improvements, or correct existing deficiencies.

The recommended SDIF is based on the Nexus Study completed by West Yost in 2023. The Fee was prepared in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act and aligns with the Capital Improvement Projects identified in the 2021 SDMP. Nexus Study findings recommend implementing a different SDIF for three study areas since the required storm drainage infrastructure improvements vary throughout the City: the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan Area, Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area, and the remaining urban service area. The proposed SDIF for each study area is summarized in Table 1 and described below. The Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study found in Attachment B supports these finding.
• The SDIF was calculated by dividing the total cost of 2021 SDMP improvements for each study area by the total runoff acreage for that study area.
• Total runoff acreage was calculated by multiplying the total area for each land use category in the study area by the runoff factor assigned to that land use category. • The total cost of the CIPs that are directly related to new development was identified for each study area based on the 2021 SDMP.

Table 1. Proposed Storm Drainage Impact Fee
Milpitas Metro Specific
Plan Area
Gateway-Main Street
Specific Plan Area
Remaining Urban
Service Area
Impact Fee per Runoff Acre $ - $ 48,768.00 $ 240,000.00 Impact Fee per 100 sf of Runoff
Surface $ - $ 112.00 $ 551.00
POLICY ALTERNATIVE(S):

Alternative: Do not adopt updated Storm Drainage Impact Fees in accordance with the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study and, rather, maintain the current 2003 Storm Drain Impact fees.

Pros: There are no identified benefits to this alternative.

Cons: Maintaining the current Storm Drainage Impact Fees would result in the collection of fees that do not align with the guidelines outlined in the Mitigation Fee Act. Some developers may not pay their proportional share of necessary public improvements to mitigate impacts from their development on the system.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Storm Drain Nexus Study identified $2.94 million of storm drain improvements projects that are a result of impacts from new developments and therefore need to be mitigated through a Storm Drain Impact Fee. Upon completion of the projects, no additional Storm Drain Impact Fees will be collected.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA):

Page 261 of 283 ends

RECOMMENDATION:
(1) Conduct a public hearing;
(2) Adopt a resolution amending the City’s Storm Drainage Impact Fee consistent with the Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study;
(3) Following the City Attorney’s reading of the title, move to waive the first reading beyond the title and introduce an ordinance amending Section 16 of Chapter 16 (“Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control”) of Title XI (“Zoning, Planning and Annexation”) of the Milpitas Municipal Code to be consistent with the newly adopted Storm Drainage Impact Fee and the City’s Development Impact Fee Program.

ATTACHMENT(S):
(a) Resolution
(b) Storm Drainage Impact Fee Nexus Study
(c) Ordinance

Page 262 of 283 ends

RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILPITAS ADOPTING THE

STORM DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, AB 1600 was adopted and codified in California Government Code Section 66000 et seq. Allowing the establishing, increasing, or imposing of a development fee as a condition of approval where the purpose and use of the fee were identified, and reasonable relationship to the development project was demonstrated; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the current storm drainage impact fee program on June 3, 2003, by their Resolution No. ---; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to change the Storm Drainage Impact Fees upon development projects to ensure that new development contributes its fair share to public facilities in the City consistent with the City’s standards; and
WHEREAS, the City contracted with West Yost to perform a nexus study analysis demonstrating the reasonable relationship between the need for each fee and the type of development on which each fee will be imposed and has determined amounts for each fee based on the reasonable relationship between each fee and the type of development project on which the fee will be imposed; and WHEREAS, West Yost prepared and submitted a Storm Drainage Impact Fee Analysis, dated June 2023, attached to the Agenda Report, and incorporated by reference (the “Nexus Study”); and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study substantiates a methodology that will charge each new development project only for the costs necessary to mitigate the impacts expected to be caused by that development project; and
WHEREAS, there is a reasonable relationship between the Impact Fees and the development projects on which the Fees will be imposed because the Fees will only fund costs necessitated by each new development; and
WHEREAS, the Impact Fees will not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the land and facilities for which the Fees are imposed; and
WHEREAS, the Impact Fees will not be levied, collected or imposed for general revenue purposes, but are levied specifically to fund facilities of the types set forth in the Nexus Study; and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study establishes proposed amounts and provides an evaluation of the need for new Impact Fees and establishes the nexus between the imposition of the new Fees and the estimated reasonable costs of providing the services for which the Fees are charged; and

Page 263 of 283 ends

WHEREAS, the Nexus Study includes information that supports the City’s actions, as required by subdivision (a) of Section 66001 of the Government Code.

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

2. The Council finds and determines that the Nexus Study and SDIF being considered does not constitute a "Project" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378 (b), which excludes items involving the general creation of governmental funding mechanisms or fiscal activities, and therefore no environmental assessment is required.

3. The Council does hereby approve the following updated storm drainage impact fees to be made effective 60 days after adoption.

Proposed Storm Drainage Impact Fee
Milpitas Metro
Specific Plan Area
Gateway-Main Street
Specific Plan Area
Remaining Urban
Service Area
Impact Fee per Runoff Acre $ - $ 48,768.00 $ 240,000.00 Impact Fee per 100 sf of
Runoff Surface $ - $ 112.00 $ 551.00
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _______ day of ________, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Page 264 of 283 ends

Suzanne Guzzetta, City Clerk Carmen Montano, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Michael Mutalipassi, City Attorney

Page 265 of 283 ends

2020 Research Park Drive
Suite 100
Davis CA 95618
530.756.5905 phone
530.756.5991 fax
westyost.com

Identifying the purpose of the fee
Identifying how the fee will be used

Page 266 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 2 ends

The City also owns, operates, and maintains 13 stormwater pumping stations.

Specific Plan Areas
The City currently includes two Specific Plan areas: the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (MMSP) area and the GSP area, each further discussed below.

Page 267 of 283 ends

Area, Acres
N-270-60-22-20-WP
City of Milpitals
Preliminary Storm Drainage Improvement Impact Fee
Last Revised: 09-02-22

Page 268 of 283 ends

PIEDMONT
RD
N PARK
VI
CTO
RIA DR
MO
NTA
GU
EE
X

S PARK VICTORIA DR
CALAV
ERAS
RD

N ABEL ST
W

CALAVE RAS BL

ESCUELA PK E CALAVERA
S
B
L
DIXON
LA
N
D
IN
G
RD

W MONTAG
UE
EX
GREAT
MALL
DR
TASMAN
DR
YOSEM
ITE
DR

S ABEL ST

N MILPITAS BL
G
R
E
AT
M
A
L
L
P
K

Page 269 of 283 ends

PIEDMONT
RD
N PARK
VI
CTO
RIA DR
MO
NTA
GU
EE
X

S PARK VICTORIA DR
CALAV
ERAS
RD

N ABEL ST
W

CALAVE RAS BL

ESCUELA PK E CALAVERA
S
B
L
DIXON
LA
N
D
IN
G
RD

W MONTAG
UE
EX
GREAT
MALL
DR
TASMAN
DR
YOSEM
ITE
DR

S ABEL ST

N MILPITAS BL
G
R
E
AT
M
A
L
L
P
K

Page 270 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 6 ends

N-270-60-22-20-WP

Runoff factors used for each land use type in the existing fee calculation are summarized in Table 2.

Page 271 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 7 ends

Page 272 of 283 ends

Page 273 of 283 ends

Page 274 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 10 ends

Page 275 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 11 ends

New development in the City will increase impervious surfaces, increasing storm drain runoff and triggering the need for improvements to the existing storm drain system.

Page 276 of 283 ends

TM – City of Milpitas
June 30, 2023

Page 12 ends

The cost of the CIP projects allocated to new development is summarized in Table 3.

Page 277 of 283 ends

Inundation Map
Attachment A

Page 278 of 283 ends

Figure3-3

Page 279 of 283 ends

1 Ordinance No. 239.8

REGULAR
NUMBER: 239.8
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MILPITAS AMENDING THE MILPITAS MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE XI (“ZONING, PLANNING AND ANNEXATION”), CHAPTER 16 (“STORMWATER AND
URBAN RUNOFF POLLUTION CONTROL”), SECTION 16 (“CONNECTION FEES”) RELATING TO THE STORM DRAINAGE SERVICE IMPACT FEES

CHARGED TO NEW DEVELOPMENTS OR REDEVELOPMENTS, AND

MAKING FINDINGS OF EXEMPTION FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15061(b)(3), 15183, 15305, 15308, AND 15378
HISTORY: This Ordinance was introduced (first reading) by the City Council at its meeting of ____________________, upon motion by_________________________ and was adopted (second reading) by the City Council at its meeting of _______________, upon motion by ____________________________. The Ordinance was duly passed and ordered published in accordance with law by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________________ __________________________ Suzanne Guzzetta, City Clerk Carmen Montano, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
Michael Mutalipassi, City Attorney

Page 280 of 283 ends

2 Ordinance No. 239.8
RECITALS AND FINDINGS:

WHEREAS, the City of Milpitas (“City”) desires to change the Storm Drainage Impact Fees upon development projects to ensure that new development contributes its fair share to public facilities in the City consistent with the City’s standards; and
WHEREAS, the City contracted with West Yost to perform a nexus study analysis demonstrating the reasonable relationship between the need for each fee and the type of development on which each fee will be imposed and has determined amounts for each fee based on the reasonable relationship between each fee and the type of development project on which the fee will be imposed; and WHEREAS, West Yost prepared and submitted a Storm Drainage Impact Fee Analysis, dated June 2023, which is incorporated by reference (“Nexus Study”); and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study substantiates a methodology that will charge each new development project only for the costs necessary to mitigate the impacts expected to be caused by that development project; and
WHEREAS, there is a reasonable relationship between the Impact Fees and the development projects on which the Fees will be imposed because the Fees will only fund costs necessitated by each new development; and
WHEREAS, the Impact Fees will not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the land and facilities for which the Fees are imposed; and
WHEREAS, the Impact Fees will not be levied, collected or imposed for general revenue purposes, but are levied specifically to fund facilities of the types set forth in the Nexus Study; and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study establishes proposed amounts and provides an evaluation of the need for new Impact Fees and establishes the nexus between the imposition of the new Fees and the estimated reasonable costs of providing the services for which the Fees are charged; and WHEREAS, the Nexus Study includes information that supports the City’s actions, as required by subdivision (a) of Section 66001 of the Government Code; and WHEREAS, revisions and updates to the Fees charged by the City of Milpitas (“City”) for the proportionate impact of new development on the City’s storm drain infrastructure and system are reasonable, necessary, and needed; and
WHEREAS, on June 5, 2012, when the City adopted Ordinance No. 239.7 and last changed these Fees, the City had not adopted the current version of its Development Impact Fee Program (Title VIII, Chapter 4 of the Milpitas Municipal Code); and
WHEREAS, consistent with Government Code section 66016(b), Title VIII, Chapter 4, Section

2.01 of the Milpitas Municipal Code confirms that the City Council may establish and amend development impact fees by resolution; and
WHEREAS, the City Council intends to confirm for the avoidance of doubt that the fee established in Milpitas Municipal Code section XI-16-16 is part of the City’s Development Impact Fee Program and may similarly be amended and modified from time to time by resolution of the City Council; and

Page 281 of 283 ends

3 Ordinance No. 239.8
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Sections 15061(b)(3), 15183, 15305, 15308, and 15378, that this Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) in that it is not a project which has the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, merely amends part of a regulatory process for the protection of the environment, does not alter the use of land from uses already authorized, prohibited, or regulated by law, and does not affect development density established by existing zoning and the City’s General Plan, for which an Environmental Impact Report was already certified; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Milpitas does ordain as follows:

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

SECTION 2. AMENDMENT OF MILPITAS MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE XI, CHAPTER 16, SECTION 16
Title XI, Chapter 16, Section 16 of the Milpitas Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

XI-16-16 - Connection Fees
Prior to connection or discharge to any storm drain facility from a new development or a redevelopment project (directly or indirectly), connectors shall pay City a fee for connection/discharge to the City's storm drain system as set by resolution of the City Council pursuant to Title VIII, Chapter 4 of this Code. as follows:
(a) $1,100 per parcel for single-family medium density with parcel size equal or smaller than 8,710 square feet (⅕ acre).
(b) $1,916 per parcel for single-family low density, with parcel size between 8,711 and 43,560 square feet (between ⅕ and 1 acre).
(c) $3,594 per parcel for single-family with parcel size between 43,561 and 174,240 square feet (between 1 acre and 4 acres).
(d) $4,792 per parcel for single-family with parcel size between 174,241 and 392,040 (between 4 and 9 acres).
(e) $6,469 per parcel for single-family with parcel size greater than 392,040 square feet (9 acres). (f) $16,771 per acre for multi-family developments.
(g) $21,562 per acre for all others (such as commercial, industrial, institutional, or mixed use sites). (h) $7,187 per acre for schools (with athletic fields), otherwise consider as institutional. (i) $4,792 per acre for parks.

The purpose of the fee imposed by this section is to fund facilities (whether presently in existence or not) necessary to provide storm drain services, and revenues derived from the fee imposed by this section shall be used solely for that purpose.

SECTION 3. UNCODIFIED AMENDMENT OF STORM DRAINAGE IMPACT FEES For the avoidance of doubt, the City Council hereby adopts by ordinance and incorporates by reference City Council Resolution No. __ and all findings, determinations, and resolutions therein, including the

Page 282 of 283 ends

4 Ordinance No. 239.8
amended storm drainage impact fee therein, as if fully set forth here. This updated storm drainage impact fee shall be effective 60 days after adoption of this ordinance. The City Council intends to confirm by ordinance and not duplicate the fee set by City Council Resolution No. __.

SECTION 4. CALIFORNIA ENVIROMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
The City Council finds and determines that the adoption of this amending ordinance is not a project and is not subject to CEQA review because it does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change, particularly in that it does not alter the use of land or does a most does not do so inconsistently with uses already authorized, prohibited, or regulated by law. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15378.) Furthermore, even if considered a project, this amending ordinance is categorically exempt from CEQA review in that it comprises of at most minor alterations in land use limitations that do not result in any changes in land use or density (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15305, 15378(a)(1)), merely amends part of a regulatory process for the protection of the environment (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15308), and by common sense can be seen with certainly that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment particularly in consideration of the activities already permitted, prohibited, or regulated by law (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15061(b)(3)). This amending ordinance is also exempt because it does not affect development density established by existing zoning and the City’s General Plan, for which an Environmental Impact Report was already certified, and does not have any project-specific significant environmental effects peculiar to the project or any site. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15183.) SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this Ordinance are separable, and the invalidity of any phrase, clause, provision or part shall not affect the validity of the remainder.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE AND POSTING
In accordance with Section 36937 of the Government Code of the State of California, this Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk of the City of Milpitas shall cause this Ordinance or a summary thereof to be published in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California.

Page 283 of 283 ends

Milpitas City CouncilFebruary 6, 2024

Milpitas City Council
February 6, 2024