CITY OF MILPITAS COM REHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 9
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
• Supportive housing;
• Single room occupancy housing;
• Employee and farmworker housing; and
• Residential care facilities.
These proposed updates are either clerical or reflect existing requirements in the City’s General Plan or state and federal law and would not affect the overall land uses, density, or intensity expected at full buildout of the approved General Plan.
Amendments to Zones
The proposed project would adjust the following development standards of certain zones to be consistent with the General Plan:
• Modify or increase density standards in the R2, R3, MHP, and MXD3 zones. • Modify or increase floor area ratio (FAR) standards in the C1, M1, M2, and MP zones. • Modify or reduce interior side and rear setbacks in R2 and R3 zones and open space requirement in R3 Zone to ensure consistency with Housing Element programs.
Furthermore, the proposed project would remove the R1-8 subzone and the R5, MXD2, and AR zones as they are not applied to any property. The proposed project would also remove the following overlays that are either outdated, not being used, or otherwise would be addressed elsewhere in the updated Zoning Ordinance:
• The Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay, which is now obsolete due to zones adopted in 2024 to implement the Metro Specific Plan.
• The High Rise (HR) Overlay, which was applied to one property as the result of a project- specific entitlement that was never constructed.
• The Gateway Office (OO) Overlay, which will be obsolete following approval of the Gateway- Main Specific Plan, which is currently under development. • The Recreation and Entertainment (RE) Overlay, which is no longer consistent with the City’s current land use policies. Most of the RE Overlay is applied to areas that are now zoned Business Park Research and Development Zone (BPRD), as evaluated in the 2024 Addendum.
• The Mobile Home Park Combining District, which would be replaced with a new base zone for mobile home parks, Mobile Home Park (MHP) Zone.
These updates would create consistency with the General Plan and/or provide administrative and clerical updates, and would not change the overall land uses, density, or intensity of development at full buildout of the City.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
10 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Amendments to Parking Regulations
The proposed project would include the following adjustments to parking regulations throughout the Zoning Ordinance to ensure consistency with the General Plan:
• Modification/reduction in required parking ratios consistent with state law, the Housing Element, and General Plan policies.
• Expanding alternative methods available to provide the required number of parking spaces (e.g., shared parking, off-site parking, car-share parking, etc.) consistent with the General Plan and Climate Action Plan policies.
• Adding citywide bicycle parking requirements consistent with the General Plan. • Adding Transportation Demand Management (TDM) requirements for development projects over certain size thresholds, consistent with the CAP.
These updates would create consistency with the General Plan and help meet the goals of the Milpitas CAP. They would not change the overall land uses, density, or intensity of development at full buildout of the City.
Amendments to Other Citywide Standards
The following citywide standards in the Zoning Ordinance would be updated by the proposed project:
• Addition of comprehensive landscape standards consistent with the General Plan and CAP. • Addition of exterior lighting standards (Draft Zoning Ordinance Section C.2.070, included in Appendix A).
• Expanding performance standards (e.g., noise, odor, hazardous materials, air contaminants, etc.) (Draft Zoning Ordinance Section C.2.110, included in Appendix A). • Adding incentives for the development of larger affordable rental units (3 or more bedrooms) consistent with Housing Element programs. Incentives consist of 30 percent reduction in setbacks and 30 percent reduction in common open space required. • Adding incentives for the consolidation of smaller existing lots into larger lots that can be more efficiently developed into higher density housing or mixed-use projects consistent with Housing Element programs. Incentives consist of 10 percent reduction in setbacks, 10 percent reduction in common open space required, and 20 percent reduction in guest parking. • Updating and expanding regulations for special uses, including alcoholic beverage sales, drive- through facilities, home occupations, temporary uses, and service stations to clarify and modernize existing regulations.
• Adding design standards for newly constructed single-family residential units.
CITY OF MILPITAS COM REHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 11
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
• Comprehensive rewrite of sign standards to reflect legally compliant, content-neutral sign types and associated sign definitions, standards, tables, and graphics.
These amendments would create consistency with the existing General Plan, Housing Element, or CAP, and/or would expand requirements related to CEQA topics such as lighting standards, noise, odor, hazardous materials, and air contaminants to reduce potential impacts of development through the application of uniformly applied standards. Other amendments would clarify and modernize existing regulations.
Amendments to Procedures
The proposed project would include updates to the following existing procedures outlined in the Zoning Ordinance:
• Revision of planning permit types and the applicable review authority for each to ensure clarity and to provide an appropriate level of review/discretion and public notification for development projects of various sizes and scales. The level of review (i.e., decision authority) for many project types has been reduced to a lower body (e.g., Zoning Administrator instead of Planning Commission).
• Offering streamlined review as an incentive for projects that exceed the City’s building code energy efficiency requirements.
• Adding Minor Deviation approval and specific allowances for building height exceptions to allow certainty and clarity for deviating from development standards (replacing the current Conditional Use Permit procedure for these types of requests). • Adding new Temporary Use Permit type and procedure, with greater detail and clarity as to the types of temporary uses that do and do not require Planning review and approval. • Revising thresholds for Site Development Permit applicability. • Adding Planned Unit Development procedures.
• Adding Development Agreement procedures.
These updates would provide administrative and clerical updates, and would not change the overall land uses, density, or intensity of development at full buildout of the City.
Municipal Code Changes
Other sections of the Municipal Code will need to be amended concurrently with the Zoning Ordinance update. These are non-substantive changes and include the following:
• Amend Municipal Code Title 1 (Administration), Chapter 1 (General Provisions), Section 4.02 (Titles Contained in the Code) to reflect the relocation of Zoning to a new Title (Title XIII).
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
12 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
• Update all references in the Municipal Code to the zoning ordinance (or specific sections thereof) to reflect new numbering in updated Zoning Ordinance. • Amend name of Title XI to “Planning and Annexation.”
• Move public art requirements (currently Section 14 of the Zoning Ordinance) to Title XI, Chapter 14.
• Conduct minor text edits to Title V (Public Health, Safety, and Welfare), Chapter 210 (Animal Regulation), Section 7.02 (Exceptions to Animals in Residential Areas) – to reflect process for permitting chickens to be kept outdoors.
These updates would provide administrative and clerical updates, and would not change the overall land uses, density, or intensity of development at full buildout of the City.
Zoning Map Changes
Under the proposed project, the Milpitas Zoning Map would be amended to be consistent with the Zoning Ordinance text changes proposed. The Zoning Map changes primarily involve the removal of overlays, including:
• Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay
• High Rise (HR) Overlay
• Gateway Office (OO) Overlay
• Recreation and Entertainment (RE) Overlay
The Site and Architecture (S) Overlay would no longer be mapped on any parcel as it will be addressed with citywide Site Development Review process.
The Mobile Home Park (MHP) Overlay would also be replaced with the new mobile home park base zone ("Mobile Home Park" [MHP]).
All proposed changes to the Zoning Map would be consistent with the proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinance listed above.
Milpitas General Plan Updates
The proposed project would include clerical changes to the General Plan to reflect the proposed text changes in the Zoning Ordinance. All General Plan changes would be focused on Table 1 of the General Plan Land Use Element: General Plan Designations and Implementing Zones, as listed below:
• Remove the R5 Zone as an implementing zone for VHDMU land use designation (as the R5 Zone would be removed).
• Change the implementing zone for MHP land use designation to MHP – Mobile Home Park Zone (not “R1-MHP” as the MHP Overlay would be removed and replaced with a base zone).
CITY OF MILPITAS COM REHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 13
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
2.4 - Project Summary
The proposed project would update the Municipal Code, Zoning Map, and General Plan. However, as explained above, all the amendments are either administrative, are meant to clarify and modernize existing regulations, or would expand requirements related to certain CEQA topics, or reflect existing requirements in the CAP, General Plan, State, or federal law. The proposed project does not include any physical development, specific development proposals or infrastructure plans. The overall projected land uses, density, and intensity of development at full buildout of the City would remain the same as previously evaluated in the approved General Plan and General Plan EIR.
2.5 - Discretionary Approvals
The proposed project requires the following discretionary approvals from the City of Milpitas:
• Adoption and Approval of General Plan Amendments
• Adoption and Approval of Municipal Code Amendments
• Adoption and Approval of Zoning Map Amendments
2.6 - Intended Uses of this Document
The City of Milpitas, as the lead agency, has prepared this Addendum to the previous EIR to provide the public and responsible and trustee agencies with an objective analysis of the potential environmental impacts resulting from adoption of the Milpitas General Plan and subsequent implementation of projects consistent with the General Plan. The environmental review process enables interested parties to evaluate the proposed project in terms of its environmental consequences, to examine and recommend methods to eliminate or reduce potential adverse impacts, and to consider a reasonable range of alternatives to the project. While CEQA requires that consideration be given to avoiding adverse environmental effects, the lead agency must balance adverse environmental effects against other public objectives, including the economic and social benefits of a project, in determining whether a project should be approved.
This Addendum to the previous EIR will be used as a supplemental environmental document to evaluate all subsequent planning and permitting actions associated with the General Plan.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
82 35
9 9
17 Santa Clara County
Santa Cruz County
85 Alameda County
Santa Clara County
580
92 880
680
237
280
84 280
Henry Cowell
Redwoods
St Park
Castle Rock
State Park
Big Basin
Redwoods
State Park
Portola
Redwoods
State Park
Lake Del Valle
State Rec Area
101
Lake Chabot
Lake Del
Valle
San Antonio
Reservoir
Calaveras
Reservoir
Anderson LakeCalero
Reservoir
Chesbro
Reservoir
Uvas
Reservoir
DublinCastro Valley
San Leandro
Livermore
San Lorenzo Pleasanton
Hayward
Foster City
NewarkRedwood CityBelmont
San Carlos
Menlo ParkNorth
Fair Oaks
East Palo
Alto
Milpitas
Stanford
Mountain ViewPalo Alto
Sunnyvale East
Foothills
Los Altos Santa Clara
Cupertino
San Jose
Campbell
Saratoga
Los Gatos
Morgan Hill
Fremont
E x h i b i t 1
R e g i o n a l L o c a t i o n M a p
5 0 52.5
Miles
Text
Project Site
S o u r c e : C e n s u s 2 0 0 0 D a t a , T h e C a l i f o r n i a S p a t i a l I n f o r m a t i o n L i b r a r y ( C a S I L ) . C I T Y O F M I L P I T A S
C I T Y O F M I L P I T A S C O M P R E H E N S I V E Z O N I N G O R D I N A N C E U P D A T E P R O J E C T A D D E N D U M 5 8 0 7 0 0 0 1 " 0 4 / 2 0 2 5 | 1 _ r e g i o n a l . m x d 87 Legend
City of Milpitas
' ' - J... ;,,. -- -- ---- -- -- -- ---- ----
' . . .. , .. ,_,,,-------, ... ___ ._,
., - ; :....___...__., ~
.. ...
I (,.
i;,
r
FIRSTCARBON ~
SOLUTIONS™ V --.------
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
58070001 04/2025 | 2_GPLU.cdr•
Source: City of Milpitas; Santa Clara County; USGS; CalAtlas. August 4, 2020. De Novo Planning Group.
Exhibit 2
General Plan Land Use Map
CITY OF MILPITAS
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT ADDENDUM [7
FIRSTCARBON
SOLUTIONS™
ALAMEDA COUNTY
Calaveras ReseNoir
SA ,J: ,,,, CLARA COUNTY
Legend
HVL - Hillside Very Low Density
HLD - Hillside Low Density
~ HMO - Hillside Medium Density
LOR - Low Density Residential
MOR - Medium Density Residential
~ HOR - High Density Residential
~ VHDR - Very High Density Residential
MHP - Mobile Home Park
~ VHDMU - Very High Density Mixed Use
~ NCMU - NeighborhoodCommercial Mixed Use
~ GNC - General Commercial
NC - Neighborhood Commercial
~ TWC - Town Center
INP - Industrial Park
~ BPRD - Business Park/Research & Development
~ MFG - Manufacturing
~ PF - Public Facilities
POS - Permanent Open Space
MMSP - Milpitas Metro Specific Plan
~ MGSP-Milpitas Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan
~ Wvl/ - Waterway
~ Future Specific Plan Overlay
Etttll 1nnovation District Overlay
Planning Areas
['_=J City of Milpitas
c:J Milpitas Sphere of Influence
[=:I Milpitas Urban Service Area
~ San Jose Planning Limits of Urban Growth
County Boundary
-.;;.;;==
Transit Stations
I:) BART Station
t1 VTA Station
f a._______._ ___ ½ ____.____,
r Miles
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
58070001 04/2025 | 3_existing_zoning.cdr•
Source: City of Milpitas, June 2024.
CITY OF MILPITAS
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT ADDENDUM Exhibit 3
Existing Zoning Map
(
'--.
FIRSTCARBON
SOLUTIONS™
I .
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
\ .,-
,,,.,' l,$
' ,,
----,
\ I
\
,,. ,.-
\
,.. ,,
\ ;,-".\
• I""
• VP1
• 'i \
pJOl3 -~
,_
-- ,, ·/ .
,; .. \
'O\ .. ,
I
l
Legend
Zones
Single Family Residential minimum lot size 2,500 s.f. (R1-2.5) Single Family Residential minimum lot size 3,000 s.f. (R1-3) Single Family Residential minimum lot size 4,000 s.f. (R1-4) • Single Family Residential minimum lot size 5,000 s.f. (R1-5) Single Family Residential minimum lot size 6,000 s.f. (R1-6) - Single Family Residential minimum lot size 10,000 s.f. (R1-10) Single Family Residential with Hillside Combining District (R 1-H) One or Two Family (R2)
Multi-Family Residential, High Density (R3)
- Multi-Family Residential, Very High Density (R4)
Mixed Use (MXD)
- Mixed Use, Very High Density (MXD3)
Administrative and Professional Offices (CO)
Neighborhood Comme rcial (C1)
• General Commercia l (C2)
- Highway Services (HS)
- Town Center (TC)
Light Industrial (M1)
- Heavy Industrial (M2)
Industrial Park (MP)
- Business Park Research & Developmen t (BPRD)
Institutional (I)
Agricultural (A)
Parks and Open Space (POS)
- Waterway
Milpitas Metro Specific Plan Zones
Metro High Density Mixed Use (MXD2-Met ro)
- Metro Very High Density Mixed Use (MXD3-Metro)
Metro Multi-Fam ily High Density Residentia l (R3-Metro) - Metro Multi-Family Very High Density Residential (R4-Metro) - Metro Urban (R5-Metro)
- Business Park Research & Developme nt (BPRD-Metro)
- Business Park Research & Development, Limited Residential (BPRD-R-Met ro) Overlays
~ Freeway Corridor Overlay (FC)
IITITJ High Rise Overlay (HR)
11:!lffl Mobile Home Park Overlay (MHP)
W Office Ove rlay (00)
~ Recreation and Entertainment Overlay (RE)
D Site and Architectural Overlay (S)
Transit Oriented Development Overlay (TOD)
Other Features
D Planned Unit Developmen t (PUD)
D Precise Plan Area
~ ~ Midtown Specific Plan Area
r_:] City Boundary
Parcels
Crestline
• View Points
0.5 Miles
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
58070001 04/2025 | 4_proposed_zoning.cdr•
Source: City of Milpitas, December 2024.
CITY OF MILPITAS
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT ADDENDUM Exhibit 4
Proposed Zoning Map
--_ _,,
\---
\._ .... -,
A ,,-
; ~
I
(,
/ / ,;,
// /
I .
\
I
I
I ~
(
I
I
\
_ ....
•;'
/ i ~-
~
,,-- i .
\ = \
"
'l
FIRSTCARBON
SOLUTIONS™
* Vf> 1
-
0 0.5
Miles
Zones
Single Family Resident ial minimum lot size 2,500 s.f. (R1-2.5) Single Family Resident ial minimum lot size 3,000 s.f. (R1-3) Single Family Resident ial minimum lot size 4 ,000 s.f. (R1-4) - Single Family Resident ial minimum lot size 5,000 s.f. (R1-5) Single Family Resident ial minimum lot size 6,000 s.f. (R1-6) - Single Family Resident ial minimum lot size 10,000 s.f. (R1-10) Single Family Resident ial with Hillside Combining District (R1-H)* One or Two Family (R2)
• Multi-Family Residential, High Density (R3)
- Multi-Fam ily Residenti al, Very High Density (R4)
Mobile Home Park (MHP)
Mixed Use (MXD)
- Mixed Use, Very High Density (MXD3)
Administrative and Professional Offices (CO)
Neighborhood Commercia l (C1)
- Gene ral Commercial (C2)
- Highway Services (HS)
- Town Center (TC)
Light Industrial (M1)
- Heavy Industrial (M2)
Industrial Park (MP)
- Business Park Resea rch & Developme nt (BPRD)
Institutional (I)
Agricultural (A)
• Parks and Open Space (POS)
- Waterway
Milpitas Metro Specfic Plan Zones
Metro High Density Mixed Use (MXD2-Metro )
- Metro Very High Density Mixed Use (MXD3-Metro)
Metro Multi-Family High Density Residential (R3-Metro)
- Metro Multi-Family Very High Density Resident ial (R4-Metro) • Metro Urban (RS-Metro)
- Business Park Research & Developme nt (BPRD-Metro )
• Business Park Resea rch & Development , Limited Residential (BPRD- R-Metro) Overlay*
~ Freeway Corr idor Overlay (FC)
Other Features
D Planned Unit Development (PUD)
D Precise Plan Area
Midtown Specific Plan Area
C:J City Boundary
Parcels
Crestline
* View Points
*Note: The "H" Hillside Combining District is mapped as R1-H. The Site and Architectural (S) Overlay was adopted through a voter initiative and is not currently mapped on any parcel.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Milpitas Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Update Project Addendum
FCS 23
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
3 - CEQA CHECKLIST
The purpose of the checklist is to evaluate the categories in terms of any changed condition (e.g., changed circumstances, project changes, or new information of substantial importance) that may result in a changed environmental result (e.g., a new significant impact or substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant effect) (CEQA Guidelines § 15162).
The questions posed in the checklist come from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. A “no” answer does not necessarily mean that there are no potential impacts relative to the environmental category, but that there is no change in the condition or status of the impact since it was analyzed and addressed with mitigation measures in the Final EIR. These environmental categories might be answered with a “no” in the checklist, since the proposed project does not introduce changes that would result in a modification to the conclusion of the previously approved CEQA document.
This Addendum addresses the conclusions of the previous EIR.
3.1 - Explanation of Checklist Evaluation Categories
(1) Conclusion in the Previous EIR and Related Documents This column summarizes the conclusion of the previous EIR relative to the environmental issue listed under each topic.
(2) Do the Proposed Changes Involve New Impacts?
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, subd. (a)(1), this column indicates whether the changes represented by the revised project will result in new significant environmental impacts not previously identified or mitigated by the previous EIR or whether the changes will result in a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact. (3) New Circumstances Involving New Impacts?
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, subd. (a)(2), this column indicates whether there have been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
(4) New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, subd. (a)(3)(A-D), this column indicates whether new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
24 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
If the additional analysis completed as part of this environmental review were to find that the conclusions of the previous EIR remain the same and no new significant impacts are identified, or identified impacts are not found to be substantially more severe, or additional mitigation is not necessary, then the question would be answered “no” and no additional environmental document would be required.
(5) Mitigation Measures Implemented to Address Impacts
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, subd. (a)(3), this column indicates whether the previous EIR provides mitigation measures to address effects in the related impact category.
Any previously adopted mitigation measures will be identified. The response will also address proposed revisions to previously adopted mitigation measures. These mitigation measures will be implemented with the construction of the project, as applicable. If “NA” is indicated, the Final EIR has concluded that the impact either does not occur with this project or is not significant, and therefore no additional mitigation measures are needed.
3.2 - Discussion and Mitigation Sections
The following sections include three components for each environmental checklist question:
discussion of each checklist question and any potential impacts to the environment, any mitigation measures required, and a conclusion of the analysis. Each component is further described below:
(1) Discussion
A discussion of the elements of the checklist is provided under each environmental category in order to clarify the answers. The discussion provides information about the particular
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 25
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
environmental issue, how the project relates to the issue, and the status of any mitigation that may be required or that has already been implemented.
(2) Mitigation Measures
Applicable mitigation measures from the previous EIR that apply to the proposed project are listed under each environmental category.
(3) Conclusions
A discussion of the conclusion relating to the analysis is contained in each section.
3.3 - Environmental Topics
The following topics are evaluated in accordance with current CEQA Guidelines and requirements:
• Aesthetics
• Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources and Tribal
Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Transportation
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Milpitas Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Update Project Addendum
FCS 27
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
I. Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial
adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Substantially
damage scenic
resources,
including, but not
limited to, trees,
rock outcroppings,
and historic building
within a State
Scenic Highway?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) In non-urbanized
areas, substantially
degrade the
existing visual
character or quality
of public views of
the site and its
surroundings?
(Public views are
those that are
experienced from
publicly accessible
vantage point). If
the project is in an
urbanized area,
would the project
conflict with
applicable zoning
and other
regulations
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
28 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
governing scenic
quality?
d) Create a new
source of
substantial light or
glare which would
adversely affect day
or nighttime views
in the area?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR indicated that there are no officially designated scenic vistas in the Planning Area.
Significant visual resources in the Planning Area include Mission Hills and Monument Peak; Mount Diablo, though outside the Planning Area, is considered a significant visual feature visible from the city limits.
The majority of areas within the City that are designated for urban land uses are already developed.
Additionally, the General Plan does not propose to convert any open space lands to urban uses.
However, implementation of the General Plan could lead to new and expanded urban development in the City, which could result in interference with views of visual features surrounding the City.
Development could also occur along highway corridors with high scenic values; however, the General Plan is developed to minimize interruption of views of nearby visual features by ensuring that new development is primarily an extension of the existing urban landscape.
The previous EIR concluded that the implementation of the policies and actions contained in the General Plan would ensure that new urban residential and nonresidential development in the City is located in and around existing urbanized areas and developed to be visually c ompatible with open space resources. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would result in a less than significant impact regarding scenic vistas.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 29
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
There are no officially designated scenic vistas within the General Plan Planning Area. Accordingly, there would be no impact to scenic vistas. The previous EIR does, however, identify significant visual resources and features. As described in Section 2, Project Description, buildout of the proposed project would result in the same intensity of development as that anticipated in the General Plan and would have a similar impact on the identified visual resources and features.
Furthermore, the proposed project does not include any specific development proposals at this time.
Future development and associated land use activities would be subject to the General Plan policies, as applicable, including provisions associated with the protection of visual resources and visual compatibility with open space resources. Future development would be required to undergo design review, through the site development permit process, to ensure consistency with the most up-to-date regulations.
The overall projected land uses, density, and intensity of development at full buildout of the City would remain the same as previously evaluated in the approved General Plan and previous EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts related to scenic vistas or significant visual resources or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building within a State Scenic Highway? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR indicated that no designated State Scenic Highway is located within the Planning Area, and no scenic highways provide views of the Planning Area. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts associated with General Plan implementation would be less than significant with respect to scenic resources.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
There are no officially designated State Scenic Highways within the General Plan Planning Area. A portion of I-680 in the northern portion of the City is listed as eligible for designation as a State Scenic Highway. However, there are no changes being proposed in the immediate vicinity of this portion of I- 680.
The proposed project does not include any physical development, specific development proposals or infrastructure plans. The overall projected land uses, density, and intensity of development at full buildout of the City would remain the same as previously evaluated in the approved General Plan and General Plan FEIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
30 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR found that the Planning Area is considered an urbanized area. Zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality in the City include the Design Guidelines and Plan Review Checklist, the City of Milpitas Master Streetscape Plan, and voter-approved Measures I, J, and K (summarized on page LU-2 of the General Plan Land Use Element). The previous EIR also noted that the policies and actions included in the General Plan are intended to complement and further the intent of these provisions regulating scenic quality and resources, and any development occurring under the General Plan would be subject to compliance with these guidelines, as well as applicable regulations set forth in the Municipal Code. The previous EIR concluded that, with compliance with applicable regulations, implementation of the General Plan would result in a less than significant impact related to consistency with regulations governing scenic quality.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
As described in Section 2, Project Description, buildout of the proposed project would result in the same intensity of development as that anticipated in the General Plan.
Additionally, the proposed project includes updates to the Zoning Ordinance regarding design standards for signage and newly constructed single-family residential units, as well as additional landscape standards, all of which would protect visual character in the City.
The proposed project does not include any physical development, specific development proposals or infrastructure plans. Future development associated with implementation of the proposed project would undergo discretionary review to ensure that such development matches the surrounding visual character and complies with the most up-to-date development standards in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The overall projected land uses, density, and intensity of development at full buildout of the City would remain the same as previously evaluated in the approved General Plan and previous EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR found that implementation of the General Plan would introduce new sources of daytime glare into previously developed areas and increase the amount of daytime glare in existing urbanized areas. Additionally, exterior lighting around commercial and industrial areas may be
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 31
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
present throughout the night, and nighttime lighting would be most severe in areas that do not currently experience high levels of nighttime lighting. The previous EIR also indicated that future development would be required to be consistent with the General Plan, as well as lighting and design requirements in the Municipal Code. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that, with the implementation of applicable General Plan policies and actions and the Municipal Code during the design review process, impacts related to daytime glare and nighttime lighting would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
As described in Section 2, Project Description, buildout of the proposed project would result in the same intensity of development as that anticipated in the General Plan. As such, the proposed project would likely introduce a similar amount of light and glare to the Planning Area.
The proposed project includes the addition of new lighting standards, which would reduce impacts related to light and glare. The proposed project does not include any physical development, specific development proposals or infrastructure plans. The overall projected land uses, density, and intensity of development at full buildout of the City would remain the same as previously evaluated in the approved General Plan and previous EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Aesthetics, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
32 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime
Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or
Farmland of
Statewide
Importance
(Farmland), as
shown on the maps
prepared pursuant
to the Farmland
Mapping and
Monitoring Program
of the California
Resources Agency,
to nonagricultural
use?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Conflict with
existing zoning for
agricultural use, or
a Williamson Act
Contract?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) Conflict with
existing zoning for,
or cause rezoning
No impact No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 33
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
of, forest land (as
defined in Public
Resources Code
Section 12220(g)),
timberland (as
defined by Public
Resources Code
Section 4526), or
timberland zoned
Timberland
Production (as
defined by
Government Code
Section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of
forest land or
conversion of forest
land to non-forest
use?
No impact No No No None
e) Involve other
changes in the
existing
environment which,
due to their location
or nature, could
result in conversion
of Farmland, to
nonagricultural use
or conversion of
forest land to non-
forest use?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
34 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Discussion
a-e) Conversion of Important Farmland to Nonagricultural Use, Conflict with Existing Zoning for Agricultural Use or Williamson Act Contracts, Conflict with Existing Forest Land Zoning, Conversion of Forest Land to Non-Forest Use, and Other Changes to Convert Farmland to Nonagricultural Use or Forest Land to Non-Forest Use
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR indicated that there are no parcels within the City that have a land use designation for agricultural use or forest land, contain agriculture or forestry uses, have a Williamson Act Contract, or are on lands identified by the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP).
The majority of the areas within the City are designated for urban land uses and are already developed. While there are three parcels throughout the Planning Area that are zoned for agricultural use, none of these parcels are in active agricultural production. Furthermore, parcels within the Zoning District Agricultural District (A) are not intended to be used exclusively for agricultural uses in perpetuity. Table 1: General Plan Designations and Implementing Zoning Districts in the General Plan Land Use Element notes that the A zoning district is consistent with all land use designations; therefore, a zoning change from A to any other zoning district can be made in general accord with the General Plan.
Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would result in a less than significant impact on Agricultural and Forestry Resources.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 35
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
There are currently no lands in the General Plan Planning Area currently being used for agriculture or forestry. While there are parcels with a land use designation of Agriculture (A) in the General Plan Planning Area, none of these parcels currently support agricultural uses. The proposed project also does not include changes to these zones to nonagricultural zones. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Agriculture and Forestry Resources, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
36 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
III. Air Quality
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or
obstruct
implementation of
the applicable air
quality plan?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable net
increase of any
criteria pollutant for
which the project
region is
nonattainment
under an applicable
federal or state
ambient air quality
standard?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
d) Result in other
emissions (such as
those leading to
odors or) adversely
affecting a
substantial number
of people?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 37
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Discussion
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the General Plan includes various policies and actions aimed at improving air quality by promoting compact urban development form, emphasizing infill development, and ensuring that land use patterns do not expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations.
The General Plan would also reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per service population at buildout using complete streets and multimodal transportation systems. The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would be consistent with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD) 2017 Clean Air Plan through policies reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, criteria pollutant emissions, odors, health risks, and other emissions. The General Plan would also be consistent with the goals of the BAAQMD by reducing emissions of criteria pollutants associated with VMT. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would update the Municipal Code, Zoning Map, and General Plan , to create conformity between the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed project would also expand performance standards, including those for air contaminants, to create consistency with the City’s CAP. As explained under Section 2.3, Project Characteristics, buildout of the proposed project would result in the same land use densities and intensities as was previously evaluated under the approved previous EIR. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with the proposed project would remain consistent with those identified in the previous EIR analyses, including the conclusions that the General Plan is consistent with the BAAQMD’s 2017 Clean Air Plan, and would have a less than significant impact as future individual development projects under the proposed project would be required to comply with policies and measures contained in the General Plan. At the time development proposals are submitted for application, they would be required to comply with the most up-to-date BAAQMD regulations and guidance, as well as the California Green Building Code (CALGreen), which provide additional policies and measures to reduce air quality impacts .
Accordingly, none of the legislative changes represent new information of substantial importance because they do not show that the proposed project would have significant effects not discussed in or more severe than shown in the previous EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Summary of the Previous EIR
Refer to summary provided in Impact III(a).
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
38 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
Consistent with the previous EIR, future individual development projects resulting from buildout of the proposed project would be evaluated under the policies and programs contained in the General Plan.
The overall buildout numbers from the proposed project would be the same as those contained in the General Plan, resulting in similar operational emissions. As such, the traffic volumes would continue to meet the BAAQMD screening criteria for CO concentrations. The proposed project would also expand performance standards, including those for air contaminants, to create consistency with the City’s CAP. The proposed project would also expand on existing performance standards, including those for air contaminants, to ensure consistency with the City’s CAP. Furthermore, the proposed project would expand TDM requirements and reduce required parking ratios. Parking on its own is not considered a physical impact on the environment under CEQA. Reduced parking could promote alternative methods of transit such as walking and biking, which could decrease the number of vehicles on the road and the secondary effects to traffic and air quality.3 Reducing parking minimums (and promoting shared parking, off-site parking, and car-share parking) allows for more compact and efficient urban layouts that prioritize pedestrians and alternative transit, creating more livable and attractive neighborhoods. Reduction in parking could also allow for increased alternative transit infrastructure, such as bike lanes, pedestrian-friendly streets, and public transit hubs. The expansion of TDM requirements would improve transportation efficiency and further support and incentivize a reduction in traffic by promoting alternative transit. Therefore, air quality impacts associated with the proposed project would be consistent with those identified in the previous EIR analyses and would have a less than significant impact, as future individual development projects under the proposed project would be required to comply with policies and measures contained in the General Plan.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR . No additional analysis is required.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would have the potential to introduce new sources of toxic air contaminant (TAC) and PM2.5 emissions within the City as well as siting new sensitive receptors in close proximity to existing sources of air pollutants. However, the previous EIR identified various policies and actions within the General Plan intended to minimize exposure of TACs to sensitive receptors within the City. For example, Policy CON 7-2 requires adequate buffer or setback distances between sensitive land uses and potential sources of toxic or harmful air emissions. Additionally, Policy CON 7-3 requires projects that generate high levels of pollutants to incorporate air quality mitigations into design, and Action CO-7c requires site-specific air quality Health Risk Assessments (HRAs) for developments that would place sensitive receptors within a specific distance from sources of TAC emissions. Furthermore, the previous EIR found that all new
3 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2010. Impacts of VMT Reduction Strategies on Selected Areas and Groups. December.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 39
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
sources of TAC emissions within the City would be required to obtain an Air Permit from BAAQMD, including the analysis of TAC or PM2.5 emissions generated and potential health impacts to the nearest sensitive receptor. Therefore, the previous EIR determined that the General Plan would minimize exposure to TACs and PM2.5 concentrations within the City. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
As discussed above, buildout of the proposed project would result in the same land use densities and intensities as those analyzed under the previous EIR. The proposed project would not propose any significant land use modifications that could result in a substantial increase in air pollutant emissions.
Furthermore, future individual development projects would be required to comply with applicable General Plan policies and measures described above, as well as applicable BAAQMD rules and regulations, designed to minimize the potential exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of TACs and PM2.5 within the City. The proposed project would also expand performance standards, including those for air contaminants, to create consistency with the City’s CAP. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors or) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that potential odor sources within the City are the Newby Island Landfill and Composting operation, the Santa Clara/San José Wastewater Facility, which is also known as the Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP), the Zanker Landfill and Composting Facility, and the Zanker Organic Digester Facility. The previous EIR found that the General Plan does not include land uses within the vicinity of these or any other potential sources of objectional odors. Future individual development projects with the potential to generate significant objectionable odors would be required to undergo CEQA review, as applicable, and the implementation of the General Plan policies would further minimize the potential for other emissions to adversely affect a substantial number of people.
Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to odors would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
Implementation of the proposed project would result in the same land use patterns as well as land use densities and intensities as those identified and analyzed under the previous EIR. Additionally, the proposed project includes expansion of performance standards for odors and air contaminants , in order to create consistency with the City’s CAP. Furthermore, the proposed project would not place sensitive land uses near odor sources beyond what was analyzed in the previous EIR . Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
40 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Air Quality, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 41
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
IV. Biological Resources
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial
adverse effect,
either directly or
through habitat
modifications, on
any species
identified as a
candidate,
sensitive, or
special-status
species in local or
regional plans,
policies, or
regulations, or by
the California
Department of Fish
and Wildlife or
United States Fish
and Wildlife
Service?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Have a substantial
adverse effect on
any riparian habitat
or other sensitive
natural community
identified in local or
regional plans,
policies, and
regulations or by
the California
Department of Fish
and Wildlife or
United States Fish
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
42 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial
adverse effect on
state or federally
protected wetlands
(including, but not
limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct
removal, filling,
hydrological
interruption, or
other means?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
d) Interfere
substantially with
the movement of
any native resident
or migratory fish or
wildlife species or
with established
native resident or
migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede
the use of wildlife
nursery sites?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
e) Conflict with any
local policies or
ordinances
protecting biological
resources, such as
a tree preservation
policy or
ordinance?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 43
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
f) Conflict with the
provisions of an
adopted habitat
conservation plan,
natural community
conservation plan,
or other approved
local, regional, or
state habitat
conservation plan?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR concluded that development associated with the implementation of the General Plan could result in the direct loss of habitat areas associated with special-status plant and animal species. Additionally, indirect impacts to special-status plant and animal species could occur, including habitat degradation, due to impacts to water quality, increased human presence, and loss of foraging habitat. However, special-status plant and animal species receive protection from various federal and state laws and regulations, including the Endangered Species Act and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). These regulations generally prohibit the removal of a species or direct impact to foraging and breeding habitats without a special permit. Additionally, the previous EIR indicated that the General Plan includes various policies and actions intended to reduce or avoid impacts to special-status plant and animal species, such as General Plan Policies CON 2-1, CON 2- 3, CON 3-1, CON 3-2, CON 3-4, CON 3-5, and CON 3-7, which require the conservation and/or replacement of trees, preservation of riparian corridors, and development of an urban forest along major corridors. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
44 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development and would result in the same land use patterns, densities, and intensities as those already evaluated in the previous EIR thereby precluding the potential for new impacts associated with biological resources beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Future development and land use activities resulting from the proposed project would be subject to federal and state regulations, including the Endangered Species Act and CESA, as well as General Plan goals, policies, and actions that would reduce impacts related to special-status plant and animal species.
Future development projects would also be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other regulations, as applicable. Applicable policies may include, but are not limited to, General Plan Policies CON 2-1, CON 2-3, CON 3-1, CON 3-2, CON 3-4, CON 3-5, and CON 3-7, which require the conservation and/or replacement of trees, preservation of riparian corridors, and development of an urban forest along major corridors. The General Plan also includes Action CON-2a, 2b, 2f, 3a through 3c, 3f, 3g, 3j, and 3l, which involve coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Santa Clara County, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and local water district groups; and require compliance with the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR . No additional analysis is required.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or United States Fish and Wildlife Service? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR concluded that development associated with the implementation of the General Plan could change the physical environment, thereby adversely affecting riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities. A California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) search revealed three sensitive natural communities within the 12-quad region of the Planning Area, including the aquatic communities of the Northern Coastal Salt Marsh and the Sycamore Alluvial Woodland, as well as the terrestrial community of Serpentine Bunchgrass grassland. Additionally, the previous EIR identified numerous aquatic habitats that qualify as sensitive habitat within the City. Therefore, implementation of individual projects would require site-specific review of the project site to determine the presence or absence of riparian habitat or natural sensitive communities. If riparian habitat or natural sensitive communities are present and disturbance is required, federal and state laws require measures to reduce, avoid, or compensate for impacts to these resources. Furthermore, development projects would be required to comply with the General Plan’s policies intended to protect sensitive natural communities, such as General Plan Policies CON-3.1 through CON-3.6, which require the preservation and enhancement of biological communities and riparian habitat and limit the disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems in the City. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 45
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development and would result in the same land use patterns, densities, and intensities as those already evaluated in the previous EIR, thereby precluding the potential for new impacts associated with sensitive natural communities and riparian habitat beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Future development and land use activities resulting from the proposed project would be subject to federal and s tate regulations, as well as General Plan goals, policies, and actions detailed above, which would require site-specific review of future project sites to determine whether riparian habitat or natural sensitive communities are present and mitigate as necessary.
Future development projects would also be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other regulations, as applicable. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the City contains numerous aquatic habitats that qualify as federally protected wetlands and jurisdictional waters found in the northwest corner of the Planning Area. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires any project that involves disturbance to a wetland or water of the United States to obtain a permit that authorizes the disturbance. If a project cannot avoid a wetland or jurisdictional water, then the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) requires that an equal amount of wetland be created elsewhere to mitigate loss of wetlands.
The previous EIR determined that construction activities could result in the disturbance or loss of protected waters of the United States, but individual projects would be required to have a detailed review of the project site to determine the presence or absence of water features and to reduce, avoid, or compensate for impacts to these resources. Furthermore, projects would be required to comply with the General Plan’s policies and actions intended to protect wetlands and jurisdictional water features, such as General Plan Policies CON-3.1 through CON-3.6, which require the preservation and enhancement of biological communities and riparian habitat and limit the disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems in the City. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development and would result in the same land use patterns, densities, and intensities as those already evaluated in the previous EIR, thereby precluding the potential for new impacts associated with federally protected wetlands beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Future development and land use activities resulting from the proposed project would be subject to federal and state regulations, including CWA
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
46 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
and USACE requirements, as well as General Plan goals, policies, and actions intended to protect wetlands and jurisdictional water features, described above.
Future development projects would also be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and other regulations, as applicable. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with wildlife corridors.
The previous EIR found that the City contains numerous aquatic habitats that may be used for movement of wildlife, but the areas of land next to waterways within the city limits were generally designated for urban uses by the previous Land Use Map and were generally devel oped with urban uses. Therefore, the creeks at the time did not function as important movement corridors for native wildlife.
The updated General Plan Land Use Map that was adopted as part of the implementation of the most recent General Plan designates the majority of land adjacent to existing waterways as existing waterways as Public Open Space (POS) to allow the area to be used by wildlife as movement corridors.
Discretionary projects associated with the implementation of the General Plan would be required to undergo a detailed review to determine the presence or absence of movement corridors on the project site and to reduce, avoid, or compensate for impacts to these resources. Furthermore, the General Plan contains policies and actions intended to protect movement corridors, including Policies CON-3.1 through CON-3.6 and Actions CON-3a through 3c, CON-3e, CON-3f, CON-3h, CON 3j, and CON-3l. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development and would result in the same land use patterns, densities, and intensities as those already evaluated in the previous EIR. Additionally, the proposed project does not propose to convert any open space lands to urban uses. This would preclude the potential for new impacts on wildlife movement corridors beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Future development and land use activities resulting from the proposed project would be subject to federal and state regulations, including CWA and USACE requirements, as well as General Plan goals, policies, and actions, described above, which require individual projects to determine the presence or absence of movement corridors and to mitigate impacts as necessary.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 47
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Furthermore, future development projects would also be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other regulations, as applicable. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR concluded that since the General Plan is a policy-level document, it would not conflict with local policies or ordinances. Further, individual development projects associated with the implementation of the General Plan would be required to comply with the General Plan and with the Municipal Code. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development and would result in the same land use patterns, densities, and intensities as those already evaluated in the previous EIR, thereby precluding the potential for new impacts on the City’s local policies protecting biological resources beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Future development projects would be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other regulations, as applicable. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR found that implementation of the General Plan would not conflict with the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan or any other Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs). The City is not currently a permittee of the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan, and the land within the city limits is not within the Habitat Plan Study Area and Permit Area. Additionally, the previous EIR determined that the Land Use Map did not re-designate any land designated for open space or habitat protection. Although the City is not a permittee of the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan, future projects associated with the implementation of the General Plan would be required to comply with the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan through the implementation of General Plan Action CON-3a, which states “Require new development, as well as infrastructure projects, long-range planning projects, and other projects, to comply with the requirements of the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan to ensure that potentially significant impacts to special-status species and sensitive resources are adequately addressed.” Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
48 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development and would result in the same land use patterns, densities, and intensities as those already evaluated in the previous EIR, thereby precluding the potential for new impacts on HCPs or Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCPs) beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Future development and land use activities resulting from the proposed project would be required to comply with the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan through the implementation of Action CON-3a in the General Plan.
Furthermore, future development projects would also be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan, Municipal Code, and other regulations, as applicable.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR . No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Biological Resources, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 49
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
V. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial
adverse change in
the significance of a
historical resource
as pursuant to
Section 15064.5?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Cause a substantial
adverse change in
the significance of
an archaeological
resource pursuant
to Section 15064.5?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) Disturb any human
remains, including
those interred
outside of formal
cemeteries?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is:
d) Listed or eligible for
listing in the
California Register
of Historical
Resources, or in a
local register of
historical resources
as defined in Public
Resources Code
Section 5020.1(k),
or
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
50 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
e) A resource
determined by the
lead agency, in its
discretion and
supported by
substantial
evidence, to be
significant pursuant
to criteria set forth
in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources
Code Section
5024.1. In applying
the criteria set forth
in subdivision (c) of
Public Resource
Code Section
5024.1, the lead
agency shall
consider the
significance of the
resource to a
California Native
American Tribe.
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
Cultural Resources
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the General Plan Planning Area includes various known historic resource sites and would have the potential for undiscovered prehistoric sites to be located in the Planning Area as well. Thirty-three cultural resources have been identified within the Planning Area
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 51
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
and 25 buildings are identified on the Santa Clara County Historic Property Data File Directory. The previous EIR further determined that future development associated with the implementation of the General Plan could affect known historical or unknown historical and archaeological resources which have not yet been identified.
Future projects would be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other applicable state and local regulations, as well as analyzed for potential environmental impacts, consistent with CEQA. Additionally, the previous EIR includes policies and actions that would reduce impacts to cultural, historic, and archaeological resources, such as requiring archaeological monitoring, halting ground-disturbing activities and construction in the event that a resource is discovered, and Tribal consultation. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to historic and archaeological resources would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not include any ground disturbance and therefore would not directly result in impacts related to historic resources. Future individual development projects would be required to comply with General Plan policies and actions, such as Policy CON 4-1, which requires a record search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) at Sonoma State University. Furthermore, Policy CON 5-2 requires that future individual development projects evaluate the condition of historical buildings when considering the demolition of historic structures, and Action CON 4a requires a cultural survey prior to approval of any project in areas that are known to be sensitive for cultural or archaeological resources. If historic resources are identified, Action CON 4b requires that all development, infrastructure, and other ground-disturbing projects comply with certain conditions and processes in the event that there is an inadvertent discovery of historic resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Summary of the Previous EIR
Refer to the summary provided in Impact V(a).
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not include any ground disturbance and therefore would not directly result in impacts related to historic resources. Future individual development projects would be required to comply with General Plan policies and actions, such as Policy CON 4-1, which requires a record search of the CHRIS at the NWIC at Sonoma State University. Action CON 4a requires a cultural survey prior to approval of any project in areas that are sensitive for cultural or archaeological resources. If archaeological resources are identified, Action CON 4b requires that all development, infrastructure, and other ground-disturbing projects comply with certain conditions and processes in the event that there is an inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources. Therefore,
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
52 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the General Plan. No additional analysis is required.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that excavation and construction activities allowed under the General Plan may yield human remains that may not be marked in former burials. Future projects may disturb or destroy buried Native American human remains. However, the previous EIR further identified that future development projects in the City would be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and state and local regulations, as well as analyzed for potential environmental impacts, consistent with CEQA. Public Resources Code Section 5097 requires construction activities to stop work and follow specific notification procedures in the event that human remains are inadvertently discovered during development activities. The General Plan also requires that human remains are treated in compliance with the provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to human remains would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not include any ground disturbance and therefore would not result in impacts related to historic resources. Future individual development projects would be required to comply with General Plan policies and actions, such as Policy CON 4-1, which requires a record search of the CHRIS at the NWIC at Sonoma State University. Policy CON 4-2 requires that if human remains are found during construction, they are treated in compliance with the provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
Policy CON 4-3 requires collaboration with Native American Tribal representatives to identify and appropriately address impacts to Native American cultural resources and sacred sites during the development review process. Action CON 4a requires a cultural survey prior to approval of any project in areas that are known to be sensitive for cultural or archaeological resources. If archaeological resources are identified, Action CON 4b requires all development, infrastructure, and other ground-disturbing projects to comply with certain conditions and processes in the event that there is an inadvertent discovery of human remains. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is:
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 53
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
d) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or
e) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR identified that no responses to Tribal consultation conducted under Senate Bill (SB) 18 were received and no specific resources were identified through consultation with affiliated Tribes.
However, the previous EIR determined that it is possible unknown cultural resources may be present and could be adversely affected by the implementation of the General Plan. Future projects would be required to be evaluated for project-specific impacts under CEQA at the time of project application, and the General Plan and CEQA Guidelines require Tribal consultation and the protection of any identified archaeological and Tribal resources. With the implementation of General Plan policies and actions, such as General Plan Action CON 4a and 4b, local review guidelines, and state and local guidelines, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not include any ground disturbance and therefore would not directly result in impacts related to TCRs. Future individual development projects would be required to comply with General Plan policies and actions, such as Policy CON 4-1, which requires a record search of the CHRIS at the NWIC at Sonoma State University. Policy CON 4-2 requires that if TCRs are found during construction, they are treated in compliance with the provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Policy CON 4- 3 requires collaboration with Native American Tribal representatives to identify and appropriately address, impacts to Native American cultural resources and sacred sites during the development review process. Policy CON 4-4 requires compliance with SB 18 and AB 52 related to Tribal intergovernmental consultation. Action CON 4a requires a cultural survey prior to approval of any project in areas that are known to be sensitive for TCRs. If archaeological resources are identified, Action CON 4b requires that all development, infrastructure, and other ground-disturbing activities comply with certain conditions and processes in the event that there is an inadvertent discovery of TCRs. Because the proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment, the City sent out a letter to X tribes requesting consultation pursuant to SB 18 on May 2, 2025 via email and on May 4, 2025 via certified mail. The Muwekma Ohlone Tribe responded on May 21, 2025, but did not request consultation. The Tamien Nation responded via email on June 2, 2025 requesting consultation. On June 5, 2025, the City reached out to the Tamien Nation to schedule consultation. No response has been received to date (Appendix A). Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
54 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 55
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
VI. Energy
Would the project:
a) Result in potentially
significant
environmental
impact due to
wasteful, inefficient,
or unnecessary
consumption of
energy resources,
during project
construction or
operation?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Conflict with or
obstruct a state or
local plan for
renewable energy
or energy
efficiency?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would not cause an inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary use of energy resources or conflict with or obstruct a s tate or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Buildout of the General Plan would use energy resources for the operation of buildings, on-road vehicle trips, and off-road construction activities.
However, the previous EIR determined that future individual development projects would conserve
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
56 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
energy to the maximum extent feasible and would reduce per capita energy consumption to achieve this goal, since the General Plan requires that all implementing projects comply with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations regulating energy usage. Furthermore, the previous EIR would comply with the state’s latest Title 24 building energy efficiency standards and other Statewide measures intended to improve energy efficiency. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to energy would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
As discussed in Section 2.3.1, Project Summary, implementation of the proposed project would result in the same land use patterns, densities and intensities as those analyzed by the previous EIR.
Therefore, the effects of the proposed project were anticipated in the previous EIR and there are no project-specific effects that were not analyzed in the previous EIR. All projects within the City would be required to comply with applicable regulations stated above to ensure efficient energy use. The proposed project also includes an update to the Zoning Ordinance that provides streamlined review for projects that exceed the City’s building code energy efficiency requirements. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Energy, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 57
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
VII. Geology, Seismicity, and Soils
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a
known
earthquake
fault, as
delineated on
the most recent
Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake
Fault Zoning
Map issued by
the State
Geologist for the
area or based
on other
substantial
evidence of a
known fault?
Refer to Division
of Mines and
Geology Special
Publication 42.
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
ii) Strong seismic
ground shaking?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
iii) Seismic-related
ground failure,
including
liquefaction?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
58 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
iv) Landslides? Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Result in
substantial soil
erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) Be located on a
geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or
that would become
unstable as a result
of the project, and
potentially result in
on- or off-site
landslide, lateral
spreading,
subsidence,
liquefaction or
collapse?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
d) Be located on
expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-
1-B of the Uniform
Building Code
(1994), creating
substantial direct or
indirect risks to life
or property?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
e) Have soils
incapable of
adequately
supporting the use
of septic tanks or
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 59
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
alternative
wastewater
disposal systems
where sewers are
not available for the
disposal of
wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly
destroy a unique
paleontological
resource or site or
unique geologic
feature?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
60 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Discussion
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides?
a) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? b) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
c) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that development associated with the implementation of the General Plan would have the potential to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, related to surface rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, ground instability/failure, or expansive soils.
The Planning Area includes known active faults, and the Hayward Fault Zone traverses the Planning Area. Unstable geologic units could be present within the Planning Area, including those at risk for liquefaction, landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse, and the majority of the land within the Planning Area has moderately to very highly expansive soils, while the eastern and western portions of the Planning Area have low expansive soils. The areas with moderately to highly expansive soils would require special design considerations due to shrink -swell potentials.
Furthermore, the previous EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan has the potential to result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Construction-related erosion could result in the loss of a substantial amount of nonrenewable topsoil and adversely affect water quality in surface waters. However, the previous EIR identified that, because the majority of the land within the city limits contains urban uses, the erosion potential is low.
The previous EIR found that all future projects would be required to comply with the provisions of the California Building Standards Code (CBC), which require geotechnical studies, engineering improvements to address potential seismic and ground failure issues, and earthq uake-resistant
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 61
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
construction techniques. Future individual development projects would be evaluated for conformance with the CBC, General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and other regulations. Further, the General Plan requires review of development proposals to ensure compliance with the California Health and Safety Code, applicable building standards related to seismic safety, and CEQA. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development, which precludes the potential for new impacts associated with seismic hazards, erosion, sedimentation, unstable geologic units, and expansive soils beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Construction- related soil erosion could occur during future discretionary projects associated with the implementation of the proposed project. However, most development that could occur as a result of the proposed project would take place on lands that already contain urban uses, which have a low erosion potential.
Furthermore, future development and land use activities resulting from the proposed project would be subject to General Plan goals, policies, and actions that would reduce impacts related to development occurring in a fault zone, ground shaking, ground failure, and landslides. Future development projects would be evaluated for conformance with the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC), General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and other regulations described above, as applicable. Future projects would be required to develop and implement a site-specific geotechnical study in compliance with the state and City codes. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would not have the potential for soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Construction within the city limits would not require the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems because wastewater would be discharged into the existing public sanitary sewer system in the Planning Area. Additionally, the previous EIR identified that adequate system capacity is ensured through implementation and periodic auditing of the Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) and sewer-related capital improvement project (CIP) projects and studies.
Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
Existing urban development within the General Plan Planning Area is currently served with sanitary sewer service provided by the City. New urban development that would occur within the Planning Area as a result of the proposed project would be served by sanitary sewer service. No new septic
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
62 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
systems or alternative wastewater systems are contemplated by the proposed project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that there could be fossils of potential scientific significance and other unique geologic features that remain undiscovered and are not recorded. Ground -disturbing construction associated with the implementation of the General Plan could potentially uncover previously unknown resources. However, the previous EIR found that implementation of the General Plan policies and actions would ensure steps would be taken to minimize impacts to paleontological resources if they are discovered during construction. This includes Action CON 4b, which requires that all work within 100 feet of a paleontological discovery cease until it can be evaluated by a Paleontologist. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would largely maintain the existing land use patterns throughout the General Plan Planning Area, thereby precluding the potential for new, unaddressed impacts on paleontological resources beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Future individual development projects would be required to adhere to all federal, state, and local policies regarding paleontological resources, including Action CON 4b. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Geology, Seismicity, and Soils, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 63
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
64 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the project:
a) Generate
greenhouse gas
emissions, either
directly or indirectly,
that may have a
significant impact
on the
environment?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Conflict with any
applicable plan,
policy or regulation
adopted for the
purpose of reducing
the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would contribute to increases of GHG emissions that are associated with global climate change, including increases of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O).
Short-term Emissions
Short-term GHG emissions would occur because of construction equipment used for demolition, grading, paving, and building construction activities. The previous EIR identified that construction- related GHG emissions would be assessed on a project-by-project basis and would be required to
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 65
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
comply with the state’s requirements for GHG emissions, as required by the City’s CAP and the BAAQMD. For example, Milpitas CAP Measure 12.2 encourages projects to comply with BAAQMD performance-based Best Management Practices (BMPs) that reduce GHG emissions during construction. Further, General Plan Policy CON 7-4 requires projects to adhere to the requirements of the BAAQMD, and Policy CON 7-5 requires the City to use the development review process and the CEQA process to evaluate and mitigate effects of new development on air quality.
Long-term Emissions
The previous EIR determined that future individual development projects would result in continuous GHG emissions from mobile, area, and operational sources. However, the implementation of the General Plan would reduce VMT per capita and per service population at buildout, thereby decreasing GHG emissions in the long run. Additionally, the previous EIR acknowledges that the City’s CAP is a Qualified GHG Reduction Plan per CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5, which identifies reduction measures and implementation strategies to achieve the s tate-recommended GHG emissions reduction targets. The previous EIR identifies several General Plan policies that directly support and implement the goals established by the CAP. Because future individual development projects would be required to comply with the General Plan and adopted federal, s tate, and local regulations, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to the generation of GHG emissions would be less than significant.
Conflict with Applicable Plans and Policies
The previous EIR determined that the General Plan is consistent with the City’s adopted CAP, which satisfies the GHG reduction requirements established by AB 32. In addition, the previous EIR found that the General Plan would not conflict with the implementation of regional transportation- related GHG targets outlined in the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Plan Bay Area because of the land use modifications contained in the General Plan and the corresponding reduction in VMT.
The General Plan would also not conflict with any provisions of the California Air Resources Board’s (ARB’s) 2022 Scoping Plan or other applicable regulations related to GHG reductions because the General Plan expands transit access, increases mobility options, promotes a compact pedestrian- oriented urban development pattern, and focuses new development on infill sit es with higher densities. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
As described in the project summary under Section 2.3.1, Zoning Ordinance Updates, the proposed project would result in the same land use densities and intensities as those identified and analyzed in the previous EIR. Since certification of the previous EIR, there have been several legislative updates related to air quality. Notably, the Ninth Circuit questioned the validity of reach codes in California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley (9th Cir. 2023) — F.4th — (No. 21-16278). However, future individual development projects would need to comply with the latest CBC and its electrification
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
66 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
requirements that function to provide similar benefits as found in the City’s Reach Code.4 Future individual development projects under the proposed project would comply with applicable policies and measures contained in the General Plan and the City’s adopted CAP. The proposed project would also expand on existing performance standards, including those for GHG emissions, to ensure consistency with the City’s CAP. Furthermore, the proposed project would expand TDM requirements and reduce required parking ratios. Parking on its own is not considered a physical impact on the environment under CEQA. Reduced parking could promote alternative methods of transit, such as walking and biking, which could decrease the number of vehicles on the road and the secondary effects to traffic and air quality.5 Reducing parking minimums (and promoting shared parking, off-site parking, and car-share parking) allows for more compact and efficient urban layouts that prioritize pedestrians and alternative transit, creating more livable and attractive neighborhoods. Reductions in parking could also encourage the use of alternative transit infrastructure such as bike lanes, pedestrian-friendly streets, and public transit hubs. The expansion of TDM requirements would improve transportation efficiency and further support and incentivize a reduction in traffic by promoting alternative transit. T, the effects of the proposed project were anticipated in the previous EIR and there are no project-specific effects that were not analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR . No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to GHG Emissions, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4 A "reach code" is a local ordinance that surpasses the state's minimum requirements for energy and green building standards.
5 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2010. Impacts of VMT Reduction Strategies on Selected Areas and Groups. December.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 67
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
68 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project:
a) Create a significant
hazard to the public
or the environment
through the routine
transport, use, or
disposal of
hazardous
materials?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Create a significant
hazard to the public
or the environment
through reasonably
foreseeable upset
and accident
conditions involving
the release of
hazardous
materials into the
environment?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) Emit hazardous
emissions or handle
hazardous or
acutely hazardous
materials,
substances, or
waste within one-
quarter mile of an
existing or
proposed school?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
d) Be located on a site
which is included
on a list of
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 69
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
hazardous
materials sites
compiled pursuant
to Government
Code Section
65962.5 and, as a
result, would it
create a significant
hazard to the public
or the environment?
e) For a project
located within an
airport land use
plan or, where such
a plan has not been
adopted, within two
miles of a public
airport or public use
airport, would the
project result in a
safety hazard or
excessive noise for
people residing or
working in the
project area?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
f) Impair
implementation of
or physically
interfere with an
adopted emergency
response plan or
emergency
evacuation plan?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
70 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
g) Expose people or
structures, either
directly or indirectly
to a significant risk
of loss, injury or
death involving
wildland fires?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan has the potential to create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Future development projects allowed under the General Plan may involve the transportation, use, and/or disposal of hazardous materials for construction and operation. Therefore, the previous EIR found that there is a potential for accidental release of hazardous materials. The use, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials is regulated and monitored by local fire departments, Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPAs), the California Occupational Health and Safety Administration (Cal/OSHA), and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), consistent with the requirements of federal, state, and local regulations and policies. These requirements would limit the potential for a project to expose nearby uses, such as schools, to hazardous emissions or an accidental release. In the event of a hazardous materials spill or release, notification and cleanup operations would be performed in compliance with applicable regulations.
Facilities that store hazardous materials are also required to maintain a Hazardous Materials Business Plan per General Plan Safety Element Policy SA-5.3. Per General Plan Action SA-5a, applications for future discretionary projects must provide detailed information regarding the potential
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 71
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
for the historical use of hazardous materials on-site as well as mitigation measures if warranted.
Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project includes the same land uses and intensity of development as those contemplated in the previous EIR. The proposed project includes expansions to performance standards, including those for hazardous materials, to create consistency with the City’s CAP. The project does not propose specific development. Future development and land use activities within the Planning Area, including development within 0.25 mile of a school, would be subject to all applicable federal, state, and local policies for the transport, use and disposal of hazardous materials as described above, including General Plan Action SA-5a. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more s evere impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that there are no hazardous materials release sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 within the Planning Area. The previous EIR identified 65 locations with a Milpitas address listed in the EnviroStor database. Of these sites, two are active, eight require no further action, four are certified, two are closed, two are protective filers, 37 are inactive and need evaluation, two are inactive and withdrawn, and eight are referred to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), SB 1248 local agency, or other agency. The previous EIR further identified 95 Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) locations within the City listed in the GeoTracker database. Of these sites, 93 have undergone LUST cleanup and have been closed by the state, one is open for site assessment, and one is an open verification monitoring case. These sites are subject to various federal and state laws such as Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), and oversight by various regulatory agencies, including the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), DTSC, and RWQCB. The previous EIR concluded that future development projects would comply with applicable federal and s tate regulations, reducing impacts to less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The project does not propose any physical development. As described above, there are no hazardous materials release sites within the General Plan Planning Area. While there are LUST sites and sites identified by EnviroStor in the General Plan Planning Area, these sites would be evaluated and restored subject to federal and state laws and regulatory agencies, including the CERCLA, the EPA, DTSC, and the RWQCB, in the case that any specific development was proposed at these sites. The proposed project includes expansions to performance standards, including those for hazardous materials, to create consistency with the City’s CAP. Therefore, implementation of the proposed
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
72 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that there are no airport facilities within the Planning Area and the nearest airport facility is the San José International Airport, located approximately two miles south of the Milpitas border. The Airport Influence Area (AIA) extends south along State Route (SR) 87 to just south of Interstate 280 (I-280), approximately 3 miles northeast of the City. The National Transportation Safety Board Aviation Accident Database identifies a total of eight aircraft accidents at the San José International Airport, and these incidents were small-scale and did not occur within Milpitas city limits. Furthermore, the previous EIR identified that the City is not located within one of the Airport Safety Zones for the San José International Airport. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The project does not propose any development in areas not previously contemplated by the previous EIR. As described in the previous EIR, the closest airport to the General Plan Planning Area is the San José International Airport, located approximately two miles south of the City. Further, the City is not located within one of the Airport Safety Zones identified by the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the San José International Airport. Therefore, development and land use activities contemplated by the proposed project would not expose persons residing or working in the General Plan Planning Area to aviation safety hazards. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would not remove or impede any established evacuation routes within the City and that the General Plan does not include land uses, policies, or other components that conflict with adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. However, the City could receive a development proposal that could potentially interfere with an established emergency evacuation route or plan. The Santa Clara County Operation Area and the Santa Clara County Emergency Management Organization provide mutual aid to communities via the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office, Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD), and the State of California Office of Emergency Services. The City of Milpitas Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) also addresses the integration and coordination within other governmental agencies required during an
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 73
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
emergency. The previous EIR found that coordination with these agencies required by the General Plan would ensure the City’s emergency access routes, emergency contact lists, and public information regarding designated facilities and routes are regularly reviewed and updated. Theref ore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development within the General Plan Planning Area. Therefore, the proposed project would not directly interfere with emergency response or evacuation. The proposed project includes shifts in zoning districts along established vehicular corridors but does not propose any increase in overall development associated with the buildout of the General Plan. Roadways would continue to accommodate project-related traffic, and individual projects would be required to make improvements where needed to ensure adequate capacity for emergency response. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the City and its vicinity are not categorized as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) and that Local Responsibility Areas (LRA) are concentrated in the incorporated areas of the City and served by the Milpitas Fire Department. The previous EIR identified policies and actions in the General Plan which require adequate water supply and water flow availability, adequate emergency access, adequate fire protection services, fire safe design site standards, and public awareness regarding fire safety. Future individual development projects associated with the implementation of the General Plan would be required to comply with the provisions of federal, s tate, and local requirements related to wildland fire hazards. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not approve or propose any physical development within the General Plan Planning Area. Furthermore, the proposed project would have the same land use patterns, densities and intensities as those analyzed by the previous EIR. As such, future individual development projects resulting from the proposed project would not expose additional people to wildland fire hazards. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
74 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Conclusion
With regard to Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 75
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
X. Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:
a) Violate any water
quality standards or
waste discharge
requirements or
otherwise
substantially
degrade surface or
groundwater
quality?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Substantially
decrease
groundwater
supplies or interfere
substantially with
groundwater
recharge such that
the project may
impede sustainable
groundwater
management of the
basin?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) Substantially alter
the existing
drainage pattern of
the site or area,
including through
the alteration of the
course of a stream
or river or through
the addition of
impervious
surfaces, in a
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
76 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
manner which
would:
(i) result in
substantial
erosion or
siltation on- or
off-site;
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
(ii) substantially
increase the
rate or amount
of surface runoff
in a manner
which would
result in flooding
on- or off-site;
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
(iii) create or
contribute runoff
water which
would exceed
the capacity of
existing or
planned
stormwater
drainage
systems or
provide
substantial
additional
sources of
polluted runoff;
or
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
(iv) impede or
redirect flood
flows?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 77
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
d) In flood hazard,
tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release
of pollutants due to
project inundation?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
e) Conflict with or
obstruct
implementation of a
water quality control
plan or sustainable
groundwater
management plan?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Summary of the Previous EIR
Construction
The previous EIR determined that grading, excavation, removal of vegetation cover, and loading activities associated with construction of future individual development projects could temporarily increase runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. Construction activities could also result in soil compaction and wind erosion impacts with the potential to adversely affect soil and reduce revegetation potential at construction sites. A future development project would require an approved Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) if it disturbs more than one acre of land to ensure BMPs are implemented during project construction. Further, the previous EIR identifies that specific projects larger than one acre in size are required to obtain National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
78 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
System (NPDES) coverage under the California General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities from the RWQCB. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
New Development
The previous EIR determined that development associated with the implementation of the General Plan could introduce constituents into the stormwater system associated with urban runoff and could increase impervious surfaces that could reduce rainwater infiltration and groundwater recharge.
However, the majority of development imagined by the General Plan is within areas currently developed with urban uses, and the amount and type of runoff would be similar to the existing conditions. Additionally, the previous EIR identified that the implementation of the General Plan would not appreciably add to the volume of impervious surfaces in the City or the Santa Clara Plain Recharge Area and that there are adequate water supplies. Furthermore, the previous EIR identified that each future development project is required to prepare a detailed project-specific drainage plan, Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), and a SWPPP to control stormwater runoff and erosion.
Future projects would also require a Dewatering permit, NPDES permit, and Waste Discharge permit from the RWQCB and compliance with all stormwater sewer system (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System [MS4]) requirements.
Furthermore, the previous EIR identified various policies and actions in the General Plan which would reduce water pollution, enhance storm drainage, and reduce the potential for water quality impacts.
Applicable policies include, but not are limited to, General Plan Policies SA 2-2, SA 2-3, UCS 1-1 through UCS 1-3, and UCS 4-1 through UCS 4-15. These policies involve coordination with agencies and landowners to plan, construct, and maintain stormwater management facilities, demonstration of stormwater runoff detention, retention, and/or conveyance for project sites, requiring all future projects to analyze infrastructure and service impacts and mitigate as necessary, as well as incorporate BMPs and Low Impact Development (LID) measures. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant with implementation of all applicable federal, state, and local policies and regulations.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development. It would result in the same land use patterns, densities and intensities as those analyzed by the previous EIR; therefore, impacts related to polluted runoff are not anticipated beyond those analyzed in the previous EIR. Furthermore, future development and land use activities within the City’s jurisdiction would be subject to General Plan policies detailed above, as applicable, including provisions associated with the protection of water quality and runoff. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 79
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan could alter the Planning Area’s storm drainage system, primarily in areas that are currently undeveloped or underutilized.
Construction activities are regulated by the NPDES General Construction Stormwater Permit, which requires the preparation of a SWPPP to control the discharge of pollutants. Additionally, the previous EIR found that the City must implement post-construction stormwater management in new development and redevelopment projects. Furthermore, the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Prevention Program (SCVURPP) implements pollution prevention, source control, and monitoring and outreach programs aimed at reducing pollutants in stormwater runoff and protecting water quality. The previous EIR also identifies several policies and actions within the General Plan which seek to reduce impacts associated with stormwater and drainage, such as Policies SA 2-2, SA 2-3, UCS 1-1 through UCS 1-3, and UCS 4-1 through UCS 4-14. Future projects would also be required to obtain permits from USACE and the CDFW if any work is performed within a waterway, and future development projects must include project-specific floodplain and drainage studies, as necessary. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant with implementation of General Plan policies and Actions, the Municipal Code, federal and state regulations, and regulations for the SCVURPP.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development and would result in the same land use patterns, densities and intensities as those analyzed by the previous EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any changes to existing drainage patterns, nor would it result in stream alteration that could result in erosion or siltation in the City beyond those analyzed in the previous EIR. Furthermore, future development and land use activities within the City’s jurisdiction would be subject to General Plan policies, as applicable, including provisions associated with the protection of water quality and runoff, such as General Plan Policies SA 2-3, UCS 1-2, UCS 4-2, UCS 4-5, and UCS 4-14, detailed above. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
80 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Summary of the Previous EIR
Flood
The previous EIR determined that the Planning Area is subject to flooding along natural creeks, drainages, and lakes. Milpitas contains areas within the 1 percent annual chance flood hazard zone, the 0.2 percent annual chance flood hazard zone, and areas of undetermined flood hazard. Portions of the City may also be at risk of inundation from upstream dam failure. According to the previous EIR, the City is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which provides property owners and renters with flood insurance, reduces flood damage through a mandatory local floodplain management ordinance, and identifies and maps flood hazards. The NFIP requires the City to maintain a floodplain management ordinance based upon current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), which the City is consistent with through the implementation of Floodplain Management Regulations (Municipal Code Title XI, Chapter 15).
Further, the previous EIR determined that future projects would require an approved SWPPP designed to control stormwater quality degradation, and the City regulates stormwater discharge in accordance with the NPDES programs and WQMP stormwater requirements. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant with implementation of the General Plan and compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations.
Tsunami and Seiches
The previous EIR determined that there are no tsunami inundation areas or tsunami inundation lines within the Planning Area. However, there are multiple dam inundation areas that could impact the Planning Area. Therefore, the Santa Clara Valley Water District’s Dam Safety Program operates a comprehensive Dam Safety Program for the public. The Dam Safety Program includes periodic special engineering studies, a surveillance and monitoring program, routine inspections, maintenance activities, and emergency response and preparedness plans. This program ensures the continued operation of the 10 major dams within the County, ensuring that Milpitas is not at significant risk from dam failure. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development. This precludes the potential for new impacts associated with 100-year flood hazards, levees, dam failure, tsunami, seiche, or mudflow. Future individual development projects would be evaluated for inundation risks pursuant to General Plan Policies SA 2-3 through SA 2-10, which describe flood control measures and requirements for new developments to reduce flooding risks. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 81
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Hydrology and Water Quality, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
82 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XI. Land Use and Planning
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an
established
community?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Cause a significant
environmental
impact due to a
conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted
for the purpose of
avoiding or
mitigating an
environmental
effect?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Physically divide an established community?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would not physically divide an established community. The land uses allowed under the General Plan provide opportunities for new growth at infill locations within existing urbanized areas of the City and would not create physical division within the community. The previous EIR found that development projects would be designed to complement the character of the existing community and provide connectivity between the existing development and new development. Furthermore, according to the previous EIR, the General Plan would not include any new areas designated for urbanization or new roadways, infrastructure, or features that would divide existing communities. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 83
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would result in the same land use patterns as those evaluated in the previous EIR. Furthermore, the proposed project would not alter existing roadways. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR found that the General Plan was prepared in conformance with state laws and regulations, and therefore would not conflict with continued application of state land use plans, policies, and regulations. Additionally, the General Plan focuses on a balanced land use pattern that promotes the City as a desirable place to live and work. The General Plan enhances policies and measures from the previous General Plan that were intended for environmental protection, and the implementation of the General Plan would not remove or conflict with City plans, policies, or regulations adopted for environmental protection. Furthermore, future development projects would be required to be consistent with all applicable policies, standards, and regulations. Ther efore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project contains updates to the City’s Municipal Code, General Plan, and Zoning Ordinance with the purpose of establishing consistency between the General Plan and Municipal Code. These updates would result in the same land uses, density, and intensity of development as what was evaluated in the previous EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Land Use and Planning, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
84 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 85
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XII. Mineral Resources
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of
availability of a
known mineral
resource that would
be of value to the
region and the
residents of the
state?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Result in the loss of
availability of a
locally important
mineral resource
recovery site
delineated on a
local general plan,
specific plan or
other land use
plan?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. The Planning Area contains four areas identified by the State Geologist as containing Regionally Significant Construction Aggregate Resources, located outside city limits. These areas are part of the South San Francisco Bay Production-Consumption Region, contain sandstone deposits, and are currently being quarried. Additionally, the previous EIR
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
86 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
determined that the Planning Area does not contain sites designated as a locally important mineral resource recovery site by the General Plan. The Santa Clara County General Plan identifies important mineral resources within the County, including the hillside areas within the City’s SOI.
However, the previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would not result in the loss of a locally important mineral resource recovery site, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the previous EIR identified that there would be no loss of known or locally important mineral resources as a result of the implementation of the General Plan, and impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any changes within the General Plan Planning Area that could potentially result in development in areas not previously contemplated by the previous EIR . This precludes the potential for new impacts associated with mineral resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce environmental impacts or create more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Mineral Resources, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 87
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XIII. Noise
Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a
substantial
temporary or
permanent increase
in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity
of the project in
excess of standards
established in the
local general plan
or noise ordinance,
or applicable
standards of other
agencies?
Significant
and
unavoidable
impact (traffic
noise)
Less than
significant
impact
(railroad
noise)
Less than
significant
impact
(stationary
noise
sources)
Less than
significant
impact
(construction
noise
sources)
No No No None
b) Generation of
excessive
groundborne
vibration or
groundborne noise
levels?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) For a project
located within the
vicinity of a private
airstrip or an airport
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
88 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
land use plan or,
where such a plan
has not been
adopted, within two
miles of a public
airport or public use
airport, would the
project expose
people residing or
working in the
project area to
excessive noise
levels?
Discussion
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Summary of the Previous EIR
Traffic Noise
The previous EIR indicated that the General Plan may contribute to an exceedance of the City’s transportation noise standards and/or result in significant increases in traffic noise levels at existing sensitive receptors, such as residences, schools, or libraries. While the General Plan included several policies and actions to reduce noise and land use compatibility impacts from traffic noise sources, the previous EIR concluded that traffic noise would still exceed applicable noise exposure criteria even with implementation of General Plan requirements. Impacts related to traffic noise on existing noise- sensitive uses in the City were therefore determined to be significant and unavoidable.
Railroad Noise Sources
The previous EIR indicated that although future development located along railroad lines could expose residents to unacceptable exterior noise levels, implementation of General Plan policies and actions related to noise mitigation would ensure that development allowed under the General Plan would not expose residents to noise levels associated with railroad operations in excess of the City’s
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 89
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
established standards. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that implementation of applicable General Plan policies and actions would ensure that development allowed under the General Plan would not be exposed to noise levels associated with railroad operations in excess of the City’s established standards, and impacts would be less than significant.
Stationary Noise Sources
The previous EIR indicated that future development could result in land uses that generate noise levels in excess of applicable City noise standards for non-transportation noise sources. However, implementation of General Plan policies and actions would ensure that develo pment allowed under the General Plan would reduce noise impacts from stationary noise sources, and impacts would be less than significant.
Construction Noise Sources
The previous EIR indicated that future development could result in an increase of construction noise sources that could result in periods of significant ambient noise level increases and the potential for annoyance. The previous EIR noted that due to the temporary nature of construction noise, noise increase from construction activities would not lead to ongoing or long term exceedances of the City’s noise standards. In addition, the ambient noise standards established by the General Plan do not apply to temporary noise sources such as construction activity. The previous EIR concluded that implementation of General Plan policies and actions would reduce noise impacts from construction noise to a less than significant level.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development in areas not previously evaluated in the previous EIR. As described in Section 2, Project Description, buildout of the proposed project would result in the same intensity of development as that evaluated in the previous EIR, and would expand performance standards for noise to reduce potential impacts of development through the application of uniformly applied standards. Therefore, the proposed project does not anticipate any additional construction noise impacts beyond those analyzed in the previous EIR. Furthermore, future development and land use activities resulting from the proposed project would be subject to General Plan goals, policies and actions that would reduce noise and land use compatibility impacts from traffic noise sources, stationary sources, railroad-related sources, and construction sources, which would help reduce potential future noise impacts from the proposed project. Similar to the conclusions of the previous EIR, potential impacts related to traffic noise would continue to be significant and unavoidable for the proposed project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
90 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Summary of the Previous EIR
Construction
The previous EIR indicated that construction associated with development under the General Plan could create perceptible vibration levels and potential damage to existing structures, resulting in a potentially significant impact. However, the previous EIR concluded that, given the temporary nature of construction, and upon compliance with applicable General Plan policies and actions, impacts from construction vibration would be less than significant.
Operation
The previous EIR indicated that development could expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration levels caused by trains; given the programmatic nature of the General Plan, the locations of buildings and their sensitivity to vibration were not known at the time previous EIR was certified. The previous EIR concluded that compliance with applicable General Plan policies and actions would require that individual development projects undergo project-specific environmental review and address potential vibration impacts associated with railroad operations. Therefore, the previous EIR determined that impacts related to groundborne vibration during operation would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development in areas not previously contemplated by the General Plan. As described in Section 2, Project Description, buildout of the proposed project would result in the same intensity of development as that anticipated in the previous EIR, and would expand performance standards for noise to reduce potential impacts of development through the application of uniformly applied standards. Therefore, the proposed project does not anticipate any additional construction vibration impacts beyond those analyzed in the previous EIR . In compliance with General Plan policies and actions, buildout of the proposed project would be required to undergo project-specific environmental review and address potential vibration impacts associated with railroad operations. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Summary of the Previous EIR
Impacts related to airports are discussed in Section 3.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the previous EIR. The previous EIR concluded that Milpitas is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public airport. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to aircraft noise.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 91
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The area associated with the proposed project is the same as the General Plan Planning Area. As such, the proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport, and the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the General Plan Planning Area to excessive aircraft noise. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Noise, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
92 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XIV. Population and Housing
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial
unplanned
population growth
in an area, either
directly (for
example, by
proposing new
homes and
businesses) or
indirectly (for
example, through
extension of roads
or other
infrastructure)?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Displace substantial
numbers of existing
people or housing,
necessitating the
construction of
replacement
housing elsewhere?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would not induce substantial unplanned growth in the City, either directly or indirectly. The General Plan accommodates future growth in the City, including new businesses, expansion of existing business, and new
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 93
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
residential uses. The previous EIR also identified that as future development occurs, new roads, infrastructure, and services would be required to serve the development, and that this infrastructure would accommodate the planned growth. There are few areas within the City designated for ur ban land uses that are not already developed as described in the previous EIR, and new growth is focused on infill sites throughout the City with higher density uses focused around major transportation corridors. Therefore, with implementation of the General Plan policies and actions intended to guide growth to appropriate areas and provide services necessary to accommodate growth, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would update the Municipal Code, Zoning Map, and General Plan . These updates would be clerical and administrative in nature and are intended to create consistency between the General Plan and the Zoning Code. The proposed project also includes the same land uses and intensity of development as those evaluated in the previous EIR. Therefore, the proposed project does not anticipate any changes to direct and indirect population growth impacts in the City beyond those analyzed in the previous EIR, and implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis required. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing. The previous EIR found that the majority of developed land in the Planning Area consists of residential uses, which would not undergo significant land use changes under the General Plan. Furthermore, the General Plan focuses on infill development in vacant and underutilized areas of the City, and the General Plan would generally increase the overall number of dwelling units within the City. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would update the City’s Municipal Code, Zoning Map, and General Plan to ensure conformity with current General Plan land use designations. The proposed project does not propose any physical development and would not lower the number of housing units allowed within the City. The land use patterns that would result from the proposed project would be the same as those envisioned and evaluated in the previous EIR. As such, there are no areas designated for residential development that would be rezoned for nonresidential uses. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR . No additional analysis is required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
94 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Population and Housing, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 95
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XV. Public Services
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Police protection? Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) Schools? Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
d) Parks? Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
e) Other public
facilities?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
96 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other public facilities?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would result in additional residents and businesses in the City, which would result in increased demand for public services, including fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities, such as libraries.
However, the previous EIR identified various policies and actions within the General Plan which would ensure that public services are provided at acceptable levels and that the City would maintain and implement public facility master plans to ensure compliance with applicable federal, s tate, and regional laws related to public services. While new public facilities would likely be required to serve growth contemplated by the General Plan, future development projects would be required to comply with regulations, policies, and standards in the General Plan and would be subject to CEQA review as appropriate. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development, land use, or policy changes within the General Plan Planning Area that could result in direct or indirect population growth not previously contemplated by the previous EIR. Additionally, the proposed project would maintain the same land use patterns as were envisioned and evaluated in the previous EIR and, as such, would result in the same intensity and density of development. This precludes the potential for new impacts associated with new or expanded public services beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Furthermore, future development projects would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, regional, and local laws and regulations related to public services, including payment of impact fees that support the provision of increased public services. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 97
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Conclusion
With regard to Public Services, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
98 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XVI. Recreation
a) Would the project
increase the use of
existing
neighborhood and
regional parks or
other recreational
facilities such that
substantial physical
deterioration of the
facility would occur
or be accelerated?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Does the project
include recreational
facilities or require
the construction or
expansion of
recreational
facilities, which
might have an
adverse physical
effect on the
environment?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 99
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Discussion
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would increase the demand for parks and recreation facilities due to an increase in population, employment, and tourism in the City. The additional demand on existing parks and recreational facilities would increase the need for maintenance and improvements. The previous EIR found that the provision of new parks and recreation facilities would reduce the potential for adverse impacts and physical deterioration of existing parks and facilities. New facilities would be provided at a pace and in locations appropriate to serve new development in order to maintain the City-adopted standard for park space of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. New neighborhood and community parks and trails would generally be accommodated in the Permanent Open Space and Public Facilities land use designations to accommodate new parks and trails, in accordance with General Plan Policy PROS 1-4. The previous EIR concluded that future projects would be analyzed for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other applicable regulations, including evaluation pursuant to CEQA.
Additionally, the General Plan includes policies and actions to ensure that parks and recreation facilities are adequately maintained and improved to serve both existing and planned growth.
Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not propose any physical development, land use, or policy changes within the General Plan Planning Area that could result in direct or indirect population growth not previously contemplated by the previous EIR. Additionally, the proposed project would maintain existing land use patterns as evaluated in the previous EIR. This precludes the potential for new impacts associated with new or expanded parks and recreational facilities beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Furthermore, future development projects would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, regional, and local laws and regulations related to parks and recreational facilities, including the policies and actions of the General Plan.
Applicable policies include, but are not limited to, General Plan Policies PROS 1-1 through 1-16, which establish standards for parkland acreage within the Planning Area, require dedication of parkland within future development or payment of in lieu fees, and provide various requirements for expansion, design, and maintenance of park facilities. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
100 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Recreation, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 101
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XVII. Transportation
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a
program plan,
ordinance or policy
of the circulation
system, including
transit, roadway,
bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Would the project
conflict or be
inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
Significant
and
unavoidable
impact
No No No None
available
c) Substantially
increase hazards
due to a geometric
design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or
dangerous
intersections) or
incompatible uses
(e.g., farm
equipment)?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
d) Result in
inadequate
emergency access?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
102 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Discussion
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy of the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the policies included in the General Plan would support and further the implementation of a variety of City transportation plans, including the Bikeway Master Plan and the Trails Master Plan. The previous EIR also identified that the context of the City’s transportation network would be considered through policies that support interjurisdictional coordination and linking the development of transportation facilities to the surrounding land uses. Furthermore, th e VTA has provided Level of Service (LOS) thresholds for intersections and roadways since the 1990s, including for intersections and roadways within the Planning Area, but LOS is no longer considered an environmental impact under CEQA. As such, the General Plan’s policies focus on the development of a multimodal transportation network and the enhancement of facilities to improve walking, bicycling, and transit use. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy associated with the circulation system would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would result in the same intensity and density of development within the General Plan Planning Area, as well as result in the same land use patterns as those evaluated in the previous EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected to alter transportation patterns and uses or conflict with any programs, plans, policies, or ordinances associated with the circulation system. Future development projects would be required to comply with all applicable standards, policies, and regulations described above. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to residential VMT and significant and unavoidable impacts related to employment-based VMT. The previous EIR identified that residential uses in the City were projected to generate an average of 11.03 VMT per capita, which is below the applied significance threshold of
11.48 VMT per capita. However, the previous EIR further identified that the projected VMT per employee (20.41) for the City was nearly 31 percent higher than the applied significance threshold (14.14 VMT per employee). The General Plan’s land use patterns, intensities, and policies include several components that aim to reduce VMT, and individual development projects would also be required to complete VMT analyses and implement TDM measures as applicable. Although these measures would likely reduce VMT impacts to less than significant when considered at an individual project-level, the previous EIR determined that they cannot be guaranteed and are not possible to
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 103
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
fully quantify or mitigate at the programmatic level. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to VMT would be significant and unavoidable.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would result in the same land use patterns, densities, and intensities as those evaluated in the previous EIR. As such, it is unlikely that the proposed project would result in additional impacts related to VMT. Future development projects would be required to comply with all applicable standards, policies, and regulations described above. To create consistency with the City’s CAP, the proposed project would update the Zoning Ordinance by adding TDM requirements. The proposed project would also expand TDM requirements and reduce required parking ratios. Parking on its own is not considered a physical impact on the environment under CEQA. however, reduced parking could promote alternative methods of transit, such as walking and biking, which could decrease the number of vehicles on the road and the secondary effects to traffic. 6 Reducing parking minimums (and promoting shared parking, off-site parking, and car-share parking) allows for more compact and efficient urban layouts that prioritize pedestrians and alternative transit, creating more livable and attractive neighborhoods. Reduction in parking could also allow for increased alternative transit infrastructure, such as bike lanes, pedestrian-friendly streets, and public transit hubs. The expansion of TDM requirements would improve transportation efficiency and further support and incentivize a reduction in traffic by promoting alternative transit. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the General Plan would not directly result in any modification to the transportation network and would have no impact related to increasing hazards related to design features. Furthermore, future facilities associated with the implementation of the General Plan would be required to meet applicable federal, state, and City design standards. General Plan Policy CIR 2-2 requires that intersections are designed to safely and comfortably accommodate all transportation modes and users. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to hazards due to geometric design features would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project includes updates to the Municipal Code, Zoning Map, and General Plan that would not result in any physical development, which precludes the potential for new impacts associated with roadway safety. Future development projects, including streets, circulation improvements, and access points associated with the implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with the applicable federal, state, and City design standards, such as General
6 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2010. Impacts of VMT Reduction Strategies on Selected Areas and Groups. December.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
104 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Plan Policy CIR 2-2, described above. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would result in modifications to the existing transportation network, which could impact emergency access response time. However, future development associated with the General Plan would be required to comply with the City’s Design and Construction Standards, which include requirements for emergency access, and would be reviewed by public safety officials as part of the entitlement process.
Additionally, the previous EIR found that emergency vehicles are able to use vehicle preemption technology and sirens to reduce response times, and specific locations that would experience a reduction in roadway capacity would undergo individual operations analyses to assess and mitigate potential impacts to emergency vehicle access. General Plan Policies CIR 1-1, 1-7, 1-11, and 1-13 further focus on considering safety needs as part of planning and implementing transportation improvements. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to emergency vehicle access would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would result in the same intensity, density, and land use patterns as those evaluated in the previous EIR, which precludes the potential for new impacts associated with emergency access. Furthermore, any future development projects associated with the implementation of the proposed project would be required to comply with the applicable City and County design standards. For example, General Plan Policies CIR 1-1, 1-7, 1-11, and 1-13 require prioritization of infrastructure and facility safety on streets, coordination with neighboring jurisdictions regarding planned developments and transportation improvements, maintenance of acceptable operations for major streets and intersections, and maintenance of updated emergency preparedness and evacuation plans and procedures. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Transportation, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 105
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
106 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XVIII. Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project:
a) Require or result in
the relocation or
construction of new
or expanded water,
wastewater
treatment or
stormwater
drainage, electric
power, natural gas,
or
telecommunications
facilities, the
construction or
relocation of which
could cause
significant
environmental
effects?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Have sufficient
water supplies
available to serve
the project and
reasonably
foreseeable future
development during
normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) Result in a
determination by
the wastewater
treatment provider
which serves or
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 107
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
may serve the
project that it has
adequate capacity
to serve the
project’s projected
demand in addition
to the provider’s
existing
commitments?
d) Generate solid
waste in excess of
state or local
standards, or in
excess of the
capacity of local
infrastructure, or
otherwise impair
the attainment of
solid waste
reduction goals?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
e) Comply with
federal, state, and
local management
and reduction
statutes and
regulations related
to solid waste?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
108 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Discussion
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Summary of the Previous EIR
Water
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would increase demand for water supplies, including water conveyance and treatment infrastructure, but that the projected 2040 water supplies would be adequate to meet the demand that would be generated by buildout of the General Plan. Therefore, the General Plan would not result in the need to construct or expand water supply and treatment facilities that have not been addressed in the Santa Clara Valley Water District’s water master plans. Future discretionary projects would be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other applicable regulations, including the requirements of CEQA.
Further, the previous EIR identifies several policies to ensure that water providers are consulted with during future land use changes to ensure that future supply meets demands. Future development would also be required to connect to existing water distribution infrastructure, pay the applicable water system connection fees, and pay the applicable water usage rates. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Wastewater
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would increase demand for wastewater services. The previous EIR found that there is excess treatment capacity at the Regional Wastewater Facility (RWF), and no physical plant expansions would be required as a result of the General Plan. Further, future development projects would be evaluated for conformance with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other applicable regulations, including the requirements of CEQA.
The previous EIR also identified policies within the General Plan that are designed to ensure adequate wastewater treatment capacity is available to serve development. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Stormwater Drainage
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan may result in increased areas of impervious surfaces throughout the Planning Area, requiring additional or expanded stormwater drainage, conveyance, and retention infrastructure. Future development would be required to evaluate stormwater drainage and conveyance facilities at the project level, and facilities would primarily be provided on sites with land use designations that allow such uses. Furthermore, General Plan Action UCS-4e requires compliance with the SCVURPP and the C.3 Stormwater Handbook, which includes post-construction stormwater controls on development projects. The previous EIR also identifies several policies and actions designed to ensure adequate drainage infrastructure is available to serve development, minimize potential adverse effects of stormwater
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 109
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
conveyance, and ensure that development does not move forward until adequate drainage capacity exists. All development projects would be required to demonstrate how stormwater detention and/or retention would occur on-site or be conveyed to the nearest drainage facility. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to stormwater drainage would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The purpose of the proposed project is to establish consistency between the General Plan and Zoning Code; therefore, the proposed project would result in the same density and intensity of development as well as the same land use patterns as those evaluated in the previous EIR.
Accordingly, the proposed project would not result in direct or indirect population growth not previously contemplated by the previous EIR and would not result in the need for construction or relocation of any utilities infrastructure. Additionally, the proposed project would not increase demand for water supplies or wastewater due to an increase in population and employment. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR . No additional analysis is required.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would result in increased demand for additional water supplies due to an increase in population and employment in the Planning Area, although the previous EIR also found that the City would have adequate water supply to serve the General Plan’s land uses with an available water supply of 17.5 million gallons per day (mgd) compared to the 13.7 mgd water demands at buildout according to the 2020 Water Master Plan Update (WMPU). Additionally, the General Plan includes various policies designed to ensure an adequate water supply for development and minimize the potential adverse effects of increased water use, such as General Plan Policies UCS 2-1 through UCS 2-8 and Actions UCS-2a through -2k, which require that the water system adequately meets the needs of existing and future development, that additional water supply sources are pursued, that new development pays its fair share of funding for water distribution, and that the use of recycled water is encouraged. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to adequate water supplies would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
Refer to Impact XVIII(a).
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
110 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the implementation of the General Plan would not exceed the projected wastewater generation volumes described in the City’s 2014 SSMP and the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The previous EIR found that there would be an increased demand for water and wastewater services, including a reliable source of recycled water; however, these needs have been addressed in the water and sewer master plans prepared for the City by West Yost Engineers and HydroScience Engineers, Inc., and the San José-Santa Clara RWF Master Plan.
Projected future water demand will require that the districts continue to implement phased improvements to pump stations, sewer mains, and wastewater treatment plans. Furthermore, the previous EIR identified various General Plan policies designed to ensure an adequate wastewater treatment capacity for development. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to adequate wastewater treatment capacity would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
Refer to Impact XVIII(a).
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would result in an increase of approximately 32,886.5 tons of solid waste per year. The City’s projected increase in solid waste generation associated with the implementation of the General Plan is well within the permitted capacity of the Newby Island Landfill, which serves Milpitas. The previous EIR also identified that future projects would be required to comply with applicable state and local requirements pertaining to solid waste, construction waste diversion, and recycling. Further, the General Plan includes actions to further reduce impacts on solid waste services. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that impacts related to solid waste would be less than significant.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would not result in direct or indirect population growth not previously contemplated by the previous EIR and would not result in any physical development. This precludes the potential for new impacts associated with solid waste capacity beyond those already evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Future individual development projects would be required to comply with General Plan policies as well as AB 939 (which mandated that 50 percent of solid waste
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 111
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
be diverted by 2000) and the City’s UWMP. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required
Conclusion
With regard to Utilities and Service Systems, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
112 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XIX. Wildfire
If located in or near State Responsibility Areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair
an adopted
emergency
response plan or
emergency
evacuation plan?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Due to slope,
prevailing winds,
and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby
expose project
occupants to,
pollutant
concentrations from
a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread
of a wildfire?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
c) Require the
installation or
maintenance of
associated
infrastructure (such
as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency
water sources,
power lines or other
utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk
or that may result in
temporary or
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 113
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
ongoing impacts to
the environment?
d) Expose people or
structures to
significant risks,
including
downslope or
downstream
flooding or
landslides, as a
result of runoff,
post-fire slope
instability, or
drainage changes?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR indicated that implementation of the General Plan does not include any site-specific designs or proposals that would have potential to impair an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan. In addition, the General Plan does not include land uses, policies, or other components that conflict with adopted emergency response or evacuation plans which would be provided by the City of Milpitas as a member of the Santa Clara County Emergency Management Organization. The City maintains adequate staffing and access for emergency services, and all new development contemplated under the General Plan would be subject to all City regulations, reviews, and requirements related to emergency services, as well as CEQA analysis of project-specific impacts. The previous EIR concluded that implementation of the policies and actions contained in the General Plan would ensure resiliency and functionality in the event of a natural disaster. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would result in a less than significant impact regarding impairment of adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
114 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not include any specific development proposals. Future development and associated land use activities would be subject to General Plan policies, as applicable, including provisions associated with fire safety. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts related to wildfires to create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The General Plan found that the City of Milpitas does not contain any areas determined to have either a High or Very High fire threat to people within city limits. While the General Plan does not include any site-specific design or proposals or entitlements with the potential to expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire, all future development contemplated under the General Plan is required to comply with all applicable federal, s tate, and local policies and regulations related to wildland fire safety hazards, such as General Plan Policies SA 4-1, 4-8 through 4-11, and 6-7, which require ensuring adequate water supplies are available for fire suppression throughout the City, providing adequate funding for fire facilities and personnel, and maintaining a response time of 4 minutes or less for urban service areas. The previous EIR concluded that nothing in the General Plan will substantially alter the slope, prevailing winds, or other factors that would increase exposure of Milpitas residents to wildfires. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would result in a less than significant impact regarding the exposure of project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not include any specific development proposals. Future development and associated land use activities would be subject to the General Plan policies, as applicable, including provisions associated with fire safety.
Applicable policies include, but are not limited to, General Plan Policies SA 4-1, 4-8 through 4-11, and 6-7, detailed above. General Plan Actions SA-4b, SA-4c, and SA-6g further require development applications to be reviewed by the Public Works Department and Fire Department and to incorporate a climate vulnerability assessment and strategies to safeguard human health and community assets into relevant plans, such as the Emergency Preparedness Plan, Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, and CAP. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts related to wildfires to create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 115
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR found that proposed construction projects contemplated under the General Plan would be located in areas that are already urbanized and served by infrastructure. However, all development would be required to comply with applicable provisions from the Calif ornia Fire Code (CFC), the California Code of Regulations, and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
The General Plan also includes requirements for adequate water supply and flow availability and access for fire suppression.
The previous EIR concluded that implementation of the policies and actions included in the General Plan and described above would ensure that wildland fire hazards would not be exacerbated by local infrastructure. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would result in a less than significant impact regarding installation or maintenance of infrastructure and wildfire risk.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not include any specific development proposals. Future development and associated land use activities would be subject to the General Plan policies described above, as applicable, including provisions related to infrastructure and fire risk. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts related to infrastructure- related fire risk to create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR.
No additional analysis is required.
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR found that a large portion of central Milpitas and areas along Coyote Creek are located within a mapped portion of 1 percent annual chance flood hazard and 0.2 percent annual chance flood hazard zones, according to the FEMA Flood Hazard Map Viewer. The General Plan Planning Area has not been impacted by fires. However, wildfire areas within the City’s SOI are located in the hillside areas outside of city limits. The topography in the urban areas of the Planning Area is generally flat and would not be at risk due to debris flows. However, as stated above, all future development under the General Plan will be evaluated for conformance to the CBC as well as the Zoning Ordinance and other City policies, and will be required to prepare a project -specific SWPPP by the RWQCB.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
116 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
The previous EIR concluded that proposed future development contemplated under the General Plan would not be subject to debris flows, as the topography of the urban portions of the General Plan Planning Area are generally flat, and portions of the Planning Area adjacent to hillside areas subject to landslides and debris flows are sparsely developed. Therefore, the General Plan would result in a less than significant impact regarding the exposure of people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage change.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not include any specific development proposals. Future development and associated land use activities would be subject to the General Plan policies as applicable, including provisions associated with fire safety and flood hazard protection, such as General Plan Policies SA 2-1 through 2-11, which include various provisions related to flood hazards and flood control facilities.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts related to risks from downslope or downstream flooding resulting from runoff or post -fire slope instability or create substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR .
No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Wildfire, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 117
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
XX. Mandatory Findings of Significance
a) Does the project
have the potential
to substantially
degrade the quality
of the environment,
substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species,
cause a fish or
wildlife population
to drop below self-
sustaining levels,
threaten to
eliminate a plant or
animal community,
substantially reduce
the number or
restrict the range of
a rare or
endangered plant
or animal, or
eliminate important
examples of the
major periods of
California history or
prehistory?
Less than
significant
impact
No No No None
b) Does the project
have impacts that
are individually
limited, but
cumulatively
considerable?
(“Cumulatively
considerable”
Significant
and
unavoidable
impact
No No No None
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
118 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion
in Previous
EIR
Do the
Proposed
Changes
Involve New or
More Severe
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
or More Severe
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
means that the
incremental effects
of a project are
considerable when
viewed in
connection with the
effects of past
projects, the effects
of other current
projects, and the
effects of probable
future projects)?
c) Does the project
have environmental
effects, which will
cause substantial
adverse effects on
human beings,
either directly or
indirectly?
Significant
and
unavoidable
impact
No No No None
Discussion
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the General Plan would have less than significant impacts related to biological resources, cultural resources, and TCRs. Future individual development projects would be required to comply with the policies and actions of the General Plan, which would require site- specific review of project sites to determine whether movement corridors, sensitive habitat, special -
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
FCS 119
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
status species, and potential cultural resources and TCRs are present. If any of these are determined to be present, future projects would be required to mitigate and reduce impacts to the greatest extent feasible. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that the General Plan would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment, reduce special-status species habitats, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would result in the same intensity and density of development, as well as the same land use patterns, as those envisioned and evaluated in the previous EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would have similar environmental effects related to biological resources, cultural resources, and TCRs as evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR . No additional analysis is required.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR found that the General Plan would result in a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact related to noise because traffic noise increases would exceed the applicable noise exposure criteria. The General Plan would also result in a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact on the transportation network because it is unlikely that the 31 percent VMT reduction needed to reach the applied significance threshold would be obtained, since VMT reductions cannot be guaranteed and could not be fully quantified or mitigated at a citywide level in the programmatic General Plan. Therefore, the previous EIR concluded that the implementation of the General Plan would have cumulatively considerable impacts related to noise and transportation.
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project does not approve any specific development and would result in the same intensity and density of development, as well as the same land use patterns, as those envisioned and evaluated in the previous EIR, because the proposed project would ensure consistency between the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. Accordingly, the proposed project would have similar environmental effects related to noise, air quality, transportation, and GHG emissions, as evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CITY OF MILPITAS COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PROJECT
ADDENDUM
120 FCS
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Summary of the Previous EIR
The previous EIR determined that the General Plan would result in a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact related to traffic noise, which could have adverse effects on human beings. Refer to summary provided in Impact XX(b).
Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusions
The proposed project would result in the same intensity and density of development, as well as the same land use patterns, as envisioned and evaluated in the previous EIR because the proposed project would ensure consistency between the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. Accordingly, the proposed project would have similar environmental effects related to noise, air quality, and GHG emissions, as evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not introduce new significant environmental impacts or create substantially more severe environmental impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
Conclusion
With regard to Mandatory Findings of Significance, the analysis demonstrates that:
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
2. No substantial changes are proposed with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
3. No new information of substantial importance indicates any new or more significant effects than shown in the previous EIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant.
5. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
City of Milpitas Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Update Project Addendum
FCS 121
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/5807/58070001/Phase 2 Addendum/58070001 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Project.docx
Appendix A:
Tribal Cultural Resources Supporting
Information
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Caution: This is an external email and may contain suspicious subject or content. Pleasetake care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, please contact yourIT DepartmentFrom:Holly PearsonTo:Maddie DolanSubject:FW: Senate Bill 18 Consultation General Plan Admendment, Milpitas CaliforniaDate:Wednesday, June 4, 2025 10:02:28 AMAttachments:May_19,_Doc_3.pdfFrom: Richard Massiatt <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 7:01 PMTo: Holly Pearson <[email protected]>; Marni McManus <[email protected]>; AlanLeventhal <[email protected]>; Charlene Nijmeh <[email protected]>Subject: Senate Bill 18 Consultation General Plan Admendment, Milpitas CaliforniaHello Holly Pearson, Thank you for reaching out to Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, Inc., we are interested in yourproject and would like to have further discussions in assisting you with our services. Weoffer Tribal Consultations as defined under Section 106, CEQA, Assembly Bill (AB) 52,Senate Bill (SB) 18 Consultation, and California Public Resources Code § 21080.3.1.Should your agency and/or project developers choose to work with our Tribe formonitoring and, if necessary, burial recovery services after reviewing documents ourSenior Tribal Archeologist and Ethnohistorian Alan Leventhal will have furtherdiscussions with you. At your request we can email you our services and ourMuwekma Rate sheet for yourreview. Any other future concerns please contact us.Please update new mailing address 1169 S. Main St. Ste. 336 Manteca CA. 95337Get Outlook for iOS
May 2, 2025
Via E-mail with Certified Mail to Follow
Quirina Luna Geary, Chairperson
Tamien Nation
PO Box 8053
San Jose, CA 95155
RE: Senate Bill 18 Consultation for Proposed General Plan Amendment, Milpitas, California.
Dear Ms. Geary:
On behalf of the City of Milpitas, we are providing you with notice of a proposed minor amendment to the Milpitas 2040 General Plan that will be considered in conjunction with the forthcoming comprehensive update to the City’s Zoning Ordinance. This notice is provided in accordance with California Government Code § 65352.3. Below please find a description of the proposed General Plan amendment and the name of the project point of contact.
• Amend Table 1: General Plan Designations and Implementing Zoning Districts in the Land Use Element to
(1) remove R5 as an implementing zone for the Very High Density Mixed Use (VHDMU) designation, since the R5 zone will be replaced with other zones through the zoning ordinance update and will be eliminated from the code; and (2) change the implementing zone for the Mobile Home Park (MHP) land use designation to MHP – Mobile Home Park Zone, since the existing Mobile Home Park Combining District Overlay will be replaced with a new Mobile Home Park (MHP) base zone as part of the zoning ordinance update.
This text amendment would apply to the entire General Plan planning area (City of Milpitas boundaries and Sphere of Influence) – see enclosed map. For your reference, the Milpitas 2040 General Plan can be viewed online: https://www.milpitas.gov/370/Milpitas-2040-General-Plan
The purpose of Tribal Consultation is to determine whether or not Tribal Cultural Resource(s) are present within the areas affected by the proposed General Plan Amendment, and, if so, whether or not those resources will be significantly impacted. If Tribal Cultural Resources may be significantly impacted, then consultation will help to determine the most appropriate way to avoid or mitigate those impacts.
No grading or other ground-disturbing activities are proposed as part of these amendments.
The City respects and values your input. In accordance with Government Code § 65352.3, you have 90 days from the receipt of this letter to either request or decline consultation in writing for this project. If you do not believe there would be an impact to protected cultural resources from these
2 limited General Plan changes, we would appreciate you affirmatively informing us of this as soon as possible.
Please send your written response to the City of Milpitas, Planning Department, 455 East Calaveras Blvd., Milpitas, California 95035, Attn: Holly Pearson, or by email to [email protected].
We look forward to receiving your response.
Sincerely,
Holly Pearson, AICP
Senior Special Projects Associate
Caution: This is an external email and may contain suspicious subject or content. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, please contact your IT Department
From: Maddie Dolan
To: Alex Ortiz
Subject: Fwd: Senate Bill 18 Consultation for Proposed General Plan Amendment, Milpitas, CA Date: Thursday, June 5, 2025 12:49:34 PM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Holly Pearson <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2025 9:48:39 PM
To: Maddie Dolan <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: Senate Bill 18 Consultation for Proposed General Plan Amendment, Milpitas, CA
From: Holly Pearson <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2025 1:20 PM
To: Tracie Carrasco <[email protected]>
Cc: Quirina Geary <[email protected]>; Lillian Camarena <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Senate Bill 18 Consultation for Proposed General Plan Amendment, Milpitas, CA
RE: TN-20250520-01 (City of Milpitas - proposed Gen. Plan Amendment)
Good afternoon,
I have scheduled a consultation meeting regarding the project referenced below for June 25, 2025 at 9:00 am Pacific time.
I will send a more detailed response to your letter, including the requested documentation, at least 10 days prior to that date.
Thank you for your interest in our General Plan Amendment process and for your willingness to meet with our staff!
Kind regards,
Holly Pearson
Holly Pearson, AICP
Zoning Update Project Manager – Planning
Department
Phone (408) 609-0072 Fax (408) 586-2700
Email [email protected]
455 E. Calaveras Blvd., Milpitas CA 95035
www.milpitas.gov
From: Tracie Carrasco <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 2, 2025 11:30 AM
To: Holly Pearson <[email protected]>
Cc: Quirina Geary <[email protected]>; Lillian Camarena <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Senate Bill 18 Consultation for Proposed General Plan Amendment, Milpitas, CA
Good Morning,
Thank you for contacting Tamien Nation regarding the SB 18 Notification for Re: Senate Bill 18 Consultation for Proposed General Plan Amendment, Milpitas, CA
Please see the attached letter requesting formal consultation. Kindly reference TN-20250520-01 in all future correspondence.
When scheduling consultations, we ask that you include Chairwoman Quirina Geary, Cultural Resource Director Lillian Camarena, and Administrative Assistant Tracie Carrasco on the invite.
We appreciate your time and look forward to your response.
Best regards,
Tracie Carrasco
Administrative Assistant
Tamien Nation
w
ww.tamien.org
1 Holly Pearson
Subject: Holly Pearson and Tamien Nation - Quirina Geary, Chairwoman Location: TN-20250520-01 (City of Milpitas - proposed Gen. Plan Amendment) Start: Wed 6/25/2025 10:00 AM
End: Wed 6/25/2025 11:00 AM
Recurrence: (none)
Meeting Status: Accepted
Organizer: Quirina Geary
CAUTION: EXTERNAL SENDER
This email originated from outside the organization. Do NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report suspicious messages to the IT Helpdesk.
Event Name: AB 52/SEC 106 Consultation
Please send all requested documentation at least 10 business days before our scheduled meeting to allow us time to review.
Please send a video/teleconference invite link to [email protected]
Suururuy (thank you) and we look forward to working with you.
Location: TN-20250520-01 (City of Milpitas - proposed Gen. Plan Amendment) Project address: Citywide (City of Milpitas)
Please enter a virtual meeting invite link here or email link to: [email protected]. :
Milpitas Planning Department is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Join Zoom Meeting
https://ci-milpitas-ca-
gov.zoom.us/j/86902690846?pwd=bRundTyYOVWYlAiwagXynqLhRy14WH.1 Meeting ID: 869 0269 0846
Passcode: 734135
Provide link to documents here or via email to [email protected]: I will send requested documentation via email at least 10 days prior to this meeting date. Thank you!
2 Need to make changes to this event?
Cancel: https://calendly.com/cancellations/6901b228-53d7-4de1-a4cd-fefae3289207 Reschedule: https://calendly.com/reschedulings/6901b228-53d7-4de1-a4cd-fefae3289207 Powered by Calendly.com
When
Wednesday Jun 25, 2025 ⋅ 9am – 10am (Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix) Location
TN-20250520-01 (City of Milpitas - proposed Gen. Plan Amendment) View map
Guests
Quirina Geary - organizer
Tracie Carrasco
[email protected]
Lillian Camarena
View all guest info
Reply for [email protected]
Yes
No
Maybe
More options
Invitation from Google Calendar
You are receiving this email because you are an attendee on the event.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to the organizer, be added to the guest list, invite others regardless of their own invitation status, or modify your RSVP. Learn more
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Resolution No. 25-007 Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. 25-007
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MILPITAS
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GP25-0001 TO AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT TEXT FOR
CONSISTENCY WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AND ZONING TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENT ZA25-0001 TO COMPREHENSIVELY UPDATE THE ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE XI, CHAPTER 10 OF THE MILPITAS MUNICIPAL CODE) AND TO
MAKE MINOR RELATED AMENDMENTS TO VARIOUS OTHER SECTIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE; AND ADOPT THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE PHASE 2 ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN FEIR (SCH # 2020070348).
WHEREAS, the City of Milpitas, California (the “City”) is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the constitution and laws of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65300 et seq. requires each city to prepare and adopt, and amend as necessary, a comprehens ive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65800 et seq. authorizes the adoption and administration of zoning laws, ordina nces, rules, and regulations by cit ies as a means of implementing the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, on March 9, 2021, the Milpitas City Council adopted the Milpitas 2040 General Plan, updating and revising the land use policies, goals, and objectives contained in the City’s previous General Plan; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65860 requires a city ’s zoning ordinance to be consistent with its adopted general plan, including any specific plan that has been adopted to establish planning policies for a defined geographic area of the city; and
WHEREAS, the City has prepared a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Text and Zoning Map Amendment (“Amendments”) to comprehensively update the Zoning Ordinance (Title XI, Chapter 10 of the Milpitas Municipal Code) and to ensure overall consistency between the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Zoning Map; and
WHEREAS, on March 9, 2021, a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was certified for the Milpitas 2040 General Plan in accordance w ith the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and whereas the proposed Amendments are consistent with the updated General Plan and the environmental analysis conducted for the same; and
WHEREAS, an Addendum to the certified Milpitas 2040 General Plan FEIR was published on June 5, 2025, which concluded that the impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendments and Zoning Text and Zoning Map Amendments remain consistent with the impacts previously analyzed in the
Resolution No. 25-007 Page 2
Environmental Impact Reports, and therefore no further environmental analysis pursuant to CEQA is required; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes and accepts as its own the findi ngs set forth in this resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on June 11, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject application, at which all those in at tendance were given the opportunity to speak on the proposed Amendments; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all the written and oral testimony presented at the public hearing in making its decision; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this resolution and the Planning Commission’s review, recommendation , and approval of the General Plan amendment, Zoning amendments, and CEQA review contained herein have been met.
NOW THEREFORE , the Planning Commission of the City of Milpitas hereby finds, determines, and resolves as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals
The Planning Commission has duly considered th e 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 Planning Co mmission. Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to be true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 2. CEQA Finding
An Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Milpitas 2040 General Plan (State Clearinghouse No: 2020070348) was published on June 5, 2025. The Addendum finds that the impacts of the proposed project remain consistent with the impacts previously analyzed in the certified General Plan FEIR. The Addendum further concludes that proposed project does not require any substantial revisions to the General Plan FEIR, that no new si gnificant information or changes in circumstances surrounding the proposed project have occurred since the certification of the General Plan FEIR, and that the previous analysis completed f or the General Plan Update FEIR remains adequate under CEQA. The Planning Commission therefore finds that its actions are consistent with CEQA and State CEQA guidelines and that no additional environ mental review is required. Subject to the City Council’s ultimate adoption and approvals, the Planning Commission approv es, recommends the City Council approve, and adopts this Addendum as if fully set forth herein.
Resolution No. 25-007 Page 3
SECTION 3. Findings for General Plan Amendment
The Planning Commission finds based upon the full record before it that all findings and prerequisites required for the General Plan amendment proposed have been met, including those set forth in the Government Code, including Sections 65350 et seq., the Milpitas Municipal Code, including Section XI-10-57.02, and page IN-8 of the Milpitas 2040 General Plan itself. The Planning Commission makes the following further and specific findings base d on the evidence in the public record in support of General Plan Amendment No. GP25-0001:
1. The amendment is deemed to be in the public interest.
The proposed amendment to the text of the Land Use Element of the City’s General Plan is necessary in order for Table 1 of the Land Use Element to accurately reflect th e implementing zones for each General Plan Land Use Designation. This minor update to Table 1 in the Land Use Element is needed because certain implementing zones listed in the table, specifically R5-Urban Residential and MHP- Mobile Home Park Combining District Overlay, are proposed to be eliminated from the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map as part of the compre hensive zoning update work. These changes are in the public interest because an up-to-date and acc urate General Plan Land Use Element, as well as overall consistency between the General Plan and the zoning ordinance and zoning map, is good public policy, helping to promote orderly development and certainty for property owners and neighbors in terms of land uses, development potential, and protection of open space areas.
2. The amendment is consistent and/or compatible with the rest of the General Plan.
The introduction to the General Plan notes that the document “is not static, but rather is a dynamic and multi-faceted document that defines and addresses th e changing needs of the City. It is based on an on-going assessment and understanding of existing a nd projected community needs” (page IN -8, Milpitas 2040 General Plan). This language reflec ts the understanding that the General Plan will occasionally require amendments to keep pace with changing circumstances and issues that affect growth, conservation, and quality of life in Milpitas.
The proposed amendment to the language in the Land Use Element updates the roster of implementing zones for two Land Use Designations in the General Plan to ensure consistency between the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Zoning Map. This is a minor amendment that affects the Land Use Element only and does not affect any other portion of the General Plan. The amendment is consistent with the General Plan as a whole and does not create any internal inconsistencies.
3. The potential impacts of the amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
The proposed amendment involves only minor changes to the language of the Land Use Element. This amendment would not be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare because it would simply bring the General Plan’s land use designations into consistency with the corresponding implementing zoning districts, resulting in clearer and more effectiv e land use policies and regulations. No changes to allowable land uses, development densities, or othe r development standards are proposed as part of this General Plan amendment.
4. The amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the
Resolution No. 25-007 Page 4
California Government Code, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the City’s Municipal Code.
California Government Code Section 65358 provides gui dance for a local jurisdiction to follow in amending its general plan, stating that such an amendm ent may be initiated if deemed “to be in the public interest” and “shall be initiated in the man ner specified by the legisla tive body” (in this case, the Milpitas City Council). The City’s procedure for amending the General Plan is outlined in Milpitas Municipal Code (MMC) [Section XI-10-57.02 in the existing zoning code; Chapter XIII-D.8 in the draft updated Zoning Ordinance]. That procedure includes requirements for a General Plan amendment to be reviewed at a public hearing before the Planning Commission, which shall make a recommendation to the City Council; and then for the City Council to hold a public hearing and make a decision on the proposed amendment. These pro cedures are being followed for the General Plan amendments in question and are consistent with and fulfill the procedure specified in the Government Code.
The City has also fulfilled all procedural prerequisites of the Government Code and Milpitas Municipal Code. This includes public involvement (Gov. Code, § 65351), referral to other agencies (Gov. Code, § 65352), tribal consultation (Gov. Code, § 65352.3), and all public notices and hearings required.
In conformity with Government Code section 65350.5 and Water Code se ctions 10910 et seq., the amendments do not substantially change the City’s prior analysis and conclusions regarding water systems, water rights, and groun dwater sustainability and management or otherwise require amendment of the City’s prior determinations in this regard with respect to its General Plan.
The California Government Code also states th at a municipality may amend a mandatory element of its general plan (including a land use element) no more than four times per calendar year. This is the City’s second proposed amendment to the Milpitas 2040 General Plan in 2025.
The proposed amendments are bei ng processed in accordance with CEQA. As noted above, an EIR Addendum to the previously certified FEIR for the General Plan was prepared and concluded that impacts are consistent with those previously analyzed in these environmental documents and no further analysis pursuant to CEQA is required.
SECTION 4. Findings for Zoning Amendment (Milpitas Municipal Code, Subsection XI- 10-57.02(G)(3))
The Planning Commission finds based upon the full record before it that all findings and prerequisites required for the Zoning Text and Zoning Map amendments proposed have been met, including those set forth in the Government Code, including Sections 65850 et seq., and the Milpitas Municipal Code, including Section XI-10-57.02. The Planning Commission makes the following further and specific findings based on the evidence in th e public record in support of Zoning Text and Zoning Map Amendment No. ZA24-0002:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan.
The draft updated Zoning Ordinance includes many proposed changes to ensure consistency with the General Plan. These include code revisions related to policies in the 2023-2031 Housing Element to address topics such as emergency shelters, low barrier navigation centers, supportive housing, single- room occupancy housing, and employee and farmwork er housing. In addition, density standards for
Resolution No. 25-007 Page 5
some zones (R2, R3, MHP, and MXD 3) and FAR standards for so me zones (C1, M1, M2, and MP) have been modified and increased to be consisten t with the policies in the General Plan Land Use Element. Transportation Demand Management provisions for larger development projects have been added to the Zoning Ordinance, consistent with policies in the General Plan Circulation Element.
2. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare.
The proposed zoning changes will not adversely affect public health, safety and welfare – in fact, the updated zoning regulations will promote safety, community health, and well-being in Milpitas because they provide clear and specific requirements for ne w development and modifications/expansions of existing buildings and sites that will improve the quality, appearance, and livability of new development. By improving development outcomes for property owners and adjacent residents and businesses, the proposed zoning amendments would advance numerous City goals related to community design, sustainabl e transportation, environment, and economic development.
SECTION 5: Amendment for Consistency with Housing Opportunity Districts (HODs)
On May 6, 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance 38.857, amending Chapter 10, Section 6 of Title XI of the Milpitas Municipal Code re lating to the establishment of Neighborhood Commercial Mixed-Use (NCMU) Zoning Districts and Town Cen ter (TC) Subdistricts a nd Amending the Zoning Map designation of certain parcels within the zoning map. These changes are commonly referred to as Housing Opportunity Districts (HODs). Due to the recent date of adoption for Ordinance 38.857, those approved changes to the zoning c ode and zoning map could not be incorporated into the proposed ordinance accompanying and being approved by this resolution. The present action, however, contemplates incorporation and continuation of the substance of Ordinance 38.857 without substantive change. Therefore, the Planning Commission re commends and approves amendment of the proposed ordinance to reflect the substance of the changes approved in Ordinance 38.857. Staff is directed to bring forward for the City Council’s consideration an amended version of the proposed ordinance reflective of this change in a form approved by the City Attorney or designee. The Planning Commission has adequately reviewed this amendment and approves it without further review and hearing.
SECTION 6: Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission of the City of Milpitas hereby adopts Resolution No. 25-007 recommending that the City Council (1) approve Ge neral Plan Amendment No. GP25-0001 and adopt the implementing proposed resolution in Exhibit 1 hereto, to amend the Land Use Element Text for consistency with the updated Zoning Ordinance, (2) approve Zoning Amendment No. ZA25-0001 and adopt the implementing proposed ordinance in Exhibit 2 hereto, to adopt the comprehensively updated Zoning Ordinance as Title XIII of the Milpitas Municipal Code (MMC), to adopt minor amendments to various other sections of the MMC for consistency with the updated Zoning Ordinance, and to update the Zoning Map for consistency with the updated Z oning Ordinance, and (3) adopt the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Update Phase 2 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR (SCH # 2020070348), based on the above Findings and the full record before it.
Resolution No. 25-007 Page 6
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Milpitas on June 11, 2025.
Parveen Gupta, Chair
TO WIT:
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the following resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Milpitas on June 11, 2025, and carried by the following roll call vote:
COMMISSIONER AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN
Mercedes Albana
Dipak Awasthi
Michael Caulkins
Alexander Galang
Parveen Gupta
Chia Ling Kong
Sonia Medina-Ashby
EXHIBITS
1: Draft City Council Resolution for General Plan Amendment 2: Draft Zoning Text and Map Amendments Ordinance
Exhibit A: Zoning Map Amendment
3: EIR Addendum
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Certificate Of Completion
Envelope Id: EE3DC57A-B53E-4AEF-8E88-9AF887C9400C Status: Completed Subject: Complete with Docusign: Attachment A - PC Reso 25-007 - Phase 2 GP and Zoning Amendments_FINAL.pdf Source Envelope:
Document Pages: 6 Signatures: 2 Envelope Originator:
Certificate Pages: 5 Initials: 0 Liz Medina
AutoNav: Enabled
EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled
Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
455 E Calaveras Blvd
Milpitas, CA 95035
[email protected]
IP Address: 76.126.29.175
Record Tracking
Status: Original
June 12, 2025 | 07:22
Holder: Liz Medina
[email protected]
Location: DocuSign
Security Appliance Status: Connected Pool: StateLocal
Storage Appliance Status: Connected Pool: City of Milpitas Location: Docusign Signer Events Signature Timestamp
Chair Parveen Gupta
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Signature Adoption: Drawn on Device
Using IP Address: 147.185.47.129
Sent: June 12, 2025 | 07:24
Viewed: June 12, 2025 | 10:39
Signed: June 12, 2025 | 10:40
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Accepted: June 12, 2025 | 10:39
ID: 632c6d03-c48c-48c6-a343-b43042fe11bd
In Person Signer Events Signature Timestamp
Editor Delivery Events Status Timestamp
Agent Delivery Events Status Timestamp
Intermediary Delivery Events Status Timestamp
Certified Delivery Events Status Timestamp
Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp
Holly Pearson
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Sent: June 12, 2025 | 10:40
Viewed: June 12, 2025 | 12:18
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via Docusign
Kristina Phung
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Sent: June 12, 2025 | 10:40
Viewed: June 12, 2025 | 10:41
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via Docusign
Witness Events Signature Timestamp
Notary Events Signature Timestamp
Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps
Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted June 12, 2025 | 07:24
Certified Delivered Security Checked June 12, 2025 | 10:39 Signing Complete Security Checked June 12, 2025 | 10:40 Completed Security Checked June 12, 2025 | 10:40
Payment Events Status Timestamps
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure
ELECTRONIC RECORD AND SIGNATURE DISCLOSURE
From time to time, City of Milpitas (we, us or Company) may be required by law to provide to you certain written notices or disclosures. Described below are the terms and conditions for providing to you such notices and disclosures electronically through the DocuSign system.
Please read the information below carefully and thoroughly, and if you can access this information electronically to your satisfaction and agree to this Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure (ERSD), please confirm your agreement by selecting the check-box next to ‘I agree to use electronic records and signatures’ before clicking ‘CONTINUE’ within the DocuSign system.
Getting paper copies
At any time, you may request from us a paper copy of any record provided or made available electronically to you by us. You will have the ability to download and print documents we send to you through the DocuSign system during and immediately after the signing session and, if you elect to create a DocuSign account, you may access the documents for a limited period of time (usually 30 days) after such documents are first sent to you. After such time, if you wish for us to send you paper copies of any such documents from our office to you, you will be charged a $0.00 per-page fee. You may request delivery of such paper copies from us by following the procedure described below.
Withdrawing your consent
If you decide to receive notices and disclosures from us electronically, you may at any time change your mind and tell us that thereafter you want to receive required notices and disclosures only in paper format. How you must inform us of your decision to receive future notices and disclosure in paper format and withdraw your consent to receive notices and disclosures electronically is described below.
Consequences of changing your mind
If you elect to receive required notices and disclosures only in paper format, it will slow the speed at which we can complete certain steps in transactions with you and delivering services to you because we will need first to send the required notices or disclosures to you in paper format, and then wait until we receive back from you your acknowledgment of your receipt of such paper notices or disclosures. Further, you will no longer be able to use the DocuSign system to receive required notices and consents electronically from us or to sign electronically documents from us.
All notices and disclosures will be sent to you electronically
"#
!
Unless you tell us otherwise in accordance with the procedures described herein, we will provide electronically to you through the DocuSign system all required notices, disclosures, authorizations, acknowledgements, and other documents that are required to be provided or made available to you during the course of our relationship with you. To reduce the chance of you inadvertently not receiving any notice or disclosure, we prefer to provide all of the required notices and disclosures to you by the same method and to the same address that you have given us. Thus, you can receive all the disclosures and notices electronically or in paper format through the paper mail delivery system. If you do not agree with this process, please let us know as described below. Please also see the paragraph immediately above that describes the consequences of your electing not to receive delivery of the notices and disclosures electronically from us.
How to contact City of Milpitas:
You may contact us to let us know of your changes as to how we may contact you electronically, to request paper copies of certain information from us, and to withdraw your prior consent to receive notices and disclosures electronically as follows:
To contact us by email send messages to: [email protected]
To advise City of Milpitas of your new email address
To let us know of a change in your email address where we should send notices and disclosures electronically to you, you must send an email message to us at [email protected] and in the body of such request you must state: your previous email address, your new email address. We do not require any other information from you to change your email address.
If you created a DocuSign account, you may update it with your new email address through your account preferences.
To request paper copies from City of Milpitas
To request delivery from us of paper copies of the notices and disclosures previously provided by us to you electronically, you must send us an email to [email protected] and in the body of such request you must state your email address, full name, mailing address, and telephone number. We will bill you for any fees at that time, if any.
To withdraw your consent with City of Milpitas
To inform us that you no longer wish to receive future notices and disclosures in electronic format you may:
i. decline to sign a document from within your signing session, and on the subsequent page, select the check-box indicating you wish to withdraw your consent, or you may; ii. send us an email to [email protected] and in the body of such request you must state your email, full name, mailing address, and telephone number. We do not need any other information from you to withdraw consent.. The consequences of your withdrawing consent for online documents will be that transactions may take a longer time to process..
Required hardware and software
The minimum system requirements for using the DocuSign system may change over time. The current system requirements are found here: https://support.docusign.com/guides/signer-guide- signing-system-requirements.
Acknowledging your access and consent to receive and sign documents electronically To confirm to us that you can access this information electronically, which will be similar to other electronic notices and disclosures that we will provide to you, please confirm that you have read this ERSD, and (i) that you are able to print on paper or electronically save this ERSD for your future reference and access; or (ii) that you are able to email this ERSD to an email address where you will be able to print on paper or save it for your future reference and access. Further, if you consent to receiving notices and disclosures exclusively in electronic format as described herein, then select the check-box next to ‘I agree to use electronic records and signatures’ before clicking ‘CONTINUE’ within the DocuSign system.
By selecting the check-box next to ‘I agree to use electronic records and signatures’, you confirm that:
x You can access and read this Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure; and x You can print on paper this Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure, or save or send this Electronic Record and Disclosure to a location where you can print it, for future reference and access; and
x Until or unless you notify City of Milpitas as described above, you consent to receive exclusively through electronic means all notices, disclosures, authorizations, acknowledgements, and other documents that are required to be provided or made available to you by City of Milpitas during the course of your relationship with City of Milpitas.