07 INFRASTRUCTURE & PUBLIC SERVICES
148 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.1.2 REC OMMENDED STORMWATER
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
STANDARDS
Support stormwater infrastructure that is appropriate
for planned development in the Plan Area through the
following standards.
1. Fulfill the most current requirements set forth by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control
Board Municipal Stormwater Permit, known as MRP 3.0.
2. Ensure that the proposed project site does not result in an increase of stormwater runoff compared to the
existing runoff, evaluated under equivalent storm
conditions.
3. Ensure that run-off in storm drains does not lower
water quality within or outside of the Plan Area by
implementing Best Management Practices in new
development.
4. Improve the public curb and gutter along project
frontages to eliminate ponding to the satisfaction of
the City.
5. Development shall be required to evaluate project
impacts on the city's stormwater infrastructure and
implement mitigation measures in compliance with
city standards.
6. Upgrade and expand the the storm drain system in
accordance with the 2021 Storm Drain Master Plan and
as required to adequately serve new development,
new and realigned roads, and development areas
within the Specific Plan Area.
a. As part of the Sense of Place Plan, conduct a
study to determine the stormwater infrastructure
system improvements needed to address flooding
along Main Street, including addressing gaps in
the stormwater infrastructure system.
b. Work with the Public Works Department
and the City Engineer to ensure that system
improvements meet City standards.
c. Require new development to participate in fair
share contributions to improvements that were
identified as deficient in the 2021 Storm Drain
Master Plan. Fair share contributions shall be re-
evaluated by the City with any significant updates
to the Storm Drain Master Plan.
A stormwater planter is a linear bioretention facility
in the public right-of-way along the edge of the street, often in the planter strip between the street and
sidewalk. They are typically designed with vertical
(concrete) sides. However, they can also have sloped
sides depending on the amount of space that is
available.
A stormwater tree well filter is a type of bioretention system consisting of an excavated pit or vault that is
filled with biotreatment soil media, planted with a
tree and other vegetation, and underlain with drain
rock and an underdrain, if needed. Stormwater tree
well filters can be constructed in series and linked via a subsurface trench or underdrain. A stormwater tree
well filter can require less dedicated space than other types of bioretention areas. 12 Suspended pavement
systems may be used to provide increased underground
treatment area and soil volume for tree well filters.
These are structural systems designed to provide
support for pavement while preserving large volumes of
uncompacted soil for tree roots. Suspended pavement
systems may be any engineered system of structural
supports or commercially available proprietary
structural systems. Stormwater tree well filters and
suspended pavements systems are especially useful
in settings between existing sidewalk elements where
available space is at a premium. They can also be used
in curb extensions or bulb-outs, medians, or parking
lots if surrounding grades allow for drainage to those
areas. The systems can be designed to receive runoff
through curb cuts or catch basins or allow runoff to
enter through pervious pavers on top of the structural
support.
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 149 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
TABLE 7-1: STORM DRAIN INFRASTRUCTURE RECOMMENDATIONS
MASTER
PLAN ID LOCATION PRIORITY REPLACEMENT OPTION
WF_11 Comet Drive Low Replace approximately 220 LF of existing 12-inch RCP with 24- inch RCP on Comet Dr between Metro Walk Dr and Curtis Ave.
WF_13 Railroad Avenue Low
Install approximately 350 LF of 36-inch RCP from Railroad Ave to Marylinn Dr. Install approximately 1020 LF of 42-inch x 28-inch rectangular RCP along Marylinn Dr to N Abel St. Replace the approximately 150 LF of existing 24-inch RCP with 42-inch x 28- inch rectangular RCP.
LP_12 Main Street - Sierra Way Low
Replace approximately 190 LF of existing 12-inch RCP on S Main St with 15-inch RCP. Replace approximately 270 LF of existing 12- inch RCP from S Main St to Serra Way with 18-inch RCP.
LP_15 Main Street - Tom Evatt Park Underserved
Area
Install approximately 170 LF of 18-inch RCP on S Main St to the existing 24-inch RCP on Carlo St.
LP_16 Main Street Underserved
Area
Install approximately 450 LF of 18-inch RCP on S Main St to the improvement project of the existing system on Serra Way.
LP_17 Main Street - Sinnott Lane Underserved
Area
Install approximately 70 LF of 18-inch RCP on S Main St from near Sinnott Ln to the improvement project of the existing system.
LP_18 Carlo Street Underserved
Area
Install approximately 300 LF of 18-inch RCP on S Main Street to the existing system.
Notes:
* A prioritized Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is established based on the analytical evaluation of Milpitas' existing storm drainage system using the integrated ICM hydrologic and hydraulic model. Refer to the 2021 Storm Drain Master Plan for additional context.
Source: City of Milpitas Storm Drain Master Plan, 2021
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
The standards above shall be followed along with the storm drain improvement recommendations in Table 7-1 from the Capital Improvement Program identified in the Milpitas Storm Drain Master Plan. These recommended improvements represent a set of projects to resolve the storm drain issues outlined in the Storm Drain Master Plan.
Although the Storm Drain Master Plan did not have access to the timing of future development, it is recommended that these improvements be implemented prior to build-out regardless of which specific development(s) trigger them.
A focused storm drain study assessing the capacity needs along Main Street must be completed after the adoption of the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan. This analysis will guide the design and improvement of the stormwater infrastructure system addressing flooding and the lack of infrastructure along Main Street as part of the planned streetscape improvements in the Main Street Sense of Place Plan. Additionally, efforts should be made to secure funding for the implementation of the stormwater drainage improvements identified in the study.
STORM DRAINAGE
Examples of stormwater tree well filters located in the amentiy zone of a sidewalk.
07 INFRASTRUCTURE & PUBLIC SERVICES
150 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.2 Flood Pr otection
7.2.1 CONTEXT
The 2021 Milpitas Storm Drain Master Plan has identified multiple inundation areas within the Plan Area.
Inundation areas will be reduced or eliminated for the 10- year storm event upon the completion of improvements
outlined in the 2021 Storm Drain Master Plan. Within
the Plan Area, the removal of paved surfaces for new
parks, open spaces, and landscaped areas will decrease
impervious surfaces, consequently reducing stormwater
runoff. Nonetheless, the region remains susceptible to
flooding during 100-year storm events due to its position in the flatter portion of the city and the influx of flows from upstream areas, which cannot be mitigated within the
Plan Area without significant channel enhancements.
Major portions of the Plan Area lies within a federally designated floodplain, necessitating compliance
with federal and local regulations. Consequently, the
Specific Plan must adhere to the provisions outlined in the Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-15 (Floodplain
Management Regulations).
For all new residential construction, the lowest floor must be constructed at least one foot above the Base Flood
Elevation. In Zone AO areas, finish floors should be at least one foot above the depth number specified on the Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), or three feet above the highest adjacent grade if no depth number is provided. Non-
residential construction can have the lowest floor elevation at the Base Flood Elevation. The FEMA-Designated Special Flood Hazard Areas are illustrated in Figure 7-5.
The Milpitas Municipal Code outlines the following
requirements for flood protection and flood proofing:
• All residential facilities shall be built 1 feet above the base flood elevations or 3 feet above the highest
adjacent grade if no depth is provided.
• All non-residential buildings must be elevated at least 1 foot above the base flood elevation or be flood-proofed to ensure they remain water tight and structurally
sound against flood forces, with certification from a
registered professional engineer or architect.
• All enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are used for parking, access, or storage and subject to flooding must include openings for floodwater entry and exit,
totaling one square inch for each square foot of enclosed area, and must be certified by a professional engineer or architect.
• All manufactured homes must be elevated according to
the standards outlined in Section XI-15-5.4 to minimize flood risk and ensure compliance with local floodplain
regulations.
Flood zones AE, AH, and AO can all be found in the Plan Area and FEMA has defined these zones as follows:
• Zone AE: Base flood elevations determine.
• Zone AH: Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding); base flood elevations determine.
• Zone AO: Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually sheet flow on sloping terrain); average depths determine. For areas of alluvial fan flooding, velocities also determine.
7.2.2 REC OMMENDED FLOOD PROTECTION
IMPROVEMENTS
STANDARDS
Ensure development is protected from flooding hazards
through the following standards.
1. Minimize damage associated with flooding events and
comply with regulations stipulated by FEMA and the
National Flood Insurance Program.
2. New development within a FEMA-designated flood
hazard zone must follow the City’s construction
standards for such areas as currently laid out in the
Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-15 (Floodplain
Management Regulations).
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Recommendations identified in Section 7.1.2 shall
be implemented in the Plan Area, along with the
recommendations from the Capital Improvement Program
for the Milpitas Storm Drain Master Plan, listed below in Table 7-2.
TABLE 7-2: FLOODING PROTECTION IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT PRIORITY CIP DETAILS ESTIMATED COST
Spence Creek Pump
Station Low Provide permanent standby power $750,000
Wrigley-Ford Creek
Maintenance Low Open Channel Maintenance $800,000
Main Street Flood Study - Study $500,000
Source: City of Milpitas Storm Drain Master Plan, 2021.
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 151 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
"X"X
"X
"X
Æba
ZONE AH
(EL 15)
ZONE AH
(EL 15)
ZONE AH
(EL 15)
ZONE AH
(EL 15)
ZONE AE
ZONE AE
ZONE AO
ZONE AO
ZONE AO
ZONE AO
ZONE AE ZONE AO
S MILPITAS BLVD
YOSEMITE D
R
CALAVERAS BLVD
S MAIN ST
S ABEL ST
MONTAGUE EXPY
GREAT MALL PKWY
M
cCARTHY
BLVD
N
ABELST
JACKLIN RD
N
M
ILPITASBLVD
N PARK VICTORIA DR
S PARK VICTORIA DR
ESCUELA
PKW
Y
LOS COCHES ST
TOPAZ ST
S HILLVIEW DR
GIBRALTAR DR AMES AVE
BARBER LN
TECHN
OLOGY DR
BELLEW DR
RA N CH
DR
N
M
cCARTHYBLVD
SPENSE AVE
MARYLINN DR
RAILROAD AVE
CARLO ST
SERRA WY
JUNIPERO DR
CORNING AVE
SYLVIA AVE
HAMMOND WY
MACHADO AVETHOMPSON ST
CURTIS AVE
E TASMAN DR
%p
CË
%t
ZONE AE
ZONE AO
ZONE AH
(EL 15)
ZONE A
ZONE AO
ZONE AH
(EL 15)
ZONE AH
(EL 16)
ZONE AH
(EL 23)
ZONE AO
ZONE A
ZONE AO
ZONE AH
(EL 27)
ZONE AO
ZONE AH
(EL 16)
ZONE AH
(EL 29)
ZONE AH
(EL 52)
ZONE AE
ZONE AH
(EL 20)
ZONE AE
ZONE A
ZONE AO
ZONE AH
(EL 15)
ZONE AH
(EL 22)
ZONE AH
(EL 49)
ZONE AH
(EL 30)
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE AH
(EL 15)
ZONE A
ZONE AO
ZONE AE
ZONE AH
(EL 27)
ZONE A
ZONE AO
ZONE AE
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE AO
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE AE
ZONE AH
(EL 15)
ZONE A
ZONE AE
ZONE AE
ZONE A
ZONE A
ZONE AO
ZONE AO
ZONE A
19 18
20 22
21 17
16 23
24 33
32 38
28 50
44 17
18 19
23 20
22 22
18 18
18 18
22 18
18 19
18 21
16 19
17 53
67 54
8179
60 5655
72 65
83 70
52 76
61 51
4537
39 31
34 35
24 20210060.01 GIS 055
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
10/7/2024
100-year Flood Zone Plan Boundary Light Rail
Railway
Æba BART Station
"X Light Rail Stop
Figure 7-4 FEMA Designated Flood Areas
Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency
FLOOD PROTECTION
07 INFRASTRUCTURE & PUBLIC SERVICES
152 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.3 Water Supply System
7.3.1 WATER MASTER PLAN ANALYSIS
The City of Milpitas Water Master Plan, drafted in 2021, describes background information and analysis relevant
to the Plan Area. The Milpitas water system operates
within two distinct service areas, each managed
separately under typical circumstances. One area is
served by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), while the other, encompassing the Plan Area, is served by Valley Water (VW), formerly known as the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
Within the VW service area, there are two pressure zones, both of which the Plan Area spans. A turnout from a VW
transmission main supplies the higher-pressure zone
(referred to as Zone VW2), which then feeds the lower-
pressure zone (Zone VW1) through pressure-reducing
valves (PRVs).
The WMP conducted various analyses, including an
assessment of the City’s distribution system's capacity to meet hydraulic performance criteria under different
demand and outage scenarios. Both the existing (2019)
and projected build-out (2040) systems were scrutinized, with the latter incorporating anticipated water demands from planned growth and development, including those
outlined in the Specific Plan. Hydraulic evaluations of the City's build-out water distribution system encompassed
peak-hour demand, maximum day demand with
fire flow, as well as potential water supply and power
outages.
7.3.2 REC OMMENDED WATER
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
The Plan Area generally met most hydraulic performance
criteria for build-out pressures during peak hour demand and fire flow conditions. At build-out, pressures and flows in the Plan Area were found to be sufficient to meet
peak hour demands and maximum day demand along
with fire flow requirements. However, the Water Master
Plan (WMP) did identify inadequate existing fire flows
within the Plan Area. Specifically, the report highlights a geographic area, "group area number 5" as having
insufficient fire flows in the following Plan Area locations:
• The West of Abel neighborhood, along Thompson
Street and Abel Street.
• The Crossroads Focus Area along Calaveras Boulevard
and Carlo Street.
• Main Street Focus Area along Hammond Way.
• North Railyards Urban Reserve Area on Sinnott Lane,
Bothelo Avenue, and Carlo Street.
To improve flow within the Plan Area, the Water Master
Plan suggests upsizing the following water mains:
• Along Sinnott Lane, Bothelo Avenue, and East Carlo
Street, replace approximately 1,730 linear feet of 6-inch and 8-inch diameter pipeline with 12-inch diameter
pipeline (ECIP-PI-01).
• On Hammond Way near Tom Evatt Park, replace the
(normally closed) isolation valve separating Zones VW1 and SF1 with an emergency pressure reducing valve (EPRV)
to allow flows from Zone SF1 during a fire event along
Hammond Way (ECIP-V-01). Alternatively, the City can
replace approximately 1,300 linear feet of 8-inch diameter pipeline with 12-inch diameter pipeline (ECIP-PI-02).
• Along Railroad Avenue between approximately hydrant
1A-355 and the southern end of Railroad Avenue, replace approximately 880 linear feet of 8-inch diameter
pipeline with 12-inch diameter pipeline (ECIP-PI-07).
• For the below criterion locations near the western end of Corning Avenue, install a new isolation valve at the end of the existing Zone SF1 pipeline, immediately
upstream of the tee connecting Zones VW1 and SF1.
Should a fire occur at the adjacent industrial site, the City can open existing (normally closed) isolation valves (numbers 35 and 35100) to supplement flows to the
area. The hydraulic model shows these locations meet
recommended fire flows with this adjustment. The new
isolation valve can be closed to maintain separation
between Zones VW1 and SF1 (ECIP-V-02). Alternatively,
the City can replace approximately 870 LF of 8-inch
diameter pipeline with 12-inch diameter pipeline
(ECIP-PI-03).
• Along South Abel Street, between Sylvia Avenue and
Corning Avenue, replace approximately 240 linear feet of 6-inch diameter pipeline with 8-inch diameter pipeline
(ECIP-PI-11).
The report also suggests upgrading pipelines smaller
than 6 inches in diameter that serve hydrants. It's worth noting in the Plan Area that under the main corridors,
water pipelines appear to all be larger than 6 inches,
particularly along Thompson Street, Abel Street, Hammond Way, Main Street, Serra Way, and Calaveras Boulevard.
Although the pipelines within the major development
areas exceed 6 inches and the Water Master Plan has
identified a set of projects to address demand, refer to Recommended Improvements section for details and
Figure 7-6. While the land uses analyzed in the Milpitas Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan differ from those in
the 2040 General Plan, the City has run sample scenarios for projected development and have found no significant deficiencies; thus, no additional modeling was conducted for the Specific Plan. Parcel-by-parcel water models shall be developed at the project level. Additional analysis by updating the city’s water model is necessary to evaluate the potential impact of the Specific Plan’s build-out on the
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 153 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
Figure 7-5 Water Infrastructure Improvements
Source: City of Milpitas Water Master Plan 2021
WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
2021 WATER MASTER PLAN RECOMMENDED
IMPROVEMENTS:
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
EXISTING WATER PIPE TO BE UPSIZE
NEW WATER PIPE
NOTE: SEE WATER MASTER PLAN FOR MORE DETAILS
EXISTING WATER PIPE
07 INFRASTRUCTURE & PUBLIC SERVICES
154 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
City’s water infrastructure system-this analysis will be conducted as part of the Main Street Sense of Place Plan .
In addition to hydraulic evaluation, the Water Master Plan assessed the supply, storage, and pumping capacities for the City’s build-out water system. The pumping capacity is sufficient to handle the increased water demands in
the VW service area from the Specific Plan and other
developments. However, improvements to water supply
and storage are recommended to meet the performance
criteria.
Although the Water Master Plan did not have access to
the timing of future development, it is recommended
that these improvements be implemented prior to build-
out, regardless of which specific development(s) trigger them. Based on the analysis of the build-out system in
the Water Master Plan, recommended water supply and
storage improvements for the VW service area include:
• A new turnout from VW with a capacity of 10,000
gallons per minute (gpm).
• Two new groundwater wells (Curtis Well and
McCandless Well), each with a capacity of at least
400 gpm. The McCandless Well will be located in
McCandless Park.
• A new, two-million-gallon potable water storage tank. • A new pump station (drawing from the new storage
tank) with a firm capacity of 4,000 gpm.
These suggested improvements represent one possible
set of projects that the City could undertake to resolve the water supply and storage issues outlined in the Water Master Plan.
STANDARDS
Provide a reliable, sustainable water supply that supports future growth projections through the following standards.
1. Provide water supply for the Plan Area from the City’s portfolio of water supplies, including potable water
from Valley Water District and San Francisco Public
Utilities Commission and groundwater and recycled
water from South Bay Water Recycling, per the
Water Master Plan. Require development to obtain
a building permit is issued by the City prior to being
entitled to municipal water.
2. Development shall be required to evaluate project
impacts on the city's water infrastructure and
implement mitigation measures in compliance with
city standards.
3. Upgrade, expand, and loop the water distribution
system in accordance with the Water Master Plan
and and as required to ensure it can adequately serve
new development, new and realigned roads, and
development areas within the Specific Plan Area.
a. Work with the Public Works Department
and the City Engineer to ensure that system
improvements meet City standards.
b. Require new development to participate in fair
share contributions to improvements that were
identified as deficient in the 2021 Water Master
Plan. Fair share contributions shall be re-evaluated
by the City with any significant updates to the
Water Master Plan.
4. Reduce overall water consumption and particularly,
potable water consumption through conservation
measures, including but not limited to the following:
a. use of recycled water;
b. water-saving features; and
c. drought-tolerant landscaping.
5. Require installation of water-saving devices, as required by the California Building Code, in all residential,
commercial, industrial, and institutional facilities within the Plan Area. Such devices are capable of reducing the amount of water used indoors, resulting in substantial
wastewater flow reductions.
6. Require, where feasible, that commercial uses, schools, and non-residential mixed-use developments include
dual plumbing to enable indoor recycled water use for
non-potable uses, to the extent feasible.
7. If available on-site, require that recycled water be used for irrigation, including parks, plazas, community facilities, linear parks, landscaped front yards, buffer zones, vegetated setbacks, and private common areas.
8. If available at the site, recycled water mains shall be installed up to and across the frontage of parcels that do not have access to recycled water.
Recycled water is used for irrigation in Tom Evatt Park.
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 155 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
The standards in the previous section shall be followed along with the recommendations for water infrastructure identified in Table 7-3 from the Capital Improvement Program of the 2021 Water Master Plan. These recommended improvements represent a set of projects to resolve the water service issues outlined in the Water Master Plan.
Although the Water Master Plan did not have access to the timing of future development, it is recommended that these improvements be implemented prior to buildout, regardless of which specific development(s) trigger them. Additional analysis by updating the city’s water model is required to evaluate the potential impact of the Specific Plan’s build-out on the City’s sewer infrastructure system-this analysis will be conducted as part of the Main Street Sense of Place Plan.
TABLE 7-3: WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION INFRASTRUCTURE RECOMMENDATIONS MASTER
PLAN ID
IMPROVEMENT
TYPE
REASON FOR
IMPROVEMENT PRIORITY IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION
CONSTRUCTION
COST WITH
MARKUPS
ECIP-V-01 Interconnection Fire Flow High
On Hammond Way near Tom Evatt Park,
replace the existing (normally closed) isolation
valve separating Zones VW1 and SF1 with a
new emergency PRV (Hammond EPRV).
$479,000
ECIP-V-02 Interconnection Fire Flow High
Near the western end of Corning Avenue,
install a new isolation valve at the end of
the existing Zone SF1 pipeline, immediately
upstream of the tee connecting Zones VW1
and SF1.
$14,000
ECIP-PI-01 Pipeline
Improvement Fire Flow High
Along Sinnott Lane, Bothelo Avenue, and East
Carlo Street, replace existing 6-inch and 8-inch
diameter pipelines with 12-inch diameter
pipeline.
$1,030,000
ECIP-PI-07 Pipeline
Improvement Fire Flow High
Along Railroad Avenue between approximately
hydrant 1A-355 and the southern end of
Railroad Avenue, replace existing 8-inch
diameter with 12-inch diameter pipeline.
$524,000
ECIP-PI-11 Pipeline
Improvement Fire Flow High
Along South Abel Street between Sylvia
Avenue and Corning Avenue, replace existing
6-inch with 8-inch diameter pipeline.
$143,000
ECIP-PN-01 New Pipeline
(Developed Area)
Fire Flow
(Outage) High
Along Curtis Avenue, connect the existing
10-inch diameter pipeline on the northern side
of the street to the existing 18-inch diameter
pipeline on the southern side of the street with
a new 12-inch diameter pipeline.
$18,000
ECIP-PN-02 New Pipeline
(Developed Area)
Firm Supply
Capacity High
Along Hammond Way, east of Tom Evatt Park,
connect the existing 8-inch diameter pipelines
in Zone VW1 with a new 8-inch diameter
pipeline.
$34,000
BCIP-TO-01 Turnout Storage
Capacity High
New VW turnout near the intersection of Piper
Drive and Garden Street with a capacity of
10,000 gpm (14.4 mgd).
$532,000
BCIP-S-01 Storage Reservoir Storage
Capacity High 2.0 MG reservoir in VW service area. $5,532,000 BCIP-PS-01 Pump Station Storage
Capacity High Firm capacity of 4,000 gpm (5.76 mgd) for new storage reservoir. $4,137,000
BCIP-W-01 Groundwater Well Storage
Capacity High Construct Curtis Well. $479,000
BCIP-V-01 Interconnection Fire Flow High
Near the intersection of Cedar Way and South
Main Street, replace the existing (normally
closed) isolation valve separating Zones SF1 and
VW1 with a new emergency PRV (Cedar EPRV).
Notes:
* Priority definitions vary depending on the project type, refer to the City of Milpitas Water Master Plan, drafted in 2021.
Source: City of Milpitas Water Master Plan 2021
WATER SUPPLY & DISTRIBUTIONWATER SUPPLY SYSTEM
07 INFRASTRUCTURE & PUBLIC SERVICES
156 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.4 Sewer System
7.4.1 CONTEXT
The Milpitas Sewer Master Plan was adopted in 2021,
which presents background information and analysis
relevant to the Milpitas Gateway-Main Street Specific
Plan. Below are excerpts highlighting the pertinent
details.
The wastewater collection system consists of
approximately 160 miles of gravity sewers, with pipe
diameters ranging from 4- to 66-inches. The collection
system generally flows from east to west and south
to north towards the San Francisco Bay. Most of the
collection system flows by gravity to the Milpitas Main Lift Station (Main LS) then is pumped to the San Jose-
Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility (RWF)
through dual force mains. (City of Milpitas Sewer Master Plan, Page ES-1)
The City of Milpitas pays a share of the capital cost
of the RWF, based on the City’s capacity rights in
proportion to the 167 MGD total capacity of the RWF.
The City also pays a share of the operating cost, based on the volume of wastewater discharged to RWF. The
City has rights to discharge 14.25 MGD to the RWF under its current allotment. (Sewer Master Plan, Page 2-4)
The Plan Area lies between Calaveras Boulevard and
Great Mall Parkway, positioned between the I-880
corridor and the UPRR and BART corridor. This area
represents the lower end of the sewer shed for the City.
Within the Master Plan, the system risk exposure was
identified and classified using a 5-point scoring - ranking all segments of the existing system. Risks levels 1, 2, and 3 range from insignificant to medium risk while significant risks are rated as #4 (High) and #5 (Extreme). These are identified in various areas of the Milpitas Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area, particularly along Main Street.
Consequently, a series of Capital Improvement Projects
have been earmarked for completion in this region.
As part of the City’s Master Plan project, a Sewer Utility Asset Renewal and Replacement Study (R&R Study) was
conducted. The study documents the City’s Business
Risk Exposure (BRE) based on the physical condition
and desktop assessment of the City’s collection system
applying a set of factors developed to determine the
relative risk of failure for each pipeline segment.
(City of Milpitas Sewer Master Plan, Page ES-1)
The 2021 Sewer Master Plan incorporates a capacity
analysis of the citywide system, which accounts for
anticipated land uses within the Plan Area (as illustrated in Figure 5-2 of the Sewer Master Plan), based on the
assumption of the city's 2040 General Plan. Although the capacity analysis did not reveal any deficiencies in the Plan Area, certain downstream segments are operating
below capacity and have thus, been designated as Capital Improvement Projects.
There were no major capacity deficiencies identified as part of this analysis. There were no additional capacity deficiencies identified under future conditions that were not seen under existing conditions. (City of Milpitas Sewer Master Plan, Page ES-1)
While the analysis considered anticipated land uses,
the land use designations within the Milpitas Gateway-
Main Street Specific Plan deviates from those outlined in the 2040 General Plan and uses examined in the Sewer
Master Plan. Additional analysis, by updating the city’s sewer models, will be required to evaluate the potential impact of the Specific Plan's build-out on the City’s sewer infrastructure system and shall be conducted as part of the Main Street Sense of Place Plan.
The following streets within the Plan Area necessitate
sewer rehabilitation Capital Improvement Projects:
• Curtis Avenue,
• South Main Street,
• Sinnott Lane,
• South Abel Street,
• East Calaveras Boulevard,
• Coming Avenue, and
• Machado Avenue
as summarized in Section 7.4.2 (Recommended Sewer
Infrastructure Improvements).
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 157 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
Figure 7-6 Recommended Sewer Rehabilitation Method
Source: Milpitas Sewer Master Plan 2021
SEWER SYSTEM
9 3
8 7
7 2
4 1
8 5
6 2021 SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN RECOMMENDED
IMPROVEMENTS
1 REHABILITATE 733 LF OF 18-INCH AND 21-INCH PIPE WITH SECTIONAL LINERS AND POINT REPAIRS 2 REHABILITATE 398 LF OF 12-INCH PIPE WITH FULL CURED-IN-PLACE-PIPE AND POINT REPAIRS REHABILITATE 172 LF OF 18-INCH PIPE WITH SECTIONAL LINERS REHABILITATE 66 LF OF 18-INCH PIPE WITH POINT REPAIRS AND SECTIONAL LINERS REHABILITATE 1,374 LF OF 8-INCH PIPE WITH FULL CURED-IN-PLACE-PIPE REHABILITATE 3,336 LF OF 15-INCH, 18-INCH AND 21-INCH PIPE WITH FULL CURED-IN-PLACE-PIPE,
POINT REPAIRS AND SECTIONAL LINERS
REHABILITATE 2,939 LF OF 24-INCH AND 30-INCH PIPE WITH FULL CURED-IN-PLACE-PIPE AND
SECTIONAL LINERS
REHABILITATE 2,882 LF OF 18-INCH AND 21-INCH PIPE WITH POINT REPAIRS AND SECTIONAL LINERS REHABILITATE 1,457 LF OF 15-INCH AND 18-INCH PIPE WITH FULL CURED-IN-PLACE-PIPE, PIPE
REPLACEMENT, POINT REPAIRS, AND SECTIONAL LINERS
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 REPLACE
FULL CIPP
POINT REPAIR(S) BY EXCAVATION
FULL CIPP + POINT REPAIR(S) BY EXCAVATION
SECTIONAL LINER(S)
SECTIONAL LINER(S) + POINT REPAIR(S) BY EXCAVATION
# HIGH PRIORITY
# MEDIUM TO HIGH PRIORITY
# MEDIUM PRIORITY
# LOW PRIORITY
EXISTING SEWER LINE, NO ACTION
07 INFRASTRUCTURE & PUBLIC SERVICES
158 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.4.2 RECOMMENDED SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
share contributions to downstream improvements
that were identified as deficient in the 2021 Sewer
Master Plan. Fair share contributions shall be re-
evaluated by the City with any significant updates
to the Sewer Master Plan.
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
The standards above shall be followed along with the
following recommendations shown in Table 7-4,
as identified in the 2021 Sewer Master Plan Capital
Improvement Program. These recommended
improvements represent a set of projects to resolve the risks outlined in the Sewer Master Plan. Although the
Sewer Master Plan did not have access to the timing
of future development, it is recommended that these
improvements be implemented prior to build-out,
regardless of which specific development(s) trigger them.
Additional analysis by updating the city’s sewer model is required to evaluate the potential impact of the Specific Plan’s build-out on the City’s sewer infrastructure system- this analysis will be conducted as part of the Main Street Sense of Place Plan.
TABLE 7-4: SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE RECOMMENDATIONS
AVERAGE
RISK
GRADE
STREET NAME PRIORITY DIAMETER (IN) LENGTH (FT)
RECOMMENDED
REHABILITATION
METHOD
CONSTRUCTION
COST
4.0 Curtis Avenue High 18 172 Sectional Liner(s) $39,000
4.0 S. Main Street High 18, 21 733 Sectional Liner(s),
Point Repair(s) $147,000
4.0 Sinnott Lane High 12 398 Full CIPP, Point
Repair(s) $139,000
5.0 S. Abel Street Medium to High 18 66 Point Repair(s), Sectional Liner(s) $32,000
3.3 E. Calaveras Blvd Medium to High 12, 15, 18, 21 3,336 Full CIPP, Point
Repair(s), Sectional
Liner(s)
$1,168,000
3.2 Coming Avenue Medium to High 8 1,374 Full CIPP $358,000
3.3 S. Main Street Medium 18, 21 2,882 Point Repair(s) and Sectional Liner(s) $576,000
2.9 Machado Avenue Medium 24, 30 2,939 Full CIPP, Sectional Liner(s) $1,006,000
3.0 Curtis Avenue Low 15, 18 1,457
Full CIPP, Pipe
Replacement, Point
Repair(s), Sectional
Liner(s)
$572,000
Notes:
* According to the 2021 Sewer Master Plan, the highest priority improvements are those segments identified to have significant defects during the conditions assessment and thus, rated with the highest risk of failure. Refer to the 2021 Sewer Master Plan for additional context.
Source: Milpitas Sewer Master Plan 2021
STANDARDS
Ensure sewer infrastructure can support future growth in the Plan Area by addressing the following standards.
1. Require development to obtain a building permit
issued by the City prior to being entitled to
wastewater treatment capacity.
2. Development shall be required to evaluate project
impacts on the city's sewer infrastructure and
implement mitigation measures in compliance with
city standards.
3. Upgrade and expand the sanitary sewer system in
accordance with the Sewer Master Plan to ensure
it can adequately serve new development, new or
realigned roads, and development areas within the
Specific Plan Area.
a. Work with the Public Works Department and City
Engineer to ensure that system improvements
meet City standards.
b. Require new development to participate in fair
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 159 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.5 Solid Wast e Services
The City of Milpitas disposes solid waste at different
facilities depending on the material waste stream (e.g. garbage, recyclables, food waste, yard trimmings, and
construction and demolition) in accordance with the
Franchise Agreement that the City has with Milpitas
Sanitation, Inc. (MSI), which has a term of contract from September 6, 2017 to August 31, 2032.
While collection is performed by MSI, the facilities where the waste streams are transported vary as listed below:
• Solid Waste. Solid waste is processed at the
GreenWaste Recovery MRF with the end destination of
the material at Kirby Canyon Landfill.
• Recyclables. The primary approved facility for
recyclables is GreenWaste Recovery MRF. Alternate
approved facilities include Alameda County Industries
Material Recovery Facility and the Sunnyvale Materials
Recovery and Transport Station (SMaRT Station).
• Yard Trimmings. Yard trimmings are processed at
GreenWaste Recovery MRF.
• Food Scraps. The primary approved facility for food
scraps is Sustainable Organic Solutions (SOS). Food
waste is used to make animal feed. Alternate approved
facilities include East Bay Municipal Utility District
Treatment Plant and the Sunnyvale Materials Recovery
and Transport Station (SMaRT Station).
• Construction and Demolition (C&D). The primary
approved facility for C&D is Mission Trails Waste Systems (MTWS). Alternate approved facilities include Zanker
Road Resource Management Facilities, Guadalupe C&D
Recovery Facility, and the Sunnyvale Materials Recovery and Transport Station (SMaRT Station).
Hazardous waste is being managed through Santa Clara
County’s household hazardous waste (HHW) program,
which provides a drop-off site for residents and small
generators through an appointment-based system.
Milpitas continues to participate in this program. Santa Clara County and the City of Milpitas hold an annual
HHW collection event within the city to encourage proper disposal of hazardous waste.
7.5.1 SOLID WAS TE FACILITY STANDARDS
Ensure solid waste facilities can support growth in
the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area and that
waste continues to be collected and disposed of safely, consistent with the following standards.
1. Require all new development to participate to the
maximum extent practical in solid waste source
reduction and diversion programs.
2. Negotiate new agreements to handle the long-term
disposal of its solid waste before the expiration of the current waste disposal contract.
Sustainable Organic Solutions food waste treatment facility.
Image source: Sustainable Organic Solutions.
SOLID WASTE SERVICES
07 INFRASTRUCTURE & PUBLIC SERVICES
160 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.6.2 TECHNOLOGY
Located in Silicon Valley, Milpitas is embedded in the
region’s culture of technological innovation. The City
is exploring opportunities for providing an efficient
and reliable citywide broadband network, which could
create new opportunities for businesses, public safety, healthcare, and will be a key asset to the development of the Crossroads and Abbott districts. A public broadband network would provide high-speed connectivity in existing and new public spaces within the city and requires
collaboration with the private sector to implement.
7.6.3 ENERGY AND TECHNOL OGY STANDARDS
The Plan Area is subject to the following standards:
1. Relocate all remaining overhead electric service
underground, and in utility easements on existing
streets.
2. Require undergrounding all new utilities as part of new development projects, street extensions, parks and
other infrastructure projects.
3. Provide a public broadband network in the Specific
Plan Area, to establish the City as an innovative
technological center.
a. Require new business developments to provide
fiber-optic connections.
b. Encourage the development of new fiber-optic
connections to existing development when utility
construction is underway.
4. Consistent with the City’s Economic Development
Strategy (EDS) #29, facilitate deployment of 5G
wireless service in the Specific Plan Area, especially in underserved areas and locations targeted for growth
of office and business uses, including the Crossroads,
Main Street, and Abbott Districts.
7.6 Energy and Technology
The Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area is an urban
area with electrical, gas, and telecommunication
facilities that future projects would be able to connect to. Additionally, the Plan Area supports energy
and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction measures by
encouraging and requiring more efficient building
systems, alternative transportation options, and green
energy generation.
7.6.1 ELEC TRICITY AND GAS
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) provides electric and gas services to the Plan Area. The area is served by two
electrical substations, located outside the Plan Area:
• The Montague Substation, located east of I-880 on
Montague Expressway; and
• Milpitas Substation, located on Milpitas Boulevard,
north of Montague Expressway.
Most electrical service in the Plan Area has already been located underground, except for a section of South
Main Street, between Corning Avenue and West Curtis
Avenue, and within the existing single family residential neighborhood around Corning Avenue and Sylvia Avenue
west of South Abel Street. Easements on both sides of
the street have been provided along this section of South Main Street and along all existing streets in the Plan Area for the undergrounding of electrical service and future utility needs as development occurs. All new streets
within the Plan Area shall be built with utilities located under the roadway.
The Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan encourages
building design features that reduce energy consumption and increase renewable energy generation through a
series of development incentives and objective design
standards as provided in Chapters 3 and 4. In addition, development associated with the Gateway-Main Street
Specific Plan is required to comply with the California Green Building Standards Code, which includes green
and sustainable building requirements to achieve energy efficiency.
New development will be served through the extension
of existing electrical lines, with existing and new utilities located underground, whenever possible. In Urban
Reserve Areas, where development would mean a
significant change in land use over a large area, utility needs may be significantly higher than existing capacity can provide, warranting further utility studies should
those areas redevelop.
Existing overhead power lines on South Main Street.
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 161 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.7 Fire Protection and Emergency
Services
The Milpitas Fire Department (MFD) is responsible for fire suppression, emergency medical services, rescue services, hazardous and toxic materials emergency response,
coordination of City-wide disaster response efforts,
enforcement of fire and life safety codes, enforcement of State and Federal hazardous materials regulations, and
investigation of fire cause, arson, and other emergency events for cause and origin.
There is one existing fire station within the Plan Area: Fire Station #1, on the northwest corner of Curtis Avenue and South Main Street. There are two additional fire stations just outside the project area boundaries: Station #2,
located northeast of the project on Yosemite Drive and
South Park Victoria Drive; and Station #4 on Barber Lane, just west of I-880. The City has automatic aid and mutual aid agreements with the cities of San Jose and Fremont.
More firefighting personnel and equipment may be
needed to provide the level of service and response time for all urban service areas described in the General Plan.
Ultimately, MFD will need to conduct a “standards of cover” analysis to determine the Gateway-Main Street Specific
Plan’s precise impact on the department’s staffing and
equipment, and any required facility enhancements.
The MFD will also need to write an addendum to the City’s emergency management plan to address the development
of the project area. Adjustments to communication
systems, evacuation plans, and community warning
systems may also be necessary.
The City currently has building regulations that ensure adequate emergency access to buildings. However, the
building and streetscape standards established in Chapters 3-5 were developed in coordination with MFD.
The Fire Department will evaluate individual development plans to assess whether emergency access is adequate.
The existing fire station on South Main Street at Curtis Avenue.
FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES
07 INFRASTRUCTURE & PUBLIC SERVICES
162 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
3. If a new fire station is built to meet the service needs of the Plan Area, it must be sited and developed in such
a way as to not create substantial adverse physical
impacts or significant environmental impacts.
4. Any new facilities should minimize noise and traffic impacts on existing land uses.
5. Update the City’s emergency and disaster response
plans to take the location and type of new
development, and future traffic levels, into account.
7.7.1 FIRE PRO TECTION AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE STANDARDS
Provide fire and emergency services and facilities that support growth in the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area, while maintaining an adequate level of service in accordance with the following standards.
1. Conduct a “standards of cover” analysis to determine the Specific Plan’s precise impact on the Fire
Department’s staffing and equipment, and any
required facility needs. Identify and evaluate
potential sites for an expanded or new fire station
near the Plan Area if the standards of cover analysis
determines it is warranted.
2. Provide an adequate level of service—as determined
by City Council—for the residents, workers, and
visitors of the Plan Area by hiring additional fire
department staff, purchasing equipment, and
building facilities. New equipment and facilities shall be funded by the Community Facilities District fee
and new staff paid from the City’s General Fund.
Fire access and equipment shall be assessed at the individual development level.
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 163 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.8 Police Services
Law enforcement services in Milpitas are provided by the City of Milpitas Police Department (MPD). Additionally, BART Police provides law enforcement services to the
Milpitas BART station and the Transit Patrol Division
of the Santa Clara County Sheriff provides contract
security and law enforcement services for the Valley
Transportation Authority, which includes the orange
light rail line that runs along Great Mall Parkway at the southern Plan Area boundary.
More than half of the police-related calls in the Plan Area are vehicle violations, traffic accidents, and automobile theft. The increase in population, business traffic, and vehicular traffic resulting from the build-out of the Plan Area will increase the workload of MPD. To maintain
current levels of service, an increase in staffing and
equipment may be necessary.
Milpitas has one existing police station located in the north part of the city that is approximately one and a half miles from the Plan Area’s northern boundary. A new
police substation is planned to be located in the Metro Plan Area in the southern part of Milpitas. The substation will be located near the Milpitas Transit Center, though the exact location has not yet been determined.
The metrics that MPD would use to determine the
precise number of additional staff required are the
projected call volume and impact in service levels, such as an increase in dispatch and response times; ring times for 9-1-1 calls; and calls that are pending for an officer.
The City should also anticipate investing in additional MPD communications staff and equipment, professional
staff needed to support the additional officers,
technology related to crime prevention, deterrence, and enforcement, and increasing the vehicle fleet of MPD.
7.8.1 POLICE SERVICES S TANDARDS
Provide adequate police services and facilities that
ensure the safety of the community, consistent with the following standards.
1. Hire additional police staff and purchase equipment
to provide an adequate level of service—as
determined by City Council—for the residents,
workers, and visitors of the Plan Area, as well as
surrounding areas. New equipment shall be funded
by the Community Facilities District fee and new staff
paid from the City’s General Fund.
2. As identified in the Metro Specific Plan, construct an additional Police Substation in the Metro Area on the
Milpitas Boulevard Extension adjacent to Berryessa
Creek or in another location determined by the City.
POLICE SERVICES
07 INFRASTRUCTURE & PUBLIC SERVICES
164 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.9.1 SCHOOL ST ANDARDS
The Specific Plan ensures that affected school districts have the funding needed to support the additional
student population generated by development in the
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area by requiring the following:
1. Coordinate with the MUSD on facilities needed to
accommodate new students and define actions the
City can take to assist or support them in their efforts.
2. Ensure that all school impact fees are paid from
individual projects prior to the issuance of any
building permits.
3. Continue to monitor school enrollment numbers to
ensure the existing schools have the resources they
need to provide quality education to MUSD students.
7.9 Schools
The Plan Area falls within the Milpitas Unified School
District (MUSD), which handles students in grades
K-12. The MUSD serves the majority of the city, adjacent unincorporated portions of Santa Clara County, and a
small area of San Jose. As of the 2022-2023 school year, MUSD's total enrollment was 10,402 students across 15
schools. The 15 schools include ten elementary schools, two middle schools, two high schools and one alternative school. There are no schools within the Plan Area,
however the Anthony Spangler Elementary School is
located just outside the northern boundary of the Plan
Area along North Abbott Avenue, across from Starlite
Park.
Total student generation is summarized in Table 7-5.
The Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan will generate
approximately 260 new students at build-out assuming
that 20 percent of the projected 1,435 units of new
housing are below market-rate.
TABLE 7-5: STUDENT GENERATION RATES AND PROJECTED NEW STUDENTS
MARKET-RATE HOUSING
GENERATION RATE
BELOW MARKET-RATE HOUSING
GENERATION RATE NUMBER OF NEW STUDENTS
Milpitas Unified School District
K-6 0.087 0.246 171
7-8 0.017 0.047 33
9-12 0.03 0.076 56
Total 260
Student generation rates are assumed to be the same as identified in the Metro Plan Specific Plan EIR. The number of new students was calculated by multiplying the student generation rates to the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan's projected units of new housing.
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 165 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.10 Libraries
The Milpitas Public Library is located just north of the Plan Area at 160 North Main Street and is a member of
the Santa Clara County Library District. The Santa Clara County Library District is governed by a Joint Powers
Authority (JPA) and overseen by the Santa Clara Board
of Supervisors. The JPA membership consists of a City
Council representative from participating jurisdictions including the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan
Hill, and Saratoga and two County Supervisors from the
County of Santa Clara.
The Library District prepares and annually reviews a
Capital Plan and budget that accounts for population
changes in the County.
7.10.1 LIBRARY S TANDARDS
1. Continue to monitor population changes in the City
and ensure that the current public library has the
capacity to provide the Milpitas community with
adequate library resources.
2. As development in the Specific Plan Area occurs,
monitor the changing needs of the community to
determine what types of resources are the highest
priority for the library, such as print, digital, or
community gathering resources.
The Milpitas Public Library on North Main Street.
SCHOOL & LIBRARY SERVICES
07 INFRASTRUCTURE & PUBLIC SERVICES
166 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
7.11.1 CHILDCARE S TANDARDS
1. Support the expansion of childcare services to support demand in the Plan Area through the following
actions.
a. Encourage childcare services near light rail stations, bus stops, and planned micro-mobility hubs.
b. Encourage childcare services to be integrated into
affordable housing projects.
c. Encourage new commercial spaces to provide
childcare services for its employees.
7.11 Child Care Services
Childcare plays an important role in economic
development and household wealth, by permitting
parents to work either part- or full-time. It plays an
especially important role in single-parent households,
where the sole adult must work. Childcare can also
provide informal income for home-based caregivers.
Demand for childcare can be all-day or just after-school in nature and can come from local residents as well as
workers within the area.
The City adopted a Childcare Master Plan in 2002 and
updated it in 2004. It calls for the following:
• Support the development of childcare within transit
overlay districts;
• Require incoming projects to be evaluated for their
potential impact on childcare demand within the city;
and
• Require incoming projects to be evaluated for their
potential to provide childcare facilities within the
project.
The City has an incentive program for developers that
incorporate childcare into their developments. The
City now offers fee reductions for large family childcare homes and has a practice of prioritizing the processing of childcare centers.
Childcare on the ground-floor of a development.
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 167 This page intentionally left blank
APRIL 2025 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
08
08 ADMINISTRATION &
IMPLEMENTATION
170 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
08 ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
Overview
The Administration and Implementation chapter
summarizes the process for administering and
evaluating future development within the Gateway-
Main Street Specific Plan Area. It also describes the
actions involved in implementing the vision for the
Specific Plan through public and private programs and
actions. Private development will be responsible for
on-site building, landscaping, open space, parking, and infrastructure improvements. The City and other public
sector agencies can help facilitate private development through organizing the mechanisms to support and
implement area-wide circulation, infrastructure, service, parking, and other improvements. In addition to city-
led improvements, it is anticipated that assessments or impact fees on private development will be required to
help pay for their fair share of improvements.
8.1 Plan Administration
Following the approval of the Specific Plan, all
applications for development entitlement shall be
reviewed by the City for conformity with the Specific Plan and EIR, applicable City regulations, and compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Development within the Plan Area shall comply with the
following City administrative requirements:
• Application Process and Review Process. Project
applications and checklists, fees, forms, and the Milpitas Development Review Handbook, describing the City's
development review process, are available on the City's website at:
https://www.milpitas.gov/375/Applications-Forms.
• Permit Requirements. The process for General Plan,
Specific Plan, and Zoning Amendments; Site
Development and Conditional Use Permits; and
Variances are addressed in the Zoning Ordinance
chapter on procedures and administration.
• Development Review. Development Review is
required for new construction, building expansions,
exterior building modifications, or site modifications
as governed by the Zoning Ordinance chapter on
procedures and administration, which also addresses
the authority and public hearing requirements for land
use and zoning decisions.
• Existing Uses. All existing uses legally operating prior to the adoption of the Specific Plan that are no longer a permitted or conditionally permitted use shall be
classified as "nonconforming," subject to the standards for in the Zoning Ordinance .
8.2 Historic And Cultural Resources
The preservation of historic resources within the Plan
Area is a city and community priority. Existing historic resources in the Plan Area shall be preserved through one of two principle strategies: 1) stabilizing, rehabilitating, or restoring buildings and surveying or cataloging; or
2) protecting artifacts, documents, and other historic
materials.
1. Designated Cultural Resources. The city's Cultural
Resources Register lists the buildings, trees, and
other resources that are officially designated cultural resources, subject to the criteria and procedures in
the Milpitas Municipal Code Title XI, Chapter 4
(Cultural Resources Preservation Ordinance).
Designated historic resources in the Plan Area include:
a. Site of the Milpitas Hotel at 147 S. Main Street.
b. Old St. John's Church Site at 279 S. Main Street.
c. Milpitas Grammar School (now the Senior Center)
at 160 N. Main Street.
d. Smith's Corner, also know as Campbell's Corner at
167 S. Main Street.
e. Dr. Smith's House, also known as DeVries House at
163 N. Main Street.
f. Windsor Blacksmith Shop at 112 N. Main Street.
g. Windsor Tank House at 112 N. Main Street.
h. O'Toole Elms Site at 701 S. Abel Street.
2. Additional Sites Recommended for Preservation.
The city's Conceptual Historic Resources Master Plan
and the city's Historic Resource Inventory identify
additional historic resources within the Plan Area
with the potential to contribute to a national register historic district nomination, although some resources
are noted to lack sufficient historic integrity. The
following additional resources are recommended for
preservation or as a potential district contributor.
a. Caudillo House/Silvera House at 282 S. Main
Street for protection and as a potential district
contributor.
b. Torres House, eligible for individual listing.
c. Pashote/Venturi House as a potential district
contributor.
d. Deniz House/Crabb House as a potential district
contributor.
e. Dr. Al Curlin House and Office as an eligible district contributor.
f. Pimental Home/Almeida Home as a potential
district contributor.
g. Dophna Home as a potential district contributor.
h. 87 Sinnott Lane as a potential district contributor.
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 171 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
i. Site of 27 S. Main Street, owned by the city and
proposed as Carlo Park.
3. Historic Resources Pursuant to CEQA. For any future
development project occurring within the Plan
Area that proposes to alter or demolish a building
that is more than 50 years old, the City will require
the project sponsor to engage a professionally
qualified historian or architectural historian to
prepare a historical evaluation of the building
unless a previously prepared historical evaluation is
available. This requirement can be met through the
preparation of California Department of Parks and
Recreation 523 Forms. The historical evaluation will
analyze whether the building meets the eligibility
requirements of the California Register of Historical
Resources. If the building is determined to be
eligible, the project sponsor’s professionally qualified historian or architectural historian must also assess
the project’s compliance with the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. If the building is determined not to be eligible, or if the project is
found to adhere to the Secretary’s Standards, relative
to eligible resources, no further action is required.
8.3 Subsequent Envir onmental Review
All applications for a development entitlement shall be reviewed by the City for compliance with CEQA. The
rules governing the extent of any future environmental
review are set forth in Section 15183 of the State
CEQA Guidelines. Under Section 15183, no additional
environmental review is required for projects that are
consistent with the zoning for which an EIR was certified, except as might be necessary to examine whether there
are project-specific effects that are peculiar to the project or its site.
CEQA requires all state and local agencies to establish reporting and monitoring programs for projects
approved by a public agency. The mitigation measures
of the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan EIR have been
identified to reduce environmental impacts associated
with project development. The Mitigation Monitoring
Program, included in the Final EIR, is intended to satisfy the requirements of CEQA and shall be used by the
City and project developers to ensure compliance with
adopted mitigation measures during project review and
implementation.
8.4 Implementation A ctions
Table 8-1 (on the next page) identifies the actions that will implement the standards of the Specific Plan, organized by the following:
• Action Number and Topic identifies the topical section and type of action.
• Implementation Action describes the specific actions
to implement the Specific Plan under each topic.
• Responsible Lead identifies the department or agency
with primary responsibility and the recommended
timeframe for the identified action.
• Time Frame identifies the anticipated timing of
implementation, classified as:
• Near-term to identify 1-5 years from plan adoption
for the highest priority projects.
• Mid-term to identify 6-10 years from plan adoption
for the highest priority projects.
• Long-term to identify 10+ years from plan adoption
for lower priority projects or those requiring a
longer time frame to achieve.
• On-going for projects that are recurring and not
limited to a specific time frame, such as application
of development regulations.
• Funding Options identify the potential programs or
funding sources that can be used to implement the
action.
8.5 Funding and Financing
8.5.1 PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE &
INVESTMENTS
A Basic Improvement Program (BIP) will be prepared
to identify an initial list of public infrastructure and improvements needed to serve the Plan Area, including:
• Current projects that are not completed or yet fully
funded.
• New utility or basic infrastructure investments required to accommodate new development anticipated by the
Specific Plan.
• New public space and mobility investments necessary
to implement the vision for the Specific Plan.
The BIP list may be adjusted as the needs of and types of development in the Plan Area evolve over time.
IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
172 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
08 ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
TABLE 8-1: IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS MATRIX
TOPIC IMPLEMENTATION ACTION RESPONSIBLE LEAD TIME FRAME FUNDING OPTIONS
1. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1.1 General Plan and
Zoning Code Map
Updates
Amend the General Plan Land Use Map
and Zoning Map boundaries to reflect
the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan
Area.
Planning At time of
adoption or
shortly after
General Fund
1.2 Development
Review
Use the city's Development Review
process to ensure private development
is consistent with the standards of the
Specific Plan.
Planning On-going General Fund
1.3 Inclusionary
Housing
Standards
Implement the city's inclusionary
housing requirements and the goals,
policies, and actions of the Housing
Element.
Planning On-going General Fund,
Affordable Housing
Fees
1.4 Specific Plan
Community
Benefits Program
Establish a Community Benefits
Program, or similar process to
implement Specific Plan incentives,
including green roofs, lot consolidation,
open space, parking, and economic
development incentives, as described in
Section 3.4.
Planning On-going General Fund
1.5 Usable Open
Space Standards
Require usable open space with
amenities to support commercial,
residential, and other uses, consistent
with the standards provided in Section
3.9. Planning On-going General Fund
1.6 Parking
Standards
Reduce parking requirements and
facilitate parking solutions, consistent
with the regulations in Section 3.10
(Parking Standards). Provide incentives
for private development projects that
construct additional district parking.
Planning On-going General Fund
1.7 Specific Plan
Monitoring
Program
Monitor the development achieved
under the Specific Plan and provide a
status report to the City Council every
two years.
Planning On-going General Fund
2. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES
2.1 Real Estate
Development
Opportunities
Expand staff capacity to support
real estate functions to incentivize
development of key properties in the
Plan Area. Prioritize working with
property owners in the Crossroads
District to facilitate the development
of a downtown area commercial and
entertainment destination for Milpitas.
Economic
Development,
Planning
Near-term General Fund
2.2 Business
Retention and
Relocation
Assistance
Coordinate with property owners to
help retain or relocate existing small
businesses that are displaced by new
development.
Economic
Development,
Planning
On-going General Fund,
Development
Agreements and
Incentives
2.3 Targeted Funding
Assistance
Seek additional funding to support the
continuation of the City's Storefront
Improvement Program to fund
commercial storefront improvement
and commercial activation projects on
Main Street. Consider establishing a new
small business grant or loan program to
support businesses in the Plan Area.
Economic Development On-going/
Near-term
Grants, General Fund
2.4 Business
Improvement
District
Establish a business improvement
district or similar entity to develop and
maintain public amenities in the Plan
Area.
Economic Development Near-term General Fund
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 173 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
TABLE 8-1: IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS MATRIX
TOPIC IMPLEMENTATION ACTION RESPONSIBLE LEAD TIME FRAME FUNDING OPTIONS
2.5 SPAR Fund Assemble a SPAR fund to strategically
acquire land to help facilitate catalytic
redevelopment projects on vacant land
in the Crossroads district. Prioritize
creating a retail shopfront presence
along Serra Way and Main Street.
Economic Development Near-Term General Fund
2.6 Programming
and Events
Identify new programming and event
opportunities to attract more visitors to
the Specific Plan Area.
Economic
Development,
Parks and Recreation
On-going /
Near-term
General Fund, BID/
PBID, User Fees
2.7 Marketing and
Promotion
Expand staff capacity and funding to
support the development of a new
marketing and branding strategy
to position the Specific Plan Area as
a community destination for local,
independent retail and restaurants. Use
the Specific Plan and Sense of Place
Plan as the basis for marketing and
branding.
Economic Development Near-term General Fund
3. MOBILITY AND PARKING IMPROVEMENTS
3.1 Mobility and
Infrastructure
Improvements
Review new development projects for
consistency with the vehicular, bike and
micromobility, and pedestrian mobility
frameworks illustrated in Figures 5-1,
5-17, and 5-18. Implement the street
section design sections in Section
5.3, including necessary stormwater
treatment facilities and street/
streetscape improvement as identified
in Specific Plan Chapters 6 and 7.
Planning,
Public Works
On-going Grants, General
Government CIP Fund,
Impact Fees,
Development Incentives,
Development
Agreements,
BID, LLAD, EIFD
3.2 Trail, Pedestrian,
and Bicycle
Master Plan
Update the city's Trail, Pedestrian,
and Bicycle Master Plan to reflect the
updates to the street design sections
identified in Chapter 6 of the Specific
Plan.
Planning,
Public Works
Near-term
3.3 Bike and
Micromobility
Improvements
Prepare a bike and micromobility
plan in accordance with the design
improvement standards in Section 5.7.
Planning,
Public Works
On-going
3.4 Public Transit
Improvement
Standards
Coordinate with VTA to implement the
public transit improvements identified
in Section 5.5 and shown in Figure 5-16.
Public Works,
Valley Transportation
Authority
On-going General Fund, General
Government CIP Fund,
Grants
3.5 Parking District Establish a parking district to support shared parking within the Crossroads,
Main Street, and Library Districts,
including establishing an in-lieu fee
program. Phase in new public parking
with parking district demands. Work
with private property owners to
implement shared or district public
parking strategies as addressed in
Section 5.8.
Planning,
Public Works
Near-term and
Mid-term
General Fund, Grants,
BID, parking fees,
parking in-lieu fees
3.6 Parking
Management
Plan
Prepare a parking management plan
to efficiently manage parking and
evaluate and monitor parking strategies,
including implementing on-street
parking time limits or parking meters in
the future.
Planning,
Public Works
Long-term General Fund, Grants
IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
174 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
08 ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
TABLE 8-1: IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS MATRIX
TOPIC IMPLEMENTATION ACTION RESPONSIBLE LEAD TIME FRAME FUNDING OPTIONS
4. PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENTS
4.1 Historical Markers
and Interpretative
Display
Work with the Milpitas Historical Society
to design and implement historical
markers and interpretive displays
that identify locally important historic
and cultural sites and resources; and
provides the public education about the
area's development history, including
tribal and Spanish settlement.
Planning,
Parks and Recreation
Near-term General Government
CIP Fund, Development
Incentives,
Development
Agreements,
BID, LLAD, Public Art In-
Lieu Fees
4.2 Main Street Sense
of Place Plan
Following the adoption of the Specific
Plan, prepare a Sense of Place Plan
for the Crossroads and Main Street
districts that prioritizes implementing
streetscape, branding, and wayfinding
improvements, including redesigning
Main Street as a slow street with parklets
and stormwater planters, and integrating
the citywide branding program.
Planning, Economic
Development, Public
Works
Near-term Grants, General Fund
4.3 Future Parks and
Open Space
During the Development Review
process, monitor the need for new
public parks and open space to support
the new population growth associated
with future development, as guided by
Figure 6.1 (Public Realm Framework).
Work with private development to pay
for or contribute to the construction of
new parks or open space in the Plan
Area.
Parks and Recreation,
Planning
On-going General Fund,
Development
Agreements,
Development
Incentives, Park In-Lieu
Fees, BID, LLAD
4.4 North Main
Street Park
Work with the Milpitas Historical Society
to construct a town green and Milpitas
Community Museum on the land north
of the library, to celebrate the city's
unique cultural diversity and heritage.
Parks and Recreation,
Milpitas Historical
Society
Near-term Grants, General
Government CIP
Fund, Park In-Lieu
Fees, BID, LLAD, EIFD,
Development Incentives
4.5 Privately Owned,
Publicly Accessible
Open Space
Provide credit and partner with
developers to develop privately
owned plazas and publicly accessible
open spaces, that provide social,
contemplative, and active recreational
development opportunities.
Planning,
Parks and Recreation
On-going Development
Agreements,
Development
Incentives
4.6 Public Art Work with developers and the City's
Public Art and Mural programs to
promote the use of public art as a
placemaking feature in the Specific Plan
Area, consistent with the Milpitas Public
Art Master Plan.
Parks and Recreation,
Planning
On-going General Fund,
Development
Incentives, Public
Art In-Lieu Fees,
Development
Agreements, BID, LLAD
5. INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS
5.1 Water
Infrastructure
Improvements
Implement the recommended water
infrastructure improvements shown
in Table 7-3, as needed to serve future
development.
Public Works,
Planning
On-going Grants, Infrastructure
Loans, General
Government CIP Fund,
Developer Incentives,
Development
Agreements, CFD, EIFD,
User Fees
5.2 Sewer
Infrastructure
Improvements
Implement the recommended sewer
infrastructure improvements shown
in Table 7-4, as needed to serve future
development.
Public Works,
Planning
On-going
5.3 Main Street Flood
and Stormwater
Infrastructure
Study
Study the design and improvement
of the stormwater infrastructure
system to address flooding along Main
Street as part of planned streetscape
improvements to be developed in the
Main Street Sense of Place Plan.
Public Works, Planning Near-term Grants, General Fund
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 175 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
TABLE 8-1: IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS MATRIX
TOPIC IMPLEMENTATION ACTION RESPONSIBLE LEAD TIME FRAME FUNDING OPTIONS
5.4 Stormwater
Infrastructure
Improvements
Implement the stormwater drainage
improvements in Section 7.1, Table 7-1
and Table 7-2, with future development
or planned public improvements
along Main Street. Seek funding and
implement the stormwater drainage
improvements addressed in Action 5.3.
Public Works,
Planning
Mid-term and
Long-term
Grants, Infrastructure
Loans, General
Government CIP Fund,
Developer Incentives,
Development
Agreements, CFD, EIFD,
User Fees
5.5 Modeling and
Analysis of
Infrastructure
Improvements
Through the Main Street Flood and
Stormwater Infrastructure Study
identified in Action 5.3 and the Main
Street Sense of Place Plan, update the
city's water, sewer, and stormwater
models; evaluate the potential impact of
the Specific Plan's build-out on the city's
infrastructure systems; and identify
needed improvements.
Public Works, Planning Near-term General Fund
5.6 Capital
Improvement
Program Updates
Update the city's Capital Improvement
Program to reflect new infrastructure
improvements identified by the above
studies.
Public Works On-going General Fund
5.7 Gateway-
Main Street
Specific Plan
Development
Impact Fee and
Nexus Study
Prepare a nexus study to create a
development impact fee to fund
Plan Area-wide public improvements
established through the Basic
Improvement Program. Consider
providing incentives for projects that
construct Basic Infrastructure Program
improvements described in Section
8.5.2, Development Incentives.
Planning, Public Works,
Finance
Near-term Grants, General Fund
5.8 Public Safety Ensure future development provides
the resources to maintain reasonable
standards of safety, dependability,
and compatibility with police and fire
service operations and rapid emergency
response.
Public Works,
Milpitas Fire
Department,
Milpitas Police
Department
On-going General Fund
(supported by increases
in tax revenues), CFD
5.9 Public Schools Require new housing development
to pay school facility fees to support
the projected new school population
growth in the Specific Plan Area.
Planning On-going School District
Development Impact
Fees
8.5.2 FUNDING STRA TEGY
The following sub-sections outline various funding
sources and financing mechanisms that may be utilized
to finance the public improvements in the Plan Area
that are shown in Table 8-1. Many of the funding sources described below are unpredictable due to uncertainty
about the availability of funding from various grant
programs, the level of funding that will be available from future Gateway-Main Street Development Impact Fees,
outcomes from future negotiations with developers, and
other factors. Therefore, the funding strategy must remain flexible and adaptable to adjust to changes over time.
Funding for public improvements can accrue on either a
one-time basis (e.g., grants, payments from developers) or ongoing basis (e.g., annual property assessments). There may be a mismatch between the timing for availability
of funds from certain revenue sources and when it
will be necessary to pay certain costs, so that public
FUNDING & FINANCING
improvements can be developed and ready when needed
to serve new development. Often, it is necessary to “front load” development of public improvements, meaning
that the improvements must be built in advance of the
development that will ultimately benefit from them and
generate the revenues that will help to pay for them. To address this, municipalities employ various debt financing tools to obtain necessary funds early in the development process, with the debt to be paid off over time by the
development that is served.
Many of the improvements shown in Table 8-1 not only
benefit new development but will also benefit existing
development. The infill and redevelopment activity that the Specific Plan anticipates calls for an approach to
funding that is different than the typical approach to
funding public improvements in a “greenfield” area, where new development is essentially responsible for all of the costs of new public improvements. Rather, in a setting
like the Plan Area, it will be necessary to identify funding
176 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
08 ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
sources that do not rely exclusively on new development, including allocating costs between new development
and existing development to the extent feasible and
pursuing outside funding opportunities that do not rely on new development for revenues.
The following is a discussion regarding the types of
funding sources and financing mechanisms that the City
of Milpitas could potentially use to finance the Plan Area public improvements.
CITY OF MILPITAS GENERAL FUND AND GENERAL
GOVERNMENT CIP FUND
The General Fund is the main operating fund for the
City of Milpitas and is the least restrictive of all potential funding sources. The use of General Fund monies is
at the discretion of the City Council. Major sources of revenue for the City’s General Fund include property
taxes, sales and use tax, and transient occupancy tax. The City of Milpitas has established the General Government Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Fund to account
for construction and maintenance of most CIPs funded
by the General Fund. The General Government CIP
Fund is used to fund a variety of improvements that
are identified in the CIP. Subject to the need to balance many budgeting needs, the City Council could decide
to allocate funds from the General Fund or the General
Government CIP Fund to finance any of the desired
implementation items.
CITY OF MILPITAS DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
The City of Milpitas may be able to fund some of the
improvements that will be needed to implement the
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan using revenue from
the City’s existing development impact fees. The City
of Milpitas charges impact fees on new development
projects to fund infrastructure and improvements that
are needed to address the impacts of new development.
The City’s existing impact fees include the Calaveras
Boulevard Widening Traffic Impact Fee, the Storm Drain
Impact Fee, and the Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP)
Development Impact Fee. The Calaveras Boulevard
Widening Traffic Impact Fee and the Storm Drain Impact
Fee could potentially be used to fund improvements in
the Plan Area. However, impact fees can only address
the need for improvements that are attributable to the
impacts caused by the projects that pay these fees,
meaning that other sources of funding will be needed
to address existing unmet needs or needs that are
otherwise inconsistent with the improvements that
the existing development impact fees are intended to
address. The TASP Development Impact Fee is reserved
for improvements in the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan
(formerly the TASP) area and therefore improvements in
the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area would not be eligible for the use of these funds.
Like many school districts in California, the Milpitas Unified School District also assesses development impact fees on new development, with funds generated by the fees used to finance construction and reconstruction of school facilities.
These funds will be used to help finance any school facilities that are needed to accommodate future growth in the
student population within the Plan Area.
FUTURE GATEWAY-MAIN STREET DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEES
The City of Milpitas intends to undertake a nexus study to develop a comprehensive development impact fee
for the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area to fund
plan-wide public improvements and specific streetscape
improvements that will be identified in the BIP. Like all impact fees, the future Gateway-Main Street Development Impact Fee will offset the cost of providing facilities that serve new development. Other sources of revenue
will be necessary to address existing needs that are
otherwise, unrelated to serving new developments and
improvements not included in the BIP.
In addition, the City could choose to set impact fees at levels that are lower than the levels needed to fully address needs from new developments in order to avoid potential negative impacts on the financial feasibility of new development, leaving some improvements to be funded through other
sources. Nonetheless, the Specific Plan development impact fee is anticipated to be an important source of financing for infrastructure and improvements in the Plan Area.
DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES
The Specific Plan has established an incentive zoning
system to allow for additional floor area and/or residential density for qualified projects. The purpose of the incentive zoning system is to incentivize the provision of certain project attributes, such as providing sustainable design features, open space, furthering economic development,
and supporting the rehabilitation of existing buildings, or other actions. The City shall monitor and periodically consider refinements to improve the effectiveness of the incentive program.
The City could also consider expanding the incentive
program to include incentives to projects that provide
specified public infrastructure and improvements identified in the BIP list. Incentives could consist of additional floor area or exemptions from other development standards. The City could also offer impact fee waivers in exchange for providing up front improvements needed to implement the Specific
Plan, particularly to the extent that improvements provided by developers are consistent with improvements that would otherwise, be financed using impact fees.
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 177 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
PARK IN-LIEU FEES
Park in-lieu fees are collected from residential developers that choose to pay an in-lieu fee rather than dedicate
land for parks and recreational purposes within their
project. The City uses funds from in-lieu fees to fund
the construction and rehabilitation of City parks. Funds generated by park in-lieu fees provide a source of
financing for Plan area improvements that are consistent with the intended use of these funds.
PUBLIC ART IN-LIEU FEES
The City of Milpitas has a Public Art Requirement for
Private Development ordinance that requires developers
to either install publicly accessible art valued at one half of one percent of the building Development Cost
or pay the same amount into the Public Art Fund. The
requirements apply to non-residential developments with more than 2,000 square feet of new construction and
residential construction of 20 or more units. Residential developments with at least 20 percent affordable
units can qualify for an exemption if the developer
demonstrates that cost would cause the project to be
economically infeasible.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEES
The City of Milpitas collects affordable housing fees from both residential and non-residential development. Fees
collected from residential developments consist of in-
lieu fees that developers can choose to pay instead of
providing affordable units within a project in accordance with the City’s inclusionary housing ordinance. Most non- residential developments in Milpitas pay an affordable
housing fee per square foot for industrial uses, as well as for office, retail, and hotel uses. These funds may be a potential source of funding for affordable housing
initiatives in the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area.
ENTERPRISE FEES OR USER FEES
User fees and enterprise funds may provide a source
of funding for improvements in the Plan areas. Fees
collected from ratepayers that receive service from
a particular City utility or “enterprise,” such as water, wastewater, and stormwater, are collected to pay for
the continued operations, maintenance, upgrades, and
new facilities to serve the ratepayers. These may also
be called “user fees” and are collected from users on an on-going basis as part of the utility billing process. Rate studies are performed routinely to adjust the enterprise fees to accurately reflect the true cost of delivery of services and the ultimate planned infrastructure to serve the City’s ratepayers. The enterprise fees are reserved and restricted to only the service for which the fees are collected. Use of enterprise fees/user fees to pay for new or replacing or upgrading infrastructure may require an increase in rates. User fees may also include new parking fees, or other fees that are paid for the use of public facilities, either for day use or for special events.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS
For discretionary projects, a Development Agreement is a voluntary but binding contract between a property owner and the jurisdiction that outlines the rules and conditions for development. Structured negotiations between cities and developers are often conducted to obtain desired
improvements in exchange for development rights
through the development agreement process. To the
extent that new developments in the Plan Area are
subject to development agreements, the City may have
opportunities to work with developers to include terms in development agreements that would require the provision of improvements noted in Table 8-1 above. The extent to which a new project can contribute to the provision of
infrastructure depends on the project’s specific economics, including the relationship between development costs and the revenues that the developer would collect from either leasing or selling the completed development.
BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT OR PROPERTY-
BASED BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
A business improvement district (BID) is a common type
of self-taxing special assessment district that assesses business and/or property owners to fund maintenance,
marketing, and other activities, including additional
public services or improvements. Property owners within a BID agree to pay an additional property levy to fund
improvements or services within the district.
To establish a BID, the City must adopt a resolution of intention. The BID is established if the resolution of intention is not protested by a majority of the affected taxpayers. Once formed, the BID is limited to those types of improvements or activities that were specified upon formation. A standard BID assesses the businesses located within the district.
A property-based business improvement district (PBID)
assesses the owners of property within the district. Although not common, BIDs and PBIDs can be established in
overlapping areas.
Revenues from a BID or PBID could be used to guarantee
issuance of a bond that could fund more significant improve- ments, such as signage and wayfinding, streetscape
improvements, and parking and parking management
improvements. BID or PBID revenue and associated bond
proceeds would also be particularly valuable to the City in supporting water, sewer, and stormwater infrastructure
replacement and upgrading which benefit existing Gateway- Main Street properties, but which are difficult to fund through increases in general user fees and/or development impact fees. To the extent that revenue exceeds that which is necessary to support debt service on bond issuance, surplus revenue could also be used to support ongoing maintenance of infrastructure and improvements in the plan area, as well as for assorted programming in the plan area. Prior to forming a BID or PBID, the City should assess the ability of the affected parcels to support an additional assessment without imposing undue economic strain.
178 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
08 ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT
State law, under the Mello-Roos Community Facility Act
of 1982, enables local governments to establish special districts in which a special tax is levied to generate money to pay for public improvements and services. The district can also issue bonds that are secured with liens against the participating properties, repaying the bonds with
annual special tax proceeds, or the revenue can be used to fund improvements or services on a pay-as-you-go basis.
Mello-Roos community facility district (CFD) formation
may be initiated by the City Council or by property owner petition. Because CFD levies are considered a special tax, district formation requires approval of either two-thirds of the registered voters (if there are more than twelve registered voters living in the area) or two-thirds of the affected property owners (if there are 12 or fewer registered voters). As opposed to a special benefit assessment district, a special tax district does not have to allocate the burden of the levy among property owners strictly on the basis of proportional benefit, meaning there is greater flexibility to structure the levy to meet project funding needs. A key consideration in establishing a CFD is the degree to which the participating properties could support an additional tax levy without imposing undue economic strain.
The Transit Area Specific Plan (now the Metro Plan) created a CFD to utilize a portion of the Plan Area’s property tax revenues to fund services and maintenance of certain
public improvements, such as police and fire protection services, public lighting, storm protection, and hazardous cleanup in the Plan Area. A similar CFD could fund public improvements in the Gateway-Main Street Plan Area.
LANDSCAPING LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
A landscaping and lighting assessment district (LLAD) is a type of special district established by a local government to finance the costs of landscaping and lighting in
public areas. Revenues are most often used toward the
installation and maintenance of landscaping, statues,
fountains, general lighting, traffic lighting, recreational and playground equipment, and public restrooms.
Revenues can also be used to back revenue bonds,
which can fund acquisition of land for parks and open
space, as well as the construction of community centers, auditoriums, and other similar public uses. By law, the levy associated with a LLAD cannot be tied to the value of land or improvements but must be established using
a “benefit formula” that allocates benefits and costs
to providing service to each parcel. A majority vote is required to establish a LLAD, as well as to increase the assessment rate. Prior to forming a LLAD, the City should assess the ability of the affected parcels to support
an additional assessment without imposing undue
economic strain.
ENHANCED INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING DISTRICTS
Enhanced infrastructure financing districts (EIFDs) are a funding mechanism that was signed into law to serve as
a post-redevelopment tool in 2014. The purpose of EIFDs is to finance a wide array of infrastructure projects with “communitywide significance,” from parks and brownfield remediation to transit improvements and affordable
housing. An EIFD can be created by a city, county, or
joint powers authority to fund specific infrastructure and economic development projects. EIFDs can also leverage
multiple funding streams to achieve these goals—including tax increment, assessment revenues, user fees, and other sources such as state and federal grants. An EIFD can be established without voter approval and does not require an affordable housing set-aside. EIFDs may not issue debt without a 55 percent vote of the District’s registered voters, nor can revenues be used to fund ongoing maintenance and operations. An important consideration in the formation of an EIFD is how much revenue could be generated, based on the portion of the property tax increment that the City controls, and how much of that increment could be
dedicated to funding plan area improvements versus the
amount that is needed to fund increases in ongoing General Fund operations and maintenance costs for various City
services that the Plan Area will also need.
GRANTS
Grants are available from a variety of public agencies and private foundations. Because there is uncertainty about the availability of funding from various grant programs, including future grant programs not known at this time, the level of funding that will be available from grants is unpredictable. A key role for the City of Milpitas will be to monitor and pursue grant opportunities for Plan Area improvements, including grants addressing storefront and streetscape improvements, pedestrian/bicycle/micromobility transportation, infrastructure improvements, flood control, roadway construction, and sustainable/livable communities.
Potential sources of grant funding are described below.
It should be noted that this list of funding opportunities should not be considered exhaustive and may be subject to change over time.
SANTA CLARA COUNTY MEASURE B
In 2016, Santa Clara County voters approved Measure B, a 30-year, half-cent countywide sales tax to enhance transit, highways, expressways and active transportation (bicycles, pedestrians and complete streets). The City has used
Measure B funds to finance prior projects in the City’s CIP.
TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT ARTICLE 3
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
administers the Transportation Development Act Article
3 (TDA-3) funding program for pedestrian and bicycle
projects within the nine-county MTC region. The funding is generated by a quarter-cent sales tax assessed statewide for transportation improvements.
MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN 179 2025 PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITIES
The California Strategic Growth Council administers the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC)
program to provide affordable housing and transportation infrastructure funding for transit-oriented development and related infrastructure projects that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Eligible projects may include
affordable housing developments; active transportation
improvements, such as sidewalks, paths, and bike lanes; transportation-related amenities, such as bus shelters, benches, or shade trees; and other programs that
demonstrate improvements to the connectivity and
accessibility of jobs and housing, increase options for mobility, reduce air pollution, and encourage infill
development.
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM
The Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP)
consolidates funding from various transportation
programs at both the state and federal level, including the federal Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA), and Safe Routes to School program. The purpose of the ATP is to encourage and
increase use of active modes of transportation, including walking and biking, as well as the safety and mobility
of non-motorized users. Eligible projects may include
infrastructure projects, such as capital improvements;
non-infrastructure projects, such as education,
encouragement, and enforcement activities; combination
projects, such as those that combine infrastructure
and non-infrastructure projects; and transportation
plans located in disadvantage communities, such as
community-wide bicycle, pedestrian, safe routes to school, or other active transportation plans.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
The City of Milpitas is designated as an entitlement
jurisdiction under the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) Community Planning and
Development (CPD) program and is therefore eligible for formula-based funding allocations under the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement program.
CDBG funds can be used to support a wide array of
public services and infrastructure improvements, so long as they provide benefits to low- and moderate-income
persons, prevent or eliminate slums or blight, or help to remediate urgent threats to the health or welfare of the community for which other funds are not available. Use
of entitlement funds is guided through the preparation
of a five-year Consolidated Plan, as well as annual action plans. Upon completion of the next Consolidated Plan in 2026, the City may elect to allocate CDBG funds towards implementation of the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan, though this may divert resources from other City priorities.
LOW-INTEREST INFRASTRUCTURE LOAN PROGRAMS
The City of Milpitas could consider applying for funds from a variety of low-interest loan programs that provide funding for infrastructure projects. Potential sources of low-interest loan funding are described below. It should be noted that this list of funding opportunities should not be considered exhaustive and may be subject to change over time.
INFRASTRUCTURE STATE REVOLVING LOAN FUND
The California Infrastructure and Economic Development
Bank (I-Bank) manages the Infrastructure State Revolving Fund (ISRF) program to provide loans to public agencies and non-profits for a wide variety of public infrastructure and economic expansion projects. Eligible project categories include rehabilitation of city streets, rehabilitation and/or replacement of water and wastewater treatment facilities; new parks and recreational facilities; flood control measures; educational, cultural, and social facilities; goods movement related infrastructure; and expanded public transit. The ISRF program could potentially be used to fund a variety of the planned improvements, including water, sewer,
and stormwater infrastructure improvements and flood
prevention improvements.
DRINKING WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND
The Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) is part of a long-standing partnership between the State of California and the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). Similar to the ISRF, the program makes low-cost
financing available to local jurisdictions and water and sanitation districts, to facilitate infrastructure improvements and upgrades that ensure safety and availability of public water systems. Projects eligible for the DWSRF program
include the rehabilitation, replacement, or installation of water distribution and transmission improvements that
bring water pressure to safe levels or prevent contamination due to leaky pipes, among other eligible improvements. To the extent that some of the infrastructure improvements identified in Table 8-1 align with the eligibility criteria for these funds this loan program could provide a source of financing for implementation.
CLEAN WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND
The Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF), similar
to the DWSRF, provides low-cost financing to protect
California’s waters from pollution. CWRF provides below- market interest rates, 30-year financing, loan forgiveness, and is compatible with other funding sources. A wide
range of projects, from treatment works to stormwater
management to water conservation, are eligible. The
City could evaluate whether any of the infrastructure
improvements identified in Table 8-1 are consistent with the eligibility criteria for these funds.
01 INTRODUCTION
180 MILPITAS GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
www.ascent.inc
DRAFT SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
Gateway-Main Street
Specific Plan
State Clearinghouse No. 2024070432
PREPARED FOR:
City of Milpitas
455 E. Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95030
ATTENTION:
Jay Lee
Planning Director
April 2025
DRAFT SUBSEQUENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan
State Clearinghouse No. 2024070432
PREPARED FOR:
City of Milpitas – Planning Department
455 E. Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95030
CONTACT:
Jay Lee
Planning Director
[email protected]
PREPARED BY:
Ascent Environmental, Inc., DBA Ascent
455 Capitol Mall, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 95814
CONTACT:
Pat Angell
Principal
916.732.3324
[email protected]
APRIL 2025
20210060.01
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... ES-1 ES.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................... ES-1 ES.2 Summary Description of the Project ......................................................................................................................... ES-1 ES.3 Environmental Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures ............................................................... ES-2 ES.4 Alternatives to the Proposed Project ....................................................................................................................... ES-3 ES.5 Areas of Controversy ..................................................................................................................................................... ES-3 ES.6 Issues to be Resolved .................................................................................................................................................... ES-4 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 1-1
1.1 Project background ...........................................................................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Type, Purpose, Scope, and Intended Uses of This Draft SEIR .............................................................................1-1
1.3 Effects Found Not to Be Significant ............................................................................................................................ 1-2
1.4 Agency Roles and Responsibilities .............................................................................................................................. 1-5
1.5 Public Review Process ...................................................................................................................................................... 1-6
1.6 Draft SEIR Organization .................................................................................................................................................. 1-6
1.7 Standard Terminology ..................................................................................................................................................... 1-6 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 2-1
2.1 Project Location and Setting ......................................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Project Background and Need ..................................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.3 Project Objectives ............................................................................................................................................................. 2-7
2.4 Proposed Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan ........................................................................................................ 2-9
2.5 Proposed Amendments ............................................................................................................................................... 2-20
2.6 Anticipated Actions ........................................................................................................................................................ 2-20 3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ................................ ................................ ........................ 3-1
3.1 Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................................................................... 3.1-1
3.2 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3.2-1
3.3 Biological Resources ..................................................................................................................................................... 3.3-1
3.4 Cultural, and Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................. 3.4-1
3.5 Energy................................................................................................................................................................................ 3.5-1
3.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change............................................................................................... 3.6-1
3.7 Land Use and Planning ................................................................................................................................................ 3.7-1
3.8 Noise and Vibration ...................................................................................................................................................... 3.8-1
3.9 Population and Housing ............................................................................................................................................. 3.9-1
3.10 Public Services and Recreation ................................................................................................................................ 3.10-1
3.11 Transportation ............................................................................................................................................................... 3.11-1
3.12 Utilities and Service Systems .................................................................................................................................... 3.12-1 4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 4-1
4.1 Introduction to the Cumulative Analysis ................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Cumulative Impact Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................................... 4-1
4.3 Cumulative Setting ........................................................................................................................................................... 4-2
4.4 Analysis of Cumulative Impacts ................................................................................................................................... 4-4
Table of Contents Ascent
City of Milpitas
ii Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 5 ALTERNATIVES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........5-1
5.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2 Considerations for Selection of Alternatives ........................................................................................................... 5-2
5.3 Alternatives Considered but not Evaluated Further ............................................................................................. 5-2
5.4 Alternatives Selected for Detailed Analysis ............................................................................................................. 5-4
5.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative ........................................................................................................................ 5-9 6 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 6-1
6.1 Growth Inducement .......................................................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 Significant and Unavoidable Adverse Impacts ....................................................................................................... 6-4
6.3 Significant and Irreversible Environmental Changes ............................................................................................ 6-4 7 REPORT PREPARERS ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 7-1 8 REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 8-1
Appendices
Appendix A Notice of Preparation and Comments Received
Appendix B Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Model Calculations Appendix C Noise Model Calculations
Appendix D Gateway-Main Street Vehicle Miles Traveled for Environmental Review Appendix E Draft Gateway-Main Street Water Supply Assessment Figures
Figure 2-1 Regional Location ............................................................................................................................................................. 2-2 Figure 2-2 Specific Plan Area ............................................................................................................................................................. 2-4 Figure 2-3 Specific Plan Boundary Changes ................................................................................................................................. 2-5 Figure 2-4 General Plan Land Use.................................................................................................................................................... 2-6 Figure 2-5 Midtown Plan Land Use ................................................................................................................................................. 2-8 Figure 2-6 District Framework ......................................................................................................................................................... 2-10 Figure 2-7 Specific Plan Land Use .................................................................................................................................................. 2-13 Figure 3.3-1 Land Cover ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3.3-6 Figure 3.3-2 Aquatic Resources ......................................................................................................................................................... 3.3-7 Figure 3.7-1 Existing General Plan Land Use ................................................................................................................................ 3.7-5 Figure 3.7-2 Existing Midtown Plan Land Use .............................................................................................................................. 3.7-7 Figure 3.11-1 Existing Transit Services ............................................................................................................................................. 3.11-11 Figure 3.11-2 Existing and Proposed Bicycle Network ............................................................................................................. 3.11-14
Tables
Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................... ES-5 Table 2-1 General Plan Land Use and Zoning ........................................................................................................................... 2-3 Table 2-2 Midtown Plan Land Use ................................................................................................................................................. 2-7 Table 2-3 Proposed New Specific Plan Zoning Districts ....................................................................................................... 2-14
Ascent Table of Contents
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR iii Table 2-4 Changes in Buildout Under Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan .................................................................... 2-15 Table 2-6 Available Incentives ....................................................................................................................................................... 2-19 Table 3.2-1 National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards .................................................................................. 3.2-2 Table 3.2-2 Sources and Health Effects of Criteria Air Pollutants ....................................................................................... 3.2-11 Table 3.2-3 Attainment Status Designations for Santa Clara County ............................................................................... 3.2-12 Table 3.2-4 Specific Plan VMT and Service Population Changes ....................................................................................... 3.2-15 Table 3.2-5 Adopted General Plan Estimated Operational Emissions (Average Daily) .............................................. 3.2-16 Table 3.2-6 Proposed Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Estimated Operational Emissions (Average Daily) ...... 3.2-16 Table 3.3-1 Special-Status Plant Species Known to Occur in the Vicinity of the Specific Plan Area and Their Potential for Occurrence in the Specific Plan Area ................................................................................. 3.3-8 Table 3.3-2 Special-Status Wildlife Species Known to Occur in the Vicinity of the Specific Plan Area and Their Potential for Occurrence in the Specific Plan Area ............................................................................... 3.3-12 Table 3.4-1 AB 52 Consultation ..................................................................................................................................................... 3.4-14 Table 3.5-1 General Plan Annual Operation-Related Building Energy Consumption (2040) ..................................... 3.5-9 Table 3.5-2 Proposed Milpitas Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Annual Operation-Related Building Energy Consumption (2040) ...................................................................................................................................... 3.5-9 Table 3.5-3 General Plan Annual Transportation Energy Consumption (2040) ............................................................ 3.5-10 Table 3.5-4 Proposed Milpitas Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Annual Transportation Energy Consumption (2040) ................................................................................................................................................... 3.5-10 Table 3.6-1 City of Milpitas Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory for 2015, 2019, and Building -as-Usual Forecast Years (MTCO2e) ............................................................................................................................................ 3.6-6 Table 3.6-2 Project Generated VMT and Population ............................................................................................................. 3.6-10 Table 3.6-3 General Plan Annual Operational GHG Emissions for Specific Plan Area ................................................ 3.6-10 Table 3.6-4 Proposed Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Annual Operational GHG Emissions ............................. 3.6-11 Table 3.7-1 Existing General Plan Land Use and Zoning within the Proposed Specific Plan Area ........................... 3.7-4 Table 3.7-2 Existing Midtown Plan Land Use and Zoning within the Proposed Specific Plan Area ........................ 3.7-6 Table 3.7-3 Project Consistency with the ABAG Plan Bay Area 2050 ............................................................................... 3.7-10 Table 3.7-4 Project Consistency with the City of Milpitas 2040 General Plan ............................................................... 3.7-13 Table 3.8-1 Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria for General Assessment ............................................................... 3.8-1 Table 3.8-2 Caltr ans Recommendations Regarding Levels of Vibration Exposure ........................................................ 3.8-1 Table 3.8-3 Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environment ......................................................................... 3.8-2 Table 3.8-4 Stationary (Non-Transportation) Noise Source Standards ............................................................................. 3.8-3 Table 3.8-5 Stationary (Non-Transportation) Noise Source Standards (Commercial Mixed-Use and Transit-Oriented Areas) ............................................................................................................................................... 3.8-5 Table 3.8-6 Typical A-Weighted Noise Levels ............................................................................................................................ 3.8-7 Table 3.8-7 Human Response to Different Levels of Ground Noise and Vibration ....................................................... 3.8-8 Table 3.8-8 Base and Future Traffic Noise Conditions Identified in the General Plan Update EIR ......................... 3.8-10 Table 3.8-9 Noise Ranges of Typical Construction Equipment ........................................................................................... 3.8-11 Table 3.8-10 Vibration Ranges of Typical Construction Equipment ..................................................................................... 3.8-11
Table of Contents Ascent
City of Milpitas
iv Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Table 3.8-11 Summary of Modeled Traffic Noise Levels under General Plan and Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Conditions ............................................................................................................................................ 3.8-15 Table 3.8-12 Representative Groundborne Vibration for Construction Equipment ...................................................... 3.8-17 Table 3.9-1 Changes in Population and Employment at Full Buildout Under Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan .................................................................................................................................................................... 3.9-4 Table 3.10-1 Schools Serving the Specific Plan Area and Enrollment ................................................................................ 3.10-7 Table 3.10-2 Student Generation in the Specific Plan Area Beyond General Plan Buildout ..................................... 3.10-12 Table 3.11-1 Existing Transit Services within the Vicinity of the Specific Plan Area ...................................................... 3.11-12 Table 3.11-2 Project-Generated Vehicle Miles Traveled Threshold ................................................................................... 3.11-16 Table 3.11-3 Total Project-Generated Vehicle Miles Traveled Assessment ..................................................................... 3.11-21 Table 3.12-1 Utilities Providers for the Specific Plan Area .................................................................................................... 3.12-12 Table 3.12-2 City of Milpitas Normal, Single-, and Multiple-Dry Year Water Supply and Demand (2025–2045) (AFY) ..................................................................................................................................................... 3.12-16 Table 3.12-3 Solid Waste Disposal Facilities .............................................................................................................................. 3.12-19 Table 3.12-4 Solid Waste Generation Rates ............................................................................................................................... 3.12-19 Table 3.12-5 Comparison of Adopted General Plan to the Specific Plan Water Demands ..................................... 3.12-24 Table 4-1 Geographic Scope of Cumulative Impacts .............................................................................................................. 4-2 Table 4-2 Cumulative Projects List ................................................................................................................................................. 4-4 Table 4-3 Summary of Modeled Traffic Noise Levels under Cumulative No Project and Cumulative Plus Project Conditions .......................................................................................................................................................... 4-13 Table 4-4 Cumulative and Cumulative Plus Project VMT Assessment ............................................................................ 4-16 Table 5-1 Summary of Environmental Effects of the Alternatives Relative to the Proposed Specific Plan ........... 5-9
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR v
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
°C degrees Celsius
°F Fahrenheit
2022 Scoping Plan Final 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality 2022 SIP 2022 State SIP Strategy
AB Assembly Bill
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
ACC Advanced Clean Cars
ACWD Alameda County Water District
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ADT average daily trips
AFY acre-feet per year
ALUCP Airport Land Use Commission Plan
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit
Basin Plan San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) Water Quality Control Plan BAWSCA Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency
BIOS Biogeographic Information and Observation System
BMP best management practice
CA MUTCD California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices CA SDWA California Safe Drinking Water Act
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAA federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
CAAQS California ambient air quality standards
CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
CalRecycle California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP Climate Action Plan
CARB California Air Resources Board
CARE Community Air Risk Evaluation
List of Abbreviations Ascent
City of Milpitas
vi Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR CBSC California Building Standards Code
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CCR California Code of Regulations
CD Community Design
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA Guide BAAQMD’s 2022 CEQA Guidelines
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CGC California Government Code
CH4 methane
CI carbon intensity
CIP Capital Improvement Program
CIR Circulation
City City of Milpitas
CIWMA California Integrated Waste Management Act
CMA Congestion Management Agency
CMP Congestion Management Program
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CON Conservation and Sustainability
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CRPR California Rare Plant Rank
CTP California Transportation Plan
CUPA Certified Unified Program Agencies
CWA Clean Water Act
CWC California Water Code
dB decibels
DHS California Department of Health Services
diesel PM exhaust from diesel engines
DOF California Department of Finance
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
Ascent List of Abbreviations
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR vii Draft SEIR draft subsequent environmental impact report DWR California Department of Water Resources
ECA Essential Connectivity Area
EO Executive Order
EPA US Environmental Protection Agency
EPAct Energy Policy Act of 1992
ESA Endangered Species Act
EV electric vehicle
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Maps
FTA Federal Transit Administration
General Plan Update EIR Draft EIR for the Milpitas General Plan Update General Plan City of Milpitas General Plan 2040
GHG greenhouse gas
GHGRP greenhouse gas reduction plan
HAP hazardous air pollutant
HRA health risk assessment
HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
Hz hertz
I Interstate
ICM Integrated Catchment Modeling
IEPR Integrated Energy Policy Report
in/sec inches per second
IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation
IWRP integrated water resources planning study
LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standard
LDIGR Interim Local Development Intergovernmental Review Ldn Day-Night Level
Leq Equivalent Continuous Sound Level
LID Low Impact Development
Lmax Maximum Sound Level
LOS level of service
loudness amplitude
List of Abbreviations Ascent
City of Milpitas
viii Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR LRA Local Responsibility Areas
LRT light rail transit
LU Land Use
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MCL maximum contaminant level
Metro Plan Milpitas Metro Specific Plan
MFD Milpitas Fire Department
mgd million gallons per day
Midtown SP EIR Environmental Impact Report for the Midtown Specific Plan MLD most likely descendant
MMC Milpitas Municipal Code
MMTCO2e million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent mPa micro-Pascals
MPD Milpitas Police Department
MPO metropolitan planning organization
MSI Milpitas Sanitation, Inc.
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
MTC/ABAG Metropolitan Transportation Association/Association of Bay Area Governments MTIP Met ropolitan Transportation Improvement Program
MTP/SCS metropolitan transportation plan/sustainable communities strategy MUSD Milpitas School District
N2O nitrous oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NO nitric oxide
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOP notice of preparation
NOX oxides of nitrogen
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NWIC Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University OO Gateway Office Overlay
OPR Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
ozone photochemical smog
Ascent List of Abbreviations
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ix PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
pitch frequency
PM particulate matter
PM10 respirable particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers or less PM2.5 fine particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less PPV peak particle velocity
PRC Public Resources Code
PV solar photovoltaic
RHNA Regional Housing Need Allocation
RMS root-mean-square
ROG reactive organic gases
ROW right-of-way
RPS California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard
RTP regional transportation plan
RTP/SCS Regional Transportation/Sustainable Communities Strategy RWF Regional Wastewater Facility
RWQCB regional water quality control board
SAF Plan State Alternative Fuels Plan
SB Senate Bill
SBWR South Bay Water Recycling
SCCLD Santa Clara County Library District
SCS sustainable communities strategy
SCVHP Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan
SCVURPPP Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Prevention Program SCVWD Santa Clara Valley Water District
SDMP Storm Drain Master Plan
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SEIR subsequent environmental impact report
SFBAAB San Fransisco Bay Area Air Basin
SFPUC San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014
SIP State implementation plan
SJWC San Jose Water Company
SMART Simple Mobile Access to Reliable Transit
SO2 sulfur dioxide
List of Abbreviations Ascent
City of Milpitas
x Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR SOI Sphere of Influence
Specific Plan Area Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area Specific Plan Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan
SPL sound pressure level
SR State Route
SSMP sanitary sewer management plan
SVCE Silicon Valley Clean Energy
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC Toxic air contaminants
TAG City of Milpitas Transportation Analysis Guidelines TASP Milpitas Transit Area Specific Plan
TCR tribal cultural resource
TDM Transportation Demand Management
TOD Transit-Oriented Development
TPBMP City of Milpitas Trail, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Master Plan UPRR Union Pacific Railroad
USFWS US Fish and Wildlife Service
UWMP City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
UWMPA Urban Water Management Planning Act
VdB vibration decibels
VMT Report Milpitas Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan: Vehicle Miles Traveled for the Environmental Review
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VTA Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
VTP Santa Clara Valley Transportation Plan
WMP Water Master Plan
WSA water supply assessment
WSCP Water Shortage Contingency Plan
ZEV zero-emission vehicle
ZWED Zanker Organic Digester Facility
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ES-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1 INTRODUCTION
This summary is provided in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (State CEQA Guidelines) Section 15123. As stated in Section 15123(a), “an EIR [environmental impact report] shall contain a brief summary of the proposed action and its consequences. The language of the summary should be as clear and simple as reasonably practical.” As required by the guidelines, this chapter includes a summary description of the Gateway - Main Street Specific Plan (Specific Plan), a synopsis of environmental impacts and recommended mitigation measures (Table ES-1), identification of the alternatives evaluated and of the environmentally superior alternative, and a discussion of the areas of controversy associated with the project.
ES.2 SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
ES.2.1 Project Location
The Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area (Specific Plan Area) is approximately 605 acres within the City. The City, located in northern Santa Clara County, within the South San Francisco Bay Area, is situated north of San Jose and east of Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, and Mountain View along State Route 237 (Highway 237) (Figure 2 -1). The City is served by three major freeways: Interstate (I)-880, I-680, State Route 237 (Highway 237)/Calaveras Boulevard, and the County-managed Montague Expressway.
ES.2.2 Background and Need for the Project
The Midtown Plan, adopted in 2002 and updated in 2010, is the predecessor plan to the proposed Milpitas Gateway- Main Street Specific Plan. Its aim was to respond to a series of development activities in the Midtown area, including the construction of new housing, reinvestment in the Great Mall, and the future extension of the VTA Light Rail Transit line and BART to the area by creating a cohesive Specific Plan for Midtown.
The Milpitas General Plan Update, adopted in 2021, is the guiding, long-term plan and policy document for the physical development of the city through 2040. The City’s General Plan Land Use Element designates the adopted Midtown Plan area as Milpitas Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan (Specific Plan). The General Plan includes the following actions related to the development of the proposed Specific Plan: Action LU -2A to maintain and implement the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan goals, policies and development standards and guidelines to create a mixed- use community that includes high-density, transit-oriented housing and a central community ‘gathering place’ while maintaining needed industrial, service and commercial uses; and Action ED -3H to work with property owners to facilitate development of vacant and underutilized properties on Main Street to achieve the highest and best use.
The Specific Plan Area includes the historic commercial core of the city, centered on Main Street and the Calaveras Gateway. The proposed Specific Plan would update the vision, standards, and policies of the Midtown Plan. The project would implement the General Plan goals and policies to update the Midtown Plan with a focus on revitalizing Main Street as the city’s historic core and improving Calaveras Boulevard as a western gateway into the city.
ES.2.3 Project Objectives
The objectives are based on the proposed Specific Plan vision and are intended to achieve the following:
Develop a center for the City composed of districts and neighborhoods organized around hubs of activity to improve the character of the area with high quality development, landscaping, and streetscape design.
Executive Summary Ascent
City of Milpitas
ES-2 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Integrate a mix of land uses throughout Main Street and the surrounding districts to create a walkable downtown supported by commercial retail and office uses, civic and cultural anchors, and infill residential and neighborhood service nodes.
Improve mobility and access for infill and mixed-use development in the community, through creation of complete streets, trails and transit improvements to support a walkable and bikeable urban community. Create diverse and meaningful public open space that builds on the assets of its location to support new public realm streetscape improvements, urban parks, plazas, special gathering places, and connected open space.
ES.2.4 Characteristics of the Project
Specific plans are a land use planning tool for the further implementation of the General Plan for individual development proposals in a defined geographic area. They give local land use agencies the ability to establish land use and design regulations to create development that is consistent with site- specific physical constraints and opportunities as well as available infrastructure. All subsequent development within the boundaries of the specific plan area is subject to the requirements of the specific plan. Sections 65450 through 65457 of the California Government Code grant authority to the City for the development and adoption of specific plans.
The purpose of the proposed Specific Plan is to guide land use and development consistent with the General Plan; implement the City’s economic development strategy and help facilitate investment in the Specific Plan’s Focus Areas; preserve and enhance existing neighborhoods; and plan for the future transition of Urban Reserve lands. The Specific Plan identifies four focus areas: Gateway District, Crossroads District, Main Street District, and Abbot District.
The Specific Plan proposes a new project area boundary, which includes additional areas that currently have other designations in the General Plan Land Use Element and removes areas south of Great Mall Parkway that were included in the Midtown Plan. The proposed Specific Plan Land Use Framework would implement the vision for the Specific Plan focus areas through Specific Plan Zoning Districts and existing Citywide Zoning Districts.
ES.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION
MEASURES
ES.3.1 Project-Specific Impacts
This Subsequent EIR (SEIR) has been prepared pursuant to the CEQA (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 1500, et seq.) to evaluate the physical environmental effects of the proposed Specific Plan. The City of Milpitas (City) is the lead agency for the project. The City has the principal responsibility for approving and carrying out the project and for ensuring that the requirements of CEQA have been met.
Table ES-1, presented at the end of this chapter, provides a summary of the environmental impacts for the project.
The table provides the level of significance of the impact before mitigation, recommended mitigation measures, and the level of significance of the impact after implementation of the mitigation measures.
ES.3.2 Significant-and-Unavoidable Impacts and Cumulative Impacts As documented throughout Chapter 3 (Sections 3.1 through 3.12) and Chapter 4, “Cumulative Impacts,” of this Draft SEIR, after implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, all of the impacts associated with the project would be reduced to a less-than-significant level or remain significant and unavoidable as identified in the General Plan Update EIR, with the exception of the following impacts identified for the proposed Specific Plan that would be significant and unavoidable:
Ascent Executive Summary
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ES-3 Impact 3.4-1 (Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a Historical Resource) Impact 3.4-2 (Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of Unique Archaeological Resources) Impact 3.4-3 (Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource) Impact 3.8-2 (Generate a Substantial Increase in Long-Term Transportation Noise Levels) Cumulative Impact 4.4.4-1 (Contribute to Cumulative Impacts to Historical Resources, Archaeological, and Tribal Cultural Resources)
Cumulative Impact 4.4.8-2 (Contribute to Cumulative Traffic Noise Impacts) Cumulative Impact 4.4.11-1 (Contribute to Cumulative Impacts Related to Vehicle Miles Traveled) ES.4 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The following provides brief descriptions of the alternatives evaluated in this Draft S EIR. Alternative 1: No Project Alternative assumes that the existing Midtown Plan and the associated General Plan land use designations and zoning would remain. No specific plan document would be adopted. Alternative 2: Increased Residential Development for Main Street and Crossroad Districts Alternative consists of the proposed Specific Plan modified that would apply the Specific Plan development incentives identified in Section 2.4.4, “Development Incentives,” of Chapter 2, “Project Description,” to the Main Street and Crossroad Districts to increase residential development beyond the proposed Specific Plan.
ES.5 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15123 requires the summary section of a Draft EIR to identify the areas of controversy known to the lead agency, including issues raised by agencies and the public. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15123 requires the summary section of a Draft EIR to identify issues to be resolved related to the proposed project.
A notice of preparation (NOP) was distributed for the Specific Plan SEIR on July 15, 2024, to responsible agencies, interested parties, and organizations, as well as private organizations and individuals that may have an interest in the project. A virtual public scoping meeting was held on August 1, 2024. The purpose of the NOP and the scoping meeting was to provide notification that an SEIR for was being prepared for the Specific Plan and to solicit input on the scope and content of the environmental document. The NOP and responses to the NOP are included in Appendix A of this Draft AEIR. Key concerns and issues that were expressed during the scoping process included the following:
Construction and operational traffic impacts of the Specific Plan in combination with other anticipated development in the area;
Request to prepare a Water Supply Assessment to evaluate the proposal’s consistency with the City’s Urban Water Management Plan and available water supplies to serve the development; water conservation measures; sufficient water supplies.
Concerns related to Valley Water-owned fee title property and easements for Valley Water’s Milpitas Pipeline and Lower Penitencia Creek within the Specific Plan Area as it relates to Valley Water encroachment permit requirements;
Concerns related to stream resources including mainstems, tributaries, drainages and floodplains associated with Penitencia Creek that may require notification to the LSA Program., migratory birds, fully protected species. Concerns related to nesting bird surveys, bats, Crotch’s bumble bee, and the Western Burrowing Owl; Concerns related to City and County of San Francisco owned in fee several parcels, and one easement, within the Specific Plan Area; San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) Right of Way parcels; consistency with SFPUC land use policies; and
Executive Summary Ascent
City of Milpitas
ES-4 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Concerns related to cultural and tribal cultural resources and compliance with AB 52 and SB 18 requirements. These issues are each addressed in this Draft SEIR.
ES.6 ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
Section 15123 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires the summary section of a Draft EIR to identify issues to be resolved in the EIR, including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate the significant project effects. The following issues, in addition to the areas of controversy, are identified to be resolved:
whether the proposed Specific Plan should be approved, modified, or denied; whether the is consistent with the City of Milpitas General Plan; and whether the mitigation measures identified in the Draft SEIR should be applied to the proposed Specific Plan.
Ascent Executive Summary
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ES-5 Table ES-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
Aesthetics
Impact 3.1-1: Have a Substantial Adverse Effect on a
Scenic Vista
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.1-2: Conflict with Applicable Zoning and Other Regulations Governing Scenic Quality in an Urbanized
Area
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.1-3: Light and Glare Impacts LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Air Quality
Impact 3.3-1: Conflict with or Obstruct Implementation
of the Applicable Air Quality Plan, or Result in a
Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Criteria
Pollutants
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.3-2: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial TAC concentrations
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.3-3: Result in Other Emissions (Such as Those
Leading to Odors) Adversely Affecting a Substantial
Number of People
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Biological Resources
Impact 3.3-1: Substantially Affect Special-Status Plant Species Either Directly or Through Habitat Modifications LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Executive Summary Ascent
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
ES-6 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
Impact 3.3-2: Substantially Affect Special-Status Wildlife Species Either Directly or Through Habitat Modifications LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.3-3: Substantially Affect any Riparian Habitat or Other Sensitive Natural Community Identified in Local or Regional Plans, Policies, or Regulations or by CDFW or
USFWS
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.3-4: Interfere with or Impede the Use of
Wildlife Nurseries
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.3-5: Have A Substantial Adverse Effect on State or Federally Protected Wetlands and Waters
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.3-6: Conflict with Local Policies and Ordinances LTS No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Cultural, and Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact 3.4-1: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a Historical Resource
PS Mitigation Measure 3.4-1a: Conduct Project-Specific Level Surveys Prior to altering or otherwise affecting a building or structure 50 years old or older and has not been previously evaluated as a potential historic resource, the City shall require the project applicant to retain a qualified architectural historian to eva luated and record it on a California Department of Parks and Recreation DPR 523 form or equivalent documentation. Its significance shall be assessed by a qualified architectural historian and evaluated against NRHP, CRHR, and local criteria. The evaluation process shall include the development of appropriate historical background research as context for the assessment of the significance. For buildings or structures that do not meet significance and integrity criteria, no further mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-1b: Historical Resources Documentation Prior to the alteration or demolition of any building or structure that qualifies as a historical resource, a qualified architectural historian, the project applicant, and the City SU, more severe
compared to the
General Plan Update
EIR
Ascent Executive Summary
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ES-7 Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
shall consult to consider measures that would enable the project to avoid direct or indirect impacts to the building or structure. If the project cannot avoid modifications to a historic building or structure that would result in a substantial adverse chan ge the City shall ensure that the project applicant have a qualified architectural historian thoroughly documents the building and associated landscaping and setting. If the historic building or structure is eligible or listed on the NRHP, documentation sh all include still and video photography and a written documentary record of the building to the standards of the Historic American Building Survey or Historic American Engineering Record, including accurate scaled mapping, architectural descriptions, and scaled architectural plans, if available. A copy of the record shall be deposited with the City, the Milpitas Historical Society, and the Milpitas Library. The record shall be accompanied by a report containing site-specific history and appropriate contextu al information. This information shall be gathered through site specific and comparative archival research, and oral history collection as appropriate.
Impact 3.4-2: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of Unique Archaeological Resources
PS Mitigation Measure 3.4-2a: Prepare and Implement Worker Training Program A training program will be provided to all construction personnel active on a given project site prior to implementation of earth moving activities. A qualified archaeologist meeting the United States Secretary of Interior guidelines for professional archaeologists shall prepare the program and provide the training to all constructi on personnel. The program will include relevant information regarding archaeological resources, including protocols for resource avoidance, applicable laws regulations, and the consequences of violating them. The program will also underscore the requirement for confidentiality and culturally-appropriate treatment of any find of significance as well as the actions that need to be taken after a find is made.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-2b: Identify and Protect Unknown Archaeological Resources During project-specific environmental review of development under the Specific Plan for any projects that include ground disturbance, the project applicant shall hire a qualified archaeologist to determine the potential for the project to result in signifi cant impacts. At a minimum, the effort shall include the following steps:
(i) Record’s search – The qualified archaeologist shall request a record’s search of the entire project area plus a one-half mile buffer from the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University.
(ii) Surface survey exposed soil – The qualified archaeologist shall complete a pedestrian survey of any exposed soils on the project site.
(iii) Reporting – The qualified archaeologist shall complete a report/memo that summarizes the results of the record search and pedestrian survey as well as provides SU, more severe
compared to the
General Plan Update
EIR
Executive Summary Ascent
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
ES-8 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
recommendations for additional study and/or mitigation measures to protect and/or reduce significant impacts to archaeological resources, as needed. If indigenous materials are identified, the associated tribe(s) will be contacted by the City and will be given the opportunity to review the report and provide input for consideration. (iv) Preservation in place – The project applicant shall consult with the qualified archaeologist to consider means of avoiding or reducing ground disturbance within the archaeological site boundaries, including minor modifications of building footprint, landscape modification, the placement of protective fill (capping), the establishment of a preservation easement, or other means that will avoid or substantially preserve the resource in place. If avoidance or substantial preservation in place is not possib le, the project applicant shall implement Mitigation Measure 3.4 -2(e).
Mitigation Measure 3.4-2c: Identify and Protect Known Unique Archaeological Resources During project-specific environmental review of development under the Specific Plan for any projects that include ground disturbance, the project applicant shall define each project’s area of effect for archaeological resources. The project applicant shall determine the potential for the project to result in cultural resources impacts, based on the extent of ground disturbance and site modification anticipated for the project. The project applicant shall implement the following steps where it has been deter mined under Mitigation Measure 3.4-2b(iv) that avoidance or preservation in place is not feasible, a qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the City, and Native American tribe(s) as applicable, shall:
1) Retain a qualified archaeologist to conduct a subsurface investigation of the archaeological site, to ascertain whether buried archaeological materials are present and, if so, the extent of the deposit relative to the project’s area of effects. The proj ect applicant shall be responsible for facilitating access to the archaeological site if it is paved at the moment of testing. If an archaeological deposit is discovered, the archaeologist shall prepare a site record and a written report of the results of investigations and filed with the appropriate Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System. The archaeological resource shall be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist, who shall determine whether it qualifies as a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource under the criteria of CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5.
2) If the resource does not meet the criteria of CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5, then it shall be noted in the environmental document and no further mitigation is required unless there is a discovery during construction. In the event of a discovery Mitigation Measure 3.4-2e below shall be implemented. However, the archaeological resource may be identified as a tribal cultural resource regardless even if it is determined that it
Ascent Executive Summary
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ES-9 Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
is not a unique archaeological resource (See Mitigation Measures 3.4 -3b and 3.4-3c below for further information).
3) If archaeological material within the project’s area of effects is determined to qualify as a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource (as defined by CEQA), the project applicant shall consult with the qualified archaeologist to prepare a research design and archaeological data recovery plan for the recovery that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant and implement the data recovery plan prior to or during development of the site. The archaeologist shall pr epare a written report of the results of the data recovery and filed with the appropriate Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System. 4) If, in the opinion of the qualified archaeologist and tribe(s) as applicable and in light of the data available, the significance of the site is such that data recovery cannot capture the values of the resource, the project applicant shall reconsider pr oject plans in light of the high value of the resource, and implement more substantial modifications to the project that would allow the site to be preserved intact, such as project redesign, placement of fill, or project relocation or abandonment. If no s uch measures are feasible, the project applicant shall implement Mitigation Measure 3.4 2d.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-2d: Retain Archaeological Monitor During project-specific environmental review of development under the Specific Plan, the project applicant shall retain an archaeological monitor for projects where an archaeological resource cannot be preserved or avoided. The archaeological monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any ground -disturbing activities (e.g., tree removals, boring, excavation, drilling, and trenching) for the future projects within 100 feet from all known archaeological resources that have been determined eligible or listed in the CRHR and NRHP, California Historical Landmarks, and any archaeological resources that have not been evaluated for its significance. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the project applicant and the City prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity. The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground- disturbing activities, locations of ground-disturbing activities, soil types, cultural -related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered archaeological resource. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the project applicant.
Executive Summary Ascent
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
ES-10 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure 3.4-2e: For All Ground-Disturbing Construction Activities, Halt Ground Disturbance Upon Discovery of Subsurface Archaeological Features During project-specific environmental review under the Specific Plan, for projects where no archaeological materials have been identified as part of Mitigation Measures 3.4 -2b and 3.4-2c, in the event that any precontact or historic era subsurface archaeol ogical features or deposits, including locally darkened soil (“midden”), that could conceal cultural deposits are discovered during construction, all ground -disturbing activity within 100 feet of the resources shall be halted and a qualified professional a rchaeologist shall be retained to assess the significance of the find. If the qualified archaeologist determines the archaeological material to be Native American in nature, the project applicant shall contact the appropriate Native American tribe for thei r input on the preferred treatment of the find. Mitigation Measure 3.4-2b(iv) or Mitigation Measure 3.4-2c and Mitigation Measure 3.4-2d shall be implemented.
Impact 3.4-3: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource
PS Mitigation Measure 3.4-3a: Conduct Tribal Cultural Resources Awareness Training During project-specific environmental review for development under the Specific Plan, the City shall coordinate with California Native American tribe(s) to prepare tribal cultural resource awareness and sensitivity training. All crew members and contractors shall be trained in the protection of tribal cultural resources and sensitive archaeological resources that the tribe(s) deems important. Workers will be trained to halt work if tribal cultural resources or sensitive archaeological resources are encountered and the construction method consists of physical disturbance of land surfaces (e.g., soil disturbance). The program will also underscore the requirement for confidentiality and culturally - appropriate treatment of any find of significance to Native Amer icans and protocols, consistent, to the extent feasible, with Native American Tribal values. The tribe(s) shall determine the most appropriate method of training (e.g., in person, brochure, or archaeological consultant).
Mitigation Measure 3.4-3b: Identify and Protect Unknown Tribal Cultural Resources During project-specific environmental review under the Specific Plan, if the City in consultation or coordination with the tribe(s) determines that a project activity may cause a substantial adverse change to a tribal cultural resource, and measures to pro tect the resource are not otherwise identified in the consultation process, the project applicant shall implement the following steps to identify and protect tribal cultural resources or archaeological resources significant to the tribe that may be present in the project’s area of effects.
1) If a tribal cultural resource is identified, the project lead shall consult with the tribe(s) to consider means of avoiding or reducing ground disturbance within the resource boundaries, including minor modifications of building footprint, landscape SU, more severe
compared to the
General Plan Update
EIR
Ascent Executive Summary
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ES-11 Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
modification, the placement of protective fill (e.g., capping), the establishment of a preservation easement, or other means that will avoid or substantially preserve the resource in place. Similar to Mitigation Measure 3.4 -2b(iv). 2) If avoidance or substantial preservation in place of tribal cultural resources is not possible, the project lead shall implement Mitigation Measure 3.4 -3(c). 3) For projects that require subsurface testing of archaeological sites that contain indigenous materials, the project applicant shall retain the Native American tribe(s) to monitor the subsurface testing of the project area that is required under Mitigation Measure 3.4-2c. The type of subsurface testing (e.g., ground -penetrating radar, core, forensic dogs, excavation) shall be coordinated with the consulting tribe(s).
Mitigation Measure 3.4-3c: Identify and Protect Known Tribal Cultural Resources If the City determines that avoidance or preservation in place of a tribal cultural resource is not feasible and ground disturbance cannot be avoided, the project lead and Native American tribe(s) as applicable, shall develop a treatment plan. The treatmen t plan shall include, but not be limited to testing, excavation strategy, research design, resource significance assessment methods, a burial treatment agreement (if applicable), reporting requirements and health and safety procedures. The burial treatment agreement (if applicable) shall include a discussion of reburial options, locations, and potential easements, considering tribal preferences. This may be developed in conjunction with Mitigation Measure 3.4-2c.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-3d: Retain a Native American Monitor Irrespective of pedestrian survey or subsurface testing findings, the project lead shall notify the appropriate Native American tribe(s) and retain a representative for tribal cultural resource monitoring prior to the commencement of any ground -disturbing activities within 100 feet from all known tribal and archaeological resources (containing indigenous materials) that have been determined eligible or listed in the CRHR and NRHP, as well as California Historical Landmarks, and any archaeological resources that have not been evaluated for its significance. The project applicant shall contact the tribal representatives a minimum of seven days prior to beginning earthwork or other ground disturbing activities; construction activities will proceed if no respons e is received 48 hours prior to ground disturbing activities. The tribal monitor shall only be present onsite during the construction phases that involve ground disturbing activities, including but not limited to tree removals, boring, excavation, drilling , and trenching. The tribal monitor shall complete daily monitoring logs that describe each day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The onsite monitoring shall end when the site grading a nd excavation activities are completed, or
Executive Summary Ascent
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
ES-12 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
when the tribal representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for impacting tribal cultural resources.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-3e: Implement Native American Response and Treatment Protocol During project-specific environmental review under the Specific Plan, for projects where no archaeological materials have been identified as part of Mitigation Measures 3.4 -3b and 3.4-3c, in the event that any tribal cultural resources and/or precontact su bsurface archaeological features or deposits, including locally darkened soil (“midden”), that could conceal cultural deposits are discovered during construction, all ground -disturbing activity within 100 feet of the resources shall be halted. The project applicant shall contact the appropriate Native American tribe(s) for their input on the preferred treatment of the find. Mitigation Measure 3.4-3b (1) or Mitigation Measure 3.4-3c and Mitigation Measure
3.4-3d shall be implemented. If artifacts are recover ed from significant tribal cultural resources, the first option shall be to transfer the artifacts to an appropriate tribal representative. If possible, accommodations shall be made to reinter the artifacts at the project site or another mutually agreed upon (with the Native American representative) location within the Specific Plan Area. Only if no other options are available will recovered precontact archaeological material be housed at a qualified curation facility, if approved by the consulting tribe(s).
Impact 3.4-4: Disturb Human Remains LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Energy
Impact 3.5-1: Wasteful, Inefficient, or Unnecessary
Consumption of Energy, During Plan Construction or
Operation
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.5-2: Conflict with or Obstruct a State or Local Plan for Renewable Energy or Energy Efficiency
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Ascent Executive Summary
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ES-13 Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
Impact 3.6-1: Generate GHG Emissions, Either Directly or Indirectly, That May Have a Significant Impact on the
Environment
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.6-2: Consistent with Local Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Strategies and Plans
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Land Use and Planning
Impact 3.7-1: Physically Divide an Established
Community
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.7-2: Conflict With any Land Use Plan, Policy, or Regulation Adopted for the Purpose of Avoiding or
Mitigating an Environmental Effect
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Noise and Vibration
Impact 3.8-1: Generate Substantial Short-Term
(Construction) Noise
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.8-2: Generate a Substantial Increase in Long - Term Transportation Noise Levels
SU
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required SU
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.8-3: Generate a Substantial Increase in Long - Term Stationary Operational Noise
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Executive Summary Ascent
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
ES-14 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
Impact 3.8-4: Generate Substantial Short-Term
(Construction) Vibration
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Population and Housing
Impact 3.9-1: Induce Substantial Population Growth LTS No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.9-2: Displace Substantial Numbers of Existing
People or Housing
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Public Services and Recreation
Impact 3.10-1: Result in Substantial Adverse Physical
Impacts Associated with the Provision of New Fire
Facilities
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.10-2: Result in Substantial Adverse Physical
Impacts Associated with the Provision of New Police
Facilities
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.10-3: Result in Substantial Adverse Physical
Impacts Associated with the Provision of New School
Facilities
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.10-4: Result in Substantial Adverse Physical
Impacts Associated with the Demand for or Provision of
New Parks and Other Recreational Facilities
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Ascent Executive Summary
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ES-15 Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
Transportation
Impact 3.11-1: Conflict with a Program, Plan, Ordinance, or Policy Addressing the Circulation System, Including
Transit, Roadway, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.11-2: Conflict or Be Inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) Regarding Vehicle Miles
Traveled
SU
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Mitigation Measure 3.11-2a: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program Future employers shall develop and implement a commute trip reduction program and shall present the strategy to the City of Milpitas for review and approval. The following elements, or equally effective alternatives, shall be provided as part of the Commut e Trip Reduction program:
ridesharing program,
subsidized or discounted transit passes,
end-of-trip bicycle facilities,
employer-sponsored vanpool, and
guaranteed ride home program.
Additionally, the Commute Trip Reduction Program must be complimented with Commute Trip Reduction Marketing to share information, facilitate coordination, and implement marketing for services, infrastructure, and incentives provided by the Commute Trip Reduction Program. The following features, or similar alternatives, shall be implemented to satisfy the Commute Trip Reduction Marketing strategy. On-site or online commuter information services,
Employee transportation coordinators, and
On-site or online transit pass sales
Potential Reduction in VMT: Commute Trip Reduction programs discourage single- occupancy vehicle trips and encourage alternative modes of transportation such as carpooling, taking transit, walking, and biking, thereby reducing VMT. A voluntary commute trip reduction program can reduce employee commute VMT by up to 4.0 percent with full participation of all eligible employees (CAPCOA 2021).
Mitigation Measure 3.11-2b: Require Employers to Provide Employer -Sponsored Vanpool or Shuttle Service
The project applicant shall require building occupants or tenants (i.e., employer) to implement an employer-based shuttle or vanpool service. For large employers with corporate campuses, this may include running private shuttles to and from neighborhoods where employees live. For smaller employers, or buildings with multiple SU
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Executive Summary Ascent
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
ES-16 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
employer tenants, it may involve a shuttle connecting to regional transit, such as a Caltrain station, funded through an organization such as a transportation management association.
Potential Reduction in VMT: Vanpooling is a flexible form of public transportation that provides groups of five to 15 people with a cost -effective and convenient rideshare option for commuting, thus reducing single -occupancy trips and VMT. Employer - sponsored vanpool can reduce employee commute VMT by up to 7 percent (Fehr & Peers 2024).
Mitigation Measure 3.11-2c: Provide a Ridesharing Program Building occupants or tenants who provide employment for 50 people or more shall develop and implement ridesharing programs. The following strategies provide examples of a multifaceted approach for promoting a rideshare program:
designating a certain percentage of desirable parking spaces for ridesharing vehicles, designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ridesharing vehicles, and
providing an app or website for coordinating rides.
Potential Reduction in VMT: Ridesharing encourages carpooled vehicle trips in place of single-occupancy vehicle trips, thereby reducing the number of trips and VMT.
Ridesharing programs can reduce employee commute VMT by up to 8 percent (CAPCOA 2021).
Mitigation Measure 3.11-2d: Implement Carshare Program
The project applicant shall increase carshare access in the user’s community by deploying conventional carshare vehicles.
Potential Reduction in VMT: Carsharing offers people convenient access to a vehicle for personal or commuting purposes. This helps encourage transportation alternatives and reduces vehicle ownership, thereby reducing VMT. Carsharing can reduce VMT by up to
0.15 percent in the plan area (CAPCOA 2021).
Measure 3.11-2e: Establish a Bikeshare, Electric Bikeshare, and Scootershare Program Establish a bikeshare and scootershare program that provides users with on -demand access to bicycles, electric pedal assist bicycles, and electric scooters for short -term rentals.
Potential Reduction in VMT: This encourages a mode shift from vehicles to active modes of transportation, displacing VMT. Establishing bikeshare, electric bikeshare, and scootershare programs can result in up to 0.02 percent, 0.06 percent, and 0.07 percent VMT reduction in plan area, respectively (CAPCOA 2021).
Ascent Executive Summary
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ES-17 Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
Measure 3.11-2f: Implement On-Street Market Price Parking The City shall establish pricing all on-street parking in central business districts, employment centers, and retail centers within the Specific Plan area.
When pricing on-street parking, best practice is to allow for dynamic adjustment of prices to ensure approximately 85 percent occupancy, which helps prevent induced VMT due to circling behaviors as individuals search for a vacant parking space. In addition , this method should primarily be implemented in areas with available alternatives to driving, such as transit availability within 0.5. mile or areas of high residential density nearby (allowing for increased walking/biking). If the measure is implemented in a small area, residential parking permit programs should be considered to prevent parking intrusion on nearby streets in residential areas without priced parking.
Potential Reduction in VMT: Increasing the cost of parking increases the total cost of driving to a location, incentivizing shifts to other modes and thus decreasing total VMT to and from the priced areas. On-street market price parking can reduce VMT by u p to 30 percent in the plan area (CAPCOA 2021).
Impact 3.11-3: Substantially Increase Hazards Due to a
Geometric Design Feature or Incompatible Uses
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.11-4: Result in Inadequate Emergency Access LTS No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Utilities and Service Systems
Impact 3.12-1: Construction Impacts of New or Expanded
Water, Wastewater Treatment, or Storm Water Drainage,
Electric Power, Natural Gas, or Telecommunications
Facilities
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.12-2: Have Sufficient Water Supplies Available to Serve the Project and Reasonably Foreseeable Future
Development
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Executive Summary Ascent
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
ES-18 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
Impact 3.12-3: Have Adequate Wastewater Treatment
Capacity
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Impact 3.12-4: Solid Waste Facilities and Compliance
with Solid Waste Statutes and Regulations
LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
None required LTS
No change in General
Plan Update EIR
determination
Cumulative Impacts
Impact 4.4.1-1: Contribute to Cumulative Visual
Resources Impacts
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.1-12 Contribute to Cumulative Light and Glare Impacts
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.2-1: Contribute to Cumulative Conflicts with or Obstruction of Implementation of an Applicable Air
Quality Plan
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.2-2: Contribute to Cumulative Exposure of
TACs
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.2-3: Contribute to Cumulative Exposure of
Odors
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.3-1: Contribute to Cumulative Impacts on
Biological Resources
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.4-1: Contribute to Cumulative Impacts to
Historical Resources, Archaeological, and Tribal Cultural Resources
Cumulatively
considerable
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.4 -1a, 3.4-1b, 3.4-2a through 3.4-2e, and 3.4-3a through 3.4-3e would assist, but not fully mitigate, this impact . No additional measures are available
Cumulatively
considerable and SU
Impact 4.4.5-1: Contribute to Cumulative Energy Impacts Less than cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Ascent Executive Summary
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR ES-19 Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
Impact 4.4.6-1: Contribute to Cumulative Greenhouse
Gas Impacts
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.7-1: Physically Divide an Established
Community
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.7-2: Conflict with Any Land Use Plan, Policy, or Regulation Adopted for the Purpose of Avoiding or
Mitigating an Environmental Effect
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.8-1: Contribute to Cumulative Construction
Noise and Vibration Impacts
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.8-2: Contribute to Cumulative Traffic Noise
Impacts
Cumulatively
considerable
None required Cumulatively
considerable and SU
Impact 4.4.8-3: Contribute to Cumulative Operational
Noise Impacts
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.9-1: Contribute to Cumulative Inducement of
Unplanned Growth or Displacement
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.10-1: Contribute to Cumulative Impacts on
Public Services and Recreation
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.11-1: Transit Service and Facilities, Bicycle Facilities, and Pedestrian Facilities
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.11-2: Vehicle Miles Traveled Cumulatively
considerable
None required Cumulatively
considerable and SU
Impact 4.4.11-3: Geometric Design Hazards Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Executive Summary Ascent
NI = No impact LTS = Less than significant PS = Potentially significant S = Significant SU = Significant and unavoidable City of Milpitas
ES-20 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Impacts Significance before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after
Mitigation
Impact 4.4.11-4: Emergency Access Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.12-1: Contribute to Cumulative Impacts
Related to Water Supply
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.12-2: Contribute to Cumulative Impacts
Related to Wastewater
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
Impact 4.4.12-2: Contribute to Cumulative Impacts
Related to Solid Waste
Less than
cumulatively
considerable
None required Less than cumulatively
considerable
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 1-1 1 INTRODUCTION
This Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR) evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposed Specific Plan. This Draft SEIR has been prepared under the direction of the City of Milpitas (City) in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines. This chapter of the Draft SEIR provides information on:
the project requiring environmental analysis (synopsis); the type, purpose, and intended uses of the Draft SEIR; effects found not to be significant;
the agency roles and responsibilities;
the public review process;
the organization of the Draft SEIR; and
the standard terminology.
1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
The purpose of the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan (Specific Plan) is to guide land use and development consistent with the General Plan; implement the City’s economic development strategy and help facilitate investment in the Specific Plan’s Focus Areas; preserve and enhance existing neighborhoods; and plan for the future transition of Urban Reserve lands. The Specific Plan identifies four focus areas: Gateway District, Crossroads District, Main Street District, and Abbott District. The Specific Plan would require amendments to the General Plan as changes to the boundaries and land use and development standards of the adopted Midtown Plan Area are proposed. The Specific Plan proposes a new project area boundary that removes the portion of the Midtown Specific Plan Area south of the Great Mall Parkway, and adds area in the northwestern portion of the Specific Plan Area. The proposed Specific Plan would allow for additional residential development beyond what is allowed under the General Plan through increases in density and implementation of an incentive program. This would also include alterations in nonresidential development potential through mixed-use development.
For further information on the proposed Specific Plan, see Chapter 2, “Project Description.”
1.2 TYPE, PURPOSE, SCOPE, AND INTENDED USES OF THIS DRAFT SEIR Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, an SEIR should be prepared if an EIR has been certified for a project, but one or more of the following conditions are met:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
Introduction Ascent
City of Milpitas
1-2 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 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.
The City certified the General Plan Update and adopted the General Plan Update in March 2021. A summary of the adopted General Plan Update is provided in Section 2.1, “Project Background and Need,” of this Draft SEIR. Due to the proposed modifications to the adopted General Plan Update, the City has determined that the preparation of a SEIR is the appropriate environmental review document for the project, per the requirements of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
The General Plan Update, Draft EIR and Final EIR are available for review through the City and online at the following locations:
https://www.milpitas.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1147/Milpitas-2040-General-Plan-PDF https://www.milpitas.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1342/Notice-of-Determination-and-Final-EIR-PDF?bidId=.
An EIR is a public informational document used in the planning and decision-making process. An EIR assesses the environmental effects related to the planning, construction, and operation of a project and indicates ways to reduce or avoid significant environmental impacts. An EIR also discloses significant environmental impacts that cannot be avoided; any growth-inducing impacts of a project; effects found not to be significant; and significant cumulative impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in combination with the impacts of the project.
Mitigation has been recommended where feasible to reduce or avoid the project’s significant impacts. Mitigation measures from the General Plan Update EIR that were adopted and apply to the Specific Plan are identified. As an informational document for decision makers, a Draft SEIR is not intended to recommend either approval or denial of a project. CEQA requires the decision makers to balance the benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental impacts. If environmental impacts are identified as significant and unavoidable (i.e., no feasible mitigation is available to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level), the City may still approve the project if it believes that social, economic, or other benefits outweigh the unavoidable impacts. The City would then be required to make findings and state, in writing, the specific reasons for approving the project, based on information in the Draft SEIR and other information in the administrative record. In accordance with Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the document containing such reasons is called a “statement of overriding considerations.” The program-level analysis in this SEIR considers the broad environmental effects of the project consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15168. This SEIR will be used to evaluate subsequent projects and activities under the project. This SEIR is intended to provide the information and environmental analysis necessary to assist public agency decision-makers in considering approval of the project. Additional environmental review under CEQA may be required for subsequent projects and would be generally based on the subsequent project’s consistency with the project and the analysis in this SEIR, as required under CEQA. It may be determined that some future projects or activities under the project may be exempt from further environmental review. When subsequent projects or activities under the project are proposed, the City will examine the projects or activities to determine whether their effects were adequately analyzed in the General Plan Update EIR and this SEIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15168[c]).
1.3 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
CEQA allows a lead agency to limit the detail of discussion of environmental effects that are not potentially significant (PRC Section 21100, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15128). Based on a review of comments received on the notice of
Ascent Introduction
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 1-3 preparation (NOP) and at the scoping meeting (Appendix A) as well as additional research and analysis of relevant project data during preparation of this Draft SEIR, it was determined, for reasons described below, that the project would not result in significant environmental impacts to agriculture and forestry resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, mineral resources, or wildfire. Accordingly, these resources are not addressed further in this Draft SEIR.
1.3.1 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
The Specific Plan Area is located within the City of Milpitas, an urbanized area in northern Santa Clara County, within the South San Francisco Bay Area. The Specific Plan Area is fully developed and no agricultural, forestry, or timber resources exist on or adjacent to the Specific Plan Area. In addition, the Specific Plan Area is currently zoned for industrial, commercial, and residential purposes. Therefore, the project would not convert farmland, conflict with any zoning for agricultural uses or forest land, result in loss or conversion of forest land or involve other changes in the environment that would result in conversion of farmland or forest land. There would be no impact to agriculture or forestry resources.
1.3.2 Geology and Soils
There are known active faults that have been mapped within the city and numerous faults located in the region as illustrated. In addition, the California Geological Survey has established an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, the Hayward Fault Zone, which traverses the city, east of the Specific Plan Area. All projects would be required to comply with the provisions of the California Building Standards Code (CBSC), which requires development projects to perform geotechnical investigations in accordance with State law, engineer improvements to address potential seismic and ground failure issues, and use earthquake-resistant construction techniques to address potential earthquake loads when constructing buildings and improvements. As future development and infrastructure projects are considered by the City, each project will be evaluated for conformance with the CBSC, General Plan, and other regulations. In addition to the requirements associated with the CBSC and the Municipal Code, the General Plan includes policies and actions to ensure that development projects address potential geologic hazards, at-risk buildings and infrastructure is evaluated for potential risks, and site-specific studies are completed for area subject to liquefaction.
In addition, it is important to note that environmental impact analyses under CEQA generally are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents unless the proposed project might cause or risk exacerbating environmental hazards or conditions that already exist (State CEQA Guidelines, section 15126.2(a)). In those specific instances, it is the project’s impact on the environment and not the environment’s impact on the project that compels an evaluation of how future residents or users may be affected by exacerbated conditions (California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369). New development would not create new seismic events or exacerbate existing seismic hazards, because limited ground disturbance would not alter seismic and fault conditions in the region.
Therefore, impacts related to geology and soils would be less than significant.
1.3.3 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The use, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials is regulated and monitored by local fire departments, Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPA), the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health and the Department of Toxic Substances Control consistent with the requirements of Federal, State, and local regulations and policies. Facilities that store hazardous materials on-site are required to maintain a Hazardous Materials Business Plan in accordance with State regulations. In the event of an accidental release of hazardous materials, the local CUPA and emergency management agencies (e.g., Police and Fire) would respond. All future projects allowed under the Specific Plan would be required to comply with the provisions of Federal, State, and local requirements related to hazardous materials. In addition to the requirements associated with Federal and State regulations and the Municipal Code, the
Introduction Ascent
City of Milpitas
1-4 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR General Plan includes policies and actions to address potential impacts associated with hazardous materials among other issues. These policies and actions in the General Plan would ensure that potential hazards are identified on a project site, that development is located in areas where potential exposure to hazards and hazardous materials can be mitigated to an acceptable level, and that business operations comply with Federal and State regulations regarding the use, transport, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials. Specifically, Action SA-5a would require that applications for discretionary development projects provide detailed information regarding the potential for the historical use of hazardous materials on the site, using information from databases identifying past soil and/or groundwater contaminations, including the Cortese list. If warranted, identify and require mitigation measures to ensure the exposure to hazardous materials from historical uses has been mitigated to acceptable levels consistent with EPA and/or DTSC standards. As identified in the General Plan Update EIR, there are no hazardous materials release sites located in the General Plan Update Planning Area listed on the Cortese List (City of Milpitas 2021). The General Plan also includes policies and actions to ensure that the City has adequate emergency response plans and measures to respond in the event of an accidental release of a hazardous substance (City of Milpitas 2021). Therefore, impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant.
1.3.4 Hydrology and Water Quality
Existing regulatory requirements that manage water quality, and implement the San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) include requirements to obtain approval from the Regional Water Quality Control Boards for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits, other discharge permits, Water Quality Management Plans, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans, and to implement Best Management Practices. These regulatory requirements are intended to ensure that water quality does not degrade to levels that would violate water quality standards.
Future development projects under the Specific Plan would result in new impervious surfaces and could reduce rainwater infiltration and groundwater recharge. However, the majority of developable areas within the Santa Clara Plain Recharge Area and Specific Plan Area are currently developed with urban uses. The amount of new pavement and impervious surfaces, and the extent to which they affect infiltration, depends on the site-specific features and soil types of a given project site. However, all new development would be subject to stormwater quality requirements and the implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) measures that would reduce impervious surfaces and promote the use of infiltration in drainage improvements. Projects located within the Specific Plan Area would have less of an impact than projects converting open lands and spaces. Implementation and future development under the proposed Specific Plan would not appreciably add to the volume of imperious surfaces in the Specific Plan Area or the Santa Clara Plain Recharge Area, when compared to the overall size of the regional groundwater basin recharge area. The proposed Specific Plan contains standards to reduce impacts associated with flooding including standards to minimize damage associated with flooding events and comply with regulations stipulated by FEMA and the National Flood Insurance Program and require that new development within a FEMA-designated flood hazard zone must follow the City’s construction standards for such areas as currently laid out in the Milpitas Municipal Code Section XI-15 (Floodplain Management Regulations).
The City manages local storm drain facilities and the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) is responsible for regional flood control planning within the County. The City is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The NFIP provides property owners and renters with federally backed 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 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). The City’s meets this requirement through the implementation of Floodplain Management Regulations specified in Section XI Chapter 15 of the Milpitas Municipal Code. The 2021 Storm Drain Master Plan outlines proposed land uses for portions of the Specific Plan Area, but not others. Areas with no defined land uses were assigned subbasin-specific hydrology parameters. The Storm Drain Master Plan highlights three low-priority improvements within the Specific Plan Area at: Main Street and Sierra Way; on Comet Drive; and a short segment of Railroad Avenue. Additionally, the report identifies four Capital Improvement Plan storm drain main extensions along Main Street. The proposed Specific Plan contains standards to reduce impacts associated with stormwater and
Ascent Introduction
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 1-5 drainage including standards to provide storm drain infrastructure that is designed to serve new development and meets City standards; construct the improvements within the Specific Plan Area that were identified in the 2021 Storm Drainage Master Plan; and Upgrade and expand the storm drain system in accordance with the Storm Drain Master Plan and as required along new roads within the Specific Plan Area, ensuring it meets the needs of new development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Compliance with mandatory Federal and State regulations, and compliance with the existing City standards and regulations for the SCVURPPP, the City of Milpitas Storm Drainage Master Plan, General Plan policies and the Milpitas Municipal Code requirements, and proposed Specific Plan standards that address drainage and flooding would ensure that impacts to drainage patterns, erosion, and water quality would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant.
1.3.5 Mineral Resources
There are no active mines, no known areas with mineral resource deposits, or mineral or aggregate resources areas of statewide importance located in the City (City of Milpitas 2021). Therefore, no impact to mineral resources would
occur.
1.3.6 Wildfire
While all of California is subject to some degree of wildfire hazard, the project site is surrounded by urban uses and, therefore, less prone to wildfire.
“Local responsibility areas,” which are under the jurisdiction of local entities (e.g., cities, counties), are required to identify very high fire hazard severity zones. Local Responsibility Areas (LRA) are concentrated in the incorporated areas of Milpitas. Milpitas is an LRA that is served by the Milpitas Fire Department. The City of Milpitas or the general vicinity is not categorized as a "Very High" FHSZ by California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE).
State Responsibility are found to the east of the city limits in the hilly terrain. There are no State Responsibility areas within the city limits of Milpitas, however areas east of the city are designated as “high” FHSZ by CAL FIRE. There are no areas that are designated as a “Very High Fire Hazard” area within the city.
New construction is subject to the City Municipal Code and the California Fire Code, which includes safety measures to minimize the threat of fire. Thus, the project would have no impact related to wildlife risk and this issue is not discussed further in this EIR.
1.4 AGENCY ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
1.4.1 Lead Agency
The City of Milpitas is the lead agency responsible for approving and carrying out the project and for ensuring that the requirements of CEQA have been met. After the SEIR public-review process is complete, the City will determine whether to certify the SEIR (see State CEQA Guidelines Section 15090) and approve the project.
1.4.2 Trustee and Responsible Agencies
A trustee agency is a State agency that has jurisdiction by law over natural resources that are held in trust for the people of the State of California.
Responsible agencies are public agencies, other than the lead agency, that have discretionary-approval responsibility for reviewing, carrying out, or approving elements of a project. Responsible agencies should participate in the lead agency’s CEQA process, review the lead agency’s CEQA document, and use the document when making a decision
Introduction Ascent
City of Milpitas
1-6 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR on project elements. Agencies that may have responsibility for, or jurisdiction over, the implementation of elements of the project include the following:
STATE AGENCIES
San Francisco Bay Region Regional Water Quality Control Board (Region 2)
REGIONAL AND LOCAL AGENCIES
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
1.5 PUBLIC REVIEW PROCESS
In accordance with CEQA regulations, an NOP was distributed on July 15, 2024, to responsible agencies, interested parties and organizations, and private organizations and individuals that could have interest in the project. The NOP was available at the City’s Planning Department at 455 E. Calaveras Blvd Milpitas, CA 95035.
The purpose of the NOP was to provide notification that an SEIR for the Specific Plan was being prepared and to solicit input on the scope and content of the document. The NOP and responses to the NOP are included in Appendix A of this Draft SEIR.
1.5.1 Public Review of This Draft SEIR
This Draft SEIR is being circulated for public review and comment for a period of 45 days. During this period, comments from the general public as well as organizations and agencies on environmental issues may be submitted to the lead agency. Please send all comments to:
Jay Lee, Planning Director
City of Milpitas, Planning Department
455 E. Calaveras Boulevard
Milpitas, CA 95035
Phone: (408) 586-3077
Email: jlee @ milpitas.gov
Agencies that will need to use the SEIR when considering permits or other approvals for the project should provide the name of a contact person, phone number, and email address. Comments provided by email should include the name and physical address of the commenter.
A copy of this Draft SEIR has been posted on the City’s Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan website:
https://www.milpitasmainstreet.org/.
Upon completion of the public review and comment period, a final SEIR will be prepared that will include comments on the Draft SEIR received during the public-review period, responses to those comments, and any revisions to the Draft SEIR made in response to public comments. The Draft SEIR and Final SEIR will comprise the SEIR for the project.
Before adopting the project, the lead agency, is required to certify that the SEIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA, that the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information in the SEIR, and that the SEIR reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency.
1.6 DRAFT SEIR ORGANIZATION
This Draft SEIR is organized into chapters, as identified and briefly described below. Chapters are further divided into sections (e.g., Chapter 3, “Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures” and Section 3.5, “Energy”):
Ascent Introduction
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 1-7 The “Executive Summary”: This chapter introduces the Specific Plan; provides a summary of the environmental review process, effects found not to be significant, and key environmental issues; and lists significant impacts and mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts to a less-than-significant level. Chapter 1, “Introduction”: This chapter provides a synopsis of the project; a description of the type, purpose, and intended uses of this Draft SEIR; effects found not to be significant; a description of the lead and responsible agencies; a summary of the public review process; and a description of the organization of this SEIR; and definitions of standard terminology used in this SEIR.
Chapter 2, “Project Description”: This chapter describes the location, background, and goals and objectives for the Specific Plan, and describes the project elements in detail. Chapter 3, “Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures”: The sections in this chapter evaluate the expected environmental impacts generated by the Specific Plan, arranged by subject area (e.g., land use, utilities). In each subsection of Chapter 3, the regulatory background, existing conditions, analysis methodology, and thresholds of significance are described. The anticipated changes to the existing conditions after development of the project are then evaluated for each subject area. For any significant or potentially significant impact that would result from project implementation, mitigation measures are presented and the level of impact significance after mitigation is identified. Environmental impacts are numbered sequentially within each section (e.g., Impact 3.2-1, Impact 3.2-2, etc.). Any required mitigation measures are numbered to correspond to the impact numbering; therefore, the mitigation measure for Impact 3.2-2 would be Mitigation Measure 3.2-2. Chapter 4, “Cumulative Impacts”: This chapter provides information required by CEQA regarding cumulative impacts that would result from implementation of the Specific Plan, as well as other past, present, and probable future projects.
Chapter 5, “Alternatives”: This chapter evaluates alternatives to the Specific Plan, including alternatives considered but eliminated from further consideration, the No Project Alternative, and alternative development options. The environmentally superior alternative is identified.
Chapter 6, “Other CEQA Sections”: This chapter evaluates growth-inducing impacts and irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources, and discloses any significant and unavoidable adverse impacts. Chapter 7, “Report Preparers”: This chapter identifies the preparers of the document. Chapter 8, “References”: This chapter identifies the organizations and persons consulted during preparation of this Draft SEIR and the documents and individuals used as sources for the analysis.
1.7 STANDARD TERMINOLOGY
This Draft SEIR uses the following standard terminology:
“No impact” means no change from existing conditions (no mitigation is needed). “Less-than-significant impact” means no substantial adverse change in the physical environment (no mitigation is needed).
“Potentially significant impact” means a substantial adverse change in the environment that might occur (mitigation is recommended because potentially significant impacts are treated as significant). “Significant impact” means a substantial adverse change in the physical environment that would occur (mitigation is recommended).
“Significant and unavoidable impact” means a substantial adverse change in the physical environment that would occur and that cannot be avoided, even with the implementation of all feasible mitigation.
Introduction Ascent
City of Milpitas
1-8 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR This page is intentionally left blank.
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 2-1 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This chapter presents a detailed description of the proposed Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan (Specific Plan), referred to as the project. The project consists of updates to the adopted Milpitas Midtown Specific Plan (Midtown Plan) including changes to existing zoning and land use to allow for increased density. This chapter describes project location, setting, and background; City of Milpitas (City) objectives; project elements; and anticipated public approvals. This draft subsequent EIR (SEIR) provides a programmatic evaluation of the proposed Specific Plan.
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING
The Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Area (Specific Plan Area) is approximately 605 acres within the City. The City, located in northern Santa Clara County, within the South San Francisco Bay Area, is situated north of San Jose and east of Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, and Mountain View along State Route 237 (Highway 237) (Figure 2-1). The City is served by three major freeways: Interstate (I)-880, I-680, State Route 237 (Highway 237)/Calaveras Boulevard, and the County-managed Montague Expressway.
2.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND NEED
The Midtown Plan, adopted in 2002 and updated in 2010, is the predecessor plan to the proposed Milpitas Gateway- Main Street Specific Plan. Its aim was to respond to a series of development activities in the Midtown area, including the construction of new housing, reinvestment in the Great Mall, and the future extension of the VTA Light Rail Transit line and BART to the area by creating a cohesive Specific Plan for Midtown.
The Milpitas General Plan Update, adopted in 2021, is the guiding, long-term plan and policy document for the physical development of the city through 2040. The City’s General Plan Land Use Element designates the adopted Midtown Plan area as Milpitas Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan (Specific Plan). The General Plan includes the following actions related to the development of the proposed Specific Plan: Action LU-2A to maintain and implement the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan goals, policies and development standards and guidelines to create a mixed- use community that includes high-density, transit-oriented housing and a central community ‘gathering place’ while maintaining needed industrial, service and commercial uses; and Action ED -3H to work with property owners to facilitate development of vacant and underutilized properties on Main Street to achieve the highest and best use.
The Specific Plan Area includes the historic commercial core of the city, centered on Main Street and the Calaveras Gateway. The proposed Specific Plan would update the vision, standards, and policies of the Midtown Plan. The project would implement the General Plan goals and policies to update the Midtown Plan with a focus on revitalizing Main Street as the city’s historic core and improving Calaveras Boulevard as a western gateway into the city .
Project Description Ascent
City of Milpitas
2-2 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2024.
Figure 2-1 Regional Location
Ascent Project Description
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 2-3
2.2.1 Specific Plan Area
The Specific Plan Area is in the western portion of the city, west of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line. It encompasses Calaveras Boulevard, Main Street, and the former Midtown Milpitas area bordered by I -880 to the west, the UPRR tracks to the east, and Great Mall Parkway to the south (Figure 2-2). Two rail lines, the UPRR freight line and Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) commuter rail lines, traverse the Specific Plan Area on the east. The Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) operates light rail transit (LRT) and interconnecting bus lines into the Specific Plan Area along the Great Mall Parkway.
Existing land uses in the Specific Plan Area consist of single-family residential, multi-family residential, retail, office, civic/institutional, park/open space, and industrial uses. Commercial uses (retail, office, and hospitality) are located throughout the Specific Plan Area. A mix of single-family and multi-family housing is scattered throughout the Specific Plan Area. Public uses, including religious, educational, and cultural facilities, comprise a portion of the Specific Plan Area, including the County-operated Elmwood Correctional Facility. Transportation and industrial uses, in the Specific Plan Area, are primarily focused between the two railroad lines. There are currently 2,403 residential units and 1,858,642 square feet of nonresidential uses in the Specific Plan Area.
The Specific Plan proposes a new project area boundary, as shown in Figure 2-3, which includes additional areas that currently have other designations in the General Plan Land Use Element and removes areas south of Great Mall Parkway that were included in the Midtown Plan. The proposed Specific Plan Land Use Framework would implement the vision for the Specific Plan focus areas through Specific Plan Zoning Districts and existing Citywide Zoning Districts.
2.2.2 Existing Land Uses and Zoning
GENERAL PLAN
Existing General Plan land use designations and zoning within the proposed Specific Plan boundary are shown in Figure 2-4. Table 2-1 provides a summary of existing General Plan land use designations and zoning within the Specific Plan Area.
Table 2-1 General Plan Land Use and Zoning
General Plan Land Use Designation within the Midtown Plan Boundary Existing Zoning Maximum Density or FAR Residential
LDR – Low Density Residential R1 3-5 du/ac
MDR – Medium Density Residential R2 6-15 du/ac
HDR – High Density Residential R3 16-30 du/ac
Commercial/Industrial
GNC – General Commercial C2 – General Commercial 0.5 FAR INP – Industrial Park M2 – Heavy Industrial 1.0 FAR
Other
POS – Permanent Open Space POS – Parks and Open Space District — Source: City of Milpitas 2022.
Project Description Ascent
City of Milpitas
2-4 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2024.
Figure 2-2 Specific Plan Area
Ascent Project Description
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 2-5
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2024.
Figure 2-3 Specific Plan Boundary Changes
Project Description Ascent
City of Milpitas
2-6 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2024.
Figure 2-4 General Plan Land Use
Ascent Project Description
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 2-7
ADOPTED MIDTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
The adopted Midtown Plan land uses are identified in Table 2-2 and shown in Figure 2-5. The Midtown Plan includes two overlay zones, the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay and the Gateway Office Overlay (OO). The TOD Overlay zone provides special development standards for multi-family residential in proximity to the Great Mall Station. The OO Overlay zone provides an increase in intensity (FAR) to areas with an underlying commercial designation where “gateway” higher intensity office development was desired. The FAR increase applies to Class A office buildings only and is not applicable to retail or other office buildings. Areas where the overlays apply have already been built out and are proposed to be removed from the Specific Plan Area.
Table 2-2 Midtown Plan Land Use
Specific Plan Land Use Designation Zoning Maximum Density or FAR Low Density Residential (LDR) Single-Family Residential (R1-6), One-, Two-Family Residential (R2)
R1: 1 du per lot or 3-15 du/ac
R2: 7-11 du/ac
Multi-Family High Density (MFH) Multi-Family High Density Residential (R3) 12-20 du/ac Multi-Family Very High Density (VHD) Multi-Family Very High Density Residential (R4) 31-40 du/ac Retail Subcenter (C1) Neighborhood Commercial (C1) 0.35 FAR General Commercial (C2) General Commercial (C2) 0.50 FAR Mixed-Use (MXD) Mixed Use (MXD) 21-30 du/ac; 0.75 FAR
Manufacturing and Warehouse (M2) Heavy Industrial (M2) 0.40 FAR Industrial Park (MP) Industrial Park (MP) 0.50* FAR
Institutional (I) Institutional (I) —
Parks and Recreation Parks and Open Space (POS) —
Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay 41-60 du/ac; 0.50 FAR Gateway Office Overlay (OO) Gateway Office Overlay (OO) 1.50 FAR Notes: du/ac – dwelling units per acre, FAR – floor area ratio.
Source: City of Milpitas 2002, City of Milpitas 2022.
2.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The objectives are based on the proposed Specific Plan vision and are intended to achieve the following:
Develop a center for the City composed of districts and neighborhoods organized around hubs of activity to improve the character of the area with high quality development, landscaping, and streetscape design. Integrate a mix of land uses throughout Main Street and the surrounding districts to create a walkable downtown supported by commercial retail and office uses, civic and cultural anchors, and infill residential and neighborhood service nodes.
Improve mobility and access for infill and mixed-use development in the community, through creation of complete streets, trails and transit improvements to support a walkable and bikeable urban community. Create diverse and meaningful public open space that builds on the assets of its location to support new public realm streetscape improvements, urban parks, plazas, special gathering places, and connected open space.
Project Description Ascent
City of Milpitas
2-8 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2024.
Figure 2-5 Midtown Plan Land Use
Ascent Project Description
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 2-9
2.4 PROPOSED GATEWAY-MAIN STREET SPECIFIC PLAN
Specific plans are a land use planning tool for the further implementation of the General Plan for individual development proposals in a defined geographic area. They give local land use agencies the ability to establish land use and design regulations to create development that is consistent with site- specific physical constraints and opportunities as well as available infrastructure. All subsequent development within the boundaries of the specific plan area is subject to the requirements of the specific plan. Sections 65450 through 65457 of the California Government Code grant authority to the City for the development and adoption of specific plans.
The purpose of the proposed Specific Plan is to guide land use and development consistent with the General Plan; implement the City’s economic development strategy and help facilitate investment in the Specific Plan’s Focus Areas; preserve and enhance existing neighborhoods; and plan for the future transition of Urban Reserve lands. The Specific Plan identifies four focus areas: Gateway District, Crossroads District, Main Street District, and Abbot District , as illustrated in Figure 2-6.
2.4.1 Specific Plan Areas
Existing neighborhoods would be preserved and enhanced with future improvements in the Specific Plan Area.
Neighborhoods are intended to benefit from local area improvements, such as new street, streetscape, and open space trail improvements that would connect residents to adjacent area shops, businesses, parks, and open space. No new development is planned or anticipated in these areas. The proposed Specific Plan provides guidance for the design of edges adjacent to the existing neighborhoods, to create compatible transitions, landscaping, and neighborhood connectivity.
Urban Reserve Areas are areas subject to longer-term planning and further study in the event that future changes of use should occur on these sites. The Elmwood Correctional Facility, North Railyards, and South Railyards are Urban Reserve Areas within the Specific Plan. If and when it is determined that the Urban Reserve Areas or their associated facilities are no longer needed for their current purpose, redevelopment would be coordinated to ensure consistency with the Specific Plan.
Focus Areas are areas of the Specific Plan targeted to support redevelopment and infill, including streetscape and open space improvements, connectivity improvements, and district branding. The Specific Plan includes four proposed focus areas, Main Street District, Crossroads District, Gateway District, and Abbott District, described below.
MAIN STREET DISTRICT
The Main Street District includes the blocks on both sides of South Main Street bound by the UPRR tracks on the east, Abel Street on the west, the extension of Junipero Drive/Sinnott Lane on the north, and Curtis Avenue on the south.
Existing land uses within this focus area include religious and educational facilities and neighborhood serving shops, restaurants, and community services, including the post office and fire station.
The Main Street District would be characterized by numerous smaller parcels along Main Street and larger blocks of multifamily housing on Abel Street, to develop a mixed-use urban village, building from the existing commercial uses and services. Infill housing, commercial, and mixed-use development would complement and support the diversity and activity of the district.
Main Street District is envisioned as a "shared street" with reduced traffic speeds and active ground floor uses, shops, and outdoor dining lining the street, interspersed with ground-floor residential uses. As new development would occur, new streets, paseos, urban plazas, and open space would further enhance the neighborhood identity and character of the area as a walkable, mixed-use urban village. Proposed streetscape and branding improvements would further enhance the local identity of Main Street. Abel Street would support activity along Main Street with urban residential development and community services.
Project Description Ascent
City of Milpitas
2-10 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2024.
Figure 2-6 District Framework
Ascent Project Description
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 2-11
CROSSROADS DISTRICT
The Crossroads District encompasses the area along Calaveras Boulevard, south of Highway 237 /Calaveras Boulevard and centered on Serra Way and S. Abel and S. Main Streets. Existing land uses within this focus area include religious and educational facilities, as well as community- and neighborhood-serving shopping, retail, and restaurants.
The Crossroads District would be characterized as the center of downtown commercial, retail, entertainment, and community activity supporting compact, higher-intensity residential and mixed-use development along Calaveras Boulevard, Abel Street, Serra Way, and Main Street. Neighborhood-scale residential infill would occur next to residential neighborhoods along Junipero Drive and Spence Avenue. Branding and streetscape improvements would create a gateway entry at Calaveras and Serra Way and provide pedestrian-oriented linkages and open spaces connecting the Gateway District to Main Street.
This district is an area of priority investment that would focus on the improvement of the aging Serra Center, Serra Way, and Main Street as the main street destination for the community, anchored by local retail shops and restaurants, and designed to connect with the civic activities along N. Main Street. Within this district, the Serra Center would be prioritized for redevelopment as an opportunity site to enhance the gateway into the Crossroads District.
GATEWAY DISTRICT
The Gateway District would include the parcels north and south of Calaveras Boulevard at the west end of the Specific Plan Area, connected by S. Abbott Avenue. The existing area includes a mix of uses, including freeway- oriented commercial development, a neighborhood service node adjacent to Spangler Elementary School and residential neighborhoods, a shopping center anchored by a grocery store, and a non-profit office center.
The Gateway District, a community commercial node along Calaveras Boulevard would provide a west gateway entry into the city, with opportunities for freeway-oriented retail and services, neighborhood shopping, and hotel and convention space. This district would transition to residential-oriented retail and services along Abbott Avenue north of the Calaveras Boulevard frontage. Higher-intensity development, oriented along Calaveras Boulevard, would support the needs of travelers along the corridor, and provide a neighborhood-scale residential and mixed-use north of Calaveras Boulevard. Complete streets improvements planned for Calaveras Boulevard would balance the scale of the corridor with bike and pedestrian access.
ABBOTT DISTRICT
The Abbott District would include the freeway-fronting commercial and industrial parcels located along the I-880 freeway, south of Calaveras Boulevard and Abbott Avenue. Existing land uses within this focus area include a mix of auto dealerships to the south, and office/flex industrial business uses to the north.
The Abbott District would be characterized as a business district in a pedestrian-friendly campus setting. The Abbott District would serve as a business and employment center providing freeway fronting commercial and flexible office and work spaces for a variety of business and technology users, as well as supporting business uses and employee amenities.
The Abbott District is oriented to the I-880 freeway frontage on the west and residential neighborhoods on the east.
Planned improvements would prioritize sustainable design and landscape features, including low-impact development strategies, with a landscaped neighborhood transition at the east edges of the district next to existing neighborhoods. Street and streetscape improvements would create a connected network of streets and open space, including a north/south open space and multi-use trail amenity, the extension of the Hetch-Hetchy greenway to the east, and new campus focal points and amenities.
Project Description Ascent
City of Milpitas
2-12 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR
2.4.2 Proposed General Plan Zoning and Land Use
Residential and non-residential land use designations in the adopted General Plan are proposed within the Specific Plan Area. Existing residential land use designation uses include low density residential (LDR), medium density residential (MDR), and high density residential (HDR); non-residential land use designations include general commercial (GNC), industrial park (INP), and permanent open space (POS).
The Specific Plan Land Use Framework is depicted in Figure 2-7. The Land Use Framework, described in Chapter 3 of the proposed Specific Plan, guides future development in the Specific Plan focus areas through a series of Specific Plan Zoning Districts, as well as existing applicable Citywide zones, and Urban Reserve Areas. Areas not expected to change in land use or character would continue to be regulated through the land use and development regulations in the City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance (ZO) for the following Citywide Zones:
Single Family Residential (R1),
Multi-Family High Density Residential (R3) and Multi-Family Very High Density Residential (R4), General Commercial (C2),
Heavy Industrial (M2),
Institutional (I), and
Parks and Open Space (POS).
A citywide overlay zone, the Freeway Corridor (FC) Overlay Zone, established in the Zoning Ordinance, may be combined with any nonresidential zoned property within 300 feet of a freeway corridor, including Interstate 880 and State Route 237 within the Specific Plan Area, to allow for an increase in the maximum floor area ratio to support new and infill developments.
The Specific Plan also identifies three potential Urban Reserve Areas, the County-owned Elmwood Correctional Facility, North Railyards, and South Railyards depicted as an overlay in Figure 2-6. The existing zoning for these areas would continue to remain in-place until these areas are ready to be redeveloped and planned for new uses. The proposed Specific Plan does not propose land use changes for these areas, but establishes policies to ensure the orderly development and integration of these projects within the Specific Plan Area .
The proposed Specific Plan mixed-use zones and overlays are described below.
MAIN STREET MIXED-USE (MS-MU)
The MS-MU zone would include a mix of residential infill and smaller pedestrian-oriented retail shops, restaurants, services, and office uses, as well as urban parks, plazas, and open space uses within the framework of an active streetscape environment. Active retail, restaurant, and residential uses generate pedestrian activity at the street level, with office and residential uses above the ground floor encouraged.
CROSSROADS MIXED-USE IV (XR-MU)
The XR-MU zone would include a commercial mixed-use focus and supports a mix of retail, entertainment and office, with urban multifamily residential, civic, and recreational uses. The XR-MU zone is a pedestrian oriented streetscape environment, with ground-floor commercial uses prioritized along Retail Priority Streets and Corners, as identified in Section 3.7.2 of the Specific Plan.
LIBRARY DISTRICT MIXED-USE (LU-MU)
The LD-MU zone, centered around the Milpitas Library on N. Main Street, supports a compatible mix of retail, office, multifamily residential, and civic uses within a pedestrian-oriented streetscape environment.
Ascent Project Description
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 2-13
Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2024.
Figure 2-7 Specific Plan Land Use
Project Description Ascent
City of Milpitas
2-14 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR
GATEWAY MIXED-USE (GW-MU)
The GW-MU zone supports a freeway and commercial corridor service orientation along Calaveras Boulevard and I- 880, transitioning to a neighborhood-oriented residential focus to the north, and a commercial/mixed-use focus adjacent to Crossroads Mixed-Use.
ABBOTT DISTRICT BUSINESS PARK (AD-PB)
The AD-BP zone allows for a compatible mix of commercial, office, light industrial, open space, and public uses, organized within a campus setting.
URBAN RESERVE OVERLAY (URO)
The URO is applied as an overlay for areas that will be subject to future study when these uses are ready for redevelopment. The policies of the Specific Plan found in Section 3.8 of the Specific Plan apply within these areas.
The proposed Specific Plan includes regulations for development, including density, intensity, height, setbacks, historic and cultural resources, housing resources, and development incentives, applicable to several new proposed Specific Plan mixed-use zones.
The proposed Specific Plan would allow for additional residential development beyond what is allowed under the General Plan through increases in density and implementation through an incentive program. This would also include alterations in nonresidential development potential through mixed-use development. Within the Specific Plan Area, rezoning would be required to clarify locations of the different types of allowable land uses. The allowable land uses, maximum building heights, residential densities, and nonresidential floor area ratios (FARs) would also change within the proposed Specific Plan Area. The Specific Plan consists of increasing the maximum density allowance (in dwelling units per acre – du/ac) for residential and non-residential areas (from 40 du/ac to 65 du/ac) as identified in Table 2-3.
Table 2-3 Proposed New Specific Plan Zoning Districts
Specific Plan Area
District
Zoning Maximum
Density
FAR
(maximum)
Maximum Building
Height (feet)
Maximum
Number of Stories
Minimum Ground
Floor Height
Main Street
District
MS-MU 65 du/ac 2.5 65 5 Main Street: 15 ft
Other Areas: 12 ft
Crossroads District XR-MU 85 du/ac 3.0 85 7 Serra Way: 15 ft Commercial Uses: 15 ft
Gateway District GW-MU 65 du/ac 2.0 65 5 Calaveras Blvd: 15 ft Commercial Uses: 15 ft
Abbott District AD-BP N/A 1.5 65 N/A Commercial Uses: 15 ft Library District LD-MU 65 du/ac 2.0 65 5 Main Street: 15 ft Other Areas: 12 ft
All Other Areas See applicable existing Zoning
Source: City of Milpitas 2024.
The proposed Specific Plan implements the General Plan policies that would change the development currently allowed under the General Plan. Table 2-4 identifies development buildout within the Midtown Plan Area under the General Plan and the proposed development buildout that would be allowed with implementation of the Specific Plan. The maximum residential development capacity under the General Plan within the Midtown Plan Area is 3,838 units. A total of 1,338 additional units would be allowed under the Specific Plan beyond what is allowed under the General Plan currently. The nonresidential development area allowed under the General Plan is 3,293,240 square feet (sf) which would be reduced to 2,058,666 sf with implementation of the proposed Specific Plan.
Ascent Project Description
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 2-15 Table 2-4 Changes in Buildout Under Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Land Use Type General Plan Proposed Specific Plan Change Residential 3,838 dwelling units 5,176 dwelling units 1,338 dwelling units Non-Residential 3,293,240 square feet 2,058,666 square feet -1,234,574 square feet Note: The allowable development numbers under the General Plan include the development assumptions of the adopted Midtown Plan.
Source: Data compiled by Ascent 2024.
Based on Table 2-4, it is estimated that the proposed Specific Plan at buildout could result in a population of 16,384 residents (General Plan identified 9,557 residents in the Midtown Specific Plan Area) and 5,541 jobs (General Plan identified 11,555 jobs in the Midtown Specific Plan Area).
2.4.3 Specific Plan Components
OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS
The proposed Specific Plan includes Objective Design Standards that provide criteria for site planning, urban form, and building design in the Specific Plan Area, as well as topics such as pedestrian -level design. The Objective Design Standards are tailored to development within the Specific Plan Area, with a focus on requirements for commercial and pedestrian-oriented mixed-use development.
The planning and design of the site and arrangement of activities identified in the proposed Specific Plan aim to activate a mixed-use Downtown environment and create walkable communities that support a mix of uses and activities. The Building Design and Architecture section of the proposed Objective Design Standards address the overall building form and massing, as well as primary building architectural features, including building entries, windows, roofs, materials, and colors. A complete list of Objective Design Standards is included in Chapter 4 of the proposed Specific Plan.
MOBILITY
The proposed Specific Plan includes a mobility chapter (Chapter 5) that addresses mobility, transportation, and parking within the Specific Plan Area and sets the standards and street designs that would support a complete street travel environment. The proposed Specific Plan addresses both the mobility and parking needs of existing uses while accommodating future development planned for the area. The mobility framework, illustrated in Figure 5-1 in Section
5.1 of the proposed Specific Plan identifies the new circulation elements of the Specific Plan. It includes existing streets as well as new streets and service alleys parallel to Main Street to provide business and neighborhood access while improving the bike and pedestrian quality and character of Main and Abel Streets. The Specific Plan supports new streets with redevelopment of the Serra Center and other large neighborhood blocks to connect to existing roadways and support a more walkable neighborhood grid pattern. Components of the mobility framework are described briefly below and a complete description is included in Chapter 5 of the proposed Specific Plan.
Traffic Improvements
The proposed Specific Plan emphasizes pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements as a way to improve safety for all roadway users. The Specific Plan does not include increases to vehicle capacity, however Caltrans’ Calaveras Boulevard Improvement Project would include changes to vehicle capacity along Calaveras Boulevard as well as other traffic and intersection improvements as described below.
The Calaveras Boulevard Improvement Project would result in the following improvements to Calaveras Boulevard between South Abel Street and Milpitas Boulevard:
1. Add pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including elevated cycle tracks in both directions.
Project Description Ascent
City of Milpitas
2-16 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR
2. Implement complete streets improvements on Calaveras Boulevard, including widening existing sidewalks on the north side of Calaveras Boulevard and providing new sidewalks along the south side of Calaveras Boulevard.
3. Widen Calaveras Boulevard and provide three through lanes between I-880 and I-680 in both directions.
4. Replace the existing structures over the UPPR/BART tracks with a wider structure and replace or widen the existing structures over North Main Street and the Union Pacific Railroad track with a wider structure or have the existing structure widened and seismically retrofitted.
5. Improve the intersection safety for bicyclists and pedestrians.
Public Transit Improvements
The Public Transit Framework for the Specific Plan Area is illustrated in Figure 5-16 in Section 5.5 of the proposed Specific Plan. The goal of the transit framework is to connect the Specific Plan Area to local and regional transit service directly and provide a comfortable, efficient, and safe experience for transit users. Figure 5 -16 of the proposed Specific Plan illustrates the existing transit networks and proposed public transit improvements in the Specific Plan area, described in more detail below.
The Specific Plan Area is served by several transit services, including Santa Clara VTA buses and light rail, and BART commuter rail. The city has a shuttle program known as Simple Mobile Access to Reliable Transit (SMART) that provides on-demand rideshare service from various pick-up / drop-off locations and provides first-mile / last-mile connections with the Milpitas BART Station and VTA’s bus and light rail stations.
The Specific Plan proposes a shuttle loop along Main Street, Weller Lane, North / South Abel Street, Thompson Street, and Great Mall Parkway to connect the Specific Plan Area with existing transit that may be coordinated with the SMART program and can build upon existing bus stop facilities, as well as serve underserved locations in the Plan Area, including at:
a. Existing bus stops on South Main Street at Curtis Avenue. b. Existing bus stops on South Main Street south of Tom Evatt Park. c. Existing bus stops on South Main Street at Corning Avenue. d. Existing bus stops on South Main Street at Serra Way. e. Existing bus stops on North Main Street at the Milpitas Library. f. Existing bus stops on North Abel Street at Weller Lane. g. Existing bus stops on Serra Way between Calaveras Boulevard and South Abel Street. h. At the intersection of South Abbott Avenue and the extension of Thompson Street north. i. At the intersection of Thompson Street and Machado Avenue.
Pedestrian Network
The Pedestrian Framework for the Specific Plan Area is illustrated in Figure 5-17 in Section 5.6 of the proposed Specific Plan which illustrates the pedestrian intersection improvement priorities proposed. The Specific Plan includes traffic signal and intersection crossing improvements that support safe pedestrian roadway crossings, prioritizing the existing signalized intersections and new signalized intersections shown in Figure 5-17 of the proposed Specific Plan.
All new intersections created by the intersection of two future streets would be required to comply with the design standards identified in Section 5.6.2 of the proposed Specific Plan.
Bicycles and Micro-Mobility
The Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Framework for the Specific Plan Area is illustrated in Figure 5-18 in Section 5.7 of the proposed Specific Plan, which illustrates the proposed bicycle infrastructure improvements and proposed micro- mobility hubs. The proposed bicycle infrastructure network would provide a continuous bicycle connection from local neighborhoods to the commercial and mixed-use zones within the Specific Plan Area.
Ascent Project Description
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 2-17 The Specific Plan for shared-use micro-mobility infrastructure provides strategically located micro-mobility hubs that provide a safe alternative transportation means within the Specific Plan Area. Micro- mobility hubs are proposed at the following locations:
Main Street / Serra Way,
Main Street / Corning Avenue,
Main Street / Machado Avenue,
Main Street / Curtis Avenue,
Main Street / Great Mall Parkway,
N Abel Street / Calaveras Boulevard,
N Abel Street / O’Toole Elms Park,
Calaveras Boulevard / Serra Way,
S Abbott Avenue / Junipero Avenue, and
Thompson Street / Machado Avenue.
Parking
The proposed Specific Plan aims to provide enough parking spaces in centralized areas without encouraging or incentivizing vehicular travel or providing unused or underutilized parking spaces. The proposed Specific Plan aims to provide sufficient parking in the four focus area districts, while reducing the demand for additional parking and providing a system to provide access to walking, biking, or transit. All development in the Specific Plan Area would be required to conform to the parking standards identified in Section 5.8.2 and the parking ratios set forth in Table 3-9 of the Specific Plan.
Public parking locations are proposed at the following locations:
At the southeast corner of South Abbott Avenue and north of Junipero Avenue (within Serra Center). To the south of Serra Way between South Main Street and South Abel Street. To the south of Calaveras Boulevard between South Main Street and South Abel Street. To the east of South Main Street adjacent to the railroad tracks.
PUBLIC REALM
The Public Realm chapter (Chapter 6) of the proposed Specific Plan addresses the network of parks, open space, and public spaces that would provide a sense of place for the Specific Plan Area. Quality public open spaces are an essential part of the urban fabric, particularly in higher-density urban neighborhoods where private outdoor spaces may be more limited. The Specific Plan Area proposes a variety of parks and shared public spaces that would act as focal points to activate districts and neighborhoods and meet the diverse needs of the community for recreation, social gathering spaces, and neighborhood connections. Parks and open space are envisioned to include neighborhood parks, urban parks, linear parks and paseos, as well as smaller privately owned pocket parks, plazas, and urban alleys/greenways, as described in Chapter 6 of the Specific Plan .
The City’s General Plan establishes an overall goal of 3.5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents in the Specific Plan Area. To achieve this, the proposed Specific Plan identifies new parks and open space to support build -out of the Plan Area as shown in Figure 6-2 in Section 6.3 of the proposed Specific Plan. Requirements would be met through a combination of public parks and plazas, privately-owned open space (up to the total allowed by the Zoning Ordinance), and park in-lieu fees.
The Specific Plan proposes new parks and plazas, illustrated in Figure 6-2, to support existing and future development in the Specific Plan Area and serve as district focal points for activity. The following parks and plazas are proposed:
1. N. Main St. Park - Implement a new neighborhood park north of the Library with an anchor civic gathering space, such as an amphitheater or farmer's market pavilion, a community museum, and flexible program spaces to host activities and community events.
Project Description Ascent
City of Milpitas
2-18 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR
2. Crossroads Square - Anchor the historic crossroads at the end of Serra Way and Main Street with a new civic plaza or "Crossroads Square."
3. Carlo Park - Create Carlo Park, as a new urban plaza and mobility hub located along Carlo Street, west of Main Street, including:
a. Conversion of unused City-owned right-of-way and vacant land. b. Preservation of existing trees to the extent possible with the future plaza design. c. Providing pedestrian amenities, such as seating, planters, and lighting.
4. Serra Center - Require the integration of new parks, plazas, and open spaces as part of the redevelopment of the Serra Center, including:
a. Creation of a new neighborhood park to provide open space supporting future residents or a linear park to serve as a community activity hub within the Crossroads District. b. Recreational amenities serving the local neighborhood area, which may include:
Play spaces.
Pedestrian seating.
Pedestrian scale lighting.
Wayfinding signage.
Landscaping.
Fountains/drinking fountains.
Bicycle racks.
5. Tom Evatt Park - Expand and activate Tom Evatt Park along the Hetch Hetchy right-of-way as a linear pen space, including:
a. New open space at the areas identified as the Tom Evatt Park West Expansion and Tom Evatt Park East Expansion.
b. Community trail connections to neighborhoods east of S. Main Street and south of Curtis Avenue. c. Recreational amenities serving the local neighborhood area, such as:
Benches.
Distinctive paving.
Bicycle racks.
Directional/wayfinding signage.
d. Coordinate all expanded Tom Evatt Park spaces and amenities with the requirements within the Hetch Hetchy right-of-way easement.
6. South Railyards Park - Integrate new urban parks, plazas, and open spaces in conjunction with future development of the South Railyards, north of the Parc Metro community that incorporates inspiration from the rail themed historic use of the site, including in the development of South Railyards Park and the Tom Evatt Park East Expansion.
Ascent Project Description
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 2-19
INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES
The Infrastructure and Public Services chapter (Chapter 7) of the proposed Specific Plan outlines the infrastructure needed to support public services within the Specific Plan Area. It sets forth policies and improvement projects for enhancing and expanding public facilities, including the following:
storm drainage,
flooding,
water supply and distribution system,
sewer,
solid waste,
energy and technology,
fire protection and emergency response,
police services,
schools, and
libraries, and childcare.
2.4.4 Development Incentives
The Specific Plan would establish a bonus system to allow for additional floor area and/or residential density for qualified projects beyond the base development potential under the Specific Plan identified in Table 2-5. The purpose of bonuses is to incentivize the provision of certain project attributes, such as providing sustainable design features and/or open space, furthering economic development, and supporting the rehabilitation of existing buildings. Bonuses would only be available within the Specific Plan focus areas, as identified in Table 2-6. The following describes the available bonuses, while Table 2-6 identifies the specific incentives available. The provision of development bonuses would be subject to review and demonstration of the achievement of the criteria in Table 2-6.
Development bonuses shall not exceed the maximum allowances described below:
Maximum FAR or Density Bonus Increase of 50 percent in the Crossroads District and 40 percent within the Main Street and Library Districts and parcels directly fronting Calaveras Boulevard in the Gateway District. ; and Maximum Height Increase of 2 stories in the Crossroads District and for parcels directly fronting Calaveras Boulevard in the Gateway District. Maximum Height Increase of 1 Story in the Main Street and Library Districts.
Maximum density, intensity, and/or bonuses may not be achievable on all sites, as superseding development regulations or site constraints may reduce development potential. Prior to issuance of a planning permit for a development project receiving a development bonus, the project developer would be required to sign a community benefit agreement, committing to the provision of the agreed upon project attributes in exchange for the development bonus. If the developer does not fulfill the obligations specified in the agreement, the developer would be subject to a financial penalty equal in cost to the value of the project attribute at the time that the occupancy is granted.
Table 2-6 Available Incentives
Green Roof or Eco-Roof
Option 1: 30% of Total Roof Footprint 10% density bonus or FAR increase.
Option 2: 31-60% of Total Roof Footprint 15% density bonus or FAR increase.
Option 3: Over 60% of Total Roof Footprint 20% density bonus or FAR increase.
Economic Development
Space for Small Businesses, Non-Profits, and
Arts Organizations or Business Expansion
Temporarily reduce or defer application and impact fees for development and remove parking minimums within the Crossroads, Main Street, and Library Districts Business Retention Temporarily reduce or defer application and impact fees and allow 20% FAR increase Retail Ready Ground Floor Commercial Space A one-story height increase, subject to the standards in Sections 3.6 and 4.3.2 of the Specific Plan
Lot Consolidation
Lot Consolidation 20% density bonus or FAR increase.
Project Description Ascent
City of Milpitas
2-20 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR District Public Parking
District Parking Lot or Garage Spaces 10% density bonus or FAR for every 20 public parking spaces; up to the allowed district maximum bonus
Publicly Accessible Open Space
Option 1: Additional 50 square foot per unit 10% density bonus or FAR increase.
Option 2: Additional 100 square foot per unit 15% density bonus or FAR increase.
Option 3: Additional 150 square foot per unit 20% density bonus or FAR increase.
Promote the City’s History
Through Preservation, Storefront Façade
Improvements, or Interpretation
Eligible for City Storefront Improvement Program Grants , Mills Act Program.
Source: City of Milpitas 2024.
The extent of this additional development potential that may occur would be based on economic conditions at an individual project basis and cannot be determined at this time. The growth potential and associated environmental impacts are addressed in Chapter 6, “Other CEQA Sections.”
2.5 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
The proposed Specific Plan would require amendments to the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance (ZO). A summary of the proposed amendments to these documents is provided below .
2.5.1 City of Milpitas General Plan Amendments
The City’s General Plan would be amended to update the residential buildout for the Specific Plan and land use/density descriptions. An amendment would also be required as changes to the boundaries and land use and development standards of the adopted Midtown Plan Area are proposed. The Specific Plan proposes a new project area boundary that removes the portion of the Midtown Specific Plan Area south of the Great Mall Parkway and adds area in the northwestern portion of the Specific Plan Area.
2.5.2 City of Milpitas Zoning Ordinance Amendments
The Specific Plan would function as zoning for the Specific Plan Area. There would be new zoning designations established for certain areas to clarify site-specific land use and buildout expectations. Potential amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance would be needed to include various text amendments for changes in development standards associated with the proposed project.
2.6 ANTICIPATED ACTIONS
City actions would include the following:
Certification of the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan EIR Adoption of the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan and associated amendments to the General Plan to reflect the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan
Milpitas Zoning Code and Zoning Map Amendments
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 3-1 3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
APPROACH TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency shall focus the EIR’s discussion on significant environmental effects and may limit discussion on other effects to brief explanations about why they are not significant (PRC Section 21002.1, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15128). Potentially significant impacts were identified based on review of comments received as part of the public scoping process (see Appendix A) and additional research and analysis of relevant project data during preparation of this Draft SEIR.
Sections 3.1 through 3.12 of this Draft SEIR present a discussion of regulatory background, existing conditions, environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the project, mitigation measures to reduce the level of impact, and residual level of significance (i.e., after application of mitigation, including impacts that would remain significant and unavoidable after application of all feasible mitigation measures). Issues evaluated in these sections consist of the environmental topics identified for review in the notice of preparation (NOP) prepared for the project (see Appendix A of this Draft SEIR). Chapter 4 of this Draft SEIR, “Cumulative Impacts,” presents an analysis of the project’s impacts considered together with those of other past, present, and probable future projects producing related impacts, as required by Section 15130 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Chapter 5, “Alternatives,” presents a reasonable range of alternatives and evaluates the environmental effects of those alternatives relative to those of the proposed project, as required by Section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Chapter 6, “Other CEQA Sections,” includes an analysis of the project’s growth inducing impacts, as required by Section 21100 (b)(5) of CEQA.
The remainder of this chapter addresses the following resource topics:
Section 3.1, “Aesthetics”;
Section 3.2, “Air Quality”;
Section 3.3, “Archaeological, Historical, and Tribal
Cultural Resources”;
Section 3.4, “Biological Resources”;
Section 3.5, “Energy”;
Section 3.6, “Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Climate Change”;
Section 3.7, “Land Use and Planning”;
Section 3.8, “Noise and Vibration”;
Section 3.9, “Population and Housing”;
Section 3.10, “Public Services and Recreation”;
Section 3.11, “Transportation”; and
Section 3.12, “Utilities and Service Systems.”
As described in Section 1.3, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, of this Draft SEIR, it was determined the project would result in no impact to agriculture and forestry resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, mineral resources, or wildfire. Accordingly, these resources are not addressed further in this Draft SEIR.
Chapter 3 of this Draft SEIR also summarizes previous analyses and the previously adopted mitigation measures from the certified EIR prepared for the City of Milpitas General Plan 2040. In certain instances, new mitigation measures are proposed to replace previously adopted and implemented mitigation, because of changes in applicable regulations (including CEQA) and standards of review. The General Plan Update EIR is available at:
https://www.milpitas.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1344/Draft-EIR-final-edits-PDF?bidId=.
FORMAT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Each section begins with descriptions of the regulatory and environmental settings as they pertain to a particular issue, references setting from the General Plan Update EIR that remains applicable, and updates settings where appropriate. The environmental setting provides a point of reference for assessing the environmental impacts of the
Approach to Environmental Analysis Ascent
City of Milpitas
3-2 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR proposed Specific Plan and alternatives (Chapter 5). The setting description in each section is followed by an impacts and mitigation discussion. The impacts and mitigation portion of each section includes impact statements, which are prefaced by a number in bold-faced type. An explanation of each impact and analysis of its significance follow each impact statement. All mitigation measures pertinent to each individual impact follow directly after the impact statement. The degree to which the identified mitigation measure(s) would reduce the impact is also described. Each impact discussion also includes a summary of the relevant impact analysis and conclusion provided in the General Plan Update EIR and determines whether the proposed Specific Plan would result in a new significant effect or more severe impact than what was identified in the General Plan Update EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
Regulatory Setting
This subsection presents information on the laws, regulations, plans, and policies that relate to the issue area being discussed. Regulations originating from the federal, state, and local levels are each discussed as appropriate.
Environmental Setting
According to Section 15125 of the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must include a description of the existing physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project to provide the “baseline condition” against which project - related impacts are compared. The baseline condition is typically the physical condition that exists when the Notice of Preparation (NOP) is published. The NOP for the proposed project was published on July 15, 2024. Therefore, this SEIR assesses the impacts of the project in comparison to conditions that exist in the Specific Plan Area. This includes the planned development potential and standards set forth in the proposed Specific Plan . Environmental setting described in the 2021 General Plan Update EIR that remains applicable is referenced and any updates to environmental setting are described.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
This section analyzes environmental impacts of the proposed Specific Plan at a programmatic level. Mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potentially significant or significant impacts. Each impact discussion also includes a summary of the relevant impact analysis and conclusion provided in the General Plan Update EIR and determines whether the Specific Plan would result in a new significant effect or more severe impact than what was identified in the General Plan Update EIR pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines 15162. Information included in this section is described in more detail below.
Methodology
This subsection identifies the methodology used to analyze potential environmental impacts.
Thresholds of Significance
The State CEQA Guidelines define a significant effect on the environment as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. A social or economic change related to a physical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant” (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15382). Definitions of significance vary with the physical conditions affected and the setting in which the change occurs. The State CEQA Guidelines set forth physical impacts that trigger the requirement to make “mandatory findings of significance” (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15065). The thresholds of significance are based on the checklist presented in Appendix G of the most recently adopted State CEQA Guidelines (December 28, 2018),
Ascent Approach to the Environmental Analysis
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 3-3 best available data, applicable regulatory standards, and local practice/standards. The level of each impact is determined by analyzing the effects of the proposed Specific Plan to the defined baseline conditions and comparing it to the applicable significance threshold.
Issues Not Discussed Further
This section identifies any topic in the technical issue area that would not be affected by the Specific Plan.
Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This subsection presents thresholds of significance and discusses significant and potentially significant effects of the Specific Plan on the existing environment, including the environment beyond the project boundaries, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2. The methodology for impact analysis is described, including technical studies upon which the analyses rely. The thresholds of significance are defined and thresholds for which the project would have no impact are disclosed and dismissed from further evaluation. Project impacts and mitigation measures are numbered sequentially in each subsection (Impact 3.2-1, Impact 3.2-2, Impact 3.2-3, etc.). A summary impact statement precedes a more detailed discussion of each environmental impact. The discussion includes the analysis, rationale, and substantial evidence on which conclusions are based. The determination of level of significance of the impact is presented in bold text. A “less-than-significant” impact is one that would not result in a substantial adverse change in the physical environment. A “potentially significant” impact or “significant” impact is one that would result in a substantial adverse change in the physical environment; both are treated the same under CEQA in terms of procedural requirements and the need to identify feasible mitigation. M itigation measures are identified, as feasible, to avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce, or compensate for significant or potentially significant impacts, in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4. Unless otherwise noted, the mitigation measures presented are recommended in the SEIR for consideration by the State to adopt as conditions of approval.
Where an existing law, regulation, or permit specifies mandatory and prescriptive actions about how to fulfill the regulatory requirement as part of the project definition, leaving little discretion in its implementation, and would avoid an impact or maintain it at a less-than-significant level, the environmental protection afforded by the regulation is considered before determining impact significance. Where existing laws or regulations specify a mandatory permit process for future projects, performance standards without prescriptive actions to accomplish them, or other requirements that allow substantial discretion in how they are accomplished, or have a substantial compensatory component, the level of significance is determined before applying the influence of the regulatory requirements. In this circumstance, the impact would be potentially significant or significant, and the regulatory requirements would be included as a mitigation measure.
This subsection also describes whether mitigation measures would reduce project impacts to less- than-significant levels. Significant-and-unavoidable impacts are identified as appropriate in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(b). Significant-and-unavoidable impacts are also summarized in Chapter 6, “Other CEQA Sections.” References
The full references associated with the references cited in Sections 3.1 through 3.12 are presented in Chapter 8, “References,” organized by chapter or section number.
Approach to Environmental Analysis Ascent
City of Milpitas
3-4 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR This page is intentionally left blank.
Ascent Aesthetics
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 3.1-1
3.1 AESTHETICS
This section provides a description of existing visual conditions, meaning the physical features that make up the visible landscape, near the Specific Plan Area and an assessment of changes to those conditions that would occur from implementation of the proposed Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan (Specific Plan), referred to as the project.
The effects of the project on the visual environment are generally defined in terms of the project’s physical characteristics and potential visibility, the extent to which the project’s presence would change the perceived visual character and quality of the environment, and the expected level of sensitivity that the viewing publ ic may have where the project would alter existing views. The “Analysis Methodology” discussion below provides further detail on the approach used in this evaluation.
No comment letters were received in response to the Notice of Preparation that pertained to aesthetics (see Appendix A).
3.1.1 Regulatory Setting
FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to aesthetics, light, and glare are applicable to the Specific Plan.
STATE
California Scenic Highway Program
California’s Scenic Highway Program (Streets and Highways Code, Section 260 et seq) was created by the Legislature in 1963 to preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from change that would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to highways. The State Scenic Highway System includes a list of highways that are either eligible for designation as scenic highways or have been so designated.
According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) list of designated scenic highways under the California Scenic Highway Program, there are no scenic highway segments within the City of Milpitas that are designated scenic. The nearest eligible state scenic highway near the Specific Plan Area is a segment of Interstate 680 (I-680) within Alameda County, located approximately 1.5 miles north of the Specific Plan Area. The Specific Plan Area is not visible from this portion of I-680 (Caltrans 2024).
LOCAL
Milpitas General Plan 2040
The City of Milpitas General Plan 2040 (City of Milpitas 2021) includes 11 elements. There are two elements (Community Design and Land Use) that contain policies relevant to aesthetics and applicable to the project, as listed below.
Community Design
Policy CD 1-1: Require development projects to:
A. Preserve positive characteristics and unique features of the site; and B. Incorporate a context-sensitive design approach that considers the scale and existing and desired character of adjacent uses and the surrounding neighborhood or district. Policy CD 3-1: Strengthen the positive qualities of the City’s neighborhoods, districts, and centers.
Aesthetics Ascent
City of Milpitas
3.1-2 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR Policy CD 3-2: Support the development and preservation of unique neighborhoods, districts, and centers that exhibit a special sense of place and quality of design. Policy CD 3-3: Ensure that new development and redevelopment reinforces desirable elements of its neighborhood, district, or center, including architectural style, scale, and setback patterns. Policy CD 3-4: Strengthen the identity of individual neighborhoods, districts, and centers through the use of entry monuments, flags, street signs, themed streets, natural features, landscaping, and lighting. Policy CD 3-5: Ensure that new residential development and substantial additions are designed to maintain and support the existing character and development pattern of the surrounding neighborhood, especially in historic neighborhoods and neighborhoods with consistent design characteristics. Policy CD 3-6: Encourage the rehabilitation of older residential neighborhoods, districts, and centers to prevent blight and maintain the city’s character.
Policy CD 3-7: Create, regulate, and enforce attractive front yards in residential neighborhoods that are open to the street.
Policy CD 3-8: Ensure that new residential developments in and adjacent to the city’s districts are designed to blend with existing building forms. Considerations for residential developments in and around Downtown should include the following:
A. Ensure that development projects with more than 2 units consist of detached units with one and two -story building elements, when located in a predominantly single-family residential neighborhood.
B. Ensure residential unit entries face the public street.
C. Ensure that new development is designed to blend in with the existing building patterns of the neighborhood. For example, if the majority of the garages on the street are at the rear of the site, the new building should be designed to accommodate a rear garage.
D. Ensure that properties designated for non-residential uses, such as offices or properties surrounding the Civic Center, retain the residential character and scale of development characteristic of the surrounding residential neighborhood. The development is to provide sufficient, safe pedestrian and bicycle access into and throughout the site, on-site parking, human-scaled lighting and landscape screening to minimize the commercial appearance of the use.
Policy CD 3-9: For commercial, multi-family, mixed-use, and employment-generating projects, encourage site designs and development patterns that connect adjoining sites and function as a single center. Policy CD 3-10: Design multi-family residential, mixed use, commercial, and employment-generating development in neighborhoods, districts, and centers to:
A. Include open space and/or recreational amenities to provide visual relief from development, form pedestrian and bicyclist linkages to adjacent uses and other portions of the neighborhood, district, or center, and serve as buffers between uses, where necessary;
B. Locate building access points along sidewalks, pedestrian areas, and bicycle routes, and include amenities that encourage pedestrian activity;
C. Create a human-scale ground-floor environment that includes public open areas that separate pedestrian space from auto traffic, or where these intersect, give special regard to pedestrian safety; and D. Provide comfortable pedestrian amenities, such as quality seating areas, lighting, and wide, shaded paths, along with specialized and engaging design features, such as interesting fountains or public art to draw and maintain people's attention.
Ascent Aesthetics
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 3.1-3 Land Use
Policy LU 5-1: Require new development and redevelopment to be compatible, complementary and, where appropriate, well integrated with existing residential areas. Integrate new largescale development projects into the fabric of the existing community rather than allowing projects to be insular and self contained, walled off, or physically divided from surrounding uses. Improve connectivity between neighborhoods and services with new development. Tie circulation systems and open spaces into existing streets and open spaces. Reduce unnecessary barriers and improve connections between neighborhoods and services by retrofitting existing development over time as area improvements or redevelopment occurs.
Policy LU 5-2: Prohibit incompatible uses and inappropriate development in and near residential neighborhoods.
As feasible, promote gradual transitions from high density development to surrounding low density neighborhoods in both building forms and land use
Policy LU 5-3: Ensure new development is consistent with specific height limits established within the City’s Zoning Ordinance as applied through the zoning district for all properties within the City Policy LU 5-7: In considering land use change requests, consider factors such as compatibility with the residential surroundings, privacy, noise, and changes in traffic levels on residential streets.
Milpitas Streetscape Master Plan
The Milpitas Streetscape Master Plan contains guidelines and recommendations for the varied streetscape conditions that exist or can be foreseen in the future and is based on the understanding that attractive streetscapes are a benefit to the community – economically, environmentally, visually and psychologically.
Milpitas Municipal Code
Chapter 10: Zoning
Section XI-10-45.15-3 of the City’s Municipal Code states that outdoor light sources shall be shielded so as not to be directly visible from off-site. This section does not pertain to motion-induced/activated or motion-sensor security- type lights. Section XI-10-54.17 requires that exterior lighting associated with development shall be shielded or recessed so that direct glare and reflections are contained within the boundaries of the parcel, and shall be directed downward and away from adjoining properties and public rights-of-way.
City of Milpitas Residential and Mixed-Use Objective Design Standards On November 1, 2022, the City adopted the Milpitas Residential and Mixed-Use Objective Design Standards (objective design standards), which established city-wide regulations on building design for multi-family residential or mixed-use projects. The objective design standards are intended to help preserve the city’s neighborhoods by balancing the form and design of existing development with new construction techniques; encourage human- scaled buildings that adhere to existing zoning regulations and promote high- quality site and building design; and emphasize a pedestrian-oriented environment where buildings and public realm design are cohesive and complementary of a diverse range of uses. The objective design standards are applied based on the specific characteristics of each project to ensure appropriate site and building design.
3.1.2 Environmental Setting
VISUAL CHARACTER OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
As noted in Chapter 2, “Project Description,” the Specific Plan Area is located within the western portion of the City of Milpitas, west of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line. It encompasses Calaveras Boulevard, Main Street, and the former Midtown Milpitas area bordered by I-880 to the west, the UPRR tracks to the east, and Great Mall Parkway to the south. Two heavy rail lines, the UPRR freight line and Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) commuter rail lines, traverse the Specific Plan Area on the east. The visual character of the Specific Plan Area is varied; existing development
Aesthetics Ascent
City of Milpitas
3.1-4 Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR consists of a mix of recreational, residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional land uses. In addition, some portions of the Specific Plan Area are in the process of being redeveloped and are transitioning from the previous industrial uses to residential and recreational uses.
Topography within the Specific Plan Area is predominantly flat, although areas to the east (outside of the Specific Plan Area) and further to the west (outside of city limits) include gently sloping hillsides. The Mission Hills and Monument Peak (elevation 2,594 feet) form a distinctive scenic backdrop to the City and are important to community identity and character.
The visual character of the Specific Plan Area is marked by a contrast between new, dense residential development (primarily along South Abel Street) with Elmwood Correctional Facility along the Specific Plan Area’s southern boundary, and commercial/industrial uses located primarily along the eastern and western boundaries of the Specific Plan Area. The majority of existing development is low- to mid- rise development, with multi-family residential development located within the central portion of the Specific Plan Area being among the highest (i.e., four floors).
Several parks are located within the Specific Plan Area, including Tom Evatt Park and Parc Metro East , but the majority of open space consists of landscaped areas and undeveloped parcels. Long distance views of and within the Specific Plan Area are precluded by existing landscaping and trees located along existing roadways and within medians. There are no unique visual resources or compelling vistas; therefore, no scenic vistas are associated with t he Specific Plan Area.
To the south and north of the Specific Plan Area, land use development patterns transition to more single- family residential, while to the east and west, commercial/industrial development is more prominent. Some higher density development, including a 12-floor hotel, are located to the west.
LIGHT AND GLARE CONDITIONS
Existing sources of light and glare are uniformly present in the Specific Plan Area vicinity. Existing sources of light include street lights along roadways; lights in parking lots, along walkways, and on the exteriors of buildings; lights associated with the light rail system; and interior lights in buildings. The existing correctional facility does not provide high-mast light standards that would otherwise be considered a substantial light source.
Sky glow is the effect created by light reflecting into the night sky. Sky glow is of particular concern in areas surrounding observatories, where darker night sky conditions are necessary, but is also of concern in more rural or natural areas where a darker night sky is either the norm or is important to wildlife. Due to the urban nature of the Specific Plan Area, a number of existing light sources affect residential areas and illuminate the night sky.
Natural and artificial light reflects off various surfaces and can create localized occurrences of daytime and nighttime glare. Buildings and structures made with glass, metal, and polished exterior roofing materials exist throughout the Specific Plan Area; however, there are no reported occurrences of excessive daytime or nighttime glare in the Specific Plan Area.
3.1.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
METHODOLOGY
The analysis of aesthetics is a qualitative analysis that compares the existing built and natural environment to the future built and natural environment and addresses the visual changes that would result from implementation of the proposed Specific Plan. General aesthetic conditions, as well as views to and from the Specific Plan Area, were compared to those that would be expected to occur in the future under the proposed Specific Plan . In addition, the changes proposed to the Specific Plan Area were evaluated in the context of the adopted Milpitas General Plan 2040 policies.
Ascent Aesthetics
City of Milpitas
Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan Subsequent Draft EIR 3.1-5 In order to assess the aesthetic characteristics of future development under the proposed Specific Plan , the analysis examines the new, changed, or eliminated development standards included in the proposed Specific Plan. The ultimate designs of future specific development projects under the Specific Plan would be proposed on a project-by- project basis, and specific project architectural and engineering design would be reviewed through the City’s site plan and design review permit process.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
An impact on aesthetics, light, and glare is considered significant if implementation of the Specific Plan would do any of the following:
have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista;
damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway;
conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality; and/or create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area .
ISSUES NOT DISCUSSED FURTHER
Scenic Highways
As described above in regulatory setting, there are no designated or eligible Caltrans Designated Scenic Highways within or near the Specific Plan Area. Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan would not damage scenic resources in the vicinity of a scenic highway. For these reasons, this topic is not addressed further in this SEIR.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.1-1: Have a Substantial Adverse Effect on a Scenic Vista The General Plan Update EIR (Impact 3.1-1) determined that impacts related to scenic vistas as a result of General Plan implementation, including the Gateway-Main Street Specific Plan, would be less than significant. Similarly, implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would increase the level and potential height of development within the Specific Plan Area. However, long distance views of and through the Specific Plan Area are largely precluded by existing development landscaping, and no expansive areas of open space would be removed as a result of project implementation. As a result, no new significant or substantially more severe impact would occur compared to the General Plan Update EIR, and this impact would remain
less than significant.
The City of Milpitas, including the Specific Plan Area, contains numerous areas and viewsheds with relatively high localized scenic value, however there are no officially designated scenic vista points within the Specific Plan Area or the broader city. As noted above, existing topography and landscaping, in addition to existing development, largely preclude long distance views of or through the Specific Plan Area.
Development under the Specific Plan would allow for greater/higher development within the Specific Plan Area, which could result in changes to the skyline. However, these changes would not be dissimilar to other development in the area and broader region and typical of urban/developed areas. Additionally, implementation of General Plan Policies LU 5-1, LU 5-3, CD 3-1, CD 3-2, CD 3-3, and CD 3-4 through implementation of the proposed Specific Plan Objective Design Standards would require consideration of existing neighborhoods and land use types to ensure that existing character and aesthetics are maintained. Implementation of the Specific Plan would also provide for greater open space opportunities within the Specific Plan Area, which may include scenic views, although most would likely be local scenic views, similar to existing conditions. The proposed Specific Plan would allow for additional residential development beyond what is allowed under the General Plan through increases in density and implementation