Agenda packet — City Council and Authorities Concurrent, March 22, 2022 (part 4 of 6)

BPAC Policy Guidelines – Revision Year 2021

City of Santa Clara
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
Policy Guidelines

The Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) was established by the Santa Clara City Council on May 28, 1991. On March 25, 2014 the Bicycle Advisory Committee was changed to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) by the Santa Clara City Council.

Section 1. Purpose

The purpose and responsibilities of the BPAC are described in Section 2.120.170 of the City Code. The purpose of the BPAC is to serve as an advisory body to the City Council on matters relative to modifying or expanding the City’s public recreational and commuter bikeway and pedestrian walkway system. Its intent shall be to encourage recreational and commuter bicycling and walking in the City by promoting safe, convenient, well-designed facilities, and by evaluating local bicycle and pedestrian related projects.

It is intended that the BPAC shall be an advisory committee to the City Council and nothing herein contained shall be construed as a limitation on the power of the City Council or the administrative staff of the City in their supervision or authority over property or personnel, which are under their jurisdictions.

Section 2. Membership

The BPAC is currently comprised of nine (9) members, which consists of eight (89) regular members and one (1) as appointed by the City Council. The Chairperson or alternate that will beis the Mayor or Councilperson designated by City Council.

After June 2025, the BPAC shall be comprised of seven (7) members, which consists of seven (67) regular members. One regular member shall be appointed by the BPAC as Chair.

Representatives from Mission College, the Santa Clara Unified School District and the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition are encouraged to be members. and shall be considered a member. The remaining eight (8) members shall be citizens at large with a representative from the following groups strongly encouraged to be members: Santa Clara Unified School District and the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition.

BPAC members must either reside or work in the City of Santa Clara.

-------

Page 2 of 4 ends

BPAC Policy Guidelines – Revision Year 2021
The City of Santa Clara adopted a Code of Ethics and Values to provide clear, positive statements of ethical behavior reflecting the core values of the community. The actions and words of members of City's boards, commissions and committees should represent the community's values: ethical, professional, service-oriented, fiscally responsible, organized, communicative, collaborative, and progressive.promote and maintain the highest standards of personal and professional conduct in the City’s government. All members are required to subscribe to this Code, understand how it applies to their specific responsibilities, and practice its core values in their work.

Section 3. Term of Office, Vacancies, and Removal

The term of office for BPAC members will be three years. Members shall serve for a term of four years and until their respective successors are appointed and qualified.

The maximum time a member may serve is two consecutive full terms. If an individual is appointed to fill a partial term, they may still serve two additional full terms of office.

After a lapse of at least two years, an individual is eligible to reapply to serve on the committee and the same application process would apply as for individuals who had never served.

The application process for membership shall be in accordance with the City of Santa Clara Guide for Board, Commissions, and Committee Applicants.

Members may be re-appointed but will be considered along with all other new applicants.

To allow for staggered terms and to phase in the change to seven (7) members:, 2 members appointed by City Council in November of 2011 will have a term of office expiring on December 31, 2014, 3 members appointed in November of 2012 will have a term of office expiring on December 31, 2015, and 3 members appointed on November of 2013 will have a term of office expiring on December 31, 2016.

 Three (3) members appointed in Decem ber of 2019 will have a term of office expiring on June 30, 2023. All three (3) vacancies shall be filled  Two (2) members appointed in December of 2020 will have a term of office expiring on June 30, 2024. All two (2) vacancies shall be filled  Three (3) members appointed on Decemb er of 2021 will have a term of office expiring on June 30, 2025. Two (2) of three (3) vacancies shall be filled

Any members of the BPAC may be removed from office by a majority vote of the City Council at a regularly scheduled Council meeting.

Section 4. Vacancies

Page 3 of 4 ends

BPAC Policy Guidelines – Revision Year 2021
Vacancies will be filled for the unexpired portion of the term, of the member being replaced, in the same manner as the original appointment.Any vacancies from whatever cause arising, shall be filled by appointment by the City Council. Upon a vacancy occurring leaving an unexpired portion of a term, any appointment to fill such vacancy shall be for the unexpired portion of such term. If a member of a board or commission absents himself/herself from three regular meetings of such board or commission, consecutively, unless with permission of such board or commission expressed in its official minutes, or is convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, or ceases to be a qualified elector of the City, his/her office shall be vacant and shall be so declared by the City Council.

The members shall be appointed, and shall be subject to removal, by motion of the City Council adopted by at least four affirmative votes.

Section 54. Meetings

The BPAC shall hold meetings on the third fourth MondayWednesday in January, March, June, AugustAugust, and October at 4:00 p.m. at City Hall. The actual date of meeting can be changed. or aAdditional meetings can be approved recommended by a quorum of the committee and approved by the City Manager. All meetings shall be open to the public and notices and agendas shall be posted at City Hall as required by law.

Section 6. Quorum

Any five members shall constitute a quorum for voting on action items.

A majority of the members of the BPAC shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.

Section 7. Voting

Only the appointed BPAC members have voting authority. The committee shall determine the voting procedure for items prior to voting.

The affirmative or negative vote of a majority of the entire membership shall be necessary for it to take action.

Section 8. Duties of BPAC to be Advisory Only

It is intended that the BPAC shall be an advisory committee to the City Council. Nothing herein contained shall be construed as a limitation on the power of the City Council or the administrative staff of the City in their supervision or authority over property or personnel, which are under their jurisdictions.

Page 4 of 4 ends

BPAC Policy Guidelines – Revision Year 2021

Section 95. Assistance of Staff

The BPAC may utilize City personnel as described in Section 2.120.040 of the City Code.The City Manager of the City of Santa Clara shall provide the BPAC with information and staff assistance but the The BPAC’s requests may from time to time be prioritized subject to staff limitations. The City Manager has appointed the Director of Public Works and the Chief of Police or their designees to staff the BPAC.

Section 10. Code of Ethics and Values

The City of Santa Clara adopted a Code of Ethics and Values to provide clear, positive statements of ethical behavior reflecting the core values of the community. The actions and words of members of City's boards, commissions and committees should represent the community's values: ethical, professional, service-oriented, fiscally responsible, organized, communicative, collaborative, and progressive.

Section 116. Amendments

These Amendments to the guidelines may be amended recommended by a quorum of the BPAC membership at any legal BPAC meeting, subject to approval by City Council.

PASSED AND RECOMMENDED FOR ADOPTION by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee this __ day of _[MONTH, YEAR]_______.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Santa Clara City Council this __ day of [MONTH, YEAR]________.

- -

Page 1 of 3 ends

BPAC Policy Guidelines – Revision Year 2021

City of Santa Clara
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
Policy Guidelines

Section 1. Purpose

The purpose and responsibilities of the BPAC are described in Section 2.120.170 of the City Code. Its intent shall be to encourage recreational and commuter bicycling and walking in the City by promoting safe, convenient, well-designed facilities, and by evaluating local bicycle and pedestrian related projects.

Section 2. Membership

The BPAC is currently comprised of nine (9) members, which consists of eight (8) regular members and one (1) Chairperson or alternate that is the Mayor or Councilperson designated by City Council.

After June 2025, the BPAC shall be comprised of seven (7) members, which consists of seven (7) regular members. One regular member shall be appointed by the BPAC as Chair.

Representatives from Mission College, the Santa Clara Unified School District and the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition are encouraged to be members.

The City of Santa Clara adopted a Code of Ethics and Values to promote and maintain the highest standards of personal and professional conduct in the City’s government.

All members are required to subscribe to this Code, understand how it applies to their specific responsibilities, and practice its core values in their work.

Section 3. Term of Office, Vacancies, and Removal
Members shall serve for a term of four years and until their respective successors are appointed and qualified. The maximum time a member may serve is two consecutive full terms. If an individual is appointed to fill a partial term, they may still serve two additional full terms of office. After a lapse of at least two years, an individual is eligible

Page 2 of 3 ends

BPAC Policy Guidelines – Revision Year 2021
to reapply to serve on the committee and the same application process would apply as for individuals who had never served.

The application process for membership shall be in accordance with the City of Santa Clara Guide for Board, Commissions, and Committee Applicants.

To allow for staggered terms and to phase in the change to seven (7) members:
 Three (3) members appointed in December of 2019 will have a term of office expiring on June 30, 2023. All three (3) vacancies shall be filled  Two (2) members appointed in December of 2020 will have a term of office expiring on June 30, 2024. All two (2) vacancies shall be filled  Three (3) members appointed on December of 2021 will have a term of office expiring on June 30, 2025. Two (2) of three (3) vacancies shall be filled

Any vacancies from whatever cause arising, shall be filled by appointment by the City Council. Upon a vacancy occurring leaving an unexpired portion of a term, any appointment to fill such vacancy shall be for the unexpired portion of such term. If a member of a board or commission absents himself/herself from three regular meetings of such board or commission, consecutively, unless with permission of such board or commission expressed in its official minutes, or is convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, or ceases to be a qualified elector of the City, his/her office shall be vacant and shall be so declared by the City Council.

The members shall be appointed, and shall be subject to removal, by motion of the City Council adopted by at least four affirmative votes.

Section 4. Meetings

The BPAC shall hold meetings on the fourth Monday in January, March, June, August and October at 4:00 p.m. at City Hall. The actual date of meeting can be changed.

Additional meetings can be recommended by a quorum of the committee and approved by the City Manager. All meetings shall be open to the public and notices and agendas shall be posted at City Hall as required by law.

A majority of the members of the BPAC shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.

The affirmative or negative vote of a majority of the entire membership shall be necessary for it to take action.

Section 5. Assistance of Staff

The BPAC may utilize City personnel as described in Section 2.120.040 of the City Code. The BPAC’s requests may from time to time be prioritized subject to staff limitations. The City Manager has appointed the Director of Public Works and the Chief of Police or their designees to staff the BPAC.

Page 3 of 3 ends

BPAC Policy Guidelines – Revision Year 2021

Section 6. Amendments

Amendments to the guidelines may be recommended by a quorum of the BPAC membership at any legal BPAC meeting, subject to approval by City Council.

RECOMMENDED FOR ADOPTION by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee this __ day of [MONTH, YEAR].

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Santa Clara City Council this __ day of [MONTH, YEAR].

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-352 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action to Waive Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 2041 to Amend Section 18.80.210 of the Zoning Code to Increase the Permissible Height of Digital Billboards

COUNCIL PILLAR
Promote and Enhance Economic, Housing and Transportation Development

BACKGROUND
At the February 22, 2022 Council meeting, proposed Ordinance No. 2041 was introduced and passed for the purpose of publication. Pursuant to City Charter Sections 808 and 812, proposed Ordinance No. 2041 was published on March 16, 2022, and copies were posted in three public places. The Ordinance now comes to Council for final adoption.

DISCUSSION
The Santa Clara City Code prohibits construction of new billboards in most locations within the City, except pursuant to a billboard relocation agreement. The Council Policy Statement for Billboard Relocation Agreements requires the removal of at least three existing billboard faces before a new “replacement” billboard can be installed. The proposed ordinance does not change the existing prohibition or the Council Policy, but going forward would allow such replacement billboards to be built up to a height of 60 feet, where previously the height limit was 35 feet.

The Code amendment would facilitate the installation of a new, 60-foot tall LED digital billboard at 630 Laurelwood Road by Outfront Media, LLC, pursuant to a relocation agreement approved by the Council on February 22, 2022. In exchange for the installation of the billboard at 630 Laurelwood, Outfront Media is removing four billboard faces, three of which have already been removed.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was prepared for the project by the environmental consultant firm Denise Duffy & Associates in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The MND, MMRP and Notice of Availability were posted on the City’s website atwww.santaclaraca.gov/ceqa <http://www.santaclaraca.gov/ceqa> and circulated for 20-day review on December 16, 2021 with the Open Comment Period from December 17, 2021 to January 5, 2022, in accordance with CEQA requirements. One comment letter was received from Valley Water on the MND, which raised minor issues. A response to the Valley Water comment letter was prepared and was attached to the February 22, 2022 Report to Council.

The MND examined environmental impacts associated with project development and identified potential air quality, biological, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
22-352 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
materials, noise, and water quality impacts that with incorporation of mitigation measures into the project would reduce all potential impacts to less than significant. A detailed discussion of the potential impacts and mitigation measures to be applied to the project are specified in the MND and would be implemented through project conditions of approval and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the proposed project.

FISCAL IMPACT
Pursuant to the City Council Policy for Billboard Relocation Agreements, as further consideration for the New Billboard installation, the Advertiser agrees to pay City $70,000 per new billboard face. The Advertiser shall pay the total amount due prior to the issuance of the building permit for the new billboard. The administrative staff time and expense related to the City’s processing of the requested application is covered by processing fees paid by the applicant.

COORDINATION
This report was coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office.

PUBLIC CONTACT
A summary of proposed Ordinance No. 2041 was published to the Santa Clara Weekly on March 16, 2022, and copies were posted in three public places and made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office.

Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected].

RECOMMENDATION
Waive Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 2041 to Amend Section 18.80.210 of the Zoning Code to allow for increased sign height in conjunction with a Billboard Relocation Agreement.

Reviewed by: Alexander Abbe, Assistant City Attorney
Approved by: City Manager’s Office

ATTACHMENTS

1. Ordinance 2041 (Introduction)
City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
ORDINANCE NO. 2041

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 18.80.210 OF "THE
CODE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA" TO

INCREASE THE PERMISSIBLE HEIGHT OF DIGIT AL

BILLBOARDS
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, since 1978, the City has had a policy to limit the number of outdoor advertising signs (commonly referred to as "billboards");
WHEREAS, pursuant to this policy, the City disallows the construction of new billboards within the City limits, except when a new billboard will replace existing billboards, at a ratio of 1 new billboard face installed for 3 existing billboard faces removed; WHEREAS, the City would like to facilitate such billboard relocations, but the current height limitation in the City Code does not allow for digital billboards to exceed 35 feet in height, which is insufficient for digital billboards; and,
WHEREAS, the City now wishes to amend the City Code to allow digital billboards up to 60 feet in height.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: That Section 18.80.050 ("Height Limitation") of Chapter 18.80 (entitled "Sign Regulations") of Title 18 (entitled "Zoning") of "The Code of the City of Santa Clara, California" ("SCCC") is amended to read as follows:

II
II
II
Ordinance/Height of Digital Billboards
Rev: 09/2019

Page 1 of 3 ends

"Title 18
Zoning

18.80.050 Height limitation.
(a) Digital billboards. No portion of any free standing digital billboard installed pursuant to Sections 18.80.220 ("Outdoor advertising signs (billboards)") and 18.80.221 ("Outdoor advertising display relocation agreements") shall exceed a height of sixty (60) feet above the perpendicular centerline height of the adjacent primary viewing street, road, or highway.
(b) Building signs. On buildings that are four stories or greater in height and that are located in other than residential zoning districts, not more than one sign may be placed on each side of the building above the ground floor level, and it shall be designed to not extend beyond the edge or the top of that building wall. (c) All other signs. Signs not described in subsections (a) and (b) shall not exceed thirty-five (35) feet above the ground level."
SECTION 2: Ordinances Repealed. With exception of the provisions protected by the savings clause, all ordinances (or parts of ordinances) in conflict with or inconsistent with this ordinance are hereby repealed.

II
II
II
Ordinance/Height of Digital Billboards
Rev: 09/2019

Page 2 of 3 ends

SECTION 3: Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final adoption; however, prior to its final adoption it shall be published in accordance with the requirements of Section 808 and 812 of "The Charter of the City of Santa Clara, California ." PASSED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLICATION this 22nd day of February , 2022, by the following vote:

AYES : COUNCILORS :

NOES: COUNCILORS :

ABSENT: COUNCILORS :

ABSTAINED : COUNCILORS:

Becker, Chahal, Park, and Watanabe,
and Mayor Gillmor
None
Hardy and Jain
None
ATTEST :

NORA PIMEN · - L1 C

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA
Attachments incorporated by reference: None
Ordinance/Height of Digital Billboards
Rev: 09/2019

Page 3 of 3 ends

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-409 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action to Waive Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 2042 Approving a Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy Pursuant to Assembly Bill 481

COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

BACKGROUND
At the March 8, 2022 Council meeting, proposed Ordinance No. 2042 was introduced and passed for the purpose of publication. Pursuant to City Charter Sections 808 and 812, proposed Ordinance No. 2042 was published on March 16, 2022 and copies were posted in three public places. The Ordinance now comes to Council for final adoption.

DISCUSSION
The proposed ordinance would adopt Santa Clara Police Department Policy 706 which describes each piece of military equipment acquired by the Santa Clara Police Department and provides guidelines for the approval, acquisition, and reporting requirements of military equipment. In addition, the ordinance would permit the Santa Clara Police Department to continue its use of military equipment described in Santa Clara Police Department Policy 706. In accordance with the requirements of AB 481, the Santa Clara Police Department has held community engagement meetings at which members of the public were able to discuss and ask questions about the proposed Military Equipment Policy.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) in that it is a governmental organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Police Department secures approximately $175,000 in asset forfeiture funds and $500,000 in local, State and Federal grants for education programs, enforcement operations, equipment and training annually.

AB 481 requires law enforcement agencies that seek to continue use of military equipment acquired prior to January 1, 2022, to approve an annual Military Purchase and Equipment Use Policy by May 1, 2022. Without such, the Police Department will be required to cease the use of approximately $1,093,178 in the Department’s operating equipment.

City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
22-409 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
Without City Council approval, the Police Department’s ability to respond to a critical incident, and provide mutual aid when called upon, would be detrimental to the safety of the public, involved parties in the incident and increase the City’s risk exposure.

COORDINATION
This report was coordinated with the Finance Department and City Attorney’s Office.

PUBLIC CONTACT
A summary of proposed Ordinance No. 2042 was published to the Santa Clara Weekly on March 16, 2022, and copies were posted in three public places and made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office.

RECOMMENDATION
Waive Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 2042 Approving a Military Equipment Funding, Acquisition and Use Policy Pursuant to Assembly Bill 481.

Reviewed by: Sujata Reuter, Chief Assistant City Attorney Approved by: City Manager’s Office

ATTACHMENTS

1. Ordinance No. 2042 (introduction)
City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
ORDINANCE NO. 2042

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,
CALIFORNIA, ADDING SECTION 2.80.080 ENTITLED
"MILITARY EQUIPMENT POLICY" TO "THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA" IN
COMPLIANCE WITH ASSEMBLY BILL 481
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 481 (creating Government Code Section 7070, et seq.), relating to the use of military equipment by California law enforcement agencies; WHEREAS, AB 481 seeks to provide transparency, oversight, and an opportunity for meaningful public input on decisions regarding whether and how military equipment is funded, acquired, or used;
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara Police Department is in possession of certain items of equipment that qualify as "military equipment" under AB 481; WHEREAS, AB 481 requires that a law enforcement agency possessing and using such qualifying equipment prepare a publicly released, written, military equipment use policy document covering the inventory, description, purpose, use, acquisition, maintenance, fiscal impacts, procedures, training, oversight, and complaint process, applicable to the Department's use of such equipment;
WHEREAS, the Policy and supporting information must be approved by the governing body by ordinance, and reviewed annually; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Clara, having received the information required under AB 481 regarding the Santa Clara Police Department's use of military equipment as defined in said law, deems it to be in the best interest of the City to approve the Military Equipment Policy as set forth herein.

Ordinance/AB 481 Military Equipment Policy
Rev: 09/2019

Page 1 of 4 ends

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: That a new Section 2.80.080 is added to Chapter 2.80 (entitled "Police Department") of Title 2 (entitled "Administration and Personnel") of "The Code of the Cityof Santa Clara, California" to read as follows:
"2.80.080 Military Equipment Policy.
(a) The City Council has made the following determinations:
(1) The military equipment inventoried and presented to the City Council is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety;
(2) The proposed military equipment use policy ("Policy") will safeguard the public's welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties; (3) The equipment is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety (if any); (4) Prior military equipment use complied with the applicable equipment use policy (which included equipment now defined as military equipment) that was in effect at the time, or if prior uses did not comply with the accompanying military equipment use policy, corrective action has been taken to remedy nonconforming uses and ensure future compliance.
(b) The Police Department has submitted a proposed Policy to the City Council and has made those documents available on the Police Department's website for at least30 days prior to the public hearing concerning the military equipment at issue.

II
II
Ordinance/AB 481 Military Equipment Policy
Rev: 09/2019

Page 2 of 4 ends

(c) The Policy was considered by the City Council as an agenda item in an open session of a regular meeting, noticed in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, at which public comment was permitted.
(d) The Policy shall be made publicly available on the Police Department's website for as long as the military equipment is available for use. (e) The Police Department shall submit an annual military equipment report to the City Council, containing the information required in Government Code Section 7072, and the City Council shall determine whether each type of military equipment identified in that report has complied with the standards for approval set forth in (a)(1 )-(4) above. (f) The City Council shall review this ordinance, and vote on whether to renew it, on an annual basis at a regular meeting, in accordance with Government Code Section 7071 (e)(2)
(g) The City Council approves the use of the Policy, and finds that it satisfies the requirements of Government Code Section 7070(d)."
SECTION 2: Ordinances Repealed. With exception of the provisions protected by the savings clause, all ordinances (or parts of ordinances) in conflict with or inconsistent withthis ordinance are hereby repealed.

SECTION 3: Savings clause. The changes provided for in this ordinance shall not affect any offense or act committed or done or any penalty or forfeiture incurred or any right established or accruing before the effective date of this ordinance; nor shall it affect any prosecution, suit or proceeding pending or any judgment rendered prior to the effective date of this ordinance. All fee schedules shall remain in force until superseded by the fee schedules adopted by the City Council.

II
Ordinance/AB 481 Military Equipment Policy
Rev: 09/2019

Page 3 of 4 ends

SECTION 4: Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final adoption; however, prior to its final adoption it shall be published in accordance with the requirements of Section 808 and 812 of "The Charter of the City of Santa Clara, California."
PASSED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLICATION this 8th day of March, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILORS :

NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

ABSTAINED : COUNCILORS:

Attachments incorporated by reference:

Becker, Chahal, Hardy, Jain, Park, and Watanabe,
and Mayor Gillmor
None
None
None
ATTEST:
~

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

1. Lexipol Policy 706 "Military Equipment" and Inventory of Military Equipment as of January 1, 2022
Ordinance/AB 481 Military Equipment Policy
Rev: 09/2019

Page 4 of 4 ends

Policy
706
Santa Clara Police Department
SCPD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2022/03/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Santa Clara Police Department Military Equipment - 1
Military Equipment
706.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines for the approval, acquisition, and reporting requirements of military equipment (Government Code § 7070; Government Code § 7071; Government Code § 7072).
706.1.1 DEFINITIONS
Definitions related to this policy include (Government Code § 7070):

Governing body
– The elected or appointed body that oversees the Department.

Military equipment categories– Includes but is not limited to the following:
• Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial or ground vehicles. • Mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles or armored personnel carriers. • High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), two-and-one-half-ton trucks, five-ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles that have a breaching or entry apparatus attached. • Tracked armored vehicles that provide ballistic protection to their occupants. • Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units. • Weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles of any kind. • Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature. This does not include a handheld, one-person ram.
• Firearms and ammunition of
_.50 caliber or greater, excluding standard-issue shotguns and standard-issue shotgun ammunition.
• Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than_.50 caliber, including firearms and accessories identified as assault weapons in Penal Code § 30510 and Penal Code § 30515, with the exception of standard-issue firearms.
• Any firearm or firearm accessory that is designed to launch explosive projectiles. • Noise-flash diversionary devices and explosive breaching tools. • Munitions containing tear gas or OC, excluding standard, service-issued handheld pepper spray.
• TASER® Shockwave, microwave weapons, water cannons, and long-range acoustic devices (LRADs).
• Kinetic energy weapons and munitions.
• Any other equipment as determined by a governing body or a state agency to require additional oversight.

Santa Clara Police Department
SCPD Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2022/03/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Santa Clara Police Department Military Equipment - 2
706.2 POLICY
It is the policy of the Santa Clara Police Department that members of this department comply with the provisions of Government Code § 7071 with respect to military equipment. 706.3 MILITARY EQUIPMENT COORDINATOR
The Chief of Police should designate a member of this department to act as the military equipment coordinator. The responsibilities of the military equipment coordinator include but are not limited to:
(a) Acting as liaison to the governing body for matters related to the requirements of this policy.
(b) Identifying department equipment that qualifies as military equipment in the current possession of the Department, or the equipment the Department intends to acquire that requires approval by the governing body.
(c) Conducting an inventory of all military equipment at least annually. (d) Collaborating with any allied agency that may use military equipment within the jurisdiction of Santa Clara Police Department (Government Code § 7071). (e) Preparing for, scheduling, and coordinating the annual community engagement meeting to include:

1. Publicizing the details of the meeting.

2. Preparing for public questions regarding the department’s funding, acquisition, and use of equipment.
(f) Preparing the annual military equipment report for submission to the Chief of Police and ensuring that the report is made available on the department website (Government Code § 7072).
(g) Establishing the procedure for a person to register a complaint or concern, or how that person may submit a question about the use of a type of military equipment, and how the Department will respond in a timely manner.
706.4 MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY
The following constitutes a list of qualifying equipment for the Department:

See attachment: 706.4 MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY.pdf
706.5 APPROVAL
The Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall obtain approval from the governing body by way of an ordinance adopting the military equipment policy. As part of the approval process, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall ensure the proposed military equipment policy is submitted to the governing body and is available on the department website at least 30 days prior to any public hearing concerning the military equipment at issue (Government Code § 7071). The military equipment policy must be approved by the governing body prior to engaging in any of the following (Government Code § 7071):

Santa Clara Police Department
SCPD Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2022/03/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Santa Clara Police Department Military Equipment - 3
(a) Requesting military equipment made available pursuant to 10 USC § 2576a. (b) Seeking funds for military equipment, including but not limited to applying for a grant, soliciting or accepting private, local, state, or federal funds, in-kind donations, or other donations or transfers.
(c) Acquiring military equipment either permanently or temporarily, including by borrowing or leasing.
(d) Collaborating with another law enforcement agency in the deployment or other use of military equipment within the jurisdiction of this department. (e) Using any new or existing military equipment for a purpose, in a manner, or by a person not previously approved by the governing body.
(f) Soliciting or responding to a proposal for, or entering into an agreement with, any other person or entity to seek funds for, apply to receive, acquire, use, or collaborate in the use of military equipment.
(g) Acquiring military equipment through any means not provided above. 706.6 COORDINATION WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Military equipment should not be used by any other law enforcement agency or member in this jurisdiction unless the military equipment is approved for use in accordance with this policy. 706.7 ANNUAL REPORT
Upon approval of a military equipment policy, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee should submit a military equipment report to the governing body for each type of military equipment approved within one year of approval, and annually thereafter for as long as the military equipment is available for use (Government Code § 7072).

The Chief of Police or the authorized designee should also make each annual military equipment report publicly available on the department website for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The report shall include all information required by Government Code § 7072 for the preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment in department inventory. 706.8 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Within 30 days of submitting and publicly releasing the annual report, the Department shall hold at least one well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting, at which the Department should discuss the report and respond to public questions regarding the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment.

SCPD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2022/03/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Santa Clara Police Department Attachments - 4
Attachments
Attachment
SCPD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2022/03/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Santa Clara Police Department 706.4 MILITARY EQUIPMENT
INVENTORY.pdf - 5
706.4 MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY.pdf
706.4 MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY.pdf

1. Robot (Category 1)
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:

Transcend Tactical Robot, cost: $24,452.24, Quantify: 1. This equipment is a battery powered, remote operated device. Equipped with two cameras and two- way radio capabilities. This equipment is for (potential) use during high-risk incidents. Use is limited to members of the Departments Special Response Team (SRT). Incidents that may qualify for its use include, but are not limited to, a high- risk warrant service, barricaded subject, and hostage negotiation/rescue. Before entering a structure, particularly in a tactically compromised and dangerous situation, knowledge of a subject’s location is very important, and the robot can provide that without placing anyone at risk. Cameras can also help determine if a subject is armed and also if there are other subjects inside that need assistance.

The two-way speakers can be used to de-escalate and determine resistance level.
b. Purpose:

To be used to remotely gain visual/audio data, deliver CNT phone, open doors, disrupt packages, and clear buildings.
c. Authorized Use:

Only assigned operators who have completed the required training shall be permitted to operate the robot. Use is established by the Incident Commander.

All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 311 – Search and Seizure, SCPD Policy 703 – Vehicle Use, SCPD Policy 404 – Special Response Team.
d. Expected Lifespan:
10-15 years
e. Fiscal Impact:

No known annual maintenance cost.

2. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (Category 1)
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:

Yuneec H520 unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), cost: Included with purchase of Transcend Tactical Robot, Quantity: 1. The H520 is a commercial-grade UAV.

Commonly used by construction and utility companies for the inspection of buildings, powerlines, windmills and other infrastructure. This UAV is a battery powered, remote operated device. Controller: ST16 All-in-one controller with 7- inch integrated screen. Controller allows operators to control UAV and view live feed from UAV-mounted cameras. Camera: CGOET camera with dual RGB and FLIR capabilities. Camera provides operators ability to switch between standard RGB camera and views based on heat of objects within frame. Flight time of approximately 25-30 minutes per battery, depending on weather and flight conditions. The UAV has also proven to be useful to public safety agencies in firefighting, search and rescue, pre-operational surveillance, and other tactical situations where aerial views enhance the safety and efficiency of law enforcement and fire personnel
b. Purpose:

To be deployed when its view would assist officers or incident commanders with the following situations, which include but are not limited to:
i. major collision investigations.
ii. search for missing persons.
iii. natural disaster management.
iv. crime scene photography.
v. SWAT, tactical or other public safety and life preservation missions. vi. In response to specific requests from local, state or federal fire authorities for fire response and/or prevention.
c. Authorized Use:

Only assigned operators who have completed the required training shall be permitted to operate the Yuneec H520 during approved missions. All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 311 – Search and Seizure, SCPD Policy 316 – Missing Persons, SCPD Policy 606 – Unmanned Aerial System Operations, SCPD Policy 703 – Vehicle Use, SCPD Policy 404 – Special Response Team.
d. Expected Lifespan:
10 years
e. Fiscal Impact:

No known annual maintenance cost.

3. Armored Personnel Carrier, vehicle with entry apparatus attached (Category 2 & 3) a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:

Lenco Armored Rescue Vehicle, cost: $309,000, quantity: 1.The ARV is designed to provide ballistic protection during tactical events (designed to withstand multiple bullet strikes from small arms fire as well as low level explosions).Equipped with nuclear/radiological detection devices, self-contained breathing apparatus, explosive gas detection devices, and thermal imaging camera. Equipped with emergency lights/siren and a public address system.

Common uses for the ARV include citizen and officer rescues, evacuations, and the deployment of officers and chemical agents. The ARV is currently deployed at every large event in the city of Santa Clara including stadium events, parades, and festivals. The ARV is a regional mutual-aid asset that has been requested and deployed to allied agencies in Santa Clara, San Benito, Monterey, Santa Cruz, Alameda, and San Mateo Counties. The ARV responded high profile events including: The Gilroy Garlic Festival shooting, Super Bowl 50, an armed barricade at Main Jail, the VTA active shooter and several incidents where local officers were killed in the line of duty
b. Purpose:

To be used in response to critical incidents to enhance officer and community safety, improve scene containment and stabilization, and assist in resolving critical incidents.
c. Authorized Use:

The use of armored vehicles shall only be authorized by a watch commander or SWAT commander, based on the specific circumstances of a given critical incident. Armored vehicles shall be used only by officers trained in their deployment and in a manner consistent with Department policy and training. The driver of the vehicle shall have a valid California driver license. All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 703 – Vehicle Use, SCPD Policy 404 – Special Response Team. d. Expected Lifespan:
20 years
e. Fiscal Impact:

Annual maintenance cost of approximately $2,500.

4. Command and Control Vehicles (Category 5)
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:
1993 Int. Model 3800, cost: $13,291, quantity: 1. The vehicle is a two-axel bus style vehicle with a front door and a rear door. It is painted black with police graphics affixed to the front, sides, and the rear of the vehicle. The vehicle has been partitioned into (2) separate workspace areas. The equipment housed in the vehicle includes, but is not limited to, a negotiations control console and accessories, communications throw phone and cables, miscellaneous office supplies, tabletops, chairs, storage space, coffee maker, and refrigerator The vehicle is capable of being used as a mobile operation and dispatch center.

The vehicle is also capable of transporting personnel and equipment The Mobile Communications Vehicle was placed into service in 2006 after its acquisition from the City of Santa Clara Library (formerly the bookmobile).

The Mobile Command Vehicle is used as an auxiliary command vehicle during major incidents. The vehicle is separated into two areas by a walled partition and door. One area is used as a negotiation / communication center by the Crisis Negotiations Team. The second area can be used as a mobile command center aiding in the command, control, and deployment of personnel at a critical incident.
b. Purpose:

To be utilized for critical incident callouts.
c. Authorized Use:

The CNT vehicle used by officers and staff who have been properly trained in the safe handling of the vehicle. The driver of the vehicle shall have a valid California driver license. All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 703 – Vehicle Use, SCPD Policy 404 – Special Response Team.
d. Expected Lifespan:
25 years (Expired)
e. Fiscal Impact:

Annual maintenance cost of approximately $5,589

5. Command and Control Vehicles (Category 5)
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:
2001 Freightliner MT45 – custom upfit by Mattman, cost: $162,181, quantity: 1.

The SRT van is a command vehicle and an equipment storage and transportation vehicle. Computerized screen used for tracking operations on the exterior. Desk with radios for dispatch on the interior. Several storage areas for the different equipment used by SRT. Manual breaching tools / Energetic breaching materials, Water, Generator, Ammunition, Robot / UAV, 40mm launchers and projectiles
b. Purpose:

To be used based on the specific circumstances of a given critical incident, large event, natural disaster or community event that is taking place. c. Authorized Use:

The SRT Van shall be used by officers trained in their deployment and in a manner consistent with Department policy and training. The driver of the vehicle shall have a valid California driver license. All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 703 – Vehicle Use, SCPD Policy 404 – Special Response Team.
d. Expected Lifespan:
20 years (expires in March 2022)
e. Fiscal Impact:

Annual maintenance cost of approximately $2,500

6. Command and Control Vehicles (Category 5)
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:
2018 Ford E450 Super Duty cutaway/stripped chassis with a large built-out cargo box mounted on the chassis. It looks like a typical box style cargo van/truck painted black with police graphics. The CSI van is not used in an enforcement capacity. This vehicle is used for the transportation of investigative equipment including a Total Station laser surveyor and accessories, computer equipment and software, evidence collection materials, and storage space for transporting items to the Santa Clara Police Department. There is a large computer monitor/TV mounted on an interior wall to view photos, diagrams, and to aid in crime scene diagramming. The CSI van is used to transport evidence and investigative tools, and a limited number of personnel, to a major crime scene or a crime scene requiring a vehicle larger than a traditional police vehicle for the purposes of transporting evidence collection materials or crime scene evidence.

Once on-scene, the van is used as shelter, supply storage, and evidence storage b. Purpose:

To be utilized for critical incident callouts.
c. Authorized Use:

The CSI vehicle is used by officers and staff who have been properly trained in the safe handling of the vehicle. The driver of the vehicle shall have a valid California driver license. All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 703 – Vehicle Use, SCPD Policy 802 – Property and Evidence.
d. Expected Lifespan:
20 years
e. Fiscal Impact:

Annual maintenance cost of approximately $5,770.

7. Breaching Apparatus: Slugs (Category 7)
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:

Royal Arms Tesar-2, cost: $1,880, quantity: 470. Shotgun breaching rounds are specialty shotgun shells utilized for door breaching. The Royal Arms Tesar-2 rounds contain compressed copper powder and are fired through a specialized breaching shotgun barrel. The copper powder is designed to strike and destroy the lock throw inside of the door, allowing entry into the room or structure. The powder is designed to dissipate after striking the lock throw in order to minimize entry into the target space for the safety of occupants and operators. Designed to breach heavy locks, dead-bolts, and hinges mounted inside of solid oak or steel doors. Royal Arms Tesar-2 rounds are good until expended if stored properly.

Shotgun breaching rounds are used to gain rapid access to a room or structure when an emergent law enforcement need exists
b. Purpose:

To safely gain entry into a structure.
c. Authorized Use:

Explosive breaching may only occur after authorization by the Incident Commander or SWAT Commander in the field, and during training exercises. All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 311 – Search and Seizure, SCPD Policy 404 Special Response Team.
d. Expected Lifespan:

Until expended
e. Fiscal Impact:

Individual unit price of approximately $4 each. Estimated between $0 and $1,880 annually

8. Breaching Apparatus: Energetic Breaching Program (Category 7) a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:

Energetic breaching is used to gain rapid access to a room or structure when an emergent law enforcement need exists. All efforts are made to minimize the amount of energetics applied to a target, while still achieving a positive breach.

Energetic breaching materials are used to make breaching charges of various shapes and strength which are specifically designed for the target. The materials release gasses, heat, and light when initiated. The pressure from the gasses released presses against mediums and or the target to cause the structure of the target to fail for a successful breach.

Breaching charges are specially designed to cause structural failure of the desired target. The breaching charges in stock were built in house by the SRT breaching cadre. Various types, configurations, and energetic weights are maintained for use as needed. Older charges are cycled out of stock during monthly training.
i. 25 grain detonation cord, cost: $349, quantity 2.4lbs. The detonating cord is a thin, flexible plastic tube usually filled with pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN, pentrite). With the PETN exploding at a rate of approximately 6400 m/s, any common length of detonation cord appears to explode instantaneously. It is a high-speed fuse which explodes, rather than burns, and is suitable for detonating high explosives.
ii. 50 grain detonation cord, cost $1,915.49, quantity 1 roll. The detonating cord is a thin, flexible plastic tube usually filled with pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN, pentrite). With the PETN exploding at a rate of approximately 6400 m/s, any common length of detonation cord appears to explode instantaneously. It is a high- speed fuse which explodes, rather than burns, and is suitable for detonating high explosives.
iii. Nonel starters, cost: included with 50 grain det cord, quantity: 88. A blasting cap is a small sensitive primary explosive device generally used to detonate a larger, more powerful and less sensitive secondary explosive such as TNT, dynamite, or plastic explosive.

Blasting caps come in a variety of types, including non-electric caps, electric caps, and fuse caps
iv. C2 Prima sheet, cost: $1,183.50, quantity: 10 lbs. A PETN based sheet explosive
b. Purpose:

To safely gain entry into a structure.
c. Authorized Use:

Explosive breaching may only occur after authorization by the Incident Commander or SWAT Commander in the field, and during training exercises. All Breachers shall be licensed as a Blaster by Cal/OSHA. All Breachers will attend an approved "Tactical Energetic Breaching" course. Master Breacher designation upon: Attend an accredited “advanced” Energetic Breaching course or equivalent. Participate in a minimum of 50 documented training breaches, of which at least ten (10) were considered “research and development” shots.

Participate in at least 1 operational energetic breach. All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 311 – Search and Seizure, SCPD Policy 404 Special Response Team.
d. Expected Lifespan:
25 grain detonation cord – 5 years
50 grain detonation cord – 5 years
C2 Prima Sheet – Until expended
Nonel Starters – until expended
e. Fiscal Impact:
25 grain detonation cord – estimated between $0 and $349 annually. 50 grain detonation cord – estimated between $0 and $1,915.49 annually C2 Prima Sheet – estimated between $0 and $1,183.50 annually Nonel Starters – $0

9. Specialized Firearms and Ammunition (Equipment Category 10) a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:

I. The Carbine Rifle is a firearm, capable of accurately stopping an armed subject at various distances. The Carbine Rifle is a lightweight, air-cooled, gas operated, magazine fed, shoulder fired weapon, designed for semi-automatic & selective fire. The Carbine Rifle does not have an expiration and will need to be serviced or replaced when the Rifle fails or breaks. The .223 / 5.56 cartridge is used as a lethal option designed to stop a violent encounter. The projectile is capable of penetrating soft body armor being worn by armed subjects. Colt AR-15/M4, cost: $119,850, quantity: 102, FN-15, cost: $46, 371, quantity: 29
II. The Hornady .223 Remington, 75 grain, BTHP Tap Precision cartridge is the primary duty ammunition deployed during potential lethal encounters. Cost: $19,980, quantity: 25,000
III. The Hornady .223 Remington, 62 grain, Tap Barrier cartridge is the secondary ammunition deployed during potential lethal encounters, when shooting through barriers. Cost: $3,996, quantity: 5,000
IV. The Hornady .223 Remington, 55 grain cartridge is the primary training ammunition for the Department. Cost: $40,176, quantity:
100,000
V. The Santa Clara Police Department Special Response Team (SRT) was formed in 1975, in response to very dangerous or violent tactical encounters. The Sniper element deploys with precision rifles, which enables the stopping of an armed subject at a safe distance. The Sniper Rifle does not have an expiration and will need to be serviced or replaced when the Rifle fails or breaks.

The .308 Winchester cartridge: is a rimless, bottlenecked rifle cartridge. The .308 WIN. cartridge is used as a Lethal option designed to stop a violent encounter. The projectile is capable of penetrating soft body armor being worn by armed subjects. JP LRP-07 Rifle cost: $14,276, quantity: 4, TacOps 700, cost: $3,999, quantity: 1, DT SRS-A1 rifle, cost: $7,698, quantity: 2, Spartan rifle, cost: $8,800, quantity: 2.

VI. The Hornady .308 WIN., 110 grain, Tap Urban cartridge is ammunition deployed during potential lethal encounters, in high collateral risk environments. The 110 grain, Tap Urban offers a unique projectile that allows rapid expansion, fragmentation & low retained weight. It also offers the least penetration, but with substantially more temporary & permanent cavity & fragmentation.

Cost: $6,303, quantity: 5,000
VII. The Hornady .308 WIN., 168 grain, ELD Match Tap Precision cartridge is ammunition deployed during potential lethal encounters at longer distances. The 168 grain projectile maintains accuracy, while resulting in higher impact velocities, less drop, less wind drift, and more energy on target. Cost: $18,909, quantity: 15,000.

VIII. The RUAG .308 WIN., 164 grain, Tactical cartridge is ammunition deployed during potential lethal encounters, when shooting through barriers. The 164-grain projectile is capable of accurately striking targets behind an angled window or windshield, without the risk of unpredictable bullet deflection Conventional bullets break apart or fragment when penetrating glass, which does not allow an accurate hit. Cost: $1,512, quantity: 500
IX. The RUAG .308 WIN., 196 grain, Armor Piercing cartridge is ammunition deployed during potential lethal encounters, when shooting through heavy barriers. The 196 grain projectile is capable of accurately striking targets behind armor, without the risk of unpredictable bullet deflection. Conventional bullets break apart or fragment when penetrating armor, which does not allow an accurate hit. Cost: $385, quantity: 80
X. The RUAG .338 Lapua Magnum, 247 grain, Styx Action cartridge is ammunition deployed during potential lethal encounters, in high collateral risk environments. The 247 grain Styx Action cartridge offers a unique projectile that allows rapid expansion, fragmentation & low retained weight. It also offers the least penetration, but with substantially more temporary & permanent cavity & fragmentation. Cost: $1,618, quantity: 500
XI. The Hornady .338 Lapua Magnum, 285 grain, ELD Match cartridge, is ammunition deployed during potential lethal encounters at longer distances. The 285-grain projectile maintains accuracy, while resulting in higher impact velocities, less drop, less wind drift, and more energy on target. Cost: $17,766, quantity: 3,840
XII. The RUAG .338 Lapua Magnum, 250 grain, Tactical cartridge is ammunition deployed during potential lethal encounters, when shooting through barriers. The 250-grain projectile is capable of accurately striking targets behind an angled window or windshield, without the risk of unpredictable bullet deflection Conventional bullets break apart or fragment when penetrating glass, which does not allow an accurate hit. Cost: $953, quantity: 350 XIII. The RUAG .338 Lapua Magnum, 260 grain, Armor Piercing cartridge is ammunition deployed during potential lethal encounters, when shooting through heavy barriers. The 260-grain projectile is capable of accurately striking targets behind armor, without the risk of unpredictable bullet deflection. Conventional bullets break apart or fragment when penetrating armor, which does not allow an accurate hit. Cost: $3,240, quantity: 500 XIV. Selections of which of the above ammunition to use is dependent on the threat and the environment (to include barriers, weather conditions, uninvolved parties, etc.)

b. Purpose:

To be used as precision weapons to address a threat with more precision and/or greater distances than a handgun, if present and feasible. c. Authorized Use:

Only members that are POST certified are authorized to use a rifle. All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 300 – Use of Force, SCPD Policy 306.5 – Firearms Training and Qualifications, SCPD Policy 404 – Special Response Team. d. Expected Lifespan:

I. Carbine Rifle – No expiration
II. The Hornady .223 Remington, 75 grain – No expiration III. The Hornady .223 Remington, 62 grain, Tap Barrier – No expiration IV. The Hornady .223 Remington, 55 grain, – No expiration V. Sniper Rifles – No expiration
VI. The Hornady .308 WIN., 110 grain – No expiration
VII. The Hornady .308 WIN., 168 grain – No expiration
VIII. The RUAG .308 WIN., 164 grain – No expiration
IX. The RUAG .308 WIN., 196 grain – No expiration
X. The RUAG .338 Lapua Magnum, 247 grain – No expiration XI. The Hornady .338 Lapua Magnum, 285 grain – No expiration XII. The RUAG .338 Lapua Magnum, 250 grain – No expiration XIII. The RUAG .338 Lapua Magnum, 260 grain – No expiration e. Fiscal Impact:

I. Carbine Rifle – Annual cost between $19,999 - $166,221 II. The Hornady .223 Remington, 75 grain – Annual cost between $0 - $19,980
III. The Hornady .223 Remington, 62 grain, Tap Barrier – Annual cost between $0 - $3,996
IV. The Hornady .223 Remington, 55 grain – Annual cost between $0 - $40,176
V. Sniper Rifle – Annual cost between $900 - $34,773
VI. The Hornady .308 WIN., 110 grain – Annual cost between $0 - $6,303 VII. The Hornady .308 WIN., 168 grain – Annual cost between $0 - $18,909 VIII. The RUAG .308 WIN., 164 grain – Annual cost between $0 - $1,512 IX. The RUAG .308 WIN., 196 grain – Annual cost between $0 - $385 X. The RUAG .338 Lapua Magnum, 247 grain – Annual cost between $0 - $1,618
XI. The Hornady .338 Lapua Magnum, 285 grain – Annual cost between $0 - $17,766
XII. The RUAG .338 Lapua Magnum, 250 grain – Annual cost between $0 - $953
XIII. The RUAG .338 Lapua Magnum, 260 grain – Annual cost between $0 - $3,240

10. Flashbangs (Category 12)
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:

A Noise Flash Diversionary Devices (NFDD) is a device that creates a bright flash and loud sound to temporarily divert the attention of subjects in the immediate area. NFDD are used to distract and temporarily incapacitate dangerous suspects by overwhelming their senses of vision and hearing. The distraction allows officers to seize a moment of opportunity to take control of high-risk situations.

I. NFDD 7290M emits a loud “bang” and a flash of light, cost:
$4,345.97, quantity: 96
II. NFDD 7290-5 emits a loud “bang” and a flash of light (5) times, cost: $1,070.13, quantity: 10
III. NFDD 9593 Multi-effect grenades with a loud blast, bright flash and dispersion of stinging .31 caliber pellets. Can also be configured to dispense an instantaneous cloud of irritant powder.

Cost: $443.30, quantity: 11

b. Purpose:

To produce atmospheric over-pressure and brilliant white light and, as a result, can cause short-term (6 - 8 seconds) physiological/psychological sensory deprivation to give officers a tactical advantage.
c. Authorized Use:

Diversionary Devices shall only be used:
i. By SRT officers who have been trained in their proper use. ii. In hostage and barricaded subject situations.
iii. In high risk warrant (search/arrest) services where there may be extreme hazards to officers.
iv. During other high-risk situations where their use would enhance officer safety. v. During training exercises.

All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 300 – Use of Force, SCPD Policy 404 – Special Response Team.

d. Expected Lifespan:

I. NFDD 7290M – 5 years
II. NFDD 7290-5 – 5 years
III. NFDD 9593 – 5 years
e. Fiscal Impact:

I. NFDD 7290M – Annual cost between $0 - $4,345.97
II. NFDD 7290-5 – Annual cost between $0 - $1,070.13
III. NFDD 9593 – Annual cost between $0 - $1,070.13

11. Tear Gas (Category 12)
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:

Chemical agent munitions, which are commonly referred to as “tear gas,” are used by the Santa Clara Police Department as a non-lethal tool to disperse rioting suspects and on barricaded suspects.

The Santa Clara Police Department uses chemical agents which are used by law enforcement across the United States: CS (2-Chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile) and OC (Oleoresin Capsicum)
CS is an irritating agent and lachrymator (irritates the eyes and causes tears to flow). CS has been medically tested in the UK and US, specifically by the U.S.

Army. There are no known allergic reactions to CS.

OC was de-regulated in California in 1996, is endorsed by the FBI, and is available to civilians to legally possess (2.5oz or less). OC is an inflammatory agent which causes involuntary closure of eyes (open in 2-5 minutes) and respiratory inflammation (subsides in approximately 2 minutes).

I. 5230B – Pyrotechnic grenade designed for indoor use delivering a maximum amount of irritant smoke throughout multiple rooms with minimal risk of fire. Cost: $2,412, quantity: 67
II. 6230 – Pyrotechnic canister grenade emitting smoke through multiple emission ports for 30 to 40 seconds. May be launched or hand thrown.

Cost: $450, quantity: 15
III. 8230 – The smallest diameter burning grenade that discharges a high volume of smoke and chemical agent through multiple emission ports.

Specifically for outdoor use and it should not be deployed on rooftops, in crawl spaces or indoors due to fire producing capability. Can be hand thrown or launched. Cost: $504, quantity: 21
IV. 9230 – The 9230 CS Jet-Lite Rubber Ball Grenade is one of the smaller diameter burning grenades that discharges a high volume of chemical agents through multiple emission ports. Specifically for outdoor use and should not be deployed from rooftops, in crawl spaces or indoors due to fire producing capability. Can be hand thrown or launched. Cost: $725, quantity: 25.

V. 3330 – Liquid CS filled projectile penetrates intermediate barriers and delivers irritant agents into an adjacent room. Cost: $735, quantity: 35 VI. 6340 – This unique grenade delivers an invisible OC vapor and renders an intense respiratory effect to a non-compliant subject. Cost: $360, quantity 10
VII. 4330 – Liquid CS filled projectile penetrates intermediate barriers and delivers irritant agents into an adjacent room. Cost: $1,950, quantity: 75 VIII. The Spede-Heat™ 40mm Short Range CS Round incorporates an aluminum shell and utilizes black powder as the propellant. The Spede- Heat™ 40mm Short Range Round is designed to deliver one dual-ported chemical canister from a 40mm launcher 75 yards to the intended target zone. Cost: $420, quantity: 15
IX. The 6 oz. OC Aerosol Grenade will delivery its payload of 1.3% MC% OC in 20-25 seconds. This is a antomized mist which enhances the pungent

1.3% OC formulation. Cost: $180, quantity: 10
b. Purpose:

To limit the escalation of conflict where employment of lethal force is prohibited or undesirable. Situations for use of the less lethal weapon systems may include, but are not limited to:
i. Self-destructive, dangerous and/or combative individuals. ii. Riot/crowd control and civil unrest incidents.
iii. Circumstances where a tactical advantage can be obtained. iv. Potentially vicious animals.
v. Training exercises or approved demonstrations.
c. Authorized Use:

Only officers who have received POST certification in the use chemical agents are authorized to use chemical agents. All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 300 – Use of Force, SCPD Policy 404 – Special Response Team.
d. Expected Lifespan:

I. 5230B – 5 years
II. 6230 – 5 years
III. 8230 – 5 years
IV. 9230 – 5 years
V. 3330 – 5 years
VI. 6340 – 5 years
VII. 4330 – 5 years
VIII. The Spede-Heat™ 40mm Short Range CS Round - 5 years IX. The 6 oz. OC Aerosol Grenade - 5 years
e. Fiscal Impact:

I. 5230B – estimated between $0 and $2,412 annually
II. 6230 – estimated between $0 and $450 annually
III. 8230 – estimated between $0 and $504 annually
IV. 9230 – estimated between $0 and $725 annually
V. 3330 – estimated between $0 and $735 annually
VI. 6340 – estimated between $0 and $360 annually
VII. 4330 – estimated between $0 and $1,950 annually
VIII. The Spede-Heat™ 40mm Short Range CS Round
IX. The 6 oz. OC Aerosol Grenade

12. PepperBall Launcher (Category 12)
a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:

System that uses high pressure air to deliver PAVA powder projectiles (similar to a paint ball delivery system). System capable of launching projectiles at a subject up to 60’. System capable of area saturation up to 160’. Non-lethal option to offer law enforcement officers to deliver chemical agents and kinetic energy impacts to subjects in a potentially violent encounter. De-Escalation tool used to avoid further injuries or lethal options on a subject. Cost: $7,500, quantity:

I. PepperBall LIVE PROJECTILE, The basic PepperBall projectile contains 2% PAVA pepper powder, and is designed for direct impact and area saturation, especially in confined, interior spaces.

Discharged from a PepperBall Launcher, the projectile has a velocity of 280-350 FPS. The projectile has a direct impact of 60ft and an area of saturation of 150+ft. The projectile contains 0.5% PAVA Powder.8230. Cost: $3,412 quantity: 1500
II. PepperBall VXR LIVE-X PROJECTILE: The VXR Live-X Projectile is a non-lethal round. The projectile contains approximately 10x the PAVA of the VXR LIVE projectile. This projectile is best for direct impact or area saturation. Discharged from a PepperBall Launcher, the projectile has a velocity of 280-425 FPS. The projectile has a direct impact of 150ft and an area of saturation of 390+ft. The projectile contains 2.5% PAVA powder. Cost: $8,984 quantity: 3000
b. Purpose:

To limit the escalation of conflict where employment of lethal force is prohibited or undesirable. Situations for use of the less lethal weapon systems may include but, are not limited to:
i. Self-destructive, dangerous and/or combative individuals. ii. Riot/crowd control and civil unrest incidents.
iii. Circumstances where a tactical advantage can be obtained. iv. Potentially vicious animals.
v. Training exercises or approved demonstrations.
c. Authorized Use:

Only those officers who have been trained in the use of PepperBall launchers are authorized to use the PepperBall launchers. All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 300 – Use of Force. d. Expected Lifespan:

I. PepperBall Launcher: No expiration
II. Live Projectile: 1 year
III. Live-X Projectile: 1 year
e. Fiscal Impact:

I. PepperBall Launcher: estimated between $0 and $7,500 annually II. Live Projectile: estimated between $0 and $3,412 annually III. Live-X Projectile: estimated between $0 and $9,000 annually

13. Projectile Launch platforms and associated munitions (Category 14) a. Description, quantity, capabilities, and purchase cost:

Penn Arms Launcher: Cost: $23,650, quantity: 22.The Penn Arms Launcher is not a firearm, but a Less-Lethal systems that uses smokeless powder to deliver 40MM projectiles from a safe distance. The Less-Lethal launcher is capable of launching 40MM munitions at a subject up to 25 yards. The Less-Lethal launcher is a single launcher, which allows the Officer to assess after every spent munition. Less-Lethal launcher does not have an expiration and will need to be serviced or replaced when the launcher fails or breaks. The 40MM munition is a Direct Impact Spin Stabilized Smokeless Sponge Munition. The Sponge Baton munition is used as a Less-Lethal weapon designed to de-escalate a potentially violent encounter. Cost: $11,454, quantity: 600
b. Purpose:

To limit the escalation of conflict where employment of lethal force is prohibited or undesirable.
c. Authorized Use:

Situations for use of the less lethal weapon systems may include, but are not limited to:
i. Self-destructive, dangerous and/or combative individuals. ii. Riot/crowd control and civil unrest incidents.
iii. Circumstances where a tactical advantage can be obtained. iv. Potentially vicious animals.
v. Training exercises or approved demonstrations.

All other applicable SCPD policies remain in effect, to include, but not limited to, SCPD Policy 300 – Use of Force.
d. Expected Lifespan:

I. 40mm Launcher: No expiration
II. 40mm Sponge Round: 5 years
e. Fiscal Impact:

I. 40mm Launcher: estimated between $0 and $23,650 annually II. 40mm Sponge Round: estimated between $0 and $12,000 annually

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-309 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

REPORT TO STADIUM BOARD

SUBJECT
Informational Report on Dates and Purpose of Stadium Authority and Stadium Manager Meetings and Corresponding Minutes for the Period of October 1 to December 31, 2021

BOARD PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

BACKGROUND
On August 24, 2017, the Stadium Authority approved the Harvey Rose Audit titled “Comprehensive Audit of Stadium”. Audit recommendation 1.Q states that “the Stadium Authority Board should direct the Executive Director to require that all meetings, including the date and purpose of the meetings, between Stadium Authority staff and Stadium Manager be documented and reported quarterly or annually to the Stadium Authority Board.” Staff has implemented this audit recommendation on a quarterly basis.

Furthermore, at the August 25, 2020 meeting, the Stadium Authority Board directed staff to prepare minutes for all future Stadium Authority/Stadium Manager staff meetings.

DISCUSSION
In accordance with the Board approved audit recommendation, meetings between Stadium Authority staff and Stadium Manager for the period of October 1 to December 31, 2021 are listed below. The minutes for these meetings are included in this report as Attachment 1.

Date Meeting Purpose
10/1/2021 Financial Management System (FMS) Implementation Follow Up Items & Non-NFL Events Statements Meeting (via Teams)
10/7/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams)
10/7/2021 FY 20/21 Non-NFL Events Documentation Review Meeting (via GoTo Meeting)
10/20/2021 FMS Meeting: Open Item Discussion (via Zoom) 10/21/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams) 10/27/2021 FY 20/21 Non-NFL Events Documentation Review Meeting (via Teams) 10/28/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams) 11/3/2021 FMS Meeting: Final Presentation - Accounting Enablement Assessment Report (via Zoom)
11/4/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams)
11/9/2021 FMS Weekly Status Meeting (via Zoom)
11/10/2021 FMS Meeting: Implementation Kickoff (via Zoom) 11/15/2021 FMS Meeting: InTwo Introduction (via Zoom)
11/18/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams) 11/23/2021 FMS Minutes Review Meeting (via Teams)
11/23/2021 FMS Meeting: Great Plains Database with InTwo (via Zoom) 12/1/2021 FMS Meeting: Great Plains' Infrastructure Requirements (via Zoom) 12/2/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams)
12/6/2021 FMS Meeting: Chart of Accounts Planning (via Zoom) 12/7/2021 FMS Weekly Status Meeting (via Zoom)
12/9/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams)
12/13/2021 FMS Meeting: Accounts Payable Planning (via Zoom) 12/14/2021 FMS Weekly Status Meeting (via Zoom)
12/15/2021 FMS Meeting: Reporting Planning (via Zoom)
12/16/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams) 12/17/2021 FMS Meeting: Accounts Receivable & Sales Order Processing Planning (via Zoom)
City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/15/2022Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
22-309 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
Date Meeting Purpose
10/1/2021 Financial Management System (FMS) Implementation Follow Up Items & Non-NFL Events Statements Meeting (via Teams)
10/7/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams)
10/7/2021 FY 20/21 Non-NFL Events Documentation Review Meeting (via GoTo Meeting)
10/20/2021 FMS Meeting: Open Item Discussion (via Zoom) 10/21/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams) 10/27/2021 FY 20/21 Non-NFL Events Documentation Review Meeting (via Teams) 10/28/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams) 11/3/2021 FMS Meeting: Final Presentation - Accounting Enablement Assessment Report (via Zoom)
11/4/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams)
11/9/2021 FMS Weekly Status Meeting (via Zoom)
11/10/2021 FMS Meeting: Implementation Kickoff (via Zoom) 11/15/2021 FMS Meeting: InTwo Introduction (via Zoom)
11/18/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams) 11/23/2021 FMS Minutes Review Meeting (via Teams)
11/23/2021 FMS Meeting: Great Plains Database with InTwo (via Zoom) 12/1/2021 FMS Meeting: Great Plains' Infrastructure Requirements (via Zoom) 12/2/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams)
12/6/2021 FMS Meeting: Chart of Accounts Planning (via Zoom) 12/7/2021 FMS Weekly Status Meeting (via Zoom)
12/9/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams)
12/13/2021 FMS Meeting: Accounts Payable Planning (via Zoom) 12/14/2021 FMS Weekly Status Meeting (via Zoom)
12/15/2021 FMS Meeting: Reporting Planning (via Zoom)
12/16/2021 Weekly Accounting Status Meeting (via Teams) 12/17/2021 FMS Meeting: Accounts Receivable & Sales Order Processing Planning (via Zoom)

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact related to this report other than the staff time to prepare this report.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the Treasurer’s Office and Chief Assistant City Attorney.

PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> .

RECOMMENDATION
Note and file the quarterly report on Stadium Authority and Stadium Manager meetings and corresponding minutes for the period of October 1 to December 31, 2021.

Reviewed by: Christine Jung, Assistant to the Executive Director Approved by: Executive Director’s Office
City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/15/2022Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
22-309 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

ATTACHMENTS

1. Stadium Authority and Stadium Manager Meeting Minutes for the Period 10/1/21 to 12/31/21 City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/15/2022Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
FMS Implementation Follow Up Items & Non-NFL Events Statements Meeting Date: 10/1/2021; 1:00pm to 2:00pm
Teams meeting
Attendees:

SCSA - Kenn Lee and Linh Lam
ManCo - Erin Fernandez, Brent Ghan, Caitlin Ritchie and Darren Wong

Re: FMS Implementation follow up items

Discussion of netting of expenses for Non-NFL Ticketed events and how these should be displayed in the new Financial Management System
- Review of Rolling Stones Profit and Loss entries
- Review of Promoter Guarantee Payout
- Suggestion by Darren for contra revenue and expense accounts. - Show documentation and contras for the credits for expenses (promoter expenses).

Discussion of Blue Moon/Encore Reporting module
- Module needed for instances of Profit/Loss statement reporting for Ticketed events.

Currently done with an MDA and Excel
- Decision that we do not need this extended module

Discussion of how Shared Stadium Expenses payroll would be shown in the new Financial Management System
- Discussion of detail and options
- SCSA request of titles, hours, department, unique IDs by pay period – Darren will discuss with 49ers team

Discussion of Other G&A and NNE payroll data that would be shown in the new system - Same level of details as the Shared Expenses

Weekly Accounting Status Meeting
Date: 10/07/2021; 2:00pm to 3:00pm
Teams Meeting: Linh Lam (SCSA) and Darren Wong (ManCo)

1. FY 19-20 Non-NFL Events Invoice – Public Safety Payment

2. CapEx Invoice

3. FY 20-21 Shared Expense True-up Invoice

4. BNY Buffet Invoice

SCSA FY2020/21 Non-NFL Event Documentation Review
October 7, 2021 | 3:00 – 5:00 p.m.

GoTo Meeting

Attendees:

SCSA - Kenn Lee, Christine Jung, Jimmy Nguyen and Linh Lam ManCo - Erin Fernandez, Brent Ghan and Darren Wong

Re: SCSA FY 2020/21 Non-NFL Event Documentation Review

Discussion of Credit Card Fees for canceled events (i.e. Justin Bieber and Monster Jam) and why the refund transaction fees doesn’t offsets the original fees for purchases:
- Fees are charged in a lump sum amount daily and they can’t be tied to a specific transaction or event
- Fees are prorated based on the individual event’s daily cash receipts over the total daily cash receipts
- Refunds are issued and booked at a later date so the fees do not tie to the original transaction
- ManCo to provide SCSA the allocation details for the fees at a later date

Discussion of Labor Charges from Other Departments:
- Non-Event Staff Labor Charges
o Reviewed documentation of positions, titles, and hours charged on a spreadsheet o Traced and agreed the time reported on the Non-NFL Events backup to the ABI report summary, which shows the days, hours, and the event (project)  Sample included: Compliance Manager, Director of Accounting, Senior Accountant, Finance Manager, Chief Strategy Officer, Director Business Strategy & Analytics, Coordinator, Ticketing, Director of Ticketing & Public Events; Senior Manager for Ticketing and Strategy; Manager SBL; Manager Ticketing; Senior Manager SBL and Strategy; Manager – Mina Tailgate & Membership Services
o Provided a brief explanation on the types of work staff performed for Non-NFL Events
 Compliance Manager reviewed Non-NFL Events’ loss for the year and Profit and Loss statements in May and June
 Finance Manager worked on the year-end close
 Chief Strategy Officer focus entirely on StadCo but will charge to Non-NFL Events every now and then when they provide some analytics to Non-NFL Events
 Director Business Strategy & Analytics provided as needed analysis on future gold cup events
 ManCo delineate Non-NFL Events and Other G&A work based on timing of when staff worked on their designated tasks during the year: Lender budget, O&M billing, Non-NFL Events’ Profit & Loss statements, and Quarterly SBL review
o ManCo to provide SCSA actual ABI reports for Finance Manager on 5/27/20 for 3.5 hours and Compliance Manager on 4/21/20 for 1.75 hours
o ManCo to provide more details on Mina Tailgate & Membership Services and how it relates to Non-NFL Events
- Catered Events Labor – FY 2019-20 Labor Allocation of 84%/16% o Catered Events Labor’s 84% allocation is based on the number attendees per Tenant Event (StadCo) and SCSA events
 Contracts has the number of attendees for each event so ManCo tracks the number of attendees and calculates the labor allocation based on that o Reviewed documentation of allocation calculation on a spreadsheet o ManCo to provide SCSA a spreadsheet of event by event that will show the SCSA attendees for FY2019-20
- Catered Events Labor Charges during the Pandemic
o Reviewed documentation of positions, titles, and hours charged on a spreadsheet o Traced and agreed the time reported on the Non-NFL Events backup to the ABI report summary, which shows the days, hours, and the event (project)  Sample included: Direct of Special Events; Event Manager; Senior Event Manager; Senior Manager of Special Event Sales; Special Events Sales manager
o Event Manager and Senior Event Manager were furloughed in the middle of the year o Senior Manager of Special Event Sales, Special Events Sales Manager, and Director of Special Events stayed through to work with clients to add and reschedule event bookings due to Covid protocol.
- Benefit and Overhead rates
o Benefit rate is based on an individual employee’s benefits and is calculated at the employee level
o Overhead rate was professionally calculated by the Matrix Consulting Group  ManCo to let SCSA know if SCSA can have a copy of the Overhead Plan prepared by the Matrix Consulting Group

Discussion of Advertisement charges, how the “clicks” were quantified and what the success rate was for the clicks:
- These are Google Paid Ads that show up at the top of the search results - Ads are charged based on the number of clicks by users - Ads ran for a month and was canceled due to the Pandemic

Discussion of Depreciation Expense and why it should be included in the payment to the Stadium Manager as an expense when it was only an accounting entry:
- Refer to previous letters from Scott Sabatino for Depreciation Expense

Discussion of Ticket Sales Revenues and why there were charges from FY 2019-20 in FY 2020- 21:
- Charges were ticket sales from Fevo, a third-party vendor that sell bock of tickets on the Stadium Authority’s behalf
o The sales invoices for FY 2019-20 events were received after the year-end close so the receipt was recorded as revenues in FY 2020-21
o The chargeback invoices for FY 2019-20 events were received after the year-end close so the expense was recorded in FY 2020-21

Discussion of Luxury Suite Ticket Revenue, complimentary tickets and prior years’ cleanup items:
- Complimentary tickets are for Owner Club (Luxury) Suites only o Luxury suites/licenses include the right to attend NFL and Non-NFL Events without additional charges
o Suites/licenses were already charged for these benefits o Tickets show up as complimentary in Artic report so staff can track it - O ther Regular Suites don’t get complimentary tickets o R egular suite holder gets charged per Non-NFL Event the holder selects to attend  ManCo invoices suite holder for each event they select to attend (Accounts Receivables and Revenues) and remit the monies back to the Stadium Authority
- Prior years’ cleanup items were for regular suite holders’ Non-NFL Events revenues o Adjustments were for cancelled attendances that ManCo staff did not charge SCSA back
o ManCo to provide SCSA the general ledger details to show that these cleanup items were previously recorded as SCSA revenues and remitted to SCSA

Discussion of Parking Revenue and prior years’ adjustments:
- Prior years’ transactions were reconciled the same time as the Luxury and Regular Suite cleanup process
- Adjustments were for Regular Suite Holders’ cancelled Non-NFL Events’ parking revenues that ManCo staff did not charge SCSA back
- ManCo to provide SCSA the general ledger details to show that these cleanup items were previously recorded as SCSA revenues and remitted to SCSA

Discussion of Partial Redaction of Non-NFL Events’ Documents:
- Refer to previous letters from Compliance Manager for Redaction

Discussion of recent Budget Amendment for Shared Expenses Salaries:
- Confirmed an increase of $163,000 for Other G&A and Lender Fees line item in the Budget

Follow up items to be discussed at a later meeting:
- ManCo to provide allocation and source documents on Credit card fees - ManCo to provide download of hours from ABI excluding names - ManCo to confirm if the Overhead Plan prepared by Matrix Consulting Group can be shared with SCSA
- ManCo to provide more details on Mina Tailgate & Membership Services - ManCo to provide SCSA catered events attendees for FY2019-2020 - ManCo to provide actual ABI reports for Finance Manager and Compliance Manger - ManCo to provide Suite Revenues backup to justify prior years’ adjustments

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Open Item Discussion
October 20, 2021 | 3:00 – 4:05 PM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting
Chris Steele, Director of Accounting

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Kenn Lee, Treasurer
Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance
Jimmy Nguyen, Management Analyst
David Presley, Accounting Technician

Armanino Attendees:

Giovana Lopez, Project Manager, Consulting
Lauren Nelson, Senior Consultant, Strategy & Transformation Judy Clarke, Director, Strategy & Transformation
Giles Zollar, Consulting Manager

A G E N D A

Judy Clarke, Director, Strategy & Transformation from Armanino, shared that the meeting agenda was to go through the outstanding questions from Armanino, and the group will discuss about it and decide on the next steps for it.

Subledger Posting Date:
• The team has decided to defer the decision on Subledger Posting Date to the Implementation phase when Armanino review the system configuration in detail.

Cash Management Module:
• The Stadium Authority confirmed that the new Great Plain instance should be setup with three separate checkbooks (Non-NFL Events, SBL, and Shared Stadium Expense).

Non-NFL Events and SBL will have full checkbook capability with check printing, and Shared Stadium Expenses’ checkbook will be setup as a Prepaid account without check printing capability.

• The Stadium Manager would like to utilize the SAP Conur integration function to pull the invoice backup attachments for Shared Stadium Expenses in their current SAP Concur to the new Great Plains instance to avoid duplicate effort in having to rescan the Shared Stadium Expense invoices into Great Plains again.
o The Stadium Authority noted that the Stadium Manager will still need to have staff allocate the 50% Shared Stadium Expense to the new Great Plains instance and ensure that the invoice attachment from SAP Concur is accurate. The vendor number and check payment number used in the new Great Plains instance will also need to match with the data from the Stadium Manager’s original Shared Expense payment in the Stadium Manager’s Great Plains instance. Additional details will be discussed during the implementation phase.
o The Stadium Authority agreed this integration effort should be included.

Sales Order Processing:
• The Stadium Manager noted that the Sales Order Processing module should be used in the new Great Plains instance to record all the invoice details. • The Stadium Manager noted that all the Catering Event billing details are stored within Ungerboeck, a subsystem used for catering services, and requested if we can revisit this item for further discussion.
o The team agreed to defer this item to Implementation to give all parties more time to assess the module.

Ticket Events Revenue Recording:
• The Stadium Authority requested that ticketed events’ revenues be recorded at gross instead of net.

Reporting Tools:
• Armanino recommended that the team implement SmartView in reporting since the cost is low and it is a very useful tool to have. The team agreed with the recommendation. • The Stadium Authority and Stadium Manager agreed that the Stadium Manager will continue to use Multi-Dimensional Analysis to track events, and that a separate project tracking software (i.e., Blue Moon) is not necessary.

Accounts Payable and Purchase Order Approval Workflow:
• The Stadium Authority confirmed that the Stadium Authority would like the Stadium Manager to use the Purchase Order module as discussed in the previous meeting.

Implementation Timeline and Go Live Date:
• The Stadium Authority and Stadium Manager confirmed with Armanino that both parties would like to go live with the new Great Plains instance starting in the new fiscal year in 2022, which is April 1, 2022. The team noted that some items will be implemented at a later date but would start transacting in April 2022.

Weekly Accounting Status Meeting
Date: 10/21/2021; 2:30pm to 3:30pm
Teams Meeting: Linh Lam (SCSA) and Darren Wong (ManCo)

1. FY 20-2 1 Non-NFL Events
a. Can send ABI files – export with dates, job titles, hours worked by day i. Consider redacting confidential information on the ABI report before submitting it to SCSA
b. Credit card fees – consider sampling a few days
c. Prior year’s
Suite adjustments – will need backup for all prior year’s adjustments

2. FY 21-2 2
Shared Expenses:
a. Utilities Invoice
b. Lender Fee & Other G&A Breakout

3. CapEx Invoice

4. KPMG AUP

5. FY 20-21 Shared Expense True-up Invoice

6. BNY Buffet Invoice

7. Lender
Budget W
orksheet
SCSA FY2020/21 Non-NFL Event Documentation Review
October 27, 2021 | 3:30 – 4:40 p.m.

Teams Meeting

Attendees:

SCSA - Kenn Lee, Christine Jung, Jimmy Nguyen and Linh Lam ManCo - Erin Fernandez, Brent Ghan and Darren Wong

Re: Continuation of SCSA FY 2020/21 Non-NFL Event Documentation Review

Review of Credit Card fees and statements for two canceled events (i.e., Justin Bieber and Monster Jam):
- Reviewed 12 individual transactions for Justin Bieber and Monster Jam on the monthly statements and performed a walkthrough of how the credit fees from the individual events were charged by the credit card companies.
o Event deferred revenues are recognized upon receipt while revenues and expenses are recognized when earned and incurred.
o Credit card fees are charged based on transaction volume and at month-end.

Review of Labor Reports from ABI export:
- Reviewed ManCo’s timekeeping system’s (ABI) time entry report and verified that the Finance Manager (3.5 hours on 5/27/20).

Review of Catered Event Allocation Calculation worksheet:
- Reviewed attendees tracking spreadsheet and traced the attendees amount to the allocation calculation used for Catered Event (84% SCSA / 16% StadCo).

Review of Overhead report:
- Reviewed the cover letter for the Overhead Plan that has the 13.86% overhead rate used for FY 2020-21.
- ManCo to confirm if SCSA can have a copy of the executive summary for the Overhead Plan prepared by the Matrix Consulting Group since SCSA can’t have a copy of the report.

Review of general ledger details for prior years’ cleanup items in Luxury Suites and Parking Revenue:
- Reviewed 9 original journal entries from ManCo’s cleanup items and verified that they were incorrectly recorded in the prior years for Luxury Suites and Parking Revenues. - ManCo will start recording Luxury Suites and Parking revenues based on scanned attendants rather than reservation report to avoid these types of adjustments.

Discussion of Mina Tailgate & Membership Services and how it relates to Non-NFL Events:
- Confirmed that this item was misclassified as a Non-NFL Event expense. The 6 hours charged belongs to SBL – Shared Stadium Expenses. An adjustment is not necessary since SBL is also a SCSA expense item.

Follow up items for ManCo:
- ManCo to confirm if they can share the Executive Summary pages of the Overhead Plan prepared by Matrix Consulting Group with SCSA.
- ManCo to provide ABI report for Compliance Manager’s 1.75 hours charged on 4/21/20.

Weekly Accounting Status Meeting
Date: 10/28/2021; 2:00pm to 2:30pm
Teams Meeting: Linh Lam (SCSA) and Darren Wong (ManCo)

1. FY 21-22 Shared Expenses:
a. Utilities Invoice
b. Lender Fee
c. Other G&A

2. CapEx Invoice

3. KPMG AUP

4. FY 20-21 Shared Expense True-up Invoice

5. BNY Buffet Invoice

6. Unclaimed Checks

7. FY 20-21 Shared Expense Review

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Final Presentation – Accounting Enablement Assessment Report November 3, 2021 | 2:00 – 3:05 PM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting
Chris Steele, Director of Accounting

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Kenn Lee, Treasurer
Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance
Jimmy Nguyen, Management Analyst
David Presley, Accounting Technician
Christine Jung, Assistant to the Executive Director

Armanino Attendees:

Giovana Lopez, Project Manager, Consulting
Lauren Nelson, Senior Consultant, Strategy & Transformation Judy Clarke, Director, Strategy & Transformation
Giles Zollar, Consulting Manager

A G E N D A

Judy Clarke, Director, Strategy & Transformation from Armanino, presented the final Accounting Enablement Assessment Report to the team and discussed the next steps for the project.

Project Summary:
• Armanino presented the Accounting Enablement Assessment Report and summarized the project objectives and assessments to date.
o Armanino performed 6 process focused sessions on General Ledger and Chart of Accounts, Cash Management and Bank Reconciliation, Accounts Receivables and Sales Order Processing, Reporting, Project Tracking, and Accounts Payable and Purchase Orders.

• Armanino provided the following configuration recommendations for the team to consider:
o Utilize 1 company and use existing segment to identify different sources of income.
o Utilize Blue Moon Project tracking for Non-NFL and Ticketed Events. o Do not utilize SAP Concur for SCSA’s shared expense transactions and integration the Stadium Manager’s SAP Concur into the new Great Plains instance to view supporting documents instead.
o Utilize reporting features in Great Plains to minimize the amount of manual work (e.g., SmartList Builder, Smart View, Management Reporter, etc.). o Utilize bank reconciliation module to reconcile bank accounts within Great Plains. o Utilize the sales order processing module for more detailed reporting on events. o Utilize SmartConnect if the team plans to import information from Ungerboeck or Blue Moon Project Tracking.
o Attend training classes for Management Reporter, General Inquiry and Reporting functionality.

• The Stadium Authority and the Stadium Manager noted that the team had previously agreed on setting up three companies (Shared Stadium Expense, Non-NFL Events, and Stadium Builder License) for the Great Plains instance since the three companies serve different purposes and require different tracking mechanisms. This is also more efficient for the Stadium Manager to record the transactions.
o Armanino agreed that the three companies setup would also work for the business purpose and that the Stadium Authority and the Stadium Manager should go with what is best for the team.

• The Stadium Authority and the Stadium Manager noted that the team had decided to not use Blue Moon Project Tracking and continue to have the Stadium Manager use Multi- Dimensional Analysis to track events since the Stadium Manager already has an existing structure to track the events. The team agreed to revisit the Blue Moon Project Tracking software again with the implementation team and will decide if it is necessary for the project.

• The Stadium Authority requested for Armanino to provide an additional page that has all the reporting software information so the team can review it in detail and determine if it’s necessary for implementation.

Next Steps for Dynamics GP Implementation:
• Armanino to align resources for implementation
• Schedule implementation kick-off meeting with stakeholders • Assign key stakeholders for the team
• SaaS Plaza (InTwo) to provision environment
• Enable log-in and security access to environment for Armanino • Hold kick-off meeting and begin remaining portion of the plan & analyze phase Weekly Accounting Status Meeting
Date: 11/4/2021; 2:00pm to 2:30pm
Teams Meeting: Linh Lam (SCSA) and Darren Wong (ManCo)

1. FY 21-22 Shared Expenses:
a. Utilities Invoice
b. Lender Fee
c. Other G&A

2. CapEx Invoice

3. KPMG AUP

4. BNY Buffet Invoice

5. Unclaimed Checks

6. FY 20-21 Shared Expense Review

7. Matrix Report

8. FY 19-20 NNE Loss

9. FMS Setup
a. 1 vs. 3 companies
b. Encore reporting

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Weekly Status Meeting
November 9, 2021 | 9:00 – 9:10 AM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting
Chris Steele, Director of Accounting

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance
Jimmy Nguyen, Management Analyst
David Presley, Accounting Technician

Armanino Attendees:

Lauren Nelson, Senior Consultant, Strategy & Transformation Judy Clarke, Director, Strategy & Transformation
Giovana Lopez, Project Manager, Consulting

Financial Management System Project Status Updates:
• Armanino presented the updated Accounting Enablement Assessment report to the team.
o New report included a glossary of all the recommended software for the team to review and research on

• Armanino confirmed with the Stadium Authority that the team can use the Accounting Enablement Assessment report and all the process and configuration documents to assist with the decision making during the project implementation phase. • Armanino noted that both Judy and Lauren will not be part of the Great Plains implementation team. Giles Zollar and Giovana Lopez will stay on with the team as we move to the project implementation phase.

Accomplishments:
• Completed the Accounting Enablement Assessment report on 11/8/21

Next Steps:
• Start the FMS implementation phase
• FMS implementation kickoff meeting is scheduled for 11/10/21

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Implementation Kickoff Meeting
November 10, 2021 | 3:00 – 3:50 PM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting
Chris Steele, Director of Accounting
Brent Ghan, Accounting Manager

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Kenn Lee, Treasurer
Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance
Jimmy Nguyen, Management Analyst
David Presley, Accounting Technician
Christine Jung, Assistant to the Executive Director

Armanino Attendees:

Giovana Lopez, Project Manager, Consulting
Giles Zollar, Consulting Manager
Jen Cook, Lead Consultant
Linda Schoephoerster, Supporting Consultant
Rebecca Bunas, Account Manager

A G E N D A

Jen Cook, Lead Consultant from Armanino, presented the Kickoff Meeting presentation, introduced the Armanino implementation team, and discussed the next steps for the project with the team.

• Armanino noted that they will treat this project as a brand-new implementation and will include a plan and analyze phase to obtain a complete understanding of the setup. o Armanino discussed the deliverables and explained that they will guide the team through the whole implementation process. They will provide a complete walkthrough to ensure a successful migration of data and transactions.

• Armanino, the Stadium Authority and the Stadium Manager reviewed the project scope, budget, and the implementation timeline together. The team agreed that the ideal scenario is to have the Go Live date on April 1, 2022 for this Great Plains instance. o Armanino noted the SAP Concur integration work that the Stadium Manager request for is outside of the scope, and the Stadium Authority agreed to pay for the integration work.

• The Stadium Authority and the Stadium Manager confirmed that we will be implementing all three companies’ chart of accounts at the same time.

Next Steps for Dynamics GP Implementation:
• Armanino to review and confirm plan and timeline, schedule meetings, and obtain account framework signoff.

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
InTwo Introduction Meeting
November 15, 2021 | 3:15 – 4:11 PM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance

Armanino Attendees:

Giovana Lopez, Project Manager, Consulting
Giles Zollar, Consulting Manager
Rebecca Bunas, Account Manager

SaaSplaza (InTwo) Attendees:

Brendan Martise, Customer Success Manager
Kim Nguyen, Cloud Engineer
Leonard Abagat, Cloud Engineer

InTwo Introduction and Database setup:

• Armanino introduced InTwo, formerly known as SaasPlaza, to the team and had everyone introduced themselves on the call.

• InTwo is the cloud base provider for the new Great Plains database. o InTwo confirmed that the contract for the Great Plains database has 6 full user license and 6 limited users. InTwo will also provide two databases (test and production) for the Great Plains instance.
o InTwo confirmed that the current Great Plains SQL version to be implemented is SQL 2016. The Stadium Manager asked if this can be upgraded to SQL 2019.

• Armanino confirmed that InTwo is responsible for creating the database and hosting it while Armanino is responsible for the configuration setup and support services.

• Armanino confirmed that they will be responsible for the managing upgrades and year- end updates with the Stadium Manager.

• Armanino confirmed to InTwo that the target Go Live date for the implementation is April 1, 2022. Armanino will work with InTwo offline for the database specification requirements.

Next Steps:
• The Stadium Authority agreed to setup a separate meeting with InTwo and the Stadium Authority’s information technology staff to discuss the Azure subscription question and any other database related questions.
• The Stadium Authority agreed to setup a separate meeting with InTwo to discuss the SQL 2019 upgrade option.

Weekly Accounting Status Meeting
Date: 11/18/2021; 2:00pm to 3:00pm
Teams Meeting: Linh Lam (SCSA) and Darren Wong (ManCo)

1. FY 21-22 Shared Expenses

2. CapEx Invoice

3. BNY Buffet Invoice

4. FY 20-21 Shared Expense Review

5. FMS IT Infrastructure Setup

FMS Minutes Review Meeting
Date: 11/23/2021; 1:30pm to 2:05pm
Teams Meeting: Linh Lam (SCSA) and Darren Wong (ManCo)

1. Review FMS Meeting Minutes

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
InTwo Introduction Meeting
November 23, 2021 | 9:00 – 9:33 AM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance

Armanino Attendees:

Giovana Lopez, Project Manager, Consulting
Giles Zollar, Consulting Manager

Great Plains Database:

• Armanino answered some database environment questions raised by the Stadium Manager for the Great Plains instance.
o Armanino confirmed that this is a Cloud base system where end users access the database through a URL link provided by InTwo.
o Armanino noted that they will work with the Stadium Manager to configure any existing data import file that the Stadium Manager currently use.

• The Stadium Authority noted that they are working with InTwo to upgrade the Great Plains environment to SQL 2019.

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Great Plains' Infrastructure Requirements Meeting
December 1, 2021 | 4:00 – 4:24 PM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance
Gill Norris, Sr. Information Technology Services Manager Christopher Jackson, Sr. Information Technology Services Manager

Armanino Attendees:

Giovana Lopez, Project Manager, Consulting
Giles Zollar, Consulting Manager

InTwo Attendees:

Brendan Martise, Customer Success Manager
Leonard Abagat, Cloud Engineer
David Flippo, Cloud Engineer
Meagan Kellner, Cloud and Network Engineer

Great Plains database setup:

• The Stadium Authority confirmed that InTwo would need to create a new server in Azure for the Great Plains instance.

• Armanino took the lead to answer InTwo’s questions about the database infrastructure and requirements.

• The Stadium Authority confirmed that we will be implementing all three companies’ chart of accounts at the same time and the go live date for the Great Plain instance is April 1, 2022.

• The Stadium Authority requested for InTwo to redo the scope of services with the changes (SQL 2019 vs. SQL 2016, SAP Concur integration, Azure subscription, and additional storage and ram space to support the document attachment feature) that Armanino noted and bring it back to the Stadium Authority to discus on the additional costs.

Next Steps:
• The Stadium Authority and InTwo noted that they will meet to discuss the additional scope and services to the current agreement.

• InTwo will continue creating the three databases for Great Plains.

Weekly Accounting Status Meeting
Date: 12/02/2021; 2:00pm to 2:30pm
Teams Meeting: Linh Lam (SCSA) and Darren Wong (ManCo)

1. December O&M Invoice

2. BNY Buffet Invoice

3. Non-NFL Events DocuSign

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Chart of Accounts Planning
December 6, 2021 | 3:00 – 4:15 PM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting
Chris Steele, Director of Accounting
Brent Ghan, Accounting Manager

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Kenn Lee, Treasurer
Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance
Gill Norris, Senior Information Technology Services Manager

Armanino Attendees:

Giles Zollar, Consulting Manager
Linda Schoephoerster, Supporting Consultant
Jen Cook, Lead Consultant

AGENDA

Jen Cook, Lead Consultant from Armanino, shared that the meeting agenda was to review the Chart of Accounts (COA) layout and decide on the proper COA structure for the new Great Plains instance. Armanino will have an open discussion with the Stadium Manager and Stadium Authority to review the COA requirements and have the group sign off on the COA setup.

Chart of Account structure
• Armanino noted that the team will need to complete the COA setup framework in order for Armanino to move on with the database installation work.

• Armanino recommended that the Stadium Manager setup 10 standard segments using 7 characters for the first 7 segments and 6 characters for the last 4 segments for a total of 66 characters. Setting up the standard segments and characters in the database will allow the Stadium Manager to tap into any unused segments or characters in the future. o Armanino confirmed with the Stadium Manager that the database characters in each segment is the maximum allowable characters and that the Company doesn’t have to use the all the characters assigned in each segment.

o The Stadium Manager agreed with the recommendation for the master database setup. The Stadium Manager confirmed that they would like to continue using the same setup as their current Great Plains instance.
 Segments – will use 4 segments (Company, Department Natural, and Extension)
 Companies – will setup three separate companies (Non-NFL Events, Seat Builder Licenses, and Shared Stadium Expenses)
 Departments – will use 12 departments (Balance Sheet, Non-NFL Events, Miscellaneous Unclassified P&L, Other General and Admin, Security, SBL Sales, Catered Events, SBL Service, Stadium Operations, Engineering, Guest Services, Grounds keeping, and Procurement)  Natural Accounts – will use natural accounts from Great Plains (Assets, Liabilities, Expenses and Revenues accounts)
 Extension – will use 000 for all three SCSA companies for now; will need to consider using extension for Non-NFL Events to show the Profit and Loss statements at gross level.

• Armanino noted that the Stadium Authority will need to sign off on the COA setup structure before work can commence.
o The Stadium Authority agreed with the request and asked the Stadium Manager to provide feedbacks on the COA setup structure and let the Armanino team know what the Stadium Manager wants before the Stadium Authority signs off on the setup.

• Armanino asked the Stadium Authority to start thinking about the type of reporting that the Stadium Authority wishes to have in the new Great Plains instance and let the team know later.
o The Stadium Authority will revisit the current reports provided by the Stadium Manager and work with the Stadium Manager to identify any other missing reports and provide a complete list of report samples to Armanino. The team will meet offline to identify the reports and submit it to Armanino once they have it.

• The Stadium Manager and Stadium Authority confirmed to Armanino that they will only need to bring the prior year’s net change (i.e., month to month change in account balance) account balances over to the new Great Plains instance.

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Weekly Status Meeting
December 7, 2021 | 9:00 – 9:18 AM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting
Chris Steele, Director of Accounting
Brent Ghan, Accounting Manager

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance

Armanino Attendees:

Giles Zollar, Consulting Manager
Linda Schoephoerster, Supporting Consultant
Jen Cook, Lead Consultant
Giovana Lopez, Project Manager, Consulting

Financial Management System Project Status Updates:

• The team discussed upcoming vacation plans for Armanino, Stadium Manager, and Stadium Authority staff.
• Armanino noted they will send over the Chart of Accounts template to the group for review and sign off later this week.
• Armanino confirmed that the team is on schedule to complete all the implementation interview sessions by December 17
th.
• The Stadium Authority confirmed with the Stadium Manager that they will purchase the preferred SQL 2019 version of the Great Plains for the Stadium Manager. The Stadium Authority is scheduled to meet with Intwo’s contract manager to discuss upgrading the SQL version from 2016 to 2019.
• Armanino confirmed with the team that they’ve asked Intwo to setup the Great Plains database by December 20
th. This was before the team decided to use SQL 2019 instead of SQL 2016. Armanino noted that we can push the due date back to the end of the year if needed.

Accomplishments:
• Completed first Chart of Accounts planning meeting on 12/6/2021 • Completed introduction meeting with Intwo (formerly known as SaaSplaza) on 12/1/2021

Next Steps:
• The team will continue to meet for the remaining planning sessions. • Armanino to complete and send over the Chart of Accounts template for the Stadium Manager and Stadium Authority to review and sign off.

Weekly Accounting Status Meeting
Date: 12/09/2021; 2:30pm to 3:00pm
Teams Meeting: Linh Lam (SCSA) and Darren Wong (ManCo)

1. O&M Invoice: G&A

2. Lender Invoice

3. BNY Buffet Invoice

4. Overhead Plan

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Accounts Payable Planning
December 13, 2021 | 3:00 – 4:00 PM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting
Chris Steele, Director of Accounting
Brent Ghan, Accounting Manager

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance

Armanino Attendees:

Linda Schoephoerster, Supporting Consultant
Jen Cook, Lead Consultant

AGENDA

Jen Cook, Lead Consultant from Armanino, shared that the meeting agenda was to review the Accounts Payable layout and decide on the proper setup structure for the new Great Plains instance. Armanino will have an open discussion with the Stadium Manager and Stadium Authority to review the setup requirements and have the group sign off on the configuration setup.

Accounts Payable (AP) structure

• The team discussed a list of questions from Armanino’s implementation team and answered all the follow up questions.

• The Stadium Manager confirmed that there is no special discount and that they use standard aging reports in the existing Accounts Payable setup.

• The Stadium Manager noted that the Accounts Payable’s (AP) check run is done on a weekly basis and that they would import a weekly SAP Conur payment file into Great Plains to initiate the payment.

• The Stadium Authority reiterated that the Stadium Manager would need to attach all the supporting documents to each vendor payment in Great Plains.

• The Stadium Manager noted that they would like to use their existing SAP Concur software to import the Shared Stadium Expense payment information and supporting documents to the new Great Plains instance. Armanino noted that this will be done during implementation. o The Stadium Authority confirmed that they would like to see the same payment information (i.e. check number, voucher number, vendor number, and amount) in the Stadium Manager’s Great Plains copied to the new Great Plains. This is so that there is consistency in the payment data in both Great Plain instances. o The Stadium Manager confirmed that we should show 50% of the Stadium Authority’s Shared Stadium Expenses in the new Great Plains and have it record against a prepaid account with the same payment information. o The Stadium Authority and the Stadium Manager requested for Armanino to show the team how the SAP Concur integration in Great Plains would work during User Acceptance Testing.
o Armanino noted that the Great Plains instance would need adequate storage space for this purpose. The Stadium Authority agreed with the assessment and noted that they will review InTwo’s contract amendment language with Armanino when the time comes to ensure there is adequate storage space in the Great Plains instance.

• The Stadium Manager reported that the Purchase Order (PO) process is currently done outside of Great Plains. The Stadium Manager currently go to the Board for approval on expenditures and then create a PO outside of Great Plains for the approved purchase. o The Stadium Authority requested that the Stadium Manager utilize the PO module in Great Plains. The Stadium Manager can override the PO number in Great Plains and use the same PO number assigned in the procurement process in Great Plains. This will make it easier for the Stadium Manager to track and research the POs, if necessary.
 The Stadium Authority noted that the Stadium Manager should attach the Board approval in the PO to substantiate that it was has been approved for.

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Weekly Status Meeting
December 14, 2021 | 9:00 – 9:12 AM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting
Chris Steele, Director of Accounting
Brent Ghan, Accounting Manager

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance

Armanino Attendees:

Giles Zollar, Consulting Manager
Linda Schoephoerster, Supporting Consultant
Jen Cook, Lead Consultant
Giovana Lopez, Project Manager, Consulting

Financial Management System Project Status Updates:

• The team discussed upcoming vacation plans for Armanino, Stadium Manager, and Stadium Authority staff.
• The Stadium Authority noted that staff is in the process of reviewing the Chart of Accounts configuration document with the Stadium Manager and will send over the final sign off later this week.
• The Stadium Authority noted that InTwo confirmed that they will be able to meet the delivery deadline previously agreed with Armanino. The Stadium Authority requested that Armanino continue to work with InTwo to ensure that the database is ready for configuration on the agreed time.

Accomplishments:
• Completed the General Ledger/Bank Reconciliation planning.

Next Steps:
• The team will continue to meet for the remaining planning sessions. • Armanino to complete all configuration documents by Monday, 12/20/21. • The Stadium Authority to sign off on the Chart of Account framework.

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Reporting Planning
December 15, 2021 | 3:00 – 4:00 PM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting
Chris Steele, Director of Accounting
Brent Ghan, Accounting Manager

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Kenn Lee, Treasurer
Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance

Armanino Attendees:

Jen Cook, Lead Consultant
Giles Zollar, Consulting Manager

AGENDA

Jen Cook, Lead Consultant from Armanino, shared that the meeting agenda was to review the Reporting layout and decide on the proper setup structure for the new Great Plains instance.

Armanino will have an open discussion with the Stadium Manager and Stadium Authority to review the setup requirements and have the group sign off on the configuration setup.

Reporting

• The Stadium Manager reported that they currently prepare their financial reports through Excel spreadsheets.
o Armanino noted that the Stadium Manager can continue to do so if they wish.

However, they should also use SmartList and SmartView to help them pull in the necessary data since the tools could simplify the reporting function. o Armanino noted that they will revisit the agreement with InTwo and check with InTwo to see if the current Great Plains instance has SmartList and what the additional cost for SmartList Builder and SmartView would be.

• Armanino discussed the attachment function in Great Plains and explained to the team how it works in each of the module. Armanino noted the attachment function is simple and can help end user search for supporting documents.

• The Stadium Manager asked if they could carry over the existing Stadium Builder License (SBL) setup in Great Plains rather than duplicating the SBL holder information in Great Plains since it is already in Arctic, the current ticketing and customer information system the ticket sales staff uses. The main customer portal is Arctic so importing the SBL data in Great Plains would duplicate the effort and create additional work for staff to manage and track both systems.
o The Stadium Authority agreed to have an offline conversation with the Stadium Manager to understand the details behind the SBL setup and the current request.

Additional topics that were discussed but were not on the agenda • Armanino noted that they are still reviewing the InTwo agreement for the Stadium Authority and will send over the comments by the end of this week.

• The Stadium Manager and Armanino discussed some follow up configuration questions from Armanino.

Weekly Accounting Status Meeting
Date: 12/16/2021; 2:00pm to 2:45pm
Teams Meeting: Linh Lam (SCSA) and Darren Wong (ManCo)

1. Other G&A Costs

2. BNY Buffet Invoice

3. FY 20-21 Non-NFL Events

4. SBL Setup in FMS

5. SCSA Review of FY2020-21 Shared Expense

MINUTES FROM

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Accounts Receivable and Sales Order Processing Planning December 17, 2021 | 3:00 – 3:30 PM
Zoom Meeting

Stadium Manager Attendees:

Darren Wong, Director of Accounting
Chris Steele, Director of Accounting
Brent Ghan, Accounting Manager

Stadium Authority Attendees:

Kenn Lee, Treasurer
Linh Lam, Assistant Director of Finance
Larry Lo, Accounting Division Manager

Armanino Attendees:

Jen Cook, Lead Consultant

AGENDA

Jen Cook, Lead Consultant from Armanino, shared that the meeting agenda was to review the Accounts Receivable layout and decide on the proper setup structure for the new Great Plains instance. Armanino will have an open discussion with the Stadium Manager and Stadium Authority to review the setup requirements and have the group sign off on the configuration setup.

Accounts Receivable (AR)
• Armanino shared the AR configuration document and has the Stadium Manager confirmed some of the setup items. The Stadium Manger doesn’t impose or have the following items in the AR module:
o Non-Sufficient Funds
o Recurring transactions
o Lockbox or electronic fund transfer transactions
o Trade discounts
o Provide customer accounts statements
o Provide credit limit to customer

The Stadium Manager has the following items in the AR module:
o Cash receipts
o Customer refunds
o Limited sales reporting as it is reported outside of Great Plains through Ungerboeck

• The Stadium Manager and Stadium Authority agreed to meet separately to discuss the required data to be attached from Ungerboeck and whether it’s okay to let the event menu and billing data resides outside of Great Plains if the Stadium Authority has access to Ungerboeck.

Additional topics that were discussed but were not on the agenda

• The team confirmed that the Stadium Manager will continue to use the Stadium Manager’s current reporting structure and use Multi-Dimensional Analysis (MDA) to track events and prepare their financial reports through Excel spreadsheets.

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-272 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD

SUBJECT
Action on Stadium Authority Bills and Claims for the Month of December 2021

BOARD PILLARS
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency
Ensure Compliance with Measure J and Manage Levi’s Stadium

BACKGROUND
Disbursements made by the Stadium Authority are based on invoices submitted for payment. Prior to payment, staff reviews all disbursement documents to ensure that they are in compliance with the goods or services provided.

The Bills and Claims listing represents the cash disbursements required of normal and usual operations during the period. Budget control is set by the Stadium Authority Board through the budget adoption process.

DISCUSSION
On April 30, 2019 the Stadium Authority Board directed staff to stop payment of any Stadium Authority invoices for services unless there is substantial documentation of services rendered, which must also be in compliance with State law and City Code. Since April 30, 2019, staff received direction to pay Stadium Authority invoices related to SBL sales and services, insurance, and utilities.

At the March 23, 2021 Stadium Authority Board meeting, the Executive Director was delegated authority to approve budget amendments of $4.2 million to move funds from the Legal Contingency line item to Shared Expenses after the review of adequate documentations for costs based on Board direction. Subsequent to that direction, Stadium Authority staff met at Levi’s Stadium on March 30, 2021 to review documentation for shared expenses. After follow-up meetings with the Stadium Manager, payments related to compensation that were reviewed and approved for monthly payment, totaling $4.2 million for the fiscal year.

In addition, at the March 23, 2021 Stadium Authority Board meeting, the Board approved staff recommendations to direct the Stadium Manager to provide a procurement plan/schedule that demonstrates the ability to manage the Stadium with the proper standard of care and that addresses the highest priority projects while balancing the potential need for City resources. Subsequent to that direction, the Stadium Manager has submitted requests to the Board for approval; to be awarded purchase order(s) related to capital projects.

Significant expenses in December 2021 include:
· Payments totaling $221,483.24 to the City of Santa Clara for the following:

City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
22-272 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
o $195,292.31 for reimbursement of General and Administrative (G&A) City payroll costs (e.g.: Executive Director’s Office (City Manager’s Office), Counsel’s Office (City Attorney’s Office), and Treasurer’s Office (Finance Department)) o $23,330.65 for the Senior and Youth Fees collected ($0.35 per ticket) for one National Football League (NFL) game.
o $2,643.12 for reimbursement of SCSA CapEx Costs - Vehicle Upfits o $217.16 for reimbursement of SCSA CapEx Costs - PPE (Nomex Bottoms) · Payment totaling $257,517.21 to Forty Niners SC Stadium Co, LLC for CFD Advance Payment - Interest
· Payments totaling $14,550.38 to Armanino LLP for CapEx Project - FMS Project · Payment totaling $135.00 to Contractor Compliance and Monitoring, Inc for November 2021 Labor Compliance Services
· Payments totaling $41,175.67 to Dell Marketing L.P. for the following:
o $39,358.62 for CapEx Project - Security Command Center Equipment o $1,817.05 for SCSA Laptop (City Manager’s Office)
· Payment totaling $61,514.42 to Fisher Scientific Co. LLC for CapEx Project - Tru Defender Chemical Detector
· Payment totaling $52,241.85 to J.S. Held LLC for June - August 2021 Audit Services · Payment totaling $1,984.43 to L.N. Curtis & Sons for CapEx Project - PPE (Nomex Bottoms) · Payment totaling $3,700.00 to Wilson Ihrig for October 2021 Noise Monitoring Services · Payments totaling $185,924.21 for September - November 2021 Legal Services Certain information such as names of law firms have been redacted from the Bills and Claims report.

The Supreme Court of California in Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court, (2016) 2 Cal.5th 282, held that invoices specifying the amounts billed by a law firm to a client fall within the scope of attorney-client privilege while the matters are active. In accordance with the Supreme Court’s ruling, the names of law firms retained by the Stadium Authority have been redacted from the public report to maintain confidentiality of billing records for legal services.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4) in that it is a fiscal activity that does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potential significant impact on the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is a $841,647.55 fiscal impact to the Stadium Authority.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the Stadium Authority Counsel’s Office.

PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
22-272 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the list of Stadium Authority Bills and Claims for December 2021.

Reviewed by: Kenn Lee, Treasurer
Approved by: Office of the Executive Director

ATTACHMENTS

1. December 2021 SCSA Bills and Claims
City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
Payment Date Vendor Invoice No. Description Fund Amount 12/15/2021 Bank of America N/A November 2021 bank fees acct 0444 CapEx 1,157.45 12/15/2021 Bank of America N/A November 2021 bank fees acct 0425 Operating 178.26 12/15/2021 Bank of America N/A November 2021 bank fees acct 6280 Operating 103.77 12/23/2021 Bank of America N/A February 2021 bank fees acct 6596 (credit) Operating (18.34) Bank of America Subtotal 1,421.14
12/10/2021 City of Santa Clara N/A B2123 SCSA Admin Payroll Costs Operating 67,657.00 12/16/2021 City of Santa Clara N/A B2124 SCSA Admin Payroll Costs Operating 50,122.94 12/23/2021 City of Santa Clara N/A B2125 SCSA Admin Payroll Costs Operating 77,512.37 12/13/2021 City of Santa Clara N/A Senior/Youth Fee NFL Game 7 Operating 23,330.65 12/3/2021 City of Santa Clara N/A Reimburse CSC for SCSA CapEx Costs - Vehicle Upfits CapEx 2,643.12 12/3/2021 City of Santa Clara N/A Reimburse CSC for SCSA CapEx Costs - PPE (Nomex Bottoms) CapEx 217.16 221,483.24
12/17/2021 Forty Niners SC Stadium Co, LLC N/A CFD Advance Payment - Interest Debt Service 257,517.21 12/6/2021 Armanino LLP 754238 CapEx Proj - FMS Project CapEx 8,400.00 12/23/2021 Armanino LLP 805191 CapEx Proj - FMS Project CapEx 6,150.38 14,550.38
12/14/2021 Contractor Compliance and Monitoring, Inc 15409 November 2021 Labor Compliance Services Operating 135.00 12/6/2021 Dell Marketing L.P 10532231520 CapEx Proj - Command Center Equipment CapEx 39,358.62 12/23/2021 Dell Marketing L.P 10543615044 SCSA Laptop (City Manager's Office) Operating 1,817.05 41,175.67
12/3/2021 Fisher Scientific Co. LLC 3939504 CapEx Proj - Tru Defender Chemical Detector CapEx 61,514.42 12/6/2021 J.S. Held LLC 1276059 June - August 2021 Audit Services Operating 52,241.85 12/3/2021 L.N. Curtis & Sons INV521937 CapEx Proj - PPE (Nomex Bottoms) CapEx 1,984.43 12/9/2021 Wilson Ihrig 16125N39 October 2021 Noise Monitoring Services Operating 3,700.00 Various September 2021 Legal Services Operating 64,744.37 Various October 2021 Legal Services Operating 91,412.37 Various November 2021 Legal Services Operating 29,767.47 185,924.21
December 2021 Total 841,647.55$
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Bills and Claims
Expenses Paid by Wire Transfer
For the Month of December 2021

Page 1 of 1 ends

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-414 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD

SUBJECT
Request from the Stadium Manager to Exercise Option to Extend Term of Agreement with Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. for Levi’s Stadium Event Security Services

BOARD PILLAR
Ensure Compliance with Measure J and Manage Levi’s Stadium

DISCUSSION
On April 17, 2017, the Stadium Authority Board adopted Resolution No. 17-4 (Resolution of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority Consenting to a Service Agreement between Forty Niners Stadium Management Company and Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. for Event Security Services) (Attachment 1) with the exception of the agreement’s two one-year extensions; and noted and filed an Amendment No. 1 to include the Stadium Authority as additional insured under the Insurance Requirements of the agreement. A copy of the agreement and Amendment No. 1 are attached to this report (Attachments 2-3). Under Section 5, the agreement terminates on March 31, 2022 and provides the Stadium Manager with an option to extend the term for one additional two-year period by notifying Landmark of its desire to exercise the extension option, subject to mutual agreement of rates.

On March 11, 2022, the Stadium Manager submitted the attached written notice (Attachment 4) to request approval from the Stadium Authority Board to exercise its option to extend the term of the existing Agreement for the Performance of Services by and between Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. (Landmark) and Forty Niners Stadium Management Company for security services at Levi’s Stadium for one additional two-year period through March 31, 2024.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. 17-4

2. Agreement with Landmark

3. Amendment No. 1 to Landmark Agreement

4. Stadium Manager’s Notice to Landmark to Exercise 2-Year Extension Option City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
RESOLUTION NO. 17-4 (STADIUM AUTHORITy)

A RESOLUTION OF THE SANTA CLARA STADIUM

AUTHORITY CONSENTING TO A SERVICE AGREEMENT

BETWEEN FORTY NINERS STADIUM MANAGEMENT

COMPANY AND LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING
SERVICES, INC. FOR EVENT SECURITY SERVICES.

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the Santa Clara Stadium Authority ("Authority"), a joint exercise of powers entity, created through Government Code Section 6500 et seq., engaged in activities that led to the development and commencement of operation of a 68,500 seat stadium suitable for professional football ("Stadium Project") on a property located at Tasman and Centennial Drive ("Staclium Site"); and
WHEREAS, the Authority, Forty Niners SC Stadium Company, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("StadCo"), and Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Stadium Manager"), are pattie s to a celtain Stadium Management Agreement effective as of March 28, 2012, as amended by that celtain First Amendment to Stadium Management Agreement dated as of November 13, 2012, that certain Second Amendment to Stadium Management Agreement dated as of May 9, 2013, and that certain Third Amendment to Stadium Management Agreement dated as of June 19,20 13, and that celtain Fomth Amendment to Stadium Management Agreement dated as of March 18, 2014 (as the same may be, further amended from time to time, the "Stadium Management Agreement"), pmsuant to which the Stadium Manager manages the operation ofthe Stadium year-round on behalf of the Authority and StadCo for the term and on the basis specified in the Stadium Management Agreement; and, WHEREAS, the Stadium Management Agreement provides the Stadium Manager with the responsibility to solicit and select the professional service vendors for Stadium operations and Santa Clara Stadium Authority Resolution/Landmark Service Agreement 3/28/20 17
Page I of4
authorizes Stadium Manager to enter into professional services agreements in compliance with the Stadium Authority's procurement policies; and,
WHEREAS, the Stadium Manager has conducted a Request for Proposal process and selected a service vendor for security services in general conformance with the Stadium Authority ' s Procurement Policy and desires to enter into Service Agreement on behalf of StadCo and Stadium Authority for those services; and,
WHEREAS, the Stadium Manager has selected Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. to provide security services for Stadium events; and,
WHEREAS, the Authority has determined that the Service Agreement with Landmark Event Staffing Services is in the best interest ofthe Stadium Authority and desires the Stadium Manager to enter into a Service Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, the Staff Report and Stadium Manager oral presentation provide additional information upon which the findings and actions set forth in this Resolution are based.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the Board of the Authorityhereby finds that the above Recitals are true and COl1'ect and by this reference makes them a pmt hereof.

2. The Board of the Authority hereby consents to the Stadium Manager entering into Service Agreement with Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. on behalf of the Authority, substantially in the form on file with the Authority Secretmy, with such revisions as are reasonably determined necessmy by the Executive Director, such detelmination to be conclusively deemed to have been made by the execution of such agreement by the Authority signatOlY.

Santa Clara Stadium Authority Resolution/Landmark Service Agreement 312812017

Page 2 ends

3. Consent to the contract is limited to the term of five years. The Stadium Manager shall not authorize an extension to the contract beyond five years without ftniher express consent of the Stadium Authority.

4. The Executive Director is hereby authorized to take such further actions as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the Authority's obligations pursuant to this Resolution.

5. The Authority Secretaty shall celtify to the adoption of this Resolution .

6. Constitutionality , severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, pln'ase, or word of this resolution is for any reason held by a COUlt of competent juri sdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid for any reason , such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the resolution . The City of Santa Clara, California , hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, pln'ase, and word thereof , inespective of the fact that anyone or more section( s), subsection(s), sentence(s), clause(s), phrase( s), or word(s) be declared invalid .

II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
Santa Clara Stadium Authority ResolutionlLandmark Service Agreement 3/28/201 7

Page 3 of 4 ends

7. Effective date. This resolution shall become effective immediately.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE A TRUE COpy OF A RESOLUTION PASSED

AND ADOPTED BY THE SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY, AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE 17th DAY OF APRIL 2017, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: BOARD MEMBERS:

NOES: BOARD MEMBERS:

ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS:

ABSTAINED: BOARD MEMBERS:

ATTEST:

Attachments incorporated by reference: None
Caserta, Davis, Kolstad, Mahan, O'Neill, and
Watanabe and Mayor Gillmor
None
None
None
Santa Clara Stadium Authority Resolution/Landmark Service Agreement 312812017

Page 4 ends

DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN

STADIUM MANAGER
AND
LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING SERVICES, INC.

PREAMBLE
This agreement for the performance of services (" Agreement") is made and entered into on this 15th day of February, 2017, ("Effective Date") by and between LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation, with its principal place of business located at 4131 Harbor Walk Drive, Fort Collins, CO 80525 ("Contractor"), and the FORTY NINERS STADIUM MANAGEMENT COMPANY LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Stadium Manager"), with its principal place of business located at [*insert Stadium address number Marie P. DeBartolo Way, Santa Clara, CA 95054. Stadium Manager and Contractor may be referred to individually as a "Party" or collectively as the "Parties" or the "Parties to this Agreement."

RECITALS
A. The CITY OF SANTA CLARA, a municipal corporation ("City") and the SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY, a joint exercise of powers entity, created through Government Code sections 6500 et seq. (the "Authority"), are parties to that certain Ground Lease dated as of March 28, 2012, as amended by that certain First Amendment to Ground Lease (Stadium Site) (as the same may be further amended from time to time, the "Ground Lease"), pursuant to which the Authority leases certain real property from the City upon which the Authority has developed and constructed a multi-purpose stadium (the "Stadium").

B. The Authority and FORTY NINERS SC STADIUM COMPANY, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("StadCo"), are parties to that certain Amended and Restated Stadium Lease Agreement dated as of March 28, 2012 as amended and restated as of June 19, 2013 (as the same may be further amended from time to time, the "Stadium Lease") , pursuant to which StadCo is granted the right during the term of the Stadium Lease to use and occupy the Stadium for the operation of an NFL franchise, subject to, and on the basis of, the terms, covenants and conditions set forth in the Stadium Lease.

C. StadCo and FORTY NINERS FOOTBALL COMP ANY LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Team") are parties to a certain Sublease Agreement dated as of March 28, 2012, as amended and restated as of June 19, 2013 (as the same may be further amended from time to time, the "Team Sublease"), pursuant to which, during the term of the Team Sublease, the Team shall play its NFL home games at the Stadium, subject to, and on the basis of, the terms, covenants and conditions set forth in the Team Sublease.

D. The Authority, StadCo, and Stadium Manager are parties to a certain Stadium Management Agreement effective as of March 28, 2012, as amended by that certain First Amendment to Stadium Management Agreement dated as of November 13, 2012, that certain Second Amendment to Stadium Management Agreement dated as of May 9, DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F 2013, that certain Third Amendment to Stadium Management Agreement dated as of June 19, 2013, and that certain Fourth Amendment to Stadium Management Agreement dated as of March 18, 2014 ( as the same may be, further amended from time to time, the "Stadium Management Agreement") , pursuant to which the Stadium Manager will manage the operation of the Stadium year-round on behalf of the Authority and StadCo for the term and on the basis specified in the Stadium Management Agreement.

E. Pursuant to the Stadium Management Agreement , the Stadium Manager is required to maintain and operate a security force to safeguard the Stadium, areas surrounding the Stadium , and users of the Stadium and, accordingly , desires to secure professional services more fully described in this Agreement , at Exhibit A, entitled "Scope of Services " (the "Services") .

F. Contractor represents that it, and its subcontractors , if any, have the professional qualifications , expertise , necessary licenses and desire to provide the Services of the quality and type which meet objectives and requirements of Stadium Manager.

G. In accordance with the Stadium Management Agreement , the Stadium Manager is authorized to enter into this Agreement on behalf of the Authority and StadCo to engage Contractor to provide the Services; and, accordingly, the Stadium Manager and Contractor desire to enter into this Agreement whereby Contractor shall have the right to provide , and Contractor agrees to provide, the Services, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement , the Ground Lease, the Stadium Lease and the Stadium Management Agreement.

The Parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT PROVISIONS

1. EMPLOYMENT OF CONTRACTOR.

Stadium Manager hereby employs Contractor to perform the Services. Stadium Manager shall pay for all such Services which are consistent with the terms of this Agreement.

2. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED.

A. Except as and to the extent expressly set forth in this Agreement, Contractor shall furnish all Services necessary to satisfactorily complete the work required by Stadium Manager at Contractor's own risk and expense. The Recitals above and all of the exhibits referenced in this Agreement are attached and are incorporated by this reference.

B. Stadium Manager shall provide , or cause to be provided, during the Term designated office and storage space within the Stadium for use by Contractor.

The location of such office and storage space shall be in the sole discretion of Stadium Manager , and Stadium Manager may direct that the office and storage space be moved to a new location within the Stadium from time to time as it deems necessary.
~:\;~:
2 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F C. Except as expressly provided in Section 10 below, Contractor shall be responsible for all costs and expenses incurred in performing the Services, including costs and expenses of maintaining, repairing and replacing any furniture, fixtures, equipment, or other tangible property and all applicable taxes, staffing (including all managerial and Event staff), and training. Check-in staff, support staff, and managerial personnel including logistics, payroll, and other non-event deployment staffing shall not be billed to Stadium Manager unless otherwise agreed to in advance by Stadium Manager. As described in greater detail in Section 7 .F hereof, Contractor agrees to fully abide by all sustainability and reuse programs established for or applicable to the Stadium, as each may be modified from time to time following the Effective Date.

D. Without limiting the generality of any other provision in this Agreement, Contractor's provision of the Services shall be subject to the reasonable prior approval of Stadium Manager acting in conjunction with Contractor, including but not limited to staffing and the manner of Contractor's performance.

Contractor shall not offer exclusivity to any supplier without the prior written approval of Stadium Manager.

E. If at any time, Contractor fails or is otherwise prevented from providing all or any portion of the Services whether due to a suspension or termination of any licenses or permits or otherwise, then, in addition to any other right of Stadium Manager, Stadium Manager shall have the right, in its sole discretion, without the payment of any kind to Contractor, to provide through any available means the Services, or any portion thereof, until such time as Contractor has resumed its provision of the Services. In the event Stadium Manager exercises its rights pursuant to this Section, Contractor shall, and shall cause its employees and the Management Team (as defined in Section 10.D below), to cooperate and assist Stadium Manager in providing the Services.

F. Notwithstanding the foregoing, and subject to any restrictions imposed by the Authority, including pursuant to the Stadium Lease and Stadium Management Agreement, the Stadium Manager and its designated agents reserve the right of access to all areas that Contractor is permitted to access, use and occupy hereunder for purposes of operating, inspecting, maintaining and repairing the Stadium (and all improvements therein or thereon) and for the purpose of determining whether the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement are being fully and faithfully observed and performed by Contractor.

Use of any space or property that Contractor is permitted to access, use and occupy hereunder for purposes other than the operations to be conducted under this Agreement, without prior written approval of Stadium Manager in its sole discretion, is prohibited. Contractor shall not interfere with any other contractor, licensee or employee of the Authority, Stadium Manager or any other person working at the Stadium.
3 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

3. COMMENCEMENT OF SERVICES.

Contractor shall begin providing the Services upon the April 1, 2017 through the expiration of Term (as defined below) or the termination of this Agreement. Contractor shall complete the Services at the time and in the manner set forth in the Scope of Services or as mutually determined in writing by the Parties.

4. QUALIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTOR- STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP.

A. Contractor represents and maintains that it has the necessa ry expertise in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services, and its duties and obligations , expressed and implied, contained in this Agreement, and Stadium Manager expressly relies upon Contractor's representations regarding its skills and knowledge. Contractor shall perform such Services and duties and obligations in conformance to and consistent with the professional standards of a specialist in the san1e discipline in the State of California.

B. The plans, designs, specifications, estimates, calculations, reports, and other documents furnished under Exhibit A shall be of a quality acceptable to Stadium Manager. To be accepted as provided under this Agreement, any such work shall be a product of neat appearance and shall be well-organized, technically and grammatically correct, and checked, and shall identify the maker and checker.

The minimum standard of appearance , organization , and content of the drawings shall be that used by Stadium Manager for similar projects.

5. TERM OF AGREEMENT.

Unless otherwise set forth in this Agreement or unless this paragraph is subsequently modified by a written amendment to this Agreement , the term of this Agreement (the "Term") shall begin on the Effective Date of this Agreement and terminate on March 31, 2022, provided however, if this Agreement extends beyond a single fiscal year, the Term for subsequent fiscal years shall be conditioned upon approval of the Authority budget for the applicable fiscal year that includes the amounts due under this Agreement. The Stadium Manager shall have the option, in its sole discretion, to extend the Term for one (1) additional two (2) year period by notifying Contractor in writing of Stadium Manager's desire to exercise said option(s) not more than one hundred twenty (120) days prior to the expiration of the then-current Term, subject to mutual agreement as to rates.

6. WARRANTY.

Contractor expressly warrants that all Services covered by this Agreement shall be fit for the purpose intended, shall be free from defect, and shall conform to the specifications , requirements, and instructions upon which this Agreement is based. Contractor agrees to promptly replace or correct any incomplete, inaccurate, or defective Services at no further cost to Stadium Manager when defects are due to the negligence, errors, or omissions of Contractor. If Contractor fails to promptly correct or replace Services, Stadium Manager may make corrections or replace Services and charge Contractor for the cost incurred by Stadium Manager.
4 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

7. PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES.

A. Contractor shall perform all Services in an efficient and expeditious manner and shall work closely with and be guided by Stadium Manager. Contractor shall be as fully responsible to Stadium Manager for the acts and omissions of its subcontractors, and of persons either directly or indirectly employed by them, as Contractor is for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by it.

Contractor will perform all Services in a safe manner and in accordance with all Applicable Laws and safety regulations , the policies and procedures issued by the Stadium Manager relating to the Services, the general operating procedures of the Authority, and any and all other applicable rules, regulations , policies and directives established or implemented by the Authority and/or Stadiwn Manager, the designees of either of them, or the NFL, from time to time, including scheduling rules, regulations and policies, related to the use or operation of the Stadium (collectively , "Stadium Policies"). The term "Applicable Laws" as used in this Agreement shall mean any statute, law, treaty, rule, code, ordinance , regulation, permit, interpretation , certificate or order, whether now or hereafter existing, of any Governmental Authority, or any judgment , decision, decree, injunction , writ, order or like action of any court, arbitrator or other Governmental Authority, whether now or hereafter existing. The term "Governmental Authority" as used in this Agreement shall mean any federal, state, local or foreign governmental entity, authority or agency, court, tribunal , regulatory commission or other body, whether legislative,judicial or executive (or a combination or pemmtation thereof), and any arbitrator to whom a dispute has been presented under Applicable Laws or by agreement of the Parties with an interest in such dispute.

B. Contractor shall at all times maintain a sufficient number of qualified personnel at the Stadium and, if applicable , the Related Facilities (e.g., offsite parking areas) for the performance of all of Contractor 's obligations under this Agreement.

Contractor shall cause the members of the Management Team to attend meetings to be scheduled by Stadium Manager at the Stadium from time to time during the Term to review the performance of the Services and to implement Stadium Manager's reasonable recommendations and directives for improving such performance.

C. Contractor's authorized personnel who are scheduled to work at events at the Stadium as requested by Stadium Manager ("Events") shall be provided with ingress to and egress from the Stadium through a gate or gates designated for such purpose by Stadium Manager, without charge, during all days on which Events are held and at all other times necessary to enable Contractor to prepare for Events and fulfill its responsibilities under this Agreement. Contractor shall be bound by and comply with all rules, policies and procedures relating to security and access rights, including requirements related to screening and identification of Contractor's personnel, established from time to time by Stadium Manager.

Nothing herein contained shall be held to limit or qualify the right of the Authority or Stadium Manager to a free and unobstructed use, occupation and control of the Stadium and ingress and egress for itself, its lessees and the public. 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F D. Contractor shall obtain on or before the Commencement Date and shall thereafter maintain throughout the Term, at its cost and in its name, all licenses and permits necessary for the performance of the Services and any and all other licenses and permits required to be obtained by Contractor by the terms of the Stadium Lease.

Stadium Manager shall cooperate with Contractor in connection with applications submitted by Contractor for any and all licenses and permits and renewals thereof.

Contractor shall not submit any application for a permit or license without first providing Stadium Manager a reasonable opportunity to review it. Contractor shall furnish Stadium Manager with copies of such licenses and permits and renewals thereof as are physically maintained at the Stadium, and all other licenses or penni ts otherwise required under Applicable Laws or this Agreement , and shall surrender all licenses and permits to Stadium Manager upon termination of this Agreement.

E. In the event that Contractor fails to obtain or maintain in full force and effect any material license or permit necessary for the performance of the Services, including upon a suspension applicable to an Event or revocation thereof, (a) Stadium Manager shall have the right (but no obligation) to perform or have another Person perform the applicable obligation without compensation to Contractor and, whether or not Stadium Manager exercises that right or its tem1ination rights, Contractor shall be responsible to Stadium Manager for the loss of income and all other damages, including consequential and special damages, suffered by Stadium Manager as the result of Contractor's breach of this Agreement, including any loss of income; and (b) Contractor shall be considered in material breach of this Agreement , and Stadium Manager may, in addition to any other rights or remedies it may have, immediately terminate this Agreement.

F. Contractor shall comply in all respects with the Santa Clara Business and Commercial Recycling Program, as the same shall be amended from time to time, and shall, in partnership with Stadium Manager, prepare and implement a plan (the "Waste Reduction and Recycling Plan") that targets I 00% diversion of solid waste from all Events, including composting or other diversion of compostable organics. Contractor shall train its employees in the methods and objectives of the Waste Reduction and Recycling Plan and shall direct and cause its employees to not dispose of or discharge recyclable s, compostab les, waste, garbage, refuse or Hazardous Substances in any area in or outside the Stadium other than in areas specifically designated therefor. Contractor shall be responsible for expeditiously collecting , separating , recycling , bagging and delivering recyclables , compostables , trash and garbage generated within the Stadium by Contractor 's employees, and Contractor shall cause its employees to deposit such recyclables , compostables , trash and garbage in appropriate containers or equipment in the locations specified by Stadium Manager, whereupon Stadium Manager shall be responsible for the further delivery and ultimate disposal of such recyclables , compostables , trash and garbage. In addition, Contractor shall separate, compact and recycle the trash generated by Contractor 's employees at Events on non-Event days. Contractor shall take all action necessary to: (i) ensure that all such recyclables , compostables , trash and garbage are placed in bags and/or the appropriate receptacles or other containers DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F (which receptacles and containers shall be provided by Contractor) that are durable for transport and not easily susceptible to breakage or leakage, (ii) notify Stadium Manager when the centralized Stadium recyclable, compostab le and garbage receptacles are full and need to be emptied, (iii) prevent recyclables, compostables and trash from piling up around the outside of the receptacles and from using the Stadium receptacles in lieu of transferring the recyclables, compostab les and trash to the required locations as described herein and (iv) ensure that recyclables, compostables and trash do not spill out prior to or during transport. Contractor agrees to and is fully committed to participating in the separation and recycling of refuse in the Stadium and to minimize the amount of non-recyclable and non-compostable refuse to be removed from the Stadium.

All recyclable, compostab le, trash and garbage receptacles within the office area controlled by Contractor shall be provided by Contractor and shall be cleaned and sanitized by Contractor in accordance with the standards reasonably set from time to time by the Authority and/or Stadium Manager, to ensure a consistently high standard of sanitation meeting or exceeding the standards set by the Santa Clara County Public Health Department and/or the City. Contractor will comply with all federal , state and local recycling and composting requirements and such recycling and composting programs implemented from time to time by the Authority and/or Stadium Manager and all rules and regulations applicable to the Stadium's adherence to, and/or certification by, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System. Contractor shall indemnify Stadium Manager and make Stadium Manager whole for any out of pocket costs incurred by Stadium Manager which are solely attributable to any direct and identifiable negligence or intentional act or omission of Contractor or any of its employees with respect to the recycling or trash removal program, including the expense of returned or rejected recyclable , compostable and trash removals due to mixing or contaminating the trash flow in violation of Applicable Laws or specific directives provided to Contractor in writing as part of the Stadium 's sustainability and recycling, composting or trash remova l programs.

Stadium Manager will determine the type, appearance and location of the recyclable , compostable and trash receptacles .

G. Contractor agrees not to use Hazardous Substances at the Stadium, except in accordance with Applicable Laws, and agrees to indemnify , defend , and hold the Indemnified Parties harmless for all Losses (as defined in Section 22.A below) arising out of its use, generation or storage of Hazardous Substances at the Stadium.

8. MONITORING OF SERVICES.

Stadium Manager may monitor the Services performed under this Agreement to determine whether Contractor's operations conform to Stadium operating policies and directives and to the terms of this Agreement. Stadium Manager may also monitor the Services to be performed to determine whether the Services are being conducted in accordance with applicable Stadium Policies, National Football League requirements , and Applicable Laws.
7 •.
\ '·
\~ 6
DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

9. CORRECTION OF SERVICES.

Contractor agrees to correct any incomplete , inaccurate , or defective Services at no cost to Stadium Manager , when such defects are due to the negligence , errors, or omissions of Contractor . If any action of Contractor constitutes a breach, Stadium Manager may terminate this Agreement pursuant to the provisions described herein.

10. RESPONSIBILITY OF CONTRACTOR.

A. Contractor shall be responsible for the professional quality , technical accuracy, and coordination of the Services furnished by it under this Agreement. Neither Stadium Manager ' s review , acceptance , nor payments for any of the Services required under this Agreement shall be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights under this Agreement or of any cause of action arising out of the performance of this Agreement and Contractor shall be and remain liable to Stadium Manager in accordance with Applicable Laws for all damages to Stadium Manager caused by Contractor failure to perform any of the Services furnished under this Agreement.

B. Any acceptance by Stadium Manager of plans, specifications , construction contract documents , reports, diagrams , maps, and other material prepared by Contractor shall not in any respect absolve Contractor from the responsibility Contractor has in accordance with customary standards of good professional practice in compliance with Applicable Laws.

C. Contractor shall comply and otherwise abide by, all emergency and security procedures and protocols of the Stadium Manager, the Authority , the City, the Team, the NFL and promoters of Events as the Stadium Manager or such other Persons shall adopt from time to time. Such procedures and protocols may include , without limitation, (i) employee pat-down and screening , (ii) presentment by Contractor 's employees of identification cards or badges issued by Stadium Manager , which may include reporting criteria such as bar codes , "Mag Stripes" , "RFID" or other identifier systems; (iii) restricting access to certain parts of the Stadium to specified employees of Contractor as reasonably approved by the Stadium Manager (with respect to security clearance standards); and/or (iv) conduct by Contractor, at its sole expense, of Team-specified minimum background and such other security screening checks on all of Contractor's employees as the Stadium Manager shall request from time to time , which checks may vary as to job function. Contrac tor shall be required to use Stadium Manager's existing time tracking system to verify all employees working the event and to share all information collected regarding the Stadium Manager's event (with the exception of any proprietary information) with the Stadium Manager. Contractor shall enroll with the Stadium Manager's existing or successive software requirements (as may be updated as reasonably required by Stadium Manager) and Contractor shall be responsible for all such costs associated with its subscription or enrollment. Contractor shall be responsible for utilizing software provided by Stadium Manager to track completion of scheduled tasks for Events, daily work, or as mutually agreed upon by the Parties. 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F D. Personnel.

1. Contractor shall hire, employ , train, supervise and discipline any and all persons necessary to provide the Services in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and shall use its best efforts to ensure that its employees continually practice the high standards of safety , courtesy and service customarily followed in the conduct of a first-class operation. Contractor shall use its best efforts to select qualified, competent and trustworthy employees. Any and all persons who furnish services under this Agreemen t, whether or not employed by Contractor prior to the Effective Date, are exclusively employees , subcontractors and/or non-affiliated third parties employed by Contractor and are not employees of the Authority , the City, StadCo or Stadium Manager. Such persons furnishing services under this Agreement shall be subject to appearance standards mutually acceptable to the parties hereto and as permitted by Applicable Laws, and shall wear , at all times while working at the Stadium , neat and clean uniforms provided by Contracto r and approved by Stadium Manager .

Such uniforms shall bear such lettering and insignia (including the name and logo of the Stadium , the Stadium naming rights sponsor , if required, and the location of the employee's assignment (e.g., a Club Area or Suite area)) as Stadium Manage r may require and shall be of a design reasonably satisfactory to Stadium Manager. Contractor shall cause its employees to conduct themselves in a professional and courteous manner , and not to unreasonably disturb or interfere with Events. Contractor shall at all times maintain accurate records of the names , addresses, employment history and other legal identification of those to whom Contractor issues employee badges , uniforms or other identifying items to ensure the proper identification and legal working status of Contractor's employees at the Stadium. Contractor shall conduct such background and other security screening checks on its employees as Stadiun1 Manager shall reasonably request from time to time and shall not knowingly hire any person who has been previously terminated by the Authority , StadCo , Stadium Manager or any of their respective Affiliates or contractors.

Upon Stadium Manager's request , and so long as any such action shall not be contrary to law, Contractor shall immediately remove from the Stadium any employee, agent, contractor or invitee of Contractor and permanently revoke such person's access credentials.

11. Contractor shall employ the Management Team, identified in c1ause (v) of this Section 1 O.D below , on a full-time , year-round basis. Contractor shall cause the members of the Management Team to be at the Stadium during all Events that Stadium Manager requires the Management Team to attend and during reasonable business hours. All changes in the Management Team shall require the prior written approval of Stadium Manager.

Contractor shall , within thirty (30) business days of the removal of a Management Team member , provide Stadium Manager with the resumes of not fewer than three (3) suitable candidates to replace the removed employee. The non-local Management Team shall , on and following the DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F Effective Date and during the Term, be exclusively responsible for the provision of services under this Agreement and shall hold no job-related responsibilities relating to any other venue or site without Stadium Manager's prior written approval.
u1. Contractor shall conduct regularly scheduled employee training programs appropriate to the Services provided , including any programs specifically requested by Stadium Manager, for all of its employees working in the Stadium (the "Employee Training Programs"). The Employee Training Programs will be mandatory for all employees, agents and any subcontractors of Contractor and, at a minimum, will include customer service, guest interaction, security procedures and specific job skills training, and will be conducted in such frequency as may be approved or directed by Stadium Manager. Contractor shall cause all Employee Training Programs to be periodically reviewed (no less frequently than annually) and updated to the extent necessary to maintain the standard of service requested by Stadium Manager. All employees of Contractor shall also be required to attend such policy and procedures training sessions as may be held by the Stadium Manager, as well as the Stadium orientation tour and training conducted by the Stadium Manager. Contractor shall not permit any employee, agent or subcontractor to work at an Event prior to his or her completion of the prescribed training sessions and Employee Training Programs.
1v. Contractor shall promptly notify Stadium Manager upon voluntary or involuntary termination of employment of its employees or contractors and ensure that each such terminated individual is denied further access to the Stadium. In no event shall the Authority , the City, StadCo or Stadium Manager be liable, and Contractor shall indemnify, protect, and hold the Authority, the City, StadCo and Stadium Manager harmless, for Contractor's record keeping ( or lack of record keeping), including the legal identification and working status of Contractor's employees and subcontractors, or for any other matters relating to Contractor's employees or subcontractors.
v. The individuals, and such other individuals as the Stadium Manager may approve , are the "Management Team" for purposes of this Agreement are listed on Exhibit G, entitled "Management Team."

11. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT.

A. In consideration for Contractor's complete performance of the Services , Stadium Manager shall pay Contractor for all materials provided and services rendered by Contractor the rates set forth in Exhibit B, entitled "CONTRACTOR COMPENSATION AND FEES." The rates are based upon a four-hour minimum paid per scheduled employee per Event, subject to potential exceptions as mutually agreed upon by the Parties in advance.

DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F B. Contractor will bill Stadium Manager within 72 hours of the conclusion of Events. All other Service deployments shall be billed on a monthly basis for Services provided by Contractor during the preceding month, subject to verification by Stadium Manager. Except as otherwise expressly provided in Exhibit B, Stadium Manager will pay Contractor within forty-five (45) days of Stadium Manager's receipt of invoice, provided the invoice provided is accurate and free of errors. In the event Contractor's invoice is inaccurate, Stadium Manager will notify contractor of such errors. Stadium Manager will pay Contractor within forty-five (45) days ofreceipt of the corrected invoice.

C. The Parties shall meet and confer as to appropriate staffing levels for each Event at least one (1) week prior to such Event, provided that Stadium Manager shall have the sole and final discretion to determine appropriate staffing numbers for each role at each Event. In the event Stadium Manager modifies staffing levels less than twenty-four (24) hours prior to an Event, Contractor shall make best efforts to contact all scheduled employees. Should Contractor be unable to reach an employee and that employee shows for scheduled work, Stadium Manager shall pay to Contractor a minimum of two (2) hours for that employee (subject to exceptions for matters of force majeure ).

12. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT.

A. In addition to any other rights or remedies Stadium Manager may have, Stadium Manager may terminate this Agreement by written notice to Contractor if:
(i) Contractor fails to correct to the reasonable satisfaction of Stadium Manager any condition created or controlled by Contractor that, in Stadium Manager 's reasonable judgment, poses a hazardous condition to occupants of the Stadium Complex , any of the Related Facilities (e.g., offsite parking areas), or any portion thereof, within twenty-four (24) hours after receipt of written notice from Stadium Manager; (ii) Contractor fails to perform any material obligation under this Agreement and such failure continues unremedied for a period often (10) days after receipt of written notice from Manager of the particular failure to perform (or thirty (30) days in the case that a remedy has commenced but cannot reasonably be accomplished in ten days); (iii) Contractor is placed into bankruptcy either voluntarily or involuntarily (and such involuntary proceeding is not dismissed within sixty (60) days), becomes financially insolvent, takes the benefit of any present or future insolvency statute, makes a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, or consents to the appointment of a receiver, trustee, or liquidator of all or substantially all of its property; (iv) Contractor transfers or permits a transfer of this Agreement in violation of Section 133; (v) Contractor fails to obtain and/or maintain required licenses and permits under Section 7.D; or (vi) Contractor fails to work cooperatively and in good faith with the Authority, Stadium Manager, any of their respective Affiliates or any of subcontractors of any of the foregoing. Contractor and Stadium Manager acknowledge and agree that termination of this Agreement by Stadium Manager pursuant to this Section I LA shall be "for cause."
11 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F B. Upon the termination or expiration of this Agreement, (I) Contractor shall immediately surrender possession of the Related Facilities, if any (including any and all leasehold and other improvements therein), uniforms, equipment (and related manuals and software) to Stadium Manager, (2) Contractor shall immediately assign to Stadium Manager or its designee(s) all right, title and interest of Contractor in and to all items purchased by Contractor on Stadium Manager's behalf in connection with the Services (including uniforms and equipment), (3) Contractor shall make all payments required to be made by Contractor under this Agreement , (4) to the extent permitted by Applicable Laws, Contractor shall immediately surrender possession of and assign to Stadium Manager all permits and licenses acquired by Contractor in compliance with Section 7.D and any Applicable Laws, and (5) all matters, rights and liabilities existing on the date of termination between the parties hereto shall be determined as of such tennination date ( except as described above), and discharged as promptly as possible thereafter, including any known claims for damages either party may have against the other for breach of the terms and conditions hereof.

Any such surrender shall require delivery of possession in good condition, reasonable and ordinary wear and tear excepted and otherwise in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any termination or expiration of this Agreement , all liabilities and obligations of the parties will survive until they are fully satisfied .

C. If the Stadium is destroyed or otherwise rendered unusable for more than thirty (30) days for any reason (a "Casualty Event"), Stadium Manager shall give Contractor a notice within ninety (90) days after the Casualty Event stating that whether the Authority intends to rebuild or restore the Stadium. If the notice states that the Authority will not rebuild or restore the Stadium, this Agreement shall be terminated. If the notice states that the Authority intends to rebuild or restore the Stadium, the Parties' obligations hereunder shall be abated during that period . If such notice states that the Authority reasonab ly believes that it will take longer than two (2) years to restore or rebuild the Stadium or, if a shorter amount ohime , such amount of time is longer than the remainder of the Term, either party shall have the option of terminating this Agreement by written notice to the other at any time within one hundred and eighty (180) days after Stadium Manager gives such notice, and such termination shall be effective one hundred twenty (120) days after the other party's receipt of such notice. Contractor shall not be entitled to any monetary or other damages or compensation from Stadium Manager in the event of a Casualty Event.

D. In the event of a material change in the labor market for the Services that significantly impacts Contractor's ability to operate under the terms of this Agreement (a "Market Change") , Contractor shalJ have the right to terminate this agreement effective March 31, 2020, subject to Contractor providing Stadium Manager notice of the Market Change in writing a minimum of one hundred twenty (120) days prior to termination effective date of March 31, 2020. Upon Stadium Manager ' s receipt of such notice, the Parties shall work in good faith to reasonably modify the rates under this Agreement to accommodate such Market Change. Should the Parties be unable to reach modified terms mutually agreeable 12 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F to the Parties within thirty (30) days of Stadium Manager's receipt of a valid notice of the Market Change, the Agreement will terminate on March 31, 2020.

13. NO ASSIGNMENT OR SUBCONTRACTING OF AGREEMENT.

A. Stadium Manager and Contractor bind themselves and their successors and assigns to all covenants of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be assigned or transferred by Contractor without the prior written approval of Stadium Manager. Contractor shall not hire subcontractors without express written permission from Stadium Manager.

B. Stadium Manager may sell, assign, pledge and otherwise transfer or encumber ( each, a "transfer") this Agreement and any or all of its rights and obligations hereunder to any other Person , including any source of or guarantor or insurer of financing or any trustee , collateral agent or other Person appointed in connection with such financing ( each, a "Manager Assignee") , whether by security agreement, collateral assignment , transfer or otherwise ; provided , that such transfer shall not relieve Stadium Manager of its obligations under this Agreement unless such Manager Assignee assumes in writing Stadium Manager's obligations under this Agreement. Upon reasonable prior notice from Stadium Manager, Contractor shall make any payments due hereunder to such Manager Assignee and shall execute and deliver any documents that Stadium Manager or any Manager Assignee may reasonably request to acknow ledge and confirm that upon any such transfer , this Agreement will remain in full force and effect, will continue to be a legal, valid and binding obligation of Contractor enforceable in accordance with its terms (subject to applicable bankruptcy or insolvency laws and general principles of equity) , and that (to the extent accurate and correct) neither Contractor , nor to Contractor ' s knowledge , Stadium Manager is in material breach or violation of this Agreement.

C. Contractor acknowledges and agrees that , in the event the Stadium Management Agreement is terminated for any reason , the Authority and StadCo shall, in accordance with the Stadium Lease, employ a replacement manager for the Stadium , who shall , following the effective date of such employment , constitute the "Stadium Manager " for all purposes under this Agreement, provided , however, that for any period of tjme before a replacement manager is appointed , this Agreement may be assigned to the Authority or StadCo.

14. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARY.

This Agreement shall not be construed to be an agreement for the benefit of any third party or parties, except for the Authority , StadCo , and Team, and no other third party or parties shall have any claim or right of action under this Agreement for any cause whatsoever.

15. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.

Contractor and all person(s) employed by or contracted with Contractor to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement are independent contractors and do not act as 13 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F agent(s) or employee(s) of Stadium Manager, the Authority or StadCo. Contractor has full rights, however , to manage its emp]oyees in their performance of Services under this Agreement. All liabilities that may arise as a result of Contractor's status as an employer shall be borne exclusively by Contractor , including liability relating to payments required to be made under, and documents to be filed with respect to, the Federal Insurance Contribution Act and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act or any similar federal, state, city or local legislation or other Applicable Laws. Contractor is not authorized to bind Stadium Manager , the Authority or StadCo to any contracts or other obligations.

16. NO PLEDGING OF STADIUM MANAGER'S CREDIT.

Under no circumstances shall Contractor have the authority or power to pledge the credit of the Stadium Manager or any other of the Indemnified Parties or incur any obligation in the name of such Persons. Contractor shall save and hold harmless the Authority, StadCo, Stadium Manager, their respective Affiliates , and their respective officers, employees, boards and commissions for expenses arising out of any unauthorized pledges of credit by Contractor under this Agreement.

17. CONFIDENTIALITY OF MA TERJAL.

All ideas, memoranda, specifications , plans, manufacturing procedures, data, drawings, descriptions , documents , discussions, or other information developed or received by or for Contractor and all other written information submitted to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Contractor and shall not, without the prior written consent of Stadium Manager, be used for any purposes other than the performance of the Services nor be disclosed to an entity not connected with performance of the Services. Nothing furnished to Contractor which is otherwise known to Contractor shall be deemed confidential. Notwiths tanding the above, the Contractor acknowledges that the Authority is a California public entity that is subject to the California Public Records Act. Information disclosed to the Authority regarding the Contractor's Services in connection with the performance of this Agreement may be subject to public disclosure in accordance with the Public Records Act.

18. USE OF STADIUM MANAGER NAME OR EMBLEM.

Contractor shall have no right to use the trademarks , symbols, trade names or other intellectual property of the Stadium, the Authority, Stadium Manager or their respective Affiliates, or Stadium tenants or their Affiliates or other Event performers directly or indirectly , in connection with any production , promotion , service or publication, without the written approval of Stadium Manager.

19. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIAL.

All material, including information developed on computer(s) , which shall include, but not be limited to, data, sketches , tracings, drawings, plans, diagrams , quantities, estimates, specifications, proposals, tests, maps, calculations , photographs , reports , and other material developed, collected , prepared , or caused to be prepared under this Agreement shall be the property of Stadium Manager, but Contractor may retain and use copies thereof. Stadium Manager shall not be limited in any way or at any time in its use DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F of said material. However, Contractor shall not be responsible for damages resulting from the use of said material for work other than the Services, including, but not limited to, the release of this material to third parties.

20. RIGHT OF STADIUM MANAGER TO INSPECT RECORDS OF
CONTRACTOR.

Stadium Manager, through its authorized employees , representatives , or agents shall have the right during the tenn ofthis Agreement and for three (3) years from the date of final payment for Services, to audit the books and records of Contractor for the purpose of verifying any and all charges invoiced by Contractor in connection with Contractor compensation under this Agreement, including termination of Contractor. Contractor agrees to maintain sufficient books and records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles to establish the correctness of all charges invoiced to Stadium Manager. Any invoiced charges not incurred by Contractor shall be disallowed by Stadium Manager. If such charges were paid by Stadium Manager, then contractor must refund all such charges, plus interest of one percent (1 %) per month, within 60 days of identification of such charges.

Contractor shall submit to Stadium Manager any and all reports concerning its performance under this Agreement that may be requested by Stadium Manager in writing. Contractor agrees to assist Stadium Manager in meeting Stadium Manager's reporting requirements with respect to Contractor's Services hereunder.

21. FAIR EMPLOYMENT.

Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion , ethnic background, or marital status, in violation of Applicable Law.

22. HOLD HARMLESS/INDEMNIFICATION.

A. Contractor shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Authority, Stadium Manager and the Additional Indemnitees, and their respective officers, directors, managers, members, partners, owners and employees ("Indemnified Parties") from and against all losses, costs, suits, actions, claims, damages, amounts paid in settlement, liabilities, costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees ( collectively, "Losses"), resulting to, imposed upon, asserted against or incurred by any of them (including in any action between the parties) in connection with or arising out of (i) any breach by Contractor under this Agreement, (ii) any activity, inactivity, work or thing done or permitted by Contractor or its employees, agents or contractors in or upon the Stadium or Related Areas, including the performance of the Services, or (iii) any injury or damage to any Person or to the property of any Person caused by any action or omission of Contractor or its employees , agents or contractors.

B. If any claim , demand ; action or proceeding is made or commenced by any third party (a "Third Party Claims") against any Indemnified Party , the Indemnified Party shall give Contractor prompt notice thereof; the failure to give such notice 15 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F shall not affect the liability of Contractor under this Agreement except to the extent the failure materially and adversely affects the ability of Contractor to defend the Third Party Claim. Contractor shall have the right to assume the defense and resolution of the Third Party Claim , provided that (i) the Indemnified Party shall have the right to participate in the defense of the Third Party Claim at its own expense through counsel of its choice ( control of the defense will remain with Contractor) , (ii) Contractor shall not consent to the entry of any judgment or enter into any settlement that would requir e any act or forbearance on the part of the Indemnified Party or which does not unconditionally release the Indemnified Party from all liability in respect of the Third Party Claim or would otherwise bring dishonor or disrepute upon Authority , Stadium Manager , any of their respective Affiliates , without the prior written consen t of the Indemnified Party, and (iii) the Indemnified Party may undertake the defense of the Third Party Claim , at Contractor's expense , if Contractor fails to (A) assume the defense within ten (10) business days after notice from the Indemnified Party or (B) diligently prosecute the defense.

23. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS.

During the term of this Agreement , and for any time period set forth in Exhibit C, Contractor shall purchase and maintain in full force and effect , at no cost to Stadium Manager insurance policies with respect to employees and vehicles assigned to the performance of Services under this Agreement with coverage amoun ts, required endorsements , certificates of insurance , and coverage verifications as defined in Exhibit C.

24. AMENDMENTS.

This Agreement may be amended only with the written consent of both Parties.

25. INTEGRATED DOCUMENT.

This Agreement represents the entire agreement between Stadium Manager and Contractor. No other understanding , agreem ents, conversations , or otherwise , with any represen tative of Stadium Manager prior to execution of this Agreement shall affect or modify any of the terms or obligations of this Agreement. Any verbal agreement shall be considered unofficial information and is not binding upon Stadium Manager.

26. SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.

In case any one or more of the provisions in this Agreement shall, for any reason , be held invalid , illegal, or unenforceable in any respect , it shall not affect the validity of the other provisions , which shall remain in fu)l force and effect.

27. WAIVER.

Contractor agrees that waiver by Stadium Manager of any one or more of the conditions of performance under this Agreement shall not be construed as waiver(s) of any other condit ion of performance under this Agreement.
16 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

28. NOTICES.

All notices to the Parties shall, unless otherwise requested in writing, be sent to Stadium Manager addressed as follows:

Name:

Attention:

Address:

Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC
Jim Mercurio
4949 Marie P. DeBartolo Way
Santa Clara, CA 95054
With a CC to: Legal Affairs
4949 Marie P DeBartolo Way
Santa Clara, CA 95054
And to Contractor addressed as follows:

Name:

Attention:

Address:

Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc.

Michael Harrison
4790 Irvine Blvd.

Ste 105-323
Irvine, CA 92620
If notice is sent via email, a signed, hard copy of the material shall also be mailed. The workday the email was sent shall control the date notice was deemed given if there is a computer-generated confirmation of receipt returned to the sender on the date of transmission. An email transmitted after 1 :00 p.m. on a Friday shall be deemed to have been transmitted on the following Monday.

29. CAPTIONS.

The captions of the various sections, paragraphs, and subparagraphs of this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of interpretation.

30. LAW GOVERNING CONTRACT AND VENUE.

This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the statutes and laws of the State of California. The venue of any suit filed by either Party shall be vested in the state courts of the County of Santa Clara, or if appropriate, in the United States District Court, Northern District of Californja, San Jose, California.

31. DISPUTE RESOLUTION.

A. Unless otherwise mutually agreed to by the Parties, any controversies between Contractor and Stadium Manager regarding the construction or application of this Agreement, and claims arising out of this Agreement or its breach, shall be submitted to mediation within thirty (30) days of the written request of one Party after the service of that request on the other Party.
17 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F B. The Parties may agree on one mediator. If they cannot agree on one mediator, the Party demanding mediation shall request the Superior Court of Santa Clara County to appoint a mediator. The mediation meeting shall not exceed one day (eight (8) hours). The Parties may agree to extend the time allowed for mediation under this Agreement.

C. The costs of mediation shall be borne by the Parties equally.

D. For any contract dispute, mediation under this section is a condition precedent to filing an action in any court. In the event of mediation which arises out of any dispute related to this Agreement, the Parties shall each pay their respective attorney's fees, expert witness costs, and cost of suit through mediation only. In the event of litigation, the prevailing Party shall recover its reasonable costs of suit, expert's fees, and attorney's fees. If mediation does not resolve the dispute, the Parties agree that the matter shall be litigated in a court of law, and not subject to the arbitration provisions of the Public Contracts Code.

32. COMPLIANCE WITH ETHICAL STANDARDS.

Contractor shall:

A. Read Exhibit D, entitled "ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR CONTRACTORS

SEEKING TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH STADIUM
MANAGER"; and,
B. Execute Exhlbit E, entttled "AFF IDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WITH ETHICAL STANDARDS."

33. CONFLICT OF INTERESTS.

This Agreement does not prevent either Party from entering into similar agreements with other parties. To prevent a conflict of interest, Contractor certifies that to the best of its knowledge, no Stadium Manager, StadCo, Team, Authority, or City officer, employee, or authorized representative has any financial interest in the business of Contractor and that no person associated with Contractor has any interest, direct or indirect, which could conflict with the faithful performance of this Agreement. Contractor is familiar with the provisions of California Government Code Section 87100 and following, and certifies that it does not know of any facts which would violate these code provisions. Contractor will advise Stadium Manager if a conflict arises.

34. SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS
The Parties acknowledge and accept the terms and conditions ohhis Agreement as evidenced by the following signatures of their duly authorized representatives. It is the intent of the Parties that this Agreement shall become operative on the Effective Date. [ Signatures continued on next page ]
18 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this agreement for the performance of services to be executed by their duly appointed representatives as of the Effective Date.

STADIUM MANAGER:

FORTY NINERS STADIUM MANAGEMENT COMPANY LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
CONTRACTOR:

By:

Name: Scott Sabatino
Title: Chief Financial Officer
4949 Marie P. DeBartolo Way
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Telephone: ( 408) 562-4949
Fax Number: (408) 727-4937
LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING SERVICES ,,INC.,
a Delaware corporation , '11 ~f\ ti
\~ ) : I ,; \ul f1 ,, l/
By: \ / l{ ~' -···- ---
Name: Michael Harrison
Title: Chief Executive Officer
4790 Irvine Blvd.

Ste 105-323
Irvine , CA 92620
Telephone: (714) 293-4248
Fax Number: (888) 709-5730
19 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN

STADIUM MANAGER,
AND
LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING SERVICES, INC.

ADDENDUM ONE

DEFINITIONS
The following terms shall have the meanings set forth below:

Affiliate: shall mean any Person directly or indirectly controlling or controlled by or under direct or indirect common control with a Person. For purposes ofthis definition , "control" when used with respect to any entity means the power to direct the management and policies of such entity, directly or indirectly, whether through the ownership of voting securities , by contract or otherwise; and the terms "controlling" and "controlled" have meanings correlative to the foregoing.

Additional lndemnitees: shall mean the Authority ' s Affiliates (including without limitation, the Authority's Board of Directors, the City, its City Council, and all City or Agency commissions , officers, employees , volunteers and agents), the Bayshore North Project Enhancement Authority, the Successor Agency to the Santa Clara Redevelopment Agency, StadCo and its Affiliates , the Team and any Additional T eam (i.e., an additional NFL franchise that plays its "home" games at the Stadium) (and their respective Affiliates) , Manager's Affiliates (if not any of the previously mentioned Persons), each other tenant of the Stadium and each Event promoter, and any mortgagee , bond trustee or other financial institution from time to time holding a lien or indenture upon Manager ' s interest in the Stadium, the Stadium Lease or the Stadium Managemen t Agreement.

Default Rate: shall mean a rate per annum equal to the lesser of (i) fifteen percent (15.0%) and (ii) the maximum non-usurious rate permitted by applicable law, with adjustments in that varying rate to be made on the same date as any change in that rate.

Fiscal Year: shall mean the twelve (12) month period commencing April 1 of each year after the execution of this Agreement , except that the first Fiscal Year will commence on the Commencement Date of the Stadium Lease and end on the next following March 31. If this Agreement expires or terminates on a date other than March 31 of a particular year, there shall be a partial last Fiscal Year ending on the date of such termination.

Hazardous Substance: shall mean, as of any date: (a) any petroleum or petroleum products, flammable explosives, radioactive materials, asbestos in any form that is or could become friable, urea formaldehyde foam insulation , and transformers or other equipment that contain dielectric fluid containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) ; (b) any chemicals or other materials or substances which as of such date are defined as or included in the definition of "hazardous substances ," "hazardous wastes," "hazardous materials ," "extremely hazardous wastes," "restricted hazardous wastes, " "toxic substances," "toxic pollutan ts," "contaminants ," DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F "infectious wastes," "pollutants" or words of similar import under any environmental law; and (c) any other chemical or other material or substance, exposure to which or use of which as of such date is prohibited, limited or regulated under any environmental law.

Holidays: shall mean New Year' s Day, MLK Day, Cesar Chavez Day, President's Day, Easter Sunday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiv ing Day, Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, New Year's Eve.

Person: shall mean any individual , corporation , partnership , limited liability company , association , trust or other entity whatsoever
DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN

STADIUM MANAGER
AND
LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING SERVICES, INC.

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES

1. Contractor Services: For each Event at the Stadium , Contractor shaJl provide the number of personnel that Stadium Manager requests for each of the roles listed below. All personnel provided by Contractor shall be certified by the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services.

A. Management: Contractor shall employ the Management Team listed in Exhibit G and such other managers as are required to manage and opera te the Services at the highest standards of employee competency , conduct and integrity. All manager and supervisors shall be Trained Crowd Manager (TCM) and National Incident Management System (NIMS) certified and shall have received at least eight hours of training on supervisory duties.

B. Event Manager: Contractor shall provide an Event Manager who works with Stadium Manager to manage the venue crowd management program. He or she directs Contractor 's operations by passing on instructions to the event supervisors , who direct the staff in execut ing the crowd management plan. This individual is responsible for quality control at the venue. This is accomplished by moving around the venue to oversee Contractor 's employees performing their jobs.

C. Supervisor: The Contractor shall provide Supervisory personnel who are responsible for directing the Event staff in providing a safe and enjoyable environment for guests. They direct and oversee the implementat ion of facility policies and procedures by the Event staff. They make decisions on the implementation of facility policy during event activities, incidents and emergencies . They communicate with Event staff personnel to execute the instructions of the Event Manager and the venue. They ensure that the staff is following the rules of the venue and are providing high quality guest services to the fans. They also mitigate and intercede to resolve any guest issues.

D. Event Security: The Contractor shall provide personnel who will assist the facility in providing a safe and enjoyable environment for the tenants and guests by implement ing the policies and procedures of the facility. They are responsible for access control, assisting guests and answering questions , enforcing venue rules, responding to event staff and guest issues and cases of emergency and DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F communicating with law enforcement, emergency services and the public in a polite and courteous manner.

E. Off Duty Officers: Contractor shall provide Off Duty Officers who shall (i) intervene and resolve any security situation within the Stadium, including conflicts and crowd control; (ii) have achieved success in a documented training course in screening techniques; (iii) communicate with patrons effectively and courteously, including in using radios and managing confrontation; (iv) effectuate Stadium Security policies (e.g., credential system, evacuation plans); (v) and have documented training history in (A) safe restraint and arrest techniques; and (B) Stadium Operating procedures and evacuation plan
F. Ushe rs: The Contractor shall provide Ushers who will welcome the guests and help guests find their assigned seats and other locations requested. They are responsible for assisting guests and answering questions, directing guests during the events, assisting guests in cases of emergency and communicating with the guest in a polite and courteous manner.

G. Ticket Takers: The Contractor shall provide staff who will examine admission tickets to verify authenticity. They are to refuse admission to individuals without proper tickets or event credential. They are responsible for assisting guests and answering questions, directing the guests during the events, assisting guests in cases of emergency and commtmicating with the guest in a polite and courteous manner.

H. Parking Security: The Contractor shall provide Parking Security staff personnel who will assist in providing a safe and enjoyable environment for the tenants and guests by implementing the policies and procedures of the facilities Parking Lots.

They are responsible for access control, assisting guests and answering questions , enforcing venue parking rules, responding to event staff and guest issues and cases of emergency and communicating with law enforcement, emergency services and the public in a polite and courteous manner.

I. Parking Attendants and Flaggers: The Contractor shall provide Parking Attendants and Flaggers who will welcome the guests and help guests find available parking spaces and other locations requested. They are responsible for assisting guests and answering questions, directing guests during the events, assisting guests in cases of emergency and communicating with the guest in a polite and courteous manner.

2. Trainings: In addition to the above-listed role-specific trainings, Contractor shall pay one-half of the cost (as determined by Stadium Manager) for all personnel to be certified in the following trainings:

A. NFL Best Practices.

B. 49ers Services Trairung.

C. Techniques for Effect ive Alcohol Management (TEAM).

DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F D. Conflict Management (Conflict Management training shall be provided by Contactor through any documented conflict management training).

3. Radios: Contractor shall rent radios from Stadium Manager's official vendor and shall follow Stadium Manager's instructions regarding radio frequencies.

DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN

STADIUM MANAGER
AND
LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING SERVICES, INC.

EXHIBIT B

CONTRACTOR COMPENSATION AND FEES
Compensation and fees for Services performed by Contractor under this Agreement shall be billed at the following rates for Year 1 (April 2017 - March 2018) of the Tenn:

I. Event Manager $35.90/hour

2. Supervisor $33.70/hour

3. Off-Duty Law Enforcement Officer $47 .80/hour

4. Usher, Ticket Taker, Parking Security, $30.47/hour
Parking Flagger, Parking Attendant,
Event Security
Compensation and fees for Services performed by Contractor under this Agreement shall be billed at the following rates for Year 2 (April 2018 -March 2019) of the Tenn:

1. Event Manager $37.50/hour

2. Supervisor $35.23/hour

3. Off-Duty Law Enforcement Officer $49.75/hour

4. Usher, Ticket Taker, Parking Security, $31.90/hour
Parking Flagger, Parking Attendant,
Event Security
Compensation and fees for Services performed by Contractor under this Agreement shall be billed at the following rates for Year 3 (April 2019 - March 2020) of the Term:

1. Event Manager $39.39/hour

2. Supervisor $37.05/hour

3. Off-Duty Law Enforcement Officer $52.01/hour

4. Usher, Ticket Taker, Parking Security, $33.63/hour
Parking Flagger, Parking Attendant,
Event Security
DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F Compensation and fees for Services performed by Contractor under this Agreement shall be billed at the following rates for Year 4 (April 2020 - March 2021) of the Term:

I. Event Manager $40.11/hour

2. Supervisor $37.73/hour

3. Off-Duty Law Enforcement Officer $52.97/hour

4. Usher, Ticket Taker, Parking Security , $34.24/hour
Parking Flagger, Parking Attendant ,
Event Security
Compensation and fees for Services performed by Contractor under this Agreement shall be billed at the following rates for Year 5 (April 2021 - March 2022) of the Term:

1. Event Manager $40.85/hour

2. Supervisor $38.42/hour

3. Off-Duty Law Enforcement Officer $53.96/hour

4. Usher, Ticket Taker, Parking Security , $34.87 /hour Parking Flagger, Parking Attendant,
Event Security
Subject to prior approval from Stadium Manager, time worked by an individual in direct performance of the in excess of eight (8) hours in a day shall be compensated as follows:
• such time between eight (8) hours and twelve (12) hours shall be compensated at one dollar ($1.00) above the base rates listed above;
• such time greater than twelve (12) hours shall be compensated a twice (2x) the base rates listed above.

Base rates shall be increased by fifty percent (50%) for Services performed on Holidays as defined herein.

DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN

STADIUM MANAGER
AND
LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING SERVICES, INC.

EXIIlBITC

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
At all times during the term hereof, Contractor shall keep and maintain in full force and effect the fo11owing types of insurance coverage and/or bonds:

1. Commercial general liability insurance, including property damage, against liability for personal injury , bodily injury, death and damage to property occurring in or about the property in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occunence and Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) in the aggregate.

2. Automobile liability in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) with respect to owned , hired and non-owned vehicles.

3. Workers compensation insurance, as required by applicable law.

4. Employer's liability in the amount of One Million Dollars($ I ,000,000) each accident, One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) each employee, by disease, and One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) policy aggregate by disease.

5. Employment practices liability with limits of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) including third party coverage.

6. Crime insurance including employee dishonesty covering all of Contractor 's agents, contractors, managers and other employees in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000).

7. Liability insurance covering claims arising out of errors and omissions by vendors rendering professional services, in the amount of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) each occurrence including contractual liability coverage, with all coverage retroactive to the earlier of the date of agreement or commencement of Contractor's services.

8. Umbrella or excess liability insurance in the amount of Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000) providing excess coverage over general liability, auto liability, garage liability and employer's liability specified above.

The above stated limits may be achieved by a combination of primary and excess/umbrella coverage. Any deductible or self-insured retention amounts are the sole responsibility of the Contractor.

DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F At Stadium Manager's request from time to time (and in any event not less than 15 (fifteen) days prior to the expiration dates of any expiring policies or bonds furnished by Contractor) , Contractor shall furnish to Stadium Manager certified copies or duplicate originals of all policies of insurance and bonds then maintained by Stadium Manager hereunder , or a certificate supplied by each such insurer and surety showing that the insurance and bonds required hereunder are in full force and effect and showing the limits thereof and that all such policies and bonds contain the provisions and endorsements required hereunder.

All insurance policies and bonds required to be maintained by Contractor shall be issued by insurers or sureties (as the case may be) reasonably satisfactory to client, authorized to do business in the state of California and having an AM Best rating and financial size category of A-/VII or better. All policies of the vendor shall be (i) primary and non-contributing with respect to any policies carried by client; (ii) with respect to liability insurance only, a provision including Stadium Manager as Additional Insured; (iii) a waiver by the insurer of any right to subrogate against Stadium Manager (iv) a severability of interest or endorsement; (v) a provision that the insurer will not cancel or change the coverage provided by such without giving the Stadium Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice; and (vi) general liability be an "occurrence form" policy. Any policy of insurance required to be carried by Contractor that names Stadium Manager as Additional Insured shall not be subject to a deductible or self-insured retention, it being the intent of the parties that such insurance shall fully and comp]ete]y insure such additional insured entities for all loss or expense.

DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN

STADIUM MANAGER
AND
LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING SERVICES, INC.

EXHIBITD

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR CONTRACTORS SEEKING TO ENTER INTO AN

AGREEMENT WITH STADIUM MANAGER
Termination of Agreement for Certain Acts.

A. Stadium Manager may, at its sole discretion, terminate this Agreement in the event any one or more of the following occurs:

1. If a Contractor 1 does any of the following:
a. Is convicted2 of operating a business in violation of any Applicable Law; b. Is convicted of a crime punishable as a felony involving dishonesty3; c. Is convicted of an offense involving dishonesty or is convicted of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with: (1) obtaining; (2) attempting to obtain; or, (3) performing a public contract or subcontract; d. Is convicted of any offense which indicates a lack of business integrity or business honesty which seriously and directly affects the present responsibility of a Stadium Manager contractor or subcontractor; and/or, e. Made (or makes) any false statement(s) or representation(s) with respect to this Agreement.

2. If fraudulent, criminal or other seriously improper conduct of any officer, director, shareholder, partner, employee or other individual associated with Contractor can For purposes of this Agreement, the word "Consultant" (whether a person or a legal entity) also refers to "Contractor" and means any of the following: an owner or co-owner ofa sole proprietorship; a person who controls or who has the power to control a business entity; a general partner of a partnership; a principal in a joint venture; or a primary corporate stockholder [i.e., a person who owns more than ten percent (10%) of the outstanding stock ofa corporation] and who is active in the day to day operations of that corporation. 2 For purposes of this Agreement, the words "convicted" or "conviction" mean a judgment or conviction of a criminal offense by any court of competent jurisdiction, whether entered upon a verdict or a plea, and includes a conviction entered upon a plea ofnolo contendere within the past five (5) years.

As used herein, "dish onesty" includes, but is not limited to, embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, failure to pay tax obligations, receiving stolen property, collusion or conspiracy.

DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F be imputed to Contractor when the conduct occurred in connection with the individual's performance of duties for or on behalf of Contractor , with Contractor ' s knowledge, approval or acquiescence , Contractor's acceptance of the benefits derived from the conduct shall be evidence of such knowledge , approval or acqmescence.

B. Stadium Manager may also terminate this Agreement in the event any one or more of the following occurs:

1. Stadium Manager determines that Contractor no longer has the financial capability4 or business experience 5 to perform the terms of, or operate under, this Agreement; or

2. If Stadium Manager determines that Contractor fails to submit information, or submits false information, which is required to perfotm or be awarded a contract with Stadium Manager , including, but not limited to, Contractor ' s failure to maintain a required State-issued license, failure to obtain a Stadium Manager business license (if applicable), or failure to purchase and maintain bonds and/or insurance policies required under this Agreement.

C. In the event a prospective Contractor (or bidder) is ruled ineligible (debarred) to participate in a contract award process or a contract is terminated pursuant to these provisions, Contractor may appeal the action to the Authority by filing a written request with the Authority Secretary within ten (10) days of the notice given by Stadium Manager to have the matter heard. The matter will be heard within thirty (30) days of the filing of the appeal request with the Authority Secretary. Contractor will have the burden of proof on the appeal. Contractor shall have the opportunity to present evidence, both oral and documentary , and argument.
4 Contractor becomes insolvent , transfers assets in fraud of creditors , makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, files a petition under any section or chapter of the federal Bankruptcy Code (11 U.S.C.), as amended, or under any similar law or statute of the United States or any state thereof, is adjudged bankrupt or insolvent in proceedings under such laws, or a receiver or trustee is appointed for all or substantially all of the assets of Contractor.

Loss of personnel deemed essential by Stadium Manager for the successful performance of tbe obligations of Contractor to Stadium Manager.

DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN

STADIUM MANAGER
AND
LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING SERVICES, INC.

EXHIBITE

AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WITH ETHICAL STANDARDS
I, Michael Harrison being first duly sworn, depose and state I am Executive VP/CEO of Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. and I hereby state that I have read and understand the language, entitled "Ethical Standards" set forth in Exhibit D. I have the authority to make these representations on my own behalf or on behalf of the legal entity identified herein. I have examined appropriate business records, and I have made appropriate inquiry of those individuals potentially included within the definition of "Contractor" contained in Ethical Standards at footnote 1.

Based on my review of the appropriate documents and my good-faith review of the necessary inquiry responses, I hereby state that neither the business entity nor any individual(s) belonging to said "Contractor" category (i.e., owner or co-owner of a sole proprietorship, general partner, person who controls or has power to control a business entity, etc.) has been convicted of any one or more of the crimes identified in the Ethical Standards within the past five (5) years.

The above assertions are true and correct and are made under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California.

Title: ___ ,..,...,.::::...._ _ _ _ _____________ _

NOTARY'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE ATTACHED
Please execute the affidavit and attach a notary public's acknowledgment of execution of the affidavit by the signatory. ff the affidavit is on behalf of a corporation, partnership, or other legal entity, the entity's complete legal name and the title of the person signing on behalf of the legal entity shall appear above. Written evidence of the authority of the person executing this affidavit on behalf of a corporation, partnership , joint venture, or any other legal entity, other than a sole proprietorship, shall be attached .

DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California
County of O ya_.K.t) e. }
On 02. f I S / 2-o I 7 before me, ------'L-a~~iA-=---v--'-'[e....=-----cH,-,------•,----------,E-cc.,--~-c=c-----,--c.-vt--=::-V'I _____ _ I DAte Here Insert Name and Tille of the Officer personally appeared
ensssnnoodnnsooo••t LAURIE l:f. ERTMANN
l. Notary Public ~ California z
i Orange County ~
~ Commltlion • 2149080 4
' •••• C JeJ :0T"!- Brt' !Ill 1t}i2i l
f---\-tt vvi s OV1
Name(s) of Signer(s)
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged
to me that he/she/they executed the same in
his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the
person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

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

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature: ~ ;/~ ~
Though ~::e i:::r::
0 t~~:n::::~: ::::equir?!;;!a~~!; p-~-ov_e_v_~_/u_a_b_le_t_o_p_er.-:-i::-:-tu ~-r:-:-i:-:-a:-n-P:-:e-lic_do_c_u_m_e_n_t -- I~ and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. ~ Description of Attached Document ~
Title or Type of Document: Ak,B dct. vr+ 0£ U)lt<'I r71 fa L,{Ul.. w~ ~Ca,{ Si-el~ Document Date: _________ ________ _ __ Number of Pages: _ ____ _ Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: _ ________ ____________ _ ___ _ Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer's Name: t1,' c,A,1ote.,{ Ht?VVTSblA
~rporate Officer - Title(s): _C-~~{?;O~-----
□ Individual RIGHT THUMBPRINT

OF SIGNER
□ Partner - □ Limited □ General Top of thumb here
□ Attorney in Fact
□ Trustee
□ Guardian or Conservator
□ Other: _ ___ ____ _
Signer Is Representing: ___ _
Signer's Name: ____________ _
□ Corporate Officer - Title(s): _______ _
□ Individual RIGHT THUMBPRINT

OF SIGNER
□ Partner - □ Limited □ General Top of thumb here
□ Attorney in Fact
□ Trustee
□ Guardian or Conservator
□ Other: --- ---~--
Signer Is Representing: ___ _
©2008 National Notary Association• 9350 De Soto Ave., P.O. Box 2402 • Chatsworth, CA 91313-2402 • www.NationalNotary.org Item #5907 Reorder: Call Toll-Free 1 ·800-876-6827 DocuSign Envelope ID: DA9F3A49-A6F1-4B82-BEE7-2F0A2DC65C7F

AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN

STADIUM MANAGER
AND
LANDMARK EVENT STAFFING SERVICES, INC.

EXHIBITG

MANAGEMENT TEAM
President /COO Peter Kranske
Executive VP/CEO Michael Harrison
VP /Operations Grant Haskell
Director of Development Brian Campbell
Regional Manager Nick Bermensolo
Branch Manager Erik Rodriquez
ODO Manager John Crabtree
Adrnin Manager Christine Ho
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99238671-2DA5-4429-A1A2-2DF6B8062EE4

FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES This FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES (this "First Amendment"), effective as of March 10, 2017 (the "First Amendment Effective Date"), amends the AGREEMENT FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES, dated as of February 15, 2017 (the "Agreement"), by and between Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC ("Stadium Manager"), a Delaware limited liability company, with principal offices at 4900 Marie P. DeBartolo Way, Santa Clara, CA 95054, and Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation, with its principal place of business located at 4131 Harbor Walk Drive, Fort Collins, CO 80525 ("Contractor"). Capitalized terms not defined herein have the meaning given to them in the Agreement.

WHEREAS, Stadium Manager and Contractor have agreed to modify certain insurance requirements under the Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and obligations set forth herein, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Stadium Manager and Contractor agree to modify the Agreement as follows:

1. Exhibit C to the Agreement shall be amended and restated in its entirety as attached to this First Amendment.

Except as expressly set forth in this First Amendment, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stadium Manager and Contractor have caused this First Amendment to be executed by an authorized representative as of the First Amendment Effective Date. :~D- STAFFING SERVICES, I~.

Name: Michael Harrison
Title: Chief Executive Officer

FORTY NINERS STADIUM MANAGEMENT COMPANY LLC
Name: Scott Sabatino
Title: Chief Financial Officer
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99238671-2DA5-4429-A1A2-2DF6B8062EE4

EXHIBITC

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
At all times during the term hereof, Contractor shall keep and maintain in full force and effect the following types of insurance coverage and/or bonds:

1. Commercial general liability insurance, including property damage, against liability for personal injury, bodily injury, death and damage to property occurring in or about the property in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence and Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) in the aggregate.

2. Automobile liability in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) with respect to owned, hired and non-owned vehicles .

3. Workers compensation insurance , as required by applicable law.

4. Employer 's liability in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) each accident, One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) each employee, by disease , and One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) policy aggregate by disease.

5. Employment practices liability with limits of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) including third party coverage.

6. Crime insurance including employee dishonesty covering all of Contractor's agents, contractors, managers and other employees in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000).

The above stated limits may be achieved by a combination of primary and excess/umbrella coverage. Any deductible or self-insured retention amounts are the sole responsibility of the Contractor.

At Stadium Manager's request from time to time (and in any event not less than 15 (fifteen) days prior to the expiration dates of any expiring policies or bonds furnished by Contractor), Contractor shall furnish to Stadium Manager certified copies or duplicate originals of all policies of insurance and bonds then maintained by Stadium Manager hereunder , or a certificate supplied by each such insurer and surety showing that the insurance and bonds required hereunder are in full force and effect and showing the limits thereof and that all such policies and bonds contain the provisions and endorsements required hereunder.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 99238671-2DA5-4429-A1A2-2DF6B8062EE4 All insurance policies and bonds required to be maintained by Contractor shall be issued by insurers or sureties (as the case may be) reasonably satisfactory to client, authorized to do business in the state of California and having an AM Best rating and financial size category of A-/VII or better. All policies of the vendor shall be (i) primary and non-contributing with respect to any policies carried by client; (ii) with respect to liability insurance only, a provision including Stadium Manager , Santa Clara Stadium Authority , Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC and Forty Niners Football Company LLC as Additional Insured ; (iii) a waiver by the insurer of any right to subrogate against Stadium Manager, Santa Clara Stadium Authority, Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC and Forty Niners Football Company LLC (iv) a severability of interest or endorsement; (v) a provision that the insurer will not cancel or change the coverage provided by such without giving the Stadium Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice; and (vi) general liability be an "occurrence form" policy. ,iijfj ;

STADIUM

FORTY NINERS STADIUM MANAGEMENT COMPANY

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc.

Attn: Michael Harrison
4 790 Irvine Blvd.

Ste 105-323
Irvine, CA 92620
Dear Mr. Harrison,
March~' 2022
We are writing to provide formal written notice that Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC is hereby exercising its option, under Section 5 of the Agreement for the Performance of Services by and between Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. and Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC dated February 15, 2017 (the "Agreement"), to extend the Term of our Agreement for an additional two (2) year period through March 31, 2024 at the rates contained in SCHEDULE 1 to this letter.

All other tenns and obligations shall remain unchanged during the extended Term of the Agreement.

We look forward to continuing our partnership with you and your team.

A-dAgreed: --
Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc.

Date: 3/'6/1--l/
Sincerely,

TIM MERCURIO
Executive Vice President, General Manager
Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC
4900 Marie P. DeBartolo Way I Santa Clara, CA 95054
,iijij ;

STADIUM

FORTY NINERS STADIUM MANAGEMENT COMPANY
SCHEDULE 1
Compensation and fees for Services performed by Contractor during the extended Term of the Agreement shall be billed at the following rates (which shall replace the rates contained in Exhibit B to the Agreement):
4/1/2022 -3/31/2023

1. Event Manager

2. Supervisor

3. Off-Duty Law Enforcement Officer

4. Usher, Ticket Taker, Parking Security,
Parking Flagger, Parking Attendant,
Event Security
4/1/2023 -3/31/2024

1. Event Manager

2. Supervisor

3. Off-Duty Law Enforcement Officer

4. Usher, Ticket Taker, Parking Security,
Parking Flagger, Parking Attendant,
Event Security
$40.85/hour
$39.76/hour
$61.07 /hour
$36.09/hour
$40.85/hour
$40. 7 6/hour
$61.69/hour
$36.99/hour
Subject to prior approval from Stadium Manager, time worked by an individual in direct performance of the in excess of eight (8) hours in a day shall be compensated as follows:
• Such time between eight (8) hours and twelve (12) hours shall be compensated at two dollars ($2.00) above the base rates listed above; and
• Such time greater than twelve (12) hours shall be compensated a twice (2x) the base rates listed above.

Base rates shall be increased by fifty percent (50%) for Services performed on Holidays as defined herein.
4900 Marie P. DeBartolo Way I Santa Clara, CA 95054
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-415 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD

SUBJECT
Report from Stadium Authority for Action on the Stadium Manager’s Request to Exercise Option to Extend Term of Agreement with Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. for Levi’s Stadium Event Security Services

BOARD PILLAR
Ensure Compliance with Measure J and Manage Levi’s Stadium

BACKGROUND
On October 8, 2019, the Stadium Authority Board (Board) approved Ordinance No. 2005 amending Chapter 17.30 of the City Code (Stadium Authority Procurement Policy), which rescinded the delegation to the Executive Director to enter into agreements without prior Board approval. As result of Ordinance No. 2005, the Stadium Manager is also required to request Board approval before entering into agreements on behalf of the Stadium Authority. As of the effective date of the Ordinance (November 8, 2019), all Stadium Authority agreements for services, supplies, materials, and equipment require the approval of the Stadium Authority Board.

As the Stadium Manager, Forty Niners Stadium Management Company, LLC is responsible for maintaining “the Stadium in the Required Condition and operate the Stadium as a quality NFL and multi-purpose public sports, public assembly, exhibit and entertainment facility” as required by the Management Agreement between the Stadium Authority and Stadium Manager.

On April 17, 2017, the Stadium Authority Board adopted Resolution No. 17-4 (Resolution of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority Consenting to a Service Agreement between Forty Niners Stadium Management Company and Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. for Event Security Services) with the exception of the agreement’s two one-year extensions; and noted and filed an Amendment No. 1 to include the Stadium Authority as additional insured under the Insurance Requirements of the agreement. Under Section 5 - Term of Agreement, the agreement terminates on March 31, 2022 and provides the Stadium Manager with an option to extend the term for one additional two-year period by notifying Landmark of its desire to exercise the extension option, subject to mutual agreement of rates.

The Stadium Manager is now requesting approval to exercise its option to extend the term of the existing Agreement for the Performance of Services by and between Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. (Landmark) and Forty Niners Stadium Management Company for security services at Levi’s Stadium for one additional two-year period through March 31, 2024.

Chapter 17.30.070 of the City Code states that, “Except for reserved purchase order numbers assigned by the purchasing officer, the purchasing officer shall not issue any purchase order or City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
22-415 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
award any contract for supplies, materials, or equipment unless there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the proper account of the Stadium Authority to which the purchase is to be charged.” However, Section 5 of the agreement provides that, “…if this Agreement extends beyond a single fiscal year, the Term for subsequent fiscal years shall be conditioned upon approval of the Authority budget for the applicable fiscal year that includes the amounts due under this Agreement.”

DISCUSSION
As described in an April 4, 2017 report to the Board regarding the original agreement, the Stadium Manager conducted a Request for Proposal (RFP) process for security services for pre-event, event, and post-event services for the stadium and surrounding areas and invited six security firms to participate. Companies submitting proposals provided information on their experience, training, local management, cost and organizational approach and Landmark was selected as the firm best able to perform the required scope of work.

Security services are critical to the ongoing operation of Levi’s Stadium. Landmark has provided security services for Levi’s Stadium since 2014. Under the existing agreement’s scope of work, Landmark provides personnel in the following categories as requested by the Stadium Manager for each event at Levi’s Stadium: Management, Event Manager, Supervisor, Event Security, Off Duty Officers, Ushers, Ticket Takers, Parking Security, and Parking Attendants and Flaggers. The agreement requires that all personnel provided by Landmark be certified by the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services.

The agreement with Landmark is based on an hourly schedule on a per event basis for StadCo for NFL events and Stadium Authority for Non-NFL events. The agreement outlines a schedule of fee for each year of services. The proposed rates for April 1, 2022 through March 31, 2023 and April 1, 2023 through March 31, 2024 are outlined under Schedule 1 in the written notice provided by the Stadium Manager (attached to corresponding report #22-414). Landmark’s staffing rates for FY 2017/18 through FY 2021/22, as outlined in the existing agreement, and proposed rates for FY 2022/23 through FY 2023/24, as outlined in the written notice that is pending the Board’s approval, are summarized in Table 1:

Staff recommends approval of the Stadium Manager’s request to exercise its option to extend the term of the agreement with Landmark by one additional two-year period through March 31, 2024 to ensure continuity of security services for Levi’s Stadium events. The Stadium Authority will require full supporting documentation before releasing public funds upon procurement of supplies and services.

This requirement is consistent with the Stadium Authority Board’s March 27, 2019 direction to staff to stop payment of any additional invoices for services unless there is substantial documentation of services rendered which must also be in compliance with State law and City Code.

City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
22-415 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

FISCAL IMPACT
The existing agreement does not include a not to exceed amount. However, the costs of the Landmark agreement are based on an hourly schedule on a per event basis for both Stadium SC Stadium Company (StadCo) for NFL events and Stadium Authority for Non-NFL events. StadCo will be responsible to the Stadium Manager for costs associated with NFL events. It is expected that the cost for Non-NFL event services will be borne either by the event promoter or by the revenue generated from the event.

The projected net revenues from the Non-NFL events at the Stadium are accounted for in the FY 2022/23 Stadium Authority Operating Budget under the Net Non-NFL Events line item which aligns with Stadium Manager’s verbal communication to staff that the costs of the security services are included in the FY 2022/23 budget.

There are also planning costs from meetings between the Stadium Manager and Landmark management that are charged to Shared Stadium Expenses and split 50/50 between the Stadium Authority and StadCo. The FY 2022/23 Operating Budget, Shared Expenses takes into consideration the new rates. Service costs for FY 2023/24 will be subject to future budget appropriations.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City’s Police Department and the Stadium Authority Counsel and Treasurer’s Offices.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Approve the Stadium Manager’s request to exercise its option to extend the term of the agreement with Landmark by one additional two-year period through March 31, 2024, and authorize staff to approve and process the reimbursement of such costs upon receiving final invoices and supporting documentation from the Stadium Manager.

Prepared by: Christine Jung, Assistant to the Executive Director Reviewed by: Office of the Executive Director
City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/17/2022Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-358 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Report and Presentation from the Independent Redistricting Commission on the 2020 Census Redistricting Process and its Adoption of a Final Map; Action on the Introduction of an Ordinance Adopting the New Council District Map

COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

BACKGROUND
Every ten years, after the U.S. Census is conducted, city council district lines must be reviewed and possibly adjusted to ensure each council district contains approximately the same number of residents. This process is known as redistricting. The redistricting process is a non-political process of reviewing census data and ensuring that council district lines are accurately drawn so that each district contains a fairly equal population. The City is required to adopt its final map 205 days before the next regular election. Deadline for submittal of final map for November 8, 2022 election is April 17, 2022.

The City must adopt boundaries for all council districts so that the districts will be substantially equal in population. According to the FAIR MAPS Act, districts must meet the following requirements:

District Map Criteria
• Comply with federal requirements of population equality and the Voting Rights Act • Have districts that are geographically contiguous (connected). • Maintaining the geographic integrity by minimizing division of local neighborhoods and communities of interest.
• Have districts that are easily identifiable, and to the extent practicable, bonded by natural and artificial barriers, streets, and boundaries.
• Draw districts that are geographical compactness where nearby areas of population are not bypassed in favor of more distant populations.
• Do not favor or discriminate against a political party.

On July 6, 2021, the City Council approved the formation of an Independent Redistricting Commission (Commission) that was tasked to redraw the Council district boundaries and adopt a final map. The Commission is composed of seven members and one alternate representing each of the six Council districts and one citywide member, all of whom are Santa Clara residents. They have dedicated the past 7 months to completing the redistricting process on behalf of the City.

DISCUSSION
To assist staff with resourcing the redistricting process, the City secured Lapkoff & Gobalet City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
22-358 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
Demographic Research, Inc. (Lapkoff and Gobalet). Lapkoff and Gobalet has supported redistricting projects since 1990 including redistricting work after the 1990, 2000, and 2010 U.S. Censuses. The firm previously worked with the City on its past City Charter Review Committees, the City Ad-Hoc Redistricting Committee and assisted with the development of the map that was court-ordered in 2018. Lapkoff and Gobalet has been instrumental in facilitating and assisting the City and the Commission through the redistricting process.

Public Notices and Outreach
While conducting the redistricting process, the City took steps to coordinate specific outreach requirements that must be met. At a minimum, four public hearings are required. One of these public hearings must be held prior to issuing the first draft map, two must be held after the draft map is issued, and one must be held on a weekend or weeknight after 6:00 p.m. Live translation is also required if requested at least 48 or 72 hours in advance depending on how much notice is provided.

In addition to the four required public hearings, the City created a specific redistricting process webpage, and provided an opportunity for residents to provide input through promote public hearings, ecomment, city calendar alerts, etc., and established an email address for feedback. Additional public hearings were held.

The City took steps to encourage public participation including a good faith effort to provide information to local media and social media. City staff used social media by posting information on the City’s redistricting process and opportunities for public participation on a variety of platforms including Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. The City published public notices in the Santa Clara Weekly informing the public of the public hearings and prior to the adoption of the Final Map. The City also took steps to provide information in multiple languages including Spanish, Chinese and Vietnamese. The Public had the opportunity to seek live translation services if needed at any of the Commission meetings. In accordance to Elections Code 21628, the proposed final map was published on the City’s Independent Redistricting website for at least seven days prior to adoption.

Public Hearings
Public hearings were held on October 23, 2021, December 9, 2021, January 13, 2022, and January 29, 2022, February 10, 2022, and February 28, 2022 where presentations were provided by staff and Lapkoff and Gobalet, on the redistricting process and criteria and the 2020 Census data; demonstration of mapping tools available for public participation; and direction was provided to staff and our demographers by the Commission on district boundary mapping alternatives to be explored.

Additionally, these hearings provided opportunities for public participation, input, comment, and testimony on the redistricting process, communities of interest, and potential district boundary adjustments for consideration.

During the February 10, 2022 public hearing, the Commission considered the fifteen (15) draft district maps and submaps submitted by the public, commissioners, and Lapkoff and Gobalet. The Commission also took into consideration testimony from the community provided at each of the Redistricting Commission Meetings. Following the close of the public hearing, the Commission selected Map 4A as the proposed final map. It should be noted that the criteria in the FAIR MAPS Act were carefully considered, as well as the Commission’s desire to maintain local neighborhoods and existing communities of interest.

Map 4A (Adopted Plan) changes the City Council boundaries in two areas:

City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
22-358 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

1. Area moved from District 2 to District 1 (population = 1,638): This area’s boundaries are:
• Highway 101 (northern boundary),
• the railroad tracks (southern boundary),
• San Tomas Expressway (eastern boundary),
• the city’s western City limits.

2. Area moved from District 4 to District 5 (population = 572): This area’s boundaries are:
• El Camino Real (northern boundary),
• Homestead Rd. (southern boundary)
• San Tomas Expressway - Madera Dr. -Las Palmas Dr. - Arroyo Dr. - White Dr. (eastern boundary)
• Saratoga Creek - Kiely Blvd (western boundary) (Census 2020 population data, adjusted by the California Statewide Database) The February 28, 2022 duly noticed public hearing represents the sixth public hearing in order to complete the redistricting process. At the February 28 public hearing, the Commission reviewed Map 4A and unanimously approved Map 4A as the Final Map for the City of Santa Clara’s district based elections.

Santa Clara Independent Redistricting Commission Meeting Summary Date Action
September 23, 2021 Workshop Independent Redistricting Commission overview and training on Brown Act, Public Records Act and
Redistricting Process
October 23, 2021 Hearing Review of Fair Maps Act requirements, process and criteria, Presentation on Communities of Interest,
Review of New Census Data, Presentation regarding
the Pieces Tool for Plan Drawing; public input and
comments
December 9, 2021 Hearing Review of Fair Maps Act requirements, process and criteria, public input and comments on communities of
interest
January 13, 2022 Hearing Review of Fair Maps Act requirements, process and criteria, Presentation of Demographer's Draft Map,
Review of Public Submitted Maps; public input and
comments
January 29, 2022 Hearing Review of Criteria for a District Map, Review of Demographer and Public Submitted Maps; Review of
Neighborhood Maps and Plan Comparisons; public
input and comments
February 10, 2022 Hearing Review of maps and Commission selection of the proposed final draft map; public input and comments
February 28, 2022 Hearing Reviewed Map 4A and Adopted Map A as the Final Map for the City
City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
22-358 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
Date Action
September 23, 2021 Workshop Independent Redistricting Commission overview and training on Brown Act, Public Records Act and
Redistricting Process
October 23, 2021 Hearing Review of Fair Maps Act requirements, process and criteria, Presentation on Communities of Interest,
Review of New Census Data, Presentation regarding
the Pieces Tool for Plan Drawing; public input and
comments
December 9, 2021 Hearing Review of Fair Maps Act requirements, process and criteria, public input and comments on communities of
interest
January 13, 2022 Hearing Review of Fair Maps Act requirements, process and criteria, Presentation of Demographer's Draft Map,
Review of Public Submitted Maps; public input and
comments
January 29, 2022 Hearing Review of Criteria for a District Map, Review of Demographer and Public Submitted Maps; Review of
Neighborhood Maps and Plan Comparisons; public
input and comments
February 10, 2022 Hearing Review of maps and Commission selection of the proposed final draft map; public input and comments
February 28, 2022 Hearing Reviewed Map 4A and Adopted Map A as the Final Map for the City
The Commission has completed the redistricting process and has adopted a final map. The City Council will now need to adopt an ordinance to update the existing district map with the newly adopted Council District Map.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) in that it is a governmental organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no cost to the City other than administrative staff time and expense.

COORDINATION
This report was coordinated with the Independent Redistricting Commission, City Manager’s Office and the City Attorney’s Office.

RECOMMENDATION
Approval of the introduction of an ordinance adopting a new City Council District map describing the district boundaries for the City of Santa Clara’s By-District elections.

Approved by: Hosam Haggag, City Clerk

ATTACHMENTS

1. Ordinance

2. Exhibit a - Final map 4A
City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
Ordinance/District Boundaries Page 1 of 3
Rev: 09/2019
ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,

CALIFORNIA, ADJUSTING THE CITY COUNCIL VOTING
DISTRICT BOUNDARIES FOLLOWING THE 2020

DECENNIAL CENSUS, ADOPTING A NEW CITY COUNCIL

DISTRICT MAP DESCRIBING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
FOR THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA’S BY -DISTRICT

ELECTIONS

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, California Elections Code section 21601 requires that following the release of the 2020 decennial census data, all local governments that elect by district must redraw their district lines to assure that all districts have nearly equal population; WHEREAS, the California Elections Code section 21622 requires that the City complete its redistricting process by April 17, 2022;
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution 21-8988 of the City of Santa Clara establishing an Independent Redistricting Commission to conduct public engagement and to adopt a City Council District Map following review o f the 2020 US Census Data;
WHEREAS, the Independent Redistricting Commission held public hearings on October 23, 2021 and December 9, 2021 to receive public input regarding the composition of the City’s voting districts before any maps were drawn;
WHEREAS, the Independent Redistricting Commission held public hearings on January 13, 2022, January 29 , 2022, and February 10, 2022 , where the public was invited to provide input on the composition of the Council Districts and on the proposed public submitted boundary maps, in addition to the maps prepared by the City’s retained demographer;
Ordinance/District Boundaries Page 2 of 3
Rev: 09/2019
WHEREAS, on February 28, 2022, the Independent Redistricting Commission held a final public hearing on the proposal to establish district boundaries, reviewed additional public input, adopted the City Council District Map 4A, incorporated in, and set forth in this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clara desires to adopt an Ordinance se tting forth the new City Council District Map adopted by the City of Santa Clara Independent Redistricting Commission.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: For the election of members of the City Council, except for the Mayor, to be held in November 2022 and for each election thereafter, there shall be 6 (six) districts each of which shall be represented by one Council Member. S uch districts shall be as designated on that cer tain map adopted by the City of Santa Clara Independent Redistricting Commission dated February 28, 2022, as the boundaries of such districts shall be amended through a redistricting process following each decennial United States Census. A copy of the map is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference.

SECTION 2: City Staff, including the City’s retained demographer when working with the Registrar of Voters during plan implementation and adjustment of precinct configurations, are authorized to make required technical amendments to the new redistricting plan that do not substantively affect the populations in the districts, the district boundaries, or the intent of this ordinance, and shall advise the City of any such amendments that are bound to be required in plan implementation.

SECTION 3: Ordinances Repealed. With exception of the provisions protected by the Ordinance/District Boundaries Page 3 of 3
Rev: 09/2019
savings clause, all ordinances (or parts of ordinances) in conflict with or inconsistent with this ordinance are hereby repealed.

SECTION 4: Savings clause. The changes provided for in this ordinance shall not affect any offense or act committed or done or any penalty or forfeiture incurred or any right established or accruing before the effective date of this ordinance; nor shall it affect any prosecution, suit or proceeding pending or any judgment rendered prior to the effective date of this ordinance. All fee schedules shall remain in force until superseded by the fee schedules adopted by the City Council.

SECTION 5: Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final adoption; however, prior to its final adoption it shall be published in accordance with the requirements of Section 808 and 812 of “The Charter of the City of Santa Clara, California.”
PASSED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLICATION this XX day of XXXXXX, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILORS:

NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:

ATTEST:
___________________________

NORA PIMENTEL, MMC

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

Attachments incorporated by reference:

1. Exhibit A – Independent Redistricting Commission Adopted Final Map 4A City of Santa Clara
Redistricting Plan 4A
Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc.
2/14/2022
Plan 4A changes the City Council boundaries in two areas:

1. Area moved from District 2 to District 1: This area’s boundaries are  Highway 101 (northern boundary),
 the railroad tracks (southern boundary),
 San Tomas Expressway (eastern boundary),
 the city’s western City limits.
(Census 2020, adjusted by the California Statewide Database, counted 1,638 persons in this area)

2. Area moved from District 4 to District 5: This area’s boundaries are • El Camino Real
(northern boundary),
• Homestead Rd. (southern boundary)
• San Tomas Expressway
– Madera Dr. – Las Palmas Dr. – Arroyo Dr. – White Dr. (eastern boundary)
• Saratoga Creek – Kiely Blvd (western boundary)
(Census 2020, adjusted by the California Statewide Database, counted 572 persons in this area)
Appended are:

An overview map of Plan 4A
Two maps that show neighborhoods
Map that shows areas where Plan 4A would adjust current Council district Data table, showi ng the total population and race/ethnic distribution of each council district.
6 SAN TOM
AS EX

GREAT AMERICA PY

SCOTT BL

KIELY BL

KIFER RD

HOPE DR

CENTRAL EX

HOMESTEAD RD

LAWRENCE EX

FORBES AV
W
OODHAM
S RD

WHITE DR

DE LA CRUZ BL

PRUNERIDGE AV

JEFFERSON S
T

MONROE ST

NEWHALL ST

RUTH CT

LAFAYETTE ST

MARKET ST

LINCOLN ST
BOW
ERS AV

ROSE WY

SYKES CT
Santa Clara High
Pruneridge
Golf Course

ARROYO DR

BARCELLS AV

MADERA DR
Agnews
Historic Park
Central Park
Elem
Bracher Elem
Westwood
Elem
Happy Days Child Dev,
Morningstar Ed Group,
Sierra Elem & High
Montague
Elem
Millikin
Basics+
Everett Alvarez
Jr Park

LAS PALM
AS DR

AZEVEDO CT

PRITCHARD CT TOLEDO AV
Wilson High
Scott Lane
Elem
Laurelwood
Elem
Eisenhower
Elem
Kathryn Hughes
Elem
Don Callejon
K-8
Granada
Islamic
Montague Park
Fuller St
Park
Westwood
Oaks Park
Great America
Theme Park
Golden State Baptist Colg
Guadalupe Riv
Saratoga Crk
Calabazas Crk
101
82 1
2 5
4 3

WALSH AV

MONTAGUE EX

LICK MILL BLTASMAN DR
Santa Clara Golf
& Tennis Club

CABRILLO AV

BENTON ST

OLD MOUNTAIN VIEW ALVISO RD

CALABAZAS BL

SARATOGA AV

MISSION COLLEGE BL

STEVENS CREEK BL
POME
ROY AV

EL CAMINO REAL

AGNEW RD

COLEMAN AV

HAYWARD DR

NOBILI AV

STEINHART CT

BELLOMY ST
Ulistac
Natural
Area
Central
Park
Monticello
Academy,
Lochnivar &
Stratford
Mission City
Memorial
Park
Cabrillo Middle

MONTY CL
Buscher
Middle

PARK AV
Briarwood
Elem
Santa Clara Youth
Soccer Park
John Sutter
Elem
Haman
Elem
Pomeroy
Elem
Bowers
Elem
Monticello
Academy
Earl R
Carmichael Park
Bowers
Park
New Valley
High
Maywood Park
Townsend
Field
Mary Gomez
Park & Pool
Jenny Strand
Park
Parkway
Park
Inst for Bus
& Tech Inc
Larry J
Marsalli Park
Fairway Glen
Park
Warburton
Park & Pool
Live Oak
Academy
Bracher
Park
Washington
Park
Elmer
Johnson
Ball Field
Machado Park
Santa Clara
Senior CtrFremont
Park
Agnew
Park
Cabrillo
Montessori
St Lawrence
Preschool
San Tomas
& Monroe
Nbhd Pk &
Comty Garden
Reed
Dog Park
St Clare
ElemCity Plaza
Park
W Schmidt
Youth Ctr
Neighborhood
Christian Ctr
North Valley
Baptist
Bright
Beginnings
Kindercare
Pacific Autism
Ctr for Education
Former BAREC Site
War Memorial
Playground
Kidz
Academy
Rotary
Park
Scuttlebugs Child
Development Ctr
A Special Place
Action Day Nursery
Geof Goodfellow
Sesquicentennial Park
NETW
ORK CL
SR 237 FY

PATRICK HENRY DR
US 101 HY

MISSION COLLEGE BL

LAFAYETTE ST

FREEDOM CL

WALSH AV

VISTA CLUB CL

BURTON DR
LAW

RENCE EX

MARTIN AV

MONTAGUE EX

LAURELWOOD RD

MEMOREX DR

NANTUCKET CL

COMSTOCK ST

JULIETT
E LN

RICHARD AV

LICK MILL BL

OLD GLORY LN

TASMAN DR

BASSETT ST

EL CAMINO REAL
I 280 HY
LAK

ESIDE DR

SAN TOM
AS EX

GREAT AM

ERICA PY
BOWE
RS AV

SCOTT BL

CARLYLE CT

DUANE AV

GREAT AMERICA W
Y

CORONADO DR

CENTRAL EX

MENZEL PL

MORAINE DR

STENDER WY

MEAD AV

CABRILLO AV

ROBERT AV

SHAFER DR

WYATT DR

LAIRD CL

AGNEW RD

ALFRED ST

HOPE DR

PAINTED ROC
K DR

DEMOCRACY WY

DE LA CRUZ BL

FAIRWAY GLEN DR

BROOKSIDE AV

HAROLD AV

MAURICIA AV

TANNERY WY

MAIN ST

GARRETT DR

CALLE DEL MUNDO

AUGUSTINE DR

MATHEW ST

CECIL AV

THOMAS RD

BILLINGS CL

SERENA W
Y

DOYLE CL
JAY ST

AGATE DR

AMETHYST DR

BENTON ST

NORTHWESTERN PY

ORTHELLO WY

HALFORD AV

TRACY DR

RODONOVAN DR

MICHAEL WY

HUMBOLT AV

SUNSET D
R
M
UIR A
V

VENTURA PL

SPACE PARK DR

SAN ANTONIO PL

SARATOGA AV

GRANADA AV

FORBES AV

OCTAVIUS DR
RAYMO
ND ST

GEORGE S
T

ELLIOT ST
N W

INCHESTER BL

PETERSON W
Y

CRONIN D
R

GARDEN COURT DR

ARCADIA AV

HOMESTEAD RD

SONOMA PL

BLOSSOM
DR

SHERATON DR

LOS PADRES BL
W

ILCOX AV

BORAX DR
EW
ERT RD

SUNLITE DR

GOLDEN STATE DR

RAMKE PL

FLORA VISTA AV

ROBIN DR

ARMANINI AV

ENRIGHT AV

PRUNERIDGE AV

JOHNSON PL

KELLOGG W
Y

NELSON DR

LAUREL DR

RAGGIO AV

CATHERINE ST

GRANT ST

BUTCHER DR

OLCOTT ST

BELLWOOD
DR

ROSITA AV

STANLEY AV

AVENIDA DE LAGO

STEVENS CREEK BL

GLORIETTA CL
POM

EROY AV

PARK CT

N CYPRESS AV

TYLER AV

OLD IRONSIDES DR

CATALA CT

GENEVA DR

LARSEN PL

CIVIC CENTER DR

WOODLAND AV

ACCOLTI WY
SN
EAD
DR

DOUGLANE AV

EARL DR

BEL AYRE DR

LASS DR
GREENW
OOD DR

TEAL DR

KAREN DR

LAWSON LN

TOBIN CL

ALDO AV

ARMSTRONG PL
TH

E ALAMEDA

LINCOLN ST

BLAKE AV

CORNELL DR

SUTTER AV

LOYOLA DR

FRENCH ST

CRYSTAL DR

AVINA CL

NOTRE DAME DR

PONDEROSA WY

BOHANNON DR

RYAN AV

LOMA ALTA DR

CALLE DE LUNA

CONDENSA ST

GALLUP DR
LOW
ELL DR

KINGSBURY CL

CIRCLE DR
TOW

NSEND AV

HUDSON DR

OAKWOOD DR

CATALINA AV

KELLER ST

COLEMAN AV

CAMERON WY

LENOX PL

MONTGOMERY DR

NELO ST

URANIUM DR

CLAY ST

CYPRESS AV

CARMEL W
Y

NOBILI AV

JACKSON ST

BANCROFT ST

BRAY AV
SAN
MARCO
S W
Y

BUTTE ST

ALEXANDER AV

REED ST

MELODY LN

KEYSTONE AV

VANDERBILT WY
WATSON
CL

HEATHERDALE AV

CIMARRON DR

ESPERANCA AV

MICHELE JEAN WY

WHEELING DR

MOLINARO ST

KIELY BL

STANFORD PL

MONROE ST

STEBBINS AV

GIANNI ST

DIXON DR
OR

KNEY AV

GOLF LINKS CL

AVENIDA DE CARMEN

HUBBARD AV

HILMAR ST

NORWOOD CL

VIA SIENA PL
OAKM

EAD VILLAGE DR

GARZONI PL

COOPER DR

PARKER ST

CRANDALL CL

PILOT KNOB DR

SHORE PL

AVENIDA DE LOS ARBOLES

FLANNERY ST
W
OODW
ARD AV

SHULMAN AV

MANHATTAN PL

SCANLAN PL

PEBBLE BEACH D
R

RIVERMARK PY
M

ONTCLAIR DR

STARS AND STRIPES DR
OSW
ALD PL

LONDONDERRY DR

HIGGINS AV

BELLA VISTA AV

WOODSTOCK WY

EDEN DR

HOWARD DR

BELLOMY ST

CONSUELO AV

RAVIZZA AV

CLYDE AV LEITH AV

STARDUST CT

PACIFIC DR

AUGUSTA PL

REBECCA LYNN WY

MARYANN DR

ELMHURST AV

SHASTA DR
PALM
VI
EW
PL

AUSTIN PL

BLUEBIRD AV

LILLICK DR

MARK AV

BURBANK DR

ANNA DR

GEORGETOWN PL

GIANNINI DR

EASTWOOD CL

HART AV

FREMONT ST
INVE
RNESS
AV

PALM DR

VIADER CT

MAGDALENA CL

CAMINO DR

HOBART TR

BONITA AV

LAFAYETTE W
Y
CROW
LEY AV

JONES AV

COLLEGE AV
W

ATERBIRD W
Y
OAKM

EAD VILLAGE CT
BROW
N AV

CALIFORNIA ST

BLOCK DR

HICKORY PL
N W

INCHESTER BL

AVENIDA DE LAS FLORES

GLENDENNING AV

NEWHALL ST

KEITH LN

CREIGHTON PL

EDGEFIELD DR

WASHINGTON ST

CAPITOLA WY

BROOKDALE DR

HARVARD AV

VIREO AV

OWEN ST

GIANERA ST

MALABAR AV

TRANSILL CL

LA HERRAN DR

SILVA PL

VICTORIA AV

W TRIMBLE
RD

LAKE SANTA CLARA DR

CALABAZAS BL

BARKLEY AV

ANDREA PL

MCKINLEY DR

DONNER PL

DI GIULIO AV

BRACKETT WY

BING DR

VALLEY W
Y

ALLEN WY
OSBORN
E AV

PARK VIEW DR

BROKAW RD

LAURIE AV

KENNETH ST

MILLAR AV

TAPER AV

SAN YSIDRO W
Y

MACHADO AV

COLGATE AV

CHEENEY ST
SEM

ICONDUCTOR DR

WARBLER AV

ALVISO ST

SHADY GLEN AV
BOW
E AV

ASBURY PL

FOWLER AV

QUINCE AV

MIRAMAR WY

VIA DONDERA

MOONLITE PL

FULLER ST

MAGELLAN AV
W

ISTARIA W
Y

FARGHER DR

CLARK AV

FOLEY AV
M

ORTON AV

JILL AV

SAINT MARYS PL

STAATS WY

TOWN AND COUNTRY LN
W

OOD DUCK AV

MARIETTA DR

REGNART WY
COLUM
BUS PL

DAYTON AV
M

ACKENZIE DR

LAYTON ST
AZA DR

CROCKER WY

FAIRFIELD AV

CARLYSLE AV

BAYLOR DR

ATHERTON DR

LINDEN DR

SAN MIGUEL AV

PATRICIA DR

VICTOR ST

SHERMAN ST

HUNTER PL

CLARA VISTA AV

ALCALDE ST
W

ILLIAM DR

ELLENA DR

STEWART LN

BERRY WY

HAZELWOOD AV
MEADOW
BROOK
DR
DUNDEE
DR

TALIA AV

RYDER ST

KIFER RD
M

ARY VIN LN

DONOVAN AV

HILLSDALE AV

VIA ROMA PL

MILL CREEK LN
DAW
SON DR
KA
RMEN
CT

FERNANDEZ CT
MISSIO

N GLEN D
R

ABERDEEN ST

SYCAMORE WY

YALE LN

HARDING AV

EL CAPITAN AV

BELICK S
T

MALONE PL

WARBURTON AV

KENSINGTON AV
BRIARW
OOD DR

RIVER SIDE CT

RAILROAD AV

SNIVELY AV

HAIG ST

EDWARD AV
W
OODH
AM
S RD

DUNFORD WY

TAFT AV

EAST RIVER PY

XAVIER CT

PEACOCK CT

HARRISON ST

NEW MAPLE ST
ROCK
HU
RST CT
W
HITE O
AK LN

SOUTH PARK LN

PAYNE PL

ESTELLA DR

MARKET ST

MORENO LN

CREEKSIDE PL

CARRIAGE DR
LEON
ARD C
T

PEPPER TREE CT

POLK AV

TRITON CT

LEHIGH DR

PARKER CT

MORSE ST

DINNY ST

ARGUS WY

ALBERTA CT

MARSTON LN

SANTA BARBARA AV
LAW

RENCE CT

MURIEL CT

SECOND ST

LAKESHORE DR

JERALD AV
W
REN AV

HEADEN WY

SOUTH DR

REMO CT

ROUSSEAU PL

FILLMORE ST

BARTO ST

MACINTOSH ST

LANDEROS DR

THRUSH WY

CHERRY ORCHARD PL

ANGELINA DR

JONATHAN ST

FOREST PARK DR
GARRI
TY W
Y

DEVOS CT
KLAM
ATH AV

CORTEZ DR

BAIRD AV

KALLIAM DR

CHESTNUT ST
ASH ST

PERREIRA DR

HIGHLAND AV

FAIRLANE AV

CROSBY CT

RITA CT

SHANNON CT

POMEROY CT

HOWELL AV

MESQUITE DR

ROSEMONT D
R

CHAPMAN CT

DOLORES AV

MAGNOLIA LN

FOREST AV

CHROMITE DR

KELLEY WY

MONASTERY W
Y

BUCHER AV

HELEN AV

DOMINICAN DR

BRUCE CT

ENOCHS ST

VARSI PL

PARK AV
NEW
HAMP
TON W
Y

ASPEN DR

CREEK BED CT

TEMPLE CT

RANDOLPH AV

ROOSEVELT CL

SULLIVAN DR
DON AV

FALLON AV

PACHECO ST
HO
GAN DR

JUANITA DR

DUKE CT

MORAGA ST

EUROPE CT

PLAZA ESCUELA

MORRISON AV

PHILLIPS CT

EMMETT PL
CLAREM
ONT AV
AM
ELIA W
Y

VISO CT

WEHNER DR

RANCHO MCCORMICK BL
KNOW
LES AV

LOS OLIVOS DR
Santa Clara PAL
BMX Track

SHAMROCK AV

LEXINGTON ST
CHA
PEL DR

DIBBLE CT

ROXBURY ST

BIRCH W
Y

PIERCE ST

CALLE DE PRIMAVERA

COLE PL
Adrian Wilcox High

COLLINWOOD CT

TOYON DR

CASA CT

QUINN AV

KENYON DR

GLADE DR

VALENCIA PL

TYNE WY
CALDW
ELL PL

HILLSDALE CT
GRAHAM
LN

ROWENA CT
M
ARI
A ST

PASETTA DR
PINEW
OOD PL

TANOAK DR
W
ADE AV

VISCONTI PL

BRANNAN PL

GILLMOR ST

CONCORD LN

LAURIE JO LN

SAINT CLAIRE CT

GAZDAR CT

FRASER P
L

LAWRENCE RD
BLA

CKFIELD
CT

KOLB PL

LAINE AV

PURDUE CT

DUVALL CT

MILES DR
DEL M

ONTE AV

IDAHO ST

ROCKRIDGE WY

GRINNELL CT

BAILEY PL

BETH CT

EDEN CT

THIRD ST

CLAIR CT

LANSFORD PL

MACEDO PL
KENTW
ORTH W
Y

BLUE LAGOON DR

BONGIOVANNI PL
PA

LMDALE CT

BUCKLEY ST

KERRYSHIRE LN

RIVER BED CT

DI GIULIO CT

FINLEY PL

TAFT CT
LOV

ELAND CT

FORDHAM
DR

MARIA CT

LAWRENCE PL

PANELLI PL
PAR
KL
AND CT

PEEBLES PL

ALTA MIRA DR
APP
ER
SO
N PL

MIRAVERDE CT

HOLMES PL

LARSEN CT

CALABAZAS CT

WALNUT GROVE AV

QUINN CT

BREECH AV

MORALES PL

HEMLOCK CT

HAINES PL
GRANA
DA CT

FRANCIS AV

RODONOVAN CT

RAMSHALL PL
ELM

HURST CT

JULIANA CT

EASTIN PL

VILLA PL

RUSTIC DR

SALLY CT
Live Oak
Park
Lick Mill Park
Henry Schmidt
Park

NORMAN AV

TULIPTREE LN
Homeridge
Park
Civic Center Park
Montague
Swim Ctr

SERRA AV

NICHOLSON AV

GAMBLIN DR

CASHDAN CT

SALBERG AV

LA SALLE AV

SHERWIN AV

LONG ST

MISSION ST

JULIE CT

MANGRUM DR

GILBERT AV

MADISON ST

WITHROW PL

RANEY CT

LEWIS ST

OUR LADYS WY

BENNETT AV
W

ILSON CT

BURKE DR

SUSAN DR

SAINT LAWRENCE DR
DAY CT

RUSSELL AV

BLACKFIELD DR

CRESTVIEW
DR
BR
OW
NW
OOD W
Y

ARLENE DR

SAHARA W
Y
MONT
ERE
Y CT

EISENHOWER DR

DAVIS ST

REEVE ST

HICHBORN DR

BOND PL

BRADY CT

SANTA CLARA ST

ISABELLA ST
W

ESTRIDGE DR

ALICE DR

BERNA ST

ELLIOT CT

BUCHANAN DR

BUNKER HILL LN

DEBORAH DR

CORVIN DR

CURTIS AV

ICEFIELD CT

MCKILLOP CT

HAYES AV
KAY DR

ATLANTIC CT

MARCHESE CT

RAYANNA AV

CLIFFORD ST

TAMARACK LN

BETTY CT

DIANNE DR

SAN RAFAEL AV

DENISE DR
M

ADELINE LN

JEFFERY CT

AGATE CT

ARBUCKLE CT

ADDISON PL

LOCHINVAR AV

GORDON AV

MARCHESE WY

COPPER RD

PEPPERWOOD LN

PORTOLA AV

VICTOR CT

FARMER PL

STEVENSON ST

ALPINE AV

DORCICH ST

FONTANA DR

ROLL ST

REGINA CT

MAPLEWOOD LN

PLAZA CORONA

BURDICK LN

ACACIA CT

LANDSLIDE CT

LOYOLA CT

CUNNINGHAM
ST

EL SOBRANTE ST

FATJO PL

HOOD CT

CASTRO PL

KING CT

ENCINA WY

ELIZABETH DR

CALVERT CT

GALA CT

TULANE CT

VARGAS PL
M

ORSE LN

TULANE DR

LESTER CT

AVILA AV

EMIG CT

ROBINSON AV

SANTA MARIA AV

SANTA CRUZ AV

FRESNO ST

ENOS CT

BRET HARTE CT

FORBES CT

LOCUST ST
DRAK
E CT

ROYAL DR

MARK TWAIN CT

BRIAN LN

KIT CARSON CT

POINCIANA DR
CLARKW
OOD CT

FAN PALM
CT

HASTINGS CT

ADRIATIC WY

CABOT AV

FRANCK AV

JEFFERSON ST

OXFORD DR

GONZAGA PL

SLOAT CT

CASTELLO W
Y

ERIE CT

THOMPSON PL

NELSON CT

COLFAX CT

HOLLY BRANCH CT

COZUMEL CL

LIBERTY ST

BEECH ST

ROSALIE DR

KITSAP CT

FRANKLIN ST

BUCHANAN CT

DEMARET DR

STAFFORD ST

BETSY ROSS DR

CAROLYN DR

ARMOUR DR

ARGUELLO PL

DE SOTO AV

KERRY DR
HIGHLA
ND
CT

BARBARA DR
DOW

NING CT

CAPISTRANO DR

AUGUSTA CT
CA
MBRIDG
E DR
JOAN W
Y

SAN JUAN AV

LUTHER DR

EBERHARD ST

MALARIN AV

HANCOCK DR

HAMILTON L
N

NUTTMAN ST

LAGUNA CT

KOHNER CT

WILLETT PL

HAIGHT PL

MORELAND WY

LEONARD STOCKING DR

BILL WALSH DR

KAISER DR

VIA TORINO PL

HEARTH PL

BAYTO PL

BROTHERS LN

RIVERMARK PZ

PRATT PL

BROKAW RD
San Jose International
Mission Colg
Santa Clara Univ
Sa
ratoga Crk
Calabazas Crk
Levi's
Stadium
880
City of Santa Clara
Council Districts
Plan 4A
Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc. 2/11/22
www.Demographers.com
Union Pacific RR
Union Pacific RR

SCOTT BL

SAN TOMAS EX

CENTRAL EX

LAWRENCE EXLAWRENCE EX

DE LA CRUZ BL

HOMESTEAD RD

SCOTT BL

KIELY BL
BENTON
ST

BENTON ST

SAN TOMAS EX
LEGEND
Plan 4A
Park
School
Highway/Freeway
Major Road
Railroad
River/Stream
Street Centerline
©2021 CALIPER

MONTAGU
E EX

MISSION COLLE
GE BL

DE LA CRUZ BL

LAFAYETTE ST
AGNEW
RD
Guadalupe Riv
101
Oakmead
Montague
Rivermark
Los
Arboles
49ers-Backdoor-
Community
Moreland
KB
Toscana
Old
Bassett
Station
Primavera
Lake
Santa
Clara
Miraval
Lakeshore Dr/
Agnew Rd
Stewart Village
1 2

TASMAN DR

GREAT AMERICA PY

SAN TOMAS EX

NETWORK CL
SR 237 FY

PATRICK HENRY DR
US 101 HY

FREEDOM CL

VISTA CLUB CL

STARS AND STRIPES DR
W

ALSH AV

LAURELWO
OD RD

NANTUCKET CL
COM

STOCK ST

JULIETTE LN
LICK M
ILL B
L

OLD GLORY LN

BASSETT ST

LAKESIDE DR

CARLYLE CT

DUANE AV

GREAT AMERICA WY CORONADO DR

CENTRAL EX

STENDER WY
M
EAD A
V

WYATT DR
LAIR
D C
L

ALFRED ST

HOPE DR
DEM

OCRACY W
Y

BOWERS AV
FAIRW
AY GL
EN DR

TANNERY W
Y

GARRETT DR

CALLE DEL MUNDO

AUGUSTINE DR

THOMAS RD

BILLINGS CL

DOYLE CL
JAY ST

NORTHWESTERN PY
OLD M

OUNTAIN VIEW

ALVISO RD

OCTAVIUS DR

RAYMOND ST

GEORGE ST

GARDEN COURT DR

WILCOX AV

SCOTT BL

NELSON DR

OLCOTT ST
BELLW
OOD DR

FARRELL PL

GEORGE SELLON CL

OLD IRONSIDES DR

MACGREGOR LN

SNEAD DR

GREENWOOD DR

LAWSON LN

TOBIN CL

ALDO AV

CONDENS
A ST

EWERT RD
KI
NGSBU
RY CL
OAKW
OOD DR

KELLER ST

MONTGOMERY DR

NELO ST

URANIUM DR

MOLINARO ST

CALLE DE LUNA
GI

ANNI ST

OAKMEAD VILLAGE DR

WOODWARD AV

CLYDE AV

RIVERMARK PY
W

OODSTOCK W
Y

LEITH AV
EASTW
OO
D CL

ORKNEY AV

OAKMEAD VILLAGE CT

AVENIDA DE LAS FLO
RES

KEITH LN
OWE
N ST

GIANERA ST

TRANSILL CL
W TR

IMBLE RD

PARK VIE
W
DR

LAURIE AV

KENNETH ST

SAN YSIDRO WY

PALM DR
MORELA
ND W
Y

SEMICONDUCTOR DR

FULLER ST
VICTOR
ST
MA

RIE P DEBARTOLO WY
STE

WART LN

RYDER ST

KIFER RD

AGATE DR

MILL CREEK LN

LAWRENCE EX

BELICK ST

HAIG ST

EDWARD AV

EAST RIVER PY

PAYNE PL

CALLE DE ESCUELA

LEONARD CT
BURT
ON DR

MARSTON LN

LAKESHORE DR

REMO CT
BAI
RD AV

CHESTNUT S
T

SPACE PARK DR

HEADEN WY

ENOCHS ST

VISO CT

AVENIDA DEL PRADO

COLLINW
OOD CT
TYNE W
Y

BUNKER HILL LN

SCHOTT CT

BETH CT

HOGAN DR

WESTON PL

RIVER BED CT
SAW
YER CT

OUR LADYS W
Y

BURKE DR

RUSSELL AV

SECOND ST
EIS
ENHOW
ER DR

DAVIS ST

HICHBORN DR

CORVIN DR

ARBUCKLE CT

GORDON AV

COPPER RD

VICTOR CT
VILL
A PL
NO

RMAN AV

BETSY ROSS DR

ARMOUR DR

COLE PL
BILL
W
ALS
H DR
RIVER
MARK
PZ
Saratoga Crk
Calabazas Crk
Saratoga Crk
Calabazas Crk
101
237
City of Santa Clara
Neighborhoods (color-shaded) - Northern Detail
Plan 4A (black line)
Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc.
2/11/22
www.Demographers.com
Union Pacific RR
LEGEND
Plan 4A
Neighborhoods (color-shaded)
Highway/Freeway
Major Road
Railroad
Street Centerline
River/Stream
©2021 CALIPER
Sunnyvale
Birdland
Santa Clara
Old Quad
Bowers/
Monroe
Warburton and
Los Padres
Central
Park
West
Wilcox High
to Cabrillo
San Tomas
Creek
Kentfield
Kimberlin

SAN TOMAS EX

BENTON ST

HOMESTEAD RD

LAWRENCE EX

SARATOGA AV

SCOTT BL

PRUNERIDGE AV

BELLOMY S
T

LILLICK DR

NEWHALL ST

MONROE ST

LOS OLIVOS DR

SERRA AV
Saratoga Crk
Calabazas Crk
Saratoga Crk
82 Oakmead
Central
Santa Clara
Newhall
Cascade
Park
Lawrence Station
Santa Clara
Fremont Park
Vicinity
Catala
Court
Westwood
Forest -
Pruneridge
Westwood
Oaks
Monroe/
Cabrillo
San Tomas
Woods
South of
Forest
Halford
Ave
Monastery
Gardens
Alta Mira
Santa Clara
Station 5
Main
Street
Manchester Dr
Maryann
Drive
Rose
Garden
West
North of
Robinson
Pruneridge
Place
Park-Hilmar
Hampton
Place
Forest
Park
Serena
Park
South
Park
College
Camino
Hilmar
Sheraton
Drive
Washington
& Reed St
Summer-
wood
Rancho
Palma
Grande
Woodsborough
Midtown
Village
Homes at
Central Park
Park
Court
Bracher
Park
Orchard
Glen
Cabrillo
Ave
Courtyard
Oakridge
Apts
Talavera
Laurel
Place II
Willow
Springs
Lawrence and
El Camino
Vista
1 2
6 5
4 3

SHAFER DR

GOLDEN STATE DR

ROBIN DR

BUTCHER DR

BOWERS AV
AUS
TIN
PL

KIELY BL
BR
AN
NAN
PL

MADERA DR

MARTIN AV
M
EM

OREX DR

RICHARD AV

EL CAMINO REAL
I 280 HY
M

ENZEL PL

MORAINE DR

ROBERT AV

PAINTED RO
CK DR

DE LA CRUZ BL

BROOKSIDE AV

HAROLD AV
M

AURICIA A
V

MAIN ST
MATHEW
ST

CECIL A
V

LAFAYETTE ST

AMETHYST DR

CAMPBELL AV

BRIARWOOD DR

ORTHELLO WY

HALFORD AV

TRACY DR

RODONOVAN DR

MICHAEL WY
HUM

BOLT AV

SUNSET DR

MUIR AV

GRANADA AV

FORBES AV

COLEMAN AV

ARCADIA AV

BLOSSOM DR

LOS PADRES BL

BORAX DR

SUNLITE DR

DORCICH ST
RAM
KE
PL

FLORA VISTA AV

ARMANINI AV

ENRIGHT AV
BOHA

NNON DR

LAUREL DR

RAGGIO AV

GRANT ST

AGATE DR

STANLEY AV

STEVENS CREEK BL

WOODHAMS RD

N CYPRESS AV

CATALA CT

GENEVA DR

POMEROY AV

LARSEN PL
W

OODLAND AV

ACCOLTI WY

EARL DR

BEL AYRE DR

TEAL DR

ARMSTRONG PL

THE ALAMEDA

LINCOLN ST

BLAKE AV

SUTTER AV

LOYOLA DR

CRYSTAL
D
R

NOTRE DAM
E DR

RYAN AV

ESTELLA DR

GALLUP DR

TOWNSEND AV
CA
MERO
N WY

CLAY ST

NOBILI AV

BANCROFT ST

BRAY AV

BUTTE ST

ALEXANDE
R
AV
REE
D ST
M

ELODY LN

GOLF LINKS CL

KEYSTONE AV

VANDERBILT W
Y
MIC

HELE JEAN W
Y
W

HEELING DR

HILLEBRANT PL

STANFORD PL

STEBBINS AV
DIXON
DR

HUBBARD AV

NORWOOD CL

COOPER D
R
PARKER
ST

PILOT KNOB DR

FLANNERY ST
SHULM
AN AV

CABRILLO AV
MA

NHATTAN PL
MA

NCHESTER DR

JEFFERSON ST

PEBBLE BEACH DR

LONDONDERRY DR

EDEN DR

HOWARD DR

CONSUELO AV

PACIFIC DR

AUGUSTA PL

ELMHURST AV

SHASTA DR

GLORIETTA CL

ANNA DR
GEOR
GE
TOW
N PL

GIANNINI DR

HART AV

INVERNESS AV VIADER CT
M

AGDALENA
CL

HOBART TR

BONITA AV

LAFAYETTE WY

CROWLEY AV

WHITE DR

BROWN AV

BLOCK DR

HICKORY PL

N WINCHESTER BL

CAPITOLA WY

BROOKDA
LE DR

CIVIC CENTER DR

HARVARD AV

VIREO AV

MALABAR AV

KELLOGG WY

MANZANITA AV

LAWRENCE RD

CALABAZAS BL

ANDREA PL
M

CKINLEY DR

DI GIULIO AV

REBEIRO AV

BING DR

VALLEY WY
ALLEN
W
Y

OSBORNE AV

BROKAW RD

MILLAR AV
W

ARBLER AV

ASBURY PL
FOW
LER AV
M
IRAM
AR W
Y

VIA DONDERA

MADRONE AV

LOCHINVAR
AV
M

AGELLAN AV

WISTARIA WY

FARGHER DR

FOLEY AV

JILL AV

MARIETTA DR

REGNART W
Y

COLUMBUS PL

JACKSON ST

LAYTON ST
AZA DR

CROCKER WY

BUCHER AV
MA

CHADO AV

CRONIN DR

WILLIAM DR

VICTORIA AV
BER
RY
W
Y

VIA SIENA PL

MEADOWBROOK DR

DUNDEE DR

TALIA AVDON AV

GALLATIN DR

VIA ROM
A PL

BURNETT AV

DAWSON DR

KARMEN CT

FERNANDEZ CT

MISSION GLEN DR

HARDING AV

EL CAPITAN AV

PATRICIA DR
W

ARBURTON AV

WOOD DUCK AV

KENSINGTON AV

ATHERTON DR

RAILROAD AV
SN
IVEL
Y AV

DUNFORD W
Y

BUCHANAN DR

TAFT AV

SALEM DR

MORSE LN

ALVARADO DR
TOW

N AND COUNTRY LN

XAVIER CT

LEWIS ST
PEACO
CK
CT
HAR
RISO
N ST
NEW
MAP
LE ST

RIP MILLER W
Y

WHITE OAK LN

MARKET ST

LINDEN DR

MORENO LN

CREEKSIDE PL

LEHIGH DR

SANTA BARBARA AV

LAWRENCE CT
RAM
ONA CT

MURIEL CT

PARK AV

JERALD AV

FRANKLIN ST

ROSITA AV

SOUTH PARK LN

SOUTH DR

HOOVER DR

BARTO ST

THRUSH W
Y

FREMONT ST JONATHAN ST

WASHINGTON ST

KAREN DR

PERREIRA D
R

HIGHLAND
AV

LIVE OAK DR

PEPPER TREE LN

CROSBY CT

RITA CT
PO
M
ER
OY
CT
HOW
EL
L AV

ROSEMONT DR

BARKLEY AV
DO
M
E AV

MAGNOLIA LN

ELLIOT ST

FOREST AV

MONASTERY WY

HELEN AV

N HENRY AV

SALSBURY DR

VARSI PL

FILLMORE ST

AZEVEDO CT

ASPEN DR

JUANITA
DR

DUKE CT

MORAGA ST

EUROPE CT

FALLON AV

PHILLIPS CT

CLAREMONT AV

PACHECO ST

LEXINGTON ST

DIBBLE CT
NEW
HAM
PTON W
Y

FOREST PARK DR

ROOSEVELT CL

QUINN AV

KENYON DR

WESTRIDGE DR

PRINCETON WY

BARCELLS AV

MARYANN DR

CALDWELL PL
DOLO
RES AV

TANOAK DR

WADE AV

FAIRLANE AV

LAINE AV

RADCLIFFE DR

OXFORD DR

DEL MONTE AV

SHAMROCK AV

DANIEL W
Y

GRAHAM LN

BURNLEY W
Y

DI GIULIO CT

TAFT CT

MARIA CT

PEEBLES PL

TOYON DR

MONTY CL
M
IRA
VERDE
CT

LARSEN CT

CALABAZAS CT
VAL
ER

I RUTH CT

QUINN CT
W

ORTHINGTON CL

SALLY CT

ALVISO ST

SHERMAN ST

CASHDAN CT

SALBERG AV

TAPER AV

DE SOTO AV

MADISON ST

BENNETT AV

MANLY CT

WILSON CT

ROGERS CT

BLACKFIELD DR

CARL ST

ARLENE DR

REDWOOD AV

SAHARA WY

ROYAL DR

ARROYO DR

CONCANNON CT

REEVE ST

POPLAR ST

SANTA CLARA ST

FRANCIS AV

BOND PL

PASETTA DR

IVERSEN CT
SHERW
IN AV

HOLMES PL

ISABELLA ST

ALICE DR

SUNNYDAYS LN

BRACH W
Y

MCCORMICK DR

ICEFIELD CT

RUTH CT
KAY DR

CLIFFORD ST
TAM

ARACK LN

BETTY CT

FULTON CT

HAYES AV

DIANNE DR

DENISE DR

HANCOCK DR

AGATE CT

ELM LEAF CT

PORTOLA AV

WREN AV

STEVENSON ST

ALPINE AV

SYKES CT

ROLL ST

LANDSLIDE CT

CUNNINGHAM ST

EL SOBRANTE ST

FATJO PL

VINCENT DR

HOOD CT

CASTRO PL

KING CT

ENCINA W
Y

VARGAS PL

FRESNO ST

ENOS CT

PINEVIEW DR

SANTA MARIA AV

FORBES CT

LOCUST ST

DRAKE CT

POINCIANA DR

GLENDENNING AV

PALM DR

LAS PALMAS DR
NORM
ANDY W
Y

CABOT AV

COLFAX CT

PIERCE ST

HOLLY BRANCH CT

KITSAP CT

CURTIS AV

STAFFORD ST

CORNELL DR

NICHOLSON AV

CAPISTRANO DR

SAN JUAN AV

EBERHARD ST

MALARIN AV

NEVES C
T

HAMILTON LN

CHERRY LN

MORSE ST

KAISER DR

BROTHERS LN

PRATT PL
Calabazas C
880
82 City WALSH AV of Santa Clara
Neighborhoods (color-shaded) - Southern Detail
Plan 4A (black line)
Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc. 2/11/22
www.Demographers.com
Union Pacific RR

SAN TOMAS EXPY

BENTON ST

HOMESTEAD RD
Saratoga Creek
LEGEND
Street Centerline
Railroad
Plan 4A
Neighborhoods (color-shaded)
Highway/Freeway
Major Road
River/Stream
©2021 CALIPER
6 5.1%

LAWRENCE EX

SAN TOM
AS EX

SCOTT BL

KIELY BL

KIFER RD

CENTRAL EX

HOMESTEAD RD NEWHALL ST

MARKET ST
LINCO
LN
ST

JEFFERSO
N S
T
BOW
ERS AV

MONROE ST
Saratoga Crk
Calabazas Crk
101
82 1

0.0%
2 -0.8%
5 -0.8%
4 -1.5%
3 -2.0%

WALSH AV

MONTAGUE EX

CABRILLO AV

BENTON ST

CALABAZAS BL

MISSION COLLEGE BL

AGNEW RD

EL CAMINO REAL
NOBIL
I AV

LAFAYETTE ST
GREA
T AM
ER
ICA PY

FORBES AV

SARATOGA AV
POME
ROY AV
N W

INCHESTE
R BL

BELLOMY ST
Sara
toga Crk
Calabazas Crk
City of Santa Clara - Redistricting Plan 4A
Areas assigned to different Council Districts
than in the Current Plan
with Total Population movedLapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc. 2/11/22 www.Demographers.com
Union Pacific RR
Union P
acific R
R

SCOTT BL

CENTRAL EX

HOMESTEAD RD SCOTT BL

KIELY B
L

BENTON ST

SAN TOMAS EX
D2 > D1
1,638
D4 > D5
572
LEGEND
Plan 4A
Areas moved in Plan 4A
Highway/Freeway
Major Road
Railroad
River/Stream
Street Centerline
©2021 CALIPER
District
Total
Population
Latino/
Hispanic White Black Asian Other Total District
Total
Population
Spanish
Surname
1 21,319 10% 20% 3% 64% 2% 100% 1 8,389 14% 34% 3% 1% 10% 9% 6% 6% 2 21,141 28% 22% 3% 44% 3% 100% 2 10,152 20% 27% 2% 1% 6% 7% 6% 5% 3 20,879 19% 24% 2% 53% 2% 100% 3 9,217 18% 27% 3% 1% 8% 7% 5% 3% 4 20,992 15% 28% 2% 53% 2% 100% 4 9,361 13% 26% 4% 1% 9% 5% 4% 3% 5 21,137 22% 41% 3% 31% 3% 100% 5 9,747 18% 15% 1% 1% 4% 3% 3% 3% 6 22,386 13% 33% 2% 49% 3% 100% 6 11,673 11% 24% 2% 2% 10% 6% 3% 2% Total 127,854 18% 28% 3% 49% 3% 100% Total 58,539 16% 25% 2% 1% 8% 6% 4% 3% Age 18+ (Voting Age) Population Percentages
1 17,089 10% 21% 3% 65% 2% 100% 1 6,967 13% 35% 2% 1% 11% 9% 6% 6% 2 16,932 25% 24% 3% 45% 3% 100% 2 8,216 19% 27% 2% 1% 6% 7% 7% 5% 3 16,821 17% 26% 2% 52% 2% 100% 3 7,599 17% 27% 2% 2% 8% 7% 5% 3% 4 17,001 14% 29% 2% 52% 2% 100% 4 7,704 13% 26% 3% 1% 9% 5% 5% 2% 5 17,779 20% 44% 3% 30% 3% 100% 5 8,042 17% 15% 1% 1% 4% 3% 3% 3% 6 17,754 12% 36% 2% 47% 3% 100% 6 9,977 11% 24% 2% 2% 9% 6% 3% 2% Total 103,376 16% 30% 3% 48% 3% 100% Total 48,505 15% 25% 2% 1% 8% 6% 5% 3% District Total Pop Deviation % Deviation
1 11,098 9% 33% 5% 47% 6% 100% 1 21,319 10 0.0%
2 12,658 22% 34% 4% 32% 7% 100% 2 21,141 ‐168 ‐0.8%
3 11,299 15% 37% 3% 40% 5% 100% 3 20,879 ‐430 ‐2.0%
4 10,903 17% 41% 2% 35% 4% 100% 4 20,992 ‐317 ‐1.5%
5 16,893 20% 50% 4% 20% 5% 100% 5 21,137 ‐172 ‐0.8%
6 12,815 10% 50% 2% 33% 5% 100% 6 22,386 1,077 5.1%
Total 75,666 16% 42% 4% 33% 5% 100% Total 127,854
Ideal 21,309 1,507 7.1%
Santa Clara Plan 4A
Registered Voters
Actual Voters
All Asian
Surname
Korean
Japanese
Chinese
Indian
Vietnamese
Filipino
Santa Clara Plan 4A
Total Population Percentages
Citizens of Voting Age (CVAP) Percentages
Non‐Hispanic
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1757 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

SUBJECT
Public Hearing: Adoption of a Resolution Ordering the Abatement of a Nuisance Consisting of Growing Weeds in Association with the County Weed Abatement Program for 2021-2022

BACKGROUND
On February 22, 2022, the Council adopted a resolution declaring weeds a nuisance in accordance with Chapter 8.15 of the City code, setting March 22, 2022 as the Public Hearing for citizens to bring forward their concerns or objections to the Weed Abatement Program.

The City of Santa Clara contracts with the Santa Clara County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office Weed Abatement Program to manage the inspection and abatement of noncompliant parcels within the City of Santa Clara. A list of City parcels in the program is published annually by the County in the form of the 2022 Weed Abatement Commencement Report. A copy of this report is available in the City of Santa Clara City Clerk’s Office as well as on the City website.

DISCUSSION
The objective of the City’s Weed Abatement program is to eliminate fires whenever possible, and to reduce the severity of such fires where they cannot be eliminated. Each year, improperly managed vegetation is the cause of destructive fires that adversely impact communities throughout the State.

In cooperation with the City of Santa Clara, the Santa Clara County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office has developed regulations governing hazardous vegetation which can be found on the County’s website.

The abatement process is most often initiated by members of the community, or by City staff proactively making referrals. Once inspection personnel verify that a hazard exists, the hazardous condition is documented, and the noncompliant parcel recorded. Following the inspection, the property owner is responsible for removing the hazard(s). If the property owner does not voluntarily abate the noted hazard(s) within the designated period, the work will be completed by the County of Santa Clara Abatement contractor. The cost of the abatement work and administrative oversight will be included as a special assessment on the property owner’s property tax bill.

Property owners that fail to abate their own properties are placed in the abatement program for a 3- year term in order to ensure ongoing compliance. For each year in the program the property owner will be subject to an annual inspection fee. If no hazards are found and/or abated by the County during that 3-year term, the property will be removed from the program.

The public hearing provides an opportunity for the property owner to raise any objections.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Santa Clara County has determined the Weed Abatement Program to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Guideline 15308.

City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
22-1757 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

FISCAL IMPACT
The County’s cost for the destruction or removal, including administrative fees, will be assessed upon the lot or land from which weeds have been destroyed or removed, and such costs shall constitute a lien upon said lots until paid, or will be collected upon the next tax roll when general municipal taxes are collected. In accordance with the 2022 Amended and Restated agreement, if the tax assessments are insufficient to cover the costs of the program, the County will invoice the City for their pro-rata share of the programs’ shortfall every December. The Fire Department will absorb the City’s pro-rata share costs in its Community Risk Reduction Division’s Operating Budget. To date, the County has been able to recover all costs. At this time, there is no fiscal impact to Fire Department’s budget.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the Finance Department and City Attorney’s Office.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution ordering the abatement of a nuisance consisting of growing weeds in the City.

Reviewed by: Ruben Torres, Fire Chief
Approved by: City Manager’s Office

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution Ordering the Abatement of Weeds
City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
Resolution/Weed Abatement Program, Ordering the Abatement of a Nuisance Page 1 of 2 Rev: 11/17/2017
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF A NUISANCE CONSISTING OF

GROWING WEEDS IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, at a public hearing on March 22, 2022, the City Council of the City of Santa Clara ordered the abatement of weeds growing in the City of Santa Clara, which was previously declared a nuisance on February 22, 2022, in the manner provided in Chapter 8.15 of the Santa Clara City Code;
WHEREAS, the City has entered into an agreement with the County of Santa Clara entitled, “Amended and Restated Agreement between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Santa Clara for Weed Abatement Services," most recently approved on February 22, 2022, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk;
WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 8.15 of the Santa Clara City Code and Resolution No. 7286 of the City of Santa Clara, the Agricultural Commissioner of the County of Santa Clara (“County Agricultural Commissioner”) has given notices prior to the abatement of the nuisance by the City; and,
WHEREAS, no protests have been received by the City Council protesting the abatement of the nuisance, so the County Agricultural Commissioner should abate the nuisance of weeds growing in the City of Santa Clara.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the County Department of Agriculture abates the nuisance in the manner provided by the ordinances, rules and regulations of the City. The County Department of Agriculture is hereby directed to give notice by mail to the owner or owners of each individual parcel of land upon which weeds will be abated by the City at least ten (10) days before abatement. The notice shall be given by mail, addressed to the owner at their last known address, as shown on Resolution/Weed Abatement Program, Ordering the Abatement of a Nuisance Page 2 of 2 Rev: 11/17/2017
the last County equalized assessment roll. If the address of the owner is unknown, then the notice shall be sent to the owner by mailing it via the Fire Marshal’s Office at 1675 Lincoln Street, Santa Clara, CA 95050. Meanwhile, and before the expiration of the ten-day period, any owner may voluntarily abate the nuisance.

2. Effective date. This resolution shall become effective immediately.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE A TRUE COPY OF A RESOLUTION PASSED

AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE ___ DAY OF _________, 2022, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: COUNCILORS:

NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:

ATTEST: ______________________________

NORA PIMENTEL, MMC

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

Attachments incorporated by reference: None
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-69 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Including: Determination of the Adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations and an Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP); Adoption of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan; Adoption of General Plan Amendments to Create New General Plan Land Use Designations and Change the General Plan Land Use Diagram from Light Industrial to Various Residential Designations; Waive First Reading and Introduce an Ordinance to Add a New Chapter

18.27 to the Zoning Code to Create Zoning Regulations for the Patrick Henry Drive Area Specific Plan and Rezoning of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area

BACKGROUND
The proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan is intended to support the development of a new high-density, mixed-use urban neighborhood in close proximity to jobs, retail, services and entertainment, and to support alternative travel modes based on its proximity to the Tasman VTA Light Rail line within the Patrick Henry Drive Future Focus Area as identified in the General Plan. The Patrick Henry Drive Area is bounded by Mission College to the south, Great America Parkway to the East, the Hetch-Hetchy right-of-way to the north, and Calabazas Creek to the west. The General Plan calls for the preparation of a Specific Plan to implement the City’s vision for Patrick Henry Drive and to implement related General Plan goals and policies (General Plan Policy 5.4.7.P1).

The proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan includes a land use framework to develop the area into a transit-oriented neighborhood with up to 12,000 residential units and up to 310,000 square feet of non-residential uses. A second scenario would substitute office for high-density residential along the east edge of the Plan Area, amounting to an approximate total of 10,300 net new residential units, 785,000 net new square feet of office, and 310,000 net new square feet of other nonresidential uses.

The City Council is being asked to conduct a public hearing and take four actions related to preparation of a Specific Plan for the City’s Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area:
1) Determination of the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared to analyze the potential environmental impacts for the project and adoption of CEQA Findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and an associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program;
2) Adoption of the Specific Plan;
3) Adoption of the following associated General Plan Land Use Designations: Village Residential (60-149 DU/AC), Urban Village (100-149 DU/AC), Urban Center (120-250 DU/AC), and High Density Flex (60-149 DU/AC, or up to 2.0 FAR), and application of those designations to the Specific Plan project area, along with the preexisting designation of Very High Density Residential (50-100 DU/AC); and
4) Adoption of Chapter 18.27 of the Zoning Code, Regulations for the Patrick Henry Drive Area City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 1 of 7
powered by Legistar™
22-69 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
(PHD) Zoning Districts, including development standards, allowed uses and parking requirements for the following zoning districts: R5 - Very High Density Residential, VR - Village Residential, UV - Urban Village, UC - Urban Center, and HD Flex - High Density Flex; and application of those zoning districts to the Specific Plan project area as an implementation action for the Specific Plan.

DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission heard and deliberated on the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan on January 26, 2022. The following discussion summarizes the Planning Commission hearing discussion and actions. Additional staff analysis is provided in the attached Report to the Planning Commission (Attachment 2).

Staff provided a presentation on the proposed project and highlighted two letters from the public received prior to the hearing (Attachment 3). One letter, received from the attorney for O2Micro, addressed removal of the alternate land use diagram that includes a roadway connection from Patrick Henry Drive to the Mission College campus. The second letter, from the President of the Silicon Valley MEPS, a labor union representing local tradespeople, requested the inclusion of an additional planning principle within the Specific Plan encouraging the use of a local construction workforce, including apprentices from state-approved local training programs.

Public speakers at the Planning Commission meeting included Jonathon Evans and Jan Hintermeister, members of the Board of Library Trustees, Alicia Guerra, attorney for O2 Micro, reiterating the comments from her letter; and a half-dozen speakers endorsing the addition of local construction workforce language in the plan, including John Dalrymple, speaking for the Union of Electricians, Plumbers, Pipe Fitters and Sheet Metal workers.

Commission Deliberation
The Commission discussed several issues, including questions to staff, which were addressed as follows:
· Recommendation for a school within the plan area. Staff responded that the location of the school was contingent on the District’s ability to purchase land; · The location of a potential library. Staff answered that the City has analyzed the possibility of a 45,000 square foot library/community center at a programmatic level, but does not have a funding plan developed;
· The proposed character of the pedestrian connection to Mission College. Staff explained that the Plan includes a small park at that location which will also accommodate bicycle circulation; · Treatment of archaeological resources encountered during construction. Staff noted that no resources were identified through a literature search with Sonoma State University, but that if any archaeological remains are discovered during construction, the EIR includes mitigation measures for avoidance and preservation of resources;
· Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures and their implementation. Staff noted that the Specific Plan includes a requirement to provide a shuttle or other transit supportive service for Patrick Henry Drive and the wider North Santa Clara area. The Specific Plan will also require the creation of a Transportation Management Association (TMA), including the proposed triggers for the creation of a TMA, and the threshold and timing for the beginning of a shuttle service; and
· Locations for drop-off parking spaces, given the demand for food delivery services, especially City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 2 of 7
powered by Legistar™
22-69 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
after work hours. Staff noted that this would be addressed as specific projects go through the entitlement process.

Following public testimony, Commissioner Cherukuru made a motion to recommend adoption of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and the motion passed unanimously. Chair Biagini then made a motion to adopt the Specific Plan, including the local workforce goal language endorsed by Commissioner Herro and several of the public speakers. The Planning Commission also recommended that the Affordable Housing requirement be a total of 15% affordable units split between three affordability levels, 50%, 80%, and 120% Area Median Income (AMI). That change is reflected in both the Specific Plan and in the Zoning Code amendment. Commissioner Saleme made a friendly amendment to the motion to request text changes to the document to clearly indicate that implementation of the alternate land use diagram, including the roadway connection to the Mission College campus, would require the approval of the Mission College Board of Trustees.

Planning Commission Action
By a vote of 7-0, the Commission recommended approval of the Specific Plan and associated environmental clearance and land use changes as recommended by staff with three modifications:
1) Change the affordable housing inclusionary requirement from 15% at an average Area Median Income (AMI) of 80% to a requirement for 5% Very Low (50% AMI), 5% Low (80% AMI) and 5% Moderate (120% AMI) units;
2) Addition of clarifying language that a roadway connection to the Mission College campus was an alternative studied in the plan and not part of the proposed alternative; and 3) Addition of a planning principle within the Specific Plan encouraging the use of a local construction workforce, including apprentices from state-approved local training programs.

The Planning Commission recommendations are shown in the recommendation section below as Alternatives 5-8.

Staff Recommendation
The staff recommendation is presented below as Alternatives 1-4. The Staff Recommendation does not include the local workforce goal language, but it does include the other two Planning Commission amendments to the original staff recommendation.

Subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting, staff worked with the Patrick Henry Drive stakeholders to refine the language in the Transportation Demand Management section of the plan, Section 7.3. The changes to that section do not affect the triggers or requirements for transportation demand management, but they were made to more clearly delineate individual stakeholder responsibilities toward the Transportation Management Association (TMA). The changes agreed to by the stakeholders and staff have been incorporated into the February 2022 version of the plan, and a strikethrough and underline version of the affected pages is included as Attachment 4.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and related approvals (the “project”) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Attachment 1). The EIR analyzes program-level impacts of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan.

The EIR and Notice of Availability were circulated for a 45-day period from July 30, 2021, to September 13, 2021, in accordance with CEQA requirements. The EIR provides a comprehensive analysis of the potential environmental impacts for the project, and addresses topics identified within the General Plan policies for Patrick Henry Drive including land use compatibility and provision of City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 3 of 7
powered by Legistar™
22-69 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
public facilities and parks and open space (Policy 5.4.7-P6, 5.4.7-P7, 5.4.7-P8, and 5.4.7-P9).

The EIR found that there would be significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to:
• Air Quality emissions (toxic air contaminant emissions) • Potential destruction or degradation of Historic Resources • Noise (increases in traffic noise levels from Specific Plan development) The project would also result in the following significant unavoidable cumulative impacts:
• Air Quality emissions (criteria pollutant emissions)
All of the other potentially significant impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures are included in their entirety as a part of the proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). A detailed discussion of the potential impacts and mitigation measures to be applied to the project is specified in the EIR and would be implemented through project conditions of approval and the MMRP for the proposed project.

The Draft EIR comment period ran from July 30, 2021, to September 13, 2021. A total of five comments were received during the comment period. None of the comment letters have identified a new significant impact or have provided substantial evidence that the CEQA analysis is otherwise inadequate. Recirculation of the EIR is therefore not required. Responses to the Draft EIR comments, as well as minor text changes and clarifications, in the form of a Final EIR, was made available to the public through the City’s website on January 12, 2022, and have been forwarded on to any commenters on the Draft EIR.

FISCAL IMPACT
Consultant costs borne by the City for the preparation of the Specific Plan have been funded through a reimbursement agreement with the stakeholders of the Patrick Henry Drive plan area.

The proposed change in land uses would significantly increase land values and the property tax base as well as demand for services, having both positive and negative fiscal impacts upon the City. The addition of retail services and an increased local population will add to more sales tax revenue for the City. It is understood that residential land uses generally have a net negative fiscal impact (as increased land value revenue does not completely offset increased costs for service), but infill development and higher density development, particularly utilizing Type I or Type III construction, provides for more efficient delivery of services and can be revenue neutral or even positive in some circumstances. Furthermore, the Plan will include private maintenance of park spaces and a significant private investment for infrastructure that will also provide fiscal benefits. On the whole, implementation of the Specific Plan is expected to have a relatively minor net fiscal impact to the City and will provide housing necessary for Santa Clara’s ongoing economic vitality.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office.

PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by publishing a hearing notice in the Santa Clara Weekly on January 12, 2022, and by mailing a hearing notice to properties within a 500-foot radius of the plan area. The Planning Commission agenda was also posted on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 4 of 7
powered by Legistar™
22-69 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> .

In addition to City Council and Planning Commission study sessions, the City held two community meetings on the plan: A virtual community meeting was held on March 11, 2021 to present the draft plan to the community. There were approximately 70 attendees. Speakers at the meeting expressed concern with traffic impacts, the potential roadway connecting the plan area to Mission College Boulevard, and planning for future pandemics. An earlier community meeting, held on February 25, 2019 for the City North Area, was attended by approximately 28 people. That early meeting helped to define the vision for the Patrick Henry Drive plan.

ALTERNATIVES
(Staff Recommendation)

1. Adopt a resolution approving and certifying the Final EIR prepared for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan (SCH # 2019120515), including CEQA Findings and a statement of overriding considerations.

2. Adopt a resolution approving the PHD Specific Plan, a specific plan consistent with Government Code Sections 65450-65457 that incorporates text in the Alternate Circulation Diagram (4.6.2-ALT:

CIRCULATION) “Subject to the Approval of the Mission College Board of Trustees”; and incorporates affordable housing language as follows: 15% affordable units split equally between three affordability levels of 50%, 80%, and 120% AMI.

3. Adopt a resolution approving General Plan text amendments creating the following land use designations: Village Residential (60-149 DU/AC), Urban Village (100-149 DU/AC), Urban Center (120-250 DU/AC), and High Density Flex (60-149 DU/AC, or up to 2.0 FAR), updating the Climate Action Plan to recognize those Land Use Designations, and amending the General Plan Land Use diagrams for Phases II and III to reflect the land use designations in the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan.

4. Waive first reading and introduce an ordinance amending the Zoning Code to create a new Chapter 18.27 of the Zoning Code, Regulations for the Patrick Henry Drive Area (PHD) Zoning Districts, including development standards, allowed uses and parking requirements for the following zoning districts: R5 - Very High Density Residential, VR - Village Residential, UV - Urban Village, UC - Urban Center, and HD Flex - High Density Flex, and rezoning the Project Site using the new districts as indicated in the Patrick Henry Drive zoning map, incorporating affordable housing language as follows: 15% affordable units split equally between three affordability levels of 50%, 80%, and 120% AMI.

OR:
(Planning Commission recommendation)

5. Adopt a resolution approving and certifying the Final EIR prepared for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan (SCH # 2019120515), including CEQA Findings and a statement of overriding considerations.

6. Adopt a resolution approving the PHD Specific Plan, a specific plan consistent with Government Code Sections 65450-65457, with the addition of a seventh principle to the Specific Plan: “7.

Building a Vibrant Middle Class: Encourage the use of a local construction workforce and local business sourcing in the buildout within the Plan area. The employment of a local construction workforce that pays family-supporting wages will generate sales tax revenue for the City as those wages are recirculated within the City's business community. The availability of a trained construction workforce is essential for the success in implementing the Plan therefore the City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 5 of 7
powered by Legistar™
22-69 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
employment of apprentices in State of California approved training programs will also be encouraged”; incorporate text in the Alternate Circulation Diagram (4.6.2-ALT: CIRCULATION) “Subject to the Approval of the Mission College Board of Trustees”; and incorporate affordable housing language as follows: 15% affordable units split equally between three affordability levels of 50%, 80%, and 120% AMI.

7. Adopt a resolution approving General Plan text amendments creating the following land use designations: Village Residential (60-149 DU/AC), Urban Village (100-149 DU/AC), Urban Center (120-250 DU/AC), and High Density Flex (60-149 DU/AC, or up to 2.0 FAR), updating the Climate Action Plan to recognize those Land Use Designations, and amending the General Plan Land Use diagrams for Phases II and III to reflect the land use designations in the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan.

8. Waive first reading and introduce an ordinance amending the Zoning Code to create a new Chapter 18.27 of the Zoning Code, Regulations for the Patrick Henry Drive Area (PHD) Zoning Districts, including development standards, allowed uses and parking requirements for the following zoning districts: R5 - Very High Density Residential, VR - Village Residential, UV - Urban Village, UC - Urban Center, and HD Flex - High Density Flex, and rezoning the Project Site using the new districts as indicated in the Patrick Henry Drive zoning map, incorporating affordable housing language as follows: 15% affordable units split equally between three affordability levels of 50%, 80%, and 120% AMI.

OR:

9. Direct staff to return to City Council with a modified version of the proposed project.

RECOMMENDATION
Alternatives 1-4:

2. Adopt a resolution approving the PHD Specific Plan, a specific plan consistent with Government Code Sections 65450-65457 that incorporates text in the Alternate Circulation Diagram (4.6.2-ALT:

Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Director of Community Development City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 6 of 7
powered by Legistar™
22-69 Agenda Date: 3/22/2022
Approved by: Office of the City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan

2. Patrick Henry Drive Planning Commission Report

3. Letters received prior to the January 26, 2022 Planning Commission meeting

4. Transportation Demand Management Section of the Patrick Henry Drive Plan (strikethrough/underline)

5. Environmental Impact Report

6. Patrick Henry Drive EIR Resolution

7. CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

8. Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program

9. Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Resolution (staff recommendation)

10. Patrick Henry Drive General Plan Amendment Resolution

11. Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Ordinance Amendments

12. Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Map

13. General Plan Future Focus Area Goals and Policies

14. Draft Plan Land Use Plan

15. Draft Plan Urban Design Framework

16. Street Section from the Patrick Henry Drive Plan

17. Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Resolution (Planning Commission recommendation)

18. Supplemental Correspondence Received
City of Santa Clara Printed on 3/18/2022Page 7 of 7
powered by Legistar™

Draft Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan

https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/departments-a-f/community- development/planning-division/specific-plans/patrick-henry-drive

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022

REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION

SUBJECT
Action on: the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan; Creation of new General Plan Designations and General Plan Amendments to change the General Plan Land Use Diagram from Light Industrial to Various Residential Designations to Implement the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan; Creation of New Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Districts and Rezoning of the Patrick Henry Drive Area Using those Zoning Districts; an Environmental Impact Report and Statement of Overriding Considerations; and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan enables the redevelopment of an approximately 74 acre industrial area (62 acres net) bounded by Mission College to the south, Great America Parkway to the east, the Hetch-Hetchy right-of-way to the north, and Calabazas Creek to the west. Because of its close proximity to the Tasman light rail line, the proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan includes a land use framework to develop the area into a transit-oriented neighborhood with up to 12,000 residential units and up to 310,000 square feet of non-residential uses. The Plan includes flexibility to allow new commercial development along Great America Parkway through a second scenario that substitutes office for high-density residential along the east edge of the Plan Area, amounting to an approximate total of 10,300 net new residential units, 785,000 net new square feet of office, and 310,000 net new square feet of other nonresidential uses.

The City began preparation of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan in 2018. The Specific Plan process has provided multiple opportunities for community input including two general community meetings, eight City Council study sessions, and two Planning Commission study sessions. Plan area property owners and stakeholders have been active participants in the Specific Plan process, including multiple developers interested in utilizing the Specific Plan to redevelop properties. Other community members have also participated and provided input through the community meetings and public hearings. The contents of the draft Specific Plan have been shaped through this stakeholder input as well as the direction provided by the City Council.

Staff is recommending adoption of the Specific Plan so that development may move forward within the Specific Plan area to realize the vision set forth in the City’s General Plan and to meet the City’s goal of providing housing in an amenity rich urban environment that is close to transit and employment opportunities.

BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission is being asked to conduct a public hearing and make recommendations on four actions related to preparation of a Specific Plan for the City’s Patrick Henry Drive Plan Area:
1) Determination of the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared to analyze the potential environmental impacts for the project and an associated Mitigation Monitoring City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 1 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
and Reporting Program;
2) Adoption of the Specific Plan;
3) Adoption of the following associated General Plan Land Use Designations: Village Residential (60-149 DU/AC), Urban Village (100-149 DU/AC), Urban Center (120-250 DU/AC), and High Density Flex (60-149 DU/AC, or up to 2.0 FAR), and application of those designations to the Specific Plan project area; and
4) Adoption of the Chapter 18.27 of the Zoning Code, Regulations for PHD, the Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Districts, including development standards, allowed uses and parking requirements for the following zoning districts: R5 - Very High Density Residential, VR - Village Residential, UV - Urban Village, UC - Urban Center, and HD Flex - High Density Flex; and application of those zoning districts to the Specific Plan project area as an implementation action for the Specific Plan.

The City of Santa Clara 2010-2035 General Plan identifies nine geographic Focus Areas within Santa Clara. The Focus Areas are intended to accommodate a significant amount of the City’s growth and to directly support the City’s quality of life and economic vitality. The Patrick Henry Drive Future Focus Area is bounded by Mission College to the south, Great America Parkway to the East, the Hetch-Hetchy right-of-way to the north, and Calabazas Creek to the west, and is specifically intended to support new residential development in close proximity to jobs, retail, services and entertainment, and to support alternative travel modes based on its proximity to the Tasman VTA Light Rail line. The General Plan calls for the preparation of a Specific Plan to implement the City’s vision for Patrick Henry Drive and to implement related General Plan goals and policies (General Plan Policy 5.4.7- P1).

Project Description
Specific Plans can provide policy guidance, regulatory requirements, and design direction. The proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan addresses each of these elements, including land use and design policies, land use and development standards, street width and street section standards, and design guidelines for bulk, massing and articulation of buildings.

Also proposed is an accompanying new chapter in the zoning code that is consistent with the Patrick Henry Drive General Plan land use designations and the Specific Plan, and includes allowed land uses and development standards which can be used to implement the Plan. The zoning chapter is described in the Creation of a Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Chapter section and includes the zoning districts relevant to the Patrick Henry Drive plan area.

Individual development projects within the Specific Plan area would be subject to architectural review approval through the City’s Development Review Hearing, including the possibility of an appeal to the City Council. To approve an individual development project, the Director of Planning will be required to make findings that individual development proposals are consistent with the design direction of the Specific Plan.

The full draft Specific Plan is available at
<https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/departments-a-f/community-development/planning- division/specific-plans/patrick-henry-drive>.

Plan Area Context
The Plan area consists of an approximately 74-acre industrial area (62 acres net) bounded by City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 2 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
Mission College to the south, Great America Parkway to the East, the Hetch-Hetchy right-of-way to the north, and Calabasas Creek to the west. With its close proximity to the Tasman light rail line, the proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan includes a land use framework to develop the area into a transit-oriented neighborhood with up to 12,000 residential units and up to 310,000 square feet of non-residential uses. A second scenario would substitute office for high-density residential along the east edge of the Plan Area, amounting to an approximate total of 10,300 net new residential units, 785,000 net new square feet of office, and 310,000 net new square feet of other nonresidential uses.

As the Plan area is located in the northern part of Santa Clara, it is generally proximate to a large number of employment uses, as well as the Santa Clara Youth Soccer Park, Levi’s© Stadium, the City’s convention center, the Great America theme park, and other potential major development projects in northern Santa Clara, including Kylli immediately to the North, the Freedom Circle Focus Area/Greystar project across Great America Parkway, and the Related Santa Clara project and the Tasman East Specific Plan Area to the east on Tasman Drive.

City Council Study Sessions
The City Council has conducted several study sessions to discuss and provide input on different content areas of the Specific Plan:

April 9, 2019 Reviewed proposed objectives for the Specific Plan and directed staff to proceed
Dec 10, 2019 Reviewed a detailed project description prior to the City’s issuance of (NOP) for EIR
Dec 17, 2019 Adopted a Resolution supporting the PHD area as one of six new ABAG/MTC PDAs.

April 28, 2020 Accepted a proposed land use plan, land use designations, circulation plan, and parkland and open space plan for preparation for the plan EIR Dec 16, 2020 Approved an expansion of the contract with MIG to expand the scope of analysis in the EIR to include a land use plan without a Mission College roadway connection
August 24, 2021 Approved contract amendment to expand services on EIR, Traffic, & Sewer Model Run
April 20, 2021 Provided feedback at Study Session on more parkland; mobility options; breakdown of affordability levels
December 7, 2021 Provided input on the Land Use Plan, roadway network, parkland and open space strategy, public facilities, a local shuttle, and affordable housing

DISCUSSION
The primary issues for the Planning Commission to consider in evaluating the proposed Specific Plan are its consistency with the General Plan and the strength of the Plan’s implementation framework to implement the Plan vision. The Planning Commission should also consider how the content of the Plan has been shaped through stakeholder input and direction provided by the City Council at previous Council study sessions.

In summary, the vision set forth for Future Focus Areas in the General Plan and in the draft Specific Plan is to create a new high-density residential neighborhood in Santa Clara focused on an inviting streetscape and urban amenities, including retail uses with outdoor seating, parks that complement the built environment and act as focal points for the neighborhood, and a network of greenways and City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 3 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
low-speed streets that allow for additional pedestrian connections through the neighborhood (General Plan Goal 5.4.7-G1, Policies 5.4.7-P6, 5.4.7-P7, 5.4.7-P8, and 5.4.7-P9). Existing public streets within the Specific Plan area will include wide sidewalks, park strips with trees, and ample space for businesses to place tables, chairs and umbrellas. Parks, plazas, and other open space amenities will have an urban character and are planned to support a wide variety of placemaking activities.

The following discusses the Plan content according to key topic areas.

Comparison to General Plan Growth Assumptions
When adopted in 2010, the 2010-2035 General Plan anticipated and accommodated growth within Santa Clara for a total of 154,300 jobs and 60,345 residential units through the year 2035. Since adoption of the General Plan in 2010, the City has approved 16 General Plan Amendments that resulted in additional capacity for approximately 13,841 additional jobs and 7,102 additional residential units, raising the total General Plan planned capacity to 168,141 jobs and 67,447 residential units.

A defining characteristic of the Specific Plan is the proposed residential capacity of 12,000 dwelling units. While the General Plan anticipated the development of only 2,550 residential units within the Plan area, through the Specific Plan process and engagement with the City Council, 12,000 dwelling units was established as the maximum capacity for the Specific Plan. The proposed General Plan Amendment will change the land use designation for the Plan area from High Density Residential (37 to 50 dwelling units per acre) to four residential land use designations and one flexible residential/commercial designation:
· Very High Density (51-100 du/ac)
· Village Residential (60-149 du/ac)
· Urban Village Residential (100-150 du/ac)
· Urban Center Residential (120-250 du/ac); and
· High Density Flex designation (60-149 du/ac or up to a 2.0 floor area ratio of commercial development).

Adoption of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would also support 310,000 square feet of new non -residential uses, which could support retail and institutional uses such as a school, library, and community center. In combination with the increased capacity for 12,000 units, this would add a net of 9,450 residential units and 451 jobs to the General Plan capacity.

Jobs/Housing balance
One objective of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan is to assist in balancing the presence of jobs and housing in Santa Clara. The most common measure used to describe the jobs-housing balance is the jobs-to-employed-residents ratio. A balanced community would have a jobs-to-employed resident ratio of one. Specifically, one job would exist for each employed resident. Historically, the City of Santa Clara has not been balanced, with a greater proportion of jobs than employed residents, although that ratio has been improving over time. This imbalance translates to quality of life impacts such as more congestion on local and regional roads as individuals travel longer distances from residential areas to reach jobs in Santa Clara and to neighboring job rich cities to the west without sufficient housing opportunities to live within proximity to the regional concentration of jobs or a transportation network that can fully support this level of daily travel.

City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 4 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
As recently as the year 2000, the jobs-to-employed residents ratio for the City was 2.22. However, the City’s General Plan indicates that the ratio had improved to 1.90 as of 2008 (at the start of the most recent General Plan comprehensive update process). More recent job data is available from the US Census Bureau and the American Community Survey. The Census Bureau’s 2020 data indicates that there are a total of 120,323 jobs and 79,262 employed residents in the City for a jobs-to- employed-residents ratio of 1.51 (120,323 / 79,262), a further decrease from 2008.

The City’s General Plan identified opportunities for concentrated residential development in General Plan Focus Areas as a strategy to address Santa Clara’s jobs-housing imbalance by providing significant amounts of new housing capacity in proximity to employment areas. However, the General Plan also anticipates and recognizes the benefits of strong jobs growth through the life of the General Plan, and supports intensification of other jobs areas so that under its current buildout scenario, the City would have a jobs-to-employed-residents ratio of 1.77 in 2035.

The most recent American Community Survey (2020) indicates that Santa Clara has 79,262 employed residents living in 50,229 housing units, or 1.57 employed residents per housing unit.

From discussing development plans and timeframes with Patrick Henry Drive stakeholders, the City is expecting 7,200 dwelling units to be built by 2035, which is the time horizon of the General Plan.

Assuming a continuation of these demographic trends, the anticipated 7,200 dwelling units would add 11,300 employed residents, potentially lowering the City’s jobs-to-employed-residents ratio to 1.32 (120,323/(79,262+11,300)). Adoption of the Plan would thus further the City’s goal of improving its jobs-housing balance.

Land Use Designations
Consistent with the Specific Plan capacity of 12,000 residential units, the envisioned urban character of the Plan area and the goal of providing flexibility for a variety of housing types, allowed residential densities in the neighborhood are planned to range from 51 to 250 dwelling units per acre (DU/AC).

The area of the developable parcels within the Specific Plan is approximately 67 acres, with 5 of those acres dedicated to private road network and sidewalk easements and an additional 14.5 acres planned for parks and useable open space, leaving approximately 47.5 acres of land available for development. The area available for development suggests a net density of 250 dwelling units per acre (DU/AC) to achieve 12,000 units.

The proposed General Plan land use designations will accommodate a broad range of development types, including wood frame podium and wrap buildings, steel-frame towers and possibly reinforced concrete construction. Buildings in all the General Plan density ranges are expected to be 5-12 stories in height, with the exception of the Urban Center Residential designation (120-250 DU/AC), where buildings are expected to be 12-25 stories in height.

The Specific Plan Land Use diagram also identifies potential locations for park space, greenways, the requirement for mixed-use buildings along the eastern end of Patrick Henry Drive and other public amenities, as shown in Attachment 10. The 5.25-acre park at the center of the Specific Plan area will be a focal point for the new neighborhood. Ground floor retail can be proposed anywhere in the plan area; however retail and active uses are required on the ground floor along the southern stretch of Patrick Henry Drive, which will provide retail with the highest visibility location in the Specific Plan and also provide for a lively street presence with areas for spill over seating.

As provided for in the proposed Specific Plan and associated zoning chapter, the existing industrial City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 5 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
and commercial uses within the Plan area can continue operation and even undergo expansion until redevelopment. New development would need to conform to the standards of the Specific Plan.

Roadways and Access
The Land Use Plan makes use of the existing street rights-of-way but also identifies new vehicular and multimodal circulation roads and/or paseos throughout the plan area. These new circulation routes will allow additional routes of travel within the Plan area, promote pedestrian and bicycle use, and break up the superblock layout of the existing light industrial area to support the creation of a mixed-use neighborhood. The new roads are intended for low-speed vehicular use, emphasizing shared facilities where pedestrians, bicycles and cars all have an equal ability to use the rights-of- way. New greenway connections are also proposed in the interior of the central block to promote pedestrian and bicycle circulation and break up the massing of future development.

As mentioned in the January 10, 2022 Study Session report, the Mission College Board of Trustees meeting voted unanimously to not approve a proposed connection between the Patrick Henry Drive and the Mission College private driveway from the Patrick Henry Drive plan area. The recommended alternative of the Patrick Henry Drive plan has been adjusted to reflect the decision by the Mission College Board of Trustees to not support the connector roadway.

Street sections incorporated into Chapter 5, the Design Guidelines of the Specific Plan, clearly delineate expectations for the sidewalk widths, tree wells and street life dimensions, and lanes of travel including bicycle lanes. These guidelines address depths of retail spill-out spaces and proposed lighting guidelines, as well as other design features that support an attractive pedestrian environment. See Attachment 12 for a representative street section from the plan.

The Specific Plan land uses will leverage proximity to the Tasman Drive Light Rail line, utilizing a robust Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to minimize vehicle trips (Chapter 7.3 of the plan). All development projects are required to participate in a Transportation Management Agency (TMA) to help coordinate VMT-reduction programs between multiple property owners. All development projects will also be required to participate in a local shuttle program or micro-transit solution that connects residents with commercial, transit, and employment centers.

As the Specific Plan is implemented, new individual development projects will be required to incorporate measures to address the evolving nature of transportation, including commuter behavior, availability of first and last mile connections to transit, and other advancements such as ride hailing and ride sharing technology. The vehicle miles traveled (“VMT”) reduction goals proposed for the Patrick Henry Drive General Plan land use designations include a total of 20%, with 10% coming from locational advantages (such as proximity to transit), and 10% coming from TDM strategies.

Collectively, these physical improvements and policy actions established within the Specific Plan will advance the goals set forth in the General Plan for the Future Focus Areas, encouraging alternative modes of transportation and reducing the impacts of new development upon the vehicular transportation network (e.g., Policy 5.4.7-P9).

Transportation Management Association
Through the development of the Specific Plan, property owners will demonstrate advancement of the formation and implementation of a privately funded and administered Transportation Management Association (TMA). The TMA will be launched by property owners implementing projects in the City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 6 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan but will also include funding and participation by other pipeline projects in North Santa Clara. The TMA will implement a fixed shuttle or on-demand micro transit option that will reduce single occupant vehicle trips within the Northern Santa Clara area. The shuttle or micro transit option will begin implementation prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy for the 3,300th unit in the PHD Specific Plan or prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the 1,500th unit in the PHD Specific Plan Area when a minimum of 5,000 units (inclusive of units issued Certificates of Occupancy in the PHD Specific Plan) contributing to the TMA funding and/or administration have been issued Certificates of Occupancy. Prior to the completion of the first four years of operation, the TMA will be evaluated by the City and alternative methods of single vehicle trip reduction could be considered.

Park Spaces, Greenways and Other Open Space
Public parkland or publicly accessible privately maintained open space is proposed to constitute a minimum of 22% of the land area available within the Specific Plan area, consistent with the approach taken with the adopted Tasman East Specific Plan, and endorsed by the City Council. The Patrick Henry Specific Plan will provide public parkland and accessible open space amenities through two strategies: 1) dedication of parkland to the City through the City’s Parkland and Recreational Amenities Dedication Ordinance (PDO); and 2) the incorporation of private open space areas, including privately owned public open space areas (POPOS). At least 11% of the net site area of the Plan area will be dedicated Parkland and in combination with other various types of private open space, a minimum of 22% of the Plan area will be open space. The net site area of a parcel is the area after roadway dedications and public sidewalk easements are excluded from the total.

The proposed dedicated Parkland includes a centrally located neighborhood park running north/south through the center of the new neighborhood and three smaller parks distributed within the Specific Plan area, and a proposed Art Garden on the SummerHill property.

The net site area of the Specific Plan area is 62.3 acres, and 22% is 14.5 acres. The Land Use Plan includes parkland as follows:
· A 5.25 acre central park shared across four properties including Menlo Equities, Marriott Center Owners Association, Z&L Properties, and Sares-Regis. · A 1.75 acre park on the west side of the north-south leg of Patrick Henry Drive, which will provide more direct access to the Calabazas Creek pedestrian bridge from the plan area. · A 1.1 acre park on the Pearlman property, to be developed if the property is redeveloped with residential uses.
· A new 1.25 acre park has now been added on the southeast corner of the plan area, split proportionally between properties owned by Dollinger and New Hope Church. · Summerhill, located along the center southern portion of the plan area also now is providing 9,250 square feet (0.21 acres) of dedicated parkland along the western border of their site, adjacent to a proposed public use community room.
· Drawbridge on the northeast corner of the plan area has offered approximately 13,000 square feet of land (0.30 acres) that staff is analyzing for the feasibility of for park use. · A new 15,800 square foot park (0.36 acres) on the O2 Micro property, substituting for the roadway connection that was not supported by the Mission College Board of Trustees. This parkland is immediately adjacent to the parkland dedication on the Summerhill property, which will create one contiguous park of 0.57 acres. A potential bicycle and pedestrian path through City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 7 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
this park connecting to Mission College’s property will be explored during the park design phase. Such a path would require coordination and support of Mission College.

Assuming the Drawbridge land dedication is feasible, the added areas would create a total of 10.23 acres of dedicated parkland. The remaining private open space obligation provided in part through POPOS to meet the 22% target, is 2.94 acres. At full build-out of the Land Use Plan, the amount of POPOS will exceed this amount as individual developers provide paseos and private open space in fulfillment of Specific Plan requirements.

Staff has begun working with the stakeholder group to further develop the design, treatment and amenities to be included within the publicly accessible, private open space areas. Private open space areas include a greenway along Patrick Henry Drive that would utilize an existing gas line easement that does not allow structures, and other internal greenways that will help to break up the massing of buildings, support pedestrian and bicycle circulation, and provide amenity space.

Collectively these features will implement the General Plan policies to provide Patrick Henry Drive residents with a high degree of access to open space (e.g., Policy 5.4.7-P6, 5.4.7-P8).

Public Facilities & Recreational Amenities - New Library, Gymnasium, Community and Senior Center
The City Council previously reviewed objectives for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan that included measures to support the quality of life for future residents by providing a new branch library as part of the Specific Plan. At the subsequent City Council meeting on December 17, 2019, during review of the proposed Notice of Preparation for the Plan, the Council, noting that one of the Plan area developers, Z&L, was proposing to develop at a density significantly higher than otherwise allowed within the Plan, suggested that the addition of a library within the project could be tied to the Z&L proposal as a “community benefit” justification for granting the increased density.

Staff subsequently met several times with Z&L to discuss the incorporation of a library space of up to 40,000 square feet within their project. While Z&L initially expressed an openness to this approach and hired an architect to explore it with the City, Z&L has since indicated that due to evolving market conditions they have reconsidered the project’s feasibility and will not be moving forward with a high- rise project in the near-term or with a library within their project. At the same time, staff considered that it would be appropriate to develop a joint library-community center as a stand-alone facility that would be located within the new central neighborhood park within the Plan area.

Staff has conducted a preliminary analysis of developing a new joint 47,000 square foot public facility containing space for library, gymnasium, community and senior serving recreation programs and parking as part of the Plan’s implementation.

Given the central location, access, adjacent roadways and compatible uses, a site identified for the public facility (library/community center) would be provided on land shown as dedicated public parkland to accompany future development of the Z&L and Sares Regis properties.

In addition to the joint library-community center facility, the Specific Plan includes a proposed 5,000 square foot visual arts center for the public incorporated within the Summerhill project located at southern center of the plan area. Summerhill would provide a cold shell space within the ground floor City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 8 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
of their project that would be dedicated to the City to program for classroom, studio, and gallery space. The City would manage this visual arts space, which would be adjacent to Summerhill’s dedicated parkland, and which could function as an area for periodic outdoor art displays curated by the City.

Creation of Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Districts
As a part of the Patrick Henry Drive planning process, the City is proposing to create a series of new zoning districts that are consistent with the proposed General Plan land use designations. The proposed Zoning Districts are flexible and allow for the variety of housing types the Plan anticipates.

The zoning code chapter includes development standards for the maximum heights and densities of the district. The districts will be applied to all the parcels in the Patrick Henry Drive area, consistent with the proposed zoning map (Attachment 8). The zoning will be effective on Patrick Henry Drive properties thirty days after the Council adoption of the zoning ordinance creating the new district.

Because Patrick Henry Drive supports a variety of housing types, including high-density mixed use, towers, and podium development, setbacks that reflect the urban context have been included in the ordinance. In general, consistent with the General Plan policies, zoning districts will require 10-foot setbacks for residential buildings and zero setbacks for mixed-use buildings.

The Specific Plan is expected to be implemented over a 20-year timeline and accordingly the Patrick Henry Drive zoning district includes provisions for the continuation and possible expansion of existing industrial uses within the area. Once industrial parcels convert to residential uses, industrial uses on those parcels will no longer be allowed and any proposed development shall conform to the Specific Plan.

The parking provisions within the zoning district reflect the desired urban character of the district.

Generally residential uses are required to provide a minimum of one space per unit regardless of the number of bedrooms. For units under 500 square feet in area, the required parking is proposed to be

0.5 parking spaces per unit. For developments subject to the standard parking ratio, the City is requiring developers to offer partially-unbundled parking, meaning each unit, regardless of size, will be rented with one parking space, and renters can choose to rent a second space, regardless of the number of bedrooms in their unit. For efficiency units subject to the 0.5 space parking requirement, parking will be required to be fully unbundled. As an alternative, developers could implement a parking preference program, where prospective renters without cars are put on a separate waiting list from renters with cars, with renters being chosen alternately from the two lists. The list of renters without cars should be shorter and renters without cars should get a unit more quickly.

The required parking for office uses in the High-Density Flex District is one parking space per 500 square feet of gross floor area. For ground floor retail and office space in mixed use buildings, no additional parking is required.

Bicycle parking is required in the plan area consistent with Council direction to provide Class 1 parking (enclosed, secured parking) at a rate of one Class 1 space per residential unit. Required bicycle parking ratios are also specified for Class 1 spaces for mixed use and office projects and for Class 2 spaces (racks) for all uses, at rates equivalent to the VTA’s Bicycle Technical Guidelines.

Design Guidelines
While the Specific Plan and zoning regulations will establish some mandatory development or design City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 9 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
criteria, the implementation of the Specific Plan’s vision will be further accomplished through the use of design guidelines for issues that require flexibility based upon project context and the inter- relationship between design objectives.

The City intends to rely on the design direction in the Patrick Henry Drive plan for private development and for the public realm. Chapter 5 of the Patrick Henry Drive plan includes dimensioned street sections for both roadways in the existing street network and for proposed new private roadways in the plan area. These street sections were vetted through a rigorous inter- departmental process with stakeholders to ensure both a positive public realm and constructability.

Affordable Housing
An objective of the Specific Plan is to promote a range of housing options and affordability levels to realize the vision for a mixed-use, mixed-income community along the corridor. As such, this Plan includes an inclusionary housing policy that goes above and beyond the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance to promote the provision of units at deeper levels of affordability within the Patrick Henry Drive plan area. Specifically, the inclusionary requirement will be that 15% of the new units be designated as affordable rental units with a mix of units affordable for extremely low, very low, low, and moderate-income households. The affordability requirement could be based on all units conforming to an average of 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) or alternatively, as previously discussed by the City Council, require that 5% of units be designated as affordable at teach of the three levels (e.g. 50% AMI for very low, 80% AMI for low and 120% AMI for moderate). Either approach represents a deeper level of affordability than required by the citywide ordinance which requires 15% of units be affordable at an average of 100% of AMI.

ALUC Review
At the September June 23, 2021 Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) meeting, the County Airport Land Use Commission found the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan to be consistent with the policies of San Jose Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP), with the following modifications:
§ Prior to approval of project specific development within the Urban Village, Urban Center or High-Density Flex areas, City staff shall check with the FAA to ensure a No Hazard Determination is not required. If a No Hazard Determination is required, one shall be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit.
§ Future project-specific development within the Airport Influence Area of San Jose International Airport, shall be required to obtain an Avigation Easement prior to the issuance of a building permit.

These requirements will be implemented through the land use entitlement process for specific projects.

Infrastructure Fee
Should the City Council approve the Specific Plan, staff will bring forward a subsequent infrastructure fee for City Council review and approval. The infrastructure fee will require individual developers to contribute a pro-rata share of the costs of the various infrastructure improvements, such as the costs of sewer improvements and new private roadways that are required to implement the Specific Plan vision and are best borne collectively by all development within the Specific Plan area. In addition to the new private roadways, the fee also includes potable water lines, recycled water, and City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 10 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
transportation improvements, and street improvements to support residential development.

Conclusion
The draft Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, General Plan Amendments, accompanying zoning districts and project EIR have been prepared through an extensive planning process which has provided a significant amount of time for discussion of the various components of the Specific Plan.

The Specific Plan will provide a land use policy framework to support the development of a new high- quality urban district within Santa Clara consistent with the City’s vision and the goals and policies set forth in the General Plan.

The EIR and Notice of Availability were circulated for a 45-day period from July 30, 2021 to September 13, 2021 in accordance with CEQA requirements. The EIR provides a comprehensive analysis of the potential environmental impacts for the project, and addresses topics identified within the General Plan policies for Patrick Henry Drive including land use compatibility and provision of public facilities and parks and open space (Policy 5.4.7-P6, 5.4.7-P7, 5.4.7-P8, and 5.4.7-P9).

The EIR found that there would be significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to:
• Air Quality emissions (toxic air contaminant emissions) • Potential destruction or degradation of Historic Resources • Noise (increases in traffic noise levels from Specific Plan development) The project would also result in the following significant unavoidable cumulative impacts:
• Air Quality emissions (criteria pollutant emissions)
All the other potentially significant impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures are included in their entirety as a part of the proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).

The Draft EIR comment period ran from July 30, 2021 to September 13, 2021. A total of five comments were received during the comment period.

None of the comment letters have identified a new significant impact, or have provided substantial evidence that the CEQA analysis is otherwise inadequate. Recirculation of the EIR is therefore not required.

Responses to the Draft EIR comments, as well as minor text changes and clarifications, in the form of a Final EIR, was made available to the public through the City’s website on January 12, 2022, and have been forwarded on to any commenters on the Draft EIR.

A detailed discussion of the potential impacts and mitigation measures to be applied to the project is specified in the EIR and would be implemented through project conditions of approval and the MMRP for the proposed project.

City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 11 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022

The proposed change in land uses would significantly increase land values as well as demand for services, having both positive and negative fiscal impacts upon the City. The addition of retail services and an increased local population will add to more sales tax revenue for the City. It is understood that residential land uses generally have a net negative fiscal impact (as increased land value revenue does not completely offset increased costs for service), but infill development and higher density development, particularly utilizing Type I or Type III construction, provides for more efficient delivery of services and can be revenue neutral or even positive in some circumstances.

Furthermore, the Plan will include private maintenance of park spaces and a significant private investment for infrastructure that will also provide fiscal benefits. On the whole, implementation of the Specific Plan is expected to have a relatively minor net fiscal impact to the City and will provide housing necessary for Santa Clara’s ongoing economic vitality.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office.

PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by publishing a hearing notice in the Santa Clara Weekly on January 13, 2022, and by mailing a hearing notice to properties within a 500-foot radius of the plan area. The Planning Commission agenda was also posted on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> or at the public
information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

In addition to City Council and Planning Commission study sessions, the City held two community meetings on the plan: A virtual community meeting was held on March 11, 2021 to present the draft plan to the community. There were approximately 70 attendees. Speakers at the meeting expressed concern with traffic impacts, the potential roadway connecting the plan area to Mission College Boulevard, and planning for future pandemics. An earlier community meeting, held on February 25, 2019 for the City North Area, and was attended by approximately 28 people. That early meeting helped to define the vision for the Patrick Henry Drive plan.

ALTERNATIVES
That the Planning Commission adopts Resolutions recommending that the City Council:

2. Adopt a resolution approving the PHD Specific Plan, a specific plan consistent with Government Code Sections 65450-65457.

3. Adopt a resolution approving General Plan text amendments creating the following land use City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 12 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022
designations: Village Residential (60-149 DU/AC), Urban Village (100-149 DU/AC), Urban Center (120-250 DU/AC), and High Density Flex (60-149 DU/AC, or up to 2.0 FAR), updating the Climate Action Plan to recognize those Land Use Designations, and amending the General Plan Land Use diagrams for Phases II and III to reflect the land use designations in the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan.

4. Adopt an ordinance amending the Zoning Code to create of the Chapter 18.27 of the Zoning Code, Regulations for PHD, the Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Districts, including development standards, allowed uses and parking requirements for the following zoning districts: R5 - Very High Density Residential, VR - Village Residential, UV - Urban Village, UC - Urban Center, and HD Flex - High Density Flex, and rezoning the Project Site using the new districts as indicated in the Patrick Henry Drive zoning map.
or

5. Provide direction to staff to make modifications to the Specific Plan and/or Zoning districts for City Council consideration.

That the Planning Commission adopt Resolutions recommending that the City Council:

1. Approve and certify the Final EIR prepared for the PHD Specific Plan (SCH # 2019120515), including CEQA Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

2. Approve the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, a specific plan consistent with Government Code Sections 65450-65457.

3. Approve a General Plan text amendment creating the following land use designations: Village Residential (60-149 DU/AC), Urban Village (100-149 DU/AC), Urban Center (120-250 DU/AC), and High Density Flex (60-149 DU/AC, or up to 2.0 FAR), updating the Climate Action Plan to recognize those Land Use Designations, and amending the General Plan Land Use diagrams for Phases II and III to reflect the land use designations in the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan; and

4. Adopt an ordinance amending the Zoning Code to create of the Chapter 18.27 of the Zoning Code, Regulations for the PHD, the Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Districts, including development standards, allowed uses and parking requirements for the following zoning districts: R5 - Very High Density Residential, VR - Village Residential, UV - Urban Village, UC - Urban Center, and HD Flex - High Density Flex, and rezoning the Project Site using the new districts as indicated in the Patrick Henry Drive zoning map.

Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Director of Community Development Approved by: Deanna J. Santana, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Environmental Impact Report

2. Patrick Henry Drive Planning Commission EIR Resolution

3. CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

4. Patrick Henry Drive Planning Commission Specific Plan Resolution

5. Patrick Henry Drive Planning Commission General Plan Amendment Resolution

6. Patrick Henry Drive Planning Commission Zoning Resolution

7. Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Ordinance Amendments

8. Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Map

9. General Plan Future Focus Area Goals and Policies

10.Draft Plan Land Use Plan

11.Draft Plan Urban Design Framework
City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 13 of 14
powered by Legistar™
22-1115 Agenda Date: 1/26/2022

12.Street Section from the Patrick Henry Drive Plan

13.Draft Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan
City of Santa Clara Printed on 1/21/2022Page 14 of 14
powered by Legistar™
Patrick Henry Drive Environmental Impact Report:

Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan | Environmental Review/CEQA | City of Santa Clara (santaclaraca.gov)
Resolution/ Patrick Henry Drive EIR reso Page 1 of 7
Rev. Rev: 1/6/2022
RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE

CITY OF SANTA CLARA , CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING

THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AND CERTIFY A FINAL

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, MAKE FINDINGS WITH

RESPECT THERETO, AND ADOPT A STATEMENT O F

OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION

MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE

PATRICK HENRY DRIVE SPECIFIC PLAN

SCH #2019120515
PLN2019-14257 (CEQA Resolution, Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, and Zoning Amendment)

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clara (the “ City”) is contemplating the adoption of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan (the “Project”), a specific plan for a transit-oriented pedestrian-friendly neighborhood of u p to 12,000 residential units with supportive retail uses, located on approximately 62 net acres of land located within one-half mile of the Tasman Drive light rail line that are currently developed with industrial uses;
WHEREAS, the proposed Specific Plan also includes an alternative development scenario that allows for up to 10, 300 residential units, with up to 785,000 square feet of office space , and 310,000 square feet of other non-residential uses; and
WHEREAS, under the proposed Specific Plan, the Patrick Henry Drive area is intended to be a walkable urban neighborhood, with parking reflective of a variety of available transit modes, including bicycle parking; and
WHEREAS, the Patrick Henry Drive area will include a variety of forms of urban housing, including podium buildings, residential towers, and residential mixed-use buildings; WHEREAS, the proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the Future Focus Areas section in the General Plan; Resolution/ Patrick Henry Drive EIR reso Page 2 of 7
Rev. Rev: 1/6/2022
WHEREAS, as a part of implementing the Specific Plan, the City is contemplating the adoption of a General Plan Amendment (“GPA”) to amend the General Plan land use diagram by changing the existing land use designations of the Project Site from Light Indu strial to a variety of residential designations that would allow dwelling unit densities of 51 to 250 Dwelling Units per acre, with supportive retail uses, along with a High Density flex designation that would allow either residential densities of between 60 to 149 DU/A C, or a non-residential Floor Are a Ratio (FAR) of up to 2.0;
WHEREAS, the GPA includes an amendment to Appendix 8.13 (the Climate Action Plan) setting forth vehicle trip reduction targets for the ne w land use designations applicable to the Patrick Henry Drive area; and
WHEREAS, the City is contemplating the amendment of SCCC Title 18, the Zoning Code to create new Patrick Henry D rive zoning districts that implement an d are consistent wi th the proposed General Plan designations, and to apply those zoning designations across the Project Site;
WHEREAS, Santa Clara City Charter Section 1007 and Government Code Section 653 53 require that the Planning Commission provide input to the City Council on any proposed General Plan Amendment;
WHEREAS, the Pr oject approvals will i nclude a resolution certifying the EIR ; a r esolution approving the General Plan Amendment ; a r esolution approving the Patric k Henry Drive Specific Plan; and an ordinance amending the Zoning Code to correspond to the Specific Plan (collectively, the “Approvals”);
WHEREAS, implementation of the Project will also require separate applications for individual development approvals and Tentative and/or Vesting Tentative Subdivision Maps for City review and approval that are not part of this application;
WHEREAS, on December 19, 201 9, the City distri buted a Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”) for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan that Resolution/ Patrick Henry Drive EIR reso Page 3 of 7
Rev. Rev: 1/6/2022
contemplated either up to 12,000 net new residential units and 310,000 n et new square feet of non-residential uses, including retail and education facilities, or a second scenario which would substitute office for high-density residential along the east edge of the Plan Area, amounting to an approximate total of 10,300 net new residential units, 785,000 net new square feet of office, and 310,000 net new square feet of other nonresidential uses; and WHEREAS, on December 19, 201 9, the C ity posted the Notice of Preparation at the Santa Clara County Clerk’s office, soliciting guid ance on the scope and content of the environmen tal information to be included in the DEIR;
WHEREAS, on January 8, 2020, the City hosted a public scoping meeting to obtain community input on the scope and content of the DEIR;
WHEREAS, the DEIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA and the City circulated copies of the DEIR and Notice of Availability to the p ublic agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, as w ell as to other interested persons, organizations and agencies, and the City sought the comments of such persons, organizations and agencies on July 30, 2021 for a 45-day review period, ending on September 13, 2021 (the “Comment Period”); WHEREAS, the City prepared written responses to the comments received during the Comment Period and included those responses in a Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”). The FEIR consists of a list of agencies and organizations to whom the DEIR was sent, a list of t he comment letters received on the DEIR, revisions to the text of the DEIR, r esponses to comments received on the DEIR, and copies of comment letters. The FEIR was distributed to commenting parties and to the public on January 12, 2022; WHEREAS, the DEIR and FEIR constitute the EIR for the Project; WHEREAS, the EIR identified certa in significant and pote ntially significant adverse effects on the environment that would be caused by the Project as proposed; Resolution/ Patrick Henry Drive EIR reso Page 4 of 7
Rev. Rev: 1/6/2022
WHEREAS, the EIR outlined various mitigation measure s t hat would substantially lessen or avoid the Project’s significant effects on the environment, as well as alternatives to the Project as proposed that would provide some environmental advantages; WHEREAS, the City is required, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.), t o adopt all feasible mi tigation measures or feasible project alternatives that can substantially lessen or avoid any significant environmental effects of the Project;
WHEREAS, the EIR analyzed a “No Project” alternative for the Patrick Henry Drive area that considers full build -out under the existing land use designation (No Project /Light Industr ial Development), along with an All Commercial Office Development alternative, an All Residential Development Alternative and a Reduced Overall Development Alternative ; WHEREAS, significant and unavoidable air quality, historic resources, and traffic noise impacts would remain with the proposed project;
WHEREAS, Public Resources Code § 2 1081, subdivision (a) requires a lead agen cy, before approving a project for which an EIR has been p repared and certified, to adopt findings specifying whether mitigation measures and, in some instances, alternatives discussed in the EIR, have been adopted or rejected as infeasible;
WHEREAS, the “CEQA Findings” attached to this Res olution is a set of Fin dings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations prepared in order to satisfy the requirements of Public Resources Code § 21081, subdivision (a);
WHEREAS, as the CEQA Findings explain, the Planning Commission intends to rec ommend that the City Co uncil adopt the Specific Plan, associated General Plan Amendments, and Zoning Ordinance Amendment (the “Project”);
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has dete rmined that none of the alternatives addre ssed in the EIR, would be both feas ible and environmentall y superior to the Project as pro posed.

Neither the No Project alternative , nor the Reduced Development alternative, nor the All Resolution/ Patrick Henry Drive EIR reso Page 5 of 7
Rev. Rev: 1/6/2022
Residential nor the All Co mmercial alternatives would sufficiently satisfy the Project Objectives.

The details supporting these determinations are set forth in the CEQA Findings; WHEREAS, in taking this course, the Planning Commission has acted consistent with the CEQA mandate to look to project mitigations and/or alternatives as a means of substantially lessening or avoiding the environmental effects of projects as proposed; WHEREAS, many of the significant and potentially significant environmental effects associated with the P roject can either be substantially lessened or avoided through the inclusion of mitigation measures proposed in the EIR;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, in reviewing the Project, recommends that the City Council adopt all mitigation measures set forth in the EIR; WHEREAS, the significant effects that cannot be avoided or substantiall y lessened by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures will necessarily remain significant and unavoidable; WHEREAS, as detailed in the CEQA Findings, the Planning Commiss ion has determined that, despite the occurrence of significant unavoidable enviro nmental effects ass ociated with the Project, as mitigated and adopted, there exist certain overriding economic, social and other considerations for approving the Project which justify the occurrence of those impacts and render them acceptable;
WHEREAS, notice of the pub lic hearing on the proposed project was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation for the City, on January 12, 2022; WHEREAS, notices of the public hearing on the proposed project were mailed to all property owners within 50 0 fe et of the Project Site, according to the most recent assessor’s roll, on January 13, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the EIR and Mitiga tion Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached as the “MMRP”, as well as a set of CEQA Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, in accordanc e with the requirements of CEQA, along with the City Staff report pertaining to the EIR for the Proje ct (SCH #2019120515), and all Resolution/ Patrick Henry Drive EIR reso Page 6 of 7
Rev. Rev: 1/6/2022
evidence received at a duly noticed public hearing on January 26, 2022. All of these documents and evidence are incorporated herein by reference into this Resolution.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the Planning Commission hereby finds that the above Recitals are true and correct and by this reference makes them a part hereof.

2. That the Planning Commission hereby finds that the EI R has been completed in compliance with CEQA.

3. That the Planning Commission hereby finds the EIR has been presented to the Planning Commission, which reviewed and considered the information and analysis contained therein before making its determination, and that the EIR reflects the Commission ’s independent judgment and analysis.

4. That the Planning Commission hereby finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and California Code of Regulations, Title 14 , Section 15091, that many of the propo sed mitigation measures described in the EIR are feasible, and therefore will become binding upon the City and affe cted landowners and their assigns or successors in interest as conditions of approval when the Project is approved.

5. That the Planning Comm ission hereby finds that none of the Project Alternatives set forth in the EIR can feasibly subst antially lessen or avoid those significant adverse environmental effects not otherwise lessened or avoided by the adopti on of all feasible mitigation measures.

6. That, in order to comply with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the Planning Commission recommends that th e City Council adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as set forth in the attached “MMR P”. The MMRP is designed to ensure tha t, during project implementation, the City, affected landowners, their assigns and successors in interest and any o ther responsible parties comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified. The Resolution/ Patrick Henry Drive EIR reso Page 7 of 7
Rev. Rev: 1/6/2022
MMRP identifies, for each mitigation measure, the actio n to be taken and the party responsible for implementation.

7. That the Planning Commission hereb y finds that the E IR set forth program and cumulative environmental impacts that are significant and unavoidable that ca nnot be mitigated or avoided through th e adoption of feasible mitigation measures or feasible alternatives. As to these impacts, the Pl anning Commission finds that there exist certain overriding economic, social and other considerations for approving the Project that justify the occurrence of those impacts, as detailed in the “CEQA Findings” exhibit attached hereto.

8. Based on the findin gs set forth in th is Resolution, the evidence in the City Staff Report, and the attached CEQA Findings, the Planning Com mission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and certify the EIR, make findings concerning mitigation measures, adopt the MMRP, make findings c oncerning alternatives and make findings that there exist certain overriding economic, social and othe r considerations for approving the Proj ect that justify the occurrence of those associated impacts and adopt the CEQA Findings and State ment of Overriding Considerations, all in accordance with CEQA for the Project. /
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
Resolution/ Patrick Henry Drive EIR reso Page 8 of 7
Rev. Rev: 1/6/2022

9. Effective date. This resolution shall become effective immediately.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE A TRUE COPY OF A RESOLUTION PASSED

AND ADOPTED B Y THE PLANNING COMMI SSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE 26th DAY OF JANUARY, 2022, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: COMMISSIONERS:

NOES: COMMISSIONERS:

ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:

ABSTAINED: COMMISSIONERS:

ATTEST:

ANDREW CRABTREE

DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

Attachments Incorporated by Reference:

1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)

2. CEQA findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

I:\PLANNING\Advance Pl anning\Specific Pl ans\Freedom Circle - Patrick Henry \Patrick Henry \Resos and ordinances \PC EIR reso.doc
CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

FOR THE PATRICK HENRY DRIVE SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT

City of Santa Clara Project No. PLN2019-14257
(EIR, Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, and Zoning Amendment) SCH # 2019120515

City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050

FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2019120515) FOR THE PATRICK HENRY DRIVE SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT (CITY PROJECT NUMBER PLN2019-14257) I. INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code section 21081 et seq , and the Guidelines for Implementation for the California Environmental Quality Act, Title 14 C alifornia Code of Regulations, s ection 15091 et seq (“CEQA Guidelines”) require that a public agency consider the environmental impacts of a project before a project is approved and make specific findings. Public Resources Code section 21002 provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmenta l effects of such projects[.]” The same statute provides that the procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially le ssen such significant effects.” Section 21002 goes on to provide that “in the event [th at] specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.”

The mandate and principles announced in Pub lic Resources Code section 21002 are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies must adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. For each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a project, the ap proving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three permissible conclusions. The CEQA Guidelines section 15091 specifically provides as follows:

(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the EIR.

2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can or should be adopted by such other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

(b) The findings required by subdivision (a) shall be suppor ted by substantial evidence in the record.

(c) The finding in subdivision (a) (2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in subsection (a)(3) shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and project alternatives.

(d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1 ), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.

(e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based.

(f) A statement made pursuant to s ection 15093 does not subst itute for the findings required by this section.

CEQA Guidelines section 15093 further provides as follows:

(a) CEQA requires the decision -making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project.

If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposal project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental eff ects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."

(b) Where the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/ or other information in the record.

This statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.

(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to section 15091.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Public Resources Code section 21061.1 defines “feasible” to mean “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, legal, and technological factors.” CEQA Guidelines section 15364 adds another fa ctor: “legal” considerations. See also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Bd. of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 565 ( Goleta II). The concept of “feasibility” also encompasses the question of whether a particular alternative or mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project. City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417 ; Sierra Club v. County of Napa (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1490, 1506 -1509 ( court upholds CEQA findings rejecting alternatives in reliance on applicant’s project objectives) ; see also California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 1001 ( CNPS) ( “an alternative ‘may be found infeasible on the ground it is inconsistent with the project objectives as long as the finding is supported by subst antial evidence in the record’”) (quoting Kostka & Zischke, Practice Under the Cal. Environmental Qualit y Act [Cont.Ed.Bar 2d ed. 2009] ( Kostka), § 17.39, p. 825); In re Bay -Delta Programmatic Environmental Impact Report Coordinated Proceedings (2008) 43 Cal.4th 1143, 1165, 1166 ( Bay-Delta) (“[i]n the CALFED program, feasibility is strongly linked to achieve ment of each of the primary project objectives”; “a lead agency may structure its EIR alternative analysis around a reasonable definition of underlying purpose and need not study alternatives that ca nnot achieve that basic goal”) . Moreover, “‘feasibility’ under CEQA encompasses ‘desirability’ to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, legal, and technological factors.” City of Del Mar, supra, 133 Cal.App.3d at p. 417; see also CNPS, supra, 177 Cal.App.4th at p. 100 1 (“an alternative that ‘is impractical or undesirable from a policy standpoint’ may be rejected as infeasible”) ( quoting Kostka, supra, § 17.29, p. 824) ; San Diego Citizenry Group v. County of San Diego (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 1, 17.

For purposes of these findings, the term “avoid” refers to the effectiveness of one or more mitigation measures to reduce an otherwise significant effect to a less than significant level.

Although CEQA Guidelines section 15091 requires only tha t approving agencies specify that a particular significant effect is “avoid[ed] or substantially lessen[ed],” these findings, for purposes of clarity, in each case will specify whether the effect in question has been “avoided” (i.e., reduced to a less than significant level).

CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur. Project modification or alternatives are not r equired, however, where such changes are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the projec t lies with some other agency. CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a), (b).

With respect to a project for which significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened, a public agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve the project if the agency first adopts a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the project’s “benefits” rende red “acceptable” its “unavoidable adverse environmental effects.” CEQA Guidelines §§ 15093, 15043(b); see also Pub. Resour ces Code § 21081(b). The California Supreme Court has stated, “[t]he wisdom of approving . . . any development project, a delicate task which requires a CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who are re sponsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be info rmed, and therefore balanced.” Goleta II, supra, 52 Cal.3d at p. 576. The EIR (as defined below) for the Project (as defined below) concluded the Project would create significant and unavoidable impacts; thus, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required.

These Findings of Fact (sometimes referred to herein as “Findings”) constitute the City of Santa Clara’s (City’s) evidentiary and policy bases for its decision to approve the Project in a manner consistent with the requirements of CEQA. To the extent that these Findings conclude that various mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City hereby binds itself to ensuring that these measures are implemented by the appropriate party(ies) . These Findings, in other words, are not merely informational, but rather constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts a resolution approving the Project.

In addition, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( “MMRP”) has been prepared for the Project, and is being approved by the City Council by the same Resolution th at has adopted these F indings. The City will use the MMRP to track compliance wit h Project mitigation measures. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program will remain available for public review during the compliance peri od. The Final Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is attached to and incorporated into the environmental document approval resolution and is approved in conjunction with cert ification of the EIR and adoption of these Findings of Fact.

Having received, reviewed, and considered the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR”) and the Final Environmental Impact Report (“Final EIR” and, together with the Draft EIR, the “EIR”) for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan (the “Project”), State Clearinghouse (“SCH”) No. 2019120515, as well as other information in the record of proceedings on this matter, the City of Santa Clara City Council, in its capacity as the decision-making body of the CEQA Lead Agency hereby finds, determines, and declares the following Findings and Facts, in accordance with Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code.

These Findings set forth the environmental basis for the discretionary act ions to be undertaken by the County for the development of the Project. These actions include the approval of the following for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Project:
 Environmental Impact report (SCH No. 2019120515)
 Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan
 General Plan Amendment
 Zoning Amendment
CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 A. Document Format
These Findings have been organized into the following sections:
(1) Section I provides an introduction to these Findings. (2) Section II provides a summary of the Project, overview of the discretionary actions required for approval of the Project, and a statement of the Project’s objectives.
(3) Section III provides a summary of environmental review related to the Project and a summary of public participation in the environmental review for the Project
(4) Section IV sets forth findings regarding the potential impact areas identified in the EIR . This section details findings for those impacts for which the County has determined that there is no impact or the impact is less than significant and thus no mitigation is required; findings regarding potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the EIR that the County has determined can be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level through the imp osition of mitigation measures; and findings regarding those significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the EIR that will or may result from the Project and which the County has determined will remain significant and unavoidable, despite the identification and incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures.

In order to ensure compliance and implementation, all of the mitigation measures will be included in MMRP for the Project and adopted as conditions of the Project by the Lead Agency. Where potentially significant impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level through mitigation, these findings specify how those impacts would be reduced to an acceptable level. (5) Section V sets forth findings regarding alternatives to the Project (6) Section VI sets forth findings regarding the growth-inducing impacts of the Project.
(7) Section VII sets forth findings regarding recirculation of the Draft EIR. (8) Section VIII sets forth findings regarding rejection of recommended mitigation measures.
(9) Section IX contains the findings pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21082.1(c)(3).
(10) Section X contains the Statement of Overriding Consider ations for the Project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 B. Custodian and Location of Records
The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report consists of:

1. Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) and Appendices 25.1 through

25.6, dated July, 2021; and

2. Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) dated December, 2021.

The following Findings of Fact are based in part on the information contained in EIR for the Project, as well as additional facts found in the complete record of proceedings. The EIR is hereby incorporated by reference and is available for review at Santa Clara City Hall, 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, California, 95050 during normal business hours.

For the purposes of CEQA, and the findings herein set forth, the administrative record for the Project consists of those items listed in Public Resources Code Section 21167.6, subdivision (e). The record of proceedings for the City’s decision on the Project consists of the following documents, at a minimum, which are incorporated by reference and made part of the record supporting these Findings:
 The NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Project;
 The Draft EIR for the Project and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference;
 All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the 45-day comment period on the Draft EIR;
 All comments and correspondence submitted to the City during the public comment period on the Draft EIR, in addition to all other timely comments on the Draft EIR;  The Final EIR for the Project, including the Planning Comm ission staff report, minutes of the Planning Commission public hearing; City Council staff report; minutes of the City Council public hearing; comments received on the Draft EIR; the City’s responses to those comments; technical appendices; and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference;
 The MMRP for the Project;
 All findings and resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the Project, and all documents cited or referred to therein;
 All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the Project prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or responsible or trustee agencies with respect to the City’s compliance with the requiremen ts of CEQA and with respect to the City’s action on the Project;  All documents submitted to the City by other public agencies or members of the public in connection with the Project, up through the close of the public hearing;  Any minutes and/or verbatim t ranscripts of all information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings held by the City in connection with the Project; CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022  Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such information sessions, public meetings and public hearings;
 All res olutions adopted by the City regarding the Project, and all staff reports, analyses, and summaries related to the adoption of those resolutions;  The City’s General Plan and applicable Specific Plans and all updates and related environmental analyses;
 Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to Federal, State, and local laws and regulations;
 The City Code;
 Any documents expressly cited in these Findings, in addition to those cited above; and
 Any other materials required for the rec ord of proceedings by Public Resources Code section 21167.6, subdivision (e).

The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City’s actions related to the Project are at Santa Clara City Hall, 1500 Warburton Avenue, Sa nta Clara, California, 95050. The City is the custodian of the Administrative Record for the Project.

The City has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decisions on the proposed Project, even if not every document was formally presented to the City Council or City Staff as part of the City files generated i n connection with the Project. Without exception, any documents set forth above not found in the Project files f all into one of two categories. Many of them reflect prior planning or legislative decisions of which the City Council was aw are in approving the Project. See City of Santa Cruz v. Local Agency Formation Commission (1978) 76 Cal.App.3d 381, 391 -391; Dominey v. Department of Personnel Administration (1988) 205 Cal.App.3d 729, 738, fn. 6. Other documents influenced the expert advice provided to City Staff or consultants, who then provided advice to the Planning Commission and the City Council as final decision makers. For that reason, such documents form part of the underlying factual basis for the City’s decisions relating to approval of the Project. See Pub. Resources Code § 21167.6 (e)(10); Browning- Ferris Industries v. City Council of City of San Jose (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 852, 866; Stanislaus Audubon Society, Inc. v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144, 153, 155.

II. PROJECT SUMMARY
A. Project Location
The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan covers approximately 73.59 acres and currently contains predominantly commercial uses such as research and development (R&D) and light industrial (electronics and computer software development). Other commercial uses include offices (professional services, architects, legal, and personnel/employment support) and a restaurant . In addition, there is a church in the southern part of the Plan Area.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area, much like the surrounding neighborhood, is characterized by several “superblocks” with ample surface parking, significant setbacks, and sig nificant separation between buildings. The Plan Area is relatively flat and developed with buildings ranging in height from one and two stories, in the south and west, to four- and five-story buildings, in the east. The building stock was developed prima rily in the 1970s and 1980s. The Plan Area is generally underutilized, and some buildings are vacant. There are no residential land uses, public parks, or historic structures located on - site. Private automobiles predominate the suburban streetscape envir onment that is defined by limited pedestrian and bicycle accessibility. Visible infrastructure on -site includes local streets and utilities, such as streetlights, as well as the Hetch Hetchy right -of- way that runs along the Plan Area’s northern border. D ue to the large -lot industrial development pattern and limited number of roadways within the Plan Area, linkages and connectivity across the Plan Area are limited.

The proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, which has been under development since 2018, enables the redevelopment of an approximately 76 acre industrial area (62 acres net) bounded by Mission College to the south, Great America Parkway to the East, the Hetch-Hetchy right-of-way to the north, and Calabasas Creek to the west. With its close proximity to the Tasman light rail line, the proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan includes a land use framework to develop the area into a transit-oriented neighborhood with up to 12,000 residential units and up to 310,000 square feet of non-residential uses. A second scenario would be the same as the first but would substitute office for high-density residential along the east edge of the Plan Area, amounting to an approximate total of 10,300 net new residential units, 785,000 net new square feet of office, and 310,000 net new square feet of other nonresidential uses.

The Patrick Henry Drive Area is identified as a Future Focus Area in Phase II I of the City’s General Plan ( 2023-2030), and the PDHSP provides an opportunity for the City to reach housing goals identified in the City’s share of the state-required Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”) and for meeting demand for housing that has resulted from job and retail growth in the City and region. The Specific Plan is a prerequisite to development of the Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area with residential uses. The Plan Area is currently classified L ight Industrial in the Santa Clara General Plan and is designated in Phase II I (2023-2030) of the General Plan for High Density Residential land use, which allows 37 -50 du/ac. Parcels in the Plan Area are currently zoned Light Industrial (ML). On April 9, 2019, the City Council of the City of Santa Clara directed City staff to proceed with the preparation of a Specific Plan in advance of the Phase III time horizon due to significant developer interest in the area.

B. Project Description
With its close proximity to the Tasman light rail line, the proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan includes a land use framework to develop the area into a transit-oriented neighborhood with up to 12,000 residential units and up to 310,000 square feet of non- residential uses. A second scenario would be the same as the first but would substitute CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 office for high-density residential along the east edge of the Plan Area, amounting to an approximate total of 10,300 net new residential units, 785,000 net new square feet of office, and 310,000 net new square feet of other nonresidential uses.

The Plan area consists of an approximately 76-acre industrial area (62 acres net) bounded by Mission College to the south, Great America Parkway to the East, the Hetch-Hetchy right- of-way to the north, and Calabasas Creek to the west.

As the Plan area is located in the northern part of Santa Clara, it is generally proximate to a large number of employment uses, as well as the Santa Clara Youth Soccer Park, Levi’s© Stadium, the City’s convention center, the Great America theme park, and other potential major development projects along in northern Santa Clara, including Kylli immediately to the North, the Freedom Circle Focus Area/Greystar project across Great America Parkway, and the Related Santa Clara project and the Tasman East Specific Plan Area to the East on Tasman Drive.

C. Discretionary Actions
Implementation of the Project within the City will require several actions by the City, including:
 Environmental Assessment : To certify an FEIR that analyzes the environmental effects of the proposed Project.

 General Plan Amendment: To amend the Santa Clara General Plan, adopted by the City Council on November 16, 2010, to create the following land use designations:
· Very High Density (51-100 du/ac)
· Village Residential (60-150 du/ac)
· Urban Village Residential (100-150 du/ac)
· Urban Center Residential (120-250 du/ac); and
· High Density Flex designation (60-150 du/ac or up to a 2.0 floor area ratio of commercial development).

The General Plan Amendment includes the amendment of the Land Use Diagram and text amendment (as well as amendments to the City’s Climate Action Plan).  Specific Plan : To adopt the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan , in order to regulate development through its development standards and regulations in conjunction with Title 18 of the Santa Clara City Code.

 Zoning Amendment : To amend the Santa Clara City Code of Chapter 18.27 of the Zoning Code, Regulations for PHD, the Patrick Henry Drive Zoning Di stricts, including development standards, allowed uses and parking requirements for the following zoning districts: R5 – Very High Density Residential, VR – Village Residential, UV – Urban Village, UC – Urban Center, and HD Flex – High Density Flex; Approval of these zoning amendments, together with adoption of the Specific Plan , would establish the land use regulations and development standards applicable to the Plan Area.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

Prior to Project implementation, additional permits and/or approvals may be required from various governmental entities, including the following:
 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)
 Santa Clara Water & Sewer Utilities Department
 Silicon Valley Power (SVP)
 County of Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health  Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC)  San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)  Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
 Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
D. Statement of Project Objectives
The statement of objectives sought by the Project and set forth in the Final EIR is provided as follows:
 Ensure an econom ically vibrant, safe, healthy, and sustainable neighborhood that supports a range of users, including residents, business owners, and visitors.  Bring clarity and consistency to the regulation of individual development proposals within the [Patrick Henry Drive] PHD Specific Plan Area boundaries.  Foster strong connectivity, access, and circulation for a mix of travel modes, including walking, cycling, driving, and transit.
 Plan parkland and open space standards consistent with City Code 17.35 to support a high quality of life within an urban environment.
 Provide community amenities and public facilities to support a “complete” neighborhood.
 Adopt infrastructure and funding plans to ensure infrastructure will adequately support planned densities and intensities.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022  Support the City’s affordable housing goals by requiring 15 percent of all developed residential units to be affordable to households at or below 80 percent of the Average Median Income (AMI).
 Engage the entire community in a robust, creative, and ongo ing participation process.

III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The Final EIR , dated January 2022 , includes the Draft EIR dated July 2021, written comments on the Draft EIR that were received during the public review period, written responses to these comments, clarifications/changes to the Draft EIR, and the MMRP. In conformance with CEQA, the City conducted an extensive environmental revi ew of the Project, as described below:
 The City issued a Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (“NOP”) on December 19, 201 9, to federal, state, regional, and local government agencies and interested parties to solicit comments and to inform agencies and the public of the Project during a 30 -day public review period that extended from December 19, 2019 to January 21, 2020.
 The Project, as it was envisioned in 2019, was described in the NOP; potential environmental effects associated w ith Project approval and implementation were identified; and agencies and the public were invited to review and comment on the Initial Study, NOP, and NOP mailing list.
 Based on the Notice of Preparation and responses, a determination was made that the EI R would contain a comprehensive analysis of the following environmental issues, identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines: aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural and Historical resources (including Tribal Cultural Resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions and energy , hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic, and utilities and service systems.
 An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for this project in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines. As required by CEQA, the EIR includes appropriate review, analysis, and mitigation measures for the environmental impacts of the proposed project. The Final EIR could be utilized by other permitting agencies in their capacity as Responsible and Trustee agencies under CEQA.  A Draft EIR was prepared and circulated for a 45-day public review period, beginning on July 30, 20 21, and ending on September 13, 20 21. The Draft EIR was distributed to responsible and trustee agencies, other affected agencies, surrounding jurisdictions, interested parties, and other parties who requested a copy of the EIR in accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 20192.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022  The Draft EIR was available for public review on the City’s webpage and, during normal business hours, at City Hall located at 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, CA, 95050. During this review period, the document was reviewed by various state, regional, and local agencies, as well as by interested organizations and individuals.

Comment letters on the Draft EIR were received from 4 agencies and 1 law firm representing a property owner within the plan area . Comment letters and responses to comments are included in the FEIR, which was issued in January 2022.

IV. FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The following potentially significant impact s were analyzed in the EIR, and the effects of the Project were considered. For some impacts, the C ity has determined that the Project impacts have no impact on the environment or have a less than significant impact on the environment and thus no mitigation is required.

Other potentially significant impacts have been determined by the City to be reduced to a level of less than significant b ecause of the environmental analysis of the Project and identification of project design features, compliance with existing laws, codes, and statutes, and the identification and incorporation o f feasible mitigation mea sures. The City has thus found for these impacts – in accordance with CEQA s ection 21081( a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines s ection 15091(a)(1) – that “Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Where the City has determined – pursuant to CEQA s ection 21081(a)(2) and CEQA Guidelines s ection 15091(a)(2) – that “Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agenc y and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency ,” it has also designated the impact as less than significant with mitigation.

Where, as a result of the environmental analysis of the Project, the City has determined that either (1) even with the identification of project design features, compliance with existing laws, codes and statutes, and/or the identification of feasible mitigation measures, potentially significant impacts cannot be reduced to a level of less than significant, or (2) no feasible mitigation measures or alternatives are available to mitigate the potentially significant impact, the City has found in accordance wit h CEQA s ection 21081(a )(3) and CEQA Guidelines section 15091(a)(3) that "Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in th e environmental impact report." These impacts ha ve been designated significant and unavoidable.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 A. Aesthetics

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on t he environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
The Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Existing, limited vistas within the Plan Area include views of distant hills, but due to the generally flat, urbanized nature of Santa Cl ara, these vistas are often blocked by buildings, trees, power poles, and walls. Public views of these features occasionally emerge along view corridors created by long, straight roads along the perimeter of the Plan Area (e.g., Great America Parkway) or selectively between buildings and other structures.

The Specific Plan would not result in significant impacts on the existing visual character and quality of the Plan Area and its surroundings , and the Specific Plan would not conflict with applicable zonin g or other regulations governing scenic quality . The Specific Plan proposes new zoning and regulations governing scenic quality and, if approved, the development anticipated by the Specific Plan would be consistent with these new provisions. The Patrick H enry Drive Specific Plan would serve to achieve a coordinated, connected environment within the Plan Area while increasing land use intensity through frameworks and unified, context -sensitive design standards and guidelines, which would result in the effic ient use of existing resources and infrastructure. Plan components are purposely designed to achieve and maintain a cohesive, compatible visual identity and sense of place in the Plan Area, as well as provide smooth transitions with adjacent neighborhoods and areas.

The Specific Plan would not significantly increase daytime or nighttime light or glare in a way that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area . .Specific Plan lighting characteristics are not expected to represent a source of substantial new light or glare which would adversely affect views and vision. The area is already developed with urban uses that are sources of daytime and nighttime light and glare and does not contain uses sensitive to light or glare.

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated
None.

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable None.

4. Cumulative impacts
Buildout of the Plan Area would not substantially block views of scenic vistas or resources beyond existing conditions. Due to the distan ce between cumulative projects, and the intervening development, vegetation, and flat topography of the area, there is not CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 anticipated to be a cumulative impact to visual character. Projects in the City and adjoining jurisdictions are subject to architectural review, design guidelines and development standards, and municipal codes, including standards to prevent light and glare impacts.

Thus, the Project would not cumulatively contribute to a significant visual impact.

B. Air Quality

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
Consistency with the 2017 Clean Air Plan. The Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Implementation of the proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would be consistent with and not hinder the implementation of any applicable 2017 Clean Air Plan Control Measures. In addition, the proposed Specific Plan’s growth in service population would be greater than the increase in trip generation within the Planning Area, and the Specific Plan would not promote disparities in health risks. Based on the preceding analysis, the proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would be consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan.

Criteria Pollutants. As described under Impact 5 -2, the proposed Specific Plan would generate cu mulatively considerable operational criteria air pollutant emissions for which the region is designated nonattainment; however, these operational criteria air pollutant emissions would not expose receptors to substantial operational pollutant concentration s.

Aside from mobile source emissions, which are anticipated to become cleaner over time due to actions taken at the state and federal level, the next largest sources of criteria air pollutant emissions are anticipated to come from the use of consumer prod ucts and landscaping equipment. Neither of these sources would be used at the frequency nor magnitude required to result in criteria air pollutant emissions that would be harmful to one’s health. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Specific Plan woul d not exacerbate or contribute to significant health risks at or in proximity of the Plan Area, nor would it increase the number of state or national ambient air quality standard exceedances (as shown in Table 5-3).

Odors. According to the BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines land uses associated with odor complaints include agricultural operations, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and certain industrial operations (such as manufacturing uses that produce chemicals, paper, etc.). Implementation of the proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would result in new residential, retail, commercial, office, and other community serving land uses. It would not permit the land uses identified in the BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines identified as generating odor. No impact would occur.

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated
(a) Potential Impact:

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Impact 5 -2: Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase in Criteria Pollutants for which the Region is Non-Attainment. Implementation of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan could result in growth in the Plan Area that exceeds the level of growth accounted for in the City’s General Plan and, therefore, could generate a cumulatively considerable net increase in criteria air pollutants for which the region is in non-attainment. This represents a potentially significant impact.

Construction activities related to t he Project could result in a n exceedance of applicable thresholds for criteria pollutants for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors) due to dust generation and emissions of the criteria pollutants such as Reactive Organic Gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter (PM).

Finding: Mitigation measures would reduce impacts due to cumulatively considerable net increases of criteria pollutants for which the region is n on- attainment to less than significant levels. The City hereby determines this impact to be less than significant.

Facts in Support of Finding
The Bay Area is non-attainment for ground level ozone and particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5) under both the federal Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act. The area is also non -attainment for particulate matter of 10 microns or less (PM10) under the California Clean Air Act. ROG and NOx are precursor pollutants to ozone. Implementation of the Project would result in temporary emissions from construction activities associated with development, including demolition, site grading, asphalt paving, building construction, construction equipment, and architectural coating. These activities would create emissions of NOx, ROG, and PM.

Architectural coatings and application of asphalt pavement would release ROG. The combination of temporary dust from activities and diesel exhaust from construction equipment and related traffic may lead to an exceedan ce of BAAQMD’s project-level thresholds for PM 2.5 and/or PM10. In addition, NOx and ROG emissions may exceed the BAAQMD NOx thresholds . Mitigation Measure 5-2A would reduce this impact to less than significant by requiring BMPs for during construction to reduce dust, emissions from idling, and constructi on emissions , and by requiring criteria pollutant quantification for individual development projects once details of those projects are available to ensure criteria pollutant emissions do not exceed BAAQMD’s thresholds. This impact would thus be less than significant with implementation of MM 5-2A, MM 5-2B, and MM5-2C.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented on a project -by-project basis to control dust and reduce const ruction TAC and criteria pollutant emissions during construction:

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Mitigation Measure 5 -2A: Implement BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures. The City shall require new development projects occurring under implementation of the Patrick Henry Drive S pecific Plan to implement the BAAQMD’s Basic Control Mitigation Measures to address fugitive dust emissions that would occur during earthmoving activities associated with project construction. These measures include:

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track -out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.

5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be pav ed shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.

7. All construction equi pment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.

8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the City regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Mitigation Measure 5-2B: Require a Project-level Construction Assessment for New Development Proposed Under Implementation of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan. The City shall require applicants to submit a quantitative project-level construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions analysis for future development proposed under implementation of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan. The estimated construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions shall be compared against the thresholds of significance maintained by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and, if emissions are shown to be above BAAQMD thre sholds, the City shall require the implementation of mitigation to reduce emissions below BAAQMD thresholds or to the maximum extent feasible. Mitigation measures to reduce emissions could include, but are not limited to:

 Selection of specific constructio n equipment (e.g., specialized pieces of CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 equipment with smaller engines or equipment that will be more efficient and reduce engine runtime);
 Requiring equipment to use alternative fuel sources (e.g., electric -powered and liquefied or compressed natural gas ), meet cleaner emission standards (e.g., U.S. EPA Tier IV Final emissions standards for equipment greater than 50-horsepower), and/or utilizing added exhaust devices (e.g., Level 3 Diesel Particular Filter);
 Minimizing the idling time of diesel -powered construction equipment to two minutes;
 Requiring that all construction equipment, diesel trucks, and generators be equipped with Best Available Control Technology for emission reductions of NOx and PM;
 Requiring all contractors use equipment that meets CARB’ s most recent certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines; and  Application of Low -VOC paints to interior and/or exterior surfaces (e.g., paints that meet SCAQMD Rule 1113 “Low -VOC” or “Super -Compliant” requirements).

Mitigation Measure 5-2C: Use Low- and Super Compliant VOC Architectural Coatings. The City shall require the use of Low- and Super-Compliant VOC Architectural Coatings in maintaining buildings in the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area through Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Ground Lease. Developed parcels shall require within their CC&Rs and/or ground leases requirements for all future interior spaces to be repainted with architectural coatings that meet the “Low-VOC” or “Super-Compliant” requirements. “Low-VOC” refers to paints that meet the more stringent regulatory limits of South Coast Air Quality Management District AQMD Rule 1113. “Super-Compliant” refers to paints that have been reformulated to levels well below the “Low-VOC” limits.

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable (a) Impact 5-3: Generate Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions that Expose Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollutant Concentrations During Construction .

Implementation of t he Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would result in construction activities over the next approximately 20 years that generate toxic air contaminant emissions and could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. These activities represent a potentially significant impact.

Finding: There are no feasible and reasonable mitigation measures which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The City hereby determines that this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation Measure 5 -2B would require the preparation of a project -specific air quality assessment to evaluate potential TAC construction emissions associated with the development project. Although future development projects would be required to implemen t Mitigation Measure 5 -2B, it cannot be definitively known or stated at this time that all development projects occurring under implementation of the Specific Plan would be able to reduce potential TAC emissions to levels that are below BAAQMD thresholds. For example, should a development project involving new residential receptors be undertaken on the eastern side of Plan Area early on in the Specific Plan’s implementation, future development projects upwind of that site (i.e., to the west / northwest; see Figure 5-1) would generate emissions that could adversely affect the new receptors and exceed applicable BAAQMD thresholds of significance. Therefore, despite the implementation of Mitigation Measure 5-2B, TAC construction emissions associated with the pr oposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan could result in significant adverse health risks at receptor locations. This impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures
Refer to MM 5-2B above.

C. Biological Resources

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
(a) Impact 6 -1: Impacts on Riparian Habitat, Sensitive Natural Communities, Wetlands, Fish and Wildlife Corridors, and Fish and Wildlife Nursery Sit es.

The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area is outside the nearest known HCP, approximately one mile west of the of the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan permit area. Two Natural Communities of Special Concern, as identified by CDFW, occur within the vi cinity of the Plan Area: northern coastal salt marsh and sycamore alluvial woodland. However, these sensitive natural communities do not occur in or adjacent to the Plan Area.

The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) databases did not identify any habitat types that could occur in the Plan Area that would be able to support special-status species.

Implementation of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would hav e a less -than- significant impact on riparian habitat, sensitive natural communities, wetlands, fish and wildlife corridors, and fish and wildlife nursery sites with mitigation incorporated.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 (b) Impact 6-5: Impacts on Protected Trees, Plants, and Shrubs. There are no City- designated heritage trees in the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area (General Plan Table 8.10). However, Section 12.35 (Trees and Shrubs) of the City of Santa Clara Municipal Code is an ordinance pertaining to all trees, plants, and shrubs along streets or public places within the city. Any of these trees, plants, or shrubs planned for removal must first obtain written permission from the superintendent of streets.

Finally, Section 12.35 states “No person without such authorization s hall trench around or alongside of any such tree, plant or shrub with the intent of cutting the roots thereof or otherwise damaging the same.” The ordinance was adopted by the City and is implemented as applicable. Under CEQA, the ordinance is considered a uniformly applicable development regulation implemented to avoid or reduce impacts on trees, plants, and shrubs along city streets and within public spaces.

Permission to alter or remove vegetation is generally based on the vegetation’s potential hazard (e.g., may fall and damage property or injure people); or, in the case of development proposals, on vegetation replacement and landscaping plans.

On obtaining a written permit from the superintendent of streets before altering or removing any trees, plant s, or shrubs along streets or public portions of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area, a project would be in compliance with all local policies and ordinances for preserving trees. Therefore, Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan implementation would hav e a less-than-significant impact on trees, plants, and shrubs.

Mitigation 6-5. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significa nt with mitigation incorporated
(a) Potential Impact: Impact 6-2: Potential Impacts on Threatened and Endangered Habitat. Development facilitated by the Patrick Henry Specific Plan could degrade the habitat of rare, threatened, or endangered species (also referred to as “special - status”) potentiall y present on a project site, and conflict with Policy 5.10.1‐P1 of the Santa Clara General Plan , to require environmental review prior to approval of any development with the potential to degrade the habitat of any threatened or endangered species.

Finding: Mitigation measures would require environmental review prior to approval of any development with the potential to degrade the habitat of any threatened or endangered species. The City hereby determines this impact to be less than significant.

Facts in Support of Finding
The absence of City evaluation of the need for further biological resource surveys would be in violation of City policy and is therefore considered a potentially significant impact.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation 6 -2. In order to keep current the biological resource evaluation prepared for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan EIR, upon receiving applications for site -specific projects within the Specific Plan Area, the City shall evaluate the need for a specific biological resourc e survey of the project site and adjacent area that may be indirectly impacted by project work. If no biological resources are determined to be at risk as determined by a qualified biologist, no further survey shall be required. However, if the City determ ines that biological resources within the project area require further analysis, the project proponent shall be required to conduct a biological resource survey of the habitat and special -status species that may be impacted by project activities, either di rectly or indirectly. A report shall be provided to the City detailing survey methods, results, and avoidance and minimization measures required to protect any special -status species with potential to be impacted, in accordance with the regulatory protocol s of the responsible jurisdictional agencies for the resource in question, including, but not limited to:

USFWS, CDFW, and USACE. If no further surveys/investigation is requested by a permitting or other regulatory agency upon receipt of biological survey report, work may proceed as planned. Implementation of this measure would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

(b) Potential Impact: Impact 6-3: Potential Impacts on Special -Status Plants. There is a low potential for Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii; California Rare Plant Rank 1B.2) and arcuate bush mallow (Malacothamnus arcuatus; California Rare Plant Rank 1B.2) to occur within the Specific Plan Area, especially if the area is left undisturbed for a long period of t ime (i.e., a year or longer). Without a proactive mitigation procedure in place, Plan implementation could inadvertently result in the removal of special-status plants. This is considered a potentially significant impact.

Finding: Mitigation measures wo uld reduce impacts to Congdon’s tarplant to less than significant levels. The City hereby determines this impact to be less than significant.

Facts in Support of Finding
Mitigation measures would require that a qualified botanist shall conduct site - specific, focused surveys according to CDFW guidelines before any project work within the Specific Plan Area begins, to determine presence or absence of special - status plant species on the individual project site and any adjacent potential area of disturbance
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation 6-3. Before any project work within the Specific Plan Area, a qualified botanist shall conduct site -specific, focused surveys according to CDFW guidelines CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 to determine presence or absence of special -status plant species on the individual project site and any adjacent potential area of disturbance. A comprehensive, site - wide survey should be conducted within May to September before project work begins, to encompass the Congdon’s tar plant and arcuate bush mallow’s blooming periods. Following the completion of the surveys, a survey results report shall be prepared and provided to the City. This report should include, but should not be limited to, the following: (1) a description of th e survey methodology; (2) a discussion of the survey results; and (3) a map showing the survey area and the location of any special -status plants encountered. If no rare plants are found, then no further mitigation would be required.

If rare plants are found during the survey, the number of individuals present shall be documented and the limits of population shall be marked with flagging. The flagged border of the population shall be avoided by construction personnel for the duration of the project. If the species cannot be avoided or may be indirectly impacted, the applicant shall notify CDFW to discuss avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures as appropriate for each species population, including measures to be taken and protocols to be followed if special -status plants are inadvertently disturbed during construction activities.

CDFW may require the preparation and implementation of a mitigation plan that details avoidance, preservation, and/or compensation for the loss of individual special-status plant species. Mitigation may include the purchase of mitigation bank credits, preserving and enhancing existing on -site populations, creation of off -site populations through seed collection and/or transplantation and monitoring these populations to ensure their successful establishment, and/or preserving occupied habitat off -site in perpetuity. Specific amounts and methods of mitigation and/or credits shall be determined in formal consultation with CDFW and USFWS.

Implementation of this measure would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

The Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code sections 3503, 3503.5, 3513, 3800, and 4150 protect migratory and nesting birds, as well as roosting bats. Although the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan does not specify which trees or buildings might be removed under individual projects facilitated by the Plan, trees (potential nesting and roosting habitat) or buildings could be disturbed or removed by Plan implementa tion. The possibility of removing trees and/or buildings that contain nests or roosting bats is identified here as a potentially significant impact. Any direct removal of trees or indirect disturbance by construction or operational activities during the n esting season that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (killing or abandonment of eggs or young) is considered a "take."

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 There is a low potential for burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia; California species of special concern), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus; California Fully -Protected Species), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), and Townsend’s big -eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii; California species of special concern) to utilize the landscaped habitat within the Specific Pl an Area for roosting and/or nesting, especially if the area is left undisturbed for a long period of time. In addition, many common bird species without a special status, though protected by the MBTA, MBPA, and California Fish and Game Code (CFGC), may uti lize buildings, gravel substrates, and the landscaped vegetation within the Plan Area for nesting, foraging, and roosting. Common bat species protected by the CFGC may also rarely utilize vegetation within the Specific Plan Area for individual roosting. Wi thout a proactive mitigation procedure in place, Plan implementation could inadvertently result in the removal of existing trees containing nests or eggs of migratory birds, raptors, or bird species during the nesting season, or roosting bats, which would be considered unlawful take under the MBTA and the CFGC (see Regulatory Setting above). This is considered a potentially significant impact.

The mitigation measure below would reduce this potentially significant impact to on Nesting Birds or Roosting Bats to a less-than-significant level.

Finding: Mitigation measures would reduce impacts on Nesting Birds or Roosting Bats to less than significant levels. The City hereby determines this impact to be less than significant.

Facts in Support of Finding

Although the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan does not specify which trees or buildings might be removed under individual projects facilitated by the Plan, trees (potential nesting and roosting habitat) or buildings could be disturbed or removed by Plan im plementation. The possibility of removing trees and/or buildings that contain nests or roosting bats is identified here as a potentially significant impact.

Any direct removal of trees or indirect disturbance by construction or operational activities duri ng the nesting season that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (killing or abandonment of eggs or young) is considered a "take."

There is a low potential for burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia; California species of special concern ), white -tailed kite (Elanus leucurus; California Fully -Protected Species), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), and Townsend’s big -eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii; California species of special concern) to utilize the landscaped habitat within the Specific Plan Area for roosting and/or nesting, especially if the area is left undisturbed for a long period of time. In addition, many common bird species without a special status, though protected by the MBTA, MBPA, and California Fish and Game Code (CFGC), may utilize buildings, gravel substrates, and the landscaped vegetation within the Plan Area for nesting, foraging, and roosting. Common bat species protected by the CFGC may also rarely utilize vegetation within the Specific Plan Area for individual roosting. Without a proactive CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 mitigation procedure in place, Plan implementation could inadvertently result in the removal of existing trees containing nests or eggs of migratory birds, raptors, or bird species during the nesting season, or roosting bats, which wou ld be considered unlawful take under the MBTA and the CFGC (see Regulatory Setting above).

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation 6 -4. The demolition of any buildings, disturbance of gravel substrate, and/or removal of trees, shrubs, or weedy vegetation shall be avoided during the February 1 through August 31 bird nesting period to the extent possible. If no demolition, gravel disturbanc e, vegetation, or tree removal is proposed during the nesting period, no further action is required. If it is not feasible to avoid the nesting period, the project applicant shall retain a qualified wildlife biologist to conduct a survey for nesting birds at most 14 days prior to the start of removal of trees, shrubs, grassland vegetation, or buildings, including prior to grading or other construction activity. If demolition of buildings, disturbance of gravel substrate, or vegetation removal efforts do n ot begin within the 14 days following the nesting bird survey, another survey shall be required. The area surveyed shall include all construction sites, access roads, and staging areas, as well as reasonably accessible areas within 150 feet outside the bo undaries of the areas to be cleared or as otherwise determined by the biologist and dependent on species’ life history requirements.

If an active nest is discovered in the areas to be directly physically disturbed, or in other habitats within the vicinity of construction boundaries and may be disturbed by construction activities (as determined by the qualified biologist), clearing and construction shall be postponed until the qualified biologist has determined that the young have fledged (left the nest), the nest fails, or the nest is otherwise determined to be inactive by the biologist (i.e. predation).

To avoid impacts to roosting b ats that may rarely utilize the Specific Plan Area vegetation and/or vacant buildings for day roosting, the project applicant shall retain a qualified wildlife biologist to conduct a survey for roosting bats at most 14 days prior to the start of demolition of any vacant buildings left with entry and egress points accessible to bats or removal of suitable bat roosting vegetation. If roosting bats are detected, the biologist shall enact a minimum of a 150 -foot no - work buffer and confer with CDFW to determine potential roost protection or roost eviction practices. After conferring with CDFW, the protective buffer may be adjusted based on specific roost needs. Once bats have been suitably protected by a buffer and/or safely evicted from roosting sites (as appro ved by CDFW), construction may resume outside the buffered area.

A nesting bird and roosting bat survey report prepared with the methods and results of the pre -project survey will be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to commencement of construction activities. Any additional construction monitoring, as determined through any necessary CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 coordination/discretionary approvals with the resource agencies, will be documented per requirements set forth in an approved mitigation monitoring and reporting program.

Implementation of this measure would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable (a) None.

4. Cumulative impacts
(a) None.

D. Cultural Resources

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
None.

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significa nt with mitigation incorporated
(a) Potential Impact: Impact 7 -2: Potential for Disturbance of Buried Archaeological Resources, Including Human Remains, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Development facilitated by the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan could disturb unrecorded sensitive archaeological resources or tribal cultural res ources in the Plan Area. This possibility represents a potentially significant impact.

Finding: Mitigation measures would reduce impacts due to a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource to less than significant levels. The City hereby determines this impact to be less than significant.

Facts in Support of Finding
The City of Santa Clara notified the Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area, in cluding providing a copy of the EIR Notice of Preparation (NOP). The Native American tribes notified include the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista, Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, Ohlo ne Indian Tribe, North Valley Yokuts Tribe, and Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan. No comments were received by the City during the NOP 30 -day review period (December 2019 to January 2020), nor have any subsequent comments been received.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Though alm ost all of the Specific Plan Area is developed, with some areas of manicured vegetation, there is a possibility that as -yet unrecorded prehistoric cultural resources or tribal cultural resources could exist beneath the surface of the Plan Area. Contact with such resources during construction activities could result in a significant impact. The mitigation below would reduce the impact to a less -than- significant level.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation 7-2. During the City’s standard project-specific review process for all future, discretionary, public improvement and private development projects in the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area, the City shall determine the possible presence of, and the potential for new or substantially more severe impacts of the action on, archaeological resources and tribal cultural resources. The City shall require individual project applicants or environmental consultants to contact the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) to determine whether the particular project is located in a sensitive area. Future discretionary development projects that CHRIS determines may be located in a sensitive area - i.e., on or adjoining an identified archaeological site - shall proceed only after the project applicant contracts with an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards, to conduct a determination in regard to cultural values remaining on the site and warranted mitigation measures, as described directly below.

In general, to make an adequate determination in these instances, the archaeologist shall conduct a preliminary field inspection to (1) assess the amount and location of visible ground surface, (2) determine the nature and extent of previous impacts, and (3) assess the nature and extent of potential impacts. Such field inspection may demonstrate the need for some form of additional subsurface testing (e.g., excavation by auger, shovel, or backhoe unit) or, alternatively, the need for on-site monitoring of subsurface activities (i.e., during grading or trenching).

In addition, the City shall continue to notify the Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Specific Plan Area of the discretionary, public improvement and private development projects if those proposed improvements or projects are subject to a CEQA Negative Declaration (including Mitigated Negative Declaration) or Environmental Impact Report (EIR), in accordance with California Assembly Bill 52, and if a Native American tribe requests consultation, conduct a good faith consultation.

Following field inspection and completion of all necessary phases of study as determined by the archaeologist and the City, damage to any identified archaeological resources shall be avoided or mitigated to the maximum extent possible. Preservation in place to maintain the relationship between the artifact(s) and the archaeological context is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts on an archaeological site. Preservation may be accomplished by:

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

 Planning construction to avoid the archaeological or tribal cultural site;  Incorporating the site within a park, green space, or other open space element;  Covering the site with a layer of chemically stable soil; or  Deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement.

When in-place mitigation is determined by the City to be infeasible, a data recovery plan, which makes provisions for adequate recovery of culturally or historically consequential information about the site (including artifacts discovered on the site), subject to review and approval by the City, shall be prepared and adopted prior to any excavation being undertaken. Such studies shall be submitted to the CHRIS Northwest Information Center. If Native American artifacts are indicated, the studies shall also be submitted to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). CHRIS and NAHC are recognized as experts in their respective disciplines.

Identified cultural resources shall be recorded on form DPR 422 (archaeological sites). Mitigation measures recommended by these two groups (CHRIS and NAHC), as reviewed and approved by the City, shall be undertaken prior to and during construction activities. Although the precise details of the mitigation measures would be specific to the particular project site, the measures shall be consistent with the avoidance and mitigation strategies described above in this programmatic mitigation measure.

A data recovery plan and data recovery for a historic resource shall not be required if the City determines that testing or studies already completed have adequately recovered the necessary data, provided that the data have already been documented in an EIR or are available for review at the CHRIS Northwest Information Center (CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4[b]).

Resource identification training procedures shall be implemented for construction personnel, conducted by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards. In the event that subsurface cultural resources are otherwise encountered during approved ground-disturbing activities for a Plan Area construction activity, work within 50 feet shall be stopped and a qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the finds following the procedures described above. Project personnel shall not collect cultural resources. Although work may continue beyond 50 feet, the archaeologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoidance of adverse impacts to archaeological resources.

If human remains are found, the rules set forth in State Health and Safety Code section 7050.5 and CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4(b) apply and shall be followed.

Implementation of this measure would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable

(b) Impact 7-1: Destruction/Degradation of Historic Resources. There may be one or more properties or features within the Specific Plan Area, now or in the future, that meets the CEQA definition of a historic resource, including properties or features eligible for listing in a local, State, or Federal register of hi storic resources.

Future development projects that are otherwise consistent with the proposed Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan may cause substantial adverse changes in the significance of one or more such historic resources. Substantial adverse changes that may occur include physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of one or more historic resources or its immediate surroundings such that the resource is "materially impaired." The significance of a historic resource would be considered potentially "materially impaired" when and if an individual future development project proposes to demolish or materially alter the physical characteristics that justify the determination of its significance (CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5[b]). Such adv erse changes in the significance of a CEQA -defined historic resource would be a significant impact.

Finding: Without knowing the characteristics of the potentially affected historic resource or of the future individual development proposal, the City cannot determine with certainty that complying with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties or relocation of the resource would be considered feasible. Consequently, this impact is currently considered significant and unavoidable.

Facts in Support of Finding
The identification of historic resources must account for change over time. Today’s newer buildings may be recognized as historic within the lifetime of the Specific Plan. Today’s older buildings may attain historic significance as more is uncovered about their past. Currently non-historic buildings may be recognized as historic in the future if the people or events associated with those buildings become historically or culturally distinguished. All these possibilities are accounted for in CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5 (Determining the Significance of Impacts to Archaeological and Historical Resources).

Consistent with the perspective described above, the California Office of Historic Preservation notes, “There is a common misconception that resources 50 years or older need to be evaluated, but anything younger cannot be considered significant….[T]he California Register criteria (CCR section 4852) state that in order for a resource to achieve significance within the past 50 years, sufficient time must have passed to obtain a scholarly perspective on the events or individuals associated with the resource….Specifically, the California Register statute allows CEQA Lead Agencies [in the case of this EIR, the City of Santa Clara] a fair amount of CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 flexibility in justifying that a resource is significant, even if that resource is less than 50 years old.”1

At of time of writing (July 2021), there are currently no buildings older than 45 years within the Specific Plan Area.2

Due to the possibilities described above, the potential for a substantial adverse change to a historic resource due to individual discretionary development projects proposed under the Specific Plan would be evaluated by a qualified professional on a case-by-case basis in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5 to determine whether projects would have new or substantially more severe impacts to historic resources.

Under CEQA, conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards will normally mitigate impacts on a historic resource to a less-than-significant level.

Under the Standards for Rehabilitation, new additions, alterations, or adjacent new construction must not destroy character-defining features, spaces, and spatial relationships. New work must be differentiated from the old and must be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale, proportion, and massing.

New additions, alterations, and construction must be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

In some cases, it can be challenging to accommodate the needs of new uses while fully adhering to the Standards for Rehabilitation and, in many situations, it can be infeasible. In addition, changes to the eligibility, identification, and condition of historic resources and their surroundings between now and the time that individual development proposals are received for specific properties could affect potential impacts on historic resources. As a result, it cannot be determined at this time, without consideration of a current, specific development proposal, whether it would be feasible to mitigate to a less-than-significant level the impacts of any given subsequent development project under the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan involving properties that may contain historic resources. (As noted above under the Setting section, 7.1, no building or structure in the Plan Area is on a local or State historic resource inventory.) Although the following mitigation measures are intended to mitigate impacts on historic resources from implementation of the Specific Plan to the extent feasible, the impacts on historic resources may still remain significant and unavoidable. This conservative approach is consistent with CEQA.

1California Office of Historic Preservation, CEQA Case Studies, September 2015 (Volume VI).

2Historic Aerials, 2020.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation 7-1. For any individual project within the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area that the City determines may involve a property that contains a potentially significant historic resource, the resource shall be assessed by a professional who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards to determine whether the property is a significant historic resource and whether or not the project may have a potentially significant adverse effect on the historic resource. If, based on the recommendation of the qualified professional, the City determines that the project may have a potentially significant effect, the City shall require the applicant to implement the following mitigation measures:

(a) Adhere to at least one of the following Secretary of the Interior’s Standards::

 Secretary of Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings; or
 Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.

The qualified professional shall make a recommendation to the City as to whether the project fully adheres to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and any specific modifications necessary to do so. The final determination as to a project's adherence to the Standards shall be made by the City body with final decision- making authority over the project. Such a determination of individual project adherence to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards will constitute mitigation of the project historic resource impacts to a less-than-significant level (CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5).

(b) If measure (a) is not feasible, the historic resource shall be moved to a new location compatible with the original character and use of the historic resource, and its historic features and compatibility in orientation, setting, and general environment shall be retained, such that a substantial adverse change in the significance of the historic resource is avoided.3 Implementation of measure (b) would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

3One example of a substantial adverse change would be the loss of eligibility for listing on the California Register. The State Historical Resources Code encourages the retention of historic resources on-site and discourages the non-historic grouping of historic buildings into parks or districts. However, it is recognized that moving a historic building, structure, or object is sometimes necessary to prevent its destruction. Therefore, a moved building, structure, or object that is otherwise eligible may be listed in the California Register if it was moved to prevent its demolition at its former location and if the new location is compatible with the original character and use of the historic resource. A historic resource should retain its historic features and compatibility in orientation, setting, and general environment.
(California Office of Historic Preservation, California Register and National Register: A Comparison, Technical Assistance Series 6; Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation, 2001) CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 If neither measure (a) nor measure (b) is feasible, then the City shall, as applicable and to the extent feasible, implement the following measures in the following order:

(c) Document the historic resource before any changes that would cause a loss of integrity and loss of continued eligibility. The documentation shall adhere to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Architectural and Engineering Documentation. The level of documentation shall be proportionate with the level of significance of the resource. The documentation shall be made available for inclusion in the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) or the Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) Collections in the Library of Congress, the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), and the Bancroft Library, as well as local libraries and historical societies.
(d) Retain and reuse the historic resource to the maximum feasible extent and continue to apply the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to the maximum feasible extent in all alterations, additions, and new construction.

(e) Through careful methods of planned deconstruction to avoid damage and loss, salvage character-defining features and materials for educational and interpretive use on-site, or for reuse in new construction on the site in a way that commemorates their original use and significance.

(f) Interpret the historical significance of the resource through a permanent exhibit or program in a publicly accessible location on the site or elsewhere within the Specific Plan Area.

Implementation of measures (b), (c), (d), (e), and/or (f) would reduce a significant impact on historic resources, but not to a less-than-significant level. Without knowing the characteristics of the potentially affected historic resource or of the future individual development proposal, the City cannot determine with certainty that measure (a) or (b) above would be considered feasible. Consequently, this impact is currently considered significant and unavoidable.

4. Cumulative impacts
None.

E. Geology and Soils

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
(a) Impact 8-1: Effects of Strong Seismic Ground Shaking. The Specific Plan Area could experience strong seismic ground shaking and related effects in the event of an earthquake on the regional fault system. The Specific Plan would not exacerbate the existing risk of strong seismic ground shaking. Mandated project compliance CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 with the stringent seismic design provisions of the latest California Building Standards Code (CBSC), as adopted by the City, would reduce the risk of property loss or hazards to occupants and adjacent property to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation 8-1. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(b) Impact 8-2: Potential Soil Erosion and Loss of Topsoil. Grading and construction activities may result in minor erosion or the minor loss of some topsoil.

City-required standard grading- and construction-period erosion control techniques (e.g., for reducing surface water runoff over exposed soil, which could include a combination of techniques such as minimizing active construction areas during the rainy season, preservation of existing vegetation, soil stabilization methods—soil binders, straw mulch, etc.—as well as project landscaping after construction), consistent with Best Management Practices (BMPs) in the California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook, would mitigate this potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation 8-2. No significant impact has been identified; no additional mitigation is required.

2. Project impacts determined to b e less than significa nt with mitigation incorporated
(a) Impact 8 -3: Potential Ground Instability Impacts. The potential for ground instability can depend on specific, highly localized underlying soil conditions.

Determination of differential settlement, liquefaction, lateral spreading, and subsidence potential in the Specific Plan Area would require site -specific geotechnical studies for future individual development proposals. Possible ground instability conditions, if not properly engineered for, could result in associated significant damage to project buildings, other improvements, and adjacent property, with direct or indirect risks to life or property, representing a potentially significant impact.

Facts in support of the finding:

Although an earthquake would affect an area larger than the Plan Area, any potential for earthquake-induced differential settlement, liquefaction, lateral spreading, and subsidence, and associated damage to proposed buildings or other improvements would be localized (i.e., generally restricted to the area where the building foundation or other improvement has been constructed) and can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through implementation of City-required geotechnical investigations and associated engineering design standards, specifications, and measures. Geotechnical mitigation requirements identified here include completion of detailed studies to address specific concerns as future site- specific project designs are refined. There is substantial, reasonable, historical information to support the conclusion that the specific subsequent CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 geotechnical/geologic investigations, inspections, and specific formulations required to meet City-adopted standards would adequately mitigate related impacts to less-than-significant levels. Information pertaining to soil testing, soil treatments, building foundations, structural strengthening, subsurface design, construction methods, etc., has been developed and refined by the California Building Standards Commission (through the California Building Code) and the California Geological Survey (especially Special Publication 117A, “Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California 2008”), and research continues at universities and colleges, as well as professional organizations such as the Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists. The City of Santa Clara requires such geotechnical/geologic investigations and specifications as part of its development review under its building code. Individual measures are typically, and most efficiently, specified at a later, more detailed level of design when foundation locations and building architecture is known.

Under the City's grading permit and building permit provisions, requirements, and regulations, an individual development project cannot be given final approval without project compliance with geotechnical/geologic requirements. These requirements and related City inspection and verification procedures prior to project operation provide reasonable, professional assurances that projects would incorporate the design and engineering refinements necessary to reduce the degree of impacts to less-than-significant levels by either avoiding identified soil and geologic impact areas altogether (i.e., basic project design changes), or by rectifying the impact through conventional engineering and construction procedures (e.g., suitable foundation design and construction) prior to issuance of permits.

Mitigation Measures applicable:

Mitigation 8-3. Subject to City review and approval, complete and implement the geotechnical mitigation recommendations identified in the required individual project- and site-specific geotechnical investigations and engineering studies for site-specific proposals, in coordination with City grading permit and building permit performance standards. Such recommendations shall address design- and construction-level details regarding engineering issues and solutions such as the type of building foundation, the extent of subsurface excavation, the details of retaining structures, and any need for subsurface water extraction. Incorporation of this mitigation requirement would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.

(b) Impact 8-4: Potential for Disturbance of Paleontological Resources.

Development facilitated by the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan could disturb unrecorded paleontological resources in the Plan Area. This possibility represents a potentially significant impact.

Facts in Support of Finding
CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Santa Clara’s surficial geologic units include alluvial and Bay mud deposits, and Pleistocene alluvial deposits, with the underlying Santa Clara Formation that may potentially contain paleontological resources; in addition, Pleistocene alluvial deposits and the Santa Clara Formation have high paleontological sensitivity.

Although an on-line archival search indicated no records of recorded fossil sites within the Plan Area, it is possible that paleontological resources could be discovered during ground-disturbing activities. Contact with such fossil resources during ground-disturbing activities could result in significant impacts. The mitigation below would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measures Applicable

Mitigation 8-4. For all public improvement and private development projects in the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area, the following measures shall be implemented:

(1) Education Program. Project applicants shall implement a program that includes the following elements:

 Resource identification training procedures for construction personnel, conducted by a paleontologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards;

 Spot-checks and monitoring by a qualified paleontologist of all excavations deeper than seven feet below ground surface; and

 Procedures for reporting discoveries and their geologic context.

(2) Procedures for Resources Encountered. If subsurface paleontological resources are encountered, excavation shall halt within a buffer area of at least 50 feet around the find, where construction activities will not be allowed to continue until the project paleontologist evaluates the resource and its stratigraphic context. Work shall be allowed to continue outside the buffer area; however, the paleontologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoidance of adverse impacts to paleontological resources.

During monitoring, if potentially significant paleontological resources are found, “standard” samples shall be collected and processed by a qualified paleontologist to recover micro vertebrate fossils. If significant fossils are found and collected, they shall be prepared to a reasonable point of identification. Excess sediment or matrix shall be removed from the specimens to reduce the bulk and cost of storage.

Itemized catalogs of material collected and identified shall be provided to a local museum repository with the specimens. Significant fossils collected during this work, along with the itemized inventory of these specimens, shall be deposited in a local museum repository for permanent curatorship and storage. A report CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 documenting the results of the monitoring and salvage activities, and the significance of the fossils, if any, shall be prepared. The report and inventory, when submitted to the City, shall signify the completion of the program to mitigate impacts on paleontological resources.

Implementation of this measure would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable None.

4. Cumulative impacts
None

F. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
(a) Impact 9-1: GHG Emissions and Plan Consistency.

Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would result in emissions that are below an interpolated Service Population GHG efficiency metric, both from a net emissions perspective (when compared to potential GHG emissions associated with existing land uses in Year 2040) as well as on a standalone basis, and would not conflict, obstruct, or otherwise interfere with the implementation of a plan, policy, or regulation for the purposes of reducing GHG emissions. Thus, the proposed Specific Plan would result in a less-than-significant impact with regard to GHG emissions and no mitigation is required.
(b) Impact 9-2. Wasteful, Inefficient, or Unnecessary Consumption of Energy Resources.

Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would increase the demand for electricity and natural gas within the Plan Area and gasoline consumption in the region during construction and operation of new land use developments.

Although growth would occur within the Plan Area over the next approximately 20 years, new development would be required to comply with statewide mandatory energy requirements outlined in Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations (the CalGreen Code), which would decrease estimated natural gas consumption in new and/or retrofitted structures. Energy is a necessary component of building operation, and any natural gas consumption by proposed land uses in the Specific Plan would not be used in an unnecessary, inefficient, or wasteful manner and would be more efficient than under existing conditions.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Fuel use by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource consumed during development activities, and VMT associated with the transportation of construction materials (e.g., deliveries) and worker trips would also result in petroleum consumption. Whereas on-site, heavy-duty construction equipment and delivery trucks would predominantly use diesel fuel, construction workers would generally rely on gasoline-powered vehicles to travel to and from construction sites. State regulations such as the LCFS would reduce the carbon intensity of transportation-related fuels, and all construction projects would be required to comply with CARB’s Airborne Toxic Control Measures, which restrict heavy-duty diesel vehicle idling to five minutes. Since petroleum use during construction would be temporary at each location and required to conduct development activities, it would not be unnecessary, wasteful, or inefficient, and no mitigation is required.

(c) Impact 9-3. Conflict with or Obstruct a State or Local Plan for Renewable Energy or Energy Efficiency. The Project would not conflict with nor obstruct a state or local plan adopted for the purposes of increasing renewable energy or energy efficiency.

The Title 24 Building Code contains energy efficiency standards for residential and non-residential buildings. These standards address electricity and natural gas efficiency in lighting, water, heating, and air conditioning, as well as the effects of the building envelope (e.g., windows, doors, walls and rooves, etc.) on energy consumption. The latest update to these standards, codified in the 2019 Title 24 Building Code, requires the installation of solar panels on new residential development under three stories. The City would enforce the applicable Title 24 Building Code (currently 2019) during design review and project approval processes. In addition, as discussed above under “GHG Emissions and Plan Consistency” the proposed Specific Plan contains numerous standards and guidelines that address sustainability for future projects in the Plan Area. The Specific Plan would also support the City’s post-2020 Climate Action Plan measures, which support energy efficiency in the City.

As discussed above, the Specific Plan would support the State’s goals of decreasing energy consumption for each of its residents, increasing energy efficiency, and would not conflict with a state or local plan for renewable energy. This impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation 9-3. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significa nt with mitigation incorporated
None.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable None.

4. Cumulative impacts
Past, present, and future development projects worldwide contribute to global climate change. No single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, change the global average temperature. Therefore, due to the nature of GHG impacts, a significant project impact is a significant cumulative impact. As discussed above, development under the Specific Plan would not generate significant levels of GHG emissions at a project level and thus the Project would not have a cumulative impact on GHG emissions.

G. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
(a) Impact 10 -1: Project -Related Potential Impacts Due to Hazardous Materials Transport, Use, Storage, and Disposal. The proposed land uses permitted under the Specific Plan are not expected to involve the routine transport, use, storage, or disposal of haza rdous materials to the extent that a significant public or environmental hazard would occur. Operations in the Plan Area may involve the occasional transport, use, storage, or disposal of common hazardous substances such as fuel, paint, and solvents. The se normal activities would be subject to applicable local, State, and federal regulations. Construction of future project proposals under the Specific Plan would likely involve the intermittent transport, use, and disposal of potentially hazardous materia ls, including fuels and lubricants, paints, solvents, and other materials commonly used in construction and maintenance. During construction activities, any on -site hazardous materials that may be used, stored, or transported would also be subject to appl icable local, State, and federal regulations that require standard protocols (as determined by the U.S.

EPA, California Department of Health and Safety, Santa Clara County, and the City) for maintaining health and safety.

With implementation of adopted, s tandard procedures and regulations, the potential for associated hazardous materials impacts would be less-than- significant.

Mitigation 10 -1. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(b) Impact 10 -2: Potential Exposure to Existing Hazardous Materials Contamination. There is always a possibility that new construction could encounter contamination and expose construction workers to existing spilled, CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 leaked, or otherwise discharged hazardous materials or wastes . Each project applicant in the Plan Area would be required to comply with all applicable, existing City-, County-, regional-, and State-mandated site assessment, remediation, removal, and disposal requirements for soil, surface water, and/or groundwater contamination. Compliance with these established requirements would prevent exacerbation of existing contamination or accidental release, and ensure that this possible health and safety impact would be less-than-significant.

Typically, implementation of these standard procedures would involve the following steps. As explained above, these steps are consistent with standard procedures required as part of City -, County-, regional-, and State-mandated requirements. The steps are not considered additional mitigations req uired by this EIR because the steps are existing development standards applied uniformly to all applicable projects.

(a) Soil Contamination. In order to avoid or substantially reduce potential health hazards related to construction personnel or future oc cupant exposure to soil contamination, as well as to prevent accidental release to surrounding areas, project applicants would complete the following steps for each site proposed for disturbance as part of construction activity in the Plan Area:

Step 1. Investigate the site to determine whether it has a record of hazardous material discharge into soils, and if so, characterize the site according to the nature and extent of soil contamination that is present before development activities proceed at that site.

Step 2. Based on the proposed activities associated with the proposed project, determine the need for further investigation and/or remediation of the soil conditions on the contaminated site. For example, if the site is slated for commercial land use, such as retail, the majority of the site will be paved and there will be little or no contact with contaminated soil. Industrial cleanup levels would likely be applicable. If the slated development activity could involve human contact with soils, such a s may be the case with residential use, then Step 3 should be completed. If no human contact is anticipated, then no further mitigation is necessary.

Step 3. If it is determined that extensive soil contact would accompany the intended use of the site, un dertake a Phase II Environmental Assessment investigation, involving soil sampling at a minimum, at the expense of the project applicant, property owner, or responsible party. Should further investigation reveal high levels of hazardous materials in the s ite soils, mitigate health and safety risks according to City of Santa Clara and regulatory agency requirements. This would include site -specific health and safety plans prepared prior to undertaking any building or utility construction. Also, if buildin gs are situated over soils that are significantly contaminated, undertake measures to either remove the chemicals or prevent contaminants from entering and collecting within the building. If CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 remediation of contaminated soil is infeasible, a deed restriction would be necessary to limit site use and eliminate unacceptable risks to health or the environment.

(b) Surface or Groundwater Contamination. In order to reduce potential health hazards due to construction personnel or future occupant exposure to surface water or groundwater contamination, or accidental transmission to other properties, project applicants would complete the following steps for each site proposed for disturbance as part of construction activity in the Plan Area:

Step 1. Investigate the site to determine whether it has a record of hazardous material discharge into surface or groundwater, and if so, characterize the site according to the nature and extent of contamination that is present before development activities proceed at that site.

Step 2. Install drainage improvements in order to prevent transport and spreading of hazardous materials that may spill or accumulate on-site.

Step 3. If investigations indicate evidence of chemical/environmental hazards in site surface water and/or groundwater, then measures acceptable to the City and the other applicable regulatory agencies would be required to ensure the site is properly remediated prior to development activity.

Step 4. Inform construction personnel of the proximity to recognized contaminated sites and advise them of health and safety procedures to prevent exposure to hazardous chemicals in surface water/groundwater.

Implementation of these required, standard procedures would result in a less-than- significant impact associated with potential soil and surface/groundwater contamination.

Mitigation 10 -2. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(c) Impact 10-3: Project -Related Potential Asbestos and PCB Exposure. Removal or disturbance of asbestos -containing material (ACM) and/or transformers during alteration, renovation, or demolition of existing structures within the Plan Area could expose construction workers and the general public to friable asbestos and/or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Therefore, in compliance with General Plan Policy 5.10.5‐P26 (“Survey pre‐1980 buildings and abate any lead‐based paint and asbestos prior to structural renovation and demolition, in compliance with all applicable regulations”) and as a condition of alteration, renovation, or demolition permit approval for buildings within the Plan Area, the City requires the project applicant to coordinate with the Bay Ar ea Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) as appropriate to determine if ACM and/or PCBs are present, in conformance with BAAQMD established protocols and consistent with the explanation below.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

Ensuring proper identification and removal of ACM and PCBs requires each project applicant to complete the following steps. As explained above (“Project -Related Potential Exposure to Existing Hazardous Materials Contamination”), these steps are standard procedures required as part of City -, County -, regional -, an d State - mandated requirements; the steps are not mitigation required by this EIR.

Step 1. Thoroughly survey the project site and existing structures for the presence of ACM and PCBs. The survey shall be performed by a person who is properly certified by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and has taken and passed an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved building inspector course.

Step 2. If building elements containing any amount of ACM or PCBs are present, prepare a written ACM/PCB Abatement Plan describing activities and procedures for removal, handling, and disposal of these building elements using the most appropriate procedures, work practices, and engineering controls.

Step 3. Provide the ACM and PCB survey findings, t he written ACM/PCB Abatement Plan (if necessary), and notification of intent to demolish to the City and BAAQMD at least ten days prior to commencement of demolition.

Step 4. Remove any on-site transformers prior to demolition of buildings.

Implementation of these required, standard procedures would result in a less-than- significant impact associated with potential ACM and PCB exposure.

Mitigation 10 -3. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(d) Impact 10-4: Project-Related Potential Lead-Based Paint Exposure. If lead- based paint is present and has delaminated (split into thin layers) or chipped from surfaces, airborne lead particles could be released during alteration, renovation, or demolition of existing structures within the Plan Area. California OSHA (CalOSHA) regulations would be applied, and each site-specific project would implement the following standard, mandatory procedures in accordance with those CalOSHA regulations:

 Notify the City's Building and Fire Safety Division prior to starting work, describing the nature, location, and schedule of the work;

 Post a sign at all work locations where lead containment is required, stating that lead-based paint abatement is in progress and public access is prohibited;

 Notify the tenant(s) where the lead-based paint abatement work will be performed on a residential property occupied by one or more tenants; and CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

 Notify the property owner when work on a residential project will disturb lead- based paint.

Lead abatement performance standards are included in the Guidelines for Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development). Accordingly, HEPA vacuums may be required for abrasive blasting, water blasting, scraping, or sanding. Burning, torching, and similar activities are prohibited. Following completion of lead-based paint abatement, all visible lead- based paint particles must be removed from the site.

The City may inspect lead-based paint abatement activities at any time during construction. These personnel are also responsible for addressing citizen complaints related to lead-based paint abatement activities and may issue a Notice of Violation, a Stop Work order, or a fine.

Implementation of these required, standard procedures would result in a less-than- significant impact associated with potential lead-based paint exposure.

Mitigation 10-4. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(e) Impact 10-5: Potential for Hazardous Materials Near Schools. See the impact discussions above. Existing schools are located within one-quarter mile of the Plan Area; however, the land uses permitted under the Specific Plan are not expected to involve the routine transport, use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials to that extent that a significant public or environmental hazard would occur. In addition, as discussed in Impact 10-1 above, although future construction under the Specific Plan would likely involve the intermittent transport, use, storage, and disposal of potentially hazardous materials, including fuels and lubricants, paints, solvents, and other materials commonly used in construction and maintenance, these projects would be required to comply with applicable local, State, and federal regulations. Also, the regulatory requirements described above (section 10.2) would be implemented as applicable. Specific to schools, State regulations on the siting of hazardous materials facilities limit their location in proximity to schools; conversely, CEQA (section 21151.8, School Site Acquisition or Construction) and other State regulations impose restrictions on where new schools can be constructed. The impact of hazardous materials on schools would be less-than- significant.

Mitigation 10-5. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(f) Impact 10-6: Protocols for Government Code Section 65962.5 Sites. A review of the Cortese List data resources conducted on March 5, 2020 indicated no sites in CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 the Plan Area in any of the Cortese List data resources (see section 10.1.1, Hazardous Materials, above). The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains the EnviroStor database, which lists and includes data on hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 (Cortese List); such sites are regulated by DTSC because hazardous materials investigations and/or cleanup actions are planned, active, or have been completed at these sites (see Table 10-1 under “Setting,” above). The site-specific mitigation protocols administered by DTSC and other jurisdictional agencies (including the Santa Clara Fire Department) – in conformance with federal, State, regional, and local regulations (see “Regulatory Setting,” above) – are intended to ensure that the cleanup of such sites would result in less-than-significant impacts.

Mitigation 10-6. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

Impact 10-7: Consistency with the San Jose Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Approximately 12 acres of the eastern third of the Plan Area (northeast of Old Ironsides Drive and Patrick Henry Drive) are in the San Jose International Airport Influence Area (AIA). The rest of the Plan Area, south of Patrick Henry Drive and west of Old Ironsides Drive, is not located within the AIA.

The Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) establishes development standards related to noise, structure height, and safety that are applicable to development in areas surrounding the airport. While the Plan Area is not located in a mapped safety or noise area, parts of the Plan Area are within the CLUP Height Restriction Area, which uses the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 imaginary surfaces to delineate the area within which structures above a maximum structure height may constitute a safety hazard.

Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 77, “Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace” (commonly referred to as FAR Part 77) sets forth standards and review requirements for protecting the airspace for safe aircraft operation, particularly by restricting the height of proposed structures and minimizing other potential hazards to aircraft such as reflective surfaces, flashing lights, and electronic interference. These regulations require that the FAA be notified of certain proposed construction projects located within an extended zone defined by an imaginary slope radiating outward for several miles from an airport’s runways, or which would otherwise stand at least 200 feet in height above ground.

CLUP Policy H-1 states that any structure, existing or proposed, that penetrates (i.e., is above the maximum structure height) the FAR Part 77 imaginary surfaces would be considered an incompatible use, barring a determination from the FAA that the proposed structure or object does not present a hazard to air navigation. Based on preliminary review of the Plan Area by the City of San Jose Airport Department, the FAR Part 77 airspace surface notification requirement would apply to structures whose proposed height would exceed from 150 feet to 170 feet above ground CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 (assuming a ground elevation of roughly 20 feet), and therefore would require review of project plans by the FAA (which would consider other factors besides height, such as flight direction and trajectory). Notification to the FAA would therefore be required for individual proposed structures that would exceed this airspace surface, such as for buildings in the Urban Center designation where allowable heights of 12-plus stories have the potential to reach 150-170 feet. FAA review and issuance of determinations that a proposed structure would not be a hazard to air navigation, and project compliance with any conditions set forth in such FAA determinations, would ensure that the structure would not be an air safety hazard.

Additional CLUP policies related to land use compatibility include Policy G-6, which prohibits uses within an AIA that may cause hazards to aircraft due to electrical interference, high intensity lighting, attraction of birds, and activities that produce smoke, dust, or glare, among others. Projects proposed in the Plan Area that are within the San Jose International Airport AIA would need to be referred to the ALUC for a consistency review with the San Jose International Airport CLUP.

Based on the discussion above and the adopted, standard protocols under the CLUP, this land use compatibility and safety impact is considered less-than-significant.

Mitigation 10-7. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated
None.

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable None.

4. Cumulative impacts
Cumulative projects located in the vicinity of the Plan Area do not include manufacturing facilities or operations that would use significant quantities of hazardous materials. The cumulative projects, therefore, would not create a significant haza rd to the environment through the routine use, transport, or reasonably foreseeable accidents related to hazardous materials use. Hazardous materials contamination impacts are specific to the individual sites within the Specific Plan area as impacts vary by site characteristics, site history, and proposed land use , and are subject to local, County, State and Federal regulations.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Redevelopment in the Plan Area therefore would not make a considerable contribution to a significant cumulative hazardous materials impact.

H. Hydrology and Water Quality

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment

(a) Impact 11-1: Construction Period Water Quality Impacts. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and City of Santa Clara water quality protection requirements and conditions applicable to Specific Plan implementation are intended to reduce any potential construction period water quality impacts to a less- than-significant level, consistent with federal and State water quality regulations and plans.

Development facilitated by the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would implement site-specific, mand ated measures (uniformly applied development standards) to protect water quality, including but not limited to those measures required under the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP).

Any project grading activities invo lving disturbance of more than one acre would require a Notice of Intent (NOI) and a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB, Region 2 for Santa Clara). The RWQC B administers the NPDES stormwater permitting program in the Bay Area, including the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit and C.3 (stormwater compliance) Permit. Project owners submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the RWQCB to be covered by the Genera l Construction Permit prior to the beginning of construction. The General Construction Permit requires the preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). For a project entailing disturbance of more than one acre, the S WPPP must be prepared before construction begins, usually during the planning and design phases of a project, and must include specifications for Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be implemented during project construction to control contaminatio n of surface flows and the potential discharge of pollutants from commencement of construction through project completion. The SWPPP document itself remains on -site during construction. After completion of the project, the owners are required to submit a Notice of Termination to the RWQCB to indicate that construction is completed.

Also, depending on individual development proposals, grading permits would be required. For all grading permits, the City mandates site -specific measures (uniformly applied d evelopment standards) to be implemented during grading to minimize construction period erosion, including a site-specific erosion and sediment control plan subject to City review and approval. Erosion and sediment control plans typically show what BMPs ar e proposed to be used and where, and are customarily superimposed on a project grading plan. Because project sites and site CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 conditions vary, the measures could include a combination of techniques such as erosion control blankets, fiber rolls, silt fences, storm drain inlet protection, and stabilized construction exit(s), and would generally address how to minimize impacts from active construction areas during the rainy season (i.e., stockpiling and protecting site soils), preservation of existing vegetatio n and revegetation of disturbed areas afterward, use of soil stabilization methods (soil binders, straw mulch, etc.), as well as sediment control measures (such as silt fences or straw wattles) to prevent residual silt runoff to storm drains or waterways a nd measures to clean equipment and prevent off -site tracking of construction -related soil and other debris.

The temporary use of hazardous materials (e.g., diesel fuel) and heavy equipment, which represent a secondary component of construction, could int roduce materials that might be spilled in the Specific Plan Area and subsequently washed into water bodies, such as Calabazas Creek, San Tomas Aquino Creek, and, ultimately, San Francisco Bay. These substances could have a direct, adverse effect on water quality in water bodies. Implementation of the standard, required NPDES, SCVURPPP, and City construction period measures to reduce the risk of construction period pollutants would reduce this risk to a less-than-significant level.

As noted above, individ ual development projects would be required to treat and detain stormwater runoff on a site -specific basis. Road resurfacing and sidewalk repair and/or replacement are exempt from the NPDES C.3 Permit requirements if the work is within the existing impervi ous area footprint. Where Specific Plan - facilitated improvements include new roadway impervious surfaces outside existing impervious areas, the NPDES C.3 Permit requirements must be implemented.

Based on the above discussion, construction period water qu ality impacts resulting from Specific Plan implementation would be less-than-significant

Mitigation 11 -1. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(b) Impact 11 -2: Long -Term Water Quality Impacts from Project Operation .

Specific Plan long -term implementation could result in contamination of Plan Area stormwater runoff with petroleum and other contaminants from motor vehicles.

Development facilitated by the Specific Plan would be required to comply with RWQCB- and City -mandated post -construction, non -point source pollution control measures (uniformly applied development standards; also known as facilities and maintenance practices) that would ensure that such impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Plan implementation could result in the deposition by motor vehicles of oil and other contaminants along Plan Area streets and in parking areas. Rainfall has the potential to wash these contaminants into the municipal storm drainage system, potentially contaminating downstream waterways, in particular San Tomas Aquino CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Creek where stormwater runoff from the Plan Area is conveyed, although during major storm events with high levels of rainfall, storm drain networks can interact through overflow connections an d surface flows. Such non -point pollution is typically controlled through a combination of source controls (generally through the use of infiltration devices, such as infiltration trenches or basins, which are designed to transmit runoff directly to subsu rface soils and thereby prevent pollutants from entering the waterways).

Under the terms of the countywide Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP) that the City of Santa Clara is subject to, each development project must also implement post -construction measures to prevent or control pollutants in runoff (recommended measures are included in the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook), and identify a plan to inspect and maintain these measures. Project designs, subject to review and approval by the City, would be required to include the on -site collection of runoff from all parking facilities and, if feasible, its on -site treatment (oil/grease traps, filters, oil/water separators, or similar in -line filtration systems), and an associated periodic clean out/main tenance program that ensures acceptable trap efficiencies, specifies appropriate disposal procedures, and adequately reduces the risk that the traps become sinks for pollutants. A regular schedule of parking facility sweeping would also be required. In a ddition, source control features such as roofed trash enclosures would be required to keep pollutants from contacting stormwater. These mandated, uniformly applied stormwater treatment measures would also need to meet engineered sizing criteria approved by the City Engineer.

Permanent post -construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) are required for all new projects that create or replace between 2,500 and 10,000 square feet ("small projects") or more ("large projects") of roofs or pavement, including new development, redevelopment, and commercial and industrial sites. Permanent treatment BMPs can include, for example:

 rainwater harvesting and re-use,

 biofiltration swales,

 detention basins,

 bioretention areas, and

 flow-through planter boxes.

Low Impact Development (LID) features can be integrated with BMPs, control measures, and permit requirements. LID features reduce impervious surfaces and can include pervious pavements, landscape features, and green roofs. Parking stalls and plaza areas in t he Plan Area would utilize pervious asphalt, pervious concrete, or permeable pavers. Medians would be landscaped to increase permeability.

Landscaped open space also would contribute to reductions in impervious surfaces.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

The Specific Plan components ide ntified in section 11.3.2 above are consistent with these water quality measures. All of the above BMPs and LID features, which are discussed in more detail below, are also compatible with the other Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan frameworks, standards, and guidelines.

Given the existing level of urbanization and the potential development under the Specific Plan, BMPs can complement the Plan’s development standards and guidelines, and address existing constraints. For example, bioretention planter areas may be used to treat roadway runoff, and flow -through planter boxes may be used to treat roof runoff. Or, depending on site -specific conditions and proposed plans, BMPs and LID features could include those listed above (BMP: rainwater harvesting and r e-use, etc.; LID: pervious pavement, landscape features, etc.) or a combination of these or other feasible and effective techniques. As part of the standard City development process, future project applicants would be required to submit, for City review and approval, a Santa Clara “C.3” data form, which would be used to determine whether C.3 requirements apply (i.e., projects meeting or exceeding the size threshold for impervious surfaces) and to identify which site design measures, pollutant source controls, and/or stormwater treatment measures are proposed to prevent runoff pollution.

During design, the Stormwater C.3 Guidebook shall be referenced for acceptable BMPs, design considerations, design criteria, and operation and maintenance information. I n addition to the C.3 Guidebook, individual development proposals shall determine if drainage would discharge to a water body impacted by specific pollutants, as identified on the C.3 data form (see above), and would be required to demonstrate compliance w ith RWQCB requirements to reduce stormwater runoff water quality impacts to a less -than-significant level. The 303(d) List of Impacted Water Bodies, prepared and issued by the RWQCB, includes Calabazas and San Tomas Aquino creeks. The Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) provides more detailed information. Based on the discussion above, the effects of contaminated site runoff on water quality in the local (municipal) storm drainage system would represent a less-than-significant impact.

Mitigation 11 -2. No s ignificant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(c) Impact 11 -3: Effects on Groundwater Recharge and Groundwater Management. Currently, the Specific Plan Area is covered almost entirely with structures, surface parking (asphalt paving ), and introduced landscaping. Based on Plan stormwater treatment components in coordination with C.3 requirements and BMPs, Plan implementation would be expected to decrease the proportion of the Plan Area that is covered with impervious surface through application of LID techniques that would increase permeable area as well as the introduction of new landscaped, open space, and park areas.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

The Specific Plan Area would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2016 Santa Clara Valley Water Dist rict Groundwater Management Plan because the Plan Area is not an area designated by Valley Water for groundwater recharge.

Also, the increased use of groundwater is one of several options available to the City to meet short -term water supply deficiencies. The City currently monitors groundwater levels at all City production wells and meters groundwater pumping.

If the City determines the need to pump additional groundwater, this groundwater monitoring, in addition to the existing groundwater recharge program, would reduce the potential to substantially decrease groundwater supplies and ensure that the groundwater basin would not approach overdraft conditions.

Therefore, the impact on groundwater recharge and groundwater management would be less-than-significant.

Mitigation 11 -3. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(d) Impact 11-4: Drainage Patterns and Risk of Flooding. Because the Specific Plan Area is already covered with structures, paved surface parking, and introduced landscaping, development under the Plan would not significantly alter the total volume or rate of stormwater runoff into the e xisting municipal storm drain system or substantially alter drainage patterns, particularly because implementation of stormwater control measures would slow down the rate and reduce the volume of stormwater runoff, especially when compared to the existing hardscape areas. In addition, the Specific Plan proposes additional landscaped, open space, and park areas with pervious surfaces.

The currently mapped FEMA Flood Zones indicate that most of the Plan Area is located in Zone X (“Area with Reduced Flood Risk Due to Levee”) – i.e., not in the 1% annual flood hazard zone.

The Specific Plan Infrastructure Program indicates that stormwater flows generated by future development under the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would be adequately received by existi ng off-site storm drain systems. In addition, because the Plan Area is currently developed, no pipeline extensions are anticipated to serve the Plan Area.

The City applies uniformly applicable stormwater management regulations to avoid or reduce the potential for flood flow or drainage impacts of development, including erosion and siltation impacts, which provide for incorporating in projects one or a combination of BMPs such as rainwater harvesting and re -use, biofiltration swales, detention basins, bior etention areas, and flow -through planter boxes, and/or LID features such as use of pervious pavement, landscape features, and green roofs. The City’s Flood Damage Prevention Code (City Code chapter 15.45) requires CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 development in Special Flood Hazard Areas to meet City standards related to anchoring of structures, construction methods and materials, elevation of structures, and floodproofing (as applicable to reduce or eliminate flood damage).

Compliance with these City Code standards would also reduce ris ks from hazards resulting from inundation by regulating uses (including new construction and other development activities) that may increase flood heights or velocities or otherwise obstruct or redirect flood water in a manner that could lead to potential release of pollutants. City erosion and sediment control plan requirements would reduce the potential for erosion and/or sedimentation resulting from any changes in drainage patterns.

Also, for individual developments, the City requires a utility plan addressing, among other infrastructure components, the storm drain system.Practices include controlling the amount and timing of runoff from development sites (e.g., see the BMPs and LID features described above, which control runoff quantities as well as improve water quality) and raising the elevation of buildings or other flood protective measures as described above. Implementation of these development standards would be required as a condition of individual development project approval, prior to issua nce of grading or building permits. Also, because development under the Specific Plan would be required to prevent increases in runoff flows from new development and redevelopment projects (e.g., comply with NPDES C.3 requirements), Specific Plan effects on existing drainage patterns would be less-than-significant.

Based on the above discussion, the impacts of drainage patterns and potential flooding are considered less-than-significant .

Mitigation 11 -4. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significa nt with mitigation incorporated

(a) None.

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable None.

4. Cumulative impacts
The Project would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on hydrology or water quality. All development projects (including future development under the Specific Plan) are required to undertake steps to avoid, minimize, and/or mitig ate flooding and water quality impacts. Projects north of the Plan Area , including City Place, shall be designed to have no impacts to upstream water surface elevations CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 and therefore will cause no negative flooding impacts to the project site. In addition, the Project will have no impact on hydrology or water quality with implementation of the mitigation measures discussed above. F uture upstream projects would not impact the Plan Area as they would not significantly alter the existing hydrologic (i.e. flow path) conditions of those areas and are subject to NPDES regulations for treatment and retention of stormwater runoff. Therefore, cumulative hydrological impacts would be considered less than significant.

J. Land Use and Planning

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
(a) Impact 12-1: Project Effects on the Physical Arrangement of the Community.

The analyses and findings in this EIR indicate that future development activity under the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of the community. The Plan Area is generally an internally focused collection of large, self-contained parcels. Specific Plan-facilitated development identified in the Project Description would occur within the Plan Area.

Implementation of the Specific Plan would establish integrated physical and functional connections between Specific Plan Area parcels and with the adjacent community.

The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, in concert with the Santa Clara General Plan, is intended to provide for the expansion of housing choices by encouraging compact, transit-accessible, pedestrian-oriented housing and mixed-use (housing/retail/office) development in the Plan Area at densities and heights greater than currently developed. The Plan is designed to ensure that this housing and mixed-use development is conveniently located near public transportation, shopping, employment, and other community facilities.

The Specific Plan land use provisions and development standards and guidelines would be expected to encourage substantial beneficial land use effects in (1) revitalizing the Specific Plan Area; (2) facilitating development where services and infrastructure can be most efficiently provided by promoting higher residential densities within or near existing employment and public transportation areas; (3) and promoting compact, transit-accessible, pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use development patterns and land use. These Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan land use characteristics epitomize the principles and policies of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Plan Bay Area, and would represent a beneficial land use effect.

Mitigation 12-1. The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would result in beneficial land use and planning effects. No mitigation pertaining to environmental impacts on the physical arrangement of the community is required.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 (b) Impact 12-2: Project Consistency with Land Use Plans, Policies, and Regulations Adopted for the Purpose of Avoiding or Mitigating Environmental Effects. CEQA requires environmental impacts to be analyzed compared to existing conditions on the ground. Both the Santa Clara General Plan and the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan identify the Plan Area as the location of future higher-density, higher-intensity, mixed-use development, which may result in building heights and massing greater than existing conditions. The General Plan policies listed in each environmental topic chapter (e.g., Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land Use, Noise, Public Services, Utilities) of the EIR apply to the proposed Specific Plan.

The Specific Plan includes components that would avoid or reduce potential land use and planning impacts. The Plan is intended to implement the basic project objectives identify improvements, and adopt frameworks, standards, guidelines, and implementation actions which can be consistently applied throughout the Plan Area.

The Plan is designed to ensure that housing and mixed-use development is conveniently located near public transportation, retail and services, employment, and open space and community facilities, both in the Plan Area and the surrounding community.

New development throughout the Plan Area would include a combination of residential, retail, flex, office, community, and open space uses. Residential uses would be located throughout the Plan Area. New uses could include combinations of, for example, residential, retail, restaurant, and office uses in single or mixed-use buildings.

The parks, recreation and open space framework for the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan “includes policies and requirements to create a diverse network of public parks, green infrastructure, and private recreational spaces that support the physical, social and environmental health of the neighborhood while integrating with the community-wide City public parks and recreation system”.

As discussed in the EIR topic chapters, the Specific Plan is substantially consistent with adopted land use plans, policies, and regulations. However, there could be some potential conflicts related to air quality and cultural and historic resources:

 Air Quality – potential conflicts. As discussed in chapter 5, Air Quality, implementation of the Specific Plan would result in construction emissions that could be substantial and result in significant health impacts, which would represent a potential conflict with BAAQMD regulatory thresholds.

 Cultural and Historic Resources – potential conflicts. As discussed in chapter 7, Cultural and Historic Resources, although EIR-identified mitigation measures would generally ensure compliance with applicable, adopted local, regional, State, and federal plans and regulations, there is the possibility that a future individual project could result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of the historic resource that cannot be avoided (for instance, an as-yet unidentified CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 historic resource that cannot be moved or otherwise preserved or rehabilitated), which would represent a potential conflict.

The remaining topics, Biological Resources (chapter 6), Geology and Soils (chapter 8), Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy (chapter 9), Hazards and Hazardous Materials (chapter 10), Hydrology and Water Quality (chapter 11), Land Use (chapter 12), Noise (chapter 13), Population and Housing (chapter 14), Public Services (chapter 15), Recreation (chapter 16), Transportation (chapter 17), and Utilities and Service Systems (chapter 18) do not identify potential conflicts with land use plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects.

For a discussion of Specific Plan consistency with other adopted plans and policies, see chapter 19, Project Consistency with Local and Regional Plans, of this EIR.

The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would serve to achieve a coordinated, connected environment within the Plan Area while increasing land use intensity through frameworks and unified, context-sensitive design standards and guidelines, which would result in the efficient use of existing resources and infrastructure. Plan components are purposely designed to achieve and maintain a cohesive, compatible land use pattern and sense of place in the Plan Area, as well as provide smooth transitions with adjacent neighborhoods and areas. The impact of the Specific Plan on land use and planning is considered a beneficial land use effect.

Mitigation 12-2. The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan would result in beneficial land use and planning effects. No additional mitigation pertaining to project consistency with land use plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects is required beyond those mitigation measures already identified in the environmental topic chapters of the EIR (see Mitigation Measure 5-3, which addresses potential construction-period air quality impacts, and Mitigation Measure 7-1, which addresses potential impacts to historic resources).

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated
None.

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable

None.

4. Cumulative impacts

The Project would not result in any impact to mineral resources, agriculture, and forestry resources, therefore, the Specific Plan would not result in cumulative CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 impacts to these resources. The Project would not contribute to cumulative projects that would divide an established community given the uses surrounding the cumulative projects and the natur e of the proposed developments. Although several of the cumulative projects would be inconsistent with the General Plan because they propose growth that is unaccounted for in their respective City’s General Plans, the PHDSP would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to such an impact.

The PHDSP, although proposing additional growth beyond that considered in the General Plan, would assist the City in meeting its regional housing needs and addressing the jobs/housing imbalance in Santa Clara. Several projects in the cumulative analysis, including City Place Santa Clara and Phase s II and III of the General Plan which includes residential development near the Lawrence Expressway Caltrain Station and PHDSP, identified land use impacts related to the regional jobs-housing imbalance. Over the past few decades, regional job growth has greatly exceeded housing capacity, leading to traffic congestion and air pol lution from vehicles as workers commute long distances from outlying areas with more affordable housing. Both City Place Santa Clara and Phase s II and III of the General Plan contain substantial employment-based land uses, which would exacerbate indirect impacts related to traffic and air pollution. Though some job -creating land uses are proposed under PHDSP, development under PHDSP would improve the regional jobs/housing imbalance by creating 12,000 dwelling units. Therefore, this cumulative impact would be less than significant.

K. Noise and Vibration

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
(a) Impact 13-5: Operational Vibrations. The Plan Area does not currently include any substantial vibration generating equipment. The Specific Plan would add a mix of residential, mixed-use, flex, and/or office land uses to the Plan Area over time, reaching full development by 2040. These new land uses could involve machinery and equipment such as pumps, compressors, generators, and other fixed equipment that produce vibrations; however, this equipment would not generate vibration levels that could exceed the City’s vibration perception threshold. Potential pumps, generators, and other typical equipment would be securely mounted and not large enough to generate substantial vibrations beyond the immediate vicinity of the equipment. The Specific Plan does not propose or support any large vibration- inducing equipment or land use activities and would not result in excessive ground- borne vibration levels. This represents a less-than-significant impact.

Mitigation 13-5. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(b) Impact 13-6: Exposure to Airport-Related Noise. The San Jose International Airport CLUP establishes the 65 CNEL contour as the noise restriction area for residential land uses, and the City’s General Plan (Policy 5.10.6-P8) encourages safe CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 and compatible land uses within the airport’s noise restriction area. As described in Section 13.1.7, the part of the Plan Area north of Patrick Henry Drive and east of Old Ironsides Drive lies within the Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport influence area; however, the Plan Area is not located within the 65 CNEL contour associated with San Jose International Airport (SCC ALUC 2016; Figure 5).

Accordingly, future development within the Plan Area would not be subjected to excessive airport-related noise levels.

Consistent with the CLUP (Policy N-5), future owners in the Plan Area that own property in the airport influence area and who rent or lease property for residential use will be required to include a disclosure in the rental/lease agreement with the tenant that the property is within a high noise area associated with airport operations and may be exposed to airport-related noise levels greater than 65 CNEL.

The Plan Area is not located within two miles of a private airstrip or related facility.

The Specific Plan would not expose people living or working in the Plan Area to excessive airport-related noise levels. This impact is considered a less-than- significant impact.

Mitigation 13-6. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated
(a) Impact 13 -1: Plan-Related Temporary Construction Noise Levels. The implementation of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan could result in construction and development activities in the Plan Area that generate noise levels above City standards and/or otherwise result in a substantial, temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Plan Area. This represents a potentially significant impact.

Finding: Mitigation measu res would reduce impacts due to construction -related vibration impacts to less than significant levels. The City hereby determines this impact to be less than significant.

Facts in Support of Finding
With regard to construction noise, demolition, site preparation, and grading phases typically result in the highest temporary noise levels due to the use of heavy-duty equipment such as dozers, excavators, graders, loaders, scrapers, and trucks. The use of specialized equipment such as impact or vibratory pile drivers can also generate high noise levels during initial foundation work stages. The worst-case Leq and Lmax noise levels associated with the operation of a dozer, excavator, scraper, etc., are predicted to be approximately 82 and 85 dBA, respectively, at a distance of CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 50 feet from the equipment operating area. At an active construction site, it is not uncommon for two or more pieces of construction equipment to operate at the same time and in close proximity. The concurrent operation of two or more pieces of construction equipment would result in noise levels of approximately 85 to 88 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from equipment operating areas. The magnitude of each individual future project’s temporary and periodic increase in ambient noise levels would be dependent upon a number of project-specific factors that are not known at this time, including: the amount and type of equipment being used; the distance between the area where equipment is being operated and the location of the specific land use, receptor, etc., where noise levels are being evaluated; the time of day construction activities are occurring; the presence or absence of any walls, buildings, or other barriers that may absorb or reflect sound waves, the total duration of the construction activities, and the existing ambient noise levels near construction areas.

Typically, sustained construction noise levels of 80 to 85 dBA or higher would require the implementation of construction noise control practices such as staging area restrictions (e.g., siting staging areas away from sensitive receptors), equipment controls (e.g., covered engines and use of electrical hook-ups instead of generators), and/or the installation of temporary noise barriers of sufficient height, size (length or width), and density to achieve targeted noise reductions. In general, typical construction equipment activities could exceed the City’s significance thresholds at residential and commercial land uses within 400 feet and 200 feet of work areas, respectively, assuming the construction activity would last for more than one year (which may or may not be the case depending on the project. The use of pile driving equipment, if necessary, could exceed residential and commercial thresholds at distances of 500 and 400 feet, respectively. While all projects in the Planning Area would be subject to the permissible construction hours established by the Municipal Code, construction activities could result in temporary increases in noise levels above ambient conditions of 10 to 30 dBs or more during permissible time frames, which would be perceived by noise-sensitive land uses as doubling or quadrupling of loudness, respectively. This is considered a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation 13 -1: Reduce Construction Noise Levels. To reduce potential noise levels from Specific Plan related construction activities, the City shall ensure future development projects within the Plan Area:

1) Notify Residential and Commercial Land Uses of Planned Construction Activities. This notice shall be provided at least one week prior to the start of any construction activities, describe the noise control measures to be implemented by the Project, and inc lude the name and phone number of the designated contact for the Applicant/project representative and the City of Santa Clara responsible for handling construction-related noise complaints (per Section 8). This notice shall be CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 provided to: A) The owner/occ upants of residential dwelling units within 500 feet of construction work areas; B) The owner/occupants of commercial buildings (including Mission College) within 200 feet of construction work areas or within 400 feet of construction work areas if pile dri ving equipment will be used; and C) Mission College when construction work areas are within 500 feet of College athletic fields.

2) Notify Cala bazas Creek Trail Users of Construction Activities. Prior to the start of construction activities within 500 fee t of Cala bazas Creek Trail, signs shall be posted along the trail warning of potential temporary elevated noise levels during construction. Signs shall be posted within 250 feet of impacted trail segments (i.e., portions of the trail within 500 feet of a w ork area) and shall remain posted throughout the duration of all substantial noise generating construction activities (typically demolition, grading, and initial foundation installation activities).

3) Restrict Work Hours. All construction -related work ac tivities, including material deliveries, shall be subject to the requirements of City Municipal Code Section 9.10.230. Construction activities, including deliveries, shall occur only during the hours of 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday, and 9 AM t o 6 PM on Saturday, unless otherwise authorized by City permit. The applicant/project representative and/or its contractor shall post a sign at all entrances to the construction site informing contractors, subcontractors, construction workers, etc. of this requirement.

4) Control Construction Traffic and Site Access. Construction traffic, including soil and debris hauling, shall follow City -designated truck routes and shall avoid routes (including local roads in the Plan Area) that contain residential dwel ling units to the maximum extent feasible given specific project location and access needs.

5) Construction Equipment Selection, Use, and Noise Control Measures. The following measures shall apply to construction equipment used in the Plan Area: A) To the extent feasible, contractors shall use the smallest size equipment capable of safely completing work activities; B) Construction staging shall occur as far away from residential and commercial land uses as possible; C) All stationary noise - generating equipment such as pumps, compressors, and welding machines shall be shielded and located as far from sensitive receptor locations as practical. Shielding may consist of existing vacant structures or a three - or four-sided enclosure provide the structure/barrie r breaks the line of sight between the equipment and the receptor and provides for proper ventilation and equipment operations; D) Heavy equipment engines shall be equipped with standard noise suppression devices such as mufflers, engine covers, and engine /mechanical isolators, mounts, etc. These devices shall be maintained in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations during active construction activities; E) Pneumatic tools shall include a noise suppression device on the compressed air exhaust; F) The applicant/project CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 representative and/or their contractor shall connect to existing electrical service at the site to avoid the use of stationary power generators; G) No radios or other amplified sound devices shall be audible beyond the property line of t he construction site.

6) Implement Construction Activity Noise Control Measures: The following measures shall apply to construction activities in the Plan Area: A) Demolition:

Activities shall be sequenced to take advantage of existing shielding/noise reduction provided by existing buildings or parts of buildings and methods that minimize noise and vibration, such as sawing concrete blocks, prohibiting on -site hydraulic breakers, crushing, or other pulverization activities, shall be employed to the maximum extent feasible; B) Demolition Site Preparation, Grading, and Foundation Work: During all demolition, site preparation, grading, and structure foundation work activities within 500 feet of a residential dwelling unit or 250 feet of a commercial building (including Mission College), a physical noise barrier capable of achieving a minimum 10 dB reduction in construction noise levels shall be installed and maintained around the site perimeter to the maximum extent feasible given site constraints and access re quirements. Potential barrier options capable of achieving a 10 dB reduction in construction noise levels could include, but are not limited to: i) A six -foot-high concrete, wood, or other barrier installed at -grade (or mounted to structures located at-grade, such as a K -Rail), and consisting of a solid material (i.e., free of openings or gaps other than weep holes) that has a minimum rated transmission loss value of 20 dB; ii) Commercially available acoustic panels or other products such as acoustic barrier blankets that have a minimum sound transmission class (STC) or transmission loss value of 20 dB; iii) any combination of noise barriers and commercial products capable of achieving a 10 dBA reduction in construction noise levels during demolition, site p reparation, grading, and structure foundation work activities; iv) The noise barrier may be removed following the completion of building foundation work (i.e., it is not necessary once framing and typical vertical building construction begins provided no o ther grading, foundation, etc. work is still occurring on -site); and C) Pile Driving: If pile driving activities are required within 500 feet of a residential dwelling unit or 400 feet of a commercial building (including Mission College), the piles shall b e pre-drilled with an auger to minimize pile driving equipment run times.

7) Prepare Project -Specific Construction Noise Evaluation. Prior to the start of any specific construction project lasting 12 months or more, the City shall review and approve a project-specific construction noise evaluation prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant that: A) Identifies the planned project construction sequence and equipment usage; B) Identifies typical hourly average construction noise levels for project construction equipment; C) Compares hourly average construction noise levels to ambient noise levels at residential and commercial land uses near work areas (ambient noise levels may be newly measured or presumed to be consistent with those levels shown in Table 1 3-2 and 13 -3 of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and D) Identifies construction noise control measures incorporated into the project that ensure: i) activities do not CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 generate noise levels that are above 60 dBA Leq at a residential dwelling unit and exceed the ambient noise environment by at least 5 dBA Leq for more than one year; and ii) activities do not generate noise levels that are above 70 dBA Leq at a commercial building (including Mission College) and ex ceed the ambient noise environment by at least 5 dBA Leq for more than one year. Such measures may include, but are limited to: a) The requirements of Sections 4, 5, 6, and 8; B) Additional project and/or equipment-specific enclosures, barriers, shrouds, or other noise suppression methods. The use of noise control blankets on building facades shall be considered only if noise complaints are not resolvable with other means or methods.

8) Prepare a Construction Noise Complaint Plan. The Construction Noise Complaint Plan shall: A) Identify the name and/or title and contact information (including phone number and email) for a designated project and City representative responsible for addressing construction -related noise issues; B) Includes procedures describin g how the designated project representative will receive, respond, and resolve construction noise complaints; C) At a minimum, upon receipt of a noise complaint, the project representative shall notify the City contact, identify the noise source generating the complaint, determine the cause of the complaint, and take steps to resolve the complaint; D) The elements of the Construction Noise Complaint Plan may be included in the project -specific noise evaluation prepared to satisfy Section 7 or as a separate document.

9) Owner/Occupant Disclosure: The City shall require future occupants/tenants in the Plan Area receive disclosure that properties in the Plan Area may be subject to elevated construction noise levels from development in the Plan Area. This disclosure shall be provided as part of the mortgage, lease, sub -lease, and/or other contractual real-estate transaction associated with the subject property.

With implementation of these measures, this impact would be less than significant.

(b) Potential Imp act: Impact 13 -2: Plan-Related Temporary Construction Vibration Levels. The implementation of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan could result in construction and development activities in the Plan Area that generate vibration levels above City standards and/or otherwise result excessive ground-borne vibration levels. This represents a potentially significant impact.

Finding: Mitigation measu res would reduce impacts due to construction -related vibration impacts to less than significant levels. The City hereby determines this impact to be less than significant.

Facts in Support of Finding
Construction activities have the potential to result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and activities involved. Vibration generated by construction equipment spreads through the CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 ground and diminishes with increases in distance. The effects of ground vibration may be imperceptible at low levels, result in low rumbling sounds and detectable vibrations at moderate levels, and can disturb human activities such as sleep and vibration sensitive equipment at high levels. Ground vibration can also potentially damage the foundations and exteriors of existing structures even if it does not result in a negative human response. Pile drivers and other pieces of high impact construction equipment are generally the primary cause of construction-related vibration impacts. The use of such equipment is generally limited to sites where there are extensive layers of very hard materials (e.g., compacted soils, bedrock) that must be loosened and/or penetrated to achieve grading and foundation design requirements. The need for such methods is usually determined through site- specific geotechnical investigations that identify the subsurface materials within the grading envelope, along with foundation design recommendations and the construction methods needed to safely permit development of a site.

As indicated under Impact 13-1, since project specific information is not available at this time, potential short-term construction-related vibration impacts can only be evaluated based on the typical construction activities associated with residential, commercial, and retail development. Potential construction equipment and activity vibration levels were developed based on methodologies, reference noise levels, and equipment usage and other operating factors documented and contained in the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment document and Caltrans’ Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (FTA 2018 and Caltrans 2020).

Construction vibration impacts generally occur when construction activities occur in close proximity to buildings and vibration-sensitive areas, during evening or nighttime hours, or when construction activities last extended periods of time.

Construction activities associated with the proposed project would occur in multiple phases and may last several years in total, with full development of the Plan Area anticipated to occur by 2040. In general, construction activities in the Plan Area would not be located near residential or commercial buildings or structures because the Plan Area is bordered by a parking lot on the north, Great America Parkway to the east, Mission College parking areas and athletic fields to the south, and the Calabazas Creek Trail to the east. The exception to this is the southeast corner of the Plan Area, where construction activities could occur within 50 feet of an existing, adjacent commercial building. The closest residential building facades are approximately 195 feet to the west of the Plan Area, across the Calabazas Creek; however, the Kylli Mixed Use Development Project borders the Plan Area to the north and could result in future buildings adjacent to the Plan Area. In addition, future land uses envisioned by the Specific Plan (e.g., residential dwelling units, library use, commercial buildings) could be located near construction work areas within the Plan Area and affected by construction vibration.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

Mitigation Measures

In addition to adhering to the City Code for construction hours, the future development projects would be required to implement the following standard construction noise control measures to reduce construction noise levels at nearby land uses:

Mitigation 13 -2: Reduce Construction Vibration Levels. To reduce potential vibration-related structural damage and other excessive vibration levels from Specific Plan related construction activities, the City shall ensure future development projects within the Plan Area:

1) Notify Residential and Commercial Land Uses of Planned Construction Activities. See Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Mitigation Measure 13-1, Section 1.

2) Restrict Work Hours. See Patrick H enry Drive Specific Plan Draft EIR Mitigation Measure 13-1, Section 2.

3) Prohibit Vibratory Equipment if Feasible. The use of large vibratory rollers, vibratory/impact hammers, and other potential large vibration -generating equipment (e.g., hydraulic breakers/hoe rams) shall be prohibited within 100 feet of any residential building façade and 50 feet of any commercial building façade during construction activities. Plate compactors and compactor rollers are acceptable, and deep foundation piers or caissons shall be auger drilled.

4) Prepare Project -Specific Construction Vibration Evaluation Plan. If it is not feasible to prohibit vibratory equipment per Section 3) due to site - or project - specific conditions or design considerations, the City shall review and approve a project-specific construction vibration evaluation that: A) Identifies the project’s planned vibration -generating construction activities (e.g., demolition, pile driving, vibratory compaction); B) the potential project -specific vibration leve ls (given project-specific equipment and soil conditions, if known) at specific building locations that may be impacted by the vibration -generating work activities (generally buildings within 50 feet of the work area); C) Identifies the vibration control m easures incorporated into the project that ensure equipment and work activities would not damage buildings or result in vibrations that exceed Caltrans’ strongly perceptible vibration detection threshold for peak particle velocity (PPV) of

0.1 inches/second (in/sec). Such measures may include, but are not limited to: i) the requirements of Sections 1, 2, and 3; ii) the use of vibration monitoring to measure actual vibration levels; iii) the use of photo monitoring or other records to document building conditions prior to, during, and after construction activities; and iv) the use of other measures such as trenches or wave barriers; D) Identifies the name (or title) and contact information (including phone number and email) of the CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Contractor and City -representatives responsible for addressing construction vibration-related issues; and E) Includes procedures describing how the construction contractor will receive, respond, and resolve to construction vibration complaints. At a minimum, upon receipt of a vibrati on complaint, the Contractor and/or City representative described in the first sub -bullet above shall identify the vibration source generating the complaint, determine the cause of the complaint, and take steps to resolve the complaint by reducing ground -borne vibration levels to peak particle velocity levels that do not exceed accepted guidance or thresholds for structural damage that are best applicable to potentially impacted buildings , including Caltrans’ strongly perceptible vibration detection threshold.

With implementation of these measures, this impact would be less than significant.

(c) Impact 13 -3: On-site Noise Levels from Specific Plan Development. The implementation of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan could result in new roadway and infrastructure improvements and new residential, office, and other land uses that generate noise from on -site equipment, activities, or other operations in excess o f applicable City standards. This represents a potentially significant impact.

Facts in Support of Finding
Although the proposed Specific Plan could increase the amount of noise sources and noise-generating activities compared to existing conditions, the project would have a limited potential to generate significant on-site noise levels for the following reasons:

 In general, residential land uses (including the proposed high-density residential land uses) are not a substantial noise-generating land use type because:
o They do not involve substantial noise-generating activities during the nighttime;
o Mechanical equipment associated with elevators, residential amenities such as pools, and other building systems are typically enclosed within the closets, sheds, or equipment rooms; and
o HVAC equipment is typically screened from public view by landscaping, fences, or walls and, therefore, shielded from adjacent property lines.

 The Plan Area would support residential and recreational land uses along shared property lines with Mission College, the Calabazas Creek Trail, and lands to the north of the Plan Area (which are currently commercial but may transition to residential in the future).

 The proposed high density flex land uses, which may consist of office/commercial developments with commercial-grade HVAC equipment, back-up generators, or other mechanical equipment, would be located along the eastern edge of the Plan Area, between Old Ironsides Drive and Great America Parkway, and would have little to no potential to impact on- or off-site receptors due to the distance CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 between flex use boundaries and other nearby properties (estimated to be a minimum of 100 feet).

 The proposed mixed-use overlay, which would permit residential development with ground-floor retail, flex, or community uses, would support an active street environment, and primarily provide local-serving retail and neighborhood services and amenities to meet the day-to-day needs of residents. These retail, flex, and community uses would be located on the interior of the Plan Area (along local roads) and would be unlikely to require substantial loading or unloading facilities or large, stationary sources of equipment.

 The Specific Plan includes design standard and guidelines for building orientation (Standard 5.5.2.5), building frontages and setbacks (Standard 5.5.3.3 and Standard 5.5.3.5), and alleys/service access (Guideline 5.5.4.11 and Standard

5.5.4.12) that screen residential uses from noise generating activities such as garage entrances and loading areas (see Section 13.3.2).

 The City’s General Plan establishes procedures and standards to protect noise sensitive land uses from noise intrusion (see Section 13.2.4.1) and the City’s Municipal Code establishes specific numeric standards for residential and commercial lands that are not be exceed by stationary equipment (see Section

13.2.4.2).

As explained above, the proposed Specific Plan is considered to have a limited potential to include on-site sources or activities that could generate noise levels that exceed City standards or otherwise substantially increase existing ambient noise levels; however since project-specific information is not available at this time, the potential exists for future development projects to include noise-generating equipment or involve noise generating activities that could exceed the City’s standards or otherwise substantially exceed the ambient noise environment if not adequately mitigated. The implementation of Mitigation Measure 13-3 would require development projects in the Plan Area to include site design, noise attenuation, and/or other noise control measures to ensure project-specific fixed noise source levels do not exceed City standards. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Mitigation 13-3: Control Fixed and Other On-site Noise-Generating Sources and Activities. To ensure on-site, operations-related equipment and activities associated with the Specific Plan do not generate noise levels that exceed City standards or otherwise result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels, future development projects shall submit a project-specific operational noise analysis to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the project, or as otherwise determined by the City. The noise analysis shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and shall identify all major fixed machinery and equipment, non-residential truck docks/dedicated loading zones, waste collection areas, and above ground parking garages included in the final project design/site plan. The noise analysis shall also document how project noise sources and activities will comply with the exterior sound limits established in Municipal Code Section 9.10.040, Schedule A and the noise compatibility guidelines in General Plan Table 8.14-1. Fixed machinery and equipment may include, but is not limited to, pumps, fans (including air intake or exhaust fans in parking garages), compressors, air conditioners, generators, and refrigeration equipment. The control of noise from such equipment may be accomplished by selecting quiet equipment types, siting machinery and equipment inside buildings, within an enclosure (e.g., equipment cabinet or mechanical closets, or behind a parapet wall or other barrier/shielding. Truck docks/dedicated loading zones consist of a loading dock or other dedicated area for the regular loading and unloading of retail, commercial, or other non-residential goods from delivery trucks. The control of noise from such truck docks/loading areas, waste collection areas, and parking garages may be accomplished by placing such areas away from sensitive land uses, restricting activities or operating hours for certain areas, or other design means.

With implementation of these measures, this impact would be less than significant.

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable (a) Impact 13 -4: Increases in Traffic Noise Levels from Specific Plan Development. The implementation of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan could generate vehicle trips that substantially increase existing and future No Project traffic noise levels and/or exceed City noise and land use compatibility standards.

This represents a potentially significant impact.

Facts in Support of Finding
The Specific Plan would have the potential to change the existing amounts and types of land uses within the Plan Area. These potential land use changes would increase residents and employees within the City and lead to an increase in vehicle trips and traffic-related noise levels that could pose land use compatibility issues and/or otherwise represent a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels on roadways used to access the Plan Area.

Mitigation Measures
CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

No feasible mitigation is possible.

L. Population and Housing

(a) Impact 14-1: Effects on Population Growth. Based on the forecasted development capacity under the proposed Specific Plan (see chapter 3, Project Description, of this EIR), the Plan is anticipated to result in up to the following new development in the Plan Area:

 10,300 (Scenario B) to 12,000 (Scenario A) residential units,  150,000 square feet (sq. ft.) of new retail space,
 90,000 sq. ft. of new flex space (residential, retail, and/or office),  70,000 sq. ft. of new community/civic space, and
 785,000 sq. ft. of new office space (Scenario B only).

Both the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and this EIR assume these numbers represent the maximum capacity for future anticipated development. As such, the City would monitor new development approvals to ensure that there is remaining capacity as new projects are approved. Should the Plan Area approach capacity, the City would reevaluate both the Plan and the EIR and amend them as necessary to address and mitigate growth above and beyond these capacity numbers.

The Specific Plan assumes an average of 2.23 persons per new household (pph) in the Plan Area, based on demographic and economic research prepared for the Plan.4 Using this factor, Plan implementation could accommodate up to approximately 22,970 (Scenario B) to 26,760 (Scenario A) new residents in the Plan Area by the year 2040 (the estimated Plan buildout horizon). The General Plan identified the Plan Area as a “future focus area” designated for “change from existing underutilized office and industrial uses to higher‐density residential and mixed‐use neighborhoods,” with objectives outlined to establish the necessary infrastructure, amenities, and services to support potential growth, and the Plan Area has been included in the “General Plan Land Use Assumptions.”5 Due to the predominately residential nature of growth anticipated under the Specific Plan, the projected

4“Persons Per Household By Unit Type, City of Santa Clara, CA,” provided by the City based on California Department of Finance Estimates for City of Santa Clara (as of 1/1/2018) and Persons Per Household by Unit Type for Santa Clara County from U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2012 -2016 Public Use Microdata Sample [PUMS] data set for Santa Clara County.

5As noted in the General Plan, potential development for areas north of U.S. 101 is anticipated to include greater intensification than under existing land use designations, with some areas expected to propose expansion from their allowed uses. The three General Plan phases (Phase I, Phase II, Phase III) were designed to provide opportunities to refine strategies and objectives as the City assesses new needs and conditions through an iterative planning process, such as the comprehensive planning process required prior to development approval in a future focus area, as is the case with this Specific Plan.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 increase in residential units would help to address the balance between housing and jobs in the city (i.e., the shortage of affordable housing discussed in section 14.1.2).

As described throughout this EIR (e.g., chapter 3 - Project Description; chapter 17 - Transportation; chapter 18 - Utilities and Service Systems), Plan implementation would not extend roads or infrastructure through undeveloped or low-density areas and, therefore, would not induce substantial population growth beyond the Plan Area boundaries. Rather, Specific Plan implementation would facilitate the projected residential, commercial, and community growth within a mixed-use Plan Area identified for such growth in the Santa Clara General Plan. Therefore, this impact is considered less-than-significant.

Mitigation 14-1. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(b) Impact 14-2: Population and Housing Displacement Effects. As of October 2020, there is no housing in the Plan Area, and the Specific Plan would not displace any residents or housing. The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan is an integrated long-term plan of frameworks and design standards and guidelines. Development potential under the Plan would be initiated voluntarily by property owners.

Infrastructure, roadway, open space, and other public improvements proposed under the Plan would not require the displacement of any housing. The mixed-use focus of the Specific Plan would provide for the addition of up to 10,300 to 12,000 residential units in the Plan Area. The Plan is intended to lower transportation costs for future residents currently dependent on private automobiles by providing a mixture of housing types near existing public transportation infrastructure, while also improving access and connectivity to these support services for existing residents through bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements.

The Specific Plan framework noted above (subsection 14.3.2, “Relevant Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Components”) would proactively facilitate affordable housing.

Based on the discussion above, impacts on population and housing displacement are considered less-than-significant.

Mitigation 14-2. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(c) Impact 14-3: Temporary Employment Impacts. Temporary construction jobs would be created over the timeframe of Plan implementation. It is anticipated that an adequate construction work force will continue to exist within commute distance of the Plan Area, thereby making highly unlikely a substantial increase in population due to project construction. The actual number of construction jobs facilitated by the Plan would depend on the construction dollars spent and the construction schedules; these variables cannot be accurately quantified at this time.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Nevertheless, these project-generated employment opportunities would represent a beneficial temporary economic effect of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan. In itself, any population growth associated with construction activity under the Plan would represent a less-than-significant environmental impact.

Mitigation 14-3. No significant environmental impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

M. Public Services

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
(a) Impact 15-1: Increase in Fire Protection/Emergency Medical Service Demands The increase in demand for SCFD services resulting from Specific Plan buildout would be expected to generate additional calls for fire protection and suppression/EMS assistance that would require additional staff in order to maintain acceptable service rat ios or response times . The SCFD has determined that 25 additional firefighters (FTE) would be sufficient to meet the fire protection and suppression/EMS assistance needs of the Specific Plan; in addition, the SCFD has also determined that three vehicles wo uld also be required: one Fire Department EMS response vehicle or ambulance for Phase 1; a second Fire Department EMS response vehicle or ambulance for Phase 2; and one tiller aerial ladder truck for Phase 3.

Demand for additional fire protection/EMS equipment resulting from Patrick Henry Specific Plan implementation (e.g., for higher buildings than allowed under current zoning) would be funded by the plan’s infrastructure fee. In addition, as discussed in Specific Plan Chapter 7 (Implementation Plan), the City has several options to ensure adequate funds will be available for facilities required by Specific Plan development, including approaches and policies for both one-time and on-going costs of public infrastructure, improvements, and services. New development projects under the Specific Plan would be required to pay their share of the costs associated with provision of these facilities through the required infrastructure fee on a per unit basis.

Based on the above uniformly applied fire protection/EMS standards and regulations, the proximity of existing fire stations, the planned expansion and relocation of Fire Station 10, and the City’s commitment to providing adequate fire/EMS service, Specific Plan impacts on fire protection/EMS demands are considered less-than-significant.

Mitigation 15-1. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(b) Impact 15-2: Impacts to Police Services
CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 The Patrick Henry Specific Plan does not propose new or expanded police facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts; any decision whether to build a new facility or expand an existing facility would be the responsibility of the City Council. The SCPD has noted that more vehicle traffic from anticipated development in the city is expected to occur (along with an associated increase in service calls due to traffic -related enforcement and accident investigations and pot entially increased service call response times), which would contribute to the need for additional staff.

Demand for additional police personnel or equipment resulting from Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan implementation (e.g., to account for an increased residential population) would be funded by established annual City General Fund budget review and allocation. Any potential future need for a separate development impact fee for police services is a policy issue under the purview of the City Council. Under CEQA, the Specific Plan impacts on police service demands are considered less- than-significant.

Mitigation 15-2. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(c) Impacts 15-3: Impacts to School Facilities
New or physically altered school facilities determined necessary by the SCUSD to accommodate students generated by future development under the Specific Plan could cause significant environmental impacts; however, any School District proposal for a new school would be subject to its own evaluation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which would be expected to involve an evaluation of environmental impact topics similar to that provided in this EIR.

The SCUSD is responsible for levying impact fees on new development. The residential and commercial development in the Plan Area would be required to pay the State-authorized school impact fees approved by the SCUSD. Pursuant to section 65995(3)(h) of the California Government Code (Senate Bill 50, chaptered August 27, 1998), the payment of statutory school impact fees "...is deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization...." Therefore, subsequent to payment of statutory fees, school impacts would be considered less-than- significant.

Mitigation 15-3. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(d) Impact 15-4: Impacts on Parks and Recreational Facilities.

The City ensures a project meets its dedication requirements through the development review process. Parkland, as required, must be included as part of a project’s “land use plan” with the location identified on the project property. A CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 project that does not comply with the parkland dedication requirement would not be approved. In addition, the City requires that parkland be improved (i.e., “turn- key”) and dedicated to the City prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

Therefore, mandatory, future development of parkland and open space in the Specific Plan Area plus individual project payment of City adopted in-lieu park fees and/or dedication of parkland would ensure that impacts on parks and recreational facilities would be less-than-significant.

Mitigation 15-4. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required. See “Construction Period Impacts” below.

(e) Impact 15-5: Impacts on Other Public Facilities. The Specific Plan-facilitated increase in residential, commercial, and public activity in the Plan Area, and associated job creation and increase in business activity, would result in a corresponding incremental increase in demand for other public, municipal services (e.g., Santa Clara Public Libraries). However, the City is requiring the Plan to include approximately 45,000 square feet of additional City library facilities to accommodate anticipated incremental library service demand. The Specific Plan has identified areas where community facilities (including a library) would be located; however, particular library development plans would be subject to discussions between the City and a future project applicant. Funding options could include those provided in Specific Plan Chapter 7 (Implementation), which discusses options for ensuring adequate funds for facilities required by Specific Plan development, including approaches and policies for both one-time and on-going costs of public infrastructure and related improvements. As an option, the City could consider working out a separate arrangement with a property owner for providing a “community benefit,” though the precise terms of such a future arrangement are beyond the scope of this analysis. A future library facility proposal would be subject to its own evaluation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); however, because the site would be in the Plan Area, then library construction would be required to follow the mitigation measures already identified elsewhere in this EIR (chapters 5 [Air Quality], 6 [Biological Resources], 7 [Cultural and Historical Resources], etc.), and review would be limited to ensuring consistency with the provisions of this EIR (see below for construction period impacts). Therefore, this impact would be less-than-significant.

Mitigation 15-5. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

(f) Impact 15-6: Construction Period Impacts. The construction of Plan-related open space, parkland, and recreational and other public facilities would be temporary and would occur within either existing public rights-of-way or on City property, a project development site, or private property subject to a municipal easement. Construction period air emissions (dust), noise, and traffic interruption typically associated with parks and recreational facilities construction would be reduced through mandatory, uniformly applied City of Santa Clara construction CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 standards and regulations, as well as mitigations already identified elsewhere in this EIR, which analyzes both operational and construction impacts.

Mitigation 15-6. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated
None.

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable None.

4. Cumulative impacts
The Project would not have a considerable contribution to a significant cumulative public services impact. The General Plan EIR discussed the cumulative impact on public services from the buildout of the General Plan (which includes a portion of the development and growth proposed by the PHSP) and concluded that future development, consistent with existing regulations, would not result in significant impacts to public facilities. The proximate City Place project would provide for public services on its site or pay in -lieu fees. The in -lieu fees paid by projects developed under the Specific Plan would reduce cumulative impacts to school and park facilities and there would be no impacts to fire, police, or library servic es. For these reasons, implementation of the Project would not have a considerable contribution to a significant cumulative public services impact.

N. Recreation

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on the environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment
(a) Impact 16-1: Impacts on Parks and Recreational Facilities The City ensures that a project meets its dedication requirements through the development review process. Parkland, as required, must be included as part of a project’s “land use plan” with the location identified on the project property. A project that does not comply with the parkland dedication requirement would not be approved. In addition, the City requires that parkland be improved (i.e., “turn- key”) and dedicated to the City. Therefore, mandatory, future development of public parks in the Specific Plan Area plus individual project payment of City adopted park in-lieu fees and/or dedication of parkland to the City in fee title and free of encumbrances would ensure that impacts on parks and recreational facilities would less-than-significant.

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022 Mitigation 16-1. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required. See “Construction Period Impacts” below.

(b) Impact 16 -2: Construction Period Impacts. No specific project development application has been advanced, and any future spec ific park or recreational facility proposal would be speculative at this time. However, construction of Plan - facilitated open space, parkland, and recreational facilities would be considered temporary and would occur within either existing public rights -of-way, City property, a project development site, or private property subject to a municipal easement. Construction period air emissions (dust), noise, and traffic interruption typically associated with parks and recreational facilities construction would be reduced through mandatory, uniformly applied City of Santa Clara construction standards and regulations, as well as mitigations already identified elsewhere in this EIR, which analyzes both operational and construction impacts.

Mitigation 16-2. No significant impact has been identified; no mitigation is required.

2. Project impacts determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated
None.

3. Project impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable None.

4. Cumulative impacts
The Project would not have significant impacts on recreation facilities. The General Plan EIR discussed the cumulative impact on recreation facilities from the buildout of the General Plan (including the Plan Area) and concluded that future development, co nsistent with existing regulations, would not result in significant impacts to recreational facilities. The previously approved City Place project includes an approximately 31-acre park to provide for recreational facilities north of US 101 and the Project will provide on -site park and recreational space and payment of parkland dedication fees such that there is no project -level impact on recreational facilit ies. Therefore, the Project would not result in significant cumulative recreation impacts.

O. Transportation/Traffic

1. Project impacts determined to have no impact on t he environment, or have a less than significant impact on the environment

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022

(a) Impact 17-1: Impacts Related to Vehicle Miles Traveled; Conflict With Adopted Policies, Plans, or Programs Regarding Roadways.

The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan qualifies as a transit supportive project and is presumed to have a less- than-significant impact on VMT due because it meets the criteria established by the City related to proximity to transit, density, multimodal transportation networks, transit-oriented design elements, parking, and affordable housing, as discussed below.

Proximity to Transit. Transit supportive projects must be located within ½ mile of an existing Major Transit Stop6 or an existing transit stop along a High-Quality Transit Corridor,7 as those terms are defined by Public Resources Code sections 21064.3 and 21155. Several parcels in the Plan Area are within ½ mile of the Old Ironsides LRT station, which meets the definition of a Major Transit Stop. In addition, VTA provides frequent bus service via Route 57, which runs along Great America Parkway, and meets the definition of a High-Quality Transit Corridor. All parcels in the Plan Area are within ½ mile of the nearest Route 57 bus stops on Great America Parkway at either Patrick Henry Drive or Old Glory Lane.

Density. For office/R&D projects, transit supportive projects must have a minimum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.75. Similarly, residential projects must have a minimum density of 35 dwelling units per acre (DU/ac). Residential densities within the Plan Area are proposed to range from a minimum of 65 DU/ac to a maximum of 250 DU/ac. Under Scenario A, flex space would be permitted in addition to proposed residential and community-oriented development. Under Scenario B, 785,000 square feet of office space would be allowed on a 9.86-acre parcel, in place of the residential use designated on that parcel under Scenario A. The office development on this parcel would have an FAR of approximately 1.83. Thus, development densities permitted within the Plan Area would meet the minimum requirements to be considered a transit supportive project.

Multimodal Transportation Networks. City Policy requires that transit supportive projects promote multimodal transportation networks. The Specific Plan would provide balanced, multimodal internal circulation as well as convenient access to nearby destinations and transit stations. The Specific Plan would include the following policies to support safe, active, and sustainable travel options for residents and visitors:

6“Major transit stop” means a site containing any of the following: (a) an existing rail or bus rapid transit station; (b) the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods; or (c) a major transit stop that is included in Plan Bay Area 2040.

Pub. Res. Code §§ 21064.3, 21155(b).

7“High-Quality Transit Corridor” means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours. Pub. Res. Code § 21155(b).

CEQA Findings Regarding the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and EIR – January 2022  Prioritize the comfort and safety for pedestrians and cyclists;  Retrofit the right-of-way to accommodate all travel modes including walking, cycling, driving, micro-mobility, and transit;
 Support access to transit stops on Tasman Drive and Great America Parkway;  Improve infrastructure for pedestrians, cyclists, and micro-mobility (e.g., scooters) to mitigate the impact of urban-scale development on traffic congestion;
 Improve connections to the Calabazas Creek Trail and other trails and greenways;
 Design flexible street environments that allow for innovative transit and ride- share options (e.g., jitneys) as well as emerging technology (e.g., autonomous vehicles);
 Use Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies in partnership with area employers and property owners to minimize vehicle miles traveled;  Limit vehicle parking spaces for residences and businesses; and  Reduce carbon emissions from transportation.

Transit-Oriented Design Elements. Transit supportive projects would be required to include transit-oriented design elements. The Specific Plan proposes design guidelines and standards to ensure a pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use residential neighborhood that is walkable, with convenient connections to transit. The following urban design principles would ensure the Specific Plan is a transit- oriented development:

City Council and Authorities ConcurrentMarch 22, 2022

City Council and Authorities Concurrent
March 22, 2022