City Council and Authorities Concurrent
September 27, 2022

3. AMENDMENT PROVISIONS
That paragraph five (5) of the Original Agreement, entitled "Term of Agreement," is hereby amended to reflect a revised termination date of September 30, 2018.

4. TERMS
All other terms of the Original Agreement which are not in conflict with the provisions of this Amendment No. 1 shall remain unchanged in full force and effect. In case of a conflict in the terms of the Original Agreement and this Amendment No. 1, the provisions of this Amendment No. 1 shall control.

5. COUNTERPART/FACSIMILE SIGNATURE
This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but both of which shall constitute one and the same instrument; and, the Parties agree that signatures on this Agreement, including those transmitted by facsimile, shall be sufficient to bind the Parties.

The Parties acknowledge and accept the terms and conditions of this Amendment No. 1 as evidenced by the following signatures of their duly authorized representatives. The Effective Date is the date that the final signatory executes the Agreement. It is the intent of the Parties that this Amendment No. 1 shall become operative on the Effective Date.

SIGNATURES FOLLOW ON PAGE 3
Amendment No. 1 to Agreement/Perkins + Will, Inc.

Rev. 02/01/15

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
a chartered California municipal corporation
Dated: _________ _

BRIAN DOYLE
Interim City Attorney
ATTEST:

ROD DIRIDON, JR.

City Clerk
Dated:
"CITY"
DEANNAJ. SANTANA
City Manager
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Telephone: (408) 615-2210
Fax: (408) 241-6771
PERKINS+ WILL, INC.
a Delaware corporation
By: - -H-----',e___::_- ---=--=:....e:..-=-=""-------------- ( 1gnature of Person executing the Agreement on behalf of Contractor)
Name: Geeti Silwal
Title: Principal-in-Charge
Local Address: 2 Bryant Street, Suite 300
San Francisco, CA 94105
Email Address: [email protected]
Telephone: (415) 856-3000
Fax: (415) 856-3001
"CONTRACTOR"
I:\PLANNING\Admin\Contracts\Perkins + Will\Amendment No l\Amendment No. 1 - Form.doc Amendment No. I to Agreement/Perkins+ Will, Inc.

Rev. 02/01/15

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN THE

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
AND
PERKINS + WILL, INC.

ADDENDUM TO EXHIBIT A

ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Services to be performed for the City by the Contractor m1der this Agreement are more fully described in the Contractor's proposal entitled, "Tasman East Focus Area Plan Additional Services" dated September 12, 2017 and "Additional Services for the Tasman East Specific Plan in Santa Clara" dated June 30, 2017, which are attached to this Exhibit A.

Agreement with RTKL Associates Inc./Additional Scope of Services/Addendum to Exhibit A Rev. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/1 5
Page I of 8
September 12, 2017
Tasman East Focus Area Plan

ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Task 1- P+W reset
Perkins+Will
Review, brainstorm, develop revised strategy and report outline; plan revised report content; and solicit input from client where necessary. The key changes requiring a rework of the Focus Area Plan and the Specific Plan document are -
• Narrower streets and revised lane configurations
• Calle del Sol extension northward to boundary of City Place • Optional roundabout at Calle Del Sol/Calle de Luna
• Optional 2 lanes/4 lanes on Lick Mill extension
• Allow for possible 600 person 'urban' school
• Minimum 10 acres public open space
These changes will have significant impact on the developed concept and will need careful re-evaluation and reworking for a revised plan. As a part of the analysis for the Calle del Sol extension, BKF will be preparing a street alignment study, as detailed in the attached memorandum dated August 2, 2017.

Task 2 - Client workshop in SF to review revised strategy, report outline and content and to agree and confirm all changes. P+W will prepare presentation, host and record this meeting. All the changes noted under Task 1 will need to be discussed and debated with the City staff for clear direction before incorporating as policy, standards and guideline recommendation in the Specific Plan. In addition Fehr and Peers will be modifying and expanding the scope of the Parking Demand and Traffic Analysis, as detailed in the attached letter from Matt Haynes to Dennis Dornan dated June 30, 2017. · Task 3 - P+W prepare revised first draft report
Documentation of agreed upon policy, standards and guideline recommendation will be incorporated in the Specific Plan with the necessary additional graphic illustration for a complete revised first draft report.

Task 4 - Client review period and comments
Client feedback will be shared as one consolidated set of comments. No Perkins+Wi/1 additional effort is expected against this task.

Task 5 - Community Meeting #4
Preparation of draft presentation, final presentation and necessary display material for a final community input session that will be attended and facilitated by P+W. A memo summarizing the feedback will be documented.

Task 6 - P+W to prepare final draft report in response to client comments and community feedback Effort required to clarify and reconcile all comments and community feedback received on the first draft with necessary text and graphic update will constitute a complete final draft.

Task 7 - P+W participate as required in EIR analysis and preparation.

No Perkins+Wi/1 additional effort is expected against this task.

Agreement with R TKL Associates fac./ Additional Scope of Services/ Addendum to Exhibit A Rev. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15

Perkins+Will
Task 8 - P+W attend Planning Commission and City Council Hearings to adopt Specific Plan Report and EIR (eight anticipated).

No Perkins+Wi/1 additional effort is expected against this task (included in base contract).

Agreement with RTKL Associates Inc./ Additional Scope of Services/ Addendum to Exhibit A Rev. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15

June 30, 2017
Dennis Dornan
Perkins + Will
2 Bryant Street, Suite 300
San Francisco, CA 94105
FEHR,f PEERS
Subject: Additional Services for the Tasman East Specific Plan in Santa Clara Dear Mr. Dornan:

This letter requests a contract amendment to conduct additional services for the Tasman East Specifi c Plan not covered under our current scope of work.

Since we have initiated our work on the proj ect, several additional tasks have been requested by the City that were not included in our original transportation analysis scope. These tasks include performing a sensitivity analysis of street extensions within the Specific Plan area connecting to the proposed City Place development, as well as additional analysis discussed in the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority's (VTA) Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines.

VTA's latest Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines state th at any project proposing changes to intersection/roadway geometry or signal operations should include an evaluation of transit delay and a quality of service (QOS) analysis for bicyclists and pedestrians. Additionally, VTA and state guidelines support the inclusion of a vehicle miles travelled (VMT) an alysis as part of the project.

Finally, the City has requested that we include an analysis of mitigation "triggers" to identify the appropriate implementation timeframe for impacted st udy intersecti ons.

The purpose of this amendment is to provide an updated scope of work that incl udes the additional tasks necessary for completion of the Tasman East Specific Plan's Draft EIR. These additional tasks are discussed below.

SCOPE OF WORK
This contract amendment request includes the following additional tasks:

Task 1: Sensitivity Testing of Calle del Sol and Lick Mill Boulevard Extensions Based on our recent discussions with the City and the project team, we will perform a "sensitivity analysis" for intersections along Calle del Mundo at the proposed Lick Mill Boulevard Extension, 160 W. Santa Clara Street [ Suite 675 [ San Jose, CA 95113 [ (408) 278-1700 I Fax (408) 278-1717 Agreement with RTKL Associates Inc./ Additional Scope of Services/ Addendum to Exhibit A Rev. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15

Dennis Dornan
June 30, 2017
Calle del Sol extension, and Lafayette Street The purpose of this analysis wil l be to determine the potential timing for construction of these street extensions as development proceeds within the Specific Plan area.

In order to perform this analysis, we will evaluate the following 5 intersections:
• Calle del Mundo/ Lafayette Street
• Calle del Mundo/ Calle del Sol
• Calle del Mundo/ Lick Mill Boulevard Extension
• Tasman Drive/ Calle del Sol
• Calle de Luna/ Calle del Sol
Each intersection will be evaluated with up to three configurations under background and cumulative traffic conditions. We will evaluate these intersection using the Traffix traffic analysis software program to determine expected peak hour traffic delay with and without stt·eet extensions to the City Place area. The roundabout option at Calle del Mundo/ Calle del Sol wi ll be evaluated using the HCH 2010 capacity method.

Based on these results, we will identify the approximate time period where extending the streets would be important for overall circulation to and from the Specific Plan area. The results of this analysis will be included as part of the Transportation Impact Analysis for the Tasman East Specific Plan EIR.

Task 2: Additional Study Intersections and Counts
Our original scope included analysis of up to 25 study intersections. Based on the draft estimated . trip generation of the project, and anticipated distribution of trips, we have identified 33 potential study intersections that would meet the general threshold of having at least ten project vehicle trips per lane or that have been requested to be analyzed in EIR Notice of Preparation comment letters.

Of these proposed study intersections, most have existing count data available from the City Place project. However, some of these counts were conducted in 2013 or earl ier. Based on consultation with the City, we wi ll conduct new traffic counts at all intersections that do not have counts in 2014 or later. We have therefore included budget to conduct new intersection counts at up to 10 intersections as part of this task.

Agreement with R TKL Associates Inc./ Additional Scope of Services/ Addendum to Exhibit A Rev. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15

Dennis Dornan
June 30, 2017
Task 3: Transit Delay Analysis for Buses and Rail Routes The City has requested that we conduct a transit delay analysis for buses and rail routes in the vicinity of the Specific Plan. For the purposes of this task, transit network performance will be analyzed during the AM and PM peak hour based on the average transit vehicle delay associated with congestion at signalized intersections along a specified corridor with and without the Project.

The change in average transit vehicle delay wi ll be determined using the following process:
• Review Traffix analysis software output for intersection delay. The average delay, by movement, at each intersection within a study corridor in the transit vehicle path of travel will be determined.
• The transit vehicle average delay due to congestion at intersections will be determined by summing the movement delay for each signalized intersection along the study transit corridor. The effects of transit signal priority or preemption will not be considered. • Without and With Project average transit vehicle delay associated with congestion at intersections will be compared. Note that the transit vehicle dwell time at transit stops is not included in the analysis.

The City of Santa Clara and the VTA do not have documented standards related to transit corridor performance associated with congestion resulting from new development projects. The agencies also do not have a documented method for determining which transit corridors should be analyzed.

For purposes of this study, the following routes within one mile of the Specific Plan area and that have full day servi ce with a frequency of 30 minutes or less are analyzed:
• Route 902 - Tasman Drive: North First Street to Great America Parkway • Route 57 - Great America Parkway: Mission College Boulevard to Tasman Drive • Route 60 - Great America Parkway: Mission College Boulevard to Tasman Drive Potential mitigation measures will consider improvements such as increased transit service frequencies, improved pedestrian/bicycle access, and other improvements to enhance transit travel and reduce conflicts with general automobile traffic.

A transit capacity analysis is neither required as part of the VTA TIA Guidelines, nor is in the latest Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) guidance. As a result this task will focus primarily on transit delay, rather than transit capacity. However, given the nature of the Specific Plan and its proximity to transit, we propose to qualitatively evaluate the Project's effect on transit capacity at the Great America station, although this may not be identified as a Project impact.

Agreement with RTKL Associates Inc.I Additional Scope of Services/Addendum to 'Exhibit A Rev. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15

Dennis Dornan
June 30, 2017
Task 4: Bicycle and Pedestrian Quality of Service Analysis Fehr & Peers will evaluate the pedestrian and bicycle QOS using the Charlotte Bicycle and Pedestrian LOS method at intersections outside of the Specific Plan area where changes to existing geometry would occur as part of the Project or be proposed as mitigation measures. We will conduct this analysis at up to 10 intersections.

The intersections will be evaluated under the following scenarios: (1) Existing Conditions; (2) Existing plus Project Conditions; (3) Background Conditions; (4) Background plus Project Conditions; (5) Cumulative Conditions; (6) Cumulative plus Project Conditions.

Task 5: VMT Analysis Based on Project Trip Generation
Our current scope of work does not include an evaluation of project Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMn.

However, VMT has been proposed as a statewide metric for evaluating project transportation impacts in accordance with SB 743 and guidance prepared by the Governor's Office of Planning an d Research (OPR). It has also been proposed by Caltrans in Implementing Ca/trans Strategic Management Plan 2015-2020 Consistent with SB 743 - Interim Guidance (September 2016), prepared by the Local Development - Intergovernmental Review Program. As a result, we expect the need to conduct a detailed evaluation of project VMT effects as part of the TIA As part of this task, we will summarize the expected VMT generated by the proposed Specific Plan.

We will also determine whether the VMT generated by the Specific Plan would result in a VMT per capita that would exceed 85 percent of the average VMT per capita for the reg ion under the Plan Bay Area sustainable communities strategy and regional transportation plan.

If significant impacts are identified, Fehr & Peers will identify additional mitigations that might be needed to address daily traffic generation and vehicle miles travelled, including TOM strategies oriented toward reducing daily travel volumes, reducing trip length, strengthening active transportation, and maximizing use of low emission modes.

Fehr & Peers will incorporate the analysis resu Its from the above tasks into the Project's Draft Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) report. We will respond to one round of consolidated comments from City Staff on the analysis and incorporate changes into the Final TIA Agreement with RTKL Associates Inc./ Additional Scope of Services/ Addendum to Exhibit A Rev. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15

Dennis Dornan
June 30, 2017
Task 6: Mitigation Triggers Analysis
This analysis will be conducted to determine the amount of Project traffic between Background and Cumulative conditions that will trigger each significant intersection impact. It will be conducted with the following steps:
• The AM and PM peak hour level of service calculations for each of the intersections with Background and Cumulative impacts will be selected and reviewed. We assume we will analyze up to 15 impacted intersections as part of this task. • Increments of Project traffic starting with the background trip generation and ending with the cumulative trip generation will be added to each of the selected intersections. • Levels of service will then be recalculated with each increment to identify the number of Project vehicle trips that would trigger a cumulative impact at each intersection based on the significance criteria.

The results will be summarized in a memorandum and added as an Appendix to the TIA report.

Task 7: Updated Existing Plus.Project Scenario
This task will inclu_de developing a new scenario evaluating existing plus project conditions. This will include developing new trip generation estimates for th e project independent of other development projects in the vicinity, and adding project-generated trips to existing volumes obtained from counts representing peak traffic conditions during the morning and evening commute periods.

This analysis will be conducted for all study intersections and freeway analysis segments identified in Task 2 above. This analysis will be presented for informational purposes and will not be used to identify significant transportation impacts.

Task 8: Updated Trip Generation Results
Our understanding from the project team call on June 19 is th at the project description will be updated to include an urban-style school (i.e. with limited playing field space). We will therefore update our current project trip generation analysis to incorporate the expected traffic generated by this school. We will rely on the City to provide the specific enrollment projections and anticipated student enrollment boundary prior to updating the trip generation results. The updated trip generation results will be incorporated into the project's transportation impact analysis.

Agreement with RT.KL Associates Inc./ Additional Scope of Services/ Addendum to Exhibit A Rev. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15

I I

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

BY AND BETWEEN THE

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
AND
PERKINS + WILL, INC.

ADDENDUM TO EXHIBIT B

FEE SCHEDULE
In no event shall the amount billed to City by Contractor for services under this Agreement exceed nine hundred fifty four thousand two hundred ninety five dollars ($954, 295), subject to budget appropriations.

The additional Fee Schedules for the total amount of $194, 870 are fully illustrated and attached to this Exhibit B.

Agreement with RTKL Associates Inc./Fee Schedule/Exhibit B Rev. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15

"O
Ill
(Q
Cl)
N
~
(.)1

REVISION B
12-Sep-17
P+W Add . Service TASK 1
P+W Add. Service TASK 2
P+W Add. Servi ce TASK 3
P+W Add. Service TASK 4
P+W Add. Service TASK 5
P+W Add. Se rv ice TASK 6
NW TASK7
P+WTASK8
r-ehr+Peers Add. service
BKF Add . service

SUBTOTAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES

ORIGINAL AGREEMENT

REVISED NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT
R.evlsed scope;
Narrower streets and revised lane configurations
Ca ll e de l Sol extension northward to boundary of Qty Place Optional roundabout at Calle De l Sol/Calle d e Luna
Optiona l 2 lanes/4 lanes on Lick MUI extension
Allow for possible 600 person 1urllan 1 school
Minimum 10 acres publlc open space
P+W reset; review, bralnstorm, develop revised strategy and report outllne, plan revised report cot1tent, sollcit lnput from dlent where necessary
C/lent workshop in SF to review revised strategy, report outline and content and to agree and conrlrm all changes; P+W prepare, host and record
P+W prepare revised first dra'ft report
Client review period and comments
Community meeting tJ4; P+W prepare presentation/graphic material, facilitate meeting and record feedback.

P+W prepare final draft report In response to client comments and community feedback
P+W participate as required In EIR analysis ilnd preparation (Included In ba,e contract)
P+W attend City Council Hearing to adopt Specific Plan Report and EI R (Included In base contract)
Addltlonal transportation analysis (lump sum}
Additional street alignment study (lump sum)
Hrs
16 8
8 0
12 16
0 0

TASMAN EAST BASIC AND ADDITIONAL SERVICES FEE SCHEDULE
Principal Project Manager Senlor Urban Designer landscape architect Jr. UD/Productlon Subtotal
$ 285 Hrs $ 250 Hrs s 185 Hrs $ 185 Hrs- $ 125
$ 4,560 16 $ 4,000 GO $ 11,100 96 $ 6,660 40 $ 5,000 $31,320 $ 2,280 12 $ 3,000 16 $ 2,960 4 $ 740 16 $ 2,000 $10,980 $ 2,280 8 $ 2,000 40 $ 7,400 20 $ 3,700 60 $ 7,500 $22,880 $ 0 $ - 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ $0
$ 3,420 16 $ 4,000 24 $ 4,440 0 $ 40 $ 5,000 $16,860
$ 4,560 16 $ 4,000 60 $ 11,100 12 $ 2,220 60 $ 7,500 $29,380 $ - 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ $0
$ - 0 $ - 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ $0
$79,950
$3,500
$194,870
$759,425
$954,295
I~ =•
, Bkf

ENGINEERS

SURVEYORS

PLANNERS
1646 N. California
Blvd, Suite 400
Wal nut Creek
California 94596
Tel 925.940.2200
Fax 925.940.2299
www .bkf.com
BKF 20155173
2 August 2017
Subject: Tasman East
Civil Engineering-Additional Services Request #1
Project Manager: Christopher Mills
Task 1: Prepare Street Alignment Study
Scope of Work: BKF will evaluate options for raising Calle Del Sol to meet the proposed grades of the City Place project to the south. We will develop a vertical alignment for Calle del Sol and indicate the extents of impacts to the plan (fill slopes, retaining walls, areas where access to existing parcels will be limited).

Total Additional Seivice Request: $3,500
y reement with RTKL Associates Inc./Fee Schedule/Exhibit B ~ v. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15

Tasman East Specific Plan -Additional Transportation Analysis Task
1-fourly Rates -->

DRAFTEIR
Additional Tasks
Sensitivity Analysis - del Sol and Lick Mill
Additional Study Intersections
Transit Delay Analysis
Ped/Bike QOS Analysis
VMT Analysis
Mitigation Triggers Analysis
Updated Existing plus Project Scenario
Updated Trip Generation Estimates
Total
Agreement with RTKL Associates Inc./Fee Schedule/Exhibit B Rev. 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15
Principal Associate
$ 275 $ 215
B 12
4 8
4 0
4 5
2 6
4 12
6 12
2 2
34 57
Total Engineer Graphics Admin Hours
$ 125 $ 120 $ 115
75 2 6 103 $
40 8 B 68 $
40 2 4 50 $
55 4 4 72 $
32 0 4 44 $
44 0 4 64 $
56 4 6 84 $
8 0 2 14 $
350 20 38 499 $
71512017
Other Total Labor Direct Costs Costs
15,085 $ 600 $ 15,685
9,700 $ 5,000 $ 14,700
6,800 $ 300 $ 7,100
9,990 $ 475 $ 10,465
6, 300 $ 300 $ 6,600
9,640 $ 450 $ 10,090
12,400 $ 600 $ 13,000
2,210 $ 100 $ 2,310
72,125 $ 7,825 $ 79,950
Page4 of5
Dennis Dornan
June 30, 2017

FEE AND SCHEDULE
The additional budget to complete these tasks is $79,950. This includes all staff time, as well as direct expenses.

This agreement will be governed by the terms of our Subcontract dated April 2016. This work will be completed within six weeks of our receipt of a fully-executed contract amendment.

S_hould you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (408) 645-7018. Otherwise, please provide a contract amendment at your earliest convenience. We appreciate the opportunity to continue working with you on t his project.

Sincerely,

FEHR & PEERS
Matt Haynes
Principal
Agreement with RTKL Associates Inc./Fee Schedule/Exhibit B Rev: 02/01/15; Typed 08/17/15

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
19-1515 Agenda Date: 1/15/2019

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on Amendment No 2. to the Agreement for Professional Services with Perkins + Will for preparation of the Tasman East Specific Plan and Related Budget Amendment

BACKGROUND
The Tasman East Specific Plan will guide the transition of an underutilized 45-acre industrial neighborhood east of the Lawrence Caltrain Station into a pedestrian-friendly, transit oriented development, providing for the addition of 4,500 new residential units in close proximity to transit and jobs. Preparation of the Tasman East Specific Plan is called for in the General Plan as a prerequisite to the redevelopment of this low-intensity industrial area for residential use.

The Specific Plan is intended to support the development of a lively neighborhood that along with the 4,500 new residential dwelling units, also incorporates approximately 100,000 square feet of neighborhood-oriented and convenience retail and 10 acres of open space including various outdoor recreational facilities and landscape features, such as a community garden, a public plaza, pocket parks and paseos.

On April 18, 2016, the City Council awarded a $759,425 contract to Perkins + Will to assist staff with preparation of the Specific Plan along with preparation of an associated EIR. On October 24, 2017, the City Council approved Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Professional Services with Perkins + Will, Inc. Amendment No. 1 Increased the total Not-to-Exceed amount by $194,870 to a total amount of $954,295 to allow completion of the Tasman East Specific Plan and associated Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which included additional traffic modeling to update the traffic impact analysis, updating of the air quality and noise technical reports, and providing an alternative technical analysis to determine the Plan’s impact on greenhouse gas emissions, as well as to make substantial text revisions to the EIR and the Specific Plan documents.

DISCUSSION
Staff is recommending that the City Council approve a contract amendment to allow for payment to the Perkins + Will for the final costs of the Plan preparation, including additional outreach with key stakeholders and environmental analysis that was needed to complete the Specific Plan process.

The proposed contract amendment for $186,587 would increase the total consultant costs to $1,140,882 for the preparation of the Specific Plan and associated EIR. The increased costs correspond to an increase in the consultant work scope to address expanded review of the Specific Plan design standards with developer stakeholders, additional analysis of the roadway network modifications, a request from the Santa Clara Unified School District to analyze a 600-student school within the plan, and land use plan revisions to accommodate additional parkland requirements which arose from City Council feedback at study sessions.

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 3 Printed on 2/22/2019
powered by Legistar™
19-1515 Agenda Date: 1/15/2019
The additional services include consultant support at public meetings and with the developer stakeholder group, preparation of responses to stakeholders and staff as part of input and review on the Specific Plan process, rewriting portions of the EIR in response to the expanded scope, including the need to describe and analyze a possible 600-student school, and preparation of the Final EIR including in depth coordination with the City’s outside counsel.

California Government Code section 65456 allows cities to recover costs for preparation, adoption, and administration of a Specific Plan, which includes preparation of the supporting EIR including the additional contract costs described in this Report. Government Code 66016(a) states that proposed fee information should be available to the public at least 10 days in advance of a public meeting on the topic. Current project applicants within the Tasman East Specific Plan area have been notified of the fee and had an opportunity to discuss the fee with City staff. The developers who will pay this fee directly benefit from the expanded project scope in that it provides for additional engagement between them and the project consultant and preparation of a better EIR document to support their future development activities. The Specific Plan provides strong design direction for development proposals and is the foundation of a clear, streamlined approval development approval process.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Tasman East Specific Plan was analyzed under an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) adopted and certified by the City Council on November 13, 2018.

FISCAL IMPACT
The amended agreement will cost an additional $186,587. Private entities will process entitlements for their project sites subsequent to the adoption of the specific plan and EIR, and will be responsible for the payment of a specific plan fee that will reimburse the City’s Building Inspection Reserves account, as applicable.

BUDGET AMENDMENT
FY 2018/19
Current Increase/
(Decrease)
Revised
Fund 063 - Building Inspection Reserves
Transfers Out
Intra Trs Out - Misc (89990-(I)TO25B) $3,177,658 $186,587 $3,364,245 Reserve
Reserve Account (44465) $12,741,482 ($186,587) $12,554,895 Fund 001 - General Fund
Transfers In
Intra Trs In - Misc (59940-(I)TO025A) $3,177,658 $186,587 $3,364,245 Expenditures
Program 5523 (Advanced Planning)
Contractual Srvcs (87870) $325,500 $186,587 $512,087
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 3 Printed on 2/22/2019
powered by Legistar™
19-1515 Agenda Date: 1/15/2019
Transfers In
Intra Trs In - Misc (59940-(I)TO025A) $3,177,658 $186,587 $3,364,245 Expenditures
Program 5523 (Advanced Planning)
Contractual Srvcs (87870) $325,500 $186,587 $512,087

COORDINATION
The proposed contract amendment was coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office and the Finance Department.

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]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement for Professional Services with Perkins + Will, Inc. to complete the Tasman East Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR), increasing the not-to-exceed cost by $186,587 to a revised total of $1,140,882; and

2. Approve appropriations of an additional $186,587 in contractual services for the Tasman East Specific Plan funded by a transfer from the Building Inspection Reserves account.

Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Director, Community Development Department Approved by: Deanna J. Santana, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Perkins + Will draft Contract Amendment No. 2

2. Perkins + Will fully executed agreement for Tasman East

2. Perkins + Will Contract Amendment No.1
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 3 Printed on 2/22/2019
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
19-736 Agenda Date: 8/20/2019

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on Amendment No 3. to the Agreement for Professional Services with Perkins + Will for Amendments to the Tasman East Specific Plan

BACKGROUND
On November 13, 2018, the City Council adopted the Tasman East Specific Plan to guide the transition of an underutilized 45-acre industrial neighborhood east of the Lawrence Caltrain Station into a pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented development, providing for the addition of 4,500 new residential units near transit and jobs. The Specific Plan also incorporates approximately 100,000 square feet of neighborhood-oriented and convenience retail and 10 acres of open space including various outdoor recreational facilities and landscape features, such as a community garden, a public plaza, pocket parks and paseos. As a result of these features, there has been strong development interest within the Specific Plan. To date, there are currently nine projects in the architectural review process with the City that collectively would allow construction of a total of 3,549 residential units.

On April 18, 2016, the City Council awarded a contract to Perkins + Will to assist staff with preparation of the Specific Plan and an associated Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The contract was amended in October 2017 to complete additional traffic modeling in order to update the traffic impact analysis, update the air quality and noise technical reports, provide alternative technical analysis to determine the Plan’s impact on greenhouse gas emissions and make substantial text revisions to the EIR as well as the Specific Plan documents. In January 2019, the contract was again amended to perform additional outreach with key stakeholders and environmental analysis that was needed to complete the Specific Plan process.

DISCUSSION
As the City has moved into implementation of the Specific Plan, working with Tasman East property owners, staff is recommending a modification of the Specific Plan to allow the Primavera sewer lift station to be maintained at its current location. As a result, the proposed extension of Calle del Sol would be implemented as a pedestrian paseo rather than a vehicular street. The proposed contract amendment would allow the consultant to complete additional analysis related to maintaining the Primavera sewer lift station in its current location and reconfiguring the Calle del Sol extension into a pedestrian paseo between Calle de Luna and Calle del Mundo. The proposed contract amendment for $45,500 would increase the total not-to-exceed amount to $1,186,432 including the current update to the Specific Plan and associated EIR addendum.

Changes to the Adopted Specific Plan
Calle del Sol Extension
As a part of the adopted Specific Plan, several public improvements were proposed to create a welldesigned public realm. One of these improvements was the proposed extension of Calle del Sol City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 4 Printed on 8/15/2019
powered by Legistar™
19-736 Agenda Date: 8/20/2019
northwards between Calle de Luna and Calle del Mundo. This roadway extension was intended to lengthen the proposed main street within Tasman East and to create a pedestrian-oriented public realm along the Calle del Sol extension, with the additional benefit of providing additional vehicular circulation within the neighborhood.

Relocation of Sewer Pump Station
To implement the Calle del Sol extension, the City’s Primavera lift station would either need to be relocated to the northern terminus of Calle del Sol, on the north side of Calle de Luna, or otherwise be converted to an underground facility within the street right-of-way. Undergrounding the lift station in its current location was determined to be infeasible due to safety concerns with potential build-up of gases in maintenance areas, along with the added difficulty of performing routine maintenance in the public right-of-way.

The City’s Public Works Department hired Woodard and Curran consultants to perform an engineering study to assess the needs and requirements to determine the feasibility of relocating the lift station. Relocating the lift station required a full analysis of current sewer flows, reconstruction of sewer lines to redirect flows to a new location, determining connections to sewer mains, and ultimately identifying locations within the plan area that met all the necessary requirements. The City evaluated potential alternative locations for the station on private properties within Tasman East including sites currently being contemplated for development projects. The potentially affected developers indicated that relocation of the lift station would have a significant impact on their development projects which were already submitted for Architectural Review approval to the City prior to the results from the Woodard and Curran relocation study. The developer group proposed an alternative that the lift station could be kept at its current location with an architectural screening treatment along with reconfiguration of the Calle del Sol extension.

Pedestrian Paseo Concept
The Tasman East developer group commissioned a design study to look at the ways to maintain the existing lift station in place and redesign the Calle del Sol extension from a two-lane street to be a pedestrian paseo that could accommodate the lift station within a portion of the paseo. City staff were agreeable to the redesign of the Calle del Sol extension provided that the removal of the Calle del Sol extension as a roadway did not impact the flow of traffic within the plan area, and that the revised proposal did not impair placemaking objectives for the district.

Converting the Calle del Sol extension into a paseo and keeping the Calle del Sol extension in place would present three major issues that need to be addressed through the contract amendment. The first issue is to confirm that the roadway network can still accommodate traffic in a manner consistent with what was originally proposed in the Specific Plan and evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The proposed contract amendment includes funds for both the environmental consultant and the traffic sub-consultant to analyze and document the changes to the proposed roadway network.

The second issue is to design the paseo to help create a vibrant and comfortable public realm, recognizing that the above-ground lift station might hamper that objective. Perkins + Will, the City’s design consultant, will create design standards for the paseo to reinforce the fact that the paseo is a public space that connects the three major streets within Tasman East. The paseo design will also focus on the optimization of pedestrian as well as bicycle access within the paseo. These changes will be incorporated into an amended Tasman East Specific Plan, which would require approval from City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 4 Printed on 8/15/2019
powered by Legistar™
19-736 Agenda Date: 8/20/2019
the City Council.

The third concern is to ensure that the paseo is an attractive gathering space that supports the Specific Plan’s placemaking objective. Toward that end, the contract also includes funds for subconsultant to Perkins + Will, Strategic Economics, to propose cooperative funding strategies for the area property owners to share in the costs of programming and maintaining the paseo, so that it can be a focal point within the neighborhood. The intention is for the paseo’s ongoing maintenance to be privately funded through financing tools such as a business improvement district or similar structure.

Conceptual Designs
The developer study includes screening and landscaping ideas to minimize the visual impacts of the lift station and its associated odor-control measures. The enclosure will be required to be accessible to heavy equipment, with large access doors and clear space around the enclosure, so that the lift station pumps can be maintained. One of the building concepts, a slatted wooden enclosure, is shown in Attachment 5. The conceptual renderings show conceptual public art on south and east sides of the building and small seating area and stage built into the north side of the building. The public art component of the enclosure would be further refined as part of the contract amendment work. This rendering suggests that the lift station could be accommodated within the paseo and still be consistent with the Specific Plan placemaking objectives.

Reimbursement Agreement
If the Council approves the proposed contract amendment with Perkins + Will, the City will enter into a reimbursement agreement for $50,050 with the applicants that are developing projects within the Tasman East Specific Plan. The reimbursement agreement will recover the $45,500 in costs which includes preparation of the supporting environmental analysis and the additional contract costs described in this report and an additional 10% to recover contract administration costs. The Council previously authorized the City Manager to execute reimbursement agreements for up to $250,000 in Resolution 18-8619.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Tasman East Specific Plan was analyzed under an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) adopted and certified by the City Council on November 13, 2018. An Addendum to the EIR will be prepared in accordance with the scope of work proposed under this Amendment.

FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed amendment includes an increase of $45,550 for the additional services related to modifications of the Specific Plan. The City will enter into a reimbursement agreement with applicants developing projects within the Tasman East Specific Plan to fully recover these costs.

COORDINATION
The proposed contract amendment was coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office and the Finance Department.

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 City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 4 Printed on 8/15/2019
powered by Legistar™
19-736 Agenda Date: 8/20/2019
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.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement for Professional Services with Perkins + Will, Inc. to update the Tasman East Specific Plan and prepare an Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), increasing the not-to-exceed cost by $45,500 to a revised total of $1,186,432.

Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Director, Community Development Department Approved by: Deanna J. Santana, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Perkins + Will draft Contract Amendment No. 3

2. Perkins + Will fully executed agreement for Tasman East

3. Perkins + Will Contract Amendment No.1

4. Perkins + Will Contract Amendment No. 2

5. Enclosure concept illustrations and proposed street sections City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 4 Printed on 8/15/2019
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
21-757 Agenda Date: 7/6/2021

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement for Professional Services with Perkins + Will for the Tasman East Specific Plan and Related Budget Amendment

COUNCIL PILLAR
Promote and Enhance Economic, Housing, and Transportation Development

BACKGROUND
In 2016, the City conducted a competitive Request for Proposal (RFP) for professional services to assist City staff with preparation of a Specific Plan and an associated Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Tasman East Focus Area. Through this process, Perkins + Will was selected and awarded an agreement with a completion date of September 30, 2017. (See attached Attachment #2 for Executed Original Agreement and Agenda Report.)
In October 2017, the agreement was amended to include additional traffic modeling to determine the Specific Plan’s impact on greenhouse gas emissions and to incorporate those revisions into the EIR as well as well as the Specific Plan document. (See attached Attachment #3 for Executed Amendment No. 1 and Agenda Report.)
In January 2019, the agreement was amended to include additional outreach with key stakeholders and to finalize the environmental analysis that was needed to complete the Specific Plan process. (See Attachment #4 for Executed Amendment No. 2 and Report to Council.) In August 2019, the agreement was amended for Perkins + Will to perform additional analysis related to maintaining the Primavera sewer lift station in its current location and reconfiguring the proposed Calle del Sol extension into a pedestrian paseo. (See Attachment #5 for the Executed Amendment No. 3 and Report to Council.)
The Tasman East Specific Plan was adopted by the City Council in November 2018. Of the 4,500 units supported through the adopted specific plan, developers have submitted applications for a total of 4,484 units on approximately two-thirds of the available land development area. Given the continued demand to provide new housing in the Tasman East area, the opportunity to gain additional unit yield within an area already planned for housing, and the benefit of building out a complete residential mixed-use neighborhood as envisioned within the Specific Plan, the City is considering creating additional capacity in the Tasman East area by preparing an amendment to the Specific Plan and conducting environmental clearance to add 1,500 residential units within the Tasman East Specific Plan boundaries. To undertake the process, the City is proposing to amend its contract with Perkins + Will, the planning consultants used for the original specific plan.

The proposed contract amendment for $275,000 would increase the not-to-exceed amount to City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 6 Printed on 7/1/2021
powered by Legistar™
21-757 Agenda Date: 7/6/2021
$1,461,432 and extend the agreement through June 30, 2022.The scope of tasks and budget to develop a Specific Plan Amendment to allow up to an additional 1,500 residential units in Tasman East include:
· $52,000 for the preparation of the Specific Plan Amendment document including the updated land use plan and diagrams;
· $106,000 to conduct Level of Service and Vehicle Miles Traveled traffic analysis; · $6,500 to update existing utility conditions which may have changed since the original Specific Plan preparation and make recommendations for potential infrastructure upgrades or future analyses that may be required to accommodate the projected demands; · $84,984 to prepare the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and · $25,516 to be available for contingency purposes.

In addition to the required environmental review for 1,500 additional units, the contract amendment would also include a transportation analysis that details the effects of additional traffic on surrounding roadways, and a building form study to determine if additional design controls are necessary as a part of updating the specific plan to create more residential capacity.

The proposed Amendment No. 4 was initially discussed at the March 9, 2021 City Council meeting.

During the Council discussion some Councilmembers expressed concern with approving the contract and thus allowing preparation of an amendment to the Specific Plan that would allow up to an additional 1,500 housing units without first better understanding the City’s strategy for providing amenities to support the additional housing growth. Because the Amendment costs would be funded by a grant received by the City, approval of the contract and associated budget action requires five affirmative votes from the City Council. Following the discussion on March 9, the City Council voted 4 -3 in favor of approving the contract Amendment and therefore did not approve the requested Amendment. The City Council then directed staff to return to the City Council with additional information on proposed amenities.

In April 2021 the American Planning Association California Chapter Northern Section selected the Tasman East Specific Plan as the 2021 winner of the Chapter’s Award of Excellence for a Large Jurisdiction Comprehensive Plan. In nominating the Specific Plan for this award the City highlighted the Plan’s focus on placemaking and amenities that contribute toward the development of a complete neighborhood.

DISCUSSION
At the March 10, 2021 City Council meeting, in response to the Council’s questions about the proposed contract amendment and overall planning approach for the Tasman East Specific Plan, staff provided the following information:

1. The proposed amendment would allow staff to engage a consultant and begin the process of preparing an update to the Specific Plan.

2. The planning process would provide opportunity to address the Council’s concerns regarding planning for parklands and amenities as part of the proposed Specific Plan amendment.

3. The number of units to be added to the Specific Plan has not been finalized. The contract amendment is described as allowing up to 1,500 residential units to be added to the 4,500 already supported by the Specific Plan.

4. The City Council previously reviewed staff proposal to amend the Specific Plan to add more City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 6 Printed on 7/1/2021
powered by Legistar™
21-757 Agenda Date: 7/6/2021
units and approved the City’s application for a grant to fund the planning work.

5. The City received a grant of $310,000 from the State for the proposed Specific Plan amendment. This grant would fully fund the consultant costs and is intended to be applied to project’s that add to the City’s housing capacity.

6. Implementation of the Specific Plan has been very successful, with 4,485 units (of the 4,500 available) in the permitting process, including two 100% affordable projects, one of which is now under construction (Attachment 1).

Following discussion, the City Council directed staff to continue the item for a full presentation at a future meeting. Staff will provide a presentation at the July 6, 2021 City Council hearing. The following additional information is being provided in advance of the meeting to support the presentation.

Development Activity
The City has received eleven project applications within the Tasman East Specific Plan area (Attachment 2). These applications generally account for all of the units available (4,485 of 4,500), but utilize only about 65% of the Plan area. Notably, these include two 100% affordable projects and a senior housing project that will provide a mix of traditional senior units, as well as assisted and memory care units. The architecture and construction type also varies considerably between the projects.

Public Parklands and Open Space
The Tasman East Specific Plan will include a mix of public and private amenities. Public amenities include public park space, publicly accessible privately owned spaces (e.g., plazas, parklets and greenways), and private amenities (located within buildings and accessible to residents of the building). As part of the development of the Specific Plan, staff reviewed the Specific Plan open space strategy with the City Council on multiple occasions and per the direction of the City Council, the amount of open space was increased from 5 acres (public parkland) to 10 acres (5 acres of public parkland plus 5 acres of privately owned open space with private open spaces areas counted as 50% of their area). This approach was formally adopted as the Specific Plan Open Space Framework (Attachment 3).

Pending or approved projects include dedication for approximately 3.78 of the 5.0 acres planned for the area. This is consistent with the Open Space Framework in that 1.0 of parkland is planned for the Central area which has not yet had project in the vicinity of the planned park. The balance of

0.22 acres is accounted for by the fact that the 100% affordable St. Anton project utilizes an exception to the City’s dedication requirement as allowed under State law for 100% affordable housing projects.

Eventual development within the Central area would be expected to deliver the 1.0 acres of dedicated parkland planned for that area. However, as part of the proposed process to prepare an Amendment to the Specific Plan, staff is recommending that the appropriate amount of parkland be evaluated and increased along with the proposed addition of residential units.

Applications on file as designed would deliver 4.58 acres of Open Space as defined in the Specific Plan. Like the planned park areas, one component of the Open Space, the greenways, is also tied to specific areas of the Plan and would be further expanded as development proceeds within the Central and Station districts. A significant portion of the Open Space area is however tied to City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 6 Printed on 7/1/2021
powered by Legistar™
21-757 Agenda Date: 7/6/2021
development and so a greater portion has been achieved with the initial applications. As with the parkland, the planned amount of open space could be increased as part of the preparation of a Plan amendment.

Attachment 4 illustrates the combined parkland and open space area (8.36 acres) provided through the initial planning applications which each project site plan overlayed upon the existing condition aerial photo.

On-site Amenities
Each of the projects includes a considerable amount of on-site amenities for their residents. As an illustration of this, the amenities for five of the projects are listed in Attachment 5. Residents will have access to swimming pools, BBQ facilities, co-working space, a variety of lounges, fitness centers, game rooms, etc.

Local Context
Calle de Luna will serve as the new ‘main street’ for the Tasman East neighborhood, including a mix of restaurants and other retail uses. It is also significant that the neighborhood is adjacent to the Related Santa Clara development which will provide ready access to a wide variety of restaurants and other recreational amenities.

Reason for Contract Amendment
While the original contract with Perkins + Will was intended to be comprehensive, the first two amendments (Amendment No 1 and Amendment No 2) were necessary to address the need for additional environmental analysis identified through the initial environmental review process and to address changes in CEQA requirements. As the City undertook implementation of the Specific Plan, it further became apparent that modifications to the Plan would be helpful to achieve the City’s objective of supporting the near-term development of much needed housing while also maintaining the overall Plan goals and objectives. The current amendment is desirable as it would allow the City to further achieve those goals and objectives by allowing additional residential development within the Plan area. Amendments to Specific Plans are not unusual as issues can be identified through implementation of the Plan that were not anticipated at the beginning of the planning process when the original contract scope was developed. In this case, the success of the Plan and the strong housing market have resulted in an accelerated implementation process and the need to amend the consultant contract to make amendments to the Plan in the near term.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Tasman East Specific Plan was analyzed under an EIR adopted and certified by the City Council on November 13, 2018. An addendum to the Environmental Impact Report that provided additional analysis related to the Calle del Sol paseo was prepared in conjunction with Amendment No. 3, which was adopted by the Council on November 17, 2020. A Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) that details the changes to the environment based on the expanded scope will be prepared in accordance with the scope of work proposed under this Amendment.

FISCAL IMPACT
The project is being funded through the State’s Planning Grants program. The proposed amendment was specifically funded by the Planning Grants Program, and the City of Santa Clara was awarded $310,000 for this purpose (Attachment 6). This is a reimbursable grant, so the following budget City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 6 Printed on 7/1/2021
powered by Legistar™
21-757 Agenda Date: 7/6/2021
amendment is recommended to appropriate the full grant award. As the City meets deliverables within this grant, staff will apply for reimbursement of costs. The remaining $35,000 of the grant funding will be used to cover costs related to City-completed Water and Sewer technical reports, recordation fees, mailings, public outreach, and other project expenses.

FY 2021/22 Budget Amendment
Current
Budget
Increase /
(Decrease)
Revised
Budget
Other City Departments Operating
Grant Trust Fund
Revenue
Grant Funding - State’s Planning Grants
Program
$0 $310,000 $310,000
Expenditures
Planning Grants Program $0 $310,000 $310,000

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the Finance Department and the City Attorney’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 Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>

RECOMMENDATION

1. Consistent with City Charter Section 1305 , “At any meeting after the adoption of the budget, the City Council may amend or supplement the budget by motion adopted by the affirmative votes of at least five members so as to authorize the transfer of unused balances appropriated for one purpose to another purpose, or to appropriate available revenue not included in the budget,” approve the FY 2021/22 budget amendment in the Other City Departments Operating Grant Trust Fund to recognize grant revenue in the amount of $310,000 and establish a Planning Grants Program appropriation in the amount of $310,000 (five affirmative council votes required to appropriate additional revenue); and

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 4 to the Agreement with Perkins + Will for professional services to prepare the Amendment to the Tasman East Specific Plan to allow up to 1,500 additional units in the Tasman East area, along with preparation of the associated environmental clearance by increasing the amount of the agreement by $275,000 and extending the term of the agreement through June 30, 2022 for a revised not-to-exceed maximum compensation of $1,461,432.

Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Director, Community Development Department City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 6 Printed on 7/1/2021
powered by Legistar™
21-757 Agenda Date: 7/6/2021
Approved by: Deanna J. Santana, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Tasman East St. Anton Project under construction

2. Tasman East Planning Applications

3. Tasman East Specific Plan Open Space Framework Diagram

4. Tasman East Green Spaces

5. Tasman East Project Amenities

6. Amendment No. 4 with Perkins + Will

7. Original Executed Agreement and Agenda Item #13.B

8. Amendment No. 1 and Agenda Item #13.B6

9. Amendment No. 2 and RTC 19-1515

10. Amendment No. 3 and RTC 19-736

11. Planning Grants Program (PGP) Award Letter
City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 6 Printed on 7/1/2021
powered by Legistar™
EBIX Insurance No. S200003424
AMENDMENT NO. 4

TO THE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES

BETWEEN THE

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA,
AND
PERKINS + WILL, INC.

PREAMBLE
This agreement ("Amendment No. 4") is entered into between the City of Santa Clara, California, a chartered California municipal corporation (City) and Perkins+ Will, Inc., Delaware corporation (Contractor). City and Contractor may be referred to individually as a "Party" or collectively as the "Parties" or the "Parties to this Agreement."

RECITALS
A. The Parties previously entered into an agreement entitled "Agreement for Professional Services by and between the City of Santa Clara, California, and Perkins+ Will, Inc.", dated April 29, 2016 (Agreement); B. The Agreement was previously amended by Amendment No. 1, dated October 27, 2017, Amendment No. 2 dated February 4, 2019, and Amendment No. 3 dated August 27, 2019, and is again amended by this Amendment No. 4. The Agreement and all previous amendments are collectively referred to herein as the "Agreement as Amended"; and
C. The Parties entered into the Agreement as Amended for the purpose of having Contractor prepare the Tasman East Specific Plan, and the Parties now wish to amend the Agreement as Amended to prepare an amendment to the approved Tasman East Specific Plan, to draft a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, to increase the amount of compensation, and to extend the agreement through June 30, 2022, subject to the appropriation of funds.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:

AMENDMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. Section 5 of the Agreement as Amended, entitled "Term of Agreement", is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Unless otherwise set forth in this Agreement or unless this paragraph is subsequently modified by a written amendment to this Agreement, the term of the Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date of this Agreement terminate on June 30, 2022."
Amendment No. 4 to AgreemenUPerkins + Will, Inc.

Rev. 10/25/19

2. Exhibit A of the Agreement as Amended, entitled "Additional Scope of Services ", is hereby amended to read as shown in Fourth Revised Exhibit A, Scope of Services, attached and incorporated into this Amendment No. 4.

3. Exhibit B of the Agreement as Amended, entitled "Budget for Additional Scope of Services", is hereby amended to read as shown in Fourth Revised Exhibit B, Fee Schedule, attached and incorporated into this Amendment No. 4.

4. Except as set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement as Amended shall remain in full force and effect. In case of a conflict in the terms of the Agreement as Amended and this Amendment No. 4, the provisions of this Amendment No. 4 shall control.

The Parties acknowledge and accept the terms and conditions of this Amendment No. 4 as evidenced by the following signatures of their duly authorized representatives.

Approved as to Form:

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
a chartered California municipal corporation
Alexander ~~g~: :::igned by Alexander
Abbe for ?a~'.~~021 .oe 2s og42,s1

BRIAN DOYLE
City Attorney
r ' [}EAN A . ANTANA
~ity Marr ger
"CITY"
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Telephone: (408) 615-2210
Fax: (408) 241-6771
PERKINS + WILL, INC

A DELAWARE CORPORATION
Dated: 18 February 2021 . ~
By (Signature):

Name: Geeti Silwal '1_
/41,d;· ~
Title: Principal-in-Charge
Principal Place of 2Bryant Street, Suite 300
Business Address: San Francisco, CA 94107
Email Address: ....9..eeti.silw._a~l@= p.;:;. e;.;.; rk;.;.;. in.;;;s;,;,; w;.;.;il~l.c;;;.;o;;.:,m,;.;__ ______ _ Telephone: (415) 856-3000
Fax: (415)856-3001
"CONTRACTOR"
Amendment No. 4 to AgreemenUPerkins + Will, Inc.

Rev. 10/25/2019
Page2

FOURTH REVISED EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
The additional services to be performed for the City of Santa Clara ("City") by the Contractor under this Amended Agreement are set forth below. The additional services include contributions from Perkins & Will (Contractor) and the following subcontractors:

BKF, Fehr & Peers, David J. Powers & Partners, and Strategic Economics.

1. Perkins & Will shall provide the following services:

1.1. Task 1: Contractor will make any necessary edits to the Specific Plan Report, including any changes from Fehr & Peers (F+P) and David J. Powers & Partners (DJP&A).

1.2. Task 2: Contractor will provide overall management of consultant team and client interface (for approximately 52 weeks, which DJP&A states is the required duration for subsequent Environmental Impact Report).

1.3. Task 3: Contractor will evaluate the impacts on urban form of an increase of up to 1,500 units on properties within the site boundary that have not yet been included in the known 'pipeline' projects of developers, either on file or pending applications. This Task 3 deliverable may be included within the Specific Plan Report; or it may be maintained as a separate document for the benefit of CSC Staff to understand the dynamics of development opportunities and the impacts of the potential consolidation of properties.

1.3.1. Contractor will build an 'existing conditions' base model, including 3D modeling, of the 3,949 residential units in the planning pipeline (based on information provided by City staff or the proponents), plus all other existing buildings.

1.3.2. Contractor will investigate various scenarios, specific below, for how the remaining units might be accommodated on site, in compliance with the approved design controls (tower separation, densities, etc.) in the Specific Plan Report.
• With no further consolidation of properties (this approach may not even yield 6,000 units because of the size of the non-consolidated properties, but it will provide a new 'benchmark' of how much development could be anticipated if each property owner redeveloped independently)
• With modest consolidation of properties
• With widespread consolidation of properties

1.3.3. Contractor shall prepare visuals for review and comment by City staff and optional City Council study session.

1.3.4. Contractor will incorporate City feedback and finalize deliverables, showing a realistic range of options for how development may occur.

Amendment No. 4 to Agreement/Perkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Scope of Services Page 3 Rev. 10/25/2019

1.3.5. Contractor will develop any necessary additional massing controls and building design guidelines to ensure additional development will be compliant with the City's expectations.

2. BKF Scope of Services

2.1. See Appendix A.1 incorporated herein.

3. Fehr & Peers Scope of Services

3.1. See Appendix A.1 incorporated herein.

4. David J. Power & Associates (DJP&A) Scope of Services

4.1. See Appendix A.1 incorporated herein.

4.2. Assumptions by DJP&A:

4.2.1. Given that this EIR will be focused on issues related to the development increase DJP&A only assumed one Administrative Draft EIR and then a Screencheck version prior to printing, to reduce the overall schedule.

4.2.2. DJP&A have allowed 10 weeks for the TIA after the City approves the trip generation assumptions (approximately four (4) months total).

5. Strategic Economics Scope of Services

5.1. Per correspondence with City staff, the market study and fiscal impact analysis do not need to be updated for this project. In the absence of a clearly defined scope of services Strategic Economics will be available on-call for advisory services to City staff and other members of the design team. This would potentially include qualitative assessment and guidance regarding potential changes to the plan area's mix of land uses and their locations. Any on-call work would be funded from the project contingency and be subject to prior approval from City staff.

Amendment No. 4 to AgreemenUPerkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Scope of Services Page 4 Rev. 10/25/2019

1. BKF Scope of Services
Exhibit A Appendix A.1
Subcontractor Scope of Services
Task 1: Evaluate Infrastructure Impacts
Scope of Work: BKF will meet with City of Santa Clara Water and Sewer Utilities Department, Silicon Valley Power, and PG&E to update existing conditions that may have changed since 2017. This research will include documenting any known upgrades to downstream sewer mains and pump stations that have been implemented or are planned, as well as improvements to the transmission and distribution systems for gas, water and electricity. Additionally, BKF will update documents prepared in 2017 to add 1,500 residential units to the proposed development scenarios and make recommendations for potential infrastructure upgrades or future analyses that may be required to accommodate the projected demands. The updated documents will include sewer and water demand projections that can be used by City Staff to prepare a Water Supply Assessment and perform further hydraulic analyses in-house as-needed. 35 Estimated Hours

2. Fehr & Peers Scope of Services
TASK 1: SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE
Fehr & Peers will work with the Perkins + Will team to update relevant sections of the Tasman East Specific Plan. Based on discussions with the City, Fehr & Peers understand there is a desire to update select portions of the specific plan, potentially including parking, TOM, street layout, and related circulation policies.

Fehr & Peers have allocated up to 48 hours for this task.

TASK 2: TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS
Fehr & Peers will prepare a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) for use in the Specific Plan EIR.

The operations of up to 20 intersections and 20 freeway segments will be evaluated during the weekday morning (AM) and evening (PM) peak hours for the scenarios as shown below. If the project size is large enough such that more than 20 intersections could potentially be impacted and the City determines there Amendment No. 4 to AgreemenUPerkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019

is a need to include additional intersections, Fehr & Peers will analyze more intersections for an additional fee.

Scenario 1: Existing Conditions - Existing volumes obtained from counts representing peak traffic conditions during the morning and evening commute periods, plus previously approved trips from the current version of the Tasman East Specific Plan.

Scenario 2: Background Conditions - Existing volumes plus traffic from approved but not yet constructed and unoccupied
developments in the area, including Phases 1-3 of City Place and previously approved trips from the current version of the Tasman East Specific Plan.

Scenario 3: Background Plus Project Conditions - Background volumes from Scenario 2 plus project traffic.

Scenario 4: Cumulative No Project Conditions - Fehr & Peers will use VT A's model refined for the proposed City Place Project, which includes approved trips from the current version of the Tasman East Specific Plan.

Scenario 5: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions - Scenario 4 volumes plus traffic generated by the Project.

Fehr & Peers will use the VTA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines and the TRAFFIX software package to analyze transportation impacts and intersection operations. Freeway segments will be analyzed in accordance with VTA guidelines. The TIA will also address potential impacts to transit service, bicycle activity, and pedestrian activity.

Task 2.1: Initial Trip Generation Estimates, Data Collection and Evaluation of Existing Conditions
Under this task, Fehr & Peers will develop vehicle trip generation estimates, along with trip distribution, and trip assignment for the proposed project. Initial project vehicle trip generation estimates, distribution patterns, and assignments will be submitted to City staff for review and will be refined if necessary to respond to their comments.

Once the final scope is approved by the City, Fehr & Peers will compile and review the available background documents relevant to the study area. Fehr & Peers will collect the following information for transportation facilities within the project area:

Motor Vehicle Traffic: Fehr & Peers has budgeted for analysis of up to 20 intersections and 20 freeway segments, to be confirmed by the City once initial Amendment No. 4 to Agreement/Perkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019

trip generation estimates are developed. The final set of intersections and freeways segments will be selected based on consultation with the City. Due to the current COVID pandemic, Fehr & Peers will not conduct new traffic counts at any new intersections. Instead, Fehr & Peers will use previous counts provided by the City and apply a reasonable growth factor to estimate traffic volumes that would exist under ordinary, non-pandemic conditions.

This task includes a site visit to observe peak hour transportation operations, obtain lane configurations, and other site specifics such as physical characteristics of the site and the surrounding transportation network.

Transit, Pedestrian and Bicycle Conditions: Fehr & Peers will also update the description of existing transit service, bicycle conditions and pedestrian conditions in the vicinity of the Specific Plan.

Task 2.2: Evaluate No Project Conditions
Fehr & Peers will evaluate a No Project scenario under Background and Cumulative Conditions. Volumes for Background Conditions will be derived accounting for approved, but not yet constructed projects in the Plan area.

Volumes for Cumulative Conditions will be obtained from the City Place version of the VT A's travel demand model. The City Place version of the VTA travel demand model has been validated and calibrated.

Task 2.3: Evaluate Project Conditions
Fehr & Peers will adjust the volumes developed in the Background and Cumulative No Project scenario to account for improvements to circulation and transportation demand management strategies from the Project. Once estimates of vehicle trip generation have been developed, the directions of approach and departure of trips will be estimated based on the locations of complementary land uses, existing travel patterns in the area, and proposed modifications of the roadway network. The project vehicle trip generation estimates, distribution pattern, and assignments will be refined to respond to comments received from City staff. Intersection LOS calculations will be conducted to estimate the LOS of the study locations during the AM and PM peak hours after completion of the proposed project.

Task 2.4: VMT Analysis
VMT has been adopted as a statewide metric for evaluating project transportation impacts in accordance with SB 743 and guidance prepared by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR). VMT is presumed to be less than Amendment No. 4 to Agreement/Perkins+ Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019

significant due to the Specific Plan area's proximity to high-frequency transit; as a result Fehr & Peers will not conduct a quantitative analysis of VMT but will instead qualitatively discuss why VMT effects are expected to be less than significant.

VTA's new VMT Evaluation Tool will be used to support the qualitative assessment and confirm the Specific Plan area meets eligible VMT screening criteria. A more detailed quantitative analysis of VMT effects can be completed as an optional task.

Task 2.5: Transit Delay Analysis for Buses and Rail Routes Fehr & Peers will conduct a transit delay analysis for buses and rail routes in the vicinity of the Specific Plan. For the purposes of this task, transit network performance will be analyzed during the AM and PM peak hour based on the average transit vehicle delay associated with congestion at signalized intersections along a specified corridor with and without the Project.

The change in average transit vehicle delay will be determined using the following process:
• Review Traffix analysis software output for intersection delay. The average delay, by movement, at each intersection within a study corridor in the transit vehicle path of travel will be determined.
• The transit vehicle average delay due to congestion at intersections will be determined by summing the movement delay for each signalized intersection along the study transit corridor. The effects of transit signal priority or preemption will not be considered.
• Without and With Project average transit vehicle delay associated with congestion at intersections will be compared. Note that the transit vehicle dwell time at transit stops is not included in the analysis.

The City of Santa Clara and the VTA do not have documented standards related to transit corridor performance associated with congestion resulting from new development projects. The agencies also do not have a documented method for determining which transit corridors should be analyzed. For purposes of this study, the following routes within one mile of the Specific Plan area and that have full day service with a frequency of 30 minutes or less will be analyzed:
• VTA Orange Line - Tasman Drive: North First Street to Great America Parkway
• VTA Green Line - Tasman Drive: North First Street to Great America Parkway
Amendment No. 4 to AgreemenVPerkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019

• Route 57 - Great America Parkway: Mission College Boulevard to Tasman Drive
• Route 59 - Great America Parkway: Mission College Boulevard to Tasman Drive
Potential mitigation measures will consider improvements such as increased transit service frequencies, improved pedestrian/bicycle access, and other improvements to enhance transit travel and reduce conflicts with general automobile traffic.

A transit capacity analysis is neither required as part of the VTA TIA Guidelines, nor is in the latest Governor's Office of Planning and Research (QPR) guidance.

As a result this task will focus primarily on transit delay, rather than transit capacity. However, given the nature of the Specific Plan and its proximity to transit, Fehr & Peers propose to qualitatively evaluate the Project's effect on transit capacity at the Great America station, although this may not be identified as a Project impact.

Task 2.6: Identify Significant Operational Impacts, Recommend Mitigation Measures
The results of the analysis for the Project will be compared to the results for the corresponding No Project Conditions for the scenarios as described above to identify roadway impacts. Significant transportation impacts will be identified based on the City of Santa Clara's non-CEQA operational standard and in keeping with current state of the practice. If significant operational impacts are identified, Fehr & Peers will recommend feasible mitigation measures, such as TOM strategies and other innovative methods.

A morning and evening left-turn queuing evaluation will be conducted under Existing and Background Conditions at impacted intersection locations.

Specifically, Fehr & Peers will compare the 95th percentile queues from TRAFFIX output between the appropriate No Project and Plus Project scenarios. This analysis will be conducted for up to ten movements at locations where the project adds enough traffic that available storage may need to be modified. Per TIA guidelines, the queuing evaluation is required for only the near- term analysis and will not be conducted for Cumulative Conditions.

A freeway ramp queuing analysis will be conducted for freeway ramp intersections to confirm that project trips will not result in queue backups to the project mainline or require modifications to ramp metering rates. Ramp analysis will be conducted for all study intersections with on- or off-ramps and will be evaluated for Existing and Background scenarios. Queue lengths will be reported based on Traffix analysis outputs only; no additional analysis of queuing using other traffic analysis software programs is assumed to be part of this task.

Amendment No. 4 to AgreemenUPerkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019

The effect of the project on transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities will be evaluated in terms of conflicts with existing or planned facilities or creation of hazardous conditions for bicyclists or pedestrians. Similarly, Fehr & Peers will ensure efficient linkages with existing and potential future transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Fehr & Peers will present specific mitigation measures that ensure adequate pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and automobile circulation within the project site and integration with the area's existing facilities.

Task 2.6: Documentation
Fehr & Peers will document our findings in a report that will include text, graphics, and tables to describe study analysis methods and results, the potential impacts of the proposed project, and corresponding mitigation measures. Fehr & Peers will submit one hard copy of the Administrative Draft TIA report and one separately bound appendix, plus one electronic version for review by the City.

This scope assumes up to 24 staff hours to respond to all comments on the Administrative Draft TIA report and prepare the Draft TIA.

Fehr & Peers will submit the Draft TIA report and Appendix for review by the City, VTA, and other agencies as applicable. This scope assumes up to 16 staff hours to respond to comments on the Draft TIA report received from the City of Santa Clara. Once the comments have been incorporated, Fehr & Peers will produce a Final TIA report and submit one hard copy and one electronic copy to City staff.

Each copy will have the report and appendices bound separately.

Deliverables:
• Administrative Draft Transportation Impact Analysis
• Agency Draft Transportation Impact Analysis
• Final Transportation Impact Analysis Chapter/Appendix for the Draft EIR Task 2.7: Response to Comments
Fehr & Peers will prepare response to comments received during the public review period regarding transportation and circulation.

Deliverables:
• Response to comments in written form
TASK 3: EIR CERTIFICATION AND ADOPTION
Fehr & Peers will assist with updates to the TIA to be included in the Final EIR based off comments received in Task 2 as well as changes adopted by either the Planning Commission or City Council.

Amendment No. 4 to Agreement/Perkins+ Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019

Deliverables:
• Updated/Revised Transportation Impact Analysis Chapter/Appendix for the Final EIR
TASK 4: MEETINGS
Fehr & Peers will participate in up to 6 project team conference calls as part of this task. Fehr & Peers will also attend up to 2 public hearings as part of Specific Plan adoption.

3. David J. Powers and Associates (DJP&A) Scope of Services Per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162, 15163, and 15164, when an EIR has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines that substantial changes to the project or circumstances under which the project is undertaken would result in new or greater significant impacts than previously disclosed in the certified EIR.

Modifications to the TESP may have significant impacts on air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation. These resource sections will be addressed in a Subsequent EIR (SEIR), as described below.

Preparation of the Subsequent EIR
Kick-Off Meeting and Subsequent EIR Initiation
DJP&A will attend one SEIR kick-off meeting with the City and the project team to discuss the project, further refine the SEIR scope as needed, identify alternatives, and coordinate the scheduling and preparation of the SEIR.

Project Description and Notice of Preparation
DJP&A will draft a project description and provide it to the City and Perkins+ Will to review for accuracy. The project description will be based on project information to be provided by Perkins + Will. A preliminary list of project information needed is included on page 8 of this scope of work. Once the project description is finalized, DJP&A will prepare the SEIR NOP.

DJP&A will prepare the NOP for circulation by the City of Santa Clara. The NOP will include a brief project description, project location map, and discussion of potential environmental effects of the project. This scope includes DJP&A attendance at one public scoping meeting for the project. The text of the SEIR will incorporate relevant issues raised in the responses to the NOP received during the 30-day NOP circulation period.

Amendment No. 4 to Agreement/Perkins+ Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019

Initial Study
DJP&A will prepare an Initial Study which will be incorporated in the SEIR as an appendix to focus the SEIR on potentially significant issues pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15178. The significant issues are discussed further below.

Preparation of Administrative Draft Subsequent EIR
DJP&A will prepare a SEIR consistent with the requirements of CEQA and the City of Santa Clara. The SEIR will include an introduction, summary, project description, environmental setting, discussion of environmental impacts, and mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts. The primary issues anticipated to be addressed in the SEIR are air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation, as described
Introduction
The introduction to the SEIR will describe the purpose of the SEIR, provide a general overview of the CEQA process, and describe the public participation process and opportunities for input.

SEIR Summary
A summary of the SEIR will include a brief description of the proposed project and identify the impacts of the project and proposed mitigation measures in tabular format. The summary will also briefly describe the project alternatives and address any known areas of public controversy.

Project Description
The SEIR will include a project description identifying the revised development totals anticipated in the Plan Area. The project description will also include a list of project objectives, necessary discretionary actions, and decision-making agencies. Maps and graphics will be provided to illustrate the text.

Existing Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures The Administrative Draft SEIR will discuss those resource areas found to be potentially significant in the Initial Study analysis and/or those areas required to be included in the SEIR. The SEIR will provide: 1) a detailed description of the existing environmental setting; 2) impacts that may result from the proposed project; and 3) feasible mitigation measures to avoid or reduce impacts to a less than significant level. A discussion of the project's consistency with applicable plans and policies will be included with particular attention given to inconsistencies, if any are identified.

Based upon DJP&A current understanding of the project, DJP&A anticipate the key environmental issues for the project will include the following resources:

Amendment No. 4 to Agreement/Perkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Page 10 Rev. 10/25/2019
• Air Quality - The SEIR will evaluate air quality impacts from construction and operational emissions. Under contract with DJP&A, an air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) assessment will be completed by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. (l&R) to assess impacts related to the proposed project.

Construction air quality impacts associated with the project will be addressed by predicting construction period regional criteria pollutant emissions. The latest version of the CalEEMod model will be used to quantify emissions. New sensitive receptors would be placed near sources of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). The previous air quality assessment will be updated using screening data provided by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The SEIR will identify existing sources of TACs and PM2.5 in the TESP area and their concentrations.

These levels will be compared against BAAQMD CEQA thresholds (i.e., cancer risks of 10 cases per one million).
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions - GHG emissions would be computed using the CalEEMod model that is recommended by BAAQMD, as described above for air quality emissions. Default inputs for the Bay Area would be used in the model along with local information regarding transit, pedestrian, and bicycle modes of travel that would replace vehicle trips. The CalEEMod model would compute annual emissions that include traffic and indirect sources such as natural gas, electricity use, water usage, and generation of solid waste that is stored in landfills. The change in emissions compared with existing land uses assumptions would be evaluated. According to the latest version of the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, GHG impacts from General Plans should be evaluated based on emissions per capita. The GHG analysis would work with City staff to develop a GHG per capita emission threshold, since plan development is anticipated to occur beyond 2020, where the BAAQMD thresholds become obsolete.
• Noise - The project proposes to increase the number of dwelling units and office space in the TESP area. l&R will prepare a brief noise memo which will calculate noise generated by construction activities and project-generated traffic at nearby sensitive land uses. The SEIR will assess the impacts of project construction and operation on residences in the vicinity of the Plan Area.
• Transportation - Modifications to the project would increase potential peak hour project- generated trips. Under contract with Perkins + Will, Fehr & Peers will prepare a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis per Senate Bill 7 43.

Additionally, Fehr & Peers will update the Traffic Impact Analysis that was prepared previously for the plan area. The SEIR will analyze, at a programlevel, impacts from any transportation improvements required for the project.

Pursuant to CEQA, the SEIR will also include a discussion of cumulative impacts; alternatives; growth inducing impacts; significant, unavoidable impacts; significant Amendment No. 4 to Agreement/Perkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019

irreversible environmental changes; references; and lead agency and consultants. Upon completion of the Administrative Draft Subsequent EIR, DJP&A will submit up to five hard copies of the document to the City for review and comment.

Draft Subsequent EIR and Notice of Completion
Revision of Administrative Draft Subsequent EIR/Preparation of Draft Subsequent EIR
Once the City provides DJP&A with comments on the Administrative Draft Subsequent EIR, DJP&A will revise the document and submit an electronic copy of the Screencheck Draft SEIR to the City for final review and comment. DJP&A will make any final revisions to the Screencheck Draft SEIR and prepare the Draft SEIR for public circulation. DJP&A will provide the City with up to 20 hard copies of the Draft SEIR for public distribution, a PDF of the document for posting on the City's website, as well as 15 CDs for the State Clearinghouse.

Notice of Completion
DJP&A will prepare the Notice of Completion (NOC), in accordance with the CEQA and City of Santa Clara requirements. The NOC will include a brief description of the project, the project location, and will state where copies of the Draft SEIR are available for review. DJP&A will submit an electronic draft of the NOC to the City for review and comment. DJP&A will revise and finalize the NOC based on City comments. DJP&A will transmit the NOC and copies of the Subsequent EIR to the State Clearinghouse on behalf of the City. This scope assumes the City will prepare a Notice of Availability and file it with the County Clerk.

Final Subsequent EIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting program, and Other Related Items
Preparation of Final Subsequent EIR
Upon completion of the 45-day Draft SEIR circulation period, DJP&A will prepare an Administrative Draft Final SEIR. The Final SEIR will contain the following :
• List of persons and agencies who commented on the Draft SEIR; • Responses to comments on the Draft SEIR;
• Revisions to the SEIR text, as necessary; and
• Copies of letters received on the Draft SEIR.

This scope of work assumes approximately 20 hours of Principal Project Manager time and 40 hours of Project Manager time to respond to comments. If additional effort is required to respond to the comments, it can be completed on a time and materials basis, in accordance with the fee schedule.

Amendment No. 4 to AgreemenUPerkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Page 12 Rev. 10/25/2019
An electronic copy of the Administrative Draft Final SEIR will be submitted to City Staff for review. The document will be revised per the comments received, and DJP&A will provide up to 35 copies of the Final Subsequent EIR to the City for public distribution. DJP&A will also provide the City with a PDF of the document for posting on the City's website.

Preparation of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program DJP&A will prepare a draft MMRP for the project. The MMRP will summarize the mitigation measures identified, when mitigation measures will be implemented, who will be responsible for implementation, and who will provide oversight.

DJP&A will submit a draft of the MMRP for the City's use with the Screencheck SEIR.

Findings
Although DJP&A are not attorneys and do not prepare legal findings, DJP&A will assist City Staff and the City Attorney in compiling information from the SEIR for findings required under CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, if requested to do so.

Notice of Determination
DJP&A will prepare a Notice of Determination (NOD), in accordance with CEQA and City of Santa Clara requirements . The NOD will include a brief project description, date of project approval, determination of the project's environmental effects, mitigation measures and conditions of approval, statement whether overriding considerations were adopted, and the location where the Final SEIR and record of project approval may be examined.

DJP&A will submit an electronic copy of the draft NOD for the City's review.

Based on comments received from the City, DJP&A will revise and finalize the NOD. An electronic copy of the finalized NOD will be submitted to the City.

Meetings and Hearing Attendance, Project Management
Attendance of Meetings and Hearings
This scope of work includes DJP&A attendance at up to two project meetings and two public hearings (e.g., one Planning Commission hearing and one City Council hearing). DJP&A can attend additional public hearings or meetings requested on a time and materials basis.

Project Management
DJP&A will provide project management, contract administration, and coordination with the City and project team throughout the SEIR process. The DJP&A Project Manager will coordinate with the City on a regular basis using email and telephone communications.

Amendment No. 4 to AgreemenUPerkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Page 13 Rev. 10/25/2019
Estimated Schedule
DJP&A proposes the following optimum schedule for preparation of the SEIR.

DJP&A can commit to maintain the schedule in the areas that are within DJP&A control. Completion of the Subsequent EIR, as outlined in the schedule below, is based upon receipt of project information listed on the following page in accordance with the schedule. Delays in receiving requested information or responses by others will result in at least day-for-day delays in the overall schedule.

Task Duration of Time Elapsed Task

1. DJP&A receives authorization to proceed
and requested project information ---

2. DJP&A completes project description 1 week and submits to Perkins + Will for review

3. DJP&A receives comments on the
project description from Perkins + Will and 1 week
completes revisions

4. Project Kick-Off Meeting --

5. DJP&A completes notice of preparation 1 week (NOP) and submits to City for review

6. Fehr & Peers submits trip generation 2 weeks estimates to City for approval

7. City completes review of NOP and 2 weeks provides comments to DJP&A

8. DJP&A completes revisions to NOP 0.5 week based on City comments

9. City approves trip generation estimates 4 weeks

10. NOP circulation 4 weeks

11. l&R completes air quality and GHG and
noise analysis (4 weeks after traffic data is 6 weeks
available)

12. Fehr & Peers completes VMT/Traffic 10 weeks Impact Analysis

13. City staff completes Sanitary Sewer 10 weeks Capacity Analysis Amendment No. 4 to Agreement/Perkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019
1 day
Week 1
Week2
Week2
Week3
Week2
Week5
Week5
Week6
Week9
Week 12
Week 16
Week 16

Task Duration of Time Elapsed Task

14. City staff completes Water Supply 13 weeks Week 19
Assessment*

15. Preparation and Submittal of the 4 weeks Week 23 Administrative Draft Subsequent EIR*

16. Review of Administrative Draft 5 weeks Week 28 Subsequent EIR by City Staff

17. DJP&A Revises Administrative Draft 3 weeks Week 31 Subsequent EIR, Prepare Screencheck

18. Review of Screencheck Subsequent 2 weeks Week 33 EIR by City Staff

19. DJP&A Revises Screencheck
Subsequent EIR and Print Subsequent EIR 1 week Week 34
for Circulation

20. Draft Subsequent EIR Circulates for 45- 6 weeks Week40 day Public Review

21. DJP&A Prepares Administrative Draft 3 weeks Week 43 Final Subsequent EIR

22. City Staff Reviews Administrative Draft 3 weeks Week46 Subsequent EIR

23. DJP&A Revises and Submits 2 weeks Week48 Screencheck Subsequent EIR

24. City Staff Reviews and Approves 1 week Week49 Screencheck Final Subsequent EIR

25. DJP&A Revises Screencheck
Subsequent EIR and Prints Subsequent 1 week Week 50
EIR for Circulation

26. City Circulates Final Subsequent EIR 1.5 weeks Week 52 for 10 days Total +/-
* Preparation of the Water Supply Assessment and the Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis can be done concurrently. The timing of the start of the analyses is contingent on other projects in the queue.

Amendment No. 4 to Agreement/Perkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019

Project Information Required
DJP&A scope and schedule are based on the assumption that DJP&A will receive the below project information concurrent with the authorization to proceed .

Perkins+ Will shall provide DJP&A any and all revisions to the TESP/project description in a timely manner. If DJP&A submits an environmental review document based upon an obsolete project description, the environmental review schedule and potentially DJP&A's budget may increase, due to additional time required to revise the document and the need for possible updates to technical reports.

Plans (in PDF)
• Revised TESP pages
Project Details
• Written description of the project, including maximum development assumptions
• Utility improvements (if any)
• Right of way improvements (if any)
• Project objectives
Technical Reports
• Traffic Impact Analysis
• Water Supply Assessment
• Water Hydraulic Modeling Analysis
• Sanitary Sewer Hydraulic Modeling and Capacity Analysis Amendment No. 4 to AgreemenUPerkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit A-Appendix A.1 Rev. 10/25/2019

1. Fees
Fourth Revised Exhibit B
Fee Schedule

1.1. For the additional services described in the Fourth Revised Exhibit A, the cost of said services are as follows:

Contractor Amount
Perkins + Will $52,000
Fehr & Peers $106,000
BKF $6,500
Strategic Economics On-Call1
David J. Powers & Associates $84,984
SUBTOTAL AMENDMENT NO. 4 $249,484
Contingency $25,516
TOTAL AMENDMENT NO. 4 $275,000
Original Agreement Not-To-Exceed $759,425
Amendment No. 1 $194,870
Amendment No. 2 $186,587
Amendment No. 3 $45,550
REVISED NOT-TO EXCEED AMOUNT $1,461,432
1 Strategic Economics services are on-call and should their services be required any payments would come from the contingency amount.

2. MAXIMUM COMPENSATION

2.1. The maximum compensation the City will pay Contractor for all services provided under this Agreement shall not exceed One Million Four Hundred Sixty-One Thousand Four Hundred Thirty-Two Dollars ($1,461,432) during the Term of the Agreement.

Amendment No. 4 to Agreement/Perkins + Will, lnc./Fourth Revised Exhibit B-Fee Schedule Page 1 Rev. 10/25/19
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1094 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Consideration of the Silicon Valley Power 2021 Power Content Label

COUNCIL PILLAR
Deliver and Enhance High Quality Efficient Services and Infrastructure

BACKGROUND
The Power Source Disclosure (PSD) program was established by Senate Bill (SB) 1305 (Stats. 1997, ch. 796) in an effort to provide retail electricity consumers “accurate, reliable, and simple to understand information on the sources of energy that are used to provide electric services.” In 2016, the California Energy Commission (CEC) adopted modifications to the regulations to incorporate statutory changes to program rules and reporting requirements as required by Assembly Bill (AB) 162 (Stats. 2009, ch. 313) and AB 2227 (Stats. 2012, ch. 616). AB 1110 (Stats. 2016, ch. 656) modified the PSD Program and Power Content Label by requiring retail suppliers to disclose the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity (the rate of emissions per unit of electricity) associated with each electricity portfolio beginning in 2021 for the 2020 reporting year. AB 1110 also required the CEC among other things, to determine a format for disclosing unbundled California eligible renewable energy credits (RECs) as a percentage of annual retail sales to be shown as an offset.

The law requires that electricity retail suppliers, like the City of Santa Clara’s Electric Department, dba Silicon Valley Power (SVP), disclose to customers which types of resources are used to generate the electricity being sold to them. SVP is required to use the reporting format developed by the CEC called the Power Content Label (PCL). The data that is used to create the PCL comes from SVP’s Power Source Disclosure (PSD) report that is audited through a third party and submitted to the CEC. Additionally, the CEC combines information from all in-state generation plant owners plus information on electricity imports and exports provided by the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) and other grid balancing authorities serving the state to create California’s overall energy mix, which is called the “CA Power Mix”. The CEC states that the CA Power Mix appears on the PCL as a reference point and it is not an exact apples-to-apples comparison of a retail supplier’s fuel mix.
2021 PCL Format
In 2020, the CEC established a new PCL that includes comparative emissions calculations along with the percentage of energy resources that is attributed to each SVP label. The 2021 PCL does not factor in the carbon intensity of the energy on an hourly basis or when energy is being drawn from the grid. However, SVP will continue to address carbon emissions reductions through all avenues available in order to meet ambitious climate targets set by both the City and the State.

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1094 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
The PCL format is broken down into two major sections. The left side of the PCL highlights the carbon intensity of each of the types of electricity products that SVP offers its customers. The right side displays the percentages of energy sources that make up each product. SVP has four types of electricity products offered to our customers. Below we describe how the new PCL format affects the reporting on each product:
· SVP Residential Mix
· SVP Non-Residential
· SVP Green Power Standard Mix - With the change in the label reporting requirements this year, SVP can no longer show energy offsets that do not fall under the CEC eligible renewable definition. The Green-e certified RECs are not recognized by the CEC unless they are also registered as California Eligible Renewable.
· SVP National Green Power Mix - This is a separate label for customers who procure global energy offsets for sustainability and carbon neutrality. The CEC does not recognize any offsets that are not considered California Eligible Renewable and will not allow these Green-e certified renewable RECs be displayed on the California Power Content label. Nor will they let RECs count toward emissions calculations.

A notice of PCL availability and link to the SVP website will be published on customers’ electric utility bill in October and will be published on the Silicon Valley Power website. The PCL will be used in other publications and marketing materials as needed.

DISCUSSION
State Compliance
SVP is in full compliance with the State Renewable Energy Portfolio requirement established in 2004, which has a different set of rules and requirements, and time periods separate from the Power Content Label.

Power Content Labels
There are two different Power Content Labels attached. The first label displays only the four energy products and the CA Power Mix per CEC reporting guidelines. This PCL will be submitted to the CEC and published for retail customers. The second label includes a combination of the four energy products into SVP’s Overall Power mix while also utilizing the California Independent System Operator’s (CAISO) emission’s factor on an hourly basis for any unspecified energy purchased via the CAISO settled open markets. This combination of SVP’s Overall Power mix is comparable to the CA Power Mix. SVP will publish the PCL including the overall SVP power mix. In summary:
· The City’s residential load is a 100% carbon-free and renewable energy mix. · The non-residential power mix consists of 27% renewable resources. With the inclusion of large hydroelectric generation (capacity sized over 30 MW), SVP’s 2021 Power Mix is 41% greenhouse gas (GHG) free.

Information reported in the Power Content Label is the SVP operating data for City-owned power plants, generation plants operated by the Northern California Power Agency, and Power Purchase City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1094 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
agreements. For other specific energy resources, SVP uses information from invoices and RECs that are accounted for in SVP's Western Renewable Energy Generation Information System (WREGIS) account. For those agencies or utilities where a specific generation source (i.e. wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, coal, natural gas, etc.) could not be identified, per the guidelines, staff must assign these resources as "unspecified source of power".

Change Over Previous Years
The amount of renewable and carbon free energy in the overall SVP Power Mix decreased compared to the past few years. The decrease in 2021 is due to two factors: drought and load growth. For example, during an average hydroelectric year, SVP receives over 45% of our clean energy from hydroelectric resources. In 2021, due to drought conditions, SVP only received about half of those expected resources with approximately 13% of its energy from hydroelectric. In 2018, the Camp Fire started in Butte County damaged transmission infrastructure that prevented SVP from receiving electricity from the SVP-owned Grizzly Powerhouse, a small hydro project generating an average 43,000 MWh/year. Grizzly is currently scheduled to return to service fall of 2023.

Other factors that impact SVP’s PCL are the cancelation of projects or the delay in the commercial operation date (COD) of projects SVP has contracted with. These delays can occur for a variety of reasons including but not limited to timing and development of transmission expansion, environmental policies and approvals, legislative mandates, supply chain issues, and unforeseen events such as the COVID19 pandemic. For example, in 2016, SVP contracted for 49.5 MW of power from the Altamont wind project that was intended to be in commercial operation in 2020.

However, due to permitting delays, operations are now not expected until 2025/2026 resulting in approximately 169,000 MWh that did not arrive to our customers. As previously discussed with Council SVP also had to cancel the contract for Viento Loco due to their inability to permit transmission connections. Viento Loco was supposed to deliver 800,000 MWhs annually starting in late 2023. Those two projects combined were 249.5 MW which is approximately 35% of SVP’s new current Peak Load.

Upcoming Years
SVP is heavily engaged in clean energy procurement for the future, including negotiations for over 850+ MWs of energy totaling over 2,900,000 MWh annually. These resources are in various stages of development and negotiations and are estimated to achieve commercial operation over the next several years. Additional opportunities are continuously identified by SVP as it is possible that not all negotiations will lead to final agreements, or a project will fail to achieve commercial operations.

The City Council recently granted the City Manager authority to enter into two of those agreements.

One is a baseload geothermal resource that will be online in 2025 and the other is a large wind project scheduled to be online by the end of 2024. The total forecasted generation is approximately 1,613,200 MWh annually. Staff will keep the Council updated on these two projects.

In addition, SVP has launched the Large Commercial Renewable Energy program. This voluntary program will enable SVP or our customers to procure up to 100% renewable energy for industrial and large commercial customers that want to exceed SVP’s current Non-Residential product offering.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This 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)) as it has no City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1094 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no economic or fiscal impact with the exception of staff time in preparing this report.

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

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]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

RECOMMENDATION
Note and file Silicon Valley Power’s 2021 Power Content Label(s).

Reviewed by: Manuel Pineda, Chief Electric Utility Officer Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. 2021 SVP Power Content Label for CEC

2. 2021 SVP Power Content Label Including SVP’s Overall Power Mix City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
0 646 0 646 456
2021 POWER CONTENT LABEL
Ci of Santa Clara db.a Silicon Valle Power
htt • II T • • • • II / d . / b t / t t I b I
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Intensity E R SVP SVP Non. Green Green 2021 CA nergy esources Power Power
(lbs CO2e/MWh) Res,dent,al Res,dent,al St d d N t I Power M IX SVP Residential
0 1000
800
600
400
200
0 an ar a 1ona
SVP Non-Residential Green Power Green Power 2021 CA Utility Eligible Renewable' 35.9% 27.0% 100.0% 27.0% Standard NatioMI Average Biomass & Biowast 0.0% 2.1% 0.0% 2.1% 646 0 646 456 Geothermal 0.0% 7.1% 0.0% 7.1%
Eligible Hydroelectri 0.0% 5.9% 0.0% 5.9%
■ SVP Residential Solar 14.7% 4.1% 100.0% 4.1%
Wind 21.2% 7.8% 0.0% 7.8%
■ SVP Non-Residential Coal 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Large Hydroelectric 64.1% 7.1% 0.0% 7.1% ■ Green Power Standard Natural Gas 0.0% 34.3% 0.0% 34.3% ■ Green Power National Nu clear 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
■ 2021 CA Utilit y Average Un specified Power2 0.0% 31.6% 0.0% 31.6% TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Percentage of Retail Sales Covered by Retired Unbundled RECs3 : 0% 0% 75% 2%
'The eligible renewable percentage above does not reflect RPS compliance. which is determined using a different methodology. 2 Unspecified power is electricity that has been purchased through open market transactions and is not traceable to a specific generation source.

33.6%

2.3%

4.8%

1.0%

14.2%

11.4%

3.0%

9.2%

37.9%

9.3%

0.2%

6.8%
100.0%
3 Renewable energy credits (RE Cs) are tracking instruments issued for renewable generation. Unbundled renewable energy credits (RE Cs) represent renewable generation that was not delivered to seive retail sales. Unbundled RECs are not reflected in the power mix or GHG emissions intensities above.

For specific information about this electricity portfolio, contact:

For general information about the Power Content Label, visit:

For additional questions, please contact the California Energy Commission at:

City of Santa Clara dba Silicon Valley Power
(408) 244-SAVE (7283)
http://www.energy.ca.gov/pcl/
Toll-free in California: 844-454-2906
Outside California: 916-653-0237
0 646 0 646 423 456
SVP Residenti~I
0 646
1000
800
600
400
200
0 Biomass & Biowaste
0 646 456 Geothermal 0.0% 7.1% 0.0% 7.1%
Eligible Hydroelectric 0.0% 5.9% 0.0% 5.9%
■ SVP Residential Solar 14.7% 4.1% 100.0% 4.1%
■ SVP Non-Residential Wind 21.2% 7.8% 0.0% 7.8%
Coal 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
■ Green Power Standard large Hydroelectric 64.1% 7.1% 0.0% 7.1% Natural Gas 0.0% 34.3% 0.0% 34.3% ■ Green Power National Nuclear 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
■ Total SVP Emisiions Protfolio w/CALSO EF Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% ■ 2021 CA Ut ility Average Unspecified Power2 0.0% 31.6% 0.0% 31.6% TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Percentage of Retail Sales Covered by Retired Unbundled RECs3 : 0% 0% 0% 0%
'The eligible renewable percentage above does not reflect RPS compliance, which is determined using a different methodology. 2 Unspecified power is electricity that has been purchased through open market transactions and is not traceable to a specific generation source.

6.7% 4.8%

5.6% 1.0%

5.4% 14.2%

8.4% 11.4%

0.0% 3.0%

13.3% 9.2%

31.4% 37.9%

0.0% 9.3%

27.2% 0.2%

0.0% 6.8%
100.0% 100.0%
0%
3 Renewable energy credits (RE Cs) are tracking instruments issued forrenewable generation. Unbundled renewable energy credits (RECs) represent renewable generation that was not delivered to seive retail sales. Unbundled RECs are not reflected in the power mix or GHG emissions intensities above.

For specific information about this electricity portfolio, contact:

For general information about the Power Content Label, visit:

For additional questions, please contact the California Energy Commission at:

City of Santa Clara dba Silicon Valley Power
(408) 244-SAVE (7283)
http://www.energy.ca.gov/pcl/
Toll-free in California: 844-454-2906
Outside California: 916-653-0237
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1125 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on a Resolution Approving the 2023 Planning Commission Calendar of Meetings

COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

BACKGROUND
The City Code states that each board or commission shall hold regular meetings at the times and on the days indicated by resolution of the City Council.

DISCUSSION
At the August 24, 2022 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission recommended the proposed 2023 schedule of meetings (Attachment 2), which includes 13 meetings to be held on Wednesdays at 6 p.m.

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 government organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact other than administrative time and expense to set the meetings.

COORDINATION
This report was coordinated with the City Attorney’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 Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the 2023 Planning Commission Calendar of Meetings.

Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Director, Community Development Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1125 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution Approving 2023 Calendar of Meetings

2. 2023 Planning Commission Calendar of Meetings
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
Resolution/PC Calendar of Meetings 2023 Page 1 of 2
Rev: 11/22/17
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
APPROVING THE 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION CALENDAR

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

WHEREAS, Section 2.120.030 of the Santa Clara City Code (“SCCC”) requires City boards and commissions to hold regular meetings at the times and on the days indicated by resolution of the Council;
WHEREAS, on August 24, 2022, The Planning Commission recommended to the City Council its meeting schedule for 2023.

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

1. That the City Council hereby finds that the above Recitals are true and correct and by this reference makes them a part hereof.

2. That the City Council hereby approves the 2023 Planning Commission Schedule of Meetings, attached hereto.
//
//
//
Resolution/PC Calendar of Meetings 2023 Page 2 of 2
Rev: 11/22/17

3. 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:

1. 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Schedule
Schedule of Meetings
2023

PLANNING COMMISSION

CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Regular meetings are held on Wednesday evenings, beginning at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers at 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, in accordance with the following schedule.

Meeting Dates
January 11, 2023
February 8, 2023
February 22, 2023
March 8, 2023
April 12, 2023
May 24, 2023
June 14, 2023
August 23, 2023
September 20, 2023
October 11, 2023
October 25, 2023
November 8, 2023
December 6, 2023
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1145 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on Addition of Five Positions Funded by Silicon Valley Power and Two Fire Department Positions Funded by Developer Permit Fees and Related Budget Amendment

COUNCIL PILLAR
Deliver and Enhance High Quality Efficient Services and Infrastructure Manage Strategically Our Workforce Capacity and Resources

BACKGROUND
Silicon Valley Power (SVP)
The City of Santa Clara’s Electric Utility, Silicon Valley Power (SVP), has provided dependable electric service for 126 years. SVP’s current peak load is about 650 MW (new record this year) and provides nearly 4,110 Gigawatt-hours (GWh) a year to SVP’s customers. As discussed with Council on April 28, 2021, (RTC 21-871) SVP’s load will almost double and $300 million of local projects will need to be constructed. In addition, the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) recently approved over $1.0 billion of new transmission projects to the City. Also, as discussed as part of SVP quarterly report on August 16, 2022, staff will soon return to Council to discuss an additional 200MW of future growth and associated new multimillion capital projects to support approved projects and the associated load growth. In addition to all the new growth staff has also presented to Council numerous times on SVP’s new proactive maintenance program which increases reliability but also requires a much higher level of work effort.

Fire Department
Although the overall economy was significantly affected by COVID-19, the City continues to see record levels of building permits and construction. The Fire Department is a key part of the building review process, and staff vacancies and workload has significantly affected permit review and inspection times. Staff continues to review options for expediting permit review times including maximizing voluntary overtime and recently entering two third-party permit review contracts. Even with those efforts the current workload exceeds the staff capacity to meet desirable permit review times.

DISCUSSION
Silicon Valley Power
In order to support the increase in system growth and continued proactive maintenance activities SVP and Finance Department need to increase contract, purchasing, and budgeting support. Since 2020, SVP has issued over 800 contracts with a variety of purposes such as service agreements, City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1145 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
power purchase agreements, purchase and sale agreements, leases, pole contacts, interconnection agreements, software agreements, public works bids, substation agreements, and numerous professional service agreements. Over the last three years, staff has continued to review the overall organization to determine opportunities to fill in gaps and enhance services and recommendations were brought to the Council for new positions. A significant amount of work has been completed in formalizing contracts and processes within SVP. Currently, however, nearly 300 contracts are still pending, and new items are continually being added to support the growth and maintenance of the utility. Additional staff capacity is needed to facilitate the current and upcoming workload.

Staff recommends the addition of one Senior Management Analyst and two Management Analyst positions in Silicon Valley Power and one Senior Management Analyst in the Finance Department to provide additional capacity in workgroups to manage and process ongoing contract and procurement requirements. With the new staff, SVP will implement an updated delivery model that assigns, prioritizes and processes contracts groups to improve efficiency and address the backlog. The position in the Finance Department will assist with budget and procurement needs to reduce the existing backlog and work with the Purchasing Division to ensure procurement processes are efficiently designed and implemented going forward.

In addition, one Human Resources Technician position for the Human Resources Department is requested to assist with the ongoing and continuous recruiting efforts for SVP. SVP services are competitive in nature and, generally, harder to recruit for given regional and statewide demand for employees with these skills. With the additional position, there will be three positions funded and dedicated to SVP’s human resource needs. This higher level of effort is needed to tackle SVP’s 22% vacancy rate and difficulty of recruiting for the electric utility.

Fire Department
Staff recommends the addition of a Fire Protection Engineer position and a Permit Technician position to support development-related activity. These positions would be supported by an increase in the fire development fees revenue estimate based on the higher collection trend.

The Fire Protection Engineer (FPE) position provides plan reviews required for land development, new building construction, interior remodel projects, fire suppression systems and fire alarms systems. The FPE position is essential to address the volume of development submittals and construction review complexity and will free up other staff to focus on State mandated and fee-based inspections. The Permit Technician will allow for a new approach for permit intake. The new position will be located at the Fire Department customer counter and will be reviewing permit applications, documents, and plan submittal's for permits to ensure accuracy, completeness, and compliance with pertinent laws. This will allow staff to identify any errors at initial intake reducing current delays by identifying areas of concerns immediately with the customers.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed staffing changes are not a project subject to CEQA review under section 15378(b)(5) as they are organizational or administrative activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment,

FISCAL IMPACT
The annual cost of the seven recommended positions totals $1.36 million, of which $974,000 would City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1145 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
be funded by the Electric Utility Fund and $388,000 would be funded by fire development fees. In FY 2022/23, it is assumed that the positions would be funded for two-thirds of the year, with a cost of $650,000 for the five-SVP supported positions and $258,000 for the two fire positions.

A budget amendment to appropriate funds for new positions in the Electric Utility, Finance, Human Resources, and Fire Departments is detailed below, including the offsetting funding sources.

Budget
FY 2022/23
Current Increase/
(Decrease)
Revised
Electric Utility Fund (091)
Expenditures
Electric Department - Salaries & Benefits $59,419,893 $407,000 $59,826,893 Operating Transfer Out to General Fund $986,573 $243,000 $1,229,573 Ending Fund Balance $33,046,275 ($650,000) $32,396,275
General Fund (001)
Revenues
Transfer In from Electric Utility Fund $986,573 $243,000 $1,229,573 Fire Permit Fees $3,100,000 $258,000 $3,358,000
Expenditures
Finance Department - Salaries & Benefits $12,585,950 $147,000 $12,732,950 Human Resources Department - Salaries &
Benefits
$3,175,995 $96,000 $3,271,995
Fire Department - Salaries & Benefits $57,256,610 $258,000 $57,514,610 The cost of these positions will be factored into the regular biannual budget process.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the Human Resources Department, Finance Department and City Attorney’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 Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.

RECOMMENDATION
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1145 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

1. Approve the addition of one Senior Management Analyst and two Management Analyst positions in the Electric Utility Department;

2. Approve the addition of one Senior Management Analyst position in the Finance Department;

3. Approve the addition of one Human Resources Technician position in the Human Resources Department;

4. Approve the addition of one Fire Protection Engineer position and one Permit Technician position in the Fire Department; and

5. Approve the following FY 2022/23 budget amendments:
a. In the Electric Utility Fund, increase the Electric Department Salaries and Benefits appropriation by $407,000, increase the Transfer to the General Fund by $243,000 and reduce the unrestricted ending fund balance by $650,000 (five affirmative Council votes required for the use of unused balances);
b. In the General Fund, increase the Finance Department Salaries and Benefits appropriation by $147,000, increase the Human Resources Salaries and Benefits appropriation by $96,000, and increase the transfer from the Electric Utility Fund by $243,000 (five affirmative Council votes required to appropriate additional revenue); and
c. In the General Fund, increase the Fire Department Salaries and Benefits appropriation by $258,000 and increase the Fire Permits revenue estimate by $258,000 (five affirmative Council votes required to appropriate additional revenue).

Reviewed by: Manuel Pineda, Chief Electric Utility Officer Reviewed by: Ruben Torres, Fire Chief
Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager
City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1184 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Actions to Approve Various Modifications to Existing Classified Job Specifications, Including Recruit Police Officer (Job Code 689), Police Officer (Job Code 650), and Firefighter (Job Code 487)

COUNCIL PILLAR
Manage Strategically Our Workforce Capacity and Resources

BACKGROUND
Sections 4 and 6 of the Personnel and Salary Resolution require City Council approval of new or revised classifications. The proposed Council action satisfies these applicable requirements.

Various Modifications to Existing Classified Classifications The Police Department coordinated with the Human Resources Department to modify the Recruit Police Officer (Job Code 689) and Police Officer (Job Code 650) classifications to incorporate revisions to the class specifications required under Assembly Bill 846 and Senate Bill 2, and to better align with the duties required to be performed.

The Fire Department worked with the Human Resources Department to revise the Firefighter I (Job Code 487) class specification to expand the minimum qualifications and update the classification to reflect current requirements of the job.

These modifications were approved by the Civil Service Commission on September 12, 2022.

DISCUSSION
Revise Recruit Police Officer (Job Code 689) and Police Officer (Job Code 650) Class Specifications The Police Department coordinated with the Human Resources Department to revise the Recruit Police Officer (Job Code 689) and Police Officer (Job Code 650) classifications in order to align with revisions under Assembly Bill 846 and Senate Bill 2.

Assembly Bill 846 updated Government Code §1031 to require agencies to review and revise class specifications and recruiting practices to emphasize community-oriented policing, community interaction, and collaborate problem-solving, as well as requiring officers to be free from any "emotional, or mental condition, including bias against race or ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, disability, or sexual orientation, which might adversely affect the exercise of the powers of a peace officer." Revisions under the Typical Duties and Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities incorporate these changes.

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1184 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
Senate Bill 2 updates Government Code §1029. Senate Bill 2 requires a law enforcement agency to employ peace officers with a valid POST certification. It also disqualifies a person from employment as a peace officer if they have been convicted of, or have been adjudicated in an administrative, military, or civil judicial process as having committed, a violation of certain specified crimes against public justice, including the falsification of records, bribery, or perjury. The bill disqualifies any person who
has been certified as a peace officer by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training and has surrendered that certification or had that certification revoked by the commission, or has been denied certification. The Minimum Qualifications section has been updated to require Police Officer candidates to possess a valid California Commission on Peace Officer standards and Training (POST) Basic certification. Revisions have also been made to the Licenses/Certifications section to clearly
identify to candidates the Government Codes they are subject to meet in order to qualify for employment as a Police Officer.

Administrative changes were made to the Class Summary and Distinguishing Characteristics sections for both classifications.

Recruit Police Officer (Job Code 689) - with an annual salary range of approximately $105,048.72 - $134,157.24. This classification is an entry level, non-sworn position in the Police Department. Incumbents in the position are assigned to the Basic Peace Officer Academy and must satisfactorily pass all of the requirements that lead to the possession of the Basic Peace Officer Standards and Training Certificate before becoming candidates for the sworn position of Police Officer.

Police Officer (Job Code 650) - with an annual salary range of approximately $142,699.44 - $182,110.56. This classification is a sworn position in the Police Department. Incumbents perform various law enforcement duties which impact public safety, including responding to calls for service and investigating complaints. Primary functions are patrol assignments where incumbents monitor and respond to calls for service to protect people, property, and enforce City, County, and State laws.

Revise the Firefighter I (Job Code 487) Class Specification The Fire Department coordinated with the Human Resources Department to revise the Firefighter I (Job Code 487) to be in alignment with duties required to be performed by the classification. The revisions include various administrative changes to update the Class Summary and add the Distinguishing Characteristics section. The Licenses/Certifications section was updated to allow candidates who are enrolled in an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) program to participate in the recruitment process, in order to expand the candidate pool. The Typical Duties and Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities sections were also updated to accurately reflect the current requirements of the position.

Firefighter I (Job Code 487) - with an annual salary range of approximately $94,911.84 - $118,094.16 (Firefighter I - 24 Hours, Job Code 487S) and $93,279.48 - $116,063.04 (Firefighter I - 80 Hours, Job Code 487Y) - This classification is the entry level classification in the Firefighter series. An incumbent in this classification responds to medical emergencies, fire City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1184 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
the Firefighter series. An incumbent in this classification responds to medical emergencies, fire alarms, performs rescue services, and protects life and property endangered by fire. When qualified and assigned, Firefighter I's may be assigned to paramedic duties.

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 fiscal impact to revise class specifications.

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

RECOMMENDATION
Approve revisions to various classified job specifications including, Recruit Police Officer (Job Code 689), Police Officer (Job Code 650), and Firefighter (Job Code 487)
Reviewed by: Aracely Azevedo, Director, Human Resources Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Recruit Police Officer (Job Code 689) Class Specification (clean)

2. Recruit Police Officer (Job Code 689) Class Specification (track changes)

3. Police Officer (Job Code 650) Class Specification (clean)

4. Police Officer (Job Code 650) Class Specification (track changes)

5. Firefighter I (Job Code 487) Class Specification (clean)

6. Firefighter I (Job Code 487) Class Specification (track changes) City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
Rev. 09/2022

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

CLASS SPECIFICATION

TITLE: RECRUIT POLICE OFFICER (JOB CODE 689)

DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTABLE TO FLSA STATUS
Police Varies Non-exempt

CLASS SUMMARY
This position is an entry level, non-sworn position in the Police Department. Incumbents in the position are assigned to the Basic Peace Officer Academy and must satisfactorily pass all of the requirements that lead to the possession of the Basic Peace Officer Standards and Training Certificate before becoming candidates for the sworn position of Police Officer. Performs related duties as assigned.

DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS
This is a trainee-level class in the law enforcement series responsible for becoming proficient in learning and performing the full range of law enforcement duties. Incumbents are responsible for learning various tasks, policies, and standard operating procedures within the Department.

Work is highly supervised and fits an established structure or pattern. A Recruit Police Officer must graduate from the Academy and be appointed as a Police Officer in order to retain employment with the City.

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
• Completion of sixty (60) semester units or ninety (90) quarter units of academic level course work at an accredited college or university with no experience required; OR • Completion of thirty (30) semester units or forty-five (45) quarter units of academic level courses at an accredited college or university and two (2) years full-time, paid, recent police experience with a sheriff's department, state police, highway patrol, or municipal police department.

ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTION
None.

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS
• Possession of an appropriate, valid California driver's license is required at time of appointment and for duration of employment.
• The minimum peace officer selection standards are set forth in Government Code (GC) Sections 1029, 1031, and 1031.4. Every California peace officer must be:
o Free from any disqualifications for employment, including felony convictions (GC 1029);
o A citizen of the United States or a permanent resident who is eligible for and has applied for citizenship (GC 1031); and
At least 21 years of age for specified peace officers (GC 1031.4) RECRUIT POLICE OFFICER (689)

PHYSICAL AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS
• Must be at least 20 years of age at time of application filing and 21 years of age at time of job appointment;
• Must possess the strength and physical ability necessary to perform the essential functions of the position of Police Officer; and
• Must be willing to be fingerprinted.

Vision requirements:
• Vision including color, night, depth, and peripheral vision sufficient to perform all of the essential functions of the position of Police Officer;
• Visual acuity of not less than 20/80 vision in each eye uncorrected, and corrected to 20/30 in each eye.

EXCEPTION: Applicants with correction afforded by soft contact lenses are exempt from the minimum uncorrected vision standard of 20/80, provided their corrected vision is 20/30 in each eye.

Hearing, speech, and mental capabilities sufficient to perform all the essential functions of the position of Police Officer.

SPECIAL CONDITIONS
• Required to work a basic 5-day workweek during the Academy. • Attendance of classes at odd and unusual hours may be required, as well as working on weekends and designated holidays.
• Candidates are required to pass the following City examinations prior to being given a conditional offer of employment: oral examination, reading/writing assessment, physical ability assessment, and personal history questionnaire.

If given a conditional offer of employment, candidates must also pass a full background check which may include medical, psychological, and polygraph examination prior to appointment.

TYPICAL DUTIES
This description may not include all the duties listed below, nor do the examples cover all duties that may be performed.

Under immediate supervision, the incumbent will:
• Upon employment, will be required to attend a POST certified basic academy and participate in and pass all required classes.
• May also be required to ride on patrol as an observer. • May be required to direct traffic or perform other police-related functions when not attending classes.
• Perform other related duties as required.

RECRUIT POLICE OFFICER (689)

KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, & ABILITIES
Possession of the following knowledge, skills, and abilities at a level necessary to do police work:
• Interest in Police Work - willingness to handle routine, repetitive tasks; enforce laws that may conflict with personal values; relate to others; become familiar with and work with residents of a diverse community; work with fellow officers and the general public in a community-based policing model; participate in situations which require courage; function in different roles; work under hostile conditions; work under hazardous conditions over long periods of time; change appearance for job requirements and conditions; accept new job duties; work weekends, holidays, shifts, overtime, and a 5-day work week during the academy and a “4/11 – 3/11” shift schedule upon graduating from the academy, subject to the operational needs of the Department. • Ability to Take Orders - the ability to relate to supervisors; to maintain objectivity; take criticism and control temper; and willingness to enforce laws that may conflict with personal values.
• Ability to Take Responsibility - ability to work without supervision; reliability; ability to participate in situations which require courage; refrain from abusing authority vested in official role; maintain confidentiality of information; assume a command presence in conflict situations.
• Self Control - the ability to control one's temper; maintain objectivity; take criticism; function under oral or physical stress; use authority effectively; function in different roles; work under hazardous and hostile conditions for long periods of time; and work at accident and crime scenes which involve severe personal injuries or in situations which involve loss of life.
• Ability to Communicate Effectively - the ability to testify accurately; obtain information from witnesses under normal and stressful conditions; communicate in person, in writing, and via radio.
• Ability to Make Reasonable Decisions Rapidly - the ability to reason logically; apply discretion in maintaining confidentiality of information; observe and interpret what is observed; evaluate situations and people effectively; and apply good judgment. • Willingness to Arrest People - willingness to take actions which will result in imposing penalties on others, including: depriving them of their freedom; taking a life if necessary; and fighting to win and injuring another if required and to enforce laws which may conflict with personal values.
• Ability to Learn - the immediate potential to learn to write readable, comprehensible reports; to read and interpret relevant laws and procedural material; read maps; apply regulations; communicate verbally with others under stress; analyze material and RECRUIT POLICE OFFICER (689)

situations; and record observations from accident and crime scenes. • Emotional Stability - be free from any emotional or mental condition, including bias against race or ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, disability, or sexual orientation, that might adversely affect the exercise of the powers of a peace officer; the ability to take verbal abuse; the possession of: honesty, integrity, maturity, tolerance, selfconfidence, truthfulness, and psychological stability; ability to meet the physical and psychological demands of police work.
• Ability to Problem Solve - the ability to identify problems or issues that are of concern to residents of the City, and the ability to respond successfully to these problems through the resources of the Police Department, other City Departments, working collaboratively with the community, and/or other governmental or private agencies.

SUPERVISION RECEIVED
Works under the general supervision of academy staff or departmental Police Sergeant or other classification as assigned.

SUPERVISION EXERCISED
May act as a class student leader as assigned.

CLASSIFICATION HISTORY
Created 05/2004; Rev. 09/2022
Rev. 09/2022

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

CLASS SPECIFICATION

TITLE: RECRUIT POLICE OFFICER (JOB CODE 689)

DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTABLE TO FLSA STATUS
Police Varies Non-exempt

CLASS SUMMARY
This position is an entry level, non-sworn position in the Police Department. Incumbents in the position are assigned to the Basic Peace Officer Academy and must satisfactorily pass all of the requirements that lead to the possession of the Basic Peace Officer Standards and Training Certificate before becoming candidates for the sworn position of Police Officer. Performs related duties as assigned.

DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS
This is a trainee-level class in the law enforcement series responsible for becoming proficient in learning and performing the full range of law enforcement duties. Incumbents are responsible for learning various tasks, policies, and standard operating procedures within the Department.

Work is highly supervised and fits an established structure or pattern. A Recruit Police Officer must graduate from the Academy and be appointed as a Police Officer in order to retain employment with the City.

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
• Completion of sixty (60) semester units or ninety (90) quarter units of academic level course work at an accredited college or university with no experience required; orOR • Completion of thirty (30) semester units or forty-five (45) quarter units of academic level courses at an accredited college or university and two (2) years full-time, paid, recent police experience with a sheriff's department, state police, highway patrol, or municipal police department.

ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTION
None.

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS
• Possession of an appropriate, valid California driver's license is required at time of appointment and for duration of employment.
• The minimum peace officer selection standards are set forth in Government Code (GC) Sections 1029, 1031, and 1031.4. Every California peace officer must be:
o Free from any disqualifications for employment, including felony convictions (GC 1029);
o A citizen of the United States or a permanent resident who is eligible for and has applied for citizenship (GC 1031); and
• At least 21 years of age for specified peace officers (GC 1031.4)Pursuant to Government Code Section 1031, applicants must be a citizen of the United States or a permanent resident alien who is eligible for and has applied for citizenship.

RECRUIT POLICE OFFICER (689)

PHYSICAL AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS
• Must be at least 20 years of age at time of application filing and 21 years of age at time of job appointment;
• Must possess the strength and physical ability necessary to perform the essential functions of the position of Police Officer; and
• Must be willing to be fingerprinted.

Vision requirements:
• Vision including color, night, depth, and peripheral vision sufficient to perform all of the essential functions of the position of Police Officer;
• Visual acuity of not less than 20/80 vision in each eye uncorrected, and corrected to 20/30 in each eye.

EXCEPTION: Applicants with correction afforded by soft contact lenses are exempt from the minimum uncorrected vision standard of 20/80, provided their corrected vision is 20/30 in each eye.

Hearing, speech, and mental capabilities sufficient to perform all the essential functions of the position of Police Officer.

Candidates are required to pass the following City examinations prior to being given a conditional offer of employment: Oral; physical ability; polygraph; and background investigation.

If given a conditional offer of employment, candidates must also pass medical and psychological examinations prior to appointment.

SPECIAL CONDITIONS
• Required to work a basic 5-day workweek during the Academy. • Attendance of classes at odd and unusual hours may be required, as well as working on weekends and designated holidays.
• Candidates are required to pass the following City examinations prior to being given a conditional offer of employment: oral examination, reading/writing assessment, physical ability assessment, and personal history questionnaire.

If given a conditional offer of employment, candidates must also pass a full background check which may include medical, psychological, and polygraph examination prior to appointment.

TYPICAL DUTIES
This description may not include all the duties listed below, nor do the examples cover all duties that may be performed.

Under immediate supervision, the incumbent will:
• Upon employment, will be required to attend a POST certified basic academy and participate in and pass all required classes.

RECRUIT POLICE OFFICER (689)

• May also be required to ride on patrol as an observer. • May be required to direct traffic or perform other police-related functions when not attending classes.
• Perform other related duties as required.

KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, & ABILITIES
Possession of the following knowledge, skills, and abilities at a level necessary to do police work:
• Interest in Police Work - willingness to handle routine, repetitive tasks; enforce laws that may conflict with personal values; relate to others; become familiar with and work with residents of a minoritiesdiverse community; work with fellow officers and the general public in a community-based policing model; participate in situations which require courage; function in different roles; work under hostile conditions; work under hazardous conditions over long periods of time; change appearance for job requirements and conditions; accept new job duties; work weekends, holidays, shifts, overtime, and a 5-day work week during the academy and a “4/11 – 3/11” shift schedule upon graduating from the academy, subject to the operational needs of the Department10-hour workday/4-day work-week. • Ability to Take Orders - the ability to relate to supervisors; to maintain objectivity; take criticism and control temper; and willingness to enforce laws that may conflict with personal values.
• Ability to Take Responsibility - ability to work without supervision; reliability; ability to participate in situations which require courage; refrain from abusing authority vested in official role; maintain confidentiality of information; assume a command presence in conflict situations; and refrain from using excessive sick or unauthorized leave. • Self Control - the ability to control one's temper; maintain objectivity; take criticism; function under oral or physical stress; use authority effectively; function in different roles; work under hazardous and hostile conditions for long periods of time; and work at accident and crime scenes which involve severe personal injuries or in situations which involve loss of life.
• Ability to Communicate Effectively - the ability to testify accurately; obtain information from witnesses under normal and stressful conditions; communicate in person, in writing, and via radio.
• Ability to Make Reasonable Decisions Rapidly - the ability to reason logically; apply discretion in maintaining confidentiality of information; observe and interpret what is observed; evaluate situations and people effectively; and apply good judgment. • Willingness to Arrest People - willingness to take actions which will result in imposing penalties on others, including: depriving them of their freedom; taking a life if necessary; RECRUIT POLICE OFFICER (689)

and fighting to win and injuring another if required and to enforce laws which may conflict with personal values.
• Ability to Learn - the immediate potential to learn to write readable, comprehensible reports; to read and interpret relevant laws and procedural material; read maps; apply regulations; communicate verbally with others under stress; analyze material and situations; and record observations from accident and crime scenes. • Emotional Stability - be free from any emotional or mental condition, including bias against race or ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, disability, or sexual orientation, that might adversely affect the exercise of the powers of a peace officer; the ability to take verbal abuse; the possession of: honesty, integrity, maturity, tolerance, selfconfidence, truthfulness, and psychological stability; ability to meet the physical and psychological demands of police work.
• Ability to Problem Solve - the ability to identify problems or issues that are of concern to residents of the City, and the ability to respond successfully to these problems through the resources of the Police Department, other City Departments, working collaboratively with the community, and/or other governmental or private agencies.

SUPERVISION RECEIVED
Works under the general supervision of academy staff or departmental Police Sergeant or other classification as assigned.

SUPERVISION EXERCISED
May act as a class student leader as assigned.

CLASSIFICATION HISTORY
Created 05/2004; Rev. 09/2022
Rev. 09/2022

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

CLASS SPECIFICATION

TITLE: POLICE OFFICER (JOB CODE 650)

DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTABLE TO FLSA STATUS
Police Varies Non-Exempt

CLASS SUMMARY
This position is a sworn position in the Police Department. Incumbents perform various law enforcement duties which impact public safety, including responding to calls for service and investigating complaints. Primary functions are patrol assignments where incumbents monitor and respond to calls for service to protect people, property, and enforce City, County, and State laws. Performs related duties as assigned.

DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS
This journey-level class is responsible for performing the full range of law enforcement duties.

Incumbents are expected to work independently and exercise judgment and initiative. Positions at this level receive only occasional instruction or assistance as new or unusual situations arise and are fully aware of the operating procedures and policies of the Department. This class is distinguished from Recruit Police Officer in that the latter is a trainee level position. This class is distinguished from the Police Sergeant in that the latter is responsible for supervising the staff and operations of an assigned shift.

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
• Thirty (30) semester units or forty-five (45) quarter units of academic level courses at an accredited college or university AND proof of a valid California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Basic certification, with at least two (2) years full-time, paid, recent police experience with a sheriff's department, state police, highway patrol, or municipal police department; OR
• Successful completion of California POST Basic Police Academy as a Recruit Police Officer with the Santa Clara Police Department.

ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTION
None.

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS
• Possession of a valid California Class C driver's license is required at the time of appointment and for the duration of employment.
• Recruit Police Officers who complete the Basic Police Academy with the City of Santa Clara must possess and maintain a valid California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Basic certification within eighteen (18) months of appointment.
• The minimum peace officer selection standards are set forth in Government Code (GC) Sections 1029, 1031, and 1031.4. Every California peace officer must be:
o Free from any disqualifications for employment, including felony convictions POLICE OFFICER (650)

(GC 1029);
o A citizen of the United States or a permanent resident who is eligible for and has applied for citizenship (GC 1031); and
o At least 21 years of age for specified peace officers (GC 1031.4)

PHYSICAL AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS
• Must be at least 20 years of age at time of application filing and 21 years of age at time of job appointment;
• Must possess the strength and physical ability necessary to perform the essential functions of the position; and
• Must be willing to be fingerprinted.

Vision requirements:
• Vision including color, night, depth, and peripheral vision sufficient to perform all of the essential functions of the position.
• Visual acuity of not less than 20/80 vision in each eye uncorrected, and corrected to 20/30 in each eye.

EXCEPTION: Applicants with correction afforded by soft contact lenses are exempt from the minimum uncorrected vision standard of 20/80, provided their corrected vision is 20/30 in each eye.

Hearing, speech, and mental capabilities sufficient to perform all of the essential functions of the position.

SPECIAL CONDITIONS
• Required to work a basic workweek consisting of a “4/11 – 3/11” shift schedule, subject to the operational needs of the Department.
• May be required to work odd and unusual hours, including weekends and designated holidays, and to be subject to call-back in the performance of job duties. • Candidates are required to pass the following City examinations prior to being given a conditional offer of employment: oral examination, reading/writing assessment, physical ability assessment, and personal history questionnaire.

If given a conditional offer of employment, candidates must also pass a full background check which may include medical, psychological, and polygraph examination prior to appointment.

TYPICAL DUTIES
This description may not include all the duties listed below, nor do the examples cover all duties that may be performed.

Under general supervision, the incumbent will:
• Patrols an assigned area in radio car, on motorcycle, on bicycle, or on foot; • Answers calls for protection of life and property in the enforcement of City, County and State laws;
POLICE OFFICER (650)

• As assigned, conducts preliminary or follow-up investigations on prowlers, burglaries, thefts, robberies, accidents, deaths, and other disturbances; • Identifies problems or issues that are important to the community, and seeks resolution of such problems through the resources of the Police Department, other City Departments, and/or other governmental or private agencies;
• Directs traffic, including regulations of vehicle flow at times of emergency or congestion; • Stops drivers who are operating vehicles in violation of laws; • Warns drivers against unlawful practices, and issues citations and makes arrests as required;
• Books, searches and questions prisoners;
• Issues parking citations;
• Collects and presents evidence and testifies at hearings and in court in connection with criminal prosecutions;
• Serves warrants and subpoenas;
• Prepares reports of arrests made, investigations conducted, and illegal incidents observed; • Patrols business districts at night and checks doors and windows of business firms; • Gives information and directions to the public;
• Addresses meetings at community organizations and schools; • May occasionally assist in maintaining police records and may operate headquarters radio-telephone equipment;
• Escorts prisoners to courts, county jail, juvenile hall, or from other jurisdictions; • Operates radio-telephone;
• Collects bail and issues receipts;
• May train and supervise Community Service Officer;
• May supervise and train new personnel as assigned; and • Perform other related duties as required.

KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, & ABILITIES
Possession of the following knowledge, skills, and abilities at a level necessary to do police work:
• Interest in Police Work - willingness to handle routine, repetitive tasks; enforce laws that may conflict with personal values; relate to others; become familiar with and work with residents of a diverse community; work with fellow officers and the general public in a community-based policing model; participate in situations which require courage; function in different roles; work under hostile conditions, work under hazardous conditions over long periods of time; change appearance for job requirements and conditions; accept new job duties; work weekends, holidays, shifts, overtime, and a “4/11 – 3/11” shift schedule, subject to the operational needs of the Department. • Ability to Take Orders - the ability to relate to supervisors; to maintain objectivity; take criticism and control temper, and willingness to enforce laws that may conflict with personal values.

POLICE OFFICER (650)

• Ability to Take Responsibility - ability to work without supervision; reliability; ability to participate in situations which require courage, refrain from abusing authority vested in official role; maintain confidentiality of information; assume a command presence in conflict situations
• Self-Control - the ability to control one's temper, maintain objectivity; take criticism, function under oral or physical stress; use authority effectively; function in different roles, work under hazardous and hostile conditions for long periods of time, and work at accident and crime scenes which involve severe personal injuries, or in situations which involve loss of life.
• Ability to Communicate Effectively - the ability to testify accurately; obtain information from witnesses under normal and stressful conditions; communicate in person, in writing, and via radio.
• Ability to Make Reasonable Decisions Rapidly - the ability to reason logically; apply discretion in maintaining confidentiality of information; observe and interpret what is observed; evaluate situations and people effectively; and apply good judgment. • Willingness to Arrest People - willingness to take actions which will result in imposing penalties on others, including: depriving them of their freedom; taking a life if necessary; and fighting to win and injuring another if required and to enforce laws which may conflict with personal values.
• Ability to Learn - the immediate potential to learn to write readable, comprehensible reports; to read and interpret relevant laws and procedural material; read maps; apply regulations; communicate verbally with others under stress, analyze material and situations; and record observations from accident and crime scenes. • Emotional Stability – be free from any emotional or mental condition, including bias against race or ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, disability, or sexual orientation, that might adversely affect the exercise of the powers of a peace officer; the ability to take verbal abuse; the possession of: honesty, integrity, maturity, tolerance, selfconfidence, truthfulness and psychological stability; ability to meet the physical and psychological demands of police work.
• Ability to Problem Solve - the ability to identify problems or issues that are of concern to residents of the City, and the ability to respond successfully to these problems through the resources of the Police Department, other City Departments, working collaboratively with the community, and/or other governmental or private agencies.

SUPERVISION RECEIVED
Works under the general supervision of a Police Sergeant or other classification as assigned.

SUPERVISION EXERCISED
May assist in the training of new personnel. May supervise Community Service Officer, Police POLICE OFFICER (650)

Records Specialist or other personnel as assigned.

CLASSIFICATION HISTORY
Created 05/2004; Rev. 12/2018; Rev. 09/2022
Rev. 09/2022

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

CLASS SPECIFICATION

TITLE: POLICE OFFICER (JOB CODE 650)

DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTABLE TO FLSA STATUS
Police Varies Non-Exempt

CLASS SUMMARY
This position is a sworn position in the Police Department. Incumbents perform various law enforcement duties which impact public safety, including responding to calls for service and investigating complaints. Primary functions are patrol assignments where incumbents monitor and respond to calls for service to protect people, property, and enforce City, County, and State laws. Performs related duties as assigned.

DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS
This journey-level class is responsible for performing the full range of law enforcement duties.

Incumbents are expected to work independently and exercise judgment and initiative. Positions at this level receive only occasional instruction or assistance as new or unusual situations arise and are fully aware of the operating procedures and policies of the Department. This class is distinguished from Recruit Police Officer in that the latter is a trainee level position. This class is distinguished from the Police Sergeant in that the latter is responsible for supervising the staff and operations of an assigned shift.

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
• Thirty (30) semester units or forty-five (45) quarter units of academic level courses at an accredited college or university and AND proof of a valid California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Basic certification, with at least two (2) years full-time, paid, recent police experience with a sheriff's department, state police, highway patrol, or municipal police department; orOR
• Successful completion of California POST Basic Police Academy as a Recruit Police Officer with the Santa Clara Police Department.

ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTION
None.

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS
• Possession of a valid California Class C driver's license is required at the time of appointment and for the duration of employment.
• Recruit Police Officers who complete the Basic Police Academy with the City of Santa Clara must possess and maintain a valid California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Basic certification within eighteen (18) months of appointment.
• Proof of completion of a Basic Peace Officer Academy certified by the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training is required at time of application. • The minimum peace officer selection standards are set forth in Government Code (GC) POLICE OFFICER (650)

Sections 1029, 1031, and 1031.4. Every California peace officer must be:
o Free from any disqualifications for employment, including felony convictions (GC 1029);
o A citizen of the United States or a permanent resident who is eligible for and has applied for citizenship (GC 1031); and
o At least 21 years of age for specified peace officers (GC 1031.4)Pursuant to Government Code Section 1031, applicants must be a citizen of the United States or a permanent resident alien who is eligible for and has applied for citizenship.

PHYSICAL AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS
• Must be at least 20 years of age at time of application filing and 21 years of age at time of job appointment;
• Must possess the strength and physical ability necessary to perform the essential functions of the position; and
• Must be willing to be fingerprinted.

Vision requirements:
• Vision including color, night, depth, and peripheral vision sufficient to perform all of the essential functions of the position;
• Visual acuity of not less than 20/80 vision in each eye uncorrected, and corrected to 20/30 in each eye.

EXCEPTION: Applicants with correction afforded by soft contact lenses are exempt from the minimum uncorrected vision standard of 20/80, provided their corrected vision is 20/30 in each eye.

Hearing, speech, and mental capabilities sufficient to perform all of the essential functions of the position.

SPECIAL CONDITIONS
• Required to work a basic workweek consisting of a “4/11 – 3/11” shift schedule, subject to the operational needs of the Department four 10-hour work-days. • May be required to work odd and unusual hours, including weekends and designated holidays, and to be subject to call-back in the performance of job duties. • Candidates are required to pass the following City examinations prior to being given a conditional offer of employment: oral examination, reading/writing assessment, physical ability assessment, and; polygraph; and background investigation. personal history questionnaire.

If given a conditional offer of employment, candidates must also pass a full background check which may include medical and, psychological, and polygraph examinations prior to appointment.

TYPICAL DUTIES
This description may not include all the duties listed below, nor do the examples cover all duties POLICE OFFICER (650)

that may be performed.
• Duties may include, but are not limited to, the following:

Under general supervision, the incumbent will:
• Patrols an assigned area in radio car, on motorcycle, on bicycle, or on foot; • Answers calls for protection of life and property in the enforcement of City, County and State laws;
• As assigned, conducts preliminary or follow-up investigations on prowlers, burglaries, thefts, robberies, accidents, deaths, and other disturbances; • Identifies problems or issues that are important to the community, and seeks resolution of such problems through the resources of the Police Department, other City Departments, and/or other governmental or private agencies;
• Directs traffic, including regulations of vehicle flow at times of emergency or congestion; • Stops drivers who are operating vehicles in violation of laws; • Warns drivers against unlawful practices, and issues citations and makes arrests as required;
• Books, searches and questions prisoners;
• Issues parking citations;
• Collects and presents evidence and testifies at hearings and in court in connection with criminal prosecutions;
• Serves warrants and subpoenas;
• Prepares reports of arrests made, investigations conducted, and illegal incidents observed; • Patrols business districts at night and checks doors and windows of business firms; • Gives information and directions to the public;
• Addresses meetings at community organizations and schools; • May occasionally assist in maintaining police records and may operate headquarters radio-telephone equipment;
• Escorts prisoners to courts, county jail, juvenile hall, or from other jurisdictions; • Operates radio-telephone;
• Collects bail and issues receipts;
• May train and supervise Community Service Officer;
• May supervise and train new personnel as assigned; and • Perform otherDoes related dutieswork as required.

KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, & ABILITIES
Possession of the following knowledge, skills, and abilities at a level necessary to do police work:
• Interest in Police Work - willingness to handle routine, repetitive tasks; enforce laws that may conflict with personal values; relate to others; become familiar with and work with residents of a diverse community minorities; work with fellow officers and the general public in a community-based policing model; participate in situations which require courage; function in different roles; work under hostile conditions, work under POLICE OFFICER (650)

hazardous conditions over long periods of time; change appearance for job requirements and conditions; accept new job duties; work weekends, holidays, shifts, overtime, and a “4/11 – 3/11” shift schedule, subject to the operational needs of the Department10-hour work-day/4-day work-week.
• Ability to Take Orders - the ability to relate to supervisors; to maintain objectivity; take criticism and control temper, and willingness to enforce laws that may conflict with personal values.
• Ability to Take Responsibility - ability to work without supervision; reliability; ability to participate in situations which require courage, refrain from abusing authority vested in official role; maintain confidentiality of information; assume a command presence in conflict situations; and refrain from using excessive sick or unauthorized leave. • Self-Control - the ability to control one's temper, maintain objectivity; take criticism, function under oral or physical stress; use authority effectively; function in different roles, work under hazardous and hostile conditions for long periods of time, and work at accident and crime scenes which involve severe personal injuries, or in situations which involve loss of life.
• Ability to Communicate Effectively - the ability to testify accurately; obtain information from witnesses under normal and stressful conditions; communicate in person, in writing, and via radio.
• Ability to Make Reasonable Decisions Rapidly - the ability to reason logically; apply discretion in maintaining confidentiality of information; observe and interpret what is observed; evaluate situations and people effectively; and apply good judgment. • Willingness to Arrest People - willingness to take actions which will result in imposing penalties on others, including: depriving them of their freedom; taking a life if necessary; and fighting to win and injuring another if required and to enforce laws which may conflict with personal values.
• Ability to Learn - the immediate potential to learn to write readable, comprehensible reports; to read and interpret relevant laws and procedural material; read maps; apply regulations; communicate verbally with others under stress, analyze material and situations; and record observations from accident and crime scenes. • Emotional Stability -– be free from any emotional or mental condition, including bias against race or ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, disability, or sexual orientation, that might adversely affect the exercise of the powers of a peace officer; the ability to take verbal abuse; the possession of: honesty, integrity, maturity, tolerance, selfconfidence, truthfulness and psychological stability; ability to meet the physical and psychological demands of police work.
• Ability to Problem Solve - the ability to identify problems or issues that are of concern POLICE OFFICER (650)

to residents of the City, and the ability to respond successfully to these problems through the resources of the Police Department, other City Departments, working collaboratively with the community, and/or other governmental or private agencies.

SUPERVISION RECEIVED
Works under the general supervision of a Police Sergeant or other classification as assigned.

SUPERVISION EXERCISED
May assist in the training of new personnel. May supervise Community Service Officer, Police Records Specialist or other personnel as assigned.

CLASSIFICATION HISTORY
Created 05/2044; Rev. 12/2018; Rev. 09/2022
Rev. 09/2022

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

CLASS SPECIFICATION

TITLE: FIREFIGHTER I (JOB CODE 487)

DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTABLE TO FLSA STATUS
Fire Varies Non-Exempt

CLASS SUMMARY
The Firefighter I is the entry level classification in the Firefighter series. An incumbent in this classification responds to medical emergencies, fire alarms, performs rescue services, and protects life and property endangered by fire. When qualified and assigned, Firefighter I's may be assigned to paramedic duties. Performs related duties as assigned.

DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS
This is the entry-level classification in the Firefighter series, responsible for becoming proficient in lifesaving and firefighting methods. Incumbents will receive specialized training and education, learn and become proficient in diverse tasks, policies, and procedures within the Department, and learn various techniques in emergency medical services and firefighting duties.

Work is rigidly structured, highly supervised, and incumbents are continuously evaluated and provided feedback regularly. Firefighter I incumbents must successfully pass the Fire Academy and meet all education and training requirements in order to be appointed to the class of Firefighter II and retain employment in the job series.

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
• Graduation from high school or possession of a GED.
• No experience is required.

ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTION
None.

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS
• A valid National Registry or State of California Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) certificate or proof of course enrollment in a valid EMT program is required at time of application. Upon appointment to the classification, a valid National Registry or State of California Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) certificate is required to be possessed and maintained as a condition of employment.
• A valid California Firefighter Joint Apprenticeship Committee (CFFJAC) Candidate Physical Ability Test (CPAT) card issued within 6 months prior to the date of a conditional offer of employment.
• Successful completion of a City of Santa Clara approved Fire Academy is required within 6 months of appointment.
• Possession of a valid California Class C driver's license is required at time of appointment. A valid California Class C driver's license with Firefighter endorsement is required within 24 months of appointment.
• All of the listed licenses and certifications must be maintained as a condition of continued FIREFIGHTER I (487)

employment in this classification for as long as they are required.

DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS
• Demonstrated proficiency in a second language, in accordance with the City's needs • Military experience, journey-level status in the building construction trades, or other work experience relevant to the fire service
• Community service experience
• Completion of thirty (30) or more units of coursework in Fire Science/Technology at an accredited college
• An associate's or higher-level degree from an accredited college or university • Possession of a valid California Paramedic (EMT-P) license (required prior to appointment to a Paramedic assignment)
• A valid California Class A or B commercial driver's license

PHYSICAL REQUIREMENTS
• At least 21 years of age
• Able to distinguish primary colors (red, green, amber), each eye free of any abnormal condition or disease which might affect performance of job duties, visual acuity in each eye of at least 20/50 vision (uncorrected) and 20/30 (corrected), and normal night vision • Normal hearing without correction in both ears
• Free from disabling speech impediments, disabling neuroses or psychoses, and disabling physical conditions or diseases
• Strength and physical abilities necessary to perform the duties of a Firefighter I. A valid CFFJAC CPAT card issued within 6 months prior to the date of a conditional offer of employment is required.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS
• Typically assigned to a 56-hour workweek (24-hour shifts); may be assigned to a 40-hour workweek as required
• May be required to work odd and unusual hours, including weekends and designated holidays and to be subject to call-back in the performance of job duties • Must be able to perform all of the essential functions of the job assignment

TYPICAL DUTIES
This description may not include all the duties listed below, nor do the examples cover all duties that may be performed.

Under immediate supervision, the incumbent will:
• Responds to routine calls and emergencies for protection of life and property • Assists in all phases of firefighting operations and medical emergencies as directed • Operates firefighting and first aid equipment, including two-way radios • Maintains and inspects equipment and makes minor adjustments and repairs to same FIREFIGHTER I (487)

• Assists in the maintenance and clean-up in and about fire stations and other Department facilities
• Communicates with a diverse community and other City employees, engaging with empathy, answering general questions and providing information as necessary • Identifies fire hazards and conducts or assists in fire inspections of buildings within the City as directed
• Interprets Department training evolutions and assists in the training of regular and volunteer fire personnel
• Conducts or participates in Fire Department demonstrations as directed • Participates in special Department programs and projects as directed • Carries out City and Department rules and regulations, adheres to policies and procedures • Maintains good public relations, works and cooperates with other City employees • Participates in and/or directs Department physical fitness activities • Attends special schools, conferences, seminars, etc. as required by the Department or City
• Collaborates within a team setting in the Department and other employees • May act as Driver/Engineer and assume the responsibilities of that position on an assigned shift
• Works in assigned Fire Division, at an assigned station, on an assigned shift, as determined by the Department
• Performs other related duties as assigned.

KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, & ABILITIES
Knowledge of:
• Basic mathematics and mechanical principles
Ability to:
• Learn and apply firefighting and rescue methods and techniques • Learn the basic operation, mechanics, and maintenance of firefighting equipment and fire apparatus
• Learn to drive fire apparatus with care and safety in accordance with the California Code during emergency and non-emergency situations
• Learn the geography of the City
• Learn pertinent federal, state, and local laws and regulations • Evaluate situations, identify problems, and exercise initiative and sound independent judgment within established guidelines
• Identify fire hazards and conduct inspections
• Interpret, understand and carry out City and Department rules and regulations, policies, procedures and training evolutions
• Read and interpret maps, run cards, and pre-fire plan drawings • Interpret and follow oral and written instructions
• Communicate clearly and effectively, both verbally and in writing by using correct English grammar, spelling, and punctuation
• Establish and maintain courteous and effective working relationships with those FIREFIGHTER I (487)

contacted in the course of work, including City staff, members of other governmental agencies, and community
• Work effectively as part of a group or team to achieve common goals • Maintain professionalism and composure at all times, including stressful situations • Take direction and follow established policies and procedures • Demonstrate empathy, collaboration, and de-escalations skills when working with the community
• Demonstrate physical endurance, agility, strength, and stamina in the performance of duties
• Work as part of a highly functional team during stressful situations • Be mentored and mentor others when necessary
In addition, the following Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities are required for a Paramedic assignment:

Knowledge of:
• Advanced Life Support pre-hospital emergency care techniques, principles, and practices • Basic human anatomy and physiology
• Medical terminology, techniques and analytical processes used in the description and assessment of patient status
• Categories, applications, contraindications, and appropriate dosage levels • Procedures and equipment used in vital sign monitoring • Symptoms of impaired cardiac and respiratory functioning, altered states of consciousness, various types of toxicity and poisoning, shock and common diseases Ability to:
• Use and manipulate tools, medical equipment and conditions at the scene • Determine appropriate basic and advanced life support procedures • Make paramedical decisions rapidly and under stressful conditions • Perform basic and advanced life support procedures including cardiac and pulmonary resuscitation, cardiac monitoring and defibrillation, trauma response, and administration of medications
• Communicate technical information effectively with those encountered in the course of the work

SUPERVISION RECEIVED
Receives general supervision from a Fire Captain or other supervisor as assigned.

SUPERVISION EXERCISED
May assist in the training of new and/or volunteer personnel.

CLASSIFICATION HISTORY
Created 05/2013, Rev. 05/2018; Rev. 09/2022
Rev. 09/2022

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

CLASS SPECIFICATION

TITLE: FIREFIGHTER I (JOB CODE 487)

DEPARTMENT ACCOUNTABLE TO FLSA STATUS
Fire Varies Non-Exempt

CLASS SUMMARY
The Firefighter I is the entry level classification in the Firefighter series. An incumbent in this classification responds to medical emergencies, fire alarms, performs rescue services, and protects life and property endangered by fire. When qualified and assigned, Firefighter I's may be assigned to paramedic duties. Performs related duties as assigned.

DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS
This is the entry-level classification in the Firefighter series, responsible for becoming proficient in lifesaving and firefighting methods. Incumbents will receive specialized training and education, learn and become proficient in diverse tasks, policies, and procedures within the Department, and learn various techniques in emergency medical services and firefighting duties. Work is rigidly structured, highly supervised, and incumbents are continuously evaluated and provided feedback regularly. Firefighter I incumbents must successfully pass the Fire Academy and meet all education and training requirements in order to be appointed to the class of Firefighter II and retain employment in the job series.

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
• Graduation from high school or possession of a GED.
• No experience is required.

ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTION
None.

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS
• A valid National Registry or State of California Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) certificate or proof of course enrollment in a valid EMT program is required at time of application. Upon appointment to the classification, a valid National Registry or State of California Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) certificate is required to be possessed and maintained as a condition of employment.
• A valid California Firefighter Joint Apprenticeship Committee (CFFJAC) Candidate Physical Ability Test (CPAT) card issued within 6 months prior to the date of a conditional offer of employment.
• Successful completion of a City of Santa Clara approved Fire Academy is required within 6 months of appointment.
• Possession of a valid California Class C driver's license is required at time of appointment. A valid California Class C driver's license with Firefighter endorsement is required within 24 months of appointment.
• All of the listed licenses and certifications must be maintained as a condition of continued FIREFIGHTER I (487)

employment in this classification for as long as they are required.

DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS
• Demonstrated proficiency in a second language, in accordance with the City's needs • Military experience, journey-level status in the building construction trades, or other work experience relevant to the fire service
• Community service experience
• Completion of thirty (30) or more units of coursework in Fire Science/Technology at an accredited college
• An associate's or higher-level degree from an accredited college or university • Possession of a valid California Paramedic (EMT-P) license (required prior to appointment to a Paramedic assignment)
• A valid California Class A or B commercial driver's license

PHYSICAL REQUIREMENTS
• At least 21 years of age
• Able to distinguish primary colors (red, green, amber), each eye free of any abnormal condition or disease which might affect performance of job duties, visual acuity in each eye of at least 20/50 vision (uncorrected) and 20/30 (corrected), and normal night vision • Normal hearing without correction in both ears
• Free from disabling speech impediments, disabling neuroses or psychoses, and disabling physical conditions or diseases
• Strength and physical abilities necessary to perform the duties of a Firefighter I. A valid CFFJAC CPAT card issued within 6 months prior to the date of a conditional offer of employment is required.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS
• Typically assigned to a 56-hour workweek (24-hour shifts); may be assigned to a 40-hour workweek as required
• May be required to work odd and unusual hours, including weekends and designated holidays and to be subject to call-back in the performance of job duties • Must be able to perform all of the essential functions of the job assignment

TYPICAL DUTIES
This description may not include all the duties listed below, nor do the examples cover all duties that may be performed.

Under immediate supervision, the incumbent will:

Duties may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Responds to routine calls and emergencies for protection of life and property • Assists in all phases of firefighting operations and medical emergencies as directed • Operates firefighting and first aid equipment, including two-way radios • Maintains and inspects equipment and makes minor adjustments and repairs to same FIREFIGHTER I (487)

• Assists in the maintenance and clean-up in and about fire stations and other Department facilities
• Communicates with a diverse community the public and other City employees, engaging with empathy, answering general questions and providing information as necessary • Identifies fire hazards and conducts or assists in fire inspections of buildings within the City as directed
• Interprets Department training evolutions and assists in the training of regular and volunteer fire personnel
• Conducts or participates in Fire Department demonstrations as directed • Participates in special Department programs and projects as directed • Carries out City and Department rules and regulations, adheres to policies and procedures • Maintains good relations with the public relations, works and cooperates with other City employees
• Participates in and/or directs Department physical fitness activities • Attends special schools, conferences, seminars, etc. as required by the Department or City
• Collaborates within a team setting in the Department and other employees • May act as Driver/Engineer and assume the responsibilities of that position on an assigned shift
• Works in assigned Fire Division, at an assigned station, on an assigned shift, as determined by the Department
• Performs other related duties as assigned.

KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, & ABILITIES
Knowledge of:
• Basic mathematics and mechanical principles
Ability to:
• Learn and apply firefighting and rescue methods and techniques • Learn the basic operation, mechanics, and maintenance of firefighting equipment and fire apparatus
• Learn to drive fire apparatus with care and safety in accordance with the California Code during emergency and non-emergency situations
• Learn the geography of the City
• Learn pertinent federal, state, and local laws and regulations • Evaluate situations, identify problems, and exercise initiative and sound independent judgment within established guidelines
• Identify fire hazards and conduct inspections
• Interpret, understand and carry out City and Department rules and regulations, policies, procedures and training evolutions
• Read and interpret maps, run cards, and pre-fire plan drawings • Interpret and follow oral and written instructions
• Communicate clearly and effectively, both verbally and in writing by using correct English grammar, spelling, and punctuation
FIREFIGHTER I (487)

• Establish and maintain courteous and effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of work, including City staff, members of other governmental agencies, and the general publiccommunity
• Work effectively as part of a group or team to achieve common goals • Maintain professionalism and composure at all times, including stressful situations • Take direction and follow established policies and procedures • Demonstrate empathy, collaboration, and de-escalations skills when working with the community
• Demonstrate physical endurance, agility, strength, and stamina in the performance of duties
• Work as part of a highly functional team during stressful situations • BDemonstrates ability to be mentored and mentor others when necessary In addition, the following Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities are required for a Paramedic assignment:

Knowledge of:
• Advanced Life Support pre-hospital emergency care techniques, principles, and practices • Basic human anatomy and physiology
• Medical terminology, techniques and analytical processes used in the description and assessment of patient status
• Categories, applications, contraindications, and appropriate dosage levels • Procedures and equipment used in vital sign monitoring • Symptoms of impaired cardiac and respiratory functioning, altered states of consciousness, various types of toxicity and poisoning, shock and common diseases Ability to:
• Use and manipulate tools, medical equipment and conditions at the scene • Determine appropriate basic and advanced life support procedures • Make paramedical decisions rapidly and under stressful conditions • Perform basic and advanced life support procedures including cardiac and pulmonary resuscitation, cardiac monitoring and defibrillation, trauma response, and administration of medications
• Communicate technical information effectively with those encountered in the course of the work

SUPERVISION RECEIVED
Receives general supervision from a Fire Captain or other supervisor as assigned.

SUPERVISION EXERCISED
May assist in the training of new and/or volunteer personnel.

CLASSIFICATION HISTORY
Created 05/2013, Rev. 05/2018; Rev. 09/2022
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1126 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Authorize the City Manager to execute the Side Letter Agreement that amends the 2019-2023 Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Santa Clara and the City of Santa Clara Employees’ Association (Units 5/7/8), that incorporates the terms of the Side Letter Agreement and Related Budget Amendments

COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency.

BACKGROUND
The City of Santa Clara and the City of Santa Clara Employees’ Association (Units 5/7/8) (hereafter, “Employees’ Association”) reached agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding (hereafter, “MOU”) in December of 2020 with a term of December 15, 2019 to December 23, 2023. As part of the MOU, the parties agreed to meet and confer under a reopener provision in the event the City reached an agreement with another nonsworn bargaining unit subject to the General Fund for a general wage increase above 3.0% for calendar year 2023. The City reached an agreement on a successor MOU with another bargaining unit, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 101 (hereafter, “Unit 6”) that included a general wage increase of more than 3.0% for calendar year 2023. Accordingly, the Employees’ Association requested to meet and confer with the City pursuant to the terms of the reopener in their current MOU.

In August 2022, the City and the Employees’ Association reached agreement on a Side Letter Agreement that amends the terms of the current MOU as follows:
§ Effective December 25, 2022 (the first pay period of calendar year 2023), all salary ranges for employees holding positions in classifications assigned to the Employees’ Association will be increased by approximately 5.0% (instead of the 3.0% previously agreed to as part of the agreement on the current MOU).
§ The City will exercise its discretion and provide employees in classifications assigned to the Employees’ Association at the time of disbursement a one-time lump sum non-pensionable payment of $5,000 (prorated for part-time employees) no later than the first pay period in October 2022.

It should be noted that no other terms of the current MOU are amended or otherwise altered, and that the Side Letter Agreement between the City and the Employees’ Association fulfills the meet and confer requirement pursuant to the terms of the reopener in their current MOU.

On or about August 23, 2022, the Employees’ Association notified the City that its membership had City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1126 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
ratified the terms of the Side Letter Agreement amending the current MOU.

DISCUSSION
The recommended action authorizes the City Manager to execute the Side Letter Agreement that amends the current Memorandum of Understanding with a term of December 15, 2019, through and including December 23, 2023, that incorporates the terms of the Side Letter Agreement reached between both parties.

The following is a summary of the notable provisions of the Side Letter Agreement, and a complete copy of the Side Letter Agreement is attached:

Wages:

Effective December 25, 2022 (the first pay period of calendar year 2023), all salary ranges for employees holding positions in classifications assigned to the Employees’ Association will be increased by approximately 5.0% (instead of the 3.0% previously agreed to as part of the agreement on the current MOU).

One-Time Non-Pensionable Discretionary Cash Payment:

In recognition of, and to help secure the employees' speedy ratification of this MOU, the City has exercised its discretion to provide a one-time discretionary cash payment of $5,000 for regular employees (pro-rated for part-time employees) in the bargaining unit following Council approval of this MOU. The Parties intend and understand that this lump sum payment is non-pensionable and will not be reported to CalPERS. An employee must be employed in a classification assigned to the Employees’ Association at the time the one-time discretionary cash payment is made to receive the payment.

No other terms of the current MOU are amended or otherwise altered, and the Side Letter Agreement between the City and the Employees’ Association fulfills the meet and confer requirement pursuant to the terms of the reopener in their current MOU.

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 costs of this MOU Side Letter Agreement are within budget authority approved by the City Council through the negotiation process. As shown in the table below, the ongoing annual costs associated with the additional 2% wage increase (from 3% to 5%) is $813,000, of which $450,000 is in the General Fund. With an implementation date of January 2023, the impact will be one-half in FY 2022/23 ($406,500 all funds/$225,000 in the General Fund). In FY 2022/23, there is also a one-time impact associated with the $5,000 non-pensionable cash payment. Based on the currently filled positions in Units 5/7/8, this one-time cost totals $1.3 million, of which $829,000 is in the General Fund.

The City regularly budgets the total compensation cost for its current employees and integrates known and projected cost increases from MOUs in the City’s annual budget. The ten-year forecast also incorporates the projected labor costs. The costs of this MOU are within budget authority City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022 powered by Legistar™
22-1126 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
also incorporates the projected labor costs. The costs of this MOU are within budget authority approved by the City Council through the negotiation process, and the negotiated agreement generates savings when compared to assumptions included in the FY 2022/23 budget and ten-year forecast.

The chart below reflects the estimated changes in costs in the General Fund as well as all funds over the term of the MOU.

Estimated Costs
Item Description Estimated General
Fund Cost
Estimated All Funds
Cost
Wages (2023) 5% increase (instead
of 3%)
$450 K ($225 K in
FY 2022/23)
$813 K ($407K in FY
2022/23)
One-time NonPensionable
Discretionary Cash
Payment (2022)
$5,000 (one-time) $829 K $1.3 M
The City regularly budgets the total compensation cost for its current employees and integrates known and projected cost increases from MOUs in the City’s annual budget. The additional ongoing costs will be factored into the FY 2023/24 and FY 2024/25 Biennial Operating Budget. The ten-year General Fund forecast also incorporates the projected labor costs and this adjustment was factored into the latest General Fund shortfall figure of $27 million.

In FY 2022/23, the additional one-time and ongoing costs will be spread across the City departments and funds. The related budget amendments to cover these additional costs are outlined in Attachment 2. In the General Fund, this will result in an additional cost of $1.1 million, which will be offset by the use of the Land Sale Reserve. The cost in other funds totaling $0.7 million will be covered by the fund balances or the recognition of additional funding sources as detailed in Attachment 2.

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

RECOMMENDATION

1. Authorize the City Manager to execute the Side Letter Agreement that amends the current Memorandum of Understanding with a term of December 15, 2019, through and including December 23, 2023, that incorporates the terms of the Side Letter Agreement reached between both parties; City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1126 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
and

2. Approve the related FY 2022/23 Budget Amendments as detailed in Attachment 2 (five affirmative votes required for the use of unused fund balances and to appropriate additional revenue).

Reviewed by: Aracely Azevedo, Director of Human Resources Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Side Letter Agreement Amending the Current MOU Between the City and the Employees’ Association dated August 8, 2022

2. FY 2022/23 Budget Amendments - Units 5/7/8 Side Letter City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA
AND

THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION
(UNITS 5, 7 & 8)
AMENDMENT TO DECEMBER 15, 2019 - DECEMBER 23, 2023

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
The City and the City of Santa Clara Employees' Association (Unit 5/7/8) (hereafter, "Employees' Association") agree to amend the current Memorandum of Understanding (hereafter, "MOU"), with a term of December 15, 2019 - December 23, 2023, as follows:

1. WAGE ADJUSTMENTS
A. Effective December 15, 2019, all salary ranges for employees holding positions in classifications assigned to the Employees' Association shall remain status quo.
1) Effective December 27, 2020 (the first pay period of calendar year 2021), all salary ranges for employees holding positions in classification assigned to the Employees' Association shall remain status quo. 2) Effective December 26, 2021 (the first pay period of calendar year 2022), all salary ranges for employees holding positions in classifications assigned to the Employees' Association shall be increased by approximately 3.5%.
3) Effective December 25, 2022 (the first pay period of calendar year 2023), all salary ranges for employees holding positions in classifications assigned to the Employees' Association shall be increased by approximately 5.0%J.,.G%..
4) One-Time Discretionary Cash PaymentReopeners:

In recognition of, and to help secure the employees' speedy ratification of this Side Letter Agreement to amend the current MOU, the City has exercised its discretion to provide a one-time discretionary cash payment of $5,000 for regular employees (pro-rated for part-time Unit 5/7/8 Side Letter Agreement - Amendment to December 15, 2019 - December 23, 2023 MOU August8,2022

employees) in the bargaining unit following Council approval of this Side Letter Agreement to amend the current MOU. The Parties intend and understand that this lump sum payment is non-pensionable and will not be reported to CalPERS.

This one-time discretionary cash payment shall only be paid as follows:

Employees who were employed in a classification assigned to the bargaining unit at the time of the disbursement, which is estimated to occur after the first pay period after Council approval of this Side Letter Agreement to amend the current MOU . The one-time discretionary cash payment shall be paid on a day after the first full pay period after Council approval of this Side Letter Agreement to amend the current MOU on a separate paycheck and no later than the first pay period in October 2022.
(a) The parties agree to meet and confer over \\'ages in the event the City reaches agreement on a ne1.v general 1Nage increase to be effective during Calendar Year 2021 or 2022 with any other miscellaneous bargaining unit as part of an agreement on a successor Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). For purposes of this section, "general 1Nage increase" means a 1.vage increase applicable to all members of the bargaining unit (not a subset), but only if that agreement does not also include an agreement for alternative cost saving measures comparable with the savings from a 1.vage and salary step freeze for that specific bargaining unit for Calendar Year 2021 or 2022 (including but not limited to unpaid furlough days). Additionally, the parties agree that this section shall not apply to any general wage lncreases applicable to sworn public safety bargaining units or to miscellaneous bargaining units that are exclusively funded through sources other than the General Fund. (b) For Calendar Year 2023, the parties agree to meet and confer over wages in the event the City reaches agreement on a new general 1 Nage increase above 3.0% to be effective during Calendar Year 2023 with any other bargaining unit as part of an agreement on a successor Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). For purposes of this section, "general wage increase" means a 1.vage increase applicable to all members of the bargaining unit (not a subset), but only if that agreement does not also include an agreement for an alternative cost saving measure (including but not limited to unpaid furlough days). Additionally, the parties agree that this section shall not apply to any general 1•
1 1age increases applicable to sworn public
safety bargaining units or to miscellaneous bargaining units that are exclusively funded through sources other than the General Fund.

Unit 5/7/8 Side Letter Agreement-Amendment to December 15, 2019 - December 23, 2023 MOU August8, 2022

This Side Letter Agreement shall not establish precedent for future agreements and shall not be construed or implied to obligate the City or the Employees' Association to enter into any similar agreements in the future.

This Side Letter Agreement that amends the current MOU shall become effective after it is adopted by the City and signed by all parties below.

FOR THE CITY: FOR THE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION:
~~~ Cl -l"l-2-z.

Rajeev Batra Date Katie Carter
City Manager President, SCEA, Unit 5/7/8
~~ 9//e/22__
Aracely Azevedo Date Andre Pau Date
Director of Human Resources Vice President, SCEA, Unit 5/7/8 SC-EA, Unit 5/7/8
Attachment 2
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
City Clerk's Office - Salaries 13,299
City Council - Salaries 1,291
City Manager's Office - Salaries 14,934
Community Development Department - Salaries 74,655
Department of Public Works - Salaries 104,729
Finance Department - Salaries 288,807
Fire Department - Salaries 55,129
Human Resources Department - Salaries 39,650
Library - Salaries 238,409
Parks & Recreation Department - Salaries 165,355
Police Department - Salaries 57,514
Transfer to the Storm Drain Capital Fund (PW Capital Projects Mgmt) 1,164 Transfer to the Parks & Recreation Capital Fund (PW Capital Projects Mgmt) 2,529 Transfer to the Streets & Highways Capital Fund (PW Capital Projects Mgmt) 12,419 Land Sale Reserve (1,069,884)
Total General Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Community Development Department - Salaries 216,030
Ending Fund Balance (216,030)
Total Building Development Services Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Parks & Recreation Department - Salaries 6,148
Ending Fund Balance (6,148)
Total Cemetery Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
City Manager's Office - Salaries 3,030
Ending Fund Balance (3,030)
Total Convention Center Enterprise Fund - -
Convention Center Enterprise Fund (860)
General Fund (001)
FY 2022/23 Budget Amendments - Units 5/7/8 Side Letter
Building Development Services Fund (155)
Cemetery Fund (093)
1 Attachment 2
FY 2022/23 Budget Amendments - Units 5/7/8 Side Letter
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Electric Utility Department - Salaries 18,541
Ending Fund Balance (18,541)
Total Electric Operating Grant Trust Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Electric Utility Department - Salaries 257,471
Ending Fund Balance (257,471)
Total Electric Utility Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Department of Public Works - Salaries 29,859
Ending Fund Balance (29,859)
Total Fleet Operations Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Community Development Department - Salaries 5,000
Ending Fund Balance (5,000)
Total Housing and Urban Development Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Information Technology Department - Salaries 6,206
Ending Fund Balance (6,206)
Total Information Technology Services Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
PW Capital Projects Management 2,529
Transfer from the General Fund - Land Sale Reserve 2,529 Total Parks and Recreation Capital Fund 2,529 2,529
Information Technology Services Fund (045)
Parks and Recreation Capital Fund (532)
Electric Operating Grant Trust Fund (191)
Electric Utility Fund (091)
Fleet Operations Fund (053)
Housing and Urban Development Fund (562)
2 Attachment 2
FY 2022/23 Budget Amendments - Units 5/7/8 Side Letter
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Department of Public Works - Salaries 20,543
Other Fees for Services 20,543
Total Public Works Capital Projects Management Fund 20,543 20,543 Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Community Development Department - Salaries 5,852
Other Revenue 5,852
Total Related Santa Clara Developer Fund 5,852 5,852
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
PW Capital Projects Management - Sewer Utility 4,431
Ending Fund Balance (4,431)
Total Sewer Utility Capital Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Water & Sewer Utilities Department - Salaries 25,380
Ending Fund Balance (25,380)
Total Sewer Utility Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Department of Public Works - Salaries 10,308
Ending Fund Balance (10,308)
Total Solid Waste Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
PW Capital Projects Management 1,164
Transfer from the General Fund - Land Sale Reserve 1,164 Total Storm Drain Capital Fund 1,164 1,164
Solid Waste Fund (096)
Sewer Utility Capital Fund (594)
Storm Drain Capital Fund (535)
Public Works Capital Projects Management Fund (044)
Related Santa Clara Developer Fund (540)
Sewer Utility Fund (094)
3 Attachment 2
FY 2022/23 Budget Amendments - Units 5/7/8 Side Letter
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
PW Capital Projects Management - Streets and Highways 12,419 Transfer from the General Fund - Land Sale Reserve 12,419 Total Streets and Highways Capital Fund 12,419 12,419
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Water & Sewer Utilities Department - Salaries 9,722
Ending Fund Balance (9,722)
Total Water Recycling Fund - -
Department
Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Water & Sewer Utilities Department - Salaries 65,617
Ending Fund Balance (65,617)
Total Water Utility Fund - -
Water Recycling Fund (097)
Water Utility Fund (092)
Streets and Highways Capital Fund (533)
4 City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1175 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Authorize the City Manager to execute the Side Letter Agreement that amends the 2019-2024 Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Santa Clara and the Miscellaneous Unclassified Management Employees (Unit 9), that incorporates the terms of the Side Letter Agreement

COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

BACKGROUND
The City of Santa Clara and the Miscellaneous Unclassified Management Employees (Unit 9) reached an agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding (hereafter, “MOU”) in November of 2020 with a term of December 15, 2019 to December 31, 2024. As part of the MOU, the parties agreed to revisions in the Vacation Accrual and Usage section of the MOU that would be effective December 25, 2022. The revisions include a maximum vacation accrual cap of 480 hours in the current vacation accrual balance and moving any accrued vacation hours over 400 to a separate Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance that must first be utilized. If an employee leaves or retires from City service, any unused Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual hours will be cashed out upon the employee’s retirement or other separation from City service.

In a letter dated April 28, 2022, Unit 9 expressed concern that a significant number of Unit 9 employees have vacation accrual limits above 400 hours. When the City and Union agreed to the vacation revisions, it was understood that from November 2020 to December 2022, employees would work with their supervisors and be encouraged to utilize their accrued vacation. However, due to a combination of factors including, but not limited to, the COVID-19 pandemic, workload demands, managers stepping in to cover duties of other vacant positions, and the citywide vacancy rate of approximately 17%, many managers have been unable to take time off. Unit 9 requested to explore options to address this concern.

The letter also expressed concerns with the City’s current performance evaluation process, specifically the completion and delivery of performance evaluations in a timely manner and corresponding eligibility for merit increases, when available. Unit 9 requested a formalized standard for evaluating individual performance, and to move away from an anniversary-based rating period to an annual fixed cycle for employees represented by Unit 9.

The City and Unit 9 engaged in several discussions regarding these two items and in September 2022, the City and the Miscellaneous Unclassified Management Employees (Unit 9) reached agreement on a Side Letter Agreement that amends the terms of the current MOU as follows:

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1175 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
§ Effective December 25, 2022, all unused accrued vacation hours above 350 hours (instead of 400 hours) as of December 24, 2022, shall be placed in a Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance. No additional hours shall be allowed in the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance after December 25, 2022. Subject to supervisory approval, any accrued vacation hours and Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual hours shall be available for use. This means that employees will no longer be required to use the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual Hours first. Once an employee exhausts any accrued hours in the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual, no additional Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual hours shall be available.
§ Effective January 1, 2023, the rating period for employees represented by Unit 9 shall move from an anniversary-based system to an annual fixed cycle, which will be January 1 - December 31 of each calendar year. Effective January 1, 2023 employees represented by Unit 9 shall be ineligible for a merit increase for the January 1, 2022 - December 31, 2022 rating period. Effective the first full pay period in April 2023, employees shall receive a onetime lump sum non-pensionable payment of $2,500 (pro-rated for part-time employees), for the calendar year 2022 rating period.

Effective January 1, 2024, any merit increase that an employee may be eligible for would be effective the first pay period after July 1st of the year subsequent to the rating period.

It should be noted that no other terms of the current MOU are amended or otherwise altered.

On or about September 7, 2022, the Miscellaneous Unclassified Management Employees (Unit 9) notified the City that its membership had ratified the terms of the Side Letter Agreement amending the current MOU.

DISCUSSION
The recommended action authorizes the City Manager to execute the Side Letter Agreement that amends the current Memorandum of Understanding with a term of December 15, 2019, through and including December 31, 2024, that incorporates the terms of the Side Letter Agreement reached between both parties.

The following is a summary of the notable provisions of the Side Letter Agreement, and a complete copy of the Side Letter Agreement is attached:

Vacation Accrual and Usage
Effective December 25, 2022, all unused accrued vacation hours above 350 hours (instead of 400 hours) as of December 24, 2022, shall be placed in a Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance. No additional hours shall be allowed in the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance after December 25, 2022. Subject to supervisory approval, any accrued vacation hours and Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual hours shall be available for use. This means that employees will no longer be required to use the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual Hours first. Once an employee exhausts any accrued hours in the Temporary Supplemental Vacation City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1175 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
Accrual, no additional Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual hours shall be available.

Performance Appraisals
Effective January 1, 2023, the rating period for employees represented by Unit 9 shall move from an anniversary-based system to an annual fixed cycle, which will be January 1 - December 31 of each calendar year. Effective January 1, 2023 employees represented by Unit 9 shall be ineligible for a merit increase for the January 1, 2022 - December 31, 2022 rating period. Effective the first full pay period in April 2023, employees shall receive a one-time lump sum non-pensionable payment of $2,500 (pro-rated for part-time employees), for the calendar year 2022 rating period.

Effective January 1, 2024, any merit increase that an employee may be eligible for would be effective the first pay period after July 1st of the year subsequent to the rating period.

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 cost of providing a lump sum non-pensionable payment of $2,500 in April 2023 (pro-rated for part-time employees) is approximately $438,000, of which $214,000 is in the General Fund. This cost would be offset by savings generated from freezing merit increases in 2023. Assuming average merit increases of 3%,
The annual savings generated from freezing these increases in 2023 is anticipated to be approximately $702,000, of which $340,000 is in the General Fund.

It is difficult to determine the fiscal impact of moving 50 additional hours to the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual because employees may take time off and utilize the accrued hours in this leave balance. It is also unknown if any employee will separate or retire from the City and have a Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance at the time of separation, which would result in a payout.

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

City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1175 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to execute the Side Letter Agreement that amends the current Memorandum of Understanding with Miscellaneous Unclassified Management Employees (Unit 9) with a term of December 15, 2019 through and including December 31, 2024, that incorporates the terms of the Side Letter Agreement reached between both parties.

Reviewed by: Aracely Azevedo, Director of Human Resources Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Side Letter Agreement Between City and Unit 9
City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA
AND

MISCELLANEOUS UNCLASSIFIED MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES
(UNIT 9)
AMENDMENT TO DECEMBER 15, 2019- DECEMBER 31, 2024

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
The City and the Miscellaneous Unclassified Management Employees (hereafter, "Unit 9") agree to amend the current Memorandum of Understanding (hereafter, "MOU"), with a term of December 15, 2019 - December 31, 2024, as follows:
(A) VACATION

6. VACATION ACCRUAL AND USAGE
Represented employees will be entitled to use vacation as it is earned under the following conditions:

A. Vacation may not be taken during the first 6 months of regular employment.

B. Vacation will be earned on a bi-weekly basis (1/26 of the yearly accrual) provided that the employee is in a paid status for at least 2/3 of the hours (53.4 hours) of that pay period.

C. Accrued vacation time will be paid off regardless of term of employment.

D. Annual and maximum vacation accrual rates, calculated to four decimal points for accuracy, are as follows:

COMPLETED ANNUAL MAXIMUM VACATION

YEARS OF SERVICE ACCRUAL ACCRUAL LIMIT
1 through 4 80 hours 480 hours
5 through 9 120 hours 480 hours
1 O through 15 168 hours 480 hours
16 through 20 176 hours 480 hours
21 years+ 192 hours 480 hours
Unit 9 Side Letter Agreement - Amendment to December 15, 2019 - December 31, 2024 MOU September 8, 2022

E. Maximum Vacation Accrual Limit - Employees are limited to the maximum accrual of vacation as defined. The current vacation balance, the annual accrual and the current pay period usage are all shown on the employees' pay- check stub and are the responsibility of the employee to track for compliance with this provision. 1) Effective December 27, 2020 (the first pay period of calendar year 2021), the Maximum Vacation Accrual Limit as described in Section 6.D above shall be temporarily suspended for two (2) years until the end of the last pay period of calendar year 2022. Employees may continue to accrue vacation above the Maximum Vacation Accrual Limit until December 24, 2022 (the end of the last pay period of calendar year 2022).
2) Effective December 25, 2022 (the first pay period of calendar year 2023), employees shall not be allowed to accrue vacation above the Maximum Vacation Accrual Limit.
3) Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual - Effective December 25, 2022 (the first pay period of calendar year 2023), employees holding positions in classifications assigned to Unit 9 shall be eligible for the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual. The Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual is a separate vacation balance subject to the following :
(a) Effective December 25, 2022, all unused accrued vacation hours above 4-00-350 hours as of December 24, 2022 (the last pay period of calendar year 2022) shall be placed in the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance.
(i) The following is only an example of the Temporary
Supplemental Vacation Accrual described above, and any
figures are for illustration purposes only and assumes the employee does not use vacation.

Issue Hours
Vacation Balance as of December 24, 2022 500
the last a eriod of calendar ear 2022
Hours to be placed in 400150
Tern orar Su lemental Vacation Accrual
Vacation Balance as of December 25, 2022 400350
the first a eriod of calendar ear 2023
Hours that can be accrued in gg130
calendar ear 2023
Hours that can be accrued above the 0
Maximum Vacation Accrual Limit of 480 hours
(b) The Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance may not be increased.
(c) Subject to supervisory approval, any accrued vacation hours and Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual hours shall be available for use Unit 9 Side Letter Agreement - Amendment to December 15, 2019 - December 31, 2024 MOU September 8, 2022

(d)
(e)
to the employee until the accrued vacation balance and Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance has been exhausted.

If an employee leaves or retires from City service, any unused Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual hours shall not be subject to the terms of Section 6.1 below. Any accrued but unused Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual hours will be cashed out upon the employee's retirement or other separation from City service. If permitted by the City's deferred compensation plan and applicable law, the separating employee may elect to contribute all or a portion of their accrued but unused Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual hours to their deferred compensation account by submitting a written request no later than 30 days prior to their separation from City service.

An employee must first use their Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual for any vacation leave taken until the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance has been exhausted, subject to supervisory approval.

An employee must use their Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual for any leave of absence until the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance has been exhausted subject to any requirement that sick leave be utilized first.

An employee may not be on unpaid status until the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance has been exhausted and must use their Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual until the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance has been exhausted, with the exception of any formal disciplinary action pursuant to the City's Civil Service Rules.

F. Vacation may be used in one-tenth (1110th) hour increments.

G. Employees who begin work prior to July 4-st--1.::_or continue to be employed after the first calendar year of employment are required to use at least one-half of the vacation accrued during the prior calendar year during the current calendar year.

H. Subject to having a sufficient balance of accrued vacation available, an employee may, on a twice per year basis, request to be paid at his/her current hourly pay rate for a total combined maximum of 80 hours of accrued vacation.

I. In lieu of receiving a vacation-leave cash payout at retirement, the Miscellaneous Unclassified Management Employees may vote to roll accrued vacation leave hours (except for any hours in the Temporary Supplemental Vacation Accrual balance) into the employee's VEBA account, subject to Association compliance with Federal rules associated with employee contributions of vacation leave to their VEBA accounts.

Unit 9 Side Letter Agreement - Amendment to December 15, 2019 - December 31, 2024 MOU September 8, 2022

(B) PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS

14. MERIT PAY/SALARY ADJUSTMENT SYSTEM
Merit pay adjustments, or merit increases, as provided for in the Personnel and Salary Resolution are, and will continue to be available during the term of this MOU when and if approved by the applicable Department Head and the City Manager, subject to Section.§.

14.A and 14.G below. The Merit Pay Adjustment system shall include the following elements:

A. Each Unit 9 employee shall receive an annual evaluation. 1) Effective January 1, 2023, the rating period for an annual evaluation for all employees in classifications assigned to Unit 9 shall be from January 1st to December 31 st of each calendar year.
a. Effective January 1, 2023, employees holding positions in classifications assigned to Unit 9 shall be ineligible for a merit increase for the rating period ending on and between January 1, 2022 - December 31, 2022. i. Effective the first full pay period in April 2023, employees shall receive a one-time discretionary cash payment of $2,500 for regular employees (pro-rated for part-time employees), for the January 1, 2022 - December 31, 2022 rating period. The Parties intend and understand that this lump sum payment is non-pensionable and will not be reported to CalPERS.

Employees hired on and between January 1, 2023 - April 30, 2023 or promoted into a Unit 9 position who were not previously represented by Unit 9 during January 1, 2023 - April 30, 2023, shall be ineligible for the one-time cash payment.

An employee who was promoted into a classification represented by Unit 9 in calendar year 2022, who was previously in a classification represented by a bargaining unit that received a onetime payment in 2022, and who received a one-time payment in 2022, shall be ineligible to receive the $2,500 one-time cash payment.
2) Effective January 1, 2024, any merit increase that an employee may be eligible for would be effective the first pay period after July 1st of the year subsequent to the rating period.
a. For any employee newly hired or appointed into a classification assigned to Unit 9 after January 1st of any given year, any merit increase shall be prorated for that rating period based on when they were hired during that year.
3) The employee must be in a classification assigned to Unit 9 during the pay period Unit 9 Side Letter Agreement - Amendment to December 15, 2019 - December 31, 2024 MOU September 8, 2022

when the merit increase is effective to receive the merit increase. If the employee leaves City service or is in a classification not assigned to Unit 9 when the merit increase becomes effective, the employee will not be eligible to receive it. a. If the employee is subsequently in a classification not assigned to Unit 9, the employee's rating period for the annual evaluation shall be from the effective date of when they started in the classification not assigned to Unit §1
B. Annual consideration of merit pay adjustments (or merit increases), subject to Section

14.G below, with an affirmative decision by the applicable Department Head shall be required each year following the annual evaluation.

C. Merit pay adjustments, or merit increases, shall range from Oto 5%. However, in 2016 and 2017 only, employee is guaranteed at least 2% and, with Department Head approval, up to 5%, subject to Section 14.G below.
1) Effective January 1, 2024, merit increases shall be effective on the first pay period after July 1st of each calendar year following the rating period described above (i.e ., if the employee's rating period is January 1, 2023 to December 31, 2023, any merit pay increase would be effective the first pay period after July 1, 2024). 2) Merit increases will be prorated based on the number of full complete months the employee was employed in a classification assigned to during the rating period (i.e., if an employee was hired into a classification assigned to Unit 9 on March 15th, the proration of the employee's merit increase will be calculated from April 1st to December 31 st).

D. In 2016, employees are eligible for a merit pay adjustment based on an evaluation prepared by February 2, 2016, which date will be their merit pay anniversary each year going forward.
1) Notwithstanding D. above, for employees that have been employed a full year as of February 2, 2016, they will be eligible on their actual anniversary date, which shall also be their merit pay anniversary date thereafter. 2) Notwithstanding D. above, for employees that receive a merit increase between January 1, 2015 and February 2, 2016, the date of their last merit increase shall be their new merit pay anniversary date.
3) If a Department Head has not completed an evaluation in time for a merit adjustment by an employee's anniversary date (February 2, 2016 for most employees), the applicable merit pay adjustment once determined shall be made retroactive to the first full pay period following the anniversary date (and to February 2, 2016 in 2016 for those persons whose anniversary date is February 2, 2016).

E. subject Subject to Section 14.G below- , the City shall not suspend or freeze consideration of merit pay adjustments for Unit 9 employees unless step increases are Unit 9 Side Letter Agreement - Amendment to December 15, 2019 - December 31, 2024 MOU September 8, 2022

suspended or frozen for all bargaining units that utilize a step system.

F. The City and Unit 9 may, by mutual+y agreement, meet to discuss potential changes to the merit pay system and/or movement toward a step pay system more like other bargaining units.

G. Effective January 1, 2021, employees holding positions in classifications assigned to Unit 9 shall be ineligible for a merit increase for the next two (2) consecutive rating periods. This means that an employee in Unit 9 shall not be eligible for a merit increase until the third rating period after January 1, 2021, and after the employee has skipped two (2) consecutive rating periods where they did not receive a merit increase.

Employees with a rating period that ends before January 1, 2021, will be eligible for a merit increase for that rating period pursuant to the Personnel and Salary Resolution, even if such merit increase (if any) is not approved until after January 1, 2021. 1) Employees hired or rehired or promoted or reclassified on or after January 1, 2021, and until on or before December 31, 2022, into positions in classifications assigned to Unit 9 shall be ineligible for a merit increase for the first two (2) consecutive rating periods. This means that an employee hired or rehired or promoted between January 1, 2021, and December 31, 2022, will not be eligible for a merit increase until the employee's third rating period with the City after the employee was hired or rehired or promoted or reclassified into positions in classifications assigned to Unit 9.
(a) A current active City employee promoted or reclassified from another bargaining unit into a position in a classification assigned to Unit 9 between January 1, 2021, and December 31, 2022, shall be ineligible for a merit increase until the employee's third rating period from the effective date of the promotion or reclassification.
(b) A current active City employee holding a position in a classification assigned to Unit 9 as of the effective date of this agreement who is promoted or reclassified into or accepts another position in Unit 9 between January 1, 2021, and December 31, 2022, shall be ineligible for a merit increase unless the employee has skipped two (2) consecutive rating periods where they did not receive a merit increase since January 1, 2021.
(c) Nothing in this Section is intended to prohibit a pay increase that may result from a current active City employee being promoted or reclassified into a position in a classification assigned to Unit 9.
(C) This Side Letter Agreement shall not establish precedent for future agreements and shall not be construed or implied to obligate the City or Unit 9 to enter into any similar agreements in the future.
(D) This Side Letter Agreement that amends the current MOU shall become effective after it is adopted by the City and signed by all parties below.

Unit 9 Side Letter Agreement-Amendment to December 15, 2019 - December 31, 2024 MOU September 8, 2022

FOR THE CITY: FOR UNIT 9:
(7?/2? I~~ ,tf. /•'7-Z,2--~Q V,__/ __ 09/15/2022
R~ ra Date Chris Jackson Date
City Manager President, Unit 9
~ 9/l~/22
AracelyAzvedo Date Carolyn McDowell Date
9/15/22
Director of Human Resources Unit 9
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1003 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on the Waiver of the First Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance Approving the Schematic Design for the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility, and Parking Improvements Project, in Accordance with City Charter Section 714.1

COUNCIL PILLAR
Deliver and Enhance High Quality Efficient Services and Infrastructure Enhance Community Sports, Recreational, and Arts Assets

BACKGROUND
The City of Santa Clara’s Central Park (Park) was constructed in the 1960’s. In October 2019, the Parks & Recreation Commission (Commission) recommended approval of the Central Park Master Plan (Master Plan) which includes a series of major park improvements to address aging infrastructures and other community park needs identified through community input and facility condition assessments. One of the capital improvement projects identified in the Master Plan is the Central Park Entrance, Access, and Parking Improvements Project (Project). The Project consists of the installation of a new accessible entrance to Central Park at the intersection of Kaiser Drive and Kiely Boulevard, adjacent to the proposed Magical Bridge All-Inclusive Playground (Playground), currently in the design phase. The purpose of the proposed signalized entrance/exit is to (a) provide a new accessible drop-off & pick up area adjacent to the Playground, (b) provide recycled water connections and drought tolerant landscaping, (c) expand and add sustainable parking area, and (d) improve bike and pedestrian connectivity to park features such as the Playground, Community Recreation Center and Basketball Courts while preserving the Veterans’ Memorial and the adjacent grass meadow/event space. The Project will support and enhance several heavily used park amenities and future improvements as envisioned in the Central Park Master Plan.

On August 24, 2021, City Council approved an agreement with NUVIS Landscape Architecture, Inc. (NUVIS) to complete the first of two phases of Project design including site assessment, arborist report, ADA evaluation, community outreach, preparation of a schematic design for the proposed improvements, and presentation of the proposed plans to the community, Parks & Recreation Commission and City Council (Report #21-627). If the schematic design is approved, then the second design phase of the Project will commence and include preparation of bid documents (plans, specifications, and engineer’s estimate - PS&E) for Public Works bidding based on the approved schematic design, assistance with building and Fire Permits approval, and engineering support services during bid and award, construction, and post-construction phases (Report #22-1005).

NUVIS developed a draft schematic design for review and consideration by the Parks & Recreation Department, the Parks & Recreation Commission, stakeholders, and the community. Staff determined that the design meets the Council-adopted guiding principles of the Central Park Master City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1003 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
Plan as well as the parking, accessibility, and connection objectives for the adjacent Playground. In addition, the design provides six Electric Vehicle (EV) charging stations to meet SB 100 targets for renewable and zero-carbon resources. The design also provides for the installation of needed recycled water infrastructure that will help the City reduce reliance on potable water on the southwest parcel of Central Park resulting in ongoing cost savings.

Community Outreach & Input
On April 19, 2022, the Parks & Recreation Commission received a presentation about the Project and initiated the public input process. On May 5, 2022 an online survey was announced and opened to the public. On May 17, 2022, three separate outreach activities took place. The first was a stakeholder meeting with members of the Veteran’s Committee at the Central Park Veteran’s Memorial to review the initial schematic design and answer questions about preservation of the Memorial, movement of one monument closer to the Memorial, and the added parking spaces to serve the Playground and Memorial.

The second community outreach effort was a community meeting held on site from 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. Six members of the public reviewed the plans and staff responded to questions related to the pick-up/drop-off zone, safety and accessibility features, the traffic signal, trees/ landscaping to be preserved and/or added, the addition of 26 parking spaces with six (6) Electric Vehicle (EV) charging stations, and the installation of new recycled water service for the meadow and the new Playground.

One member of the public submitted written comments regarding funding to fix the Pavilion parking lot and other deficiencies in the existing park infrastructure. Staff informed the member of the public that this project does not address the Pavilion Parking Lot deficiencies, which would be addressed in future Central Park Master Plan projects.

The final outreach opportunity was a presentation to the Parks & Recreation Commission on the initial schematic design. This presentation was also an opportunity to remind the community about the importance of their participation in the online survey.

The community survey was hosted on the City website from May 5 through May 18, 2022. There were 409 attendees with 287 completed responses representing over 14.4 hours of public comment.

The survey results were as follows:
· 74.4% indicated that the new traffic signal alignment and pedestrian pathways improve safe access into Central Park for vehicles and pedestrians
· 79% indicated that the plan provides inclusive and safe access to the Magical Bridge Playground
· 81% indicated that the plan provides inclusive and safe access to the Veterans Memorial · 66% agreed that the plan provides adequate trees and shading and · 39% favor EV charging stations
Respondents stated that they access Central Park primarily by driving (60%), while fewer walk (26%), bike (11%), take public transit (2%), or rideshare (1%). The survey was completed primarily by persons over age 35 (28.4% ages 35-49; 24.1% ages 50-60; and 42.2% age 61 and over). Most respondents live in the 95051 (59.9%), while 28.9% live in 95050, 5.6% live in 95054, and 5.6% nonresident.

City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1003 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

DISCUSSION
At the June 21, 2022 Commission Meeting, the Consultant provided the Commission with a detailed presentation of the Project and community input (Report #22-793). The Commission recommended that Council approve the proposed Schematic Design for the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility, and Parking Improvements Project (Attachment 1), and the Measure R Draft Ordinance (Attachment 2).

Measure R Compliance
The approval of the proposed Schematic Design for the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility, and Parking Improvements Project may be subject to Measure R. In November 2016, voters passed Measure R, which added Section 714.1 Protection of Parkland and Public Open Space to the City Charter. Measure R prohibits selling, leasing, or otherwise disposing of parkland for a period of one hundred eighty (180) days or more, and prohibits its use from changing, being abandoned, or discontinued without such sale, lease, disposal, or changed use having first been authorized or ratified by a two-thirds majority vote of the electorate during a general municipal election for that purpose. Measure R also prohibits changes in park use for over 180 days without a majority vote of the electorate and substantial building, construction, reconstruction, or development upon dedicated parkland except pursuant to ordinance subject to referendum. The referendum process is set forth in the Elections Code.

The proposed Schematic Design for the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility, and Parking Improvements Project, if approved, will include changes to the existing park that may be considered “substantial building, construction, reconstruction, or development.” Therefore, the approval of the proposed Schematic Design for the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility, and Parking Improvements Project, will require an ordinance to comply with Measure R. It does not include a sale, lease, disposal, or change in use requiring a majority vote of the electorate. Therefore, staff recommends that the Council approve the proposed Schematic Design for the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility, and Parking Improvements Project and introduce an ordinance to ensure compliance with Measure R. Staff return to Council at a second meeting for adoption of the ordinance in accordance with City Charter Sections 808 and 812.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to the following sections of the CEQA Guidelines:
· Section 15303 (Class 3 - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), in that the project will construct limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures and equipment. The proposal would expand the existing parking lot area by adding 26 new parking spaces to 140 existing spaces already on site. A later phase of Central Park’s Master Plan would remove a similar number of parking spaces. The Project includes installation of electrical conduit and cabling for Electric Vehicle Charging stations and entrance and exit drive aisles and reclaimed water for new and existing irrigation systems.
· Section 15304 (Class 4 - Minor Alterations to Land), and 15304(b) (Class 4(b) - replacement of existing landscaping with water efficient landscaping), in that the project would make minor alterations in the condition of land, water and/or vegetation which do not involve the removal of healthy, mature scenic trees, and would include the replacement of existing conventional landscaping with water efficient landscaping. The proposal would remove entry trees that have structural issues and present safety concerns, and replace them with drought-tolerant species, City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1003 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
as well as minor trenching and backfilling for utilities that serve this area of the park. · Section 15311 (Class 11 - Accessory Structures), in that the project would construct or replace minor structures accessory to existing commercial, industrial, or institutional facilities (including publicly owned parks). The project would install (a) on-premises signs and (b) a small parking lot to connect with the adjacent All-Inclusive Playground and park pathways to meet ADA, code and program requirements.
· Section 15269(c), actions taken to prevent or mitigate an emergency. Several of the trees onsite are in a compromised structural condition, and numerous limbs have already fallen from those trees. The immediate removal of the trees is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare.

FISCAL IMPACT
The schematic design under consideration is funded by the Central Park Master Plan - New Entrance, Access, and Parking Improvements Project in the Parks Capital Fund. This project has a total budget of $2,518,448, of which the Schematic Design and PS&E agreement(s) are not to exceed $404,000. Construction of the Schematic Design (Attachment 1) project elements are currently estimated at $2,310,000. Additional budget actions may be necessary based on the final construction award.

Central Park maintenance and operations activities are included in the Parks & Recreation Department’s Operating Budget.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the Parks & Recreation Department, the Public Works Department, the Finance Department, and the City Attorney’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 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.

RECOMMENDATION
Waive first reading and introduce an ordinance approving the Schematic Design for the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility, and Parking Improvements Project in accordance with City Charter Section 714.

Reviewed by: James Teixeira, Director of Parks & Recreation Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Schematic Design for the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility, and Parking Improvements Project

2. Measure R Draft Ordinance

3. Schematic Design Presentation
City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 4 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
100 101
102
100
99 101
102
103
,1,7,$/SCHEMATIC PLAN - ENTRANCE3$5.,1*$&&(66,03529(0(17 Santa Clara Central Park
Santa Clara, CA
City of Santa Clara

COMMUNITY CENTER

MAGICAL BRIDGE

PLAYGROUND
8 12
9 10
11 13
KIELY BLVD.

KAISER
DRIVE

BASKETBALL
COURTS

PROPOSED ROUNDABOUT

WITH PLANTER

DROP OFF AREA

STAMPED ASPHALT

BOLLARDS, TYPICAL
KIELY BLVD.

EXISTING BUS

STOP SHELTER

ENHANCED PAVING, TYPICAL

PROPOSED WALKWAY, TYPICAL

NEW PLANTING, TYPICAL

EXISTING
PAVERS

EXISTING
"VETERANS MEMORIAL"
SIGN

PROPOSED DRIVE AISLE

ALIGNMENT & PARKING

SARATOGA CREEK

RELOCATED

MONUMENT

RAISED ADA

CROSSWALK WITH

ENHANCED PAVING
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26

SHEET OF
21-037.01 3-30-2022
1 1
S C A L E : 1"=20'-0"
0' 10' 20' 40'

EXISTING
"CENTRAL PARK"

SIGN TO BE

RELOCATED

EXISTING
"CHRISTMAS TREE"

TO REMAIN

MAGICAL BRIDGE

PLAYGROUND ENTRY

PROPOSED

WALKWAY

PROPOSED

WALKWAY

SEAT WALL / LOW

RETAINING WALL

EXISTING KNOLL

TO REMAIN
"CENTRAL PARK"

SIGN - NEW

LOCATION
$WWDFKPHQW
nUV1s
L A NDS~ r''u pR~
ARCH I:: 7 3 1 1
7] <I - l If! DH
C1' lttl MV3" I
Ordinance/Central Park Entrance, Accessibility & Parking Improvements Project Page 1 of 3 Rev: 09/2019
ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,

CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SCHEMATIC

DESIGN FOR CENTRAL PARK ENTRANCE,

ACCESSIBILITY & PARKING IMPROVEMENTS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH CITY CHARTER SECTION 714.1
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, Central Park (“Park”), located at 909 Keily Blvd. was dedicated as

11.85 acres of parkland (APN 290-26-029) on November 19, 1961(VERIFY DATE); WHEREAS, the Park was prioritized for rehabilitation and funding for the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility and Parking Improvements Project #3133 (“Project”) was approved by Council in the City’s Biennial Capital Improvement Program (CIP); WHEREAS, implementation of the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility and Parking Improvements Project will include renovation, expansion, relocation, new construction, and preservation of existing park amenities;
WHEREAS, the voters of the City of Santa Clara passed Measure R in 2016, which added section 714.1 to the City Charter, which prohibits substantial building, construction, reconstruction, or development of parks and recreation facilities except pursuant to ordinance subject to referendum;
WHEREAS, the Project improvements constitutes as substantial building, construction, reconstruction and/or development, and is subject to Measure R; and, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to approve the Park Project improvements by ordinance in accordance with City Charter section 714.1.

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

Ordinance/Central Park Entrance, Accessibility & Parking Improvements Project Page 2 of 3 Rev: 09/2019
SECTION 1: That the City Council hereby approves the building, construction, reconstruction and/or development in accordance with the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility, and Parking Improvements Schematic Design, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, and in accordance with City Charter section 714.1.

SECTION 2: 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 3: This Ordinance shall not be codified in the Santa Clara City Code.

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 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
Ordinance/Central Park Entrance, Accessibility & Parking Improvements Project Page 3 of 3 Rev: 09/2019
Attachments incorporated by reference:

1. Central Park Entrance, Accessibility and Parking Improvements Project Schematic Design
Consideration of the
Proposed Schematic
Design of Central Park
Entrance, Accessibility &
Parking Improvements
Project
September 27, 2022
Central Park Master Plan
– Provides a “phased approach” to address end
of life and deteriorated infrastructure
replacement
– 14 identified/prioritized facility renovation/
expansion projects over a 20-year time frame
– Implement based on funding availability
• Developed 2017-2019
– Included community workshops & input
– August 2018 Council approved Design Principles
– October 19, 2019 Parks & Recreation Commission Review – November 19, 2019 PRC recommended approval
2 Central Park Master Plan
Projects - Years 1-5
3  Arbor Center and Magical Bridge All-Inclusive
Playground
- CIP 3183 (FY2016/17)
- $5.5M funded, various sources
 Entrance at Kaiser/Kiely Blvd. with accessibility
& sustainability improvements
- CIP 3133 (FY2018/19)
- $2,518,448 funded, MFA in-lieu fees
• Creek Trail Improvements
- CIP 3191 (unfunded)
• Pavilion Parking Lot Renovation
- TBD (unfunded)
~
Saratoga Creek
Pavilion Parking , . Lot & PedestriM
· Connection
s:i
CIP 3133 - Central Park Entrance,
Accessibility & Parking Improvements Project
Design Contract
• August 24, 2021 – NUVIS Landscape Architecture
Public Input
• April 19, 2022 Input from Parks and Recreation Commission • May 5 thru May 18, 2022 Online Survey, hosted on City website • May 17, 2022 On-site Meeting with Veterans Committee
• May 17, 2022 On-site Meeting with Members of the Public • June 21, 2022 Refined and updated Schematic Plan based on community input presented to Parks & Recreation Commission
• September 27, 2022 Council Consideration
4 5
Central Park Entrance,
Accessibility & Parking Improvements Project
• Adheres to Central Park Master Plan Principles
• Provides signalized entry on Kiely Blvd. aligned
with Kaiser Dr.
• Provides Accessible drop-off area for Magical
Bridge Playground and Veterans Memorial
• 26 additional parking stalls, including 2 ADA
• 6 electric vehicle (EV) charging stations
• Connection to existing CRC parking
• New ADA walkways for enhanced circulation
• Significantly improve vehicular drop off, and safe
pedestrian, ADA, bicycle and bus stop access
• Recycled water for irrigation 1 acre meadow
i[ ~ I r

COMMUNITY
CENTER
I '•i ,.~: 6 PROPOSED ELECTRIC

VEHICLE CHARGING STALLS

I EXISTING KNOLL

TO REMAIN
:1
RELOCATED --+-"---,

MONUMENT
KAISER
DRIVE
•CENTRAL PARK•

SIGN - NEW

LOCATION

PRO POSED

WALKWAYS
ci
~ (D
>-
...J
w
:.:

EXISTING BUS

STOP SHELTER
\
BOLLARDS, TYPICAL -:---
PROPOSED ROUNDABOUT0

RETAINING
::; :1:L:~El:W WALL ~•
~ - ~ <'JJ

STAMPED

DROP OFF

ASPHALT
AREA ~~ ~
X ✓ MAGICAL BRIDGE

PLAYGROUND
-~
I
I
I

AREA FOR

RECYCLED

WATER USE
)
I
I
"' UJ
UJ
0:
(.)
8 ~ ;:;
I
Community Survey Results
May 5 thru May 18, 2022
409 Attendees, 287 completed responses
Survey results indicate:
• 81% - Plan provides inclusive & safe access to the Veterans Memorial • 79% - Plan provides inclusive & safe access to the Magical Bridge Playground • 74% - New traffic signal and alignments improve safe access • 66% - Plan provides adequate trees and shading
• 39% - Favor Electric Vehicle charging stations
6 How Respondents access Central Park
• 59% - Drive
• 26% - Walk
• 11.2% - Bike/Roll; 2.1% - Public Transit; 1.1% - Rideshare Project Schedule (estimated)
April 2022 - Parks & Recreation Presentation
April-May 2022- Public Outreach and Community Input
May 2022 –Update Schematic Plan
• Parks & Recreation Review and Recommendation - May 2022 • Council Review & Approval of Schematic Design – June 2022 • Construction Plans, Specifications, & Cost Opinion – Summer 2023 • Bid & Award – Summer 2023
• Project Construction Begins – Winter 2023
• Project Completion – Summer 2023
7 Project Funding
• Total CIP Project Budget: $2.5 Million
• Budget Includes Design, Engineering, Construction & Contingency 8 Commission Consideration
• Commission Questions & Comments
• Commission Review
- Refer to Schematic Design
• Public Comment
• Recommendation: Recommend that Council approve the proposed Schematic Design for the Central Park Entrance, Accessibility, and Parking Improvements Project and Ordinance subject to the provisions of Measure R. 9 10
Draft Schematic Design
for Consideration
It ci
> ' I-
_j
ro
1 11
>- g I _j
'i- w
SZ 1
J, I
I I EXISTING KNOLL TO REMAIN _ :1 RELOCATED

MONUMENT
' I

EXISTI NG
"VETERANS~
MEMORIAL"
S
IGN I '-...

I I
EX
I
STI NG "CHRISTMAS
TREE" TO REMAIN 1
I I I l
'· EXISTING "CENTRAL
PARK"
S

IGN TO BE
RELOCATED -I;;/ I
·-r--•--•---,
KAISER
DRl
1 VE
-~
"CENTRAL PARK"
SIG
N
-
N
EW

LOCATION
ci
~ ro
6 PROPOSED ELECTRIC
VEHI

CLE CHARGI
NG S
T
ALLS
j

PROPOSED DRIVE

PARKING
AISLE

ALIGNMENT & I

BASKETBALL I

COURTS AREA FOR

RECYCLED

WATER USE
I
I \ I
~
UJ
UJ
0::
0 4'.

CJ
0 ~ 0::
4'.
(f)
Parks &
Recreation
Commission
Consideration of the
Proposed Schematic
Design of Central Park
Entrance
June 21, 2022
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1060 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD

SUBJECT
Action on Stadium Authority Bills and Claims for the Month of June 2022

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.

In addition, at the March 23, 2021 Stadium Authority Board meeting, the Board approved staff recommendations to direct the Forty Niners Stadium Management Company, LLC (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.

At the March 15, 2022 Stadium Authority Board meeting, the Executive Director was delegated authority to approve budget amendments that move funds from the Legal Contingency to Shared Expenses after the review of adequate documentations for costs based on Board direction.

Subsequent to that direction, Stadium Authority staff met with Stadium Manager on April 12, 2022 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 $5.1 million for the fiscal year.

Expenses paid in June 2022 include:

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1060 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
· Payments totaling $124,796.90 to the City of Santa Clara for the following:
o $113,278.09 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 $3,937.08 for reimbursement of SCSA G&A Costs (Supplies/Equipment) o $7,581.73 for reimbursement of SCSA CapEx Costs - Dispatch Monitors · Payment totaling $3,027,810.81 to Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC for the following:
o $7,662.00 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - Compensation for Grounds o $31,302.00 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - Compensation for Guest Services
o $32,497.00 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - Compensation for Security o $143,482.00 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - Compensation for Engineering o $208,053.00 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - Compensation for Stadium Ops
o $240,624.00 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - Utilities o $2,128,152.00 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - Insurance o $174,077.00 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - SBL Sales & Services o $1,741.81 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - StadCo Tenant Improvements o $8,333.00 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - Lender Fees o $51,887.00 for July 2022 Stadium Manager Expenses - Other G&A · Payment totaling $326,462.23 to Forty Niners SC Stadium Co, LLC for CFD Advance Payment - Interest
· Payment totaling $13,819.31 to Armanino LLP for CapEx Project - FMS Project

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 $3,494,700.27 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 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.

City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1060 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the list of Stadium Authority Bills and Claims for June 2022.

Reviewed by: Kenn Lee, Treasurer
Approved by: Rajeev Batra, Executive Director

ATTACHMENTS

1. June 2022 SCSA Bills and Claims
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
Payment Date Vendor Invoice No. Description Fund Amount 6/15/2022 Bank of America N/A May 2022 bank fees acct 0444 CapEx 1,528.976/15/2022 Bank of America N/A May 2022 bank fees acct 0425 Operating 230.426/15/2022 Bank of America N/A May 2022 bank fees acct 6280 Operating 51.63 1,811.02
6/21/2022 City of Santa Clara N/A B2210 SCSA Admin Payroll Costs Operating 60,163.896/27/2022 City of Santa Clara N/A B2211 SCSA Admin Payroll Costs Operating 53,114.206/15/2022 City of Santa Clara N/A Reimburse CSC for SCSA G&A Expenses (Supplies/Equipment) Operating 3,937.086/30/2022 City of Santa Clara N/A Reimburse CSC for SCSA CapEx Costs - Dispatch Monitors CapEx 7,581.73 124,796.90
6/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - Compensation for Grounds Operating 7,662.006/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - Compensation for Guest Svcs Operating 31,302.006/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - Compensation for Security Operating 32,497.006/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - Compensation for Engineering Operating 143,482.006/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - Compensation for Stad Ops Operating 208,053.006/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - Utilities Operating 240,624.006/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - Insurance Operating 2,128,152.006/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - SBL Sales & Svcs Operating 174,077.006/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - StadCo Tenant Improvements Operating 1,741.816/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - Lender Fees Operating 8,333.006/30/2022 Forty Niners Stadium Management Co, LLC SLS-23499 July 2022 Std Mgr - Other G&A Operating 51,887.00 3,027,810.81
6/17/2022 Forty Niners SC Stadium Co, LLC N/A CFD Advance Payment - Interest Debt Service 326,462.236/24/2022 Armanino LLP 891794 CapEx Proj - FMS Project CapEx 13,819.31 June 2022 Total $ 3,494,700.27
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Bills and Claims
Expenses Paid by Wire Transfer
For the Month of June 2022

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1092 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD

SUBJECT
Delegation of Authority to Executive Director and Stadium Authority Counsel to Negotiate and Execute Allocation Agreement with Various 49ers Entities and Insurance Carriers Relating to Proceeds from Their Settlement with Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff

COUNCIL PILLAR
Ensure Compliance with Measure J and Manage Levi’s Stadium; Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

BACKGROUND
In 2016, a class action lawsuit was filed by Plaintiffs Priscilla and Abdul Nevarez against the City, Stadium Authority and various 49ers entities (including the Management Company and the Stadium Company) alleging that the Stadium, its parking lots, and the surrounding public rights of way contained ADA accessibility defects. The case was settled in 2019 for approximately $38.5 million, which was comprised of approximately $25 million damages to the members of the class, plus approximately $13.5 million in attorney’s fees paid to the plaintiffs’ law firms. This settlement was funded in full by the 49ers and three insurance carriers (Indian Harbor Insurance Company, North American Capacity Insurance Company, and Starr Indemnity and Liability Company). In addition, they paid for the costs and attorney’s fees associated with defending the City, Stadium Authority and 49ers defendants in the litigation. The City and Stadium Authority were not required to contribute financially to this settlement. This settlement figure does not include the costs of doing the remedial construction work at the stadium site and in the surrounding areas.

DISCUSSION
The 49ers and the three insurance companies thereafter pursued financial contribution from the architecture firm that designed the Stadium, Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff (“HNTB”) on the grounds that defects in the design work led to the ADA violations and subsequent liability to the plaintiffs. One aspect of the handling of the case against HNTB is a determination of how any proceeds from the eventual resolution of the HNTB litigation will be split amongst the parties who contributed to the Nevarez settlement (the 49ers and the insurance carriers). The split of such settlement proceeds shall be memorialized in an Allocation Agreement signed by the insured parties and the insurance carriers. The Stadium Authority has not been involved in this litigation, staff therefore has no details regarding the terms of the proposed settlement between the 49ers, the insurance carriers, and HNTB.

While the Stadium Authority did not financially contribute to the Nevarez settlement, and therefore did not participate in pursuing reimbursement from HNTB, the Stadium Authority is an insured party under the policies at issue (i.e., the policies under which the settlement payments and defense costs were paid). Accordingly, the insurance carriers have asked that the Stadium Authority ratify an City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1092 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
allocation of percentage of recovery as between the 49ers and the three insurance carriers. The Stadium Authority has no financial stake in this allocation agreement, but should as an insured party, cooperate with its carrier(s) in resolving the dispute.

An additional benefit to the Stadium Authority of the resolution of this HNTB matter is that it forecloses potential future litigation over the payment of plaintiffs’ attorneys fees as well as defense costs and fees incurred in defending against the allegations relating to the defects in the public rights of way (“prow”). This prow issue was litigated along with the rest of the ADA violations by the Nevarez plaintiffs, but these defects in the prow were not caused by faulty architecture or construction of the stadium structure. Upon conclusion of the Nevarez litigation, the question of whether or not the City and Stadium Authority would have to contribute financially towards the plaintiffs’ fees and costs that dealt solely with the prow defects, and/or the costs of defense relating to same, was reserved until such time as the HNTB litigation was favorably concluded. It appears that a favorable conclusion is imminent; the insurance carriers would release the Stadium Authority from any claims related to the Nevarez case and the 49ers entities likewise would agree to waive any such claims for reimbursement.

Allocation of the costs of remediation within the Stadium structure and the Main Lot as between the 49ers entities and Stadium Authority (and likely some contribution from the design-builder Turner Devcon Joint Venture, and their subcontractors) is not affected by the allocation of the HNTB settlement proceeds. That issue remains outstanding.

Because the City and Stadium Authority are not part of the existing litigation and do not anticipate any litigation, there are no closed session exceptions for consideration of this item. The Executive Director and Stadium Authority Counsel seek authority to negotiate and execute an Allocation Agreement that would include the following parties: Forty Niners Football Company LLC, Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC, Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC, Forty Niners Stadium LLC, Indian Harbor Insurance Company, North American Capacity Insurance Company, and Starr Indemnity & Liability Company. Such terms will consist of ratifying an allocation of percentage of recovery from HNTB as between the 49ers and the three insurance carriers and insurance carriers’ release of the Stadium Authority from any claims related to the Nevarez case and waiver of any such claims for reimbursement against the Stadium Authority from the 49ers entities.

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 fiscal impact other than staff time.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated between the Stadium Authority Counsel’s Office and the Executive Director’s Office.

PUBLIC CONTACT
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1092 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
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]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve delegation of authority to the Executive Director and Stadium Authority Counsel to negotiate and execute an Allocation Agreement regarding proceeds from a settlement with HNTB that would include the following parties: Forty Niners Football Company LLC, Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC, Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC, Forty Niners Stadium LLC, Indian Harbor Insurance Company, North American Capacity Insurance Company, and Starr Indemnity & Liability Company.

Reviewed by: Steve Ngo, Interim Stadium Authority Counsel Approved by: Rajeev Batra, Executive Director
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1177 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD

SUBJECT
Request from the Stadium Manager to Award Purchase Order to imageOne Uniforms for Guest Services Uniforms

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

DISCUSSION
On September 12, 2022, the Stadium Manager submitted a Recommendation for Award memo, along with supporting documentation, to request approval to award a purchase order to imageOne Uniforms to procure Guest Services uniforms in the amount of $10,807. These costs are classified in the Stadium Authority Fiscal Year 2022/23 Shared Stadium Manager Expenses as NonCompensation Expenses for the Guest Services Department. Shared Expenses are split between the Stadium Authority and Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC per the Management Agreement.

The Stadium Manager’s Recommendation for Award memo describes the request and the procurement process in more detail.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Stadium Manager’s Recommendation for Award
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 1 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
1 Date: September 12, 2022
To: Rajeev Batra
Executive Director
Santa Clara Stadium Authority (SCSA)

From: Jenti Vandertuig
Procurement Director
Subject: Recommendation for Award for Uniforms for Guest Services at Levi’s Stadium Recommend approval and award of a one-time Purchase Order to imageOne Uniforms to procure uniforms for Guest Services in the amount of $10,807.36.

The Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC (Stadium Manager) has a need to replenish uniforms for Guest Services Representatives at Levi’s Stadium. On May 10, 2022 the SCSA Board approved Stadium Manager’s recommendation to award a blanket Purchase Order to Cintas Corporation for the purchase of uniforms, brand name apparel including customization such as logos, embroidery, emblems, or silk screening through March 31, 2023.

Subsequently, a blanket Purchase Order was established for use by Stadium Manager.

Stadium Manager requested and obtained pricing and availability from Cintas Corporation for the Port Authority Vortex waterproof 3-in-1 jackets in various sizes. While conducting a price comparison, imageOne Uniforms offered approximately 16% lower pricing for the same brand and customized logos.

Therefore, approval is sought to issue a Purchase Order to imageOne Uniforms to procure 100 Port Authority Vortex waterproof 3-in-1 jackets in the amount of $10,807.36 inclusive of shipping and applicable sales tax. Supporting documentation for the request has been provided with the recommendation.

The cost for this purchase is covered in the FY22/23 SCSA Budget, Guest Services, as a shared expense.

Submitted By: __________________________________ Date: ___________________ Jenti Vandertuig, Procurement Director






 










STADIUM

FORTY NINERS STADIUM MANAGEMENT COMPANY
~
DocuSigned by:
~v~
A4B5666F5BF147D ...

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1178 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD

SUBJECT
Report from Stadium Authority Regarding Stadium Manager’s Request to Award Purchase Orders to imageOne Uniforms for Guest Services Uniforms

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.

The Stadium Manager is requesting approval to award a purchase order to imageOne Uniforms to procure Guest Services uniforms in the amount of $10,807.

DISCUSSION
Stadium Authority staff reviewed the Stadium Manager’s Recommendation for Award memo (attached to corresponding report #21-1177) and supporting procurement documentation submitted for the request for consistency against the Stadium Authority Procurement Policy and Santa Clara City Code Chapter 2.105.280 (Informal bidding).

At the May 10, 2022 meeting, the Stadium Authority Board approved the Stadium Manager’s request to award a blanket purchase order to Cintas Corporation for a variety of goods and services including Guest Services uniforms. However, through the Stadium Manager’s procurement process, imageOne Uniforms offered lower pricing by approximately 16% for the same product and customized logos.

Staff recommends approval of the Stadium Manager’s request to award a one-time purchase order to imageOne Uniforms for the Guest Services uniforms. Per Paragraph 4(b) of the Settlement Agreement, the Stadium Authority reserves all rights to confirm and dispute charges by and payments to the Stadium Manager during a fiscal year-end reconciliation/true-up, including but not limited to changes based on improper allocation, calculation, lack of support, or failure to comply with the Parties’ contracts or California law. The Stadium Authority may raise related questions before the fiscal year-end reconciliation/true-up, which the Stadium Manager agrees to assess and respond to in good faith.

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1178 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The actions being considered do not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(a) as it has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment or 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
The Stadium Authority Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Budget contains Shared Stadium Manager Expenses (Shared Expenses) such as Security, Stadium Operations, Engineering, Guest Services, and Groundskeeping. Shared Expenses are split between the Stadium Authority and Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC per the Management Agreement.

There are sufficient funds in the FY 2022/23 Guest Services line item to cover the uniforms ($10,807, of which the Stadium Authority is responsible for $5,404).

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

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]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Stadium Manager’s request to award a purchase order to imageOne Uniforms to procure Guest Services uniforms, in an amount not to exceed $10,807.

Reviewed by: Christine Jung, Assistant to the Executive Director Approved by: Rajeev Batra, Executive Director
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1186 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD

SUBJECT
Request from the Stadium Manager to Utilize Cooperative Agreements to Leverage Discounted Pricing and Award Purchase Orders to EyeP Solutions, Inc. for Security Software Subscription Renewals and Security Cardkeys and Tags

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

DISCUSSION
On September 12, 2022, the Stadium Manager submitted the attached Recommendation for Award memorandum to request approval to utilize cooperative agreements available through the Federal General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules for the following:

1. Genetec Advantage Software Subscription Renewal: Award a purchase order to EyeP Solutions, Inc. in the amount of $40,126 to provide Genetec Advantage software license renewals for a one year period. These costs are classified in the Stadium Authority Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Shared Stadium Manager Expenses as Non-Compensation Expenses for the Security Department.

2. Genetec Proximity Cardkeys and MicroproxTags: Award a purchase order to EyeP Solutions, Inc. in the amount of $6,931 to procure Genetec proximity cardkeys and Microprox tags. These costs are classified in the Stadium Authority FY 2022/23 Shared Stadium Manager Expenses as Non-Compensation Expenses for the Security Department.

The Stadium Manager’s memorandum describes the cooperative agreements that are being utilized and the requested goods and services in greater detail. The memorandum contains sensitive public safety information which has been redacted. The requests are Shared Stadium Manager Expenses totaling $47,057 for Fiscal Year 2022/23. Shared Expenses are split between the Stadium Authority and Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC per the Management Agreement.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Stadium Manager’s Recommendation for Award Memo
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 1 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
Date:

To:

From:

Subject:

STADIUM

FORTY NINERS STADIUM MANAGEMENT COMPANY
September 12, 2022
Rajeev Batra
Executive Director
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Jenti Vandertuig
Procurement Director
Recommendation for Award for Genetec Security Advantage Software License Renewal and Related Supplies for Levi's Stadium
Recommendation

1. Recommend approval and award of a Purchase Order to EyeP Solutions, Inc., to provide Genetec Advantage software subscription renewal for a one year period, beginning September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2023, in the amount of $40,126.22.

2. Recommend approval and award of a Purchase Order to EyeP Solutions, Inc., to procure Genetec proximity cardkeys and Microprox tags, in the amount of $6,930.87.

Because this document contains information regarding security systems at Levi's Stadium (Stadium), w e recommend that the Santa Clara Stadium Authority (SCSA) limit the public disclosure/discussion of this particular item, to the extent possible.

Proprietary Software System as a Sin~le Source
Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC (Stadium Manager) utilizes the Genetec Security Center system as a unified security monitoring system at the Stadium for access control and for closed-circuit television also known as CCTV. Genetec Omnicast is used for CCTV security and Genetec Synergis is used for access control. These systems were installed during the construction of the Stadium in 2014.

In order to maintain the Genetec Omnicast and Genetec Synergis system current, updated, and supported, Genetec, Inc., requires Stadium Manager to subscribe to their ongoing software maintenance support referenced as Genetec Advantage.
1 2
Utilize the Federal General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules as Cooperative Agreements to Procure from EyeP Solutions, Inc.

Genetec software license subscriptions, products and related maintenance and subscription renewals can be procured only through Genetec’s third party resellers. Stadium Manager requested assistance from Genetec, Inc., and was referred to the Federal GSA Schedule 47QSWA18D0050 for software subscriptions, products and maintenance services.

Stadium Manager evaluated the current needs and determined that it was in our best interest to utilize a cooperative agreement. EyeP Solutions, Inc. is one of the value added resellers on the Federal GSA Schedules who has provided the required Genetec certification training to our Security personnel and will accept our local terms and conditions to contract with Stadium Manager. The links to the GSA Schedules are provided here:

Genetec GSA Schedule Cooperative Agreement:
https://resources.genetec.com/genetec-awards-certifications/general-services-administration-gsa Federal GSA Schedule 47QSWA18D0050 for Genetec Software Licenses, Products and Maintenance Services:
https://www.gsaadvantage.gov/ref text/47QSWA18D0050/0X8LED.3SYYD2 47QSWA18D0050 GENETECTERMSMASPA0039MAY2022.PDF
Genetec Advantage
The specific items are referenced in the GSA Schedule as ADV-RE-CAM-E-1Y - Page 89 and ADV-RE-RDR-E-1Y – Page 95.

Proximity Cards
The specific items are referenced in the GSA Schedule as 1386LGGMV – Page 14 and 1391LGSMN – Page 14.

1. Genetec Advantage Software License Renewal
Stadium Manager engaged EyeP Solutions, Inc. and Genetec, Inc. to true-up our existing Genetec Security System portfolio and obtained a quotation from EyeP Solutions, Inc. Stadium Manager has a portfolio of 748 Genetec Omnicast licenses and 850 Genetec Synergis licenses that require to be renewed for a one year period. EyeP Solutions, Inc., provided a discount of approximately 11% off the GSA pricing.

The cost for this purchase is covered in the FY22/23 SCSA Budget, Security Department, as a shared expense.

2. Genetec Proximity Cardkeys and Tags
Stadium Manager has a need to replenish Genetec proximity cardkeys and Microprox tags. 3 On June 21, 2022, the SCSA Board approved Stadium Manager’s recommendation to procure the Genetec proximity cardkeys, Microprox HID tags and related supplies from Johnson Controls, Inc. Fire and Security (JCI). JCI was the main integrator of our Genetec security system when the Stadium was built. JCI owned the rights to our card’s format and issue level including becoming the main distributor for ordering HID products.

When Stadium Manager issued the Purchase Order, JCI took exception to our terms and conditions and insisted that the order be filled on their terms. Stadium Manager contacted Genetec and requested assistance. Genetec recommended using the Corporate 1000 format and cease using the proprietary format with JCI. This was made possible by procuring the standard proximity cards and Microprox tags and formatting for our use by a Genetec authorized dealer.

Therefore, the SCSA Board approval on June 21, 2022 to issue a Purchase Order to Johnson Controls, Inc. Fire & Security in the amount of $7,845.15 will not be exercised by Stadium Manager.

Stadium Manager requested a quotation from EyeP Solutions, Inc., for the regular Genetec proximity cardkeys and Microprox tags with the additional Corporate 1000 format so that those cards can be used at the Stadium. Stadium Manager has a need to procure 1000 Genetec proximity cardkeys and 200 Microprox tags with no biometric data stored. The quotation provided included pricing of the cardkeys and tags plus the cost of formatting them for Stadium Manager use.

Therefore, approval is sought to issue a Purchase Order to procure the Genetec proximity cardkeys and Microprox tags from EyeP Solutions, Inc., in the amount of $6,930.87 inclusive of all shipping and applicable sales tax.

The cost for this purchase is covered in the FY22/23 SCSA Budget, Security Department, as a shared expense.

Next Steps
Once Stadium Manager receives approval from the SCSA Board, Purchase Orders will be issued to EyeP Solutions, Inc. and executed copies forwarded to the Board. Supporting documentation is provided for review and approval.

Submitted By: _____ _____________ Date: ___________________ Jenti Vandertuig, Procurement Director
~ 


DocuSigned by:
~v~
A4B5666F5BF147D ...

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1189 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD

SUBJECT
Report from the Stadium Authority for Action Regarding Stadium Manager’s Request to Utilize Cooperative Agreements to Leverage Discounted Pricing and Award Purchase Orders to EyeP Solutions, Inc. for Security Software Subscription Renewals and Security Cardkeys and Tags

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.

The Stadium Manager is requesting approval to utilize cooperative agreements available through the Federal General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules to leverage discounted pricing for the following:

1. Genetec Advantage Software Subscription Renewal: Award a purchase order to EyeP Solutions, Inc. in the amount of $40,126 to provide Genetec Advantage software subscription license renewals for a one-year period. These costs are classified in the Stadium Authority Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Shared Stadium Manager Expenses as Non-Compensation Expenses for the Security Department.

2. Genetec Proximity Cardkeys and Microprox Tags: Award a purchase order to EyeP Solutions, Inc. in the amount of $6,931 to procure Genetec proximity cardkeys and Microprox tags. These costs are classified in the Stadium Authority FY 2022/23 Shared Stadium Manager Expenses as Non-Compensation Expenses for the Security Department.

DISCUSSION
Stadium Authority staff reviewed the Stadium Manager’s Recommendation for Award memo, supporting procurement materials, and draft purchase orders for the two requests (the memo is attached to corresponding report #22-1186) for consistency against the Stadium Authority Procurement Policy and Santa Clara City Code Chapter 2.105.160 (Single source procurement).

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1189 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
The Genetec Security Center system at Levi’s Stadium requires a proprietary software, referenced as Genetec Advantage, to maintain support. Genetec software license subscriptions, products, and related maintenance and subscription renewals can only be procured through Genetec’s third party resellers and the requested purchase is consistent with best practices for single source procurements.

At the June 21, 2022 meeting, the Stadium Authority Board approved the Stadium Manager’s request to award a purchase order to Johnson Controls, Inc. Fire and Security (JCI) in the amount of $7,845 to procure the Genetec proximity cardkeys, Microprox HID tags, and related supplies. However, as noted in the Stadium Manager’s memo, JCI took exception to the Stadium Manager’s purchase order terms and conditions and as result, the Stadium Manager will not move forward with the purchase order. The requested purchase order with EyeP Solutions, Inc. will procure 1,000 Genetec proximity cardkeys and 200 Microprox tags.

Staff recommends approval of the Stadium Manager’s request to award two purchase orders to EyeP Solutions, Inc. for the Genetec Advantage software license renewals and Genetec proximity cardkeys and Microprox tags. Per Paragraph 4(b) of the Settlement Agreement, the Stadium Authority reserves all rights to confirm and dispute charges by and payments to the Stadium Manager during a fiscal year-end reconciliation/true-up, including but not limited to changes based on improper allocation, calculation, lack of support, or failure to comply with the Parties’ contracts or California law. The Stadium Authority may raise related questions before the fiscal year-end reconciliation/true-up, which the Stadium Manager agrees to assess and respond to in good faith.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The actions being considered do not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(a) as it has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Stadium Authority Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Budget contains Shared Expenses such as Security, Stadium Operations, Engineering, Guest Services, and Groundskeeping. Shared Expenses are split between the Stadium Authority and Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC per the Management Agreement.

There are sufficient funds in the Stadium Authority FY 2022/23 Security line item to cover the Genetec Advantage software subscription license renewals ($40,126, of which the Stadium Authority is responsible for $20,063) and Genetec proximity cardkeys and Microprox tags ($6,931, of which the Stadium Authority is responsible for $3,466).

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

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 City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1189 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
Special Meeting. A hard copy of any report to Council 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.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Approve the Stadium Manager’s request to utilize a cooperative agreement to leverage discounted pricing and award a purchase order to EyeP Solutions, Inc. in the amount of $40,126 to provide Genetec Advantage software license subscription renewals for a one-year period; and

2. Approve the Stadium Manager’s request to utilize a cooperative agreement to leverage discounted pricing and award a purchase order to EyeP Solutions, Inc. in the amount of $6,931 to procure Genetec proximity cardkeys and Microprox tags.

Prepared by: Christine Jung, Assistant to the Executive Director Approved by: Rajeev Batra, Executive Director
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-953 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Public Hearing: 2021-2022 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER)

COUNCIL PILLAR
Promote and Enhance Economic, Housing and Transportation Development

BACKGROUND
The City of Santa Clara receives entitlement funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through HUD’s Community Development Program. The funds allocated to the City are Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) funds. These funds are provided for programs and activities that benefit lowincome persons and households. The City develops a 5 ‐
year strategic plan called a Consolidated
Plan (ConPlan) which identifies housing and community needs of low-income persons within the City, identifies and prioritizes resources to address those needs, and establishes annual goals and objectives to measure performance. The current ConPlan was approved by council on May 12, 2020.

During the 5-year ConPlan cycle, the City develops Annual Action Plans. The Annual Action Plan provides a summary of the projects, activities, and the specific federal and non-federal resources that will be allocated to address the priority needs and specific goals identified in the ConPlan. The 2021- 2022 Annual Action Plan was approved by the City Council on May 4, 2021.

At the end of each program year, the City reports its progress and accomplishments. This year-end report is called the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER). This 2021 CAPER reports on the 2021-2022 Program Year; the second year of the ConPlan cycle.

DISCUSSION
The 2021 CAPER summarizes the City's HUD program accomplishments during the program year, the number of beneficiaries, and the resources used to complete the activities and projects. The major accomplishments include, but are not limited to:

Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA). TBRA provided rental and deposit assistance to homeless households or those at risk of becoming homeless with incomes at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI). A total of 48 households were assisted comprising 63 adults and 81 children. Case management services were also provided and funded through City special revenue funds.

Funds spent (approx.): $1,368,204, (HOME), and $300,697 (City Affordable Housing Funds and City Housing Successor Funds).

Public Services & Homelessness Services. CDBG, HOME and local funds were awarded to 10 City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-953 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
public service agencies to administer 13 public service activities, such as meals, legal services, senior care and housing assistance to low-income residents. Approximately 1,300 people benefited from these services.

Funds spent (approx.): $232,760 (CDBG), $95,000 General Funds, $250,000 (City Housing Successor Funds), and $225,697 (City Affordable Housing Funds).

Capital Improvement Projects. 14 households benefited from capital improvements through the City’s Neighborhood Conservation and Improvement Program and Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley’s Minor Home Repair Program. Funds Spent (approx.): $394,787 (CDBG).

Emergency Rental Assistance: 58 households, made up of 160 people, received emergency rental assistance through the City’s Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP). Funds Spent (approx.): $56,528 (CDBG) and $580,677 (CDBG-CV).

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no cost to the City other than administrative staff time and expense to produce the 2021- 2022 CAPER.

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

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.

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]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

A public notice announcing the availability of the CAPER for review and the start of the 15-day public review period was published in the Santa Clara Weekly on September 7, 2022. The public review period runs from September 8-27, 2022 and provides the public the opportunity to review and comment on the CAPER prior to HUD submission. Comments received during the public review period will be incorporated into the final version of the CAPER.

ALTERNATIVES

1. No Action. Should the Council choose to not take action, HUD may withhold future funding until the CAPER is submitted.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Approve the 2021-2022 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (Attachment 1) City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-953 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the documents for submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by September 30, 2022 unless otherwise directed by HUD.

2. Direct staff to incorporate all public comments into the final version to be submitted to HUD on or before September 30, 2022.

Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Director of Community Development Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. 2021-2022 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 3 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™

CONSOLIDATED
ANNUAL

PERFORMANCE

AND EVALUATION

REPORT (CAPER)
Program Year 2021-2022
City of Santa Clara
Prepared by:

Housing & Community Services
1500 Warburton Ave.

Santa Clara, CA 95050
-
Contents
Overview.................................................................................................................................... 1 CR-05 - Goals and Outcomes .................................................................................................... 2 CR-10 - Racial and Ethnic Composition of Families Assisted..................................................... 7 CR-15 - Resources and Investments 91.520(a) ......................................................................... 8 CR-20 - Affordable Housing 91.520(b)......................................................................................12 CR-25 - Homeless and Other Special Needs 91.220(d, e); 91.320(d, e); 91.520(c) ..................14 CR-30 - Public Housing 91.220(h); 91.320(j).............................................................................17 CR-35 - Other Actions 91.220(j)-(k); 91.320(i)-(j) ......................................................................18 CR-40 - Monitoring 91.220 and 91.230 .....................................................................................22 CR-45 - CDBG 91.520(c)..........................................................................................................23 CR-50 - HOME 91.520(d) .........................................................................................................24 2021-2022 CAPER 1
Overview
The City of Santa Clara receives entitlement funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through HUD’s Community Development Program (CPD). The funds allocated to the City are Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) funds. These funds are provided for programs and activities that benefit low-income persons and households. The City develops a 5‐year strategic plan called a Consolidated Plan (ConPlan) which identifies housing and community needs of low-income persons within the City, identifies and prioritizes resources to address those needs, and establishes annual goals and objectives to measure performance. The ConPlan was approved by council on May 12, 2020.

During the 5-year ConPlan cycle, the City develops Annual Action Plans for each year. The Annual Action Plan provides a summary of the projects, activities, and the specific federal and non-federal resources that will be allocated to address the priority needs and specific goals identified in the ConPlan. The 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan was approved by the City Council on May 4, 2021.

At the end of each program year, the City reports on its progress and accomplishments. This year-end report is called the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER).

This 2021 CAPER reports on activities performed during the 2021-2022 Program Year; the second year of the 2020-2025 ConPlan cycle.

Major accomplishments for the Program Year 2021 include, but are not limited to:

Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA). TBRA provided rental and deposit assistance to homeless households or those at risk of becoming homeless with incomes at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI). There was a total of 48 households assisted that comprise of 63 adults and 81 children. Case management services were also provided and funded through City special revenue funds. Funds spent (approx.): $1,035,000, (HOME), and $300,697 (City Affordable Housing Funds and City Housing Successor Funds).

Public Services & Homelessness Services. CDBG and HOME funds were awarded to 10 public service agencies to administer 13 public service activities, such as meals, legal services, senior care and housing assistance to low-income residents. Approximately 1,000 people benefited from these services. Funds spent (approx.): $232,760 (CDBG), $95,000 General Funds, $250,000 (City Housing Successor Funds), and $225,697 (City Affordable Housing Funds).

Capital Improvement Projects. 14 households benefited from capital improvements through the City’s Neighborhood Conservation and Improvement Program and Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley’s Minor Home Repair Program. Funds Spent (approx.): $400,680 (CDBG).

Emergency Rental Assistance: 58 households, made up of 160 people, received emergency rental assistance through the City’s Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP). Funds Spent (approx.): $56,528 (CDBG) and $580,677 (CDBG-CV). 2021-2022 CAPER 2
CR-05 - Goals and Outcomes
Progress the jurisdiction has made in carrying out its strategic plan and its action plan.

91.520(a)
Program Year 2021 is year two of the 2020-2025 ConPlan. Data in Table 1 highlights key accomplishments and shows progress towards the ConPlan goals. Results for activities funded with local funds are noted in this narrative rather than the table. A summary of each ConPlan goal are:

Affordable Housing Goal – The ConPlan has an expected goal of assisting 630 households over the 5-year period. The Goal Outcome Indicators stated in the ConPlan are:
225 households to receive homeowner rehabilitations (175 from NCIP and 50 from the minor repair program).
5 rental units rehabilitated.
200 households to receive Tenant Based Rental Assistance.

For Program Year 2021, the progress towards the ConPlan goals is as follows:
14 total households assisted (7 through NCIP and 7 through the minor repair program). 48 households received TBRA subsidies.

Homelessness Goal – The ConPlan has an expected goal of assisting 815 people with Homelessness Prevention and Case Management services. The Goal Outcome Indicators stated in the ConPlan are:
315 households to receive homeless prevention services for domestic violence survivors.
200 TBRA households to receive case management services funded with local funds. 200 homeless households to receive case management services funded with local funds.

For Program Year 2021, the progress towards the ConPlan goals are as follows:
72 households affected by domestic violence received services, exceeding the annual goal of 69 households.
48 TBRA households received case management services funded with local funds.

These households are only counted under the Affordable Housing goal so as to not double count them.
141 homeless households received case management services funded with local funds. 2021-2022 CAPER 3
Public Services – The ConPlan has an expected goal of assisting 10,020 persons through various Public Services. The Goal Outcome Indicators stated in the ConPlan are. 10,020 households to receive various public services benefiting seniors, youth and the disabled.
200 households to receive emergency rental assistance rental. This extra goal of assisting 200 households was added during the pandemic and was not noted in the 5- year ConPlan.

For Program Year 2021, the progress towards the ConPlan goals are as follows:
1,004 households received a variety of public services. Some public service agencies did not meet their annual goal due to pandemic related restrictions in the first half of the program year.
58 households received emergency rental assistance.

Fair Housing – The ConPlan has an expected goal of assisting 150 households assisted with Fair Housing services. In Program Year 2021, 12 households received assistance. The low number was due in part to pandemic related restrictions during the first half of the program year.

Public Facilities – The ConPlan has an expected goal of assisting 684 households with Public Facility Improvements. The goal of 684 households is attributed to the LifeMoves generator project for homeless facilities. This activity was put on hold due to the need to develop and administer ERAP. A Notice of Funding Availability was published in the Spring of 2022 to find other capital improvement projects for public facilities. These projects will begin in late 2022 and results will be reported in future CAPERs.

Comparison of the proposed versus actual outcomes for each outcome measure submitted with the consolidated plan and explain, if applicable, why progress was not made toward meeting goals and objectives. 91.520(g)
Table 1 provides numeric detail on activities completed in Program Year 2021, and progress made toward meeting the ConPlan goals and objectives.
2021-2022 CAPER 4
Table1 (CR05) – Accomplishments – Program Year & ConPlan to Date Goal Category Source
and
Amount
Indicator Unit of
Measure
Expected
2020-2025
Strategic
Plan
Actual
2020-2025
Strategic
Plan
Percent
Complete
of 5-year
Goal
Expected
PY
2021
Actual
PY
2021
Percent
Complete
PY 2021
Admin.

Other –
Admin. of
CDBG &
HOME
HOME:
$37,104
CDBG:
$235,940
Other Other 0 0 0% 0 0 0%
Affordable
Housing
Affordable
Housing
HOME:
$1,596,151
TBRA/Rapid
Rehousing
Households
Assisted 200 100 50% 40 48 120%
Rental units
rehabilitated
Household
Housing Unit 5 0 0% 1 0 0%
CDBG:
$150,251
Homeowner
Housing
Rehabilitated
Household
Housing Unit 215 27 12.5% 45 14 37%
Fair
Housing
Affordable
Housing
NonHomeless
Special
Needs
HOME:
$22,197
Public service
activities other than
Low/Moderate
Income Housing
Benefit
Households
Assisted 150 43 29% 30 12 40%
Homeless
Homeless
General
Fund:
$22,197
Public service
activities other than
Low/Moderate
Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 315 142 45% 63 72 114%
Homeless
County
Case Mgt.
&
Homeless
Prevention
CHSF:
$250,000
CAHF:
$225,697
Homelessness
Prevention
Persons
Assisted 300 222 74% 60 141 235%
Public
Services
NonHomeless
Special
Needs
CDBG:
$232,829
Nonprofit
agencies
Public service
activities other than
Low/Moderate
Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 7,045 2,176 31% 1,409 1,026 73%
NonHomeless
Special
Needs
General
Funds:
$72,803
Public service
activities
Low/Moderate
Income Housing
Benefit
Households
Assisted 250 261 104% 50 58 116%
Public
Facility
Impr.

Public
Facilities
CDBG:
$642,000
Public Facility or
infrastructure
activities other than
low/mod income
housing benefit
Households
Assisted 150 0 0% 0 0 0%
2021-2022 CAPER 5
Assess how the jurisdiction’s use of funds, particularly CDBG, addresses the priorities and specific objectives identified in the plan, giving special attention to the highest priority activities identified.

The ConPlan describes the following priorities and objectives in order to guide programmatic decisions and resource allocation:

Affordable Housing: Support affordable housing for low-income and special needs households. This includes funding new affordable housing developments, rent subsidies, and rehabilitation of single and multi-family housing.

There are four housing problems that are measured by ACS Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data that give a glimpse into the conditions of households:
1) Incomplete kitchen facilities;
2) Incomplete plumbing facilities;
3) More than 1 person per room; and,
4) Cost Burden. The ratio of housing costs to household income.

A. Cost Burden of greater than 30% and less than 50%.

B. Severe Cost Burden of greater than 50%.

According to 2015-2019 CHAS data, 39.60% of the 44,670 Santa Clara households experience at least one of the four Housing Problems. Further, 17.55% of households have a housing cost burden greater than 30% but less than 50%, and 15.72% experience severe cost burden in which their housing expenses exceed 50% of their income. Taking into consideration those two data points, one third of all Santa Clara households have a housing cost burden greater than 30%.

The CDBG-funded Neighborhood Conservation and Improvement Program (NCIP) continued to see low interest coming out of the pandemic. To address the issue of slow declining interest in its loan-based homeowner rehabilitation program, the City has increased funding to Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley’s repair program. Further, the City will be allocating more funds to Capital Improvement Projects to city facilities and affordable housing rental housing.

The HOME-funded Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) program which also addresses the goal of Affordable Housing continues to be a strong program. TBRA assists households with deposit and rental subsidies (funded with HOME funds), along with case management services (funded with local funds). The TBRA program assisted 48 households comprised of 63 adults and 81 children were assisted.
2021-2022 CAPER 6
Public Services: Several non-profit partners provide services to the City’s low-income residents. Most agencies saw a slow start to the program year as pandemic restrictions loosened after the first part of the program year. Many of the agencies had to pivot and become creative in their programming to continue providing services.

The City also saw the phase out of its Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP). The program began in June of 2020 to assist low-income renters with rent payments. CDBG-CV and regular CDBG funds were used to fund ERAP. During the 2021 Program Year, the City assisted 58 households before exhausting all its funding.

Homelessness: The City funds Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence to provide services to those impacted by domestic violence. The agency assisted 72 persons during the program year. The City also uses local funds to provide funding to the County of Santa Clara’s Office of Supportive Housing to administer case management services to 20 homeless households and provides Homeless Prevention services.

CDBG and local funds are also used to fund non-profit agencies such as The Bill Wilson Center, which focuses on homeless teens, families at risk of homelessness, and they are also one of two agencies that administer the City’s TBRA program.

Fair Housing: The City used HOME funds to fund Project Sentinel, a non-profit agency, that promotes Fair Housing choice through funding education, counseling, advocacy, investigation, conciliation, and enforcement of Fair Housing regulations. Due to eviction moratoriums, Project Sentinel’s other services increased, but they were still able to assist 12 persons with fair housing related services.

Public Facilities: The City published a NOFA in April of 2022. The City will be funding two capital improvement projects for public facilities in the coming year, the results of which will be in future CAPERs.
2021-2022 CAPER 7
CR-10 - Racial and Ethnic Composition of Families Assisted Describe the families assisted (including the racial and ethnic status of families assisted). 91.520(a)

CDBG CDBG-CV HOME LOCAL
White 484 22 43 127
Black or African American 67 4 7 27
Asian 176 8 3 29
American Indian/Alaska Native 11 0 1 6
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 66 0 0 2
Asian & White 0 0 0 0
Black/African-American & White 6 0 3 0
American Indian/Alaska Native & White 86 0 0 0
Other Multi-Racial 144 24 3 36
Total 1040 58 60 227
Hispanic 201 25 33 83
Not Hispanic 839 33 27 144
Table 1 – Table of assistance to racial and ethnic populations by source of funds Narrative
The City’s programs serve an ethnically diverse population of individuals and families. The services provided to Santa Clara residents align with the overall demographics of the city.

48.81% of beneficiaries identify as White (37.9% of the City’s population identify as White).

15.60% of the beneficiaries identify as Asian (45.10% of the City’s population identify as Asian).

14.95% of beneficiaries identify as “Other” (7.2% of the City’s population identify as “Other”). Of all beneficiaries, 24.69% identified as Hispanic while 16.3% of the overall City population identifies as Hispanic. Data derived from 2015-2019 CHAS Data.

NOTE: IDIS did not have space for other demographics AND other funding sources that were identified.

See added table for a more detailed account of participant and demographic data. 2021-2022 CAPER 8
CR-15 - Resources and Investments 91.520(a)
Identify the resources made available
Source of
Funds Source Resources Made Available
Amount
Expended During
Program Year
CDBG CDBG Allocation and Program Income $1,261,020 $956,935.79 HOME HOME Allocation and Program Income $1,589,000 $1,474,654.28 CDBG-CV CDBG CARES Act Funding $0 $618,612.68
Gen. Fund General Fund $95,000 $95,000.00
Other City Affordable Housing Fund $225,697 $225,697.00 Other
Successor Housing Agency Program
Income $250,000 $250,000.00
Table 2 - Resources Made Available
Narrative
The City of Santa Clara used CDBG, CDBG-CV (CARES Act Funds), HOME funds, and local funds to carry out the objectives identified in the 5-Year ConPlan. These activities were performed throughout the City, with no directed geographic concentration of resources.

CDBG: CDBG resources that were available in Program Year 2021 totaled $1,261,020. $394,796.66 was used for homeowner rehabilitation activities (i.e., Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley, NCIP and project delivery costs) which addressed the Goal Outcome Indicator of Affordable Housing. $289,288.42 was used for Public Services such as the City’s Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP), youth services, and senior services which addressed the Goal Outcome Indicator of Public Services. Lastly, $272,850.71 was used for General Admin.

HOME: HOME resources that were available in Program Year 2021 totaled $1,589,000. $1,368,204.40 was used for Tenant Based Rental Assistance Program Goal Outcome Indicator of Affordable Housing. $106,449.88 was used for Fair Housing Services, and General Admin.

CDBG-CV (Cares Act Funds): No new CDBG-CV resources were made available for Program Year 2021; however, the remaining $618,612.68 CDBG-CV funds from Program Year 2020 were disbursed in Program Year 2021. Goal Outcome Indicator addressed was Public Services.

GENERAL FUNDS: General Fund resources that were available in Program Year 2021 totaled $95,000. $68,803 was used for Tenant/Landlord Mediation, $22,197 was used for services for Domestic Violence Survivors, and $5,000 was used for United Way 211.

CITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND (CAHF): CAHF resources that were available in Program Year 2021 totaled $225,697 which was used for case management services for TBRA participants and the County’s homeless prevention program and intensive case management to address the ConPlan Goal Outcome Indicator of Homelessness through case management services for TBRA participants.
2021-2022 CAPER 9
CITY HOUSING SUCCESSOR FUND (CHSF): CHSF resources that were available in Program Year 2021 totaled $250,000. $249,991.36 was used to address the ConPlan Goal Outcome Indicator of Homelessness through case management services for TBRA participants and the County’s homeless prevention program and intensive case management.

Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments Target
Area
Planned %
of Allocation
Actual %
of Allocation
Narrative
Description
Citywide 100 100 Service area
Table 3 – Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments Narrative
All activities and programs were open to all low-income residents in the City of Santa Clara.

Leveraging:

Explain how federal funds leveraged additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements were satisfied, as well as how any publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that were used to address the needs identified in the plan.

Fiscal Year Summary – HOME Match

1. Excess match from prior Federal fiscal year $7,395,666.36

2. Match contributed during current Federal fiscal year $124,822.32

3. Total match available for current Federal fiscal year (Line 1 plus Line 2) $7,520,488.68

4. Match liability for current Federal fiscal year $211,458.58

5. Excess match carried over to next Federal fiscal year (Line 3 minus Line 4) $7,309,030 Table 4 – Fiscal Year Summary - HOME Match Report
The HOME Match Report shows the local match contribution of $124,822.32. The City’s required contribution was $211,458.58. The City met its match requirement through the exemption of property taxes and carry-over match from prior program years. Further, the City was able to use local funds of to pay for case management services for TBRA clients. Locally funded case management services for our TBRA clients have resulted in a more comprehensive and successful program for our previously homeless families. Lastly, CDBG funds are leveraged private funds from our nonprofits to allow for more beneficiaries served.

The City has used public lands to address ConPlan goals in the past and those projects are still in the planning stages and/or construction phase. In this past fiscal year, no new public lands were used.
2021-2022 CAPER 10
Match Contribution for the Federal Fiscal Year
Project
No. or
other ID
Date of
Contribution
Cash
(nonFederal
sources)
Foregone
Taxes, Fees,
Charges
Appraised
Land/Real
Property
Required
Infrastructure
Site
Preparation,
Construction
Materials
Bond Total Match
#10 -
Liberty
Tower
04/10/2022 0 $49,822.83 0 0 0 0 $49,822.83
#20 - BWC
Jackson
St.
04/10/2022 0 $13,644.55 0 0 0 0 $13,644.55
#21 - SC
Senior
Homes
04/10/2022 $9,618.91 0 0 0 0 $9,618.91
#210 -
BWC
Main St.
04/10/2022 0 $7,115.75 0 0 0 0 $7,115.75
#254 - De
La Cruz
04/10/2022 0 $11,411.90 0 0 0 0 $11,411.90
#326 -
Briarwood
04/10/2022 0 $12,012.54 0 0 0 0 $12,012.54
#639 -
Cypress
04/10/2022 0 $11,179.01 0 0 0 0 $11,179.01
Shafer
House
04/10/2022 0 $10,016.84 0 0 0 0 $10,016.84
Table 5 - Match Contribution for the Federal Fiscal Year HOME Program Income
Program Income – Enter the program amounts for the reporting period Balance on hand at
beginning of
reporting period
$
Amount received
during reporting period
$
Total amount expended
during reporting period
$
Amount expended
for TBRA
$
Balance on hand at end
of reporting period
$
$421,406.17 $220,773.57 $356,379.16 $1,368,204.40 $285,800.58 Table 6 – Program Income
2021-2022 CAPER 11
HOME MBE/WBE report
Minority Business Enterprises and Women Business Enterprises – Indicate the number and dollar value of contracts for HOME projects completed during the reporting period
Total Minority Business Enterprises White NonAlaskan Native or Hispanic American Indian
Asian or Pacific
Islander
Black NonHispanicHispanic
Contracts
Number 2
Dollar Amount $1,458,894 0 0 0 0 0
Sub-Contracts
Number
Dollar Amount
Total Women Business
Enterprise
Male
Contracts
Number 2 0 0
Dollar Amount $1,458,894 0 0
Sub-Contracts
Number
Dollar Amount
Table 7 - Minority Business and Women Business Enterprises Minority Owners of Rental Property – Indicate the number of HOME assisted rental property owners and the total amount of HOME funds in these rental properties assisted
Total Minority Property Owners White NonAlaskan Native or Hispanic American Indian
Asian or Pacific
Islander
Black NonHispanicHispanic
Number 0
Dollar Amount 0
Table 8 – Minority Owners of Rental Property
Relocation and Real Property Acquisition – Indicate the number of persons displaced, the cost of relocation payments, the number of parcels acquired, and the cost of acquisition Parcels Acquired 0
Businesses Displaced 0
Nonprofit Organizations Displaced 0
Households Temporarily Relocated, not Displaced 0
Households
Displaced
Total Minority Property Enterprises White NonAlaskan Native Hispanic or American
Indian
Asian or Pacific
Islander
Black NonHispanic
Hispanic
Number 0
Cost 0
Table 9 – Relocation and Real Property Acquisition
2021-2022 CAPER 12
CR-20 - Affordable Housing 91.520(b)
Evaluation of the jurisdiction's progress in providing affordable housing, including the number and types of families served, the number of extremely low-income, low-income, moderate-income, and middle-income persons served.

One-Year
Goal
Actual
Number of Homeless households to be provided affordable housing units 45 48 Number of Non-Homeless households to be provided affordable housing units 14 14 Number of Special-Needs households to be provided affordable housing units 0 0 Total 59 62
Table 10 – Number of Households
One-Year
Goal
Actual
Number of households supported through Rental Assistance 45 48 Number of households supported through The Production of New Units 0 0 Number of households supported through Rehab of Existing Units 14 14 Number of households supported through Acquisition of Existing Units 0 0 Total 59 62
Table 11 – Number of Households Supported
Discuss the difference between goals and outcomes and problems encountered in meeting these goals.

Homeless households to be provided affordable housing units. The City had a goal of 45 households to be assisted through its TBRA program. The City assisted 48 households – exceeding its goal by 3 households. The TBRA program did not encounter any issues in meeting its goals as most of the clients in the program were continuing from the previous year.

Number of Non-Homeless households to be provided affordable housing units. The City anticipated assisting 14 households through its NCIP, Minor Repair (Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley) programs, and CHDO set-aside. The City met its goal; however, interest in homeowner rehabilitation was low to start the year due to COVID concerns.

The City continues to struggle to find a Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO) to accept the HOME CHDO set-aside funding. Many non-profits state that there are too many requirements that come with the CHDO funds, and there is not enough funding to make the extra work worth the effort.
2021-2022 CAPER 13
Discuss how these outcomes will impact future annual action plans.

The TBRA numbers will stay about the same, but the NCIP and Minor repair programs have been reassessed. Due to the drop in interest in these homeowner rehabilitation programs, the City shifted much of its new funding to capital improvement projects for city facilities and for affordable housing rental housing. The City has already amended its 2021/2022 annual action plan and has issued a NOFA to attract new capital projects.

Include the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income persons served by each activity where information on income by family size is required to determine the eligibility of the activity.

CDBG HOME
Income Levels Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Extremely Low (<=30%) 9 0 0 46
Low (>30% and <=50%) 2 0 0 1
Mod (>50% and <=80%) 3 0 0 1
Total Low-Mod 14 0 0 48
Non Low-Mod (>80%) 0 0 0 0
Total Beneficiaries 14 0 0 48
Table 12 – Number of Households Served
Narrative Information
This table displays the number of households assisted at each income level that received housing assistance during the program year. The majority of beneficiaries for housing related services are extremely low-income residents. Both programs focus on Extremely low and lowincome populations. All renter data is from TBRA, while owner data is from our NCIP and Minor Repair programs.
2021-2022 CAPER 14
CR-25 - Homeless and Other Special Needs 91.220(d, e);

91.320(d, e); 91.520(c)
Evaluate the jurisdiction’s progress in meeting its specific objectives for reducing and ending homelessness through: Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs The City of Santa Clara has endorsed the Community Plan to End Homelessness, which serves as the roadmap for ending homelessness in the City of Santa Clara and across the county. The City conducted a Homelessness Taskforce and outreach process in summer/fall 2022 and intends to prepare a local homelessness response plan. In partnership with WeHope, the City began offering a weekly mobile shower and laundry service in spring 2022.

Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons Interim Housing Solutions:

Congregate Shelter: Bill Wilson operates a runaway shelter in Santa Clara for homeless youth.

This shelter has 20 beds.

Domestic Violence Shelter: The City allocated $22,197 of General Funds funding to Next Door Solutions for case management support services for residents of HomeSafe Santa Clara, an affordable transitional housing property for survivors of domestic violence, serving approximately 70 individuals.

Non-congregate Shelter: Bill Wilson Center manages 15 transitional living group homes (5-6 bedrooms each) where they place homeless youth, and help persons transitioning out of the foster care system. Covenant House California opened a full-service Transitional Housing program for 30 youth, ages 18-24. In collaboration with Santa Clara County and CISCO as primary partners, the site at the ‘Western Motel’ was renovated to meet the needs of young people transitioning from homelessness to independence. Resources for Community Development and the County are renovating the “Bella Vista Inn” to create 64 units of interim housing.

Outreach: The Santa Clara Police Department Community Response Team conducts regular street outreach and performs crisis intervention. The team works with Abode Services and maintains a list of homeless and unsheltered individuals considered to be the City's most vulnerable to incidences of both personal and public safety and makes referrals to the County based on this list.

Upcoming: The City will be receiving HOME-ARP funds in the future and is considering projects that will benefit homeless persons in need of emergency shelter and/or transitional housing.

Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families and those who are: likely to become 2021-2022 CAPER 15
homeless after being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); and, receiving assistance from agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs
Emergency Rental Assistance: The City’s Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) closed at the end of Program Year 2021. 58 households were assisted in addition to over 200 households the prior Program Year 2020.

Tenant Based Rental Assistance: Approximately 45-50 households receive assistance annually at a cost of roughly $900,000. Although the majority of TBRA participants come from the County’s Coordinated Assessment Queue and are homeless prior to entering the program, there are some that fall under the category of being “at risk” of being homeless. The City does not have a specific program for assisting those discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care. The County of Santa Clara Office of Supportive Housing takes the lead to assist clients in this category and the City coordinates with the County to receive referrals to our TBRA program or our locally funded program that assists individuals that have a high use of police and/or hospital resources. Those exiting such facilities are assessed and placed into the County’s Coordinated Assessment list based on their housing need.

Foster Care & Transition: The Bill Wilson Center, which specializes in young adults exiting the foster care system, is one of the administrators of the TBRA program. With this connection, they are able to refer some of their own clients to the TBRA program in order to prevent them from possibly becoming homeless as they exit the foster care system In June 2020, Santa Clara City Council approved a $250,000 two-year Agreement for the Santa Clara County Permanent Supportive Housing Program and one-time funding of $150,000 for the Homeless Prevention Program. The County of Santa Clara provides case management on an ongoing basis for up to 20 homeless and chronically homeless individuals. Additionally, under the Agreement, the County provides housing subsidies at no additional cost to the City of Santa Clara. To further the goal of ending homelessness in Santa Clara, County’s Homeless Prevention Program is a countywide initiative in which several jurisdictions participate to provide eligible households with emergency assistance such as rent, security deposits, food, work related transportation, medical assistance, and utilities assistance to prevent homelessness. Sixty-two Santa Clara residents were assisted in this program.

April 2021: The City approved a loan agreement with Allied Housing for a $4,000,000 loan to Support the Construction of 80 Affordable Housing Units, 39 of these units were set aside for formerly chronically homeless senior (55+) residents. The project is under construction.

May 2021: Calabazas Community Affordable Apartments completed construction and began accepting applications May 24-June 7. The Calabazas Apartments provides 144 units of affordable housing including 80 units of supportive housing at 3311 Kifer Road. 2021-2022 CAPER 16
June 2021: Closed financing on Agrihood by Core companies, a $250 million mixed-use development on city-owned land, which includes 108 units at 30% AMI or lower. The project is under construction.

April 2022: In spring 2022, the City closed a loan with Freebird Development for $6.5M to support the construction of 64 affordable housing units, 16 of which will be set aside for persons with developmental disabilities. The project is located at 2330 Monroe Street and is under construction.

Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again.

The TBRA program assists homeless households with an emphasis on assisting families with children. Participants receive locally funded case management services. The goal is to reduce their housing costs for the time they are in the program and get them on affordable housing development lists, improve their credit, get out of debt, and develop a history of tenancy. The goal is for the participants to transition to an affordable unit, or afford they currently rent. 48 households received assistance through the TBRA program. 2021-2022 CAPER 17
CR-30 - Public Housing 91.220(h); 91.320(j)
Actions taken to address the needs of public housing
The Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) takes the lead in the creation of Public Housing through their Moving to Work (MTW) program. Planned New and Existing Project Based Vouchers (PBVs) in the City of Santa Clara include:

Property Name #
PBVs
Description of Project
2275 Ellena Drive 1 Family project consisting of 4 two-bedroom units; 1 PBV 2287 Pasetta Drive 1 Family project consisting of 4 two-bedroom units; 1 PBV Agrihood Senior
Apartments
54 Under construction. Senior project consisting of 165 units. 109 of the units will be affordable, and of those 54 will be PBVs Calabazas 80 Under construction family project consisting of 136 units. 80 PBVs will support the project, directed toward the homeless and those with special needs
Eklund Gardens I 10 Family project consisting of 10 2- bedroom units. PBV units are for families
Eklund Gardens II 6 Family project consisting of 6 3- bedroom units. PBV units are for families.

Monroe Street 8 New construction project consisting of 65 total units. 8 family units will be supported with PBVs
Homestead SROs 4 Senior project consisting of 4 SRO units. PBV units are for persons aged 60 years and over
Westwood
Ambassador
10 10 PBV units for former Moderate Income. Rehab project.

Total 174
SCCHA reopened their Federal MTW Housing Choice Voucher list as an “always-open” Interest List. This allows individuals to add themselves to the list at any time and/or update their information. SCCHA anticipates exhausting its prior waiting list and begin random drawing of applicants from the Interest List before the start of FY2022.

Actions taken to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership
When federal funds are used to develop or rehabilitate low-income units, the City requires that the developer make efforts to obtain input from low-income residents on the management of the development. The City also has a Below Market Purchase program. Case managers for the TBRA program are aware of the BMP program and encourage their clients to apply.

Actions taken to provide assistance to troubled PHAs
SCCHA is not a troubled PHA.
2021-2022 CAPER 18
CR-35 - Other Actions 91.220(j)-(k); 91.320(i)-(j)
Actions taken to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment. 91.220 (j); 91.320 (i) The Advance Planning Team is scheduled to complete several significant efforts. All these projects include Council Study Sessions and robust community outreach.

Zoning Ordinance update. Update began in January 2018 and most community engagement has been completed. The Plan document is undergoing final review and is scheduled for Council consideration in the spring of 2023.
2023-2030 Housing Element Update. – Staff has begun work on the next 8-year cycle update to the City’s General Plan Housing Element in accordance with State Law. The Housing Element update must be complete by the end of 2022. The preliminary Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for Santa Clara is approximately 12,000 units, including approximately 7,000 affordable units, a significant increase (3x) the City’s prior allocation. The City has hired a consultant and submitted a first draft to the state in August 2022.

Permit System Replacement. – – The Community Development Department lead a multidepartment effort to replace its 20-year-old permit tracking system. The upgraded system (Accela) enables a more streamlined permit process, including the ability to submit application online through the Permitting Online Portal. The system was put into operation in August 2021.Outreach and Community Benefits Policy. Per recent Council direction, staff is researching potential approaches to enhance public outreach activities, including potential use of consultants to facilitate outreach meetings, and mechanisms to incorporate the voluntary delivery of community benefits into the outreach process.

Freedom Circle Focus Area. The City established a new General Plan Focus Area that supports a future development capacity for up to 3,600 new dwelling units and 2 million square feet of office development. This project also included a private development proposal that was approved for a mixed-use development project on a 13.3 acre site within the Freedom Circle Focus Plan area, that consists of up to 1,100 residential units, up to 2,000 square feet of commercial space, and a 2-acre public park.

Downtown Precise Plan. Staff began preparation of a Precise Plan for the Downtown in October 2019. The development of a Precise Plan will provide guidance for new mixed use development within a portion of the Downtown Precise Plan Focus Area (as identified in the General Plan) through policies, guidelines, and illustrations that implement the community vision and objectives for a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented destination Downtown. The planning process is anticipated to be completed in the Summer of 2023.
2021-2022 CAPER 19
Actions taken to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) In line with one of the objectives set forth by the Housing Element (2014) of the General Plan, the City of Santa Clara adopted a new Affordable Housing Ordinance, including residential and nonresidential mitigation impact fees (in line with the results of the Affordable Housing Nexus Study). The revenue from the adopted fees is a new source of local affordable housing funds not available since the closure of redevelopment agencies back in 2012.

In the summer of 2022, the City also convened a Homelessness Taskforce. The taskforce included residents from each council district, persons with lived experience of homelessness, and nonprofit agency staff. The Taskforce will advise on a local plan to address homelessness.

The draft plan will be presented at public hearings in late 2022.

Actions taken to reduce lead-based paint hazards. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) All housing rehabilitated receives a lead assessment to determine level of lead mitigation.

Based on the results of the assessments, mitigation measures are included in the scope of work. TBRA clients receive the lead pamphlet information.

Actions taken to reduce the number of poverty-level families. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) The Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) program fosters self-sufficiency so that the participating households would eventually be able to afford permanent housing without subsidies. Part of the case management services Abode Services and Bill Wilson Center provides to participants to help them transition to a more stable housing situation include:
 Employment and training resources
 Benefit application assistance and advocacy
 Behavioral health services (i.e. mental health and substance abuse)  Credit counseling and repair services
Actions taken to develop institutional structure. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) City staff continues to participate in discussion and development of common strategies to address the housing and community needs in Santa Clara County with other local jurisdictions regarding CDBG, HOME and other housing programs. Meetings take place on a monthly basis to address pressing issues or news pertaining to local funding such as the use of the Countywide Measure A funds and collaborations for county-wide reports. Trainings and webinars are used to keep staff up to date with regulator changes. City staff also meets with HUD staff on a quarterly basis.
2021-2022 CAPER 20
Actions taken to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
The Santa Clara City Council, in response to a request from the Cities Association of Santa Clara County for support in regional coordination towards addressing homelessness and the housing needs of our communities, adopted a resolution to endorse the Community Plan to End Homelessness in the County of Santa Clara. Destination: Home, a Supporting Organization of the Health Trust, is a public-private partnership implementing collective impact strategies to end homelessness in Santa Clara County. Its mission is to drive and align resources to create permanent housing and sustainable support systems built for the long term. The organization is improving how systems work together to end homelessness, as well as protect individuals and families at risk of becoming homeless.

The Destination: Home Board also serves as the governing body of the county-wide "Continuum of Care" (CoC), which is a county-wide entity required by HUD to enable local housing and services providers to apply for HUD grants for various homeless assistance programs. In August 2016, the CoC Board submitted a request to HUD of $20.5 million to fund various nonprofit agencies within Santa Clara County.

The Community Plan to End Homelessness is based on three central strategies:

1. Disrupt the System: Develop strategies and innovative prototypes that transform the systems related to housing homeless people.

2. Build the Solution: Secure the funding needed to provide 6,000 housing opportunities with services for those who are homeless and those at risk of homelessness.

3. Serve the Person: Adopt an approach that recognizes the need for client-entered strategies with different response for different levels of need and different groups, targeting resources to the specific individual or household.

Much of the effort described in the Community Plan relates to the work of various county agencies that provide health care, housing, social services, corrections, and related services.

Participating cities will most likely be involved with Build the Solution strategy, which relates to development of affordable housing units through various methods. Such methods include development of new permanent supportive housing (PSH) units, rehabilitation or retrofitting of existing housing or other structures (e.g., motels) into new affordable units, and use of long-term subsidies such as rental vouchers to make existing market-rate or affordable housing more affordable for homeless or at-risk households.

The City has already funded and implemented efforts related to “Building the Solution” including the TBRA program for homeless and at-risk households, and supportive housing projects such as Homesafe Santa Clara, Sobrato Family Living Center, Bill Wilson Center and Silicon Valley Independent Living Center. In addition, the City has provided assistance to a number of local agencies that operate programs serving the homeless that are consistent with the, "Serve the Person" strategy, such as Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence, Support Network for Battered Women, HomeFirst (formerly Emergency Housing Consortium), LifeMoves (formerly 2021-2022 CAPER 21
Innvision), and Project Sentinel. The City has also provided the County of Santa Clara with $200,000 in funding to address homelessness prevention.

Identify actions taken to overcome the effects of any impediments identified in the jurisdiction analysis of impediments to fair housing choice. 91.520(a) The City funds fair housing education, investigation, enforcement and outreach through our nonprofit partner Project Sentinel. Project Sentinel provides comprehensive fair housing services including investigation, counseling, referral and education, designed to reduce the incidence of illegal discrimination in housing. The agency assisted 31 individuals during the program year, and also ran the conducted landlord/tenant mediation assisting 330 households.

The City is currently working on updating the Housing Element which will analyze contributing factors housing challenges and will propose actions to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing. The Housing Element will also include data from Santa Clara County’s regional Assessment of Fair Housing process.
2021-2022 CAPER 22
CR-40 - Monitoring 91.220 and 91.230
Describe the standards and procedures used to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and used to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements
The City completes desk audits of subrecipients for every invoice submitted, and Public Service agencies are required to submit semi-annual reports on their service activities. The City also has procedures in place to monitor subrecipients on-site.

Capital Improvement expenditures slowed during the COVID crisis. The City has addressed the issue of expenditure requirements by shifting funds from its homeowner rehabilitation program to capital improvement projects through a NOFA in April of 2022. The City has policies and procedures in place to move forward with these capital projects. Procedures include an open and competitive bidding process, a request for Section 3 and MBE/WBE entities to apply, Davis Bacon review, progress inspections, etc. Quarterly status reports on all construction projects are also a requirement.

Citizen Participation Plan 91.105(d); 91.115(d)
Describe the efforts to provide citizens with reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment on performance reports.

The 2021 CAPER was made available for public review and comment for at least a 15-day period, from September 8, 2022, through September 27, 2022. It was posted on the City website and available at the Housing and Community Services Division at 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, and at the Santa Clara Central Library. An "e-blast" notification of the draft CAPER was sent to a variety of nonprofit agencies and public stakeholders.

Public Comment during public comment period:TBD
Public Comment at the September 27, 2022 City Council Meeting: TBD 2021-2022 CAPER 23
CR-45 - CDBG 91.520(c)
Specify the nature of, and reasons for, any changes in the jurisdiction’s program objectives and indications of how the jurisdiction would change its programs as a result of its experiences.

Capital Improvement expenditures slowed during the COVID crisis. The City has addressed the issue of expenditure requirements by shifting funds from its homeowner rehabilitation program to capital improvement projects through a NOFA in April of 2022. Four projects were chosen and construction is set to begin early 2023 on most of them Does this Jurisdiction have any open Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) grants?
Not applicable.
[BEDI grantees] Describe accomplishments and program outcomes during the last year.

Not applicable.
2021-2022 CAPER 24
CR-50 - HOME 91.520(d)
Include the results of on-site inspections of affordable rental housing assisted under the program to determine compliance with housing codes and other applicable regulations Please list those projects that should have been inspected on-site this program year based upon the schedule in §92.504(d). Indicate which of these were inspected and a summary of issues that were detected during the inspection. For those that were not inspected, please indicate the reason and how you will remedy the situation.

All properties with HOME funds complete HQS inspections. If a property has deficiencies, Corrective Action Notices are issued, and follow-up inspections will be scheduled. For properties that pass their HQS inspection, they are put on a 3-year cycle of inspections.

Summary of HOME Rental Project Monitoring
Project Name
Year
Built
Total
Units
HOME
Units
Compliance
Status
Last Insp. Next
Insp.

Reason for
non-insp.

Summary of
Issues
Briarwood House 2001 5 5 Compliant 06/07/2022 2025 n/a In Progress BWC Commons 2007 28 27 In Progress 08/31/2022 2022 n/a In Progress BWC Main Street 2002 5 4 Compliant 09/15/2022 10/2022 n/a In Progress BWC Shafer 2002 5 5 Compliant 09/13/2022 10/2022 n/a In Progress BWC Teen Parent 1996 5 3 Compliant 09/15/2022 10/2022 n/a In Progress Chateau Apts. 1993 25 4 Compliant 08/29/2022 10/2022 n/a In Progress Cypress 2010 5 5 Compliant 8/30/2022 2025 n/a In Progress De La Cruz House 2001 4 4 Compliant 08/15/2022 10/2022 n/a In Progress Homesafe San Jose 2004 25 3 In Progress 06/27/2019 2022 Scheduling In Progress Homesafe (SC) 2002 25 16 In Progress 06/18/2019 2022 Scheduling In Progress Liberty Tower 1998 101 100 In Progress 08/29/2022 10/2022 n/a In Progress Maitri Transitional 2009 10 9 In Progress 7/25/2022 10/2022 n/a In Progress SC Senior Homes 1994 6 3 In Progress 12/13/2019 2022 Scheduling In Progress Sobrato Family Ctr. 2003 51 5 Compliant 08/09/2022 11/2022 n/a In Progress Stoney Pines Apts. 2001 23 2 Compliant 8/30/2022 2025 n/a In Progress Vista Drive Apts. 2004 24 1 In Progress 09/30/2022 11/2022 n/a In Progress Westwood
Ambassador 1994 42 10 In Progress 06/28/2019 2022 Scheduling In Progress Provide an assessment of the jurisdiction's affirmative marketing actions for HOME units. 92.351(b)
Developments are required to submit marketing plans and updates of said plans for the Housing Division to review. The City of Santa Clara is also working with the Lawyer’s Committee, who is also working with the County and other county jurisdictions, to draft and approve its Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH) Plan. The City’s assessment of its affirmative marketing actions for HOME units is adequate. We are hopeful that when the AFFH is completed, it will help in bolstering our efforts.
2021-2022 CAPER 25
Refer to IDIS reports to describe the amount and use of program income for projects, including the number of projects and owner and tenant characteristics According to IDIS report PR09, the following receipts and draws occurred during the PY:
- Receipts: $220,773.57 (from PY2021)
- Draws: $334,301.83 (from 2020 PI)
$ 22,077.33 (from 2021 PI)
Of the $220,773.57 of PI receipted in PY2021, the City used $22,077.33 for administrative purposes. The remaining PI received will be programmed in the following annual action plan.

Program Income from prior years was used for the TBRA program which benefits homeless families or families at risk of becoming homeless with an income at or below 60% of Area Median Income (AMI). 46 of the 48 households had an income between 0-30% of AMI, 1 was between 31-50% of AMI, and 1 was between 51-60% of AMI.

Describe other actions taken to foster and maintain affordable housing. 91.220(k) STATES ONLY: Including the coordination of LIHTC with the development of affordable housing). 91.320(j) The City of Santa Clara is committed to ensuring availability of affordable housing to moderate, low, very-low and extremely-low income households through the adoption of the Affordable Housing Ordinance and Impact Fees. The new requirements include a combination of inclusionary requirements for residential projects and impact fees for smaller projects and nonresidential projects to provide a steady stream of affordable housing units and income to fund the provision of affordable housing projects across the City.

The current rental development pipeline is robust. The City works with the County of Santa Clara to infuse Measure A funds into affordable rental projects. The rental development pipeline is shown in the table below.

Project ELI
< 30% AMI
VLI
30 50% AMI
LI
50-80% AMI
Mod
80-120% AMI
Totals
90 N Winchester (Corre) 59 72 32 18 181
2330 Monroe Street (Freebird) 16 10 29 10 65
3575 De La Cruz (Habitat) 0 0 6 7 13
2094 Corvin (Abode Services) 80 64 0 1 145
3337 Kifer Rd. (Abode Services) 35 35 0 0 70
1601 Civic Center Dr. (Charities) 40 40 40 0 120
2233 Calle Del Mundo (St. Anton) 0 37 158 1 196
2310 Calle Del Mundo (Ensemble) 0 32 103 15 150
Totals 230 290 368 52 940
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1099 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Public Hearing: Actions on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), General Plan Amendment from Community Commercial to High Density Residential, Rezone from General Office (OG) to Planned Development (PD), and density bonus agreement to allow a multifamily affordable housing development with 108 rental units at 1601 Civic Center Drive

COUNCIL PILLAR
Promote and Enhance Economic, Housing and Transportation Development.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Charities Housing, property owner, is proposing to construct a five-story 100% affordable housing development consisting of 108 apartments, 82 parking spaces, landscaping, and private and public amenities on a 1.4-acre parcel, along with public right-of-way improvements at 1601 Civic Center Drive. The site is developed with a 28,950 square foot two-story office building, that has been vacant since 2019, surface parking lot and site landscaping. The project involves demolition of the existing structure and site improvements with project development.

The proposed project includes a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) (SCH#2022060217) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP); a General Plan Amendment from Community Commercial to High Density Residential, a Density Bonus, and a Rezone from General Office (OG) to Planned Development (PD) (PLN21-15206). These entitlements together would allow construction of 108 rental units at 76.6 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) with studio, one- two- and three- bedroom units, common and private open space, resident services and amenities, shared parking and associated on- and off-site improvements. The affordable housing units, with rents set to be affordable to 30 to 50 percent Annual Median Income (AMI) levels, would be secured with an Affordable Housing Agreement between Charities Housing and the City.

BACKGROUND
The project site is located adjacent to the El Camino Real Corridor. While it is not located in the El Camino Real Focus Area, it was included in the Draft El Camino Real Specific Plan initiated by the City Council in 2017. The Council initiated preparation of the Specific Plan to provide a more detailed level of policy and design guidance to support the successful transformation of the El Camino Real corridor and to refine the allowed land uses and density levels along the corridor. A Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) was appointed to guide the Specific Plan planning process.

The Draft Specific Plan was presented to City Council for adoption at the June 15, 2021 City Council meeting. The Draft Specific Plan included three proposed land use designations, as recommended by the CAC, supporting residential and mixed-use development at low (Corridor Residential), medium City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 6 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1099 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
(Corridor Mixed Use) and higher (Regional Mixed Use) densities. As identified by the CAC, the project site was designated Corridor Mixed Use which would allow four- to five-story residential development at 45 to 65 du/ac in the Draft Specific Plan.

At the conclusion of the City Council’s consideration of the item, the City Council directed staff to modify the proposed Specific Land Use designations to establish reduced height limits and densities as follows: no more than two-stories for Corridor Residential, no more than three stories for Corridor Mixed-Use, and no more than four stories for Regional Mixed-Use. On July 6, 2021, the City Council affirmed their direction for staff to prepare an alternative form of the Specific Plan that reduces densities from the prior draft. At their meeting of October 19, 2021. The City Council again directed staff to proceed with modification of the Specific Plan to include height limits; to continue consideration of the first Draft Specific Plan; and to prepare an analysis comparing the economic feasibility of the two different land use plans. At the time of this staff report, the additional Specific Plan work has been funded within the City’s budget, and staff is now initiating a work program to modify the Plan per City Council’s direction.

DISCUSSION
For analysis on the project’s proposed General Plan Amendment, rezoning, and use of the State of California’s Density Bonus Law, see the staff report prepared for the Planning Commission and provided here as Attachment 4.

The project was presented to the Planning Commission at a noticed public meeting on August 3, 2022. Joe Head and Hai Nguyen, representing Charities Housing were present at the meeting and 30 individuals that included community residents and interested organizations participated virtually by Zoom. All correspondence received prior to publication of the Planning Commission Staff Report was included as an attachment to the Staff Report; comments received after publication and before 5:00 p.m. the day of the Planning Commission meeting were distributed at the meeting to the Commissioners; and all e-comments received at the Planning Commission meeting were read into the record during public comment.

At this meeting, staff provided an overview of the proposal and the applicant, representatives of Charities Housing, gave a presentation of the proposed project. The representatives then responded to questions by the Planning Commissioners regarding site selection, changes made to the project, rents assigned to the affordability levels, tenancy, shade and shadow effects on neighboring properties, allocation of on-site parking, provision of transit passes, exploration of shared parking opportunities, and on-site management and security. Public discussion followed with neighboring residents expressing their opposition to the project and management by Charities Housing. The issues raised throughout the planning process for the project include density, shade and shadow impacts, tenancy, site access, parking on- and off-site, construction impacts, noise, security, crime, and site management and are conveyed in Attachment 9. Individuals representing environmental organizations and housing advocacy groups expressed support of the project for site location, transit accessibility, provision of needed affordable housing, integration of the development into the community, provision of on-site resident services and amenities, and connectivity to neighborhood and commercial uses, services, schools and employment.

Following the close of public hearing, the Planning Commission discussed the project and expressed their concerns with the level of public opposition, displeasure with the initial management of the property, reduced parking count and critical need for affordable housing. The Commissioners City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 6 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1099 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
proposed additional measures to the Charites Housing representatives to address parking, site management and security, and post construction engagement with the neighbors. The representatives were receptive to the measures proposed by the Commission and agreed to the added conditions iterated below.

The Planning Commission then concluded their deliberation with the following motions:

1. Adopt a resolution recommending that Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Civic Center Family Housing Project (5-0-2-0).

2. Adopt a resolution recommending Council approve a General Plan Amendment from Community Commercial to High Density Residential (5-0-2-0).

3. Adopt a resolution to approve a Rezone from General Office (OG) to Planned Development (PD) to allow a five-story affordable housing development with 108 rental units, on-site parking and amenities, landscaping, and off-site improvements, with the following recommended added conditions (4-1-2-0):
· Charities Housing to provide a transit pass upon request for each tenant. · Continue community outreach with neighbors through an oversight program provided by the Applicant to the satisfaction of Director of Community Development. · Designate a ride share area within the project site to the satisfaction of Director of Community Development.
· Include a venue for the display of public art with consideration towards Native American artists.
· Give serious consideration to establishing a shared parking arrangement with commercial and City buildings in area.
· Failure by the developer or any contractor to comply with mitigation measures or other conditions (including, but not limited to, emissions, noise, street cleaning, and dust control) will subject the developer to code enforcement under the City Code. · Charities shall install a security system approved by the Director of Community Development, with security to be recorded and monitored with approximately 50 cameras.

At the Director’s discretion, monitoring may be required to be conducted in real-time by security personnel.

An excerpt of the Planning Commission meeting minutes is provided as Attachment 3 for review. The added conditions of approval recommended by the Planning Commission are incorporated as Conditions P13 through P19 in Attachment 8.

Conclusion
The Project would redevelop an underutilized and currently unoccupied parcel to construct 108 affordable housing units and provide housing opportunities for individuals and families with income levels between 30 to 50 percent AMI; which support the City’s Housing Goals and assist the City in achieving RHNA targets for production of affordable housing units as mandated by the State. The General Plan Amendment to allow residential development along with a density bonus would facilitate affordable housing development on the Project Site through an increase in residential density and building height to make the Project economically feasible to construct. As required by Santa Clara City Code Section 18.78.060, a Density Bonus Housing Agreement must be approved prior to the issuance of building permits. The building footprint and height allow the project to City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 6 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1099 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
maximize open space and private use by the residents, while providing housing at a higher density, and includes common space that is available to the community.

A detailed discussion of the projects’ conformance with the City’s 2010 - 2035 General Plan policies, site design and architecture, circulation and parking, and landscaping and open space is provided for review in Attachment 4 - Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachment 10 - Development Plans.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project by the environmental consultant firm David J. Powers & Associate, Inc., in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The MND and Notice of Availability were posted on the City’s website at <https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/departments-a-f/community-development/planningdivision/environmental-review-ceqa> and circulated for 30-day review on June 13, 2022 and ending on July 12, 2022, in accordance with CEQA requirements. The Planning Department received agency comments on the MND from Valley Water, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, Department of Toxic Substances Control and public comments from Jamie Lau, Keyhan Sinai, Jean Song, and David Bayto which are provided as Attachment 3 to this report, along with responses to comments for review.

The MND examined potential environmental impacts associated with project development and identified air quality biological, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise 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 the MMRP (available on the above web link) and project conditions of approval (Attachment 8).

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the City for processing the requested application other than administrative time and expense typically covered by processing fees paid by the applicant.

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

On June 22, 2022, the notice of public hearing for this item was posted in three conspicuous places within 300 feet of the project site and was mailed to property owners within 1,000 feet of the project site boundaries. A notice of public hearing was also published in the Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation in the City on July 20, 2022. The Planning Department has received comments City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 6 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1099 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022
on the project and are provided in Attachment 9 to this report for review.

Virtual public outreach meetings were conducted by Charities Housing on November 10, 2021, June 29, 2022, and July 27, 2022 to engage the neighborhood community in the planning process. Notices of the meeting were mailed by the applicant to property owners within 500 feet of the project boundaries and interested parties and was also posted on the City’s website. These meetings provided the community the opportunity to convey their concerns to Charities Housing regarding their property management (both past and future); the type and density of housing proposed for the site; five-story building height and shade/shadow effects on neighboring residential properties; driveway access on Civic Center Drive; impacts of reduced parking and off-site parking on Civic Center Drive; construction related impacts and enforcement of mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts; noise from construction; and type of tenants, crime and security with occupancy.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Adopt a resolution to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Civic Center Family Housing Project.

2. Adopt a resolution to approve a General Plan Amendment from Community Commercial to High Density Residential.

3. Adopt a resolution to approve a Rezone from General Office (OG) to Planned Development (PD) to allow a five-story affordable housing development with 108 rental units, on-site parking and amenities, landscaping, and off-site improvements.

4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a density bonus agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney.

5. Deny a General Plan Amendment from Community Commercial to High Density Residential.

6. Deny a rezone from General Office (OG) to Planned Development (PD) to allow a five-story affordable housing development with 108 rental units, on-site parking and amenities, landscaping, and off-site improvements.

RECOMMENDATION
Alternative: 1, 2, 3 and 4

1. Adopt a resolution to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Civic Center Family Housing Project.

2. Adopt a resolution to approve a General Plan Amendment from Community Commercial to High Density Residential.

3. Adopt a resolution to approve a Rezone from General Office (OG) to Planned Development (PD) to allow a five-story affordable housing development with 108 rental units, on-site parking and amenities, landscaping, and off-site improvements.

4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a density bonus agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney.

Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Community Development Director Approved by: Rajeev, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Web Link)

2. Responses to Comments received on the Mitigated Negative Declaration

3. Excerpt Planning Commission meeting minutes of August 3, 2022 City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 6 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1099 Agenda Date: 9/27/2022

4. Planning Commission Staff Report of August 3, 2022.

5. Resolution Recommending Council Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

6. Resolution Recommending Council Approve the General Plan Amendment

7. Resolution Recommending the Council Approve the Rezone

8. Conditions of Rezoning Approval

9. Correspondence

10. Petition

11. Development Plans
City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 6 Printed on 9/22/2022
powered by Legistar™
Civic Center Family Housing Project
Mitigated Negative Declaration
and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
https://www.santaclaraca.gov/Home/Components/BusinessDirectory/BusinessDirectory/ 451/3649?alpha=C

CIVIC CENTER FAMILY HOUSING PROJECT

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
The Civic Center Family Housing Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared and evaluated in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Santa Clara. The Initial Study/MND was circulated for 30 days from June 13 to July 12, 2022. The City received eight comment letters during the public comment period:

Comment Letters Received by the City from State, County, or Local agencies:

A. Department of Toxic Substances Control July 8, 2022
B. Valley Water July 8, 2022
C. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority July 12, 2022 C. Sneha Shah July 6, 2022
D. Keyhan Sinai July 6, 2022
F. Jamie Lau July 11, 2022
G Jean Song July 12, 2022
H. David Bayto July 12, 2022
This memo responses to public comments on the Initial Study/MND as they relate to the potential environmental impacts of the project under CEQA. Numbered responses correspond to comments in each comment letter. Copies of all comment letters are attached.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 2 Response to Comments Memo Comment Letter A: Department of Toxic Substances Control – July 8, 2022 Comment A-1: The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) received a Notice of Availability of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Civic Center Drive Family Housing Project (Project). The Lead Agency is receiving this notice from DTSC because the Project includes one or more of the following: groundbreaking activities, work in close proximity to a roadway, presence of site buildings that may require demolition or modifications, importation of backfill soil, and/or work on or in close proximity to an agricultural or former agricultural site.

DTSC recommends that the following issues be evaluated in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the MND:

1. The MND should acknowledge the potential for historic or future activities on or near the Project site to result in the release of hazardous wastes/substances on the Project site. In instances where releases have occurred or may occur, further studies should be carried out to delineate the nature and extent of the contamination, and the potential threat to public health and/or the environment should be evaluated. Section 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials of the Draft Initial Study prepared by the City of Santa Clara dated June 2022 makes reference to a Phase II Subsurface Investigation prepared by Professional Service Industries, Inc. in February 2022, but the data presented therein is not available for review as this document does not appear to be included in the Draft Initial Study. The MND should also identify the mechanism(s) to initiate any required investigation and/or remediation and the government agency who will be responsible for providing appropriate regulatory oversight.

Response A-1: DTSC is correct that the Phase II was not included in the distributed materials. The document has been provided to DTSC for review and posted to the State Clearinghouse. The findings of the Phase II are, however, summarized on page 81 of the Initial Study. As stated in the Initial Study:
“A total of 10 soil borings were taken on the project site with soil samples taken at one and four feet bgs. Groundwater was not encountering in any soil borings. The samples were tested for chlorinated pesticides and one sample was found to have a measurable concentration of DDE at 0.054 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). The RWQCB Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) for residential land uses have a threshold of 0.65 mg/kg. The level of contamination documented on-site is below the ESL residential threshold.”
Furthermore, as explained on page 82 of the Initial Study, no off-site releases have impacted the project site. The analysis concluded that construction and operation of the proposed project would have a less than significant hazards and hazardous materials impact.

Furthermore, the project was found to be consistent with all applicable City policies pertaining to potential safety risks for future site residents and hazardous materials.

Therefore, no mitigation or oversight is required.

Comment A-2: 2. Refiners in the United States started adding lead compounds to gasoline in the 1920s in order to boost octane levels and improve engine performance. This practice did not officially end until 1992 when lead was banned as a fuel additive in California. Tailpipe emissions from automobiles using leaded gasoline contained lead and resulted in aerially deposited lead (ADL)being deposited in and alongside roadways throughout the state. ADL-contaminated soils still exist along roadsides and medians and can also be found under some existing road surfaces due to Civic Center Family Housing Project 3 Response to Comments Memo past construction activities. Due to the potential for ADL-contaminated soil, DTSC recommends collecting soil samples for lead analysis prior to preforming any intrusive activities for the Project described in the MND.

Response A-2: As a Condition of Approval, the City will require soil sampling for lead prior to issuance of a grading permit.

Comment A-3: 3. If buildings or other structures are to be demolished on any project sites including in the proposed project, surveys should be conducted for the presence of lead-based paints or products, mercury, asbestos containing materials, and polychlorinated biphenyl caulk. Removal, demolition and disposal of any of the above-mentioned chemicals should be conducted in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies. In addition, sampling near current and/or former buildings should be conducted in accordance with DTSC’s 2006 Interim Guidance Evaluation of School Sites with Potential Contamination from Lead Based Paint, Termiticides, and Electrical Transformers.

Response A-3: Page 81 of the Initial Study addresses the potential for lead-based paint and asbestos containing materials to be on-site due to the age of the existing building. Page 86 of the Initial Study outlines the Conditions of Project Approval required by the project to address these contaminants consistent with Cal/OSHA and Bay Area Air Quality Management District regulations. The Phase I did not identify polychlorinated biphenyls or mercury as an environmental condition.

Comment A-4: 4. If any projects initiated as part of the proposed Project require the importation of soil to backfill any excavated areas, proper sampling should be conducted to ensure that the imported soil is free of contamination. DTSC recommends the imported materials be characterized according to DTSC’s 201 Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material.

Response A-4: The commenters recommendation to require sampling of imported fill (if any is required) consistent with DTSC’s 201 Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material will be provided to the decision-makers during consideration of the proposed project.

Comment A-5: 5. If any sites included as part of the proposed Project have been used for agricultural, weed abatement or related activities, proper investigation for organochlorinated pesticides should be discussed in the MND. DTSC recommends the current and former agricultural lands be evaluated in accordance with DTSC’s 2008 Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties (Third Revision).

Response A-5: As discussed in Response A-1, 10 soil borings were taken on the project site and tested for chlorinated pesticides. Only one sample was found to have a measurable concentration of DDE at 0.054 mg/kg, which is below the ESL residential threshold.

Comment A-6: DTSC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the MND. Should you need any assistance with an environmental investigation, please visit DTSC’s Site Mitigation and Restoration Program page to apply for lead agency oversight. Additional information regarding voluntary agreements with DTSC can be found at DTSC’s Brownfield website.

Response A-6: This comment is noted.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 4 Response to Comments Memo Comment Letter B: Valley Water – July 8, 2022
Comment B-1: Valley Water has reviewed the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Civic Center Drive Family Housing Project, received on June 10, 2022. Valley Water has the following comments on the subject IS/MND document:

1. Section 4.10.1.1- Municipal Regional Permit Provision C.3 should note that the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has renewed the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit on May 11, 2022 (Order No. R2-2022-0018, NPDES Permit No.

CAS612008).

Response B-1: This edit is incorporated into the Initial Study/MND by reference. See the attached errata sheet.

Comment B-2: 2. Section 4.10.1.1- Water Resources Protection Ordinance and Well Ordinance, the text should also include: “Valley Water also provides stream stewardship and is the wholesale water supplier throughout the county, which includes the groundwater recharge program.” Response B-2: This edit is incorporated into the Initial Study/MND by reference. See the attached errata sheet.

Comment B-3: 3. Section 4.10.1.1- Water Resources Protection Ordinance and Well Ordinance, the language under this section should be revised to clarify that well construction and deconstruction permits, including borings 45 feet or deeper, are required under Valley Water’s Well Ordinance 90-1.

Under Valley Water’s Water Resources Protection Ordinance, projects within Valley Water property or easements are required to obtain encroachment permits.

Response B-3: This edit is incorporated into the Initial Study/MND by reference. See the attached errata sheet.

Comment B-4: 4. Section 4.10.1.1- 2016 Groundwater Management Plan, this section includes a subsection on Valley Water’s 2016 Groundwater Management Plan. The subsection should be updated to reference Valley Water’s updated 2021 Groundwater Management Plan which was adopted by the Board of Directors on November 21, 2021. The updated plan can be found at https://s3.uswest2.amazonaws.com/assets.valleywater.org/2021_GWMP_web_version.pdf.

Response B-4: This edit is incorporated into the Initial Study/MND by reference. See the attached errata sheet.

Comment B-5: 5. Section 4.10.1.2- Storm Drain System, states that the project site drains to a vegetated channel based on Valley Water’s Storm Drain Catchment Map. Valley Water’s catchment map notes the site drains to the Guadalupe River; however, it is not clear from the discussions in the MND if the drainage from the site is directed to storm drains that discharge to the Guadalupe River or San Tomas Creek. Please revise the document for consistency and accuracy.

Response B-5: The Initial Study/MND will be edited to correct the reference to Guadalupe River. See the attached errata sheet.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 5 Response to Comments Memo Comment B-6: 6. Section 4.10.1.2- Stormwater Drainage, states that “all stormwater enters Guadalupe River through the existing stormwater discharge system” which conflicts with Section

4.10.1.2 on page 93 which states that “all stormwater enters the San Tomas Aquino Creek through the existing stormwater drainage system”. The discussion about drainage at the site should be consistent throughout the document.

Response B-6: Refer to Response B-5.

Comment B-7: 7. Section 4.10.1.2- Dam Failure and Section 4.10.2- Impact HYF-4, describes the project as within both the Lexington Dam and Anderson Dam failure inundation zones; however, the project site is only located within the James J. Lenihan Dam on Lexington Reservoir failure inundation zone. Anderson Dam should be removed from the discussion.

Response B-7: The Initial Study/MND is correct as written. Page 94 and 99 of the Initial Study/MND specifically state that the site is outside the Anderson Dame inundation zone.

Comment B-8: 8. Section 4.21- Cumulative Hydrology Impacts, states “the geographic area for the cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts is the San Tomas Aquino Creek Watershed”. This should be corrected to the Guadalupe River Watershed.

Response B-8: This edit is incorporated into the Initial Study/MND by reference. See the attached errata sheet.

Comment B-9: 9. The buildout of the project will increase water use by an estimated 36 acre-feet per year. Although the MND concludes that the project can be accommodated by existing and planned water sources, given regional and state-wide challenges with water supply, water use should still be reduced to the greatest extent possible. Potential opportunities to minimize water and associated energy use include requiring water conservation measures from the Model Water Efficient New Development Ordinance, which include:
• Hot water recirculation systems.
• Require installation of separate submeters to each unit in multi-family developments and individual spaces within commercial buildings to encourage efficient water use - studies have shown that adding submeters can reduce water use by 15 to 30 percent. • Graywater dual distribution plumbing.
• Encourage non-potable reuse of water like recycled water, graywater, and rainwater/stormwater in new development and remodels through the installation of dual plumbing for irrigation, toilet flushing, cooling towers, and other non-potable water uses. • Require dedicated landscape meters where applicable.
• Weather- or soil-based irrigation controllers.

If you have any questions, you may reach me at (408) 630-2479, or by e-mail at [email protected]. Please reference District File No. 34738 on future correspondence regarding this project.

Response B-9: The commenter’s recommendations for reducing water usage on-site will be provided to the decision-makers. This comment does not speak to the adequacy of the Initial Study/MND, and no text edits are required.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 6 Response to Comments Memo Comment Letter C: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority – July 12, 2022 Comment C-1: VTA appreciates the opportunity to comment on the IS/MND for the Civic Center Drive Family Housing Project at 1601 Civic Center Drive. VTA has reviewed the document and has the following comments:

Pedestrian Improvements
This project is located one block from El Camino Real, VTA’s highest ridership roadway. VTA recommends this project install or upgrade existing crosswalks at the Civic Center Drive/Lincoln Street intersection to high visibility to facilitate more comfortable crossings at this intersection. As this intersection is also skewed, VTA suggests the long crossings be shortened through curb extensions with to help tighten the turning radii and slow drivers down in the area. Installing a curb extension at the northwest corner of the intersection would provide room for new ADA-compliant directional curb ramps that would serve both crosswalks. This should enhance the proposed improvements in the city’s Pedestrian Master Plan for the intersection of Lincoln Street/El Camino Real, one block south.

Response C-1: The commenter’s recommendations for pedestrian improvements will be provided to the decision-makers. This comment does not speak to the adequacy of the Initial Study/MND, and no text edits are required.

Comment C-2: Bicycle Improvements
VTA appreciates the project including a bicycle storage room for residents. VTA recommends the project increase the number of available spaces to at least match 1 space per unit (108 spaces) to meet VTA’s recommended bicycle parking guidance in Chapter 10 of our Bicycle Technical Guidelines. This can be accessed at https://www.vta.org/sites/default/files/2022- 03/vta_bicycle_technical_guidelines_complete_1.pdf.

The Revised Development Plans from May 2022 show that the bicycle room is located on the east side of the building. VTA recommends the access from the room directly out to Lincoln Street be removed to reduce the risk of theft. Doing so will allow for more wall space to fit more bicycle spaces. VTA also recommends that the door into the room from the garage have ADA-compliant kick plates to automatically open. Industrial strength sliding doors are recommended over swinging doors as the closing of the door can be timed for ADA compliance while also helping to prevent unwanted people from tailgating behind users. The path of travel should be well lit. Any elevators for the project should accommodate multiple large bicycles.

Response C-2: The commenter’s recommendations for bicycle improvements will be provided to the decision-makers. This comment does not speak to the adequacy of the Initial Study/MND, and no text edits are required.

Comment C-3: AHSC Grant Potential
VTA believes this project would be highly competitive for the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Grant administered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. The AHSC Grant funds land-use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects to support infill and compact development that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. VTA would like to begin working with the City and the developer to strategize for an AHSC application because this project proposes a high number of affordable housing units near Route 22 and Rapid 522 routes that are major bus corridors and frequent (15 minute) routes. Close collaboration between Civic Center Family Housing Project 7 Response to Comments Memo developer, City of Santa Clara and VTA can make for a highly competitive application. VTA has had two calls to date with the developer and their technical assistance provider Enterprise Community Partners. VTA has experience working on five AHSC applications to date, include two awards in 2019 in partnership with the City of San Jose and one award in 2021 for a VTA project in San Jose at Tamien Station.

Potential El Camino Real Qualifiable AHSC Improvements
• Transit signal priority upgrades
• Bus stop enhancements
• ADA improvements near bus stops
• Protected bikeway enhancements
• Intersection safety enhancements
• Sidewalk improvements
Santa Clara Station Qualifiable AHSC Improvements
Recent discussions and briefings have occurred between the BART Silicon Valley II program team and VTA planning about future coordination of bicycle and pedestrian station amenity improvements at the Santa Clara Station. Qualifiable AHSC improvements could be included in a 1601 Civic Center Drive AHSC grant at this location because Route 22 and Rapid 522 both serve the station.

Potential improvements could include the following:
• Bicycle ramps
• Escalator installation or improvements
• Bus stop enhancements
• Real-time information signs
• Marketing or advertising signs
• Gateway, signage or customer wayfinding enhancements
Response C-1: If the project is approved and the grant opportunities are sought, the City will coordinate with the VTA. This comment does not speak to the adequacy of the Initial Study/MND, and no text edits are required.

Comment Letter D: Sneha Shah – July 6, 2022
Comment D-1: I am greatly concerned and absolutely condemn the new construction proposed by Charities Housing at 1601 Civic Center Dr, Santa Clara. They are not ethical and have provided no due diligence to the property and are an absolute nuisance as a neighbor.

Their environmental study of the project is an example of their bad ethics and lack of diligence. Our neighbors have the following concerns that should be addressed, otherwise we feel the city and council have failed us.
• Transportation Study recommends the project to have only one driveway entrance to reduce pedestrian and traffic safety risk. The project currently plans to have two driveways – one on Civic Center Drive adjacent to Triton Court, another one on Lincoln Street. Our community requests to have the driveway on Lincoln Street only and away from existing homes on Civic Center Drive. The developer was unable to accommodate it.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 8 Response to Comments Memo Response D-1: While the traffic study recommends one driveway, the City has concluded that two driveways are necessary due to site constraints and for distribution of traffic and to reduce noise.

Comment D-2: The security risks of the open parking lot adjacent to Triton Court are not considered in the environmental study. The open parking lot is currently not designed with any security gate and is out of sight from the main street. This can become a hidden alley for dumping, car break-ins and other criminal activities. Even if it is designed with a secured gate, according to posted tenant comments from other CH properties, broken security gates are not fixed promptly.

Response D-2: All proposed projects in the City undergo review by the Santa Clara Police Department (SCPD). The SCPD did not identify any issues with the proposed design. The driveway and parking lot would be visible at all times by the residents of the project site.

Furthermore, the proposed driveway and associated parking lot on Civic Center Drive has better visibility from publicly accessible viewpoints than the adjacent driveway and parking lot located between the church and Triton Court.

The commenter provided no documentation regarding the purported comments from other CH properties. As such, no evaluation of these comments can be made by the City and no response is possible.

Comment D-3: Transportation Study did not consider the sight distance for drivers coming out of Triton Court with the new driveway at Civic Center Drive from the project. Both driveways are very close together and may be a safety risk if the drivers from both driveways are coming out simultaneously.

Response D-3: The transportation study did address the potential conflicts from the proposed location of the driveways on-site. As discussed on Page 4 of the transportation study, drivers must be able to see 200 feet in both directions to be able to safely enter/exit the proposed driveways. The project would meet this criterion. The project drive on Civic Center Drive would also be approximately 100 feet from cars exiting Triton Court. Given the site distances and the distance between exiting cars at both driveways, the proposed project would not create a safety risk for persons exiting Triton Court.

Comment D-4: Parking study was not considered as part of the environmental study. Project's less than 1:1 parking space to unit ratio will burden the existing street parking situation. Also, the project may eliminate many street parking along its frontage at Civic Center Drive as it could be red-zoned for sight clearance, while some for white-zoned for loading as recommended by the Transportation Study.

Response D-4: Parking or lack thereof is not considered a physical effect under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is, therefore, not addressed. A project need only meet the City’s parking requirements. The potential loss of street parking is also not a physical effect under CEQA. Per the Santa Clara Fire Department and Public Works, the City will allow a loading zone and will require the red curbs as recommended by the traffic report.

Comment D-5: Shadow study was not considered at all, though there is a negative impact to the adjacent family homes.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 9 Response to Comments Memo Response D-5: The City of Santa Clara does not have a threshold by which to address increased shading by any project. Therefore, shading was not addressed in the Initial Study.

Comment D-6: Noise Study uses a noise threshold (90 dBA) from a 2018 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) assessment as a criteria to determine construction noise impact to residential homes. The FTA assessment noted its criteria is not meant as construction standards for all, but CH's noise study decided to use that on a residential project study. FTA projects are mostly construction for transportation projects like train stations and rail lines in populated areas, the guidelines are therefore likely to have a higher noise threshold. This standard may not be suitable for the 1601 Civic Center site. The noise study should have used residential construction guidelines from similar projects in kind, and considered the delta to existing ambient noise instead. The study has used 90 dBA as a threshold and that's equivalent to a lawn mower.

Response D-6: The noise study was commissioned by the environmental consultant under direction by City staff. The project applicant has no authority over the analysis in the Initial Study/MND or the methodologies used in the analysis.

The commenter mischaracterized the language in the FTA manual. Chapter 7, page 172 of the PDF document (https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no0123_0.pdf) specifically states:
“Generally, local noise ordinances are not very useful for evaluating construction noise impact. They usually relate to nuisance and hours of allowed activity, and sometimes specify limits in terms of maximum levels, but are generally not practical for assessing the impact of a construction project. Project construction noise criteria should take into account the existing noise environment, the absolute noise levels during construction activities, the duration of the construction, and the adjacent land uses. While it is not the purpose of this manual to specify standardized criteria for construction noise impact, the following guidelines can be considered reasonable criteria for assessment. If these criteria are exceeded, there may be adverse community reaction.”
As discussed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b), the determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for judgment on the part of the lead agency and must be based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data. The City of Santa Clara does not have adopted construction noise thresholds. As such, the City and the noise consultant concluded that the FTA thresholds represent reasonable criteria to quantify construction noise impacts, consistent with other local jurisdictions. This is an accepted industry standard, in the absence of local criteria. Therefore, the thresholds and methodology used to assess construction noise impacts from the proposed project are appropriate.

Comment D-7: The permanent noise impact study did not consider the scenario when a car with loud exhaust and building fire alarms can affect permanent noise level of adjacent homes. Also, delivery trucks and moving trucks coming in and out frequently on the Civic Center Driveway were not considered.

Response D-7: Both car exhaust and building fire alarms are temporary noise events. In order for either of these events to result in a permanent increase in ambient noise levels, these events would have to occur non-stop over an extended time period (multiple hours) every day. This is not an accurate or reasonable representation of a residential project. CEQA does not allow for speculative analysis (Section 15145).

Civic Center Family Housing Project 10 Response to Comments Memo It is not clear what the commenter considers frequent with regard to delivery trucks and moving trucks, but it would be speculative to assume that the proposed project would have any greater frequency of these types of events than other types of housing as this is not temporary housing.

Comment D-8: The environmental study did not consider the project's architectural aesthetic to the surrounding due to being an affordable high-density housing. In some neighbor's opinions, The 5- story building does not fit in with the adjacent 2-story homes, or surrounding homes.

Response D-8: As discussed on page 19 of the Initial Study, the project side is located in a transit priority area as designated by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). Consistent with state law, residential infill projects in transit priority areas shall not be considered to have a significant aesthetic impact on the environment. Furthermore, while the houses immediately adjacent to the project site are two-story, there are three-story townhouses and a seven-story apartment complex in the immediate vicinity (Civic Center Drive and Warburton). As a result, a fivestory building would be consistent with the mix of residential densities in this area.

Comment D-9: The project is not close to a transit hub like a BART or Caltrain station. There's only bus stops nearby with infrequent services unless it's peak hours. Public transportation is not a reliable option for daily commute for work or school at this site. There is no bus route going to Buchser Middle School and Santa Clara High School.

Response D-9: The project site is within 1,000 feet of two bus stops which are served by Bus 22, the most active bus line in the County which runs from Palo Alto to East San José. Also, within 2,000 feet (standard transit access walking distance) are Routes 32, 59, and Rapid 522 (see page 142-143 of Initial Study). Bike lanes are also planned on El Camino Real. As such, the site is well suited for the proposed project as it is also within walking or biking distance to shopping and services on El Camino Real.

Comment D-10: The schools' existing capacity in the Initial Study was sourced from a 2017 data, which is about 5 years old. The Santa Clara High School enrollment is already operating over capacity according to the study with the old data. Also, to a neighbor's knowledge, Busher Middle School has no more space for newcomers as it does not accept a second round of enrollment for 2022, indicating operating at capacity. The school impact study may not be accurate due to old data being used. The mitigation for school impact is for the project to pay fees to the school district to offset the impact, but will the schools be able to implement changes to provide adequate spaces to neighborhood students?
Response D-10: Existing capacity is the number of students that can be reasonably accommodated by a school. None of the schools analyzed have been expanded or modified since 2017, so the existing capacity numbers provided by the school district are valid. Current enrollment numbers were provided by the California Department of Education and represent the best available data at the time the analysis was completed. As the commenter noted, the mitigation for additional students is to pay the school impact fee. School impact fees are discussed on Pages 129 and 134 of the Initial Study/MND. As noted on Page 129, “Government Code Sections 65995 through 65998 set forth provisions for the payment of school impact fees by new development by “mitigating impacts on school facilities that occur (as a result of the planning, use, or development of real property” (Section 65996[a]). The legislation states that the payment of school impact fees “are hereby deemed to provide full and complete school facilities mitigation” under CEQA (Section 65996[b]).” Civic Center Family Housing Project 11 Response to Comments Memo Each school utilizes the monies as necessary to accommodate any additional students. As this is deemed appropriate and adequate mitigation by the state, no further mitigation is required.

Comment D-11: The project does not have underground parking as encouraged by City's General Plan guidelines.

Response D-11: General Plan Policy 5.3.2-P3 encourages but does not require below-grade or structured parking, so the proposed parking is not inconsistent with this policy.

Comment D-12: The general plan amendment and rezone from commercial to residential for 1601 Civic Center will permanently remove the commercial land use that was designated to serve the planned residential areas surrounding the location, as City Hall, church and medical building lots' planned use until 2035 is residential. The amendment and rezone of site in question does not align with City's General Plan and is shortsighted.

Response D-12: Changing a land use from commercial to residential in a mixed-use area with adjacent residential is not inconsistent with the existing development in the area.

Furthermore, the City has a jobs/housing imbalance (Page 126 of the Initial Study/MND) and must continue to build housing to meet state mandated housing requirements. Currently, the City must build 11,632 new housing units by 2031 under the Association of Bay Area Governments Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The RNHA is mandated by state law.

Comment Letter E: Keyhan Sinai – July 6, 2022
Comment E-1: I hereby strongly and formally object to the "mitigated negative declaration " or MND prepared pursuant to CEQA, for the proposed 1601 Civic Center Drive project.

I believe there is not adequate mitigation for the problems below.

My home at 1691 Triton Ct. is identified as RED on page 36 of the MND report, and is wall-to-wall with 1601 Civic Center Drive. As I understand my home will be exposed to dangerously high cancercausing agents from the construction site equipment for an extended period of time. We do not believe the mitigation measures proposed will reduce the risk of exposure to cancer and other toxic agents adequately or mitigate the risk of accidents and malfunctions. We do not feel safe breathing the air in our home if/when this project starts.

Response E-1: This comment is noted. Please see responses to specific comments below.

Comment E-2: Please note the following points:

1. Charities Housings Credit History of mitigation efforts is terrible. Their mitigation measures (a $2000 perimeter fence) came too late and exposed our homes for 13 months to petty crime and blight a few yards from our property line culminating in dumping of a toilet tank full of human feces within a few yards of our home which took them 4 days to clean. We suffered 4 days of intolerable odors and exposure to airborne bacteria and viruses from the dumped human feces during the peak of the Covid-19 crisis. Charities Housing was nowhere to be seen during any part of our 13 month ordeal to take any mitigation steps. FYI The dumping of feces was reported by us not them. Stating that we "did not know" makes matters worse (how can you not know for 13 long months?) and is proof of negligence, lack of accountability and a cavalier attitude towards neighbors' safety and well being. We have no reason to believe Charities Housing will take responsibility for the hazards and nuisance it has imposed or will impose upon its neighbors in Civic Center Family Housing Project 12 Response to Comments Memo the future. Hiding under the cover of a "mitigated negative declaration" does not absolve them of responsibility and does not address the true actual risks to us neighbors, with my home being one of the most impacted.

Response E-2: As stated on Page 1 of the Initial Study, the City of Santa Clara is the Lead Agency for this project and prepared the Initial Study/MND in accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations §15000 et. seq.) and the regulations and policies of the City of Santa Clara, California. Project applicants are not involved in the preparation of the CEQA documents and are required through permitting processes and regulatory oversight to properly implement the mitigation measures and conditions of approval identified in the Initial Study/MND.

The intent and purpose of the Initial Study/MND is to provide the public and decisionsmakers with an accounting of the physical environmental effects which may result from construction and implementation of the proposed project. The law does not allow for the CEQA analysis to address current operational issues of a property.

Comment E-3: 2. Absent 24/7 3rd-party monitoring of construction equipment we have no reason to believe we are safe from exposure to cancer causing agents. However, considering how cost sensitive (i.e. cheap) Charities Housing has been in the past, they will figure ways of making short cuts to the cost of preserving our safety and security. Even with a stringent monitoring regime the risks are too high as stated below:

3. Even with effective 24/7 3rd-party monitoring there is a high risk of industrial accidents, malfunctions, power loss or interruption in monitoring that will result in dangerously high exposure for finite periods of time with unpredictable and potentially horrendous long term effects.

Response E-3: It is assumed that the commenter is referring to the toxic air contaminants (TAC) analysis in the air quality report. As noted by the commenter in Comment E-1, Figure 1 of Appendix A shows the commenters house with a red circle on it. This denotes that this house would experience the highest concentration of emissions during construction on the project. As discussed on Pages 35-37 of the Initial Study/MND, the project will be required to implement mitigation measures to reduce emission impacts to this receptor and all other nearby receptors to a less than significant level. This means below the thresholds established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD).

While the air quality analysis did identify an impact which would exceed the BAAQMD thresholds, the BAAQMD thresholds are based on a 70-year exposure to the emissions, so the actual risk is far less than what is calculated for project construction. Construction is estimated to be 18 months. Also, the cancer risk impact is based on the respiratory rates of infants, which are different than children and adults. The analysis did not find an impact to children or adults.

The threshold established by BAAQMD for cancer risk is 10 cancer cases per one million people exposed. With mitigation the infant cancer risk is reduced to 5.99 cases per million people based on a 70-year exposure. For annual PM2.5 emissions, the BAAQMD threshold is

0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3). With mitigation, the PM2.5 emissions would be reduced to 0.15 µg/m3. Therefore, with implementation of the identified mitigation measure on Page 36 of the Initial Study/MND, the proposed project would have a less than significant construction air quality impact on all adjacent and nearby sensitive receptors.

The mitigation would be enforced by the City. Furthermore, as noted on Page 33 of the Initial Study/MND (under Conditions of Approval), a publicly visible sign will be posted on-site Civic Center Family Housing Project 13 Response to Comments Memo with the numbers for the on-site project superintendent and the Air District to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Comment E-4: 4. In addition, there will be 90db noise from the construction site a few yards away from our fence. The City code for maximum noise level in residential areas is 55db from 7am-10pm and 50db at night. Why are we being asked to put up with 90db noise a few yards from our home when the City noise code mandates significantly less noise levels by orders of magnitude? The Table below shows the difference in power (loudness) between 55db and 90db is more than 10000 times! Response E-4: Refer to Response D-2.

Comment E-5: In addition the noise from fire trucks and fire drills, which are often conducted at mid night to emulate real-time conditions, will deprive us of sleep, with fire trucks running their engines right behind our homes. We have repeatedly asked not to place a fire lane or parking access behind our homes and to block access from Civic Center Drive to the 1601 site along the Triton Ct. property line. This is based on our actual experience during 13 months with problems associated with such access.

Response E-5: This is a housing project and like all other multi-family housing projects in Santa Clara, the Fire Department would not be conducting fire drills at this location. Any and all use of the fire lane by first responders would be for actual emergencies. It would be speculative to assume that emergency calls to this site would be substantially greater than for any other multi-family residential property in the City.

Comment E-6: Is our actual experience and observations over 13 months not more relevant than a hypothetical study based on potentially incomplete models? So far our request for blocking access from Civic Center Drive along Triton Ct.'s property line has been ignored. Noise from traffic and fire trucks are a major environmental nuisance. Suffering sleep deprivation due to noise for an extended period of time as we did during our 13 month ordeal has long term health and economic adverse consequences. Many of us still work from home and will not be able to do so because of noise levels.
dB Power ratio Amplitude ratio
100 10000000000 100000
90 1000000000 31623
80 100000000 10000
70 10000000 3162
60 1000000 1000
50 100000 316.2
I I
Civic Center Family Housing Project 14 Response to Comments Memo 40 10000 100
30 1000 31.62
20 100 10
10 10 3.162
6 3.981 ≈ 4 1.995 ≈ 2
3 1.995 ≈ 2 1.413 ≈ √2
1 1.259 1.122
0 1 1
−1 0.794 0.891
−3 0.501 ≈ 1⁄2 0.708 ≈ √
1 ⁄2
−6 0.251 ≈ 1⁄4 0.501 ≈ 1⁄2
−10 0.1 0.3162
−20 0.01 0.1
−30 0.001 0.03162
−40 0.0001 0.01
−50 0.00001 0.003162
−60 0.000001 0.001
−70 0.0000001 0.0003162
D
□
Civic Center Family Housing Project 15 Response to Comments Memo −80 0.00000001 0.0001
−90 0.000000001 0.00003162
−100 0.0000000001 0.00001
Response E-6: Based on the Community Crime Map for the City of Santa Clara (https://communitycrimemap.com/) there have been no calls for service to the project site between January 1, 0221 and July 12, 2022. Fire Department data is not available on-line.

As noted in Response E-2, the intent and purpose of the Initial Study/MND is to provide the public and decisions-makers with an accounting of the physical environmental effects which may result from construction and implementation of the proposed project. The law does not allow for the CEQA analysis to address current operational issues of a property. The current commercial operation of the site is not equivalent to the proposed project and the current conditions on-site cannot be extrapolated into the analysis of future operations of a housing development.

As discussed on Pages 117-118 of the Initial Study/MND, operation of the proposed project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels from either traffic or building operations and would have a less than significant impact. While construction noise would occur during allowable construction hours (Monday through Friday 7:00am to 6:00pm) for a period of 18 months, a noise control plan is required as a condition of approval.

Comment E-7: 5. As you are aware we have objected to the shadow study and statement in the FAQs posted on the City Project web site that " there is no additional shadow line impact on the neighboring properties when comparing the existing two-stories office building with a 10 ft setback ..."
The above statement is simply false: If you carefully examine Charities Housing's own shadow analysis it clearly shows there is no shadow from the existing building onto my home most of the year (Spring, Summer, Fall). I take issue with the only image showing some shadow during the Winter. I live in this home and currently have no building in my line of sight casting a shadow or blocking my view of the sky. How can a comparison of shadows cast onto my property with the existing building be correct?
I respectfully request a correction to the FAQ.

Response E-7: The shade and shadow study provided by the applicant shows the property at 1691 Triton Court as being cast in varying degrees of shadow from the proposed building in the morning hours throughout the year. The shade and shadow study shows the property at 1691 Triton Court to only be in shadow during the morning winter months under existing conditions. As a result of the applicant’s shade and shadow study, an increase in shading on the commenter’s property from the project is shown. No change to the diagram is necessary.

This comment does not speak to the environmental analysis.

Comment E-9: Conclusion: The primary reason these risks are magnified and don't lend themselves to adequate mitigation is the density of the project and its proximity to our homes. The mitigation models are not incorporating the effect of actual risks. How are the risks of a malfunction or accident Civic Center Family Housing Project 16 Response to Comments Memo modelled? How are the effects of long term ambient noise on our health, sleep, and sanity modelled? We therefore strongly object to the project which poses a long-term health hazard even after mitigations, and emphatically ask that Charities Housing relocate its project to a more suitable location with less adverse impact upon their neighbors, and do so before they cause more damage to their wall-to-wall neighbors than they already have.

Response E-9: Refer to Responses E-2 through E-7.

Comment Letter F: Jamie Lau – July 11, 2022
Comment F-1: Earlier on 6/24 I have submitted questions for the 1601 Civic Center Initial Study.

Please don’t take those as public comments. They are interim questions for the public outreach meeting and some of them have been answered, leading my final comments.

Please use below for my final public comments instead:

1. The 5-story high-density tall building does not fit in with the adjacent 2-story single family homes, this is a significant discount of aesthetics and property value to the adjacent family homes. This consideration should be included for the approval process.

Response F-1: While the houses immediately adjacent are two-story, there are three-story townhouses and a seven-story apartment complex in the immediate vicinity (Civic Center Drive and Warburton). So, a five-story building would be consistent with the mix of residential densities in this area. For additional reference, the proposed building would be setback 67 feet from the shared property line with the adjacent two-story residences and Civic Center Drive is 50 feet wide.

Comment F-2: City of Santa Clara has the opportunity to implement inclusive planning to mandate percentage of affordable housing units with any new regular market rate homes. There are also vacant lots elsewhere in the City more suitable for high-density affordable housing with less social and environmental impact to the surrounding. The site selection at 1601 Civic Center Drive is not suitable for the community in many ways.

Response F-2: This comment does not speak to the adequacy of the Initial Study/MND, and no text edits are required.

Comment F-3: 2. High-density of concentrated low income housing contradicts the City’s planning policies that affordable housing units should be dispersed throughout the City to avoid a concentration in any neighborhood. This Project will bring over 100 units in a small parcel of land - it is concentrated in one neighborhood. I understand the need of building more housing to solve homelessness, but such high-density affordable housing should be planned on a busy street away from quiet residential neighborhood for lesser social and environmental impact, and closer to a transit hub, such as a CalTrain or BART station for mobility. This project is neither.

Response F-3: The intent of the City’s policy is to avoid having all affordable units within one neighborhood or area of the City. Dispersal means throughout all neighborhoods.

Relative to the number of affordable units the City has and still needs to build, having 106 units in this area is not inconsistent with the policy. For reference, the City needs to build 4,525 affordable units by 2031. This project represents two percent of the total new units Civic Center Family Housing Project 17 Response to Comments Memo required Citywide. When added to the existing and approved affordable units, the project represents less than two percent of the total affordable units Citywide.

City policy also states “Encourage higher-density residential development in transit and mixed-use areas and in other locations throughout the City where appropriate. This site meets both criteria. The project site is within 1,000 feet of two bus stops which are served by Bus Route 22, the most active bus line in the County which runs from Palo Alto to East San José.

Also, within 2,000 feet (standard transit access walking distance) are Routes 32, 59, and Rapid 522 (see page 142-143 of Initial Study). The Santa Clara Transit Station is easily accessible from the project site using Bus Route 22 which runs 24 hours per day with buses running every 15 minutes. Bike lanes are also planned on El Camino Real. As such, the site is well suited for the proposed project as it is also within walking or biking distance to shopping and services on El Camino Real.

Comment F-4: 3. The plan amendment and rezoning of 1601 Civic Center is shortsighted. It is the only designated neighborhood commercial planned use outside of El Camino Real for the Civic Center community in City’s General Plan. The planned commercial land use can be local services that neighbors can safely walk to. We do not want to lose the only land that can serve as a commercial use to Civic Center neighbors in the years to come, considering all surrounding parcels will be planned for residential use in City's General Plan. Please use common sense and considerations for existing neighbors when determining the plan amendment approval.

Response F-4: This comment does not speak to the adequacy of the Initial Study/MND, and no text edits are required.

Comment F-5: 4. In the construction noise impact analysis, the study opted to use a guideline from FTA noise assessment, which is intended for transportation projects like trains stations/lines in populated areas. The assessment stated the guidelines are not meant as industry standards for all projects. The noise threshold of 90 dBA is especially high for a quiet residential neighborhood like Civic Center’s. Study should consider the delta from existing ambient noise and construction noise in determining impact level.

Response F-5: See Response D-6.

Comment F-6: 5. The project-generated permanent noise study did not consider scenario of cars with loud exhaust in the open parking lot.

Response F-6: See Response D-7.

Comment F-7: 6. The Project plans an open parking lot located adjacent to existing Triton Court single family homes. First, open at-grade parking lot design is not encouraged by City’s planning policies. Secondly, as the parking lot being situated discreetly away from a main street, it will attract crimes and dumping. As a consideration to the community’s safety and social impact, the Project should be designed with an underground parking lot and secured gate. The developer expressed no intent to build an underground parking structure due to cost.

Response F-7: See Responses D-2 and D-11.

Comment F-8: 7. Project’s planned 5-story building will have shadow impact to adjacent existing homes. It was evident in Developer’s initial project info. However, shadow impact was not discussed in the Initial Study. The shadow impact should be properly investigated.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 18 Response to Comments Memo Response F-8: See Response D-5.

Comment F-9: 8. The Transportation Study from Appendix F recommended only one entrance should be planned for the Project, but it currently plans two entrances - one on Civic Center Dr and another one on Lincoln Street. The recommendation is to reduce pedestrian and traffic safety incidents, as more entrances increases risks of collisions. The Project should follow the study’s recommendation to keep only one entrance, and that entrance should be on Lincoln Street.

Response F-9: This comment does not speak to the adequacy of the Initial Study/MND, and no text edits are required.

Comment F-10: 9. The Transportation Study from Appendix F did not mention there is no bus route from Project site going to Buscher Middle School and possible transit modes to the school. Only Santa Clara High School and Scott Lane Elementary School are discussed for the topic.

Response F-10: The transportation analysis acknowledges all three schools that would serve the project site and their distance from the site. In addition, the analysis outlines the available pedestrian and bicycle routes. Because the analysis provides a description of all transit access currently available to the three schools, it can be inferred that there is no transit access readily available to the middle school. It is acknowledged that most students are expected to be driven or will drive to school.

Comment F-11: 10. The Transportation Study from Appendix F recommended the Project to have white-lined zone and red-lined zones along the Project’s frontage on Civic Center Drive. This will remove street parking on Civic Center and burden the already tighten parking situation.

Response F-11: See Response D-4.

Comment F-12: 11. No where on the development plan indicating the Project’s parking will be assigned or not. The plan should list that as a design commitment on the design plan.

Response F-12: This comment does not speak to the adequacy of the Initial Study/MND, and no text edits are required.

Comment F-13: 12. The Project Listing summary page should accurately reflect the total number of units as 108 instead of 106 without the two management units.

Response F-13: The total number of units proposed is 108, with 106 rental units and two manager units. For the purposes of CEQA and the environmental analysis, the composition of the 108 units is not relevant as each residential unit is treated the same with regard to traffic generation, utility usage, public services usage (including student generation), etc.

Comment F-14: 13. School enrollment impact study uses data from 2017, that’s about 5 years old.

The Santa Clara High School is already reaching capacity per the 2017 data. To my knowledge, Buscher Middle School is also reaching capacity as it does not accept second round of open enrollment; the study shows no impact to Busher Middle School, which is likely false. The mitigation for school enrollment impact is for the developer to pay a fee to the district. The study should involve the school district to provide current enrollment status and if the district is able to mitigate the problem with fees paid. The report does not show the school district was involved in the study.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 19 Response to Comments Memo Response F-14: See Response D-10.

Comment F-15: 14. Appendix D indicates Charities Housing did not return the User Questionnaire per EPA, therefore, environmental liens and activity and use limitations are not evaluated. Should these be evaluated for the study?
Response F-15: The lack of a user questionnaire does not invalidate the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment or the analysis in the Initial Study/MND. While these are helpful to gather information on a specific site, the analysis is reliant on a site reconnaissance completed by the hazardous materials consultant and a review of all available regulatory databases.

Comment F-16: 15. Sanitary Sewer Study from Appendix G indicates a sewer pipe will reach 82.2% capacity with the development. Did City of Santa Clara sanitary department review this finding and consider that’s an acceptable number?
Response F-16: The Sanitary Sewer Study is commissioned by the City and reviewed for accuracy prior to being provided to the environmental consultant. Had the study identified any capacity issues resulting from the project, the project would be conditioned by the City to make the necessary improvements. The City did not identify any capacity issue which would require an upgrade to the current infrastructure by the project applicant. As discussed on Page 156 of the Initial Study/MND, City staff concluded that there is sufficient capacity to serve the proposed development.

Comment Letter G: Jean Song – July 12, 2022
Comment G-1: This is Jean, a resident of the Civic Center Drive neighborhood. I read the environmental report and read the reviews of existing Charities Housing (CH) in the bay area. The more I read and learned, the more I'm concerned about this project.

I'm afraid CH barely cares about the living conditions of their residents. Hardly does CH show respect to the neighbors. I'll write in the aspects of transportation, safety and security, amenities and construction impacts.

Response G-1: Responses to specific comments are provided below.

Comment G-2: 1) Transportation
They plan to build 108 units with only 82 parking spaces at most. Note that the average car ownership in Santa Clara county is 2 cars per household. That means, 134 cars of the residents of CH are expected to do street parking. But the current parking in the neighborhood is already overcrowded. You can find _zero_ parking spot after 4pm in Civic Center Dr. I can't imagine what the residents can do after they come back from work but can't find a parking spot.

Response G-2: See Response D-4. A project need only meet the applicable parking requirements. The City of Santa Clara parking ratios are not derived from average car ownership. Parking requirements are based on land use type and take into account mitigating factors such as mixed use, affordable housing, proximity to transit, and the Density Bonus law (when applicable) as noted by the commenter. Per Assembly Bill 2345, 100 percent affordable housing projects within one-half miles of a major transit stop are only required to provide 0.5 spaces per unit. By state law (Government Code Section 65915), the project is required to provide 54 parking spaces, but is proposing 82.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 20 Response to Comments Memo Comment G-3: According to the outreach meeting organized by CH, their focus of this project is the people who make 30-50% AMI. These are working people who need to commute every day. With the poor transportation nearby (no caltrain, no VTA light rail, only 2 bus routes to Palo Alto and Baypointe station), the residents have to commute mostly by cars.

I also learned that 25% of the residents would be those who have risks to become homeless. They either recently lost their jobs, or have some medical conditions. These people either have to look for jobs actively, or need to commute to hospitals frequently. In either case, they need cars to commute.
82 parking spaces are absolutely far from enough. However, CH refused to provide enough parking space to their residents. They rejected the suggestion to build underground parking. I don't understand why they can't accommodate, but they don't seem to care about their residents, let alone the burden that will be posed upon the neighborhood.

Response G-3: See Responses D-4 and D-9.

Comment G-4: 2) Safety and security
According to the reviews of other CH locations in the Bay Area, there're many car break-ins. This poses a big risk to the neighborhood. Is CH prone to attract crimes? Does CH do any security or background check to the future residents? As someone living within 2-min walk from the proposed location, I'm really worried about the change that would be brought by the project. Will it be safe to walk in the neighborhood any more? Will there be break-ins to cars and even houses? How could we protect our fences?
Response G-4: This comment does not speak to the environmental analysis. The intent and purpose of the Initial Study/MND is to provide the public and decisions-makers with an accounting of the physical environmental effects which may result from construction and implementation of the proposed project. The law does not allow for the CEQA analysis to address speculative future scenarios.

Comment G-5: The proposed project creates an entry driveway along the wall with Triton Ct, and their proposed parking lot just faces Triton Ct. How much impact would be on the existing residents?
Response G-5: It is unclear what potential impacts the commenter is referring to. With regard to parking lots, the primary issues under CEQA are noise and lighting. Both were addressed in the Initial Study/MND. Light and glare is discussed in Section 4.1.2 (Page 19) of the Initial Study/MND. Operational noise is discussed on Pages 117-118 of the Initial Study/MND.

Comment G-6: 3) Amenities
Lots of CH residents complain that the places are full of bed bugs and roaches. How CH manages the places is a big question. CH isn't willing to treat these bugs before the move-in of new residents. Again, this shows how little CH cares about their residents.

Response G-6: The intent and purpose of the Initial Study/MND is to provide the public and decisions-makers with an accounting of the physical environmental effects which may result from construction and implementation of the proposed project. The law does not allow for the CEQA analysis to address current operational issues of properties that are not part of the proposed project.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 21 Response to Comments Memo Comment G-7: One reason that CH selected this location is the Warburton medical plaza. However, that plaza only offers urgent care and treatment for sport injuries. If the residents have any other medical conditions, such as diabetes, COVID, or cancer, they have to drive to big hospitals to get treatment. CH's claim of walking distance to hospitals doesn't really hold.

Response G-7: This comment does not speak to the environmental analysis.

Comment G-8: Additionally, the schools in the neighborhood are almost full. With the high density that the proposed CH will bring, how the schools can accommodate more kids is another big question. If overflow happens, parents have to drive even farther to send and pick up their kids. As discussed above about the transportation, this would be very hard for both the CH residents and the neighbors.

Response G-8: See Response D-10.

Comment G-9: 4) Construction impacts
According to the environmental report, the noise from the construction will be up to 90 dB. This is absolutely inappropriate to a neighborhood with so many residents. 90 dB is mostly used to build airports and railways, absolutely not for houses. The construction will also bring lots of dusts, such as PM2.5 and PM10. The proposed location is just one wall against Triton Ct. This will bring great inconvenience and risks to the existing residents. I'm really pathetic about the situation.

Response G-9: A noise study was commissioned by the environmental consultant under direction by City staff. The Initial Study/MND concluded that with implementation of the identified measures, the temporary construction noise impacts would be less than significant (see Pages 116-117 of the Initial Study/MND).

An air quality analysis was also commissioned by the environmental consultant under direction by City staff which addressed dust and other air pollutants that would be generated during construction. The Initial Study/MND concluded that with implementation of the conditions of approval and mitigation measures identified, the temporary construction air quality impacts would be less than significant (Pages 31-33 and 34-37).

Comment G-10: In summary, this project will bring extremely negative impacts on both the future CH residents and the existing neighbors. I know the housing crisis in the bay area is urgent. But please, please do it good instead of evil. Please treat all the people, both low-income and highincome, with respect. Please protect the neighborhood with improved safety and security. Please provide the necessary amenities and healthy living environment to the residents.

There're other locations in Santa Clara that might tolerate 90 dB construction noise, such as those near commercial zones. These locations could be big enough to build more parking spaces. They can also have better transportation, be closer to hospitals, and have less crowded school enrollment than the proposed location. I hope you could consider my petition and cancel this project.

Response G-10: This comment does not speak to the environmental analysis. Please see previous responses.

Comment Letter H: David Bayto – July 12, 2022
Comment H-1: Below are my comments, opinions and recommendations related to Charities Housing (CH) environmental review documents (Mitigated Negative Declaration "MND").

Civic Center Family Housing Project 22 Response to Comments Memo I am opposed to the rezoning of the 1601 Civic Drive property from commercial to high density residential housing zoning as currently proposed. If the zoning change is approved, then the following recommendations should be adapted prior to approved zoning changes.

Comments, Opinions, and Recommendations related to Charities Housing (CH) environmental review documents.

Summary:
• Issue: At what point are the legal rights of the project developers to overshadow the rights and quality of life of the current residences of the Civic Center neighborhood? • Issue: The financial impact of the proposed development has not been provided for public review and discussion.
o What is the financial burden for the citizen of Santa Clara, City of Santa Clara, County of Santa Clara, and the State of California?
o What is the financial interest of the project stakeholders such as the Limited Partnership(s) involved in the proposed development?
Response H-1: Section 15131 of the CEQA Guidelines states that “economic or social effects of a project shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment”. The Initial Study/MND can only address impacts as they relate to the checklist questions which are intended to address the physical environmental effects of the project. As a result, the Initial Study/MND did not address any economic or social effects of the project.

Comment H-2: Issue: The traffic study of Charities Housing (CH) environmental review documents does not address the current neighborhood parking issue. There is a significant lack of street parking to support the current neighborhood requirements.
• Issue: The proposed 1601 Civic Center Drive project would require an additional 134 street parking spaces to be available to service the 1601 Civic Center Drive residence causing an adverse effect on the current parking issues on Civic Center Drive.

Response H-2: See Response D-4.

Comment H-3: Issue: CH’s project design does not include the Transportation Study’s recommendations for 1.) Site Access, 2.) Passenger Loading and 3.) Sight Distance at Project Driveways.

Response H-4: See Responses D-1, D-3, and D-4.

Comment H-5: Issue: The project does not have underground parking as encouraged by City's General Plan guidelines.

Response H-5: See Response D-11.

Comment H-6: Issue: The proposed five (5) story structure architectural does not conform to the El Camino Corridor heigh limits and the adjacent 2-story homes, or surrounding homes.

Response H-6: See Response F-1. The proposed General Plan designation is intended for mid-rise buildings. Mid-rise buildings are typically defined as five to 12 stories.

Comment H-7: Recommendation: Provide a financial impact study for transparency and public review prior to change in rezoning.

Civic Center Family Housing Project 23 Response to Comments Memo Response H-7: See Response H-1.

Comment H-8: Recommendation: Provide no less than two parking space per unit or 216 parking spaces. (108 units x 2 cars)
o Based on the potential 480 occupancy rate and
o Based on 2 car per household is average number for California would require 216 spaces (108 units x 2 cars). Thus, 82 space per unit would appear to be unreasonable. o Based on the need to address the current lack of parking during peak hours and weekends. • Recommendation: All parking should be under the proposed structure either in a garage and/or underground parking lot. Underground parking is both feasible and particle. o 1364 El Camino development has both under building structure parking and an underground parking lot Thus, it can be done.
o 1690 Civic Center Drive has an underground parking lot. Thus, it can be done. o The marginal cost for an underground parking lot structure would be amortized over a 55- year period based. Thus, minimizing the issues that it is not cost effective to build underground parking.

Response H-8: The intent and purpose of the Initial Study/MND is to provide the public and decisions-makers with an accounting of the physical environmental effects which may result from construction and implementation of the proposed project. The law does not allow for the CEQA analysis to address current operational issues of a property or surrounding area.

See Response D-4.

It should be noted that the excavation required for underground parking would result in a longer construction timeframe and, due to the extended use of heavy equipment, increase construction noise and air pollutant emissions compared to the current proposal.

Comment H-9: Recommendation: Eliminate all surface parking on the west side of the proposed project that impact the quality of life for the residence on Triton Court.

Response H-9: It is not clear what quality of life issues the commenter believes would occur as a result of the surface parking lot. See Responses D-2, D-7, and G-5 for responses to specific issues raised by other commenters regarding the proposed surface lot.

Comment H-10: Recommendation: The project should provide only one driveway to access the site on Lincoln Street per Transportation Study’s recommendations • Recommendation: The project should include a loading zone per the per Transportation Study’s recommendations
Response H-10: See Response D-4.

Comment H-11: Analysis and Comments:

Parking
This development, as proposed will provide up to 82 parking spaces which may conform to the Density Bonus law but conflict with the car California ownership data indicating that the average car ownership in California is 2 cars per household. The number of parking space should be 216 (108 units x 2 cars per household. Thus, the proposed 82 parking spaces will contribute to have an adverse effect on the existing the current parking issues on Civic Center Drive. Therefore, based on the California average rate of 2 car per household and CH’s proposed 82 parking would require an additional 134 street parking spaces to be available to service 1601 Civic Center Drive residence
Civic Center Family Housing Project 24 Response to Comments Memo Response H-11: See Response G-2.

Comment H-12: Occupancy:

How Many is too Many? Limits on Unit Occupancy Explained. The total number occupants for the proposed project could be as high as 480 based on Charities Housing’s (CH) occupancy data, and the “California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) policy for regulating occupancy, which is known as the “two plus one” formula.

Based on
Plus 1 for each living room (108 -28) =
80 80
Total 480
Is it reasonable to assume that occupancy rate in combination with the 2 car average per household would requirement more parking than the 82 spaces assuming 2 car per household is average number for California. Thus, there should be 216 parking spaces (108 units x 2) instead of the 82 proposed parking spaces
Response H-12: See Response G-2.

Comment H-13: Transportation Study’s Recommendation
Site Access - Recommendation: The project should provide only one driveway to access the site.

The project would increase the number of driveways accessing the site from one to two driveways.

Because the project would generate a low number of project trips, it is not necessary to provide two access points to the site for access and circulation. Increasing the access points would increase the conflicts between pedestrians/bicycles and vehicles. Therefore, the project should maintain only one driveway to access the site.

Passenger Loading - Recommendation: The project should provide a passenger loading zone on Civic Center Drive near the entrance to the building lobby or within the surface parking lot or parking garage.

Sight Distance at Project Driveways - Recommendation: The curb segments next to the project driveways on Civic Center Drive should be painted red for 15 feet to prohibit parking and ensure adequate sight distance for outbound traffic.

Response H-13: See Responses D-1, D-3, and D-4.

Unit Size # Units Max
Studio (1-2
occupants) 28 56
1BR (1-3 occupants) 24 72
2BR (2-4 occupants) 26 104
3BR (3-6 occupants) 26 156
3BR (3-6 occupants) 2 12
400
Civic Center Family Housing Project 25 Response to Comments Memo

CIVIC CENTER FAMILY HOUSING PROJECT

TEXT EDITS
This section contains revisions to the text of the Civic Center Family Housing project dated June 2022. Revised or new language is underlined. All deletions are shown with a line through the text.

None of the text revisions shown below change the conclusion of the IS/MND and no recirculation is required.