Agenda packet — City Council and Authorities Concurrent, April 29, 2025 (part 5 of 5)

CITY OF SANTA CLARA MUNICIPAL FEE SCHEDULE
Date Fee Last
Changed
--------------
Ordinance /
Resolution Number
& Date
Fee Detail
Objective
Prop 26 Exception
(See Reader's Guide)
Full Cost Factor
Field Marking - Recycled Water Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Water Prop 26 Exception: 2
Up to 50 ft. of excavation 297.00$ No Res. No. 24-9316 Full Cost: 308.17$ 307.00$ 3.4% Collected by:

Over 50 ft. - each additional 50 ft. or 121.00$ No Finance Full Cost: 125.24$ 125.00$ 3.3% fraction thereof of excavation
Water and Fire Service Tap (2" and smaller) 1,161.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Includes installation and 1,201.00$ 3.4% Water inspection of water main tap
Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 2 only.

Collected by:

Finance Full Cost: 1,202.47$
Water and Fire Service Tap (4", 6", and 8") 1,300.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Includes installation and 1,345.00$ 3.5% Water inspection of water main tap
Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 2 only.

Collected by:

Finance Full Cost: 1,346.32$
Water and Fire Service Tap (10" and 12") 1,745.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Includes installation and 1,806.00$ 3.5% Water inspection of water main tap
Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 2 only.

Collected by:

Finance Full Cost: 1,806.60$
Reference: CMD 109 16 - 9
Department / Division: Water & Sewer Utilities / Water Resolution: Date Approved:

Description of Fee, Rate, or Charge Current Fee
Technology Fee
(3.37%) Applies
(Yes or No)
Charging Dept /
Div
---------------
Collecting Dept
/ Div Comments Proposed New Fee
Percent
Change

CITY OF SANTA CLARA MUNICIPAL FEE SCHEDULE
Date Fee Last
Changed
--------------
Ordinance /
Resolution Number
& Date
Fee Detail
Objective
Prop 26 Exception
(See Reader's Guide)
Full Cost Factor
Insertion Valve Installation Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Includes installation and Water Prop 26 Exception: 2 inspection of valve only.
4" Valve 16,051.00$ No Res. No. 24-9316 Full Cost: 16,613.76$ 16,612.00$ 3.5% Collected by:
6" Valve 16,938.00$ No Engineering Full Cost: 17,530.87$ 17,530.00$ 3.5% 8" Valve 17,714.00$ No Full Cost: 18,334.07$ 18,333.00$ 3.5% 10" Valve 21,190.00$ No Full Cost: 21,932.36$ 21,931.00$ 3.5% 12" Valve 22,902.00$ No Full Cost: 23,704.47$ 23,703.00$ 3.5% Insertion Valve Installation Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Note: The cost of Encroachment Water Prop 26 Exception: 2 Permit, Soil Disposal, and
4" Valve (excavation included) 27,991.00$ No Res. No. 24-9316 Full Cost: 28,971.39$ Pavement Restoration not 28,970.00$ 3.5% Collected by: included.
6" Valve (excavation included) 28,877.00$ No Engineering Full Cost: 29,888.51$ 29,887.00$ 3.5% 8" Valve (excavation included) 29,653.00$ No Full Cost: 30,691.71$ 30,690.00$ 3.5% 10" Valve (excavation included) 33,130.00$ No Full Cost: 34,290.01$ 34,289.00$ 3.5% 12" Valve (excavation included) 34,842.00$ No Full Cost: 36,062.11$ 36,061.00$ 3.5% Project Clearance Committee - Utility 1,390.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost 1,438.00$ 3.5% Engineering / Subcommittee Review Water
Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 2
Collected by:

Finance Full Cost: 1,439.17$
Hold Harmless Agreement 1,040.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost 1,076.00$ 3.5% Water
Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 2
Collected by:

Finance Full Cost: 1,076.40$
Fire Flow (Hydraulic Model) Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Water Prop 26 Exception: 2
Single Family Homes (SFH) 1,056.00$ No Res. No. 24-9316 Full Cost: 959.00$ 959.00$ -9.2% Collected by:

Others, Excluding SFH 2,364.00$ No Finance Full Cost: 1,404.00$ 1,404.00$ -40.6% Reference: CMD 109 16 - 10
Department / Division: Water & Sewer Utilities / Water Resolution: Date Approved:

Description of Fee, Rate, or Charge Current Fee
Technology Fee
(3.37%) Applies
(Yes or No)
Charging Dept /
Div
---------------
Collecting Dept
/ Div Comments Proposed New Fee
Percent
Change

CITY OF SANTA CLARA MUNICIPAL FEE SCHEDULE
Date Fee Last
Changed
--------------
Ordinance /
Resolution Number
& Date
Fee Detail
Objective
Prop 26 Exception
(See Reader's Guide)
Full Cost Factor
Development Impact Analysis 3,094.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost This is a hydraulic modeling fee 2,139.00$ -30.9% Water for new development.

Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 6
Collected by:

Finance Full Cost: 2,139.00$
Water Service Upgrade of Existing Service Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Note: The cost of meters, excluding Device Cost Water Prop 26 Exception: 2 backflows, Encroachment Res. No. 24-9316 Permit, Soil Disposal, and
5/8" x 3/4" water services and backflow 11,098.00$ No Collected by: Full Cost: 11,486.62$ Pavement Restoration not 11,486.00$ 3.5% preventer Engineering included.
1" water service and backflow preventer 11,098.00$ No Full Cost: 11,486.62$ 11,486.00$ 3.5% 1-1/2" water service and backflow preventer 11,135.00$ No Full Cost: 11,525.74$ 11,524.00$ 3.5% 2" water service and backflow preventer 11,135.00$ No Full Cost: 11,525.74$ 11,524.00$ 3.5% 3" water service and backflow preventer 11,508.00$ No Full Cost: 11,911.24$ 11,910.00$ 3.5% Reference: CMD 109 16 - 11
Department / Division: Water & Sewer Utilities / Sewer Resolution: Date Approved:

Cleanout box is included.

Sewer lateral cleanout 11,429.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost When no cleanout exists, it 11,829.00$ 3.5% 6 inch lateral or larger Sewer is necessary that one be Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 1, 2 installed in order for City to Collected by: have access to sewer lateral
Finance Full Cost: 11,829.87$ for courtesy maintenance.

Cleanout box is included.

Cleanout box only 378.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost 391.00$ 3.4% Sewer
Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 1, 2
Collected by:

Finance Full Cost: 1,069.58$
4" sewer lateral installation 44,123.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Note: The cost of Encroachment 45,667.00$ 3.5% Sewer Permit, Soil Disposal, and
Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 2 Pavement Restoration not Collected by: included.

Engineering Full Cost: 45,667.51$ No cleanout or box cost included.
6" sewer lateral installation 44,123.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Note: The cost of Encroachment 45,667.00$ 3.5% Sewer Permit, Soil Disposal, and
Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 2 Pavement Restoration not Collected by: included.

Engineering Full Cost: 45,667.51$ No cleanout or box cost included.

Description of Fee, Rate, or Charge Current Fee
Technology Fee
(3.37%) Applies
(Yes or No)
Charging Dept /
Div
---------------
Collecting Dept
/ Div Comments Proposed New Fee
Percent
Change

CITY OF SANTA CLARA MUNICIPAL FEE SCHEDULE
Date Fee Last
Changed
--------------
Ordinance /
Resolution Number
& Date
Fee Detail
Objective
Prop 26 Exception
(See Reader's Guide)
Full Cost Factor
8" sewer lateral installation 44,123.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Note: The cost of Encroachment 45,667.00$ 3.5% Sewer Permit, Soil Disposal, and
Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 2 Pavement Restoration not Collected by: included.

Engineering Full Cost: 45,667.51$ No cleanout or box cost included.

Sewer Lateral Video Inspection 508.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Video inspection of existing 525.00$ 3.3% Sewer lateral to determine that its
Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 2 replacement is not required Collected by: as a condition of
Finance Full Cost: 1,037.07$ redevelopment.

Encroachment Permit: Charged By: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost See Article 2 of Chapter 3.1 Field Marking - Sanitary Sewer Engineering / of Div. 5 of Title 1 of the LPD Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 1, 2, 3 Government Code.

Up to 50 ft. of excavation 297.00$ No Full Cost: 308.17$ 307.00$ 3.4% Collected By:

Over 50 ft. - each additional 50 ft. or 297.00$ No Finance Full Cost: 308.17$ 307.00$ 3.4% fraction thereof of excavation plus plus
121.00$ No Full Cost: 125.24$ 125.00$ 3.3% each add'l 50 ft or each add'l 50 ft or
fraction thereof fraction thereof
Fats, Oil and Grease (FOG) Charged By: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost For new building permit Building Division applicants
FOG Plan Review and Inspection Fee 2,724.00$ No Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 1, 2, 3 2,819.00$ 3.5% (Building Permits) Collected By: Combine plan review and Building Division Full Cost: 2,819.34$ permit into one fee Short Term Wastewater Discharge Permit 460.00$ No Charged By: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Use per HCF / per 1,000 gal 476.00$ 3.5% + ($5.29 / HCF Engineering / of discharge and a $460 + ($5.29 / HCF or $7.07 / 1,000 gal) LPD Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: 1, 2, 3 processing fee. or $7.07 / 1,000 gal) Collected By: Full Cost: 476.10$
Finance
Reference: CMD 109 16 - 13
Department / Division: Water & Sewer Utilities / Sewer Resolution: Date Approved:

Description of Fee, Rate, or Charge Current Fee
Technology Fee
(3.37%) Applies
(Yes or No)
Charging Dept /
Div
---------------
Collecting Dept
/ Div Comments Proposed New Fee
Percent
Change

CITY OF SANTA CLARA MUNICIPAL FEE SCHEDULE
Date Fee Last
Changed
--------------
Ordinance /
Resolution Number
& Date
Fee Detail
Objective
Prop 26 Exception
(See Reader's Guide)
Full Cost Factor
Wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity Fee Charged By: Date 8/22/2017 Objective: Recover Cost Accessory Dwelling Unit Engineering / Charge per City Ordinance
Residential Dwelling Unit 1,187.00$ No LPD Ord. No. 1968 Prop 26 Exception: 2 1968 passed by Council on Unchanged - Refer to per dwelling unit 8/22/2017. Current Fee
Collected By: Full Cost: 2,464.28$
Accessory Dwelling Unit 747.00$ No Finance Unchanged - Refer to per accessory Current Fee
dwelling unit
Wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity Fee Charged By: Date 4/18/2017 Objective: Recover Cost Engineering /
Non-Residential 4.47$ No LPD Ord. No. Prop 26 Exception: 6 Unchanged - Refer to per gallon, per day Current Fee
Collected By: Full Cost: 10.52$
Finance
Reference: CMD 109 16 - 14
Department / Division: Water & Sewer Utilities / Solar Resolution: Date Approved:

Description of Fee, Rate, or Charge Current Fee
Technology Fee
(3.37%) Applies
(Yes or No)
Charging Dept /
Div
---------------
Collecting Dept
/ Div Comments Proposed New Fee
Percent
Change
Solar pool heating system 5,324.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Costs are recovered through 5,510.00$ 3.5% Installation Fee plus Water / Solar Prop 26 Exception: N/A the combination of installation plus Res. No. 24-9316 fees and monthly service
309.00$ Collected by: Full Cost: 17,338.32$ charges, and recoverable 319.00$ 3.2% per panel Finance system components. per panel
Full Cost: 1,083.65$
Solar domestic hot water system Actual Cost No Charged by: Date 6/9/2009 Objective: Recover Cost Costs are recovered through Unchanged - Refer to installation fee Water / Solar the combination of installation Current Fee Single-family fee Res. No. Prop 26 Exception: N/A fees and monthly service Collected by: charges, and recoverable
Finance Full Cost: Actual Cost system components.

Solar domestic hot water system Actual Cost No Charged by: Date 3/14/1985 Objective: Recover Cost Installation fees based on cost Unchanged - Refer to installation fee Water / Solar of labor and permanently- Current Fee Multi-family fee Res. No. Prop 26 Exception: N/A installed materials. Example Collected by: for system to serve 10
Finance Full Cost: Actual Cost dwelling units. Remaining costs recovered by monthly
service charges.

Solar domestic hot water system panel 623.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Costs are recovered through 644.00$ 3.4% removal and replacement fee per panel Water / Solar the combination of installation per panel Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: N/A fees and monthly service Collected by: charges, and recoverable
Finance Full Cost: 3,891.60$ system components.

Solar pool heating system panel removal 378.00$ No Charged by: Date 4/23/2024 Objective: Recover Cost Costs are recovered through 391.00$ 3.4% and replacement fee per panel
Water / Solar the combination of installation per panel Res. No. 24-9316 Prop 26 Exception: N/A fees and monthly service Collected by: charges, and recoverable
Finance Full Cost: 3,891.60$ system components.

CITY OF SANTA CLARA MUNICIPAL FEE SCHEDULE
Date Fee Last
Changed
--------------
Ordinance /
Resolution Number
& Date
Fee Detail
Objective
Prop 26 Exception
(See Reader's Guide)
Full Cost Factor
(Note: "N/A" here signifies the fee, rate, or charge is not a fee imposed exclusively by local government.) Reference: CMD 109 16 - 15

Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
10-Day Letter for House Meter Finance 8 - 3
Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Program Fire 9 - 40
Access Control and Traffic Calming Fire 9 - 13
Access Controlled Egress Fire 9 - 17
Active Construction Site Inspections of Projects Public Works 15 - 1 Additional Temporary Tent, Canopy or Air Supported Structure Fire 9 - 15 Addressing Community Development 4 - 14
Administrative Citations Fire 9 - 35
Affordable Housing Application Community Development 5 - 2 Affordable Housing Application (BMP) Community Development 5 - 4 AHA Affordable Housing Agreement Community Development 5 - 2 Alarm Permit Police 13 - 1
Alternate Materials and Methods Review (per hour) Community Development 4 - 13 Alternate Materials and Methods Review Fire 9 - 4
Ambulance Transport Fees Fire 9 - 43
Amended Final Map Checking Public Works 14 - 1
Amended Parcel Map and Record of Survey Checking Public Works 14 - 1 Amplified Music Permit Parks and Recreation 12 - 5
Amplified Music Permit Finance 8 - 2
Animal Control - Adoption Police 13 - 12
Animal Control - Animal Surrender Police 13 - 12
Animal Control - License Police 13 - 10
Animal Control - Other Fees Police 13 - 13
Animal Control - Shelter Services Police 13 - 11
Animal Control - Trap Police 13 - 13
Annexation of Territory to City of Santa Clara Community Development 6 - 4 Appeals Community Development 6 - 3
Application Extension Community Development 4 - 14
Architectural Review Community Development 6 - 4
Assessment District Reapportionment Public Works 14 - 2 Automatic Fire Extinguishing Systems Fire 9 - 4
17 - 1
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Automatic Fire Protection System for Spray Booths Fire 9 - 16 Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems - Existing Fire 9 - 5
Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems - New Fire 9 - 4
Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems - Residential 13D Fire 9 - 15 Backflow Preventer - Device Cost Only Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 5 Backflow Preventer Replacement Fire 9 - 11
Bathroom Remodel Community Development 4 - 15
Below Market Purchase Processing and Transaction Fee Community Development 5 - 4 Billing Service Charge for Late Payment Finance 8 - 2
Bingo Organization Police 13 - 1
Black Line Print of Plans on File Public Works 14 - 5
Block Party Request Finance 8 - 2
Borrowing Materials from Other Libraries (Interlibrary Loan) Library 10 - 1 Building Conformance Fee Community Development 4 - 2
Building Demolition Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) Inspection Public Works 15 - 2 Building Permit Site Clearance Public Works 14 - 13
Building Plans Fire 9 - 6
Burial Materials Processing Parks and Recreation 11 - 11 Burial Permit Filing Parks and Recreation 11 - 6
Business Certificate Information Finance 8 - 1
Business Tax Certificate Finance 8 - 1
Business Tax Rental Unit Surcharge Finance 8 - 1
CAD Report for Legal Purposes Police 13 - 1
California Accidental Release Program (CALARP) Fire 9 - 38 Carbon Dioxide Beverage Dispensing System Fire 9 - 18
Carnivals and Fairs Fire 9 - 6
Casket Parks and Recreation 11 - 2
Casket Burial Parks and Recreation 11 - 1
CD for Legal Purposes Police 13 - 1
CD/DVD Materials Citywide 1 - 1
Central Park - Picnic Area Parks and Recreation 12 - 2
Certificate of Compliance Community Development 6 - 6
Certificate of Compliance Processing Public Works 14 - 2 17 - 2
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Certificate of Correction Processing Public Works 14 - 1 Change of Name, Address or Business Type as Shown on
Current Certificate
Finance 8 - 1
Chapel Rental Parks and Recreation 11 - 8
Citation Sign Off Police 13 - 1
City Flag Finance 8 - 2
City Plaza Park Gazebo Parks and Recreation 12 - 2
City to Repurchase Interment Rights Parks and Recreation 11 - 6 Cleanout Box Only Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 12
Clean-Up Campaign Debris Bag Public Works 15 - 5
Clearance Letter Police 13 - 1
Closing Out Sale Police 13 - 2
Closure of an Onsite Hazardous Waste Treatment System Fire 9 - 6 Code Enforcement Re-Inspection Community Development 6 - 9 Collection Agency Fee Library 10 - 1
Color Photographs Police 13 - 2
Combination Agreement/Grant Deed for the Same Lot Public Works 14 - 7 Combustible and Flammable Materials Fire 9 - 30
Commercial Day Care (E3) Fire 9 - 32
Commercial/Multi-Family/Industrial Scaled Permit Community Development 4 - 18 Community Development Department Referrals Fire 9 - 12
Community Garden Space Membership Parks and Recreation 12 - 8 Community Recreation Center Room Rental Parks and Recreation 12 - 1 Compressed Gas Installation Fire 9 - 7
Concrete Removal/Replace Public Works 15 - 3
Construction & Demolition Public Works 15 - 5
Contract Administration Community Development 6 - 9
Cooking Oil Storage Tanks Fire 9 - 7
Copy Fee Citywide 1 - 1
Copies Public Works 14 - 5
Corrosives Fire 9 - 30
Cost Analysis for Development Public Works 14 - 15
Credit Card Convenience Fee Citywide 1 - 2
17 - 3
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Cremation Parks and Recreation 11 - 2
Crime Analysis Reports Police 13 - 2
Cryogenic Fluids Fire 9 - 30
Custom Hourly Rate Parks and Recreation 11 - 7
Delinquent Payment of Business Certificate Tax Finance 8 - 1 Delinquent Reconnect Finance 8 - 3
Delinquent Service Letter Finance 8 - 2
Design Review/Consultation Fire 9 - 18
Development Agreement Community Development 6 - 6
Development Impact Analysis Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 11 Development Impact Fees Community Development 5 - 4
Dig Single Depth Grave to Double Depth Parks and Recreation 11 - 7 Disinter and Reinter Casket into Same Grave Parks and Recreation 11 - 3 Disinternment Parks and Recreation 11 - 2
Dispatch Service Required for Special Events Police 13 - 2 Distribution Pole Contact Electric Utility 7 - 7
Document Recordation Public Works 14 - 7
Driving Under the Influence Emergency Response Police 13 - 2 Duplicate Business Certificate Finance 8 - 1
Electric Disconnection Fee Electric Utility 7 - 4
Electric Equipment Relocation Electric Utility 7 - 6
Electric Reconnection Fee Electric Utility 7 - 4
Electric Replacement/Reconnection Fee Due to Meter
Tampering/Illegal Access
Electric Utility 7 - 4
Electric System Damage Electric Utility 7 - 3
Electrical Permit Community Development 4 - 2
Emergency Alarm Systems Fire 9 - 7
Emergency Responder Radio Coverage System Fire 9 - 7
Encroachment Agreement Application Public Works 14 - 6
Encroachment Permit Public Works 14 - 3
Encroachment Permit: Field Marking - Sanitary Sewer Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 13 Energy Storage Systems Fire 9 - 17
Engineering Plan Check - Electric Electric Utility 7 - 5 17 - 4
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Engineering Plan Review (Streets) Public Works 15 - 3
Engineering Referrals Fire 9 - 8
Environmental Review Community Development 6 - 5
Environmental Impact Report Fire 9 - 8
Equiment Rentals Parks and Recreation 12 - 3
Exhibit and Trade Shows Fire 9 - 8
Existing Improvements Public Works 14 - 10
Expedited Plan Review Service Community Development 4 - 20 Expired Construction Permit Fire 9 - 34
Facility Rental Fire 9 - 2
False Alarm Calls Police 13 - 3
False Alarm Responses Fire 9 - 34
Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 13 Fee for Work Commencing Before Permit Issuance Community Development 4 - 20 Field Fire Hydrant Flow Test Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 5 Field Marking - Fiber Electric Utility 7 - 6
Field Marking - Recycled Water Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 9 Field Marking - Water Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 8
Field Preparation Parks and Recreation 12 - 5
Field Sample - Environmental Laboratory Analysis Fire 9 - 42 Fields and Turf Areas Reservations Parks and Recreation 12 - 4 Final Map Checking Public Works 14 - 1
Fingerprinting Police 13 - 3
Fire Alarm Systems Fire 9 - 9
Fire Alarm Systems with Pre-Wire Inspection Required Fire 9 - 9 Fire Flow (Hydraulic Model) Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 10 Fire Hydrant Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 4
Fire Pump Installation Fire 9 - 10
Fire Safety Demolition/Construction Plan Fire 9 - 17
Fire Service Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 4
Fire Service Upgrade Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 4
First Tent, Canopy or Air Supported Structure Fire 9 - 14 Flammable and Combustible Liquids Materials Fire 9 - 30 17 - 5
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Flat Marker Parks and Recreation 11 - 5
Flood Zone Verification Community Development 6 - 7
Foundation Repair / Seismic Upgrade Community Development 4 - 16 General Plan / Advanced Planning Surcharge Community Development 4 - 2 General Plan Amendment Community Development 6 - 5
Grading Permit Community Development 4 - 11
Grading Plan Review Community Development 4 - 11
Hazardous Material Tool/Equipment Installation Fire 9 - 11 Hazardous Materials Business Plan Fire 9 - 41
Hazardous Materials Closure Plan Fire 9 - 11
Hazardous Materials Tool/Equipment Modification Fire 9 - 17 Hazardous Waste Generator Fire 9 - 38
High-Piled Combustible Storage Fire 9 - 11
High-Rise Fire 9 - 32
High-Rise Fire Protection Water Storage Tank Fire 9 - 10 High-Rise R-1/R-2 Fire 9 - 32
Highly Toxic Materials Fire 9 - 30
Historical & Landmarks Community Development 6 - 8
Hold Harmless Agreement Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 10 Hospitals Fire 9 - 33
Hourly Rate for Miscellaneous Services Fire 9 - 20
Hourly Rate (Personnel) Parks and Recreation 11 - 7
Hourly Staff (As-Needed) Assigned to Facility Parks and Recreation 12 - 3 ID Card Renewal/Replacement Police 13 - 3
In-House Planning Rate Community Development 6 - 9
Industrial/Commercial Facility Stormwater Inspections Public Works 15 - 1 Insertion Valve Installation Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 10 Inscribe Shutters or Grave Markers Parks and Recreation 11 - 4 Installation of a Flower Vase and Ring on a Niche Parks and Recreation 11 - 4 Installation of a Monobar, Emblem, Flower Vase, or Ring on a Crypt Parks and Recreation 11 - 4 17 - 6
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Installation of a Niche Plaque Parks and Recreation 11 - 4 Installation of Grave Marker Parks and Recreation 11 - 4 Jails Fire 9 - 33
Jump House Permit Parks and Recreation 12 - 7
Jury Fees Citywide 1 - 2
Knox Box Installation Fire 9 - 12
Late Filing of Documents/Reports/Information Fire 9 - 35 Late Payment of CUPA Fire 9 - 35
Late Payment of Operational Permits Fire 9 - 35
Late Payment Penalty for Multi-Family Monitoring Fee Community Development 5 - 5 Licensed Care Facility Fire 9 - 20
Liquefied Petroleum Gas Fire 9 - 30
Liquefied Petroleum Gases - Installation Per Tank Fire 9 - 12 Load Development Electric Utility 7 - 2
Loan Demand Payoff Community Development 5 - 1
Lobbying Activities City Clerk 2 - 1
Lot Line Adjustment Processing Public Works 14 - 2
Mailed Notices Community Development 6 - 3
Maintenance Fee Parks and Recreation 11 - 3
Maps Community Development 6 - 3
Massage Application / Inspections Police 13 - 3
Master Plan Fee Community Development 4 - 13
Mechanical Permit Community Development 4 - 5
Meter Reading More Than Once Per Month Finance 8 - 3
Meter Test Deposit Electric Utility 7 - 3
Methane Venting and Detection Systems Fire 9 - 12
Microfilm Copies Fire 9 - 37
Mills Act Application Community Development 6 - 6
Mills Act Plaques Community Development 6 - 7
Minor Modifications Community Development 6 - 2
Minor Residential Combination Permits Community Development 4 - 1 Miscellaneous CUPA Inspections, CUPA Plan Reviews or
CUPA Field Sampling
Fire 9 - 42
17 - 7
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Miscellaneous Haz Mat Inspections, Haz Mat Plan Reviews or Haz Mat Field Sampling
Fire 9 - 19
Miscellaneous Inspections or Plan Reviews Fire 9 - 19
Mission City Memorial Park Interment Rights and Burial Materials Parks and Recreation 11 - 12 Motor Funeral Escort Police 13 - 4
Multi-Family Loan Conversion Community Development 5 - 3 Multi-Family Loan Origination Community Development 5 - 3 Multi-Family Loan Recapitalization Community Development 5 - 3 Multi-Family (MF) Loan Subordination Request Review Community Development 5 - 1 Multi-Family Monitoring Community Development 5 - 2
Multi-Family Project Refinance Community Development 5 - 3 Multi-Family Project Restructuring - Transfer of Ownership Community Development 5 - 3 Multi-Family Transaction Application Review Community Development 5 - 2 Multi-Story Buildings Fire 9 - 27
Municipal Services Information Finance 8 - 3
Neighborhood Conservation Improvement Program (NCIP) Loan Application Community Development 5 - 1 Neighborhood Parks Parks and Recreation 12 - 6
No-Fee Parade Permit City Manager 3 - 1
Non-Exclusive Franchise Hauler Application Public Works 15 - 5 Non-Historical Referral to Historical and Landmarks Commission Community Development 6 - 8 Off-Duty Employment Police 13 - 5
Off-Site Parking Community Development 6 - 2
On-Demand Mobile Fueling Site Permit Fire 9 - 16
Onsite Treatment of Hazardous Waste Annual Fee Fire 9 - 39 Open Burnings Fire 9 - 12
Operation & Maintenance Inspection of Stormwater Treatment Systems Public Works 15 - 1 Operational Permits Fire 9 - 21
Organic Peroxides Fire 9 - 30
Other Inspections and Fees Community Development 4 - 12 Outside 3rd Party Review (public ROW or easements) Public Works 14 - 7 Outside 3rd Party Review (survey or mapping) Public Works 14 - 8 Ovens Fire 9 - 12
Overhead Lines - New Electric Utility 7 - 1
17 - 8
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Oversize, Overweight Vehicles Public Works 14 - 12
Outdoor Assembly Event Fire 9 - 20
Overtime Haz Mat Inspection Fire 9 - 19
Overtime Inspection Fire 9 - 19
Overtime Plan Check, Mapping Review Public Works 14 - 7 Overtime Haz Mat Plan Review Fire 9 - 19
Overtime Plan Review Fire 9 - 19
Organic Materials Fire 9 - 31
Parcel Map and Record of Survey Checking Public Works 14 - 1 Park Building Room Rentals Parks and Recreation 12 - 1
Parkways and Boulevards Plan Review Public Works 15 - 4 Patrick Henry Drive CFD Formation Community Development 6 - 11 Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Area Impact Public Works 14 - 12 Pavement Restoration Public Works 15 - 3
Pawn/Secondhand Dealer Police 13 - 5
Payment Default Citywide 1 - 1
Permit Extension Community Development 4 - 14
Permit Issuance Community Development 4 - 2
Permit to Final (per trade) Community Development 4 - 13 Perpetual Care (Endowment) Parks and Recreation 11 - 8
Phased Permitting/Occupancy Plan Fire 9 - 17
Phased Plan Check (per each phase) Community Development 4 - 13 Photo CD's Police 13 - 5
Photographs Fire 9 - 37
Photovoltaic Community Development 4 - 15
Plan Duplication Community Development 4 - 14
Plan Revision Fire 9 - 18
Plant Extraction Systems Fire 9 - 18
Plumbing Permit Community Development 4 - 8
Police Reports Police 13 - 6
Pool Demo Community Development 4 - 16
Pool Rentals Parks and Recreation 12 - 7
Portable Hydrant Meter and Deposit Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 5 17 - 9
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Pre-Application Community Development 6 - 7
Preparation of Agreement/Easement/Grant Deed Public Works 14 - 6 Preparation or Peer Review of Technical Report Community Development 6 - 9 Private Land Drainage Area (PLDA) Program Inspection Public Works 15 - 2 Private Security Police 13 - 6
Project Clearance Committee Review Public Works 14 - 14 Project Clearance Committee/Subcommittee Review Electric Utility 7 - 5 Project Clearance Committee/Subcommittee Review Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 10 Public Entertainment Police 13 - 6
Public Fireworks Display and Pyrotechnic Special Effects Use Fire 9 - 13 Pyrophoric Materials Fire 9 - 31
Pyrotechnics Special Effects Proximal to Audience Fire 9 - 13 R-1/R-2 Occupancies Fire 9 - 32
Racquet Court Reservations Parks and Recreation 12 - 5
Re-Inspection Fire 9 - 34
Record Drawings Archiving Public Works 14 - 6
Recreation Cancellation Parks and Recreation 12 - 5
Recreation Center Auditorium / Senior Center Parks and Recreation 12 - 1 Recreation Classes Parks and Recreation 12 - 8
Recreation Course/Class Cancellation, Withdrawal Admin Fee Parks and Recreation 12 - 8 Recreation Tax (Bedroom) Public Works 14 - 11
Recycled Hydrant Meter and Deposit Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 6 Refrigeration System Fire 9 - 13
Release of Stored Vehicles Police 13 - 7
Remove and Dispose of Marker, Marker Frame, Plaque, Vase and Ring Parks and Recreation 11 - 5 Replacement Fee for Lost Link+ Materials Borrowed from Other Libraries Library 10 - 1 Replacement Fee for Lost or Damaged Library Card Library 10 - 1 Replacement Fee for Portable Electronic Devices Library 10 - 1 Replacement for Library Materials Library 10 - 1
Replacement Permit Community Development 4 - 14
Repo Fee (Repossessed Vehicles) Police 13 - 7
Reposting of Public Notification Community Development 6 - 4 Residential Development Park Dedication In-Lieu Fees Parks and Recreation 12 - 9 17 - 10
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Residential Fire-Building Plan Review (R-3/R3.1 Occupancies Only) Fire 9 - 20 Residential Loan Refinance/Subordinations All Programs Community Development 5 - 1 Residential Parking Permit Police 13 - 7
Residential Reroof Community Development 4 - 16
Residential Scaled Permit Community Development 4 - 16
Resource Fees Fire 9 - 2
Resubmittal Fee Fire 9 - 18
Review and Stamp Transfer of Lost Plan Set Community Development 4 - 14 Review of Agreements and Easements Public Works 14 - 7
Review of Permit to Enter Agreement onto City Property Public Works 14 - 7 Review of Right of Entry Agreement onto City Property Public Works 14 - 7 Rezoning Community Development 6 - 1
Sanitary Sewer Capacity Model Run Public Works 14 - 9
Sanitary Sewer Conveyance Fee Public Works 14 - 9
Sanitary Sewer Outlet Charge Public Works 14 - 8
Sanitize Crypt Parks and Recreation 11 - 6
Saturday Service Parks and Recreation 11 - 7
SB Review Community Development 6 - 7
School Fire 9 - 32
Second Response Ordinance Police 13 - 7
Secondary Fireworks/Pyro Submittal - No Detailed Plan Review Required Fire 9 - 13 Secondary Pyro Submittal - No Detailed Plan Review Required Fire 9 - 13 Security Deposit for Survey Public Works 14 - 2
Senior Citizens Center Parks and Recreation 12 - 3
Service Disconnection Electric Utility 7 - 4
Service Fee Customer - Owned Equipment Problem Electric Utility 7 - 4 Service Reconnection Electric Utility 7 - 4
Service Removal Electric Utility 7 - 5
Service Turn-On Finance 8 - 2
Service Wire Relocation Electric Utility 7 - 3
Sewer Lateral Cleanout Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 12 Sewer Lateral Installation Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 12 Sewer Lateral Video Inspection Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 13 17 - 11
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Shared Mobility Permit and Impound Public Works 14 - 16 Short Term Rental Permit Community Development 6 - 10
Short Term Wastewater Discharge Permit Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 13 Significant Property Alteration Community Development 6 - 10 Signs Community Development 6 - 6
Single or Double Upright Monument Foundation Parks and Recreation 11 - 5 Single Story Buildings Fire 9 - 27
Smoke Control System Fire 9 - 13
Solar Domestic Hot Water System Installation Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 15 Solar Domestic Hot Water System Panel Removal and Replacement Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 15 Solar Photovoltaic System Fire 9 - 16
Solar Pool Heating System Installation Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 15 Solar Pool Heating System Panel Removal and Replacement Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 15 Solicitor/Peddler Police 13 - 8
Solid Waste Management Public Works 15 - 5
Special Event Application Parks and Recreation 12 - 6
Special Event Parking at Parks and Recreation Facilities Parks and Recreation 12 - 7 Special Event Food or Merchandise Vendor Parks and Recreation 12 - 8 Special Event Structure Fire 9 - 15
Specific Plan Community Development 6 - 10
Standpipe Systems Fire 9 - 13
State of California Annual Surcharges Fire 9 - 40
Storage or Refuse Bins on City Street Public Works 14 - 13 Storage Tanks - Hazardous Materials Fire 9 - 14
Storm Drain Medallion Fee Public Works 15 - 2
Storm Drain Outlet Charge Public Works 14 - 8
Storm Outlet Charge Public Works 14 - 8
Stormwater Management Plan Review Community Development 6 - 8 Stormwater Management Building and Planning Public Works 15 - 2 Street Tree Planting Public Works 15 - 4
Street Tree Removal Public Works 15 - 4
Subdivision Committee Review Public Works 14 - 13
Subpoena Fees Citywide 1 - 1
17 - 12
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
SVP System Impact Study Electric Utility 7 - 6
SVP Generation Interconnection Study Electric Utility 7 - 6 Tasman East Specific Plan Area Impact Public Works 14 - 12 Taxicab/Pedicab Company Police 13 - 8
Taxicab/Pedicab Driver Police 13 - 8
Technology Fee Citywide 1 - 1
Technology Fee (Building Fees) Community Development 4 - 2 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Community Development 4 - 13 Temporary Connection to Pole Electric Utility 7 - 2
Temporary Power Electric Utility 7 - 2
Temporary Sanitary Sewer Discharge Public Works 14 - 13 Time Extensions Community Development 6 - 9
Time of Use Meter Installation Electric Utility 7 - 5
Tournament Parks and Recreation 12 - 7
Tow Drivers Police 13 - 9
Toxic Materials Fire 9 - 31
Traffic Flow Map Public Works 14 - 13
Traffic Impact Public Works 14 - 11
Traffic Sign Fabrication Public Works 15 - 3
Training Fire 9 - 1
Transportation Demand Management Fee Community Development 6 - 10 Tree Removal Community Development 6 - 8
Underground - Existing Electric Utility 7 - 1
Underground - New Electric Utility 7 - 1
Underground and Above Ground Tank Installations Fire 9 - 14 Underground and Above Ground Tank Modifications Fire 9 - 14 Underground and Above Ground Tank Removals Fire 9 - 14
Underground Fire Service Systems Fire 9 - 15
Underground Hazardous Materials Tank Fire 9 - 41
Underground Street Light Relocation Electric Utility 7 - 3 Unstable (Reactive) Materials Fire 9 - 31
USB Drive for Police Reports Police 13 - 9
Use Permits Community Development 6 - 2
17 - 13
Fee Section Page No.

C I T Y O F S A N T A C L A R A M U N I C I P A L F E E S C H E D U L E Alphabetical Listing by Fee
Using Library Meeting Room Library 10 - 1
Utility Billing Splitting or Combining Accounts Finance 8 - 3 Utility Engineering Plan Review & Inspection Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 6 Utility Service Deposit Finance 8 - 2
Variance Community Development 6 - 1
Vault Disposal Parks and Recreation 11 - 6
Verification of Electric Meter Address Finance 8 - 3
Wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 14 Water and Fire Service Tap Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 9 Water Efficiency Review Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 7 Water Meter and Backflow Preventer Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 2 Water Meter (Device Cost) Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 2 Water Meter Test Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 6
Water Reactive Materials Fire 9 - 31
Water Reconnection Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 8
Water Service Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 1
Water Service Abandonment Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 8 Water Service Dual Meter Service Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 2 Water Service Relocation Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 8 Water Service Upgrade Excluding Device Cost Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 11 Water Supply Assessment Preparation Water and Sewer Utilities 16 - 7 Watershed Map Public Works 14 - 6
Youth Activity Center Room Rental Parks and Recreation 12 - 4 Youth Activity Center Gymnasium Rental Parks and Recreation 12 - 4 Youth & Teen Center Room Rental Parks and Recreation 12 - 6 Zoning Clearance Community Development 6 - 1
Zoning Code Text Amendment Community Development 6 - 1
Zoning Verification Community Development 6 - 7
17 - 14

Resolution/Municipal Fee Schedule Page 1 of 3

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
ADOPTING THE “CITY OF SANTA CLARA 2025/26 MUNICIPAL
FEE SCHEDULE”

WHEREAS, for the previous fiscal year 2024/25 (July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025) the Santa Clara City Council (“City Council”) adopted certain fees by Resolution No. 24-9316 (“2024/25 Fee Schedule”);
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clara (“City”) now desires to amend existing fees, eliminate certain fees, and impose new fees as set forth in the “PROPOSED CITY OF SANTA CLARA 2025/26 MUNICIPAL FEE SCHEDULE” (“Fee Schedule”) attached to the staff report accompanying this Resolution and incorporated herein by reference; WHEREAS, unchanged fees will continue to be charged at the rate set forth in the FY 24/25 Fee Schedule adopted under Resolution 24-9316;
WHEREAS, in compliance with Article XIIIC of the California Constitution and as also detailed in the Fee Schedule, the fees, rates, rental fees, fines, and charges (hereinafter, “Fee” or “Fees”) in the Fee Schedule are not taxes and are
(a) fees imposed for a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the City;
(b) fees imposed for a specific government service or product provided directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the City;
(c) fees imposed for the reasonable regulatory costs to the City for issuing licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits; (d) fees imposed for entrance to or use of local government property, or the purchase, rental, or lease of local government property;
(e) fines, penalties, or other monetary charges imposed by the City as a result of a Resolution/Municipal Fee Schedule Page 2 of 3

violation of law;
(f) charges imposed as a condition of property development; and/or (g) assessments and property-related fees imposed in accordance with the provisions of Article XIIID of the California Constitution;
WHEREAS, in adopting the Fee Schedule, the City exercises its powers under (a) Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution, (b) Article XIIIC of the California Constitution, (c) Section 50076 of the California Government Code, (d) the Charter of the City of Santa Clara, (e) the Code of the City of Santa Clara, California, and (f) any other applicable laws; WHEREAS, the City made available the proposed Municipal Fee Schedule for public review and comment ten (10) days prior to the public hearing for the proposed Fees; WHEREAS, on April 9 and April 16, 2025, the City timely published notice of the public hearing in the Santa Clara Weekly in the manner set forth in Government Code Sections 6062a and 66018;
WHEREAS, the City mailed notice of the public hearing to all persons requesting such notice pursuant to Government Code Section 66016;
WHEREAS, on April 29, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing on the Fees set forth in the Fee Schedule; and
WHEREAS, also on April 29, 2025, the City Council discussed and determined, by Resolution 25-xxxx, the amounts to be charged as field and turf user fees (agenda item 25-377), which shall also be included in the FY 25/26 Municipal Fee Schedule.

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

1. The findings as set forth herein above are hereby adopted by the City Council of Santa Clara.

2. Adoption of Fees, Rates and Charges. The Fees contained in the “CITY OF SANTA CLARA 2025/26 MUNICIPAL FEE SCHEDULE” are hereby adopted. The field and turf user fees adopted under Resolution 25-xxxx shall be included in the “CITY OF SANTA CLARA Resolution/Municipal Fee Schedule Page 3 of 3

2025/26 MUNICIPAL FEE SCHEDULE.”

3. Effect of Fees Prior to effective Date of Resolution. This Resolution shall not be construed so as to affect any fee or charge payable or paid under any applicable fee schedule operative prior to the effective date of this Resolution, except to the extent that the Fee Schedule supersedes the 2024/25 Fee Schedule for new fees, amended fees, and deleted fees.

4. Effective date. The Fees set forth in the “CITY OF SANTA CLARA 2025/26 MUNICIPAL FEE SCHEDULE” described in Section 2 above shall be effective on July 1, 2025.

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 29th DAY OF APRIL 2025, 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. City of Santa Clara 2025/26 Municipal Fee Schedule

2. Resolution 25-XXXX

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
25-481 Agenda Date: 4/29/2025

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL

SUBJECT
PUBLIC HEARING: Action on a General Plan Text Amendment for the 2023-2031 Housing Element Sites Inventory List to Remove the Development Site located at 4701 Patrick Henry Drive, commonly referred to as the “Great America Technology Park,” and to add the Development Site located at 3005 Democracy Way, commonly known as the “Mission Point” site.

BACKGROUND
The Housing Element, one of the required elements of the City’s General Plan, includes policies and programs intended to help the City meet the housing needs of all current and future Santa Clara residents. State law requires that local jurisdictions update their Housing Element every eight years and that the Housing Element be reviewed by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). HCD “certifies” housing elements that it determines to be in substantial compliance with State housing law. Since the Housing Element statutes were first enacted, six such cycles of adoption and certification have been completed. A certified Housing Element allows the City to pursue federal and State grant funding for housing and infrastructure, such as One Bay Area Grants (OBAG) and retain local control of the City’s land use plans and development regulations.

At the conclusion of the three-year Housing Element Update process that began in early 2021, the City’s sixth cycle Housing Element was adopted by the City Council on May 7, 2024, and certified by HCD on May 31, 2024. This latest cycle covers a planning period between 2023 and 2031.

One of the required components of the Housing Element is the development and maintenance of an inventory of specific sites that have been analyzed for their suitability to develop with residential uses within the current planning period (2023-2031). The Sites Inventory must include sufficient capacity to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) in all affordability categories (i.e. Lower, Moderate, Above Moderate).

Staff requests an amendment to the Sites Inventory List that removes one of the sites from the list and adds a recently approved project to the list. Such action would implement the terms of a pending settlement agreement with Housing Action Coalition and would mitigate the risk of other potential challenges to the City’s Housing Element.

Attachment 1 is a comparison of the Sites to Meet the RHNA table from the certified adopted Housing Element and what is being proposed with this amendment.

Also included in this report as Attachment 2 (clean) and Attachment 3 (redlined) are excerpts from the Housing Element (Chapter 3 - Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing AFFH, Chapter 6 - Housing Resources, and Appendix C - Supplemental Sites Inventory Analysis) showing the revisions associated with the proposed amendment. Should this amendment be adopted, a copy of the City of Santa Clara Printed on 4/25/2025Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
25-481 Agenda Date: 4/29/2025
revisions, along with an updated Housing Element Appendix B - Electronic Sites Inventory (Excel workbook), will be submitted to HCD for their review to confirm the residential capacity in the City’s Sites Inventory remains adequate to meet the City’s RHNA.

Any amendment to the General Plan, including the Housing Element, is a legislative action requiring a recommendation from the Planning Commission and action by the City Council in accordance with City Code Chapter 18.142.

The discussion section in the April 16, 2025, Planning Commission staff report (Attachment 4) provides additional background information regarding the proposed amendment, including the settlement proposal (removal of the 4701 Patrick Henry Drive site, also known as the “Great America Technology Park”) and the addition of the Kylli “Mission Point” project, located at 3005 Democracy Way. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the amendment. A summary regarding the meeting is contained in the Discussion section.

DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission hearing on this item took place on April 16, 2025. Staff provided a presentation (Attachment 5) with background information on housing elements in general, the City’s Housing Element Update process, and specifically about the proposed amendment.

The Commission asked questions and/or provided comments as follows (Commission questions/comments listed first with staff responses after each bullet):
· The high median income for Santa Clara
o Staff Response: The 2024 Area Median Income (AMI) for Santa Clara County is $184,300 for a family of four.
· Clarification was requested about potentially revising the definition of moderate-income units to lower the percentage of AMI from 120-percent to 100-percent. o Staff Response: This was discussed during the Housing Element Update process and captured in Housing Plan Action 2 Affordable Housing Ordinance, Objective a.2, “Assess the feasibility of updating the ordinance’s definition of “moderate income” units from 120% AMI to 100% AMI to further distinguish the difference between “moderate income” and market rents. This responds to stakeholder feedback that 120% AMI is not affordable for many residents and in some cases exceeds market rents.” · The status of any approvals for the site recommended to be removed (4701 Patrick Henry Drive) and why this site and not others.
o Staff Response: Although the 4701 Patrick Henry Drive site is part of the approved Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, they do not have any subsequent approvals (or a pending application on file). Unlike other sites, this site is a condominium development with multiple owners, which adds to the complexity of redevelopment. · Adding language to the resolution, in response to public comment, to encourage developers and contractors to evaluate hiring local labor.
o Staff Response: The Commission and staff noted that it would be more appropriate to add such language to project approvals, such as what was recommended for the Mission Point development and other projects.

Public Comments:

Two members of the public provided comments:

City of Santa Clara Printed on 4/25/2025Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
25-481 Agenda Date: 4/29/2025
· Daniel Alvarez, representing Carpenter’s Union Local 405, stated the biggest challenge members face is finding affordable housing that is closer to where they work and that new affordable housing that supports the community should be built by responsible contractors that pay fair wages, utilize apprenticeship programs and invest in skilled workers. · Linda questioned why the City was proposing to reduce AMI for very low income o Staff Response: Staff clarified that the proposed amendment to remove one site and add one site to the Sites Inventory would change the number of expected units in each of the affordability categories (Lower, Moderate, and Above Moderate-Income), but would not change the percent of AMI ranges for those categories.

The Commission voted 7-0-0 with Commissioner Cherukuru making the motion (Chair Saleme Seconded) to adopt a resolution (Attachment 6) to recommend City Council Amend the General Plan Housing Element with revisions associated with changes to the Housing Sites Inventory.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On January 31, 2023, pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council approved an Addendum to the 2010-2035 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (Attachment 7 and 8) for the sixth Cycle (2023-2031) Housing Element, which concluded that it did not constitute a substantial change to the General Plan that would require major revisions to the previous EIR; that there were no substantial changes in circumstances as a result of modifications to the General Plan that would cause new or substantially more severe impacts; and, that there was no new information of substantial importance that identified new or more intense significant impacts than those identified in the General Plan EIR. The removal of a single site from the adopted Housing Element Sites Inventory would not change these conclusions.

The potential environmental impacts of the Kylli “Mission Point” Project were analyzed in an EIR, approved and certified by the City Council on November 19, 2024. The EIR identified impacts in the areas of traffic, greenhouse gases, energy, biology, geology and soils, cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, utilities, water quality, and hazards and hazardous materials, which with the incorporation of mitigation measures would be reduced to less than significant. The EIR also identified air quality and noise as having significant unavoidable impacts with mitigation incorporated, and for those impacts the Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report other than administrative staff time and expense.

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

City of Santa Clara Printed on 4/25/2025Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
25-481 Agenda Date: 4/29/2025
On March 5, 2025, pursuant to Government Code Section 65353 and 65355, a notice of public hearing was published in The Santa Clara Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation, regarding the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings.

On March 7, 2025, pursuant to Government Code Section 65352(a), the City mailed referral letters to tribes and outside agencies advising them of the City’s intent to act on a General Plan Amendment to adopt revisions to the 2023-2031 Housing Element. The referral letters also included notice of the proposed Planning Commission and City Council hearings.

On March 14, 2025, and April 11, 2025, a GovDelivery bulletin was emailed to the City’s Housing Element Update topic subscribers (3,791 as of April 8, 2025), to let them know the availability of the draft revisions to the Housing Element and the proposed Planning Commission and City Council public hearings.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Adopt a Resolution to Amend the General Plan Housing Element with revisions associated with changes to the Housing Sites Inventory

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution Amending the General Plan Housing Element with revisions associated with changes to the Housing Sites Inventory
Reviewed by: Afshan Hamid, Director, Community Development Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Comparison of Sites to Meet the RHNA Tables (adopted and proposed)

2. Excerpts showing revisions to Housing Element (clean)

3. Excerpts showing revisions to Housing Element (redlined)

4. Planning Commission Staff Report April 16, 2025

5. Planning Commission Presentation April 16, 2025

6. Planning Commission Draft Resolution No. 25-XXX

7. Addendum

8. City Council Addendum Resolution No. 23-9188

9. General Plan Amendment Resolution
City of Santa Clara Printed on 4/25/2025Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
Attachment 1
1 Sites to Meet the RHNA (May 7, 2024 Adopted Housing Element)

ModerateAbove ModerateVery Low Low[0-50% AMI][50-80% AMI][> 120% AMI]Pending and Approved Projects 710 794 504 10,201 12,209Tasman East Focus Area 114 239 175 3,838 4,366Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area 76 75 75 1,294 1,520Lawrence Station Area Plan 39 45 58 635 777Freedom Circle Focus Area 54 54 54 913 1,075Other 427 381 142 3,521 4,471ADU Projection 118 118 118 39 393Available Specific Plan Sites 2,138 1,586 1,728 140 5,592Tasman East Focus Area 268 196 318 121 903Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area 1,747 1,299 1,299 - 4,345Lawrence Station Area Plan 123 91 111 19 344El Camino Real Rezoning Sites 319 236 250 - 805Total 3,285 2,734 2,600 10,380 18,999RHNA 2,872 1,653 1,981 5,126 11,632Surplus (buffer above RHNA) 31.2% 102.5% 63.3% Site/Credit TypeAffordability CategoryTotal CapacityLower[80-120% AMI] 33%
Attachment 1
2 Sites to Meet the RHNA (Housing Element Proposed Amendment)

ModerateAbove ModerateVery Low Low[0-50% AMI][50-80% AMI][> 120% AMI]Pending and Approved Projects 710 794627 10,898 13,029Tasman East Focus Area 114 239 175 3,838 4,366Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area 76 75 75 1,294 1,520Lawrence Station Area Plan 39 45 58 635 777Freedom Circle Focus Area 54 54 54 913 1,075Other 427 381265 4,218 5,291ADU Projection 118 118 118 39 393Available Specific Plan Sites1,748 1,295 1,4371404,620Tasman East Focus Area 268 196 318 121 903Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area 1,357 1,008 1,008 - 3,373Lawrence Station Area Plan 123 91 111 19 344El Camino Real Rezoning Sites 319 236 250 - 805Total 2,895 2,443 2,432 11,077 18,847RHNA 2,872 1,653 1,981 5,126 11,632Surplus (buffer above RHNA)23% 116% 62%18% Site/Credit TypeAffordability CategoryTotal CapacityLower[80-120% AMI]

Page 13 ends

Area is contributing to overcrowding and is forcing people to move away from Santa Clara. It is possible that development pressure has been focused on the City’s specific plan areas and that once these areas are built out, developers may look to redevelop older lower density buildings that are naturally occurring affordable housing. This indicates a need to build more affordable housing, and policies that prevent a net loss of affordability if older market rate buildings are redeveloped, and to potentially require relocation assistance for displaced residents.

AFFH Analysis of the Sites Inventory
An important part of the AFFH analysis is looking at where the site inventory is directing housing growth and how that will replace segregated living patterns with integrated and balanced living patterns and convert any racially or ethnically concentrated areas that may exist into areas of opportunity for households at all income levels. The site inventory in chapter 13.3 places 82.5% of the City’s housing growth over the next 8 years into in HCD/TCAC Opportunity Map High or Highest Resource areas. The site inventory includes a buffer of additional units above the required RHNA so most of the following figures exceed 100%.  84.5 percent of the City’s Very Low Income RHNA units are located in High or Highest Resource areas.
o VLI RHNA = 2,872 units.
o VLI Units in Sites Inventory: 252 in Highest Resource Areas (9% of VLI RHNA) and 2,169 in High Resource Areas (75.5% of VLI RHNA).
 126 percent of the City’s Low Income RHNA units located in High or Highest Resource areas.
o LI RHNA = 1,653 units.
o LI Units in Sites Inventory: 358 in Highest Resource Areas (22% of LI RHNA) and 1,726 in High Resource Areas (104% of LI RHNA).
 104 percent of the City’s Moderate RHNA units located in High or Highest Resource areas. o Moderate RHNA = 1,981 units.
o Moderate Units in Sites Inventory: 112 in Highest Resource Areas (6% of Moderate RHNA) and 1,946 in High Resource Areas (98% of Moderate RHNA).  175 percent of the City’s Above Moderate RHNA units located in High or Highest Resource areas.
o Above Moderate RHNA = 5,126 units.
o Above Moderate Units in Sites Inventory: 161 in Highest Resource Areas (3% of Above Moderate RHNA) and 8,813 in High Resource Areas (172% of Above Moderate RHNA).

The following table provides additional details on which types of units are located in different HCD/TCAC opportunity Map Areas:

13.3 SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Page 13 ends

Table 13.3-22: Sites Inventory Units by HCD/TCAC Opportunity Map Area HCD/TCAC Opportunity Map Areas
Affordability Category Highest Resource High Resource Moderate Resource Low Resource Site/Credit Type VLI LI Mod.

Above
Mod.

Total
Capacity VLI LI Mod.

Above
Mod. VLI LI Mod.

Above
Mod.

RHNA 2,872 1,653 1,981 5,126 11,632
Pending and Approved
Projects 710 794 627 10,898 13,029 148 271 20 145 364 372 464 8,676 92 72 63 669 106 79 80 1,408 Tasman East Focus Area SP 114 239 175 3,838 4,366 114 239 175 3,838 Patrick Henry Drive SP 76 75 75 1,294 1,520 76 75 75 1,294 Lawrence Station Area 39 45 58 635 777 39 45 58 635
Freedom Circle Focus Area 54 54 54 913 1,075 54 54 54 913 Other1 427 381 265 4,218 5,291 148 271 20 145 120 4 160 2,631 53 27 5 34 106 79 80 1,408 ADU Projection 118 118 118 39 393 47 47 47 16 47 47 47 16 18 18 18 6 6 6 6 1 Available Specific Plan Sites 1,748 1,295 1,437 140 4,620 1,625 1,204 1,326 121 123 91 111 19 Tasman East Focus Area SP 268 196 318 121 903 268 196 318 121 Patrick Henry Drive SP 1,357 1,008 1,008 - 3,664 1,357 1,008 1,008 Lawrence Station Area 123 91 111 19 344 123 91 111 19
El Camino Real Rezoning
Sites 319 236 250 - 805 57 40 45 - 133 103 109 - 129 93 96 - - - - - Total 2,895 2,443 2,432 11,077 18,847 252 358 112 161 2,169 1,726 1,946 8,813 362 274 288 694 112 85 86 1,409 Surplus Units 23 790 451 5,951 7,215
Surplus Percentage Above
RHNA 0.8% 47.8% 22.8% 116.1% 62%

4.7% Highest Resource 77.8% High Resource 8.6% Moderate Resource 9% Low Resource Note:

1. Included in the “Other” category, the Mission Point Project, a 48-acre mixed-use Planned Development that has been entitled to allow up to a maximum of 2,600 residential units and is subject to a 10-year Development Agreement with three optional 5-year extensions, is still in the early planning stages, so to be conservative, only a portion of maximum allowable residential units have been included. The Developer has agreed to provide at least fifteen (15%) percent of their units at rents or prices affordable to very low, low and moderate income households or some combination thereof, providing an average affordability of eighty (80%) AMI with no individual affordable rental unit exceeding a maximum of one hundred percent (100%) AMI and no individual affordable for-sale unit exceeding a maximum of one hundred and twenty percent (120%) AMI.
-
-
I
I I I

I I -I I I
I I I
I
I
I
I I I
~
I -

I I I I I I I
I I I
I I -I
I
I I
I I I
I I
I
I I
~
I
I
I
I
I
r--
I
I
I
I
r--
I I
t--
I l I
I l I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
- ~
- ~
I
1 I I
~
I
-
I I I I I 1 I
-
1 I I 1 I I I
-

T I I I I T
-
I -

I I I I I I I

I I I I I I
-
I

I I I I I I I
-
J ~ I I I I I I I I
-
I I I I I I I _J

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Page 13 ends

period. As determined by ABAG, the City of Santa Clara’s allocation for the 2023-2031 planning period is 11,632 housing units, with the units distributed among the four income categories as shown in Table 13.6-1.

Table 13.6-1 City of Santa Clara RHNA 2023-2031
Income Group
Income Category
(% AMI)
RHNA
(Housing Units)
Percentage of
Total Housing
Units
Very Low <50% 2,872 25%
Low 50-80% 1,653 14%
Moderate 80-120% 1,981 17%
Above Moderate >120% 5,126 44%
Total 11,632 100%
Source(s): Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031, Updated March 2022.

Note(s):
1 AMI = Area Median Income
2 Pursuant to AB 2634, local jurisdictions are required to project the housing needs of extremely low-income households (0-30% AMI) and consider this income group a subset of the very low-income category. In estimating the number of extremely low-income households, a jurisdiction can use 50% of the very low-income allocation or apportion the very low-income figure based on Census data.

Progress Toward the RHNA
Since the RHNA uses June 30, 2022, as the baseline for growth projections for the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period, jurisdictions may claim units approved and proposed that are anticipated to be complete (have a Certificate of Occupancy) after June 30, 2022.

Approved and proposed residential development projects credited toward the RHNA include a variety of affordable and market-rate projects in various stages of the development process. Most of these projects are concentrated within Specific Plan areas and along major thoroughfares, where residential development is expected to continue throughout the planning period. These projects are credited toward the RHNA based on the affordability and unit count of the development. Combined, a total of 13,029 units are expected to be completed within the planning period, as shown in Table 13.6-2.

Approved Projects
Approved residential development projects credited toward the 2023-2031 RHNA have been reviewed by Planning and other City departments for compliance with applicable Codes and regulations and have received all required planning entitlement approvals. The next step for these projects is to proceed through the building permit application review, issuance, and

Page 13 ends

construction process. All approved projects have anticipated completion and occupancy permits that will be finalized on or after June 30, 2022 and before January 31, 2031.

Historically, the drop-out rate (percentage of projects that do not develop after receiving entitlements) in the City of Santa Clara has been extremely low. Rather than drop-out completely after receiving entitlements, it is more common that projects will delay the start of construction until presented with more favorable market conditions. After receiving entitlements, the primary barrier to development has, and will likely continue to be, the availability of financing/market conditions.

Pending or Proposed Projects
Five projects in various stages of planning review are included as proposed projects. These sites are included although there is no certainty those units will be achieved because the proposals have not been approved, are currently under staff review, or are pending a formal application submittal. The identified realistic capacity for these sites is the total units included in the preliminary proposals.

To help ensure that pending and proposed projects will complete the development process and result in new units, the City has included an additional ongoing objective under Action 10, Adequate Sites Inventory. The Planning Division will included a narrative and table within the City’s Annual Progress Report that describes the status of projects listed in Table 13.6-2, Pending and Approved Projects, and when an entitlement is nearing expiration, the Planning Division will proactively notify applicants to apply for an extension.

In Addition, the Zoning Code Update will allow administrative extensions for entitlements Development approvals are generally permitted for 2 years initially, and then two 1-year administrative extensions are allowed, which saves time and eliminates that possibility of adding conditions. The current process requires going through entitlement process again for extension.

The administrative time extension process has been added to Action 9, Zoning Ordinance.

Since there is no guarantee that the projects will be approved or developed, in the case a proposed development falls through, the sites are still available to accommodate those identified units and may be able to count toward the lower-income RHNA depending on site density and size.

Affordability for these projects is assumed based on the site’s location per Specific Plan requirements, the City’s inclusionary housing ordinance requirements, or a developer/affordable housing agreement. The status of the following projects is as of December 2023.

As shown in Table 13.6-2 below, the total of all pending and approved projects is 13,029units, which is 1,397 units more than the City’s total RHNA of 11,632 units. Because the majority of pending and approved projects fall within the above moderate affordability category (10,898 units), the City has a remaining RHNA of 4,375 units in the very low, low, and moderate affordability categories.

13.6

Page 13 ends

Site/Credit Type

AFFORDABILITY CATEGORIES
Project Status
(est. completion date) Affordability
Very Low
[0-50% AMI]
Low
[50-80% AMI]
Moderate
[80-120% AMI]
Above
Moderate
[above 120% AMI] Total Units
Gateway Crossings (Hunter/Storm) - Phase 2 - 42 42 756 840 Proposed per Developer Agreement, Phase 2: affordability TBD Mission Point/3005 Democracy Way (Kylli) 123 697 820 Approved6 per Developer Agreement; affordability TBD subtotal other project(s) 427 381 142 4,218 5,291
Total Pending and Approved Projects 710 794 627 10,898 13,029 Remaining RHNA 2023-2031 2,162 859 1,354 (5,772) (1,397) Source(s): City of Santa Clara, April 2023.

Note(s): All calculations were rounded down. There are likely discrepancies due to rounding down between the row and column totals. Project Status “Approved” means a project has received all required Planning entitlements. 1 Phase I building permit issued 4/18/22 for 311 units; the remaining 192 units are approved. 2 Application expected early 2024.
3 Application expected early 2024.
4 165 unit affordable senior apartment occupied.
5 Project’s affordable housing obligation consolidated into 2302 Calle Del Mundo 6 The Mission Point Project, a 48-acre mixed-use Planned Development that has been entitled to allow up to a maximum of 2,600 residential units and is subject to a 10-year Development Agreement with three optional 5-year extensions, is still in the early planning stages, so to be conservative, only a portion of maximum allowable residential units have been included. The Developer has agreed to provide at least fifteen (15%) percent of their units at rents or prices affordable to very low, low and moderate income households or some combination thereof, providing an average affordability of eighty (80%) AMI with no individual affordable rental unit exceeding a maximum of one hundred percent (100%) AMI and no individual affordable for-sale unit exceeding a maximum of one hundred and twenty percent (120%) AMI.

13.6

Page 13 ends

o Phase 2 (2030-2034): 2,234 units
 Housing Element (2023-2031): 5,184 units (1,520 pending/approved + 3,664 sites)
 Ten remaining Patrick Henry Drive sites have maximum densities of 149 du/ac, one site has a maximum density of 250 du/ac, and one site has a maximum density of 99 du/ac.
 72% of 149 du/ac = 107 du/ac. One approved Patrick Henry Drive project has a density of 122 du/ac (Summerhill). There are pre-applications on file for projects on two other sites that have proposed densities of 123 du/ac (Sares Regis) and 148 du/ac (Walnut Hill).

For the Lawrence Station area, the realistic capacity of the remaining sites is a total of 344 units (123 VLI, 91 LI, 111 Mod, and 19 Above Mod). See Table 13.6-5. The buildout horizon for these units falls within the 6th cycle.

For the Tasman East Specific Plan area, the realistic capacity of the remaining sites not tied to approved or proposed projects is 903 units, per Table 13.6-5. When combined with the number of units already proposed or on file, the total number of units is 769 units greater than the total number of units approved as a part of the adoption of the Tasman East Specific Plan. The City is currently processing a Specific Plan amendment to increase the capacity of the plan area by an additional 1,500 units. That effort is recognized as Action 19, Tasman East Specific Plan Amendment in the Housing Plan. The buildout horizon for the Housing Element portion of these additional units is 2030.

For the Patrick Henry Drive Plan area, sites totaling 3,664 units are available during the planning period. Additionally, 1,520 units have either been proposed or approved in the Patrick Henry Drive area.

Given the fact that housing in all the City’s Specific Plan areas and on the El Camino Real rezoning sites (with the adoption of the December 2023 Zoning Ordinance Amendment and spring 2024 Zoning Map Amendment) is allowed by right, the primary impediment to development of housing, according to feedback received from developers at stakeholder meetings, is the economic environment (construction and land costs) and the ability for developers to obtain financing and/or state funding (for affordable projects). Another potentially significant impediment is the provision of infrastructure, which has been addressed in the Tasman East and Patrick Henry Drive plan areas through the creation and administration of infrastructure fees for the respective areas. For the few remaining projects not yet built in the Lawrence Station Area, required infrastructure improvements will be addressed through the development review process.

13.6

Page 13 ends

Table 13.6-4 Specific Plan Land Use Designations
Land Use Designation
Min./Max.

Density
Meets
Default
Density
Number of
Parcels
Included
in 6th
Cycle
Total
Acreage of
Available
Sites
Tasman East Focus Area Specific Plan
Transit Neighborhood
(parcels less than 1 acre) 60 to 350 Yes 13 7.033
Tasman East Specific Plan Subtotal 13 7.033
Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area Specific Plan
Very High Density Residential 51 to 99 Yes 1 3.8
Village Residential 60 to 149 Yes 01 9.062
High Density Flex 60 to 149 Yes 4 9.568
Urban Village 100 to 149 Yes 5 12.986
Urban Center 120 to 250 Yes 1 3.821
Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Subtotal 11 39.238
Lawrence Station Area Plan
Low Density Residential 8 to 19 No 0 0
Medium Density Residential 20 to 36 No 3 1.993
High Density Residential 37 to 50 Yes 0 0
Very High Density Residential 51 to 100 Yes 1 3.14
Lawrence Station Area Plan Subtotal 4 5.133
Source(s): Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, March 2022. Lawrence Station Area Plan, Neighborhood Transit-Oriented Development Plan, Nov. 2016. Tasman East Focus Area Specific Plan, Nov. 2020.

Note: 1. The Patrick Henry Drive site designated Village Residential includes 26 parcels for each condominium unit and an approximately 6.8-acre common area parcel (shared parking/circulation). This site is available for redevelopment, but not included on the Sites Inventory for purposes of RHNA.

Re-use of Sites
AB 1397 (2017) requires that specific parameters be placed on sites that were used in previous Housing Element planning cycles but did not develop and are identified in the current Housing Element to meet the lower-income RHNA. However, as noted in HCD guidance documents, due to updates in the prior planning period to the General Plan or other planning activities, such as the creation of a specific plan, some sites previously identified in the Housing Element may have been rezoned during intervening years to allow a higher density, thereby increasing the potential

13.6

Page 13 ends

Site Selection
The Housing Element sites inventory, in addition to the list of pending and approved projects, includes accessory dwelling unit (ADU) projections, underutilized sites within Specific Plan areas zoned for high-density residential and mixed-use development, and the El Camino Real rezoning sites. These latter two categories have been used to demonstrate that the RHNA for the extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income categories can be accommodated during the planning period. As the discussion below concludes, the sites have no identified constraints that would prevent development or reuse during the Housing Element period. Table 13.6-5 summarizes the sites inventory.

Table 13.6-5 Sites to Meet the RHNA
Site/Credit Type
Affordability Category
Total
Capacity
Lower Moderate
Above
Moderate
Very Low
[0-50%
AMI]
Low
[50-80%
AMI]
[80-120%
AMI] [> 120% AMI]
Pending and Approved
Projects 710 794 627 10,898 13,029
ADU Projection 118 118 118 39 393
Available Specific Plan Sites 1,748 1,295 1,437 140 4,620 Tasman East Focus Area
Specific Plan 268 196 318 121 903
Patrick Henry Drive Focus
Area Specific Plan 1,357 1,008 1,008 - 3,373
Lawrence Station Area
Plan 123 91 111 19 344
El Camino Real Rezoning
Sites 319 236 250 - 805
Total 2,895 2,443 2,432 11,077 18,847
RHNA 2,872 1,653 1,981 5,126 11,632
Surplus (buffer above RHNA) 18% 23% 116% 62%
Source(s): Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031, Updated March 2022. Technical Assistance for Local Planning, Housing – Using ADUs to Satisfy RHNA, Technical Memo, March 2022. Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, March 2022. Lawrence Station Area Plan, Neighborhood Transit- Oriented Development Plan, Nov. 2016. Tasman East Focus Area Specific Plan, Nov. 2020.

Note(s): AMI = Area Median Income. In the Pending and Approved Projects category, the Mission Point Project , a 48-acre mixed-use Planned Development that has been entitled to allow up to a maximum of 2,600 residential units and is subject to a 10-year Development Agreement with three optional 5-year extensions, is still in the early planning stages, so to be conservative, only a portion of maximum allowable

13.6 SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Page 13 ends

residential units have been included. The Developer has agreed to provide at least fifteen (15%) percent of their units at rents or prices affordable to very low, low and moderate income households or some combination thereof, providing an average affordability of eighty (80%) AMI with no individual affordable rental unit exceeding a maximum of one hundred percent (100%) AMI and no individual affordable for-sale unit exceeding a maximum of one hundred and twenty percent (120%) AMI.

ADU Projection
Since 2017, the State legislature has passed a series of laws that significantly increase the potential for the development of ADUs and Junior ADUs (JADUs) by removing development barriers, allowing ADUs through ministerial permits, and requiring jurisdictions to include programs in their housing element that incentivize ADU development. Interest in constructing ADUs is high in Santa Clara and continues to grow. In 2018, the City issued 21 ADU building permits. In 2019, the number increased to 51 annual building permits, with similar numbers in 2020 (45 ADU building permits) and 2021 (53 ADU building permits), then increasing in 2022 to 76 ADU building permits. This represents a 262 percent increase in ADU production in Santa Clara between 2018 and 2022. The City estimates that interest will continue to increase over the next few years, given the many single-family neighborhoods citywide that create capacity for additional ADUs. As of June 2022, 53 percent (or 16,103 parcels) of total parcels were zoned for single-family housing, totaling 2,504 acres. ADUs are permitted on single-family, multi-family, and mixed-use lots, including R1, R2, and R3 zone districts, which represent a significant number of lots in Santa Clara.

As an incentive to ADU production, the City does not charge a Planning fee for review/processing ADU requests. Also, State law allows jurisdictions to charge impact fees on ADUs over 750 square feet, but the City of Santa Clara does not. The City has also exempted ADUs/JADUs from providing parking (JADUs that convert a garage space/s are required to provide replacement parking for the primary dwelling).

The slight dip in ADU production in 2020 may be due to the COVD-19 pandemic and other events of 2020. In 2022, the City had the highest number of ADU building permits to date, which is likely more representative of ADU production moving forward based on ADU trends in Santa Clara, new and pending favorable ADU legislation that created new incentives and streamlined processes to build ADUs, and the pent-up demand for additional housing in the Bay Area.

While it is impossible to predict with certainty the exact number of ADUs that will be developed during the planning period (2023-2031), the City conservatively estimates:
 An average of 49.2 ADUs per year will be constructed throughout the planning period.

This reflects the average number of building permits issued for ADUs between 2018 and 2022. Given the anticipated increase in ADUs over the near term, this is a conservative estimate.

Page 13 ends

Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area Specific Plan
In March 2022, the City Council approved the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan. The planning area encompasses approximately 73.59 acres bounded by Sunnyvale and Calabazas Creek to the west, the southern edge of San Francisco Public Utilities Commission right-of-way to the north, Great America Parkway to the east, and Mission College to the south. As one of the City’s first high-density residential neighborhoods, Patrick Henry Drive will add thousands of units to better balance the City’s jobs-housing ratio, a share of which will be income restricted to help meet regional and local affordability goals. Several regional destinations and amenities are nearby, including Levi’s Stadium, Great America Theme Park, and the Santa Clara Convention Center.

The VTA light rail station at Old Ironsides and Tasman Drive is just over one-half mile, or an approximately 10-minute walk, from the center of the Specific Plan area.

The Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan resulted from a collaborative planning effort involving the City, area property owners, and the Santa Clara community. The plan will create a 73.59-acre high-density, residential neighborhood located near regional destinations, including job-centers, transit, and other amenities. At buildout, the project will accommodate up to 12,000 new residential dwelling units and 310,000 square feet of nonresidential uses, including 200,000 square feet of new neighborhood-serving retail and public facilities, such as libraries and community spaces. New and improved pedestrian and bicycle connections, trails, and parks will link neighborhoods and enhance connections to nearby amenities and recreation destinations. Careful planning will ensure adequate infrastructure and services to support the proposed new development. Targeted residential densities range from a minimum of 51 dwelling units per acre to a maximum of 250 units per acre. These densities will help meet the demand for housing that addresses job and retail growth in the City and region.

Three projects within the Specific Plan area were counted toward the sixth cycle RHNA as approved, proposed, or under construction. Eleven remaining parcels, on approximately 30.2 acres, have been identified as sites and remain to be re-developed. Not Viable sites were identified and excluded based on existing uses. Assuming realistic capacity, on a parcel-level, the Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area Specific Plan sites identified in this Housing Element can accommodate a total of 3,373 units (see Table 13.6-5). Appendix B provides a detailed list of all sites, including assumed affordability. Appendix C provides supplemental sites inventory analysis including the availability of specific plan sites during the planning period and suitability of nonvacant sites.

There are no regulatory constraints or City-specified buildout horizons that would prevent the eleven remaining parcels from being developed in this Housing Element cycle. Sites that are unlikely to be developed in this Housing Element cycle have not been included and are shown in the Patrick Henry Drive plan as being in a later build-out horizon. As a result of the adoption of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and the associated program EIR, regulatory impediments to the development of those sites have been removed via a streamlined by-right approval process that includes CEQA tiering.

13.6

Page 13 ends

FIGURE 13.6-6 PATRICK HENRY DRIVE SITES
Not Included on Inventory
0 0.02 0.04 OD7 0
- - M;les

13.6 City of Santa Clara
Patrick Henry Drive
Specific Plan Sites
Legend
Bosem op Features
[~..:_ ! Santa Clara Cit y li mits
Surroundine Cities
MaJor Destinations
Rivers and Waterbod ies
Parks and Open Space
~- Railways
Specific Pion Sites
-Appro ved
- Proposed
- Ava,1able
*
Scurcz,(!f E•i.Ccuntyo f S:w•0•110penOa1112022.

OtyolSanuoOual)ll
C
Page C-1
Appendix C
Supplemental Sites Inventory
Analysis
Sites to Meet the RHNA
Santa Clara has taken concrete steps, including the recent adoption of multiple specific plans, to support a significant amount of new housing development within the City. There are 13,029 units in pending and approved projects with a status of either: proposed (i.e. awaiting Planning approval), approved (all required Planning entitlements secured), under construction, or occupied (See Table 13.6-2 Pending and Approved Projects).

The majority of pending and approved projects are market rate with the conservative assumption that assigns the 10,898 units from those projects into the Above Moderate (above 120% AMI) affordability category. The remaining pending and approved projects include over 2,100 restricted affordable units, because of the City’s inclusionary requirements and/or the development of 100% affordable projects.

Although the total number of pending and approved units (13,029) exceeds the City’s total RHNA of 11,632 units, as shown in the below table, these projects do not fully meet the City’s RHNA requirement within the Very Low (0-50% AMI), Low (50-80% AMI), and Moderate (80-120% AMI) affordability categories.

In addition to the City’s pending and approved projects (14,809 units) and projected ADU production (393 units), the Housing Element Sites Inventory includes redevelopment of available specific plan sites (4,620 units) and certain rezoning sites along the El Camino Real corridor (805 units).

The sites to meet the City’s RHNA includes a surplus of units (buffer beyond the minimum RHNA target) in all affordability categories (i.e. Lower, Moderate, Above Moderate) above the 15 to 30-percent buffer recommended by HCD to comply with “no net loss” provisions of State Housing Element law, which requires jurisdictions to maintain a sufficient capacity to accommodate their RHNA throughout the planning period at all income levels.

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT
Page C-2
Table 13.C-1 Sites to Meet the RHNA
Site/Credit Type
Affordability Category
Total
Capacity
Lower Moderate
Above
Moderate
Very Low
[0-50%
AMI]
Low
[50-80%
AMI]
[80-120%
AMI]
[> 120%
AMI]
Pending and Approved Projects 710 794 627 10,898 13,029 Tasman East Focus Area 114 239 175 3,838 4,366
Patrick Henry Drive Focus 76 75 75 1,294 1,520
Lawrence Station Area Plan 39 45 58 635 777
Freedom Circle Focus Area 54 54 54 913 1,075
Other2 427 381 265 4,218 5,291
ADU Projection 118 118 118 39 393
Available Specific Plan Sites 1,748 1,295 1,437 140 4,620 Tasman East Focus Area 268 196 318 121 903
Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area 1,357 1,008 1,008 - 3,373 Lawrence Station Area Plan 123 91 111 19 344
El Camino Real Rezoning Sites 1 319 236 250 - 805
Total 2,895 2,443 2,432 11,077 18,847
RHNA 2,872 1,653 1,981 5,126 11,632
Surplus (buffer above RHNA) 18% 23% 116% 62%
Notes:

1. The El Camino Real rezoning sites are not required to accommodate a lower-income RHNA shortfall but have been included in the Sites Inventory for their contribution to the recommended RHNA buffer for lower- income units, particularly in the VLI affordability category.

2. In the “Other” category, the Mission Point Project, a 48-acre mixed-use Planned Development that has been entitled to allow up to a maximum of 2,600 residential units and is subject to a 10-year Development Agreement with three optional 5-year extensions, is still in the early planning stages, so to be conservative, only a portion of maximum allowable residential units have been included. The Developer has agreed to provide at least fifteen (15%) percent of their units at rents or prices affordable to very low, low and moderate income households or some combination thereof, providing an average affordability of eighty (80%) AMI with no individual affordable rental unit exceeding a maximum of one hundred percent (100%) AMI and no individual affordable for-sale unit exceeding a maximum of one hundred and twenty percent (120%) AMI.

I
C
Page C-3
Availability of Specific Plan Sites During the Planning Period Planned Buildout Horizons
Tasman East Focus Area
 Specific Plan (6,000-unit capacity)
o Phase 1 (4,500 units)
o Phase 2 (1,500 units) *Action 19
 Housing Element (5,269 units):
o Pending and Approved (4,366 units, estimated completion 2028)  196 units occupied
 2,441 units under construction
 581 units approved (all Planning entitlements secured)  1,148 units pending Planning approval
o Available Sites (903 units, estimated completion 2030) Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area
 Specific Plan (10,300 to 12,000-unit capacity)
o Phase 1 (5,839 units, estimated completion 2025-2029) o Phase 2 (2,234 units, estimated completion 2030-2034)  Housing Element (5,184 units, estimated completion 2030) o Pending and Approved (1,520 units)
 307 units approved (all Planning entitlements secured)  1,213 units pending Planning approval
o Available Sites (3,664 units)
Lawrence Station Area
 Specific Plan (3,500-unit capacity)
 Housing Element (846 units) completed in 5th Cycle
 Housing Element (1,121 units)
o Pending and Approved (777 units, estimated completion 2024-2027)  449 units under construction
 328 units approved (all Planning entitlements secured) o Available Sites (344 units, estimated completion 2030) I
C
Page C-31

11. 4701 Patrick Henry Drive (APN: 104-53-001 through -026) Consolidated Site “O” Site is Available for Redevelopment, but Not Included on Sites Inventory for Purposes of RHNA Criteria 6 (Existing Site Utilization) Criteria 7 Criteria 8 Acres
Min.

Density
Max.

Density

Building
Size (sf) FAR Stories
Surface
Parking
Improvement
Ratio
Year
Built

9.06 60 149 52,920 0.13 1 & 2 All 1.67 1981
Use(s): Office.

This 9.06-acre industrial site was developed with approximately 52,920 square feet in multiple, mostly one-story, with some two-story office buildings (0.13 FAR) with surface parking in 1981.

The following factors were used to determine that the existing use does not constitute an impediment to additional residential uses on the site and that the existing use is likely to be discontinued during the planning period.
 The low FAR (less than 0.5), mostly one-story, all surface parking, indicate that the property is underutilized, particularly in comparison to the high density residential allowed on the site.
 The existing buildings are almost 43 years old, indicating they may need substantial improvements or replacement for maximum financial return.  The Village Residential Zoning District for this site has flexible development standards to facilitate redevelopment of this site, including a gross density maximum of 149 du/ac, height up to 160-feet and 12-stories, with no FAR maximum.
 This site (Great America Technology Park / Marriott Center) is currently made up of 26 separate condominium map parcels (and 1 common area parcel) with 10 separate owners.

Although there are multiple owners, several of them, including one property owner who own a majority of the parcels, actively participated in the drafting of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, which has as one of its primary purposes the redevelopment of sites like 4701 Patrick Henry Drive.
 In a March 2024 conversation between the City and the majority property owner and a follow-up conversation with the broker representing the majority owners, they expressed keen interest in redeveloping their site with residential uses and noted that their existing I
C
Page C-55
Public Comment on Sites Inventory
The City received public comment from the Housing Action Coalition on the adopted Housing Element objecting to the inclusion of several sites, including 4701 Patrick Henry Drive, on the sites inventory (see Appendix A Public Outreach).

Although the City continues to believe that 4701 Patrick Henry Drive is prime for redevelopment within the timeframe of the Housing Element (see evaluation criteria above), this site has been removed from the inventory. As noted in table 13.C-1, there are sufficient sites in the inventory to achieve the City’s RHNA targets with a buffer at all affordability levels.

As described in Chapter 6 Housing Resources and reflected in Appendix B Electronic Sites Inventory and Appendix C Supplemental Sites Inventory Analysis, the following sites were also identified through public comments (see Appendix A Public Outreach) and have been excluded from the Sites Inventory since they are unlikely to redevelop with residential uses within the timeframe of the Housing Element:
 Tasman East Specific Plan
o 5101 Lafayette Street (data center)
 Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan
o 4650 Old Ironsides Drive (data center)
o 4700 Old Ironsides Drive (data center)
o 4600 Patrick Henry Drive (Drawbridge parcel)
 Lawrence Station Area Plan
o 2960 – 3030 Corvin Drive (data centers)
o 3350 – 34420 Central Expressway (Gemini Rosemont industrial campus)  El Camino Real Rezoning Sites
o 3615 El Camino Real (24-hour Fitness)
o 3735 and 3705 El Camino Real (Big Lots/Lucky)
As noted above (Appendix C), in addition to the removal of the 4701 Patrick Henry Drive site at the request of the Housing Action Coalition, six additional El Camino Real rezoning sites and one Tasman East Specific Plan site were also excluded from the inventory because it was determined that they are less likely to redevelop in the planning period.

Page 13 ends

AFFH Analysis of the Sites Inventory
An important part of the AFFH analysis is looking at where the site inventory is directing housing growth and how that will replace segregated living patterns with integrated and balanced living patterns and convert any racially or ethnically concentrated areas that may exist into areas of opportunity for households at all income levels. The site inventory in chapter 13.3 places 82.5% of the City’s housing growth over the next 8 years into in HCD/TCAC Opportunity Map High or Highest Resource areas. The site inventory includes a buffer of additional units above the required RHNA so most of the following figures exceed 100%.  97.5 84.5 percent of the City’s Very Low Income RHNA units are located in High or Highest Resource areas.
o VLI RHNA = 2,872 units.
o VLI Units in Sites Inventory: 252 in Highest Resource Areas (9% of VLI RHNA) and 2,541 2,169 in High Resource Areas (88.575.5% of VLI RHNA).  144 126 percent of the City’s Low Income RHNA units located in High or Highest Resource areas.
o LI RHNA = 1,653 units.
o LI Units in Sites Inventory: 358 in Highest Resource Areas (22% of LI RHNA) and 2,0171,726 in High Resource Areas (122104% of LI RHNA).  113 104 percent of the City’s Moderate RHNA units located in High or Highest Resource areas.
o Moderate RHNA = 1,981 units.
o Moderate Units in Sites Inventory: 112 in Highest Resource Areas (6% of Moderate RHNA) and 2,1141,946 in High Resource Areas (10798% of Moderate RHNA).  161 175 percent of the City’s Above Moderate RHNA units located in High or Highest Resource areas.
o Above Moderate RHNA = 5,126 units.
o Above Moderate Units in Sites Inventory: 161 in Highest Resource Areas (3% of Above Moderate RHNA) and 8, 116 813 in High Resource Areas ( 158172% of Above Moderate RHNA).

The following table provides additional details on which types of units are located in different HCD/TCAC opportunity Map Areas:

13.3 SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Page 13 ends

Above
Mod.

Total
Capacity VLI LI Mod.

Above
Mod. VLI LI Mod.

Above
Mod.

RHNA 2,872 1,653 1,981 5,126 11,632
Pending and Approved
Projects 710 794 504627
10,20110,
898
12,20913,0
29 148 271 20 145 364 372 341464
7,9798
,676 92 72 63 669 106 79 80 1,408
Tasman East Focus Area SP 114 239 175 3,838 4,366 114 239 175 3,838 Patrick Henry Drive SP 76 75 75 1,294 1,520 76 75 75 1,294 Lawrence Station Area 39 45 58 635 777 39 45 58 635
Freedom Circle Focus Area 54 54 54 913 1,075 54 54 54 913 Other1 427 381 142265
3,5214,21
8 4,4715,291 148 271 20 145 120 4 37160
1,9342,
631 53 27 5 34 106 79 80 1,408
ADU Projection 118 118 118 39 393 47 47 47 16 47 47 47 16 18 18 18 6 6 6 6 1 Available Specific Plan Sites
2,1381,74
8 1,586295 1,728437 140 5,5924,620
2,0151,
625
1,4952
04 1,6173
26 121 123 91 111 19
Tasman East Focus Area SP 268 196 318 121 903 268 196 318 121 Patrick Henry Drive SP 1,747357 1,299008 1,299008 - 4,3453,664 1,7471,
357
1,2991,
008
1,2991,
008
Lawrence Station Area 123 91 111 19 344 123 91 111 19
El Camino Real Rezoning
Sites 319 236 250 - 805 57 40 45 - 133 103 109 - 129 93 96 - - - - - Total
3,2852,
895
2,7342,4
43 2,60043
2 10,3801
1,077
18,99918
,847 252 358 112 161
2,541
2,169
2,017
1,726
2,114
1,946
8,1168
,813 362 274 288 694 112 85 86 1,409
Surplus Units 413 23 1,081790 619 451
5,2545,95
1 7,3677,215
Surplus Percentage Above
RHNA 140.8% 6547.8% 3122.8%
102116.1
% 6362%

4.654.
7% Highest Resource 77.8% High Resource 8.58.
6%
Moderate Resource 89.9
%
Low Resource
Note:

I I I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I
-
-
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
l I
I I
I I
I I
I I
1 I
I I
I I -
I I -
I I -
I I I _J

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Page 13 ends

Approved and proposed residential development projects credited toward the RHNA include a variety of affordable and market-rate projects in various stages of the development process. Most of these projects are concentrated within Specific Plan areas and along major thoroughfares, where residential development is expected to continue throughout the planning period. These projects are credited toward the RHNA based on the affordability and unit count of the development. Combined, a total of 12,20913,029 units are expected to be completed within the planning period, as shown in Table 13.6-2.

Page 13 ends

construction process. All approved projects have anticipated completion and occupancy permits that will be finalized on or after June 30, 2022 and before January 31, 2031.

The administrative time extension process has been added to Action 9, Zoning Ordinance.

As shown in Table 13.6-2 below, the total of all pending and approved projects is 12,20913,029 units, which is 577 1,397 units more than the City’s total RHNA of 11,632 units. Because the majority of pending and approved projects fall within the above moderate affordability category (10,20110,898 units), the City has a remaining RHNA of 4,4984,375 units in the very low, low, and moderate affordability categories.

13.6

Page 13 ends

Site/Credit Type

AFFORDABILITY CATEGORIES
Project Status
(est. completion date) Affordability
Very Low
[0-50% AMI]
Low
[50-80% AMI]
Moderate
[80-120% AMI]
Above
Moderate
[above 120% AMI] Total Units
Gateway Crossings (Hunter/Storm) - Phase 2 - 42 42 756 840 Proposed per Developer Agreement, Phase 2: affordability TBD Mission Point/3005 Democracy Way (Kylli) 123 697 820 Approved6 per Developer Agreement; affordability TBD subtotal other project(s) 427 381 142 3,5214,218 4,4715,291 Total Pending and Approved Projects 710 794 504627 10,20110,898 12,20913,029 Remaining RHNA 2023-2031 2,162 859 1,4771,354 (5,0755,772) (5771,397) Source(s): City of Santa Clara, April 2023.

13.6

Page 13 ends

o Phase 2 (2030-2034): 2,234 units
 Housing Element (2023-2031): 5,8655,184 units (1,520
pending/approved + 4,3453,664 sites)
 Ten remaining Patrick Henry Drive sites have maximum densities of 149 du/ac, one site has a maximum density of 250 du/ac, and one site has a maximum density of 99 du/ac.
 72% of 149 du/ac = 107 du/ac. One approved Patrick Henry Drive project has a density of 122 du/ac (Summerhill). There are pre-applications on file for projects on two other sites that have proposed densities of 123 du/ac (Sares Regis) and 148 du/ac (Walnut Hill).

For the Patrick Henry Drive Plan area, sites totaling 4,3453,664 units are available during the planning period. Additionally, 1,520 units have either been proposed or approved in the Patrick Henry Drive area.

13.6

Page 13 ends

Table 13.6-4 Specific Plan Land Use Designations
Land Use Designation
Min./Max.

Density
Meets
Default
Density
Number of
Parcels
Included
in 6th
Cycle
Total
Acreage of
Available
Sites
Tasman East Focus Area Specific Plan
Transit Neighborhood
(parcels less than 1 acre) 60 to 350 Yes 13 7.033
Tasman East Specific Plan Subtotal 13 7.033
Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area Specific Plan
Very High Density Residential 51 to 99 Yes 1 3.8
Village Residential 60 to 149 Yes 1101 9.062
High Density Flex 60 to 149 Yes 4 9.568
Urban Village 100 to 149 Yes 5 12.986
Urban Center 120 to 250 Yes 1 3.821
Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Subtotal 1211 39.238
Lawrence Station Area Plan
Low Density Residential 8 to 19 No 0 0
Medium Density Residential 20 to 36 No 3 1.993
High Density Residential 37 to 50 Yes 0 0
Very High Density Residential 51 to 100 Yes 1 3.14
Lawrence Station Area Plan Subtotal 4 5.133
Source(s): Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, March 2022. Lawrence Station Area Plan, Neighborhood Transit-Oriented Development Plan, Nov. 2016. Tasman East Focus Area Specific Plan, Nov. 2020.

13.6

Page 13 ends

Table 13.6-5 Sites to Meet the RHNA
Site/Credit Type
Affordability Category
Total
Capacity
Lower Moderate
Above
Moderate
Very Low
[0-50%
AMI]
Low
[50-80%
AMI]
[80-120%
AMI] [> 120% AMI]
Pending and Approved
Projects 710 794 504 627 10,20110,898 12,20913,029
ADU Projection 118 118 118 39 393
Available Specific Plan Sites 2,1381,748 1,5861,295 1,7281,437 140 5,5924,620 Tasman East Focus Area
Specific Plan 268 196 318 121 903
Patrick Henry Drive Focus
Area Specific Plan 1,7471,357 1,2991,008 1,2991,008 - 4,3453,373 Lawrence Station Area
Plan 123 91 111 19 344
El Camino Real Rezoning
Sites 319 236 250 - 805
Total 3,2852,895 2,7342,443 2,6002,432 10,38011,077 18,99918,847 RHNA 2,872 1,653 1,981 5,126 11,632
Surplus (buffer above RHNA) 3318% 3123% 102116% 6362%
Source(s): Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031, Updated March 2022. Technical Assistance for Local Planning, Housing – Using ADUs to Satisfy RHNA, Technical Memo, March 2022. Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, March 2022. Lawrence Station Area Plan, Neighborhood Transit- Oriented Development Plan, Nov. 2016. Tasman East Focus Area Specific Plan, Nov. 2020.

13.6 SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT

Page 13 ends

This reflects the average number of building permits issued for ADUs between 2018 and 2022. Given the anticipated increase in ADUs over the near term, this is a conservative estimate.

Page 13 ends

The VTA light rail station at Old Ironsides and Tasman Drive is just over one-half mile, or an approximately 10-minute walk, from the center of the Specific Plan area.

Three projects within the Specific Plan area were counted toward the sixth cycle RHNA as approved, proposed, or under construction. Twelve Eleven remaining parcels, on approximately 3930.24 acres, have been identified as sites and remain to be re-developed. Not Viable sites were identified and excluded based on existing uses. Assuming realistic capacity, on a parcel-level, the Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area Specific Plan sites identified in this Housing Element can accommodate a total of 5,8653,373 units (see Table 13.6-5). Appendix B provides a detailed list of all sites, including assumed affordability. Appendix C provides supplemental sites inventory analysis including the availability of specific plan sites during the planning period and suitability of nonvacant sites.

There are no regulatory constraints or City-specified buildout horizons that would prevent the twelve eleven remaining parcels from being developed in this Housing Element cycle. Sites that are unlikely to be developed in this Housing Element cycle have not been included and are shown in the Patrick Henry Drive plan as being in a later build-out horizon. As a result of the adoption of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan and the associated program EIR, regulatory impediments

13.6

Page 13 ends

FIGURE 13.6-6 PATRICK HENRY DRIVE SITES
Not Included on Inventory
0 0.02 0.Ot 0.07 0
- - MUes

13.6 City of Santa Clara
Patr ick Henry Drive
Specifi c Plan Sites
Legend
Bosemop Feature s
[~ ~ ! Santa Clara City Limits
Surround ine Cities
Major Destinations
Rivers and Waterbod ies
Parks and Open Space
~- Railways
Specific Plan Sites
- Approved
- Propose d
- Avail able
*
Sau«z(if E , i. CcuntyofS.,t ■ O •• OpenOat ■ 2012.

CtyolS..ni..O.,a.3J22.

C
Page C-1
Appendix C
Supplemental Sites Inventory
Analysis
Sites to Meet the RHNA
Santa Clara has taken concrete steps, including the recent adoption of multiple specific plans, to support a significant amount of new housing development within the City. There are 12,20913,029 units in pending and approved projects with a status of either: proposed (i.e. awaiting Planning approval), approved (all required Planning entitlements secured), under construction, or occupied (See Table 13.6-2 Pending and Approved Projects).

The majority of pending and approved projects are market rate with the conservative assumption that assigns the 10,20110,898 units from those projects into the Above Moderate (above 120% AMI) affordability category. The remaining pending and approved projects include over 2,000 100 restricted affordable units, because of the City’s inclusionary requirements and/or the development of 100% affordable projects.

Although the total number of pending and approved units ( 12,20913,029) exceeds the City’s total RHNA of 11,632 units, as shown in the below table, these projects do not fully meet the City’s RHNA requirement within the Very Low (0-50% AMI), Low (50-80% AMI), and Moderate (80-120% AMI) affordability categories.

In addition to the City’s pending and approved projects ( 12,20914,809 units) and projected ADU production (393 units), the Housing Element Sites Inventory includes redevelopment of available specific plan sites (5,5924,620 units) and certain rezoning sites along the El Camino Real corridor (805 units).

SANTA CLARA

HOUSING ELEMENT
Page C-2
Table 13.C-1 Sites to Meet the RHNA
Site/Credit Type
Affordability Category
Total
Capacity
Lower Moderate
Above
Moderate
Very Low
[0-50%
AMI]
Low
[50-80%
AMI]
[80-120%
AMI]
[> 120%
AMI]
Pending and Approved Projects 710 794 504 627 10,20110,898 12,20913,029 Tasman East Focus Area 114 239 175 3,838 4,366
Patrick Henry Drive Focus 76 75 75 1,294 1,520
Lawrence Station Area Plan 39 45 58 635 777
Freedom Circle Focus Area 54 54 54 913 1,075
Other2 427 381 142265 3,5214,218 4,4715,291
ADU Projection 118 118 118 39 393
Available Specific Plan Sites 2,1381,748 1,5861,295 1,728 1,437 140 5,5924,620 Tasman East Focus Area 268 196 318 121 903
Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area 1,7471,357 1,2991,008 1,2991,008 - 4,3453,373 Lawrence Station Area Plan 123 91 111 19 344
El Camino Real Rezoning Sites 1 319 236 250 - 805
Total
3,2852,8
95 2,7342,4
43 2,6002,432
10,38011,
077
18,99918,8
47 RHNA 2,872 1,653 1,981 5,126 11,632
Surplus (buffer above RHNA) 3318% 3123% 102116% 6362%
Notes:

1.2.In the “Other” category, the Mission Point Project, a 48-acre mixed-use Planned Development that has been entitled to allow up to a maximum of 2,600 residential units and is subject to a 10-year Development Agreement with three optional 5-year extensions, is still in the early planning stages, so to be conservative, only a portion of maximum allowable residential units have been included. The Developer has agreed to provide at least fifteen (15%) percent of their units at rents or prices affordable to very low, low and moderate income households or some combination thereof, providing an average affordability of eighty (80%) AMI with no individual affordable rental unit exceeding a maximum of one hundred percent (100%) AMI and no individual affordable for-sale unit exceeding a maximum of one hundred and twenty percent (120%) AMI.

I
C
Page C-3
Availability of Specific Plan Sites During the Planning Period Planned Buildout Horizons
Tasman East Focus Area
 Specific Plan (6,000-unit capacity)
o Phase 1 (4,500 units)
o Phase 2 (1,500 units) *Action 19
 Housing Element (5,269 units):
o Pending and Approved (4,366 units, estimated completion 2028)  196 units occupied
 2,441 units under construction
 581 units approved (all Planning entitlements secured)  1,148 units pending Planning approval
o Available Sites (903 units, estimated completion 2030) Patrick Henry Drive Focus Area
 Specific Plan (10,300 to 12,000-unit capacity)
o Phase 1 (5,839 units, estimated completion 2025-2029) o Phase 2 (2,234 units, estimated completion 2030-2034)  Housing Element (5,8655,184 units, estimated completion 2030) o Pending and Approved (1,520 units)
 307 units approved (all Planning entitlements secured)  1,213 units pending Planning approval
o Available Sites (4,3453,664 units)
Lawrence Station Area
 Specific Plan (3,500-unit capacity)
 Housing Element (846 units) completed in 5th Cycle
 Housing Element (1,121 units)
o Pending and Approved (777 units, estimated completion 2024-2027)  449 units under construction
 328 units approved (all Planning entitlements secured) o Available Sites (344 units, estimated completion 2030) I
C
Page C-31

Density
Max.

Density

Building
Size (sf) FAR Stories
Surface
Parking
Improvement
Ratio
Year
Built

9.06 60 149 52,920 0.13 1 & 2 All 1.67 1981
Use(s): Office.

This 9.06-acre industrial site was developed with approximately 52,920 square feet in multiple, mostly one-story, with some two-story office buildings (0.13 FAR) with surface parking in 1981.

Although there are multiple owners, several of them, including one property owner who own a majority of the parcels, actively participated in the drafting of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan, which has as one of its primary purposes the redevelopment of sites like 4701 Patrick Henry Drive.
 In a March 2024 conversation between the City and the majority property owner and a follow-up conversation with the broker representing the majority owners, they expressed keen interest in redeveloping their site with residential uses and noted that their existing I
C
Page C-55
Table 13.C-2 Sites to Meet the RHNA - Hypothetical
with 4701 Patrick Henry Drive Site Removed
Public Comment on Sites Inventory
The City received public comment from the Housing Action Coalition on the adopted Housing Element objecting to the inclusion of several sites, including 4701 Patrick Henry Drive, on the sites inventory (see Appendix A Public Outreach).

Although the City continues to believe that 4701 Patrick Henry Drive is prime for redevelopment within the timeframe of the Housing Element (see evaluation criteria above), even if this site was has been removed from the inventory., As noted in table 13.C-1, there City would still haveare sufficient sites in its the inventory to achieve its the City’s RHNA targets with a buffer at all affordability levels (see Table 13.C- 2).

I
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
25-436 Agenda Date: 4/16/2025

REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION

SUBJECT
PUBLIC HEARING: Recommendation on a General Plan Text Amendment for the 2023-2031 Housing Element Sites Inventory List

BACKGROUND
The Housing Element, one of the required elements of the City’s General Plan, includes policies and programs intended to help the City meet the housing needs of all current and future Santa Clara residents. State law requires that local jurisdictions update their Housing Elements every eight years and that the Housing Element be reviewed by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). HCD “certifies” housing elements that it determines to be in substantial compliance with State housing law. Since the Housing Element statutes were first enacted, six such cycles of adoption and certification have been completed. A certified Housing Element allows the City to pursue Federal and State grant funding for housing and infrastructure, such as One Bay Area Grants (OBAG) and retain local control.

At the conclusion of the three-year Housing Element Update process that began in early 2021, the City’s sixth cycle Housing Element was adopted by the City Council on May 7, 2024 and certified by HCD on May 31, 2024.

One of the required components of the Housing Element is the development and maintenance of an inventory of specific sites that have been analyzed for their suitability to develop with residential uses within the eight-year planning period (2023-2031). The Sites Inventory must include sufficient capacity to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) in all affordability categories (i.e. Lower, Moderate, Above Moderate).

Staff is requesting an amendment to the Sites Inventory List to remove one of the sites from the list and add a recently approved project to the list as discussed below. Such action would implement the terms of a pending settlement agreement with Housing Action Coalition and would mitigate the risk of other potential challenges to the City’s Housing Element. Any amendment to the General Plan, including the Housing Element, is a legislative action requiring a recommendation from the Planning Commission and action by the City Council in accordance with City Code Chapter 18.142.

DISCUSSION
The Housing Element Update process gives community members multiple opportunities to provide input and recommend revisions. During the adoption timeline of more than two years, a lobbying group known as the Housing Action Coalition (HAC) provided five separate comment letters on the City’s Housing Element drafts. Many of their comments focused on the properties in the City’s Sites Inventory; in order to be listed on the sites inventory, it must be reasonably foreseeable that properties will redevelop into residential uses during the planning period (2023-2031). In response, City of Santa Clara Printed on 4/13/2025Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
25-436 Agenda Date: 4/16/2025
the City conducted additional analysis, and in consultation with HCD, removed selected sites from the inventory that were unlikely to redevelop with residential uses within the 2023-2031 timeframe.

The City also added additional sites to the inventory to offset the removed sites.

Nevertheless, the Housing Action Coalition continues to object to the inclusion of at least four sites that were retained in the adopted/certified Housing Element, especially the sites located within the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan area. The City continues to believe that it is reasonably foreseeable that most of the Patrick Henry Drive sites will redevelop during the planning period, due to the current underutilization of the properties, the age of the existing buildings, the participation of property owners during the Specific Plan process, and additional reasons stated in Housing Element Appendix C (the “Supplemental Sites Inventory Analysis”). However, the HAC maintains that these sites, due to their characteristics and multiple property ownerships, in their opinion, will not develop in the next housing cycle.

Settlement Proposal
In order to avoid the risks and costs of litigation, City staff has negotiated a proposed settlement agreement with the HAC, under which the City would agree to remove one site, 4701 Patrick Henry Drive, from the inventory, and in exchange the HAC would agree to not challenge the City’s Housing Element in court. The removal of 4701 Patrick Henry would still leave sufficient sites to achieve the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets with a substantial buffer at all affordability levels, and therefore staff is proposing a General Plan Text Amendment to the 2023-2031 Housing Element Sites Inventory List to remove the site from the list. See Attachment 1, a comparison of the Sites to Meet the RHNA table from the adopted Housing Element and the proposed Housing Element Amendment.

HCD recommends all jurisdictions include a 15 to 30-percent buffer of units beyond the minimum required RHNA target numbers in all affordability categories (i.e. Lower, Moderate, and Above Moderate) to comply with the “no net loss” provisions of State Housing Element law, which requires jurisdictions to maintain a sufficient capacity to accommodate their RHNA throughout the planning period. The proposed removal of 4701 Patrick Henry Drive from the adopted Sites Inventory would decrease the recommended buffer in the lower-income category from 33-percent to 18-percent and in the moderate-income category from 31-percent to 17-percent. The buffer in the above moderate- income category would remain unchanged at 103-percent above the required RHNA. The City will still meet the overall RHNA of 11,632 units and a buffer. The removal of this site from the Inventory also does not change its current General Plan land use designation and Zoning (Village Residential), which allows conversion of all or part of the site from low-density industrial office to high-density residential uses, consistent with the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan.

Kylli “Mission Point” Project
On November 19, 2024, the City Council approved the Kylli “Mission Point” Project (3005 Democracy Way), a 48-acre mixed-use Planned Development that has been entitled to allow up to a maximum of 2,600 new residential units with a minimum 15-percent affordability requirement. This project was not included on the Sites Inventory in the Housing Element adopted and certified in May 2024. As part of the negotiations with the HAC, staff proposed that when removing 4701 Patrick Henry Drive from the inventory, the City would simultaneously, and conservatively, include only a portion (820 units) of the maximum allowed units from the recently approved Mission Point Project. Taken together, these two changes would result in a decrease in the lower-income buffer from 33-percent to 18-percent, and a City of Santa Clara Printed on 4/13/2025Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
25-436 Agenda Date: 4/16/2025
decrease in the moderate-income buffer from 31-percent to 23-percent. In the above moderate- income category, the recommended buffer would increase from 103-percent to 116-percent. The HAC indicated that it would agree to the inclusion of Mission Point as part of the settlement.

Included in this report as Attachment 2 (clean) and Attachment 3 (redlined) are excerpts from the Housing Element (Chapter 3 - AFFH, Chapter 6 - Housing Resources, and Appendix C - Supplemental Sites Inventory Analysis) showing the revisions associated with the proposed amendment. Should this amendment be approved, a copy of the revisions, along with an updated Housing Element Appendix B - Electronic Sites Inventory (Excel workbook), will be submitted to HCD for their review to confirm the residential capacity in the City’s Sites Inventory remains adequate to meet its RHNA.

Recommendation
On balance, in the interest of addressing the HAC’s ongoing concerns regarding the foreseeability of redevelopment of the City’s Housing Element Sites Inventory, and because the proposed removal of 4701 Patrick Henry would not impact the City’s ability to meet the required RHNA with a sufficient recommended buffer at all income levels, it is staff’s recommendation that this site be removed from the inventory. In order to soften the impact on the buffer, staff recommends simultaneously adding the Mission Point project to the inventory.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On January 31, 2023, the City Council approved an Addendum to the 2010-2035 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (Attachment 4) for the sixth Cycle (2023-2031) Housing Element, which concluded that it did not constitute a substantial change to the General Plan that would require major revisions to the previous EIR; that there were no substantial changes in circumstances as a result of modifications to the General Plan that would cause new or substantially more severe impacts; and, that there was no new information of substantial importance that identified new or more intense significant impacts than those identified in the General Plan EIR. The removal of a single site from the adopted Housing Element Sites Inventory would not change these conclusions.

The potential environmental impacts of the Kylli “Mission Point” Project were analyzed in an Environmental Impact Report, approved and certified by the City Council on November 19, 2024.

The EIR identified impacts in the areas of traffic, greenhouse gases, energy, biology, geology and soils, cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, utilities, water quality, and hazards and hazardous materials, which with the incorporation of mitigation measures would be reduced to less than significant. The EIR also identified air quality and noise as having significant unavoidable impacts with mitigation incorporated, and for those impacts the Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report other than administrative staff time and expense.

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 City of Santa Clara Printed on 4/13/2025Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
25-436 Agenda Date: 4/16/2025
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 March 5, 2025, pursuant to Government Code Section 65353 and 65355, a notice of public hearing was published in The Santa Clara Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation, regarding the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings.

On March 14, 2025 and April 11, 2025, a GovDelivery bulletin was emailed to the City’s Housing Element Update topic subscribers (3,791 as of April 8, 2025), to let them know of the availability of the draft revisions to the Housing Element and the proposed Planning Commission and City Council public hearings.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Adopt a Resolution to Recommend the City Council Amend the General Plan Housing Element with revisions associated with changes to the Housing Sites Inventory

2. Adopt a Resolution to Recommend the City Council Amend the General Plan Housing Element with revisions associated with changes to the Housing Sites Inventory, with additional revisions

RECOMMENDATION
Alternative 1: Adopt a Resolution to Recommend the City Council Amend the General Plan Housing Element with revisions associated with changes to the Housing Sites Inventory Prepared by: John Baty, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Alexander Abbe, Assistant City Attorney
Afshan Hamid, Director, Community Development
Approved by: Lesley Xavier, Planning Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Comparison of Sites to Meet the RHNA Tables (adopted and proposed)

2. Excerpts showing revisions to Housing Element (clean)

3. Excerpts showing revisions to Housing Element (redlined)

4. Addendum

5. City Council Addendum Resolution No. 23-9188

6. Planning Commission Resolution
City of Santa Clara Printed on 4/13/2025Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
Planning CommissionItem # 3General Plan Text Amendment – Housing Element Sites InventoryApril 16, 2025 Background•One of required elements of General Plan•Updated every 8 years. Reviewed by HCD•City of Santa Clara 6thCycle (2023-31) Housing Element–Adopted May 7, 2024–Certified May 31, 20242 Housing Elements
Background•Maintain inventory of sites with capacity to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)3 Sites Inventory
Background
4 6th Cycle RHNA
Total
Above Mod. IncomeModerate IncomeLower Income
(>120% AMI)(80-120% AMI)
Low
(50-80% AMI)
Very Low
(≤50% AMI)
11,6325,1261,9811,6532,872
• AMI = Area Median Income. FY 2024 $184,300 (4 persons) • ALI $27,650 ELI $55,300 VLI $92,150 LI $146,100 Mod $221,150 ~

I I I I'
-I
I
-
'
L- J l J l _J
BackgroundSites to Meet the RHNA (Adopted Housing Element)ModerateAbove ModerateVery Low Low[0-50% AMI][50-80% AMI][> 120% AMI]Pending and Approved Projects 710 794 504 10,201 12,209ADU Projection 118 118 118 39 393Available Specific Plan Sites 2,138 1,586 1,728 140 5,592El Camino Real Rezoning Sites 319 236 250 - 805Total 3,285 2,734 2,600 10,380 18,999RHNA 2,872 1,653 1,981 5,126 11,632Surplus (buffer above RHNA) 31.2% 102.5% 63.3%Site/Credit TypeAffordability CategoryTotal CapacityLower[80-120% AMI]33% ModerateAbove ModerateVery Low Low[0-50% AMI][50-80% AMI][> 120% AMI]Pending and Approved Projects 710 794627 10,898 13,029ADU Projection 118 118 118 39 393Available Specific Plan Sites1,748 1,295 1,4371404,620El Camino Real Rezoning Sites 319 236 250 - 805Total 2,895 2,443 2,432 11,077 18,847RHNA 2,872 1,653 1,981 5,126 11,632Surplus (buffer above RHNA)23% 116% 62%18%Site/Credit TypeAffordability CategoryTotal CapacityLower[80-120% AMI]BackgroundSites to Meet the RHNA (Proposed Housing Element Amendment)1. 3005 Democracy Way (+820 units)2. 4701 Patrick Henry Dr (-972 units) RecommendationAdopt a Resolution to Recommend the City Council Amend the General Plan Housing Element with revisions associated with changes to the Housing Sites Inventory7 Planning CommissionItem # 3General Plan Text Amendment – Housing Element Sites InventoryApril 16, 2025 Resolution/ Housing Element General Plan Amendment Page 1 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024
RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING THAT

THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE
GENERAL PLAN TO REMOVE ONE SITE (4701 PATRICK
HENRY DRIVE) FROM AND ADD ONE SITE (3005 DEMOCRACY

WAY) TO THE ADOPTED HOUSING ELEMENT SITES

INVENTORY AND MAKE ASSOCIATED TEXT EDITS

WHEREAS, State Housing Element Law (Government Code Se ctions 65580 et seq.) requires that the City Council adopt a Housing Element for the eight -year period 2023 -2031 to accommodate the City of Santa Clara (City) regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) of 11,632 housing units, comprised of 2,872 very -low inc ome units, 1,653 low -income units, 1,981 moderate-income units, and 5,126 above moderate-income units; WHEREAS, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) recommends all jurisdictions include a 15 to 30 -percent buffer of units beyond the minimum required RHNA target numbers in all affordability categories (i.e. Lower, Moderate, and Above Modera te) to comply with the “no net loss” provisions of State Housing Element law, which requires jurisdictions to maintain sufficient capacity to accommodate their RHNA throughout the planning period; WHEREAS, on May 7, 2024 the City Council adopted the City’s sixth cycle (2023-2031) Housing Element with sites identified that can accommodate housing units meeting the City’s RHNA with a substantial buffer of units in all affordability categories; WHEREAS, on May 31, 2024 the State Department of Housing and Commu nity Development (HCD) issued a letter indicating that the City’s adopted Housing Element was in substantial compliance with State Housing Element law;
WHEREAS, on January 31, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 23 -9188, approving an Addendum to the 2010-2035 General Plan Environmental Impact Report adopted by the City Council on November 16, 2010, and to the environmental review documents that were prepared for subsequent amendments to the General Plan that affected housing development in the Cit y, Resolution/ Housing Element General Plan Amendment Page 2 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024
all of which provide environmental clearance for all of the units in the 6 th cycle Housing Element Sites Inventory;
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 24-9396, adopting and certifying an Environmental Impact Report for the Kylli “Mission Point” project; WHEREAS, at various stages during the three-year Housing Element Update process, comment letters received from the Housing Action Coalition (HAC) resulted in the removal of several properties from the City’s Housing Element Sites Inventory after analysis and consultation with HCD indicated those sites were unlikely to redevelop with residential uses within the timeframe of the Housing Element;
WHEREAS, the HAC continues to object to the i nclusion of one site (4701 Patrick Henry Drive ) that was retained in the adopted and certified Housing Element; and, WHEREAS, although the City continues to believe that it is reasonably foreseeable that 4701 Patrick Henry Drive will redevelop within the planning period, for the reasons stated in Housing Element Appendix C Supplemental Sites Inventory Analysis, its removal from the inventory would still leave sufficient sites to achieve the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets with a substantial buffer at all affordability levels;
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2024, the City Council approved the Mission Point Project (3005 Democracy Way), a 48-acre mixed-use Planned Development that has been entitled to allow up to a maximum of 2,600 new residential units with a minimum 15-percent affordability requirement, and the Mission Point Project does not currently appear in the Housing Element Sites Inventory; WHEREAS, the combined addition of units from the 3005 Democracy Way site and re moval of units from the 4701 Patrick Henry Drive site would result in a decrease in the lower-income buffer from 33-percent to 18-percent and a decrease in the moderate-income buffer from 31-percent to 23-percent. In the above moderate -income category, the recommended buffer would increase from 103-percent to 116-percent;
Resolution/ Housing Element General Plan Amendment Page 3 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024
WHEREAS, a General Plan Amendment is required for the proposed changes to the adopted Housing Element Sites Inventory;
WHEREAS, Santa Clara City Charter Section 1007 requires that the Planning Commission provide input to the City Council on any proposed General Plan Amendment; WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65353 requires the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing prior to making a recommendation on the General Plan Amendment; WHEREAS, on March 5, 2025, a notice of the public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation for the City, for the Planning Commission Hearing to be conducted on March 19, 2025 and for the City Council Hearing to be conducted on April 29, 2025;
WHEREAS, on March 19, 2025, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment, and then continued the hearing to April 16, 2025; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, on April 16, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed revisions to the adopted 6 th Cycle Housing Element during which the Planning Commission invited and considered any and all verbal and written testimony and evidence offered in favor and in opposition to the General Plan Amendment.

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

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

2. That the Planning Commission finds and determines that the General Plan Amendment is in the interest of the public good for the following reasons:

A. The proposed Amendment is deemed to be in the public interest, in that the revision to the adopted Housing Element Sites Inventory is consistent and compatible with the rest of the City’s General Plan and any implementation programs that may be Resolution/ Housing Element General Plan Amendment Page 4 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024
affected, in that the proposed removal of one site and addition of another site is consistent with the General Plan’s Land Use and Circulation policies, and does not increase development capacity and does not introduce new or revised policies or programs under the General Plan, as amended.

B. The proposed amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the Californ ia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in that the impacts of the Housing Element are disclosed by the General Plan EIR as addended by subsequent amendments to the General Plan EIR as addended by subsequent amendments to the General Plan that affected housing developments in the City, including but not limited to the December 2013 Climate Action Plan Negative Declaration; the February 2016 Mission Town Center EIR; the 2016 Related Santa Clara EIR; the November 2016 Lawrence Station Area Plan EIR; the July 2018 575 Benton Project Addendum; the July 2019 Gateway Crossings EIR; the March 2022 Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan EIR; the June 2022 Climate Action Plan Addendum; and the June 2022 Freedom Circle Future Focus Areas EIR. The impacts of the Kylli “Missio n Point” project were analyzed and mitigated in an Environmental Impact Report adopted and certified by the City Council on November 19, 2024.

C. The potential impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment have been assessed and have been determined not t o be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, in that the Housing Element creates a policy framework that provides opportunities for the development of housing in the City through the year 2031. The impacts of the Housing Element have been dis closed through the CEQA process, and the Planning Commission has determined that any impacts from the proposed revisions to the adopted Housing Element remain within the scope of the General Plan EIR, as addended, and the Kylli Mission Point EIR.

Resolution/ Housing Element General Plan Amendment Page 5 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024

3. The Planning Commission recommends City Council approval of the revisions to the May 7, 2024 Adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023-2031) as provided in Attachment 1 (Revisions to Housing Element – redlined) showing revisions to the Housing Element, plus any non- substantive edits or corrections, including those that may be directed by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) after their review of the revisions to the adopted Housing Element.

4. 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 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: COMMISSIONERS:

NOES: COMMISSIONERS:

ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:

ABSTAINED: COMMISSIONERS:

ATTEST:

AFSHAN HAMID

DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

Attachments Incorporated by Reference:

1. Revisions to Housing Element - redlined
S:\Attorney\RESOLUTIONS\Form Resolution-Planning Commission.doc Web Links

City of Santa Clara 2023-2031 6th Cycle Housing Element Update – Addendum to the City of Santa Clara General Plan Environmental Impact Report:
https://santaclara.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=12854349&GUID=21A89EDE-6BC3-4B44-85BF- BF66B6979AE6

This document is available for viewing in the Community Development Department

Resolution/Housing Element Update 2023 Addendum Page 1 of 4 Rev: 11/22/17
RESOLUTION NO. 23-9188

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA,

TO ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, FOR ADOPTION OF THE
6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT (2023-2031)

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

WHEREAS, the California legislature has found that “California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the state’s environmental and climate objectives.” (Gov. Code Section 65589.5.); and
WHEREAS, the legislature has further found that “Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration.” (Gov. Code Section 65589.5.); and WHEREAS, the legislature recently adopted the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) which states that “In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states i n housing units per capita… California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over 7 years”; and WHEREAS, State Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65580 et seq.) requires that the City Council adopt a Housing Element for the eight-year period 2023-2031 to accommodate the City of Santa Clara (City) regional housing need allocation (RHNA) of 11,632 housing units, comprised of 2,872 very-low income units, 1,653 low-income units, 1,981 moderate- income units, and 5,126 above moderate-income units; and WHEREAS, to comply with State Housing Element Law, the City of Santa Clara has prepared its Housing Element Update for the years 2023 -2031 (the Housing Element); and Resolution/Housing Element Update 2023 Addendum Page 2 of 4 Rev: 11/22/17
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 65350 et. seq., the Housing Element constitutes a General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Project approvals will include a resolution approving the Addendum to the General Plan EIR; and a resolution approving the General Plan Amendment (collectively, the “Approvals”); WHEREAS, the City has prepared an Addendum to the 2010- 2035 General Plan Environmental Impact Report adopted by the City Council on November 16, 2010, and to the environmental review documents that were prepared for subsequent amendments to the General Plan that affected housing development in the City, including but not limited to the December 2013 Climate Action Plan Negative Declaration; the February 2016 Mission Town Center EIR; the 2016 Related Santa Clara EIR; the November 2016 Lawrence Station Area Plan EIR; the July 2018 575 Benton Project Addendum; the July 2019 Gateway Crossings EIR; the March 2022 Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan EIR; the June 2022 Climate Action Plan Addendum; and the June 2022 Freedom Circle Future Focus Area EIR (collectively, the “Subsequent Docum ents”), all of which provide environmental clearance for all of the units in the 6th cycle Housing Sites Inventory; WHEREAS, a notice of the public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation for the City, on December 11, 2022, for the January 11, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting and the January 31, 2023 City Council meeting; and
WHEREAS, on January 11, 2023, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment, and then continued the hearing to January 23, 2023; and WHEREAS, on January 20, 2023, the City published a revised draft Housing Element with the changes required by HCD (see Housing Element Exhibit A – HCD Comments and Reponses) and requested public comment on the draft; and
WHEREAS, on January 23, 2023, the Planning Commission resumed the previously-opened public hearing to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment, and then subsequently continued the hearing to January 26, 2023; and
Resolution/Housing Element Update 2023 Addendum Page 3 of 4 Rev: 11/22/17
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Addendum to the General Plan EIR , in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, along wit h t he City Staff report pertaining to the Project, and all evidence received at a duly noticed public hearing on January 26, 2023. All these documents and evidence are incorporated herein by reference into this Resolution ; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Addendum to the General Plan EIR, in accordance with CEQA for the Project; and WHEREAS, on January 31, 2023, the City Council conduc ted a public hearing, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to give testimony and provide evidence in support of and in opposition to the proposed Addendum to the General Plan EIR.

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 finds that the Addendum to the General Plan EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA.

3. That the City Council hereby finds that the Addendum to the General Plan EIR has been presented to the Council, which reviewed and considered the information and analysis contained therein, and that the Addendum represents the independent judgment of the Council.

4. That the City Council hereby finds that the proposed General Plan Amendments do not involve substantial changes to the General Plan that would require major revisions to the previous EIR or Subsequent Documents.

5. That the City Council hereby finds that there is no substantial change in circumstances as a result of modifications to the General Plan that would require major revisions to the previous EIR and Subsequent Documents or cause new or substantially more sev ere significant impacts. //
//

6. That the City Council hereby finds that there is no new information of substantial importance that identifies new or more intense significant impacts than those identified in the General Plan EIR and Subsequent Documents .

7. Based on the findings set forth in this Resolution and the evidence in the City Staff Report, the City Council approves the Addendum to the General Plan EIR, in accordance with CEQA for the Project.

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 31 8T DAY OF JANUARY 2023 , BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: COUNCILORS:

NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT : COUNCILORS :

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:

Attachments incorporated by reference: None
Resolution/Housing Element Update 2023 Addendum
Rev: 11 /22/17
Becker, Chahal, Hardy, Jain, Watanabe, and
Mayor Gillmor
Park
None
None
ATTEST:~
= c ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

Page 4 of 4 ends

Resolution/ Housing Element General Plan Amendment Page 1 of 9 Rev: 11/22/17
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO
REMOVE ONE SITE (4701 PATRICK HENRY DRIVE) FROM AND
ADD ONE SITE (3005 DEMOCRACY WAY) TO THE ADOPTED

HOUSING ELEMENT SITES INVENTORY AND MAKE

ASSOCIATED TEXT EDITS

WHEREAS, State Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65580 et seq.) requires that the City Council adopt a Housing Element for the eight-year period 2023 -2031 to accommodate the City of Santa Clara (City) regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) of 11,632 housing units, comprised of 2,872 very -low income units, 1,653 low -income units, 1,981 moderate-income units, and 5,126 above moderate-income units; WHEREAS, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) recommends all jurisdictions include a 15 to 30 -percent buffer of units beyond the minimum required RHNA target numbers in all affordability categories (i.e. Lower, Moderate, and Above Moderate) to comply with the “no net loss” provisions of State Housing Element law, which requires jurisdictions to maintain sufficient capacity to accommodate their RHNA throughout the planning period; WHEREAS, on May 7, 2024 the City Council adopted the City’s sixth cycle (2023-2031) Housing Element with sites identified that can accommodate housing units meeting the City’s RHNA with a substantial buffer of units in all affordability categories; WHEREAS, on May 31, 2024 the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) issued a letter indicating that the City’s adopted Housing Element was in substantial compliance with State Housing Element law;
WHEREAS, on January 31, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2 3-9188, approving an Addendum to the 2010-2035 General Plan Environmental Impact Report adopted by the City Council on November 16, 2010, and to the environmental review documents that were prepared for subsequent amendments to the General Plan that affec ted housing development in the City, all of which provide environmental clearance for all of the units in the 6 th cycle Housing Element Resolution/ Housing Element General Plan Amendment Page 2 of 9 Rev: 11/22/17
Sites Inventory;
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 24-9396, adopting and certifying an Environmental Impact Report for the Kylli “Mission Point” project; WHEREAS, at various stages during the three-year Housing Element Update process, comment letters received from the Housing Action Coalition (HAC) resulted in the removal of several properties from the City’s Housing Element Sites Inventory after analysis and consultation with HCD indicated those sites were unlikely to redevelop with residential uses within the timeframe of the Housing Element;
WHEREAS, the HAC continues to object to the inclusion of one site (4701 Patrick Henry Drive) that was retained in the adopted and certified Housing Element; and, WHEREAS, although the City continues to believe that it is reasonably foreseeable that 4701 Patrick Henry Drive will redevelop within the planning period, for the reasons stated in Housing Element Appendix C Supplemental Sites Inventory Analysis, its removal from the inventory would still leave sufficient sites to achieve the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets with a substantial buffer at all affordability levels;
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2024, the City Council approved the Mission Point Project (3005 Democracy Way), a 48-acre mixed-use Planned Development that has been entitled to allow up to a maximum of 2,600 new residential units with a minimum 15-percent affordability requirement, and the Mission Point Project does not currently appear in the Housing Element Sites Inventory; WHEREAS, the City now wishes to add 820 of the units of the 3005 Democracy Way Project to the Sites Inventory, of which 123 units would be designated as moderate-income; WHEREAS, the combined addition of units from the 3005 Democracy Way site and removal of units from the 4701 Patrick Henry Drive site would result in a decrease in the lower-income buffer from 33-percent to 18-percent and a decrease in the moderate-income buffer from 31-percent to 23-percent. In the above moderate -income category, the recommended buffer would increase from 103-percent to 116-percent;
Resolution/ Housing Element General Plan Amendment Page 3 of 9 Rev: 11/22/17
WHEREAS, a General Plan Amend ment is required for the proposed changes to the adopted Housing Element Sites Inventory;
WHEREAS, Santa Clara City Charter Section 1007 requires that the Planning Commission provide input to the City Council on any proposed General Plan Amendment; WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65353 requires the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing prior to making a recommendation on the General Plan Amendment; WHEREAS, on March 5, 2025, a notice of the public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation for the City, for the Planning Commission Hearing to be conducted on March 19, 2025 and for the City Council Hearing to be conducted on April 29, 2025;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 2025, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment, and then continued the hearing to April 16, 2025; WHEREAS, on April 16, 2025, the Planning Commission reconvened the public hearing, at the conclusion of which, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2 5-XXX, recommending the City Council adopt a General Plan Amendment to revise the May 7, 2024 Adopted 6 th Cycle Housing Element (2023-2031) as provided in Attachment 1 (Revisions to Housing Element – redlined) showing revisions to the Housing Element, plus any non-substantive edits or corrections, including those that may be directed by the State Department of Hous ing and Community Development (HCD) after their review of the revisions to the adopted Housing Element; WHEREAS, on April 29, 2025, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public meeting to review the revisions to the previously adopted 6 th Cycle Housing Element and all pertinent documents and exhibits, the staff report and all attachments, and to take public testimony on the subject.

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

1. The foregoing recitals are true and cor rect and are incorporated by reference into this action.

Resolution/ Housing Element General Plan Amendment Page 4 of 9 Rev: 11/22/17

2. General Plan Amendment Findings. That the City Council hereby finds and determines that the General Plan Amendment is in the interest of the public good for the following reasons:

A. The proposed Amendment is deemed to be in the public interest, in that the proposed Amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the City’s General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected, in that the Housing Element is consistent with the General Plan’s Land Use and Circulation policies, and does not increase development capacity under the General Plan, as amended.

B. The proposed amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and t he California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in that the impacts of the Housing Element are disclosed by the General Plan EIR as addended by subsequent amendments to the General Plan EIR as addended by subsequent amendments to the General Plan that affe cted housing developments in the City, including but not limited to the December 2013 Climate Action Plan Negative Declaration; the February 2016 Mission Town Center EIR; the 2016 Related Santa Clara EIR; the November 2016 Lawrence Station Area Plan EIR; the July 2018 575 Benton Project Addendum; the July 2019 Gateway Crossings EIR; the March 2022 Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan EIR; the June 2022 Climate Action Plan Addendum; and the June 2022 Freedom Circle Future Focus Areas EIR. The impacts of the Kyl li “Mission Point” project were analyzed and mitigated in an Environmental Impact Report adopted and certified by the City Council on November 19, 2024.

C. The potential impacts of the proposed General Plan Amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, in that the Housing Element creates a policy framework that provides opportunities for the development of housing in the City through the year 2031. The impacts of the Housing Element have b een disclosed through the CEQA process, and the City Resolution/ Housing Element General Plan Amendment Page 5 of 9 Rev: 11/22/17
Council has determined that any impacts from the proposed revisions to the adopted Housing Element remain within the scope of the General Plan EIR, as addended, and the Kylli Mission Point EIR.

3. The City Council approves the revisions to the May 7, 2024 Adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023-2031) as provided in Attachment 1 (Revisions to Housing Element – redlined) showing revisions to the Housing Element, plus any non -substantive edits or corrections, including those that may be directed by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) after their review o f the revisions to the adopted 2023 -2031 Housing Element.

4. 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 29th DAY OF APRIL, 2025, 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. Revisions to Housing Element - redlined
S:\Attorney\RESOLUTIONS\Form Resolution-City.doc
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
25-443 Agenda Date: 4/29/2025

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Adoption of a General Plan Amendment to Incorporate the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Program into the Safety Element of the City's General Plan

COUNCIL PILLAR
Deliver and Enhance High Quality Efficient Services and Infrastructure

BACKGROUND
The City Council adopted the Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) and the City of Santa Clara Local Annex on August 27, 2024 (Attachments 1 and 2).

A MJHMP is a document that outlines strategies to reduce the vulnerability of a community across multiple jurisdictions to natural and man-made hazards by identifying potential risks, assessing vulnerabilities, and developing mitigation actions to minimize damage from disasters, often requiring collaboration between cities, counties, and state agencies. The August 2024 adoption of the MJHMP allows the City to access Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding in case of a natural disaster.

As a follow-on action, the City is proposing a General Plan Amendment to recognize the updated MJHMP in the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan. The proposed General Plan Amendment resolution is provided as Attachment 3. This update will provide consistency between the City’s documents and will allow the City to access state funds offered through the California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA), AB 2140 (2006). A fact sheet describing AB 2140 is provided as Attachment

4. DISCUSSION
At the February 19, 2025 Planning Commission meeting, Community Development staff provided a presentation describing the proposed General Plan Amendment, emphasizing the benefits of access to state disaster assistance funding that would result from the amendment, and the additional obligation of making the MJHMP accessible through the City’s General Plan. The Planning Commission briefly discussed hazards covered in the MJHMP and Local Annex. The Commission then voted to recommend approval of the General Plan Amendment (motion by Commissioner Crutchlow, second by Commissioner Biagini, motion adopted by a vote of 6-0-1 with Commissioner Cherukuru absent).

Consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation, staff recommends adoption of the General Plan Amendment to provide consistency between the City’s documents and to allow the City to access state funds offered through the California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA), AB 2140 (2006).

City of Santa Clara Printed on 4/25/2025Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
25-443 Agenda Date: 4/29/2025

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered would make a minor update to the 2010-2035 General Plan, and the City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan on November 16, 2010. The proposed amendment updates the existing hazard mitigation plan in the General Plan and the update does not introduce new or more significant environmental effects than those discussed in the EIR, and therefore no further environmental review is warranted.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no immediate fiscal impact. The City will have the ability to apply for state disaster assistance funds, which would potentially decrease the financial burden on the City after City Council adopts the General Plan Amendment. The City will continue to be ineligible for CDAA funding should the General Plan Amendment not be adopted.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office and the Office of Emergency Services.

PUBLIC CONTACT
On April 16, 2025, a hearing notice was published in the Santa Clara Weekly. Public contact was also 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] or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution Approving a General Plan Amendment to incorporate the Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) and the City of Santa Clara Local Annex into the subsection “Emergency Preparedness” of Section 5.10.5, “Safety Goals and Policies” of the City of Santa Clara 2010-2035 General Plan.

Reviewed by: Afshan Hamid, Community Development Director Approved by: Jovan D. Grogan, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Internet Links for the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and Local Annex

2. MJHMP General Plan Amendment resolution

3. AB 2140 fact sheet

4. RTC 25-96 recommendation report
City of Santa Clara Printed on 4/25/2025Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
Internet Links
_______________________________________________________________________________

Santa Clara County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP):
https://files.santaclaracounty.gov/exjcpb1566/2024-10/final-vol-i-santa-clara-county-mjhmp_7- 26-2024.pdf

City of Santa Clara Local Annex:
https://www.santaclaraca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/85991/638732399897128007

These documents are available in the Community Development Department/Planning Division for Viewing

Resolution/MJHMP General Plan Amendment Page 1 of 4
Rev: 7/27/2023
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

ADOPTING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT INCORPORATING

THE MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AND
THE CITY’S LOCAL ANNEX INTO THE CITY’S GENERAL PLAN

WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clara recognizes the threat that natural hazards pose to people and property within the City;
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clara has participated in the preparation of a multi-hazard mitigation plan, hereby known as the Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) and the City of Santa Clara Annex in accordance with federal laws, including the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended; the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended; and the National Dam Safety Program Act, as amended; WHEREAS, the Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP), dated 2023, and the City of Santa Clara Annex, dated February 21, 2024, identify mitigation goals and actions to reduce or eliminate long- term risk s to people and property in Santa Clara from the impacts of future hazards and disasters;
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the Santa Clara County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and the City of Santa Clara Annex on August 27, 2024; WHEREAS, on February 19, 2025, the City of Santa Clara Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment, voting to recommend that the City Council approve the amendment (6-0-1, Commissioner Cherukuru absent); WHEREAS, the City Council now wishes to incorporate the MJHMP and Local Annex into the City’s General Plan;
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2025, a notice of public hearing was published in the Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation, for the public hearing to be conducted on March 25, 2025; WHEREAS, on March 20, 2025, a notice of the March 25, 2025 public hearing was posted in three public places in the City (specifically, at City Hall, the Central Park Library, and the Northside Resolution/MJHMP General Plan Amendment Page 2 of 4
Rev: 7/27/2023
branch library);
WHEREAS, on March 25, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to present evidence and provide testimony, both in support of and in opposition to the proposed General Plan Amendment.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT 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 makes the following findings in support of the General Plan Amendment:

A. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest, in that participation in the MJHMP and Santa Clara Annex will reduce the vulnerability of the City to disasters and their effects, will promote individual and community safety and the ability to adapt to changing conditions, will promote community vitality after a disaster, and will provide educate the community on response and recovery resource requirements after a disaster ; B. The proposed General Plan amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected, in that state law mandates that all General Plans contain a Safety Element, and the MHJMP is an update to the existing hazard prevention plan that was already a component of the General Plan Safety Element; C. The potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, in that the MHJMP is a multi -jurisdictional plan to reduce injury, death, and property damage that can result from a disaster; and
D. The proposed amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in that the proposed action would update the Safety Element of the General Plan, and the City Resolution/MJHMP General Plan Amendment Page 3 of 4
Rev: 7/27/2023
Council certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the 2010 -2035 General Plan on November 16, 2010. The proposed amendment updates the existing hazard mitigation plan in the General Plan and the update does not introduce new or more significant environmental effects than those discussed in the EIR.

3. That the City Council hereby amends the subsection entitled “Emergency Preparedness” of Subsection 5.10.5 (“Safety Goals and Policies”) of Section 5.10 (“Environmental Quality”) of Chapter 5 (“Goals and Policies”) of the City of Santa Clara 2010- 2035 General Plan to read as follows:
“Emergency preparedness is an effective method of reducing risk to life and property from natural disasters, such as earthquakes or fires, through planning. In Santa Clara, planning for emergency response has resulted in the adoption of the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan for Santa Clara County and the Local Annex for the City of Santa Clara in conformance with the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA). “In 2003, the federal Disaster Mitigation Act established a national hazard mitigation program to reduce the loss of life and property, human suffering, economic disruption and disaster assistance costs resulting from natural disasters. The DMA also provided a source of pre‐disaster hazard mitigation funding to assist local governments in implementing effective hazard mitigation measures to ensure the continued functionality of critical services and facilities after a natural disaster. In accordance with the DMA, local agencies are required to adopt a LHMP to be eligible for Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA) funding for pre‐disaster hazard mitigation and projects that prevent disaster.
“The City of Santa Clara participated in the Multi‐Jurisdictional Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan entitled, Taming Natural Disasters, developed in cooperation with other local agencies and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The Plan provides jurisdiction‐specific information that has been reviewed and approved by FEMA.
“The Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan for Santa Clara County and the Local Annex Resolution/MJHMP General Plan Amendment Page 4 of 4
Rev: 7/27/2023
for the City of Santa Clara was developed in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) and followed FEMA’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan guidance. The LHMP incorporates a process where hazards are identified and profiled, the people and facilities at risk are analyzed, and mitigation actions are developed to reduce or eliminate hazard risk. The implementation of these mitigation actions, which include both short and long-term strategies, involve planning, policy changes, programs, projects, and other activities.
“The Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan for Santa Clara County is available at the following web address: https://files.santaclaracounty.gov/exjcpb1566/2024-10/final-vol-i-santa-clara- county-mjhmp_7-26-2024.pdf
“The City of Santa Clara Local Annex is available at the following web address:
https://www.santaclaraca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/85991/638732399897128007 ”

4. 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 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2025, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: COUNCILORS:

NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:

ATTEST: ______________________________

NORA PIMENTEL, MMC

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

Attachments incorporated by reference:

None

C:\Users\JDavidson\Downloads\MJHMP_resolution.doc

Page 1 of 5 ends

Updated 11.20.2024

Assembly Bill 2140 (AB 2140) Fact Sheet
Information for Counties and Cities
What is AB 2140?
Passed in 2006, Assembly Bill No. 2140 (AB 2140) allows California counties and cities to be considered for additional state cost-share on eligible Public Assistance projects by adopting their current, FEMA-approved local hazard mitigation plans (LHMPs) into the Safety Element of their General Plan. This adoption, along with other requirements, makes the county or city eligible to be considered for part or all of its local-share costs on eligible Public Assistance projects to be provided by the state through the California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA). For m ore information regarding Public Assistance, please visit Cal OES Public Assistance Division.

How Can AB 2140 Help Counties, Cities, and Your Citizens? For eligible Public Assistance projects, the typical local (non-federal) cost share is 25% of the total project cost. CDAA can allow the state to pay up to 18.75% of the non- federal share, that would otherwise fall upon the county or city, to pay for eligible Public Assistance projects once the legislature has passed a bill allowing additional state funding after a disaster occurs. Upon approval of the legislature, counties and cities that are AB 2140 compliant are also eligible to be considered for the remaining

6.25% local share to be funded by the state, essentially covering the entire local-share cost for eligible Public Assistance projects. Please note that funding is not guaranteed.

What Do You Need to Know?
 AB 2140 is not a requirement; it is an optional state incentive to help counties and cities become more resilient to natural hazards. Be sure to work with your planning department as the process proceeds.
 There are multiple steps that must be completed before Cal OES can issue a letter of AB 2140 compliance. These steps are listed in detail below in the section What Are the Steps to Become AB 2140 Compliant?  Be aware that adopting the LHMP via a formal resolution is a federal requirement for FEMA to officially “approve” the LHMP and does not make your jurisdiction automatically AB 2140 compliant. AB 2140 is a state incentive which also requires adopting your LHMP into the Safety Element of your General Plan.

However, both adoptions can take place at the same time using the same adoption resolution.
 AB 2140 compliance expires when the LHMP expires. You must re-adopt the LHM
P itself AND adopt the LHMP into the Safety Element of your General Plan each time you update your LHMP in order to continue compliance.  For multi-jurisdiction haza rd mitigation plans (MJHMPs), the county and each city in the MJHMP must adopt its own specific annex into its own General Plan

Page 2 of 5 ends

Updated 11.20.2024

Assembly Bill 2140 (AB 2140) Fact Sheet
Information for Counties and Cities
Safety Element. Annex jurisdictions are not covered under the county’s adoption.
 Special districts are not eligible for AB 2140 compliance as they do not have General Plans.
 For additional information on General Plan and Safety Element requirements please contact the California Office of Planning and Research (OPR).

What Are the Steps to Become AB 2140 Compliant?

1. Complete and submit an LHMP to the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES). A jurisdiction must have a current, FEMA-approved LHMP. a. Cal OES will provide an initial review and, if applicable, request required revisions based on the FEMA LHMP Guidance.
b. Once Cal OES has determined the plan has met all FEMA LHMP requirements, Cal OES will then forward the LHMP to FEMA for final review and approval.
c. For questions or assistance, please contact the Cal OES Local Mitigation Planning Unit at [email protected].

2. LHMP adoption AND adoption into the Safety Element of the General Plan a. Adopt the LHMP via a formal resolution following your jurisdiction’s typical procedure once FEMA has issued “approvable pending adoption” (APA) status. Once FEMA receives a signed adoption resolution, they can then issue an official “approval” notice for your LHMP.
i. A sample adoption resolution for your LHMP is provided in Appendix B of the FEMA LHMP Policy Guide.
b. At this time, you may also choose to adopt the LHMP into the Safety Element of your General Plan using the same resolution in order to meet a requirement of
AB 2140 compliance (see step 3).
i. Within the Safety Element update adoption resolution, there must be language specific to adopting the LHMP into the Safety Element of the General Plan, and the resolution must be signed and approved before
the LHMP expires. This adoption can occur at the
same time the LHMP is adopted to comply with FEMA requirements, or it can occur after the LHMP is approved but before it expires after five years.
c. At any time during the life of an approved LHMP a jurisdiction may choose to adopt the LHMP into the
Safety Element of their General Plan,
however, when the LHMP expires, AB 2140 compliance will also expire.

Page 3 of 5 ends

Updated 11.20.2024

Assembly Bill 2140 (AB 2140) Fact Sheet
Information for Counties and Cities

3. Safety Element Language
a. The local agency must include language specific to the LHMP within the Safety Element of their General Plan and make the LHMP easily accessible in its entirety as a weblink, appendices, or attachment (see step 4).
b. Jurisdictions should follow their own internal procedures for Safety Element language, however, below is sample language that may be used:
i. “The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) for the [Add Jurisdiction Name] planning area was developed in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA
2000) and followed FEMA’s
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan guidance. The LHMP incorporates a process where hazards are identified and profiled, the people and facilities at risk are analyzed, and mitigation actions are developed to reduce or eliminate hazard risk. The implementation of these mitigation actions, which include both short and long-term strategies, involve planning, policy changes, programs, projects, and other activities. (Add
a web link or language directing to the
LHMP attachment or appendix within the Safety Element. Discussed further in step #4 below.)”

4. LHMP Accessibility and Links
a. The current, approved LHMP must be easily accessible and available to the public viewing the Safety Element. This requirement can be met by linking the LHMP electronically to the General Plan Safety Element or by including the LHMP in its entirety as an attachment or appendix in the Safety Element and referencing its location with the plan. b. Web links should be monitored so that they are in working condition and bring the viewer to the most recent approved version of the LHMP.

5. E-mail the link to the updated General Plan Safety Element web page along with the signed adoption resolution(s) to the Cal OES AB 2140 inbox [email protected] for review and approval.

Page 4 of 5 ends

Updated 11.20.2024

Assembly Bill 2140 (AB 2140) Fact Sheet
Information for Counties and Cities
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Who do I contact if I have additional questions regarding my LHMP or AB 2140 status?
A: For questions regarding AB 2140 compliance please contact [email protected]
. For questions pertaining to your LHMP, please contact the Cal OES Local Hazard Mitigation Planning team at
[email protected].

Q: If a c
ounty is AB 2140 compliant, are its cities automatically covered? A: No. Each county and city must:

1. Have either your own stand-alone LHMP or have an annex in a MJHMP.

2. Have adopted your approved stand-alone LHMP or annex into your own General Plan Safety Element.

Q: Can a ju
risdiction obtain AB 2140 compliance before their LHMP is approvable pending adoption (APA) from FEMA?
A: No. The LHMP must be either APA or officially “approved” by FEMA before you may adopt to obtain AB 2140 compliance.

Q: A re specia
l districts covered under their county’s LHMP since they do not have their own general plan?
A: No. Special districts are not qualified for additional cost share under AB 2140 because they do not have a General Plan.

Q: If a cou
nty or city becomes AB 2140 compliant, does this compliance last forever?
A: No. AB 2140 compliance expires on the day the LHMP expires. You must re-adopt your LHMP into your General Plan Safety Element each time you update your LHMP.

Q: O nce a
county or city becomes AB 2140 compliant, are they guaranteed funding?
A: No. You will be elig ible to be considered for additional CDAA funding upon approval of the legislature. There is no guarantee of funding.

Q: Can a city
or county adopt their LHMP to obtain AB 2140 compliance at the same time they adopt their LHMP to fulfill the FEMA requirement when the LHMP is approvable pending adoption?
A: Yes, this is a viable option. It is crucial, however, that Cal OES receives a copy of the adoption resolution to ensure compliance. Your jurisdiction is

Page 5 of 5 ends

Updated 11.20.2024

Assembly Bill 2140 (AB 2140) Fact Sheet
Information for Counties and Cities
not compliant until Cal OES has documentation and has issued a compliance letter.

Q: I f the actu
al LHMP is added to the General Plan, but not within the Safety Element, is language still required in the Safety Element? A: Yes, language specific to the LHMP and a web link, appendix, or language within the Safety Element that directs the public to the most current, approved LHMP in its entirety is required to be in the Safety Element.

AB 2140 Compliance Checklist
In order to issue a letter of AB 2140 compliance, Cal OES will review and verify that your jurisdiction has performed the following:
 Ha
s a current, FEMA-approved or approvable pending adoption (APA) LHMP.  Formally adopted the LHMP via resolution.
 Formally adopted the
most current, approved LHMP into the Safety Element of
your General Plan via resolution.
 Included language within the Safety Element of your General Plan that references your LHMP.
 Included a web link, appendix, or language within the Safety Element that directs the public to the most current, approved LHMP in its entirety.  E-mailed the link to the updated General Plan Safety Element web page along with the signed, adoption resolution(s) to the Cal OES AB 2140 inbox [email protected] for review and approval.

For AB 2140 Questions:

[email protected]
For LHMP Questions: [email protected]
For Public Assistance and CDAA Questions: [email protected] City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
25-96 Agenda Date: 2/19/2025

REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION

SUBJECT
Recommendation to City Council to Adopt a General Plan Amendment to Incorporate the Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) and the City of Santa Clara Local Annex into the City's General Plan

BACKGROUND
In November 2022, the City of Santa Clara participated in a coalition of Santa Clara County cities and special districts preparing to lessen the impacts of natural hazards by updating the Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP). A MJHMP is a document that outlines strategies to reduce the vulnerability of a community across multiple jurisdictions to natural and man- made hazards by identifying potential risks, assessing vulnerabilities, and developing mitigation actions to minimize damage from disasters, often requiring collaboration between cities, counties, and state agencies. The MJHMP allows the City to access Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding in case of a natural disaster.

The City Council adopted the MJHMP and the City of Santa Clara Local Annex on August 27, 2024 (Attachment 3). This is the fourth update to the Hazard Mitigation Plan, which was initially approved in 2005.

As a follow-on action, the City is proposing a General Plan Amendment to recognize the updated MJHMP in the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan. This update will provide consistency between the City’s documents.

DISCUSSION
The proposed General Plan Amendment updates existing language in the Emergency Preparedness subsection of Section 5.10.5, Safety Goals and Policies, to reference the most recent update to the MJHMP.

Incorporation of the MJHMP and Local Annex makes the City eligible to be considered for part or all of its local-share costs on eligible Public Assistance projects to be provided by the state through the California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA). A CDAA (AB 2140 (2006)) fact sheet is attached to this report (Attachment 2).

AB 2140 also directs the City to include web links to the MJHMP and Local Annex. The links are included in the proposed resolution (Attachment 1). The report includes links to the MJHMP (Attachment 4) and the Local Annex (Attachment 5).

There are no known disadvantages to incorporating the most recent update of the MJHMP and Local City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/13/2025Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
25-96 Agenda Date: 2/19/2025
Annex into the General Plan.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office and the Office of Emergency Services.

PUBLIC CONTACT
On February 5, 2025, a hearing notice was published in the Santa Clara Weekly. Public contact was also 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
Recommend that the City Council adopt a General Plan Amendment to incorporate the Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) and the City of Santa Clara Local Annex into the subsection “Emergency Preparedness” of Section 5.10.5, “Safety Goals and Policies” of the City of Santa Clara 2010-2035 General Plan.

Reviewed by: Alexander Abbe, Assistant City Attorney
Approved by: Afshan Hamid, Community Development Director

ATTACHMENTS

1. LHMP recommendation resolution

2. AB 2140 fact sheet

3. RTC 24-1433 adoption report

4. Santa Clara County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) <https://files.santaclaracounty.gov/exjcpb1566/2024-10/final-vol-i-santa-clara-county-mjhmp_7-26- 2024.pdf>

5. City of Santa Clara Local Annex
<https://www.santaclaraca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/85991/638732399897128007> City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/13/2025Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™

City Council and Authorities ConcurrentApril 29, 2025

City Council and Authorities Concurrent
April 29, 2025