Agenda packet — City Council and Authorities Concurrent, May 19, 2026 (part 7 of 7)

1. That the City of Santa Clara is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is the City of Santa Clara legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this resolution.

2. That the City of Santa Clara has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described in Attachment B.

3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right-of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project(s).

4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right-of-way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested.

5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.).

6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s).

7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA Article 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by the City of Santa Clara within the prior five fiscal years.

8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan, or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project.

9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document.

TDA Article 3 Resolution – Attachment A Page 2

10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation plus two additional fiscal years).

11. That the City of Santa Clara agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the public.

TDA Article 3 Resolution – Attachment B Page 1
Resolution No. _____ page ___ of ___
Attachment B
TDA Article 3 Project Application Form

1. Agency City of Santa Clara

2. Primary Contact Ralph Garcia

3. Mailing Address 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050

4. Email Address [email protected] 5. Phone
Number
408-615-3026

6. Secondary
Contact (in the event
primary is not
available)
Carol Shariat

7. Mailing address (if
different) N/A☐
Same as above

8. Email Address [email protected] 9. Phone
Number
408-615-3024

10. Send allocation
instructions to (if
different from above):

11. Project Title Bicycle Route Wayfinding

12. Amount
requested
$416,545 13. Fiscal Year of
Claim
2026/2027

14. Description of Overall Project:

15. Project Scope Proposed for Funding: (Project level environmental, preliminary planning, and ROW are ineligible uses of TDA funds.)

16. Project Location: A map of the project location is attached or a link to a online map of the project location is provided below:

Project Relation to Regional Policies (for information only)

17. Is the project in an Equity Priority Community? Yes☐ No☒

18. Is this project in a Priority Development Area or a Transit-Oriented Community? Yes☐ No☒

19. Project Budget and Schedule
Develop and install a bicycle wayfinding system along bicycle routes that will facilitate access to various City destinations including schools, commercial centers, libraries, government facilities and parks.

Design, construction, construction engineering
TBD – Various locations based on the City of Santa Clara Bicycle Plan Update.

Project Phase TDA 3 Other Funds Total Cost Estimated Completion (month/year)
Bike/Ped Plan
ENV
PA&ED
PS&E
ROW
CON
Total Cost
$416,545 $416,545 $416,545 06/2029
I I
TDA Article 3 Resolution – Attachment B Page 2
Project Eligibility
A. Has the project been reviewed by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee? Yes☒ No☐ If “YES,” identify the date and provide a copy or link to the agenda.

If "NO," provide an explanation).

January 26, 2026
https://santaclara.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1356081&GUID=7E844B34-A0E5-4F4A-A880- 1B068C5698EB&Options=info|&Search=
B. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? Yes☐ No☒ If "NO," provide expected date:_May 19, 2026________
C. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? Yes☐ No☒ (If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page)
D. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria Yes☒ No☐ pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California Highway Design Manual? E. 1. Is the project categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CCR Section 15301(c), Yes☒ No☐ Existing Facility?

2. If “NO” above, is the project is exempt from CEQA for another reason? Yes☐ No☐ Cite the basis for the exemption. __________________________ N/A☐ If the project is not exempt, please check “NO,” and provide environmental documentation, as appropriate.

F. Estimated Completion Date of project (month and year): __June 2029_____ G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has Yes☒ No☐ the claimant arranged for such maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility, please identify below and provide the agreement.

H. Is a Complete Streets Checklist required for this project ? Yes☒ No☐ If the amount requested is over $250,000 or if the total project phase or construction phase is over $250,000, a Complete Streets checklist is likely required. Please attach the Complete Streets checklist or record of review, as applicable. More information and the form may be found here: https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/complete-streets City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-222 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action to Appoint a City of Santa Clara Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Member to Serve as the City's Representative on the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee

BACKGROUND
The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) requests that cities appoint members to the VTA Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (VTA BPAC). The VTA BPAC is comprised of one representative from each of the sixteen member agencies, which includes the City of Santa Clara.

VTA BPAC members serve two-year terms starting on July 1 and ending on June 30 of the second year and may serve successive terms.

The VTA BPAC advises the VTA Board of Directors on matters pertaining to funding and planning issues for bicycle and pedestrian projects and serves as the countywide bicycle advisory committee for Santa Clara County. Typical duties involve review of regional plans related to bicycling and walking, review of funding proposals for projects and consideration of specialized issues of regional or cross-jurisdictional significance.

DISCUSSION
The VTA has notified the City that the term for the City’s current VTA BPAC representative, Betsy Megas, will end on June 30, 2026. Therefore, the City must appoint a new VTA BPAC representative.

The City’s VTA BPAC representative must live and/or work in Santa Clara County during their term.

The VTA also requires that the representative be either a member of the City’s BPAC or an individual interested in bicycle or pedestrian issues and not a City or VTA staff person.

At the March 23, 2026 Santa Clara BPAC meeting, the BPAC voted to recommend to Council that BPAC member Betsy Megas continue to serve as the City’s VTA BPAC representative. Betsy Megas’ membership on both the City and VTA BPAC facilitates communication between the City and the other member agencies. If appointed, she will serve a term which will end on June 30, 2028.

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

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

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-222 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026

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

RECOMMENDATION
Appoint City of Santa Clara Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee member Betsy Megas to serve as the City’s Representative on the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee.

Reviewed by: Craig Mobeck, Director of Public Works
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-546 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action to approve moving the location of the June 1, 2026 Stadium Neighborhood Relations Ad Hoc Subcommittee meeting to the City Council Chambers.

BACKGROUND
At the November 4, 2025, City Council meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution 25-9506 establishing the Stadium Neighborhood Relations Ad Hoc Subcommittee (Committee). The Committee is comprised of up to three Councilmembers. The Committee was established to provide a forum for communication with residents and businesses impacted by Levi’s Stadium events, provide updates on the Major Events 2026 (Super Bowl LX and FIFA World Cup), evaluate current outreach/communication efforts. The intended outcomes of the Committee are to establish a pathway forward for addressing neighborhood parking challenges and establish a pathway to effective stakeholder communication.

The Committee has held three meetings at the Northside Branch library; December 15, 2025, March 30, 2026, and May 4, 2026. When the Committee was established, the Council directed staff to have committee meetings on the north side of the City to make it convenient for stakeholders. The Northside Branch Library was identified as the location for the meetings and was included in Resolution 25-9506 establishing the Committee. Pursuant to this Resolution, Committee meetings are to be held at the North Branch Library.

DISCUSSION
The Committee needs to meet prior to the start of the FIFA World Cup matches on June 13, 2026, to provide information to stakeholders on the impacts of the upcoming event. FIFA permits are still being processed; therefore, impact information was not finalized and available for dissemination at the May 4, 2026, meeting.

Staff has confirmed June 1, 2026, as the date for the next Committee meeting, however, the Northside Branch Library is a Santa Clara County voting center and will be in use for the Primary Election to be held on June 2, 2026, rendering the location unavailable for the upcoming meeting.

Alternate dates are unavailable prior to the commencement of FIFA as the Northside Branch Library will be occupied by Santa Clara County from May 22,2026 - June 3, 2026.

Accordingly, staff is recommending that the Council approve moving the location of the June 1, 2026, Committee meeting to City Council Chambers. If the Council approves this action staff will take appropriate steps to publish and properly notice stakeholders of the change of venue.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-546 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(a) as it has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal impacts will depend on the meeting location selected by the Committee. Hosting the meeting at the City of Santa Clara Council Chambers would not result in additional costs. However, selecting an alternative venue that lacks the necessary technology to support a virtual meeting may result in additional expenses.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve waiving the requirement that the June 1, 2026 Committee meeting be held at the Northside Branch Library, which is unavailable on that date, and approve moving the meeting to the City Council Chambers.

Reviewed by: Paulina Morales, Assistant City Manager
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-1748 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Public Hearing: Action on a Resolution Setting Rates for Overall Solid Waste Service and Annual Clean-up Campaign in the Exclusive Franchise Area

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City has agreements with outside contractors for the collection and processing of garbage and recyclables. In 2021, Council approved a Solid Waste Rate Study performed by R3 Consulting, Inc. (R3) that developed a model to calculate equitable solid waste rates based on current contractor costs, subscription levels, and disposal data. The model has been updated with the latest cost data to calculate solid waste rates for FY 2026/27, which will enable the program to achieve cost recovery.

The monthly solid waste rates for FY 2026/27 are contained in Table A of the Resolution (Attachment 1).

Notices (Attachment 2) were sent to all solid waste rate payers on April 3, 2026, informing them of the proposed rate increases and the date of the Public Hearing to approve the rates, as required by Article XIII D § 6 of the California Constitution. Following the close of the Public Hearing, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the subject Resolution, which establishes the solid waste rates effective for the utility bills issued for services rendered on and after July 1, 2026.

BACKGROUND
In November 1996, California voters approved Proposition 218, which amended the state Constitution and imposed new substantive and procedural requirements for imposing or increasing property-related fees and charges. Under these requirements, water, sewer, and solid waste service fees or charges may only be increased if a majority of rate payers do not protest the increase. The City must mail a written notice of the proposed increases and hold a public hearing on the proposed increase not less than 45 days after mailing the notice. At the public hearing, all protests against the proposed fees or charges are tabulated and if the number of protests from rate payers equals or exceeds 50 percent plus one, the fees or charges cannot be imposed. The public hearing for the City’s FY 2026/27 solid waste rates is scheduled for May 19, 2026. If there is not a majority protest, the Council can adopt the proposed monthly rate increases contained in Table A of the Resolution (Attachment 1).

The City sets rates and collects bundled charges from customers to fund the solid waste program in the exclusive franchise area. Customers are only charged for the specific components for which they receive service. The current rates are based on the parameters established in the 2025 Solid Waste Rate Study conducted by R3. The bundled solid waste rate is comprised of one or more of the following components:
· Garbage
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-1748 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
· Yard trimmings
· Residential recycling
· Annual Clean-up Campaign (CUC)
In 2019, City Council authorized the City Manager to negotiate and execute the following agreements:
· Recology South Bay (Recology) for residential recycling collection · Mission Trail Waste Systems (MTWS) for garbage and yard trimmings collection · GreenWaste Recovery, Inc. (GWR) for mixed waste processing and residue disposal beginning January 1, 2025
In 2024, the Department of Public Works (DPW) conducted formal procurements to secure disposal and yard trimmings composting services to succeed the 35-year agreement with Republic/BFI which expired December 31, 2024. City Council approved an agreement with GWR to utilize the Zanker Material Processing Facility to compost yard trimmings and to process and dispose of CUC and municipal operations debris.

The term for each agreement is aligned to expire on June 30, 2036. The services provided under these agreements enable the City to comply with the organic waste collection program and diversion requirements for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from landfills mandated by Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383).

R3 has updated the cost factors in the latest rate model with FY 2026/27 projected costs to ensure that rates continue to be based on the true costs of service and are equitable. Each rate for garbage, yard trimmings, residential recycling, and CUC service was developed to equitably incorporate the following cost elements:
· Compensation paid to service providers to collect and transport solid waste · Compensation paid to process, compost, and/or dispose of solid waste · City program costs (billing and internal costs, street sweeping, household hazardous waste, leaf vacuum, and holiday tree collection services, franchise fees, landfill post closure costs, and SB 1383 compliance costs)
The subsequent discussion summarizes upcoming changes to the various cost elements and associated impacts on the proposed FY 2026/27 rates.

DISCUSSION
Primary Reasons for Rate Increases
There are two main reasons for rate increases in FY 2026/27. The primary reason is that additional revenue is needed to cover the FY 2026/27 compensation adjustments paid to service providers for the collection, processing, recycling, composting, and disposal of solid waste in compliance with state laws and current market conditions, as required per the agreements.

Each agreement specifies annual cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) based on annual changes to price indices. The COLA in the agreement with GWR is based on the annual change to the Bay Area Consumer Price Index (CPI). The COLA in the agreements with Recology and MTWS is based on the annual change to the Water-Sewer-Trash Index (WST). Both indices are published by the Bureau City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-1748 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
of Labor Statistics (BLS).

Below are summaries of the compensation adjustment percentages effective July 1, 2026, based on the agreements previously approved by Council.
· GWR: +3.04% COLA
· Recology: +5.09% (4.70% COLA + 0.39% route growth)
· MTWS: +4.70% COLA
The agreement with Recology also contains a provision for route growth in which the percentage change in the number of container lifts over the calendar year is added to the COLA to determine the total compensation adjustment. The number of container lifts increased by 0.39 percent in 2025. The route growth provision of the compensation adjustment does not impact customer rates because the number of rate-paying customers also increases.

The secondary reason for rate increases is higher City Program costs, which include the Solid Waste Program portions of the City’s Cost Allocation Plan (CAP) and Technical Services (Information Technology Department costs). In the FY 2026/27 Proposed Budget, the CAP costs are increasing 2% (approximately $31,000) from the FY 2025/26 Adopted Budget. The FY 2025/26 solid waste rates were developed using an initial estimate from the prior year budget for the CAP costs rather than the actual amount prepared by the City’s CAP consultant given the timing of the CAP study. As a result, the Cost Allocation Plan increased by approximately $100,000 from the FY 2025/26 initial estimates to FY 2026/27 Proposed Budget. Similarly, the Technical Services costs increased by approximately $290,000 from FY 2025/26 initial estimates to FY 2026/27 due to increased Information Technology (IT) expenses associated with increased Unisys contract costs and upgrades to improve the accessibility of the City’s website. These trends were experienced among all of the City’s enterprise funds.

Operations and Maintenance Reserve
The Solid Waste Fund maintains an Operations and Maintenance Reserve for capital costs and onetime large expenditures. The City will be utilizing $400,000 of the Operations and Maintenance Reserve to fund the Emergency Backup and Collection System Enhancements for Closed Landfill project in FY 2026/27.

The target reserve balance is 25% of the annual expenditures, which is approximately $11.3 million in FY 2026/27. The preliminary estimate for this reserve is $7.3 million for FY 2026/27, which is approximately 16.2% of annual expenditures.

Rate Stabilization Reserve
The Solid Waste Fund maintains a Rate Stabilization Reserve to enable the smoothing of rate changes. An amount of $483,000 from the Rate Stabilization Reserve will be programmed into the FY 2026/27 Solid Waste Fund’s operating budget to cover vehicle amortization for street sweeper replacement ($415,000) and increased payments to MTWS and Recology ($68,000) as a result of the BLS March 2026 update to the WST Index.

Vehicle amortization for street sweeper replacement increased from $134,000 in initial FY 2025/26 estimates to $415,000 in FY 2026/27, reflecting the shift to planning for the potential of future electric powered sweepers, which are substantially more expensive than fuel-powered sweepers. The City City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-1748 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
will be using the Rate Stabilization Reserve to cover this cost.

In March 2026, the City was informed that the BLS revised its previously reported 2025 WST index values, which caused the year-over-year change to the WST index to shift from +4.5% to +4.7%.

DPW staff had already calculated proposed FY 2026/27 solid waste rates based on the initially reported +4.5% annual increase and finalized the proof of the Prop 218 notice. The FY 2026/27 solid waste rates proposed in Table A of the Resolution (Attachment 1) are based on a +4.5% WST increase. DPW staff estimates the proposed rates could fall short of funding collection services by approximately $68,000 in FY 2026/27 as a result.

The target Rate Stabilization Reserve balance is 10% of annual expenditures, which is approximately $4.5 million in FY 2026/27. The preliminary estimate for this reserve is $2.9 million for FY 2026/27 which is about 6.4% of annual expenditures.

Monthly Bundled Solid Waste Rates
The individual garbage, yard trimmings, recycling and CUC components are bundled together to create the overall solid waste rates that are charged to residential cart customers monthly. The rates for each service are based on the cost to provide collection, disposal, processing and/or composting, and City program costs. The table below summarizes the monthly individual rate component increases for residential cart customers:

Service Type FY 2025/26
Monthly Rate
FY 2026/27 Monthly
Rate
Change in Monthly
Rate
20-gallon garbage cart $20.90 $21.60 $0.70
32-gallon garbage cart $28.92 $29.86 $0.94
64-gallon garbage cart $53.75 $55.48 $1.73
96-gallon garbage cart $78.46 $80.95 $2.49
Yard trimmings $16.37 $17.09 $0.72
Recycling $8.39 $8.65 $0.26
CUC $6.62 $6.94 $0.32
Each customer pays a rate that is dependent on cart size subscription and whether they pay for yard trimmings or CUC services. Below is a summary of FY 2026/27 bundled monthly rates for singlefamily residential and townhouse cart customers. Townhouse residential cart customer rates are the FY 2026/27 bundled monthly rate for garbage cart size less the $17.09 yard trimmings rate since they do not receive this service. Monthly rates for cart customers that do not participate in the CUC are $6.94 less than the bundled rates shown in the table.

Garbage Cart Size Monthly
Garbage Rate
Monthly Yard
Trimmings
Rate*
Monthly
Recycling
Rate
Monthly
CUC Rate*
FY 26/27
Bundled
Monthly
Rate
20-gallon singlefamily$21.60 $17.09 $8.65 $6.94 $54.28 20-gallon townhouse $21.60 $0.00 $8.65 $6.94 $37.19
32-gallon singlefamily$29.86 $17.09 $8.65 $6.94 $62.54 32-gallon townhouse $29.86 $0.00 $8.65 $6.94 $45.45
64-gallon single$55.48 $17.09 $8.65 $6.94 $88.16
City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-1748 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
Rate*RateMonthly
Rate
20-gallon singlefamily$21.60 $17.09 $8.65 $6.94 $54.28 20-gallon townhouse $21.60 $0.00 $8.65 $6.94 $37.19
32-gallon singlefamily$29.86 $17.09 $8.65 $6.94 $62.54 32-gallon townhouse $29.86 $0.00 $8.65 $6.94 $45.45
64-gallon singlefamily$55.48 $17.09 $8.65 $6.94 $88.16 64-gallon townhouse $55.48 $0.00 $8.65 $6.94 $71.07
96-gallon singlefamily$80.95 $17.09 $8.65 $6.94 $113.63 96-gallon townhouse $80.95 $0.00 $8.65 $6.94 $96.54
*Applied only if the resident receives the service.

The table below shows the increase in each residential cart bundled rate.

Garbage Cart Size FY 25/26
Monthly
Bundled Rate
FY 26/27
Monthly
Bundled Rate
Change in
Monthly Rate
Percentage
Change
20-gallon single-family $52.28 $54.28 $2.00 3.8%
20-gallon townhouse $35.91 $37.19 $1.28 3.6%
32-gallon single-family $60.30 $62.54 $2.24 3.7%
32-gallon townhouse $43.93 $45.45 $1.52 3.5%
64-gallon single-family $85.13 $88.16 $3.03 3.6%
64-gallon townhouse $68.76 $71.07 $2.31 3.4%
96-gallon single-family $109.84 $113.63 $3.79 3.5%
96-gallon townhouse $93.47 $96.54 $3.07 3.3%
Monthly Garbage Bin Rates
Garbage bin rates include the costs for collection, processing, disposal, and City program costs.

Loose garbage bin charges will be increasing between 5.3 percent to 5.7 percent and compacted garbage bin charges will be increasing between 5.2 percent to 5.5 percent in FY 2026/27, depending on service level. The loose garbage bin and compacted garbage bin rates are shown in Section II.D and Section II.E of Attachment 1.

Monthly Services Billed by MTWS
The City sets the rates and bills for residential and commercial cart and bin garbage service. MTWS bills customers directly for commercial business recycling, voluntary commercial organics collection, and the loose and compacted roll-off debris bin collection services that it provides as prescribed in the agreement. The City needs to notice the rate increases in accordance with Proposition 218 requirements and approve the rates at a Public Hearing for increases to take effect. MTWS’s compensation will increase 4.7% in FY 2026/27. If the proposed rate increases for services that are billed by MTWS are not approved by the City Council, the City is contractually obligated to pay MTWS the increased compensation and will have to absorb the additional 4.7% shortfall between cost of service and revenue collected.

Commercial Recycling
City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-1748 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
MTWS is required to provide up to 96-gallons of commercial recycling services to businesses at no separate charge to the City under the agreement. The rates for additional service above 96-gallons per week are based on container size and frequency of service, plus a 10 percent markup for billing and franchise fees. Commercial recycling service rates charged to cart and bin customers will increase by 4.5 percent in FY 2026/27 (Sections II.B and II.F of Attachment 1).

MTWS remits 5 percent of the amount collected from customers to the City as franchise fees that are deposited in the General Fund for all services that it provides billing for, which includes the services described below.

Voluntary Food Scraps and Organic Waste Service
MTWS provides voluntary source separated food scraps and organic waste service to commercial business customers under the agreement. The rates for collection and processing are based on container size and frequency of service, plus a 10 percent markup for billing and franchise fees.

Collection and processing rates charged to customers with cart and bin source separated food scrap and organic waste service will be increasing by 4.5 percent in FY 2026/27 (Section II.C and Section II.G of Attachment 1).

Loose and Compacted Roll-Off Debris Bin Service
MTWS provides scheduling, collection, and billing for loose and compacted roll-off debris box service in the exclusive franchise area. The collection rate component is based on container size and frequency of service, plus a 10 percent markup for billing and franchise fees. Rates for these services will increase by 4.5 percent in FY 2026/27. Customers are also billed for the actual charges incurred for the disposal, processing, and/or recycling of collected contents plus 10 percent markup for billing and franchise fees. Section II.H of Attachment 1 contains rates for these services.

Countywide Rate Comparison
The Santa Clara County Residential Cart Rate Comparison (Attachment 3) provides a comparison of monthly solid waste rates for residential collection services in Santa Clara County (County). Most jurisdictions have indicated they will also be seeking rate increases in FY 2026/27 but were unable to share that information at this time. As a result, the comparison is based on comparing Santa Clara’s proposed FY 2026/27 monthly rates to the current FY 2025/26 monthly rates in other jurisdictions . The survey is for bundled solid waste services that include garbage, yard trimmings, and recycling services.

Santa Clara is the only city in the county that offers a townhouse service rate in which customers do not subscribe to yard trimmings service. The townhouse rates are lower than countywide averages for the same size container across the board. It should also be noted that the City’s rates that are presented for comparison do not include the proposed $6.94 per month charge for the CUC because no other jurisdiction in the County has a comparable program. The table below summarizes the City’s single-family and townhouse rates compared to the countywide averages. 20-gallon 32-gallon 64-gallon 96-gallon
Monthly FY
2025/26
countywide
average
$42.56 $50.99 $88.98 $131.21
Monthly FY
2026/27 Santa
Clara singlefamily rate*
$47.34 $55.60 $81.22 $106.69
Monthly FY$3025 $3851 $6413 $8960
City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-1748 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
20-gallon 32-gallon 64-gallon 96-gallon
Monthly FY
2025/26
countywide
average
$42.56 $50.99 $88.98 $131.21
Monthly FY
2026/27 Santa
Clara singlefamily rate*
$47.34 $55.60 $81.22 $106.69
Monthly FY
2026/27 Santa
Clara townhouse
rate* **
$30.25 $38.51 $64.13 $89.60
*Excludes CSC Clean-up Campaign Cost
**No other city offers reduced townhouse rates
The Santa Clara County Commercial Bin Rate Comparison (Attachment 4) provides a comparison of monthly solid waste rates for commercial bin collection services in the County. Most jurisdictions in the County have indicated that rate increases will be occurring in FY 2026/27 but were not able to share details, so the City’s proposed FY 2026/27 rates are compared to other jurisdictions’ FY 2025/26 rates. The City’s commercial bin rates are close to the countywide average. Santa Clara multi-family and commercial business customers that subscribe to frontload bin garbage service are not required to subscribe to an additional organics container to meet SB 1383 requirements because the contents of the garbage bins will be taken to the GWR mixed waste processing facility to recover the organics for composting. This is not the case for some other jurisdictions. The cost savings of not subscribing to an additional container for organics is not captured in the countywide comparison, which only shows the cost to subscribe to a specific garbage service level.

Rate Assistance Program
Under the current agreement, MTWS provides the City with a $3 per month decrease in tariff for residential accounts that qualify through the Silicon Valley Power (SVP) low income Rate Assistance Program. On March 10, 2021, the City Council approved to increase the rate discount to $10 per month. There are currently 1,228 customers enrolled in the Rate Assistance Program. MTWS will continue to fund $3 per month. A transfer from the General Fund in the amount of $102,564 is included in the FY 2026/27 operating budget to fund the additional $7 per month rate discount for customers receiving the rate discount.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed activity has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and it has been determined that the activity does not constitute a “project” pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(a) because it will not result in a physical change in the environment.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, it has also been determined that the activity qualifies for an Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of CEQA Guidelines. Thus, no environmental review is required.

FISCAL IMPACT
With the proposed rate increases, the solid waste customer charges will generate approximately $43.9 million of revenue in FY 2026/27. These revenues have been incorporated into the Solid Waste Fund operating budget in the Proposed FY 2026/27 Biennial Operating Budget. A transfer from the General Fund to the Solid Waste Fund in the amount of $102,564 has also been programmed to fund the additional $7 per month for qualifying customers in the Rate Assistance Program for FY 2026/27.

COORDINATION
City of Santa Clara Page 7 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-1748 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
This report has been coordinated with the Finance Department and the City Attorney’s Office.

PUBLIC CONTACT
On March 27, 2026, notices were mailed to 35,984 solid waste customers, which provided information on the proposed FY 2026/27 rate increases, instructions on how to protest the rate increases, and details on how to access the public hearing.

Additionally, 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.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Adopt a Resolution setting the overall rates to be charged to rate payers for the collection and disposal of garbage, refuse, yard trimmings, recycling, and annual Clean-up Campaign in the exclusive franchise area, effective for the utility bills issued for services rendered on and after July 1, 2026; or

2. Do not adopt a Resolution to increase the proposed rates to be charged to rate payers for collection and disposal of garbage, refuse, yard trimmings, recycling, and annual Clean-up Campaign in the exclusive franchise area and subsidize FY 2026/27 expenditures with funds in the amount of approximately $2 million from the General Fund.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution setting the overall rates to be charged to rate payers for the collection and disposal of garbage, refuse, yard trimmings, recycling, and annual Clean-up Campaign in the exclusive franchise area, effective for the utility bills issued for services rendered on and after July 1, 2026.

Reviewed by: Craig Mobeck, Director of Public Works
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Notice

3. Santa Clara County Residential Cart Rate Comparison

4. Santa Clara County Commercial Bin Rate Comparison
City of Santa Clara Page 8 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 1 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

SETTING RATES FOR OVERALL SOLID WASTE SERVICES

AND CLEANUP CAMPAIGN SERVICES IN THE EXCLUSIVE

FRANCHISE AREA
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Clara (“City”) has provided, by contract or with its own forces, certain garbage collection and disposal services, yard trimming and recycling collection, and the Cleanup Campaign (“Solid Waste Services”) within the corporate limits of the City of Santa Clara;
WHEREAS, City entered into an agreement entitled “Agreement for Services Between the City of Santa Clara, California and GreenWaste Recovery, Inc.” (“Solid Waste Processing Agreement”), dated April 27, 2020, to process solid waste from the exclusive franchise area to recover recyclables and organic waste for a term commencing July 1, 2020, and terminating on June 30, 2036;
WHEREAS, City entered into an agreement entitled “Agreement for Services Between the City of Santa Clara, California and Mission Trail Waste Systems, Inc.” (“Refuse Franchise Agreement”), April 27, 2020, to collect and transport solid waste from customers in the exclusive franchise area, excluding residential recyclables for a term commencing July 1, 2020, and terminating on June 30, 2036;
WHEREAS, City entered into an agreement entitled “Agreement for Services Between the City of Santa Clara, California, and Recology South Bay DBA Recology Santa Clara” (“Residential Recycling Services Agreement”), February 5, 2020, for residential recycling collection services for a term commencing July 1, 2020, and terminating on June 30, 2036; WHEREAS, City entered into an agreement entitled “Agreement for Services Between the City of Santa Clara, California and GreenWaste Recovery, Inc.” (“Disposal Agreement”), dated December 16, 2024, to process and dispose of solid waste collected through the City’s Cleanup Campaign and municipal operations for a term commencing January 1, 2025, and terminating Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 2 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
on June 30, 2036;
WHEREAS, City entered into an agreement entitled “Agreement for Services Between the City of Santa Clara, California and GreenWaste Recovery, Inc.” (“Composting Agreement”), dated December 16, 2024, to compost yard trimmings for a term commencing January 1, 2025, and terminating on June 30, 2036;
WHEREAS, the overall adjustments to the monthly rates charged to customers for Solid Waste Services made by this Resolution do not in any way modify the rates of compensation which Mission Trail Waste Systems, Inc., GreenWaste Recovery, Inc., and Recology Santa Clara are entitled to under the Refuse Franchise and Residential Recycling Services Agreements; WHEREAS, a Solid Waste Rate Study was finalized on February 10, 2026 which analyzed the costs of service that comprise each monthly rate are equitably distributed; WHEREAS, on April 3, 2026, the City timely mailed notices of a public hearing to property owners and rate payers of Solid Waste Services that detailed proposed rate adjustments in accordance with Article XIIID §6 of the California Constitution (Proposition 218); and, WHEREAS, on May 19, 2026, the City held a public hearing on the proposed adjustments to fees for Solid Waste Services, and there was no majority protest.

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

1. In accordance with Article XIIID § 6 of the California Constitution and as set forth in the accompanying staff report, incorporated herein by reference:

A. The revenues derived from the Solid Waste Services rates, as stated in Table A, attached hereto and incorporated herein, do not exceed the funds required to provide solid waste programs.

B. The revenues derived from the Solid Waste Services rates will not be used for any purpose other than solid waste programs.

C. The Solid Waste Services rates charged will not exceed the cost of solid waste programs per parcel.

Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 3 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
D. The Solid Waste Services rates are only charged for solid waste programs that are currently available.

E. The Solid Waste Services rates are not charged for general governmental services.

2. Notice of the proposed Solid Waste Services rates was mailed on April 3, 2026, more than 45 days prior to the public hearing on this matter, in compliance with Proposition 218.

3. A public hearing was conducted on May 19, 2026, regarding the proposed rates to be charged and all protests and other comments were considered.

4. The number of written protests by owners of parcels within the City against the increased rates were tabulated by City staff at the hearing and did not constitute a majority protest.

5. That following the public hearing, the City Council approves and adopts the rates for collection and disposal of garbage, yard trimming and recycling collection, and the Cleanup Campaign, as set forth in Table A, incorporated here by reference.

6. That any and all amounts by which the fees set forth in Table A exceed monies paid to contractors that provide Solid Waste Services in accordance with their respective agreements, shall solely belong to City and shall constitute cost recovery for Solid Waste Services rendered by City.

7. That a true and correct copy of this Resolution shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk and in the Municipal Services Division of the City Finance Department at all times in which the rates are operable or until replaced with any future adjusted monthly charges by the City Council and shall be open to public inspection during the regular hours of such offices.

8. That the adjusted monthly charges for Solid Waste Services described herein are ordered to be effective for utility bills issued for services rendered on and after July 1, 2026 and thereafter.
///
Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 4 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023

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

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

AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE ___ DAY OF _________, 2026, 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. Table A – City of Santa Clara Rates for Collection and Disposal of Garbage, Yard Trimming and Recycling Collection, and the Annual Cleanup Campaign (Effective for Utility Bills Issued for Services Rendered on and After July 1, 2026) Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 5 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023

TABLE A

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

RATES FOR COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF GARBAGE,

YARD TRIMMING AND RECYCLING COLLECTION, AND THE ANNUAL CLEANUP

CAMPAIGN
(Effective for utility bills issued for services rendered on and after July 1, 2026) I. RESIDENTIAL USERS:

A. All Occupancy Classes (separate line billing)

1. Cleanup Campaign $6.94/month1

2. Extra Bag Tag Pre-Paid Sticker Program for extra garbage bag setouts $8.31/bag tag
B. Single Occupancy (includes Complexes of 4 or Less Units)2 & 3

1. Regular service, (includes Yard Trimming Collection Service, and Recycling Services) single collection weekly:
a. One (1) thirty-two-gallon capacity garbage can
or Small Cart $55.60/month
b. One (1) twenty-gallon capacity super saver can
or Super Saver Cart $47.34/month
c. Two (2) thirty-two-gallon capacity garbage cans
or Medium Cart $81.22/month
d. Three (3) thirty-two-gallon capacity garbage cans
or Large Cart $106.69/month

e. Additional thirty-two (32) gallon container $29.54/month

1 Exemption with no charge to residence with limited space based on determination by Deputy Director of Public Works.
2 Last two weeks of each year, encompassing the Christmas holiday and the week following, single occupancy customers may set out up to four (4) extra thirty-two (32) gallon garbage bags total (two per week) at no extra charge. 3 Low income rate discount of $10.00 per month for single-family and townhouse customers that qualify for Silicon Valley Power’s Rate Assistance Program.

Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 6 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
C. Residential Apartment Complexes of 5 or more units where Yard Trimming Collection Services Provided:

Regular service, single collection weekly:

1. First dwelling unit (includes Yard Trimming and Recycling Collection Services):
a. One (1) thirty-two-gallon capacity garbage can
or Small Cart $55.60/month
b. One (1) twenty-gallon capacity Super Saver
Cart. Only for duplexes with individual billing $47.34/month and where carts are set out at each residence.
c. Two (2) thirty-two-gallon capacity garbage cans $81.22/month or Medium Cart
d. Three (3) thirty-two-gallon capacity garbage cans $106.69/month or Large Cart

2. Each additional dwelling unit exceeding one (1) unit (includes recycling charge, but not Yard Trimming Collection $38.51/month Service charge)

3. For each additional thirty-two-gallon capacity container $29.54/month

4. Recycling Service: (first unit includes recycling charge automatically) $8.65/month/
All residential dwellings are required to have recycling unit/once services. The monthly charge is unbundled for additional weekly lift units after the first unit.

5. Each additional weekly lift of recycling container. $8.65/month/ unit
D. Townhouses – garbage and recycling provided (recycling not bundled into rate, but billed as a separate line item on utility bill); no Yard Trimming Collection Services:

1. Regular service, single collection weekly:
a. One (1) thirty-two-gallon capacity garbage can
or Small Cart $29.86/month
b. One (1) twenty-gallon capacity super saver
garbage can or Super Saver Cart only where can
setout and billed individually at each residence $21.60/month Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 7 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
c. Two (2) thirty-two-gallon capacity garbage cans $55.48/month or Medium Cart
d. Three (3) thirty-two-gallon capacity garbage cans $80.95/month or Large Cart
e. Additional thirty-two (32) gallon capacity $29.54/month container

2. Recycling Service, single collection weekly, additional charge $8.65/month/ per participating dwelling unit unit/once
weekly lift
E. Yard Trimming Collection Service $17.09/month/
unit
Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 8 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
II. COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS; AND RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEXES OF 5 OR MORE UNITS 4(WHERE DWELLING UNITS NOT

SERVED SEPARATELY)
A. Regular Garbage Cart Service: Variable

CONTAINER
SIZE
ONE TO SIX COLLECTIONS PER WEEK4
(CAPACITY)

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX
One 32-gallon capacity
can, or Small Cart
$30.32 $60.62 $90.94 $121.23 $151.60 $181.88
Two 32-gallon capacity
cans, or Medium Cart
$56.36 $112.64 $169.06 $225.43 $281.73 $338.06
Three 32-gallon capacity
cans, or Large Cart
$82.39 $164.75 $247.16 $329.51 $411.87 $494.26
Each additional
32-gallon capacity
container
$30.02 $60.05 $90.05 $120.09 $150.16 $180.14
Rates do not include Recycling or Clean Green collection services Notwithstanding the above, in no event will the minimum charge for service for commercial and institutional establishments be less than $30.32.

4 For residential apartment complexes of 5 or more units add $8.65 per unit per month for recycling charges.

Complexes requiring more than one lift per week will be assessed an additional $8.65 per unit for each additional lift required beyond once a week.

Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 9 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
B. Regular Recycling Cart Service – Commercial and Institutional Only: Variable Contractor bills customers for commercial recycling services directly, not the City. Per Exhibit A, Section 3.C.v. of Agreement, if a commercial customer requires more than 96 gallons of recycling service per week, Contractor shall charge customer up to a maximum of the corresponding tariff level for the specific container and service level, plus ten percent (10%) for billing and franchise fees. Contractor shall retain five percent (5%) for billing and remit five percent (5%) to City on a quarterly basis, along with its non-exclusive franchise fees. Rates below include the ten percent (10%) for billing and franchise fees.

CONTAINER

SIZE ONE TO SIX COLLECTIONS PER WEEK
(CAPACITY) ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX
First 96-gallon container $0 $96.79 $145.17 $193.50 $241.90 $290.29 Each additional 96-gallon
container $48.39 $96.79 $145.17 $193.50 $241.90 $290.29 C. Source Separated Food Scrap and Organic Waste Service

CONTAINER

SIZE (CAPACITY)

FOOD SCRAP RECYCLING

COLLECTIONS PER WEEK

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE
First 64-gallon container (collection rate) $32.43 $64.73 $97.16 $129.60 $161.91 Each additional 64-gallon container (collection rate) $32.03 $64.01 $96.01 $128.02 $160.11 Processing cost per container $9.14 $17.96 $26.78 $35.60 $44.42 Contractor bills customers for food scrap recycling services (collection and processing) directly.

Collection rates above include ten percent (10%) for billing and franchise fees. Contractor shall retain five percent (5%) for billing and remit five percent (5%) to City on a quarterly basis, along with its nonexclusive franchise fees. Contractor shall invoice City on a monthly basis for processing costs.

Processing cost per container include ten percent (10%) for billing and franchise fees.

Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 10 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
D. Front Load Bin Garbage Service (loose – not compacted): Variable, for commercial, institutional, and residential apartment complexes of 5 or more units; monthly charge (for weekly collections) with container furnished by Contractor.

BIN SIZE
(Cubic Yards)
ONE TO SIX COLLECTIONS PER WEEK5

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX
1 $194.10 $385.00 $572.79 $757.43 $942.08 $1,123.53
1½ $268.16 $534.40 $791.73 $1,043.43 $1,297.11 $1,545.34 2 $342.17 $678.15 $1,014.08 $1,337.79 $1,660.82 $1,990.53 3 $491.83 $970.47 $1,437.16 $1,891.71 $2,352.85 $2,810.27 4 $637.46 $1,262.00 $1,875.84 $2,466.10 $3,064.76 $3,624.45 6 $909.70 $1,806.82 $2,663.09 $3,519.34 $4,375.57 $5,233.04 8 $1,176.39 $2,347.91 $3,542.37 $4,572.46 $5,686.41 $6,839.19 _____________________
5 For residential apartment complexes of 5 or more units add $8.65 per unit per month for recycling charges.

Complexes requiring more than one lift per week will be assessed an additional $8.65 per unit for each additional lift required beyond once a week.

Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 11 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
E. Front Load Bin Garbage Service (Compacted): Variable, for commercial, institutional, and residential apartment complexes of 5 or more units; monthly charge (for weekly collections) with container furnished by Contractor.

BIN SIZE
(Cubic Yards)
ONE TO SIX COLLECTIONS PER WEEK6

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX
1 $299.30 $595.42 $888.39 $1,178.25 $1,468.10 $1,754.77 1½ $425.98 $850.00 $1,265.15 $1,674.67 $2,086.15 $2,492.18 2 $552.59 $1,098.97 $1,645.32 $2,179.43 $2,712.88 $3,252.99 3 $807.43 $1,601.71 $2,384.00 $3,154.17 $3,930.91 $4,703.95 4 $1,058.28 $2,103.64 $3,138.30 $4,149.38 $5,168.84 $6,149.35 6 $1,540.94 $3,069.28 $4,556.77 $6,044.24 $7,531.71 $9,020.40 8 $2,018.03 $4,031.19 $6,049.27 $7,939.00 $9,894.59 $11,889.01 ___________________
6 For residential apartment complexes of 5 or more units add $8.65 per unit per month for recycling charges.

Complexes requiring more than one lift per week will be assessed an additional $8.65 per unit for each additional lift required beyond once a week.

Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 12 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
F. Front Load Bin Recycling Service: Variable, for commercial, and institutional customers only; monthly charge (for weekly collections) with container furnished by Contractor.

Contractor bills customers for commercial recycling services directly, not the City. Per Exhibit A, Section C. (v.) of Agreement, if a commercial customer requires more than 96 gallons of recycling service per week, Contractor may charge customer. Contractor shall retain five percent (5%) for billing and remit five percent (5%) to City on a quarterly basis, along with its non-exclusive franchise fees.

BIN SIZE
(Cubic Yards)

ONE TO SIX COLLECTIONS PER WEEK

ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX
1 $109.14 $213.92 $314.60 $410.98 $507.38 $599.51
1½ $157.31 $312.02 $454.74 $589.90 $727.75 $858.23
2 $205.40 $402.45 $599.51 $780.09 $959.76 $1,148.39
3 $303.83 $589.90 $859.95 $1,113.68 $1,376.20 $1,633.74 4 $396.81 $776.28 $1,141.34 $1,474.70 $1,819.36 $2,111.64 6 $557.24 $1,097.59 $1,583.00 $2,068.36 $2,553.78 $3,040.77 8 $710.23 $1,413.86 $2,124.19 $2,661.95 $3,288.16 $3,966.69 Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 13 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
G. Front Load Bin Source Separated Food Scrap and Organic Waste Service

FOOD SCRAP RECYCLING

BIN COLLECTIONS PER WEEK

SIZE (CAPACITY) ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE
One (1) cubic yard (collection rate) $109.14 $213.91 $314.60 $411.00 $507.38 Processing cost per one (1) cubic yard
container $28.48 $56.32 $84.17 $112.02 $139.86
Three (3) cubic yards (collection rate) $303.83 $589.90 $859.95 $1,113.68 $1,376.22 Processing cost per three (3) cubic yard
container $84.49 $168.02 $251.56 $335.10 $418.64
Contractor bills customers for food scrap recycling services directly. Contractor shall retain five percent (5%) for billing and remit five percent (5%) to City on a quarterly basis, along with its non-exclusive franchise fees. Contractor shall invoice City on a monthly basis for processing costs. Processing cost per container includes ten percent (10%) for billing and franchise fees.

H. Roll-Off Bin Garbage and Construction and Demolition Service: Per collection with rolloff container furnished by Contractor and front loader compactor bin furnished by customer. The rates specified below do not include recycling/disposal costs. Customer shall be billed by Contractor for the actual charges incurred by the Contractor for recycling and/or disposal of collected contents plus ten percent (10%) markup for billing and franchise fees. This 10% markup is included in the rates below.

BIN SIZE/CAPACITY OPEN (Loose)

CONTAINER
(per cubic yard)
COMPACTED (Closed)

CONTAINER
(per cubic yard)
10 cubic yards or less $44.79 $58.99
11 to 15 cubic yards $44.79 $51.19
16 to 20 cubic yards $40.87 $46.78
21 to 29 cubic yards $37.43 $46.78
30 cubic yards $31.54 $46.78
31 to 39 cubic yards $29.85 $46.78
40 cubic yards & over $28.91 $46.78
Demurrage charge (one-week extension without
collection) per week $79.01 $82.97
Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 14 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023
III. SPECIAL CHARGES
A. Provided by Mission Trail Waste Systems and Billed to Customer by City:

1. Manual Front-Load Bin Push/Pull Charges

RATE LEVEL ONE-WAY DISTANCE RATE
L-1 6 to 20 feet $39.60
L-2 21 to 40 feet $51.68
L-3 41 to 60 feet $77.03
L-4 61 to 80 feet $91.89
L-5 81 to 100 feet $128.22
L-6 101 to 120 feet $168.39
L-7 121 to 140 feet $208.02
L-8 141 to 160 feet $245.40
L-9 161 to 180 feet $285.03
L-10 181 to 200+ feet $319.70

2. Lock Bar/ Lock Jam Front Load Services
One-time installation fee, including one (1) lock: $116.64

3. Purchase of Lock
Per each, includes delivery of lock: $55.02

4. Front-Load Bin Steam Cleaning - Per
occurrence, not include once per year annual
cleaning: $139.79
B. Provided by Mission Trail Waste Systems and Billed to Customer by Contractor:

1. Roll-Off Bin Steam Cleaning - Per occurrence
not including once per year annual cleaning: $622.85*

2. Saturday Service Roll-Off Bin - Per occurrence: $677.91* Resolution/Solid Waste Rates Page 15 of 15
Rev: 7/27/2023

3. “Emergency” Roll-Off Load Collection on a
Weekday- Per driver hour with one (1) hour
minimum charge:
$363.19*

4. Relocation of Roll-Off Bin - Per driver hour
with one (1) hour minimum charge:
$363.19*

5. Roll-Off Driver Time - Per driver hour with one
(1) hour minimum charge:
$363.19*

6. Counter-balanced Front-Load Covered Bin
(Premium charge paid by Customer –
availability limited to 100 bins total)
$15.80*/unit/month

7. Special Charges for return trips, non-scheduled
collections, overages, and contamination:

Monthly collection charge for cart or
bin size multiplied by 12, divided by
52, and multiplied by 1.5 per
occurrence

8. Illegal bin removal and storage fee: $394.77* plus disposal cost per occurrence
* Roll-off bin special services charges include markup of ten percent (10%) for billing and franchise fees. Contractor shall retain five percent (5%) for billing and remit five percent (5%) to City on a quarterly basis.

C. Provided by Recology for Residential Recycling Customers:

1. Manual Push/Pull Charges (first 10 feet complimentary): $1.21 per foot moved

2. Front Loading Bin Cleaning Charge: $151.64 per cleaning

3. Driver-time Reimbursement: $115.25 per hour

4. Lock-Jam Bin Installations: $90.99 flat fee

5. Charge to Service Contaminated Toter: $30.33 flat fee per container

6. Charge to Service Contaminated Front-Loading Bins: $151.64 flat fee per container

7. Charge to haul compactor: $621.15 per haul **
** Contractor provides billing and collection for compactor hauling services. en_. C 0 m ..,. CD - · :I 0-o ~ ;- 0 m 0 o::E~- -m3cn
m - CD m .,, - ; ~a a
en
- ~ 0 >om
C, z
> <-o
.,, (D
- J:I, 0 .,, C0 :I~~ I"" u,Cc-m
-< ::a 0 0 (D ==
ffl :I: u, 0
J:I, J:I, 0 ::E ::a ... ::a 0 II,) 0 ...
~ ~ 0 z Ill
II,)
0) ::a I ffl II,)
... a z
u, J:I,
0 ::a -I
!: 5!
ICII z z ~ Ci) s ,, J:I, ::a u,
... 0
ffl ,, ~ u,
0 -
n '" ... ICII ffl ffl
u,

YOU CAN PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS
A public hearing on these proposed increases will
be held during the Santa Clara City Council Meeting
scheduled for Tuesday, May 19, 2026 at 7:00 p.m.

The City of Santa Clara is conducting meetings in a
hybrid manner (in-person and remotely).

Via Zoom:
https://santaclaraca .zoom .us/j/99706759306
Meeting ID: 997
-0675-9306
Phone: 1-669-900-6833
Proposed rate increases for the Solid Waste
Program (Garbage, Yard Trimmings, Cleanup
Campaign, and Recycling) for Fiscal Year 2026-27
will be considered for adoption at the public
hearing.

To formally protest the proposed increases you
must do so in writing, as protests cannot be
accepted via email, Zoom, or telephone. Written
protests must be received before the close of the
public hearing. To be counted, protests must be
mailed or dropped off to:

City Clerk's Office - Solid Waste Rate Comments
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Written protests must include your name, your
signature, the address of the property for which you
are the owner or utility customer, and the rate(s) you
are protesting. If protests are received from a
majority of the parcels affected by the proposed
rate increase by the close of public hearing, the City
Council will not impose the increase.

If you have questions about this notice, please
contact the Department of Public Works at
408-615-3080.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND

PROPOSED SOLID WASTE RATE INCREASES

FOR UTILITY BILLS
ON AND AFTER JULY 1, 2026
The City provides customers with dependable,
efficient, safe, and cost-effective solid waste
services for residents and businesses that call
Santa Clara home.

The proposed solid waste rates were calculated
using a rate study which was prepared by an
independent, third-party consultant. The study
provides a detailed review of the City's solid
waste costs to ensure that each rate equitably
captures the cost of each service. Each
proposed solid waste rate was developed to
include the sum of the following cost elements:
1) Collection costs
2) Processing and disposal or composting costs
3) City program costs
Rate increases are necessary to fund the
contractually obligated compensation
adjustments paid to the City's solid waste
service providers.

The City will continue to implement appropriate
and prudent cost-saving and cost-controlling
measures to maintain the affordability of these
basic services.

For more information about the City's
solid waste rates, visit
SantaClaraCA.gov/SolidWasteRates
PROPOSED SOLID WASTE RATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27
Residential, Commercial and Institutional Customers Only The proposed rates shown below generate revenues to cover solid waste programs, which include garbage col lection, processing and disposal, yard trimmings collection and processing, recyclables collection and processing, the Cleanup Campaign, street sweeping, and other solid waste program overhead and functions.

The proposed rates also fund landfill post-closure maintenance and monitoring and financial system software Capital Improvement Projects. These rate increases do not apply to customers in areas zoned for industrial use_
I
'
M-onthly Resjde_!l_t]al,Rates: Tota.I Mo11th!y ~ate is suin _of Gaibage Subscr_iptio~ (Al-,4), ..

F.Y 26-27
P,lus YBrd ,Trimmings (B)1 Cleanup Campaign (C). and'Recycling (D) , Current- p . d ' Rate ropo~e
Rate
Al 20-gallon Garbage Cart Charge $20.90 $21.60
A2. 32-gallon Garbage Cart Charge $28.92 $29.86
A3. 64-gallon Garbage Cart Charge $53.75 $55.48
A4. 96-gallon Garbage Cart Charge $78.46 $80.95
B. Yard Trimmings Per Unit Charge (not charged to townhomes) $16.37 $17.09 C. Cleanup Campaign Charge $6.62 $6.94
D. Recycling Charge/Unit Based on Once Weekly Pickup (also applied to each $8.39 $8.65 additional pickup) E. Extra Garbage Bag Tags $7.91 $8.31
FY 26-27 Proposed Monthly Commercial Business and Multi-Family Loose Garbage Bin Rate Billed by City Container Size 1/week 2/week 3/week 4/week 5/week 6/week 1 Cubic Yard $194.10 $385.00 $572.79 $757.43 $942.08 $1,123.53

1.5 Cubic Yards $268.16 $534.40 $791 .73 $1,043.43 $1,297.11 $1,545.34 2 Cubic Yards $342.17 $678.15 $1,014.08 $1,337.79 $1,660.82 $1,990.53 3 Cubic Yards $491.83 $970.47 $1,437.16 $1,891.71 $2,352.85 $2,810.27 4 Cubic Yards $637.46 $1,262.00 $1,875.84 $2,466.10 $3,064.76 $3,624.45 6 Cubic Yards $909.70 $1,806.82 $2,663.09 $3,519.34 $4,375.57 $5,233.04 8 Cubic Yards $1,176.39 $2,347.91 $3,542.37 $4,572.46 $5,686.41 $6,839.19 FY 26-27 Proposed Monthly~ Garbage Bin Rate Billed by City Container Size 1/week 2/week 3/week 4/week 5/week 6/week 1 Cubic Yard $299.30 $595.42 $888.39 $1,178.25 $1,468.10 $1,754.77

1.5 Cubic Yards $425.98 $850.00 $1,265.15 $1,674.67 $2,086.15 $2,492.18 2 Cubic Yards $552.59 $1,098.97 $1,645.32 $2,179.43 $2,712.88 $3,252.99 3 Cubic Yards $807.43 $1,601.71 $2,384.00 $3,154.17 $3,930.91 $4,703.95 4 Cubic Yards $1,058.28 $2,103.64 $3,138.30 $4,149.38 $5,168.84 $6,149.35 6 Cubic Yards $1,540.94 $3,069.28 $4,556.77 $6,044.24 $7,531.71 $9,020.40 8 Cubic Yards $2,018.03 $4,031.19 $6,049.27 $7,939.00 $9,894.59 $11,889.01 FY 26-27 Proposed Monthly Commercial Business Garbage Can Rate Billed by City Container Size 1/week 2/week 3/week 4/week 5/week 6/week 32-gal lon $30.32 $60.62 $90.94 $121.23 $151 .60 $181.88 64-gallon $56.36 $112.64 $169.06 $225.43 $281.73 $338.06 96-gallon $82.39 $164.75 $247.16 $329.51 $411.87 $494.26 Each additional 32·
gallon $30.02 $60.05 $90.05 $120.09 $150.16 $180.14
Monthly Commercial Services Billed by Mission Trail Waste Systems FY 26-27 Proposed Increase
A. Commercial Recycling1 4.5%
B. Voluntary Commercial Food Scraps and Organics 4.5%
C. Roll-off compactor and debris box per pull charges 4.5% D. Roll-off debris box and oompaotor disposal charges Up to $252.38 per ton E. Mission Trail Waste Systems special charges2 4.5%

1. 96-gallons of recycl ing service included in base garbage rates, additional service available for an extra charge.

All charges based on once weekly pickup.

2. Al l other charges including, but not limited to, push/pull, driver-time, lock installation, extra pickups, and Saturday service.

Attachment 3
Santa Clara County Residential Cart Rate Comparison
CITY
Supersaver
(or 20-24-gal
cart)
Small
(or 32-35-gal
cart)
Medium
(or 65-gal cart)
Large
(or 95-gal cart)
Anticipates Rate
Increases in FY
26/27
CAMPBELL (2025/2026) $42.55 $52.68 $95.61 $138.54 ✓
CUPERTINO (2026) $43.48 $46.24 $89.00 $131.75 ✓
GILROY (2025/2026) N/A $45.52 $65.11 $85.22 ✓
LOS ALTOS (2025/2026) $49.89 $53.75 $107.47 $161.23 ✓

LOS GATOS
(2025/2026)
$45.94 $57.22 $104.46 $151.71 ✓
MILPITAS (2026)
$43.79
(split-cart with
19-gal for
garbage, 19-
gal for food
scraps = 38-gal
total)
$47.60
(split-cart with
26-gal for
garbage, 19-gal
for food scraps
= 45-gal total)
$55.99
(split-cart with
45-gal for
garbage, 19-gal
for food scraps
= 64-gal total)
$64.31
(split-cart with
67-gal for
garbage, 29-gal
for food scraps
= 96-gal total)
✓

MORGAN HILL
(2025/2026)
N/A
1 $44.781 N/A1 N/A1 ✓

MOUNTAIN VIEW
(2025/2026)
$37.55 $50.05 $100.10 $150.15 ✓
PALO ALTO (2026) $27.81 $50.07 $100.15 $150.22
SAN JOSE (2025/2026) N/A $54.51 $109.02 $163.53 ✓

SANTA CLARA
(2025/2026)
$45.66 $53.68 $78.51 $103.22 ✓
SARATOGA (2025/2026) $46.98 $58.33 $106.41 $154.47 ✓

SUNNYVALE
(2025/2026)
$41.98
(27-gallon
split-cart)
$48.39
(43-gallon
split-cart)
$55.99
(64-gallon
split-cart)
N/A ✓
AVERAGE $42.56 $50.99 $88.98 $131.21
SANTA CLARA Single
Family Rate (2026/27) -
does not include CUC
charge
$47.34 $55.60 $81.22 $106.69

SANTA CLARA
Townhouse Rate
(2026/27) – does not
include CUC charge
$30.25 $38.51 $64.13 $89.60
1 Value shown is for Basic Single-Family Rate with Street Sweeping for Morgan Hill. Single-Family Rate for 48 gallon container with no street sweeping is $44.22. Hillside Residential 48 gallon container with street sweeping is $48.71 and Hillside Residential 48 gallon with no street sweeping is $48.02.

Attachment 4
Santa Clara County Commercial Bin Rate Comparison
1-1.5 CUBIC
YD BIN

SERVICE
1 Time/Week
1-1.5 CUBIC
YD BIN

SERVICE
3 Times/Week
1-1.5 CUBIC
YD BIN

SERVICE
5 Times/Week
3 CUBIC YD

BIN SERVICE
1 Time/Week
3 CUBIC YD

BIN SERVICE
3 Times/Week
3 CUBIC YD

BIN SERVICE
5 Times/Week
Separate
Charge for
Organics
Collection
Service
Anticipates
Rate Increases
in FY 26/27 CITY
CAMPBELL (2025/26) $157.99 $473.96 $789.94 $473.96 $1,421.89 $2,369.82 ✓ 2 ✓ CUPERTINO (2026) $217.181 $651.581 $1,086.001 $347.50 $1,042.50 $1,737.55 ✓ ✓ GILROY (2025/26) $208.76 $574.21 $939.67 $435.45 $1,204.94 $1,974.45 ✓ ✓ LOS ALTOS (2025/26) $210.84 $632.56 $1,054.27 $632.54 $1,897.68 $3,162.79 ✓ LOS GATOS (2025/26) $198.31 $594.92 $991.53 $594.92 $1,784.75 $2,974.58 ✓ 2 ✓ MILPITAS (2026) $157.96 $388.99 $585.36 $358.74 $1,015.52 $1,636.52 ✓ ✓ MORGAN HILL (2025/26) $234.63 $655.08 $1,075.54 $492.57 $1,383.56 $2,274.41 ✓ ✓ MOUNTAIN VIEW (2025/26) $144.80 $491.40 $837.80 $433.35 $1,357.90 $2,282.25 ✓ ✓ PALO ALTO (2026) $178.54 $549.36 $919.03 $437.20 $1,388.28 $2,341.65 ✓ SAN JOSE (2025/26) $252.06 $721.83 $1,195.12 $352.01 $1,006.83 $1,665.08 ✓ SANTA CLARA (2025/26) $183.73 $542.09 $891.44 $466.70 $1,363.41 $2,231.76 ✓ ✓ SARATOGA (2025/26) $230.91 $692.72 $1,154.54 $692.72 $2,078.17 $3,463.62 ✓ 2 ✓ SUNNYVALE (2025/26) $200.28 $600.85 $1,001.41 $508.75 $1,526.24 $2,543.74 ✓ ✓ AVERAGE $198.15 $582.27 $963.20 $478.95 $1,420.90 $2,358.32 SANTA CLARA (2026/27) $194.10 $572.79 $942.08 $491.83 $1,437.16 $2,352.85 1 Rates shown are for 1.5 cubic yard bins. This jurisdiction does not provide 1 cubic yard bins. 2 Rate includes one organics cart up to 96 gallons in size with weekly service for no charge.

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on the Revised El Camino Real Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment for the Creation of Five New General Plan Land Use Designations, Waive the First Reading and Introduce an Ordinance for the Creation of the El Camino Real Zoning Districts, and Certify and Adopt an Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The El Camino Real Specific Plan carries forward the City Council and the community’s vision for revitalization, housing, and economic development. A re-vitalized El Camino Real corridor will provide opportunities for establishing a strong City identity for visitors and residents alike.

The revised El Camino Real Specific Plan (“Plan”) establishes a comprehensive framework to guide the transformation of a key City corridor, El Camino Real, from an auto-oriented commercial strip into a mixed-use, pedestrian- and transit-oriented urban corridor. The Plan implements the City’s 2010- 2035 General Plan vision for this Focus Area by accommodating long-term growth while enhancing quality of life, economic vitality, and urban design.

The El Camino Real Specific Plan Area is just over 250 acres and extends the entire 3.2-mile length of the El Camino Real corridor between the western City limits and Lafayette Street. The revised Plan allows for the development of up to 4,390 residential units and concentrates higher-intensity mixeduse development at larger parcels. Key components of the Plan are:

1. Lower density transitions to adjacent single-family neighborhoods. This addresses community concerns regarding neighborhood compatibility, building scale, height and privacy.

2. Objective Design Standards (ODS) consistent with State Law, enabling streamlined housing approvals, and clear, enforceable design expectations while maintaining community character.

3. Retail development is strategically located in “Activity Centers” to allow for experiencebased uses and local-serving businesses. The retail is a projected reduction of approximately 10% of existing commercial space to reflect market demand.

4. Affordable housing provisions that exceed current City standards.

5. Multimodal “complete streets” to improve pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure along El Camino Real.

6. Requirements for publicly accessible open space within new development.

Adoption of the Plan will provide a clear, predictable regulatory framework to guide future development, balance growth with neighborhood compatibility, and support the long-term revitalization of El Camino Real. The adoption of the Plan advances a key City Council vision City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
consistent with General Plan policies and implements new objective development standards.

Staff has also conducted robust community outreach and proactively engaged the community in multiple ways to address concerns.

BACKGROUND
The City of Santa Clara 2010-2035 General Plan identifies specific geographic areas within the City as Focus Areas, including El Camino Real. The purpose of a Focus Area is to accommodate a significant amount of the City’s long-term growth. The General Plan vision for El Camino Real is to transform this Focus Area from a series of automobile-oriented strip malls to a tree lined, pedestrian and transit-oriented corridor with a mix of residential and retail uses with an emphasis on mixed use and higher intensity development. This type of redevelopment is an opportunity to support the City’s changing quality of life and economic vitality. Section 4.5 of General Plan, “Support Focus Areas and Community Vitality,” lists the following goals for the El Camino Real focus area:
“Redefining El Camino Real as a pedestrian-oriented corridor, including a diverse array of uses, with an emphasis on increasing the intensity of development at mixed use areas that have larger properties for redevelopment.” The revised Specific Plan implements the General Plan’s goals and policies for the El Camino Real Focus Area and establishes the land use and development regulations for the Plan Area. There are approximately 2,500 existing residential units along the corridor and 2.8 million square feet of commercial uses. Adoption of the Plan will allow up to 4,390 residential units along the corridor, establish fine-grained land use designations and detailed land use policy beyond those in the General Plan, and provide objective design standards to streamline and regulate new development projects.

The first proposal for the Specific Plan was initially prepared between 2017 and 2021, with multiple City Council check-ins and robust community outreach throughout the process. The first complete draft Specific Plan was presented to the City Council in June of 2021; however, neither the Plan nor the Environmental Impact Report were adopted. At that time, the main concern of the City Council and the community was the impact of additional density on surrounding established neighborhoods and it was requested that staff look at lowering density in the Plan. On September 13, 2022, City Council provided direction on developing a revised draft of the El Camino Real Specific Plan. Staff engaged a consultant, Raimi & Associates, to work on the draft revisions. All of the City Council actions on the Specific Plan are summarized in Attachment 1.

DISCUSSION
The Specific Plan sets forth land use, urban design, and transportation policies that balance the community’s wants and needs and support an overarching vision of a future El Camino Real Corridor.

The Plan envisions a corridor with:
· Land Use Framework designed as mixed-use and residential to respect the scale and character of adjacent residential neighborhoods;
· Retail that is anchored by vibrant shopping destinations and public open space; · Objective Design Standards to create an attractive and engaging pedestrian environment with City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
wider sidewalks and street trees;
· Affordable Housing options for a range of incomes and life stages; · A Complete Streets Policy that is multi-modal with protected or separated bicycle lanes for bicyclists and enhanced bus stops and boarding areas for transit riders; · Open Space to promote and support community gathering, enjoyment, and a broad range of active uses
· A Community Benefits Program to allow for additional amenities through a Development Agreement.

The desired outcomes, listed above, are outlined in Chapter 2, Vision and Framework, and set the stage for the overall planning framework, policies, design standards and guidelines, and implementation actions.

Land Use Framework
El Camino Real is currently characterized by predominantly one-story automobile-oriented strip commercial development and surface parking located at the street edge, resulting in approximately 70% of the existing land area being dedicated to parking. Many of the parcels are relatively shallow, and located adjacent to single-family neighborhoods, which limits the potential for higher-intensity development. In response to these constraints, the land use framework focuses more intensive development at key nodes or “Activity Centers” while promoting a less intensive mix of commercial and residential uses in the “in-between” areas.

In August 2023, the City Council directed staff to continue advancing the proposed land use plan, including the addition of a fourth land use designation, Corridor Residential - Low (12-25 du/ac). This designation was proposed for the 60 properties along the corridor that serve as sensitive interfaces due to their proximity to single-family residences. Since then, staff and the consultant team have worked on updating the Specific Plan with revised guidelines, standards, and policies to reflect Council direction and the new land use designation. The updates specifically address concerns related to taller buildings and their potential to cast shadows on single-family lots.

Adoption of Plan will amend the General Plan Land Use Designations along the entire corridor (See Attachment 2 Land Use Plan) to include the following new designations:
· Regional Commercial Mixed Use (55-100 dwelling units per acre; 0.20 minimum commercial Floor Area Ratio (FAR) required) - applied to the larger shopping centers or activity centers and would support the most intensive uses.
· Corridor Mixed Use (45-65 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required, except where the Ground Floor Commercial Overlay is applied) - a medium density designation applied to the larger sites in the in-between areas. · Corridor Residential (26-45 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required) - a lower density designation for sites with the most sensitive interfaces. · Corridor Residential - Low (12-25 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required) - a low density designation intended for townhome development. These areas provide a low-intensity residential character compatible with adjacent single-family residential neighborhoods.
· Ground Floor Commercial Overlay - is applied to sites in the in-between areas where commercial uses are likely to be most viable and support pedestrian activity.

City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
· Public/Quasi-Public - applied to City Hall and includes a variety of public and quasi-public uses such as government offices, schools, and childcare centers.

The estimated build out under the revised Specific Plan’s proposed land use designations, through the 2040 horizon year, anticipates a development of 4,390 housing units above existing conditions, and a decrease of approximately 289,110 (10%) square feet of commercial space, relative to the existing General Plan land use designations. These net growth projections are focused on sites with anticipated redevelopment potential and excludes sites such as recently constructed housing developments and the Santa Clara Town Center (Target shopping center). While the Specific Plan permits office uses, the expected commercial development under the plan would primarily be retail and service uses.

Retail Market Trends
The City’s General Plan currently supports approximately 2.8 million square feet of retail development, spread out along the corridor. Consistent with the findings and recommendations in the City’s retail market demand analysis (See weblink in Attachment 7), by KMA, the proposed plan would support a reduced amount of retail development, approximately 1.8 million square feet, concentrated at focal locations that would act as shopping destinations and minimize the designation of retail on sites where it would not be economically viable.

The Plan includes a significant amount of retail that is comparable to a large, regional shopping center. The retail market demand analysis conducted by Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) examined key factors that will affect future retail development opportunities in the Specific Plan Trade Area. The Trade Area for the Specific Plan extends two miles from the corridor but does not extend north of Highway 101 and does not include the automobile retailing that dominates the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, and does extend into a small portion of the adjacent Sunnyvale. The factors include:
· Retail market trends;
· Demographics of the Trade Area;
· Performance of existing retailers within the specific Plan area; · Attributes of the properties within the Specific Plan area to accommodate new retail development; and
· Strengths of competing retail centers that serve the Trade Area.

Internet sales have a significant negative impact on several retail segments, including department stores, apparel, and electronic stores. Experience-based or “experience” sectors such as restaurants, entertainment, fitness centers and other services-oriented retail have remained strong until the COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruptions. Grocery stores, however, have remained strong both before and during the pandemic. Looking ahead “experience” sectors are expected to recover gradually while grocery stores will continue to remain strong. However, internet sales will likely reduce the demand for many brick and mortar retailers.

Retail within the Specific Plan area is doing well with respect to maintaining high occupancy rates, but sales volumes are less than industry standards. There are no large sites (approximately 20 acres) remaining to accommodate the development of large anchor tenants and many of the remaining retail properties are too small and shallow to meet current market requirements.

City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
Santa Clara Town Center, the last large site on El Camino Real, was redeveloped in 2014 with a total shopping center square footage of 280,000 square feet including a 140,000 square foot Target department store, and a Sprout’s Farmers Market, but no on-site housing. No site of comparable size is currently available in the Specific Plan. Although the Trade Area is largely built out, its population is projected to grow by 11,244 residents by 2032, which will provide some additional support for new retail within the Specific Plan area. However, opportunities are constrained by competition from the Valley Fair Mall and Santana Row. Leakage analysis indicates that the primary market segments with growth opportunities are grocery stores and eating and drinking establishments.

Given the current market trends and site attributes, the retail market demand analysis concluded that the best approach to strengthening the retail base of the Specific Plan area is to:

1. Support intensification of retail development at major intersections, with an emphasis on grocery anchors.

2. Encourage the re-purposing of existing retail space for local-serving tenants, such as ethnic restaurants, fitness centers, and services-oriented retail.

3. Reduce the number of properties for which commercial use is a requirement; and develop a strategy to retain and enhance existing commercial businesses.

These recommendations for positioning new retail along the El Camino Real corridor remain unchanged in the post-pandemic context.

As a part of the Specific Plan revision process the City engaged a second economic consultant, Seifel Consulting, to review the Land Use Plan and its commercial square footage requirements.

Based on this review, the commercial square footage in the Corridor Mixed Use land use designation has been removed and is now proposed as optional, except for properties within the Ground Floor Commercial Overlay. These properties are generally located at major intersections and will be required to provide ground floor commercial for 50% of their property frontage on El Camino Real.

This requirement is supported by existing vehicular traffic and pedestrian activity, which is necessary for commercial uses to remain viable.

Objective Design Standards
Chapter 4, Development Standards and Guidelines, establishes objective design standards (ODS) and guidelines for new land development to achieve the future vision for El Camino Real. These standards and guidelines apply to all new development in the El Camino Real Specific Plan Area, as well as to public improvements and substantial renovations to existing structures. They build on basic design standards or regulations, such as setbacks, height limitations, parking requirements and signage regulations already contained in the Zoning Ordinance by providing more detailed and specific requirements within developments on El Camino Real Specific Plan area.

Recent changes to State Law necessitated a shift to establish objective design standards. The Housing Accountability Act and the Housing Crisis Act require expedited processing of qualifying residential projects and limit the City’s ability to deny or reduce the density of housing projects that meet locally adopted objective standards, such as those set in the Zoning Ordinance. Objective Standards involve no personal or subjective judgement by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant and public official prior to application submittal. As the City has increasingly needed to rely on objective standards for the review of projects where discretionary design review is limited, establishing objective standards is essential to ensuring that new development aligns with City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
community objectives.

A primary motivation for the preparation of the Specific Plan was to establish design standards to address and improve the interface between new development and adjacent single-family neighborhoods. Throughout the planning process, the community continued to voice this concern. In response to community feedback, the Specific Plan includes objective standards that ensure appropriate and sensitive transitions in height and scale between new development to existing neighborhoods with the goals of preserving neighborhood character and protecting light and privacy.

These transition standards limit building heights and require taller buildings to step down toward existing neighborhoods. Other design requirements or policies, such as deeper setbacks, and required landscaping, will also help to buffer existing homes from new development.

The Specific Plan provides objective standards to address the following:
· · Building Height (maximum, interface, transition)
· Landscape setback areas (including a build-to requirement) · Sidewalk width
· Private Open space (shared and individual) - amount, dimensions, visibility, amenities · Publicly accessible private open space - dimensions, accessibility, amenities, lighting · Ground floor commercial use at specific locations
· Block size
· Maximum limits on a building façade length without a break · Minimum amounts of building façade articulation - architectural elements and rhythm · Requirement for differentiation of vertical façade elements · Window design requirements
· Variation in building materials
· Building entries (location, frequency and architectural treatment) · Commercial space - minimum depths, façade transparency, interior heights, grease traps, · Awnings, etc.
· Live/workspace - minimum dimensions, façade treatment · Parking access
· Passenger pick-up locations
· Pedestrian circulation path dimensions, materials, etc. · Driveways and curb cuts
· Private street design standards (dimensions, street trees) · Utility locations
· Screening of storage and service areas
· Limitations on parking and garages along project frontages · Signage
· Fences
Commercial Space Design Requirements
The draft Specific Plan establishes a set of requirements that ensure new commercial spaces are well utilized. The Plan allows most retail and commercial spaces by right in order to streamline review. The design requirements address interior column spacing and façade transparency, as well City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
as provisions that support outdoor dining, including design standards for awnings, planters and railings. The Plan also directly supports creating a “warm retail shell” where the developer has a space ready for a restaurant. For example, future food service uses will be required to have access to necessary infrastructure such as grease traps and venting. While these measures may increase costs or require specific design approaches, they are critical to ensuring that future commercial spaces are well utilized and contribute to a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly environment.

Affordable Housing
An objective of the Specific Plan is to promote a range of housing options and affordability levels to realize the vision for a mixed-use, mixed-income community along the corridor. To achieve this, the Plan includes an inclusionary housing policy that exceeds the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance by requiring the provision of units at deeper levels of affordability within the Plan area. Specifically, the Plan requires that 15% of the new units be designated as affordable rental units with a mix of affordability levels for extremely low, very low, low, and moderate-income households. The mix must be structured such that the average household income across all affordable units does not exceed 80% of Area Median Income (AMI). This inclusionary requirement represents a deeper level of affordability than the citywide ordinance, which requires 15% of units be affordable at an average of 100% of AMI.

Complete Streets for El Camino Real Right-of-Way
The vision for the El Camino Real right-of-way is to transform the auto-oriented arterial into a multimodal “complete street” designed to accommodate all travel modes. Complete streets provide safe mobility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, and motorists regardless of age or ability. The Plan Area’s proximity to the Santa Clara Caltrain station and future BART station presents a unique opportunity to further promote transit trips by improving the multimodal functionality of the corridor.

The Plan establishes concepts for both interim and final right-of-way configurations for El Camino Real that strengthen bicycle and transit infrastructure beyond what exists today. In both right-of-way configurations, the curb-to-curb dimension remains the same, as will the center median. Both configurations take advantage of the removal of on-street parking, and the Caltrans restriping completed last year, which narrowed the travel lanes. On average, only 31% of on-street parking spaces are utilized along the corridor, providing an opportunity to remove this space to accommodate a separated bike lane. Consistent with proposed right-of -way concepts in the Specific Plan and the Santa Clara Bicycle Plan Update (2018), the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-9047 on January 25, 2022, modifying parking regulations and establishing a "No Stopping Anytime" zone on El Camino Real between Halford Avenue and Alviso street. This action enables the design and construction of a Class IV separated bikeway as a future capital project.

Publicly Accessible Open Space
Many valuable open space amenities can be found just outside the El Camino Real corridor; however, the corridor itself currently lacks dedicated public open spaces. The Specific Plan seeks to create new public and publicly accessible, privately-owned open spaces that promote and support community gathering, enjoyment, and a broad range of active uses.

Adding public open spaces within the corridor presents challenges. The City’s primary mechanism for securing open space is through development requirements, specifically requiring a new development City of Santa Clara Page 7 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
project to dedicate a portion of the site as open space, and the corridor is composed primarily of smaller parcels. While all new residential development will be required to contribute toward parkland per the City’s Park and Recreational Land Ordinance, the Specific Plan adds a unique requirement for certain commercial properties. New commercial development within the Regional Commercial Mixed-Use land-use designation (Activity Centers) will be required to provide 10% of the site area as new publicly accessible privately-owned open space.

The specific size, location, and configuration of these urban park or plaza sites will be finalized as future development projects moves forward. As redevelopment occurs under the Specific Plan, the corridor will gain new open spaces that may either be traditional public parks or smaller, publicly accessible privately owned open spaces.

Community Benefits
The Specific Plan includes a Community Benefits policy that allows developers to obtain additional development rights in exchange for voluntarily providing additional benefits to the community, beyond those already required by City ordinances or the Specific Plan. Potential community benefits that could be provided include greater amounts of affordable housing, bicycle and pedestrian amenities or public art. As drafted, these benefits would be implemented through a Development Agreement giving the City the discretion to determine the appropriate level of community benefits required and the corresponding amount of bonus granted in return.

Community Outreach
The El Camino Real Specific Plan Community Advisory Committee (ECRCAC) was reconvened in December 2024 to review and provide feedback on the revised Draft Specific Plan document.

Between February and April 2025, additional community outreach activities were undertaken to collect more feedback. Staff also conducted a study session with City Council on June 24, 2025. A summary of community outreach is provided below.

The final revised version of the Plan was published in April 2026 and is available on the El Camino Real Specific Plan website, also accessible via the weblink included in Attachment 7.

Staff have conducted a robust and continued community outreach to receive feedback on the revisions.
· On December 16, 2024, the ECR CAC met and provided input on the added land use designation to allow for townhome development on specific sites. · On February 24, 2025, an open house was held at the Mission Branch Library, attended by approximately 40 community members. Attendees acknowledged the revisions and asked questions of staff, and the consultant related to parking and public right of way improvements on El Camino Real. No significant comments on the revisions were provided. · On April 2, 2025, a second community meeting was held at the Senior Center with approximately 15 attendees. No significant comments on the revisions were provided. · On March 25, 2025, staff presented a summary of the Specific Plan to the Silicon Valley Central Chamber of Commerce.
· October 2025: Pop up event at the Art & Wine Festival · Additional outreach included social media posts on the City’s Instagram and Facebook pages, as well as information about the revisions to the Plan in the City Manager’s weekly email. · May 2026: Informational display at Central Library
City of Santa Clara Page 8 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
June 24, 2025 City Council Meeting Feedback
On June 24, 2025, the City Council held a study session to review the revised Specific Plan. Key topics discussed by the Council included the need for sufficient parking for retail uses, applicability of the State Density Bonus law, retail preservation in key locations along the corridor, regulation of window placement in taller buildings overlooking single-family residences, and the appropriate approach for measuring the daylight plane specifically whether it should be measured from the lower grade of adjacent single-family homes rather than from parcels along El Camino Real.

The following summarizes the key City Council questions received, organized by topic area and staff responses (in italics):

1. Specific Site Land Use Designation: parcels at the northeast corner of San Tomas are designated as lower-density townhomes - it was suggested that a higher density land use be applied given their adjacency to the creek trail and intersection location.

These sites are located adjacent to single-family rear yards and are small in size - approx. 12 to 15,000 square feet size, which makes it challenging to develop as higher density. Therefore, no changes were made to the land use designations.

2. Measurement of Daylight Plane: Consider measuring the 30-degree daylight plane from the lower grade of adjacent single-family homes rather than from El Camino Real parcels.

The daylight plane regulates the shadow and bulk of a building. The 6-foot privacy fence creates its own shadow; therefore, the measurement starts from the top of the fence. Grade difference along the corridor is limited and varies 1 to 2 feet and would not be a perceivable difference.

3. Stacking of Bonus Programs: Can a developer stack the State Density Bonus Law with local incentives (e.g., LEED, transit, and affordability bonuses in the General Plan)? Yes, a developer is allowed to use State Density Bonus Law with local incentives where feasible, based on the specific provisions of each program.

4. Vacant Retail, Retail Preservation, and Current Market Conditions: There were concerns about preserving existing retail, having vacant retail, and current market conditions when implementing the Plan.

Per the growth projections developed for the plan, the current commercial/retail space is 2 million square feet and with the implementation of the Specific Plan the loss is 289,000 or 10% loss. It should be noted that the loss of commercial space could be higher than anticipated, given that projects under current market conditions are unable to build the required commercial space.

In development of the Specific Plan, the project team, including the City’s retail consultant KMA, performed a retail market demand analysis of retail market conditions across the City and along the El Camino Real corridor. This effort aimed to ensure that the Plan’s land use City of Santa Clara Page 9 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
requirements, policies, and design standards aligned with best practices for attracting and maintaining a vibrant retail environment.

Supported by the retail market demand analysis findings, the revised Plan requires commercial uses in two instances:
1) Regional Commercial Mixed Use land use designation with a 0.2 FAR requirement; and
2) On properties with the Ground Floor Commercial Overlay, where ground floor commercial is required for 50 % of the project frontage.

As a part of the revision process, the City’s second economic consultant, Seifel Consulting, reviewed the Plan, original market analysis, and present-day conditions, and affirmed that the components of the revised Draft Specific Plan, including proposed land uses and design standards, would encourage successful commercial/retail.

Considerations
The City Council’s primary considerations in evaluating the proposed Specific Plan are consistency with the General Plan; and the strength of the Plan’s policies and standards to implement the Plan vision. The City Council can identify areas where policies and standards may be enhanced or modified to align with City objectives and priorities and can be included in the City Council action to be incorporated into the final, adopted version of the Specific Plan.

General Plan Consistency
The General Plan envisions transforming the El Camino Real Focus Area from a series of automobile oriented strip malls to a tree lined, pedestrian and transit-oriented corridor with a mix of residential and retail uses. Key General Plan goals for the El Camino Real Focus Area include:
· 5.4.1 G1 - An economically viable mix of uses along El Camino Real that attracts upscale retail uses.
· 5.4.1 G2 - High quality design that respects the scale and character of adjacent residential neighborhoods and historic resources and creates a walkable environment. · 5.4.1 G3 - Concentration of higher intensity commercial and residential development at key intersections with Regional Mixed-Use designations.
· 5.4.1 G4 - Pedestrian, bicycle and transit priority for mobility in the El Camino Real Focus Area.

The proposed Specific Plan achieves these goals by introducing additional land use designations that provide clearer differentiation of land uses and a stronger correlation to anticipated development types. The Plan establishes detailed land use policies that require commercial uses in key locations where they are most viable and can support destination shopping and placemaking. It further includes design standards to guide new development and improve the interface between new and existing land uses. Finally, the Plan provides a concept for the improvement of El Camino Real rightof-way to better serve pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders.

General Plan Amendment
For consistency between the General Plan and the Specific Plan, the City is proposing a General Plan text amendment creating the Regional Corridor Mixed Use (55-100 DU/AC; 0.2 Commercial FAR); Corridor Mixed Use (45-65 DU/AC); Corridor Residential (26-45 DU/AC); Corridor Residential - City of Santa Clara Page 10 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
Low (12-25 DU/AC); and Ground Floor Commercial Overlay land use designations. This amendment also includes updates to the General Plan Land Use diagrams for Phases II and III to reflect the land use designations in the El Camino Real Specific Plan and to remove the El Camino Real Focus Area.

Creation of the ECR Zoning Districts
As a part of the Specific Plan planning process, the City is proposing to create four new zoning districts that align with the five land use designations of the Specific Plan:
· Regional Commercial Mixed Use,
· Corridor Mixed Use,
· Corridor Residential,
· Corridor Residential-Low, and
· Ground Floor Commercial Overlay.

These zoning districts allow residential and commercial uses and include provisions allowing existing uses to remain until properties are redeveloped. Each zoning district includes development standards for maximum height, density, setbacks, and requirements for both common and private open space.

Rezoning properties in the Plan area to these new zoning districts, consistent with the Specific Plan land use plan framework, is proposed as a part of this project. The application of these new zoning districts will facilitate a more streamlined review process, by enabling qualifying residential projects to be approved through the City’s architectural review process.

ALUC Review
The El Camino Real Specific Plan was referred to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for review as the Plan includes properties within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) of the San Jose International Airport. At the March 24, 2020 ALUC meeting, the ALUC determined that the Specific Plan is consistent with the policies of San Jose Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP), noting that the Plan Area is located outside both the airport safety zone and the airport area noise contours. As part of its review, the ALUC recommended adding a policy to the Specific Plan requiring any new development on properties within the AIA dedicate an avigation easement to the San Jose International Airport.

The revised draft Specific Plan was subsequently submitted to the ALUC for their review. However, since their initial review, the AIA boundaries have changed, and the Specific Plan Area is no longer within the referral area. As a result, ALUC staff stated that review of the revised Specific Plan was not needed.

Planning Commission Recommendation
On April 8, 2026, the proposed Specific Plan, accompanying Zoning Districts, and associated actions were presented to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. The Commission commented that the Plan followed an intentional process for planning for future development, asked clarifying questions and discussed the following:
· Parking requirements and providing adequate parking for commercial uses, and new residents;
· Providing art with new development;
· Walkability along the Specific Plan Area;
· Possibility of a local trolley or shuttle service given the length of the corridor; · Ability to protect small businesses;
City of Santa Clara Page 11 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
· Ensuring viable commercial areas;
· Increase density along the South side of El Camino Real due to limited availability of land and the projected population growth.

There were two public speakers who spoke on the item. One speaker was concerned about their proximity to El Camino Real (0.1 miles away) and noted that they had not received notice of the Plan.

This speaker also emphasized the importance of providing adequate parking for vehicles associated with new development, as well as maintaining the existing number of vehicle travel lanes on El Camino Real.

Following public comment and Commission discussion, the Commission voted 6-1 (with Commissioner Bouza dissenting) to recommend that the City Council certify the EIR, adopt the Specific Plan and General Plan amendments and create the accompanying El Camino Real Zoning districts.

Conclusion
The draft El Camino Real Specific Plan, accompanying zoning districts and project EIR have been prepared through an extensive community-based planning process that has provided substantial time for discussion and refinement of the Plan’s various components. The Specific Plan will provide a land use policy framework to support the development of a mixed-use, multi-modal corridor anchored by vibrant shopping destinations and public open space consistent with the City’s vision and the goals and policies set forth in the General Plan.

Proposed City Council Actions
The project is presented to the City Council for consideration and action. The following specific actions are required:

1. Adoption of a resolution certifying the EIR, MMRP and related CEQA documents.

2. Adoption of a resolution approving the El Camino Real Specific Plan, a specific plan consistent with CA Government Code Sections 65450-65457.

3. Adoption of a resolution approving a General Plan text amendment creating the Regional Corridor Mixed Use (55-100 DU/AC; 0.2 Commercial FAR); Corridor Mixed Use (45-65 DU/AC); Corridor Residential (26-45 DU/AC); Corridor Residential - Low (12-25 DU/AC); and Ground Floor Commercial Overlay land use designations, and amending the General Plan Land Use diagrams for Phases II and III to reflect the land use designations in the El Camino Real Specific Plan and remove the El Camino Real Focus Area.

4. Introduction of an Ordinance amending the zoning code to create the El Camino Real Zoning districts.

The decisions on the Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, and Zoning Ordinance are legislative actions. The decision on the EIR is considered an “administrative” action, which is neither quasijudicial nor legislative, but nevertheless requires specific findings, including that the EIR complies with CEQA and reflects the independent judgment of the Council.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the El Camino Real Specific Plan and related approvals (the “project”) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

City of Santa Clara Page 12 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
The EIR analyzes program-level impacts of the El Camino Real Specific Plan. The EIR and Notice of Availability (NOA) were circulated for a 45-day period from December 12, 2025 to January 26, 2026 in accordance with CEQA requirements. The EIR provides a comprehensive analysis of the potential environmental impacts for the project.

The EIR found that any potentially significant impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level.

The mitigation measures are included in their entirety as a part of the proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). A detailed discussion of the potential impacts and mitigation measures to be applied to the project is specified in the EIR and would be implemented through the MMRP for the proposed project.

During the Draft EIR comment period a total of eleven comments were received. None of the comment letters identified a new significant impact, or have provided substantial evidence that the CEQA analysis is otherwise inadequate. Responses to the Draft EIR comments, as well as minor text changes and clarifications, in the form of a Final EIR, were made available to the public through the City’s website on March 30, 2026, and have been forwarded on to the commenters on the Draft EIR.

The environmental impacts of redeveloping an existing commercial corridor and state highway were analyzed at a program level. It is intended for the Final EIR to be used by developers as a starting point for the environmental clearance of their individual development proposals, which will further facilitate redevelopment of the area.

FISCAL IMPACT
As part of the adoption of the FY 2022/23 and FY 2023/24 CIP Budget in June 2022, $1.0 million was appropriated for the El Camino Real Specific Plan project. The City Council approved the carryover of the project’s remaining balance ($0.7 million) as part of the adoption of the FY 2025/26 and FY 2026/27 Biennial Operating Budget on June 10, 2025.

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

On March 16, 2026, the notice of public hearing for this item was mailed to 5,782 property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the project site. Newspaper notice of this item was published in The Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation, on March 18, 2026. At the time of this staff report, one comment was received by the Planning Division in opposition to the proposed Specific Plan (Attachment 8).

RECOMMENDATION

1. Adopt a resolution certifying the EIR, MMRP and related CEQA documents; City of Santa Clara Page 13 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-425 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026

2. Adopt a resolution approving the El Camino Real Specific Plan, a specific plan consistent with CA Government Code Sections 65450-65457;

3. Adopt a resolution approving a General Plan text amendment creating the Regional Corridor Mixed Use (55-100 DU/AC; 0.2 Commercial FAR); Corridor Mixed Use (45-65 DU/AC); Corridor Residential (26-45 DU/AC); Corridor Residential - Low (12-25 DU/AC); and Ground Floor Commercial Overlay land use designations, and amending the General Plan Land Use diagrams for Phases II and III to reflect the land use designations in the El Camino Real Specific Plan and remove the El Camino Real Focus Area; and

4. Waive first reading and introduce an Ordinance amending the zoning code to create the El Camino Real Zoning districts.

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

ATTACHMENTS

1. El Camino Real Previous City Council Actions

2. El Camino Real Land Use Plan

3. El Camino Real EIR City Council Resolution

4. CEQA Facts and Findings

5. El Camino Real Specific Plan CC Resolution

6. El Camino Real General Plan Amendment CC Resolution

7. El Camino Real Zoning Districts Ordinance

8. El Camino Real Specific Plan Web Links

9. El Camino Real Public Comment
City of Santa Clara Page 14 of 14 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
Attachment 1
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
El Camino Real Specific Plan City Council Actions
2021 City Council Action Summary
At the June 15, 2021 City Council meeting, the City Council reviewed the 2021 draft of the El Camino Real Specific Plan and directed staff to significantly modify the three proposed Specific Plan General Plan Land Use Designations. The City Council requested that the maximum heights for the three designations be two, three, and four stories, respectively, with corresponding reductions in allowable densities. These proposed changes were in response to concerns from community members and some City Council members about potential impacts of proposed heights and densities on adjacent single-family neighborhoods on the north side of El Camino.

On July 6, 2021, staff returned to the City Council to receive direction on the next steps for the El Camino Real Specific Plan. Staff explained that the reduced height limits would likely correspond to significant reductions in land density than those previously studied in the project Environmental Impact Report (EIR), requiring additional California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis and associated funding. Based on this information, the City Council directed staff to proceed with the significant modifications consistent with the reduced densities and height identified at the June 15, 2021 hearing, and to update and recirculate the project EIR accordingly.

On September 28, 2021, staff provided the City Council with more specific information on the process and costs to revise the Specific Plan per City Council’s direction. The City Council then directed staff to proceed with the preparation of a revised, reduced density Specific Plan while also continuing to consider the original draft Specific Plan.

Staff was also directed to prepare economic feasibility analyses for both alternatives.

However, the City Council did not approve an accompanying amendment to the City’s budget at that time to fund the work.
2022 City Council Action Summary
In June 2022, as part of the adoption of the FY 2022/23 and FY 2023/24 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget, the City Council approved $1.0 million in funding to proceed with preparation of the reduced density El Camino Real Specific Plan. The City Council also directed staff to return with alternative scopes of work, including options to reduce overall costs.

In September 2022, the City Council directed staff to prepare a significantly modified Specific Plan that retains enough density (4,400 residential units) and key elements of the prior plan (e.g., a range of densities that support mixed-use) to be consistent with the prior draft EIR. The Council also directed that the revised plan include the activity zones with building heights of up to six stories as proposed in the 2021 draft Specific Plan, and that an economic feasibility analysis be prepared for both Plans.

Attachment 1
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
2023 City Council Action Summary
In March 2023, the City Council approved an agreement with Raimi & Associates, Inc. to provide services to revise the El Camino Real Specific Plan, consistent with prior Council direction.

In August 2023, the City Council directed staff to continue advancing the proposed land use plan as presented, including the addition of a fourth land use designation, Corridor Residential - Low (12-25 du/ac). This designation was proposed for the 60 properties along the corridor that serve as sensitive interfaces due to their proximity to singlefamily residences. (O&DPLQR5HDO6SHFL¿F3ODQ| 37
CHAPTER 3: Land Use
Figure 3–1. /DQG8VH3ODQ
Attachment 2El Camino Real Specific PlanCity Council Review May 19, 2026 I
Legend
.J
City Boundary
Plan Boundary Parcels
Machado
Park
Landmarks
Parks
Creeks
>,
"' "' !'! (I) a.
!'! X >, C, w oi "' ;;z "' .9
"' C (/J
(f) "'
Benton St
Land Use Designation
- Regional Commercial Mixed Use
- Corridor Mixed Use - Corridor Residential
Corridor Residential - Low
- Public/Quasi-Public
TI
2 (D
"'
Q._ "'
_g "'
Steve
CarfiParl<
Commercial Overlay
Ground Floor
Commercial
Required
0 0.125 0.25
ReedDogParl<
CMy
Plaza
Park
Bme,
Johnson
Ba(JFie/d
v\-ar Washington
Memorial Park
Playground

0.5 Miles n
'k 5 minute walk
Attachment 3
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Resolution/El Camino Real EIR Reso Page 1 of 2
Rev: 7/27/2023
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

CERTIFYING A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT,

ADOPTING CEQA FINDINGS WITH RESPECT THERETO, AND

ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING

PROGRAM FOR THE EL CAMINO REAL SPECIFIC PLAN
SCH # 20 2025010508
El Camino Real Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report WHEREAS, the City intends to adopt the El Camino Real Specific Plan, a Specific Plan for a transitoriented, pedestrian-friendly corridor of up to 4,390 residential units with supportive commercial uses, located on approximately 240 acres along the 3.2 mile El Camino Real corridor between the western City limits and Lafayette Street in the east, which is currently largely developed with auto oriented uses;
WHEREAS, the El Camino Real Specific Plan is intended to be a tree‐lined, pedestrian‐ and transit‐oriented corridor with a mix of residential and retail uses; WHEREAS, the El Camino Real area will include a variety of forms of urban housing, including podium buildings, mid-rise residential mixed-use buildings, and medium density townhomes; WHEREAS, a Specific Plan is a tool for providing regulatory direction for specific parts of a city, and can include policy guidance, regulatory requirements, and design guidelines; WHEREAS, the proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the El Camino Real Focus Area in the General Plan;
WHEREAS, as a part of implementing the Specific Plan, the City intends to adopt a General Plan Amendment (“GPA”) to align the General Plan land use diagram by changing the existing land use designations of the Project Site from Community Mixed Use and Regional Mixed Use to Regional Commercial Mixed Use (55-100 dwelling units per acre; 0.20 FAR of commercial required), Corridor Mixed Use (45-65 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required), Corridor Residential (26-45 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not Attachment 3
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Resolution/El Camino Real EIR Reso Page 2 of 2
Rev: 7/27/2023
required), Corridor Residential-Low (12-25 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required), and Ground Floor Commercial Overlay which requires commercial uses at specific sites;
WHEREAS, the City is also proposing to adopt an ordinance to amend Title 18, the Zoning Code, to create the new El Camino Real Corridor zoning districts; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 8, 2026 for the Project, and after opening and closing the public hearing for public comments, recommended the City Council approve the Project, the EIR and the MMRP by a vote of 6-1; and WHEREAS, the Project approvals will include this Resolution No. ___________ (the “CEQA Resolution”); Resolution No. _______________ (the “General Plan Amendment Resolution”); Resolution No. _______________ (the “Specific Plan Resolution”); and Resolution No. _______________ (the “Zoning Resolution”) (collectively, the “Approvals”); WHEREAS, on January 17, 2025 the City of Santa Clara (“City”) distributed a Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”) for the El Camino Real Specific Plan that included a total of 4,390 dwelling units and a reduction of 395,000 square feet of commercial uses and on January 17, 2025 posted the Notice at the Santa Clara County Clerk’s office, soliciting guidance on the scope and content of the environmental information to be included in the DEIR; WHEREAS, the DEIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA and the City circulated copies of the DEIR and Notice of Availability to the public agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, as well as to other interested persons, organizations and agencies, and the City sought the comments of such persons, organizations and agencies on December 12, 2025 for a 45-day review period, ending on January 26, 2026 (“Comment Period”); WHEREAS, the City prepared written responses to the comments received during the Comment Period and included those responses in a Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”). The FEIR Attachment 3
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Resolution/El Camino Real EIR Reso Page 3 of 2
Rev: 7/27/2023
consists of a list of agencies and organizations to whom the DEIR was sent, a list of the comment letters received on the DEIR, revisions to the text of the DEIR, responses to comments received on the DEIR, and copies of comment letters. The FEIR was distributed for public review on March 30, 2026;
WHEREAS, the DEIR and FEIR constitute the EIR for the Project; WHEREAS, the EIR identified certain significant and potentially significant adverse effects on the environment that would be caused by the Project as proposed; WHEREAS, the EIR outlined various mitigation measures that would substantially lessen or avoid the Project’s significant effects on the environment, as well as alternatives to the Project as proposed that would provide some environmental advantages; WHEREAS, the City is required, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.), to adopt all feasible mitigation measures or feasible project alternatives that can substantially lessen or avoid any significant environmental effects of the Project;
WHEREAS, the EIR analyzed three No Project alternatives for the El Camino Real area, including an alternative that contemplates the existing conditions remaining substantially the same (the “No Project” Alternative); a “No Project/Commercial, Residential, and Office Redevelopment Alternative,” that assumes that the Plan area would be redeveloped with the maximum allowable development under the current zoning districts; and a Reduced Development Alternative that would have a reduced number of residential units and a reduced amount of retail/commercial and office square footage within the boundaries of the Specific Plan area; WHEREAS, Public Resources Code § 21081, subdivision (a) requires a lead agency, before approving a project for which an EIR has been prepared and certified, to adopt findings specifying whether mitigation measures and, in some instances, alternatives discussed in the EIR, have been Attachment 3
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Resolution/El Camino Real EIR Reso Page 4 of 2
Rev: 7/27/2023
adopted or rejected as infeasible;
WHEREAS, the “CEQA Findings” attached to this Resolution is a set of Findings of Fact prepared in order to satisfy the requirements of Public Resources Code § 21081, subdivision (a); WHEREAS, as the CEQA Findings explain, the City Council intends to adopt the Specific Plan, associated General Plan Amendments, and Zoning Ordinance Amendment (the “Project”); WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that none of the alternatives addressed in the EIR, would be both feasible and environmentally superior to the Project as proposed. All of the No Project alternatives and the Reduced Development alternative would not sufficiently satisfy the Project Objectives. The details supporting these determinations are set forth in the CEQA Findings; WHEREAS, in taking this course, the City Council has acted consistent with the CEQA mandate to look to project mitigations and/or alternatives as a means of substantially lessening or avoiding the environmental effects of projects as proposed;
WHEREAS, all of the significant and potentially significant environmental effects associated with the Project can either be substantially lessened or avoided through the inclusion of mitigation measures proposed in the EIR;
WHEREAS, the City Council, in reviewing the Project, adopts all mitigation measures set forth in the EIR;
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on the proposed project was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation for the City, on March 18, 2026; WHEREAS, notices of the public hearing on the proposed project were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the Project Site, according to the most recent assessor’s roll, on March 18, 2026;
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the EIR and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached as the “MMRP”, as well as a set of CEQA Findings and, in accordance with the Attachment 3
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Resolution/El Camino Real EIR Reso Page 5 of 2
Rev: 7/27/2023
requirements of CEQA, along with the City Staff report pertaining to the EIR for the Project (SCH # 2025010508), and all evidence received at a duly noticed public hearing on May 19, 2026. All of these documents and evidence are incorporated herein by reference into this Resolution; and WHEREAS, on May 19, 2026, the City Council conducted 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 EIR.

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 finds that the EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA.

3. That the City Council hereby finds the EIR has been presented to the Council, which reviewed and considered the information and analysis contained therein.

4. That the City Council hereby finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15091, that all of the proposed mitigation measures described in the EIR are feasible, and therefore will become binding upon the City and affected landowners and their assigns or successors in interest when the Project is approved.

5. That the City Council hereby finds that none of the Project Alternatives set forth in the EIR can feasibly substantially lessen or avoid those significant adverse environmental effects not otherwise lessened or avoided by the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures.

6. That, in order to comply with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as set forth in the attached “MMRP”. The Program is designed to ensure that, during project implementation, the City, affected landowners, their assigns and successors in interest and any other responsible parties comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified. The MMRP identifies, for each mitigation measure, the action to be Attachment 3
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Resolution/El Camino Real EIR Reso Page 6 of 2
Rev: 7/27/2023
taken and the party responsible for implementation.

7. Based on the findings set forth in this Resolution, the evidence in the City Staff Report, and the attached CEQA Findings, the City Council approves and certifies the EIR, adopts the CEQA findings, and adopts the MMRP, all in accordance with CEQA for the Project.

8. 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 19TH DAY OF MAY, 2026, 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. CEQA findings

2. MMRP
Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
1 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS FOR THE El CAMINO REAL SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT
I. INTRODUCTION
The City of Santa Clara, as the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., has prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the El Camino Real Specific Plan (State Clearinghouse No. 2025010508). The Final EIR is a program EIR pursuant to Section 15168 of the State Guidelines for implementation of CEQA (CEQA Guidelines).1 The Final EIR consists of the December 2025 Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR), and April 2026 Final EIR. The EIR addresses the environmental effects associated with implementation of the project. The EIR is intended to serve as an informational document for public agency decision-makers and the general public regarding the objectives and components of the project. The EIR addresses the potential significant adverse environmental impacts associated with the project and identifies feasible mitigation measures and alternatives that may be adopted to reduce or eliminate those impacts.

In determining to approve the El Camino Real Specific Plan project, which is described in more detail in Section II, the City Council certifies that the EIR reflects the City's own independent judgment and analysis under Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(a)-(c) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15090(a)(3). The City Council further makes and adopts the following findings of fact and adopts and incorporates into the project the mitigation measures identified in the EIR, all based on substantial evidence in the whole record of this proceeding (“administrative record”). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15090(a), the EIR was presented to the City Council of the City of Santa Clara, and the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR prior to making the findings provided in Sections IV to IX, below. The conclusions presented in these findings are based upon the EIR and other evidence in the administrative record. The documents that constitute the administrative record on which the City Council's findings are based are located at the Planning Division office at City Hall, 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, California. This information is presented in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(e).

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Location
The El Camino Real Specific Plan area is comprised of approximately 238.3 acres of properties that are located immediately adjacent to the segment of the El Camino Real between Lafayette Street on the east and the City limits on the west.

1 The State CEQA Guidelines are found in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
2 Project Overview
The City of Santa Clara 2010-2035 General Plan, adopted November 2010, envisions transforming the El Camino Real corridor from a series of automobile-oriented strip malls to a tree-lined, pedestrian- and transit-oriented corridor with a mix of residential and retail uses. The proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan provides a vision and planning framework for future growth and development in the El Camino Real Corridor.

The City of Santa Clara, with support from the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), was provided grant funding to develop a specific plan for El Camino Real within Santa Clara.

Following a two plus-year community engagement process, the City completed the El Camino Real Specific Plan which was presented to the Santa Clara City Council for adoption on June 15, 2021.

The City Council did not take action on the El Camino Real Specific Plan and the EIR was not certified. The Santa Clara City Council directed City staff to modify the plan to reduce residential density and maximum building heights. Since then, the El Camino Real Specific Plan was revised per direction received from City Council.

The El Camino Real Specific Plan builds on two supporting plans: 1) the Grand Boulevard Initiative - a regional, multi-jurisdictional effort to transform El Camino Real into a multimodal corridor; and 2) the City’s 2015-2035 General Plan, which envisions El Camino Real as a tree-lined, pedestrian and transit-oriented corridor with a mix of residential and retail uses. The El Camino Real Specific Plan seeks to articulate and implement a long-range vision for the El Camino Real Specific Plan area by establishing a broad set of goals, principles, and strategies. The El Camino Real Specific Plan’s Vision Statement is assembled as a set of desired outcomes, which are summarized below.  Increase the amount of parks, green space, plazas, and other public space that encourages pedestrian activity, recreation, and access to nature.
 Integrate a variety of landscaping and street trees along the El Camino Real corridor.  Improve the pedestrian experience, public space, aesthetics, safety, and design quality throughout the El Camino Real Specific Plan area.
 Improve pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicle connections in the Plan area, with a focus on better connections between El Camino Real and adjacent neighborhoods.  Provide a range of multimodal transportation options and improvements.  Implement parking management solutions that most efficiently use parking resources.  Ensure compatibility with the residential neighborhoods that are adjacent to the planning area and encourage sensitive design transitions in bulk, height, and massing, provision of public amenities, and uses and services that benefit surrounding neighborhoods.  Increase the variety of retail amenities and amount of public space and gathering places to create destinations along the El Camino Real corridor.
 Support a diverse mix of uses within the Plan area including retail, housing, civic spaces, and community facilities.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
3  Support a variety of appropriately scaled and designed housing types, both market rate and affordable housing, along the corridor while protecting existing neighborhoods from privacy, shading, and traffic impacts.
 Beautify the El Camino Real corridor by improving the visual appearance and character of existing building facades, requiring high-quality design for new development and renovations, renovating streets, encouraging public art and unique street furnishings, and adding landscaping and open space.
 Create a sustainable urban environment that incorporates green building, energy efficiency, water conservation, and stormwater management best practices.  Support health and well-being through cross-cutting strategies such as active transportation, connections to open space, access to healthy foods, and improved air quality.

Full build out of the El Camino Real Specific Plan is anticipated to occur by 2055. The El Camino Real Specific Plan includes the development of 4,392 housing units, as well as a reduction of approximately 289,000 square feet of commercial space.

Project Objectives
The El Camino Real Specific Plan is intended to achieve the following project objectives and desired outcomes as it is implemented over time.
 Land Use: Establish a land use plan and policy framework that will guide future development and redevelopment activities within the area toward multi-modal supportive uses and improvements, including; an increase in housing density to help meet the City’s statemandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) numbers; new development that appropriately transitions to existing adjacent residential neighborhoods, and more intensive development and public improvements focused at key nodes, which will include a concentration of retail, services, housing, and new public gathering areas.  Transportation: Improve vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities along the El Camino Real corridor by establishing a mobility framework that balances El Camino Real’s many functions while improving mobility and safety for people of all ages, means, and abilities.

The Plan area’s circulation network consists of the roadways and sidewalks that serve vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit vehicles, as well as off-street shared-use paths and pedestrian-only connections.

The El Camino Real Specific Plan envisions and accommodates improvements to transit service, including increased frequencies and better connections to the Santa Clara Transit Station, which provides Caltrain, Amtrak, and Altamont Corridor Express transit service.  Public Realm: Provide standards and guidelines to achieve the future vision for El Camino Real. These standards and guidelines will apply to all new development in the El Camino Real Specific Plan area, as well as public improvements and extensive renovations to existing structures. Develop and implement urban design standards to improve the pedestrian Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
4 experience, public space, aesthetics, safety, and design quality throughout the Plan area to attract visitors, serve residents, and promote walking.  Parks: Increase the amount of parks, green space, plazas, and other public space that encourages pedestrian activity, recreation, and access to nature, including recreation opportunities along Calabazas and Saratoga Creeks. In addition to the existing parkland dedication requirements of City Code Chapter 17.35, require developers to create new plazas and open spaces along the corridor that provide a place where residents and visitors can gather comfortably, that have their own distinctive identity, are safe and visually attractive, and contribute to local character. This network of open spaces could include new public neighborhood and community parks as well as publicly-accessible privately-owned open space.
 Environmental: Create a sustainable urban environment that incorporates green building, energy efficiency, water conservation, and stormwater management best practices.

III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
In accordance with Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Santa Clara prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the El Camino Real Specific Plan Project. The NOP was circulated to local, state, and federal agencies on January 17, 2025. The standard 30-day comment period concluded on February 18, 2025. The NOP provided a general description of the project and identified probable environmental impacts that could result from implementation of the project. The City of Santa Clara also held a public scoping meeting on January 30, 2025, via Zoom to discuss the project and solicit public input.

The City of Santa Clara prepared the Draft EIR in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The Draft EIR was circulated to the public and local, state, and federal agencies for public review and comment for 45 days from December 12, 2025 through January 26, 2026. Notices of the availability and completion of the Draft EIR were sent directly to every agency, person, and organization that commented on the NOP, as well as the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. Written comments from public agencies, organizations, and individuals concerning the environmental review contained in the Draft EIR were sent to the City during the 45-day public review period on the Draft EIR.

Following the conclusion of the 45-day public review period, the City prepared a Final EIR in conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132. The Final EIR includes responses to comments received by the City on the Draft EIR and any necessary text revisions to the Draft EIR. These revisions do not require recirculation of the EIR because none of the revisions constitute “significant new information” pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 in as much as these changes would not result in a new environmental impact and would not cause a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact; and all mitigation measures will be adopted. Responses to public agency comments on the EIR were sent to the commenting agencies on March DATE, 2026. -
Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
5 On April 8, 2026, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR.

IV. FINDINGS
These findings summarize the environmental determinations of the EIR about project impacts before and after mitigation, and do not attempt to repeat the full analysis of each environmental impact contained in the EIR. Instead, these findings provide a summary description of and basis for each impact in the EIR, describe the applicable mitigation measures identified in the EIR, and state the City’s findings and rationale on the significance of each impact with the adopted mitigation measures. A full explanation of these environmental findings and conclusions can be found in the EIR, and these findings hereby incorporate by reference the discussion and analysis in the EIR supporting the EIR’s determinations regarding mitigation measures and the project’s impacts.

In adopting the mitigation measures outlined below, the City intends to adopt each of the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR. Accordingly, in the event a mitigation measure identified in the Final EIR has been inadvertently omitted from these findings, such mitigation measure is hereby referred to, adopted, and incorporated in the findings below by reference. In addition, in the event the language of a mitigation measure set forth below fails to accurately reflect the mitigation measure in the Final EIR due to a clerical error, the language of the mitigation measure as set forth in the Final EIR shall control unless the language of the mitigation measure has been specifically and expressly modified by these findings.

Sections V through VI, below, provide brief descriptions of the impacts the Final EIR identified as either significant and unavoidable or less than significant with adopted mitigation. These descriptions also reproduce the full text of the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR for each significant impact.

V. SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE DIRECT IMPACTS
A significant unavoidable impact is an impact that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level if the project is implemented as proposed. The proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan would not result in any significant unavoidable impacts.

VI. SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE FINAL EIR THAT ARE

REDUCED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL BY MITIGATION

MEASURES ADOPTED AND INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT
The City Council, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR, hereby finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), that the following potentially significant impacts will be reduced below a level of significance with implementation of the identified mitigation measures. These findings are based on Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
6 Section 3.0 of the Draft EIR, the discussion and analysis of which are hereby incorporated in full by this reference.

Air Quality
Impact AIR-1: Development proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would result in a significant operational period emissions impact.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1.1, set forth below, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce operational emissions associated with future development proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan by requiring projects that exceed the Bay Area Air District’s thresholds to implement Transportation Demand Management programs, incorporate green building measures, and requiring all future interior spaces to be repainted with architectural coatings that meet the “Low-Volatile Organic Compounds” or “Super-Compliant” requirements as part of the Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions and/or ground leases requirements. Therefore, the operational emissions impacts from individual projects proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation: MM AIR-1.1: Operational criteria pollutant analysis shall be conducted in accordance with the latest guidance provided by the Bay Area Air District for projects with the potential to exceed project emission thresholds. The Bay Area Air District California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Guidelines provide project screening level sizes to determine if projects warrant modeling to evaluate their emissions. Projects smaller than the screening sizes listed in Table 3-1 of the Bay Area Air District2 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines would be considered to have less than significant operational air pollutant emissions. Projects that are found to have emissions above significance thresholds would be required to implement additional mitigation measures, including, but not limited to, the measures described below:
 Proposed residential development within the El Camino Real Specific Plan area shall implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs to reduce residential vehicle miles traveled as required by the City’s Climate Action Plan. The TDM programs would be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or Director’s designee prior to issuance of building permits. An annual TDM monitoring report shall be submitted to the Community Development Director or Director’s designee to document each development is meeting the required TDM program reductions.  Proposed development within the Specific Plan area shall incorporate additional green building measures such as rooftop solar photovoltaic systems, rough-ins for electric

2 Formerly known as the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
7 vehicle charging, use of efficient lighting and irrigation, and recycle water, as feasible, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or Director’s designee.  Developed parcels shall require within their Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs) and/or ground leases requirements for all future interior spaces to be repainted only with architectural coatings that meet the “Low-VOC” or “Super-Compliant” requirements.

Impact AIR: As mitigated, the project would not result in a significant construction criteria pollutant emissions impact nor would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in nonattainment.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measures AIR-2.1 and AIR-2.2, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would control dust and reduce construction toxic air contaminants and criteria pollutant emissions. Therefore, future developments proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in nonattainment.

Mitigation: Same mitigation as Mitigation Measures AIR-2.1 and AIR-2.2.

Impact AIR-2: Development proposed under the El Camino Specific Plan (Specific Plan) would result in significant construction air pollutant emissions due to dust generation, and emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and criteria pollutants during construction.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2.1, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, requires that the project contractor implement Construction Best Management Practices to control dust. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2.2, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, requires individual projects proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan to prepare a project-level construction air quality assessment that quantifies construction criteria pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions to ensure health risks from construction do not exceed the Bay Area Air District’s construction criteria pollutant emission thresholds. Therefore, future developments proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would have a less than significant construction air pollutant emissions impact.

Mitigation: MM AIR-2.1: All future development projects under the Specific Plan shall implement the following Bay Area Air District-recommended Best Management Practices (BMPs):
 All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day;  All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered; Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
8  All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited;
 All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph);  All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used;
 All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph;
 All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.
 Unpaved roads providing access to sites located 100 feet or further from a paved road shall be treated with a six- to 12-inch layer of compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
 Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points;  All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation;  Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the City regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s General Air Pollution Complaints phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations;  The contractor shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g. compressors).

MM AIR-2.2: Prior to receiving demolition, grading, and building permits, all future development projects under the Specific Plan shall complete a project-level construction air quality assessment that quantifies construction criteria pollutants and TACs once construction details are available. The air quality assessments shall model construction impacts and, if necessary, include measures to reduce emissions. The screening tables included in the Bay Area Air District California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (CEQA) can be used to demonstrate less than significant criteria air pollutant emission impacts. Criteria pollutant emissions shall not exceed the Bay Area Air District construction criteria pollutant emissions thresholds. Health risks from construction TACs shall be reduced below 10 in one million excess cancer cases, a hazard index (HI) of 1.0, and a fine particulate matter where particles have a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5) concentration of 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3). The air quality assessment shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Community Development or the Director’s designee, once complete. If construction Bay Area Air District thresholds are exceeded, future projects shall include Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
9 measures to reduce emissions below the Bay Area Air District emissions thresholds.

Emission reduction measures shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures:
 Construction equipment selection for low emissions (e.g., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Tier 4 standards);
 Use of alternative fuels, engine retrofits, and added exhaust devices;  Low-volatile organic compounds (VOC) paints;
 Modify construction schedule; and
 Implementation of the Bay Area Air District Basic Best Management Practices and/or additional construction mitigation measures for control of fugitive dust.

Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: Construction activities associated with future development within the project area could result in the loss of fertile eggs, nesting raptors or other migratory birds, or nest abandonment.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1 and BIO-1.2, set forth below, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce impacts to nesting birds by avoiding construction of future projects during nesting bird season or completing pre-construction nesting bird surveys to minimize and/or avoid impacts to nesting birds.

Mitigation: MM BIO-1.1: Construction shall be scheduled to avoid the nesting season to the extent feasible. The nesting season for most birds, including most raptors in the San Francisco Bay area, extends from February 1st through August 31st.

MM BIO-1.2: If it is not possible to schedule demolition, construction, and tree removal between September 1st and January 31st, pre-construction surveys for nesting birds shall be completed by a qualified ornithologist to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project implementation. This survey shall be completed no more than 14 days prior to the initiation of grading, tree removal, or other demolition or construction activities during the early part of the breeding season (February 1st through April 30th) and no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of these activities during the late part of the breeding season (May 1st through August 31st).

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
10 During this survey, the ornithologist would inspect all trees and other possible nesting habitats immediately adjacent to the construction areas for nests. If an active nest is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by construction, the ornithologist, in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, would determine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established around the nest, typically 250 feet, to ensure that raptor or migratory bird nests would not be disturbed during project construction.

Impact BIO-2: Tree removal from redevelopment of individual parcels under the Specific Plan would result in a significant impact to mature trees.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2.1 and BIO-2.2, set forth below, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce impacts to trees by requiring project applicants to implement precautionary measures during site construction and to comply with the City Code and tree replacement requirements for any trees proposed for removal per General Plan Policy 5.3.1-P10. Therefore, future developments proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact on trees.

Mitigation: MM BIO-2.1: Projects proposing or required to retain trees on-site shall implement precautionary measures during site construction to limit adverse environmental effects on trees protected under General Plan Policies 5.10.1-P3 and 5.10.1-P4 that are to be retained. A tree protection plan shall be prepared by a qualified arborist that, at a minimum, requires installation of an open material (e.g., chain link) fence six feet in height around the drip line and maintenance of the existing grade level around a tree and out to its drip line.

Proof of tree protection measures shall be provided to the Director of Community Development or the Director’s designee prior to issuance of any demolition or grading permits.

MM BIO-2.2: Project applicants under the Specific Plan shall comply with the City Code and submit permit applications for removal of all trees covered by City’s tree ordinance. Any trees to be removed would require replacement on-site or off-site at a minimum 2:1 ratio per General Plan Policy 5.3.1-P10. To the extent feasible, the replacement trees shall be planted on-site and the project applicant shall comply with all other tree removal requirements imposed by the City. The minimum tree replacement size shall be a 24-inch box for all onsite plantings, with all street trees to be a minimum 36-inch box. Street tree selection shall be per City specifications; spacing, and species shall be approved by City Arborist. Tree removal permits shall be obtained prior to the issuance of any demolition or grading permits.

Impact BIO-C: As mitigated, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulatively significant biological resources impact.

Findings: All individual projects would be required to comply with the City Code, existing regulations, and Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1, BIO-1.2, BIO-2.1, and BIO-2.2 to protect migratory and nesting birds and minimize the loss of trees; therefore, individual projects Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
11 proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a biological resources impacts.

Mitigation: Same mitigation as Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1, BIO-1.2, BIO-2.1, and BIO2.2.

Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-1: Redevelopment of the Specific Plan area could result in impacts to unknown buried archaeological resources and human remains.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1.1 to CUL-1.4, set forth below, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would avoid and/or reduce impacts to unknown buried archaeological resources to a less than significant level by requiring a geoarchaeological buried sensitivity assessment and Archaeological Monitoring Plan (at specific locations) and mechanical presence/absence exploration to determine if archaeological resources are present. If resources are present, investigation, data recovery, and a data recovery plan would be required. Therefore, future developments proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact on unknown buried archaeological resources and human remains.

Mitigation: MM CUL-1.1: Prior to the issuance of any grading permit in the vicinity of Saratoga Creek well as the eastern end of the Project area (to the east of Pierce Street and South of El Camino Real), a geoarchaeological buried sensitivity assessment and a projectspecific Archaeological Monitoring Plan shall be developed, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or Director’s designee, and implemented to guide the project should any significant archaeological deposits be uncovered during construction. The Archaeological Monitoring Plan shall provide detailed guidance for how impact areas should be methodically excavated under the direct supervision of a qualified archaeologist. A qualified archaeologist and a representative from the local Native American community shall monitor all initial ground-disturbing activities associated with these two areas of potential sensitivity.

MM CUL-1.2: For all proposed development sites within the Specific Plan area, a qualified archaeologist shall monitor the demolition of the building foundations and any other below surface disturbances, such as but not limited to, grading, excavation, roadway improvements, potholing for utilities, utility removal, and addressing storm drain issues. After demolition activities and surface improvements are removed for projects involving excavation, and prior to other construction activities, mechanical presence/absence exploration will be completed to a depth ranging from 6.5 to 10 feet below the ground surface. Presence/absence efforts shall be conducted by a qualified local archaeologist. If any cultural resources are identified, all activity in the vicinity of such resources shall stop until a research design and treatment plan is prepared to address those types of resources encountered and such plan is approved by Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
12 the City. Any cultural resources identified shall be evaluated to determine if these resources would qualify for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). If no resources are found during presence/absence testing, the implementation of mitigation measures, MM CUL-1.3 and MM CUL-1.4, would ensure any resources discovered during construction are adequately protected.

MM CUL-1.3: In the event that buried, or previously unrecognized archaeological deposits or materials of any kind are inadvertently exposed during any construction activity, work within 50 feet of the find shall cease until a qualified archaeologist can assess the find and provide recommendations for further treatment, if warranted. Preservation in place is the preferred treatment of an archaeological resource. When preservation in place of an archaeological resource is not feasible, data recovery, in accord with a data recovery plan prepared and adopted by the City, is the appropriate mitigation. Construction and potential impacts to the area within a radius determined by the archaeologist shall not recommence until the assessment is complete.

Impact CUL-1.4: In the event that human remains are discovered during excavation and/or grading of the site, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped. The Santa Clara County Coroner shall be notified and shall make a determination as to whether the remains are of Native American origin or whether an investigation into the cause of death is required. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) immediately. Once NAHC identifies the most likely descendants, the descendants will make recommendations regarding proper burial, which will be implemented in accordance with Section 15064.5(e) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

Impact CUL: As mitigated, the project would not disturb any human remains.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1.1 to CUL-1.4, set forth above, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would avoid and/or reduce significant impacts to unknown buried human remains to a less than significant level by notifying the Santa Clara County Coroner and following the necessary procedures as outlined in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) if human remains are found. Therefore, future developments proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would not disturb any human remains.

Mitigation: Same mitigation as Mitigation Measures CUL-1.1 through CUL-1.4.

Impact CUL-C: As mitigated, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulatively significant cultural resources impact.

Findings: As discussed under Impact CUL-1 and as a Condition of Approval for all future developments proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan, project applicants shall Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
13 prepare appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Forms for any building or structure that is 50 years or older to determine whether the building or structure is eligible as a historical resource under the federal, state, or local criteria. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1.1 to CUL-1.4 would ensure that impacts to subsurface cultural resources and human remains (if encountered) would be reduced to a less than significant level. The cumulative projects are all subject to CEQA and are required to comply with the federal, state, and local regulations put in place to protect cultural resources. Therefore, future developments proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to cultural resources.

Mitigation: Same mitigation as Mitigation Measures CUL-1.1 through CUL-1.4.

Geology and Soils
Impact GEO-1: Development proposed under the Specific Plan has the potential to disturb paleontological resources during excavation, grading, and construction activities.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1.1, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce or avoid impacts to paleontological resources to a less than significant level by requiring a paleontologist to monitor construction on sites requiring excavation of 10 feet or more below the ground surface. Therefore, future developments proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact on paleontological resources.

Mitigation: MM GEO-1.1: Projects requiring excavation of 10 feet or more below the ground surface (bgs) would require monitoring by a qualified paleontologist. In the event paleontological resources are discovered, all work on the site shall stop immediately, the Community Development Director or Director’s designee shall be notified, and a qualified paleontologist shall assess the nature and importance of the find and recommend appropriate treatment. Treatment may include, but is not limited to, preparation and recovery of fossil materials so that they can be housed in an appropriate museum or university collection and may also include preparation of a report for publication describing the finds. The project applicant shall be responsible for implementing the recommendations of the qualified paleontologist. A report of all findings shall be submitted to the Community Development Director or Director’s designee prior to the issuance of building permits.

Impact GEO-C: As mitigated, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulatively significant paleontological resources impact.

Findings: Adherence to Mitigation Measure GEO-1.1, set forth above, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would ensure that impacts to unknown paleontological resources from construction of individual projects proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan are reduced to a less than significant level. Because all individual Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
14 projects would have a less than significant impact, there would be no significant cumulative impact.

Mitigation: Same mitigation as Mitigation Measure GEO-1.1.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact GHG-1: Operation of developments approved under the El Camino Specific Plan (Specific Plan) could include natural gas infrastructure resulting in a significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impact.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce impacts from GHG emissions by requiring project applicants to demonstrate conformance with the City’s most recent Climate Action Plan and utilizing zero nitrogen oxide water heaters and furnaces. Projects that include natural gas appliances are required to provide evidence to the Director of Community Development or the Director’s designee demonstrating that GHG emissions equivalent to those emitted by the project’s natural gas appliances were properly identified and offset.

Therefore, individual projects proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would have a less than significant GHG emissions impact.

Mitigation: MM GHG-1: Future projects approved under the Specific Plan shall be required to comply with the following measures:
 The project applicant shall demonstrate conformance with the City of Santa Clara’s most recent Climate Action Plan by completing the City’s Climate Action Plan Compliance Checklist at the time the project application is submitted to the City of Santa Clara.  All new development projects under the El Camino Real Specific Plan shall utilize zero nitrogen oxide (NOx) water heaters and furnaces consistent with the schedule in Bay Area Air District Rules 9-4 and 9-6.3
 Projects that include natural gas appliances shall provide evidence to the Director of Community Development or the Director’s designee demonstrating that GHG emissions equivalent to those emitted by the project’s natural gas appliances were properly identified and offset, and in compliance with then-current Climate Action Plan requirements, prior to the issuance of any building permit.

3 The rules establish zero NOx emission standards for natural gas-fired furnaces and water heaters. The proposed ultra-low and zero NOx standards would apply to appliance retailers, wholesalers and installers and would affect Bay Area consumers at the point in time when they install a new appliance or replace their existing furnaces and water heaters. Implementation begins in January 2027, where only zero-NOx water heaters can be sold or installed for most single-family residences. In January 2029, only zero-NOx furnaces can be sold or installed and in January 2031, only zero-NOx water heaters can be sold or installed for most commercial and multi-family uses.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
15 Impact GHG-C: As mitigated, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulatively significant GHG emissions impact.

Findings: No single land use project could generate sufficient GHG emissions on its own to noticeably change the global average temperature. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1.1, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce GHG impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, individual projects proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a GHG emissions impact.

Mitigation: Same mitigation as Mitigation Measure GHG-1.1.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-2: Existing hazardous materials contamination in soils and groundwater on sites within the Plan area has the potential to impact construction workers and adjacent land uses if disturbed during demolition and construction activities.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1.1 to HAZ-1.5, set forth below, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce impacts from existing hazardous materials contamination to a less than significant level by requiring a property-specific Phase I Environmental Site Assessment to be completed in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials Standard Designation E1527-13 (or most recent version) and to evaluate if measures are needed to protect the health and safety of construction workers on-site and occupants of adjacent land uses. If warranted, a correction action/risk management plan or Site Management Plan will be prepared and implemented with all applicable regulatory oversight. Therefore, any hazardous materials impacts from individual projects proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation: MM HAZ-1.1: Prior to the start of any demolition or construction activity, a property-specific Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) shall be completed in accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Designation E 1527-13 (or most recent version) to identify Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), evaluate the property history, and establish whether or not the property is likely to have been impacted by chemical releases. Soil, soil vapor, and/or groundwater quality studies (Phase II ESAs) shall subsequently be conducted, if warranted, based on the findings of the property-specific Phase I ESAs, to evaluate if measures are needed to protect the health and safety of construction workers on-site and occupants of adjacent land uses.

At parcels with an agricultural history, soil sampling and laboratory analyses shall be conducted to determine if agricultural chemicals are present prior to redevelopment or earthwork activities. Because pesticides were often stored within structures such as barns or Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
16 sheds, and pesticide mixing was often performed near agricultural wells on such parcels, the sampling shall include an evaluation of these areas (if they can be identified), along with the former agricultural field and orchard areas.

All site mitigation measures identified in the property-specific Phase I and II ESAs shall be completed under the oversight of an appropriate regulatory agency, such as the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health (SCCDEH), Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Any required cleanup/mitigation of the site during development activities shall meet all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and requirements. The project applicant shall provide the appropriate oversight agency’s written approval of the site mitigation measures to the Community Development Director or Director’s designee prior to the issuance of a demolition and/or grading permit.

MM HAZ-1.2: Prior to the start of earthwork activities (e.g., excavation, trenching, grading, etc.) on properties with known contaminants of concern (COC) exceeding the lower of the then-current DTSC, RWQCB, or U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulatory levels and/or appropriate residential/commercial screening levels, including sites having either open or closed leaking underground storage tank (LUST) or Cleanup Program Site (CPS) cases, an appropriate corrective action/risk management plan (e.g., remedial action plan [RAP], removal action workplan [RAW], or Site Management Plan [SMP], etc.) shall be prepared that reflects the results of the on-site investigations.4 The corrective action/risk management plan shall describe mitigation measures necessary to protect the health and safety of future site occupants and establish appropriate management practices for handling and monitoring of impacted soil, soil vapor, and groundwater that may be encountered during construction activities. The corrective action/risk management plan shall be prepared by an Environmental Professional and be submitted to an appropriate overseeing regulatory agency (e.g., SCCDEH, DTSC, or RWQCB) and the City of Santa Clara Fire Department (SCFD) for review.5 Regulatory agency approval shall be obtained prior to commencing earthwork activities. A Health and Safety Plan (HSP) shall also be prepared to establish health and safety protocols for personnel working at the site.

All mitigation measures shall be completed under regulatory agency oversight and meet all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and requirements. Following completion, a report documenting compliance with the provisions of the corrective action/risk management plan and describing the work completed shall be submitted and approved by the overseeing regulatory agency.

4 Naturally occurring background concentrations of some metals may exceed their respective screening levels.

Regulatory agencies generally do not require cleanup of contaminants in soil to below background levels. Sitespecific background levels may be substituted for the published screening levels if approved by the overseeing regulatory agency.
5 Environmental Professional refers to someone who meets the qualification requirements described in ASTM E 1527-13 and 40 CFR 312, Section 312.10.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
17 MM HAZ-1.3: As part of the facility closure process for occupants that use and/or store hazardous materials, the SCFD requires that a closure plan be submitted by the occupants that describes required closure activities, such as removal of remaining hazardous materials, cleaning of hazardous material handling equipment, decontamination of building surfaces, and waste disposal practices, among others. Facility closure shall be coordinated with the SCFD to ensure that required closure documents are completed prior to redevelopment of site parcels or changes in use.

MM HAZ-1.4: If a project requires importing soil for property grading, the source and quality of imported soil shall be documented according to the DTSC’s Clean Fill Advisory (October 2001).

MM HAZ-1.5: Groundwater monitoring wells associated with identified LUST and CPS cases shall be protected during construction. Upon written approval from the overseeing regulatory agency and the well owner, wells may be destroyed under permit from Valley Water prior to development activities. Relocation of the wells may be required.

Monitoring wells that are no longer in use, or any unidentified wells (such as former agricultural wells) encountered during construction activities, shall be properly destroyed in accordance with Valley Water Ordinance 90-1.

Prior to redevelopment of the site, well records from the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) shall be researched, and attempts shall be made to locate and properly destroy any identified abandoned on-site wells.

Any proposed well closure or destruction activities on a redevelopment site shall be completed, and any proposed well protection measures shall be approved by the Director of Public Works prior to the issuance of a grading permit. A well destruction report shall be submitted to the SCFD as proof of completion of any well closure.

Impact HAZ: As mitigated, the project would not result in a significant hazard due to hazardous materials contamination.

Findings: Within the El Camino Real Specific Plan area, one parcel is the subject of an open leaking underground storage tank case and seven parcels are the subject of open Cleanup Program Site cases. In addition, there are 28 closed leaking underground storage tank cases and seven closed Cleanup Program Site cases. These spill incidents have impacted soil, soil vapor, and/or groundwater. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1.1 and HAZ-1.2, set forth above, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce impacts from hazardous materials contamination to a less than significant level.

Mitigation: Same mitigation as Mitigation Measures HAZ-1.1 and HAZ-1.2.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
18 Noise and Vibration
Impact NOI-1: Land uses in the project vicinity would be exposed to a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels due to project construction activities.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measures NOI-1.1 and NOI-1.2, set forth below, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce construction noise levels at nearby land uses by requiring project applicants to submit and implement a construction noise logistics plan. Therefore, construction noise impacts from individual projects proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation: MM NOI-1.1: Develop and adhere to a construction noise control plan to be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a demolition and/or grading permit, including, but not limited to, the following available controls.  Ensure that construction activities (including the loading and unloading of materials and truck movements) within 300 feet of any residentially zoned property to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction is permitted on Sundays or holidays.  Ensure that excavating, grading and filling activities (including warming of equipment motors) within 300 feet of residentially zoned property are limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction is permitted on Sundays or holidays within 300 feet of occupied residentially zoned property.
 Contractors equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.  Contractors utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.
 Locate loading, staging areas, stationary noise-generating equipment, etc. as far as feasible from sensitive receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area. Construct temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noisegenerating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive land uses.  Control noise from construction workers’ radios to a point where they are not audible at existing residences bordering the project area.
 Comply with Air Resource Board idling prohibitions of unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.
 Construct solid plywood fences around construction sites adjacent to operational business, residences or noise-sensitive land uses.
 Route construction-related traffic along major roadways and as far as feasible from sensitive receptors.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
19  Businesses, residences or noise-sensitive land uses adjacent to construction sites shall be notified of the construction schedule in writing. Designate a “construction liaison” that will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The liaison will determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the liaison at the construction site.  Include a disclosure in the lease of future tenants within the El Camino Real Specific Plan properties that provides information regarding the ongoing construction activities within the area.

MM NOI-1.2: If pile driving occurs, the following best management practices shall be included in the construction noise control plan.
 During pile driving, pre-drill foundation pile holes to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile.
 During pile driving activities, install “acoustical blankets” to provide shielding for receptors located within 100 feet of the site, or use a noise attenuating shroud on the pile driving hammer.

Impact NOI-2: Mechanical equipment from future projects located in close proximity to existing residential land uses could result in noise levels in exceedance of City standards for fixed sources.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-2.1, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would require applicants for future development projects to retain a qualified acoustical consultant to review mechanical noise from the selected equipment to determine whether the noise reduction measures sufficiently reduce noise and meet the City Code requirements. Therefore, mechanical noise impacts from individual projects proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation: MM NOI-2.1: Prior to the issuance of building permits, mechanical equipment shall be selected and designed to reduce impacts on surrounding uses to meet the City Code requirements. A qualified acoustical consultant shall be retained by the applicants for future development projects to review mechanical noise as the equipment systems are selected in order to determine whether the proposed noise reduction measures sufficiently reduce noise to comply with the City’s noise and vibration level performance standards for fixed sources.

Noise reduction measures that would accomplish this reduction include, but are not limited to, selection of equipment that emits low noise levels and/or installation of noise barriers such as enclosures and parapet walls to block the line of sight between the noise source and the nearest receptors.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
20 Impact NOI-3: Existing and planned land uses in the project vicinity could be exposed to an increase in ambient vibration levels beyond applicable Caltrans vibration limits due to project construction activities.

Findings: Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-3.1, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would require future development projects to incorporate measures into the project, including implementation of a construction vibrationmonitoring plan, to reduce vibration impacts. Therefore, vibration impacts from individual projects proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation: MM NOI-3.1: The following measures would be incorporated into the project to reduce vibration impacts:
 Comply with the City Code construction hours requirements to limit the hours of exposure to surrounding properties. The City Code limits construction activities within 300 feet of residentially zoned property to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction is permitted on Sundays or holidays within 300 feet of occupied residentially zoned property.
 Prohibit impact or vibratory pile driving as a method of construction.  Limit the use of vibratory rollers, hoe rams, large bulldozers, and caisson drilling, and avoid clam shovel drops within 65 feet of the property lines shared with residences and commercial structures adjacent to the site.
 Place operating equipment on the construction site as far as possible from vibrationsensitive receptors.  Use smaller equipment to minimize vibration levels below the limits.  Select demolition methods not involving impact tools.  Avoid dropping heavy objects or materials near vibration sensitive locations.  A list of all heavy construction equipment to be used for this project known to produce high vibration levels (tracked vehicles, vibratory compaction, jackhammers, hoe rams, etc.) shall be submitted to the City by the contractor. This list shall be used to identify equipment and activities that would potentially generate substantial vibration and to define the level of effort required for continuous vibration monitoring.  A construction vibration-monitoring plan shall be implemented to document conditions at the residences and commercial structures adjacent to the site prior to, during, and after vibration generating construction activities. All plan tasks shall be undertaken under the direction of a licensed Professional Structural Engineer in the State of California and be in accordance with industry accepted standard methods. The construction vibration monitoring plan should be implemented to include the following tasks:

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
21 o Identification of sensitivity to ground-borne vibration of the residences and commercial structures adjacent to the site. A vibration survey (generally described below) would need to be performed.
o Performance of a photo survey, elevation survey, and crack monitoring survey for the residences and commercial structures nearest to the site. Surveys shall be performed prior to and after completion of vibration generating construction activities located within 65 feet of the structure. This distance shall be extended to 80 feet for vibratory pile driving and 120 feet for impact pile driving. The surveys shall include internal and external crack monitoring in the structure, settlement, and distress, and shall document the condition of the foundation, walls and other structural elements in the interior and exterior of the structure.

Impact NOI-C: As mitigated, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulatively significant noise and vibration impact.

Findings: With implementation of Mitigation Measures NOI-1.1 and NOI-1.2, set forth above, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, construction noise impacts associated with future projects under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would be reduced below the City’s thresholds of significance. Noise impacts from mechanical equipment would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI2.1, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project. With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-3.1, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, construction vibration impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation: Same mitigation as Mitigation Measures NOI-1.1, NOI-1.2, NOI-2.1, and NOI3.1.

Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact TCR-1: As mitigated, the project would not result in a significant impact to tribal cultural resources.

Findings: Future projects under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would be required to implement Mitigation Measures CUL-1.1 to CUL-1.4, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, to reduce impacts to unknown buried archaeological resources, including tribal cultural resources, and human remains, if encountered. Therefore, individual projects proposed under the El Camino Real Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact on tribal cultural resources.

Mitigation: Same mitigation as Mitigation Measures CUL-1.1 through CUL-1.4.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
22 Impact TCR-C: As mitigated, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulatively significant tribal cultural resources impact.

Findings: Cumulative projects would be required to implement Mitigation Measures CUL1.1 through CUL-1.4, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, to avoid impacts and/or reduce impacts to tribal cultural resources to a less than significant level consistent with CEQA and Assembly Bill 52 requirements.

Mitigation: Same mitigation as Mitigation Measures CUL-1.1 through CUL-1.4.

VII. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS
The CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR identify the likelihood that a proposed project could “foster” or stimulate “economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment” (Section 15126.2(d)). This section of the EIR is intended to evaluate the impacts of such growth in the surrounding environment.

Direct growth inducement results if a project involves construction of new housing that would result in new residents moving to the area. A project can have indirect growth-inducement potential if it establishes substantial new permanent employment opportunities (e.g., commercial, industrial, or governmental enterprises) or if it involves a substantial construction effort with substantial short-term employment opportunities and indirectly stimulates the need for additional housing and services to support the new employment demand. Similarly, under CEQA, a project could indirectly induce growth if it expands roadway capacity or removes an obstacle to additional growth and development, such as removing a constraint on required public services or utilities (e.g., adding a sewage treatment plant that has capacity to serve demand beyond the associated project).

These findings are based on the discussion of growth inducing impacts in Section 4.0 of the Draft EIR, the discussion and analysis of which is hereby incorporated in full by this reference.

The proposed project site is within the City’s existing boundaries, already served by existing infrastructure, and planned for urban uses. Redevelopment of the El Camino Real Focus Area was envisioned as part of the City’s General Plan. The proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan has increased the allowed density in the El Camino Real Specific Plan area from what was assumed in the General Plan. The El Camino Real Specific Plan would result in the development of 4,392 residential units. Redevelopment of underutilized properties within the El Camino Real Specific Plan boundary would result in an estimated reduction of approximately 289,000 square feet of retail space.

The impacts to infrastructure and services resulting from the proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan are described throughout the Draft EIR.

The proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan is a previously envisioned growth area in the General Plan and is not anticipated to result in increased growth outside the City where urban development is not already planned. For these reasons, the proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan would not result Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
23 in growth-inducing impacts beyond what is envisioned in the City’s General Plan.

VIII. SIGNIFICANT AND IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(c) requires that an EIR also address significant and irreversible environmental changes that may occur as a result of project implementation. Significant irreversible changes include the use of nonrenewable resources, the commitment of future generations to similar use, irreversible damage resulting from environmental accidents associated with the project and the irretrievable commitment of resources.

These findings are based on the discussion of significant and irreversible environmental changes in Section 5.0 of the Draft EIR, the discussion and analysis of which are hereby incorporated in full by this reference.

Use of Nonrenewable Resources
Future development under the proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan, during construction and operation, would require the use and consumption of nonrenewable resources. Renewable resources, such as lumber and other wood byproducts, could also be used. Unlike renewable resources, nonrenewable resources cannot be regenerated over time. Nonrenewable resources include fossil fuels and metals. Energy would be consumed during both the construction and operational phases of the El Camino Real Specific Plan development. The construction phase would require the use of nonrenewable construction material, such as concrete, metals, and plastics, and glass. Nonrenewable resources and energy would also be consumed during the manufacturing and transportation of building materials, preparation of the site, and construction of the buildings. The operational phases would consume energy for multiple purposes including building heating and cooling, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Energy, in the form of fossil fuels, would be used to fuel vehicles traveling to and from Plan area.

The proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan would result in a substantial increase in demand for nonrenewable resources. However, the project is subject to the standard California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6 and CALGreen energy efficiency requirements. As discussed in Section

3.6 Energy, the El Camino Real Specific Plan is consistent with the City’s General Plan policies regarding energy use, which fosters development that reduces the use of nonrenewable energy resources in transportation, buildings, and urban services (utilities).

Irreversible Damage from Environmental Accidents
The project does not propose any new or uniquely hazardous uses, and its operation would not be expected to cause environmental accidents that would impact other areas. As discussed in Section 3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the El Camino Real Specific Plan area contains individual parcels that have been confirmed or may contain soil and groundwater contamination that may expose Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
24 construction workers, future occupants, and the surrounding environment to contaminated soils and soil vapor intrusion. Phase I ESAs and Phase II ESAs (if warranted) shall be implemented by future development under the El Camino Real Specific Plan to mitigate potential risks to construction workers, future occupants, and the environment from potential exposure to hazardous substances.

There are no known significant unmitigable on-site or off-site sources of contamination that would substantially affect the proposed uses in the El Camino Real Specific Plan area. There are no significant geology and soils impacts from implementation of the project. Based on the discussion above, the proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan would not result in irreversible damage that may result from environmental accidents.

IX. ALTERNATIVES
CEQA requires that an EIR identify alternatives to a project as it is proposed. Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines specifies that the EIR should identify alternatives which “would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project.” The EIR considered alternatives of design, scope, or location, which would substantially lessen the project's significant impacts, even if those alternatives “impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives” or are more expensive. While CEQA does not require that alternatives must be capable of meeting all of the project objectives, an alternative's ability to meet most of the objectives is relevant to its consideration.

Project Objectives
The El Camino Real Specific Plan is intended to achieve the following project objectives and desired outcomes as it is implemented over time.
 Land Use: Establish a land use plan and policy framework that will guide future development and redevelopment activities within the area toward multi-modal supportive uses and improvements, including; an increase in housing density to help meet the City’s statemandated RHNA numbers; new development that appropriately transitions to existing adjacent residential neighborhoods, and more intensive development and public improvements focused at key nodes, which will include a concentration of retail, services, housing, and new public gathering areas.
 Transportation: Improve vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities along the El Camino Real corridor by establishing a mobility framework that balances El Camino Real’s many functions while improving mobility and safety for people of all ages, means, and abilities.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
25  Public Realm: Provide standards and guidelines to achieve the future vision for El Camino Real. These standards and guidelines will apply to all new development in the El Camino Real Specific Plan area, as well as public improvements and extensive renovations to existing structures. Develop and implement urban design standards to improve the pedestrian experience, public space, aesthetics, safety, and design quality throughout the Plan area to attract visitors, serve residents, and promote walking.  Parks: Increase the amount of parks, green space, plazas, and other public space that encourages pedestrian activity, recreation, and access to nature, including recreation opportunities along Calabazas and Saratoga Creeks. In addition to the existing parkland dedication requirements of City Code Chapter 17.35, require developers to create new plazas and open spaces along the corridor that provide a place where residents and visitors can gather comfortably, that have their own distinctive identity, are safe and visually attractive, and contribute to local character. This network of open spaces could include new public neighborhood and community parks as well as publicly-accessible privately-owned open space.
 Environmental: Create a sustainable urban environment that incorporates green building, energy efficiency, water conservation, and stormwater management best practices.

CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and applicable case law have determined that feasibility can be based on a wide range of factors and influences. Section 15126.6(f)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines advises that such factors can include, but are not limited to, the suitability of an alternate site, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, consistency with planning documents or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries or whether the project proposed can “reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site.”
The City Council, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR, hereby finds that the alternatives described below are not feasible. The City finds that there are specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including consideration for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, and important matters of public policy that render these alternatives infeasible.

As explained above, “feasible” is defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15364 to mean “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors.” According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), the City may reject an alternative to the project if the City finds that it would be infeasible to implement that alternative because of “[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers.” An agency also may reject an alternative that does not meet the public policy goals of the agency. In Rialto Citizens for Responsible Growth v. City of Rialto (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 899, 947, the City of Rialto approved a project while rejecting as infeasible a reduced-density alternative that stripped out the portions of the project that would have created a synergistic mix of retail and restaurant tenants. Additionally, in Environmental Council of Sacramento v. City of Sacramento (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1018, 1039, the appellate court upheld the City of Sacramento's findings that Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
26 additional preservation of open space would be infeasible because it would “at the very least [slow] 'the progress of necessary development such that the public's health and welfare is harmed through the lack of economic growth and productivity and a shortage of housing supply.” 6 These findings are based on the discussion of alternatives in Section 7.0 of the Draft EIR and Section

5.0 of the Final EIR, the discussion and analysis of which are hereby incorporated in full by this reference.

Alternatives Considered but Rejected
The CEQA Guidelines encourage consideration of an alternative site when significant effects of the project might be avoided or substantially lessened (Section 15126.6(f)(2)(A)). Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant impacts of the project and meet most of the project objectives need to be considered for inclusion in the EIR.

Location alternatives are frequently considered to reduce the site-specific impacts of a project. The alternative location would typically need to be of similar size to the Plan area, within the urban service area of the City, near existing transit, and have the appropriate General Plan land use designation(s). Given that the Specific Plan was developed to address planned growth within the El Camino Real Focus Area that was identified in the City’s General Plan, and redevelopment in the current phase of the General Plan is a primary goal for this particular location, a location alternative was not considered further. The City has previously identified the El Camino Real Focus Area as an appropriate location for housing to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation and other goals and policies of the General Plan. Moreover, there is not an equivalent area available for redevelopment within the El Camino Real Focus Area or immediate vicinity. For these reasons, an alternative location to the Plan area was considered but rejected as infeasible.

No Project Alternative
The CEQA Guidelines specifically require consideration of a “No Project” Alternative. The purpose of including a No Project Alternative is to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the project with the impacts of not approving the project. The Guidelines specifically advise that the No Project Alternative is “what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services.” The Guidelines emphasize that an EIR should take a practical approach, and not “…create and analyze a set of artificial assumptions that would be required to preserve the existing physical environment (Section 15126.6[e][3][B]).”

6 Similarly, courts have upheld an agency's infeasibility finding on a policy-based rationale in the following cases:

Gilroy Citizens for Responsible Planning v. City of Gilroy (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 911, 936, and Defend the Bay v.

City of Irvine (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 1261, 1270.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
27 The majority of the Plan area is currently developed with residential, commercial, public, and recreational uses. The No Project Alternative assumes that the Plan area would remain as it is developed today. Because the No Project Alternative would not result in any new development with the El Camino Real Specific Plan area, this Alternative would avoid all of the environmental impacts of the project. However, this Alternative would not meet any of the City’s project objectives.

No Project – Commercial, Residential and Office Redevelopment Alternative The No Project - Commercial, Residential and Office Redevelopment Alternative assumes that the Plan area would be redeveloped with the maximum allowable development under the current zoning districts, summarized below. Maximum allowable building heights within these zoning district range from 25 to 100 feet, and the City’s Zoning Code does not require height step backs for properties that abut residential neighborhoods.

Existing Zoning in the Specific Plan Area
Zoning
Designation
Allowed Height Within 20 feet
of R1-6L, R1-8L, and R2
zones1/ Within all Other Zones
Acres Percent
of Total
Allowed Uses
R4 32 feet/80 feet 1.0 0.4 Multi-family dwellings (i.e., rowhouses, townhouses, low-rise
apartments)
MUCC 32 feet/40 feet 94.1 39.5 Pedestrian- oriented developments that focus on community serving
commercial uses (e.g., grocery
stores, banks, pharmacies,
restaurants, retail establishments).

A mix of residential and
commercial uses, with residential
on the upper floors and
commercial and office on the
lower floors, as well as stand-alone
uses in certain circumstances, is
allowed.

MURC 32 feet/60 feet 85.4 35.8 Pedestrian- oriented developments that focus on regional-serving
commercial uses (e.g., big box
stores, entertainment
establishments, restaurants, retail
establishments). A mix of
residential and commercial uses,
with residential on the upper floors
and commercial and office on the
lower floors is allowed.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
28 Zoning
Designation
Allowed Height Within 20 feet
of R1-6L, R1-8L, and R2
zones1/ Within all Other Zones
Acres Percent
of Total
Allowed Uses
OS 25 feet/32 feet 2.4 1.0 Open space and outdoor
recreational opportunities for the
community.

PD N/A 43.4 18.2 Uses consistent with the General
Plan land use designation and
description.

PQP 32 feet/60 feet 10.5 4.4 Public and quasi-public uses including, but not limited to
government offices, fire and police
facilities, transit stations,
commercial care centers, religious
institutions, schools, cemeteries,
hospitals and convalescent care
facilities, places of assembly and
other facilities that have a unique
public character as their primary
use.

R1-6L 25 feet/25 feet 1.5 0.6 Single-family dwellings, secondary dwellings authorized by
Government Code Section
65852.21, and accessory dwelling
units.

Source: Raimi + Associates. Personal Communication. October 1, 2025.

Note: 1 This applies to all zoning districts listed exempt for OS and PQP. The maximum height applies to development within 20 feet of R1 and R2 zones.

The El Camino Real Specific Plan area could be developed with approximately 75 percent mixeduse, one percent residential, and 24 percent of Open Space (OS), Planned Development (PD), and Public/Quasi Public (PQP) uses under this alternative.

The most common land use existing within the El Camino Real Specific Plan area is retail commercial, with lesser amounts of public/institutional, mixed-use, medium/high density residential, single-family residential and light industrial making up the remaining properties. There are approximately 2,265,000 square feet of commercial space, including 100,000 square feet of local office uses, and 2,500 residential units existing within the El Camino Real Specific Plan area currently. Approximately 30 percent of the El Camino Real Specific Plan area’s buildable land (excluding streets, rail rights-of-way, creeks, and parks) is currently occupied by buildings. Most of the remaining 70 percent is occupied by surface parking lots and associated drive aisles and landscaping.7

7 City of Santa Clara. El Camino Real Specific Plan: Area Profile.

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
29 Build out of the El Camino Real Specific Plan area under the No Project - Commercial, Residential and Office Redevelopment Alternative would substantially increase vehicle trips over the existing condition, as much of the area that is currently vacant or used for parking would convert to commercial and residential uses that generate traffic. The No Project - Commercial, Residential and Office Redevelopment Alternative, which would allow a greater proportion of commercial uses to residential uses than the proposed project, would also exacerbate the City’s existing jobs/housing imbalance and likely increase commute times and distances which would be a significant unavoidable impact due to inconsistency with General Plan policies that were adopted to mitigate environmental impacts. The No Project - Commercial, Residential and Office Redevelopment Alternative would also likely result in greater significant criteria pollutant impacts and potentially significant GHG emissions impacts due to the increased number of trips and VMT from workers traveling to the El Camino Real Specific Plan area.

This alternative would not meet the City’s primary project objectives of increasing housing density to help meet the City’s state-mandated RHNA numbers, allowing new development that appropriately transitions to existing adjacent residential neighborhoods, and allowing more intensive development and public improvements focused at key nodes, which would include a concentration of retail, services, housing, and new public gathering areas. This alternative would also be unlikely to provide substantial public open space to serve the needs of area residents. The No Project - Commercial, Residential and Office Redevelopment Alternative, therefore, would not meet the City’s primary objectives for the El Camino Real Focus Area consistent with the General Plan.

Reduced Scale Development Alternative
A Reduced Scale Development Alternative would have a reduced number of residential units and a reduced amount of retail/commercial and office square footage within the boundaries of the El Camino Real Specific Plan area. The residential unit and commercial square footage totals would represent the maximum amount that would avoid any significant unavoidable impacts and achieve as many of the project objectives as possible. Any development with a smaller project of any size would be built over a shorter timeframe and have less heavy equipment use which would lessen construction and operational air quality impacts compared to the proposed project. Under this alternative, all development would still be required to implement all identified mitigation and conditions of approval identified for this project to reduce construction and operational impacts.

While the Reduced Scale Development Alternative would meet the City’s objectives for providing public space, increase housing density, and improve multi-modal uses, it would be at a far lower density than what is currently proposed.

Environmentally Superior Alternative
The CEQA Guidelines specify that an EIR must identify the environmentally superior alternative among those alternatives discussed. If the environmentally superior alternative is the “No Project” alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative amongst the other alternatives [Section 15126.6(e)(2)].

Attachment 4
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
30 Based upon the previous discussion, the environmentally superior alternative would be the No Project Alternative, which would avoid the identified significant impacts. This alternative would not meet the City’s primary objectives of guiding future development and redevelopment activities within the area toward multi-modal supportive uses and improvements, including an increase in housing density to help meet the City’s state-mandated RHNA numbers, and more intensive development and public improvements focused at key nodes, which would include a concentration of retail, services, housing, and new public gathering areas. Beyond the No Project Alternative, the Reduced Scale Development Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative.

The Reduced Scale Development Alternative would lessen construction and operational air quality and noise impacts when compared to the project. While this alternative would meet the City’s objectives, the development would be at a far lower density than what is currently proposed.

X. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEQA requires decision makers to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological and/or other benefits of a project against its significant and unavoidable environmental impacts when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological and/or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts, those impacts may be considered "acceptable" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a)). When significant impacts are not avoided or lessened, CEQA requires the agency to state, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable. Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the Final EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(b)).

The proposed project has no significant unavoidable impacts. As such, no overriding considerations are required.

Resolution/ El Camino Real Specific Plan Page 1 of *
Rev. 1/9/2024
RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,

CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE EL CAMINO REAL SPECIFIC

PLAN, A SPECIFIC PLAN PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 65450, et seq.

El Camino Real Specific Plan
WHEREAS, the City intends to adopt the El Camino Real Specific Plan, a Specific Plan for a transit-oriented pedestrian-friendly corridor of up to 4,390 residential units with supportive commercial uses, located on approximately 240 acres along the 3.2 mile El Camino Real corridor between the western City limits and Lafayette Street in the east, which is currently largely developed with auto oriented uses;
WHEREAS, the El Camino Real Specific Plan is intended to be a tree‐lined, pedestrian‐ and transit‐oriented corridor with a mix of residential and retail uses; and, WHEREAS, the El Camino Real area will include a variety of forms of urban housing, including podium buildings, mid-rise residential mixed-use buildings, and medium density townhomes; WHEREAS, a Specific Plan is a tool for providing regulatory direction for specific parts of a city, and can include policy guidance, regulatory requirements, and design guidelines; WHEREAS, as a part of implementation of the Specific Plan, the City intends to adopt a General Plan Amendment (“GPA”) to align the General Plan land use diagram by changing the existing land use designations of the Project Site from Community Mixed Use and Regional Mixed Use to Regional Commercial Mixed Use (55-100 dwelling units per acre; 0.20 FAR of commercial required), Corridor Mixed Use (45-65 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required), Corridor Residential (26-45 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required), Corridor Residential-Low (12-25 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required), and Ground Floor Commercial Overlay which requires commercial uses at specific sites;
Resolution/ El Camino Real Specific Plan Page 2 of *
Rev. 1/9/2024
WHEREAS, as a part of implementation the Specific Plan, the City is also proposing to amend Title 18 (“Zoning”), of the City Code to create the new El Camino Real zoning districts; WHEREAS, the proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the El Camino Real Focus Area in the General Plan; WHEREAS, Santa Clara City Charter Section 1007 and Government Code sections 65353 and 65453 require that the Planning Commission provide input to the City Council on proposed Specific Plans and General Plan Amendments;
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on the proposed Specific Plan was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, a newspaper of general circulation for the City, on March 18, 2026; and WHEREAS, notices of the public hearing on the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the Project Site, according to the most recent assessor’s roll, on March 18, 2026;
WHEREAS, notice of the hearing was mailed to each local agency expected to provide water, sewage, streets, roads, schools, or other essential facilities or services to the project, including the Santa Clara Unified School District, on March 18, 2026; WHEREAS, before considering recommending adoption of the Specific Plan for the area, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the potential environmental impacts of the Project, including the implementing General Plan Amendment, Zoning Code Amendment, and identified mitigation measures, and recommended that the City Council adopt and certify the Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the Project (SCH #2025010508), as well as a set of CEQA Findings, in accordance with the requirements of CEQA; and WHEREAS, on April 8, 2026, the Planning Commission reviewed the Specific Plan and conducted a public hearing, at the conclusion of which, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the Specific Plan to the City Council; Resolution/ El Camino Real Specific Plan Page 3 of *
Rev. 1/9/2024
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2026, the City Council conducted a duly noticed 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 Specific Plan.

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

A. The proposed Specific Plan is deemed to be in the public interest, in that:

The Specific Plan is located in an urbanized area served by existing municipal services and implements smart growth principles by redeveloping underutilized properties with high intensity mixed-use, pedestrian- and transit-oriented development that will contribute to the City both socially and economically.

B. The proposed Specific Plan is consistent and compatible with the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected, in that:

The Plan furthers and is consistent with the goals, policies and major strategies of the General Plan that enhance the City’s quality of life, preserve and cultivate neighborhoods, promote sustainability, enhance City identity, support Focus Areas and community vitality, maintain the City’s fiscal health and quality of services, and maximize health and safety benefits with the creation of new land use designations that allow for the development of a high-density mixed-use transit-oriented environment.

C. The proposed Plan has been processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in that:

A Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”) was prepared in accordance with CEQA and the City circulated copies of the DEIR and Notice of Availability to the public agencies which Resolution/ El Camino Real Specific Plan Page 4 of *
Rev. 1/9/2024
have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, as well as to other interested persons, organizations and agencies, and the City sought the comments of such persons, organizations and agencies. The City prepared and circulated written responses to the comments received during the Comment Period and included those responses in a Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”), in accordance with CEQA.

D. 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:

3. That based on the findings set forth in this Resolution, the EIR Resolution and the evidence in the City Staff Report and such other evidence as received at the public hearing on this matter, the City Council hereby adopts the Specific Plan. //
//
//
//
//
//
//

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 19th DAY OF MAY, 2026, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

Resolution/ El Camino Real Specific Plan Page 5 of *
Rev. 1/9/2024
AYES: COUNCILORS:

NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:

ATTEST:

Nora Pimentel, MMC

ASISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA
Resolution/General Plan Amendment CC Resolution Page 1 of 7 Rev. Rev:

RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
ADOPTING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO (1) CHANGE

THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM COMMUNITY MIXED

USE AND REGIONAL MIXED USE TO REGIONAL

COMMERCIAL MIXED USE, CORRIDOR MIXED USE,
CORRIDOR RESIDENTIAL AND CORRIDOR RESIDENTIALLOW FOR THE AREA ON BOTH SIDES OF EL CAMINO REAL

BETWEEN THE WESTERN CITY LIMITS AND LAFAYETTE
STREET TO THE EAST; (2) ADD THE LAND USE
DESIGNATIONS TO CHAPTER 5 OF THE GENERAL PLAN;
AND (3) REMOVE THE EL CAMINO REAL FOCUS AREA
El Camino Real Specific Plan General Plan Amendment
WHEREAS, the City intends to adopt the El Camino Real Specific Plan, a Specific Plan for a transit-oriented, pedestrian-friendly corridor of up to 4,390 residential units with supportive commercial uses, located on approximately 240 acres along the 3.2 mile El Camino Real corridor between the western City limits and Lafayette Street in the east, which is currently largely developed with auto oriented uses;
WHEREAS, the El Camino Real Specific Plan is intended to be a tree‐lined, pedestrian‐ and transit‐oriented corridor with a mix of residential and retail uses; and WHEREAS, the El Camino Real area will include a variety of forms of urban housing, including podium buildings, mid-rise residential mixed-use buildings, and medium density townhomes; WHEREAS, the proposed El Camino Real Specific Plan is consistent with the El Camino Real Focus Area Goals And Policies in the General Plan;
WHEREAS, as a part of implementing the Specific Plan, the City intends to adopt a General Plan Amendment (“GPA”) to align the General Plan land use diagram by changing the existing land use designations of the Project Site from Community Mixed Use and Regional Mixed Use to Regional Commercial Mixed Use (55-100 dwelling units per acre; 0.20 FAR of commercial required), Corridor Mixed Use (45-65 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required), Corridor Residential (26-45 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not Resolution/General Plan Amendment CC Resolution Page 2 of 7 Rev. Rev:
required), Corridor Residential - Low (12-25 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required), and Ground Floor Commercial Overlay which requires commercial uses at specific sites;
WHEREAS, the GPA includes the removal of the El Camino Real Focus Area from the General Pla with the adoption of the Specific Plan;
WHEREAS, the City is also proposing to amend Title 18, the Zoning Code, to create the new El Camino Real zoning districts;
WHEREAS, Santa Clara City Charter Section 1007 and Government Code Section 65353 require that the Planning Commission provide input to the City Council on any proposed General Plan Amendment;
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2026 the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing, at the conclusion of which the Commission voted to recommend that the Council approve the proposed General Plan Amendment;
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65355 requires the City Council to hold a public hearing prior to adopting an amendment of the General Plan;
WHEREAS, 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 March 18, 2026;
WHEREAS, notices of the public hearing on the General Plan Amendment were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the Project Site, according to the most recent assessor’s roll, on March 18, 2026;
WHEREAS, notice of the hearing was mailed to each local agency expected to provide water, sewage, streets, roads, schools, or other essential facilities or services to the project, including the Santa Clara Unified School District, on March 18, 2026; WHEREAS, before considering the General Plan Amendment for the Project Site, the City of Santa Clara City Council reviewed and considered the potential environmental impacts of the Resolution/General Plan Amendment CC Resolution Page 3 of 7 Rev. Rev:

Project, identified mitigation measures, and adopted and certified the Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the Project (SCH #2025010508), as well as a set of CEQA Findings and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, in accordance with the requirements of CEQA; and WHEREAS, on May 19, 2026, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment, 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 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. General Plan Amendment Findings. That the City Council 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 Project is located in an urbanized area served by existing municipal services and implements smart growth principles by redeveloping underutilized properties with higher intensity mixed-use, pedestrian- and transit-oriented development that will contribute to the City both socially and economically.

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:

The Project furthers and is consistent with the goals, policies and major strategies of the General Plan that enhance the City’s quality of life, preserve and cultivate neighborhoods, promote sustainability, enhance City identity, support Focus Areas and community vitality, maintain the City’s fiscal health and quality of services, and maximize health and safety benefits with the creation of the following new land use designations: Regional Commercial Mixed Use (55-100 dwelling units per acre; 0.20 FAR of commercial required), Corridor Mixed Use (45-65 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required), Corridor Residential (26-45 dwelling Resolution/General Plan Amendment CC Resolution Page 4 of 7 Rev. Rev:
units per acre; commercial allowed but not required), Corridor Residential - Low (12-25 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required), and Ground Floor Commercial Overlay which requires commercial uses at specific sites.

C. 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:

A Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”) was prepared in accordance with CEQA and the City circulated copies of the DEIR and Notice of Availability to the public agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, as well as to other interested persons, organizations and agencies, and the City sought the comments of such persons, organizations and agencies. The City prepared and circulated written responses to the comments received during the Comment Period and included those responses in a Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”), in accordance with CEQA. Additional comments were received from agencies, organizations and individuals following the distribution of the FEIR and the City prepared responses to the comments received for incorporation into an Appendix to the FEIR and made available for review.

D. 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:

A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared for implementation with Project development to reduce potentially significant impacts identified in the DEIR, FEIR and Appendix to the FEIR, that combined constitute the EIR for the Project, to less than significant and a set of CEQA Findings has been prepared in accordance with CEQA; the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt all of these documents; and the City Council adopted and certified the FEIR and adopted the CEQA Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and MMRP.

Resolution/General Plan Amendment CC Resolution Page 5 of 7 Rev. Rev:

3. That the City Council hereby amends the General Plan by adding the following text to Subsection 5.2.2 (“Land Use Classifications and Diagram”) of Section 5.2 (“Land Use Diagram”) of Chapter 5 (“Goals and Policies”), to be inserted in the mixed use land use designations section, after the existing definition of “Santa Clara Station Area” :
“Regional Commercial Mixed Use (55-100 dwelling units per acre; 0.20 FAR of commercial required)
This classification is intended for high-intensity commercial or mixed-use residential and commercial development with open space that can serve as a center for community gathering and activity. A large variety of commercial uses are allowed including retail, restaurant, entertainment, offices, hotel, and service uses to meet local and regional needs. Autooriented uses and live/work uses are not appropriate in this designation.

Residential uses are allowed in a vertical or horizontal mixed-use form.

Development under this designation should have an urban feel and typically be composed of mid-rise buildings featuring pedestrian-oriented frontages and facades and structured or below-grade parking. All new development under this designation with a frontage along El Camino Real must include ground floor commercial uses along El Camino Real.” “Corridor Mixed Use (45-65 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required)
This classification is intended to encourage a mix of commercial uses and medium-to-high density residential at smaller cross-streets along El Camino Real. This designation allows for standalone commercial or residential uses, and mixed-use development in a horizontal or vertical format. However, there are key locations along the El Camino Real corridor where ground floor commercial uses are required. Commercial uses under Resolution/General Plan Amendment CC Resolution Page 6 of 7 Rev. Rev:
this designation are intended for local and neighborhood serving retail, office, and service uses. Auto-oriented uses are not appropriate in these areas.”
“Corridor Residential (26-45 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required)
This classification is intended for low- to mid-rise residential building types such as townhomes and garden apartments with garages or below-grade parking. These areas provide a moderate-intensity residential character and a transition to adjacent single-family residential neighborhoods. This designation is generally applied to small to moderate-sized parcels along the corridor.”
“Corridor Residential - Low (12-25 dwelling units per acre; commercial allowed but not required)
This classification is intended for townhome development. These areas provide a low-intensity residential character in keeping with adjacent singlefamily residential neighborhoods. This designation is generally applied to smaller parcels along the corridor that are constrained by shallow lot depths and parcel aggregation challenges.”
“Ground Floor Commercial Overlay
This classification illustrates where ground floor commercial is required in selected parcels with the Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) land use designation; this classification also applies to all parcels designated Regional Commercial Mixed Use (RCMU). These concentrations of commercial uses will support pedestrian activity and create opportunities for vibrant public spaces. The Ground Floor Commercial Overlay does not cover any Resolution/General Plan Amendment CC Resolution Page 7 of 7 Rev. Rev:

Corridor Residential areas, where ground floor commercial is encouraged but not required.

4. That the City Council, pursuant to Government Code § 65354, hereby amends the General Plan by changing the General Plan Land Use Designation for the Project Site by modifying Figures

5.2-2 and 5.2-3 of the General Plan to the land use designations described in the land use plan, Figure 3-1, of the El Camino Real Specific Plan, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

5. That the City Council hereby amends the General Plan by removing references to the El Camino Real Focus Area in Section 5.4, Focus Areas, and Figure 5.4-1.

6. That based on the findings set forth in this Resolution, the EIR Resolution and the evidence in the City Staff Report and such other evidence as received at the public hearing on this matter, the City Council hereby approves the General Plan Amendment.

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

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

AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, AT A SPECIAL MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE 19TH DAY OF MAY, 2026, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: COUNCILORS:

NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:

ATTEST:

NORA PIMENTEL, MMC

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA
Resolution/General Plan Amendment CC Resolution Page 8 of 7 Rev. Rev:

Attachments Incorporated by Reference:

1. Land Use Plan

2. MMRP
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 1 of 22 Rev:

ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 18 OF “THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA” TO ADD A
NEW CHAPTER 18.27, REGULATIONS FOR THE EL
CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR; REVISING CHAPTER 17.15,

PROPERTY DEVELOPMENTS, TO CLARIFY THAT THE

NEW EL CAMINO PROPERTY STANDARDS WILL
SUPERSEDE THAT CHAPTER; AND ADDING A NEW
SECTION 17.40.117 TO CHAPTER 17.40, CITYWIDE

AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS, TO SPECIFY

AFFORDABILITY LEVELS APPLICABLE TO THE EL

CAMINO REAL ZONING DISTRICTS
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: That a new Chapter 18.27, “Regulations for the El Camino Real Corridor”, is hereby added to Title 18 (entitled “Zoning”), of “The Code of the City of Santa Clara, California” (“SCCC”) as follows:
“Chapter 18.27
Regulations for the El Camino Real Corridor
Table of Contents
Article I. Regulations for the El Camino Real Corridor

18.27.010 Application

18.27.020 Intent

18.27.030 Purpose

18.27.040 Permitted and Conditional Uses

18.27.050 Land Use Table
Article II. Minor Use Permits

18.27.070 Purpose

18.27.080 Intent
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 2 of 22 Rev:

18.27.090 Applicability

18.27.100 Application Filing, Processing, and Review

18.27.200 Project Review, Notice, and Hearing

18.27.300 Findings and Decision

18.27.400 Conditions of Approval
Article III. Development Standards for the El Camino Real Corridor

18.27.500 Existing Buildings and Uses.

18.27.600 Regional Commercial Mixed Use District (RCMU) Development Standards Table.

18.27.700 Corridor Mixed Use District (CMU) Development Standards Table.

18.27.800 Corridor Residential District (CR) Development Standards Table.

18.27.900 Additional Development Standards
Article I. Regulations for the El Camino Real Corridor

18.27.010 Application.

The regulations set forth in this chapter apply to all parcels in the El Camino Real Specific Plan area.

18.27.020 Intent.

The El Camino Real Corridor zoning districts are designed to implement the Regional Commercial Mixed Use, Corridor Mixed Use, and Corridor Residential General Plan designations, creating a range of residential densities that are transit-oriented with supportive commercial services. The El Camino Real corridor zoning districts include the Regional Commercial Mixed Use District (RCMU), Corridor Mixed Use District (CMU), the Corridor Residential District (CR), and Corridor Residential – Low District (CR-L) and are expected to be implemented over time, and the district contains provisions for the continuation of existing auto-oriented uses.

18.27.030 Purpose
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 3 of 22 Rev:

The purpose of the El Camino Real Corridor individual districts and the way they are applied are as follows:

1. Regional Commercial Mixed Use (RCMU). The purpose of the RCMU - Regional Commercial Mixed Use Zone is to provide land areas for the construction, use, and occupancy for pedestrian- oriented developments that focus on regional-serving commercial uses (e.g., big box stores, entertainment establishments, restaurants, retail establishments). It is the intent of this zone to be located on high-traffic corridors and to provide a mix of residential and commercial uses, with residential on the upper floors and commercial and office on the lower floors. This zone has a minimum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.2. The allowable residential density range is 55-100 dwelling units per acre.

2. Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). The purpose of the CMU - Corridor Mixed Use Zone is to provide land areas for the construction, use, and occupancy for pedestrianoriented developments that focus on community-serving commercial uses (e.g., grocery stores, banks, pharmacies, restaurants, retail establishments). It is the intent of this zone to provide a mix of residential and commercial uses, with residential on the upper floors and commercial and office on the lower floors, as well as, stand-alone uses in certain circumstances. This zone does not have a minimum Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The allowable residential density range is 45-65 dwelling units per acre.

3. Corridor Residential (CR). The purpose of the CR - Corridor Residential Zone is to provide land areas for the construction, use, and occupancy for a variety of multi- Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 4 of 22 Rev:
family residential housing types that focus on the transition between higher-intensity mixed use and single-family residential. This zone also allows commercial uses. It is the intent of this zone to be located small parcels on high-traffic corridors and to provide a mix of residential and commercial uses, with residential on the upper floors and commercial and office on the lower floors. This zone does not have a minimum Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The allowable residential density range is 26-45 dwelling units per acre.

4. Corridor Residential – Low. The purpose of the CR-L Corridor Residential – Low Zone is for townhome development. This designation is generally applied to smaller parcels along the corridor that are constrained by shallow lot depths and parcel aggregation challenges. Commercial ground floor uses are allowed and encouraged in this designation, but not required. Auto-oriented uses are not appropriate under this designation. This zone does not have a minimum Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The allowable residential density range is 12-25 dwelling units per acre.

18.27.040 Permitted and conditional uses.

The land uses in the following table, are as defined in the Santa Clara City Code (SCCC).

The requirements under “Required Ground Floor Commercial Areas” apply to required ground floor commercial spaces in locations identified in the Ground Floor Commercial Overlay as described in the El Camino Real Specific Plan. If a land use is not listed in the Land Use Table, the use is not allowed, otherwise, uses will be denoted as either; P - Allowed by Right; MUP - Minor Use Permit; CUP - Conditional Use Permit; or Blank - Not Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 5 of 22 Rev:
allowed. Additional regulations may apply to specific uses per SCCC Title 18, Article 4 (Standards for Specific Land Uses).

18.27.050 Land Use Table.

Allowed Uses and
Permit
Requirements
Designations
Land Use
(see SCCC for land use
definitions)
CR-L CR CMU RCMU Additional Regulations and
Exceptions
Residential Uses
Caretaker Housing - - - - See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Dwelling,
Multifamily P P P
Dwelling, Attached
SingleFamily/Townhomes PP P P
Employee Housing - - - -
Home Occupations P P P P See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Live-Work P
2 P2 P1,2 P1,2
1Permitted except along the El
Camino Real street frontage in the
RCMU designation or the Ground
Floor Commercial Overlay.
2 Live/work facilities shall not
count towards commercial FAR
requirements but shall count
toward residential density.

Single-Room
Occupancy (SRO)
Facilities
- - P P
Supportive Housing P P P P
Transitional Housing - - - -
Land Use
(see Zoning Ordinance for
land use definitions)
CR-L CR CMU RCMU Additional Regulations and
Exceptions
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 6 of 22 Rev:

Human Services Uses
Assisted Living
Facilities - - CUP CUP See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Child Day Care
Facilities P P P See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Community Care
Facilities CUP CUP CUP -
Residential Care
Facilities, six or
fewer residents

P P P -
Residential Care
Facilities, seven or
more residents

MUP MUP MUP -
Day Care Homes, Up
to 14 Children P P P P
Supportive Housing P P P
Low Barrier
Navigation Centers P P P P
Emergency Shelters - - - - See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Recreation, Education, and Public Assembly Uses
Cemeteries and
Mausoleums - - - -
Community Gardens MUP MUP MUP
Commercial
Recreation Facilities,
Indoor

P P P P
Commercial
Recreation Facilities,
Outdoors
- - - -
Fitness Facilities P P P P
Libraries P P P -
Museums P P P P
Parks and Public P P P P
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 7 of 22 Rev:

Plazas
Places of Assembly - - CUP CUP
Public Schools P P P P
Private Schools CUP CUP CUP CUP
Public/Private
Colleges and
Universities
- P P P
Vocational/Trade
Schools - P P P
Land Use
(see Zoning Ordinance for
land use definitions)
CR-L CR CMU RCMU Additional Regulations and
Exceptions
Utility, Transportation, and Communication Uses
Broadcasting and
Recording Studios - - - -
Park and Ride
Facilities P P P P
Parking Structures MUP MUP MUP MUP Section 18.14.040(I) Public Safety
Facilities P P P P
Wireless
Telecommunications
Facilities and Towers
Co-location/Small
Cell
P P P P See SCCC Chapter 18.66
Wireless
Telecommunication
Facilities and
Towers, Minor (less
than 70 feet)
MUP MUP MUP MUP See SCCC Chapter 18.66
Wireless
Telecommunication
Facilities, Major (70
feet or higher)
- CUP CUP See SCCC Chapter 18.66
Transit Stations and P P P P
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 8 of 22 Rev:

Terminals
Utility Facilities and
Infrastructure CUP CUP CUP CUP
CUP required for private utility
facilities and infrastructure. Public
utilities and infrastructure are
permitted uses.

Photovoltaic
Systems P P P P
Retail, Service, and Office Uses
Alcoholic Beverage
Sales and Service MUP P P P
Retail sale of beer, wine, and/or
other alcoholic beverages for offpremises consumption at a retail establishment which has 50
percent or more of the shelving or
gross floor area devoted to the
public display. See SCCC Chapter

18.60. Ambulance Services - - - -
Animal Sales and
Grooming Facilities P P P P
Banks and Financial
Establishments,
General

P P P P
Banks and Financial
Establishments,
Stand-alone ATM

P P P P
Bars CUP CUP CUP CUP See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Bed and Breakfast
Inns - - - - See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Business Support
Centers P P P MUP
Drive-in/Drivethrough
Establishments
- - - - See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Equipment Sales and
Rental - - - -
Garden - - - -
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 9 of 22 Rev:

Centers/Plant
Nurseries
Hotels and Motels - - P P Section 18.14.040.O
Land Use CR-L CR CMU RCMU Additional Regulations and
Exceptions
Retail, Service, and Office Uses (continued)
Kennels - - CUP -
Live Entertainment.

Incidental CUP p P P
Live Entertainment,
Standalone MUP/CUP MUP/CUP MUP/CUP MUP/CUP Section 18.14.040.K Maintenance and
Repair Services P P P P
Nightclubs - - - CUP See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Offices P P P P
Outdoor Dining and
Seating MUP MUP MUP MUP See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Outdoor Displays
and Sales CUP CUP CUP CUP See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Personal Services P P P P
Personal Services,
Restricted MUP MUP MUP MUP See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Restaurants P P P P See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Retail Establishments:

General, Small
Format P P P P
General,
Medium
Format
- P MUP P
General, Large
Format - - - CUP
Veterinary Facilities P P P P
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 10 of 22 Rev:

Vehicle Oriented Uses
Vehicle Rental
Facilities, Limited - - MUP MUP
Vehicle Rental
Facilities, Office Only - - P P
Vehicle Repair
Facilities, Minor - - - - See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Vehicle Service
Stations - - CUP CUP See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Industrial, Manufacturing, and Processing Uses
Printing and
Publishing Facilities P P P P
Wineries,
Distilleries,
Breweries, and
Micro-Breweries
MUP MUP MUP MUP See SCCC Chapter 18.60
Personal Storage
Facilities - - - -
Article II. Minor Use Permits (MUPs).

18.27.070 Purpose
Minor Use Permits are for uses of land that require special review and control to ensure they are compatible with the neighborhood and surrounding land uses. They are considered more likely to have greater impacts than land uses permitted by right in the zone, but lesser impacts than uses requiring a Conditional use Permit.

18.27.080 Intent.

The Minor Use Permit procedures are intended to provide sufficient flexibility in the use regulations to further the objectives of this Chapter and of the Zoning Code and to provide the City with the opportunity to impose special conditions to mitigate potential Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 11 of 22 Rev:
impacts that could result from allowing the use(s) at the requested location.

18.27.090 Applicability
Approval of a Minor Use Permit is required to authorize proposed land uses specified by Table 18.27.050 above (Land Use Table), and Development Standards as being allowable in the applicable zone when subject to the approval of a Minor Use Permit.

18.27.100 Application Filing, Processing, and Review
A. Filing and Processing. An application for a Minor Use Permit shall be filed and processed in compliance with Article II (Minor Use Permits) of this Chapter 18.27.

B. Application Contents. The application shall include the information and materials specified in the most up-to-date Department handout for Conditional and Minor Use Permit applications, together with the required fee in compliance with the Fee Schedule.

C. Responsibility. It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide evidence in support of the findings required by Section 18.27.300 (Findings and Decision), below.

D. Applicable Review Authority.

1. Except as provided in paragraph 2 below, Minor Use Permits shall be reviewed and either approved or denied by the Director.

2. The Director may choose to refer any Minor Use Permit application to the Planning Commission.

18.27.200 Project Review, Notice, and Hearing
Each application for a Minor Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Director to ensure that the proposal complies with all applicable requirements of this Chapter 18.27 and the Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 12 of 22 Rev:

Zoning Code.

A. Notice Required. Before a decision on a Minor Use Permit is made, the City shall provide notice as follows.

1. The notice shall state that the Director will decide whether to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the Minor Use Permit application on a date specified in the notice, and that a public hearing will be held only if requested in writing by any interested person before the specified date for the decision.

2. Any written request for a hearing shall be based on issues of significance directly related to the application (e.g., provision of evidence that the request cannot meet one or more of the findings specified in Section 18.27.030 [Findings and Decision], below).

3. If the Director determines that the evidence has merit and can be properly addressed by a condition(s) added to the Minor Use Permit approval, the Director may consider the permit in compliance with paragraph B.2, below.

B. Hearing.

1. A hearing before the Director shall be scheduled and noticed if either of the following apply:
a. If a public hearing is requested and the provisions of paragraph A.3, above, do not apply; or
b. The Director determines that a hearing would serve the public interest.

2. In all other circumstances, the Director shall render a decision on the date Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 13 of 22 Rev:
specified in the notice referred to in paragraph A.1, above.

C. Appeals. The Director’s decision is appealable to the Planning Commission. In the event of such an appeal to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission decision shall be final and non-appealable.

18.27.300 Findings and Decision
The Review Authority may approve or conditionally approve a Minor Use Permit only after first making all of the following findings:

A. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan to the maximum extent practicable;
B. The proposed use is allowed within the subject zone and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Zoning Code and the City Code; C. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the allowed uses in the vicinity;
D. Operation of the use at the location proposed would not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, or endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare; and E. The subject site is:

1. Physically suitable in terms of design, location, operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle (e.g., fire and medical) access and public services and utilities; and

2. Served by highways and streets adequate in width and improvement to carry the type and quantity of traffic the proposed use would likely generate.

Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 14 of 22 Rev:

18.27.400 Conditions of Approval
When considering approval of a Minor Use Permit, the Review Authority may impose any conditions deemed reasonable and necessary to ensure that the approval will comply with the findings required by Section 18.27.300 (Findings and Decision), above.

Article III. Development Standards for the El Camino Real Corridor

18.27.500 Existing Buildings and Uses.
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision in this Chapter, the lawful use of buildings existing prior to the adoption of this Chapter may continue and none of the other sections of this Chapter 18.27 shall apply, as though the prior zoning of the parcel remained in place, until such time as the existing use (including any expansions) has been discontinued in its entirety, at which time the prior zoning shall become inapplicable and the other sections of this chapter shall apply from that point forward. (b) Allowed Uses. For parcels with legal uses of buildings existing prior to the adoption of this Chapter, permitted uses of the prior zoning district are allowed, and none of the other sections of this chapter shall apply to such building and use, until such time as the existing use (including any expansions) has been discontinued in its entirety. (c) Conditional Uses. For parcels with legal uses of buildings existing prior to the adoption of this chapter, conditional uses of the prior zoning district are conditionally permitted, and none of the other sections of this chapter shall apply, until such time as the existing use (including any expansions) has been discontinued in its entirety. (d) Development Standards. For parcels with legal uses of buildings existing prior to Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 15 of 22 Rev:
the adoption of this chapter, development standards of the prior zoning district shall apply, and none of the other sections of this chapter shall apply, until such time as the existing use (including any expansions) has been discontinued in its entirety.

18.27.600 Regional Commercial Mixed Use District (RCMU) Development Standards Table.

Standards Regional Commercial Mixed Use
Height, Density, & Intensity 1
Maximum Stories/Height to Top of Wall 70 ft (6 stories)2,3,4,5 Minimum Commercial Floor Area Ratio 0.2
Maximum Dwelling Units per Acre 100 du/acre5
Minimum Dwelling Units per Acre 55 du/acre
Minimum Commercial Ground Floor Area
50% of the ground floor along ECR parcel frontage. See
Specific Plan Table 4-13, Ground Floor Commercial
Overlay Requirements.

Transitions Adjacent to Single-Family/Duplex Zoning Districts Maximum Height adjacent to Single-Family
and Duplex residential zoning districts
Parcels on the Northern Side of ECR: No portion of the
building volume shall encroach into a daylight plane
starting six feet above grade at the property line and
sloping upward at a 30-degree angle toward the interior of the lot.

Parcels on the Southern Side of ECR: No portion of the
building volume shall encroach into a daylight plane
starting six feet above grade at the property line and
sloping upward at a 45-degree angle toward the interior of the lot. (see Figure 4-19 of the Specific Plan).

See also Neighborhood Transitions in Section 4.4 of the Specific Plan.

Maximum Height across the street from
Single-Family and Duplex residential zoning
districts
6 At the setback line, the height of the roof plate7 may be no taller than one story above the maximum height
allowed in the opposing residential zone. Behind the
setback line, building heights may step up away from
the street following a 45-degree angle measured from
the roof plate (see Figure 4-22 of the Specific Plan). See also Neighborhood Transition in Section 4.4 of the
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 16 of 22 Rev:

Specific Plan.

1. Density shall be calculated as net density, which excludes public streets and dedicated public parkland (per Chapter 17.35 of the Santa Clara City Code). The lot area that contains publicly-accessible private open space, private streets and pathways, and required easements will be counted toward lot area for the purposes of calculating residential density and commercial floor area ratio.

2. See Specific Plan Figure 4-1, Heights.

3. Projects must comply with both stories and overall height maximums. Height exceptions up to 10 feet above the maximum may be allowed to accommodate architectural features, rooftop stair access and elevator shafts, mechanical equipment, or other rooftop amenities, as approved by City staff.

4. FAA airspace safety clearance may be required on a project-specific basis pursuant to Federal Aviation Regulations/Part 77.

5. Projects may be eligible for additional height, density, or FAR in exchange for providing community benefits above and beyond what is required by the Plan, as outlined in Specific Plan section 6.2, Community Benefits Program.

6. Applies to portions of a development directly opposite a residentially zoned property where the street is less than 50 feet wide.

7. A roof plate is defined as the top horizontal framing member of a wall where the roof structure is attached.

Standards Regional Commercial Mixed Use
Lot or Development Site Setbacks and
Frontage
Ground Floor
Commercial Other Ground Floor Uses
ECR Minimum Front Setback, from back of
walk 2
0 or 5 ft3 10 ft4
ECR Maximum Front Setback, from back of
walk 1,2 10 ft 15 ft
Minimum Street Setback, other than ECR 10 ft 15 ft
Maximum Street Setback, other than ECR 15 ft 20 ft
Minimum Rear Setback (from adjacent parcel
or alley) 10 ft
Minimum Side Setback (from adjacent parcel) 5 ft
Minimum Rear Setback adjacent to single
family and duplex residentially-zoned parcel 25 ft
Minimum Side Setback adjacent to singlefamily and duplex zoned parcel 25 ft Private Open Space5 Non-Residential Hotel
Residential/Residential
Portion of Mixed-Use
Project
Minimum Required Personal Open Space NA NA 120 sf per unit, of Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 17 of 22 Rev:

Minimum Required Common Usable Open
Space NA 20 sf per
room
which at least 40 sf
shall be personal67
Minimum Required Publicly-Accessible Open
Space 10% of lot area 8
Storage
Personal Storage 110 cubic ft per unit
Standards Regional Commercial Mixed Use
Parking9
Maximum Surface Parking Length along ECR
parcel frontage
30% (See also Parking and Loading Location and
Frontage standard in Section

4.4)
Minimum Setback for Off-Street Surface
Parking. Loading. Service and
Vehicular Circulation
Off-Street parking, loading, service. and vehicular
circulation areas are prohibited in the front and
street side setback. except for driveway access. OffStreet parking, vehicular circulation. loading, and service areas shall be located behind the minimum
setback or 5 feet from the back of walk. whichever is
greater.

Required Off-Street Parking and Loading
Private off-street parking and loading shall be
provided in accordance with SCCC Chapter 18.38
(Off-Street Parking Regulations and Design
Standards).

Required Bicycle Parking Spaces See Specific Plan Chapter 5, Transportation and Public Spaces

1. At least 75% of the building facade shall be located within the minimum and maximum setback lines; up to 25% of the building façade may be located behind the maximum setback to allow for massing breaks, forecourts, plazas, etc. Publicly-accessible plazas/open spaces may be subtracted from the overall facade length to calculate the minimum percentage of building facade to be located within the setback range.

2. The intent is to achieve a total sidewalk width of 20 feet along El Camino Real, with a minimum sidewalk width of 15.5 feet. Setbacks are measured from the new back of walk. As sites are redeveloped over time, the City will work with property owners to negotiate the appropriate dedication and/or public easement to meet new sidewalk requirements on a case-by-case basis.

3. The minimum setback is 0 feet in instances where the sidewalk width is 20 feet. In areas where that cannot be achieved and the sidewalk is less than 20 feet wide, the minimum setback is 5 feet from the back of walk.

4. The minimum front/street side setback for live/work units shall be 10 feet from the back of walk.

5. Open space requirements are separate from parkland dedication requirements established by SCCC Chapter 17.35. However, depending on the size, location, and amenities provided, it is possible that the open space would qualify for private open space credit under Chapter 17.35. In the RCMU designation, onsite Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 18 of 22 Rev:
public parks provided per the City’s parkland dedication requirements may count towards fulfilling the 10% publicly-accessible open space standard, subject to approval by the Director of Parks and Recreation (per Section 17.35.080).

6. The required personal open space for up to 50% of the units may be provided as common private open space (i.e. 120 sf per unit could be provided as common open space).

7. Includes roof decks and other shared common open areas. Setback areas are not considered usable open space unless they are at least 20 feet wide from the building to the property line. Up to 40 sf per unit can be provided in an indoor communal space so long as it opens directly on to a common outdoor space.

8. Must be ground floor publicly-accessible open space.

18.27.610 Additional Standards for Regional Commercial Mixed Use A. Limitation on Townhomes. Townhomes/single-family attached dwelling units shall be limited to a maximum of 25% of the site/lot area for developments in the RCMU designation.

B. Shared Parking. Regional Commercial Mixed Use Centers shall include shared parking between uses with different peak periods to encourage the efficient use of parking resources and are eligible for reduced parking requirements, in accordance with SCCC Section 18.38.040.A. For example, residential visitor and retail customer parking spaces can be shared. The total number of spaces and their distribution through the site shall be substantiated through a parking demand study and a parking management plan prepared by a qualified traffic engineering professional subject to approval by the Director. See Specific Plan Chapter 5, Transportation and Public Spaces, for additional details and requirements. //
//
//
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 19 of 22 Rev:

18.27.700 Corridor Mixed Use District (CMU) Development Standards Table.

Standards Corridor Mixed Use
Height, Density, & Intensity 1
Maximum Stories/Height to Top of Wall 60 ft (5 stories)2,3,4 Minimum Floor Area Ratio None
Minimum Dwelling Units per Acre 45 du/acre
Maximum Dwelling Units per Acre 65 du/acre4
Minimum Commercial Ground Floor Area
See Specific Plan Table 4-13, Ground Floor
Commercial Overlay Requirements. Specific Plan
Figure 4-18 shows locations where commercial is
required for 50% of the ground floor building
frontage along El Camino Real. All other areas -
commercial allowed, not required.

Transitions Adjacent to Single-Family/Duplex Zoning Districts Maximum Height adjacent to Single-Family and
Duplex residential zoning districts
Parcels on the Northern Side of ECR: No portion of
the building volume shall encroach into a daylight
plane starting six feet above grade at the
property line and sloping upward at a 30-degree
angle toward the interior of the lot.

Parcels on the Southern Side of ECR: 1 No portion
of the building volume shall encroach into a
daylight plane starting six feet above grade at the
property line and sloping upward at a 45-degree
angle toward the interior of the lot. (see Figure 4-
19 of the Specific Plan).

See also Neighborhood Transitions in Section 4.4 of
the Specific Plan.

Maximum Height across the street from SingleFamily and Duplex residential zoning districts 5 At the setback line, the height of the roof plate6
may be no taller than one story above the
maximum height allowed in the opposing
residential zone. Behind the setback line, building
heights may step up away from the street following
a 45-degree angle measured from the roof plate.

See also Neighborhood Transitions in Section 4.4 of
the Specific Plan.

1. Density shall be calculated as net density, which excludes public streets and dedicated public parkland (per Chapter 17.35 of the Santa Clara City Code). The lot area that contains publicly-accessible private open Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 20 of 22 Rev:
space, private streets and pathways, and required easements will be counted toward lot area for the purposes of calculating residential density and commercial floor area ratio.

2. See Specific Plan Figure 4-1, Heights.

4. Projects may be eligible for additional height, density, or FAR in exchange for providing community benefits above and beyond what is required by the Plan, as outlined in Specific Plan section 6.2, Community Benefits Program.

5. Applies to portions of a development directly opposite a residentially zoned property where the street is less than 50 feet wide.

6. A roof plate is defined as the top horizontal framing member of a wall where the roof structure is attached.

Standards Corridor Mixed Use
Lot or Development Site Setbacks and Frontage Ground Floor Commercial Other Ground Floor Uses
ECR Minimum Front Setback, from back of walk 2 0 or 5 ft3 10 ft4 ECR Maximum Front Setback, from back of walk 1,2 10 ft 15 ft Minimum Street Setback, other than ECR 10 ft 10 ft
Maximum Street Setback, other than ECR 15 ft 20 ft
Minimum Rear Setback (from adjacent parcel or
alley) 5 ft
Minimum Setback adjacent to single family and
duplex residentially-zoned parcel 25 ft
Minimum Side Setback adjacent to single-family
and duplex zoned parcel 15 ft
Private Open Space5 Non-Residential Hotel
Residential /
Residential
Portion of
Mixed-Use
Project
Minimum Required Personal Open Space NA NA 150 sf, of
which at least
50 sf shall be
personal67
Minimum Required Common Usable Open Space NA 20 sf per
room
Minimum Required Publicly-Accessible Open Space NA NA
Personal Storage
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 21 of 22 Rev:

Personal storage 110 cubic square feet
Standards Corridor Mixed Use
Parking9
Maximum Surface Parking Length along ECR parcel
frontage
30% (See also Parking and Loading Location and
Frontage standard in Section

4.4)
Minimum Setback for Off-Street Surface parking,
Loading, Service, and Vehicular Circulation
Off-Street parking, loading, service, and vehicular
circulation areas are prohibited in the front and
street side setback, except for driveway access.

Off-Street parking, vehicular circulation, loading,
and service areas shall be located behind the
minimum setback or 5 feet from the back of walk,
whichever is greater.

Required Off-Street Parking and Loading
Private off-street parking and loading shall be
provided in accordance with
SCCC Chapter 18.38 (Off-Street Parking
Regulations and Design
Standards).

Required Bicycle Parking Spaces See Specific Plan Chapter 5, Transportation and Public Spaces

3. The minimum front/street side setback for live/work units shall be 10 feet from the back of walk.

4. The minimum setback is 0 feet in instances where the sidewalk width is 20 feet. In areas where that cannot be achieved and the sidewalk is less than 20 feet wide, the minimum setback is 5 feet from the back of walk.

5. Open space requirements are separate from the parkland dedication requirements established by SCCC Chapter 17.35. However, depending on the size, location, and amenities provided, it is possible that the open space would qualify for private open space credit under Chapter 17.35.

6. Required personal open space for up to 50% of units can be provided as common private open space.

7. Includes roof decks and shared common areas. Setback areas are not considered usable open space unless they are at least 20 feet wide from the building to the property line. Up to 50 sf per unit can be provided in an indoor communal space so long as it opens directly on to a common outdoor space.

8. The minimum setback for parcels adjoining Saratoga Creek ROW shall be 20 feet.

9. Refer to the Zoning Code for additional off street parking and loading requirements.

Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 22 of 22 Rev:

18.27.800 Corridor Residential District (CR) Development Standards Table.

Standards Corridor Residential Corridor Residential - Low Height, Density, & Intensity 1
Maximum Stories/Height to Top
of Wall 50 ft (4 stories)2,3,4 40 ft (3 stories) 2,3,4
Minimum Floor Area Ratio None None
Minimum Dwelling Units per Acre 26 du/acre 12 du/acre
Maximum Dwelling Units per
Acre 45 du/acre4 25 du/acre4
Minimum Commercial Ground
Floor Area
Commercial allowed, not
required
Commercial allowed, not
required
Transitions Adjacent to Single-Family/Duplex Residential Districts Maximum Height adjacent
residential zoning district
Parcels on the Northern Side of
ECR: No portion of the building
volume shall encroach into a
daylight plane starting six feet
above grade at the property line
and sloping upward at a 30-
degree angle toward the interior
of the lot.

Parcels on the Southern Side of
ECR: No portion of the building
volume shall encroach into a
daylight plan starting six feet
above grade at the property line
and sloping upward at a 45-
degree angle toward the interior
of the lot (Specific Plan Figure 4-
19).

NA
Maximum Height across the
street from residential zoning
district5
At the setback line, the height of
the roof plate6 may be no taller
than one story above the
maximum height allowed in the
opposing residential zone. Behind
the setback line, building heights
may step up away from the street
following a 45-degree angle
measured from the roof plate
NA
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 23 of 22 Rev:
(Specific Plan Figure 4-22).

2. See Specific Plan Figure 4-1, Heights.

5. Applies to portions of a development directly opposite a residentially zoned property where the street is less than 50 feet wide.

6. A roof plate is defined as the top horizontal framing member of a wall where the roof structure is attached.

Standards Corridor Residential
Lot or Development Site Setbacks and Frontage
Ground Floor
Commercial Other Ground Floor Uses
ECR Minimum Front Setback, from back of walk 2 0 or 5 ft3,4 10 ft4 ECR Maximum Front Setback, from back of walk 1,2 10 ft 15 ft Minimum Street Setback, other than ECR 10 ft 15 ft
Maximum Street Setback, other than ECR 15 ft 10 ft
Minimum Rear Setback (from adjacent parcel or
alley) 5 ft 10 ft
Minimum Side Setback (from adjacent parcel) 5 ft
Minimum Setback adjacent to single family and
duplex residentially-zoned parcel 20 ft
Private Open Space5 Non-Residential Hotel
Residential /
Residential
Portion of
Mixed-Use
Project
Minimum Required Personal Open Space NA NA 180 sf per
Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 24 of 22 Rev:

Minimum Required Common Usable Open Space NA 20 sf per
room
unit, of which
at least 50 sf
shall be
personal67
Minimum Required Publicly-Accessible Open Space NA NA NA Storage
Personal Storage 110 cubic feet per unit

4. The minimum front/street side setback for live/work units shall be 10 feet from the back of walk.

6. Includes roof decks and other shared common open areas. Setback areas are not considered usable open space unless they are at least 20 feet wide from the building to the property line. Up to 50 sf per unit can be provided in an indoor communal space so long as it opens directly on to a common outdoor space.

7. Includes shared common areas. Setback areas are not considered usable open space unless they are at least 20 feet wide from the building to the property line.

8. The minimum setback for parcels adjoining Saratoga Creek ROW shall be 20 feet.

Standards Corridor Residential - Low
Lot or Development Site Setbacks and Frontage Ground Floor Commercial Other Ground Floor Uses
ECR Minimum Front Setback, from back of walk 2 0 or 5 ft3,4 10 ft4 ECR Maximum Front Setback, from back of walk 1,2 10 ft 15 ft Minimum Street Setback, other than ECR 10 ft 10 ft
Maximum Street Setback, other than ECR 15 ft 20 ft
Minimum Rear Setback (from adjacent parcel or 5 ft8 10 ft8 Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 25 of 22 Rev:
alley)
Minimum Rear Setback adjacent to single-family
and duplex residentially-zoned parcel 15 ft
Minimum Side Setback (from adjacent parcel) 5 ft
Minimum Setback adjacent to single family and
duplex residentially-zoned parcel 10 ft
Private Open Space5 Non-Residential Hotel
Residential
/
Residential
Portion of
Mixed-Use
Project
Minimum Required Personal Open Space NA NA 200 sf per
unit, of
which at
least 100 sf
shall be
personal67
Minimum Required Common Usable Open Space NA 20 sf per
room
Minimum Required Publicly-Accessible Open Space NA NA NA Storage
Personal Storage NA
Parking7
Maximum Surface Parking Length along ECR parcel
frontage 30%
Minimum Setback for Surface Parking 10 t

1. At least 75% of the building facade shall be located within the minimum and maximum setback lines:
up to 25% of the building facade may be located behind the maximum setback to allow for massing breaks. forecourts. plazas. etc. Publicly-accessible plazas/open spaces may be subtracted from the overall facade length to calculate the minimum percentage of building facade to be located within the setback range.

2. The intent is to achieve a total sidewalk width of 20 feet along El Camino Real. with a minimum sidewalk width of 15.5 feet. Setbacks are measured from the new back of walk. As sites are redeveloped over time. the City will work with property owners to negotiate the appropriate dedication and/or public easement to meet new sidewalk requirements on a case-by-case basis.

3. The minimum setback is O feet in instances where the sidewalk width is 20 feet. In areas where that cannot be achieved and the sidewalk is less than 20 feet wide the minimum setback is 5 feet from the back of walk.

4. The minimum front/street side setback for live/work units shall be 10 feet from the back of walk.

5. Open space requirements are separate from parkland dedication requirements established by SCCC Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 26 of 22 Rev:

Chapter 17.35. However. depending on the size. location. And amenities provided. it is possible that the open space would qualify for private open space credit under SCCC Chapter 17.35.

6. Includes roof decks and shared common areas. Setback areas are not considered usable open space unless they are at least 20 feet wide from the building to the property line. Up to 50 sf per unit can be provided in an indoor communal space so long as it opens directly on to a common outdoor space.

7. Includes shared common areas. Setback areas are not considered usable open space unless they are at least 20 feet wide from the building to the property line.

8. The minimum setback for parcels adjoining Saratoga Creek ROW shall be 20 feet.

Corridor Residential and Corridor Residential – Low Parking Standards Standards Corridor Residential Corridor Residential - Low Parking
Maximum Surface Parking Length
along ECR parcel frontage
30% (See also Parking and Loading Location and Frontage standard in Section 4.4 of the Specific Plan)
Maximum Garage Frontage for
Townhomes
See Townhome Garage Frontage standard in Section 4.4 of the Specific Plan
Minimum Setback for Off-Street
Surface Parking, Loading, Service,
and Vehicular Circulation
Off-Street parking, loading, service, and vehicular circulation areas are prohibited in the front and street side setback, except for driveway access. Off-Street parking, vehicular circulation, loading, and service areas shall be located behind the minimum setback or 5 feet from the back of walk, whichever is greater.

Required Off-Street Parking and
Loading
Private off-street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with SCCC Chapter 18.38 (Off-Street Parking Regulations and Design Standards)
Required Bicycle Parking Spaces See Specific Plan Chapter 5, Transportation and Public Spaces

18.27.900 Additional Development Standards.

In addition to the standards specified in the following, all development standards contained in the El Camino Real Specific Plan shall be applicable.

A. Landscape Screening Between Uses. A landscape buffer shall be provided between residential and mixed-use/nonresidential uses, and between singlefamily uses and multi-family uses containing three or more units. Buffer Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 27 of 22 Rev:
areas shall include a minimum 5-foot wide planter strip with a minimum of one tree per 20 to 40 linear feet on center depending on trees species and canopy at maturity. Buffer areas shall also be planted with ground cover and shrubs. Additional landscaping and fencing requirements are set forth in Chapters 18.34 and 18.36.

B. Balconies. Balconies on floors greater than 25 feet in height shall be set back a minimum of 25 feet from an abutting property line with a singlefamily/duplex residential zoned parcel or existing single- family/duplex home.

C. Building Frontage Location. At least 75% of the building facade shall be located within the minimum and maximum setback lines; up to 25% of the building façade may be located behind the maximum setback to allow for massing breaks, forecourts, plazas, etc. Publicly-accessible plazas/open spaces may be subtracted from the overall facade length to calculate the minimum percentage of building facade to be located within the setback range. See Specific Plan Figure 4-25.

D. Maximum Building Length. Buildings shall not exceed 450 feet in length or width. See also Smaller Blocks and New Connections standard.

E. Major Massing Breaks. Buildings greater than three stories in height with a building facade greater than 200 feet in length shall have a minimum of one major massing break. Major massing breaks shall be a minimum of five feet deep and a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall extend the full height of the building including a break in the roofline. Building facades greater than 400 Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 28 of 22 Rev:
feet in length shall include at least two major massing breaks with one major break with a minimum depth of 10 feet and minimum width of 20 feet. See Specific Plan Figure 4-26.

F. Minor Massing Breaks. Continuous building facades greater than 100 feet in length shall have at least one minor massing break through the use of varying setbacks, building entries and recesses, or structural bays. Minor breaks shall be a minimum of two feet deep and five feet wide and shall extend at minimum the full height of the building above the ground floor, including a break in the roofline. See Specific Plan Figure 4-26.

G. Facade Rhythm and Pattern. Residential and residential mixed-use buildings shall express a rhythm and pattern of lines, shapes, forms, and/or colors that reflects the size and scale of a housing unit and/or individual rooms and spaces. This may be achieved through building modulation to create vertically-oriented facades (height greater than the width of the facade), facade articulation, and repeating vertically- oriented patterns of fenestration. This rhythm shall be between 20 to 50 feet in width of linear frontage. See Specific Plan Figure 4-27.

H. Building Components (Base/Middle/Top). This standard applies to buildings that are designed using a traditional architectural style. Buildings four stories and higher, on lots wider than 75 feet, shall be designed to differentiate a defined base, a middle or body, and a top, cornice, or parapet cap. Buildings three stories or less on lots wider than 75 feet shall include at Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 29 of 22 Rev:
minimum a defined base and top. See Specific Plan Figure 4-28. Each of these elements shall be distinguished from one another for a minimum of 70% of the facade length through use of two or more of the following:
a. Horizontal facade modulation. Horizontal facade modulation which could include upper floor or ground floor step backs. Ground floor step backs shall include a horizontal shift of the ground floor facade with a minimum depth of two feet to create an overhang or arcade.

Upper floor step backs shall include at minimum a five- foot step back from the primary facade for a minimum of 80% of the length of the facade.
b. Horizontal facade articulation and/or variation in facade articulation strategy (see Facade Articulation standard).
c. Variation in facade rhythm and pattern (see Facade Rhythm and Pattern standard).
d. Variation in fenestration strategy (size, proportions, pattern, and depth or projection) (see Fenestration standard).
e. Variation in material (facade material, material size, texture and/or pattern) and color.

I. Façade Articulation. Building facades shall use a variety of strategies including building modulation, fenestration, and facade articulation to create visual interest and express a variety of scales through a variety of strategies.

All facades shall include a minimum of two of the following facade Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 30 of 22 Rev:
articulation strategies to create visual interest:
a. Recesses. Vertical and horizontal recesses such as a pattern of recessed grouping of windows, recessed panels, or similar strategies.

The recess shall be a minimum four inches in depth.
b. Projections. Vertical and horizontal projections such as shading and weather protection devices, applied art reliefs and sculptures, decorative architectural details, or similar strategies. Projections shall be a minimum four inches in depth. Shading and weather protection shall be a minimum of two feet in depth. Art reliefs are exempt from minimum depths.
c. Datum lines. Datum lines that continue the length of the building, such as cornices, with a minimum four inches in height and a minimum two inches in depth with a change in material.
d. Balconies. Balconies or Juliet balconies (every 20 to 50 feet).

Balconies shall be a minimum of five feet in depth; Juliet balconies shall be a minimum of eight inches in depth.
e. Screening devices. Screening devices such as lattices, louvers, perforated metal screens, or similar strategies; that are distinct in material from the primary facade.

J. Fenestration. Fenestration shall meet the following standards:
a. Fenestration shall reinforce vertical proportions and patterns with vertically oriented windows that shall not exceed a 2:1 horizontal- to- Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 31 of 22 Rev:
vertical ratio.
b. Windows shall be recessed a minimum of three inches to provide a “punched” recessed character, or shall provide a combination of trim and recess with minimum one inch recess.
c. Curtain walls, if used, shall have a vertical orientation of mullions, joints, or solid panels that create a vertical pattern that does not exceed a 2:1 horizontal-to-vertical ratio.

K. Blank Walls. Blank walls (facades without doors, windows, landscaping treatments, artistic treatments, or facade articulation as identified in the Facade Articulation standard) shall be less than 30 feet in length along sidewalks, pedestrian walks, or open spaces. For parking structure facade treatments and screening, see the Parking Structure Design and Screening standard.

L. Roof Edge Treatment. Buildings shall be designed with at least one of the following roofline edge treatments:
a. A decorative cornice treatment (other than just colored “stripes” or “bands”). Cornices shall project a minimum of four inches from the facade.
b. A sloped roof with overhangs and brackets.
c. A parapet, which shall include a cap and corner detail to create a shadow line to enhance the building.

M. Front Yard Setback Landscaping. Required setbacks shall provide Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 32 of 22 Rev:
landscaped areas to create a transition between public and private space.

The following standards apply based on intended use, and are exclusive of areas devoted to the required dedication/public easement to meet the new 20-foot sidewalk requirement, outdoor seating, front porches, door swing of building entries, and publicly accessible open space:
a. Ground floor retail or active uses. A minimum of 10 percentage of the required setback shall be landscaped.
b. Other ground floor non-residential uses. A minimum of 20% of the required setback area shall be landscaped.
c. Ground floor residential uses. A minimum of 40% of the required setback area shall be landscaped. Front yards that are greater than 10 feet in depth shall also include at minimum one tree per 40 linear feet of street frontage.

N. Retail/Storefront Ground Floor Design.
a. Ground floor height. Ground floor height shall be a minimum 16 feet interior floor-to-ceiling height.
b. Minimum tenant space depth. All ground floor commercial/retail tenant spaces shall be at least 50 feet deep for a minimum of 50% of primary street building facades. All other commercial frontages shall be a minimum 30 feet in depth. Parcels less than 100 feet in depth are exempt from this requirement.
c. Minimum tenant space width. Ground floor retail and commercial shall Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 33 of 22 Rev:
have tenant space width of at least 16.5 feet.
d. Transparency. Ground floor retail and commercial uses shall contain transparent openings, doors, and windows for a minimum of 60% of the total wall area located between 30 inches and eight feet above ground level for facades facing sidewalks, pedestrian walks, or publicly-accessible open space areas. Dark tinted, reflective, mirrored, or opaque glazing is not permitted for any required wall opening along ground floor retail facades.
e. Bulkheads and solid base walls. If provided, shall not be less than 12 inches or higher than 30 inches.
f. Transom windows. Commercial clerestory and transom windows are recommended to provide a continuous horizontal band or row of windows across the upper portion of the shopfront.
g. Weather protection. Primary ground floor entrances shall include weather protection that is a minimum six feet wide and four feet deep by recessing the entry, providing an awning/ canopy, or using a combination of these methods.

O. Other Non-Residential Ground Floor Design.
a. Ground floor height. Ground floor height shall be a minimum 15 feet floor-to-ceiling or shall match the second floor datum line of an abutting building.
b. Transparency. Other non-residential ground floor facades shall Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 34 of 22 Rev:
contain transparent openings, doors, and windows for a minimum of 50% of the total wall area located between 30 inches and eight feet above ground level for facades facing sidewalks, pedestrian walks, or publicly-accessible open space areas. Dark tinted, reflective, mirrored, or opaque glazing is not permitted.
c. Non-residential spaces. Lobbies, common amenity spaces, leasing offices, and similar non- residential spaces that are a part of new mixed-use development shall provide direct access to an adjacent street, patio, or open space.
d. Weather protection. Primary entries shall include weather protection that is a minimum eight feet wide and six feet deep by recessing the entry, providing an awning/canopy, or using a combination of these methods.

P. Venting Shafts and Grease Interceptors. Mixed-use multi-story buildings with ground floor commercial shall provide grease interceptors and venting shafts for cooktops, ovens, and other food heating equipment for a minimum of 50% of the ground floor square footage. This equipment shall meet the requirements of Environmental Health and/or the Sanitary District. Side discharge vents are discouraged.

Q. Structural Columns. Structural columns shall be at least 20 feet from each other in each direction to facilitate functional tenant space configuration.

R. Single-Story Non-Residential Frontages. For new single-story non- Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 35 of 22 Rev:
residential buildings, at least 75 percent of the street-facing portion of the building shall be at a height of at least 20 feet to the top of the parapet, to ensure pedestrian-supportive street presence and appropriate scale with neighboring uses.

S. Residential Ground Floor Design.
a. The finished floor of ground floor residential units shall be within the minimum and maximum heights according to setback distance from back of walk identified in Specific Plan Figure 4–32, and as follows:
i. Setback 10 - <15 feet: Minimum finished floor height of three feet above grade; maximum finished floor height of five feet above grade.
ii. Setback 15 - <20 feet: Minimum finished floor height of two feet above grade; maximum finished floor height of four feet above grade.
iii. Setback ≥ 20 feet: Minimum finish floor height of zero feet above grade; maximum finished floor height of three feet above grade.
b. Setbacks/dooryards/stoops shall be terraced such that any retaining wall is no taller than three feet.
c. On sites with a cross slope greater than two percent along a building facade, the average height of the finished floor and back of walk shall be used. Where ADA accessibility requirements prohibit raised unit Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 36 of 22 Rev:
entries for some or all units, those units are exempt. For corridor buildings, accessible entries shall be located on the corridor. d. Ground floor units shall include ground cover and/or shrubs to limit views into residential units. Where the front setback is 15 feet or greater, trees shall be planted in the building setback at a minimum of one tree per 40 linear feet of facade.

T. Primary Shared Residential Entries. Primary entries shared by multiple units shall meet the following standards:
a. At least one pedestrian entry is required for each building on each primary street frontage, unless a greater number is required by the adopted Building or Fire Codes. A single corner entry may be provided to fulfill this requirement.
b. Primary shared residential entries shall provide weather protection that is a minimum eight feet wide and six feet deep by recessing the entry, providing an awning/canopy or using a combination of these methods.

U. Primary Individual Residential Entries.
a. A minimum of 50% of the ground floor residential units that face a public right-of-way, publicly-accessible path, or open space shall have unit entries that face the street, path, or open space (Senior units or other deed-restricted units for special populations are exempt.). b. Primary ground floor entrances serving individual residential units Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 37 of 22 Rev:
shall include weather protection that is a minimum of four feet wide and four feet deep by recessing the entry, providing an awning/canopy, or using a combination of these methods.

V. Windows. Windows shall be recessed a minimum of three inches to provide a “punched” recessed character, or shall provide a combination of trim and recess with minimum one inch recess.

W. Curtain Walls. Curtain walls, if used, shall have a vertical orientation of mullions, joints, or solid panels that create a vertical pattern that does not exceed a 2:1 horizontal-to-vertical ratio.

X. Durable Materials. Buildings shall be designed with high-quality, durable finishing materials which include concrete, steel, stone, brick, tile, hardwood, stucco, and glass. Low quality materials including corrugated metal, stucco foam trim, and T1-11 siding are prohibited.

Y. Variation in Materials. At least two materials shall be used on any building frontage, in addition to glazing and railings. Any one material must comprise at least 20 percent of the building frontage, excluding windows, railings, base bulkheads, and trim.

Z. Communal Refuse and Recycling Collection Areas.
a. For development projects with communal refuse and recycling areas/containers, a communal refuse room or enclosure structure shall be provided that is adequate in capacity, number, and distribution to accommodate all waste generation of the site. The Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 38 of 22 Rev:
number of containers and collection areas shall be reviewed and approved by the local disposal service.
b. Location and Screening of Communal Refuse and Recycling Enclosures. Refuse and recycling collection areas shall be integrated into building and landscape design and located to minimize impact on the pedestrian experience and neighboring properties by complying with the following the standards. See additional requirements in SCCC Section 18.30.060 (Solid Waste and Recycling Enclosures and Storage Areas).
i. Refuse and recycling collection areas shall be prohibited along front or street side frontages, or in any required parking spaces, required landscape areas, and open space areas. ii. Refuse and recycling collection areas shall be located inside of buildings or inside of covered enclosures located along alleys, in parking areas, or at the rear and side of buildings. iii. Refuse and recycling collection areas, to the extent feasible, shall be located as far as possible from the residential portion of mixed-use buildings and open space areas. Storage areas shall not be located closer than 20 feet from doors or operable windows of adjacent structures.
iv. Enclosures shall be on a concrete pad with a concrete apron that facilitates the handling of the individual bins or containers.

Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 39 of 22 Rev:
v. Enclosures shall be adequate in height to fully screen containers and materials.
vi. Enclosures shall be opaque and made of a primary exterior finish material(s) used on other portions of buildings, masonry, decorative block, or architectural grade wood, and may be accented with metal. Barbed wire and chain-link fencing are prohibited.
vii. Enclosure doors shall not swing into any public right-of-way, driveway approaches, or drive aisles. In these cases, sliding doors may be used.
viii. Separate pedestrian access shall be provided to encourage main gates to remain closed. Enclosures shall be properly secured to prevent access by unauthorized persons, while allowing authorized persons access for disposal of materials.

AA. Lighting and Security.
a. Open parking areas and common open space areas shall include lighting which provides a minimum illumination of one footcandle.

Lighting fixtures shall be weather and vandal resistant. Lighting shall reflect away from residential areas and public streets. b. All main entrance doors to individual dwelling units shall be equipped with one hundred eighty (180) degree door viewers. Each main entrance door shall be equipped with a deadbolt lock with a cylinder Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 40 of 22 Rev:
guard, a minimum of one-inch bolt projection and a maximum security strike plate.
c. All sliding glass doors and ground floor windows shall be equipped with auxiliary locks, as approved by the Chief of Police.

18.27.910 Additional Development Standards Townhomes.

A. Maximum Townhome Units in Row. There shall be a maximum of 10 townhome units per building/row.

B. Minimum Building to Building Distance:
a. When townhomes face each other onto a landscaped central path/open space (personal and/or common) there shall be a minimum width of 30 feet from building face to building face. Balconies may project up to five feet from either building face into the central path/open space. Other building projections are allowed to encroach within the minimum width of the common path/open space per SCCC Section.
b. The minimum garage alley width (from building face to building face) shall be 20 feet for emergency vehicle access. The minimum distance from garage door to garage door shall be 26 feet.

C. Facade Modulation. Townhome units shall employ at least two of the following building modulation strategies:
a. Varied roof forms, including but not limited to changes in roof height, offsets, change in direction of roof slope, dormers, parapets, etc.; b. Use of balconies, front porches, overhangs, or covered patios; and/or, Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 41 of 22 Rev:
c. Projections, offsets, and/or recesses of the building wall at least two feet in depth, such as bay windows.

D. Facade Articulation. All building elevations that face a street or a shared driveway shall employ varied facade articulation of wall surfaces. Facades shall incorporate at least three of the following features, consistent with the design style, which provide articulation and design interest:
a. Variation in texture or material, provided all exterior wall textures and materials are consistent with the overall architectural style of the dwelling; b. Building base (typically bottom three feet) that is faced with a stone or brick material, or is delineated with a channel or projection; c. Railings with a design pattern and materials such as wood, metal, or stone which reinforces the architectural style of the building; d. Decorative trim elements that add detail and articulation, such as door surrounds with at least a two-inch depth, decorative eave detailing, belt courses, etc.;
e. Decorative window elements such as, lintels, shutters, window boxes, etc.; and/or,
f. Roof overhangs at least 18 inches deep.

E. Corner Side Units. Any end unit where the side facade faces the public right-ofway, private street, or publicly-accessible pathway is considered a Corner Side Unit and shall meet the following standards:
a. The Corner Side Unit building facade shall have a glazing area greater than Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 42 of 22 Rev:
or equal to 15 percent of the facade area.
b. The Corner Side Unit facade shall have at least one architectural projection that projects a minimum of 18 inches from the street facing facade (e.g., bay windows on the exterior of the house, canopies/screening devices, etc.) with a minimum width of two feet.

F. Building Entries.
a. Orientation.
i. Dwelling units that abut a public right-of-way shall orient the primary entryway toward the public street. Deviations from this requirement may be approved by the Director for projects where the project site is located on an expressway, provided the facade facing the public street is designed with similar details and treatments to those of the front facade.
ii. Dwelling units located in the interior of a development shall orient the primary entryway toward and be visible from a private street, pedestrian pathway, or courtyard/ common open space.
b. Weather Protection. Primary entries shall have a roofed projection (such as a porch) or recess that is a minimum four feet wide and three feet deep by recessing the entry or using a combination of these methods (not including primary roof overhang).

G. Roof Edge Treatment. All townhomes with sloping roofs shall have eave overhangs of not less than 12 inches measured from the vertical side of the Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 43 of 22 Rev:
residential structure unless overhangs are incompatible with the architectural style of the structure.

H. Window Recess/Trim. Windows shall be recessed at least three inches from the plane of the surrounding exterior wall or shall provide a combination of trim and recess with a minimum one-inch recess.

I. Colors and Materials.
a. Variation in Materials. At least two materials shall be used on any building frontage, in addition to glazing and railings. Any one material must comprise at least 20% of the building frontage, excluding windows, railings, and trim. b. Material Changes at Corners. A change in material shall be offset by a minimum of two inches in depth. Materials shall continue around corners for a minimum distance of four feet. If feasible, the same material should continue to the next change in the wall plane.

J. Durable Materials. Buildings shall incorporate durable finish and/or accent materials, which include masonry, tile, stone, stucco, architectural grade wood, brick, glass, and finished metal. Low quality materials including corrugated metal, stucco foam trim, and T1-11 siding are prohibited.

K. Building Component Colors. All vents and electrical conduits shall be painted the same color as the adjacent surface.

SECTION 2: That section 17.15.310 (“Standards deemed minimum requirements”) of Chapter 17.15 (“Property Developments”) of Title 17 (“Development”) is hereby amended to read as follows:

Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 44 of 22 Rev:
“17.15.310 Standards deemed minimum requirements.

A. The standards established by this Chapter are minimum standards only, and the City Council reserves the right to require higher standards in the event that the City Manager of the City shall find that the minimum standards established by this chapter are not adequate, suitable, or proper because of traffic patterns, the location, soil structure or any other cause in the area in which the improvement of facility is located.

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, in the event of any conflict between the terms of this Chapter and the terms of Chapter 18.27 (“Regulations for the El Camino Real Corridor”) of Title 18 (“Zoning”), as may be amended, the terms of Chapter 18.27 shall control.”
SECTION 3: That a new section 17.40.117 is hereby added to Chapter 17.40, Citywide Affordable Housing Requirements, of Title 17 (entitled “Development”), of “The Code of the City of Santa Clara, California” (“SCCC”) to read as follows:
“17.40.117 Affordability Levels – El Camino Real Specific Plan.

For either ownership or rental housing developed under the El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts in the El Camino Real Specific Plan Area, the following affordable housing requirements apply:
(a) Notwithstanding Subsection 17.40.080(a), residential ownership projects of ten or more units must provide at least fifteen percent (15%) of the units at affordable housing costs for extremely low, very low, low and moderate income households, or some combination of those income categories. A developer shall select income categories for Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 45 of 22 Rev:
each of the affordable units such that the average income of purchasers will not exceed eighty percent (80%) of AMI. Residential ownership projects of fewer than ten units may either provide one dwelling at an affordable housing cost for a household earning up to eighty percent (80%) of AMI, or pay an in-lieu fee identified for residential ownership projects in the affordable housing master fee schedule. (b) Notwithstanding Subsection 17.40.090(a), residential rental projects of ten or more units must provide at least fifteen percent (15%) of the units at affordable housing costs made available at affordable rental prices to extremely low, very low, low, and moderate income households as long as the distribution of affordable units averages to a maximum of eighty percent (80%) of AMI. Residential rental projects of fewer than ten units may either provide an affordable unit at an affordable housing cost for a household earning up to eighty percent (80%) of AMI, or pay an in-lieu fee identified for residential rental projects in the affordable housing master fee schedule. (c) In-Lieu Fee for Rental Units. In order for residential development projects under the El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts in the El Camino Real Specific Plan Area to satisfy the affordable housing requirement through payment of an In Lieu Fee, the City Council shall establish a fee per square foot for the Specific Plan Area to reflect the reduced average AMI of 80 percent.”
SECTION 4: Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final adoption; however, prior to its final adoption it shall be published in accordance with the requirements of Section 808 and 812 of “The Charter of the City of Santa Clara, California.” Attachment 7
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Ordinance/El Camino Real Corridor Zoning Districts Page 46 of 22 Rev:

PASSED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLICATION this 19th day of May, 2026, 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
Attachment 8
El Camino Real Specific Plan
City Council Review May 19, 2026
Web Links
Name of Document: El Camino Real Specific Plan (April 2026) https://www.santaclaraca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/89199 Environmental Website:

Here you will find documents related to the environmental assessment of the project and any information regarding meetings related to the environmental assessment of the project. https://www.santaclaraca.gov/Home/Components/BusinessDirectory/BusinessDirectory/547/15209?alpha =E
Project Website:

Here you will find the Specific Plan document and a summary of the project planning process and information regarding past community meetings.
https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/departments-a-f/community-development/planning-division/specificplans/el-camino-real-specific-plan-revision These documents are available for viewing in the Community Development Department From: Tim Greene
To: Lesley Xavier
Subject: El Camino Plan
Date: Monday, April 13, 2026 12:37:59 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Dear Lesley Xavier:

I think the city is being too aggressive with the development of the El Camino Real.

Adding 4390 residential units is far too many. I can't imagine the traffic nightmare it will cause. Talking with other residents, they also agree, and we will be at the meetings to voice our concerns
I disagree with the whole plan.

Thanks
Timothy Greene
2364 Cabrillo Ave, Santa Clara, CA 95050
[email protected]
I
El Camino Real Specific Plan - City Council Hearing - May 19, 2026 Dear Mayor Gillmore and City Counsil_ Members,
Please stop pandering to the very vocal Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition and your personal preferences.

Santa Clara needs more parking with more lanes for mass public transportation and fewer bike lanes along State Route 82 (El Camino Real) for the following reasons:
1) There are an average of just over 2 vehicles per household in The County of Santa Clara. With 4,390 residential units scheduled to be built, between Lafayette Street and Lawrence Expressway, this translates to an additional 8,780 vehicles along a three-mile stretch of El Camino. 2) 35,000 - 45,000 vehicles currently utilize El Camino every day compared to less than 400 cyclists.

Chat GPT says that the total traffic at El Camino and San Tomas is easily over 100,000 vehicles per day.
3) Adding these additional vehicles will create more dangers for bikers. A safer solution might be for cyclists to use a bus to get past this 3-mile section of El Camino. It is not reasonable to inconvenience tens of thousands of commuters along this State Route to accommodate a few cyclists.
4) Dedicated "pork chops" at intersections, for example as proposed at El Camino and Scott, where cars can currently turn right after yielding to pedestrians should not be made accessible only to bikes. If these "pork chops" are dedicated to bikes only, it will significantly hinder the flow of traffic and cause unnecessary excess greenhouse emissions as hundreds of cars a day must wait for a light to change before turning right.
5) Requiring vehicles to stop behind busses, or swerve around them, as the bus driver drops off and picks up passengers will not only be inconvenient but dangerous. Inconveniencing tens of thousands of drivers while accommodating perhaps a few hundred cyclists is not reasonable. 6) Maintaining parking along El Camino should be a priority. With the State no longer allowing cities to mandate any parking for residential or commercial projects; parking already is, and will continue to be, in short supply. The City of Santa Clara should do all it can to protect this valuable asset for residents and customers. I urge the City to maintain the estimated 1,000 existing parking spaces along El Camino from Lafyette to Lawrence Expressway. These spaces bring greater value to the community than bike lanes ever will. 7) Bike lanes are costly to install and remove. For an example see below.

Vista, CA recently spent $200,000 to removed bike lane safety features-including berms and bollards-just months after their $1.5 million installation. (See attached for reasons for Bike Lane Removal and additional examples of Cities That Have Removed Bike Lanes.) I urge the Counsil to consider not moving forward with the traffic plan of the El Camino Real Specific Plan as proposed.

Respectfully submitted,
/I/~ M,w( J /?ht~
Vivian and Tom Shults
2268 Bray Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
[email protected]
Attachment - El Camino Real Specific Plan - City Council Hearing - May 19, 2026 Reasons for Bike Lane Removal - per Al
• Reason for Removal: Immediate backlash from drivers who found the barriers difficult to see, leading to numerous collisions.
• Business Impact: Concerns from merchants about loss of customer parking • Emergency Vehicle Access: Concerns that protected lanes hinder fire trucks and ambulances • Safety Concerns (Driver vs. Bike): Reports that barriers were being hit by cars, causing damage or new safety hazards
• Reversion to Car Focus: Shift in municipal or federal priorities, such as the Department of Transportation prioritizing auto-centric infrastructure.

Cities That Have Removed Bike Lanes - Result from Al
Several major cities and municipalities across the U.S. have implemented protected or dedicated bike lanes only to remove or significantly scale them back later, often due to community pushback, business complaints regarding parking, or safety concerns. Based on recent developments, here are key cities where this has occurred:
• San Francisco, California: In February 2025, work began to remove a controversial center bike lane on Valencia Street. Installed as a 12-month pilot project, the lane was removed after 18 months following pressure from local business owners who argued it decreased foot traffic and caused over five businesses to close.
• Washington, D.C.: The District is removing protected bike lane barriers, including on Arizona Avenue NW, due to complaints about their appearance. Furthermore, as of March 2026, the federal government is moving to remove protected bike lanes on 15th Street NW near the National Mall. • Vista, California: In 2025, this San Diego County city decided to remove specialized "BMS" (raised curb) barriers and bollards on South Melrose Drive and Sycamore Avenue just months after installing them.

The removal followed roughly 1,000 complaints from drivers who found the barriers hard to see, leading to collisions.
• Oakland, California: Cal trans removed bike lanes on Oak Street in 2026 to widen a freeway ramp, replacing them with a single "sharrow" (shared lane marking). • San Mateo, California: The City Council voted to remove a portion of separated bike lanes on Humboldt Street installed in 2022, intending to restore roughly 100 parking spaces, according to 2025 reports. • New Orleans, Louisiana: The city began removing bike lanes in the Algiers neighborhood in July 2023. • Denver, Colorado: The city removed vertical plastic bollards on Market Street that had been installed to create protected lanes, replacing them with, or leaving in place, only lower-profile lane dividers after complaints about maintenance and visual obstruction.

These removals are often driven by vocal opposition from motorists and business owners concerned about the loss of parking or increased traffic congestion .. . " City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-566 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Declaration of Property as Exempt Surplus Land and Approval of Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Valley Oak Partners for a Potential Land Exchange of the City Hall Civic Center Campus (1405 Civic Center Drive, APN 224-25-074) for the Agnews Office Park and Historic Site (4220 Network Circle, APNS 216-33-022 and 097-08-114) and Direction on the Formation of Community Advisory Committee

BACKGROUND
Agnews VOP, LLC (“VOP”) is currently Oracle Corporation’s designated development partner for portions of the Agnews Office Park and Historic Site located on Network Circle in Santa Clara. In 2023, VOP submitted a residential development application for the site pursuant to provisions of State Housing Law commonly referred to as the “Builder’s Remedy.” The City disputes the applicability of the Builder’s Remedy provisions to the proposed project, and the parties subsequently entered into a tolling agreement to allow additional time for discussions regarding potential alternative development and settlement concepts.

As part of those discussions, the City and VOP began exploring the potential for a land exchange involving the City’s existing City Hall property located at 1500 Warburton Avenue and a portion of the Agnews campus. Through these preliminary discussions, the parties identified the potential opportunity to relocate City Hall operations to the Agnews campus while facilitating redevelopment of the existing City Hall site and portions of the remaining Agnews property.

Valley Oak Partners, LLC is a vertically integrated real estate operating company that focuses on investment and development opportunities throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. Founded in 2008, the company utilizes an entrepreneurial and proactive approach to identify and capture market opportunities in the highly dynamic Bay Area. Valley Oak Partners is led by a team with over 125 years of collective experience in creating local development opportunities. Their extensive entitlement expertise is built on decades of experience with local municipalities, land use policies, and regional planning trends. To date, the company has been responsible for delivering more than 4,000 residential units and over 2 million square feet of commercial development to the region. Some notable projects completed by Valley Oak Partners include the entitlement of: 1) 737 residential units on River Oaks Parkway in North San Jose, 2) 242 residential units on Sunnyvale Saratoga Rd in Sunnyvale, CA, 3) 785 residential units, 350,000 square feet of Class A office and a 150-room hotel at Warm Springs in Fremont, and 4) the 1.1 million-square-foot Platform 16 office campus in downtown San Jose. By maintaining a local focus, the firm ensures that its decision-making is project -specific and tailored to the unique needs of the communities in which it operates.

Under the preliminary proposal currently being evaluated, the City would potentially acquire approximately 26.9 acres within the Agnews campus area, including approximately 288,420 square City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-566 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
feet of existing building improvements across nine buildings. Portions of the property are subject to historic preservation easements and related restrictions that require preservation of several historic structures and surrounding open space areas. While maintaining historic buildings and open space, the proposal contemplates potential reuse and renovation of portions of the campus for future City Hall and civic operations, while also allowing for residential redevelopment opportunities on the City’s existing Warburton Avenue site and portions of the remaining Agnews property.

To assist the City in evaluating the proposal and negotiating the potential transaction, the City has retained Century Urban, LLC as the City’s real estate and financial advisor to provide strategic real estate analysis, valuation review, transaction advisory services, and related due diligence support. In addition, the City has retained Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP as outside legal counsel to assist with real estate, land use, CEQA, and transaction-related legal matters associated with the proposed Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (“ENA”) and potential land exchange discussions. These consultant teams are supporting staff in evaluating the proposal, protecting the City’s interests, and assisting the City Council in assessing the legal, operational, financial, and policy considerations associated with the proposed project. In addition, the City has contracted with ICF and subconsultants as the environmental consultant to assist with analyzing the project in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

To be clear, the City has not made a decision to proceed with the relocation or the transaction with Valley Oak Partners. The aforementioned work efforts and those planned during the exclusive negotiation period will inform the City’s decision-making process and provide information to be shared with the general public and the Community Advisory Committee (described later in this report). Nothing in this report (including the recommendation to proceed with an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement) should be construed as a recommendation to proceed with the transaction and relocation of Santa Clara’s Civic Center complex to the Agnews campus. Staff has not arrived at a recommendation for or against the VOP proposal.

As noted in the Fiscal Impact section of this report, the proposed ENA and associated Reimbursement Agreement, states that VOP will reimburse the City for all third-party consultant and professional service costs incurred in connection with the evaluation and negotiation of the proposed project, including outside legal counsel, real estate and appraisal consultants, environmental consultants, technical studies, and other due diligence-related expenses, except that the City will share in paying half of the Community Engagement Consultant costs. Existing City staff time associated with project coordination, review, and administration will be absorbed within existing departmental operating budgets.

DISCUSSION
VOP’s proposal presents an opportunity for the City to explore a transformative civic and community development initiative that could reposition City Hall operations, preserve and activate a historically significant campus, facilitate new housing opportunities, and create long-term public benefits for the community. The proposal provides the City with the opportunity to evaluate whether portions of the Agnews/Oracle campus could serve as a viable future civic center location while also allowing for potential redevelopment of the existing City Hall site and surrounding properties in a manner that supports broader City planning, housing, economic development, and community objectives. Given the complexity and long-term implications of the proposed transaction, the ENA process is intended to provide the City and VOP sufficient time and flexibility to conduct comprehensive due diligence and evaluate the operational, financial, environmental, legal, planning, and community considerations City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-566 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
associated with the proposal before the City Council considers any final approvals or commitments.

The discussion below summarizes the major components of the proposed ENA process, including the proposed agreement terms, project schedule and milestones, environmental review process, Surplus Land Act considerations, and the proposed formation of a Community Advisory Committee (“CAC”) to support transparency, public participation, and ongoing community engagement throughout the evaluation process.

Proposed Agreement
The proposed Exclusive Negotiation Agreement, Attachment 1, between the City and VOP establishes a framework for the City and VOP to evaluate and negotiate the potential terms of a complex land exchange and related development opportunity involving the City Hall site and portions of the Oracle/Agnews property.

Importantly, approval of the ENA does not constitute approval of any development project, land exchange, disposition of City property, General Plan amendment, zoning action, environmental determination, or final agreement. Rather, the ENA establishes the negotiating parameters and due diligence process necessary for the City to fully explore the opportunity and evaluate whether the proposed transaction and related projects are in the best interests of the City and community. The ENA allows the City to conduct technical, environmental, financial, operational, legal, and planning analyses so that the City Council may make informed decisions regarding any future actions associated with the proposed project. At the same time, the ENA expressly provides that the City retains full discretion regarding any future approvals and that no binding commitment to complete the project is created by the ENA itself.

The ENA also ensures that the City’s costs associated with evaluating and negotiating the project are reimbursed by the VOP, including outside legal counsel, consultant support, environmental review costs, and other project-related expenses. The City will be conducting community engagement as well in which VOP will be sharing in the cost of those efforts.

Key terms of the proposed ENA include the following:
· Term: Establishes an exclusive negotiation period through June 1, 2027, unless earlier terminated or extended by mutual agreement.
· Due Diligence: Requires extensive due diligence activities by both parties, including:
o geotechnical investigations;
o hazardous materials review;
o title review;
o infrastructure and utility analysis;
o parking and circulation analysis;
o facility relocation and operational feasibility review; and o financial feasibility evaluations
· Environmental Review: As further discussed below, the agreement requires preparation and processing of all necessary environmental review documentation pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) prior to consideration of any future project approvals. This obligation continues beyond the termination of the ENA if the Developer so wishes to continue processing its residential development project submitted in 2023.

City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-566 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
· City Council Approvals: Specifies that all future discretionary approvals, including land use entitlements, environmental determinations, and approval of any final agreements, remain subject to future City Council consideration and approval. · Reimbursement of Costs: Requires VOP to reimburse the City for project-related costs and expenses associated with negotiating and evaluating the proposed transaction. · Schedule and Timeline: Establishes milestone schedules and coordination procedures intended to facilitate orderly project evaluation and negotiations. · Termination Provision: Allows either party to terminate the ENA if due diligence, financial feasibility, title review, operational considerations, scheduling constraints, or other material issues indicate the project should not proceed.
· Special Default/Remedies Provisions: The Agreement prohibits the parties from negotiating with any other entity with respect to this proposed transaction, and more specifically prohibits the City from engaging in negotiations with Oracle with respect to the City acquiring the VOP Exchange Parcel. Violation of this provision gives the non-defaulting party a right to legal and equitable remedies as further outlined in the ENA.
· Tolls Builder’s Remedy Project: Provides that the ENA does not waive or resolve the parties’ respective positions related to the pending Builder’s Remedy dispute and preserves each party’s legal rights regarding that matter.

Through the ENA process, staff will continue to evaluate the proposed concept and negotiate potential transaction terms, while returning to the City Council at future public hearings for consideration of any required environmental review documents, land use approvals, surplus land findings, and any final transaction agreements.

The proposed ENA includes multiple “off-ramps” and termination provisions that preserve the City’s discretion and ability to discontinue the process if the proposed project is determined to be infeasible, financially impractical, inconsistent with City objectives, or otherwise not in the public interest. The ENA allows the City to terminate negotiations if due diligence findings are unsatisfactory, if mutually acceptable business terms cannot be reached, if required approvals or environmental clearances cannot be obtained, if scheduling milestones are not achieved, or if the City Council determines not to proceed with the proposed transaction or related projects.

Milestones/Schedule
Included in the ENA is a preliminary milestone schedule, Exhibit B, outlining the anticipated timeline, major milestones, public engagement activities, environmental review process, and key decision points associated with the proposed ENA evaluation process and potential City Hall relocation study.

As currently proposed, the schedule anticipates the ENA becoming effective on the date of execution, followed by commencement of the CEQA process in August 2026 and completion of the initial due diligence period by November 2026. The schedule further anticipates negotiation and drafting of a Land Exchange Agreement in early 2027, release of draft environmental documents and related project materials for public review in January 2027, Planning Commission consideration in March 2027, and potential City Council consideration of environmental documents, project applications, and the proposed Exchange Agreement in April 2027. If ultimately approved by the City Council, the current schedule anticipates closing of the land exchange transaction in May 2027.

City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-566 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
The schedule is intended to provide the City Council and community with a general framework for how the City anticipates conducting the due diligence, technical analysis, community outreach, environmental review, and negotiation activities necessary to evaluate the feasibility and viability of the proposed land exchange and related projects. The schedule is preliminary in nature and may be adjusted as additional analysis, environmental review requirements, community input, agency coordination, and overall project considerations evolve throughout the ENA process.

Environmental Review and Approval
The City anticipates holding public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council to consider the required land-use entitlements and the associated environmental review for the proposed projects. To support the environmental review process, the City has retained ICF to prepare the necessary California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation and Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. to prepare the required transportation analysis. The CEQA review process will be integrated into the overall entitlement process and will include multiple opportunities for public participation and agency review prior to the City Council's final action. Public outreach and stakeholder engagement will be conducted throughout the entitlement process by both the applicant team and the City. In accordance with CEQA requirements, the public will have opportunities to participate during the Notice of Preparation (NOP) process, the public review period for the draft environmental document, and all duly noticed public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. It is anticipated that the final certification of the EIR, adoption of CEQA findings, and action on other analysis and environmental documents as necessary to comply with CEQA will be part of the overall entitlements and will be brought to the City Council in April of 2027.

Surplus Land Act Compliance
The Surplus Land Act is a state law that requires local agencies to complete certain procedures before transferring agency-owned land. As an initial step, the agency typically must declare property to be “surplus land” or “exempt surplus land” before entering into formal negotiations regarding agency-owned land. If land is surplus land, the Surplus Land Act sets forth a specific process for making the property available and negotiating potential disposition terms. If land is exempt surplus land, the majority of the Surplus Land Act’s procedures do not apply. However, the Surplus Land Act requires local agencies to declare property to be exempt surplus land, make written findings in support of this declaration, and provide a copy of the determination to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) at least 30 days before closing the transaction to dispose of the property in question.

Here, if the transaction proceeds as contemplated in the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement, the current City Hall campus would be exempt surplus land. The Surplus Land Act defines “exempt surplus land” to include “surplus land that a local agency is exchanging for another property necessary for the agency’s use.” (Gov. Code § 54221(f)(1)(C).) If the transaction proceeds, the City would be exchanging a city-owned parcel for another parcel, a portion of the Agnews property that includes the historic resources associated with the former St. Agnews hospital. If the transaction is approved, the City would use the acquired property for its City Hall Improvement Project, which would allow the City to create a modernized and expanded City Hall that meets the City’s current and future facility needs. Therefore, the City would be exchanging its current property for property necessary for the City’s use, and it is accordingly exempt from the Surplus Land Act.

Staff recommends that, in connection with the approval of the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement, the City Council declare the property to be exempt surplus land based on findings presented in the draft City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-566 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
Resolution (ATTACHMENT 3). Following the City Council’s determination, City staff would submit the Resolution to HCD for its review and secure HCD’s confirmation of the City’s exemption determination before entering into any transaction document, should the City Council determine to go forward with the property exchange.

Owner Authorization
Staff is requesting authorization for the City Manager to execute property-owner authorization forms and related application materials necessary for the VOP to submit and process development applications associated with the proposed project on City-owned property. Because the City is the current property owner of the City Hall site, owner authorization is required in order for applications, environmental review documents, technical studies, and related entitlement materials to be submitted and processed during the ENA evaluation period. This authorization is administrative in nature and is intended solely to facilitate the City’s ability to evaluate the feasibility and impacts of the proposed project concepts. The authorization would not constitute approval of any project, land use entitlement, environmental determination, land exchange, or other final action by the City Council.

Community Advisory Committee
The potential relocation of City Hall to another location within the City represents a significant public decision for the community. While substantial technical, operational, financial, and environmental analysis will be required to evaluate the technical feasibility of any potential relocation, meaningful engagement with residents, businesses, and community stakeholders will also be critical throughout the process. To promote transparency, public participation, and ongoing community dialogue regarding the potential City Hall relocation, staff proposes establishing a Community Advisory Committee. Staff will prepare a proposed scope of the Community Advisory Committee role for presentation to the Council at the meeting in which the Community Advisory Committee is formed.

Selection Process
The CAC would consist of one representative appointed by each City Councilmember to ensure broad, district-based representation and citywide participation. Appointments are expected to be made at the June 9 City Council meeting.

Next Steps
If Council approves the ENA, in the coming months, staff will continue conducting the necessary technical, financial, legal, operational, and environmental due diligence associated with the proposed project and will return to the City Council in June to formalize the formation of the Community Advisory Committee, as well as return to the City Council in Closed Session, as appropriate, to discuss ongoing negotiations and due diligence findings related to the proposed project prior to any future consideration of formal project approvals or transaction agreements.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Exclusive Negotiation Agreement involves feasibility and planning studies for possible future actions that the City may take, which actions have not yet been approved, adopted, or funded.

Therefore, California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Section 15262 classifies approval of the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement as statutorily exempt from CEQA. As summarized above, to ensure that potential environmental impacts are analyzed, the City will analyze the Project’s environmental effects as necessary to comply with CEQA prior to making a final determination to go forward with the potential land exchange, acting on project approvals, or entering into any final, binding agreements with the potential to result in physical environmental effects.

City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-566 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026

FISCAL IMPACT
Pursuant to the proposed ENA and associated Reimbursement Agreement, Attachment 3, VOP will reimburse the City for all third-party consultant and professional service costs incurred in connection with the evaluation and negotiation of the proposed project, including outside legal counsel, real estate and appraisal consultants, environmental consultants, technical studies, and other due diligence-related expenses, except that the City will share in paying half of the Community Engagement Consultant costs. Accounting for this project will occur in the existing Civic Center Campus Future Needs appropriation in the Public Buildings Capital Fund. Existing City staff time associated with project coordination, review, and administration will be absorbed within existing departmental operating budgets.

COORDINATION
This report was coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office, Community Development Department, and the City Manager’s Office. HCD coordination will be required to obtain HCD’s validation of the City’s Surplus Land Act findings should the City Council determine to proceed with the land exchange.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Adopt Resolution Declaring Real Property Owned by the City to be Exempt Surplus Land and Approving an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement between the City and Agnews VOP, LLC for a Potential Land Exchange and City Hall Improvement Project which includes:
a. Declaring the current City Hall property to be exempt surplus land; b. Authorizing the City Manager to sign and execute the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement in substantially the form presented, in a final form approved by the City Attorney; and c. Authorizing the City Manager to perform all other acts, and enter into other agreements or sign documents necessary to carry out the purposes of the Resolution.

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute property owner authorization forms and related documents necessary to permit the submission, processing, and evaluation of development applications, entitlement applications, environmental review documents, and related materials associated with the proposed project on City-owned property, provided that such authorization shall not constitute approval of any project, land use entitlement, environmental determination, or final transaction by the City; and

3. Direct staff to bring back the formation of a Community Advisory Committee, with each Councilmember appointing one representative from their district, and the Mayor an at-large appointments, with Committee formation and appointments anticipated for the June 9 Council meeting.

Reviewed by: Elizabeth Klotz, Assistant City Manager
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager
City of Santa Clara Page 7 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-566 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026

ATTACHMENTS

1. Exclusive Negotiation Agreement

2. Resolution

3. Reimbursement Agreement
City of Santa Clara Page 8 of 8 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
1 EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT
This Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into as of the ___th day of May, 2026 (“Effective Date”) by and between the City of Santa Clara, a California chartered municipal corporation (“City”) and Agnews VOP, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer” or “VOP”), on the terms and provisions set forth below.

RECITALS
A. Oracle Corporation (“Oracle”) is the owner of two parcels of real property in the City of Santa Clara (APNs 097-08-114 and 097-08-058), as shown on the map attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A-1 (“Oracle Campus”) and incorporated by this reference. Following completion of a lot line adjustment between the two parcels within the Oracle Campus and pursuant to the terms of an agreement between Oracle and the Developer, Oracle intends to sell to Developer a portion of the Oracle Campus (APN: 097-08-058), as modified by such lot line adjustment (“Agnews Parcel”), and retain the remaining portion of the Oracle Campus (APN 097-08-114), as modified by such lot line adjustment (“Oracle Retained Parcel”), for its continued use and ownership.

B. City is the owner of certain real property in the City of Santa Clara (APN 24-25- 074) that operates as the City’s current City Hall, as shown on the map attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A-3 (“City Exchange Parcel”), and incorporated by reference herein.

C. On September 20, 2023, Developer submitted a preliminary application, and on September 25, 2023, paid the associated fees for an application to develop a housing development project pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(5) on the Agnews Parcel (the “Builder’s Remedy Project”). The City has indicated its position that Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(5) does not apply to the Builder’s Remedy Project (the “Builder’s Remedy Dispute”). The parties entered that certain Tolling Agreement (as defined in Section 16, below) to engage in productive discussions to resolve the Builder’s Remedy Dispute.

D. In furtherance of the effort to settle the parties’ dispute with respect to the Builder’s Remedy Project, the City and Developer, after preliminary feasibility discussions, now intend to negotiate the potential disposition of a portion of the Agnews Parcel (“VOP Exchange Parcel”) to the City in exchange for the City Exchange Parcel, with the Developer retaining the remaining portion of the Agnews Parcel (“VOP Retained Parcel”), as shown on the map attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A-2, and incorporated by this reference (collectively, “Land Swap”). The VOP Retained Parcel and the City Exchange Parcel are referred to collectively as the “Residential Properties.”
E. With respect to the Residential Properties, Developer has proposed constructing two residential developments consisting of a mix of residential uses (which may include multifamily units, townhomes, and single-family homes, and as shall be more particularly described in VOP’s formal entitlement applications) on the City Exchange Parcel (“Warburton Residential Project”) and the VOP Retained Parcel (“Network Circle Residential Project”) 2 (collectively, the “VOP Residential Projects”). The Developer also continues to propose, and intends to proceed with, the Builder’s Remedy Project in the event that for any reason the proposed Land Swap is unsuccessful; however, the Developer acknowledges that the Builder’s Remedy Dispute is ongoing and the City has not conceded that Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(5) applies to the Builder’s Remedy Project. While reserving all rights (which include, without limitation, all legally applicable rights to deny, modify, or condition the Builder’s Remedy Project) the City will continue to process the Builder’s Remedy Project as necessary and appropriate while the parties negotiate the Land Swap so that the Developer is not detrimentally delayed in the event of termination. For the purposes of clarity, nothing in this Agreement is intended to affect or waive either parties’ rights with respect to the Builder’s Remedy Project.

F. With respect to the VOP Exchange Parcel, City is considering that certain improvements could be made to the buildings thereon that will allow the City to use the VOP Exchange Parcel for City’s intended use as its City Hall (“City Hall Improvement Project”).

The Land Swap, the VOP Residential Projects and the City Hall Improvement Project shall be collectively referred to herein as the “Project”.

G. Developer will obtain all discretionary entitlements and approvals necessary for the VOP Residential Projects (“Residential Project Approvals”) and the General Plan and zoning amendments necessary for the City Hall Improvement Project (together, the “Project Approvals”), from the City in its regulatory capacity and the City shall process the Project Approvals expeditiously and in good faith, including compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), prior to closing of the Land Swap. The City shall be responsible for all analysis and preparation of improvement plans related to the City Hall Improvement Project. The Parties acknowledge that the Project Approvals are a necessary precondition and are material to the Land Swap.

H. Prior to the execution of this Agreement, the City Council of the City of Santa Clara (“City Council”) declared the City Exchange Parcel to be “exempt surplus land” as described in Government Code Section 54221. The City Council adopted written findings that the City Exchange Parcel is exempt surplus land pursuant to Government Code Section 54221(f)(1)(C), because the City Exchange Parcel would be exchanged for the VOP Exchange Parcel, which is property that is necessary for the City’s use. The City shall seek the California Department of Housing and Community (“HCD”)’s determination of validity regarding the City Council’s declaration and findings. The parties shall not be under any obligation to close on the Land Swap unless and until the City Council’s exemption determination has been confirmed by HCD.

I. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish procedures and standards for the processing of the Project Approvals and the negotiation by City and Developer of: (i) a land exchange agreement (“Land Exchange Agreement”) pursuant to which Developer and City would complete the Land Swap, (ii) the form of property conveyance documents, and (iii) a lease to be attached to the Land Exchange Agreement as an exhibit, pursuant to which City would lease back from Developer the City Exchange Parcel (“City Lease”) for approximately a twoyear term (with the potential for extensions on terms to be negotiated by the parties) commencing upon closing of the Land Swap; and any other ancillary agreements or matters related to the 3 Land Swap. Based on the Milestone Schedule (defined below), it is anticipated that the closing would occur within approximately 30 days after execution of the Land Exchange Agreement.

J. As more fully set forth in Section 11, Developer acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement on its own does not grant Developer the right to carry out the Land Swap or develop the VOP Residential Projects, nor does it obligate City to complete any activities, except for the preliminary analysis, negotiations and processing contemplated and specified by this Agreement. The City acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement does not affect Developer’s Builder’s Remedy Project nor operate as any form of agreement, waiver or relinquishment of Developer’s rights thereto. Developer further acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement does not affect the City’s position with respect to the Builder’s Remedy Project nor operate as any form of agreement, waiver or relinquishment of City’s position in the Builder’s Remedy Dispute.

K. The parties acknowledge and agree that time is of the essence with respect to all aspects of this Agreement.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, which are incorporated herein by reference, and the mutual covenants and promises contained herein and for other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby agree as follows:

I. EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATIONS RIGHT

1. Good Faith Negotiations. During the Negotiation Period (defined in Section 2), City and Developer shall negotiate diligently and in good faith the terms and conditions of the Land Exchange Agreement and other agreements related to the Land Swap, including the City Lease, and the development of the Project, draft the related documents, reports and resolutions and ordinances, and provide all required legal notices and hold necessary public hearings for consideration by the City Council. Further, the parties shall use good faith efforts to accomplish the respective tasks outlined herein to facilitate the negotiation of the Land Swap in a logical, efficient and cost-effective manner. The parties shall endeavor to accomplish the tasks within the timeframe described in the “Milestone Schedule” shown in Exhibit B attached to this Agreement.

Because time is of the essence, the parties’ failure to meet the tasks in the Milestone Schedule provides a basis for a no-fault termination of this Agreement by either party.

2. Negotiation Period; Termination. Unless terminated sooner as provided below or elsewhere in this Agreement, the term of this Agreement shall commence on the date of this Agreement and initially expire on June 1, 2027 (“Negotiation Period”). During the Negotiation Period, City and Developer shall have regular meetings to facilitate the planning and negotiations contemplated herein. If upon expiration of the Negotiation Period, City and Developer have not executed a mutually acceptable Land Exchange Agreement and any required ancillary documents, this Agreement shall automatically terminate, unless mutually extended in writing by City and Developer in each party’s sole and absolute discretion prior to expiration of the Negotiation Period. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days written notice. If at any time during the term of this Agreement, the City Council votes affirmatively to 4 disapprove or reject the Land Exchange or the VOP Residential Projects, this Agreement shall automatically terminate without further notice or action of the parties.

3. Exclusive Negotiations. During the Negotiation Period, City shall not negotiate with any entity other than Developer with respect to the City Exchange Parcel or VOP Exchange Parcel, and Developer shall not negotiate with any entity other than City and Oracle with respect to the VOP Exchange Parcel, the VOP Retained Parcel, or the City Exchange Parcel, and neither party shall solicit or entertain bids or proposals to do so. This Section 3 is a material term of this Agreement and a breach of this term by either party shall give right to a default and potential remedies under Section 14. For the purposes of clarity, the City acknowledges that VOP is under contract with Oracle with respect to the Agnews Parcel, including the VOP Exchange Parcel, and as part of the City’s obligation to exclusively negotiate with VOP during the Term of this Agreement, the City agrees that it shall not negotiate directly with Oracle regarding acquisition of the VOP Exchange Parcel. For purposes of this section “negotiate directly” means engage in substantive communication between parties that are authorized to negotiate on the City’s behalf containing proposed terms for the City acquiring the VOP Exchange Parcel for City purposes, directly and without involvement of Developer. The City shall retain all rights in its regulatory and proprietary capacity to communicate with Oracle on any or all other matters.

4. City Costs Reimbursement. Developer acknowledges that in negotiating this Project, City anticipates expending substantial resources on the Project and the performance of the tasks described in, contemplated by and related to this Agreement, and that City has not budgeted for this effort. Accordingly, in order for this Agreement to continue in effect, substantially concurrently with the execution of this Agreement (but in no event longer that five (5) days after executing this Agreement), Developer and City shall enter into a separate agreement under which the Developer agrees to reimburse the City for City’s costs and expenses related to City’s work on the Project beginning on December 30, 2025 and continuing through the term of this Agreement (“Project Costs”) subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Form of Reimbursement Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit D, and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Reimbursement Agreement”). If Developer fails to timely execute the Reimbursement Agreement or fails to maintain a sufficient balance to reimburse the City for Project Costs, or if the Reimbursement Agreement is terminated, then this Agreement shall automatically terminate.

II. NEGOTIATION TASKS

5. Overview. To facilitate negotiation of the Land Exchange Agreement and related documents and the carrying out of tasks related to the Project, Developer and City shall use reasonable good faith efforts to accomplish the tasks set forth in this Article II in a timeframe that will support negotiation, City Council approval and execution of a mutually acceptable Land Exchange Agreement and related documents prior to the expiration of the Negotiation Period and that facilitates a closing on the Land Swap pursuant to the Milestone Schedule.

The issues to be addressed in the negotiations include, without limitation, the conditions precedent to the acquisition and exchange of land pursuant to the Land Swap (including, without limitation, satisfactory title review, site inspections, CEQA review, issuance and finality of all approvals for the Project); mutually-approved appraisal instructions and procedures to determine the values of 5 the VOP Exchange Parcel and the City Exchange Parcel; the terms and conditions of the City Lease applicable to the City Exchange Parcel; respective responsibility for any physical and title conditions of the VOP Exchange Parcel and the City Exchange Parcel and remediation of any adverse conditions related thereto; respective responsibility for any improvements on the VOP Exchange Parcel that will completed prior to the Land Swap; the portions of the City Hall Improvement Project that will be completed by the City after the Land Swap but in advance of use and occupancy by City of the VOP Exchange Parcel; interim uses that may be allowed and/or prohibited on the VOP Retained Parcel and/or the City Exchange Parcel prior to commencement of construction of the VOP Residential Projects (in the event there is an extended period before commencement of construction); and development of a schedule of performance for completion of the City Hall Improvement Project to facilitate relocation to the VOP Exchange Parcel to allow construction of the Warburton Residential Project.

6. Project Scope and Application. At the time specified on the Milestone Schedule, Developer shall prepare and submit to City: (a) a scope of development describing the proposed location, land uses and other details reasonably requested by City regarding the VOP Residential Projects, and the City shall prepare a scope of development describing in reasonable detail the improvements that will make up the City Hall Improvement Project to inform environmental review of the Project.
(a) VOP Applications. At the time specified on the Milestone Schedule, Developer shall prepare and submit to City proposed formal entitlement applications for the VOP Residential Projects, including General Plan and zoning amendment applications for the City Hall Improvement Project. The City will cooperate with the Developer to identify the most appropriate and preferred land use designations for the VOP Residential Projects and the City Hall Improvement Project.
(b) Developer Cooperation with City Hall Improvement Project. Developer acknowledges and agrees that the VOP Exchange Parcel must be made suitable for City’s use and occupancy following the Land Swap but prior to the City taking occupancy of the City Exchange Parcel and that this process, timing, allocation of responsibility and other terms will be established in the City Lease. Developer agrees to cooperate with and work in good faith to coordinate its construction and site planning efforts for the VOP Retained Parcel with the City to assist the City in understanding and planning for the relationship between the VOP Residential Project on the VOP Retained Parcel and the City Hall Improvement Project (e.g. site access, utilities and construction staging).

7. Community Outreach and Engagement. The Developer will comply with the City’s standard community engagement process with respect to the Residential Project applications. In addition, Developer will contribute funding for a community engagement consultant pursuant to the terms of the Reimbursement Agreement.

8. Due Diligence. During the initial six (6) months of the Negotiation Period (“Due Diligence Period”), Developer and City will complete initial work and studies on the City Exchange Parcel and the VOP Exchange Parcel and shall endeavor to come to initial material financial business terms, Project feasibility determinations and schedule, and key terms for the Exchange Agreement and City Lease and make a coordinated plan to draft the necessary 6 documents and agreements thereafter. The parties shall conduct the following due diligence activities, among others:
(a) City Exchange Parcel; Adequacy Determination by Developer. Developer shall determine whether the City Exchange Parcel appears suitable for development of the Warburton Project, taking into account the geotechnical and soils conditions, the presence or absence of toxic or other hazardous materials, the zoning of the City Exchange Parcel, the massing of the proposed improvements and the parking requirements imposed on projects of this type and the other environmental and regulatory factors that Developer deems relevant. If, in Developer's judgment based on such investigations and analyses, the City Exchange Parcel is not suitable for development, Developer may notify City in writing prior to the expiration of the Due Diligence Period of its determination. Upon such timely notification by Developer, this Agreement shall be terminated without further action of either party, and thereafter neither party shall have any further duties, obligations, rights, or liabilities under this Agreement, except as set forth in Section 14 and Section 16. Such termination shall be a no-fault termination for purposes of the Reimbursement Agreement.
(b) VOP Exchange Parcel; Adequacy Determination by City. City shall determine whether the VOP Exchange Parcel appears suitable for the contemplated development and use by City, taking into account the geotechnical and soils conditions, the presence or absence of toxic or other hazardous materials, the zoning, the massing of the proposed improvements and the parking requirements imposed on properties of this type and the other environmental and regulatory factors that City deems relevant. City will also study and determine the feasibility of the City Lease, the feasibility of the relocation of public use facilities that currently operate within the City Exchange Parcel, the improvements that must be completed as part of the City Hall Improvement Project prior to use and occupancy by City and any other improvements that must be completed as part of the City Hall Improvement Project but which can occur after City begins using and occupying the building, and the projected costs of any leasing, relocation of existing uses and/or the overall City Hall Improvement Project in order for City to use and occupy the parcel it requires. If, in City's sole discretion, the VOP Exchange Parcel is not suitable for the contemplated development and use by City, City may notify Developer in writing prior to the expiration of the Due Diligence Period of its determination. Upon such timely notification by City, this Agreement shall be terminated without further action of either party, and thereafter neither party shall have any further duties, obligations, rights, or liabilities under this Agreement, except as set forth in Section 14 and Section 16. Such termination shall be a no-fault termination for purposes of the Reimbursement Agreement.
(c) Objections to Title. Promptly following the execution of this Agreement, Developer shall cause a title company mutually approved by Developer and City to issue to Developer and City a Preliminary Title Report (“Reports”) on the Agnews Parcel and the City Exchange Parcel. If either party objects to any exception appearing on the Reports or should any title exception arise after the date of the Reports, either party may object to such exception provided such objection is made to the other party in writing on or before 5:00PM on or before the sixtieth (60th) day after the Effective Date. If either party objects to any exception to title, the other party, within fifteen (15) days of receipt of such objection shall notify the objecting party in writing whether it elects to (i) cause 7 the exception to be removed of record, (ii) obtain a commitment from Title Company for an appropriate endorsement to the policy of title insurance to be issued to the objecting party insuring against the objectionable exception (this shall not apply to the City Exchange Property except to the extent that any proposed endorsement is acceptable to Developer, in Developer's sole discretion), or (iii) terminate this Agreement effective as of the expiration of the Due Diligence Period unless the objecting party elects in writing, prior to the expiration of the Due Diligence Period, to take title subject to such exception or the parties agree to address such objection in the terms of the Land Exchange Agreement. If the other party fails to provide notice of its election to proceed under clause (i) through (iii) above within such fifteen-day period, then the other party shall be deemed to have given notice of its election of clause (iii) above. If the objecting party fails to terminate this Agreement during the Due Diligence Period, then the objecting party shall be deemed to have accepted and approved the other party's election (or deemed election) relative to the objectionable title matter except if the parties agree to address such objection in the terms of the Land Exchange Agreement. If this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this subsection (c), neither party shall thereafter have any obligations to or rights against the other hereunder, except as set forth in Section 14 and Section 16, and such termination shall be a no-fault termination under the Reimbursement Agreement. If a party fails to provide any notification to the other party regarding any title objections prior to expiration of the time period set forth herein, the condition set forth in this subsection (c) shall be deemed satisfied as to such non-objecting party and this Agreement shall continue in effect, except if the parties agree to address such objection in the terms of the Land Exchange Agreement.
(d) Site Access. Developer and City shall enter into a separate mutually acceptable agreement to provide Developer and its consultants with a right of entry to access, examine and conduct tests on the City Exchange Parcel during the Due Diligence Period subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Form of Right of Entry attached hereto as Exhibit C, and incorporated herein by this reference. Developer shall use commercially reasonable efforts to enter into a separate agreement with Oracle to grant Developer, City and their respective consultants a right of entry on the VOP Exchange Parcel to access, examine and conduct tests on the VOP Exchange Parcel during the Due Diligence Period subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Form of Right of Entry. Developer’s inability to obtain Oracle approval of the City’s right of entry shall not be a default under this Agreement, but such inability shall be a no-fault basis for the City to terminate this Agreement if such approval is not provided within 30 days after the Effective Date.
(e) Reports. Within 30 days after the execution of this Agreement, Developer shall provide City with copies of all reports and studies but excluding confidential or proprietary information, then in its possession or under its reasonable control and/or prepared or commissioned by Developer with respect to this Agreement, the Land Swap and the Project, promptly upon completion (collectively, “Due Diligence Documents”).

Within 30 days after the execution of this Agreement, City shall provide Developer with copies of all Due Diligence Documents then in its possession or under its reasonable control and/or prepared or commissioned by City with respect to the VOP Exchange Parcel, this Agreement, the Land Swap and the Project promptly upon completion. 8 (f) Financial Terms and Schedule. The parties will continue to negotiate the key financial terms of the Land Swap and track the Milestone Schedule to facilitate timely closing. If at any time, either party determines in their reasonable business judgment that the parties will not be able to come to mutually acceptable financial terms or meet the Milestone Schedule, such party may provide written notice to the other party to terminate this Agreement.

While desiring to preserve its rights with respect to treatment of certain information on a confidential or proprietary basis, Developer acknowledges that City will need sufficient detailed information about the proposed Project to make informed decisions about the content and approval of the Land Exchange Agreement. At no cost or expense to the City, and following the terms and procedures set forth in the Tolling Agreement, City will work with Developer to maintain the confidentiality of proprietary information subject to the requirements imposed on City by the Public Records Act (Government Code Sections 6253 et seq.). Developer acknowledges that City may share information provided by Developer of a financial and potential proprietary nature with third party consultants and City Council members as part of the negotiation and decision-making process. In the event that City or any of its representatives is legally required or requested to disclose all or any portion of the Developer’s confidential information pursuant to a subpoena, court order, civil investigative demand, request under the California Public Records Act or similar judicial process or similar request issued by a court of competent jurisdiction or by a governmental or regulatory authority, City shall promptly notify Developer in writing by email or facsimile and certified mail, of the existence, terms and circumstances surrounding such request, so that Developer may elect to approve disclosure or seek a protective order or other appropriate remedy at Developer’s sole cost and expense. If Developer fails to notify the City of Developer’s election within five (5) business days after receiving notice from the City, Developer shall be deemed to have approved disclosure of such material.

9. Environmental Review and Project Approvals. At the times provided in the Milestone Schedule, City shall prepare or cause to be prepared any environmental documentation required by CEQA prior to consideration or approval of the Land Exchange Agreement, Project Approvals and the City Lease and the Builder’s Remedy Project; provided that nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to compel City to approve or make any particular findings with respect to such environmental documentation. Developer shall promptly provide such information as may be required to enable City to prepare or cause preparation and consideration of any CEQA-required document and shall otherwise generally cooperate with City to complete this task. Developer shall embark upon and diligently pursue all Project Approvals for the Project as supported by its required CEQA documentation and with the cooperation of the City with respect to processing given the material nature of the Project Approvals to the Land Swap.

Developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with the preparation of the required CEQA documentation and the processing and consideration by the City of the Project Approvals. It is understood by the parties that the CEQA documentation is likely the controlling factor in meeting the schedule, and time is of the essence in all aspects of the CEQA process and processing of the Project Approvals. In the event of termination of this ENA, the City shall continue to process the CEQA documentation for the Builder’s Remedy Project in good faith. This Section 9 shall survive termination of the ENA.
9 10. Progress Reports. From time to time as reasonably agreed upon by the parties, each party shall make oral or written progress reports advising the other party on studies being made and matters being evaluated by the reporting party with respect to this Agreement and the Project.

III. GENERAL PROVISIONS

11. Limitation on Effect of Agreement. This Agreement shall not obligate either City or Developer to enter into a Land Exchange Agreement, any particular Land Exchange Agreement and/or any related documents. By execution of this Agreement, City is not committing itself to or agreeing to undertake acquisition, disposition or exercise of control over any property. Execution of this Agreement by City is merely an agreement to conduct a period of exclusive negotiations in accordance with the terms and conditions hereof reserving for subsequent City and City Council action the final discretion and approval regarding the execution of a Land Exchange Agreement, related documents and all proceedings and decisions in connection therewith. Any Land Exchange Agreement and related documents resulting from negotiations pursuant to this Agreement shall become effective only if and after such Land Exchange Agreement and related documents has been considered and approved by City.

12. Notices. Formal notices, demands and communications between City and Developer shall be sufficiently given if, and shall not be deemed given unless, dispatched by email and by certified mail postage prepaid return receipt requested or sent by express delivery or overnight courier service to the office of the parties shown as follows or such other address as the parties may designate in writing from time to time:

City: City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara CA 95050
Attention: City Manager
Email: [email protected]
With copies to:

City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, California 95050
Attention: City Attorney
Email: [email protected]
Burke, Williams & Sorenson, LLP
1 California Street, Suite 3050
San Francisco, CA 94111
Attention: Anna Shimko
Email: [email protected]
10 Developer: Agnews VOP, LLC
c/o Valley Oak Partners GP, LLC
734 The Alameda
San Jose, CA 95126
Attention: Doug Rich
Email: [email protected]
With copy to: Holland & Knight, LLP
560 Mission St. Suite 1900
San Francisco, CA 94105
Attention: Tamsen Plume
Email: [email protected]
Such written notices, demands and communications shall be effective on the date shown on the delivery receipt as the date delivered or the date on which delivery was refused.

13. No Commissions. City shall not be liable for any real estate commissions or brokerage fees that may arise from this Agreement or any Land Exchange Agreement that may result from this Agreement. City represents that it has engaged no broker agent or finder in connection with this transaction and Developer shall indemnify, defend and hold City harmless from any claims by any broker, agent, or finder retained by Developer. This Section 13 shall survive termination of this Agreement.

14. Defaults and Remedies. Failure by either party to comply with the exclusive negotiation provisions of Section 3 of this Agreement shall constitute an event of default hereunder. The non-defaulting party shall give written notice of a default to the defaulting party specifying the nature of the default and the required action to cure the default. If a default remains uncured thirty (30) days after receipt by the defaulting party of such notice, the non-defaulting party may exercise the remedies set forth below in this Section 14.

In the event of an uncured default by City, Developer's exclusive remedies shall be (1) to terminate this Agreement and the Reimbursement Agreement and (2) if, and only if, the default is related to the City default under Section 3 with respect to Oracle, all available rights and remedies under law and equity, provided, however, that any damages (including direct, indirect, consequential, or punitive damages) shall be limited to the amount of Eligible Costs (as such term is defined in the Reimbursement Agreement) paid to the City by Developer.

Following such termination, neither party shall have any further right, remedy or obligation under this Agreement, provided, however, that Developer’s indemnification obligation pursuant to Section 13 shall survive such termination.

In the event of an uncured default by Developer, City's sole remedy shall be to terminate this Agreement and collect funds pursuant to the Reimbursement Agreement’s terms. Following such termination, neither party shall have any right, remedy or obligation under this Agreement, provided, however, that Developer's indemnification obligation pursuant to Section 13 shall survive such termination.
11 Except as expressly provided above, neither party shall have any liability to the other for damages or otherwise for any default, nor shall either party have any other claims with respect to performance under this Agreement. Each party specifically waives and releases any such rights or claims they may otherwise have at law or in equity.

15. Assignment. Neither party shall assign any of its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the other party’s express prior written consent, which the responding party may grant, condition, or withhold in its sole and absolute discretion.

16. Tolling of Builder’s Remedy Dispute. Pursuant to that certain Tolling Agreement by and between Developer and City dated as of October 9, 2024, as extended by that certain First Amendment to Tolling Agreement by and between the parties and dated as of December 17, 2024, that certain Second Amendment to Tolling Agreement by and between the parties and dated as of March 28, 2025, that certain Third Amendment to Tolling Agreement by and between the parties and dated as of June 6, 2025, that certain Fourth Amendment to Tolling Agreement by and between the parties and dated as of August 28, 2025, that certain Fifth Amendment to Tolling Agreement by and between the parties and dated as of November 15, 2025, and that certain Sixth Amendment to Tolling Agreement by and between the parties and dated as of February 16, 2026 (collectively, the “Tolling Agreement”), the parties agreed that the running of any litigation filing and/or service deadlines related to a dispute under Section 65589.5(d)(5) of the California Government Code shall be tolled and suspended in their entirety until June 1, 2026, or earlier cancellation as provided in the Tolling Agreement (“Tolling Period”).

Concurrently with execution of this Agreement, the Tolling Agreement and Tolling Period shall be automatically extended, without further action being required, through the term of this Agreement, plus an additional thirty (30) days thereafter. If the City Council takes action to approve the Project, the Tolling Agreement and Tolling Period shall automatically be extended, without further action being required, through the period during which any legal challenge or referendum of such City Council action can be filed without any such challenges or referenda being filed; or, if such challenge or referendum is filed, through the final resolution thereof, including and expiration of any appeal periods.

17. Attorneys’ Fees. The prevailing party in any action to enforce this Agreement shall be entitled to recover attorney’s fees and costs from the other party.

18. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

19. Incorporation of Recitals. The parties acknowledge the truth of the foregoing Recitals, which by this reference are incorporated into and be deemed operative provisions of this Agreement.

20. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties regarding the subject matters of this Agreement.

21. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, including pursuant to an electronic signature method, such as DocuSign, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same agreement. 12 22. Effective Date. The date of this Agreement shall be as stated in the first paragraph of this Agreement.
[Signatures on following page]

13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their signatures.

DEVELOPER:

VOP AGNEWS, LLC
By: ______________________________
Name: __________________________
Title: Authorized Signatory
CITY:

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, a municipal corporation
By: ______________________________
Name: __________________________
Title: __________________________
ATTEST:

By: ____________________________
Name: ____________________________
Title: ____________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: ____________________________
Name: ____________________________
Title: ____________________________
14 EXHIBIT A-1

ORACLE CAMPUS
15 EXHIBIT A-2

AGNEWS PARCEL
16 EXHIBIT A-3

CITY EXCHANGE PARCEL
17 EXHIBIT B

MILESTONE SCHEDULE
The parties shall endeavor in good faith to accomplish the tasks listed below within the timeframes identified. The parties agree and acknowledge that failure to meet any of the projected timeframes below shall not constitute a default by either party.

Task / Milestone Projected Timeframe
VOP submits scope and entitlement
applications for VOP Residential Projects and
City Hall Improvement Project (General Plan
amendment/rezoning only)
June 15, 2026
City prepares scope for City Hall Improvement
Project
July 15, 2026
City releases Notice of Preparation or
otherwise commences CEQA process, as
applicable
August 28, 2026
Due Diligence period ends November 30, 2026
City submits Surplus Land Act findings to HCD February 15, 2026 Draft EIR/CEQA document released for public
review
January 5, 2027
Parties prepare draft Land Exchange Agreement February 1, 2027 CEQA Public Comment Period ends February 20, 2027
Final EIR and Responses to Comments
document released
March 16, 2027
Planning Commission hearing for
recommendations on CEQA documents, Project
Approvals and Exchange Agreement
March 24, 2027
City Council hearing and action on CEQA
documents, Project Approvals, and Exchange
Agreement
April 6, 2027
City Council Second Reading on applicable
Project Approvals
April 20, 2027
If CEQA documents, Project Approvals and
Exchange Agreement approved, close Land
Swap transaction
May 28, 2027
18 EXHIBIT C

FORM OF RIGHT OF ENTRY AGREEMENT
CITY EXCHANGE PARCEL – DUE DILIGENCE
This Right of Entry Agreement ("ROE") is entered into as of the ___th day of _________, 20__, by and between the City of Santa Clara, a municipal corporation ("City"), and Agnews VOP, LLC, a California limited liability company ("Developer"), with reference to the following:

Recitals
A. City is owner of that certain real property in the City of Santa Clara, California (APN 24-25-074), as more particularly shown on the map attached hereto depicted as Exhibit A (“City Exchange Parcel”).

B. City and Developer have entered into that certain Exclusive Negotiation Agreement dated as of the ___th day of May, 2026 ("Agreement"), pursuant to which the parties are negotiating a Land Exchange Agreement (as defined in the Agreement), including related ancillary documents, for the exchange of certain real property, including the City Exchange Parcel.

C. Section 8 of the Agreement provides for certain due diligence activities to be conducted during the Due Diligence Period (as defined in the Agreement), including Developer's investigation of the City Exchange Parcel to determine its suitability for development of the Project.

D. City is willing to grant Developer a limited right of entry onto the City Exchange Parcel solely for the purpose of conducting the due diligence investigations described in Section 8 of the Agreement, subject to the terms, conditions, restrictions, and protections set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, which are incorporated herein by this reference, and the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, City and Developer agree as follows:

1. Definitions. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement.

2. Grant of Right of Entry. Subject to the terms and conditions of this ROE, City hereby grants to Developer and its officers, directors, employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors, engineers, architects, environmental consultants, geotechnical consultants, surveyors, and other professional consultants retained by or on behalf of Developer (collectively, “Authorized Representatives”) a limited, non-exclusive, revocable right of entry upon and across the City Exchange Parcel solely for the purpose of performing the those certain due diligence investigations, inspections, tests, surveys, studies, and analyses described in Section 3 of this ROE (collectively, “Authorized Activities”) during the Entry Period (defined below).

This ROE does not convey to Developer or any Authorized Representative any possessory interest, leasehold interest, easement, license coupled with an interest, or other property right or interest in or to the City Exchange Parcel. The right of entry granted herein is a mere license, revocable at will by City as provided in Section 10 of this ROE. Developer acknowledges and agrees that the City Exchange Parcel is currently occupied and used by City for municipal and 19 public purposes, and Developer shall conduct all Authorized Activities in a manner that does not unreasonably interfere with, disrupt, or impair City's continued use, operations, and occupancy of the City Exchange Parcel.

3. Entry Period. The rights granted to Developer herein shall commence on the date of this ROE and expire on the termination of the Agreement (“Entry Period”); provided, however, that City may terminate the Entry Period at any time upon written notice to Developer if the Agreement is terminated in accordance with its terms.

4. Scope of Authorized Activities.
(a) Developer and its Authorized Representatives may enter the City Exchange Parcel during the Entry Period to perform the following Authorized Activities, which are consistent with the due diligence investigations contemplated by Section 8 of the Agreement:
(i) Preliminary analysis of toxic and hazardous waste conditions throughout the City Exchange Parcel;
(ii) Review of site historical soils and subsurface data and information; (iii) Preliminary analysis of geotechnical conditions of site surface and subsurface; (iv) Preliminary analysis of site issues relative to endangered species and sensitive habitat;
(v) Preliminary assessment of traffic and parking issues/constraints that may affect site development;
(vi) Assessment of major public and private utility capacities and connections for providing service to the Project;
(vii) Assessment of site drainage and waterway issues that may affect site development;
(viii) Review of any site easements or other use restrictions that may affect site development;
(ix) Review of title as it may affect site development and financing of development; and
(x) such other inspections, tests, and investigations to be performed in accordance with Section 8 of the Agreement and subject to the prior written approval of City. (b) Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer shall not, without the prior written consent of City (which City may grant, condition, or withhold in its sole and absolute discretion):
(i) Conduct any Phase II environmental site assessment work, intrusive or destructive test, other than volume soil sampling, or any other invasive testing, boring, drilling, excavation, or sampling that penetrates below the surface of the City Exchange Parcel;
(ii) Disturb, remove, or destroy any improvements, structures, landscaping, trees, or vegetation on the City Exchange Parcel;
(iii) Discharge, release, or dispose of any hazardous materials, pollutants, or contaminants on, under, or about the City Exchange Parcel; or (iv) Conduct any activity that would trigger any reporting, notification, or remediation obligation under any applicable federal, state, or local environmental law, regulation, or ordinance.
20 5. Conditions of Entry.
(a) Prior Notice. Prior to entering the City Exchange Parcel to perform the Authorized Activities, Developer shall provide City at least forty-eight (48) hour’s prior written notice, which notice may be provided via electronic mail. Such notice shall describe in reasonable detail the nature, scope, and anticipated schedule of the proposed Authorized Activities, and shall identify all Authorized Representatives who will enter the City Exchange Parcel.

Developer shall promptly provide to City all material updates and modifications to the schedule.
(b)City Representative. City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to have a representative present during any entry by Developer or its Authorized Representatives onto the City Exchange Parcel; if City's representative is not available at the time and date identified in Developer's notice given pursuant to Section 5(a) above, the City may propose alternative times that are within two (2) business days of the time and date identified in Developer's notice .
(c) Compliance with Laws. Developer and all Authorized Representatives shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, statutes, regulations, ordinances, codes, and orders in connection with their entry onto and activities on the City Exchange Parcel, including without limitation all applicable environmental laws, health and safety regulations, and building codes.
(d) Permits and Approvals. Developer shall, at its sole cost and expense, obtain all permits, licenses, and governmental approvals required in connection with the Authorized Activities prior to commencing such activities.

6. Insurance Requirements. Prior to any entry on the City Exchange Parcel, Developer and each Authorized Representative entering the Property (other than Developer's its officers, directors, employees, who shall be covered by Developer's insurance) shall, at its sole cost and expense, procure and maintain in full force and effect throughout the Entry Period, a commercial general liability insurance policy with a financially responsible insurance company acceptable to City, covering (i) Developer’s and its Authorized Representatives’ performance of the Authorized Activities; and (ii) with respect to Developer's insurance only, contractual liability coverage insuring Developer’s indemnity obligations set forth in this ROE. Developer shall deliver to City evidence that Developer and each such Authorized Representative is carrying insurance policies which shall: (i) have a per occurrence limit of at least One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) and an aggregate limit of at least Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00); (ii) name City and Developer as additional insureds; (iii) be primary and non-contributing with any other insurance available to City; and (iv) contain a full waiver of subrogation clause. [City to review/confirm insurance requirements.]
All insurance policies required under this Section shall be issued by insurance companies licensed to do business in the State of California with a Best's rating of not less than A-:VII.

7. Indemnification. To the maximum extent allowed by law, Developer shall indemnify, defend (with counsel approved by City), assume all liability for and hold harmless City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers (collectively, "City Indemnitees") from all actions, claims, suits, penalties, obligations, liabilities, damages to property (including, without limitation, any damage cause by Hazardous Materials that are released, discharged, or spilled on, under, or from the City Exchange Parcel as a result of the 21 Authorized Activities), costs and expenses (including, without limitation, any fines, penalties, judgments, settlements, actual litigation expenses and experts’ and actual attorneys’ fees, and any cost to remediate and clean up the release, discharge, or spill of any Hazardous Materials as a result of the Authorized Activities to the satisfaction of City and all applicable governmental authorities), liens filed against the City Exchange Parcel or bodily and/or personal injuries or death to any persons to the extent caused by Developer’s and its Authorized Agents’ use of the City Exchange Parcel or performance of this ROE, except to the extent caused by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of any City Indemnitees and also and expressly excluding any claims or expenses (i) resulting from the mere discovery of any adverse condition or (ii) for consequential, indirect or punitive damages except to the extent that City is liable therefor to any third party that is unaffiliated with City. This Section 7 shall survive the expiration or termination of this ROE and shall not be limited by the insurance requirements set forth in Section 5.

8. Restoration and Repair.
(a) Upon completion of the Authorized Activities, or upon expiration or termination of this ROE, whichever occurs first, Developer shall, at its sole cost and expense, promptly restore the City Exchange Parcel to substantially the same condition as existed immediately prior to Developer's entry, including without limitation: (i) backfilling and compacting any borings, test pits or excavations approved in writing by City in connection with the Authorized Activities; (ii) repairing or replacing any damaged improvements, structures, pavement, curbing, fencing, landscaping, and irrigation systems caused by or resulting from the Authorized Activities; (iii) removing all equipment, materials, debris, and waste generated by or in connection with the Authorized Activities; and (iv) properly disposing of all soil cuttings, groundwater, and other materials on the Property as a result of or in connection with the Authorized Activities and removed from the City Exchange Parcel in accordance with all applicable environmental laws and regulations. (b) If Developer fails to restore the City Exchange Parcel as required above within thirty (30) days following written notice from City, or within such shorter period as may be reasonably necessary to address an imminent health or safety concern, City may perform or cause to be performed such restoration work as City deems necessary, and Developer shall reimburse City for all actual, out-of-pocket costs and expenses incurred by City in connection therewith within fifteen (15) days following City's written demand, together with reasonable documentation of such costs.
(c) Developer's restoration obligations under this Section 7 shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this ROE.

9. Reports and Information. Developer shall provide City with copies of all final reports, studies, analyses, test results, and other documents prepared by or on behalf of Developer in connection with the Authorized Activities (collectively, "Investigation Reports"), promptly upon completion. Developer shall promptly notify City, in writing and in no event later than twentyfour (24) hours following discovery, of: (i) the discovery of any hazardous materials, contamination, or environmental condition on or under the City Exchange Parcel not previously known to City; (ii) any damage to the City Exchange Parcel or any improvements thereon resulting from the Authorized Activities; (iii) any personal injury occurring on the City Exchange Parcel in connection with the Authorized Activities; or (iv) any claim, demand, or action arising out of or related to the Authorized Activities. City acknowledges that certain Investigation Reports may contain confidential or proprietary information of Developer. City 22 shall treat such information in accordance with the confidentiality provisions of the Agreement, subject to the requirements imposed on City by the California Public Records Act (Government Code Sections 6253 et seq.).

10. Hazardous Materials.
(a) Developer shall not bring onto, use, store, generate, treat, or dispose of any Hazardous Materials on, under, or about the City Exchange Parcel, except for such quantities of Hazardous Materials as are customarily and reasonably necessary to perform the Authorized Activities (such as drilling fluids, sampling equipment decontamination fluids, and laboratory-grade chemicals), provided that all such Hazardous Materials are used, stored, handled, transported, and disposed of in strict compliance with all applicable environmental laws. In the event that any Hazardous Materials are brought onto the property and released, discharged, or spilled on, under, or from the City Exchange Parcel as a result of the Authorized Activities, Developer shall immediately: (i) take all steps necessary to contain and control such release, discharge, or spill; (ii) notify City in writing within twenty-four (24) hours thereof; (iii) notify all applicable governmental authorities as required by law; and (iv) at Developer's sole cost and expense, remediate and clean up such release, discharge, or spill to the satisfaction of City and all applicable governmental authorities. Developer expressly agrees to and shall indemnify, defend (with counsel approved by City), release and hold City Indemnitees harmless from and against any liability, loss, fine, penalty, fee, charge, lien, judgment, damage, entry, claim, cause of action, suit, proceeding (whether legal or administrative), remediation, response, removal, or clean-up and all costs and expenses associated therewith, and all other costs and expenses (including, but not limited to, attorneys’ fees, expert fees, and court costs) in any way related to the release, discharge, migration, disposal, treatment, transportation, manufacture, or use of any Hazardous Materials on, in, under, or about the City Exchange Parcel caused by or resulting from Hazardous Materials that are brought onto the Property by the Developer in connection with the Authorized Activities and/or entry upon the City Exchange Parcel by Developer, its Authorized Representatives or any other third party acting under the control or request of Developer, except to the extent caused by City’s gross negligence or willful misconduct. This indemnity, defense and hold harmless obligation shall survive the expiration or termination of this ROE. (b) City makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, in this Agreement with respect to the environmental condition of the City Exchange Parcel or the surrounding property (including, without limitation, all facilities, improvements, structures and equipment thereon and soil and groundwater thereunder), or compliance with any applicable Hazardous Materials Laws, and gives no indemnification, express or implied, in this Agreement for any costs of liabilities arising out of or related to the presence, discharge, migration or release or threatened release of Hazardous Materials in or from the City Exchange Parcel. Developer recognizes that, in entering upon the City Exchange Parcel and performing the Authorized Activities under this ROE, Developer and its Authorized Representatives may be working with, or be exposed to, substances or conditions which are toxic or otherwise hazardous. Developer shall provide prior written notice to its Authorized Representatives of the potential presence and exposure to such toxic or Hazardous Materials or conditions. Developer agrees that, for purposes of this ROE and performance of the Authorized Activities, it is assuming full responsibility for such risks. The provisions of this Section 10(e) shall not limit or otherwise affect the rights and obligations of Developer and City under any separate written agreement between the parties.
23 11. Termination and Revocation. This ROE shall terminate automatically upon expiration of the Entry Period. City may revoke the right of entry granted herein and terminate this ROE at any time, with or without cause, upon five (5) business days' prior written notice to Developer.

Upon receipt of such notice, Developer shall immediately cease all Authorized Activities on the City Exchange Parcel and shall complete all restoration obligations under Section 7 within thirty (30) days following such revocation. This ROE shall terminate automatically and without further action by either party upon termination of the Agreement in accordance with its terms.

The following provisions shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this ROE:

Section 6 (Indemnification), Section 7 (Restoration and Repair), Section 8 (Reports and Information), Section 9 (Hazardous Materials), Section 12 (Waiver of Claims), Section 13 (No Liens) and Section 14 (Costs).

12. Waiver of Claims. Developer, for itself and on behalf of each Authorized Representative, hereby waives any and all claims against City Indemnitees for any loss, damage, or injury to Developer's or any Authorized Representative's property or equipment occurring on or about the City Exchange Parcel, except to the extent caused by the gross or willful misconduct of any City Indemnitees.

13. No Liens. Developer shall not permit or suffer any mechanic's lien, materialman's lien, stop notice, or other lien or encumbrance to be filed or recorded against the City Exchange Parcel arising out of or in connection with the Authorized Activities. If any such lien or encumbrance is filed or recorded, Developer shall cause the same to be discharged, released, or bonded within fifteen (15) days following Developer's receipt of written notice from City thereof.

14. Costs. Developer shall bear all costs and expenses of any kind or nature in connection with its use of the City Exchange Parcel, including, without limitation, any fines or penalties related to, or arising from performance of the Authorized Activities and any costs to incurred by City to the extent caused by Developer’s or its Authorized Representatives’ failure to comply with this ROE.

15. Notices. All notices, demands, and communications under this ROE shall be given in the manner provided in Section 12 of the Agreement.

16. Governing Law. This ROE shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

17. Entire Agreement. This ROE, together with the Agreement, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations, and understandings relating thereto.

18. Amendment. This ROE may not be amended or modified except by a written instrument executed by both City and Developer.

19. Assignment. Developer shall not assign any of its rights or obligations under this ROE without City's express prior written consent, which City may grant, condition, or withhold in its sole and absolute discretion.
24 20. Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this ROE shall be effective unless in writing and signed by the party against whom such waiver is sought to be enforced. No waiver of any breach of this ROE shall constitute a waiver of any subsequent breach.

21. Severability. If any provision of this ROE is held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.

22. Counterparts. This ROE may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same agreement.

23. Attorney's Fees. The prevailing party in any action to enforce this ROE shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees and costs from the other party.

24. Strictly Construed. This ROE is to be strictly construed and no uses other than the Authorized Activities specifically stated herein are authorized hereby. [Signatures on following page]
25 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this ROE as of the date first written above.

DEVELOPER:

VOP AGNEWS, LLC
By: ______________________________
Name: __________________________
Title: Authorized Signatory
CITY:

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, a municipal corporation
By: ______________________________
Name: __________________________
Title: __________________________
ATTEST:

By: ____________________________
Name: ____________________________
Title: ____________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: ____________________________
Name: ____________________________
Title: ____________________________
26 RIGHT OF ENTRY EXHIBIT A

CITY EXCHANGE PARCEL

27 EXHIBIT D

FORM OF REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 1 of 9

REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN THE

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA,
AND

AGNEWS VOP, LLC

PREAMBLE
This Reimbursement Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into on May ____, 2026 (“Effective Date”), by and between Agnews VOP, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”), and the City of Santa Clara, California, a chartered California municipal corporation (“City”). City and Developer may be referred to individually as a “Party” or collectively as the “Parties.”

RECITALS
A. Developer owns and/or is authorized to submit a development application by the owner of those certain real properties totaling approximately 52.9 acres located at 4220 Network Circle, in Santa Clara, California. Developer would retain a portion of the site (“VOP Retained Parcel”) for the development of residential uses (“Network Circle Residential Project”) and exchange a portion of the site with the City (“VOP Exchange Parcel”) that would accommodate the potential relocation of the City Hall Campus (“City Hall Improvement Project”). Developer is also in preliminary discussions with City for a separate development application for residential uses (“Warburton Residential Project”) on the current City Hall Campus located at 1500 Warburton Avenue (“City Exchange Parcel”). The Network Circle Residential Project and the Warburton Residential Project collectively may be referred to as the “VOP Residential Projects,” and the VOP Residential Projects and the City Hall Improvement Project collectively may be referred to as the “Proposed Projects”). The Developer and City require or contemplate the following approvals and processing (collectively, “Project Approvals”):

1. General Plan Amendments for the Proposed Projects

2. Rezonings for the Proposed Projects

3. Development Plans for the VOP Residential Projects

4. Subdivision Maps for the VOP Residential Projects

5. Land Exchange Agreement regarding the exchange of the VOP Exchange Parcel and the City Exchange Parcel

6. One or more Development Agreements for the VOP Residential Projects

7. Analysis necessary to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) for each of the Proposed Projects, which would include at least one Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”), consisting of a Draft EIR, Responses to Comments, a Final EIR, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 2 of 9 B. The Parties executed that certain Exclusive Negotiation Agreement dated May __, 2026 (“ENA”). The ENA defines a period of time during which the Parties will engage in good faith negotiations regarding the potential exchange of the VOP Exchange Parcel and the City Exchange Parcel. Negotiation pursuant to the ENA, review and processing of the Project Approvals, and due diligence work associated with the City Hall Improvement Project will require City to incur various costs and expenses including consultant costs and attorneys’ fees and costs that the City has not budgeted for. The Developer has agreed to reimburse the City for Eligible Costs (as defined below) that incurred by City in connection with the Proposed Projects beginning on December 30, 2025 and continuing during the ENA’s term.

C. In order to facilitate processing of the Project Approvals and conduct negotiations pursuant to the ENA, City has retained a law firm with expertise in CEQA and land use matters (the “Outside Counsel”) and a real estate consulting firm (the “Real Estate Consultant”). City also expects to retain other professionals, including a certified real estate appraiser, and architectural and engineering firm, and various technical consultants to inform the due diligence, feasibility, and valuation efforts associated with the potential exchange of the VOP Exchange Parcel and the City Exchange Parcel (the “Due Diligence Consultants”). Finally, City will retain a community engagement specialist to manage communications, outreach and an online website portal (the “Community Engagement Consultant”). Developer is willing to reimburse City for costs charged by the Outside Counsel, Real Estate Consultant, and Due Diligence Consultants, and to share costs of the Community Engagement Consultant, starting as of December 30, 2025, and continuing throughout the ENA’s term and pursuant to this Agreement’s terms and conditions.

D. Separately, City has identified, and Developer is directly reimbursing, an environmental consultant with expertise in CEQA and their subconsultants to conduct the environmental analysis, and such costs are outside the scope of this Agreement. The parties acknowledge and agree that the City is the lead agency conducting review pursuant to CEQA, and any final determination must reflect the City’s independent judgement as to the analysis and how to comply with CEQA.

E. Developer understands and agrees that its funding of such costs is at its sole risk and that nothing in this Agreement is or shall be construed to control or limit the City’s exercise of discretion with respect to any aspect of evaluating the Proposed Projects, nor shall it be construed as making any commitment regarding the granting of any entitlements for development.

In consideration of the recitals and mutual promises contained herein, the Parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT PROVISIONS

1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT.

The purpose of this Agreement is to provide for payment by Developer of all Eligible Costs (defined below) actually incurred by City in connection with the Proposed Projects.

Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 3 of 9

2. REIMBURSEMENT OBLIGATION.

Developer shall reimburse the City for all “Eligible Costs,” which shall consist of the following:

A. Outside Counsel’s and Real Estate Consultant’s fees and costs associated with the negotiation, drafting, and implementation of the ENA and costs and expenses related to City’s work on the Proposed Projects, including review and consideration of the Project Approvals;
B. Due Diligence Consultants’ fees and costs associated with the analysis of the VOP Exchange Parcel and the City Exchange Parcel for purposes of evaluating the potential land swap pursuant to the ENA;
C. One-half (1/2) of a Community Engagement Consultant’s fees and costs associated with outreach efforts under the ENA; and
D. Outside Counsel’s fees and costs (“Legal Defense Costs”) actually incurred in connection with the legal defense of the ENA and any activities conducted pursuant thereto (“Legal Challenge”), subject to the limitations below.

Eligible Costs shall include City costs incurred beginning on December 30, 2025 through the Effective Date to cover initial feasibility analysis and the negotiation and preparation of the ENA.Beginning as of the Effective Date, additional Eligible Costs shall be strictly limited to fees and costs incurred during the term of the ENA; provided, however, that if a Land Exchange Agreement is approved by the City during the term of the ENA, additional Eligible Costs shall also include fees and costs related to the implementation of such Land Exchange Agreement. If either Party terminates the ENA pursuant to the terms thereof, no further Eligible Costs shall accrue; provided, however, that Developer shall remain obligated to reimburse the City for Eligible Costs incurred prior to such termination.

Outside Counsel and Real Estate Consultant will initially focus on tasks related to the Project Approvals, environmental review, and negotiation of the key financial terms of the land swap pursuant to the ENA. Prior to commencement of drafting the Land Exchange Agreement or a development agreement, City shall provide Developer with a good faith, non-binding estimate of additional fees and costs for the subsequent phase of work in writing. Developer shall have five (5) business days after receipt of such notice to terminate the ENA prior to such work commencing. If Developer fails to provide timely notice of its desire to terminate the ENA, or provides early notice that it accepts the costs, such additional work shall commence and be considered Eligible Costs.

Prior to commencement of Due Diligence Consultants’ work, City shall provide Developer with a good faith, non-binding estimate of fees and costs for the due diligence work in writing. Developer shall have five (5) business days after receipt of such notice to terminate the ENA prior to such work commencing. If Developer fails to provide timely notice of its desire to terminate the ENA, or provides early notice that it accepts the costs, such additional work shall commence and be considered Eligible Costs.

Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 4 of 9 Prior to commencement of Community Engagement Consultant’s work, City shall provide Developer with a good faith, non-binding estimate of fees and costs for the community engagement work in writing. Developer shall have five (5) business days after receipt of such notice to terminate the ENA prior to such work commencing. If Developer fails to provide timely notice of its desire to terminate the ENA, or provides early notice that it accepts the costs, such additional work shall commence and be considered Eligible Costs.

In the event of a Legal Challenge, the City and Developer shall meet and confer to assess the Legal Challenge for no more than ten (10) business days following the date the City is served with such Legal Challenge. If, and only if, during the meet and confer period, Developer opts to defend any such Legal Challenge (in the Developer’s sole and absolute discretion) and informs the City of this election, Eligible Costs shall include the Legal Defense Costs, and Developer shall indemnify and hold harmless the City from costs and expenses (including, without limitation, any fines, penalties, judgments, settlements, actual litigation expenses and experts’ and actual attorneys’ fees) arising from or related to the Legal Challenge, except to the extent caused by the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the City. If, during the meet and confer period, Developer opts not to defend any such Legal Challenge, informs the City of this election, and terminates the ENA to moot any Legal Challenge, Legal Defense Costs shall be excluded from Eligible Costs, but Developer shall remain responsible for costs and expenses (including potential third-party catalyst attorney’s fees) incurred as a result of the Legal Challenge.

The City will make a good faith effort to track spending on an at least monthly basis and shall promptly notify Developer in writing if City becomes aware that actual costs are expected to materially exceed the original estimates (“Increase Notice”). For purposes of this Agreement, an increase of 15% or more shall be considered a material increase.

Such increase within 15% of the estimate shall not affect the Developer’s obligation to reimburse the City for Eligible Costs actually incurred. Upon receipt of the City’s Increase Notice Developer shall have five (5) business days after receipt of such notice to terminate the ENA. If Developer fails to provide timely notice of its desire to terminate the ENA, or provides early notice that it accepts the costs, Developer shall pay such costs and the ENA shall remain in effect. .

Subject to Section 6, the City shall provide summary invoices to verify that the Eligible Costs were incurred in accordance with this Agreement.

3. EVERGREEN DEPOSIT.
(a) City shall establish and Developer shall fund a deposit account designed to ensure that City is never required to perform work for which reimbursement funds have not been previously deposited (“Evergreen Deposit”). The Evergreen Deposit shall contain funds necessary to cover three months’ worth of budgeted expenditures by City for Eligible Costs. Developer shall fund the Evergreen Deposit initially by depositing with City on or before the Effective Date the sum of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000) in the form of a cashier’s check. Developer shall replenish the Evergreen Deposit on a monthly basis until termination of this Agreement or as long as expenditures made by City relating to City’s review, evaluation, consideration, and processing of the Proposed Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 5 of 9 Projects remain unreimbursed, whichever is later. At no time shall there be less than $50,000 remaining fund balance in the account.

Beginning on the Effective Date, Developer shall replenish the Evergreen Deposit by depositing on or before the last day of each month the full amount of all invoices delivered by City to Developer within the previous month. Thus, for example, on or before July 1, 2026, Developer would replenish the Evergreen Deposit by depositing the sum of all invoices submitted by City to Developer during the month of June, 2026. (b) In the event City determines that total invoices for any particular three-month period are likely to exceed $250,000, City may request that Developer increase the total funds available in the Evergreen Deposit accordingly. If Developer does not agree to increase the deposited amount, City may adjust its work schedule, including through the adjustment of project deadlines, so as not to exceed the amount available in the Evergreen Deposit.
(c) The Parties acknowledge that deposits to the Evergreen Deposit are not a “source of income” within the meaning of the California Political Reform Act (pursuant to California Government Code Section 87103.6).
(d) Upon termination of this Agreement, if the City has incurred Eligible Costs in excess of total funds available in the Evergreen Deposit, the City shall, within ninety (90) days of such termination, deliver to Developer reasonable evidence of its incurrence of such Eligible Costs, and Developer shall, within ninety (90) days of receipt of such evidence, reimburse City for all remaining and outstanding reimbursements of Eligible Costs to which it is entitled under this Agreement. Once all remaining and outstanding reimbursements have been paid to the City by the Developer, City shall return to Developer any remaining unused portion of the Evergreen Deposit.

4. REFUND OF UNEXPENDED BALANCE.

The City shall refund any unexpended balance of the Deposit within 120 days of the occurrence of any of the following: (1) the termination of this Agreement pursuant to Section 7 below; or (2) the no-fault termination of the ENA pursuant to its terms; (3) the date of a final City Council action to disapprove the Proposed Projects; or (4) the date on which all applicable limitations periods to challenge a final City Council action to approve the Proposed Projects, if so approved, have expired or, if any challenge is filed, then the date on which such challenge is finally resolved.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the ENA is terminated by City due to an uncured default of Developer under the ENA, the Deposit and any interest earned thereon shall be retained by City, and City shall be reimbursed by Developer for any additional Eligible Costs incurred by City in excess of the remaining balance of the Deposit prior to the effective date of such termination of the ENA.

5. NO COMMITMENT AS TO FUTURE APPROVALS.

Nothing in this Agreement is or shall be construed to be a covenant, promise, or commitment by the City (including, without limitation, any agency, board, or Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 6 of 9 commission of City) to grant or issue any Project Approvals or any other preliminary or final approvals in connection with the Proposed Projects or to enter into a Land Exchange Agreement. Developer acknowledges and agrees that nothing in this Agreement limits City’s discretion, in any manner, with respect to any aspect of the Proposed Projects.

Developer agrees that it shall remain obligated to pay all Eligible Costs incurred prior to termination of this Agreement or the ENA, regardless of whether any aspect of the Proposed Projects is approved and regardless of whether City and Developer enter into the proposed Land Exchange Agreement.

6. ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP AND CONSULTANT WORK
PRODUCT.

Developer recognizes that City will be the client of Outside Counsel, and that attorneyclient privilege will apply to all communications between City and Outside Counsel, whether verbal, written, or electronically transmitted, including but not limited to exchanges of administrative draft documents and discussions about administrative draft documents. Developer does not have an attorney-client relationship with Outside Counsel and shall not have access to any such communications.

Developer further recognizes that City will be the client of Real Estate Consultant, Due Diligence Consultants, and Community Engagement Consultant, and that the City shall have sole authority to direct such consultants’ work, and all consultant work product remains under the control and ownership of such consultants (or the City, as may be set forth in individual consultant agreements).

7. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT.

Either Party may terminate this Agreement without cause by giving the other Party written notice (“Notice of Termination”) which clearly expresses that Party’s intent to terminate the Agreement. Notice of Termination shall become effective no less than ten (10) calendar days after a Party receives such notice.

As of the Notice of Termination effective date, the ENA shall automatically terminate, and the City shall stop processing the Warburton Residential Project application.

Developer shall have no obligation to pay any Eligible Costs incurred on or after the effective date of the termination, but shall remain responsible for any fees incurred prior to the effective date of the termination. Developer shall remain liable for expenses incurred by City following Developer’s termination in order to terminate any contractual relationships and/or to conduct clerical, logistical, or other non-substantive work required to efficiently terminate the consulting relationship.

8. INTEGRATED DOCUMENT.

This Agreement, along with the ENA, represents the entire agreement between City and Developer. Other than the ENA, no other understanding, agreements, conversations, or otherwise, with any representative of either Party prior to execution of this Agreement shall affect or modify any of the terms or obligations of this Agreement. Any verbal Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 7 of 9 agreement shall be considered unofficial information and is not binding upon either Party.

9. SEVERABILITY.

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

10. AMENDMENTS.

This Agreement may only be modified by a written amendment duly authorized and executed by the Parties.

11. WAIVER.

Waiver of any one or more of the conditions of performance under this Agreement shall not be construed as waiver(s) of any other condition of performance under this Agreement.

12. NOTICES.

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

City of Santa Clara
Attention: City Manager
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, California 95050
Email: [email protected]
With copies to:

City of Santa Clara
Attention: City Attorney
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, California 95050
Email: [email protected]
Burke, Williams & Sorenson, LLP
1 California Street, Suite 3050
San Francisco, CA 94111
Attention: Anna Shimko
Email:[email protected]

Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 8 of 9 and to Developer addressed as follows:

Agnews VOP, LLC
c/o Valley Oak Partners GP, LLC
734 The Alameda
San Jose, CA 95126
Attention: Doug Rich
Email: [email protected]
With a copy to:

Holland & Knight, LLP
560 Mission St. Suite 1900
San Francisco, CA 94105
Attention: Tamsen Plume
Email: [email protected]
If notice is sent via email, a signed, hard copy of the material shall also be mailed. The workday the email was sent shall control the date notice was deemed given. An email transmitted after 5:00 p.m. on a Business Day shall be deemed to have been transmitted on the following Business Day.

13. CAPTIONS.

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

14. LAW GOVERNING CONTRACT AND VENUE.

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

15. COUNTERPARTS AND SIGNATURES.

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

Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 9 of 9 The Parties acknowledge and accept the terms and conditions of this Agreement as evidenced by the following signatures of their duly authorized representatives. The Effective Date is the date that the final signatory executes the Agreement. It is the intent of the Parties that this Agreement shall become operative on the Effective Date.

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
a chartered California municipal corporation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Dated: ________________________

GLEN GOOGINS
City Attorney

JOVAN GROGAN
City Manager
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Telephone: (408) 615-2210
Fax: (408) 241-6771
“CITY”

AGNEWS VOP, LLC
a California Limited Liability Company
Dated: _________________________
By:
(Signature)
Name:

Title:

Local Address:

Email Address:

Telephone: ( )
Fax: ( )
“DEVELOPER”
Resolution/ VOP Santa Clara Land Swap – Exclusive Negotiation Agreement Page 1 of 5 RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
DECLARING REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY (APN 24-
25-074) TO BE EXEMPT SURPLUS LAND AND APPROVING AN

EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY

OF SANTA CLARA AND AGNEWS VOP, LLC FOR A POTENTIAL

LAND EXCHANGE AND CITY HALL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clara (“City”) owns certain real property located at 1500 Warburton Avenue in the City (APN 24-25-074) that the City operates as its current City Hall (“Warburton Parcel”);
WHEREAS, VOP Agnews, LLC (“Developer”) intends to acquire that certain parcel of real property located at 4220 Network Circle in the (APN: 097-08-058) (“Agnews Parcel”); WHEREAS, the Agnews Parcel was formerly occupied by the Agnew State Hospital and includes historic structures and features on portions of the property, all of which is contained within a portion of the Santa Clara campus of the Oracle Corporation; WHEREAS, on September 20, 2023, Developer submitted a preliminary application, and on September 25, 2023, paid the associated fees for an application to develop a housing development project pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(5) on the Agnews Parcel (the “Builder’s Remedy Project”)
WHEREAS, the City has indicated its position that Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(5) does not apply to the Builder’s Remedy Project (the “Dispute”); WHEREAS, the City and Developer have engaged in preliminary feasibility discussions in connection with the effort to settle their Dispute, wherein the Developer would potentially dispose of a portion of the Agnews Parcel developed with historic structures and public gathering facilities (the “VOP Exchange Parcel”) to the City for the City’s use as a modernized, consolidated City Hall campus (“City Hall Improvement Project”) in exchange for the Warburton Parcel; WHEREAS, under this scenario, the Developer would retain the remaining portion of the Resolution/ VOP Santa Clara Land Swap – Exclusive Negotiation Agreement Page 2 of 5 Agnews Parcel (“VOP Retained Parcel”) to be developed with residential uses in place of the Builder’s Remedy Project, and Developer would develop the Warburton Parcel with residential uses following the City’s completion of the City Hall Improvement Project and relocation to the VOP Exchange Parcel (both residential developments, together with the City Hall Improvement Project, are the “Project”);
WHEREAS, in order to give the City and Developer time to fully analyze the feasibility of the potential land exchange, assess the desirability of the City Hall Improvement Project, process and act on necessary entitlements and other approvals, conduct analysis pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), and negotiate the terms of a potential land exchange agreement and other ancillary agreements, the City desires to enter into an exclusive negotiation agreement with Developer (“Exclusive Negotiation Agreement”) that will establish procedures and standards for the negotiation by City and Developer, including requirements for Developer to reimburse the City for third-party consulting and legal costs in connection with the potential transaction;
WHEREAS, City staff have negotiated and recommended the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement, which is attached as an Exhibit to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference;
WHEREAS, the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement involves feasibility and planning studies for possible future actions that the City may take, which actions have not yet been approved, adopted, or funded. Therefore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 classifies approval of the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement as statutorily exempt from CEQA; WHEREAS, in order to ensure that all potential environmental impacts of the Project are thoroughly analyzed, the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement sets forth an understanding between the parties that the City will analyze the Project’s environmental effects as necessary to comply with CEQA, prior to making a final determination to go forward with the potential land exchange, acting on Project approvals, or entering into any final, binding agreements with the potential to Resolution/ VOP Santa Clara Land Swap – Exclusive Negotiation Agreement Page 3 of 5 result in physical environmental effects;
WHEREAS, concurrent with its approval of the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement, the City is declaring the Warburton Parcel to be “exempt surplus land” as that term is used in Section 54220 et seq. of the California Government Code (the “Surplus Lands Act”), which determination is supported by written findings included in this Resolution; WHEREAS, on May 19, 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement and its Surplus Land Act declaration and all pertinent information in the record during which the City Council invited and considered any and all verbal and written testimony and evidence offered in connection with such matters.

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

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

2. The City Council hereby declares the Warburton Parcel to be exempt surplus land and makes the following findings in support of such declaration:
a. The existing City Hall facility located on the Warburton Parcel is an aging facility in need of extensive upgrades to meet the City’s current and future needs; b. The existing City Hall facility located on the Warburton Parcel is too small to house all of the City’s operations, and currently the City maintains satellite offices for departments and staff on sites throughout the City;
c. The City Hall Improvement Project on the VOP Exchange Parcel would allow the City to create a new, modern City Hall campus that accommodates its current and future space needs, allowing consolidation of City facilities and creating the opportunity for ongoing preservation of on-site historic resources; d. For each of the foregoing reasons, the VOP Exchange Parcel is therefore necessary for the City’s use;
Resolution/ VOP Santa Clara Land Swap – Exclusive Negotiation Agreement Page 4 of 5 e. To acquire the VOP Exchange Parcel for the City’s use, the City would exchange the Warburton Parcel with the Developer;
f. Accordingly, if the City ultimately decides to go forward with the transaction contemplated in the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement, the Warburton Parcel is “exempt surplus land” pursuant to Section 54221(f)(1)(C) of the California Government Code, which provides that agency property that is exchanged for another property necessary for the agency’s use is exempt from the Surplus Land Act.

3. The City Council hereby approves the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement, and hereby authorizes and directs the City Manager to sign the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement substantially in the form attached as an Exhibit hereto, subject to such minor and clarifying changes consistent with the terms thereof as may be approved by the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, prior to execution thereof.

4. The City Manager is further authorized and directed to perform all other acts, enter into all other agreements and execute all other documents necessary or convenient to carry out the purposes of this Resolution and the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement, including, but not limited to executing the Reimbursement Agreement and any necessary Right of Entry Agreements in substantially the same form as the Exhibits attached to the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement.

5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Resolution is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Resolution.

The City of Santa Clara, California, hereby declares that it would have passed this Resolution and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, and word thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section(s), subsection(s), sentence(s), clause(s), phrase(s), or word(s) be declared invalid.

Resolution/ VOP Santa Clara Land Swap – Exclusive Negotiation Agreement Page 5 of 5

6. 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 19TH DAY OF MAY 2026, 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. Exclusive Negotiation Agreement
Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 1 of 9

REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN THE

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA,
AND

AGNEWS VOP, LLC

1. General Plan Amendments for the Proposed Projects

2. Rezonings for the Proposed Projects

3. Development Plans for the VOP Residential Projects

4. Subdivision Maps for the VOP Residential Projects

5. Land Exchange Agreement regarding the exchange of the VOP Exchange Parcel and the City Exchange Parcel

6. One or more Development Agreements for the VOP Residential Projects

In consideration of the recitals and mutual promises contained herein, the Parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT PROVISIONS

1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT.

The purpose of this Agreement is to provide for payment by Developer of all Eligible Costs (defined below) actually incurred by City in connection with the Proposed Projects.

Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 3 of 9

2. REIMBURSEMENT OBLIGATION.

Developer shall reimburse the City for all “Eligible Costs,” which shall consist of the following:

Subject to Section 6, the City shall provide summary invoices to verify that the Eligible Costs were incurred in accordance with this Agreement.

4. REFUND OF UNEXPENDED BALANCE.

5. NO COMMITMENT AS TO FUTURE APPROVALS.

6. ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP AND CONSULTANT WORK
PRODUCT.

7. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT.

As of the Notice of Termination effective date, the ENA shall automatically terminate, and the City shall stop processing the Warburton Residential Project application.

8. INTEGRATED DOCUMENT.

9. SEVERABILITY.

10. AMENDMENTS.

This Agreement may only be modified by a written amendment duly authorized and executed by the Parties.

11. WAIVER.

Waiver of any one or more of the conditions of performance under this Agreement shall not be construed as waiver(s) of any other condition of performance under this Agreement.

12. NOTICES.

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

City of Santa Clara
Attention: City Manager
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, California 95050
Email: [email protected]
With copies to:

Reimbursement Agreement with Agnews VOP, LLC Page 8 of 9 and to Developer addressed as follows:

Agnews VOP, LLC
c/o Valley Oak Partners GP, LLC
734 The Alameda
San Jose, CA 95126
Attention: Doug Rich
Email: [email protected]
With a copy to:

13. CAPTIONS.

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

14. LAW GOVERNING CONTRACT AND VENUE.

15. COUNTERPARTS AND SIGNATURES.

CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
a chartered California municipal corporation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Dated: ________________________

GLEN GOOGINS
City Attorney

JOVAN GROGAN
City Manager
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Telephone: (408) 615-2210
Fax: (408) 241-6771
“CITY”

AGNEWS VOP, LLC
a California Limited Liability Company
Dated: _________________________
By:
(Signature)
Name:

Title:

Local Address:

Email Address:

Telephone: ( )
Fax: ( )
“DEVELOPER”
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-482 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AND STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD

SUBJECT
Update to City Council on Implementation of City Council Policy 056 - Prohibiting Use of City Properties for Civil Immigration Enforcement Purposes and provide feedback on policy implementation.

BACKGROUND
On February 3, 2026, the Santa Clara City Council unanimously established Council Policy 056, Prohibiting Use of City Properties for Civil Immigration Enforcement Purposes, which prohibits the use of City-owned or City-controlled parking lots, garages, open space, or other facilities as a “Staging Area,” “Processing Location,” or “Operations Base” for civil immigration enforcement purposes. The City Council also approved a statement on behalf of the City of Santa Clara that was shared on the city website and social media handles.

The adoption of Resolution 26-9533 establishing Policy 056 occurred five days prior to the City hosting Super Bowl LX. Due to the limited implementation timeline, certain components of Policy 056 would be implemented prior to the Super Bowl, with a subsequent update on policy implementation to be provided in advance of FIFA World Cup matches. The action taken by Council included the following direction:
(1) Implement Policy 056 immediately (with the understanding, given the short amount of time before Super Bowl LX, and the need to coordinate with Stadium Manager, full implementation of the policy would be limited)
(2) Staff to provide a report at a public meeting prior to FIFA World Cup matches on the implementation of the policy and any recommended changes. (3) Modify Section B.4 of the City Council Policy to provide training and reporting procedures for City employees.

DISCUSSION
This report presents staff’s implementation update for City Council Policy 056 -- Prohibiting Use of City Properties for Civil Immigration Enforcement Purposes. (1) Implementation Prior to SBLX:

The following implementation of the policy was completed before Super Bowl LX:

1. Signage (Identify City-owned and City-Controlled properties, Properties with Barriers to Limit Access, and Post Signage)
Ø Staff undertook quick efforts to implement Council Policy 056 across City-owned and controlled properties. This included a detailed review of City-owned and Citycontrolled properties surrounding Levi’s® Stadium (Stadium), including a review of City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 6 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-482 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
properties with physical barriers that could be used to limit access to the properties.

The City identified fifteen (15) public facilities and parks as potential Staging Areas, Processing Locations, or Operations Bases. These sites include Agnew Historic Cemetery and Museum, Agnew Park, Fairway Glen Park, Fuller Street Park, Live Oak Park, Meadow Park, Montague Park and Aquatic Center, Youth Soccer Park, Thamien Park, Ulistac Natural Area, Calle de Luna Park, Calle de Mundo Park, Lick Mill Park, and the Northside Branch Library.

In parallel, staff developed an inventory of City-Controlled properties, identifying a total of five sites near the stadium. To ensure awareness and coordination, notification letters were issued to applicable leaseholders on February 6, 2026, outlining the City’s policy requirements. With respect to Levi’s® Stadium, the facility was under lease to the Forty Niners SC Stadium Company (StadCo) during the Super Bowl period and therefore not under direct City control; however, the City provided StadCo with formal notification of the policy.

To reinforce policy compliance, staff also developed standardized signage clearly communicating allowable uses of City-owned properties. Following finalization of the messaging, staff coordinated the fabrication and installation of signage at the fifteen (15) identified City-owned sites located north of Highway 101, completing installation prior to February 8, 2026.

Since February 9, 2026, the City has installed signage at all City parks, the Santa Clara Convention Center, the Yellow Lot Parking structure, and is working with the Stadium Manager to have signage installed before the FIFA World Cup matches at the Stadium. Signage at parking lots (not associated with a park or library) or other city facilities that are public-facing will be posted before June 13, 2026.

2. City Employee Procedure Policy and Training
Ø The City has developed a City Manager’s Directive (CMD) and is currently coordinating with the City Attorney’s Office to finalize the directive. Portions of the CMD are modeled after San Jose’s Safe Site protocols. The CMD establishes procedures for staff related to the implementation of the policy and guidance for responding to contact from immigration agent(s). It defines the roles and responsibilities of staff and supervisors, including incident reporting protocols.

The directive is intended to ensure staff are informed, equipped to respond appropriately to potential policy violations, and maintain employee and resident safety. The CMD also clarifies that while staff may verbally object to the use of City property for immigration enforcement activities, they are not to physically intervene with or obstruct immigration agent(s). Additionally, the CMD reaffirms that the Policy does not prohibit the City from complying with valid federal warrants, subpoenas, or court orders.

The CMD outlines that employees should limit interactions with immigration agent (s). Should a city employee observe or suspect use of city properties for immigration City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 6 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-482 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
enforcement, the employee is instructed to inform their supervisor, the Person In Charge at the facility/site.

Supervisors are provided with protocols on how to interact with immigration agent (s), guidance on what to ask for, and what types of documentation allow for entry into Employee Only areas. Supervisors are required to submit an Incident Report within 24 hours of the incident. The CMD also includes notification protocols for informing the City Manager’s Office and City Council of confirmed immigration enforcement incidents. Staff has also developed an Incident Report form specific to reporting on Policy 056 violations.

Staff is currently developing a training program for City employees that will cover the protocols and procedures outlined in the CMD. The training will be implemented in two phases. Phase One will prioritize front-line employees who regularly interact with the public at City facilities, with completion targeted by June 13, 2026. Training for all remaining employees will be conducted throughout June 2026.

3. Future Agreements
Ø City Attorney’s office is in the process of developing standardized language that will be included in future leases, licenses, and operation agreements, and amendments to existing agreements, in order to implement Policy 056 on Cityowned or controlled properties.

4. Support for Private Property Owners/Businesses and Residents Ø Signage
The City developed standardized signage that may be voluntarily used by private property owners, businesses, and landowners to communicate enforcement-free zones.

This signage was designed to provide clear, consistent messaging.

To ensure accessibility, the signage templates have been made available on the City’s website as part of the policy resource page, “Know Your Rights and EnforcementFree Zones | City of Santa Clara.” This online resource enables property owners to easily download and display the signage.

Staff have taken additional proactive steps to engage and inform Santa Clara businesses regarding the implementation of Policy 056. Outreach efforts included the distribution of an informational email to local businesses outlining the adopted policy, sharing the City’s dedicated resource webpage, and providing links to relevant local and community resources.

Ø Know Your Rights Materials
The City has developed a dedicated webpage that provides comprehensive information on Council Policy 056, including an overview of the policy, existing laws in California regarding immigration enforcement, guidance on immigrant rights, a direct link to the Santa Clara County office of Immigration Relations website and a Frequently Asked Questions about the policy. This centralized platform is intended to improve public access to accurate information and support community awareness.

City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 6 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-482 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
To further enhance outreach, the City has distributed “Know Your Rights” Red Cards at all public-facing City facilities, ensuring that residents have readily available, easy-tounderstand information regarding their rights.

Ø Additional Efforts:

The City is also working with the Immigrant Protect and Empowerment Network (IPEN) to bring resources to local businesses. IPEN works with its partner, Working Partnerships USA, which provides an Employer Engagement program, hosting inperson training sessions for business owners and sharing resources and information on how to prepare for immigration raids and federal agents visiting the workplace. The City is collaborating with the Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce to host an Employer Engagement session in June prior to FIFA World Cup.
(2) Provide a report at a Public Meeting
a. This report and the presentation at the May 19 meeting is intended to stratify the City Council request to provide a summary report in implementation of Policy 056. Staff does not recommend any changes to the policy at this time.

Additionally, as the Santa Clara Police Department is the lead agency managing public safety efforts for the Super Bowl, the Department provided the following feedback regarding the impacts of implementing Policy 056 during Super Bowl LX:

The Police Department does not engage in civil immigration enforcement, consistent with state law (including the California Values Act) and long-standing departmental practice.

Policy 056 did not result in any substantive change to police operations during the Super Bowl.

The timing of the policy’s adoption, immediately prior to a major global event, introduced additional complexity in public messaging and contributed to heightened public concern and protest activity, which required adjustments to our crowd management posture.
b. Information regarding data sharing policies
Ø As a SEAR 1 (Special Event Assessment Rating) event, as designated by the US Department of Homeland Security, federal interagency support was integral to public safety operations for Super Bowl LX (SBLX), an event of national/international importance. Collaboration and information sharing were limited to coordinated public safety efforts and criminal threat prevention. This included joint planning, real-time situational awareness, resource deployment strategies and staffing, and unified incident response protocols to ensure a safe and secure environment for the public. The interagency support was effective and efficient in achieving our public safety mission.

As noted below, the Police Department does not engage in civil immigration City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 6 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-482 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
enforcement. No such enforcement occurred at SBLX, nor at related SBLX operations. c. Opportunities for updates or refinements to City Council Policy 056 Ø The City is currently implementing Policy 056 and collaborating with IPEN to ensure alignment with current best practices and approaches that best serve the needs of Santa Clara. Through this partnership, staff will continue to evaluate opportunities to refine and enhance the City’s policy framework. IPEN has expressed support for Santa Clara’s adoption of the policy and has indicated that the City’s website is being used as a reference for other jurisdictions.
(3) Modify Section of B.4 of the City Council Policy to provide training and reporting procedures for City employees
Ø No modifications to Section of B.4 of the City Council Policy are recommended.

Training and reporting procedures for City employees will be outlined in the draft City Manager’s Directive (CMD), which will be finalized prior to June 13 and modified as needed in the future.

The following are the remaining portions of the policy that need to be implemented:
· Finalize posting of signage before June 13, 2026, at City parking lots. · Finalize the City Manager’s Directive (Employee policy implementation procedure and training).
· Finalize and deliver training for City employees.
· Coordinate with IPEN and Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce & Innovation for an Employee Training/Engagement session in Santa Clara.

In addition, the City has executed a Memorandum of Understanding with Silicon Valley Office of Protocol and is currently working with them in anticipation of the upcoming FIFA World Cup. The City has met with representatives from several countries and addressed their concerns about the safety of their citizens. The Silicon Valley Office of Protocol is evaluating the establishment of temporary Embassy services in partnership with countries whose teams are playing matches at the Stadium.

The goal is to provide a centralized access point for individuals seeking support or services from their country’s diplomatic representatives.

FISCAL IMPACT
Implementation of the policy has fiscal impacts, including the cost to fabricate and post the signage at City-owned and City-controlled properties. Additional costs include administrative costs for staff time to develop the CMD, develop training, and provide training.

COORDINATION
This report was coordinated between the City Manager’s Office and the City Attorney’s Office.

PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 6 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-482 Agenda Date: 5/19/2026
Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

RECOMMENDATION
Receive the report and provide input or further direction to staff regarding Policy 056 implementation as Council deems appropriate.

Reviewed by: Paulina Morales, Assistant City Manager
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager
City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 6 Printed on 5/15/2026
powered by Legistar™

City Council and Authorities ConcurrentMay 19, 2026

City Council and Authorities Concurrent
May 19, 2026