Agenda packet — City Council and Authorities Concurrent, September 22, 2026 (part 3 of 3)

Purchase Order Date: XXXX

SHIP ALL ITEMS TO
Forty Niners Stadium Management
Company LLC
Receiving
ATTN: Roger Elu
4900 Marie P DeBartolo Way
Santa Clara, California 95054

BILL TO
Forty Niners Stadium Management
Company LLC
Accounts Payable
C/O: Roger Elu
4949 Marie P DeBartolo Way
Santa Clara, California 95054
Email: [email protected]
ATTENTION:

Roger Elu
[email protected]
Budget: SCSA CapEx Project: Plumbing Fixtures urinals/sinks/water closets/hose bibs & Restroom Automatic Flushing Device Replacement
ITEM
#

DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT
PRICE

TOTAL PRICE
1 Lavatory – Faucet Kit
3520-E2805ABCP - Deck-mounted metering faucet, singlehole mounting 400 137.60 $55,040.00 2 Sloan Closet (Toilet) Flushing Device Kit
3325500 - EBV500A Exposed Sensor Urinal/Water Closet
Retrofit Flushometer
0301346PK - Flushometer Body Sub-Assembly A3A Chrome
Plated Valve Body with 2-1/16" Adjustable Tail
0301336 - Royal Flushometer Inside Cover (Purple) A-71-1 3301119 - A1045A Royal High Efficiency Dual Diaphragm Kit, Closet- Boxed (1.28 GPF)
0301172PK - A-72 Chrome Plated Cover Royal 1,000 218.80 $218,800.00 3 Sloan Urinal Flushing Device Kit
3325500 - EBV500A Exposed Sensor Urinal/Water Closet
Retrofit Flushometer
0301346PK - Flushometer Body Sub-Assembly A3A Chrome
Plated Valve Body with 2-1/16" Adjustable Tail
0301336 - Royal Flushometer Inside Cover (Purple) A-71-1 3301143 - Royal High Efficiency Urinal Diaphragm Assembly (0.125 GPF)
0301172PK - A-72 Chrome Plated Cover Royal 450 218.80 $98,460.00 Sub Total: $372,300.00
Tax: $36,299.25
Shipping: $0.00
Total: $408,599.25
Lead Time: 3 Weeks from Purchase Order Date
-
-
Stadium Manager: Vendor: Purchase Order:

Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC
Procurement
4900 Marie P DeBartolo Way
Santa Clara, California 95054
[email protected]
Industrial Plumbing Supply
PO Box 2216
Redwood City, CA 94064
Tom D'Orsi, [email protected]
XXXX

Page 2 of 6 ends

This purchase is subject to the terms and conditions attached and incorporated by reference.

STADIUM MANAGER VENDOR
Signature: Signature:

Name: Tony Vroman Name: Tom D’Orsi
Title: Executive Vice President and General Manager Title: Managing Partner Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Date: Date:
-
Stadium Manager: Vendor: Purchase Order:

Page 3 of 6 ends

LEVI’S STADIUM PURCHASE ORDER TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. CONTRACT: This purchase order, which consists of these standard terms and conditions, and any attachments hereto, evidences acceptance by the Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC (“Stadium Manager”) of the offer from the provider of goods and services (“Vendor”) which are the subject of this purchase order and constitutes a binding contract upon the terms and conditions set forth herein without further action or agreement of Vendor. In the event of conflict between these standard terms and conditions and the provisions of any attachment hereto these standard terms and conditions shall control.

2. SCHEDULE; TIME OF PERFORMANCE: Vendor shall supply the goods and perform the services, with the schedule and term, as specified herein. Time is of theessence.

3. COMPENSATION; SCHEDULE OF PAYMENT: Compensation, and method of payment, shall be as set forth herein. Vendorshall submit an invoice within thirty (30) calendar days after satisfactory completion of performance. Stadium Manager shall make payment within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of such invoice. Vendor is responsible for all costs and expenses incident to the performance of this purchase order, including without limitation all costs, taxes, and all other costs of doing business.

4. DISCOUNT PERIODS: Intentionally left blank.

5. SALES TAXES: Vendor shall separately state on all invoices any sales, use or similar taxes imposed by federal or state government applicable to furnishing of the goods.

6. PACKING AND SHIPPING OF GOODS; TITLE AND RISK OF LOSS: All goods shall be delivered “free on board destination” to the location specified herein, full freight prepaid except for special or expedited orders, which shall be agreed upon prior to shipment.

Deliveries of goods shall be made without charge for boxing, crating, carting or storage unless otherwise specified, and goods shall be suitably packed to secure lowest transportation costs, and in accordance with the requirements of common carriers, and in such a manner as to assure against damage from weather or transportation. Stadium Manager’s order numbers and symbols must be plainly marked on all invoices, packages, bills of lading and shipping orders. Packing lists shall accompany each box or package shipment. Stadium Manager’s count or weight shall be final and conclusive on shipments not accompanied by packing lists. Shipments for two or more destinations when so directed by Stadium Manager shall be shipped in separate boxes or containers for each destination at no extra charge. Title to and risk of loss on all goods pass to Stadium Manager only upon Stadium Manager’s acceptance of suchgoods.

7. WARRANTIES: Vendor represents and maintains that it has the expertise in the professional calling necessary to perform the services, and its duties and obligations, expressed and implied, contained herein, and Stadium Manager expressly relies upon Vendor’s representations regarding its skills and knowledge. Vendor shall perform such services and duties in conformance to and consistent with the professional standards of a specialist in the same discipline in the State of California. Vendor warrants that all goods and services shall be delivered or performed free of all liens, claims, security interest or encumbrances, will conform to applicable specifications, drawings, descriptions and samples, and will be merchantable, of good workmanship and material, and free from defect. Vendor assumes design responsibility, and warrants that all goods shall be delivered or performed free of design defect and suitable for the purposes intended by Stadium Manager, and that neither purchase, use or resale, nor delivery or performance thereof shall violate any patent, copyright or similar rights. Vendor’s warranties shall run to Stadium Manager and shall not be deemed to be exclusive. Vendor agrees to promptly replace or correct any incomplete, inaccurate or defective goods or services at no further cost to Stadium Manager when defects are due to the negligence, errors or omissions of Vendor.

8. CHANGES: Stadium Manager shall have the right by written notice to change the extent of the work covered by this purchase order, the time or place of delivery, the method of shipment or packaging, or to suspend work. Notice of change must be signed by Stadium Manager’s Executive Vice President and General Manager or his/her designee. Upon receipt of any such notice, Vendor shall promptly make the changes in accordance with the terms of the notice. If Vendor believes that the change will cause an increase or decrease in the cost of or time for performance, then Vendor must deliver to Stadium Manager a statement showing the effect of any such changes within ten (10) calendar days of receipt of the Stadium Manager’s notice of change. An equitable adjustment shall be negotiated promptly and the purchase order modified in writing accordingly. Failure of Vendor to submit the statement within the time limit shall constitute its consent to perform the change without increase in compensation or time for performance. Changes may only be made in writing.

9. TERMINATION FOR DEFAULT OR CONVENIENCE: Stadium Manager may, by written notice, terminate this purchase order in whole or in part for default: (i) if Vendor fails to timely deliver the goods, or performthe services, or if no time is specified, within a reasonable time; (ii) if the goods delivered or services performed are incorrect or unsatisfactory; (iii) if Vendor fails to perform any of the other provisions of this purchase order, or so fails to make progress as to endanger performance of this purchase order; or (iv) if the Vendor becomes insolvent. If this purchase order is terminated for default, Stadium Manager, in addition to all other rights afforded by law, shall have the right to charge Vendor the amount by which the costs of fabricating or procuring the goods or services cancelled from another source exceed the compensation specified herein, and Stadium Manager may offset any such charge against any amounts which had or may become payable to Vendor under this purchase order or otherwise. Stadium Manager may, by not less than thirty (30) days written notice -
Stadium Manager: Vendor: Purchase Order:

Page 4 of 6 ends

to Vendor, terminate this purchase order without cause or penalty.

10. INDEMNITY: TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, VENDOR AGREES TO DEFEND, INDEMNIFY AND

HOLD HARMLESS STADIUM MANAGER, ITS AFFILIATES, THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, THE SANTA CLARA

STADIUM AUTHORITY, AND EACH OF THEIR OFFICERS, AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES (COLLECTIVELY, THE “INDEMNIFIED PARTIES”), AGAINST ANY CLAIM, LOSS OR LIABILITY (COLLECTIVELY, “CLAIMS”), INCLUDING

WITHOUT LIMITATION CLAIMS FOR INJURIES OR DEATH TO PERSONS OR DAMAGE TO OR DESTRUCTION OF

PROPERTY, INCLUDING ECONOMIC LOSS, CAUSED BY OR RESULTING FROM THE ACTS OR OMISSIONS OF

VENDOR, ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES OR SUBCONTRACTORS, IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS PURCHASE ORDER, OR THE BREACH BY VENDOR OF ANY OF ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THIS PURCHASE ORDER.

VENDOR’S OBLIGATION TO PROTECT, DEFEND, INDEMNIFY, AND HOLD HARMLESS, SHALL SPECIFICALLY

EXTEND TO ANY AND ALL EMPLOYMENT- RELATED CLAIMS OF ANY TYPE BROUGHT BY EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS, SUBCONTRACTORS OR OTHER AGENTS OF VENDOR. CONTRACTOR WARRANTS THAT IT IS MEETING ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT (“ACT”) AND/OR ANY OTHER SIMILAR

FEDERAL OR STATE LAW, AND WILL FULLY INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS THE INDEMNIFIED PARTIES FOR ANY PENALTIES, FINES, ADVERSE RULINGS, OR TAX PAYMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH VENDOR’S RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THE ACT.

11. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS: Vendor shall, at no cost to Stadium Manager, maintain (or cause to be maintained) the following insurance coverage required under Attachment A, which is incorporated herein by this reference.

12. COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW: Vendor shall comply with all applicable federal,state and local laws, ordinances, codes and regulations.

13. GOVERNING LAW; VENUE: This purchase order shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The venue of any suit filed by either Party shall be 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 Division.

14. ASSIGNMENT: Vendor shall not assign any of the work to be performed under this purchase order nor shall Vendor subcontract for complete or substantially completed goods or major components thereof without the prior written consent from Stadium Manager or his/her designee.

15. WAIVER: Vendor agrees that Stadium Manager's waiver of any breach or violation of any provision of this purchase order, or acceptance of any performance, or tender of any payment, shall not be deemed a waiver of any other provision or any subsequent breach of the same or any other provision. Stadium Manager’sinspection and warranty rights are not waived by payment or any other action by Stadium Manager.

16. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: It is understood and agreed that Vendor and all person(s) employed or contracted by Vendorshall act as, and be, an independent contractor and not an employee, agent, joint venturer, or partner of Stadium Manager. Vendor has full rights to manage its employees and contractors under this Agreement. Vendor shall retain the right to provide goods or perform services for others during the term of this purchase order.

17. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION: All data, documents, discussions or other information developed or received by or for Vendor in performance of this purchase order are confidential and not to be disclosed to any person except as authorized by Stadium Manager, or as required by law.

18. VENDOR’S BOOKS AND RECORDS: Vendor shall maintain all records evidencing or relating to performance and amounts charged to or paid by Stadium Manager for a minimum period of four (4) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Vendor pursuant to this purchase order. Any such records shall be made available for inspection or audit, at any time during regular business hours, upon written request by Stadium Manager. Copies of such documents shall be provided to Stadium Manager for inspection at Levi’s Stadium if requested and if practical to do so, otherwise records will be inspected atVendor’s business location.

19. NON-DISCRIMINATION. Vendor and all of Vendor’s subcontractors shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, sex, color, religion, religious creed, national origin, ancestry, age, gender, marital status, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, sexual orientation, gender expression, gender identity, military and veteran status, or ethnic background, in violation of federal, state or local law.

20. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Vendor certifies that no Stadium Manager officer, employee or authorized representative has any financial interest in the business of Vendor and that no person associated with Vendor has any interest, direct or indirect, which could conflict with the faithful performance of this Purchase Order. Vendor is familiar with the provisions of California Government Code section 87100, et seq., and certifies that it does not know of any facts which would violate these laws. Vendor will promptly advise Stadium Manager if a conflict arises. Vendor has read and agrees to comply with City of Santa Clara’s Ethical Standards (http://santaclaraca.gov/home/showdocument?id=58299).
-
Stadium Manager: Vendor: Purchase Order:

Page 5 of 6 ends

21. 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. -
Stadium Manager: Vendor: Purchase Order:

Page 6 of 6 ends

ATTACHMENT A

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

1. Commercial general liability insurance, including property damage, against liability for personal injury, bodily injury, death and damage to property occurring in or about the property in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence and Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) in the aggregate.

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

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

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

5. Liability insurance covering claims arising out of errors and omissions by vendors rendering professional services, in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) each occurrence including contractual liability coverage, with all coverage retroactive to the earlier of the date of agreement or commencement of Contractor’s services.

6. Umbrella or excess liability insurance in the amount of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) providing excess coverage over general liability, auto liability, and employer’s liability specified above.

The above stated limits may be achieved by a combination of primary and excess/umbrella coverage. Any deductible or self-insured retention amounts are the sole responsibility of the Contractor. Contractor is responsible for insuring any equipment brought to Levi’s Stadium. Stadium Manager shall have no liability for such equipment.

All insurance policies and bonds required to be maintained by Contractor shall be issued by insurers or sureties (as the case may be) reasonably satisfactory to client, authorized to do business in the state of California and having an AM Best rating and financial size category of A-/VII or better. All policies of the vendor shall be (i) primary and noncontributing with respect to any policies carried by client; (ii) with respect to liability insurance only, a provision including Stadium Manager, Santa Clara Stadium Authority, Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC and Forty Niners Football Company LLC as additional insureds; (iii) a waiver by the insurer of any right to subrogate against Stadium Manager (iv) a severability of interest or endorsement; (v) a provision that the insurer will not cancel or change the coverage provided by such without giving the Stadium Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice; and (vi) general liability be an "occurrence form" policy. Any policy of insurance required to be carried by Contractor that names additional insureds contained herein shall not be subject to a deductible or self-insured retention, it being the intent of the parties that such insurance shall fully and completely insure such additional insured entities for all loss or expense; if any such policy has a deductible or self-insured retention clause applicable to these operations, Contractor shall provide evidence that insurance carrier shall pay without regard to such deductible or self-insured retention. -

Page 1 of 2 ends

Date: August 10, 2026

To: Jovan Grogan
Executive Director
Santa Clara Stadium Authority

From: Procurement Department
Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC

Subject: Recommendation for Award for Levi’s Stadium Restroom Plumbing Fixtures
Recommendation:

1. Recommend approval and award of a one-time contract to Industrial Plumbing Supply, LLC in the amount of $408,599.25 for the Levi’s Stadium Restroom Plumbing Fixtures (“the Project”) at Levi’s Stadium.

2. Authorize Stadium Manager to execute change orders up to 25% or $102,149.81 for a total not to exceed purchase order amount of $510,749.06.

3. Authorize Stadium Manager to execute any and all documents associated with, and necessary for the award, completion, and acceptance of the Project.

Solicitation Process:

Forty Niners Stadium Management Company LLC (Stadium Manager) needs to replace plumbing valves (toilets/urinals and sinks) at Levi’s Stadium (Stadium). The Project was approved as part of the FY26/27 SCSA Capital Expenditures budget. This replacement is the first of several phases to replace aging valves in the stadium restrooms, excluding tenant-exclusive facilities. This is a material only purchase, and all labor will be performed in-house.

On June 22, 2026, Stadium Manager issued a Request for Bids (RFB) FY26-0097 for the Project.

Stadium Manager published the RFB on Bonfire Interactive, Stadium Manager’s eProcurement portal https://49ers.bonfirehub.com/portal/. Stadium Manager invited suppliers from our established supplier list and selected suppliers registered on the portal with specific commodity codes offering such goods.

Stadium Manager issued addendum #1 to the RFB on July 10, 2026. The addendum updated the bid due date to July 24, 2026.

STADIUM

FORTY NINERS STADIUM MANAGEMENT COMPANY
4900 Marie P. DeBartolo Way I Santa Clara, CA 95054

Page 2 of 2 ends

Public Bid Opening:

Electronic bid submissions were due on or before July 24, 2026 at 3:00 p.m. (PT). Two bids were received on or before the closing due date and time from the following firms:

1. Palm Beach Plumbing Parts

2. Industrial Plumbing Supply, LLC
A public bid opening was held on July 24, 2026 at 4:00 p.m. (PT). The RFB provided the public bid opening webcast information including a meeting ID and password for bidders to log on via Zoom to attend. No callers were in attendance. Stadium Manager announced the receipt of the two bids on or before the due date and time, announced the name of the bidders and the total amount for each bidder and declared Industrial Plumbing Supply, LLC the apparent low bidder.

Evaluation of Apparent Low Bidder:

Bids were tabulated and a bid abstract was created. Stadium Manager reviewed and confirmed that the bid from Industrial Plumbing Supply, LLC was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, exclusive of applicable state and local taxes.

On July 27, 2026, Stadium Manager issued a Notice of Intended Award and made it available to all the bidders.

The protest period ended on July 31, 2026. There were no protests.

Next Steps:

The Project was approved as part of the FY26/27 SCSA Capital Expenditures budget under two projects. The combined approved amount for this Project is $887,375.00.

1. Plumbing Fixtures urinals/sinks/water closets/hose bibs etc. for $287,375

2. Restroom Automatic Flushing Device Replacement for $600,000 This order represents the first phase of the plumbing fixtures and valves update. As additional replacement parts are identified, Stadium Manager anticipates additional bids for device and assembly parts and submitting those purchases for approval, as required.

Once Stadium Manager receives approval from the SCSA Board, a Purchase Order (with the terms included in the RFB) will be executed with Industrial Plumbing Supply, LLC, and a fully executed copy of the Purchase Order will be forwarded to the SCSA. In addition, Stadium Manager requests authorization to issue change orders up to $102,149.81, or 25% of the Agreement cost, to allow timely administrative action, if required, without delaying completion of the Project. The 25% change order covers Stadium Manager’s optional right to increase the quantities up to 25%. 4900 Marie P. DeBartolo Way I Santa Clara, CA 95054
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-891 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Informational Report on the Proposed Citywide Prohibition on the Sale of Nitrous Oxide products

BACKGROUND
Nitrous oxide, commonly known as “laughing gas,” is a colorless, nonflammable gas used by health care professionals as a mild sedative and pain-relieving agent. It acts quickly and its effects generally wear off soon after administration, which makes it well suited for short medical and dental procedures. Nitrous oxide also has established culinary, automotive, and industrial applications.

When administered appropriately under the supervision of a licensed professional, nitrous oxide is considered safe and effective.

Concerns have grown in recent years regarding the recreational misuse of nitrous oxide, particularly among teens and young adults. Rather than being used for a legitimate medical or culinary purpose, the gas is intentionally inhaled to produce a brief feeling of euphoria or intoxication. Products associated with this pattern of use are frequently sold in canisters, offered in flavors such as fruit, candy, or dessert, and packaged with colors that appeal to young consumers.

Recreational misuse of nitrous oxide can result in serious health consequences. Immediate effects may include dizziness, fainting, loss of coordination, low blood pressure, oxygen deprivation, and, in severe cases, loss of consciousness or other life-threatening complications. Frequent or prolonged misuse may cause neurological damage, including numbness or tingling in the hands and feet, muscle weakness, difficulty walking, cognitive impairment, and other potentially lasting health effects.

Impaired driving associated with nitrous oxide use is an additional public safety concern.

Although nitrous oxide has legitimate medical, dental, food-service, and commercial uses, the historical propensity for misuse of the product has necessitated federal and state regulations on its possession, sale, and use. The Food and Drug Administration allows nitrous oxide for medical and culinary use only. In California, state law restricts the possession and use of nitrous oxide for the purpose of intoxication and prohibits furnishing nitrous oxide under specified circumstances, including certain sales or distributions involving minors or when the seller knows or should know that the substance will be used for intoxication. These restrictions are intended to preserve legitimate uses of nitrous oxide while reducing its recreational misuse and associated public health and safety risks.

Currently, both federal and state lawmakers are considering new regulations relating to nitrous oxide consumer products (HR 7945 and SB 936).

As of the time of this report’s drafting, SB 936 has been enrolled, but not (yet) signed by the Governor. In short, SB 936 does the following:

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 5 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-891 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
· Prohibit the sale and distribution of a nitrous oxide container that can hold more than 8 grams of nitrous oxide or from which an individual may directly inhale nitrous oxide. · Prohibit the sale and distribution of a nitrous oxide product that has, or is marketed as having, the taste or smell of any food.
· Prohibit knowingly selling or distributing a device that allows an individual to inhale nitrous oxide from the container or hold nitrous oxide for the purposes of inhalation. · Prohibit a person that is engaged in the business of selling cigarettes or tobacco products in this state from possessing, storing, owning, or selling nitrous oxide at any site where cigarettes and tobacco products are stored or sold
· The enforcing department is the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) · Violations are punishable as an infraction, with monetary penalties ranging from $1,000 to $10,000 depending on the severity of the violation and frequency of the violations. The inventory will be seized, and the CDTFA can take action to suspend or revoke a business license.
· State law does not expressly limit the authority of a city to adopt or enforce a local ordinance that further restricts the sale, furnishing, offering, or distribution of nitrous oxide · Any person, distributor, or business found to have violated these prohibitions is liable for all reasonable costs incurred by a public agency in the investigation, inspection, seizure, storage, transportation, handling, venting, abatement, disposal, or destruction of nitrous oxide products, nitrous oxide containers, inhalation devices, or related materials The proposed City of Santa Clara ordinance provides for the potential for criminal penalties as well as nuisance abatement actions against the location of the illegal sale and revocation of the local business license.

DISCUSSION
The proposed ordinance responds to the increasing availability of nitrous oxide (N ₂
O) cartridges,
canisters, cylinders, dispensers, and similar products at local retail establishments. These products are readily available for purchase at smoke shops, convenience stores, and other retail businesses, raising concerns regarding their potential misuse for recreational intoxication, particularly among young adults.

Retail availability and prominent store display of nitrous oxide products may increase access to products that can be intentionally inhaled for their intoxicating effects, which is inconsistent with the intended medical, culinary, automotive, and industrial uses of the substance.

The proposed ordinance is intended to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by limiting retail access to nitrous oxide products that may be readily misused for intoxication.

The ordinance would make it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, distribute, or otherwise provide nitrous oxide, nitrous oxide dispensers, or cartridges, canisters, cylinders, or similar devices containing nitrous oxide, except for specifically exempted lawful uses.

The ordinance includes exemptions intended to preserve legitimate commercial, medical, culinary, automotive, and industrial uses. Exemptions include certain food products and sales or uses involving pharmacies, licensed physicians and dentists, wholesalers, restaurants and other qualifying food-service operations, and industrial gas manufacturers and merchants.

City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 5 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-891 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
These exemptions would allow legitimate use of nitrous oxide to continue. Grocery and retail stores could continue selling commercially packaged aerosol whipped cream; physicians and dentists could continue administering nitrous oxide in connection with patient care; restaurants and other qualifying food-service establishments could continue purchasing and using nitrous oxide and appropriate dispensing equipment for culinary purposes, such as preparing whipped cream; and qualifying businesses could continue selling or using nitrous oxide for legitimate automotive, manufacturing, and industrial applications.

By distinguishing between legitimate uses and general retail availability, the proposed ordinance seeks to reduce access to nitrous oxide for recreational intoxication while minimizing impacts on businesses and professionals that use the substance for lawful purposes.

Enforcement of Ordinance
Pursuant to SCCC Section 1.05.070, the City of Santa Clara, in its prosecutorial discretion, may enforce any violation of the provisions of this ordinance through criminal, civil, and/or administrative action.

Criminal Enforcement: Any person who violates a provision of the ordinance may be guilty of a misdemeanor, subject to the applicable penalties provided by the Santa Clara City Code and State law.

Administrative Citations and Penalties: Administrative citations issued pursuant to the ordinance shall be subject to the following penalty structure:

1. Five hundred dollars ($500.00) for a first violation.

2. One thousand dollars ($1,000.00) for a second violation and for each additional violation occurring within one year of the immediately preceding violation.

Public Nuisance: Any violation of the Ordinance is declared to constitute a public nuisance and shall be subject to all applicable civil, administrative, and criminal remedies and penalties available under this City Code and State law, including, but not limited to, abatement and injunctive relief.

Business License or Permit Revocation: Any violation of the ordinance shall constitute good cause for the revocation of an applicable business license or permit in accordance with Chapter 2.115 SCCC.

Community Outreach
The City is developing an outreach and communications plan to inform businesses, residents, and the broader community about the proposed prohibition.

Following City Council discussion of the proposed ban and direction to continue exploring its potential implementation, City staff will undertake the following outreach activities prior to Council consideration and approval. These efforts are intended to increase public awareness, provide educational resources, gather stakeholder input, and prepare affected businesses and the community for potential implementation and compliance requirements.

Communications and Outreach Tasks:

City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 5 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-891 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026

1. City Webpage: Develop a dedicated City webpage containing information regarding the Nitrous Oxide Ban, including an overview of the regulations, a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section, the adopted ordinance, effective dates, enforcement information, and relevant City contact information.

2. Direct Mailer: Distribute an informational postcard to businesses holding active City of Santa Clara business licenses. The postcard will provide an overview of the Nitrous Oxide Ban, identify key requirements and effective dates, and direct businesses to the City webpage for additional information and resources.

3. Email Campaign: Distribute informational notices through the City’s GovDelivery system to City news subscribers and Santa Clara business licensees. Communications will provide information regarding the Nitrous Oxide Ban, applicable requirements and implementation timelines, and links to the City webpage and other educational resources.

4. Regional and Community Partner Outreach: Coordinate with regional and community partners, including the County of Santa Clara and the Silicon Valley Central Chamber of Commerce, to broaden awareness of the Nitrous Oxide Ban and assist with disseminating information to businesses and community stakeholders.

5. Ongoing Education and Compliance Outreach: Following implementation, continue providing educational information and responding to questions from businesses and community members to promote voluntary compliance prior to and during enforcement of the ordinance.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This is an information report only and no action is being taken by the City Council and no environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") is required.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no significant fiscal impact to the City associated with the proposed outreach efforts beyond existing staff time. Minimal costs are anticipated for the preparation, printing, and distribution of informational mailers to businesses.

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
It is recommended that the City Council receive the staff report regarding the proposed citywide Nitrous Oxide Ban, receive and consider public comment, and provide additional direction and feedback to staff for incorporation into the proposed ordinance and possible return to the City Council for further action.

City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 5 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-891 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
Reviewed by: Aimee Escobar, Management Analyst, City Manager’s Office Approved by: Jovan D. Grogan, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Ordinance of the City of Santa Clara, California - New Chapter 8.38 - Nitrous Oxide to Title 8 - Health & Safety Prohibiting the Sale of Nitrous Oxide City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 5 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
Ordinance/Nitrous Oxide Ban Page 1 of 8
ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,
CALIFORNIA, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 8.38 (“NITROUS
OXIDE”) TO TITLE 8 (“HEALTH AND SAFETY”) OF “THE
CODE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA,”

PROHIBITING THE SALE OF NITROUS OXIDE
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, nitrous oxide (commonly known as “laughing gas”) is a colorless, nonflammable gas with a slightly sweet odor, with various legitimate and common uses in medical and dental procedures, food preparation and service, and industrial processes; WHEREAS, inhaling nitrous oxide (recreationally, outside the medical/dental setting) can result in very serious health problems including asphyxiation, blood clots, frostbite, impaired bowel and bladder function, loss of consciousness, paralysis, psychiatric disturbances (delusions, hallucinations, paranoia, depression), spinal cord or brain damage, and in some cases, death;
WHEREAS, nitrous oxide is not intended for recreational use, however, some individuals misuse it by inhalation to achieve a momentary euphoric high. Various medical and public safety authorities across the country have identified recreational use/abuse of nitrous oxide as a serious and growing threat to health and safety, particularly amongst the youth; WHEREAS, small canisters of nitrous oxide (referred to as “whippets”) are relatively inexpensive, sold in a variety of shops, often display colorful branding, and are offered in flavors like grape, cherry, and blueberry, making it appealing and accessible to a younger audience;
WHEREAS, due to the legitimate uses of nitrous oxide, it has not been classified as a controlled substance under federal law;
Ordinance/Nitrous Oxide Ban Page 2 of 8
WHEREAS, California Penal Code §§381b-381e, inclusive, regulate some, but not all, aspects of sale and use of nitrous oxide. Anyone who possesses it with the intent to ingest it, or is under the influence of it in a non-medical or dental setting, or sells it to a minor, is guilty of a misdemeanor. It is also a misdemeanor to sell or otherwise distribute it to another person, but only if the seller/distributor knows that the person is going to use it in violation of the law, and that person consequently causes great bodily injury or death to himself, herself, or another person;
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clara does not presently regulate the sale or other distribution of nitrous oxide; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Clara deems it to be in the interest of promoting the safety, health, and welfare of the public to adopt an ordinance banning the sale of nitrous oxide, with certain exceptions.

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

SECTION 1: That a new Chapter 8.38 (entitled “Nitrous Oxide”) is added to Title 8 (entitled “Health and Safety”) of “The Code of the City of Santa Clara, California” (“SCCC”) to read as follows:
“Chapter 8.38

NITROUS OXIDE

8.38.010 Definitions.

8.38.020 Prohibition on the sale or other distribution of Nitrous Oxide.

8.38.030 Exceptions to Prohibition.

8.38.040 Enforcement.

8.38.010 Definitions.
(a) “Nitrous Oxide” (empirical formula N2O) is a colorless and non-flammable gas, Ordinance/Nitrous Oxide Ban Page 3 of 8
about 50 percent heavier than air, with a slightly sweet smell, also known as dinitrogen monoxide, dinitrogen oxide, or nitrogen oxide. It may be colloquially referred to as laughing gas, NOX, or galaxy gas, among others. For purposes of this chapter, nitrous oxide includes any substance containing nitrous oxide, and any nitrous oxide product containing additions such as flavorings.
(b) "Nitrous Oxide Device" means any cartridge, compressed gas cylinder, apparatus, container, balloon, attachment, nozzle, or any other object used to contain, dispense, inhale, ingest, or administer any amount of Nitrous Oxide. A Nitrous Oxide device may at times be colloquially referred to as a whippet, nang, nos canister, cannies, dusters, or laughing gas canister, amongst others.
(c) “Person” shall have the same meaning as set forth in SCCC 1.05.020(p)(1). (d) “Research and Development” means the systematic investigation, experimentation, or development undertaken to acquire new knowledge, test hypotheses, evaluate or improve products, processes, or technologies, or create new applications, when conducted by or under the supervision of (1) an accredited academic or vocational institution; (2) a business entity engaged in bona fide scientific, engineering, medical, or technological product development; or (3) a government agency or recognized nonprofit research organization. Research and Development does not include activities primarily intended for personal, recreational, or other nonscientific purposes. (e) “Wholesale Capacity” means sale of or distribution of Nitrous Oxide or a Nitrous Oxide Device to a Person that will use it either in the performance of a lawful service, Research and Development, or in the creation or production of lawful goods for Ordinance/Nitrous Oxide Ban Page 4 of 8
resale. Examples include, but are not limited to, commercial sale of dentistry supplies to dentists or dentistry offices, commercial sale of Nitrous Oxide Devices for the use in food production or in a commercial kitchen, commercial sale of Nitrous Oxide Devices for academic research purposes, and/or commercial sale of Nitrous Oxide for the purpose of producing food products for commercial sale (e.g., whipped cream canisters).

8.38.020 Prohibition on the sale or other distribution of Nitrous Oxide.

Except as otherwise authorized by law or allowed under this article, it is unlawful for any Person to sell, attempt to sell, offer, distribute or otherwise provide to any Person Nitrous Oxide, or a Nitrous Oxide Device. For the purposes of enforcement under this Chapter, possession by a Person of any of the following shall give rise to a rebuttable presumption that the Person is attempting to sell or distribute Nitrous Oxide:
(a) Any refillable or disposable Nitrous Oxide Device with a net content of six (6) pounds or more;
(b) An aggregate of two hundred (200) or more standard 8-gram Nitrous Oxide Devices; or
(c) Any equivalent amount of Nitrous Oxide
This presumption may be rebutted by competent evidence of lawful use or exemption under this Chapter.

8.38.030 Exceptions to Prohibition.

This Chapter does not apply to the sale, attempt to sell, offer, distribution, or other manner of providing Nitrous Oxide or a Nitrous Oxide Device in the following circumstances:

Ordinance/Nitrous Oxide Ban Page 5 of 8
(a) If the Nitrous Oxide or Nitrous Oxide Device is being sold, attempted to be sold, offered, or distributed in a Wholesale Capacity. This exemption only applies if the wholesaler does not know or have reason to know that the recipient intends to use the Nitrous Oxide or Nitrous Oxide Device in violation of State law or this Chapter. (b) If the Nitrous Oxide is being sold, attempted to be sold, offered, or distributed specifically for the purpose of Research and Development. (c) A pharmacist, pharmacist intern, or pharmacy as defined by California Business and Professions Code Sections 4030, 4036, and 4037, as may be amended or renumbered, who dispenses the device in the course of their duties as a pharmacist or pharmacist intern, or wholesalers licensed by the Board of Pharmacy. (d) Manufacturers classified under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS Code 325120).
(e) A health care professional licensed in California who possesses and dispenses Nitrous Oxide in the course of medical or dental treatment, and in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations.
(f) Any person who is under the influence of Nitrous Oxide or any material containing Nitrous Oxide lawfully received or administered pursuant to subsections (c) or (e) above.
(g) If the Nitrous Oxide is contained in a food product for use as a propellant. (h) If the Nitrous Oxide or Nitrous Oxide Device that is being sold, attempted to be sold, offered for sale, or distributed is specifically designed for use in a vehicle to enhance the performance of the vehicle. This exemption only applies if the provider Ordinance/Nitrous Oxide Ban Page 6 of 8
does not know or have reason to know that the recipient intends to use the Nitrous Oxide or Nitrous Oxide Device in violation of State law or this Chapter. (i) Any person who possesses or distributes Nitrous Oxide or Nitrous Oxide Devices under an express exemption pursuant to California Penal Code §§381b-e, as amended or renumbered.

Any sale or other distribution of Nitrous Oxide allowed under this Chapter must comply with all documentation requirements set forth in California Penal Code §381e, as amended or renumbered. Failure to comply shall constitute an independent violation of this Chapter.

8.38.040 Enforcement.

Pursuant to SCCC §1.05.070, the City, in its prosecutorial discretion, may enforce any violation(s) of the provisions of this Chapter as a criminal, civil, and/or administrative action.
(a) Violators may be guilty of a misdemeanor.
(b) Administrative citations issued under this chapter shall follow the process set forth in Chapter 1.10 SCCC. Administrative citations are subject to the following administrative penalty structure:
(1) Five hundred dollars ($500.00) for a first violation. (2) One thousand dollars ($1,000.00) for a second violation, or each additional violation thereafter, within one year of the last violation. (c) Any violation of this Chapter is hereby declared a public nuisance, subject to all applicable civil, administrative, and criminal remedies and penalties according to Ordinance/Nitrous Oxide Ban Page 7 of 8
the provisions and procedures contained in this City Code and State law, including, but not limited to, an action for abatement or injunctive relief. (d) Any violation of this Chapter shall constitute good cause for revocation of a business license or permit, in accordance with Chapter 2.115, if applicable. (e) All remedies provided herein shall be cumulative and not exclusive.

This Chapter shall not be interpreted to limit the applicable civil or administrative remedies available under law. All available enforcement procedures and remedies available under other applicable law shall remain available.” SECTION 2: Ordinances Repealed. With exception of the provisions protected by the savings clause, all ordinances (or parts of ordinances) in conflict with or inconsistent with this ordinance are hereby repealed.

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

SECTION 4: Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final adoption; however, prior to its final adoption it shall be published in accordance with the requirements of Section 808 and 812 of “The Charter of the City of Santa Clara, California.” PASSED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLICATION this XX day of XXXXXX, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILORS:

Ordinance/Nitrous Oxide Ban Page 8 of 8
NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:

ATTEST: ___________________________

NORA PIMENTEL, MMC

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA
Attachments incorporated by reference: None
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Public Hearing: Action on a Prezone, Pre-designation of a General Plan Land Use, Application for Annexation, and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to Allow the Development of 408 Residential Units and Associated On- and Off-Site Improvements Located at 451 - 475 El Camino Real. CEQA:

Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Prepared in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)

REPORT IN BRIEF
The proposed project, University Residential Station, is a request for an annexation and vesting tentative map of a .94 acre site from City of San Jose to the City of Santa Clara. Currently the Santa Clara portion of the site is 10.02 acres and the San Jose portion is .94 acres. If the annexation proceeds, it will allow for a future cohesive development on a 10.96 acre site with 408 residential units. The total project site would be developed within the allowable residential density range at 37.2 dwelling units per acre. Currently the applicant, Bixby Land Company has also submitted an SB 330 application for the entire 10.6 acre site which will be reviewed at a later date once the annexation is approved,
A City of Santa Clara action is first required on the .94 acre parcel and it would then require the City of San José to approve the detachment of the same parcel. In addition to annexation, the City of Santa Clara must approve the tentative map, pre-zoning and pre-designation of a General Plan land use for the parcel to allow for residential development. Pursuant to Government Code § 56654(a), the City Council will consider and adopt a resolution to authorize the application to LAFCO to approve the annexation request.

Four legislative actions are being requested, first an annexation for the .94 acre site. Secondly, a vesting tentative map for the entire 10.6 acre site to allow for multi-family project, townhomes, associated access and common areas. A General Plan Pre-designation and Pre-zoning of the 0.94- acre parcel in the City of San José as Mixed-Use Regional Commercial (MU-RC). The applicant is also requesting the certification of the Environmental Impact Report and adoption of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings and a MMRP
The overall benefit to the City of an annexation if approved are:

1. Redevelopment of the project site consistent with the vision of the Santa Clara General Plan for higher-density residential development (37 to 50 dwelling units per acre) along major transportation corridors.

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026

2. Residential units that will contribute to the overall Regional Housing Needs Allocation obligations in accordance with the Housing Element.

3. Safety improvements at two intersections tied to the development.

4. Residential density will support housing for Santa Clara University students, faculty and staff.

5. Residential density located near existing transit and future BART extension can potentially support jobs, housing and transit which is a regional goal.

6. Allow municipal facilities and services to be provided to the entire development in a coordinated and efficient manner.

BACKGROUND
The proposed project, University Station Residential, is located at 451-475 El Camino Real and is south of the railroad tracks and north of El Camino Real between Franklin Street/Palm Drive and Campbell Avenue; see Vicinity Map in Attachment 1. Previously, in September of 1997, the site was rezoned (File No. Z.1606) from Light Industrial to PD-Planned Development to allow for the development of the existing two retail buildings, commercial services, four research and development buildings and a three-story hotel.

Applicant /Owner: Bixby Land Company, Bixby SPE Finance 11 LLC General Plan: Regional Mixed-Use (Santa Clara Station Area) Zoning: Planned Development
Site Area: 10.96 acres
Existing Conditions: The site currently has three two-story office buildings and two parking garages.

Surrounding Land Uses:
· North: Railroad tracks
· South: Santa Clara University
· East: Three-story apartment
· West: Three-story hotel and one-story retail buildings On December 11, 2023, Bixby Land Company (Bixby) submitted a preliminary application (File No.

PRE23-00139) pursuant to Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) to redevelop the 10.96-acre site as a residential development with apartment and townhouses. Most of the site (10.02 acres) falls within the City of Santa Clara and the remaining 0.94 acre falls within the City of San José’s jurisdiction. As a portion of the site is within the City of San José, the applicant would like to annex the remaining portion into the City of Santa Clara.

On June, 3, 2024, Bixby (applicant) filed the formal applications for a Prezone, Pre-designation of a General Plan Land Use, Annexation, and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (File Nos. PLN24- 00279, PLN24-00314, PLN24-00603 and PLN24-00604) for the University Station Residential project to redevelop the subject 10.96-acre site [Assessor Parcel Number (APN): 230-09-020 and 230-09- 021] as a 408-unit residential development including 297 apartment units and 98 townhouses on the City of Santa Clara’s site and currently 13 townhouses on the City of San José’s site.

City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
On August 6, 2026, the project went before the Historical and Landmarks Commission (HLC) in accordance with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (the “HPO”). SCCC Section 18.130.070, which is within the HPO, requires HLC referral for all projects located within 200 feet of a Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) property that will undergo Architectural Review. Here, the parcel within Santa Clara has a driveway that extends towards Franklin Street, which puts the site within 200 feet of the historic Santa Clara Railroad Depot structure. On August 6, 2026, the HLC voted 7-0 to recommend approval, with a comment added by Commissioner Stocks to review the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) carefully for potential impacts to the Santa Clara Railroad Depot.

On September 2, 2026, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider a recommendation on the Project, as well as on the EIR, the CEQA Findings, and the MMRP. The Planning Commission’s discussion of the project included infrastructure conflicts, annexation benefits and processes. Attachment 3 includes a weblink to the Planning Commission staff report and associated documents. The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council.

As part of the process, the City Council will consider the recommendation from the Planning Commission, conduct a public hearing and act on the project’s requests as outlined below.

Requested Actions

1. Annexation of the of the 0.94-acre parcel in the City of San José. This is a legislative action, but several findings are required under the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act of 2000 (CKH):
a. The Proposal is a Reorganization. The Council must find that the proposed boundary change is a “reorganization” under the CKH because it consists of two related changes of organization: (1) detachment of the affected territory from the City of San Jose and (2) concurrent annexation of that territory to the City of Santa Clara. b. Identification of the Territory. The resolution identifies the 0.94 acres currently located within the City of San Jose, APN 230-09-021.
c. Necessity for the Annexation. The proposed reorganization would place the affected territory and the remainder of the proposed University Station development within a single municipal jurisdiction, establish a more logical municipal boundary, facilitate coordinated landuse regulation and development of the property, and allow municipal facilities and services to be provided to the entire development in a coordinated and efficient manner. d. Contiguity and boundaries. The affected territory is contiguous to the existing boundaries of the City of Santa Clara. The proposed detachment and annexation would transfer the territory directly from San Jose to Santa Clara without creating an intervening unincorporated area.

2. General Plan Pre-designation of the 0.94-acre parcel in the City of San José as Regional Mixed-Use. This is a legislative action not requiring any specific findings.

City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026

3. Pre-zoning of the 0.94-acre parcel in the City of San José as Mixed-Use Regional Commercial (MU-RC). This is a legislative action not requiring any specific findings.

4. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (VTM) to combine two parcels into one and create 27 lots for the 111 townhouses and one apartment building with associated access and common areas. This is a quasi-judicial action with a list of required findings:
a. General Plan Consistency: The proposed subdivision, together with the design and proposed improvements, is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Regional Mixed-Use (Santa Clara Station). The proposed subdivision Map would facilitate development of housing stock and construction of rental and ownership housing opportunities for the community; and furthermore, redevelop an underutilized property (Policy 5.3.1-P8), provide adequate landscaping and replace trees at a 2:1 ratio (Policy 5.3.1-P10), include sidewalks (Policy 5.3.1-P16), and provide a design that is compatible with and sensitive to neighboring residential development (Policy 5.3.1-P29).
b. Site Suitability: The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is suitable for the site because the Project is designed to provide highquality housing consistent with existing and planned development in the surrounding area and is designed to provide high-quality housing consistent with existing and planned development in the surrounding area. The density of the proposed project [37.2 dwelling units/acre (du/ac)] is within the allowable density of the Regional Mixed Use (Santa Clara Station) General Plan designation (37-50 du/ac).
c. No Adverse Effects: The design of the subdivision and type of improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage, as the Project Site is located in an urbanized setting, on a previously developed site, and includes mitigation measures, as identified in the EIR and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), that reduce all identified impacts to less than significant levels.
d. Conflicts with Easements: As designed, the project would not conflict with any recorded public easements for access through or use the proposed subdivision. The VTM application was reviewed for potential conflicts with public easements by the Project Clearance Committee/Subdivision Committee which includes Public Works, Silicon Valley Power, and Water and Sewer departments.
e. Natural/Passive Heating and Cooling: The project will adhere to CALGreen energy efficiency measures to conserve energy through building design and site planning.

5. Certification of the EIR and adoption of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings and a MMRP for the annexation and development. This is an administrative action, which is neither a legislative nor quasi-judicial decision. CEQA requires that the City Council find that it has reviewed the EIR, that the EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA, and that it reflects the City Council’s independent judgment and analysis. There is also a separate CEQA Findings document (Attachment 5) for the Council’s adoption, as a part of its CEQA resolution.

City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
Should these pre-annexation actions and related project entitlements be approved, a request for annexation shall be submitted to San José and the Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Clara County (LAFCO) for processing, and the 408-unit residential development project will be considered in a separate review at staff level through Architectural Review. The development will be required to meet the standards of the City’s General Plan Land Use designation, the Zoning Code Standards and Objective Design Standards. The staff level Architectural Review will address the demolition of the buildings, site design and architecture. Architectural Review will occur after the City Council decision on the above actions.

DISCUSSION
The proposed University Station Residential project would remove the existing four office buildings (which total 217,000 square feet of office space) and two parking garages and construct a new fivestory building with 297 multi-family residential units and 111 three-story townhouse units distributed among 26 buildings. Thirteen of the townhouse units would be located on what is currently the 0.94- acre San José parcel (APN: 230-09-021), which will be annexed to Santa Clara as described below, and the remaining townhouse units and the multi-family building would be on the Santa Clara parcel (APN: 230-09-020). The project uses provisions in State Law to streamline the process for new housing development, including not having to rezone the site.

As the project is meeting the City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance, the applicant applied the State Density Bonus Law (SDBL). The SDBL entitles the applicant to waivers and concessions. The waivers are reductions of development standards that would have the effect of physically precluding construction of the project. Concessions result in identifiable, actual cost reductions to provide affordable housing. Any waivers or concessions will be applied to the development phase of the project during the staff level review of the project.

Annexation
The project proposes to annex the 0.94-acre San José parcel to the City of Santa Clara, which would require the City of San José to approve the detachment of the parcel. In addition to annexation, the City of Santa Clara must approve the pre-zoning and pre-designation of a General Plan land use for the subject parcel. Pursuant to Government Code § 56654(a), the City Council will consider and adopt a resolution to authorize the application to LAFCO to approve the annexation request. The overall steps for annexation are:

1. City of Santa Clara approval of the pre-zoning and pre-designation of the General Plan land use, resolution of application to LAFCO, and environmental review (EIR).

2. Separate City of San José detachment application process.

3. Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Clara County approval.

Since developer’s submission of their application, staff coordinated with City of San José staff to discuss the annexation and detachment of the 0.94-acre parcel. The subject parcel is landlocked and accessible through the current development via a Santa Clara street (Campbell Avenue). Given its location, the annexation of this parcel will not require an equal exchange of land, population or tax base by the City of San José.

City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
Should the City of Santa Clara approve the annexation request, the City of San José will process and consider the detachment application. If the City of San José does not approve the detachment of the

0.94-acre San José parcel, the parcel would remain in the City of San José and be subjected to their entitlement process. The 10.02-acre Santa Clara portion of the site would then be developed independently. At a preliminary level, staff has discussed the annexation with the City of San Jose and the City is in support as the .94 acre parcel is land locked.

Under the scenario of both annexation and detachment approval, Santa Clara will apply to LAFCO for approval of the 0.94-acre San José parcel detachment from the City of San José and annexation to the City of Santa Clara. LAFCO will then hold a hearing on whether to approve the request, the final approval step of the annexation process.

The Project Clearance Committee reviewed and deemed the proposed annexation cleared on July 29, 2025 and staff determined it can make the requested actions and findings as stated above.

Traffic Improvements at the Intersections
As the project will add more housing units, staff worked with the applicant to address potential safety concerns at the two intersections abutting the site. The two traffic signals are located at Campbell Avenue/Accolti Way and El Camino Real and Franklin Street/Palm Drive and El Camino Real. Due to the current roadway configuration and the character of the site and surrounding areas, the applicant is proposing to improve the existing traffic signals and add dedicated left turn lanes which will allow for pedestrian crossings that are separated from vehicular movement.

General Plan Conformance
The existing General Plan land use designation for the project site is Santa Clara Station Regional Mixed-Use. This General Plan designation is intended for a combination of Santa Clara Station Regional Commercial and Santa Clara Station High Density Residential. This classification is intended for residential development at density ranging from 37 to 50 dwelling units per gross acre (du/ac). This High-Density Residential land use is characterized by urban surroundings with mid ‐
rise
buildings, structured or below
‐
grade parking, and shared open space. Although the City is in the process of preparing a Station Area specific plan, the plan is still in draft form and the City cannot apply any of its proposed standards to this project. This General Plan does have reference to a maximum commercial Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 3.0 for this area, but it does not currently specify a specific minimum FAR; it simply states that commercial uses are required. The project proposes residential uses in an area that is immediately adjacent to an existing hotel, retail, and other office use. Given this existing condition, the applicant is requesting a concession under the State Density Bonus Law to not provide any commercial use. Any concessions or waivers will be reviewed during the Architectural Review process.

To maintain consistency for the entire project site, the 0.94-acre parcel currently in San José would be pre-designated as the same General Plan land use as the rest of the site, Santa Clara Station Regional Mixed-Use.

Staff find that the project is consistent with the following General Plan Policies:

City of Santa Clara Page 6 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
General Land Use Policies
· 5.3.1-P2: Encourage advance notification and neighborhood meetings to provide an opportunity for early community review of new development proposals. · 5.3.1-P26: Support a community-initiated planning process so that existing neighborhoods can participate in developing more detailed plans for street, landscape and pedestrian facility improvements.

The applicant conducted a community meeting to involve neighboring property owners in the design of the project. Notices were mailed to property owners within 1,000 feet of the project boundaries and interested parties.
· 5.3.1
‐
P4 Encourage new development that meets the minimum intensities and densities specified in the land use classifications or as defined through applicable Focus Area, Neighborhood Compatibility or Historic Preservation policies of the General Plan.

The total project site would be developed within the allowable density range at 37.2 dwelling units per acre.

The subject property is located within the Santa Clara Station Focus Area. A Specific Plan is currently in the planning stage but has not been adopted. The proposed project is reviewed under the current Zoning Code and General Plan and the Specific Plan cannot be retroactively applied. Nonetheless, Staff finds that the project is consistent with existing policies listed in the General Plan for the focus area:

Santa Clara Station Focus Area Policies
· 5.4.3
‐
P2 Maximize residential development within walking distance of the Station, particularly on the northeast side of the Caltrain corridor.
· 5.4.3
‐
P9 Encourage streetscape design with street trees, wider sidewalks, pedestrian ‐
oriented
lighting, curb bulb
‐
outs and special paving and/or striping within the Focus Area to emphasize accessibility.
· 5.4.3
‐
P20 Highly encourage the development of affordable housing and senior housing that is well designed and compatible with adjacent uses in the Santa Clara Station Focus Area.

Zoning Conformance
In accordance with Assembly Bill 3194’s amendments to the Housing Accountability Act, the 10.02- acre parcel would not require rezoning from the current Planned Development zoning district. The City would use the MU-RC zone in a manner that facilitates and accommodates the density allowed on the site by the General Plan. The MU-RC zone is intended to facilitate development near hightraffic corridors with a mix of land uses. The project was designed based on the objective development standards for the Mixed-Use Regional Commercial Zoning (MU-RC) zoning district. To maintain consistency for the entire project site, the 0.94-acre San José parcel would be pre-zoned to the MU-RC zoning district.

City of Santa Clara Page 7 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
The future project will be required to adhere to site-specific development standards set forth in the proposed MU-RC zoning district.

Subdivision
In accordance with Chapter 17.05 of the City Code, the project requires a tentative subdivision map.

The application proposes a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (Attachment 11) to combine two parcels into one and create 27 lots for the 111 townhouses and one apartment building with associated access and common areas.

The subdivision includes on-site and off-site improvements. Primary access to the project site is from three 26-foot wide, two-way directional driveways located on El Camino Real, Franklin Street and Campbell Avenue. The project would construct a 10-foot-wide detached sidewalk with a five-foot landscape strip along the El Camino Real frontage.

Subdivision Map applications are reviewed for General Plan and Zoning Code consistency, and conformance with the Subdivision Map Act. With approval of the General Plan pre-designation and pre-zoning, the proposed subdivision will not result in any inconsistencies with the General Plan or zoning designation for the property. The project was deemed cleared by the City’s Project Clearance Committee on August 11, 2026, and the Subdivision Committee on July 29, 2025. Conditions of Approval for the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map are included as Attachment 11.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the project by the environmental consultant firm David J. Powers & Associates, Inc., in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Draft EIR (Attachment 4) for the University Station Residential project and the Notice of Availability were circulated to affected public agencies and interested parties for a 45-day review period from April 10, 2026, through May 25, 2026. During the review period, the Community Development Department received agency comments on the Draft EIR from Valley Water, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, and the Department of Transportation.

The Draft EIR analyzed the project with the proposed annexation and identified potential environmental impacts associated with project development and identified biological, cultural resources, geology and soils, and hazardous materials impacts that with incorporation of mitigation measures into the project would reduce all potential impacts to less than significant. A detailed discussion of the potential impacts and mitigation measures to be applied to the project are specified in the Draft EIR and would be implemented through project conditions of approval and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) as included in Attachment 4.

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines 15124(b), the City of Santa Clara and Developer have identified the following project objectives for evaluation of the proposed project and the development of a range of alternatives in the Draft EIR for consideration in the findings (Attachment 4).

Project Objectives
City of Santa Clara Page 8 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
· Support the State’s housing goals during a time of housing crisis by providing much needed housing, including affordable housing.
· Redevelop the property consistent with the land use policies and strategies provided in Plan Bay Area 2050 such as integrating affordable housing into all major housing projects and transforming aging office buildings into vibrant neighborhoods. · Redevelop the project site consistent with the vision of the Santa Clara General Plan for higher-density residential development (37 to 50 dwelling units per acre) along major transportation corridors.
· Provide a mix of for-sale and rental housing at a range of income levels and unit sizes, to assist the City in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation obligations in accordance with its Housing Element.
· Annex the San José portion of the project site into Santa Clara to provide for efficient delivery of services and utilities.
· Replace underutilized office buildings and surface parking lots with modern, high-quality residential units and associated landscaping and amenities. · Enhance the architectural and visual character of the neighborhood by improving the site with high-quality architecture and landscaping.
· Deliver an economically feasible development balancing market conditions and City objectives.

The Draft EIR examined three project alternatives and provides a comparison of impacts of each alternative to the proposed project:
1) No Project/No Development and No Redevelopment Alternatives; 2) Redistributed Housing Units Alternatives; and
3) No Annexation, Redevelopment Alternative.

As discussed in Section IV and Section V of the CEQA Findings attachment, changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project which will reduce the severity of all significant impacts identified for the project. Therefore, findings can be made consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR, and implementation of an alternative to the project to avoid or lessen significant impacts is not required.

A Final EIR included in Attachment 4 was subsequently prepared that included responses to all comments received on the Draft EIR, and was distributed on August 7, 2026, in accordance with CEQA. Following the close of the FEIR period, the City received two comment letters and prepared written responses that do not change the conclusions of the FEIR nor require recirculation of the EIR and are provided as Attachment 4.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the City for processing the requested application other than administrative time and expense typically covered by processing fees paid by the applicant.

An analysis of future costs and/or revenues has not been completed. If the property is annexed, the City will incur additional costs of providing City services including utilities. These costs will be partially City of Santa Clara Page 9 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
recovered through property tax and any utility-related revenue.

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

PUBLIC CONTACT
Community Meetings
On May 29, 2025, an online and in-person community meeting was held at City Hall Cafeteria. A notice of the meeting was mailed to 524 property owners and tenants within 1,000 feet of the project site. Thirteen people attended in-person and 12 people attended online. Community feedback focused on density, commercial, architecture, pedestrian safety and intersection improvement. There were no comments given regarding annexation. A member of the Santa Clara University staff attended the meeting and is generally in support of the project.

Noticing of the Meeting
Public contact was made by posting the City 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.

On August 5, 2025, a hearing notice was published in the Santa Clara Weekly and on August 5, 2025, a notice of public hearing for this item was mailed to 524 property owners and tenants within 1,000 feet of the project site boundaries and emailed to interested parties. This provides more than the minimum 20-day notice required by State law (AB2904) for rezoning. The notice was for the Planning Commission meeting on August 26, 2026. At the August 26 meeting, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing, received public testimony, and then voted to continue the hearing to September 2, 2026. At the time of writing this report, Staff received one comment letter of support from Santa Clara University and one general comment from Catalyze SV. Comment letters are included in Attachment 13

RECOMMENDATION

1. Adopt a resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report and adopt the CEQA Findings and the Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program (MMRP);

2. Adopt a resolution of application for the annexation of the 0.94-acre parcel in the City of San Jose;

3. Adopt a resolution approving the General Plan pre-designation of the 0.94-acre parcel in the City of San José as Regional Mixed-Use;

4. Adopt a resolution approving a pre-zone of the 0.94-acre parcel in the City of San José as Mixed-Use Regional Commercial (MU-RC); and

5. Adopt a resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for condominium purposes for the entire project site, subject to conditions of approval.

City of Santa Clara Page 10 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-954 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
Prepared by: Steve Le, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Glen Googins, City Attorney
Approved by: Afshan Hamid, Director Community Development

ATTACHMENTS

1. Vicinity Map

2. Project Data and Compliance

3. Web Link to September 2, 2026, Planning Commission Hearing

4. Web Link to the Project Page and Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program

5. CEQA Findings

6. Resolution to Certify the Environmental Impact Report and Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program

7. Resolution of Application to Annex the 0.94-acre Parcel

8. Resolution to Approve the Pre-designation of a General Plan Land Use

9. Resolution to Approve the Prezone

10. Resolution to Approve the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map

11. Conditions of Tentative Subdivision Map Approval

12. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map

13. Correspondence as of September 17, 2026
City of Santa Clara Page 11 of 11 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
Vicinity Map (Zoning)
451 El Camino Real
Zoning
Land Parcels
CR - Commercial Regional
CT - Thoroughfare
Commercial
LI , ML - Light Industrial
LI , ML - Light Industrial
MH, HI - Industrial Heavy
MUCC - Mixed Use
Community Commercial
MUNC - Mixed UseNeighborhood Commercial
MURC - Mixed Use-Regional
Commercial
PD - Planned Development
PQP - Public/Quasi Public
R1 - Single-Family
Residential
R2 - Low-Density Residential
R3 - Medium Density
Residential
R4 - High Density Residential
MU-VHD - Mixed Use-Very
High Density Residential
Base Layers
Air Parcels
Land Parcels
Land Parcels
Right of Ways
Common Areas
Streets
Notes:

PLN24-00279
7/23/2026 8:53:00 AM
This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable.

NAD_1983_2011_StatePanel_California_III_FIPS_0403_Ft_US ©City of Santa Clara THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 0 500 1000
ft -
ityof Clara ..
■
■
■
~
■
■
■
■
□
■
□
■
■
■
■
Attachment 2: Project Data/Compliance (Multi-Family)
Project Address: 451 El Camino Real Project Number: PLN24-00279 Zoning: Mixed-use Regional Commercial
Standard Existing Proposed Requirement Complies?
(Y/N)
Parcel Area (SF) (min): -- 10.2 acre -- Y
Density (Units/Acre)
Density -- 39.4 37-50 Y
Commercial FAR
Commercial FAR: -- 0 Up to 3.0 N
(Concession)
Building Square Footage (SF)
4 Plex Townhouse: -- 186,000 -- --
6 Plex Townhouse: -- 41,100 -- --
Multi-family Building: -- 475,000 -- --
Main Building Setbacks (FT)
Front: -- 10 0 or 5-10 Y
Side (left):
(right):
-- 10
10-50+
0 Y
Side, Corner: -- -- 0 Y
Rear: -- 21 10 Y
Multi-story Stepback: -- 0 N (Waiver)
Height (FT)
Main building: -- Threestory (38)
– Fivestory (64)
6-story/60 N (Wavier)
Parking:

Is the site Gov. Code 65863.2 (AB 2097) eligible? Y
Off-Street – Multi-family: -- 359 0 Y
Off-Street – Townhouse: 196 0 Y
Class 1 Bicycle (Multifamily/Townhouse):-- 297/98 1 per unit Y Class 2 Bicycle (Multifamily):-- 15 1 per 20 units Y
Landscaping
Open Landscaped Area: -- 178,841 30% of area
(143,269)
Y
Consistent with City’s Complete Streets Policy? 5’ Landscape/ 10’ sidewalk
Y
Web Link to September 2, 2026 Planning Commission Hearing for 451 El Camino Real – University Station Residential
Project
September 2, 2026 Planning Commission Hearing (Staff Report):

Here you will find documents related to the Planning Commission Hearing staff report and attachments for 451 El Camino Real – University Station Residential Project. https://santaclara.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=8195840&GUID=AD953A4A-DE8E4B0A-971E-0008C56583E6&Options=&Search= These documents are available for viewing in the Community Development Department

Web Links- Project Website and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program
(MMRP)
Project Website:
https://www.santaclaraca.gov/Home/Components/BusinessDirectory/BusinessDirectory/529/249 5?npage=4
Environmental Website (Draft and Final EIR and MMRP:
https://www.santaclaraca.gov/Home/Components/BusinessDirectory/BusinessDirectory/614/152 09 These documents are available for viewing in the Community Development Department 1 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS

FOR THE UNIVERSITY STATION RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
I. INTRODUCTION
The City of Santa Clara (City), as the Lead Agency under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., has prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report for the University Station Residential Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2025050963) (Final EIR or EIR”). The Final EIR is a project EIR pursuant to Section 15161 of the State Guidelines for implementation of the CEQA (CEQA Guidelines).1 The Final EIR consists of the April 2026 Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) and August 2026 Final Environmental Impact Report. 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 identified feasible mitigation measures and alternatives that may be adopted to reduce or eliminate those impacts.

In determining to approve the University Station Residential 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 VIII, 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 approximately 10.96 gross acre project site is comprised of two parcels, one located at 451 El Camino Real in Santa Clara (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN] 230-09-020; 10.02 acres) and one parcel in San José without a physical address (APN 230-09-021; 0.94 acres) that is accessed via the site in Santa Clara. The project site is situated between El Camino Real to the southwest and the Southern Pacific railroad lines (that serve Caltrain, Amtrak, Altamont Corridor Express, and Union Pacific freight trains) to the northeast. The site is currently developed with four office buildings, two parking garages, and surface parking lots. The Santa Clara portion of the project site has a General Plan land use designation of Santa Clara Station Regional Mixed Use (Santa Clara Station Regional 1 The State CEQA Guidelines are found in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq. 2 Commercial + Santa Clara Station High Density Residential) and is in the Planned Development zoning district. The San José portion of the site is designated and zoned Light Industrial (LI).

Project Overview
As proposed, the project would remove the existing four office buildings (which total 217,000 square feet of office space) and two parking garages and construct a new five-story building with 297 multifamily residential units and 111 three-story townhouse units distributed amongst 26 buildings.

Thirteen of the townhouse units would be located on what is currently the 0.94-acre San José parcel (which will be annexed to Santa Clara as described below) and the remaining townhouse units and the multi-family building would be on the Santa Clara parcel. The average density of the project would be 37 dwelling units per acre.

The project would comply with Santa Clara’s Affordable Housing Ordinance and the affordability requirements of the State Density Bonus Law. The proposed multi-family residential building would provide 15 percent of the 297 units at affordable income levels averaging to no more than 100 percent of area median income (AMI), of which 10 percent would be affordable to lower income households. The proposed townhouses would provide 15 percent of the 111 units at affordable income levels averaging to no more than 100 percent of AMI, of which 10 percent would be affordable to moderate income households.

All five levels of the proposed multi-family residential building would include residential units. The multi-family residential building’s roof would include screened mechanical units. The maximum height of the multi-family residential building would be 60 feet above grade, as measured to the top of the parapet. The maximum height of the townhouse buildings would be 38 feet above grade, as measured to the top of the roof.

The proposed multi-family residential building would be set back approximately 10 to 15 feet from El Camino Real, and the townhouse development would be set back approximately 10 to 28 feet from the northern property line and approximately 150 feet from Campbell Avenue. The project would construct a new 8.5-foot-wide sidewalk along the project frontage adjacent to the proposed multi-family residential building on El Camino Real and along the project frontage on Campbell Avenue. The project would construct a 10-foot soundwall along the northern boundary of the site.

Site Access and Parking
The proposed project would be accessed via four 26-foot-wide driveways located on El Camino Real, Franklin Street and Campbell Avenue, which would connect to internal drive lanes within the development.

The multi-family residential building would include a parking garage on the western end of the building. The parking garage would have 359 parking spaces, including dedicated parking spaces to accommodate electric vehicles (EV) consistent with 2025 Energy Code and 2025 CALGreen Tier 1 requirements. The parking garage would include six levels of parking (including a roof level) and have a maximum height of 64 feet, as measured to the top of the parapet. 3 Each townhouse unit would include an attached two-car garage on the ground floor, for a total of 222 parking spaces. All 222 parking spaces would have EV charging, consistent with 2025 Energy Code and 2025 CALGreen Tier 1 requirements. Specifically, 111 spaces would be Level 2 EV ready, and the other 111 spaces would be Level 1 EV ready. The project would include 12 on-street parking spaces on the site’s internal streets which would be available to guests of the townhouse development. In addition, the project would provide 408 long-term bicycle parking spaces (297 for the multi-family development and 111 spaces for the townhouse development) and 15 short-term bicycle parking spaces (at the multi-family development).

Transportation Demand Management Plan
The City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) states that multi-family residential development projects are required to adopt a 20 percent reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) with a 10 percent reduction through active transportation demand management (TDM) measures. The project TDM plan, completed in March 2025, includes the TDM measures and features listed below. • Designating a Transportation Coordinator on-site
• Providing a New Resident Welcome Flyer
• Providing an Online Kiosk/TDM Information Board
• Providing trip planning assistance to residents
• Providing transit resources to residents (e.g., schedules, route maps & other info) • Constructing pedestrian scale lighting on-site
• Constructing new walkways on-site
• Providing on-site bicycle parking
• Providing biking resources to residents (e.g., bikeway maps & other information) • Providing ride-matching assistance to residents
• Providing residents with information regarding the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Ride-matching Service
• Providing incentives to residents for new carpools/vanpools • Providing residents with information regarding the VTA Guaranteed Ride Home Service • Providing residents with a high-bandwidth internet connection General Plan Amendment, Detachment, Pre-Zoning and Annexation of the San José 0.94-acre Parcel The project would annex the 0.94-acre San José parcel to the City of Santa Clara, which would require the City of San José to approve the detachment of the parcel and the City of Santa Clara to approve the pre-zoning and annexation of the parcel to the City. The Santa Clara General Plan would be amended to designate the annexed parcel to Santa Clara Station Regional Mixed Use (Santa Clara Station Regional Commercial2 and Santa Clara Station High Density Residential) and the annexed parcel would be rezoned to the Mixed Use-Regional Commercial (MU-RC) zoning district. 2 Although no commercial uses are proposed as part of the project, this designation allows development to provide up to 3.0 floor area ratio (FAR) of commercial space.
4 Project Objectives
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15124, the EIR must identify the objectives sought by the proposed development project. The applicant’s objectives for the project are as follows:

1. Support the State’s housing goals during a time of housing crisis by providing much needed housing, including affordable housing.

2. Redevelop the property consistent with the land use policies and strategies provided in Plan Bay Area 2050 such as integrating affordable housing into all major housing projects and transforming aging office buildings into vibrant neighborhoods.

3. Redevelop the project site consistent with the vision of the Santa Clara General Plan for higher-density residential development (37 to 50 dwelling units per acre) along major transportation corridors.

4. Provide a mix of for-sale and rental housing at a range of income levels and unit sizes, to assist the City in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation obligations in accordance with its Housing Element.

5. Annex the San José portion of the project site into Santa Clara to provide for efficient delivery of services and utilities.

6. Replace underutilized office buildings and surface parking lots with modern, high-quality residential units and associated landscaping and amenities.

7. Enhance the architectural and visual character of the neighborhood by improving the site with high-quality architecture and landscaping.

8. Deliver an economically feasible development balancing market conditions and City objectives.

III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
In accordance with Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City prepared a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) of an EIR for the University Station Residential Project. The NOP was sent to state and local responsible and trustee agencies and federal agencies on May 23, 2025. The 30-day comment period concluded on June 23, 2025. The NOP provided a description of the project and identified probable environmental effects that could result from implementation of the project. The City also held a public scoping meeting on June 4, 2025, during the NOP comment period to discuss the project and solicit public input as to the scope and content of the EIR. The meeting was held at the City of Santa Clara City Hall.

The City prepared the Draft EIR for the University Station Residential Project in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The Draft EIR was circulated for public review and comment for 45 days from April 10, 2026 through May 25, 2026. During this period, the Draft EIR was available to the public and local, state, and federal agencies for review and comment. Notice of the Availability and completion of the Draft EIR was sent directly to every agency, person, and organization that commented on the NOP, as well as to the State Clearinghouse. 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. 5 Following the conclusion of the 45-day public review period on the Draft EIR, 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 the project sponsor would adopt the mitigation measures. Responses to public agency comments on the EIR were sent to the commenting agencies on August 7, 2026.

On September 2, 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 therefore 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 VII, below, provide brief descriptions of the impacts the Final EIR identified as less than significant with adopted mitigation. No impacts in the Final EIR were found to be Significant and Unavoidable. These descriptions also reproduce the full text of the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR for each significant impact.

V. 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 6 Section 3.0 of the Draft EIR, the discussion and analysis of which are hereby incorporated in full by this reference.

Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: Construction of the proposed project could result in the loss of fertile eggs, nesting raptors or other migratory birds, or nest abandonment, which would constitute a significant impact under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW).

Findings BIO-1: Changes or alterations, which have been incorporated into the project, will reduce the severity of the significant biological resource impact. Specifically, implementation of MM BIO-1.1 and MM BIO-1.2, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce biological resource impacts to a less than significant level by scheduling demolition and construction activities outside of the nesting season, when feasible, or by completing pre-construction surveys for nesting birds prior to the initiation of construction activities during the nesting season.

MM BIO-1.1: The project applicant shall schedule demolition and construction activities to avoid the nesting season if feasible. The nesting season for most birds, including most raptors in the San Francisco Bay area, extends from February 1st through August 31st (inclusive).

MM BIO-1.2: If demolition and construction cannot be scheduled between September 1st and January 31st (inclusive), pre-construction surveys for nesting birds shall be completed by a qualified ornithologist to ensure that no nests shall be disturbed during project implementation. This survey shall be completed no more than 14 days prior to the initiation of construction activities during the early part of the breeding season (February 1st through April 30th inclusive) 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 inclusive).

During this survey, the ornithologist shall 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 shall 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 shall not be disturbed during project construction.

Prior to any tree removal, or approval of any grading or demolition permits (whichever occurs first), the ornithologist shall submit a report indicating the results of the survey and any designated buffer zones to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or Director’s designee.
7 Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-1: Construction activities associated with the project could disturb unknown archaeological resources.

Findings CUL-1: Changes or alterations, which have been incorporated into the project, will reduce the severity of the significant cultural resource impact. Specifically, implementation of MM CUL-1.1 through CUL-1.5, set forth below, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would avoid and/or reduce significant impacts to unknown buried archaeological resources to a less than significant level by completing subsurface sampling in identified sensitive areas on-site, preparing a workforce environmental awareness program, monitoring excavation activities, and identifying the procedures necessary to protect resources, if found.

MM CUL-1.1: After demolition but prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, a qualified archaeological consultant will conduct subsurface sampling in identified sensitive areas on-site (based on the Archaeological Sensitivity Assessment) to determine if subsurface archeological resources are present. If requested by a tribe registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of Santa Clara that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area as described in Public Resources Code Section 21080.3, a Native American monitor will assist in the implementation of the subsurface sampling.

Testing for historic-era resources shall extend to a depth of four feet below the current ground surface. Testing for prehistoric resources shall extend to a depth of eight feet below the current ground surface. In the event that no significant resources are discovered, the archaeological consultant shall prepare a findings report to be submitted to the Director of Community Development for review and approval and no further field work would be required prior to the start of construction. In addition, Mitigation Measures CUL-1.3 through CUL-1.5 (listed below) would be required to be implemented.

In the event that significant resources are discovered on-site, a site-specific cultural resources treatment plan shall be prepared by the archaeological consultant and approved by the Director of Community Development.

Implementation of the plan will occur prior to issuance of any grading permits in conformance with the steps outlined below.

1. Investigation – Resource Identification
Archaeologists will investigate features to determine their potential significance. Decisions will be made about which features will be subject to archaeological data recovery.

Determination of significance of historic archaeological property types is tied directly to their historical context and relevance to research themes further discussed below. Usefulness of a property type (feature) with regard to relevant research themes determines the legal importance of that 8 resource. Also germane to the importance of property types are assessments of integrity, land use history, and comparison with other known similar property types. Especially relevant here are issues that cannot be addressed using data from other sources. The purpose of identifying relevant research themes is to help predict areas of special concern, given expected property types. Determination of relevance to research themes is critical to the identification of significant features in the field.

If data recovery is determined to be appropriate, excavation will target recovery of an appropriate amount of information from archaeological deposits to determine potential of the resource to address specific research questions. If it occurs, data recovery will emphasize understanding of the archaeological deposit’s structure, including features and stratification, horizontal and vertical extent, and content including the nature and quantity of artifacts.

2. Reporting
Upon completion of the field work, a findings report will be prepared consistent with the outline below and will focus on particular finds encountered during the excavation. All reports will at a minimum meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Archaeological Documentation. The report will be submitted to the applicant and all reviewing agencies, and will ultimately be filed with the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University.

The technical report on project results may address the following elements: executive summary; statement of scope, including project location and setting; background contexts or summaries; summary of previous research, historical and archaeological; research goals and themes; field and laboratory methodologies; descriptions of recovered materials; findings and interpretations, referencing research goals; conclusions; references cited; and appendices such as artifact catalogs, special studies, and other information relevant to the project and findings.

MM CUL-1.2: Upon completion of all field work, but before completion of the Findings Report (outlined in MM CUL-1.1), a preliminary report outlining the data recovery work on the site shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development for review and approval prior to issuance of grading or building permits.

MM CUL-1.3: Prior to the commencement of construction activities on-site, the applicant shall secure the services of a qualified archaeologist and a representative of a tribe registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of Santa Clara that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area as described in Public Resources Code Section 21080.3. The qualified archaeologist and tribal representative shall prepare a workforce environmental 9 awareness program (WEAP) to instruct construction workers of the obligation to protect and preserve valuable resources. The WEAP shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Community Development Director, or his or her designee, prior to the issuance of construction and grading permits. This program shall be provided to all construction workers as a field training prior to the beginning of ground-disturbing activities, and shall include a discussion of applicable laws and penalties under the laws; samples or visual aids of resources that could be encountered in the project vicinity; instructions regarding the need to halt work in the vicinity of any potential archaeological and Native American resources encountered; and measures to notify their supervisor, the applicant, and the specialist(s).

MM CUL-1.4: Ground-disturbing activities (including, but not limited to, excavation, grading, irrigation installation, foundation preparation, and utility trenching) shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards and, if requested by a tribe registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of Santa Clara that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area as described in Public Resources Code Section 21080.3, a Native American monitor. The qualified archaeologist and Native American representative shall be given five days’ written notice prior to the start of any ground-disturbing activity. The project applicant shall document receipt of notification in writing. The qualified archaeologist shall have authority to halt construction activities temporarily in the immediate vicinity of an unanticipated find until its significance can be assessed by the qualified archaeologist. A summary report of the monitoring results, including any protective measures implemented, shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of building permits.

MM CUL-1.5: In the event that archaeological deposits or materials of any kind are inadvertently exposed during any construction activity, work within 50 feet of the find shall cease until the qualified archaeologist can assess the find and provide recommendations for further treatment, if warranted. The archaeologist, in consultation with the project applicant, shall make the necessary plans for treatment of the find(s) if the resource is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). Construction within a radius determined by the archaeologist shall not recommence until the assessment is complete.
a. Any treatment other than preservation in place must be approved by the City of Santa Clara. Treatment for most resources would consist of (but would not be limited to) sample excavation, artifact collection, site documentation, and historical research, with the aim to target the recovery of important scientific data contained in resource.
b. The culturally affiliated tribe(s) who consulted on the project, or if no consultation occurred the tribe identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), shall determine the disposition of any 10 tribal cultural resources (TCR) artifacts discovered during on-site excavation or construction activities or TCR artifacts resulting from execution of a treatment plan. The disposition of TCR artifacts shall include, but not be limited to, reburying in close proximity of the finds without scientific study, allowing scientific study before reburying the materials either near the origin of the find or in another protected place, or temporary curation at a facility at an institution that meets the U.S.

Secretary of the Interior’s criteria for curation (36 CFR 79) prior to reburial. Disposition of any TCR artifacts shall be subject to approval by the culturally affiliated tribe. All curation fees and related expenses shall be paid by the project applicant.
c. To ensure adequate space and protection are provided for reburial of any TCRs discovered on the project site, the Permittee shall designate a cultural easement area. The easement area shall be in a location that will not be subject to future disturbance and that will not require the relocation of buildings or other physical improvements on the site. d. The registered professional archaeologist shall file State of California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Series 523 forms for the cultural easement/TCR reburial location (if used) with the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Center in accordance with the guidelines established by the California Office of Historic Preservation. The DPR Series 523 forms shall establish a permanent record of the cultural easement location and any TCRs discovered on the project site for future site identification and protection. The registered professional archeologist shall also file a Sacred Lands File record with the NAHC on behalf of the culturally affiliated tribe.

Impact CUL-2: The proposed project could result in the disturbance of human remains during excavation of the project site.

Findings CUL-2: Changes or alterations, which have been incorporated into the project, will reduce the severity of the significant cultural resource impact. Specifically, implementation of MM CUL-2.1, set forth below, which is 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 following procedures necessary to identify and protect resources if found.

MM CUL-2.1: 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 CEQA Guidelines. 11 Geology and Soils
Impact GEO-1: Construction of the proposed project could result in the disturbance and/or accidental destruction of unknown paleontological resources, if any resources are on-site.

Findings GEO-1: Changes or alterations, which have been incorporated into the project, will reduce the severity of the significant geological hazards impact. Specifically, implementation of MM GEO-1.1, set forth below, which is hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce geologic impacts to a less than significant level by identifying the procedures necessary to protect paleontological resources, if found.

MM GEO-1.1: If vertebrate fossils are discovered during construction, all work on the site shall stop immediately, the Director of Community Development or the Director’s designee shall be notified, and a qualified professional 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 Director of Community Development or the Director’s designee.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-1: Development of the project could result in an impact to construction workers and nearby sensitive receptors from exposure to contaminated soil and soil vapor.

Findings HAZ-1: Changes or alterations, which have been incorporated into the project, will reduce the severity of the significant hazards and hazardous material impact. Specifically, implementation of MM HAZ-1.1, set forth below, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce construction worker, future occupant, and surrounding environment exposure to on-site contaminated soil and soil vapor impacts to a less than significant level by additional testing, analysis, and implementation of measures to dispose of contaminated soils consistent with regulatory requirements and under regulatory oversight.

MM HAZ-1.1: Due to detections of various contaminants above regulatory environmental screening levels in the subsurface soils and soil vapor, prior to issuance of any grading permit, the applicant shall obtain regulatory oversight from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) under their Site Cleanup Program.

The applicant shall meet with the RWQCB and perform additional soil, soil vapor, and groundwater sampling and testing, as needed, to adequately define the known and suspected contamination from past uses of concern. In addition to a Health and Safety Plan (HSP), a Site Management Plan (SMP), Removal Action Plan (RAP), or equivalent document shall be prepared under regulatory oversight and approval by a qualified environmental consultant that identifies remedial 12 measures and/or appropriate management practices to ensure construction worker safety and protect the health of nearby sensitive receptors. These appropriate management practices shall include measures to sample excavated soil that will be exported from the site to ensure proper disposal and sampling of any soil that will be imported to the site to confirm that no contaminates are introduced to the existing soil on-site. The plans and evidence of regulatory oversight shall be provided to the Planning Manager of the Planning Division, or their designee.

VI. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS
An EIR is required to discuss growth inducing impacts, which consist of the ways in which the project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d); Pub.

Resources Code Section 21100(b)(5).)
Direct growth inducement would result, for example, if a project involves the construction of substantial new housing that would support an increased population in a community or establish substantial new permanent employment opportunities. This additional population could, in turn, increase demands for public utilities, public services, roads, and other infrastructure. Indirect growth inducement would result if a project stimulates economic activity that results in physical development or removes an obstacle to growth and development (e.g., increasing infrastructure capacity that would enable new or additional development). CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) cautions that it must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.

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.

As discussed throughout the EIR, particularly in Section 3.14 Population and Housing and Section

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems in the Draft EIR, most of the development included in the project is accounted for in the City’s General Plan based on the project’s consistency with the established General Plan land use designation for the site. The only portion of the project that was not previously accounted for in build out of the City’s General Plan is the portion currently within the City of San José. The project would result in the construction of 13 townhouse units on this portion of the site which would result in an incremental increase in development and an associated population increase than previously evaluated. However, this additional development would remain consistent with the visions, standards, guidelines, policies, and intent of the General Plan and would be located in an urbanized area served by existing infrastructure and services. Incorporation of this small area into the City and development of 13 townhouse units would not require an expansion of existing utility infrastructure or the construction of new public streets to access the site. For these reasons, the project would not foster or stimulate substantial economic growth or population growth, or the construction of additional housing in the surrounding area. 13 VII. 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; Commitment of Future Generations to Similar Use The project would occur in an infill location adjacent to a transit corridor and major transit facilities, encourage the use of transit services through implementation of a TDM plan, and result in the efficient use of non-renewable energy sources. In addition, as discussed in Section 3.6 Energy of the Draft EIR, the project would be constructed in compliance with all applicable building codes and the City’s Reach Code and would not result in unnecessary, inefficient, or wasteful use of resources. The project would result in an irreversible use and commitment of nonrenewable resources; however, the project would result in the construction and operation of a more transit-oriented and sustainable development on-site.

Irreversible Damage Resulting from Environmental Accidents Associated with the Project As discussed in Section 3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials of the Draft EIR, the project would be required to comply with all federal, state, and local laws and regulations regarding the safe use and storage of hazardous materials. In addition, the project would implement MM HAZ-1.1 to ensure that any potentially contaminated materials are handled properly during the construction process.

Implementation of this measure and compliance with relevant federal, state, and local laws and regulations would reduce any potential irreversible or nearly irreversible environmental changes to a less than significant level.

VIII. 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 considered relevant to its consideration. 14 The Project Objectives
The applicant’s objectives for the project are as follows:

1. Support the State’s housing goals during a time of housing crisis by providing much needed housing, including affordable housing.

5. Annex the San José portion of the project site into Santa Clara in order to provide for efficient delivery of services and utilities.

6. Replace underutilized office buildings and surface parking lots with modern, high-quality residential units and associated landscaping and amenities.

7. Enhance the architectural and visual character of the neighborhood by improving the site with high-quality architecture and landscaping.

8. Deliver an economically feasible development balancing market conditions and City objectives.

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." 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 15 restaurant tenants, thereby failing to meet core project objectives. An agency also may reject an alternative that does not meet the public policy goals of the agency. In California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 1001, the Court upheld the Santa Cruz City Council’s rejection of the environmentally superior alternative on the basis that the alternative was undesirable from a policy standpoint because it failed to achieve primary objectives of the city’s master plan with respect to transportation alternatives and open space considerations. 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 rejection of an enhanced preservation alternative as based on findings that additional preservation of open space would be infeasible because it would fail to implement the jurisdiction's General Plan or Community Plan and "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."3 These findings are based on the discussion of alternatives in Section 7.0 of the Draft EIR, the discussion and analysis of which are hereby incorporated in full by this reference.

Alternatives Considered but Rejected
Location Alternative
CEQA does not require that an analysis of alternate sites always be included in an EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(2), in making the decision to include or exclude analysis of an alternate site, the “key question and first step in analysis is whether any of the significant effects of the proposed project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the proposed project in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the proposed project need to be considered for inclusion in the EIR.” Here, the proposed project’s applicant does not control a site within the City of Santa Clara that could accommodate the proposed development and meet the basic project objectives, and lacks funding to acquire an alternative site.

As stated above, CEQA confirms that whether a proponent can reasonably acquire, control, or otherwise have access to an alternative site is a key factor in determining whether an off-site alternative is potentially feasible (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(f)). In addition, some of the primary, basic objectives of the project are to replace the existing underutilized office buildings and surface parking lots on the project site with modern, high-quality residential units and focus higher-density residential development (37 to 50 dwelling units per acre) along major transportation corridors. The project applicant does not have access to alternative location(s) that contain aging, underutilized office development and that are located proximate to a major transportation corridor like El Camino Real, or a major transportation stop like Santa Clara Station.

No significant and unavoidable impacts were identified for the proposed project. Several potentially significant impacts were identified for biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, and hazards and hazardous materials, but all of these impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels through incorporation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR. Since these significant impacts are primarily related to the construction activities planned on-site, it is reasonable to assume 3 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. 16 that similar impacts could result at an alternative project location given the archaeological sensitivity in Santa Clara, the common presence of residual agricultural contaminants in shallow soil throughout Santa Clara Valley, and the likelihood that alternative sites would also have existing trees that would be removed during redevelopment.

For all these reasons, most of the impacts of the proposed project would not be reduced or avoided by constructing the project on a different parcel, and in any event the project would not have significant and unavoidable impacts after incorporation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR. In addition, the project applicant does not control other parcels within the City that are suitable for the proposed project or that would meet the basic project objectives, and so this alternative was not considered further.

Reduced Redevelopment Alternative
The construction and operation of the proposed project would result in an increase in temporary and permanent air pollutant emissions and noise levels. However, as discussed in Section 3.3 Air Quality of the Draft EIR, the criteria air pollutant emissions generated by project implementation would not exceed the Air District’s thresholds of significance, and the health risk impacts associated with construction of the proposed project would not exceed the Air District’s single-source threshold for health risks. In addition, as discussed in Section 3.13 Noise of the Draft EIR, compliance with the City’s allowable construction hours and implementation of standard Conditions of Approval would reduce impacts associated with construction noise to a less than significant level.

The Reduced Development Alternative would reduce the number of units developed on-site and result in a corresponding decrease in the duration of the construction periods required to implement the alternative, which in turn would reduce the already less than significant air emissions and construction noise generated during construction and operation of the project. However, as currently proposed with 408 dwelling units on an approximately 10.96-acre site, the project’s development density would be approximately 37 dwelling units per acre, which is the minimum required under the existing General Plan designation for the site and the minimum density stated in the project objectives. Therefore, any meaningful reduction in the number of units constructed on-site under this alternative would result in a project that would not meet the minimum development density required for this General Plan designation and included in the project objectives. As such, this alternative was not considered further.

Focused Development Alternative
Construction of the proposed project has the potential for disturbance of unknown archaeological resources and tribal cultural resources as described in Chapters 3.5 and 3.18 of the Draft EIR.

However, these potentially significant impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels through incorporation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR (CUL 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, and 2-1).

The Focused Development Alternative would shift the development on-site and concentrate the proposed 408 dwelling units on the portions of the site most likely to contain resources associated with the Santa Clara Mission orchard and orchard walls, the abode structures within the orchard, and 17 the neophyte cemetery that abutted the orchard walls between the Mission and the orchard. The type of development that could accommodate this shift is assumed to be a larger multi-family residential building or two similarly sized multi-family residential buildings, and no townhome units.

However, unless this alternative also imposed development restrictions on the western portion of the site limiting development to surface-level improvements like parking or open space areas, this alternative would not avoid the potential for future redevelopment of that portion of the site with something that could disturb the documented resources related to the Santa Clara Mission. In addition, disturbance and demolition of existing structures would still be required even for surface level improvements, which could likewise result in impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources.

Moreover, restriction of portions of the project site to future development would not meet the project objective of providing a mix of for-sale and rental housing at a range of income levels and unit sizes, nor would it meet the objective of replacing existing underutilized office buildings and surface parking lots with modern, high-quality residential units and associated landscaping and amenities. In addition, as discussed in Section 3.5 Cultural Resources of the Draft EIR, a Native American shell midden was identified adjacent to the site and records of known Native American burial areas have been recorded in the project area. The horizontal and vertical extent of the shell midden and Native American burial areas has not been clearly delineated; therefore, it is possible that the portions of the site where redevelopment would be concentrated under the Focused Development Alternative are equally as sensitive for cultural resources as the remaining portion of the site. In which case, this alternative would not avoid or substantially lessen any of the potential impacts to archaeological resources compared to the proposed project.

In addition, this alternative could concentrate development closer to the railroad tracks that run parallel to the northern site boundary, which could expose future residents on-site to additional noise from train pass-bys. Therefore, this alternative was not considered further.

No Project Alternative - No Redevelopment 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. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 specifically advises that the No Project Alternative “shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published” and “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,” and emphasizes 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.”
Under the No Project, No Redevelopment Alternative, the project site would remain as it is today, and no annexation would occur. Under existing conditions, the site is developed with four office buildings, two parking garages, and surface parking lots.

The No Project, No Redevelopment Alternative would avoid all impacts associated with the project, as no changes would occur to the existing improvements on-site and no short-term construction 18 impacts would be generated. However, this alternative would not meet any of the project objectives because no new housing units would be constructed on-site.

No Project Alternative - Redevelopment Alternative
The approximately 10.02-acre portion of the project site in Santa Clara has a General Plan land use designation of Santa Clara Station Regional Mixed Use (Santa Clara Station Regional Commercial + Santa Clara Station High Density Residential) and is in the Planned Development zoning district.

This General Plan designation permits residential development at 37 to 50 dwelling units per gross acre. The San José portion of the site is designated and zoned Light Industrial.

If the proposed project were not approved, the annexation would not be approved, and Santa Clara would have no jurisdiction over development on the San Jose portion of the site. Although San Jose might approve light industrial development on the San José portion of the site, for purposes of the No Project – Redevelopment Alternative, the San Jose portion of the site is assumed not to be redeveloped.

Under this alternative, it is reasonable to expect that an alternative residential project would be proposed on the Santa Clara portion of the site in the foreseeable future, particularly due to the site’s location within the proposed Santa Clara Station Area Plan area. Based on the maximum allowable residential density allowed for the project site (50 dwelling units per gross acre) and the size of the site (10.02 acres), this could include a residential development with up to 502 dwelling units (assuming that no density bonuses are utilized).

Under this alternative, the potential number of residential units constructed on-site would increase by up to 94 units (23 percent) compared to the proposed project. To achieve this density, it is likely that the site would be developed solely with multi-family residential buildings instead of the proposed mix of multi-family residential units and three-story townhouse units. Although this alternative would meet most of the project objectives by redeveloping a site with underutilized office buildings and surface parking lots and constructing new housing units adjacent to a major transportation corridor, this alternative would not meet the project objective of providing a mix of for-sale and rental housing at a range of income levels and unit sizes. Therefore, it would not meet that project objective to the same extent as the proposed project.

In addition, the larger size of the potential residential development under this alternative could result in a corresponding increase in the duration of construction activities on-site. This could result in new or more severe impacts to surrounding receptors from construction equipment emissions and temporary construction noise/vibration that could require mitigation. The higher unit count would also result in additional vehicle trips compared to the proposed project, which could generate new or more severe impacts related to circulation on-site, traffic safety, and operational deficiencies, as well as new or more severe impacts related to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions and traffic noise.

Finally, depending on the location and orientation of the additional units on-site, more of the future residents on-site could be exposed to high levels of noise from the adjacent rail tracks and El Camino Real.
19 The No Project, Redevelopment Alternative could result in a residential development on-site; however, it would not meet the project objectives to the same extent as the proposed project and could result in more significant environmental impacts related to air quality, noise, greenhouse gases, and transportation.

Redistributed Housing Units Alternative
Under this alternative, approximately 16 of the townhouse units would be removed from the northernmost portion of the site and would be replaced by 16 additional apartment units in the multifamily residential building in order to maintain the required minimum development density for the site. This would require an additional level on at least a portion of the multi-family residential building, which would result in the multi-family residential building being a maximum of six-stories tall (an increase to approximately 80 feet).

Although this alternative would meet most of the Project Objectives by redeveloping a site with underutilized office buildings and surface parking lots and constructing new housing units adjacent to a major transportation corridor, this alternative would not provide the same number or mix of for-sale housing units as the proposed project. Therefore, it would not meet that project objective to the same extent as the proposed project.

In addition, constructing a taller multi-family residential building on-site would exacerbate conflicts with the design requirements (i.e., maximum height and step-back standards) under the existing zoning and General Plan land use designation. Constructing a taller multi-family residential building on-site could also result in the need for taller construction equipment (e.g., cranes) that would require review by the FAA to ensure compatibility with nearby airport operations. The addition of another story of residential development on the apartment site would also increase construction costs compared to the construction of town home development.

Under the Redistributed Housing Units Alternative, impacts associated with both construction and operation of 16 apartments within the same footprint as the proposed apartment building would be slightly reduced when compared to construction of 16 townhomes, however these reduced impacts would not be material and all project impacts are already less than significant with application of mitigation measures. This alternative would reduce exposure of future residents adjacent to the northern site boundary to noise and vibration from train pass-bys. These impacts of the environment on the project, however, are not considered impacts under CEQA.

The Redistributed Housing Units Alternative would result in a residential development on-site that is similar to the proposed project; however, it would not meet the project objectives regarding the mix of for-sale and rental units to the same extent as the proposed project. This alternative would result in additional conflicts with the City’s standard design requirements under the existing land use and zoning designation. This alternative could potentially utilize design waivers permitted under the State Density Bonus Law. Although these design waivers are not likely to result in any new or substantial more severe environmental impacts, the applicant has indicated it would not construct the project under these conditions.
20 No Annexation, Redevelopment Alternative
A separate alternative was considered to evaluate a scenario where the proposed annexation of the

0.94-acre San José parcel would not be approved. If that were to occur, the 13 townhouse units on that parcel would still be constructed under a separate development application with the City of San José. Under this alternative, it is assumed that the separate San José project would comply with San José’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance rather than Santa Clara’s Affordable Housing Ordinance, and that some of the access and utilities for the San José parcel may run through or connect with Santa Clara streets and utilities.

In this alternative, the Santa Clara parcel (which would have an area of 10.02 acres) would be redeveloped with the remaining 98 townhouse units and 297 apartment units in the same locations as the currently proposed project. This would result in a development density of 39.4 dwelling units per acre on the Santa Clara project site, which is consistent with the desired density range in the project objectives and the allowable density under the General Plan designation. However, this alternative would provide 13 fewer residential units in the City of Santa Clara; therefore, it would not assist the City with its Regional Housing Needs Allocation obligations to the same extent as the proposed project. In addition, this alternative would not meet the project objective to annex the San José portion of the project site into Santa Clara, and could result in less efficient delivery of services and utilities compared to the proposed project as a result.

Under this alternative, construction phasing and development of the site would occur in the same fashion as proposed under the current project. Therefore, the environmental impacts discussed throughout this document would be similar to those that would occur in this alternative.

The No Annexation, Redevelopment Alternative would result in similar environmental impacts compared to the proposed project; however, it would not meet the project objectives to the same extent as the proposed project and would not meet the project objective related to annexation of the San José parcel.

Environmentally Superior Alternative
The CEQA Guidelines state that an EIR shall identify an environmentally superior alternative. Based on the discussion of project alternatives, the environmentally superior alternative to the project is the No Project, No Redevelopment Alternative because it would avoid all of the project’s environmental impacts. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) states that “[i]f the environmentally superior alternative is the “no project” alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.”
21 CEQA, however, does not require an agency to consider an environmentally superior alternative when approving a project if mitigation measures will substantially reduce the project’s environmental impacts. (Laurel Heights Improvement Ass’n v Regents of Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 402; see also Laurel Hills Homeowners Ass’n v City Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515.) Because all potentially significant effects of the proposed project will be mitigated to less than significant with incorporation of mitigation measures, the City is not required to make findings that the environmentally superior alternative is infeasible. (Mira Mar Mobile Community v City of Oceanside (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 477.)
Among the other alternatives, the Redistributed Housing Units Alternative would be an environmentally superior alternative because on an individual unit basis, both construction and operation of 16 apartments within the same footprint as the proposed apartment building, would have slightly reduced impacts when compared to construction and operation of 16 townhomes, however these reduced impacts would not be material and all project impacts are already less than significant with application of mitigation measures. The Redistributed Housing Units Alternative would also reduce exposure of future residents adjacent to the northern site boundary to noise and vibration from train pass-bys. These impacts of the environment on the project, however, are not considered impacts under CEQA. The Redistributed Housing Units Alternative, as described above, would not reduce impacts in a material way sufficient to justify the alternative’s failure to fully implement the project objectives and would also increase construction costs compared to the construction of town home development, and therefore the City rejects the Environmentally Superior Alternative. -
Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real EIR Page 1 of 5
Rev. 1/9/2024
RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,

CALIFORNIA APPROVING AND CERTIFYING A FINAL

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, MAKING FINDINGS

WITH RESPECT THERETO, AND ADOPTING THE MITIGATION

MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE

UNIVERSITY STATION RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT
451 EL CAMINO REAL, SANTA CLARA
PLN24-00279 (Architectural Review)
PLN24-00314 (Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map)
PLN24-00604 (Annexation)
PLN24-00603 (General Plan Pre-designation and Prezoning) Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2025050963)
WHEREAS, on June 3, 2024, Bixby Land Company (“Applicant”) filed a development application for the 10.96-acre site located at 451 El Camino Real (APN: 230-09-020 and 230- 09-021) in the Santa Clara Station Focus Area, which is developed with two retail buildings, commercial services, four research and development buildings and a three-story hotel (“Project Site”);
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes the detachment of the 0.94-acre parcel (APN: 230-09-021) from the City of San Jose and its annexation to the City of Santa Clara; a General Plan predesignation of the 0.94-acre parcel as Regional Mixed-Use; a prezoning of the 0.94-acre parcel as Mixed-Use Regional Commercial (MU-RC); and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map application to allow the construction of a 297-unit apartment building and 111 townhouses with associated on- and off-site improvements (“Project”); as shown on the Development Plans and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map;
WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City circulated copies of the DEIR to the public agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, as well as to other interested persons and agencies, and the City sought the comments of such persons and agencies for forty-five (45) days, beginning on April 10, 2026, and concluding on May 25, 2026 (“Comment Period”); Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real EIR Page 2 of 5
Rev. 1/9/2024
WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”), attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has been prepared for implementation with Project development to reduce potentially significant impacts identified in the DEIR to less than significant;
WHEREAS, the City prepared written responses to the comments received during the Comment Period and included these responses in a Final Environmental Impact Report. The FEIR consists of: a list of agencies and organizations to whom the DEIR was sent, a list of the comment letters received on the DEIR, responses to comments received on the DEIR, and copies of comment letters. The FEIR was distributed on August 7, 2026, in accordance with CEQA;
WHEREAS, the EIR identified certain 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, whenever possible, to adopt all feasible mitigation measures or feasible project alternatives that satisfy project objectives and that can substantially lessen or avoid any significant environmental effects of the Project; 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 adopted or rejected as infeasible;
WHEREAS, the “CEQA Findings” attached to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference is a set of Findings of Fact prepared in order to satisfy the requirements of Public Resources Code § 21081 (a) and CEQA Guidelines § 15901(a); Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real EIR Page 3 of 5
Rev. 1/9/2024
WHEREAS, as the CEQA Findings explain, the City Council, reflecting the advice of City staff and input from various state and local agencies, has expressed its intention to adopt the proposed Project as described;
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the alternatives addressed in the EIR would not be feasible and would not sufficiently satisfy the Project Objectives, and CEQA does not require a lead agency to consider an environmentally superior alternative when approving a project if mitigation measures will substantially reduce the project’s environmental impacts. The details supporting these determinations are set forth in the CEQA Findings; WHEREAS, all of the significant and potentially significant environmental effects associated with the Project, as approved, can either be substantially lessened or avoided through the inclusion of mitigation measures proposed in the EIR;
WHEREAS, the City Council, in reviewing this Project, intends to adopt all Mitigation Measures set forth in the EIR and MMRP;
WHEREAS, on August 5, 2026, a notice of the public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, for the City Council Hearing to be conducted on September 22, 2026;
WHEREAS, on August 5, 2026, the notice of public hearing for the September 22, 2026, City Council meeting for this item was mailed to 524 property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the Project Site boundaries;
WHEREAS, pursuant to SCCC Section 18.146.020, on August 5, 2026, notices of the public hearing of September 22, 2026, were posted at three public places, and on the City’s website; WHEREAS, on August 26 and September 2, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the EIR, CEQA Findings, MMRP and Project, at the conclusion of which, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council certify and approve the EIR, adopt the CEQA Findings, and adopt the MMRP; and Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real EIR Page 4 of 5
Rev. 1/9/2024
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2026, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Project, EIR, CEQA Findings, MMRP, 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 favor of and in opposition to the Project.

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 that the EIR reflects the Council’s independent judgment and analysis.

5. 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.

6. That the City Council hereby finds that because all of the environmental impacts have been mitigated to a less than significant level, there is no obligation to adopt one of the Project Alternatives set forth in the EIR.

7. That, in order to comply with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council hereby adopts the CEQA Findings and 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 Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real EIR Page 5 of 5
Rev. 1/9/2024
other responsible parties comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified. The MMRP identifies, for each mitigation measure, the party responsible for implementation.

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

9. Pursuant to 14 Cal. Code of Regs. Section 15091(e), the City Council hereby designates the Director of Planning and Inspection as the Custodian of Records for the Project, and the Planning and Inspection Division at City Hall, 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, California, is the location of the documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based.

10. 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 22
nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 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. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)

3. Response to FEIR Comments After the Close of the FEIR Review Period Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real General Plan Amendment Page 1 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024
RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION OF THE CITY OF SANTA
CLARA, CALIFORNIA FOR AN ANNEXATION OF THE 0.94-
ACRE PARCEL IN THE CITY OF SAN JOSE WITH APN 230-09-
021
PLN24-00279 (Architectural Review)
PLN24-00314 (Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map)
PLN24-00604 (Annexation)
PLN24-00603 (General Plan Pre-designation and Prezoning) Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2025050963)
WHEREAS, on June 3, 2024, Bixby Land Company (“Applicant”) filed a development application for the 10.96-acre site located at 451 El Camino Real (APN: 230-09-020 and 230-09-021) in the Santa Clara Station Focus Area, which is developed with two retail buildings, commercial services, four research and development buildings and a three-story hotel (“Project Site”); WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes the detachment of the 0.94-acre parcel (APN: 230-09-021) from the City of San Jose (APN: 230-09-021) and its annexation to the City of Santa Clara; a General Plan pre-designation of the 0.94-acre parcel as Regional Mixed-Use; a prezoning of the

0.94-acre parcel as Mixed-Use Regional Commercial (MU-RC); and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map application to allow the construction of a 297-unit apartment building and 111 townhouses with associated on- and off-site improvements (“Project”); as shown on the Development Plans and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; WHEREAS, annexations are governed by the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, which gives Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCOs) authority over governmental boundary changes;
WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City circulated copies of the DEIR to the public agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, as well as to other interested persons and agencies, and the City sought the comments of such persons and agencies for forty-five (45) days, beginning on April 10, 2026 and concluding on May 25, 2026 (“Comment Period”); Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real General Plan Amendment Page 2 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024
WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) has been prepared for implementation with Project development to reduce potentially significant impacts identified in the DEIR to less than significant;
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at the conclusion of which, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval and certification of the EIR, made the CEQA Findings, adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, approve a General Plan Pre-designation, approve a Prezoning and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map;
WHEREAS, on August 5, 2026, a notice of the public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, for the City Council Hearing to be conducted on September 22, 2026;
WHEREAS, on August 5, 2026, the notice of public hearing for the September 22, 2026, City Council meeting for this item was mailed to 524 property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the Project Site boundaries;
WHEREAS, pursuant to SCCC Section 18.146.020, on August 5, 2026, notices of the public hearing of September 22, 2026, were posted at three public places, and on the City’s website; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2026, the City Council held the public hearing to consider the Project, EIR, CEQA Findings, MMRP, 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 favor of and in opposition to the Project.

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 proposed boundary change is a “reorganization” under the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real General Plan Amendment Page 3 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024
2000 because it consists of two related changes of organization: (a) detachment of the affected territory from the City of San Jose and (b) concurrent annexation of that territory to the City of Santa Clara.

3. That the City Council hereby finds that the affected territory consists of approximately 0.94 acre currently located within the City of San Jose, as more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit A and depicted on the map attached as Exhibit B.

4. That the City Council hereby finds that the proposed reorganization would place the affected territory and the remainder of the proposed University Station development within a single municipal jurisdiction, establish a more logical municipal boundary, facilitate coordinated land-use regulation and development of the property, and allow municipal facilities and services to be provided to the entire development in a coordinated and efficient manner.

5. That the City Council hereby finds that the affected territory is contiguous to the existing boundaries of the City of Santa Clara. The proposed detachment and annexation would transfer the territory directly from San Jose to Santa Clara without creating an intervening unincorporated area.

6. That the City Council hereby finds that the proposed annexation would not adversely affect the delivery of services to the subject parcel and that the City can feasibly provide the municipal services to the affected parcel.

7. That the City Council hereby finds that the annexation would not adversely affect the delivery of necessary services to other properties in the City of Santa Clara.

8. That the City Council hereby finds that the proposed development and concurrent proposed land use pre-designation are consistent with Santa Clara’s General Plan, and the property is concurrently being prezoned as required by Government Code section 56375(a)(7), and therefore the Project would not enable development or land uses incompatible with other properties in the area.

Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real General Plan Amendment Page 4 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024

9. That the City Council hereby finds that the reorganization will promote logical boundaries, efficient service delivery, and orderly development and will not impair San José’s ability to serve its remaining territory.

10. That based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed annexation is in the public interest and the Council supports the annexation of the 0.94-acre parcel (APN:
230-09-021) into the City of Santa Clara.

11. That the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to submit to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) of Santa Clara County applications for annexation and detachment of the 0.94-acre parcel (APN: 230-09-021) and for a corresponding amendment to the spheres of influence of the affected cities, and to execute all documentation necessary and take all steps necessary to complete the annexation of the subject parcel.

12. That the City Council hereby directs that upon LAFCO’s recordation of a Certificate of Completion, which is the effective date of annexation of the 0.94-acre parcel (APN: 230-09-021), the City of Santa Clara’s pre-zoning classification and pre-designation classifications shall become effective on the subject parcel and the City of Santa Clara’s zoning map shall be revised accordingly.
//
//
//
//
//
Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real General Plan Amendment Page 5 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024

13. 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, A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE 22nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 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. Legal description

2. Annexation Plat Map
Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real General Plan Amendment Page 1 of 4 Rev. 1/9/2024
RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,

CALIFORNIA TO APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
TO PRE-DESIGNATE THE 0.94-ACRE PARCEL IN THE CITY

OF SAN JOSE AS REGIONAL MIXED-USE FOR THE
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT APN 230-
09-021
PLN24-00279 (Architectural Review)
PLN24-00314 (Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map)
PLN24-00604 (Annexation)
PLN24-00603 (General Plan Pre-designation and Prezoning) Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2025050963)
WHEREAS, on June 3, 2024, Bixby Land Company (“Applicant”) filed a development application for the 10.96-acre site located at 451 El Camino Real (APN: 230-09-020 and 230- 09-021) in the Santa Clara Station Focus Area, which is developed with two retail buildings, commercial services, four research and development buildings and a three-story hotel (“Project Site”);
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes the detachment of the 0.94-acre parcel (APN: 230-09-021) from the City of San Jose and its annexation to the City of Santa Clara; a General Plan predesignation of the 0.94-acre parcel as Regional Mixed-Use; a prezoning of the 0.94-acre parcel as Mixed-Use Regional Commercial (MU-RC); and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map application to allow the construction of a 297-unit apartment building and 111 townhouses with associated on- and off-site improvements (“Project”); as shown on the Development Plans and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map;
WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City circulated copies of the DEIR to the public agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, as well as to other interested persons and agencies, and the City sought the comments of such persons and agencies for forty-five (45) days, beginning on April 10, 2026 and concluding on May 25, 2026 (“Comment Period”); WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) has been prepared for Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real General Plan Amendment Page 2 of 4 Rev. 1/9/2024
implementation with Project development to reduce potentially significant impacts identified in the DEIR to less than significant;
WHEREAS, on August 26 and September 2, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at the conclusion of which, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the Council approve and certify the EIR, make the CEQA Findings, adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, approve a General Plan Pre-designation, approve a Prezoning, and approve a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; WHEREAS, on August 5, 2026, a notice of the public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, for the City Council Hearing to be conducted on September 22, 2026;
WHEREAS, on August 5, 2026, the notice of public hearing for the September 22, 2026, City Council meeting for this item was mailed to 524 property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the Project Site boundaries;
WHEREAS, pursuant to SCCC Section 18.146.020, on August 5, 2026, notices of the public hearing of September 22, 2026, were posted at three public places, and on the City’s website; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2026, the City Council held the public hearing to consider the Project, EIR, CEQA Findings, MMRP, 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 favor of and in opposition to the Project.

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 finds and determines that the General Plan Amendment is in the interest of the public good for the following reasons:

Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real General Plan Amendment Page 3 of 4 Rev. 1/9/2024
A. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest, in that the project provides additional 13 townhomes on the 0.94-care parcel in an urbanized area served by existing municipal services and invests in public services and infrastructure with on- and offsite improvements; 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 Site is located in the Santa Clara Station Focus Area and is in close proximity to existing and planned transit facilities at the Santa Clara Transit Center and future Bay Area Rapid Transit Station and terminus along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor. The Project aligns with the goals and policies of the Santa Clara Station Focus Area in that the Project is an integrated mixed-use development that combines high density housing, commercial uses, park and open space to promote pedestrian, bicycle and transit use and maximize local and regional transit investments in bus rail service. The Project provides market rate and affordable housing units, contributes to the City’s housing stock, and lessens the jobs/housing imbalance in support of General Plan land use goals and policies. The Project is consistent and compatible with existing uses along El Camino Real, such as the office, university, hotel, retail, and future development of the Santa Clara Station Area as envisioned in the General Plan; 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 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; and Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real General Plan Amendment Page 4 of 4 Rev. 1/9/2024
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 has been prepared for implementation with Project development to reduce potentially significant impacts identified in the EIR to less than significant levels and a set of CEQA Findings have been prepared.

3. That the City Council, pursuant to Government Code § 65353, hereby amends the General Plan by pre-designating the 0.94-acre parcel in the City of San José as Regional Mixed-Use to allow the construction of 13 for-sale townhouse units.

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 22
nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 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. None
Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real Rezone Page 1 of 3
Rev. 1/9/2024
RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,
CALIFORNIA TO APPROVE A PREZONE OF THE 0.94-ACRE

PARCEL IN THE CITY OF SAN JOSE AS MIXED-USE

REGIONAL COMMERICAL (MU-RC) FOR THE PROPOSED
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT APN 230-09-021
PLN24-00279 (Architectural Review)
PLN24-00314 (Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map)
PLN24-00604 (Annexation)
PLN24-00603 (General Plan Pre-designation and Prezoning) Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2025050963)
WHEREAS, on June 3, 2024, Bixby Land Company (“Applicant”) filed a development application for the 10.96-acre site located at 451 El Camino Real (APN: 230-09-020 and 230- 09-021) in the Santa Clara Station Focus Area, which is developed with two retail buildings, commercial services, four research and development buildings and a three-story hotel (“Project Site”);
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes the detachment of the 0.94-acre parcel (APN: 230-09-021) from the City of San Jose (APN: 230-09-021) and its annexation to the City of Santa Clara; a General Plan pre-designation of the 0.94-acre parcel as Regional Mixed-Use; a prezoning of the

0.94-acre parcel as Mixed-Use Regional Commercial (MU-RC); and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map application to allow the construction of a 297-unit apartment building and 111 townhouses with associated on- and off-site improvements (“Project”); as shown on the Development Plans and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City circulated copies of the DEIR to the public agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, as well as to other interested persons and agencies, and the City sought the comments of such persons and agencies for forty-five (45) days, beginning on April 10, 2026 and concluding on May 25, 2026 (“Comment Period”); WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) has been prepared for Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real Rezone Page 2 of 3
Rev. 1/9/2024
implementation with Project development to reduce potentially significant impacts identified in the DEIR to less than significant;
WHEREAS, on August 26 and September 2, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at the conclusion of which, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council approve and certify the EIR, make the CEQA Findings, adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, approve a General Plan Pre-designation, approve a Prezoning, and approve a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; WHEREAS, on August 5, 2026, a notice of the public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, for the City Council Hearing to be conducted on September 22, 2026;
WHEREAS, on August 5, 2026, the notice of public hearing for the September 22, 2026, City Council meeting for this item was mailed to 524 property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the Project Site boundaries;
WHEREAS, pursuant to SCCC Section 18.146.020, on August 5, 2026, notices of the public hearing of September 22, 2026, were posted at three public places, and on the City’s website; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2026, the City Council held the public hearing to consider the Project, EIR, CEQA Findings, MMRP, 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 favor of and in opposition to the Project.

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 prezones the 0.94-acre parcel in the City of San Jose as Mixed-Use Regional Commercial (MU-RC) to allow the construction of 13 townhouse units with Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real Rezone Page 3 of 3
Rev. 1/9/2024
associated on- and off-site improvements, as shown on the attached Development Plans, incorporated herein by this reference.

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

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

AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE 22
nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 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. None
Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Page 1 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024
RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,

CALIFORNIA TO APPROVE A VESTING TENTATIVE

SUBDIVISION MAP FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES FOR
THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL PROJECT LOCATED AT 451

EL CAMINO REAL, SANTA CLARA
PLN24-00279 (Architectural Review)
PLN24-00314 (Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map)
PLN24-00604 (Annexation)
PLN24-00603 (General Plan Pre-designation and Prezoning) Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2025050963)
WHEREAS, on June 3, 2024, Bixby Land Company (“Applicant”) filed a development application for the 10.96-acre site located at 451 El Camino Real (APN: 230-09-020 and 230- 09-021) in the Santa Clara Station Focus Area, which is developed with two retail buildings, commercial services, four research and development buildings and a three-story hotel (“Project Site”);
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes the detachment of the 0.94-acre parcel (APN: 230-09-021) from the City of San Jose and its annexation to the City of Santa Clara; a General Plan predesignation of the 0.94-acre parcel as Regional Mixed-Use; a prezoning of the 0.94-acre parcel as Mixed-Use Regional Commercial (MU-RC); and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map application to allow the construction of a 297-unit apartment building and 111 townhouses with associated on- and off-site improvements (“Project”); as shown on the Development Plans and the attached Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, incorporated herein by this reference; WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City circulated copies of the DEIR to the public agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, as well as to other interested persons and agencies, and the City sought the comments of such persons and agencies for forty-five (45) days, beginning on April 10, 2026 and concluding on May 25, 2026 (“Comment Period”); WHEREAS, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) has been prepared for Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Page 2 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024
implementation with Project development to reduce potentially significant impacts identified in the DEIR to less than significant;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 17.05.210 of the Code of the City of Santa Clara (“SCCC”), a Tentative Subdivision Map shall be required for all divisions of land into five or more parcels; WHEREAS, consistent with the proposed uses under the development plan, the proposal includes the division of the site for condominium purposes, as shown on the proposed Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; WHEREAS, on August 26 and September 2, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, at the conclusion of which, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council approve and certify the EIR, make the CEQA Findings, adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, approve a General Plan Pre-designation, approve a Prezoning, and approve a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; WHEREAS, on August 5, 2026, a notice of the public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment was published in the Santa Clara Weekly, for the City Council Hearing to be conducted on September 22, 2026;
WHEREAS, on August 5, 2026, the notice of public hearing for the September 22, 2026, City Council meeting for this item was mailed to 524 property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the Project Site boundaries;
WHEREAS, pursuant to SCCC Section 18.146.020, on August 5, 2026, notices of the public hearing of September 22, 2026, were posted at three public places, and on the City’s website; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2026, the City Council held the public hearing to consider the Project, EIR, CEQA Findings, MMRP, 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 favor of and in opposition to the Project.

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

Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Page 3 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024

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. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Findings. Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 66426 and 66428 and SCCC Section 17.05.300(h), the City Council finds and determines that:

A. The Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land use and programs specified in the City’s General Plan in that the proposed Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map is to subdivide the parcel for condominium purposes to accommodate the residential development with 297-unit apartment building and 111 townhouses with associated on- and off-site improvements.

B. The design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the City’s General Plan in that the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map would facilitate development of housing stock and construction of rental and ownership housing opportunities for the community; and furthermore redevelop an underutilized property (Policy 5.3.1-P8), provide adequate landscaping and replace trees at a 2:1 ratio (Policy 5.3.1-P10), include sidewalks (Policy 5.3.1-P16), and provide a design that is compatible with and sensitive to neighboring residential development (Policy 5.3.1-P29).

C. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development in that the Project is designed to provide high-quality housing consistent with existing and planned development in the surrounding area.

D. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development in that the Project is in an urbanized area and is designed to provide high-quality housing consistent with existing and planned development in the surrounding area, and the density of the proposed project (37.2 du/ac) is within the allowable density of the Regional Mixed Use (Santa Clara Station) General Plan designation (37-50 du/ac).

Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Page 4 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024
E. The design of the subdivision and type of improvements are not likely to cause serious health problems in that a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared for implementation with Project development to reduce all potentially significant impacts identified in the EIR to less than significant levels, and the Planning Commission has recommended that the City Council adopt these documents.

F. The design of the subdivision and type of improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and will not substantially or unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat in that the Project Site is located in an urbanized setting, on a previously developed site, and includes mitigation measures, as identified in the Draft EIR and MMRP, that reduce impacts to wildlife and their habitat to less than significant levels.

G. The design of the subdivision and type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large or use of property within the proposed subdivision in that, the Project is designed to avoid encroachments and conflicts with public easements in the site design.

H. The Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities, in that the project will adhere to CALGreen energy efficiency measures to conserve energy through building design and site planning.

3. Based on the findings set forth in this Resolution and the evidence in the Staff Report, EIR and such other evidence as received at the public hearings on this matter before the City Council, the City Council hereby approves the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to the City Council, substantially in the form on file as shown on the attached Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map and Conditions of Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Approval, hereby incorporated by this reference.

4. Effective date – Santa Clara Parcel. With respect to APN 230-09-020, located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Santa Clara, this resolution shall become effective immediately.

Resolution/ 451 El Camino Real Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Page 5 of 5 Rev. 1/9/2024

5. Effective date – San Jose Parcel. With respect ton APN 230-09-021, located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of San Jose, this resolution is contingent upon the Santa Clara LAFCO’s approval of the detachment of the parcel from the City of San Jose and the annexation of the parcel to the City of Santa Clara, and shall not go into effect unless and until such annexation is finalized.

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 22
nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 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. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map

2. Conditions of Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Approval Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026
Conditions of Approval: Subdivision
PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real
A Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN24-00314) for the residential development of 408 units at 451 El Camino Real, Subject to Senate Bill (SB) 330 (2019)

GENERAL / PERFORMANCE
G1. Subdivision Expiration. This subdivision shall automatically be revoked and terminated if not used within two years of original grant or within the period of any authorized extensions thereof. The date of granting of this subdivision is the date this subdivision is approved by the decision-making body and the appeal period has been exhausted. The expiration date is September 22, 2028.

G2. Conformance with Plans. The lot design on the subdivision map shall be designed in substantial conformance with the subdivision map, as approved by the decision-making body.

G3. Compliance with Architectural Review Conditions. The project shall comply with the final Development Plans and Conditions of Approval associated Architectural Review Approval (PLN24-00279).

G4. Conditions on Plans. All conditions of approval for this subdivision shall be reprinted and included within the first three sheets of the subdivision map sets submitted for review and approval. At all times these conditions of approval shall be on all grading and construction plans kept on the project site.

G5. Necessary Relocation of Public Facility. If relocation of an existing public facility becomes necessary due to a conflict with the owner or designee’s new improvements, then the cost of said relocation shall be borne by the owner.

G6. Indemnify and Hold Harmless. The owner or designee agrees to defend and indemnify and hold City, its officers, agents, employees, officials and representatives free and harmless from and against any and all claims, losses, damages, attorney’s fees, injuries, costs, and liabilities from any suit for damages or for equitable or injunctive relief which is filed by a third party against the City by reason of its approval of owner or designee’s project.

G7. Code Compliance. The construction permit application drawings submitted to the Santa Clara Building Division shall include an overall California Building Code analysis; proposed use and occupancy of all spaces (CBC Ch. 3), all building heights and areas (CBC Ch. 5), all proposed types of construction (CBC Ch. 6), all proposed fire and smoke protection features, including all types of all fire rated penetrations proposed (CBC Ch. 7), all proposed interior finishes fire resistance (CBC Ch. 8), all fire protection systems proposed (CBC Ch. 9), and all means of egress proposed (CBC Ch. 10). Noncombustible exterior wall, floor, and roof finishes are strongly encouraged.

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 2
a. During construction retaining a single company to install all fire related penetrations is highly recommended.
b. The grade level lobbies shall be minimum 1-hour rated all sides and above. c. All stair shafts shall be minimum 1-hour rated.
d. All elevator shafts shall be minimum 1-hour rated.
e. All trash chute shafts shall be minimum 1-hour rated. f. Recommendation: provide minimum two trash chutes; one for recyclables, one for trash, each trash chute to be routed down to a grade level trash collection room.
g. Any trash rooms shall be minimum 1-hour rated all sides and above.

G8. Building Codes as Amended. See Title 15 of the Santa Clara City Code for any amendments to the California Building Codes.

G9. Reach Codes. This project is subject to the provisions of the City of Santa Clara 2022 Reach Code, effective January 2022. See Ordinance No. 2034 and/or Title 15 of the Santa Clara City Code.
a. Chapter 15.36 – Energy Code for “all electric” provisions for new construction.
b. Chapter 15.38 – Green Building Code for additional Electric Vehicle Charging requirements for new construction.

G10. Code Compliance. Comply with all applicable codes, regulations, ordinances and resolutions.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION

PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF FINAL MAP
P1. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions. Submit Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R) for Planning Review.

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS
P2. Landscaping Installation & Maintenance. The owner or designee shall ensure that the landscaping installed and accepted with this project shall be maintained on the site as per the approved plans. Any alteration or modification to the landscaping shall not be permitted unless otherwise approved by the Director of Community Development.

P3. Landscape Water Conservation. The owner or designee shall ensure that landscaping installation meets City water conservation criteria in a manner acceptable to the Director of Community Development.

P4. Landscaping. The owner or designee shall maintain the front yard landscaping between the house and sidewalk. New landscape areas of 500 square feet or more or rehabilitated landscape of 2,500 square feet or more shall conform to the California Department of Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 3

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - BUILDING DIVISION
DESIGN / PERFORMANCE – PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE BD1. Addressing. Prior to overall construction permit application, submit to the Santa Clara Building Division, 2 copies of an addressing diagram request, to be prepared by a licensed architect or engineer. The addressing diagram(s) shall include all proposed streets and all building floor plans. The addressing diagram(s) shall conform to Santa Clara City Manager Directive #5; Street Name and Building Number Changes, and Santa Clara Building Division Address Policy For Residential and Commercial Developments. The addressing diagram(s) shall indicate all unit numbers to be based off established streets, not alleys nor accessways to garages. Allow a minimum of 10 working days for initial staff review. Please note city staff policy that existing site addresses typically are retired. Provide digital pdf printed from design software, not scanned from printed paper sheet. a. Any building or structure that is demolished shall have its address retired and a new address/s shall be issued for the project.

BD2. Flood Zone. The construction permit application drawings submitted to the Santa Clara Building Division shall include a copy of the latest Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Zone Map: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home.

The project drawings shall indicate how the project complies with the Santa Clara Flood Damage Prevention Code.
a. FEMA Flood Zone map designations and requirements are based on the map in effect at date of Building Permit issuance.

BD3. Water Pollution Control. The construction permit application drawings submitted to the Santa Clara Building Division shall include Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program Low Impact Development (LID) practices http://www.scvurppp-w2k.com/nd_wp.shtml. All projects that disturb more than one acre, or projects that are part of a larger development that in total disturbs more than one acre, shall comply with the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program Best Management Practices (BMP):
http://www.scvurppp-w2k.com/construction_bmp.shtml, and shall provide a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). All site drainage and grading permit applications submitted to the Santa Clara Building Division shall include a city of Santa Clara "C3" data form, available on this web page:
 https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/departments-g-z/publicworks/environmental-programs/stormwater-pollution-prevention and will be routed to a contract consultant for review.

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 4
DURING CONSTRUCTION – PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY
BD4. Exterior walls: The wall rating, opening protections and projection of the existing and new structures shall comply with the requirement of Building Codes based on the fire separation distance measured from the building’s exterior to new lot lines.

BD5. Access and circulation: each new parcel created by the subdivision shall have legal access to a public way, either directly or through a recorded easement.

BD6. Underground utility: all existing and proposed utility shall not cross the new lot lines

FIRE DEPARTMENT
DESIGN / PERFORMANCE—PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE
F1. Prior to any Building Department Issuance, all fire department apparatus access roadways on private property are required to “be recorded” with the County of Santa Clara as Emergency Vehicle Access Easements (EVAE’s) and reviewed by the Fire Department. No other instruments will be considered as substitutions such as P.U.E, Ingress/Egress easements and/or City Right-of-Ways.

DURING CONSTRUCTION – PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY
F2. Shared Fire Protection Features that Cross Property Lines. Prior to Building Permit Final, any EVAEs or fire protection equipment (including but not limited to fire service undergrounds, sprinkler piping, fire alarm equipment, fire pumps, ERRCS) that cross property lines or is not located on the parcel of the building it serves shall have a CC&R legally recorded detailing who is responsible for maintenance and repair of the EVAE or fire protection equipment.

PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT
DESIGN / PERFORMANCE—PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE
PR1. For residential projects, park in-lieu fees imposed pursuant to City Code Chapter

17.35 and the Quimby Act, shall be due and payable to the City prior to issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit. Final calculations shall be based on the actual number and type of units, as well as the mix of eligible private recreational amenities, dedicated parkland, and any remaining fee due, as determined at the City's discretion.

PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP
PR2. Provide a covenant, such as the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R’s), to the City Attorney for review and approval, ensuring the ongoing maintenance of private recreational amenity spaces for which parkland dedication credit is received. The covenant shall be submitted to the City Attorney prior to approval of the final subdivision map, and once approved, shall be recorded concurrently with the final map.

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 5

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - ENGINEERING
DESIGN—PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE
E1. Site Clearance. Obtain site clearance through Public Works Department prior to issuance of Building Permit. Site clearance will require payment of applicable development fees. Other requirements may be identified for compliance during the site clearance process. Contact Public Works Department at (408) 615-3000 for further information.

E2. Subdivision Map. After City Council approval of the Tentative Map, submit the Subdivision Map, prepared by a Licensed Land Surveyor or a Registered Civil Engineer with Land Surveyor privileges to the Engineering Department. The submittal shall include a title report, closure calculations, and all appropriate fees.

E3. Easement. Obtain Council approval of a resolution ordering vacation of existing public easement(s) proposed to be abandoned, if any, through Public Works Department, and pay all appropriate fees, prior to start of construction.

DURING CONSTRUCTION
E4. Encroachment Permit. All work within the public right-of-way and/or public easement, which is to be performed by the Developer/Owner, the general contractor, and all subcontractors shall be submitted within a Single Encroachment Permit to be reviewed and issued by the City Public Works Department. Issuance of the Encroachment Permit and payment of all appropriate fees shall be completed prior to commencement of work, and all work under the permit shall be completed prior to issuance of occupancy permit.

E5. Encroachment Permit. Submit public improvement/encroachment permit plans prepared in accordance with City Public Works Department procedures which provide for the installation of public improvements directly to the Public Works Department. Plans shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to approval and recordation of final map and/or issuance of building permits.

E6. Encroachment Permit. Existing non-standard or non-ADA compliant frontage improvements shall be replaced with current City standard frontage improvements as directed by the City Engineer or his designee.

E7. Encroachment Permit. All work within Santa Clara County right-of-way shall require a Santa Clara County encroachment permit.

E8. Encroachment Permit. Damaged curb, gutter, and sidewalk within the public right-of-way along property’s frontage shall be repaired or replaced (to the nearest score mark) in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer or his designee. The extents of said repair or replacement within the property frontage shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer or his designee.

E9. Encroachment Permit. Existing streetlights shall be clear of proposed sidewalk, developer shall relocate as necessary.

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 6
E10. Easement. Dedicate required on-site easements for any new public utilities, and/or emergency vehicle access by means of subdivision map or approved instrument at time of development.

E11. Easement. Dedicate sidewalk easements along the project frontage where public sidewalks extend into private property. Sidewalk easements are to be 1’ behind proposed back of walk where there is landscaping behind sidewalk. Sidewalk easement where hardscape is behind sidewalk is to be at back-of-walk. Cold joint is required between public sidewalk and private hardscape.

E12. Agreement. If requested, owner or designee shall prepare and submit for City approval a maintenance plan for all sidewalk, curb and gutter, landscaping and irrigation system improvements installed within the public right-of-way prior to encroachment permit issuance. Such plan shall include at a minimum, maintenance requirements for trees and shrubs, in acknowledgement of developer’s/property owner’s obligation under Chapter 12.30 and 17.15.

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - STORMWATER
DESIGN / PERFORMANCE—PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE
ST1. Final Stormwater Management Plan. Prior to City’s issuance of Building or Grading Permits, the applicant shall develop a Final Stormwater Management Plan, update the C.3 Data Form, the Special Project Narratives and Worksheet (as appropriate), and an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.

ST2. 3
rd Party Review of Final Stormwater Management Plan. The Final Stormwater Management Plan and all associated calculations shall be reviewed and certified by a qualified 3rd party consultant from the SCVURPPP List of Qualified Consultants, and a 3rd party review letter (on design) shall be submitted with the Plan.

ST3. Notice of Intent. For project that disturbs a land area of one acre or more, the applicant shall provide a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) with WDID number for coverage under the State Construction General Permit. Active projects with NOI will be inspected by the City once per month during the wet season (October – April).

ST4. Best Management Practices. The applicant shall incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) into construction plans and incorporate post-construction water runoff measures into project plans. Include the SCVURPPP Countywide Construction BMPs Plan Sheet with the plans. Applicant to add Source control measures with designations from C.3 stormwater handbook, Appendix H.

ST5. C.3 Treatment Facilities Construction Notes. Include the C.3 Treatment Facilities Construction Notes on the Improvement Plans and/or Stormwater Control Plans.

ST6. Decorative & Recreational Water Features. Decorative and recreational water features such as fountains, pools, and ponds shall be designed and constructed to drain to the sanitary sewer system only.

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 7
ST7. Small Projects. For single-family homes and other small projects that create and/or replace 2,500 – 10,000 square feet of impervious surface area, the applicant shall implement at least one of the following site design measures:
a. Direction of roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels b. Direction of roof, sidewalk, walkway, patio, driveway, or parking lot runoff onto vegetated areas
c. Construction of sidewalks, walkways, patios, bike lanes, driveways, and parking lots with permeable surfaces
Plans shall specify which site design measures are selected for the project and show the direction of flow from impervious surfaces to the selected site design measures. All measures shall meet the design criteria in the 2016 C.3. Stormwater Handbook, Appendix K: Standard Specifications for Lot-Scale Measures for Small Projects.

ST8. Interior Floor Drains. Interior floor drains shall be plumbed to the sanitary sewer system and not connected to the City’s storm drain system.

ST9. Trash Enclosure Floor Drains. Floor drains within trash enclosures shall be plumbed to the sanitary sewer system and not connected to the City’s storm drain system.

ST10. Architectural Copper. The use of architectural copper is prohibited.

DURING CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION
ST11. Biotreatment Soil Media. Applicant shall install biotreatment soil media that meets the minimum specifications as set forth in the SCVURPPP C.3 Stormwater Handbook. If percolation rate test of the biotreatment soil mix is not performed onsite, a certification letter from the supplier verifying that the soil meets the specified mix (the date of such document shall not be older than 3 months).

ST12. Stormwater Control Measure Inspection. At critical construction phases, all stormwater control measures shall be inspected for conformance to approved plans by a qualified 3rd party consultant from the SCVURPPP List of Qualified Consultants.

ST13. Inspections. Permeable Pavement, Media Filter vaults, and Trash Full Capture Devices shall be inspected by a 3rd party reviewer and/or manufacturer representative for conformance with the details and specifications of the approved plans. All new pervious concrete and porous asphalt pavements should have a minimum surface infiltration rate of 100 in./hr. as described in the SCVURPPP C.3 Handbook. A map displaying the number, location and details of full trash capture devices shall be prepared as an attachment to the Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement with the City.

ST14. Stormwater Treatment Facilities. Stormwater treatment facilities must be designed, installed, and maintained to achieve the site design measures throughout their life in accordance to the SCVRUPPP C.3 Stormwater Handbook (Chapter 6 and Appendix C).

ST15. Amendments to Operation & Maintenance Agreement. Any site design measures used to reduce the size of stormwater treatment measures shall not be installed for the project without the written approval from the City, installing the Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 8
corresponding resizing of other stormwater treatment measures and an amendment of the property’s O&M Agreement.

ST16. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Messaging. Developer shall install an appropriate stormwater pollution prevention message such as “No Dumping – Flows to Bay” on any storm drains located on private property.

ST17. Outdoor Storage Areas. All outdoor equipment and materials storage areas shall be covered and/or bermed or otherwise designed to limit the potential for runoff to contact pollutants.

PRIOR TO FINAL OF BUILDING PERMIT
ST18. As-Built Drawings. As-Built drawing shall be submitted to the Public Works Department.

ST19. 3
rd Party Concurrence Letter. 3rd Party concurrence letter on the C.3 facilities construction shall be submitted to the Public Works Department. The letter shall be prepared by a 3rd party consultant from the SCVURPPP List of Qualified Consultants. The City reserves the right to review the 3rd party inspection report on the C.3 stormwater facility installation.

ST20. Final C.3 Inspection. Applicant shall schedule and City shall conduct a final C.3 inspection.

ST21. Operation & Maintenance Agreement. The property owner shall enter into an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement with the City for all installed stormwater treatment measures and full trash capture devices in perpetuity.

Applicants should contact Public Works Dept. - Environmental Services at (408) 615-3080 or [email protected] for assistance completing the Agreement.

For more information and to download the most recent version of the O&M Agreement, visit the City’s stormwater resources website at http://santaclaraca.gov/stormwater. Inspection of permeable pavement, media filter vaults and full trash capture devices is to be done annually by December 31 of each year.

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - TRANSPORTATION
DURING CONSTRUCTION – PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY
TR1. Encroachment Permit. Design and construct 10-foot sidewalk with a five-foot landscape strip on El Camino Real.

STREETS DIVISION

RIGHT-OF-WAY LANDSCAPE
L1. Submit copy of complete landscape plans for review and comment by City staff.

Plans are to include a site plan showing location of all existing trees with 4” or larger diameter (measured 30” above ground) on development property and adjacent property if they may be impacted (include size and species), proposed trees (including location, size and species. Provide a table of trees removed and trees proposed – include sizing and species. For trees that are preserved, prepare a tree Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 9
protection plan for review and approval by the City prior to any demolition, grading or other earthwork in the vicinity of existing trees on the site.

L2. Include City of Santa Clara Tree Protection Standards and City of Santa Clara Arborist Notes on all improvement plans.

L3. No cutting of any part of public right-of-way trees, including roots, shall be done without securing approval from the City Streets Division. If approved, applicant shall follow all specifications outlined in the permit. Refer to City of Santa Clara Arborist Notes and implement all City of Santa Clara Tree Protection Standards.

L4. If removal of public right-of-way trees is approved by the City Streets Division, a 2:1 tree replacement ratio is required. If replacement ratio cannot be met, developer must pay city tree planting fees set by the Department of Public Works.

Minimum tree replacement size will be a 36-inch box for all tree plantings within the right-of-way. Street tree selection and spacing shall be reviewed and approved by the City Streets Division.

L5. All public right-of-way trees, existing and proposed, must maintain minimum of ten (10) feet from any existing or proposed Water Department facilities or five (5) feet with root barrier. Existing trees that conflict with utilities must be removed by developer at developer’s expense. Trees shall not be planted in water easements or public utility easements.

L6. Include City of Santa Clara Tree Protection Standards and City of Santa Clara Arborist Notes on all improvement plans.

L7. No cutting of any part of public right-of-way trees, including roots, shall be done without securing approval from the City Streets Division. If approved, applicant shall follow all specifications outlined in the permit. Refer to City of Santa Clara Arborist Notes and implement all City of Santa Clara Tree Protection Standards.

L8. Identified existing mature trees to be maintained. Prepare a tree protection plans for review and approval by the City of Santa Clara prior to any demolition, grading or other earthwork in the vicinity of existing trees on the site.

L9. Tree replacement ratio shall be 2:1 with minimum box size replacements. If project can’t meet the 2:1 replacement ratio, in-lieu fees must be paid prior to issuance of building permit.

SILICON VALLEY POWER
DESIGN / PERFORMANCE – PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT SVP1. Initial Information: Applicant shall provide a site plan showing all existing utilities, structures, easements, and trees. The applicant shall also include a detailed panel schedule showing all current and proposed electric loads.

SVP2.SVP Developers Work Drawing: Applicant shall have a developers work drawing created for the site by either an SVP estimator or through the applicant design process. All SVP standards and clearance requirements as defined in the General Section of the COA’s must be met, or variance approvals must be granted by SVP. The developers’ work drawing shall include but is not limited to:

SVP substructure for primary, low voltage, streetlight, and fiber facilities. SVP Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 10
facilities may extend off-site to the nearest utility connection point to tie-in with existing infrastructure as deemed necessary by SVP.

SVP3.Encroachment Permit: Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit an encroachment permit application with an approved SVP Developers Work Drawing for construction of electric utilities that comply with the latest edition of SVP Standards and Rules and Regulations, Electric Notes, and Electric Standard Details and Specifications
SVP4. Applicants Switchgear: All applicant main switchgear with SVP meters must meet EUSERC standards and be approved by SVP’s meter shop prior to ordering. Switchgear for 12KV gear must have batteries sized for 4 hours of operation, no capacitive tripping, and 2 sets of relays, CTs, & PTs for each main.

All double ended switchgear with a tie breaker, must include a kirk-key interlock scheme and an SVP provided warning label for the operation of the main tiebreaker.

SVP5. AMI/Fiber Building Requirements: All projects implementing high rise metering and multi-floor infrastructure requirements shall meet the requirements outlined in UG 0250 & FO1901.

DURING CONSTRUCTION – PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY
SVP6.Easements: Prior to the City’s issuance of Building or Grading Permits, the applicant shall provide a dedicated underground electric utility easement (U.G.E.E) around the electric onsite facilities (Not a P.U.E). The electric utility easement shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide around conduit and 5’ minimum around equipment and vault/manhole pads. Additionally, the applicant shall submit plans defining existing easements so Electric Division can verify if there are any conflicts with new proposed easements or improvements. The Applicant shall grant to the City, without cost, all easements and/or right of way necessary for serving the property of the Applicant and for the installation of utilities (Santa Clara City Code chapter 17.15.110).

SVP7. Coordination Study: For any services taken at 12KV, a coordination study will need to be conducted by the applicant prior to energizing the service.

SVP8. Applicants Switchgear: Applicants’ switchgear will be inspected on site by SVP to ensure compliance with approved switchgear drawings. Electric meters and main disconnects shall be installed per Silicon Valley Power Standard MS-G7, Rev. 2.

SVP9.Electric Facilities: Prior to the City's issuance of Occupancy, the applicant shall construct all electric utilities per the approved SVP Developers Work Drawing.

SVP will inspect all electric utility installations and all other improvements encroaching on electric facilities.

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 11
SVP10. Municipal Fee’s: Prior to electric service energization, all applicable fees per the City of Santa Clara’s Municipal Fee Schedule shall be paid by the applicant.

SVP11. Costs & Expenses: Unless expressly stated otherwise or covered by a fee to be paid by the applicant, applicant shall be responsible for all costs and expenses associated with fulfilling these conditions of approval.

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS
SVP12. Access: SVP will require 24-hour unobstructed access to all SVP equipment which includes: manholes, transformers, vaults, switches, meters, indoor electrical rooms with SVP owned equipment etc.

General
SVP13. Applicant Design Process: available to Applicants to expedite distribution electric substructure design.

SVP14. SVP Rules and Regulations: Applicant shall comply with all applicable SVP rules, regulations, standards, guidelines, and requirements, as may be amended from time to time.

SVP15. SVP Equipment Clearances:
a. Access Doors: Ten (10) foot minimum clearance in front of equipment access doors.
b. Pad Sides: Five (5) foot minimum clearance from pad on sides without access doors.
c. Truck Access: Eighteen (18) foot minimum width on one side of the equipment pad for truck access.
d. Barrier pipes: (on sides accessible to vehicles)
i. Thirty (30) inches from equipment sides.
ii. Forty-Eight (48) inches in front of access doors. (use removable bollards)
SVP16. SVP Conduit Clearances:
a. Longitudinal: Five (5) foot minimum between new conduits/piping and existing/proposed SVP conduits.
b. Vertical: Twelve (12) inch minimum between new conduit/pipes perpendicular to existing SVP conduits.
c. Poles/Posts: Three (3) foot six (6) inches clearance required from poles (electrolier, guy stub, service clearance, self-supporting steel, and light poles), except for riser conduits. This is reduced to a three (3) foot minimum for posts (signposts, barrier pipes, bollards, fence posts, and other similar posts).

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 12
d. Structures: Five (5) foot minimum is required from walls, footings, retaining walls, landscape planter, or similar permanent structures. e. Subsurface Facilities: Five (5) foot minimum from new splice boxes, pull boxes, manholes, vaults, or similar subsurface facilities. f. Fire Hydrant: Five (5) foot minimum from fire hydrant thrust block. (Extends 5 feet on either side of the hydrant in line with the radial water pipe connected to the hydrant).

SVP17. SVP Vault/Manhole Clearances:
a. Ten (10) foot minimum between adjacent Vaults or Manholes. b. Three (3) foot minimum from face of curb. (bollards required for vaults).

SVP18. SVP Guy Anchor Clearances: Five (5) foot minimum clearance is required between the center of anchor line and any excavation area.

SVP19. Tree Clearances:
a. Conduits: Five (5) foot minimum to tree root barrier or other subsurface wall or structure.
b. Equipment: Five (5) foot minimum to tree root barrier. The tree canopy drip line cannot be over the SVP equipment.
c. Subsurface Facilities: Five (5) foot minimum to any electric department facilities. Any existing trees in conflict will have to be removed. d. Easements: No trees shall be planted in SVP’s U.G.E.E or P.U.E’s.

SVP20. Transformer & Switch Placement: these devices and pads may only be located outdoors. Clearances to buildings are defined in UG1225. All projects are to assume mineral oil fluid, unless otherwise approved by SVP.

SVP21. SVP Standards. Applicant shall comply with the following SVP standards (as may be amended or supplemented).
a. UG1000 - Installation of Underground Substructures by Developers b. UG1250 – Encroachment Permit Clearances from Electric Facilities c. UG0339 – Remote Switch Pad
d. OH1230 – Tree Clearances from Overhead Electric Lines e. SD1235 – Tree Planting Requirements Near Underground Electric Facilities f. UG1225 – Pad mounted Equipment Clearances and Protection g. UG0250 – High Density Residential Metering Requirements h. FO-1901 – Fiber Optic Splicing and Testing Methods
i. SVP Rules and Regulations – Latest Edition
SVP22. SVP Standards, Miscellaneous:
a. In the case of podium-style construction, all SVP facilities and conduit systems must be located on solid ground (aka “real dirt”) and cannot be supported on parking garage ceilings or placed on top of structures. b. No splice boxes are allowed between the SVP utility connection point and the applicants main switch board.

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 13
c. SVP does not utilize any sub-surface (below grade) devices in its system.

This includes transformers, switches, etc.

SVP23. Meter Locations:
a. For condominium or apartment, all electric meters and service disconnects shall be grouped at one location, outside of the building or in a accessible utility room. If they are townhomes or single-family residences, then each unit shall have its own meter, located on the structure. A double hasp locking arrangement shall be provided on the main switchboard door(s).

Utility room door(s) shall have a double hasp locking arrangement or a lock box shall be provided. Utility room door(s) shall not be alarmed. b. All interior meter rooms at ground level are to have direct, outside access through only ONE door. Interior electric rooms must be enclosed in a dedicated electric room and cannot be in an open warehouse or office space.

SVP24. Underground Service Entrance
a. (277/480V Service or Lower) Underground service entrance conduits and conductors shall be “privately” owned, maintained, and installed per City Building Inspection Division Codes to the SVP defined utility connection point.
b. (12KV Service) SVP terminates cable on the applicant owned switchgear. c. No cross-parcel distribution is allowed. SVP service points must be within the parcels that they serve.

SVP25. Code Sections:
a. The Applicant shall provide and install electric facilities per Santa Clara City Code chapter 17.15.210.
b. Installation of underground facilities shall be in accordance with City of Santa Clara Electric Department standard UG-1000, latest version, and Santa Clara City Code chapter 17.15.050.
c. The applicant shall perform, in accordance with current City standards and specifications, all trenching, backfill, resurfacing, landscaping, conduit, junction boxes, vaults, street light foundations, equipment pads and subsurface housings required for power distribution, street lighting, and signal communication systems, as required by the City in the development of frontage and on-site property. Upon completion of improvements satisfactory to the City, the Applicant will dedicate the improvement to the City subject to City’s acceptance the work. The applicant shall further install at his cost the service facilities, consisting of service wires, cables, conductors, and associated equipment necessary to connect a applicant to the electrical supply system of and by the City. After completion of the facilities installed by the Applicant, the City shall furnish and install all cable, Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 14
switches, street lighting poles, luminaries, transformers, meters, and other equipment that it deems necessary for the betterment of the system per Santa Clara City Code chapter 17.15.210 (2).

SVP26. Existing Facilities:
a. All existing SVP facilities, onsite or offsite, are to remain unless specifically addressed by SVP personnel in a separate document. It is the Applicants responsibility to maintain all clearances from equipment and easements.

The Applicant may contact SVP outside of the PCC process for clear definitions of these clearance requirements. Applicant should not assume that SVP will be removing any existing facilities without detailed design drawings from SVP indicating potential removals. Simply indicating that SVP facilities are to be removed or relocated on conceptual plans does not imply that this action has been approved by SVP.
b. Any relocation of existing electric facilities shall be at Applicants expense.

SVP27. Generators: Non-Utility Generator equipment shall not operate in parallel with the electric utility, unless approved and reviewed by the Electric Engineering Division. All switching operations shall be “Open-Transition-Mode”, unless specifically authorized by SVP Electric Engineering Division. A Generating Facility Interconnection Application must be submitted with building permit plans. Review process may take several months depending on size and type of generator. No interconnection of a generation facility with SVP is allowed without written authorization from SVP Electric Engineering Division.

WATER & SEWER DEPARTMENT

DESIGN / PERFORMANCE -- PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT W1. Encroachment Permit. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit an encroachment permit application and design plans for construction of water utilities that comply with the latest edition of the Water & Sewer Utilities Water Service and Use Rules and Regulations, Water System Notes, and Water Standard Details and Specifications. In addition, prior to the City's issuance of Occupancy, the applicant shall construct all public water utilities per the approved plans. The Water & Sewer Utilities will inspect all public water utility installations and all other improvements encroaching public water utilities.

W2. Utility Design Plans. Utility Design Plans shall indicate the pipe material and the size of existing water, recycled water and sewer main(s). The plans shall show the nearest existing fire hydrant and the two nearest existing water main line gate valves near the project area. The plans shall show meter and backflow configurations to scale and per City of Santa Clara Water & Sewer Utilities Standard Details. Note that all new water meters and backflow prevention devices shall be located behind the sidewalk in a landscape area. Fire hydrants should be located two feet behind monolithic sidewalk if sidewalk is present; two feet behind Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 15
face of curb if no sidewalk is present, per City Std Detail 18. The plans shall provide the profile section details for utilities crossing water, sewer, or recycled water mains to ensure a 12” minimum vertical clearance is maintained.

W3. Utility Separations. Applicant shall adhere to and provide a note indicating that all horizontal and vertical clearances comply with State and local regulations. The applicant shall maintain a minimum 12” of vertical clearance at water service crossing with other utilities, and all required minimum horizontal clearances from water services: 10' from sanitary sewer utilities, 10’ from recycled water utilities, 8' from storm drain utilities, 5' from fire and other water utilities, 3' from abandoned water services, 5' from gas and electric utilities, and 5’ from the edge of the propose or existing driveway. For sanitary sewer, water, and recycled water utilities, the applicant shall maintain a minimum horizontal clearance of 10' from existing and proposed trees. If applicant installs tree root barriers, clearance from tree reduces to 5' (clearance must be from the edge of tree root barrier to edge of water facilities). No structures (fencing, foundation, biofiltration swales, etc.) allowed over sanitary sewer, potable water and/or recycled water utilities and easements.

W4. Separate Services. Applicant shall submit plans showing proposed water, recycled water, sanitary sewer, and fire services connected to a public main in the public right-of-way to the satisfaction of the Director of Water & Sewer Utilities.

Different types of water and recycled water use (domestic, irrigation, fire) shall be served by separate water services, each separately tapped at the water main.

Tapping on existing fire service line(s) is prohibited. Approved backflow prevention device(s) are required on all potable water services.

W5. City Standard Meters and Backflows. All proposed meters and backflows for all water services shall meet the current City of Santa Clara Water & Sewer Utilities Standard Details. Plans shall show meter and backflow configurations to scale.

W6. Existing Services. The applicant must indicate the disposition of all existing water and sewer services and mains on the plans. If the existing services will not be used, then the applicant shall properly abandon these services to the main per Water & Sewer Utilities standards and install a new service to accommodate the water needs of the project. The applicant shall bear the cost of any relocation or abandonment of existing Water Department facilities required for project construction to the satisfaction of the Director of Water and Sewer Utilities.

W7. On-Site Storm Drain Treatment. Prior to issuance of Building Permit, the applicant shall submit plans showing any onsite storm water treatment system.

The plan shall include a section detail of the treatment system. No water, sewer, or recycled water facilities shall be located within 5-feet of any storm water treatment system.

W8. Water Usage. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall provide documentation of water usage so the Water Division can verify the appropriate size of all proposed water meters. Please note that if the existing water services are incapable of supplying the water needs to the site, the existing services shall be abandoned, and new separate dedicated water services shall be provided for each use (domestic and irrigation).

W9. Landscaping. All the landscaping for the project shall comply with the California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act, Government Code Section 65591 et. seq.

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 16
All plants shall be either California native or non-invasive, low water-using or moderate water-using plants. High water-using plants and nonfunctional turf are prohibited.

W10. Water Features. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit plan details for all water features (including but not limited to fountains and ponds) designed to include provisions for operating the system without City potable water supply and capable of being physically disconnected from source of potable water supply during City declared water conservation periods, to the satisfaction of the Director of the Water & Sewer Utilities. Decorative water features may be permanently connected to the City’s recycled water supply.

W11. Easements. Prior to City’s issuance of Building or Grading Permits, the applicant shall provide a dedicated water utility easement around the backflow prevention device onsite. The water utility easement for the water services and all other public water appurtenances shall be a minimum 15 feet wide and be adjacent to the public right-of-way without overlapping any public utility easement. Additionally, the applicant shall submit plans defining existing easements so Water Division can verify if there are any conflicts with proposed easements and water utilities.

W12. Underground Fire Permit. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, applicant shall submit an underground fire permit unless otherwise waived by the Fire Department. If fire flow information is needed, applicant shall coordinate with Water and Sewer Utilities Department, for fire flow information at (408)615-2000. A dedicated fire service line, with an approved backflow prevention device, shall be used for on-site fire hydrants. Fire service lines required for commercial and industrial use shall be sized appropriately per fire flow demand and code requirements.

DURING CONSTRUCTION
W13. City Standard Meters and Backflow Installation. No meters or backflows shall be installed prior to establishment of water service account with the Municipal Services Division of the Finance Department. The applicant shall provide a copy of the account information to the Water and Sewer Utilities Department Inspector and Meter Shop prior to installation of any meter or backflow. All meters and backflows approved for installation shall be tested prior to use. Water service connections shall not be used prior to authorization by the Water and Sewer Utilities inspector.

W14. Construction Water. This project shall use recycled water for all construction water needs for onsite and offsite construction.

W15. Water Shortage Response Actions. Pursuant to the City of Santa Clara’s Urban Water Management Plan, during times of drought or water shortage, the City implements water shortage response actions in accordance with the level of water shortage declared. All construction activities and all new irrigation connections are subject to the Water Shortage Response Actions in effect at the time of construction and connection of the irrigation service.

Water Shortage Response Actions for Stage 2 and higher include water use restrictions that limit the use of potable water such as:

Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 17
a. prohibiting the installation of new potable water irrigation services. new irrigation connections, construction, and dust control. b. restrict the use of potable water used for construction and dust control if recycled water is available.

This project is subject to all the requirements and restrictions of the Water Shortage Response Actions in place or adopted during the duration of the project.

For more information, visit the City of Santa Clara Water & Sewer Utilities website at www.santaclaraca.gov/waterconservation.

PRIOR TO FINAL OF BUILDING PERMIT
W16. Record Drawings. Upon completion of construction and prior to the City’s issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall provide "as-built" drawings of the public water utility infrastructure prepared by a registered civil engineer to the satisfaction of the Director of Water & Sewer Utilities Department.

W17. Conditional Releases. The applicant shall comply with all the requirements of any building permit conditional release requirements.
_____________________________________
KEY:

G = General
P = Planning Division
BD = Building Division
H = Housing & Community Services Division
F = Fire Department
PR = Parks & Recreation Department
PD = Police Department
E = Engineering Division
Streets Division (Landscape, Solid Waste, and Stormwater) L = Landscape
SW = Solid Waste
SVP = Silicon Valley Power
W = Water & Sewer Department
Conditions of Approval PLN24-00314 / 451 El Camino Real Planning Commission
Meeting Date: 9/22/2026 Page 18

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Permittee/Property Owner
The undersigned agrees to each condition of approval and acknowledges and hereby agrees to use the project property on the terms and conditions set forth in this permit.

Signature:
_________________________________________________
Printed Name:
_________________________________________________
Relationship to Property:
_________________________________________________
Date:
_________________________________________________
Pursuant to Santa Clara City Code 18.128.100, the applicant shall return this document to the Department, properly signed and dated, within 30-days following the date of the Acknowledgement.

BIXBY LAND COMPANY
1501 Quail St #230 Newport Beach, CA 93660 ENTITLEMENT APPLICATION NOVEMBER 13, 2025 UNIVERSITY STATION SAN JOSE, CA # 2023-0944 Architecture + Planning
The Leamington Building
1814 Franklin Street Suite 400 Oakland, CA 94612
510.272.2910
ktgy.com
0 30 60 120 VESTING
TENTATIVE MAP C1.0
CONTACTS BIXBYSP£ FlN ANCE11,

AOELAWAREUMITEO UABILITY COMPANY
C/OBl)JJY I.AND COMPAN Y
1501 00AIL ST f 230
NEWPORT8EAl}j,CA93660
(949)J36- 700()
236N.SANTACRUZAvfNUE, SI.J TE 106- A
LOSGATOS,CA95030
(408)497- 9722
CARLS00, 8ARBEE,&Cl8SON
2633C,&J,!INORAMON, SUITE350
SAN RAMON,C>.94583
(925)- 866- 0322
RYAN HANSEN.P.E.
1814f'RANKLJ N STREET, SIJTE 400
OAl<LAND,CA 946I2
(510)272- 2910
.£SSIC>. t.lUSICK

GENERAL NOTES
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 230- 09- 020
451, W9, HI, 475 EL CAMINO REAL
SANTAQ.ARA: 10.023AC±
SANXJSE·09:18AC±
TOTAL PROJECTSITE:10.961AC±
1 FOOT(EXIST1NG)
■
" L _.!~~14 J7 9<f
25'
' '
~t:~1 m==7""C, ~ ~~~ '"'3 1
SANTA O.ARA:24
"'--""'---'-
TOTAL:27
$ANTA O.ARA: 23TOYINHOMES
SAN/05f· } ID'M!HOl!ES
TOTAL: 26TO\\NHOMES
1 WRAPPEDBUlDING
98TO\\NHC1,I
~

E UNITS
297MULTl-f-'J,1ILY UNITS(WRAP~BL.!l.DING)
""-"""-
13 TO~ HOt.lEUNITS
SANTAO.ARA: 39.41 OU/AC
SANJ()Sf· I J.86 OU/AC
TOTAl..: 37.22 DU/AC(GROSSSITE AREA)
EX
~
IST1NG:3.I53AC±/10.023AC • 31.45t
PROPOSE0:4.I95AC±/10.023 AC • 41.86l
""-"""-
EXIST1NG:0.0AC± /0.938AC • O.O,;
PROPOSED:0,22AC± /0.938AC = 23.45%
E
~
XISTING:3.I53AC±/10.961 AC • 28.76%
PROPOSED: U l5AC±/10.961AC = 40.28l
GfNERAL PI.ANOCSIGNATlON SANTAO.ARASTATIONREGION AL t.llXED USE (SANTA CLARA STATION REGIONAL COMMERaAL
t SAN TA Q.ARASTATIONHIGHRESlDENTIAL)
OFFIO:/RETAIL/WAREHOO SE

MULTIPLE FAMILY D'/IEWNGS
~
CARL.SON,
BARBEE & GIBSON, Inc.
~----- APN 2
BRASSOl9< ST-'J,!PED "SCVWDBt.1371 2007":

SOOTHERLYCORNER Cf BRIDGffOR TA\'1.0R
STRE£T OVERGUADALUPERlvfR:500FEET
SOOTHERLYFROM INTERSECTION'MT\I HIGHWAY
87: 31 FEETNORTI-lEASTERLYFROMENDCf

2.25 FEET TALL CONCRETE HEADW.IU: 3.5
FEETSOOTH FROMSIREETLAMP;0.7FEET
HIGHERT\lAT Tl-£ R()AO.aTYOF SANJOSE.

T\IE BEARING OFN57'57'45"W TAKEN ON THE
MONUt.lENT UNE OFEl. CAMiNOREAL AS
SHO~ONTHEPARCELMAPFILED FOR
RECORDONSEPTIMBER 1,1998 IN800(707
CfMAPSPAGfS26- 30.SANTA a..ARA

COUNTY RECOOOSWAS TAKENASBASISOF
BEARINGS5HO'ltl HEREON
Al.l. EXISTlNGBUlDINGSANOPAVEMENT WfllilN
T\IEPRO.£CT BOUNDARYARETOBEREMO\IEO
EXISTlNG UTlUTIES 'M nilN mE PRO..CCT

BOUNDARYAREBETOREMOVEO UNLESS
011-£R'/IISE NOTED.

SlREET TREES 'MLL BE INSTAI..LED PER THE
CITY Cf SANTA Cl.ARA STANDARDS. SEE
LANDSCAPEPL,',NS.Al.l.EXISTINGTREESON

SITEARE TOBE REMOVEO UNLESSOTIER'MSE
NOTEDONSHEETS C2.0TOC2.2.

All. ONSITE DOMESTIC WATER ANO FlRE
SERVIC( t.lAJNS'Mll BE PRIVATE.niE ONSI TE

SANITARYSE'/IER MAIN ANOSTORMDRAIN MAIN
Al.l.l.ANDSCAPING'li1THIN PRlllCTBOONOARY
'MLL BEPRIVATELYOYINEO ANDMAINTAINED

ZON E X - AREASOETERMINEDTOBEOUTSIDE
T\lE0.2:tANNUALCHANC(fl.OOOPI..AIN. PER
fEMAMAPPANEL 06085C0231HCREATEDMAY
18,2009
UTU TfS:

WATER
SE>ER

STORMDRAIN

ELECTRIC

TELEPHONE
aTYCf S,',NTA Q.ARA
arr OF SANTA Q.ARA
arr Cf S,',NTA Q.ARA
""' SILICONVALLHPOWER
AT&T
PRCf'OSED GRADING AS SHO\lltl IS PREU,\JNARY,
FlNI5HEDGRADING ISSUB..CCTTOFINAL
DESIGN
EROSIONCONTRct.'MLL BEPREPARED FORaTY

STANOAROSANO ABAGRECOMMENDATIONS
ALL ONSIITSlRE£TSARETOBEPRIVATEAND

PRIVATELY MAINTAINED
PARCELSC,6,E,G,H, l,J, K,L. M,N,O,P,
0, T, U, V, & WARE TO INCLUDE THE
fOLlOWNG PUBUC ANO PRIVATE EASEMENTS TO
SER,£ PRIVATE ANO PUBLIC fACUTlES AND
PRO'IIDEGRANTCfACCESSASNOITD: EVAE,
PAE, UGIT, Pl\£ & PSSE. EASEMENTS MAY
OIANG( SUB..cCT TO FlNAL DESIGN.

ALLPARCELSANO LOT DIMENSIONSSHOYINARE
APPROXIMAITANOSUB.£CTTOFINALDESIGN
PRO.£CTMAYBE PHASEDANO HAVEMULTFLE
FlNAL MAPS
ACONOOMINIUMPL,',NWILl BE RECOODEDFOR
LOTS2TI-lROUGH27. THESUBDl,_,SION ISA

CONDOMINIUMPROJECT ASDEF'INEDINSECTION
4285 ET. SEO. Cf TH E OVl. COOE Cf TH E
STATE CfC"1..f'O'lNIAAN0 f l.EDPURSUANTTO
T\IESUBDIVISION MAP ACT.Tl-£TOTALNUMBER
Of CONDOOINIUM D'IIELl~G UNITS SHALL BE NO
MOREIBAN111 RESIDENTIALCONDOt.!INIUM
UNITSFORLOTS2niROUGH27
N5T58'48"W 214'
~C~C ~' ~£Ebf " SI23 LLC
PN 230-1 4- 026
230- 14- 026

VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
SHEET INDEX SHEET NO. SHEET TITI£

ABBREVIATIONS
" '"'' EMERGENCY vfHIClf ACCESS EASEMENT
PRIVAITACCfSSEASEt.lENT
esoc PRIVAITSTORMORAINEASEMENT
"" PRIVAITSANITARYSEWER EASEt.lENT
,.. PRIVATEWAITREASEMENT CONSTRUCTlON BEST MANAGOilENTPRACTICES(BMPS) e;,

SE SIOEWALJ(EASEMENT

SC SQUAREFEET
TOf' Cf OJRB
UCEE UNDERGROUNDElICTRICALEASEMENT
.. WATER UTILITY EASEt.lENT
From: Sean Collins
To: Steve Le
Subject: 451 El Camino Real Development Project - SCU Comments Date: Monday, August 31, 2026 3:46:11 PM
Dear Steve,
On behalf of Santa Clara University, I am writing in response to the list of Conditions of Approval (COAs) regarding traffic signal improvements at the intersections of El Camino Real and Franklin St./Palm Drive, and El Camino Real and Campbell Ave./Accolti Way for the development project at 451 El Camino Real.

The University supports projects that add critical housing to the area and has no objections to this project, provided the identified intersection and traffic enhancements are made. This includes incorporating left-turn phasing for the east- and west-facing lights at both intersections, among other listed enhancements.

Regards,
Sean Collins
Sean Collins
Associate Vice President
University Operations
500 El Camino Real, Santa Clara, CA 95053
phone |
email |
Ill
www.CatalyzeSiliconValley.org
May 27, 2025
Eric Morley
Morley Bros.
236 N. Santa Cruz Ave.

Suite 106-A
Los Gatos, CA 95030
RE: Proposed University Station Project in Santa Clara
Dear Eric,
Thank you for sharing Bixby Land Company’s proposal for University Station in Santa Clara to the Catalyze SV Project Advocacy Committee on April 23, 2025. We appreciate being among the first community members to get to see the project. As we understand it, University Station is a proposal for a new residential neighborhood on a 10-acre site located at 451 El Camino Real, across the street from Santa Clara University and adjacent to Santa Clara Station. The project comprises multiple buildings, including a 5-story 298-unit apartment building and 111 3-story for-sale townhomes, for a total of 408 units. The 5-story multi-family building will have 359 vehicle and 100 bicycle parking spaces, while each townhome will have a two-car garage.

Residents of the proposed project would have access to 76,000 square feet of common open space and 9,600 square feet of private open space.

Standout Elements:

Legacy
Legacy is not a category we and our members typically score, but it is important to highlight the efforts being made to ground this project in the area's history. Although the project does not involve adaptive reuse of existing structures, our members commend the developer's intention to honor the site's history as a cannery owned by the DiNapoli family. The architectural design includes brick elements and other industrial design features intended to allude to the site's past life as a cannery. While well-received among our members, some suggest further enhancing these elements, particularly through additional public art or making the design look even more like San José canneries that have been preserved and undergone adaptive reuse.

Affordability
Our members appreciate that the project meets the City of Santa Clara's 15% affordability requirement and that affordable units will be dispersed throughout both the apartment building and townhomes. Affordable for-sale units are rare, and our members 1 • '
~
w

CATALYZE SV
www.CatalyzeSiliconValley.org
appreciate that the developer will include for-sale units alongside the rental component.

However, many members feel the project meets only the minimum requirements and could do more to address affordability, particularly given the location near Santa Clara University, where a need for student and faculty housing exists. Members also express concern regarding the affordability levels, noting that moderate-income units at 110% or 120% AMI may not truly address affordability needs in the area. This may be especially relevant in the wake of the Bay Area News Group reporting showing how affordable homes at the highest AMI levels are hard to fill and thus sit vacant. While appreciating the integration of affordable units throughout the development, our members encourage deeper affordability levels and a higher percentage of affordable units.

Elements to Improve:

Community
Our members appreciate the developer's efforts to engage with community stakeholders, such as meeting with the Old Quad and immediate neighbors. However, members feel that the community engagement is relatively standard and could be expanded to include more diverse stakeholders. Several members recommend that the developer broaden their outreach to include future residents and the wider community. We understand the project is fairly early in the outreach process, and we encourage the developer to hold additional public meetings and engage with underrepresented voices in the community to gather more comprehensive feedback. Such low-hanging fruit could yield easy ways to increase this project’s score.

Vibrancy
University Station will benefit significantly from its close proximity to Santa Clara University and Santa Clara Station. To take full advantage of its location, our members want to encourage the developer to knit the project into the existing and promising future urban fabric. Suggestions to ensure the project meshes with the existing neighborhood include opening the paseo up to the public and extending it down Lane A to connect with Santa Clara Station. Our members do not support fencing off the paseo. Additionally, members express concern regarding the activation of the street front. Multiple members note that the resident-serving amenity space doesn't provide sufficient street-level interaction. Since the developer owns the existing adjacent retail site, members suggest enhancing the pedestrian connections between these sites with landscaping or plaza-like elements along Lane C. Other suggested public realm improvements include incorporating more green and open spaces, as well as potentially creating a community room that could be open to the neighborhood or rented out to nonprofits. Although not currently on the table, an ideal scenario would be for 2 CATALYZE SV
www.CatalyzeSiliconValley.org
Bixby to concurrently redevelop the adjacent site too by placing housing on top of the existing commercial enterprises.

Transportation
Our members recognize the project's proximity to the Santa Clara Station as a significant transportation asset. However, several members expressed concerns about walkability and the project's connection to the train station from Lane A. It's unclear from the plans if the proposed sidewalk will continue past the project frontage along Lane A toward Franklin Street to the northwest. If this connection is not currently planned, we recommend that the developer implement some enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections along Lane A. Other suggestions unrelated to Lane A include promoting alternative non-car transportation by providing University Station residents with transit passes. Options for transit passes include Caltrain's GoPass program and VTA's SmartPass program. These transit passes would allow the project's owner to purchase passes for residents in bulk at a reduced price.

Sustainability
Members of Catalyze SV do not feel we have sufficient information to evaluate the project's sustainability features based on the information shared by the property owner’s representative. We will rescore this category at a later date as the developer continues to refine and develop more concrete sustainability measures.

Intensity/Zoning
With a proposed density of 39.5 dwelling units per acre, our members have significant concerns regarding the project's density, particularly given its proximity to a major transit center. Our members are dissatisfied with the inclusion of townhomes adjacent to Santa Clara Station—a current Caltrain station and future BART stop. Members emphasize that building townhomes will lock in a low-density land use for many decades, and that transit-adjacent locations should prioritize higher densities. While our members understand the financial constraints raised by the developer, we staunchly support and encourage maximizing density, especially so close to major transit centers such as this. Land adjacent to high-quality transit is very limited, and using it to build townhomes does not represent a sustainable use of this scarce resource.

We wish you luck on your May 29th community meeting. We plan to be there to represent the views of our members.

Sincerely,
Catalyze SV’s staff and Project Advocacy Committee members CC: Mayor Lisa M. Gillmor ([email protected])
3 CATALYZE SV
•
www.CatalyzeSiliconValley.org
Albert Gonzalez ([email protected])
Raj Chahal ([email protected])
Kathy Watanabe ([email protected])
Kevin Park ([email protected])
Sudhanshu Jain ([email protected])
Kelly G. Cox ([email protected])
Steve Le ([email protected])
Jason Baker, Caltrain ([email protected])
Navi Dhaliwali, Caltrain ([email protected])
VTA ([email protected])
Jason Lee ([email protected])
Jonathon Evans, Old Quad Residents Association ([email protected], [email protected])
Alison Cingolani, SV@Home ([email protected]) Victorina Arvelo, Greenbelt Alliance ([email protected]) Ali Sapirman, Housing Action Coalition ([email protected])
Ray Bramson, Destination: Home ([email protected]) South Bay YIMBY ([email protected])
About Catalyze SV
Catalyze SV’s Project Advocacy Committee is comprised of community members who identify, evaluate, & lead advocacy efforts around specific development projects.
4 CATALYZE SV
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-1019 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Councilmember Park to Place an Item on a Future Agenda to Consider how Residents may Safely Park their Cars in or near their Apartment Complexes without Fear of getting Ticketed or Towed

BACKGROUND
Council Policy 030 (Adding an Item on the Agenda) sets forth the procedure for written petitions. A member of the Council may submit a written request for inclusion of an item on a future City Council agenda. Prior to submitting a Council Item Request form, the Member shall discuss the proposed request with the City Manager (and/or the City Attorney, as appropriate), If City staff’s response does not satisfy the Member’s request, the Member may submit the Council Item Request form for placement on a future City Council agenda. Once the City Clerk’s Office receives the Council Item Request form, it should immediately be forwarded to the City Manager for placement on an agenda, if possible, within two (2) Council meetings after original receipt of the original request by the City Clerk’s Office.

DISCUSSION
On August 14, 2026, the City Clerk’s Office received a Council Written Request submitted by Councilmember Park requesting that an item be placed on a future meeting agenda to discuss how residents can safely park their cars in or near their apartment complexes without fear of getting ticketed or towed. Related owns much property in the area and should have provided alternate parking during their construction phases on other parcels. If management cannot provide sufficient parking for affordable housing residents at reasonable rates. I would like to look into permitted street parking for residents.

As a reminder, this item is for purposes of discussing whether the Council wishes to agendize this matter on a future Council agenda for a report or action. It is not for the purpose of discussing the substance of the item itself. Specifically, the policy provides as follows:

1. At the meeting where the request to add an item to a future agenda is heard, Council discussion is limited to whether the item should be added to an agenda and a date, not the merit of the item. Valid considerations that can be discussed include whether the matter is within the City’s jurisdiction, being addressed in some other way, City resource requirements, legality, timing, and prioritization.

2. Council may take the following actions when a request is made:
a. No Action
b. Refer the request to City staff for further study and a timely report back to Council c. Refer the item to a future annual Council Priority Setting session meeting d. Placement on a future Council meeting agenda for further consideration or action City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-1019 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026

3. At the meeting where the item is first considered, if a majority of the City Council supports further study of the item, then a full staff analysis shall be prepared within thirty (30) days, unless otherwise directed by the City Council. If the request requires more than thirty (30) calendar days to prepare, status updates will be provided to the City Council every sixty (60) days as an informational memo.

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 administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with considering the request to be placed on a future agenda except for staff time.

COORDINATION
This item was coordinated with the City Manager and the City Attorney.

ALTERNATIVES
a. No Action
b. Refer the request to City staff for further study and a timely report back to Council c. Refer the item to a future annual Council Priority Setting session meeting d. Placement on a future Council meeting agenda for further consideration or action

RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff to proceed as Council deems appropriate.

Reviewed by: Nora Pimentel, Assistant City Clerk
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Policy Procedure 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda

2. Written Petition dated August 14, 2026, Submitted by Councilmember Park City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
Revised 10/24/2023 CP 030
Resolution No. 23-9278

Page 1 of 3 ends

City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual

ADDING AN ITEM TO THE
AGENDA
PURPOSE The purpose of this Policy is to establish a clear, effective, and easily understood process for members of the City Council and the public to have items, within the jurisdiction of the City Council, placed on the City Council agenda for consideration.

POLICY/

PROCESS

FOR CITY

COUNCIL

MEMBERS
Referral from Members of the City Council in Advance of a Meeting:

After consultation with the City Manager (and/or City Attorney, as appropriate), the Mayor or any individual Councilmember may submit a written request by using the Council Item Request Form to the City Manager’s Office for inclusion of an item on a future City Council agenda. An item may be referred to the City Manager for inclusion on a City Council agenda during a Council meeting by City Council action.

The procedure for written request from the City Council shall be as follows:

1. Members of the City Council shall use the Council Item Request form to submit a written request for inclusion of an item on a future City Council agenda.

2. Prior to submitting a Council Item Request form, the Member shall discuss the proposed request with the City Manager (And/or City Attorney, as appropriate) to determine if City staff’s response does not satisfy the Member’s request, the Member shall submit the Council Item Request form for placement on a future City Council agenda.

3. Once the City Clerk’s Office receives the Council Item Request form, it should immediately be forwarded to the City Manager for placement on an agenda, if possible, within two (2) Council meetings after receipt of the original request by the City Clerk’s Office. All written material (Council Item Request Form and any support material) will be submitted on the agenda in the form substantially provided by the requestor without any staff analysis, including fiscal review, legal review and policy review, until the City Council has had the opportunity to provide the direction to the City Manager.

Referrals from Members of the Council at the Council Meeting If an issue arises during a Council meeting that may require future City Council action a City Council member may also request, through a referral, that such item be agendized for future Council consideration.

Such a request may be considered by the Council following the City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Revised 10/24/2023 CP 030
Resolution No. 23-9278

Page 2 of 3 ends

City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual

POLICY/

PROCESS
FOR

COUNCIL

COMMITTEES

POLICY/

PROCESS
FOR

MEMBERS
OF THE
PUBLIC
“Procedure for Handling Requests at the City Council Meeting” set forth below.

Referral from a Council Committee:

Council Committees may request that an item to be considered for inclusion on a future City Council agenda by formal committee action. Any such request shall be submitted to the City Manager in writing. Provided the request is received two (2) days prior to the public release of the City Council agenda packet the item shall be included for consideration at that City Council meeting in accordance with the “Procedure for Handling Requests at the City Council Meeting” set forth below. .

Requests from Members of the Public:

Members of the public may request that an item be added to a City Council Agenda in any of the following ways:

1. Public Presentations: Any member of the public may address the City Council under the “Public Presentations” section of the agenda to make a request of the City Council to add an item to a future meeting. If a member of the public wishes to provide a written petition of their request prior to their appearance at a Council Meeting they may be submitted as follows:
a. Email:

City Council: [email protected]
City Manager: [email protected]
b. MySantaClara App:
santaclaraca.gov/services/make-a-service-request
Note: Written Petitions will not be listed on the City Council agenda, and the member must be present at the meeting to present their request.

2. Individual City Councilmembers: Members of the public may directly petition individual City Councilmembers to request that an item be added to a future Council meeting. The Councilmember may then choose to submit the request through the Council referral process outlined in this Policy, above.

3. City Manager and City Departments: Members of the public may also petition the City Manager or City staff for specific action. The City Manager and/or staff may respond, as appropriate, directly to this request, or direct the member of the public to the other methods of petitioning the City outlined above.

City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Revised 10/24/2023 CP 030
Resolution No. 23-9278

Page 3 of 3 ends

City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual

PROCEDURE

FOR HANDLING

REQUESTS AT

THE CITY

COUNCIL

MEETING

2. Council may take the following actions when a request is made:
a. No Action.
b. Refer the request to City staff for further study and a timely report back to Council.
c. Refer the item to a future annual Council Priority Setting session meeting.
d. Placement on a future Council meeting agenda for further consideration or action.

References
10/24/2023 Revised, Resolution No. 23-9278
10/27/2020 Revised, Resolution No. 20-8895
Attachments: Council Item Request Form
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible

COUNCIL ITEM REQUEST FORM
The Council Item Request Form is for members of the City Council to submit written requests to the City Manager’s Office for inclusion of an item on a future City Council meeting agenda. At the meeting where the initial written request is heard, discussion should be limited to whether the item should be added to an agenda and a date, not the merit of the item. A majority vote of the City Council is required for the item to be added to future Council meeting agenda for action.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Requesting Member of City Council
Contact E-mail
Contact Phone
Today’s Date

WRITTEN REQUEST
I, , hereby request that the following item
be placed on the City of Santa Clara Council and Authorities Concurrent meeting agenda:

Reference: Council Policy 030 – Adding an Item on the Agenda Resolution No. 23-9278
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible

RECEIVED
City of SEP l 6 20lS COUNCIL ITEM REQUEST FORM
Santa Clarfiity Clerk's Office
The Center of Whnt's PO!.SlblcCity of Santa Clara
The Council Item Request Form is for members of the City Council to submit written requests to the City Manager's Office for inclusion of an item on a future City Council meeting agenda. At the meeting where the initial written request is heard, discussion should be limited to whether the item should be added to an agenda and a date, not the merit of the item. A majority vote of the City Council is required for the item to be added to future Council meeting agenda for action.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Requesting Member of City Council _K_e_vi_n_P_ar_k _______________ _ Contact E-mail ___________________________ _
Contact Phone ___________________________ _
Today's Date August 14, 2026

WRITTEN REQUEST
1, Councilmember Park hereby request that the following item be placed on the City of Santa Clara Council and Authorities Concurrent meeting agenda:

I would like to discuss how residents can safely park their cars in or near their apartment complexes without fear of getting ticketed or towed. Related owns much property in the area and should have provided alternate parking during their construction phases on other parcels. If management cannot provide sufficient parking for affordable housing residents at reasonable rates, i would like to look into permitted street parking for residents.

Reference: Council Policy 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda Resolution No. 23-9278
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-1020 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Councilmember Park to Place an Item on a Future Agenda Regarding Potential Compensation for Residents Whose Vehicles were Ticketed or Towed during recent Stadium Events

DISCUSSION
On August 14, 2026, the City Clerk’s Office received a Council Written Request submitted by Councilmember Park requesting that an item be placed on a future meeting agenda to discuss the residents that were ticketed or towed during the last Stadium Events. I would like to look into how they can be recompensed. This could be a simple matter of proving residency.

3. At the meeting where the item is first considered, if a majority of the City Council supports further study of the item, then a full staff analysis shall be prepared within thirty (30) days, unless otherwise directed by the City Council. If the request requires more than thirty (30) City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-1020 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
calendar days to prepare, status updates will be provided to the City Council every sixty (60) days as an informational memo.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with considering the request to be placed on a future agenda except for staff time.

COORDINATION
This item was coordinated with the City Manager and the City Attorney.

RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff to proceed as Council deems appropriate.

Reviewed by: Nora Pimentel, Assistant City Clerk
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Policy Procedure 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda

2. Written Petition dated August 14, 2026, Submitted by Councilmember Park City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
Revised 10/24/2023 CP 030
Resolution No. 23-9278

Page 1 of 3 ends

City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual

POLICY/

PROCESS

FOR CITY

COUNCIL

MEMBERS
Referral from Members of the City Council in Advance of a Meeting:

The procedure for written request from the City Council shall be as follows:

1. Members of the City Council shall use the Council Item Request form to submit a written request for inclusion of an item on a future City Council agenda.

Such a request may be considered by the Council following the City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Revised 10/24/2023 CP 030
Resolution No. 23-9278

Page 2 of 3 ends

City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual

POLICY/

PROCESS
FOR

COUNCIL

COMMITTEES

POLICY/

PROCESS
FOR

MEMBERS
OF THE
PUBLIC
“Procedure for Handling Requests at the City Council Meeting” set forth below.

Referral from a Council Committee:

Requests from Members of the Public:

Members of the public may request that an item be added to a City Council Agenda in any of the following ways:

City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Revised 10/24/2023 CP 030
Resolution No. 23-9278

Page 3 of 3 ends

City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual

PROCEDURE

FOR HANDLING

REQUESTS AT

THE CITY

COUNCIL

MEETING

References
10/24/2023 Revised, Resolution No. 23-9278
10/27/2020 Revised, Resolution No. 20-8895
Attachments: Council Item Request Form
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible

CONTACT INFORMATION
Requesting Member of City Council
Contact E-mail
Contact Phone
Today’s Date

WRITTEN REQUEST
I, , hereby request that the following item
be placed on the City of Santa Clara Council and Authorities Concurrent meeting agenda:

Reference: Council Policy 030 – Adding an Item on the Agenda Resolution No. 23-9278
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible

RECEIVED
SEP 1 6 2026 City of COUNCIL ITEM REQUEST FORM
Santa Cla&; Clerk's Office
TheCenterofWhoc"s Possible of Santa Clara
The Council Item Request Form is for members of the City Council to submit written requests to the City Manager's Office for inclusion of an item on a future City Council meeting agenda. At the meeting where the initial written request is heard, discussion should be limited to whether the item should be added to an agenda and a date, not the merit of the item. A majority vote of the City Council is required for the item to be added to future Council meeting agenda for action.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Requesting Member of City Council _K_e_vi_n_P_a_rk ________________ _ Contact E-mail ___________________________ _
Contact Phone ___________________________ _
Today's Date August 14, 2026

WRITTEN REQUEST
1, Councllmember Park , hereby request that the following item be placed on the City of Santa Clara Council and Authorities Concurrent meeting agenda:

For residents that were ticketed or towed during the last stadium events, I would like to look into how they can be recompensed. This could be a simple matter of proving residency.

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Councilmember Park to Place an Item on a Future Agenda to Discuss Parking Requirements for Affordable Housing Projects

DISCUSSION
On August 14, 2026, the City Clerk’s Office received a Council Written Request submitted by Councilmember Park requesting that an item be placed on a future meeting agenda to discuss parking requirements for affordable housing projects. While parking can be reduced and even waived for projects near mass transit, there should be requirements for minimum parking numbers and considerations when the mass transit nearby is a train station. Few residents use the train station near Calle del Mundo for work, and I would guess that even fewer use the train for grocery shopping or school. People have to understand that residents with multiple jobs are not serviced well by municipal transit, or even by bicycles, when distances and time frames are taken into account, and cars are increasingly becoming a requirement for jobs as gig work expands.

2. Council may take the following actions when a request is made:
a. No Action
b. Refer the request to City staff for further study and a timely report back to Council c. Refer the item to a future annual Council Priority Setting session meeting City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-1021 Agenda Date: 9/22/2026
d. Placement on a future Council meeting agenda for further consideration or action

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with considering the request to be placed on a future agenda except for staff time.

COORDINATION
This item was coordinated with the City Manager and the City Attorney.

RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff to proceed as Council deems appropriate.

Reviewed by: Nora Pimentel, Assistant City Clerk
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Policy Procedure 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda

2. Written Petition dated August 14, 2026, Submitted by Councilmember Park City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 9/17/2026
powered by Legistar™
Revised 10/24/2023 CP 030
Resolution No. 23-9278

Page 1 of 3 ends

City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual

POLICY/

PROCESS

FOR CITY

COUNCIL

MEMBERS
Referral from Members of the City Council in Advance of a Meeting:

The procedure for written request from the City Council shall be as follows:

1. Members of the City Council shall use the Council Item Request form to submit a written request for inclusion of an item on a future City Council agenda.

Such a request may be considered by the Council following the City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Revised 10/24/2023 CP 030
Resolution No. 23-9278

Page 2 of 3 ends

City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual

POLICY/

PROCESS
FOR

COUNCIL

COMMITTEES

POLICY/

PROCESS
FOR

MEMBERS
OF THE
PUBLIC
“Procedure for Handling Requests at the City Council Meeting” set forth below.

Referral from a Council Committee:

Requests from Members of the Public:

Members of the public may request that an item be added to a City Council Agenda in any of the following ways:

City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Revised 10/24/2023 CP 030
Resolution No. 23-9278

Page 3 of 3 ends

City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual

PROCEDURE

FOR HANDLING

REQUESTS AT

THE CITY

COUNCIL

MEETING

References
10/24/2023 Revised, Resolution No. 23-9278
10/27/2020 Revised, Resolution No. 20-8895
Attachments: Council Item Request Form
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible

CONTACT INFORMATION
Requesting Member of City Council
Contact E-mail
Contact Phone
Today’s Date

WRITTEN REQUEST
I, , hereby request that the following item
be placed on the City of Santa Clara Council and Authorities Concurrent meeting agenda:

Reference: Council Policy 030 – Adding an Item on the Agenda Resolution No. 23-9278
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible

RECEIVED
SEP 1 6 2026
City Of City Clerk's OfficeCOUNCIL ITEM REQUEST FORM
Santa Claray of Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
The Council Item Request Form is for members of the City Council to submit written requests to the City Manager's Office for inclusion of an item on a future City Council meeting agenda. At the meeting where the initial written request is heard, discussion should be limited to whether the item should be added to an agenda and a date, not the merit of the item. A majority vote of the City Council is required for the item to be added to future Council meeting agenda for action.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Requesting Member of City Council _K_e_vi_n_P_a_rk _ _____________ __ _ Contact E-mail - - ------ ----- ----- ----- ------ Contact Phone ___________ ______________ ___ _ Today's Date August 14, 2026

WRITTEN REQUEST
1, Councilmember Park , hereby request that the following item be placed on the City of Santa Clara Council and Authorities Concurrent meeting agenda:

I would like to look into parking requirements for affordable housing projects. While parking can be reduced and even waived for projects near mass transit, there should be requirements for minimum parking numbers and considerations when the mass transit nearby is a train station. Few residents use the train station near Calle del Mundo for work and i would guess that even fewer use the train for grocery shopping or school. People have to understand that residents with multiple jobs are not serviced well by municipal transit, or even by bicycles, when distances and time frames are taken into account, and cars are increasingly becoming a requirement for jobs as gig work expands.

Reference: Council Policy 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda Resolution No. 23-9278

City Council and Authorities ConcurrentSeptember 22, 2026

City Council and Authorities Concurrent
September 22, 2026