advice 4970-e · the project is located on 240-acres of land north of levi’s stadium and...

December 2, 2016 Advice 4970-E (Pacific Gas and Electric Company ID U 39 E) Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Subject: Grant of Bridge Consent Agreement to the City of Santa Clara for

Proposed Bridge Installations Across PG&E Electric Transmission Easements – Request for Approval Under Section 851 and General Order 173

Purpose Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) requests approval under Public Utilities Code Section 851 (Section 851) to grant to the City of Santa Clara (Grantee or Santa Clara) a Bridge Consent Agreement (Agreement) for the installation of two bridge structures that cross over two PG&E electric transmission easements. PG&E has determined that these bridge structures will not interfere with PG&E’s operations. A copy of the Bridge Consent Agreement is attached as Attachment 1. PG&E has determined that granting the Bridge Consent Agreement will not interfere with PG&E’s ability to provide safe and reliable utility service to its customers. In addition, PG&E believes that granting this Agreement will not be adverse to the public interest, but instead will serve the public interest because the bridge structures are being installed as part of a multi-phased, development called City Place Santa Clara (Project). The Project is a 240-acre development consisting of both a pedestrian-friendly urban City Center and office campuses, which altogether will offer residential housing, restaurants, entertainment venues, hotels, office space and retail shopping. The proposed bridge structures will accommodate additional foot, bicycle and vehicle traffic as the result of the development. Background The Project is a 240-acre mixed-use development located in the City of Santa Clara and is separated into five parcels that will be developed in phases. The development, including PG&E’s easements and facilities, are located on the Santa Clara Golf and Tennis Club, which is operated by the City of Santa Clara. Project construction is expected to begin in 2017 and be completed by 2020.

Erik Jacobson Director Regulatory Relations

Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale St., Mail Code B10C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 Fax: 415.973.1448

Advice 4970-E - 2 - December 2, 2016

Santa Clara is seeking PG&E authorization and Commission approval of the Agreement prior to bridge construction which is expected to begin in 2019, under Phase 2 of the Project. Construction and planning for the two bridges is contingent upon Commission approval of the Agreement which memorializes PG&E’s consent of the proposed installation of two bridge structures that each cross two PG&E transmission and communication easements. There will also be road improvements. PG&E does not own the land on which PG&E currently has easements for its electric transmission facilities. The land is owned by Santa Clara. The Project is located north of Levi’s Stadium and California’s Great America amusement park. It is south of Highway 237 and fronts Tasman Drive to the south, Great America Parkway to the west and Guadalupe River to the east with Lafayette Street bisecting the project site. PG&E’s easements, 175 feet and 40 feet wide, respectively, are parallel with Lafayette Street. The proposed bridge structures will both cross Lafayette Street and PG&E’s two easements, below PG&E’s tubular steel pole mounted transmission lines. There is adequate safety clearance from the proposed structures to the existing conductors, consistent with General Order 95, such that a relocation or rearrangement of PG&E’s facilities is not required. PG&E has inspected the Easement area subject of this proposed transaction and determined that the proposed bridge structures and road improvements will not impact PG&E’s ability to maintain, repair or replace its facilities. Pursuant to the Agreement, if there are events that necessitate the rearrangement, relocation, reconstruction or removal of any of PG&E’s facilities currently in place, the City shall notify PG&E in writing and agree to reimburse PG&E on demand for its costs incurred in complying with such notice. For the above reasons, PG&E respectfully requests Commission approval of this Section 851 request and approve the attached Agreement because it will not impair PG&E’s provision of safe and reliable utility service. In accordance with General Order 173, Rule 4, PG&E provides the following information related to the proposed transaction:


(a) Identity and Addresses of All Parties to the Proposed Transaction:

Pacific Gas and Electric Company Darren P. Roach Law Department P.O. Box 7442 San Francisco, CA 94120 Telephone: (415) 973-6345 Facsimile: (415) 973-5520

Email: [email protected]

City of Santa Clara Attention: Gustavo Gomez Land & Property Develop. Div. 1500 Warburton Avenue Santa Clara, CA 95050 Telephone: l(408) 615-3011 Facsimile: (408) 985-7936 Email: [email protected] City of Santa Clara Attention: Rod Diridon, Jr. City Clerk’s Office 1500 Warburton Avenue Santa Clara, CA 95050 Telephone: (408) 615-2220 Facsimile: (408) 241-6771 Email: [email protected]

(b) Complete Description of the Property Including Present Location,

Condition and Use:

Approximately 28,000 sq. ft. of the two bridge structures affect PG&E’s existing 175 ft. wide, 1,333,500 SF, easement strip located west of Lafayette Street (LD 2306-01-1717, Ref. APNs 104-03-036 and 104-01-102) and approximately 6,400 sq. ft. of the two bridge structures affect PG&E’s existing 40 ft. wide, 41,131 SF, easement strip located along the east side of Lafayette Street (LD 2306-01-2045, Ref. APNs 097-01-039 and 097-01-073). The attached maps (See Appendix A of Attachment 1) identify the location of the bridge structures within and adjacent to PG&E’s easements and the location of these structures relative to the existing PG&E tubular steel poles and conductor facilities. The bridge structures are separated from PG&E’s electric transmission tubular steel pole structures by a minimum of 25 feet. The land is owned by the City of Santa Clara. The Project is located on 240-acres of land north of Levi’s Stadium and California’s Great America amusement park. It is south of Highway 237 and fronts Tasman Drive to the south, Great America Parkway to the west and Guadalupe River to the east with Lafayette Street bisecting the project site. PG&E’s easements are impacted on the west and east sides of Lafayette Street.


(c) Intended Use of the Property:

The City of Santa Clara will use the easement area to construct two transportation bridges with construction expected to begin in 2019, as explained in the Background section.

(d) Complete Description of Financial Terms of the Proposed Transaction:

PG&E is not receiving payment for this transaction.

(e) Description of How Financial Proceeds of the Transaction Will Be Distributed: Not Applicable.

(f) Statement on the Impact of the Transaction on Ratebase and Any Effect

on the Ability of the Utility to Serve Customers and the Public: There is no impact to PG&E’s ratebase nor will granting the proposed Agreement for the installation of the bridge structures within PG&E’s easements affect PG&E’s ability to service customers and the public.

(g) The Original Cost, Present Book Value, and Present Fair Market Value for Sales of Real Property and Depreciable Assets, and a Detailed Description of How the Fair Market Value Was Determined (e.g., Appraisal): Not Applicable.

(h) The Fair Market Rental Value for Leases of Real Property, and a Detailed Description of How the Fair Market Rental Value Was Determined: Not Applicable.

(i) The Fair Market Value of the Easement or Right-of-Way, and a Detailed Description of How the Fair Market Value Was Determined: PG&E is not collecting any use fees associated with the granting of the Agreement. The installation of the two bridge structures within the Easement area does not rise to the level of a right that has any realizable economic value to PG&E.


(j) A Complete Description of any Recent Past (Within the Prior Two Years)

or Anticipated Future Transactions that May Appear To Be Related to the Present Transaction:

There are no recent past or anticipated future transactions that appear related to the present transaction.

(k) Sufficient Information and Documentation (Including Environmental

Information) to Show that All of Eligibility Criteria Set Forth in Rule 3 of General Order 173 are Satisfied: See Attachments

(l) Additional Information to Assist in the Review of the Advice Letter: No additional information is readily available other than what has already been included within this advice letter filing.

(m) Environmental Information

Pursuant to General Order 173, the Advice Letter program applies to proposed transactions that will not require environmental review by the CPUC as a lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA") either because: (a) a statutory or categorical exemption applies (the applicant must provide a Notice of Exemption from the Lead Agency or explain why an exemption applies), or (b) because the transaction is not a project under CEQA (the applicant must explain the reasons why it believes that the transaction is not a project), or (c) because another public agency, acting as the Lead Agency under CEQA, has completed environmental review of the project, and the Commission is required to perform environmental review of the project only as a Responsible Agency under CEQA.

For this advice letter, the Grantee has completed environmental review as a Lead Agency, and the Commission can serve as a Responsible Agency.

c. CPUC as a Responsible Agency under CEQA

If another public agency, acting as the Lead Agency under CEQA, has completed an environmental review of the project and has approved the final CEQA documents, and the Commission is a Responsible Agency under CEQA, the applicant shall provide the following.

a. The name, address, and phone number of the Lead Agency, the

type of CEQA document that was prepared (Environmental Impact Report, Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration), the


date on which the Lead Agency approved the CEQA document, the date on which a Notice of Determination was filed.

Lead Agency City of Santa Clara

1500 Warburton Avenue Santa Clara, CA 95050 Attn.: Debby Fernandez, Project Planner Phone: (408) 615-2457 [email protected]

Type of CEQA Document Prepared

Final Environmental Impact Report

Date Certified EIR Approved June 28, 2016 Date Notice of Determination Filed June 29, 2016

b. A copy of all CEQA documents prepared by or for the Lead

Agency regarding the project and the Lead Agency’s resolution or other document approving the CEQA documents.

See Attachment 3 c. A list of section and page numbers for the environmental impacts,

mitigation measures, and findings in the prior CEQA documents that relate to the approval sought from the Commission. References to the bridge structures crossing Lafayette Street and within PG&E’s easements may be found as follows and detailed in Attachment 3:

The bridge over Lafayette Street at City Place Parkway is addressed as part of the “urban interchange” in the project description on page 2-16 of the DEIR and both bridges are illustrated in the adjacent Figure 2-7.

A brief description of the second bridge over Lafayette Street is

included on page 2-17 of the DEIR under the heading “Other Access Points.”

Both bridges are again shown in Figure 2-8, “Site Access

Variants,” of the DEIR and then are described under the “Jug Handle Variant” on page 2-18.

The bridge of Lafayette Street at City Place Parkway is addressed

again in the DEIR on page 3.3-62, under the heading “Project


Roadway Infrastructure” and both bridges are illustrated in adjacent Figure 3.3-15.

Both bridges are again addressed on page 3.3-144 of the DEIR

under the heading “Variant Access Scheme Intersection Analysis” and shown in adjacent Figure 3.3-23.

Both bridges are addressed and illustrated frequently in Appendix

3.3.I to the DEIR “On-site Street Analysis for Parcels 4 and 5,” (page 3844 of Appendix 3.3, Transportation Data).

d. An explanation of any aspect of the project or its environmental setting which has changed since the issuance of the prior CEQA document.

Not Applicable – There are no prior CEQA documents.

e. A statement of whether the project will require approval by additional public agencies other than the Commission and the Lead Agency, and, if so, the name and address of each agency and the type of approval required.

No additional approvals are required that pertain to the installation of the bridge structures within PG&E’s easement areas.

Protests Anyone wishing to protest this filing may do so by sending a letter by December 22, 2016, which is 20 days from the date of this filing. The protest must state the grounds upon which it is based, including such items as financial and service impact, and should be submitted expeditiously. Protests should be mailed to:

CPUC Energy Division ED Tariff Unit 505 Van Ness Avenue, 4th Floor San Francisco, California 94102 Facsimile: (415) 703-2200 E-mail: [email protected]

Copies of protests also should be mailed to the attention of the Director, Energy Division, Room 4004, at the address shown above.


The protest shall also be sent to PG&E either via E-mail or U.S. mail (and by facsimile, if possible) at the address shown below on the same date it is mailed or delivered to the Commission:

Erik Jacobson Director, Regulatory Relations c/o Megan Lawson Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Mail Code B10C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, California 94177 Facsimile: (415) 973-1448 E-mail: [email protected]

Any person (including individuals, groups, or organizations) may protest or respond to an advice letter (General Order 96-B, Section 7.4). The protest shall contain the following information: specification of the advice letter protested; grounds for the protest; supporting factual information or legal argument; name, telephone number, postal address, and (where appropriate) e-mail address of the protestant; and statement that the protest was sent to the utility no later than the day on which the protest was submitted to the reviewing Industry Division (General Order 96-B, Section 3.11). Effective Date Pursuant to the review process outlined in General Order 173, PG&E requests that this Tier 3 advice filing become effective upon disposition by a Commission resolution. Notice In accordance with General Order 96-B, Section IV, a copy of this advice letter is being sent electronically and/or via U.S. mail to parties shown on the attached list. Address changes to the General Order 96-B service list should be directed to PG&E at email address [email protected]. For changes to any other service list, please contact the Commission’s Process Office at (415) 703-2021 or at [email protected]. Send all electronic approvals to [email protected]. Advice letter filings can also be accessed electronically at: http://www.pge.com/tariffs. /S/ Erik Jacobson Director, Regulatory Relations


Attachments Attachment 1 – Bridge Consent Agreement Attachment 2 – PG&E Easements Attachment 3 – Relevant Sections of Draft EIR (Draft EIR and Final EIR available

upon request) Attachment 4 – Notice of Determination Attachment 5 – Resolution 16-8337 Attachment 6 – City Place Santa Clara Project Master Plan – Vol. 1

http://santaclaraca.gov/home/showdocument?id=41301


************ SERVICE LIST Advice 4970-E *********** APPENDIX A

Jonathan Reiger Legal Division 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 355-5596 [email protected] Mary Jo Borak Energy Division 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 703-1333 [email protected] Robert (Mark) Pocta Office of Ratepayer Advocates 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 703- 2871 [email protected] Andrew Barnsdale Energy Division 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 703-3221 [email protected]

City of Santa Clara Attention: Gustavo Gomez Land & Property Develop. Div. 1500 Warburton Avenue Santa Clara, CA 95050 (408) 615-3011 [email protected] City of Santa Clara Attention: Rod Diridon, Jr. City Clerk’s Office 1500 Warburton Avenue Santa Clara, CA 95050 (408) 615-2220 [email protected] City of Santa Clara Attention: Debbie Fernandez Project Planner 1500 Warburton Avenue Santa Clara, CA 95050 (408) 615-2457 [email protected]

CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION ADVICE LETTER FILING SUMMARY

ENERGY UTILITY

MUST BE COMPLETED BY UTILITY (Attach additional pages as needed)

Company name/CPUC Utility No. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (ID U39 E)

Utility type: Contact Person: Kingsley Cheng

ELC GAS Phone #: (415) 973-5265

PLC HEAT WATER E-mail: [email protected] and [email protected]

EXPLANATION OF UTILITY TYPE

ELC = Electric GAS = Gas PLC = Pipeline HEAT = Heat WATER = Water

(Date Filed/ Received Stamp by CPUC)

Advice Letter (AL) #: 4970-E Tier: 3 Subject of AL: Grant of Bridge Consent Agreement to the City of Santa Clara for Proposed Bridge Installations

Across PG&E Electric Transmission Easements - Request for Approval Under Section 851 and General Order 173

Keywords (choose from CPUC listing): Compliance, Agreements AL filing type: Monthly Quarterly Annual One-Time Other _____________________________

If AL filed in compliance with a Commission order, indicate relevant Decision/Resolution #: N/A Does AL replace a withdrawn or rejected AL? If so, identify the prior AL: No Summarize differences between the AL and the prior withdrawn or rejected AL: ____________________

Is AL requesting confidential treatment? If so, what information is the utility seeking confidential treatment for: No

Confidential information will be made available to those who have executed a nondisclosure agreement: N/A Name(s) and contact information of the person(s) who will provide the nondisclosure agreement and access to the confidential information: __________________________________________________________________________________________________ Resolution Required? Yes No Requested effective date: Upon Commission Resolution No. of tariff sheets: N/A Estimated system annual revenue effect (%): N/A Estimated system average rate effect (%): N/A When rates are affected by AL, include attachment in AL showing average rate effects on customer classes (residential, small commercial, large C/I, agricultural, lighting). Tariff schedules affected: N/A Service affected and changes proposed: N/A Pending advice letters that revise the same tariff sheets: N/A

Protests, dispositions, and all other correspondence regarding this AL are due no later than 20 days after the date of this filing, unless otherwise authorized by the Commission, and shall be sent to: California Public Utilities Commission Pacific Gas and Electric Company

Energy Division EDTariffUnit 505 Van Ness Ave., 4th Flr. San Francisco, CA 94102 E-mail: [email protected]

Attn: Erik Jacobson Director, Regulatory Relations c/o Megan Lawson 77 Beale Street, Mail Code B10C P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, CA 94177 E-mail: [email protected]

Advice 4970-E December 2, 2016

Attachment 1

Bridge Consent Agreement


Attachment 2

PG&E Easements


Attachment 3

Relevant Sections of Draft EIR


Attachment 4

Notice of Determination


Attachment 5

Resolution 16-8337

RESOLUTION NO. 16-8337

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND CERTIFYING A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING CEQA FINDINGS WITH RESPECT THERETO, AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE CITYPLACE SANTA CLARA PROJECT LOCATED AT 5155 STARS AND STRIPES DRIVE, ET AL, SANTA CLARA

SCH#2014072078 CEQ2014-01180 (EIR)

PLN2014-10554 (General Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Development Agreement)

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

WHEREAS, on May 23, 2014, Santa Clara Centennial Gateway, LLC (predecessor in interest to

Montana Property Group), filed a preliminary application for the development of a mixed-use

project on approximately 9.48 acres of real property (together, the "Tasman Parcels") located at

5120 Stars and Stripes Drive (APNs 104-03-038 and -039);

WHEREAS, on June 9, 2014, Related Santa Clara LLC (the "Applicant") filed a preliminary

application for the development of a mixed-use project on approximately 230 acres of real

property (together, the "City Landfill Parcels") located at 5155 Stars and Stripes Drive (APNs

104-03-036, 104-03-037, 104-01-102, 097-01-039, 097-01-073), generally located to the north

and northeast of the Tasman Parcels;

WHEREAS, the Tasman Parcels and the City Landfill Parcels (together, the "Project Site")

encompass approximately two hundred forty (240) acres of land generally located north of

Tasman Drive, east of Great America Parkway and San Tomas Aquino Creek, west of the

Guadalupe River, and south of Great America Way and State Route (SR) 237, most of which

was formerly occupied by a landfill and is now occupied by currently occupied by the Santa

Resolution/CityPlace Santa Clara EIR Page 1 of 11

Rev. 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16

Clara Golf & Tennis Club, a restaurant and banquet facility, a maintenance building, Fire Station

10, a Bicycle-Motocross (BMX) track, the Arnereseo Methane Plant, the Eastside Retention

Basin, a City vehicle washing station, and vacant lots used for parking;

WHEREAS, on August 5, 2014, an application was filed by Related Santa Clara, LLC (the

"Applicant"), to combine the two development proposals into a single project (the "Original

Project") that would encompass up to 9.16 million gross square feet (gsf) of office buildings,

retail and entertainment facilities, residential units, and hotel rooms, consistent with the elements

of the "CityPlace Project" discussed in the Master Community Plan;

WHEREAS, on February 5, 2015, Montana Property Group and the Applicant formed a joint

venture to develop the "City Center" portion of the Project Site (as described in the Master

Community Plan), with the remainder of the Project Site to be developed by the Applicant;

WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes a General Plan Amendment to change the land use

designation from Parks/Open Space and Regional Commercial to Urban Center/Entertainment,

to revise Figure 2.3-1 Areas of Potential Development and Table 8.6-2 Proposed Development

(Approved, Not Constructed and Pending Projects), to add transportation demand goals to

Appendix 8.13 (Climate Action Plan), and to make related minor text amendments; Rezone of

the Project Site from Public, Quasi-Public, Park or Recreation (B) and Commercial Park (CP) to

Planned Development-Master Planned Community (PD-MC) Zoning District, with a

corresponding Master Community Plan, Infrastructure Master Plan, and Conditions of Approval,

attached hereto; a Development Agreement; a Disposition and Development Agreement; an

Ordinance to allow leases in excess of 55 years at the Project Site; and an Override of the Airport

Land Use Commission Comprehensive Land Use Plan;

WHEREAS, the Project approvals will include this Resolution No. 16-8337 (the "CEQA

Resolution"); Resolution No. 16-8338 (the "General Plan Amendment Resolution"); Resolution


Rev. 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16

No. 16-8339 (the "Rezoning Resolution"); Ordinance No. 1956 ("Development Agreement

Ordinance"); Resolution No. 16-8340 (the "Disposition and Development Agreement

Resolution"); Ordinance No. 1957 (the "Lease Term Authorization"); and Resolution No. 16-

8341 (the "ALUC Override") (collectively, the "Approvals");

WHEREAS, the Project will also require separate applications and submittals of Development

Area Plans and Tentative and/or Vesting Tentative Subdivision Maps for the implementation of

Project development for City review and approval;

WHEREAS, on July 30, 2014, the City of Santa Clara ("City") distributed a Notice of

Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") and on July 30, 2014 posted the

Notice at the Santa Clara County Clerk's office, soliciting guidance on the scope and content of

the environmental information to be included in the DEIR;

WHEREAS, the DEIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA and the City circulated copies of

the DEIR and Notice of Availability to the public agencies which have jurisdiction by law with

respect to the Project, as well as to other interested persons, organizations and agencies, and the

City sought the comments of such persons, organizations and agencies on October 9, 2015 for a

45-day review period and extended the review period an additional 15 days upon agency request

ending on December 15, 2015 ("Comment Period") ;

WHEREAS, the City prepared written responses to the comments received during the Comment

Period and included those responses in a Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR"). The

FEIR consists of a list of agencies and organizations to whom the DEIR was sent, a list of the

comment letters received on the DEIR, revisions to the text of the DEIR, responses to comments

received on the DEIR, and copies of comment letters. The FEIR was circulated for a 10-day

review period beginning on April 19, 2016 and was extended and additional 10 days upon

agency request thereby concluding on May 9, 2016;


Rev. 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16

WHEREAS, the City received additional comments from agencies, organizations and

individuals following the close of the FEIR review period and prepared responses to comments

that do not change the conclusions of the FEIR and are provided as Exhibit B to the FEIR, which

was prepared after the initial publication of the FEIR;

WHEREAS, after the publication of the FEIR, the Applicant proposed an additional land use

scheme, referred to as the Enhanced Open Space Variant ("EOS Variant"), under which a portion

of one of the parcels (APN 104-01-102) (designated as Parcel 3 in the Master Community Plan),

would be retained by the City and reserved for parks and open space uses, and the 720,000

square feet of office that had been planned for Parcel 3 would be reallocated to the other parcels

in the development, all as described more particularly in the Master Community Plan

Supplement;

WHEREAS, on June 3, 2016, the City distributed an "Impact Analysis for CityPlace Enhanced

Open Space Variant," which concluded that the EOS Variant would not result in any changes to

the previously identified environmental impacts, or result in any additional environmental

impacts, and which is provided as Exhibit A to the FEIR, which was prepared after the initial

publication of the FEIR;

WHEREAS, the DEIR, FEIR and FEIR Exhibits constitute the EIR for the Project;

WHEREAS, upon further review of the EIR, the City has identified certain minor revisions to

the EIR that do not change the conclusions of the EIR, and which are set forth in the body of this

Resolution;

WHEREAS, the EIR identified certain significant and potentially significant adverse effects on

the environment that would be caused by the Project as proposed;

Resolution/CityPlace Santa Clara E1R Page 4 of 11

Rev. 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16

WHEREAS, the EIR outlined various mitigation measures that would substantially lessen or

avoid the Project's significant effects on the environment, as well as alternatives to the Project as

proposed that would provide some environmental advantages;

WHEREAS, the City is required, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act

("CEQA") (Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.), to adopt all feasible mitigation measures or

feasible project alternatives that can substantially lessen or avoid any significant environmental

effects of the Project;

WHEREAS, the EIR identifies an Increased Housing Alternative to improve the jobs-to-housing

ratio which would result in fewer impacts associated with transportation/traffic, air quality, and

greenhouse gas emissions through a replacement of 320,000 square feet of office space planned

under the Original Project with 320 additional housing units to provide a total of 1,680

residential units on the Project Site;

WHEREAS, significant and unavoidable land use, transportation, air quality, greenhouse gas

emissions, noise, biological resources, population and housing, and public services impacts

would remain with the Increased Housing Alternative, as it includes the same amount of total

building area (9.16 million gross square feet) and types of uses contemplated by the Original

Project, but the severity of the impacts would be reduced for some transportation, greenhouse

gas, and noise impacts;

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;


Rev. 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16

WHEREAS, the "CEQA Findings" attached to this Resolution is a set of Findings of Fact and a

Statement of Overriding Considerations prepared in order to satisfy the requirements of Public

Resources Code § 21081, subdivision (a);

WHEREAS, as the CEQA Findings explain, the City Council, reflecting the advice of City staff

and input from various State and local agencies, has expressed its intention to adopt the EOS

Variant, together with the Increased Housing Alternative presented in the EIR, as the project for

development on the Project Site (the "Project");

WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that none of the alternatives addressed in the EIR,

other than the Increased Housing Alternative, would be both feasible and environmentally

superior to the Project as proposed. Both of the "No Project" alternatives and the "Reduced

Intensity" alternative would not sufficiently satisfy the Project Objectives, and the "Reduced

Intensity Alternative" would be infeasible. The details supporting these determinations are set

forth in the CEQA Findings;

WHEREAS, in taking this course, the City Council has acted consistent with the CEQA

mandate to look to project mitigations and/or alternatives as a means of substantially lessening or

avoiding the environmental effects of projects as proposed;

WHEREAS, many of the significant and potentially significant environmental effects associated

with the Project can either be substantially lessened or avoided through the inclusion of

mitigation measures proposed in the EIR;

WHEREAS, the City Council, in reviewing the Project, intends to adopt all mitigation measures

set forth in the EIR;

WHEREAS, the significant effects that cannot be avoided or substantially lessened by the

adoption of feasible mitigation measures Will necessarily remain significant and unavoidable;


Rev. 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16

WHEREAS, as detailed in the CEQA Findings, the City Council has determined that, despite

the occurrence of significant unavoidable environmental effects associated with the Project, as

mitigated and adopted, there exist certain overriding economic, social and other considerations

for approving the Project which justify the occurrence of those impacts and render them

acceptable; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the EIR and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting

Program, attached as the "MMRP", the CEQA Findings, the City Staff reports pertaining to the

EIR, and all evidence received at a duly noticed public hearing on June 28, 2016. All of these

documents and evidence are incorporated herein by reference into this Resolution.

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

AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the City Council hereby finds that the above Recitals are true and correct and by this

reference makes them a part hereof.

2. That the City Council hereby incorporates the following changes into the EIR:

a. The response to the comment regarding Intersection #28 on page B-2.24 of

Exhibit B to the FEIR is revised as follows (struck through text indicates deletions and

bolded, underlined text indicates insertions):

There is no Cumulative impact at this intersection as shown correctly in the FEIR.

location.

This improvement at this intersection is the full responsibility of the City of

San Jose pursuant to the North San Jose settlement agreement between the

City of San Jose and Santa Clara County. Therefore, the City of Santa Clara

(and thus the Project) have no funding obligation.


Rev. 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16

b. In light of the fact that Yahoo! is already responsible for the construction and/or

funding of the entirety of the improvements to Intersections 64, 65, and 66 and that the

City of San Jose is already responsible for the construction and/or funding of the entirety

of the improvements to Intersection Nos. 27 and 28 pursuant to the North San Jose

settlement agreement between the City of San Jose and Santa Clara County, the Project

Responsibility for each of these intersections in the following tables (as applicable) is

revised to be zero percent (0%); Tables 3.3-20, 3.3-26 and 3.3-50.

3. That the City Council hereby finds that the EIR has been completed in compliance with

CEQA.

4. That the City Council hereby finds the E1R has been presented to the City Council, which

reviewed and considered the information and analysis contained therein.

5. That the City Council finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and

California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15091, that many 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 finds that none of the Project Alternatives set forth in the EIR,

other than the Increased Housing Alternative, can feasibly substantially lessen or avoid those

significant adverse environmental effects not otherwise lessened or avoided by the adoption of

all feasible mitigation measures.

7. That, in order to comply with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council

hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program as set forth in the attached

"MMRP". The Program is designed to ensure that, during project implementation, the City,

Resolution/CityPlace Santa Clara E1R Page 8 of 11

Rev. 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16

affected landowners, their assigns and successors in interest and any other responsible parties

comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified. The MMRP identifies, for each

mitigation measure, the action to be taken and the party responsible for implementation. Exhibit

"1" to the MMRP shall be amended to reflect that the Montague/Zanker intersection lies within

the City of San Jose's jurisdiction rather than the County of Santa Clara's jurisdiction, with the

corresponding fair share funds being reallocated to the City of San Jose, thus increasing the City

of San Jose share and decreasing the County of Santa Clara share of the fair share fee.

8. That the City Council finds that the EIR set forth project-level and cumulative

environmental impacts that are significant and unavoidable that cannot be mitigated or avoided

through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or feasible alternatives. As to these

impacts, the City Council finds that there exist certain overriding economic, social and other

considerations for approving the Project that the City Council believes justify the occurrence of

those impacts, as detailed in the "CEQA Findings" exhibit attached hereto.

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. Based on the findings set forth in this Resolution, the evidence in the City Staff Report,

and the attached CEQA Findings, the City Council approves and certifies the EIR, makes

findings concerning mitigation measures, adopts a MMRP, makes findings concerning

alternatives and makes findings that there exist certain overriding economic, social and other

considerations for approving the Project that justify the occurrence of those associated impacts


Rev. 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16

and adopts the CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, all in accordance

with CEQA for the Project.

11. Constitutionality, severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or

word of this resolution is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be

unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the

remaining portions of the resolution. The City of Santa Clara, California, hereby declares that it

would have passed this resolution and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, and

word thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section(s), subsection(s), sentence(s),

clause(s), phrase(s), or word(s) be declared invalid.

II/

IH

///


Rev. 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16

ATTEST: ROD DIRIDON, JR. CITY CLERK CITY OF SANTA CLARA

12. 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 28 1" DAY OF JUNE, 2016, BY THE

FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: COUNCILORS: Caserta, Davis, Kolstad, O'Neill and Watanabe and

Mayor Gillmor

NOES: COUNCILORS:

None

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

Mars alli

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS: None

Attachments Incorporated by Reference:

1. "MMRP" (Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program)

2. "CEQA Findings" (CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations)

3. "Development Plans" (Master Community Plan and Infrastructure Master Plan)

4. Exhibit "Project Conditions of Approval"

TAPLANNING\Current Planning12011-2014120141Project Files Aelive\PLN2014-10554 5155 Stars & Stripes - City Place\CC16-28-161CC Reso

E1R.doc


Rev, 11-30-11; Typed: 06-22-16


Attachment 6

City Place Santa Clara Project Master Plan – Vol. 1

Available at the following link: http://santaclaraca.gov/home/showdocument?id=41301

http://santaclaraca.gov/home/showdocument?id=41301

PG&E Gas and Electric Advice Filing List General Order 96-B, Section IV

AT&T Division of Ratepayer Advocates Office of Ratepayer Advocates Albion Power Company Don Pickett & Associates, Inc. OnGrid Solar Alcantar & Kahl LLP Douglass & Liddell Pacific Gas and Electric Company Anderson & Poole Downey & Brand Praxair Atlas ReFuel Ellison Schneider & Harris LLP Regulatory & Cogeneration Service, Inc. BART Evaluation + Strategy for Social

Innovation SCD Energy Solutions

Barkovich & Yap, Inc. G. A. Krause & Assoc. SCE Bartle Wells Associates GenOn Energy Inc. SDG&E and SoCalGas Braun Blaising McLaughlin & Smith, P.C. GenOn Energy, Inc. SPURR Braun Blaising McLaughlin, P.C. Goodin, MacBride, Squeri, Schlotz &

Ritchie San Francisco Water Power and Sewer

CENERGY POWER Green Charge Networks Seattle City Light CPUC Green Power Institute Sempra Energy (Socal Gas) California Cotton Ginners & Growers Assn Hanna & Morton Sempra Utilities California Energy Commission ICF SoCalGas California Public Utilities Commission International Power Technology Southern California Edison Company California State Association of Counties Intestate Gas Services, Inc. Spark Energy Calpine Kelly Group Sun Light & Power Casner, Steve Ken Bohn Consulting Sunshine Design Center for Biological Diversity Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc. Tecogen, Inc. City of Palo Alto Linde TerraVerde Renewable Partners City of San Jose Los Angeles County Integrated Waste

Management Task Force TerraVerde Renewable Partners, LLC

Clean Power Los Angeles Dept of Water & Power Tiger Natural Gas, Inc. Clean Power Research MRW & Associates TransCanada Coast Economic Consulting Manatt Phelps Phillips Troutman Sanders LLP Commercial Energy Marin Energy Authority Utility Cost Management Cool Earth Solar, Inc. McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP Utility Power Solutions County of Tehama - Department of Public Works

McKenzie & Associates Utility Specialists

Crossborder Energy Modesto Irrigation District Verizon Crown Road Energy, LLC Morgan Stanley Water and Energy Consulting Davis Wright Tremaine LLP NLine Energy, Inc. Wellhead Electric Company Day Carter Murphy NRG Solar Western Manufactured Housing

Communities Association (WMA) Defense Energy Support Center Nexant, Inc. YEP Energy Dept of General Services ORA

advice 4970-e · the project is located on 240-acres of land north of levi’s stadium and...

Documents