On the agenda: Campbell City of Campbell - City of Council 12/7/2021 - Dec 07, 2021 — LPR Camera (Dec 7)

City Council Agenda
City of Campbell, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California

NOTE: To protect our constituents, City officials, and City staff, the City requests all
members of the public follow the guidance of the California Department of Health Services',
and the County of Santa Clara Health Officer Order, to help control the spread of COVID-19.
Additional information regarding COVID-19 is available on the City's website at
www.campbellca.gov.
This City Council Regular meeting will be conducted in person as well as telecommunication
and is compliant with provisions of the Brown Act.
The City Council meeting will be live-streamed on Channel 26, the City's website and on
YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofCampbell for those who only wish to view the
meeting.
Those members of the public wishing to provide public comment virtually are asked to
register in advance at: www.campbellca.gov/signup. After registering, you will receive a
confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting. Members of the public
may attend the meeting in person at Campbell City Hall - Council Chambers. If attending in
person, face coverings and physical distancing will be required until further notice.
Public comment will also be accepted via email at [email protected] prior to the
start of the meeting. Written comments will be posted on the website and distributed to the
Council. If you choose to email your comments, please indicate in the subject line “FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT” and indicate the item number.

REGULAR MEETING OF THE CAMPBELL CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, December 7, 2021 7:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chamber – 70 N. First Street
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS
ORAL REQUESTS

NOTE: This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the City Council
on any matter not on the agenda. Persons wishing to address the Council are requested, but
not required to complete a Speaker’s Card. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes. The law
generally prohibits the Council from discussion or taking action on such items. However, the
Council may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Requests.

COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
CONSENT CALENDAR

NOTE: All matters listed under consent calendar are considered by the City Council to be
routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items
unless a request is made by a member of City Council, City staff, or a member of the public.
Any person wishing to speak on any item on the consent calendar should ask to have the item
removed from the consent calendar prior to the time the Council votes to approve. If removed,
the item will be discussed in the order in which it appears.

1.

Minutes of City Council Regular Meeting of November 16, 2021
Recommended Action: Approve the regular meeting minutes of November 16,
2021.

2.

Minutes of City Council Executive Session Meeting of November 17, 2021
Recommended Action: Approve the Executive Session meeting minutes of
November 17, 2021.

3.

Approving Bills and Claims
Recommended Action: Approve the bills and claims in the amount of
$1,876,421.67.

4.

Monthly Investment Transactions Report
Recommended Action: That the City Council review and accept the Monthly
Investment Transactions Report for October 2021.

5.

Resolution Appointing Directors to the Pooled Liability Assurance Network
Joint Powers Authority (PLAN JPA). (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a Resolution appointing
Directors to the Pooled Liability Assurance Network Joint Powers Authority
(PLAN JPA).

6.

Approval of the Vacation of the Light and Air / Building (Setback) Lines
Created by Tract Map No. 405 (Portions of Grace Avenue, Hamilton Avenue,
and Hurst Avenue – Formerly Hurst Street) and Directing the City Clerk to
Record the Resolution (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a Resolution summarily
vacating the Light and Air/Building (Setback) Lines created by Tract Map No. 405
and directing the City Clerk to record the Resolution.

7.

Resolution Declaring Weeds a Public Nuisance and Scheduling a Public
Hearing. (Resolution/Roll Call)
Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a Resolution, declaring
weeds a public nuisance, and setting January 18, 2022, as the date for a public
hearing to hear protests.

8.

Approval of a Used Car Dealer Permit for Campbell Pre Owned Inc.
(Resolution/Roll Call)
Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the
issuance of a Used Car Dealer Permit to sell used cars at 125 E. Sunnyoaks
Ave. Suite 209A, Campbell, CA 95008.

9.

Approval to Accept a Check Donation from San Jose Water in Support of
the “Explore Public Art Project”
Recommended Action: That the City Council accept a donation for $1,000 from
San Jose Water and directing the City Clerk to send a letter of appreciation.

PUBLIC HEARINGS AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES

NOTE: Members of the public may be allotted up to two (2) minutes to comment on any public
hearing item. Applicants/Appellants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of
five (5) minutes for opening statements and up to a total of three (3) minutes maximum for
closing statements. Items requested/recommended for continuance are subject to Council’s
consent at the meeting.

10.

Public Hearing to Consider the Applications (PLN-2021-128 / PLN-2021-129)
of Nicole Comach for Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural
Review for T-Mobile & AT&T to Allow for the Reestablishment and
Continued
Operation
of
an
Existing
Concealed
Wireless
Telecommunications Facility (Faux Tree Pole) with a Requested Exception
to the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan Height Limit of 45 Feet to Allow
the Retention of the Approximately 69-Foot Tall Facility, on Property
Located at 2041 S. Winchester Boulevard in the P-D (Planned Development)
Zoning District. (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a Resolution approving
Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review for T-Mobile & AT&T
to allow for the reestablishment and continued operation of an existing concealed
wireless telecommunications facility (faux tree pole) with an exception to the
Winchester Boulevard Master Plan height limit of 45-feet to allow the retention of
an approximately 69-foot tall facility, on property located at 2041 S. Winchester
Boulevard in the P-D (Planned Development) Zoning District, finding the project
Categorically Exempt under Section 15301 of the California Environmental
Quality Act.

11.

Public Hearing to Consider an Interim Ordinance to Adopt Urgency
Measures to Implement Senate Bill No. 9 to Allow for Two-Unit Housing
Developments and Urban Lot Splits in All Single-Family Residential Zoning
Districts. (Ordinance/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt an Interim Ordinance to adopt
urgency measures to implement Senate Bill No. 9.

NEW BUSINESS
12.

Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan
Recommended Action: That the City Council discuss a conceptual ARPA
spending plan and provide staff with feedback regarding areas of interest for
future development, follow up, and approval.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS
13.

City Council Policy Manual Section 1.33 - Annual Selection of Mayor and
Vice Mayor (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)

Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a Resolution adding Section
1.33 - Annual Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor to the City Council Policy
Manual.
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
14.

Council Committee Reports
Recommended Action: Report on committee assignments and general
comments.

ADJOURN
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the City Council
after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection with the agenda packet
in the lobby of City Clerk’s Office, 70 N. First Street, Campbell, CA 95008, during normal business
hours.
These
materials
will
also
be
available
on
the
City
website
at
https://www.ci.campbell.ca.us/agendacenter with the agenda packet following the last item of the
agenda, subject to staff’s ability to post the documents prior to the meeting. All documents not
posted prior to the meeting will be posted the next business day.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, listening assistive devices are available for
all meetings held in the City Council Chambers. If you require accommodation, please contact
the City Clerk’s Office, (408) 866-2117, at least one week in advance of the meeting.

1

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

City of Campbell, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California

This City Council meeting was conducted pursuant to provisions of the Brown
Act and Assembly Bill 361.
This meeting was recorded and can be viewed in its entirety at:
https://campbellca.gov/agendacenter and https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofCampbell.
CALL TO ORDER
The City Council of the City of Campbell convened on the regularly scheduled day of
November 16, 2021.
Mayor Gibbons stated that this City Council meeting was conducted pursuant to
provisions of the Brown Act and Assembly Bill 361 allowing a virtual meeting process for
local jurisdictions under a declared state of emergency.
ROLL CALL
Attendee Name
Elizabeth 'Liz' Gibbons
Paul Resnikoff
Anne Bybee
Susan M. Landry
Sergio Lopez

Title
Mayor
Vice Mayor
Councilmember
Councilmember
Councilmember

Status
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Pastor Ouk-Yean Kim Jueng, Associate Pastor Daniel Gbundema from the Campbell
United Methodist Church and Tim Hagstrom from the Church of Jesus Christ of LatterDay Saints lead the Pledge of Allegiance in honor of United Against Hate Week.
Mayor Gibbons read the proclamation declaring the Week of November 14 – 21, 2021
as “United Against Hate Week” in the City of Campbell. United Against Hate Week is a
call for seven days of local civic action by people in every California community to stop
the hate and implicit biases that are a dangerous threat to the safety and civility of our
neighborhoods, towns, and cities.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS

Packet Pg. 5

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

REGULAR MEETING OF THE CAMPBELL CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, November 16, 2021 – 7:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chamber – 70 N. First Street

1

There were no special presentations and proclamations.
COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS
There were no communications and petitions.
ORAL REQUESTS

COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
With the holidays approaching, the County of Santa Clara Public Health Department
recommends all eligible members of the public, who live or work in Santa Clara County
receive a COVID-19 booster shot. The booster is appropriate for almost everyone ages
18 and older 6 months following the last Pfizer or Moderna vaccination, or 2 months
following the Johnson & Johnson vaccination. County clinics are taking appointments at
www.sccfreevax.org and many locations readily accept walk-in patients for booster
shots. Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson vaccines are available within the
County. Additionally, many doctor offices and pharmacies provide COVID-19 boosters.
The City Clerk’s Office is accepting applications for the Parks and Recreation
Commission. To find out more about this Commission, please contact the City Clerk’s
Office
at
(408)
866-2117
or
visit
the
city’s
website:
www.campbellca.gov/boardsandcommissions. The deadline to apply is Monday,
December 20, 2021 at 5:00 PM.
The Campbell Senior Lunch Program reopened for indoor dining on November 1. The
Senior Nutrition Program offers nutritious meals to adults 60 years of age and older.
Take-out meals are available on a first come first served basis. Reservations are not
required. There is a suggested contribution of $3.00 per meal. Menus are available
online at www.campbellca.gov.
For over 30 years the Campbell Community Toy Program has been helping families
residing in Campbell, San Jose and other adjoining cities. Community volunteers join
together to donate, gather, organize and distribute thousands of gifs through the
program each year. For more information on ways to help, toy drop off locations,
volunteering or how to sign up for help, please visit www.campbelltoyprogram.com.
Holidays at the Ainsley House runs November 18 - December 19, 2021, Thursday
through Sunday from 11:00 AM to 3:00 PM, for unguided walk-through tours. This
year’s holiday theme is “Joys of the Season.” While visiting the Ainsley House, stop by
the museum’s holiday boutique.
The Ainsley House is excited to celebrate their 27th holiday season at 12:00 PM
December 2 – 5, 2021 and December 9 – 12, 2021 with Holiday Teas and Tours inside
the Carriage House. Enjoy holiday tea followed by a self-guided tour of the Ainsley

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

Page
2 Pg. 6
Packet

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

There were no oral requests.

1

House decorated for the holidays. These Holiday Tea and Tours are a major museum
fundraiser.

City Hall Offices will be closed Thursday, November 25 and Friday, November 26, 2021
in observance of the Thanksgiving Day holiday and will reopen on Monday, November
29, 2021. Police and emergency services will remain open.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Gibbons asked if anyone wished to remove an item from the Consent Calendar.
The Consent Calendar was considered as follows:
1.

Minutes of City Council Study Session Meeting of September 29, 2021.
Recommended Action: Approve the Study Session meeting minutes of
September 29, 2021.
This action approves the City Council Study Session meeting minutes of
September 29, 2021.

2.

Minutes of City Council Regular Meeting of November 2, 2021.
Recommended Action: Approve the Regular meeting minutes of November 2,
2021.
This action approves the Regular meeting minutes of November 2, 2021.

3.

Approving Bills and Claims.
Recommended Action: Approve the bills and claims in the amount of
$1,624,864.95.
This action approves the bills and claims in the amount of $1,624,864.95 as
follows: payroll checks dated October 14, 2021, in the amount of $69,874.48;
payroll checks dated October 18, 2021, in the amount of $451,162.74; and bills
and claims checks dated October 25, 2021, in the amount of $1,103,827.73.

4.

Second Reading of Ordinance 2276 to Allow Electronic Filing of Campaign
Disclosure Statements and Statements of Economic Interests
(Ordinance/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the
second reading and adopt Ordinance 2276 adding Chapter 2.50 to the Campbell
Municipal Code relating to allowing electronic filing of statements, reports, or
forms required by Chapter 4 of the Political Reform Act (commencing with
Section 84100 of the Government Code) and Statement of Economic Interests
(Form 700).

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

Page
3 Pg. 7
Packet

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

On Saturday, December 4, 2021, 9:00 AM to 12:00 PM, Santa Clause will be coming to
the Ainsley House. Tickets are $10 per family, please bring your own camera for
photos. For more information about “Joys of the Season” or other upcoming events at
the Ainsley House, or Museum, please visit www.campbellca.gov.

1

Ordinance 2276 adds Chapter 2.50 to the Campbell Municipal Code relating to
allowing electronic filing of statements, reports, or forms required by Chapter 4 of
the Political Reform Act (commencing with Section 84100 of the Government
Code) and Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700).

RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:

ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
Landry
Lopez
Bybee, Landry, Lopez, Resnikoff, Gibbons

PUBLIC HEARINGS AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES
There were no public hearings and introduction of ordinances.
NEW BUSINESS
5.

Discuss Process for Annual Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor
Recommended Action: It is recommended that City Council discuss and provide
direction to Staff on the appointment method for Mayor and Vice Mayor.
City Clerk Christopherson reviewed the Staff Report dated November 16, 2021
noting that traditionally, the City Council has held a reorganization meeting in
December of each year where the City Council nominates and votes on a Mayor
and Vice Mayor based on the two highest vote getters in the most recent
election. This traditional method can continue to be utilized for those who are
serving out their current at-large elected seats from the 2018 citywide election
(Vice Mayor Resnikoff and Councilmember Bybee), however, beyond year 2022
this traditional process is problematic as the City is now holding district elections.
Staff is recommending Council select a Mayor and Vice Mayor using a numerical
basis by District number with flexibility for a Councilmember to decline their
position in the rotation, noting this rotation is a starting point and a formal Council
vote will decide the official selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor.
Councilmembers discussed and confirmed consensus for the need for a newly
elected Councilmember to serve for one year on Council prior to being appointed
as Mayor, to ensure a proper orientation to serving on Council prior to taking the
leadership role.
Mayor Gibbons raised a concern relating to the need for a Council Policy that
stipulates City decisions will be based on what’s best for the City as a whole, and
not what is best for a particular district.
City Manager Loventhal noted that the Executive Team has begun discussions
relating to how information is presented to Council and how opportunities are

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

Page
4 Pg. 8
Packet

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

M/S: Landry/Lopez – That the City Council approve the Consent Calendar.
The motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:

1

sought based on the City’s new district structure and should Council confirm
consensus could bring back a report for further discussion.

In response to an inquiry relating to Councilmember term limits and how long a
Councilmember needs to be out of office before they could again run for Council,
City Manager Loventhal stated that current Municipal Code states election or
appointment to the City Council may be sought after the expiration of twenty-two
months following the end of the two consecutive City Council terms. The Council
term limits are voter approved and would require returning to the ballot for
modifications.
M/S: Landry/Resnikoff – That the City Council confirm consensus for Staff
to return with a draft Council Policy assigning the nomination of Mayor and
Vice Mayor on a rotational basis by District number, beginning with District
5 in 2023, and allowing for a temporary change in the rotation to
accommodate the experience of a newly elected Councilmember. The
motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:
6.

ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
Landry
Resnikoff
Bybee, Gibbons, Landry, Lopez, Resnikoff

Campbell Park Improvement Project 17-DD Report of Bid Results with Staff
Recommendation to Reject All Bids, Authorization to Advertise and Award
a Project with Minor Scope Modifications, and Other Associated Actions
(Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt a
Resolution for the Campbell Park Improvement Project 17-DD to reject all bids;
approve the plans and specifications with minor scope modifications; and
authorize the Director of Public Works to advertise for bids and award the project,
the City Manager to execute a construction contract to the lowest responsive and
responsible bidder in an amount not to exceed $2,179,000 plus encumber a 10%
construction contingency, the City Engineer to negotiate and execute contract
change orders up to and within the allocated construction contingency, the Public
Works Director to reject bids and rebid the project should bids received have
unamenable irregularities, and the Finance Director to perform a budget
adjustment.
Public Works Director Todd Capurso reviewed the Staff Report dated November
16, 2021 noting that on July 20, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution 12741
approving the Project plans and specifications and authorizing the Public Works
Director to advertise for bids and award the project. The bid opening was held on

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

Page
5 Pg. 9
Packet

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

Council confirmed consensus for a continued discussion on the need for a
Council Policy describing City decision making based on a City as a whole
approach rather than a by District approach.

1

Dave Rubin, Callandar & Associates reviewed the various factors that are
influencing the increase in bids noting much of which is outside economic factors
and are happening across the country, such as inflation, uncertain supply chain,
increased supply costs, fuel prices, and contractor backlogs. Some factors of this
project specifically could have impacted bid results as well such as small work
site, topography of the site, requirement for numerous trades and suppliers,
timing of bidding the project (summer months vs. winter months).
Mr. Rubin noted some fairly minor scope modifications that could be made to the
overall project which could help to bring the cost of the project down to the bid
levels, which would include restroom specification modifications, eliminating
landscape boulders, reducing seat wall height and replacing it with stand alone
benches, not using color concrete, removing the specialty beaver themed play
equipment and replacing it with more cost-effective equipment.
City Engineer Amy Olay reviewed the options before Council noting the three
alternatives, 1) to rebid the project with the minor scope modifications, 2) award
the contract as is to the lowest bidder, 3) reject all bids and rebid the project
without scope modifications, and 4) reduce the scope of the current project to fit
the current budget. City Engineer Olay noted that all three come with risks, and it
is not guaranteed that if the project is rebid it would result in a different result, but
that Staff is recommending alternative 1 with the scope modifications
recommended by Callandar & Associates.
City Engineer Olay noted that moving forward, especially in an unpredictable
economic climate, the Public Works Department will include additional third-party
cost estimators in the project review, especially for a multi-trade project, use a
cost estimate validation throughout the design process and keep a close eye on
the bidding environment, trying to take advantage of winter timing as much as
possible.
In response to inquiries, Public Works Director Capurso stated that Staff is
recommending Alternative 1 in an effort to be conservative with funding
resources noting that the scope changes presented are not significant enough to
change the overall vision for the project. Public Works Director Capurso noted
that should Council move forward with the project as is, taking the additional
money from the Parks Dedication Fund, no other projects in the current pipeline
would be affected.

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

Page
6 Pg. 10
Packet

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

August 25, 2021, a total of three (3) construction bid proposals were received.
The base bid amounts are $2,272,000, $2,295,000, and $2,516,730 submitted by
Goodland Landscape Construction, Inc. of Tracy, California, Robert A. Bothman
Construction of Santa Clara, California, and Suarez & Munoz Construction, Inc.
of Hayward, California, respectively. All three proposals exceeded the final
engineer’s estimate of $1,661,000. The lowest responsible and responsive bid
from Goodland Landscape Construction is $611,000 or 37% above the final
engineer’s cost estimate.

1

In response to an inquiry relating to the change order process, City Attorney
Representative Darcy Pruitt stated that Council needs to either decide to accept
the current low bidder with the scope as is or change the scope and rebid the
project. It would not be advisable to accept the low bidder and then issue a
change order significantly altering what was agreed upon in the bid.
Council discussed the risks and concerns associated with going back out to bid
when the market conditions have not changed and the potential for increasing
costs to the project.
Council confirmed consensus for Alternative 2, awarding the project as-is to the
current lowest bidder.
M/S: Resnikoff/Landry – That the City Council adopt Resolution 12780 for
Campbell Park Improvement Project 17-DD to award contract as-is to
lowest bidder; and authorize the following: the City Manager to execute a
construction contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder in
an amount not to exceed $2,272,000 plus encumber a 10% construction
contingency, the City Engineer to negotiate and execute contract change
orders up to and within the allocated construction contingency, and the
Finance Director to perform a budget adjustment. The motion was adopted
by the following roll call vote:
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:

ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
Resnikoff
Landry
Bybee, Landry, Lopez, Resnikoff, Gibbons

The City Council took a recess and reconvened at 9:27 P.M.
7.

Review Updated City Population Data as Reported through the 2020
Federal U.S. Census
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council review the City's
updated population data as reported through the 2020 Federal U.S. Census and
provide direction to Staff relating to the continued public outreach process.
City Clerk Christopherson reviewed the Staff Report dated November 16, 2021
and stated that on September 27, 2021, the State of California posted its
adjusted 2020 U.S. Census data. For California cities, these figures are the final
numbers that must be used to determine if district boundaries need to be
adjusted. The City’s current population deviation – the difference between the

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

Page
7 Pg. 11
Packet

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

Vice Mayor Resnikoff suggested that moving forward, if there are two vendors
who make a specific product, our bidding allows for a contractor to bid out either
vendor or to substitute an equal product as in the modular restroom in this
project.

1

While the current district boundary map is considered balanced from an equal
population standpoint, the City must also find the current map to be compliant
with the California Fair Maps Act by the legal deadline of April 17, 2022. If
Council finds the current districts meet the requirements of the Act, then the
election district lines may be retained as they are at the conclusion of the
required four public hearings. This does not preclude the City from considering
any alternative map submitted by the public during the final two public hearings.
Staff is recommending Council find the current District boundary map to be
population balanced, declare their support to focus on the current boundary map
for the remaining two public hearings and to forgo the previously scheduled
Community Workshops.
Mayor Gibbons opened the public hearing, there being no public speakers, the
public hearing was closed.
Councilwoman Landry expressed concern relating to the current district boundary
map, her preference not to bring forward the current map for consideration at the
public hearings and stated her support for holding at least one community
workshop to assist the public in drawing additional draft maps for consideration.
Councilmember Lopez expressed support for the staff recommendation given the
added time and cost associated with drawing and analyzing additional district
maps given our current map is deemed balanced with the new U.S. Census
population numbers.
Vice Mayor Resnikoff expressed support for the staff recommendation noting a
benefit to the community in keeping the boundaries the same as was just
completed in 2019, and for saving the expense of continuing to draw additional
maps that will require consultant review.
Councilmember Bybee expressed concern for declaring a map choice at this
stage and the message to the public that would dissuade someone from
submitting a draft map for consideration.
In response to inquiries, City Manager Loventhal clarified that the purpose of
putting forward the current boundary map is to use it as a starting point during
the required next two public hearings, it would not preclude any member of the
public from submitting a draft map for consideration as well.
In response to inquiries, City Clerk Christopherson stated that the cost savings in
selecting the current district boundary map as a starting point for the remaining

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

Page
8 Pg. 12
Packet

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

most populous and least populous districts – is 7.65%, which is within the 10%
threshold where a map is considered “presumptively constitutional,” and thus the
districts do not require an adjustment to comply with the federal equal population
requirement.

1

Mayor Gibbons expressed concerns relating to transparency in the utilization of
the current district map and expressed concern for not considering any future
potential developments and growth that may take place within the next ten years.
Mayor Gibbons expressed support for holding on community workshop for the
public to attend.
Councilmembers discussed the adoption process of the current district boundary
map and the need to utilize the current U.S. Census population data to make
mapping decisions.
Council confirmed consensus for holding one community workshop to assist any
interested residents in drawing and proposing additional maps.
Vice Mayor Resnikoff made a motion that the City Council finds the current
district boundary map to be population balanced, declares support to focus on
the current district boundary map for the final two public hearings and forgo the
community workshops.
Councilmember Bybee seconded the motion and made a friendly amendment to
include scheduling one community workshop.
Vice Mayor Resnikoff accepted the friendly amendment.
M/S: Resnikoff/Bybee – That the City Council finds the current district
boundary map to be population balanced, declares support to focus on the
current district boundary map for the final two public hearings and
schedule one community workshop. The motion was adopted by the
following roll call vote:
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:
8.

ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
Resnikoff
Bybee
Bybee, Landry, Lopez, Resnikoff, Gibbons

Extension of Declaration of Local Emergency (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt a
Resolution extending the October 19, 2021 City Council proclamation declaring
the existence of a local emergency resulting from community spread of COVID19.
City Manager Loventhal reviewed the Staff Report dated November 16, 2021
noting that under Assembly Bill 361, Council is required to review this declaration

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

Page
9 Pg. 13
Packet

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

public hearings is due to a lessened consultant project cost as there is a
presumption that this process is simpler overall. A consultant would not
necessarily be required to attend the final two public hearings or the community
workshop.

every thirty days to continue to hold public meetings virtually. Council last met on
October 19, 2021 and asked Staff to poll Board and Commission members on
their readiness to return to in person meetings. At this time, over 89% of the
responding Board and Commission members have declared their willingness to
return to in person meetings, and Staff does not feel there would be quorum
issues in holding in person meetings. The resolutions recommended by staff do
not include the findings relating to Assembly Bill 361, therefore all of the City’s
public meeting bodies would be required to meet in person following tonight’s
meeting. If adopted, the resolutions presented relating to the remaining
emergency actions for business accommodations would be valid through
January 29, 2022, with the exception of the Parklet Program which is set to
expire on January 3, 2022.
In response to inquiries, City Clerk Christopherson reviewed the plan for bringing
public bodies back to in person meetings noting that the City Council and the
Planning Commission will hold their meetings in person as well as on Zoom for
virtual attendance by the public moving forward. These two public bodies will
have their meetings live streamed and videos posted to the City’s YouTube page
and website. The Boards and Commissions and Subcommittee meetings will
also be held in person and on Zoom for virtual attendance by the public but will
not be live streamed or have their videos posted online.
Councilmembers discussed the increase in transparency and participation in
having all of the public meeting bodies recordings available on the City website
and YouTube channel over the past two years.
Council confirmed consensus for continuing to post all of the City’s public
meeting body video recordings to the City’s website and YouTube channel.
M/S: Landry/Bybee – That the City Council adopt Resolution 12781
extending the October 19, 2021 City Council proclamation declaring the
existence of a local emergency resulting from community spread of COVID19. The motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:
9.

ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
Landry
Bybee
Bybee, Landry, Lopez, Resnikoff, Gibbons

Approve Appointments to the Historic Preservation Board
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council approve the
recommendation of the Advisory Commissioner Appointment Interview
Subcommittee regarding appointments to the Historic Preservation Board for two
four-year terms expiring October 2025.
Councilmember Bybee introduced the item stating that the Advisory
Commissioner Appointment Interview Subcommittee met on November 9, 2021

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

PagePacket
10 Pg. 14

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

1

1

and interviewed two applicants to fill two four-year terms available on the Historic
Preservation Board. One applicant did not attend the interview.

M/S: Bybee/Landry – That the City Council approve the recommendation of
the Advisory Commissioner Appointment Interview Subcommittee
regarding appointments to the Historic Preservation Board for two fouryear terms expiring October 2025. The motion was adopted by the
following roll call vote:
RESULT:
MOVER:
SECONDER:
AYES:

ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
Bybee
Landry
Bybee, Landry, Lopez, Resnikoff, Gibbons

COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
10.

Council Committee Reports
Recommended Action: Report on committee assignments and general
comments.
Councilmember Bybee attended the Advisory Commissioner Interview
Subcommittee meeting and the Cities Association meeting receiving updates on
Senate Bill 9 and Plan Bay Area 2050.
Councilwoman Landry attended the Advisory Commissioner Interview
Subcommittee meeting and the Economic Development Subcommittee meeting
where the potential need for an economic consultant and the impacts of the
General Plan on economic development were discussed.
Councilmember Lopez attended the Valley Transportation Authority Policy
Advisory Committee meeting where Measure B funding was discussed and noted
that the project for the Highway 17/Hamilton off ramp is now a strong contender
for funding and the City is expecting to receive approximately $1.3 million dollars
in project funding which is anticipated to be reflected in the next Capital
Improvement Plan.
Vice Mayor Resnikoff attended meetings of the West Valley Clean Water Joint
Powers Authority, the West Valley Sanitation District, the Veteran’s Memorial
Foundation Veteran’s Ceremony, and the Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
Board.
Mayor Gibbons attended the Cities Association meeting and noted that Senator
Cortese has indicated a willingness to work with the Governor to advocate for an

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

PagePacket
11 Pg. 15

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

The Subcommittee is recommending the reappointment of Mike Foulkes and the
new appointment of Rob Corteway each to a full four-year term expiring on
October 2025.

1

extension to the new housing law deadlines. Mayor Gibbons attended the Silicon
Valley Clean Energy Authority meetings noting the new long term power
contracts and energy projects and programs currently in the works.
ADJOURN

APPROVED:
ATTEST:

Elizabeth 'Liz' Gibbons, Mayor

Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

Minutes of November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting

PagePacket
12 Pg. 16

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 16, 2021 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

Mayor Gibbons adjourned the meeting at 10:56 p.m.

2

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

City of Campbell, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California

This City Council meeting was conducted pursuant to provisions of the Brown
Act and Assembly Bill 361.
CALL TO ORDER
The City Council of the City of Campbell convened on the special day of November 17,
2021.
Attendee Name
Elizabeth 'Liz' Gibbons
Paul Resnikoff
Anne Bybee
Susan M. Landry
Sergio Lopez

Title

Mayor
Vice Mayor
Councilmember
Councilmember
Councilmember

Status
Present
Absent
Present
Present
Present

PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments.
MOVE INTO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
A.

Personnel

B.

Litigation – CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION
(Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of California Government Code Section
(54956.9)
Name of case: Housekeys Resource and Education Center v. Garland Yee
Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 20CV366175

C.

Litigation - CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED
LITIGATION
Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of California
Government Code Section 54956.9: (4 potential cases)

D.

Real Property

E.

Labor Negotiations

Packet Pg. 17

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 17, 2021 4:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION
Wednesday, November 17, 2021 – 4:30 p.m.
City Hall – 70 N. First Street

2

The City Council met in Executive Session to discuss Items B and C. City Manager
Brian Loventhal, City Attorney Representative Darcy Pruitt, Housekeys Representatives
Julius Nyanda and Matthew Kabak were in attendance.
RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION

City Attorney Representative Darcy Pruitt announced that the City Council voted
unanimously with one absence, to continue to pursue existing litigation in the
Housekeys Resource and Education Center v. Garland Yee case relating to affordable
housing agreements and authorized initiation of litigation in four new actions relating to
affordable housing agreements. Details on the actions will be available upon request
once the actions are filed.
ADJOURNMENT
Council adjourned at 5:32 p.m.
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Elizabeth “Liz” Gibbons, Mayor
Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

Minutes of November 17, 2021 City Council Meeting

Page
2 Pg. 18
Packet

Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 17, 2021 4:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

A. Reportable Actions –

3

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

3
CONSENT CALENDAR
December 7, 2021

Approving Bills and Claims

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve the bills and claims in the amount of $1,876,421.67.
DISCUSSION
The bills and claims that have been audited and approved by staff for payments made
as noted below:
Type

Payroll
Bills & Claims
Bills & Claims
Payroll
Bills & Claims

Check Date

October 28, 2021
November 1, 2021
November 8, 2021
November 10, 2021
November 15, 2021

Total

Amount

$40,634.14
$242,832.19
$174,708.59
$28,958.40
$1,389,288.35

$1,876,421.67

FISCAL IMPACT
Requested action does not require a budget adjustment. Adequate funding was
available to cover all expenses as listed.

Prepared by:

Roberto Garcia-Acosta, Accounting Clerk
II

Reviewed by:
Norite Vong, Finance Manager

Packet Pg. 19

3
Approving Bills and Claims

Page 2 of 2

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Packet Pg. 20

4

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

4
CONSENT CALENDAR
December 7, 2021

Monthly Investment Transactions Report

RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council review and accept the Monthly Investment
Transactions Report for October 2021.
BACKGROUND
On August 17, 2021, the City Council approved the Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-22 City of
Campbell Investment Policy Update. Included as part of the updated policy was the
addition of Monthly Investment Transaction Reports. As required by California
Government Code (GC) Section 53607, staff will submit to Council Monthly Investment
Transaction Reports within 45 days of the prior month end that show a listing of
investments purchased, sold, called, or that have reached maturity, along with any
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) transfers. This is in addition to the Quarterly
Investment Report, which shows a number of other items listed under Section VII.A of
the City’s Investment Policy and has been historically prepared by staff and submitted to
Council within 30 days from the end of the prior quarter.
DISCUSSION
This Monthly Investment Transaction Report covers October 2021. As shown in
Attachment A, staff withdrew various amounts from the City’s Local Agency Investment
Fund (LAIF) account from July 1 to September 30, 2021 to support ongoing operating
expenses as well as scheduled debt service payments and investment purchases.
Withdrawals totaling $1.7 million were offset by interest earnings of $29,500; thereby
resulting in a net reduction to the City’s LAIF account balance of $1.67 million. Such a
reduction to the City’s primary liquidity account during this time period is a normal
occurrence every year since Property Taxes and other large seasonal revenue sources
aren’t received by the City until later in the fiscal year. Staff expects that the drawdown
during this period will be largely offset by deposits into LAIF over the next several
months as taxes and other revenue sources are received.
In addition to LAIF transactions, Attachment A also shows the purchase of one (1)
Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) Agency Note with a 3.5 year maturity and a 0.81%
yield. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, staff has largely held off on
purchasing new long-term investments so as to maintain sufficient liquidity necessary to

Packet Pg. 21

4
Monthly Investment Transactions Report

Page 2 of 2

support ongoing City operations during a time of economic uncertainty. However,
consistent with the recommended FY 2021-22 Investment Strategy accepted by Council
on August 17, 2021, staff has revised this approach in the current fiscal year and started
to look for longer-term investment opportunities outside of LAIF; thereby providing a
higher, yet still safe return consistent with the City’s Investment Policy. With the
pandemic being brought under better control and the current LAIF investment rate being
quite low at 0.203%, staff believes that this is a fiscally prudent approach and will
continue to look for attractive and appropriate longer-term investment opportunities
throughout FY 2021-22; contingent on a continued positive economic trend and
stabilization of the pandemic’s negative impacts. Please note that all investment
purchases made adhere to the City’s Investment Policy.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with reviewing and accepting the Monthly
Investment Transactions Report.

Prepared by:

Will Fuentes, Finance Director

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Attachment:

a. Monthly Investment Transactions Report (Oct 2021)

Packet Pg. 22

4.a

CITY OF CAMPBELL
Monthly Investment Transactions Report
October 1 to October 31, 2021
Trans. Date

0.203%

Beginning Balance
Transactions
Withdrawal
Interest Earnings
Withdrawal
Monthly Total

$ 41,863,905

10/13/2021
10/15/2021
10/27/2021

Ending Balance
Account
Bank of New York (BNY) ‐ ******818

Ending Balance

(900,000)
29,510
(800,000)
(1,670,490)
$ 40,193,415

Trans. Date

Beginning Balance
Transactions
Invest. Purchase ‐ FHLB (0.81% Yield; 3.50 Yrs)
Monthly Total

Oct 2021
Attachment: Monthly Investment Transactions Report (Oct 2021) (Monthly Investment Transactions Report)

Account
LAIF ‐ ******137
Average Monthly Yield

Oct 2021

$

10/27/2021

7,000,000

1,000,000
1,000,000
$

8,000,000

Packet Pg. 23

5

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

5
CONSENT CALENDAR
December 7, 2021

Adopt a Resolution Appointing Director to the Pooled Liability
Assurance Network Joint Powers Authority (PLAN JPA).
(Resolution/Roll Call Vote)

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt a resolution appointing directors to the Pooled Liability Assurance Network Joint
Powers Authority (PLAN JPA).
BACKGROUND
Since 1986, the City of Campbell has participated in a Pooled Liability Assurance
Network (PLAN) to obtain coverage and risk management services related to liability,
property, automobile physical damage and other ancillary lines of coverage. Campbell
is one of 28 member cities. This PLAN was previously administered by the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC). A 2017 study commissioned by the MTC found that
significant savings could be achieved by contracting pool administration services
through another source. Sedgwick (formerly Bickmore Risk Services) was subsequently
contracted as the new pool administrator and a new Joint Powers Authority (JPA) was
created to act as the new fiscal agent and to exclusively manage the existing and future
risk management and coverage needs of the members. On January 16, 2018, the City
Council adopted Resolution 12272 authorizing the City Manager to execute the PLAN
JPA Agreement. And on February 19, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution
12405 reaffirming the Finance Director as the primary appointee and the Human
Resources Manager as the voting alternate to the PLAN JPA Board of Directors. This
matched previous Director appointments when the risk pool was administered by MTC.
DISCUSSION
Article X of the PLAN JPA agreement states that each member of the JPA shall have a
Director and an alternate Director who have the authority to bind the City on matters
relating to the JPA. As stated previously, for the City of Campbell, these roles have
traditionally been held by the Finance Director and the Human Resource Manager,
respectively. However, so as to afford the City operational flexibility and to acknowledge
the fact that City risk management is primarily the responsibility of the Finance
Department, staff recommends that the Finance Manager be added as an alternate
Director option. If approved by the attached resolution, this would allow either the
Human Resources Manager or the Finance Manager to act as a voting alternate when

Packet Pg. 24

5
Appointing Directors to the PLAN JPA

Page 2 of 2

the Finance Director is not able to attend PLAN JPA Board meetings. Those instances
are rare, but meeting conflicts do arise from time to time. However, to ensure that the
City’s interests are properly and fully protected, the Finance Manager would also be
fully trained in all risk management issues and would meet with the Finance Director
before PLAN JPA Board meetings that they attend to confirm the City’s position on all
voting matters.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts associated with this resolution.

Prepared by:

Will Fuentes, Finance Director

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Attachment:

a. Resolution - Appointing Directors to PLAN JPA

Packet Pg. 25

5.a

RESOLUTION NO. ______

WHEREAS, the City of Campbell is a member of the Pooled Liability Assurance Network
Joint Powers Authoirty (PLAN JPA), a California non-profit corporation comprised of public
agencies pooling their property and liability risk, established pursuant to California Government
Code §6500 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, PLAN JPA is a self-funded insurance pool serving public agencies; and
WHEREAS, the operations of these programs are governed by a Board of Directors
consisting of one representative from each member agency; and

WHEREAS, participation on the Board of Directors is carried out by City of Campbell
staff as part of their regular duties and does not result in any remuneration to the employee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CAMPBELL that it hereby designates the City’s Finance Director as its represenative Board
Member; and the City’s Finance Manager or Human Resources Manager as its Board Alternate.

vote:

PASSED AND ADOPTED this ______ day of ______, 2021 by the following roll call
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:

Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
APPROVED:

Elizabeth “Liz” Gibbons, Mayor
ATTEST:

Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

Packet Pg. 26

Attachment: Resolution - Appointing Directors to PLAN JPA (Appointing Directors to the PLAN JPA)

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
APPOINTING DIRECTORS TO THE POOLED LIABILITY ASSURANCE NETWORK
JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY (PLAN JPA)

6

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

6
CONSENT CALENDAR
December 7, 2021

Approval of the Vacation of the Light and Air / Building (Setback)
Lines Created by Tract Map No. 405 (Portions of Grace Avenue,
Hamilton Avenue, and Hurst Avenue – Formerly Hurst Street) and
Directing the City Clerk to Record the Resolution (Resolution/Roll
Call Vote)

RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council adopt a resolution (1) summarily vacating the Light and
Air/Building (Setback) Lines created by Tract Map No. 405; and (2) directing the City
Clerk to record the resolution.
BACKGROUND
In August of 1947, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara (County)
approved Tract Map No. 405 which created a 37-lot subdivision as shown in Exhibit A of
the attached resolution. As was common at the time, the County required the subdivider
to dedicate a Light and Air / Building (Setback) Line along the street frontage of the lots
requiring that any structures constructed be set back 25 feet from the street.
DISCUSSION
The Building Setback Lines previously required by the County are no longer
appropriate. These Building Setback Lines represent outdated standards and are
frequently in conflict with the front and side setbacks required by the City of
Campbell’s Zoning Ordinance. For example, the R-1-6 zoning district for this
neighborhood requires a 20-foot front setback and a 12-foot street side set back,
whereas the Building Setback Line shown on Tract Map 405 requires a 25-foot front
setback, and a 25-foot street side setback. To eliminate this confusion, staff
recommends that the Building Setback Lines be vacated and that building setbacks be
determined solely through the requirements of the City’s Zoning Code.
In order to avoid a piecemeal implementation of the vacation of these easements, staff
is recommending that the City Council vacate all of the Building Setback Lines created
with Tract Map No. 405. A comprehensive list of the properties to be relieved of this
encumbrance is presented in Exhibit B of the attached resolution. Upon recordation of

Packet Pg. 27

6
Approval of the Vacation of the Light and Air/Building (Setback) Lines Created by Tract Map No.405
Page 2 of 2

the resolution approving this vacation, these properties will become unencumbered by
these easements.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

Prepared by:

Roger Storz, Senior Civil Engineer

Reviewed by:
Todd Capurso, Director of Public Works

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Attachment:

a. Resolution
b. Exhibit A - Tract No. 405
c. Exhibit B - Vacation of Light and Air Easement

Packet Pg. 28

6.a

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
VACATING THE LIGHT AND AIR / BUILDING SETBACK LINE EASEMENTS AS
SHOWN ON TRACT MAP NO. 405 (PORTIONS OF GRACE AVENUE, HAMILTON
AVENUE, AND HURST AVENUE – FORMERLY HURST STREET), AND DIRECTING
THE CITY CLERK TO RECORD THE RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, an easement for light and air purposes was recorded on August 11, 1947
on Tract Map No. 405 (portions of Grace Avenue, Hamilton Avenue, and Hurst Avenue
– formerly Hurst Street) in Book 13 of Maps at Page 43 of Official Records, Santa Clara
County; and
WHEREAS, this easement is no longer required as it has been superseded by the
requirements of the City of Campbell Zoning Code; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City of Campbell to remove this outdated
encumbrance from the properties within the subdivision known as Tract No. 405 as
shown on Exhibit A and more particularly described in Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, the easement vacation is to be made pursuant to Chapter 4, Summary
Vacation, of Part 3 of Division 9 of the California Street and Highway Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Campbell
does hereby vacate the light and air/building setback line easement and directs the City
Clerk to record this Resolution for the properties within Tract No. 405 as shown on
Exhibit A and more particularly described in Exhibit B.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
AYES:

Councilmembers:

NOES:

Councilmembers:

ABSENT:

Councilmembers:

day of

, 2021 by the following roll call vote:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Elizabeth “Liz” Gibbons, Mayor

Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

Packet Pg. 29

Attachment: Resolution (Approval of the Vacation of the Light and Air/Building (Setback) Lines Created by Tract Map No.405)

RESOLUTION NO.

Attachment: Exhibit A - Tract No. 405 (Approval of the Vacation of the Light and Air/Building (Setback) Lines Created by Tract Map No.405)

EXHIBIT A - Tract No. 405
6.b

Packet Pg. 30

6.c

Assessor Parcel
Number
288-25-019
288-25-084
288-25-021
288-25-022
288-25-023
288-25-024
288-25-025
288-25-026
288-25-027
288-25-028
288-25-029
288-25-030
288-25-031
288-25-032
288-25-049
288-25-050
288-25-051
288-25-052
288-25-053
288-25-054
288-25-055
288-25-056
288-25-057
288-25-058
288-25-059
288-25-087

Address
1870 Hamilton Avenue
1651 Grace Avenue
1671 Grace Avenue
1681 Grace Avenue
1691 Grace Avenue
1701 Grace Avenue
1711 Grace Avenue
1721 Grace Avenue
1731 Grace Avenue
1741 Grace Avenue
1751 Grace Avenue
1761 Grace Avenue
1771 Grace Avenue
1781 Grace Avenue
1780 Grace Avenue
1770 Grace Avenue
1760 Grace Avenue
1750 Grace Avenue
1740 Grace Avenue
1730 Grace Avenue
1720 Grace Avenue
1710 Grace Avenue
1700 Grace Avenue
1690 Grace Avenue
1680 Grace Avenue
1670 Grace Avenue

Map Reference
Tract No. 405, Lot 1
Tract No. 405, Lot 2
Tract No. 405, Lot 3
Tract No. 405, Lot 4
Tract No. 405, Lot 5
Tract No. 405, Lot 6
Tract No. 405, Lot 7
Tract No. 405, Lot 8
Tract No. 405, Lot 9
Tract No. 405, Lot 10
Tract No. 405, Lot 11
Tract No. 405, Lot 12
Tract No. 405, Lot 13
Tract No. 405, Lot 14
Tract No. 405, Lot 15
Tract No. 405, Lot 16
Tract No. 405, Lot 17
Tract No. 405, Lot 18
Tract No. 405, Lot 19
Tract No. 405, Lot 20
Tract No. 405, Lot 21
Tract No. 405, Lot 22
Tract No. 405, Lot 23
Tract No. 405, Lot 24
Tract No. 405, Lot 25
Parcel Map 835 M 47 &
48, Lot 2 (Originally Tract
No. 405, Lot 26 and a
portion of Lots 27 & 28)

288-25-086

1836 Hamilton Avenue

288-25-065
288-25-066
288-25-067
288-25-068
288-25-069
288-25-070
288-25-071
288-25-072
288-25-073

1637 Hurst Avenue
1647 Hurst Avenue
1657 Hurst Avenue
1667 Hurst Avenue
1677 Hurst Avenue
1687 Hurst Avenue
1697 Hurst Avenue
1707 Hurst Avenue
1717 Hurst Avenue

Parcel Map 835 M 47 &
48, Lot 1 (Originally Tract
No. 405, portion of Lots
27 & 28)
Tract No. 405, Lot 29
Tract No. 405, Lot 30
Tract No. 405, Lot 31
Tract No. 405, Lot 32
Tract No. 405, Lot 33
Tract No. 405, Lot 34
Tract No. 405, Lot 35
Tract No. 405, Lot 36
Tract No. 405, Lot 37

Page 1 of 1

Attachment: Exhibit B - Vacation of Light and Air Easement (Approval of the Vacation of the Light and Air/Building (Setback) Lines Created by

Exhibit B - Vacation of Light and Air Easement

Packet Pg. 31

7

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

7
CONSENT CALENDAR
December 7, 2021

Resolution Declaring Weeds a Public Nuisance and Scheduling a
Public Hearing. (Resolution/Roll Call)

RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council adopt a resolution, declaring weeds a public nuisance, and setting
January 18, 2022, as the date for a public hearing to hear protests.
DISCUSSION
Chapter 17.54 of the Campbell Municipal Code governs the abatement of hazardous
vegetation (weeds) on private property and/or adjoining rights-of-way. The Chapter
requires that upon a declaration of the City Council that weeds constitute a public
nuisance, owners of properties determined to contain hazardous vegetation be notified
that it is their responsibility to remove the vegetation "without delay." The notice further
advises that unless the weeds are voluntarily removed, the removal will be performed
through the Santa Clara County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office, the cost of which
will be placed as a lien on the property tax roll. Property owners may protest this
determination at a set public hearing.
The attached resolution declares weeds to be a public nuisance and sets a public
hearing date of January 18, 2022. The Commissioner’s Office will provide a list of
properties having hazardous vegetation prior to this meeting. Property owners will be
notified that they may attend this meeting to protest the inclusion of their property on the
List of Hazardous Vegetation.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the City. All associated costs to remove hazardous
vegetation will be borne by property owners.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Take no action.

Prepared by:
Daniel Fama, Senior Planner
Packet Pg. 32

7
Weed Abatement – City Council Meeting of December 7, 2021

Page 2 of 2

Reviewed by:
Rob Eastwood, Community
Development Director

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Attachment:

a. CC Resolution ~ Weed Abatement (December)

Packet Pg. 33

7.a

BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CAMPBELL DECLARING WEEDS A PUBLIC
NUISANCE AND SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING
WHEREAS, the growth of weeds and indigenous grasses accumulate annually upon
private property, including that property located in the public right-of-way, streets, alleys
and sidewalks in the City of Campbell; and
WHEREAS, weeds and indigenous grasses may attain such large growth as to become,
when dry, a fire hazard to adjacent improved property;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Campbell,
California, hereby declares that all weeds growing upon any private property or in any right
of way, street or alley, as defined in Sections 17.54.010 and 17.54.020 of the Campbell
Municipal Code, constitutes a public nuisance, which nuisance must be abated by the
destruction or removal thereof. The Agricultural Commissioner is hereby ordered to give
notice of the passage of this resolution stating that, unless such nuisance is abated without
delay by the destruction or removal of such weeds, the work of abating such nuisance will
be done by the City authorities; and the expense thereof assessed upon the lots and lands
from which, and/or in the front of which, such weeds shall have been destroyed or
removed. All property owners having any objections to the proposed destruction or
removal of such weeds are hereby notified to attend a meeting of the City Council to be
held in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 70 N. First Street, Campbell, California, on
Tuesday, January 18, 2022, at 7:30 p.m., when and where their objections will be heard
and given due consideration.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of December, 2021, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
ABSENT:

COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:______________________________
Elizabeth "Liz" Gibbons, Mayor

ATTEST:______________________________
Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

Packet Pg. 34

Attachment: CC Resolution ~ Weed Abatement (December) (Weed Abatement – City Council Meeting of December 7, 2021)

RESOLUTION NO.______

8

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

8
CONSENT CALENDAR
December 7, 2021

Approval of a Used Car Dealer Permit for Campbell Pre Owned Inc.
(Resolution/Roll Call)

RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council adopts a Resolution approving the issuance of a Used Car Dealer
Permit to sell used cars at 125 E. Sunnyoaks Ave. Suite 209A, Campbell, CA 95008.
DISCUSSION
The following applicant has requested a used car dealer permit:
Campbell Pre Owned Inc.
125 E. Sunnyoaks Av. Suite 209A
Campbell, CA 95008.
On February 13, 2018, The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4427
approving a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (PLN2018-337) to allow a motor vehicle sales
establishment at 125 E. Sunnyoaks Av. Suite 209A .
The applicant who seeks the permit is the owner and President of Campbell Pre Owned
Inc. California Articles of Incorporation Number C3559432 Document ID # GX89311 have
been filed. This is a family owned business since 2013. The applicant has worked at the
family business since 2013 and therefore has a history of business operations.
The applicant’s business will be located at 125 E. Sunnyoaks Av. Suite 209A, Campbell,
CA and will include the sales of used vehicles as well as an office and a non-service
center area. The business will not include, paint, body work, welding or fabrication. The
applicant states he will have one (1) employee and seeks the ability to sell the vehicles
from 9:00 am to 8:00 pm, daily.
A background check on the applicant consisting of fingerprinting was conducted and the
Department of Justice responded with no information prohibiting the applicant from
operating a used car dealership.
FISCAL IMPACT

Packet Pg. 35

8
Campbell Pre Owned Inc

Page 2 of 2

The applicant has paid the Campbell Police Department fee of $261.00 for the used car
dealer permit. This is a non-refundable fee no matter what decision is rendered by the
City Council. He is also required to pay the necessary business license fees to the City.
Due to the nature of the business, the dealership will also generate Sales Tax revenue for
the City, but an estimate cannot be made at this time until actual sales results are
realized.

Prepared by:

Ana Spear, Police Permits

Reviewed by:
Gary Berg, Police Chief

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Attachment:

a. Resolution - Campbell Pre Owned
b. Resolution 4427 Approving CUP

Packet Pg. 36

8.a

RESOLUTION NO. ____
BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CAMPBELL AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A USED
MOTOR VEHICLE DEALER PERMIT TO CAMPBELL PRE
OWNED INC, LOCATED AT 125 E. SUNNYOAKS AV SUITE
209A.

1. Business: The proposed business will involve the retail sale of used
vehicles to the public.
2. Location: The business is operated at one property, located at 125 E.
Sunnyoaks Av. Suite 209A, Campbell, CA 95008.
3. Zoning: The locations of the business are within the M-1(Light Industrial)
Zoning District. The applicant has secured the necessary land use
entitlements for the retail sale of motor vehicles. Specifically, the Planning
Commission approved an Administrative Planned Development Permit
(PLN2017-337) on February 13, 2018 for 125 E. Sunnyoaks Av. Suite
209A.
4. Ownership: The applicant is the owner of Campbell Pre Owned Inc.
5. Experience: The applicant has operated the business for over 10 years.
6. Background Review: A background check through the Department of
Justice revealed that there is no information prohibiting the applicant from
operating a used car dealership.
WHEREAS, based on the foregoing findings, the City Council further finds and
concludes that, subject to the Conditions of Approval, there is no evidence that
the activity applied for or the location thereof will create a public nuisance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Campbell does hereby grant a Used Motor Vehicle Dealer Permit to Campbell
Pre Owned, pursuant to Campbell Municipal Code Section 5.08.010(12), subject
to the following Conditions of Approval:
1. Approved Permit: Approval is granted for a Used Motor Vehicle Dealer
Permit to allow the retail sale of used motor vehicles on property located
at 125 E. Sunnyoaks Av. Suite 209A.
2. Approval Expiration: Approval of the Used Motor Vehicle Dealer Permit is
valid in perpetuity, subject to continued compliance with the Conditions of

Packet Pg. 37

Attachment: Resolution - Campbell Pre Owned (Campbell Pre Owned Inc)

WHEREAS, after due consideration of all the evidence presented, the City
Council does find as follows:

8.a

City Council Resolution
Used Motor Vehicle Dealer Permit – Campbell Pre Owned Inc.
125 E. Sunnyoaks Av Suite #209A

Page 2 of 4

Approval contained herein. A change in business ownership shall require
approval of a new Used Motor Vehicle Dealer Permit.

4. Street Parking: Vehicles for sale or in inventory shall not be parked,
displayed, stored, or otherwise placed on the public street.
5. Employees: There will be one (1) employee of Campbell Pre Owned
6. Hours of Operation: The hours of operation for the vehicle sales office and
associated sales activities shall be restricted as follows.
•

By appointment only and limited to 9:00 AM to 8:00 PM, daily.

•

The business's operating hours, when employees may be on site,
shall be limited to 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily.

7. Business License: The business owner shall at all times maintain a City of
Campbell Business License.
8. DMV Dealer License: The business owner shall at all times maintain in
good standing a Vehicle Dealer License from the California Department of
Motor Vehicles (DMV).
9. Fingerprint Clearance: The business owner has successfully passed a
background check through Department of Justice fingerprinting system.
10. Sales Office: All sales activity, other than the viewing of vehicles, shall
take place within the auto sales office.
11. On-Site Advertising: There shall be no form of temporary on-site
advertising associated with the retail auto sales business, including but not
limited to, flags, strobe lights, banners, A-frames, and human signs
advertising. All permanent signage shall comply with the provisions of the
Campbell Municipal Code.

Packet Pg. 38

Attachment: Resolution - Campbell Pre Owned (Campbell Pre Owned Inc)

3. Compliance with Conditions: The business at all times shall remain in
compliance with the Conditions of Approval imposed by Administrative
Planned Development Permit PLN2018-337 (Planning Commission
Resolution No. 4427, approved February 13, 2018) except where the
Conditions of Approval contained herein provide a more restrictive or
specific requirement or limitation.

8.a

City Council Resolution
Used Motor Vehicle Dealer Permit – Campbell Pre Owned Inc.
125 E. Sunnyoaks Av Suite #209A

Page 3 of 4

12. Vehicle Advertising: Vehicles for sale shall only contain the minimum
information necessary as required by the Department of Motor Vehicles.
Vehicles shall not be advertised with painted letters or numbers,
streamers, flags, or similar attention grabbing contrivances.

14. Noise Standard: Any noises, sounds and/or voices, including but not
limited to amplified sounds, loud speakers, sounds from audio sound
systems, and/or music, generated by the subject shall not be audible to a
person of normal hearing capacity from any residential property. Public
address systems of all types are strictly prohibited.
15. Parking and Driveways: All parking and driveway areas shall be striped
and maintained in compliance with the approval plans and Chapter 21.28
(Parking and Loading) of the Campbell Municipal Code. All parking and
driveway areas shall be regularly swept and cleaned to remove litter and
debris.
16. Revocation of Permit: Operation of the business in violation of the Used
Motor Vehicle Dealer Permit or any standards, codes, or ordinances of the
City of Campbell, shall constitute a public nuisance pursuant to Campbell
Municipal Code Section 6.10.020(6), which shall be grounds for revocation
of the Used Motor Vehicle Dealer Permit by the City Council. Such a
determination may also result in revocation of the Administrative Planned
Development Permits (PLN2018-337) pursuant to Campbell Municipal
Code Chapter 21.68 (Revocations and Modifications).
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of December, 2021, by the following roll
call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:

COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Elizabeth “Liz” Gibbons, Mayor

Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

Packet Pg. 39

Attachment: Resolution - Campbell Pre Owned (Campbell Pre Owned Inc)

13. Property Maintenance: The owner/operator of the subject property shall
maintain all exterior areas of the business free from graffiti, trash, rubbish,
posters and stickers placed on the property.

Attachment: Resolution - Campbell Pre Owned (Campbell Pre Owned Inc)

8.a

Packet Pg. 40

8.b

RESOLUTION
BEING

A RESOLUTION

OF THE PLANNING

THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
PERMIT (
SALES (

APPROVING

COMMISSION

A CONDITIONAL

OF
USE

PLN2017-337) TO ALLOW A MOTOR VEHICLE
ESTABLISHMENT
ON
RETAIL/WHOLESALE)

PROPERTY
SUITE

NO. 4427

LOCATED

209A

IN

THE

125

AT

E. SUNNYOAKS

M-1 ( LIGHT

AVENUE,
ZONING

INDUSTRIAL)

DISTRICT.

public hearing, as specified by law and after presentation by the
Community Development Director, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed.

After

and

due consideration

follows with

of all evidence

respect to file numbers

presented, the Planning Commission

did find

as

PLN2017- 337:

1.

project site is located within an existing professional office center ( Sunnyoaks
Executive Offices) at the northwest intersection of E. Sunnyoaks Avenue and San
Tomas Expressway.

2.

The

project site
Map.

is zoned

3.

The

is

4.

The

5.

The

6.

The

7.

The

8.

As the tenant space is located on the second-floor,which is accessible only by stairs,
the business would also be required to occasionally use a conference
room on the

The

project site
Plan Map.

M-1 (Light

Industrial) as shown

designated Light Industrial

project site is bordered by industrial
Tomas Expressway to the north.

uses

project site is located is developed
building built in the early 1970's.

with

as

shown

to the

the

on

on

the

Campbell Zoning

Campbell

General

south, east, and west, and San

atwo-story multi-tenant

commercial

proposed business is considered a " motor vehicle -sales (new and/or used)",
subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit consistent with CMC 21.46.
subject tenant space, Suite 209A, is 120 square feet in gross floor area.

ground floor to meet accessibility requirements.
9.

The hours of operation shall be restricted

to 9:00 AM to 8:
00

10. The proposed wholesale and vehicle sales business

results

PM, daily.
in

parking demand
three parking spaces; two of which shall be reserved for sales display purposes.

11.

a

The center has a total of 56 spaces ( 53 standard; 3 accessible) shared

of

by all tenants.

Packet Pg. 41

Attachment: Resolution 4427 Approving CUP (Campbell Pre Owned Inc)

After . notification

8.b

Planning Commission

Resolution

No. 4427

Page 2 of 2

PLN2017-337 - 125 E. Sunnyoaks Avenue - Conditional
12.

When

of the entire

calculating the parking demand

Use Permit
of the

center, inclusive

proposed

use, there is a net surplus of six ( 6)parking spaces on the project site. As such,
pursuant to the City's Parking and Loading Ordinance, adequate parking exists on

site.

foregoing findings of fact, the Planning Commission

1.

The

project will aid in the harmonious development of the immediate

2.

The proposed

3.

The

4.

The

project is consistent

5.

The

proposed use will not create

project is consistent

with the General

further

finds

and

area.

Plan.

proposed use is allowed within the applicable Zoning District with Conditional
Use Permit approval, and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Zoning
Code and the Municipal Code.
with

applicable adopted design guidelines.
a

nuisance due to litter, noise, traffic, vandalism, or

other factors.
6.

adequate in terms of size and shape to accommodate the
fences
and walls, landscaping, parking and loading facilities, yards, and other
development features required in order to integrate the use with uses in the
surrounding area.

7.

The

8.

The

9.

The

The

proposed

site

is

proposed site is adequately served by streets of sufficient capacity to carry the
kind and quantity of traffic the use would be expected to generate.

design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed use are
compatible with the existing and future land uses on-site and in the vicinity of the
subject property.
establishment, maintenance,

or

operation of the proposed

use

at the

location

proposed will not be detrimental to the comfort, health, morals, peace, safety, or
general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed
use, or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood
or to the general welfare of the city.
10.

The

proposed use will not significantly increase the demand on City services.

11. The project qualifies as a Categorically

Exempt project under Section 15301 Class 1
Quality Act (CEQA) pertaining to minor alterations to
an existing private structure,
involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that
at
the
time
of
the lead agency's determination.
existing
of the California Environmental

Packet Pg. 42

Attachment: Resolution 4427 Approving CUP (Campbell Pre Owned Inc)

Based upon the
concludes that:

8.b

Planning Commission

Page 2 of 2

Resolution No. 4427

PLN2017-337 - 125 E. Sunnyoaks Avenue -Conditional

Planning Commission approves a Conditional
Use Permit ( PLN2017-337)to allow a motor vehicle sales ( retail/
wholesale) establishment
on property located
at 125 E. Sunnyoaks Avenue, Suite 209A, subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval (attached Exhibit A).

PASSED

IT RESOLVED

AND ADOPTED

that the

this 13th

AYES:

Commissioners:

NOES:

Commissioners:

ABSENT:

Commissioners:

ABSTAIN:

Commissioners:

day of February, 2018, by the following roll call vote:

Rich, Hernandez, Krey & Rivlin

APPROVED: /

Attachment: Resolution 4427 Approving CUP (Campbell Pre Owned Inc)

THEREFORE, BE

Use Permit

rte
Michael Rich, Chair

ATTEST
Paul

Kermoyan, Secretary

Packet Pg. 43

8.b
EXHIBIT

A

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Conditional

Where approval

by the Director

Use Permit (PLN2017-337)

of Community

Development, City Engineer, Public Works
review shall be for compliance
with all applicable conditions
of approval, adopted policies and guidelines, ordinances,
laws and regulations and accepted engineering practices for the item under review.
Additionally, the applicant is hereby notified that he/she is required to comply with all
applicable Codes or Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of California that
pertain to this development and are not herein specified.
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

COMMUNITY

Planning Division:
Approved Project: Approval is granted for a Conditional Use Permit ( PLN2017-337)to
allow a motor vehicle sales (retail/wholesale) establishment on property located at
125 E. Sunnyoaks
the

Avenue, Suite

written_business
Division

Planning

description

on

December

Conditions of Approval contained
2.

project shall substantially conform to
project plans stamped as received by the
10, 2018, except as may be modified by the
209A. The

and

herein.

Conditional Use Permit Expiration: The Conditional
be valid for
this

one

oneyear

established

continued

on

a

entitlement

site. The

operation, of

operations for

Use Permit

approved herein

shall

year from the date of final approval (expiring April 21, 2018).Within
period, the wholesale and retail automotive sales use shall be
the

continuous

use.

approval shall

be

valid

in

perpetuity with
Abandonment, discontinuation, or ceasing of

period of twelve months

shall

void the Conditional

Use

Permit approved herein.
3.

Operations: All on-site sales

4.

DMV Retail

activity shall be byappointment only.

License: At all times, use of the

will be

contingent upon obtainment
DMV Retail Used AutoCommercial

5.

Business

License: A valid

the business

6.

subject tenant space for vehicle display
and maintenance in good standing of a California
or

New/Used Auto-Commercial

City business license shall
is in operation.

be maintained

license.
at all times that

Used Motor Vehicle Permit: If used vehicles are to be sold from the premises under
the requested Conditional Use Permit, the business owner shall obtain a Used Motor
Vehicle

Permit

from

5.
010(
08.issued
12)

the

by

City Council pursuant to Campbell Municipal Code Sec.
Campbell Police Department prior to the issuance of a

the

business license.

Packet Pg. 44

Attachment: Resolution 4427 Approving CUP (Campbell Pre Owned Inc)

Director, City Attorney or Fire Department is required, that

8.b
Exhibit A -Conditions

Page 2 of 2

of Approval

PLN2017-337 ~ 125 E. Sunnyoaks Avenue, Suite 209A
Conditional

Use Permit

7.

Sign Permit: An application for a sign permit from the Planning Division and building
permit from the Building Department will be required for all new signage.

8.

Hours

of Operation: ,The business
limited

hours

to 9:
00 AM to 8:
00

that the establishment

may be open to the

PM, daily. The business' s operating hours, when

public
employees may be on site, shall be limited to 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily.
are

Advertising:

On-Site

associated
strobe

10.

Vehicle

with

the

There

shall

be

form

no

retail auto sales business,

of

on-site

advertising
including, but not limited to, flags,
temporary

frames, and human sign advertisers.
lights, banners, AAdvertising: Vehicles

necessary
advertised

for sale

the

shall

only contain

of Motor

the

minimum

Vehicles.

Vehicles

required by
Department
with painted. letters or numbers, streamers, flags, or

as

information
shall

similar

not be

attention

grabbing contrivances.
11.

Designated

Parking: No

more

than

two vehicles

for sale

shall

be

permitted

on

the

subject property at any time. Vehicles for sale shall be restricted to the two parking
spaces designated for display purposes, as indicated on the project plans. Vehicles
shall not be displayed, stored, or otherwise placed on the public street.
12. Property Maintenance: The owner/operator of the
exterior

areas

of the business

free from

subject property shall maintain all
rubbish, posters and stickers
graffiti, trash, ~

placed on the property.
13.

Revocation

of Permit:

Operation of the use in violation of the Conditional Use Permit
or any standards, codes, or ordinances of the City of Campbell or any laws of the
State of California
applicable to operation of the business, shall be grounds for
consideration of revocation of this approval by the Planning Commission.

14.

Noise

Standard:

Any noises, sounds

and/or

voices, including but not limited to
audio sound systems, and/or music,

amplified sounds, loud speakers, sounds from
generated by the subject use shall not be audible to a person of normal hearing
capacity from any residential property. Public address systems of all types are strictly
prohibited.
15.

Parking and Driveways: All parking and driveway areas shall be maintained in
compliance with the standards in Chapter 21.28 (Parking & Loading) of the Campbell
Municipal Code.

16. Vehicle Repair: No vehicle

repair of any kind shall be permitted in association with the
wholesale and automotive retail sales use.

Packet Pg. 45

Attachment: Resolution 4427 Approving CUP (Campbell Pre Owned Inc)

9.

9

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

9
CONSENT CALENDAR
December 7, 2021

Approval to Accept a Check Donation from San Jose Water in
Support of the “Explore Public Art Project”

RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council accept a donation for $1,000 from San Jose Water and that the
City Council request the City Clerk to send a letter of appreciation.
BACKGROUND
On July 20, 2021, the Civic Improvement Commission Explore Art Subcommittee
presented to the City Council the Explore Public Art program. The Explore Public Art
program featured: Wall Murals, Neighborhood Identification (Gateway) Signs, Sidewalk
Chalk Art, and Solidarity Art Panels.
The Wall Mural Project, seeks to enrich Campbell’s community identity, add color to
building walls and streets, attract locals and tourists alike. This program recruit’s local
artists through outreach with Campbell residents/businesses on a selection committee.
The murals are 100% funded though sponsorships and individual donations by
residents and other non-profit organizations. Donations received will provide accepted
artists an honorarium to complete their artwork.
A donation from San Jose Water for $1,000 has been received in support of the Wall
Mural project.
DISCUSSION
City Council Policy Section 3.6 requires that gifts valued at $500 or more may only be
accepted by the City Council.
If accepted, the City will act as the fiscal agents for these funds and will receive,
expend, track, account, and report on the funds as appropriate.
FISCAL IMPACT
Staff recommends that the donation received is deposited into General Fund account
101.510.4817 (Miscellaneous Donations) to support the anticipated costs for this
project, which will be recorded in expense account 101.510.7427. A budget adjustment

Packet Pg. 46

9
Donation from SJ Water for Explore Public Art

Page 2 of 2

will be requested at mid-year to recognize the donation revenue and the project
expense.

Prepared by:

Diana Johnson, Executive Assistant to the
City Manager

Reviewed by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Packet Pg. 47

10

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

10
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND
INTRODUCTION OF
ORDINANCES
December 7, 2021

Public Hearing to Consider the Applications (PLN-2021-128 / PLN2021-129) of Nicole Comach for Conditional Use Permits with Site
and Architectural Review for T-Mobile & AT&T to Allow for the
Reestablishment and Continued Operation of an Existing Concealed
Wireless Telecommunications Facility (Faux Tree Pole) with a
Requested Exception to the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan
Height Limit of 45 Feet to Allow the Retention of the Approximately
69-Foot Tall Facility, on Property Located at 2041 S. Winchester
Boulevard in the P-D (Planned Development) Zoning District.
(Resolution/Roll Call Vote)

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt a Resolution approving Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural
Review for T-Mobile & AT&T to allow for the reestablishment and continued operation of
an existing concealed wireless telecommunications facility (faux tree pole) with an
exception to the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan height limit of 45 feet to allow the
retention of an approximately 69-foot tall facility, on property located at 2041 S.
Winchester Boulevard in the P-D (Planned Development) Zoning District, finding the
project Categorically Exempt under Section 15301 of the California Environmental
Quality Act.
PROJECT DATA
Zoning District:
General Plan Designation:
Area Plan:

P-D (Planned Development)
Central Commercial
Winchester Boulevard Master Plan (Area 2)

Tower Height:

Proposed
68-feet, 11-inches1

PROJECT SITE

Requirement/Standard
45-feet (see discussion on
‘Height’)

The project site is located on the west side of Winchester Boulevard, south of Campbell
Avenue, behind Merrill Gardens, a mixed-use assisted living senior housing community.

1

No change to the height of the existing facility is proposed.

Packet Pg. 48

10
Page 2 of 9

2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless)

BACKGROUND

Figure 1 – Location Map

The faux monopine tree pole was originally approved by the Community Development
Director in 2005 through an Administrative Site and Architectural Review Permit
(PLN2005-1021). The pole, which initially served AT&T (then Cingular Wireless), was
approved, and built to a height of 60-feet and had a five-year approval which expired on
April 4, 2010. In 2011, AT&T obtained an approval for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2011-104) allowing for a modification and reinstatement of the existing wireless facility
(PLN2011-104) for 10-years with an expiration date of September 2, 2021.
In 2017, T-Mobile received authorization to collocate equipment on the facility through
an Eligible Facilities Request2 (PLN2017-374) but did not obtain a building permit and
the approval expired. In 2018, T-Mobile was approved for an Eligible Facilities Request
(PLN-2018-165) to increase the height of the pole to its present height of 68-feet, 11inches to accommodate an additional antenna array. In 2018 and in 2019, AT&T
obtained Eligible Facilities Requests (PLN2018-199 and PLN2019-28 respectively) to
swap/replace antennas and equipment but did not seek an extension of the permit
approval. The applicant submitted the subject Conditional Use Permit and Site and
Architectural Review Permit on August 5, 2021 prior to the permit expiration deadline for
the 2011 approval and thus the permit remains in effect until a decision on the renewal
is made or the application is withdrawn.
On November 9, 2021, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the subject
item. The Commission reviewed the Conditions of Approval added in response to SARC
feedback. After due consideration, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution
recommending the City Council approve the project as presented on a unanimous 7-0-0
decision. No members of the public provided feedback in advance of or at the public
hearing (reference Attachment F – Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, November
9, 2021).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Applicant’s Proposal: The applicant is requesting approval of two (2) Conditional Use
Permits with Site and Architectural Review, on behalf of for T-Mobile & AT&T, to allow
for the reestablishment and continued operation of an existing concealed wireless
telecommunications facility (faux monopine tree pole) on property located at 2041 S.
An Eligible Facilities Request allows for non-discretionary modifications to previously approved facilities through
a zoning clearance when the change does not substantially alter the facility design or defeat a concealment method.
2

Packet Pg. 49

10
2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless)

Page 3 of 9

Winchester Boulevard. No physical changes to the facility, or increase in height beyond
that which already exists, are proposed.
ANALYSIS
Environmental (CEQA) Determination: Staff recommends that the City Council find that
this project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15301 (Class 1) of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pertaining to the operation, repair, maintenance,
permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of an existing private structure.
Administrative Procedure: While the current Conditional Use Permit (PLN-2011-104)
was approved prior to the adoption of the City’s Wireless Telecommunications Facilities
Ordinance (2017), the reestablishment and continued operation of the facility through a
new permit requires review3 to ensure the facility meets today’s standards. If the permit
is approved under the new Ordinance, the facility will be eligible for 10-year extensions
of the permit approval by the Community Development Director. A term limited permit
helps ensure that the facility remains in good condition (faux tree branches and
needles) and is reviewed in the future to ensure it is designed to be consistent with
advances in technology and/or changes to the City’s Wireless Telecommunications
Facilities Ordinance.
Further, the type of permit required is a ‘Conditional Use Permit’ as artificial trees are
considered a type of ‘concealed facility’ (which requires Conditional Use Permit
Approval) rather than ‘stealth’ (which requires an Administrative Site and Architectural
Review Approval) under the City’s Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Ordinance.
For ease of reference, the definition of a ‘concealed facility’ from the Wireless
Ordinance is as follows:
"Concealed facility" means any wireless communications facility which results in
new site or architectural features being added to a property in a manner which
complements, enhances, or seamlessly integrates into their surroundings.
Examples of concealed facilities include, but are not limited to the construction
of new rooftop, louver, chimney, silo, pole, railing, sign, window, parapets,
dormers, steeples, penthouses, water towers, bell towers, artificial trees, and
flag poles.
In review of the applicant’s proposal, the City Council should consider the City’s
adopted Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance and Wireless Facility Design
Requirements which includes an assessment of the faux tree species, shape, and size
as well as the quality and longevity of materials (branches & bark), color, and finish in
consideration of the facilities’ surroundings (see ‘SARC Review’). Finally, as the site is
in Area 2 of the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan, which has a height restriction of 45feet which the subject facility exceeds (see discussion on ‘Height’) an exception to the
As the site serves two carriers, two separate Conditional Use Permits are required to facilitate changes on a
‘carrier-by-carrier’ basis through future Eligible Facility Requests. Providing independent Conditional Use Permit
approvals helps ensure aspects of the entitlement – such as the maximum number of ground mounted equipment
cabinets, may be evaluated on a carrier-by-carrier basis rather than comprehensively as part of a single-site approval.
3

Packet Pg. 50

10
2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless)

Page 4 of 9

Winchester Boulevard Master Plan is required to grant the request. As exceptions to the
Winchester Boulevard Master Plan may only be granted by the City Council, Planning
Commission action served as a recommendation and not a final decision4.
Height: The existing tree is 68-feet, 11-inches tall5 or 23-feet, 11-inches taller than the
maximum height allowed in Area 2 of the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan (i.e., 45feet). While the height of the facility would not change, an exception to the maximum
height must be approved to grant the permit request.
Two administrative procedures are available that could allow the height exception to be
granted (see Option 1 & 2 below).
➢ Option 1: Wireless Ordinance – Limited Exemption to Standards
• Decision-Making Body: Planning Commission
The Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance provides a ‘Limited Exemption to
Standards’ to ensure adequate network coverage is provided in the City. To grant a
height increase, an applicant is required to demonstrate that a ‘significant gap in
coverage’ would occur without the requested height and ‘all other alternative sites
identified in the review process are either technically infeasible or not potentially
available’.
The applicant has provided an alternative sites analysis which explains their decision to
not relocate the facility (reasons include - existing tree is camouflaged, relocating would
have an environmental impact, lack of other ‘preferred6’ locations within the search
radius). While these reasons provide the applicant’s rationale for reusing the existing
facility versus other options, it does not sufficiently provide documentation
demonstrating that no other options are feasible in staffs opinion. Thus, staff does not
believe there is sufficient evidence submitted to support the City’s approval of a Limited
Exemption to Standards as outlined in Option 1.
➢ Option 2: Winchester Boulevard Master Plan – Exception to Requirements
and Regulations
• Decision-Making Body: City Council
The Winchester Boulevard Master Plan provides exceptions to the requirements and
regulations set forth in the plan, including height restrictions, provided it is approved by
the City Council with the following findings (staff analysis is provided in plain text below
each finding):
As the height exception is an integral and inseverable component of the applicant’s request, the Conditional Use
Permits and exception to the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan have been referred to the City Council for approval.
5
The facility was originally approved at 60-feet prior to the adoption of the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan and
extended to 68-feet, 11-inches through an Eligible Facilities Request process that is preempted from local land use
authority and control (see ‘Background’).
6
The Wireless Facilities Ordinance establishes a list of more preferred (i.e., City-owned sites) and less preferred
locations (i.e. residential). While the applicant indicates there are not more preferred sites within 2-miles, the
Community Center is an example of a preferred site per the zoning ordinance.
4

Packet Pg. 51

10
2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless)

Page 5 of 9

1. There are special circumstances and conditions affecting subject property;
The existing concealed wireless telecommunications facility (faux tree pole) was
established prior to the adoption of the current Wireless Ordinance and
Winchester Boulevard Master Plan. The existing facility represents a sizeable
investment in the property which is unique to the subject property, as is the site
location (rear of the property; not visible from the right-of-way) and proximity to
surrounding pine/redwood trees make the location uniquely suited for a faux tree
pole.
2. That the exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the developer; and,
A height exception is necessary to retain the faux tree pole at its existing height
and to preserve network coverage enjoyed by the property owner, developer,
and surrounding community.
3. That the granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare, or
injurious to other property in the area in which said property is situated.
Granting the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to
other property in the area as the facility is existing and camouflaged as a tree.
In recommending approval of an exemption to the City Council, the Planning
Commission complied with the following:
1. Secure substantially the objectives of the regulations to which exceptions are
requested, and shall act to protect the public health, safety, convenience and
general welfare;
The Winchester Boulevard Master Plan established a 45-foot height limit for Area
2 with the intent of accommodating a ‘village scale of development with up to two
floors of residential and/or office space above the ground floor commercial
frontage’. The height limit considered ‘local site conditions and the adjacent
neighborhood context’ and was in furtherance of the vision of the plan which is
aimed at ‘guiding new development and major renovations to create an attractive
boulevard street that adds value to the community as a whole’.
As the intent of the height limit established by the Winchester Boulevard Master
Plan was intended to guide building development, and not wireless tree pole
facilities, it can be reasonably concluded that the requested height exception
does not interfere with the objectives of the height regulation. Further, there are
no known impacts to the public health, safety, convenience or general welfare
that would result from retaining the existing height, but there would be an impact
to network coverage in the area if the request was not approved.

Packet Pg. 52

10
2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless)

Page 6 of 9

The Draft Resolution (reference Attachment A) captures this understanding of
the objectives and known impacts as established by the Planning Commission.
2. Report to the City Council its findings with respect thereto, and all facts in
connection therewith, and shall specifically and fully set forth the exceptions
recommended and the conditions designated.
The Draft Resolution (reference Attachment A) sets forth the findings, the
exception recommended (i.e., height increase), and conditions of approval by
which the permit should be granted as recommended by the Planning
Commission.
Conditional Use Permit Findings: Pursuant to CMC Section 21.46.040 (Findings and
decision), prior to making the findings for a Conditional Use Permit, the decision-making
body must first affirmatively establish all six (6) of the findings described in italics below.
Staff analysis follows in plain text below.
1. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district with
Conditional Use Permit approval, and complies with all other applicable
provisions of this Zoning Code and the Campbell Municipal Code;
See related discussion under ‘Administrative Procedure’. The use is
considered a ‘concealed facility’ which is allowed with the approval of a
Conditional Use Permit with Site and Architectural Review.
2. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan;
Allowing a concealed rooftop wireless telecommunications facility will meet
the purpose/intent of the Central Commercial General Plan land use
designation which is intended to serve as an economically viable retail and
business center serving local and area wide commercial needs. The
applicant’s proposal may also be found to further the following General Plan
policy:
Policy LUT-13.1: Variety of Uses: Attract and maintain a variety of uses that
create an economic balance within the City while maintaining
a balance with other community land use needs, such as
housing and open space, and while providing high quality
services to the community.
3. The proposed site is adequate in terms of size and shape to accommodate
the fences and walls, landscaping, parking and loading facilities, yards, and
other development features required in order to integrate the use with uses in
the surrounding area;
The faux tree pole facility has been designed to mimic other trees in the area
by using similar colors, details (needles/branches), and is at a height
appropriate for a tree of the species it mimics and blends in with other trees in
the area. No changes to fences, walls, landscaping, parking and loading
facilities, yards, or other development features are proposed or necessary to
integrate the use with uses in the surrounding area.

Packet Pg. 53

10
2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless)

Page 7 of 9

4. The proposed site is adequately served by streets of sufficient capacity to
carry the kind and quantity of traffic the use would be expected to generate;
The facility would not be staffed. The project site is located along Winchester
Boulevard which is identified as a Class II Arterial roadway in the General
Plan’s Roadways Classifications Diagram (Figure LUT-3) which has sufficient
capacity to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the use would be expected to
generate for routine maintenance and repair of the facility.
5. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed use
are compatible with the existing and future land uses on-site and in the
vicinity of the subject property; and
See response to finding ‘3’ of the Conditional Use Permit.
6. The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the proposed use at the
location proposed will not be detrimental to the comfort, health, morals,
peace, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of the proposed use, or be detrimental or injurious to property
and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the city.
See response to ‘3’. Further, no concerns with the operation or maintenance
of the proposed use have been identified that will not be addressed by the
Conditions of Approval included in the Draft Resolution (reference
Attachment A).
Site and Architectural Review Findings: In addition to satisfying the findings for a
Conditional Use Permit, and an Exception to the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan, the
City Council must also affirmatively establish all three (3) of the findings related to Site
and Architectural Review pursuant to CMC 21.46.050 and CMC 21.42.060.B captured
in italics below. Staff analysis follows in plain text below.
1. The project will be consistent with the General Plan;
As previously stated, allowing the continued operation of the facility will meet
the purpose/intent of the Central Commercial General Plan land use
designation which is intended to serve as an economically viable retail and
business center serving local and area wide commercial needs. The
applicant’s proposal may also be found to further the following General Plan
policy:
Policy LUT-13.1: Variety of Uses: Attract and maintain a variety of uses that
create an economic balance within the City while maintaining
a balance with other community land use needs, such as
housing and open space, and while providing high quality
services to the community.
2. The project will aid in the harmonious development of the immediate area;
The project as designed and conditioned, will aid in the harmonious
development of the surrounding area by camouflaging the facility as a tree.
3. The project is consistent with applicable adopted design guidelines,
development agreement, overlay district, area plan, neighborhood plan, and
specific plan(s).

Packet Pg. 54

10
2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless)

Page 8 of 9

The project has been reviewed for conformance with the City’s Winchester
Boulevard Master Plan and adopted Wireless Facility Design Requirements
(see discussion related to ‘SARC Review’, and Attachment E - SARC Memo)
and may be found consistent with its provisions as designed and conditioned.
SARC Review: The application was reviewed by the Site and Architectural Review
Committee (SARC) at its meeting of October 26, 2021. The SARC was supportive of the
project with the following revisions:
1. Branch Length and Density. The tree branches should be extended to
completely envelop all tower-mounted equipment and extend beyond the
edge of equipment by at least 18 inches. Further, at least 3-branches per
foot should be provided around the equipment consistent with the City’s
Wireless Facility Design Guidelines.
At the SARC meeting, the applicant expressed a concern that as an ‘existing’ facility the
pole may not be able to support the weight of branches in select areas and would
require further structural review and analysis of wind loads. The SARC was responsive
to the applicant’s concern and directed staff to provide flexibility in the condition of
approval to only require compliance to the ‘extent feasible’ subject to the satisfaction of
the Community Development Director. The Planning Commission agreed with the
Condition of Approval language provided and the applicant spoke to the condition and
did not express concern with its inclusion at the October 26, 2021 meeting.
Public Outreach: The project was noticed to all property owners within 300 feet of the
subject property and publicized in the newspaper (Metro). No public comments have
been received.
FISCAL IMPACT
No direct fiscal impact will result from approving the applicant’s request.

Prepared by:

Stephen Rose, Senior Planner

Reviewed by:
Rob Eastwood, Community
Development Director

Packet Pg. 55

10
2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless)

Page 9 of 9

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Attachment:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

Draft Resolution
Location Map
Project Plans
Alternative Sites Analysis
SARC Memo
Planning Commission Minutes, November 9, 2021

Packet Pg. 56

10.a

BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CAMPBELL APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS WITH SITE
AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW (PLN-2021-128 / PLN-2021-129) FOR
T-MOBILE & AT&T TO ALLOW FOR THE REESTABLISHMENT AND
CONTINUED OPERATION OF AN EXISTING CONCEALED WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY (FAUX TREE POLE) WITH A
REQUESTED EXCEPTION TO THE WINCHESTER BOULEVARD
MASTER PLAN TO ALLOW THE RETENTION OF AN
APPROXIMATELY 69-FOOT TALL FACILITY, WHERE OTHERWISE
LIMITED TO 45-FEET, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2041 S.
WINCHESTER BOULEVARD IN THE P-D (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT)
ZONING DISTRICT.
After notification and public hearing, as specified by law and after presentation by the
Community Development Director, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed.
The City Council did find as follows with regard to application PLN-2021-128 and 129:
1. The project site is zoned P-D (Neighborhood Commercial) and designated Neighborhood
Commercial by the General Plan.
2. The project site is located on the west side of Winchester Boulevard, south of Campbell
Avenue, behind Merrill Gardens a mixed-use assisted living senior housing community.
3. The faux monopine tree pole was originally approved by the Community Development
Director in 2005 through an Administrative Site and Architectural Review Permit
(PLN2005-1021). The pole originally served AT&T (then Cingular Wireless), was 60-feet
tall, and had a five-year approval which expired on April 4, 2010. In 2011, AT&T obtained
an approval for a modification and reinstatement of the existing wireless facility
(PLN2011-104) for 10-years with an expiration date of September 2, 2021.
4. In 2017, T-Mobile received authorization to collocate equipment on the facility through
an Eligible Facilities Request (PLN2017-374) but did not obtain a building permit
resulting in the permit expiring one year later. In 2018, T-Mobile obtained an Eligible
Facilities Request (PLN-2018-165) to increase the height of the pole to its present height
of 68-feet, 11-inches to accommodate an additional antenna array. In 2018 and in 2019,
AT&T obtained Eligible Facilities Requests (PLN2018-199 and PLN2019-28
respectively) to swap/replace antennas and equipment but did not seek an extension of
the permit approval and, accordingly, the permit expired on September 2, 2021.
However, as the applicant submitted the subject permit prior to the permit expiration
deadline (August 5, 2021) the permit remains in effect until a decision on the renewal is
made or the application is withdrawn.
5. The existing facility serves AT&T and T-Mobile.

Packet Pg. 57

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

RESOLUTION NO.

10.a

City Council Resolution No.
Page 2 of 4
2041 S. Winchester Boulevard
Conditional Use Permit (PLN-2021-128/129) – Faux Tree Pole (AT&T / T-Mobile)
6. The applicant is requesting approval of two (2) Conditional Use Permits with Site and
Architectural Review, on behalf of for T-Mobile & AT&T, to allow for the reestablishment
and continued operation of an existing concealed wireless telecommunications facility
(faux monopine tree pole) on property located at 2041 S. Winchester Boulevard.

8. The City’s Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Ordinance defines a concealed
facility as follows:
"Concealed facility" means any wireless communications facility which results in new site or architectural
features being added to a property in a manner which complements, enhances, or seamlessly integrates into
their surroundings. Examples of concealed facilities include, but are not limited to the construction of new
rooftop, louver, chimney, silo, pole, railing, sign, window, parapets, dormers, steeples, penthouses, water
towers, bell towers, artificial trees, and flag poles.

9. The faux monopine tree pole (as a type of artificial tree) satisfies the definition of a
‘concealed facility’ under the City’s Wireless Ordinance.
10. Approval of a of a ‘concealed facility’ is subject to the requirements of the City’s adopted
Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance, Wireless Facility Design Requirements
which includes an assessment of the tree species, shape, and size as well as the quality
and longevity of materials (branches & bark), color, and finish in consideration of the
facilities’ surroundings.
11. Although the project includes development plans, it does not require a separate
architectural review permit application but is subject to site and architectural review in
accordance with CMC 21.45.050.
12. Applicable General Plan Policies considered by the City Council included, but were not
limited to, the following:
Policy LUT-13.1: Variety of Uses: Attract and maintain a variety of uses that create an economic
balance within the City while maintaining a balance with other community land use needs, such as
housing and open space, and while providing high quality services to the community.

13. No substantial evidence has been presented which shows that the project, as currently
presented and subject to the required conditions of approval, will have a significant
adverse impact on the environment.
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the City Council further finds and concludes that:
Conditional Use Permit Findings (CMC Sec. 21.46.040):

Packet Pg. 58

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

7. While the applicant is not proposing any changes to the facility, since the permit was
approved in 2011, prior to the adoption of the City’s updated Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities Ordinance in 2017, permit renewal requires a new land
use approval to ensure the facility meets today’s standards.

10.a

City Council Resolution No.
Page 3 of 4
2041 S. Winchester Boulevard
Conditional Use Permit (PLN-2021-128/129) – Faux Tree Pole (AT&T / T-Mobile)
14. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district with Conditional Use
Permit approval, and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Zoning Code
and the Campbell Municipal Code;
15. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan;

17. The proposed site is adequately served by streets of sufficient capacity to carry the kind
and quantity of traffic the use would be expected to generate;
18. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed use are
compatible with the existing and future land uses on-site and in the vicinity of the subject
property;
19. The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the proposed use at the location
proposed will not be detrimental to the comfort, health, morals, peace, safety, or general
welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use, or be
detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the
general welfare of the city;
Site and Architectural Review Permit Findings (CMC Sec. 21.42.060.B):
20. The project will be consistent with the General Plan;
21. The project will aid in the harmonious development of the immediate area;
22. The project is consistent with applicable adopted design guidelines, development
agreement, overlay district, area plan, neighborhood plan, and specific plan(s);
Exemption to the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan Findings (Page 37):
23. There are special circumstances and conditions affecting subject property;
24. That the exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the developer;
25. That the granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious
to other property in the area in which said property is situated;

Packet Pg. 59

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

16. The proposed site is adequate in terms of size and shape to accommodate the fences
and walls, landscaping, parking and loading facilities, yards, and other development
features required in order to integrate the use with uses in the surrounding area;

10.a

City Council Resolution No.
Page 4 of 4
2041 S. Winchester Boulevard
Conditional Use Permit (PLN-2021-128/129) – Faux Tree Pole (AT&T / T-Mobile)
26. The Planning Commission (in forming its recommendation to the Council) has
substantially secured the objectives of the regulations to which exceptions are requested,
and shall act to protect the public health, safety, convenience and general welfare;

Environmental Finding(s) (CMC Sec. 21.38.050):
28. The project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15301 (Class 1) of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pertaining to the operation and leasing, and minor
alteration of an existing private structure; and
29. No substantial evidence has been presented which shows that the project, as currently
presented and subject to the required conditions of approval, will have a significant
adverse impact on the environment.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves Conditional Use Permits
with Site and Architectural Review (PLN-2021-128 / 129) for T-Mobile & AT&T to allow for
the reestablishment and continued operation of an existing concealed wireless
telecommunications facility (faux tree pole) with a requested exception to the Winchester
Boulevard Master Plan to allow the retention of an approximately 69-foot tall facility, where
otherwise limited to 45-feet, on property located at 2041 S. Winchester Boulevard in the PD (Planned Development) Zoning District subject to the attached Conditions of Approval
(attached Exhibit A).
PASSED AND ADOPTED this __ day of ______, 2021, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
ABSENT:

COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:______________________________
Elizabeth "Liz" Gibbons, Mayor

ATTEST:______________________________
Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

Packet Pg. 60

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

27. The Planning Commission (in forming its recommendation to the Council) has reported
its findings with respect thereto, and all facts in connection therewith, and shall
specifically and fully set forth the exceptions recommended and the conditions
designated;

10.a
EXHIBIT A

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Conditional Use Permit (PLN-2021-128/129)

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
1. Approved Project: Approval is granted for Conditional Use Permits with Site and
Architectural Review (PLN-2021-128 / 129) for T-Mobile & AT&T to allow for the
reestablishment and continued operation of an existing concealed wireless
telecommunications facility (faux tree pole) with a requested exception to the Winchester
Boulevard Master Plan to allow the retention of an approximately 69-foot tall facility,
where otherwise limited to 45-feet, on property located at 2041 S. Winchester Boulevard.
The project shall substantially conform to the Project Plans Attachment C in the
December 7, 2021 City Council Staff Report, except as may be modified by the
Conditions of Approval contained herein.
2. Permit Approval Expiration: The Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural
Review (PLN-2021-128 / 129) shall be valid for one year from the date of final approval
(expiring December 17, 2022). Within this one-year period, an application for the Building
Permit to modify the tree branches must be submitted. Failure to meet this deadline or
expiration of the Building Permit plan check or issued Building Permit will result in the
Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review being rendered void.
3. Previous Approvals: All conditions of approval and land use authorization granted by
previously approved permits (e.g., PLN2005-1021, PLN2017-374, PLN-2018-165, PLN2018-199, and PLN-2019-28) are hereby superseded. Notwithstanding anything in the
resolution, or conditions of approval to the contrary, the basis for future Eligible Facility
Requests, or similar preemptions from local land use authority, shall remain based on
the original PLN2005-1021 permit.
4. Plan Revisions: Upon prior approval by the Community Development Director, all Minor
Modifications to the approved project plans shall be included in the construction drawings
submitted for Building Permit. Any modifications to the Building plan set during
construction shall require submittal of a Building Permit Revision and approval by the
Building Official prior to Final Inspection. Further, prior to building permit submittal, the
following revisions to the plans shall be incorporated to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director:

Packet Pg. 61

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

Where approval by the Director of Community Development, City Engineer, Public Works
Director, City Attorney or Fire Department is required, that review shall be for compliance
with all applicable conditions of approval, adopted policies and guidelines, ordinances, laws
and regulations and accepted engineering practices for the item under review. Additionally,
the applicant is hereby notified that he/she is required to comply with all applicable Codes
or Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the State of California that pertain to this
development and are not herein specified.

10.a

a. Branch Length and Density. The tree branches shall be extended to
completely envelop all tower-mounted equipment and extend beyond the edge
of equipment by at least 18 inches. Further, at least 3-branches per foot shall
be provided around the equipment as required the City’s Wireless Facility
Design Guidelines. This condition shall be applied to the extent feasible to the
in recognition of potential structural limitations for the existing tower equipment
but shall apply as a mandatory requirement prior to adding any additional
equipment to the artificial tree, such as equipment that may be proposed
through an Eligible Facilities Request. The applicant shall provide a structural
analysis to support any deviation from these standards and the City retains the
right to require a refundable deposit from the applicant to capture the cost of
a peer review of this structural support analysis.
5. Contractor Contact Information Posting: The project site shall be posted with the name
and contact number of the lead contractor in a location visible from the public street prior
to the issuance of building permits. The contractor contact information posting shall be
removed upon project completion (building permit final).
6. Construction Activities: The applicant shall abide by the following requirements during
construction:
a. The project site shall be posted with the name and contact number of the lead
contractor in a location visible from the public street prior to the issuance of building
permits.
b. Construction activities shall be limited to weekdays between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
and Saturdays between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. No construction shall take place on
Sundays or holidays unless an exception is granted by the Building Official.
c. All construction equipment with internal combustion engines used on the project site
shall be properly muffled and maintained in good working condition.
d. Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines shall be strictly prohibited.
e. All stationary noise-generating construction equipment, such as air compressors and
portable power generators, shall be located as far as possible from noise-sensitive
receptors such as existing residences and businesses.
f. Use standard dust and erosion control measures that comply with the adopted Best
Management Practices for the City of Campbell.
7. Construction Hours/Fines/Stop Work Notice: Failure to comply with permitted working
hours that result in verified complaints may result in the issuance of a Stop Work Notice
issued to the project with cessation of work for a minimum of seven (7) days from the
date of issuance and an Administrative fine of up to $1,000.00.
8. Timely Completion: Once under construction it shall be the obligation of the property
owner and contractor to demonstrate continued progress on the project. In the event the

Packet Pg. 62

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

City Council Resolution No.
Page 2 of 8
2041 S. Winchester Boulevard
Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review (PLN-2021-128/129)

10.a

City Council Resolution No.
Page 3 of 8
2041 S. Winchester Boulevard
Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review (PLN-2021-128/129)
building permit expires, the City may impose fines or exercise administrative remedies
to compel timely completion of work.

10. Cessation of Operations: The service provider shall provide written notification to the
community development director upon cessation of operations on the site exceeding a
ninety-calendar day period. The service provider, permittee and/or property owner shall
remove all obsolete or unused facilities from the site within one hundred eighty calendar
days of termination of the lease with the property owner or cessation of operations,
whichever comes earlier.
a. New Permit Required. If a consecutive period of one hundred eighty calendar
days has lapsed since cessation of operations, a new permit shall be required
prior to use or reuse of the site.
11. Length of Approval: A validly issued conditional use permit, or administrative site and
architectural review permit shall be valid for a period of ten years from the effective date
of the approval or date the facility gains a "deemed granted" status (subject permit is for
a Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review and expires November 19,
2031) but may be reduced for public safety reasons or substantial land use reasons
pursuant to Government Code Section 65964(b). Use permits and site and architectural
review permits approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall expire pursuant
to the previously approved permit term. If a request for a renewal of the required
permits(s) is received before the permit expiration, the permit shall remain in effect until
a decision on the renewal is made or the application is withdrawn. Communication
facilities that exist on the effective date of this chapter without a specified expiration date
(e.g. because the governing permit(s) contained no expiration date or due to nonconforming status), and which had not otherwise already expired (e.g. due to the
previously established amortization period(s) contained in City Council Ordinance 2070,
CMC Section 21.34.060(E), and/or CMC Section 21.58.040(F), as they existed prior to
the effective date of this Chapter), shall expire five years from the effective date of this
chapter or ten years from the date of their establishment, whichever is greater. Nothing
contained in this Chapter is intended to revive or extend any permit or use that expired
on or prior to the effective date of this Chapter.
a. The permit may be renewed for subsequent time periods, subject to the following:
i.

The renewal application is filed with the community development
department prior to expiration, but no earlier than twenty-four months
prior to expiration.

Packet Pg. 63

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

9. No Ground Mounted Equipment: The facility is not approved for any ground mounted
equipment. Accordingly, no ground mounted equipment shall be permitted to be added
to the site as part of an Eligible Facilities Request (EFR) request made under Section
6409(a) and FCC rules implementing Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act, codified at 47
U.S.C. 1455.

10.a

ii.

The permit approval may be administratively extended by the community
development director from the initial approval date for a subsequent ten
years and may be extended by the community development director
every ten years thereafter upon verification that the facility continues to
comply with this chapter (as may be amended from time to time) and all
conditions of approval under which the facility was approved. All costs
associated with the review process shall be borne by the service provider,
permittee and/or property owner.

iii.

This provision shall not apply to conditional use permits or administrative
site and architectural review permits granted prior to the effective date of
this chapter. However, applications for use permits or site and
architectural review permits to modify existing wireless communications
facilities that are granted on or after the effective date of this chapter are
subject to this subsection 21.34.070(A)(2)(a).

b. If a request for renewal of the required permit(s) is not timely received and the
permit expires, the City may declare the facility(ies) abandoned or discontinued in
accordance with Section 21.34.070(A)(16) (Abandonment).
12. Business License Required: Each service provider with a wireless communications
facility in the City shall obtain and maintain a City business license.
13. Impact on Parking: The installation of wireless communication facilities shall not reduce
required parking on the site. For the purposes of this requirement, routine maintenance
activities shall not be considered to result in a measurable impact on parking.
Applications for eligible facilities requests shall be exempt from this condition provided
that any reduction in onsite parking spaces does not violate a prior condition of approval
or applicable building or safety code.
14. Implementation and Monitoring Costs: The wireless communications permittee, service
provider or its/their successor shall be responsible for the payment of all reasonable
costs associated with the monitoring of the conditions of approval, including, but not
limited to, costs incurred by the community development department, the office of the
city attorney or any other appropriate City department or agency, to the full extent such
costs are recoverable or collectible under applicable state and/or federal law. The
community development department shall collect costs on behalf of the City.
15. Development and Operational Standards: All facilities shall satisfy the development
standards of the district in which they are proposed, as well as the Development and
Operational Standards outlined in CMC 21.16 (e.g. Electrical Interference, Light and
Glare, Noise, Odor, Vibration, Maintenance) and the Site Development Standards (e.g.
as specified in CMC 21.18). Exceptions to development and operational standards shall
only be permitted for (A) an eligible facility request to the extent required by law, (B) a
subsequent collocation facility to the extent required by California Government Code
section 65850.6(a), or (C) for a stealth facility when such exception is limited to maximum

Packet Pg. 64

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

City Council Resolution No.
Page 4 of 8
2041 S. Winchester Boulevard
Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review (PLN-2021-128/129)

10.a

City Council Resolution No.
Page 5 of 8
2041 S. Winchester Boulevard
Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review (PLN-2021-128/129)
allowable heights, or minimum setbacks, and when such exception would not result in a
perceivable visual impact.

17. Concealment: Every aspect of a stealth and/or concealed facility is considered an
element of concealment including, but not limited to, the dimensions, bulk and scale,
color, materials and texture. For all other facilities, elements such as dimension, scale,
color, materials, and textures may be considered stealth and/or concealment elements
of the facility. Any future modifications to the facility must not defeat concealment.
18. Compliance with Applicable Laws: The permittee and service provider shall at all times
comply with all applicable provisions of the CMC including, but not limited to, Title 21
(Zoning), any permit or approval issued under the CMC including, but not limited to, Title
21 (Zoning), and all other applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations.
Failure by the City to enforce compliance with applicable laws, rules or regulations shall
not relieve any permittee of its obligations under the CMC including, but not limited to,
Title 21 (Zoning), any permit or approval issued under the CMC, or any other applicable
laws, rules and regulations.
19. Compliance with Approved Plans: The facility shall be built in compliance with the
approved plans on file with the community development department.
20. Inspections; Emergencies: The City or its designee may enter onto the facility area to
inspect the facility upon reasonable notice to the permittee in times of emergency. The
permittee shall cooperate with all inspections. The City reserves the right to enter (or
direct its designee to enter) the facility and support, repair, disable or remove any
elements of the facility in emergencies or when the facility threatens imminent harm to
persons or property.
21. Contact Information for Responsible Parties: The permittee shall at all times maintain
accurate contact information for all parties responsible for the facility, which shall include
a phone number, street mailing address and email address for at least one natural
person. All such contact information for responsible parties shall be provided to the
community development director upon request.
22. General Maintenance: The site and the facility, including but not limited to all
landscaping, fencing, concealment features, and related transmission equipment, must
be maintained in a neat and clean manner and in accordance with all approved plans
and conditions of approval.
23. Graffiti Removal: All graffiti on facilities must be removed at the sole expense of the
permittee within forty-eight hours after notification from the City.

Packet Pg. 65

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

16. Permits: All permits required for the installation of the facility and associated
improvements, shall be completed prior to operation of the facility (or component of that
facility).

10.a

City Council Resolution No.
Page 6 of 8
2041 S. Winchester Boulevard
Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review (PLN-2021-128/129)
24. FCC (including, but not limited to, RF Exposure) Compliance: All facilities must comply
with all standards and regulations of the FCC and any other state or federal government
agency with the authority to regulate such facilities.

a. To promote the public health, safety and welfare, the community development
director may declare a facility (or component of a facility) abandoned or
discontinued when: (a) The permittee or service provider abandoned or
discontinued the use of a facility (or component of a facility) for a continuous
period of ninety calendar days; or (b) The permittee or service provider fails to
respond within thirty calendar days to a written notice from the community
development director that states the basis for the community development
director's belief that the facility (or component of the facility) has been abandoned
or discontinued for a continuous period of ninety calendar days; or (c) The permit
expires and the permittee has failed to file a timely application for renewal.
b. After the community development director declares a facility (or component of a
facility) abandoned or discontinued, the permittee shall have sixty calendar days
from the date of the declaration (or longer time as the community development
director may approve in writing as reasonably necessary) to: (a) reactivate the
use of the abandoned or discontinued facility (or component thereof) subject to
the provisions of this chapter and all conditions of approval; or (b) remove the
facility (or component of that facility) and all improvements installed in connection
with the facility (or component of that facility), unless directed otherwise by the
community development director, and restore the site to a condition in compliance
with all applicable codes and consistent with the then-existing surrounding area.
c. If the permittee fails to act as required in Section 21.34.070(A)(16)(b) within the
prescribed time period, the City may (but shall not be obligated to) remove the
abandoned facility (or abandoned component of the facility), restore the site to a
condition in compliance with all applicable codes and consistent with the thenexisting surrounding area, and repair any and all damages that occurred in
connection with such removal and restoration work. The City may, but shall not
be obligated to, store the removed facility (or component of the facility) or any part
thereof, and may use, sell or otherwise dispose of it in any manner the City deems
appropriate. The last-known permittee or its successor-in-interest and, if on
private property, the real property owner shall be jointly liable for all costs and
expenses incurred by the City in connection with such removal, restoration, repair
and storage, and shall promptly reimburse the City upon receipt of a written
demand, including, without limitation, any interest on the balance owing at the
maximum lawful rate. The City may, but shall not be obligated to, use any financial
security required in connection with the granting of the facility permit to recover its
costs and interest. Until the costs are paid in full, a lien shall be placed on the
facility, all related personal property in connection with the facility and, if
applicable, the real private property on which the facility was located for the full

Packet Pg. 66

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

25. Abandonment:

10.a

City Council Resolution No.
Page 7 of 8
2041 S. Winchester Boulevard
Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review (PLN-2021-128/129)
amount of all costs for removal, restoration, repair and storage (plus applicable
interest). The City Clerk shall cause the lien to be recorded with the County of
Santa Clara Recorder's Office. Within sixty calendar days after the lien amount is
fully satisfied including costs and interest, the City Clerk shall cause the lien to be
released with the County of Santa Clara Recorder's Office.

26. Indemnities: The permittee, service provider, and, if applicable, the non-government
owner of the private property upon which the tower and/or base station is installed (or is
to be installed) shall defend (with counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City), indemnify
and hold harmless the City of Campbell its officers, officials, directors, agents,
representatives, and employees (i) from and against any and all damages, liabilities,
injuries, losses, costs and expenses and from and against any and all claims, demands,
lawsuits, judgments, writs of mandamus and other actions or proceedings brought
against the City or its officers, officials, directors, agents, representatives, or employees
to challenge, attack, seek to modify, set aside, void or annul the City's approval of the
permit, and (ii) from and against any and all damages, liabilities, injuries, losses, costs
and expenses and any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, judgments, or causes of action
and other actions or proceedings of any kind or form, whether for personal injury, death
or property damage, arising out of, in connection with or relating to the acts, omissions,
negligence, or performance of the permittee, the service provider, and/or, if applicable,
the private property owner, or any of each one's agents, representatives, employees,
officers, directors, licensees, contractors, subcontractors or independent contractors. It
is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve (which approval shall not
be unreasonably withheld) the legal counsel providing the City's defense, and the
property owner, service provider, and/or permittee (as applicable) shall reimburse City
for any and all costs and expenses incurred by the City in the course of the defense.
Building Division
27. Permit Required: A Building Permit application shall be required for the proposed project.
The Building Permit shall include Electrical/Plumbing/Mechanical fees when such work
is part of the permit.
28. Conditions of Approval: The Conditions of Approval shall be stated in full on the cover
sheet of construction plans submitted for building permit.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
29. Formal Plan Review: Review of this development proposal is limited to accessibility of
site access and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not
be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted

Packet Pg. 67

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

d. After a permittee fails to comply with any provisions of this Section
21.34.070(A)(16) (Abandonment), the City may elect to treat the facility as a
nuisance to be abated as provided in the CMC (including, but not limited to,
Chapter 6.10).

10.a

City Council Resolution No.
Page 8 of 8
2041 S. Winchester Boulevard
Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review (PLN-2021-128/129)
model codes. Prior to performing any work the applicant shall make application to, and
receive from, the Building Division all applicable construction permits.

Attachment: Draft Resolution (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

30. No Violation: This review shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the
provisions of the California Fire Code or of other laws or regulations of the jurisdiction. A
permit presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of the Fire Code or
other such laws or regulations shall not be valid. Any addition to or alteration of approved
construction documents shall be approved in advance. [CFC, Ch.1, 105.3.6].

Packet Pg. 68

10.b

Attachment: Location Map (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

2041 S. Winchester Blvd.

800

0

WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere
Campbell IT, GIS Services

400

800
Feet

Scale 1: 4,800

This map is based on GIS Information and reflects the most current
information at the time of this printing. The map is intended for reference
purposes only and the City and its staff is not responsible for errors.

Packet Pg. 69

10.c

BUSINESS UNIT # :
SITE NAME:
PROJECT:

856577
CAMPBELL- WEST CAMPBELLAVE
CUP RENEWAL

SITE INFORMATION
rJlO\li'N C.ASTI..E CS,\ 1:--c
SITE NAME:

r .A.\IPBE.U.. 'll'E.:.7' r.\..\lPBEll.A\'£

StTEAUllllESS:
C<Jl'"-'r\':

2041 Wli-.C:HESTEk Bl.VD.
CA.\fl'IH!"l.l., Ch ?SI.IOI!
S,\NT,\C:L\Jt.\

/IL•W/P.\JI.Ct:.L #:

JOS-JI-Oll

AllE,\ (IF 0.JSSTJWCTIUN:

Ex1m:,,;:c

SIIE.ET~

T-.2

c.r:..1•ff:Ai\L :-:OTJT.s

C-1.1

OVl!l.AU..Srn.: rt..-\N

C-1.!

l':XISTI:,.'G & :,,:{i'X' SITT-: Pf.ANS
l'\J\\'E.Jt ELEVATtO~
t\NTI!.'JNJ\t'LIS:i

u:rmiou,

)7,2~2,,r

Lo:,a,.t11•0E:

-1:!l.'ISUl66'

c.1

GROIIND ~WVi\TION·

NAD6.1
191fT.

<.'UM.f:..'JTZOSIN(.;:

PD

JllRISDit.,io:,..1
c>c.:C.:llf'1\N<.''1' UJ\SS(fl{j\TII):,.:
TI"PEOF C.:QSSTJI.Ut.,i()S:
A.0.A. co.,1PUAI\'.(]::,

c.:m·,1r-CAMPIH!IJ.
ll

PROPERTY OWNEl\:

i
I

'ITIIBSIIElsT

.

'

.
;

:

IIR
f'IIC:IUTY 1S l:NM, \NNt,;D AND NCYrl":(') p.
HU)IAN IIABIT.\T I0:-,1

:

Tilm.lPSON f,\~II LYTP.l' ST
SC.:01TS V,\LI..EY, t.:..\ 9SOC.C.
CJ\O\\'N C.ASTLE

U:-JE PM!-. PU.CE, Sl
OllflUI'\, C,\ ?~~
C".AMJOJ.\rrur_-\NT:

mr:e:nU<.: l'1tov10r.R•

·m J,tO

T-MUl!II.£
1855 G.-\~'i\Y JIL\'D~ '111-1 f'l.OOJt
t..:OSCOR.D, Cl\ 9H20

P<..&li
{800)74). 500)

11!1.C:O PRc>\"101~

.\iSQl1.UED \\.llElLSS
l)lr.<".AU.E.\\'i\NZAOO
SAN CLE.\IENTU,C,\ 9167.)

CJU1\\'N f'.ASTU
\ISi\ INC. DISD.ICT
C.:Ol'.,'TALTS:

-'l fll lL\('J l;..'rnA D~ \'E, St.:ITli ,&10
1'1£ASANTUN, CA '>-fSM

....

u 'li!J.l>f ~ ii

r

i

c-.

·-~

, .,,•

I

;.

C.ALl.,"\UFORNIA ONE Ca\U.

81 1/ (800) 422-4133

®

-

9 ~~1•,,_

m

• C:UPJU!....:~,•AL

.

CAMPBELL, CA 95008
EXIS11NG 6N'-0" MONOPINE

·····•··9
a

~~:::=~9

1-..

/ ,·

✓/ ·

ISSUED FOR,
,sv

t Q tt~ac:,C,.,l',olQ>lllu

nm<

., ,.,~,~.:• m=

"

nF.W'.Jll'f1fll\.

....

DOW

l'U.U.\LL~ lJ.l

/ I

/'

Or1t-"' '·""'"' P11l

APPLICABLE CODE S/ REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
All. WOIU..SIL\U.Oli PEJl.fOJL\IEO ,\NO 111.\TEIU..\LS INSTALL.ED IN .\<:O)JtD.\....:f'.EWITM
Tl If. C:l:M.ENT El>ITl(lSS CW TIIE. H)U.()WING C:OUES J\S AlXJirrEJ.l U\' TI Iii UK".Al
GOYEP-.NIXG ,\\ITI 1011,mf.S. NOTIIJSG 1:-. 11 !ESfi PlANS IS TO IJE cu:-.sn.l'ED TU l'El\MIT
\~C)R.K N<rr t.:OSR)R,.\IIXC Tl) nmsr: c.:oor..s:

t:oonn,,I!

c.:oon

01,;IWING

~l~ll\.'-llh Ot:ILDISG f'.ODE
~1'1CI\IJRJRNI,\ Ml!CIIANICALCOOE
2(11\IC.:AIJFORNIA EI.EC..TitlC.:I\LCUOE
201') t:AU l'OJU,,,'1.:\ FlRE C.:00£

MF.CIIANIC.\L
ELEc..Ult:.\l
FIRli

•••• • l'Rt)Jf:,C.T .\lANAGr:.A.

j

2041 WINCHESTER BLVD.

••

N(lSC.-\W

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
THE Pl:IU'OSE Of THIS PROJECT IS
£.'1,llL\....:(.E
llkOAl>H.\~l>C.ONN~IYJT\' ,\NU C".Al'A<:m·n,n IE
EXISTISG EUGIHL(i. \\1 1JlELESS r=AOLm',

I

..
1-,.~•· C•..._,... 9

~k

BU#: 856577
CAMPBELL - WEST
CAMPBELL AVE

/

•·•,o.=9

'\ .,,.-

g

•

.;

•.

,;

J\EFORE YOU DIG!

--- SITE NUMBER: - ··

-

I·,,,.-.,~·!(

ll_..

. ••

; / I

I·~. .. I•,·• . r 'I'

· -~-,

C:,\LL 3 WORKING DAYS

j

. c..~,-.,~-, _,:.:'

a

el ~ ~

,

v·:,_ .• •, .

t

·, .

·1-,. . -,
I

•

c-.ir- - to-

"'....- ...

't,.

V1111,..,1,,1.Q

f '

•

,

9

c.. .;.... !'!:f"00 9

,

')/

I

ll J -{, '• I O,•, N

i

(~:
'I.:.

A1''D SIIAU.. IMMEOIATllL'f :-:trnfYTIIE t!X(~INEF.ft JS
\t'J\m.-;G OF .ANY DISCJl6M?--t..:ltS 8Hfll1J: PlUX"'EEDING
\\ 1TH TI IL:: \\'OIU. OR 81: R~~~)S!ilDUi FOil S:\Mt'-

PROJECT TEAM
A&Ef'lk.\l:

,}
,

.

!

• i
•

AU. DJL-\WINGS C.:ON"TAISl!D IIEJl.EJN l\RG FC)k.'Li\TI1!0 POI\
fCLL SJl.6. C:ON1"1'u\<:TOJI. SHAU.. VEIUF\' ALL PLANS ANO
&XISTIS(; Pl,\IES!,1():-,.'j ,\NI) <:t ):'1/nmt)NS t)N 1111.ijll~ SITE

®

M S(lUAR{t:;,
WI RELESS
l l l r CA L L& A1'AN~AOO
~Q.DICJffllCACff1Cl&l)»t..:..

..,.,,,'?'IP,>,•

AT&T
{800),?.AL JC.l!

IR\'INE, CA Ql,tt

I

'I

l~5M MOIINT l lr:JlMANlm 1119.8

TU\\1e,tO\\'Nl:J\:

SUITC:: 1-:-rA& 1800

LOCAT ION MAP

SlmETm:~<JllYTIOS

T•I

~ .sl~E~

2041 WI NCHESTER BLVD.
CAMPBELL, CA 95008
SANTA CLARA
MONOPINE
68'-0"

COUNTY:
SITE TYPE:
T OWER HEIGHT:

DRAWING INDE X

C-2.l

LAT/I.ONG TYPl:::

SITE ADDRESS:

T HIS DOCUMENT IS
PRELIMINARY IN
NATURE AND IS NOT A
FINAL, SIGNED AND
SEALED DOCUMENT

• - . C.ONSTl\l'CTION MANAGER

.\SOIU,\'C' MACOON • A&f: SPF:C.:lAUST
.\SDII.EW.MAG('X):-.@:r.ftOWNr.AS11.C:.C:OM
(602}~S.l'1J

n ·1,1o .,v,o, ... nosoF,.n,·l'l1&M,'Y•' "6:•i-.
,,,. .,1x.o.~ nc.r,&,1t,:,r,u. u,;c.1:-.'UA

l~U:SJ1l1(1' ,u.fi/ll.'YIS<l~•l'J.JtaTJUiPINX"lll.lS

T11 \l,ff'A"tlJl$1Kll'.l')lf'.I',, ,

NOT£S:

i:""ni"~
2.

Dof.S I IAVECUMUJ;,.:G FACILmESM,\NIJJ-TM,\'I' AHJ1fi(,,!t:1Jt!1J) FOJl f1Jl:V,\TED\'HlP."-..
C.:lll TO\'mll. l L\5 E-911 {j\r,\AllffiCS AND ILWEll )
JtE.\LUN ONUNE Pf.A FC:C

:-.:<lTT':
riij'ijiTo A<:CE.'i..,1i-.c1E.VTF.RING 1'11.E Sill! Yt)U ~11,;ST <:osncr THE ('Jlt}WN N<X: AT (1IOOJ 711.ll-.01 I & t:llO\\'N <:()NSTP,UCTION ?.U,N.\CER.

l

[ ?r:1~ AN•

Packet Pg. 70

Attachment: Project Plans (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

a:

CROWN
CASTLE

zw

a' I
\,u:::

;:: ...J 0:

oln~
Qf'.! I
~~ i

o:~ ~

UU tl

::Ji
V)

i

I

3

~

Cl

8

I

:a ' ::l

ci
>oe

-l 8

:,:

t.l

st 9

R

~ i~

0

z

;;:
C

B

e~ i~ I

f;;~
~"' Cz
~ J::~ < "'"'
@< ;:;:
f-< U

::,

it Ill"'

~ ::l::J w
~i. ~

f-<

t.l

z

ir.

d

'

~ ~

C i!

V)

x

l!l

i'i

u,,, "'
::i "' ...
a, ... ~
~ e: <.,
z
~u !;!::-" i::
i iJ

~

~

!

~

~

~

I

~

OU

~

~
8

~

~

BHHHH..n !I H~

5

B HI i~ H uii h ha

Attachment: Project Plans (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))
10.c

Packet Pg. 71

10.c

'.PU e,a cno wre·
PROPOn'T Uf,IQNIJOSTRUCTUAtSHolY[
1£VtDIOTllU>nKllrilPfl(YIClvSJOt.M
$CTS. OIi ntOl,I ASS£SSOrcS MN'S.
CAST\£ USA WC. KAS MOT

°'°""
CDW'\.CltO A SrT1: SUfMY IMO

TltOV'CN':MMt1'N0ClJAISASTO
TH[,t,CQ;fl,,l,C'f'O,W0IIM.IJIQH

ocPICTalOHTHISs.<Cl

«>.~=~

(JIUVl(NC(c-,..

~ .~11rJ~

(t),,7:..,:;;~
~ ' . , ~~~~--17
""'"""" rr:
"-,, 'ttv"'1"~- - ~

,

-·-·~,
~

--

I

IA" lNE, (.,\ 916111

~•

•

0 UAIR~0 .1
M S"(,,WIRELESS
;;,

I

ua, C All & AYA IIU: A ltO
SNI Cl..OCJCnCA C l n ~ ~

(;_f.) '~j~,. _(.'- (l:::_-;\

,,

.,.---•-- j"

~.~,

g'
i/

, .~-~.
- ')

bI

.,~,
-~I

I

.

- -

......,"""''°"'!2'-...~
([) ~

.,

·.

f''iI

(£) -

I

B
-

•

,..,
[:

-J:l

N'PflOUU.J£ l

'

' ::~
'•
.'• ';)

,.,

.... SITE NUl\IBEJc - -

u ·1;

BU # , 856577
CAMPBELL · WEST
CAMPBELL AVE

I I~
,'f

0.

-·

.~, -

CAMPBELL, CA 9500R
EXISTIN G 68'-0" MO NOPL'IE

g

I,

.,.,:,·'ii:

·, ,. , -1-~

O<AOON<r

2041 WINCHESTER BLVD.

z
()

C

APN. J0,-31-0S2

-')
. ,-:-:,i ',);) ' -~
~·

. ¥

O '°:'·CJ. ··"

. '

)

''

'

----;n,
Ff

I

•

"•

:Ir$

I CD

l,r.u·
"

I

ISSUED FOR;

I I
n1.• ~

D.V,n

lifl fl.:l ~ I

ir

o C-" ..lirll<JS
r.lCJ.00:(.\1.l'

1t>CS,1Q.,
JJX.

I§

I

~.

iI~£) •- rn•

::1

"' -

§ 1,-.

!t~•

:I
1

h ~':{
·;;
('

~

I

l~
I
-=._};

THIS DOCUMENT IS
PRELIMINARY IN
NATURE AND IS NOT A
FINAL, SIGNED AND
SEALED DOCUMENT

-""°"""'""' /

APPIIOGU.-1'[ Loe>.IJOfll Of

-- - -- -

W RINCON AVE

- -

-

us~~,~~.~:~~\~;~·~1~C:-~=-s
or,\ uu;.-.~,I.Of't.'>MI.X\ L D,){, ~ "t:C..

CD

Tl l \ l,Tf'Jl 1111!D<IO..~'T.

OVERAU. SITE PLAN

1 SCAlE, ~

~

:::::::: r,;-:;1)1Q'C)

~

SHE ET NUMBER:

11£V1510N:

C-1.1 A

Packet Pg. 72

Attachment: Project Plans (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

~ ~· -

'
I

sL1rm r:oo & 1800

10.c

CC..~,~~E~
UWINE. <".A92618

,

M s,QUARE::9
.1
WIRELE S S ii"'
1 J l f C A L LI: AWA.N.tAO O
l,O,'ICUlaJff'IIC..a71.,,_,,MM

,.~..,. ...,.,,

IC) c;o,c,tttt

,o,_,._,., .,.,

I
1
~ ,_
Q••- -~-.
~I
,,Ii

"

~
-,a

·--

--

:JL

~

-.--- - -

- . ·,-,L:::2=~.~- 1

I

~--=i

_,

L.

__

'

-

~/!~/I~/·' · -;,· '

1

':-L ,

_.,._,,.,

---- SITE NlJMIIER: - -([) ururr eo1

DU #: 856577

M•FII.A.wl:
81' ATH

CAMPBELL - \VEST
CAMPBELL AVE

vnurt
""""'"''"'

(C)ACCCSSCM[

2041 WINCH ESTER BLVD.
CAMPDfil.L, CA 95008
EXJSTING 68'-0" MONOPINE

-

'

-

'

-

1[7

ISSUED FOR:

.~~

"'-

~
r1J:1..1)Ux.uy

J N>L

(t) l•lil09U CPS
([} T-WC:OU:

CMUl'SOH ""' l'NICL
(() T-woau: AM 6 102 W
11: ( 0JPWOO(J,Bf,l(T
([) f•rr.o&UG

""""

I

•·-•·•

I

•·-•·,__I

([) t-wce..c UTIJTI"

•·""""

((} t-woau: m.co 11(),:

THIS D OCUMENT IS
PRELIMINARY IN
NATURE AND IS NOT A
FINAL, SIGNED AN D
SEALED DOCUMENT

n l.".\ V11ll.nll1S"of>l.\ W- t1,11 .\m·rati,m.:,

UN•.FnTitF\" u , . 11CT1Sc. l""'tH'" 11•1s 0 11:r,: n.:os
0 1".\UI.L~ f'J.U{•t,~ .JUl,\\1,.l'.Nl,U,,:.:C,..

1,1,1.~"TIMfl'<l~r:,.-r,

EXISTING EQUIPMENT LAYOUT PLAN - NO CHANGE
SCALE: ~

~ ~~!~':~·"i'i't,~'

~

SHEET NUMBER:

Rl?YJSION:

C-1.2 A

Packet Pg. 73

Attachment: Project Plans (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

surrn 1700& 1aoo

10.c

CC..~1~~~~

(QI•....,""""""-'·"'-""...,_~
I POI SCCTOA}

(3 fO'l'AI.. I POI $CC10RJ

SUIT£ 1700& I~
lllVL-..:E. r.\ IJ261,.

(.) l'Ofjt.

·•=

([)!-_,...,.,.,.,
(J TOTH.. I POI SCCTQR) ~

( ) ,__, " , ,. , _,_.,. - -----------=: .

J '"' or , . : .

~

(l TOl.._, I POI 5tt'l0f!)

([)1- , n=~~:=~ -~

TOP o, tlQSnlC: T-1,11091,,L ~ •

Q.[Y. • M"-0"

• .

~

(t) l•W081.CRAUSl1112 ~

$

(l TOl..,_, I f'(llt !itt'IOII)

_ _ _ !_xist..c~~~

•· 1

I

I

•
'

----~~.!~~

,\'i*..:_':..."''.'""''
.,._.?/11.
r\ 1:,lJ7.I
lfl
___,,,/~ J" U

.

(f T01""-, 2 POt SCC'IOA)

II TOTAL

(C) AJ•t """
02 l01Al... 4 P(R SCCTCR)

1·

1117 CAI.la AY,UU. AOO
-~C....SZl1J('M'>lt\.0

--~NC~~~

---- SITE NUMBER: - -

~~::v:~

•

I

M sn
UARl!W.1
~ WIRELESS "

I

~'~:::.~

{HJ

(C)AlillTM.IS

ox:. ~ $

',

1I
·Ii

,. . .,. .o._~

,

$

CUV, • M'-1 I"

TOP o,

- -•

I

(12 TOTAL. 4 POI SCC:10111)

J

Ttll" 0, tQSnf,iC l-MOaU AH1Y»-.$

J<ic:•~=

- --- [~ ~~,!,.~

2041 WINCHESTER BLVD.

CAMPBELi~ CA 95008

!

'" ,.,..,_ ([)POI
....SCCl0R)
.....

l

DU II: 8565n
CAMPBELL - WEST
CAMPBELL AVE

'

4

I

E.XJSTING 68'-0" MONOPINE

, !i

II

ISSUED FOR,

'ii'

11
;..._:i

11 1~-1$,!/..'l\!I

I W>

:~~~:~

r::~

L

I

I\
N<M11 HSN T5l1 N!DD!
(t)

•·-o·

I,
W0NCIPN(

fkC DCSIC:l"I OU'ICTl:D IN TIC( (IWftC5
,SV~N«HAOC0MP~DIITJ.
a:JMtSPOtC)INCPASSINC:tiOU,,,,-NW..TSl'S.

2, CONmlJCOON ~ /

\- - - (Q ee·-o· ~

~

COHnt.lCTOR~ftt"oUWnc:uoun

...,......,_

NW.l'SIS TOR N<'I COGTIONS lll'IIIIC»° 10

m [Kl5blC aooo rocc

l . /lfff Rl'.o.MCD MOUN"I' ~ OCS1CH
OR~1~51-W,l.8[
~ IT COIi.

(() [X511C

wooo IVICt

THIS DOCUMENT JS
PRELIMINARY IN
N ATURE AND IS NOT A
FINAL, SIGNED AND
SEALED DOCUMENT

~

TOWl'.:A 00CS HAY[ ~ rAC:l.ltCS •

11~1

IUiNUl MAT IC A(OAAEO (al tl.[V.tJ(O IIIOftK.

fTor.\UU
..!~~.~~~:;~~~;.~
:.~~~~'":~-,i.:.,, r.u ...u n;.,,11...:,\L U-'(:tSCD.,

\l~..

1\1\1,Tl'. TIH, t.lOCIJ)IF.,"T.

CI/XISTING NORTH ELEVATION - NO CHANGE
SCALE:

4"

v,.-.,·...trw. •nJ
)/)l"•l' --o" (IU11)

Attachment: Project Plans (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

([)1--.. ....., ..,_,_.....,,. . ..,... ~

SOUTHEAST El~:.~:: - :
2 )!x,sn~c
CALE. ·
•· vu·.,·..-~,,

CHANCE

SHIEIST NUMBEII.:

'

REVISION:

C-2.1 1 A
Packet Pg. 74

10.c

ii!

~

,.,

~

()fl1IH.,I

~\'!I
•·--~.,,_,_,
cgr;.~ ... =<"'l

I

U\\'l~E,f"--\ 926111

,

M SQUARm.-:l
· w t RElESS '1,/
1Jt f CALL• 4Y41U400
~CLOmffl!CAClfni:r,u)»1.-=&

//

" '-...>

. .u ..

RAO CENTER -

65 ' -0"

<'i,~

'

sunn 1100 & 1soo

I

\

¾·"'~
"..-

:ZOO Sl'f:.C..71,llM

✓U~11IAz I••

~

c,

EXISTING T- M091LE ANTENNA PLAN -

r

SCALE:

'

---- SITE NUMBER: BU#: 856S77
CAMPBELL - WEST
CAMPBELL AVE

:,?.::::::: ~,~o

"' ·'"%."l: ~~~v~·
b(([}

fN[ M[allT'I' ~ fH£ WOY CUW9 NC) ALL
~ o r JMCa.u.aMCrA01JTYSktU.8C
OOIISIOOtO> o.AN; 'tL
OT OC:sot,
IN$t'AI..LAhON, NtO IN5PCCn0N. Towtll ltOWlCAnaN,
WCLJHT - - - -· - ··-- - - ---- -- - --

n.ra:s

~

=~~
~

icu.u.

I,\?
f

"'"' '"'"""1--...........~ , / ·~ /\ Th
"o/1
¾·"'~
"...

-

lo

'

'

RAD CENTER ( N01'ti 1'!1101 TO 0IIDClltHC lrM'[NN,IS,, ~ QlMCC1 WCl0Q. tu«Jf
.rtt u.tm .-OS AHO NOtf'Y OICtlCCJII fS RCCCIRO
,r CIISOIO"MC'f d f lMiO.

...«Mt[t:

)

0

so· - 0"

EXISTING AT&T ANTENNA PLAN - NO CHANCE
SCALE:

I

:i::::::: ~.r

10

~·

- ...... _,..._ .,__., ....... ns

CCT CCINTACT Oft Q.OSt; NtC>lllll'rt

u•-o· M0N0flw,c(

.,

ISSUED FOR,

·-

'

<• TOTAL, JC~KA

"'"*' """'

EXISTING 68'-0" MONOPINE

W:Trr'fNi ffl.:t}W' "" re

~~

AU1l ~

2041 WINCHESTER BLVD.
CAMPllEll, CA 95008

~

NO CHANCE

~.•1i

l12T01M...4

V'-' CASTLE
cr:..,"JT,Jt o,uvr..

/ ~ U)M-

<··
/
\
/lJA

.,....,<-C_,.,."'=~

r ' r ' CROWN

;-(()T-:::..:::•ou,n

.

"""'"""

!

..O P [ ~ I W ' C t u S ( " ~

_ · · · -- - TOfHCJrHCttoRM:cPOM11N'JHr
tJAY. 0lt TO lrdlCOt/11..,0ol "1 «TOClal U5C. Nff
~WO'TQJWI..KUO'tGCX!SfWIIC
C0f'IDITJ0ffS WST IC l,OCCO CM NCO ~

IOTO.ll~CAm.t USAINC. ~
TN( NOC TO ~ T ( ,.

..,,.,

wm cuwa

CIRC.U

_IWNl (MNQ 1HO COHT""'101t HOTU hCXCT•

,. IIOl1'0ICt
,00.U.

c-• '°' ,...._ COJPIDff

2, Mft1'0rlCC C-)/C- 1 r01t HCW [OWWOff
SPCCFICmOHS.
) . COM'IUCTOII TO "(1WY .it.I. »trc- r.
NOCHfS 00 NOT OCUD er.ACOH ~ HOQfl,
,. TINIUI

.......

oocs HAY£ QJW8M. rAOt.mcs -

1,1,WJ'l MAI" llt MO,alit[O Nlfl WV.lil lD

Hl'UO MM T5!'S NQJI5·

'

t.TH[tl[SICNDUIC:f(D IH T H ( S C ~

THIS D OCUMENT IS
PREU MIN ARY IN
NATURE AND IS NOT A
FINAL, SIGNED AND
SEALED DO CUMENT

1$11.IU>M<NACCOWPNCITA
OOM[SPOMIIHC PASSIIC ll(Mllf NUrrl'Y9!.

2

~"°"~/CCNOtM.

COfTRACIOA SH,lf,..L RlV,(W 1"H[ VOUHI'
NW,.n11: 'Oft Nff (:(liNgrhoNS ~ lO

""""""'-

J. NffR[OUACl)WCM(fwomntl,l'IOHO[SIQI
Ollt.lOUNTflUIV,C(.W(Hl5MAU._K

N""1oimaT[Cll.

~~r!;t~~~:~;~\~~·~~~i-:~
' "·' U(.Do\CD u.ort.,,I(,,...,~CNl.r.--u,.,
1UIII.TrATIIU l'Ji'W;;lf )ir....,-,

~

SHEET NlJMDEI\:

IU!VISION:

C-3

A

Packet Pg. 75

Attachment: Project Plans (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

Kl'l090114e-l_BM-=-:=
{[)l-WO..C

10.d

June 24, 2021

ALTERNATIVE SITE ANALYSIS
SITE NAME/# 856577/ Campbell-W. Campbell Ave.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: PLN2011-104

SITE ADDRESS: 2041 Winchester Blvd., Campbell, CA 95008

The Crown Castle Telecommunications Facility is located at the address above, in the City of Campbell. The
existing cellular facility, an unmanned monopole, is disguised as a monopine. With this permit renewal, the
Applicant proposes no changes to the tower The tower and equipment are all behind a locked enclosure, a
wood fence on top of a CMU wall. This department approved the project as constructed and implemented
Conditions of Approval to ensure that it was completed using the least intrusive means necessary. The tower
as existing is aesthetically pleasing, as it blends with the natural aesthetic of its surroundigs. There are trees
similar in aesthetic and height, making it difficult to see the tower at all. As constructed, the tower is
strategically placed out of the public right-of-way as well.
Alternative site locations were considered for this project, but no other locations in the general vicinity are
as accommodating or preferred as the current site. Changing the location of the tower would involve more
disruption to the surrounding environment and community. It would also cause bigger environmental affects
by increasing exhaust from construction vehicles and additional raw material would be needed for full
construction.
The subject parcel is zoned PD (Planned Development). There wouldn’t be any better place to put the
tower that would be more preferred. Alternative site locations would potentially eliminate the aesthetically
pleasing aspect of tower, with proposed modifications. Other areas surrounding the current site include
Residential. There are no other “more preferred” zoning classifications within this small search ring area (+/- 2
miles). Moving the site would cause unnecessary disruptions to the residences due to the tower removal and
reconstruction nearby.

Packet Pg. 76

Attachment: Alternative Sites Analysis (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

CARRIER: AT&T

10.d

Miles Away
1.1

Location
1901 South Bascom
Avenue, Campbell, CA
95008

Notes
Several alternative sites
within the right-of-way
were considered. We
could not consider these
options because the
poles already have
existing equipment.

1

Existing tower location

Packet Pg. 77

Attachment: Alternative Sites Analysis (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

#
1

10.d

Rooftop @ 216'

_
^
_
^

856577

Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China
(Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User
Packet Pg. 78
Community

Attachment: Alternative Sites Analysis (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

T-Mobile Rooftop Neighbor Coverage without 856577

10.d

Rooftop @ 216'

_
^
_
^

856577

Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China
(Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User
Packet Pg. 79
Community

Attachment: Alternative Sites Analysis (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

856577 T-Mobile Coverage with Rooftop Neighbor

10.d

Rooftop @ 216'

_
^
_
^

856577

Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China
(Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User
Packet Pg. 80
Community

Attachment: Alternative Sites Analysis (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

AT&T Rooftop Neighbor Coverage without 856577

10.d

Rooftop @ 216'

_
^
_
^

856577

Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China
(Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User
Packet Pg. 81
Community

Attachment: Alternative Sites Analysis (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

856577 AT&T Coverage with Rooftop Neighbor

10.e

MEMORANDUM
Community Development Department
Planning Division

Site and Architectural Review Committee

Date: October 26, 2021

From:

Stephen Rose, Senior Planner

Via:

Rob Eastwood, Community Development Director

Subject:

Wireless Telecommunications Facility

Address:

2041 S. Winchester Boulevard

File No.(s):

PLN-2021-128 & PLN-2021-129 (Conditional Use Permit with Site and Architectural Review)

PROPOSAL
The applicant is requesting approval of two (2) Conditional Use Permits with Site and Architectural Review, on
behalf of for T-Mobile & AT&T, to allow for the reestablishment and continued operation of an existing
concealed wireless telecommunications facility (faux monopine tree pole) on property located at 2041 S.
Winchester Boulevard.
PROJECT SITE
The project site is located on the west side of Winchester Boulevard, south of Campbell Avenue, behind Merrill
Gardens a mixed-use assisted living senior housing community.

Figure 1 – Location Map
PROJECT DATA
Zoning District:
General Plan Designation:
Area Plan:

P-D (Planned Development)
Central Commercial
Winchester Boulevard Master Plan (Area 2)

Tower Height:

Proposed
68-feet, 11-inches 1

1

Requirement/Standard
45-feet (see discussion on ‘Height’)

No change to the height of the existing facility is proposed.

Packet Pg. 82

Attachment: SARC Memo (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

To:

10.e

SARC Memorandum – October 26, 2021
PLN-2021-128 & 129 ~ 2041 S. Winchester Boulevard

Page 2 of 6

BACKGROUND

In 2017, T-Mobile received authorization to collocate equipment on the facility through an Eligible Facilities
Request (PLN2017-374) but did not obtain a building permit, and resultantly the permit expired one year later.
In 2018, T-Mobile obtained an Eligible Facilities Request (PLN-2018-165) to increase the height of the pole to
its present height of 68-feet, 11-inches to accommodate an additional antenna array. In 2018 and in 2019,
AT&T obtained Eligible Facilities Requests (PLN2018-199 and PLN2019-28 respectively) to swap/replace
antennas and equipment but did not seek an extension of the permit approval and the permit expired on
September 2, 2021.
ADMINSITRATIVE PROCEDURE
While the permit has been recently modified several times through Eligible Facility Requests, none served to
grant an extension of the underlying entitlement and, accordingly, the Administrative Site and Architectural
Review Permit for the faux monopine tree pole facility expired September 2, 2021.
While the facility is existing, to ‘reestablish’ the facility a new land use approval is required to ensure the
facility meets today’s standards. Once a permit is granted under the new Ordinance, the facility will be eligible
for future extensions by the Community Development Director.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of the Site and Architectural Review Committee's (SARC) review is to provide feedback on site
design, circulation, architectural form, materials, colors, and landscaping. To aid in the SARC review, staff has
provided an analysis of key project details and raised points as appropriate to facilitate discussion.
Design Requirements: The design of new wireless communications facilities is largely governed by the City’s
Wireless Facility Design Requirements. As a ‘concealed’ faux tree pole facility, the design should include an
assessment of the appropriate tree species, shape, and size as well as the quality and longevity of materials
(branches & bark), color, and finish in consideration of the facilities’ surroundings.
"Concealed facility" means any wireless communications facility which results in new site or architectural features
being added to a property in a manner which complements, enhances, or seamlessly integrates into their
surroundings. Examples of concealed facilities include, but are not limited to the construction of new rooftop, louver,
chimney, silo, pole, railing, sign, window, parapets, dormers, steeples, penthouses, water towers, bell towers, artificial
trees, and flag poles.

In addition to the general review criteria, all faux tree facilities are required to comply with the following
standards:
a. The tree species shall be selected based on its proposed surroundings and ideally placed in an
established grove of trees of comparable size, height, species, and shape as the proposed.
b. Utilize faux trees that replicate the shape, structure, height, and color of live trees.
c. The canopy shall completely envelop all tower-mounted equipment and extend beyond the towermounted equipment at least 18 inches.
Packet Pg. 83

Attachment: SARC Memo (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

The faux monopine tree pole was originally approved by the Community Development Director through an
Administrative Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2005-1021) in 2005 for AT&T (then Cingular
Wireless). The original tree pole was approved at a height of 60-feet tall and had a five-year approval which
expired April 4, 2010. In 2011, AT&T obtained an approval for a modification and reinstatement of the
existing wireless facility (PLN2011-104) for a period of ten years, expiring September 2, 2021.

10.e

Page 3 of 6

d. The canopy shall be naturally tapered to mimic the particular tree species.
e. All faux trees must incorporate a sufficient number of branches (no less than 3 branches per foot) and
design materials so that the structure is as natural in appearance as possible.
f. Where branches are connected to the pole, the branches shall make a seamless connection with the faux
bark cladding.
g. All tower-mounted equipment, including, without limitation, antennas, equipment cabinets, cables,
mounts and brackets, shall be painted flat, natural colors to mimic the bark or branches of the particular
tree species based on the predominant backdrop.
h. All antennas and other tower-mounted equipment cabinets shall be covered with leaf or needle “socks”
to blend in with the faux foliage.
i. The entire vertical structure shall be covered with permanently-affixed three-dimensional faux bark
cladding to mimic the particular tree species.
j. All coaxial cables must be routed directly from the ground up through the pole.
As an existing tree pole facility, the SARC may wish to prioritize areas where the design may be improved (as
opposed to points focused on site and tree species selection which have already been established).

Figures 1 to 3: Existing Tree Pole Facility (Increasing Sizes)
In review of the standards, the following items have been prioritized by staff for discussion:
 The canopy shall completely envelop all tower-mounted equipment and extend beyond the towermounted equipment at least 18 inches.
The existing branches do not extend 18-inches beyond the antennas (see Sheet C-3). This may be remedied by
installing branches to the RAD centers of the antennas. An example of how branches could be added to the
antennas (for the higher RAD center at 65-feet) can be seen below:

Figures 4 & 5: Adding Branches to RAD Center
Packet Pg. 84

Attachment: SARC Memo (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

SARC Memorandum – October 26, 2021
PLN-2021-128 & 129 ~ 2041 S. Winchester Boulevard

10.e

SARC Memorandum – October 26, 2021
PLN-2021-128 & 129 ~ 2041 S. Winchester Boulevard

Page 4 of 6

Adding additional branches around the antennas and at the top of the pole could also serve to further the
following design requirements:
 Utilize faux trees that replicate the shape, structure, height, and color of live trees.
 The canopy shall be naturally tapered to mimic the particular tree species.

In review of the other design standards and requirements (‘a-j’ above), it should be noted that the antennas are
clad in leaves (leaf socked), the pole has an artificial textured finish, the tree does replicate the color of live
trees and, in consideration of the tree’s location, (at the rear of a parcel behind other buildings and streets) the
other details related to design are imperceptible from the public right-of-way. Accordingly, staff recommends
that discussion focus on branch length, branch color, and branch density which are visible at a distance.
Height: The existing tree is 68-feet, 11-inches tall or 23-feet, 11-inches taller than the maximum height allowed
in Area 2 of the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan (i.e., 45-feet). While the height of the facility would not
change, an exception to the maximum height must be approved to grant the permit request.
Two administrative procedures are available that could allow the height exception to be granted (see Option 1 &
2 below).
 Option 1: Wireless Ordinance – Limited Exemption to Standards (PC Approval)
• Decision-Making Body: Planning Commission
The Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance provides a ‘Limited Exemption to Standards’ to ensure
adequate network coverage is provided in the City. To grant a height increase, an applicant is required to
demonstrate that a ‘significant gap in coverage’ would occur without the requested height and ‘all other
alternative sites identified in the review process are either technically infeasible or not potentially available’.
The applicant has provided an alternative sites analysis which explains their decision to not relocate the facility
(reasons include - existing tree is camouflaged, relocating would have an environmental impact, lack of other
‘preferred 2’ locations within the search radius). While these reasons provide the applicant’s rationale for using
the existing facility versus other options, it does not present a strong argument case that there will be a
significant gap in coverage without the requested height. For this reason, staff would recommend the applicant
provide materials which better establish the grounds for the exception or seek relief under the provisions of the
Winchester Boulevard Master Plan as discussed below.
 Option 2: Winchester Boulevard Master Plan – Exception to Requirements and Regulations
• Decision-Making Body: City Council

The Wireless Facilities Ordinance establishes a list of more preferred (i.e., City-owned sites) and less preferred locations (i.e.
residential). While the applicant indicates there are not more preferred sites within 2-miles, the Community Center is an example of a
preferred site per the zoning ordinance.
2

Packet Pg. 85

Attachment: SARC Memo (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

 All faux trees must incorporate a sufficient number of branches (no less than 3 branches per foot)
and design materials so that the structure is as natural in appearance as possible.

10.e

SARC Memorandum – October 26, 2021
PLN-2021-128 & 129 ~ 2041 S. Winchester Boulevard

Page 5 of 6

The Winchester Boulevard Master Plan provides exceptions to the requirements and regulations set forth in the
plan may be allowed provided that the City Council finds as follows (staff feedback is provided in plain text
below each point):
1. There are special circumstances and conditions affecting subject property;

2. That the exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
developer; and,
A height exception is necessary to retain the faux tree pole at its existing height and to preserve network
coverage enjoyed by the property owner, developer, and surrounding community.
3. That the granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to other
property in the area in which said property is situated.
Granting the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to other property in the
area as the facility is existing, does not pose an aesthetic impact as it is camouflaged as a tree, and is
provided safety oversight provided by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
In recommending an exemption to the City Council, the Planning Commission is required to:
1. Secure substantially the objectives of the regulations to which exceptions are requested, and shall act to
protect the public health, safety, convenience and general welfare;
The Winchester Boulevard Master Plan established a 45-foot height limit for Area 2 with the intent of
accommodating a ‘village scale of development with up to two floors of residential and/or office space
above the ground floor commercial frontage’. The height limit considered ‘local site conditions and the
adjacent neighborhood context’ and was in furtherance of the vision of the plan which is aimed at
‘guiding new development and major renovations to create an attractive boulevard street that adds value
to the community as a whole’.
As the intent of the height limit established by the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan was intended to
guide building development, and not wireless tree pole facilities, it can be reasonably concluded that the
requested height exception does not interfere with the objectives of the height regulation. Further, there
are no known impacts to the public health, safety, convenience or general welfare that would result from
retaining the existing height, but there would be an impact to network coverage in the area if the request
was not approved.
2. Report to the City Council its findings with respect thereto, and all facts in connection therewith, and
shall specifically and fully set forth the exceptions recommended and the conditions designated.
Note: To be established as an outcome of the Planning Commission action on the permit.
Packet Pg. 86

Attachment: SARC Memo (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

The existing concealed wireless telecommunications facility (faux tree pole) was established prior to the
adoption of the current Wireless Ordinance. The existing facility represents a sizeable investment in the
property which is unique to the subject property, as is the site location (rear of the property; not visible
from the right-of-way) and proximity to surrounding pine/redwood trees make the location uniquely
suited for a faux tree pole.

10.e

SARC Memorandum – October 26, 2021
PLN-2021-128 & 129 ~ 2041 S. Winchester Boulevard

Page 6 of 6

In consideration of the arguments presented under Option 1 and 2 (above), staff considers the applicant’s
proposal under Option 2 to make the strongest case based on the reasons stated above.
CONSIDERATIONS
The SARC should discuss the proposed project's design, with a specific emphasis on the following discussion
points:
•

Branch Length: Should the tree branches be extended to completely envelop all tower-mounted
equipment and extend beyond the tower-mounted equipment at least 18 inches?

•

Branch Color: Should the branch color be changed?
 Staff Recommendation: No. While the color is not identical to trees in the surrounding area, it
does faithfully replicate the color of live trees. Replacing the branches would be costly and
would draw more attention to the tree because of the change in the short term.

•

Branch Density: Should additional branches be added to ensure a canopy density of at least 3-branches
per foot?
 Staff Recommendation: Yes; but only in select areas. The tree at a distance does faithfully reflect
a natural tree canopy except where the antennas occur where large rectangular leaf socked panels
are visible. Staff would recommend requiring that additional branches be added around the
antennas as noted above, and that the canopy extend out at least 18-inches beyond the face of the
panels to ensure a more natural appearance up to a density of 3-branches per foot.

Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Project Plans
3. Alternative Sites Analysis

Packet Pg. 87

Attachment: SARC Memo (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

 Staff Recommendation: Yes. Ensuring the branches remain at least 18-inches beyond the antenna
panels helps ensure the concealment method is not defeated.

10.f

Campbell Planning Commission Action Minutes for November 9, 2021

Page 2

Director Rob Eastwood:
• Advised the Commission that there were no additional communication items for Agenda
Items 1 (Public Hearing) and 2 (Study Session #1).
• Said that several communication items were received and forwarded to the members of
the Planning Commission for Item 3 (Study Session #2) that will be held at or after 7:30
p.m. this evening.
• Reported that the start time was wrong for an early noticing that went out. Instead of a
5:30 p.m. start reflected on a postcard mailing, the actual start time as later changed to
6:30 p.m.
ORAL REQUESTS
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Acting Chair Ching asked if there were any disclosures from the Commission.
There were none.
Acting Chair Ching advised the Commission that he would actually have to recuse himself
from participating on Item 1 due to a professional conflict of interest.
Commissioner Krey assumed the role of Chair from Acting Chair Ching to oversee Agenda
Item 1.
Acting Chair Krey read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record as follows:
1. PLN-2021-128
PLN-2021-129

Public Hearing to consider the applications (PLN-2021-128 /
PLN-2021-129) of Nicole Comach for Conditional Use Permits
with Site and Architectural Review for T-Mobile & AT&T to allow
for the reestablishment and continued operation of an existing
concealed wireless telecommunications facility (faux tree pole)
with a requested exception to the Winchester Boulevard Master
Plan to allow the retention of an approximately 69-foot tall
facility, where otherwise limited to 45-feet, on property located
at 2041 S. Winchester Boulevard. This item is Categorically
Exempt under CEQA Project Planner: Stephen Rose, Senior
Planner.

Mr. Stephen Rose, Senior Planner, provided the staff report.
Commissioner Buchbinder provided a Site and Architectural Review Committee (SARC)
report, advising there were no issues, and this installation is well concealed at the back of
this site.

Packet Pg. 88

Attachment: Planning Commission Minutes, November 9, 2021 (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

COMMUNICATIONS/AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS

10.f

Campbell Planning Commission Action Minutes for November 9, 2021

Page 3

Chair Ostrowski asked if there were any questions for staff.
Commissioners Rivlin and Zisser had questions about coverage and the effective
concealment of this wireless telecommunications facility on this site.

Acting Chair Krey turned the gavel over to Chair Ostrowski for the balance of Item 1.
Commissioner Kamkar asked if this installation would provide 5G wireless services.
Planner Stephen Rose replied no. He added that usually 5G installations are situated on
light poles.
Chair Ostrowski opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1.
Male Speaker, on behalf of Nicole Comach, spoke in support of their request.
There was no one else present wishing to speak about Agenda Item No. 1.
Chair Ostrowski closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1.
Chair Ostrowski suggested the members of the Commission begin their deliberations on
this application.
Commissioner Krey advised he was at the SARC meeting for this item. There were no
problems. This was found to be a good location for this use.
Commissioner Rivlin stated his support.
Commissioner Buchbinder agreed this installation is well concealed and not visible. He too
is supportive of this project.
Motion:

Upon motion of Commissioner Zisser, seconded by Commissioner
Krey, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4627
recommending approval of Conditional Use Permits with Site and
Architectural Review for T-Mobile & AT&T to allow for the
reestablishment and continued operation of an existing concealed
wireless telecommunications facility (faux tree pole) with a requested
exception to the Winchester Boulevard Master Plan to allow the
retention of an approximately 69-foot tall facility, where otherwise
limited to 45-feet, on property located at 2041 S. Winchester
Boulevard, and finding the project to be Categorically Exempt under
CEQA, by the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
Buchbinder, Kamkar, Krey, Rivlin, and Zisser
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
Ching and Ostrowski
Packet Pg. 89

Attachment: Planning Commission Minutes, November 9, 2021 (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

Chair Ostrowski arrive at 6:53 p.m.

10.f

Campbell Planning Commission Action Minutes for November 9, 2021

Page 4

Chair Ostrowski advised that this item would be considered by the City Council for final
action.

STUDY SESSION 1
2. PLN-2021-169

Study Session to consider a Preliminary Application (PLN2021-169) to review the proposed reconstruction of an existing
service station (Shell) with a new convenience market and
drive-through carwash on property located at 570 E. Hamilton
Avenue. Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Senior Planner.

Mr. Daniel Fama, Senior Planner, provided the staff report.
Chair Ostrowski asked if there were Commission questions for staff.
Planner Daniel Fama advised that the current General Plan calls for more intensive
development. However, the existing use can stay as it is. The reinvestment of this scale is
inconsistent with the General Plan.
Commissioner Kamkar asked if this upgrade proposal is consistent with the current General
Plan. Just not with the new General Plan currently being updated.
Planner Daniel Fama said that the current General Plan polices were adopted 20 years
ago and are consistent with the Land Use diagram.
Commissioner Kamkar pointed out that there are inconsistencies within the General Plan,
but he understands the ultimate goal.
Planner Daniel Fama restated that these General Plan polices being referenced were
adopted 20 years ago.
Commissioner Buchbinder asked what date of compliance this current use is at with respect
to the General Plan
Planner Daniel Fama replied a 1983 Conditional Use Permit approval.
Commissioner Zisser admitted to having misgivings in denying this expansion of a longstanding business.
Director Rob Eastwood:
• Reiterated that the existing General Plan established the Gateways policies.
• Added that the City Council has been favorable with the development of a Specific Plan
for this area as part of the Envision General Plan Update.
• Concluded that the PC should consider the existing General Plan when considering this
project.
Packet Pg. 90

Attachment: Planning Commission Minutes, November 9, 2021 (2041 S. Winchester Blvd. (Wireless))

***

11

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

11
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND
INTRODUCTION OF
ORDINANCES
December 7, 2021

Public Hearing to Consider an Interim Ordinance to Adopt Urgency
Measures to Implement Senate Bill No. 9 to Allow for Two-Unit
Housing Developments and Urban Lot Splits in All Single-Family
Residential Zoning Districts. (Ordinance / Roll Call Vote)

RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that City Council adopt an Interim Ordinance to adopt urgency
measures to implement Senate Bill No. 9.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff recommends that the City Council find that the proposed interim ordinance is
statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Section 65852.21(j) and Section 66411.7(n) of the Government Code relating to
implementation of Senate Bill No. 9.
BACKGROUND
Senate Bill 9: On September 16, 2021, Senate Bill No. 9 (SB-9) was signed into law by
Governor Newsom. SB-9 will functionally eliminate single-family residential zoning in
California by allowing all properties within a "single-family residential zone" to be
developed with two units and to be subdivided into two parcels, irrespective of local
standards. In short, the law allows for two new types of development activities that must
be reviewed ministerially without any discretionary action or public input:
•

"Proposed Housing Development" allows a single-family residential parcel to
accommodate two primary dwelling units instead of one, as well as accessory
dwelling unit(s) (ADUs).

•

"Urban Lot Splits" allows a single-family residential parcel to be divided into two
parcels and for each parcel to also accommodate two primary dwelling units.
However, ADUs are not required.

The City may impose objective zoning, design, and subdivision standards, but may not
impose any standard(s) that would physically preclude the construction of two units of
less than 800 square feet each per property. Additionally, the City is also precluded

Packet Pg. 91

11
City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance

Page 2 of 7

from imposing side or rear setbacks greater than 4-feet or requiring onsite parking
spaces for properties one-half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit
corridor or a major transit stop, or within one block of a car share vehicle.
Prior City Council Direction: The City Council at its meeting of October 19, 2021,
authorized preparation of an interim SB-9 ordinance to be adopted on an urgency basis
prior to January 1, 2022. As discussed in the October 19 staff report (reference
Attachment B), adoption of a local ordinance will provide for the orderly implementation
of SB-9 starting January 1, including establishment of new objective zoning, design, and
subdivision standards, and a permitting process for SB 9 projects.
DISCUSSION
Procedural Requirements: An interim ordinance (reference Attachment A) requires a
four-fifths vote of the City Council for adoption and is effective for no more than 45 days
unless extended by Council. Staff anticipates that the interim ordinance will need to be
extended at least once prior to the 45-day expiration to allow sufficient time to prepare
and adopt a formal ordinance through the normal hearing procedures, including review
and recommendation by the Planning Commission.
Staff Approach: To create clarity for the staff and community in implementing SB-9
provisions while ensuring a degree of consistency between SB-9 and the City's existing
codes the draft interim ordinance was prepared to achieve the following objectives:
•

Reinforce the applicability of existing development standards to SB-9 projects,
except where specifically preempted by the law (i.e., setbacks and parking).

•

Establish objective design standards addressing architectural elements,
materials, colors, privacy, and scale in SB-9 projects.

•

Establish objective subdivision standards for SB-9 projects, including provisions
that prohibit the creation of irregular lots in single family neighborhoods

•

Implement a clear and standardized permitting procedure for proposed housing
developments and urban lot splits.

•

Provide a process to waive development standards that physically preclude
construction of up to two units of at least 800 square feet, as required by SB-9,
while prioritizing the preservation of open space and front- and street-side yards.

•

Create clarifying definitions that resolve ambiguities in SB-9 including identifying
the number and type of ADUs that may be constructed in association with an SB9 project.

Proposed Ordinance: The following is a summary of the key provisions contained in the
interim ordinance. Consistent with the concerns raised by the YIMBY Law group at the
October 19th Council meeting (reference Attachment C – YIMBY Law letter), the
interim ordinance does not establish new standards that would reduce the allowable
intensity of residential uses as currently allowed in a single-family residential zone.

Packet Pg. 92

11
City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance

Page 3 of 7

◼ Objective Zoning Standards: The interim ordinance reinforces applicability of
existing development standards to SB-9 projects, including height, floor area
ration (FAR), lot coverage, fencing, landscaping, lighting, building separations,
private open space, equipment placement, and stormwater management, as
currently specified by the Zoning Code and applicable area plans, with two
modifications:
o Setbacks. Although the applicable front and street-side yard setbacks
would continue to apply, SB-9 restricts the City from imposing setbacks
greater than 4-feet for side and rear property lines.
o Parking. Recognizing the physical constraints likely to be introduced by
additional building area allowed by SB-9, when parking is required, the
stalls may be either covered (garage or carport) or uncovered at the
applicant's discretion.
◼ Objective Design Review Standards: The interim ordinance provides new
objective design review standards applicable to SB-9 projects. The standards are
intended to incorporate general best design practices for single-family
neighborhoods, as identified by staff, including:
o Privacy requirements including limiting the size and placement of secondstory windows, and a prohibition of rooftop terraces and decks. Balconies
would only be permitted on the front elevation of a primary dwelling unit
fronting a public street and have to be entirely inset into the building.
o Limits the height of entryways, doors, and floors (plate heights).
o Restricts roof forms to hipped cross-hipped or hipped and valley forms
with a minimum slope of 4:12 and a maximum slope of 6:12 (to prevent
flat, shed, or strongly angular roofs). Gabled and dormer elements are
allowed.
o Limits roofing materials to composition shingles, photovoltaic shingles,
standing seam metal, clay tile, concrete tile, and slate shingles.
o Requires that stairways to access upper-level units be entirely enclosed
within the structure.
o Limits wall material to stucco and siding (fiber cement, wood, or
engineered/composite wood) with an allowance for stone or brick veneer
as an accent.
◼ Objective Subdivision Standards: To provide for the orderly creation of new
parcels through SB-9 enabled lot splits, the interim ordinance provides the
following standards:

Packet Pg. 93

11
City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance

Page 4 of 7

o Defines allowable lot types (i.e., interior lots, cul-de-sac lots, corner lots,
flag lots, etc.) and prohibiting "irregular lots" that do not meet these
standard types.
o Requires that side property lines of newly created lots shall be at right
angles to streets or radial to the centerline of curved streets.
o Specifies that each new parcel shall not be smaller than 40 percent of the
size of the original parcel and in no case less than 1,200 square-feet (per
SB-9).
o Defines a minimum width requirement for the access (pole) portion of flag
lots as 12-feet, consistent with the minimum Fire Code requirement.
o Defines the minimum lot width as 25-feet (equal to approximately 40% of
the width of a standard 60-foot wide R-1-6 lot).
o Maintains a minimum street frontage of 25-feet for new lots, except for
flag-lots which are allowed a frontage of 12-feet.
◼ Accessory Dwelling Units: Existing State law and the City's ADU Ordinance
allow for ADUs in association with single-family dwellings or duplex structures. In
conformance with SB-9, the interim ordinance allows for ADUs in conjunction
with SB-9 projects as follows:
o Single-Family Homes (No Lot Split): One ADU and JADU are allowed in
addition to the two primary dwellings allowed by SB-9, for a total of four
units.
o Duplex (No Lot Split): Two ADUs are allowed per property in addition to
the duplex, for a total of four units.1 The ADUs must be detached from the
duplex structure but may be connected to each other.
o Urban Lot Splits : SB-9 provides that the City may restrict the number of
units—inclusive of primary dwellings, ADUs, and JADUs—to no more than
two on parcels created from an urban lot split. Consistent with SB-9, the
interim ordinance restricts the total number of allowable units resulting
from an urban lot split to four units (two on each parcel).
◼ Review and Permitting Process: The interim ordinance establishes the use of a
ministerial "Zoning Clearance," process to review proposed housing development
Duplexes are considered "multifamily dwelling structures" under both State law and the City's local ADU
ordinance. Multifamily dwelling structures are allowed two detached ADUs and one ADU for every four primary
dwelling units (25%) created within non-livable space(s), such as garages, with at least one such ADU unit
allowed. The interim ordinance clarifies that the latter part of this provision only applies to existing duplexes,
consistent the Government Code which uses the term "existing multifamily dwelling structures." As such, SB-9
projects with duplexes will only be permitted the two detached ADUs. Only in very limited circumstances where
an existing legal non-conforming duplex is currently located on a R-1 zoned property would a third ADU created
from an existing non-livable space be allowed (resulting in the potential creation of a total of five units).
However, the City's GIS consultant found only 11 such properties in the City.
1

Packet Pg. 94

11
Page 5 of 7

City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance

proposals and ensure that they meet the required objective standards, including
a review of all existing and proposed structures compromising the proposed
housing development. Approval of the Zoning Clearance would be required prior
to submittal of applications for building permits for the individual structures.
Urban lot splits would be processed through the existing parcel map review
process overseen the Public Works Department. Since urban lot splits are
ministerial, an application for a tentative parcel map would not be required.
However, to ensure orderly development of SB-9 projects, applications for urban
lot splits must be submitted concurrently with the zoning clearance application.
◼ Exceptions. Consistent with SB-9, the Community Development Director must
waive any zoning or design standard that has "the effect of physically precluding
the construction of up to two units or that would physically preclude either of the
two units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area".
This determination would occur as part of the Zoning Clearance review process.
The interim ordinance establishes a prioritization process in determining which
standards are waived by indicating other objective standards must be waived
prior to granting an exception(s) to the private open space, landscaping, frontyard setback, or street-side setbacks standards. This provision prioritizes the
maintenance of sufficient open space onsite, consistent with general plan policies
that identify the need for private open space for recreational enjoyment,
protection of the urban forest, preservation of the community character, reduction
of the ambient air temperature (to limit the "heat island" effect), and to allow for
the percolation of rainfall into the groundwater system.
Potential Development Buildout: As noted, SB-9 will result in the potential creation of
four dwelling units from an existing single-family parcel, generally in the four (simplified)
scenarios identified in the table, below (in comparison, a single-family property is
currently permitted three units, inclusive of a single-family dwelling, an ADU, and a
JADU). The extent that existing dwellings may be retained will reflect existing lot
constraints.
#
1
2
3
4

SB-9
Project Type

Detached Units Attached Units
(SFD)
(Duplex)
Existing Lot 2
No Lot Split
Existing Lot
2
Lot 1
1
Lot 2
2
With Lot Split
Lot 1
2
Lot 2
2
Lot

ADU JADU Total
1
2
1

1

4
4
4
4

Packet Pg. 95

11
City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance

Page 6 of 7

The "real-world" impact of SB-9 will likely be felt most in the R-1-6 Zoning District as
approximately 80% (5,475 lots) of the City's 6,800 R-1 zoned lots have this zoning
designation. Moreover, these lots are typically smaller than the those found in the City's
other R-1 districts, which will result more building square-footage relative to their lot
area (i.e., higher FARs).
In terms of neighborhood design, the objective standards proposed by staff prioritize the
preservation of onsite open space and thus will encourage that housing developments
under SB-9 be constructed as two-level structures. While this approach maintains more
on-site open space, it will likely result in more two-story buildings with 4-foot side and
rear setbacks that could affect neighboring properties by additional building massing,
shadowing, and perceived privacy disruption. An alternative approach would be to
establish objective standards that allow greater lot coverage with buildings,
deprioritizing private open space, and front- and street-side yard setback requirements.
This will result in more single-story development by allowing a greater portion of a lot to
be built upon.
NEXT STEPS
Following adoption of an interim ordinance, staff will subsequently return to the Planning
Commission and Council with a formal ordinance to codify the proposed SB-9
provisions into the Zoning Code. It is anticipated that a Planning Commission public
hearing will be scheduled in February with a Council hearing following six to eight
weeks later. Additionally, staff will return to the Council no later than February 1st to
seek an extension of the interim ordinance.
ALTERNATIVES
SB-9 will go into effect on January 1st regardless of any action taken by the City.
Adoption of the interim ordinance is, therefore, imperative before the end of the year. If
the Council wishes to make minor revisions to the draft, the hearing may be continued
to December 16th or 21st. However, substantive changes will have to be reflected in the

Packet Pg. 96

11
City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance

Page 7 of 7

formal ordinance and considered next year.
FISCAL IMPACT
All necessary costs associated with preparing the interim ordinance, including staff
costs, are accounted for within the Department’s approved FY 2022 budget. The
Department will separately bring forward to the Council in 2022 proposed new permit
application fees for SB-9 projects to ensure there is sufficient cost recovery associated
with permit processing.

Prepared by:

Daniel Fama, Senior Planner

Reviewed by:
Rob Eastwood, Community
Development Director

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Attachment:

a. Draft SB-9 Ordinance
b. City Council Staff Report
c. YIMBY Letter

Packet Pg. 97

11.a

Ordinance No. _____

WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, the Governor of the State California signed into
law Senate Bill No. 9 (Atkins), "An act to amend Section 66452.6 of, and to add Sections
65852.21 and 66411.7 to, the California Government Code, relating to land use," which
requires ministerial approval of a housing development of no more than two units in a singlefamily zone (proposed housing development), the subdivision of a parcel zoned for residential
use into two parcels (urban lot split), or both.
WHEREAS, certain zoning and subdivision standards of the City of Campbell Zoning
and Subdivision Codes, respectively, and their permitting procedures are inconsistent with
the proposed housing developments and urban lot splits authorized by Senate Bill No. 9.
WHEREAS, the provisions of Senate Bill No. 9 shall be in effect on January 1, 2022,
and without locally codified objective design standards and implementation procedures, the
law presents a current and immediate threat to the public peace, health, safety, and welfare,
in that certain existing zoning and subdivision standards are in conflict with Senate Bill No. 9
and could create confusion and hinder the development of the additional residential units
enabled under Senate Bill No. 9.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 65858 of the Government Code and Section
21.60.090 of the Campbell Municipal Code, the City Council may take appropriate action to
adopt urgency measures as an interim ordinance.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 65852.21(j) and Section 66411.7(n) of the
Government Code, a local agency may adopt an ordinance to implement Senate Bill No. 9.
WHEREAS, this interim ordinance adopts interim urgency objective zoning standards,
objective subdivision standards, and objective residential design standards as to allow for
orderly housing development and subdivision of land as authorized by Senate Bill No. 9 while
protecting the public peace, health, safety, or welfare in the City of Campbell.
WHEREAS, it is not the intent of this interim ordinance to adopt permanent standards
to govern the development of single-family zoned properties. The City Council reserves the
right to adopt permanent standards consistent with Senate Bill No. 9 that will supersede those
contained in this interim ordinance.
WHEREAS, it is not the intent of this interim ordinance to deny approvals needed for
the development of projects with a significant component of multifamily housing.
WHEREAS, in light of the foregoing findings, the City Council further finds that there is
a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare, and that the approval
of additional subdivisions, use permits, variances, building permits, or any other applicable

Packet Pg. 98

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

BEING AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CAMPBELL ADOPTING URGENCY MEASURES TO IMPLEMENT SENATE BILL NO. 9
TO ALLOW FOR TWO-UNIT HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS AND URBAN LOT SPLITS IN
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. (FILE NO. PLN-2021-187)

11.a

entitlement for use which is in conflict with this ordinance would result in that threat to public
health, safety, or welfare.
WHEREAS, adoption of this interim ordinance is not a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to California Government Code Section
65852.21(j) and Section 66411.7(n) relating to implementation of Senate Bill No. 9.

SECTION 1 (PURPOSE): This interim ordinance establishes interim exceptions to the Zoning
Code to allow proposed housing developments and urban lot splits as specified by California
Government Code Sections 66452.6, 65852.21, and 66411.7, as adopted and amended by
Senate Bill No. 9. The provisions of this interim ordinance shall supersede any other provision
to the contrary in the Zoning Code or Subdivision Code. Zoning standards and design review
standards provided for in the Zoning Code that are not affected by this interim ordinance shall
remain in effect. It is not the intent of this interim ordinance to override any lawful use
restrictions as may be set forth in Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) of a
common interest development.
SECTION 2 (APPLICABILITY): This interim ordinance is applicable only to voluntary
applications for proposed housing developments and urban lot splits. Owners of real property
or their representatives may continue to exercise rights for property development in
conformance with the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code. Development applications that do
not satisfy the definitions for a proposed housing development or an urban lot split provided
in Section 3 (Definitions) shall not be subject to this interim ordinance.
SECTION 3 (DEFINITIONS): In addition to the terms defined by Article 6 (Definitions) and
Section 21.23.120 (Definitions), the following terms shall have the following meanings as used
in this this interim ordinance. Where a conflict may exist, this Section shall prevail over any
definition provided in the Zoning Code:
"Acting in concert" means persons, as defined by Section 82047 of the Government
Code as that section existed on the date of the adoption of this interim ordinance, acting jointly
to pursue development of real property whether or not pursuant to a written agreement and
irrespective of individual financial interest;
"Addition" means any construction which increases the size of a building or facility in
terms of site coverage, height, length, width, or gross floor area;
"Alteration" means any construction or physical change in the arrangement of rooms
or the supporting members of a building or structure or change in the relative position of
buildings or structures on a site, or substantial change in appearances of any building or
structure;
"Building" means any structure having a roof supported by columns or walls and
intended for any shelter, housing or enclosure of any individual, animal, process, equipment,
goods, use, occupancy, or materials. When any portion of a structure is completely separated
Page 2 of 16
Packet Pg. 99

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

11.a

from every other portion of the structure by a masonry division or firewall without any window,
door or other opening and the masonry division or firewall extends from the ground to the
upper surface of the roof at every point, such portion shall be deemed to be a separate
building;

"Existing non-livable space(s)" and "portions of existing multifamily dwelling structures
that are not used as livable space" as referenced in Section 21.23.050 of the Zoning Code
and Section 65852.2(e)(1)(C) of the Government Code, respectively, refers to storage rooms,
boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, garages, carports, and similar spaces that are
located within or a part of existing multifamily dwelling structures that received a certificate of
occupancy prior to January 1, 2022;
"Existing structure" means a lawfully constructed building that received final building
permit clearance prior to January 1, 2022 and which has not been expanded on or after
January 1, 2022;
"Lot types" means "corner lot," "interior lot," flag lot," "double frontage lot," "reversed
corner lot," and "key lot" as depicted in Figure 1-1 (Lot Types and Yards), below. A "cul-desac lot" is a lot located along the curved terminus formed by the bulb of a cul-de-sac street,
as depicted by Figure Lot 1-2 (Cul-de-Sac Lots). Any other lot type not defined herein shall
be considered an "irregular lot";
Figure 1-1 – Lot Types and Yards

Figure 1-2 – Cul-de-Sac Lots

"Natural grade" means the average existing elevation of datum points located at each
corner of a proposed primary dwelling unit, measured in feet above mean sea level (AMSL);

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

"Entry feature" means a structural element, which leads to an entry door;

"Neighborhood plan" means both the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan and the
Campbell Village Area Neighborhood Plan, as applicable;
"Nonconforming zoning condition" means a physical improvement on a property that
does not conform with current zoning standards;
"Proposed housing development" means an application proposing no more than two
primary dwelling units on a single parcel located within a single-family residential zone as
Page 3 of 16
Packet Pg. 100

11.a

"Public transportation" means a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in subdivision
(b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, or a major transit stop, as defined in
Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code;
"Single-family residential zone" means an R-1 (Single-family) zoning district as
specified by Chapter 21.08 (Residential zoning districts) of the Zoning Code;
"Subdivision code" means Title 20 of the Campbell Municipal Code;
"Urban lot split" means a ministerial application for a parcel map to subdivide an
existing parcel located within a single-family residential zone into two parcels, as authorized
by Section 66411.7 of the Government Code;
"Yards" means the open space formed by the required building setbacks, as illustrated
by Figure 1-1 and Figure 1-2;
"Zoning code" means Title 21 of the Campbell Municipal Code.
SECTION 4 (GENERAL ELIGIBILITY): An urban lot split or a proposed housing development
may only be created on parcels satisfying all of the following general requirements:
A. Zoning District. A parcel that is located within a single-family residential zone;
B. Historic Property. A parcel that is not listed on the City of Campbell Historic Resource
Inventory, as defined by Chapter 21.33 (Historic Preservation) of the Zoning Code;
C. Legal Parcel. A parcel which has been legally created in compliance with the
Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) and Subdivision Code,
as applicable at the time the parcel was created. The city engineer may require a
certificate of compliance to verify conformance with this requirement;
D. Hazardous Waste Site. A parcel that is not identified as a hazardous waste site
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 or a hazardous waste site designated
by the Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Section 25356 of the
Health and Safety Code, unless the State Department of Public Health, State Water
Resources Control Board, or Department of Toxic Substances Control has cleared the
site for residential use;

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

authorized by Section 65852.21 of the California Government Code. A proposed housing
development shall consist of either the construction of two new primary dwelling units, one
new primary dwelling unit and retention of one existing primary dwelling unit, or retention of
two existing legal non-conforming primary dwelling units where one or both units are subject
to a proposed addition or alteration. A proposed housing development may also consist of
one new or existing primary dwelling unit and an accessory dwelling unit(s) and/or a junior
accessory dwelling unit located on a new parcel created from an urban lot split;

E. Flood Zone. A parcel that is not located within a special flood hazard area subject to
inundation by the 1 percent annual chance flood (100-year flood) on the official maps
published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency unless a Letter of Map
Page 4 of 16
Packet Pg. 101

11.a

F. Earthquake Fault Zone. A parcel that is not located within a delineated earthquake
fault zone as determined by the State Geologist on any official maps published by the
State Geologist, unless the proposed housing development complies with applicable
seismic protection building code standards adopted by the California Building
Standards Commission under the California Building Standards Law (Part 2.5
(commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code), and
by any local building department under Chapter 12.2 (commencing with Section 8875)
of Division 1 of Title 2;
G. Natural Habitat. A parcel that is not recognized by the City as a habitat for protected
species identified as candidate, sensitive, or species of special status by state or
federal agencies, fully protected species, or species protected by the federal
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531 et seq.), the California
Endangered Species Act (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 2050) of Division 3
of the Fish and Game Code), or the Native Plant Protection Act (Chapter 10
(commencing with Section 1900) of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code).
SECTION 5 (PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS): Proposed housing developments
shall comply with the following objective zoning standards, design review standards, and
general requirements and restrictions.
A. Zoning Standards
The following objective zoning standards supersede any other standards to the
contrary that may be provided in the Zoning Code or a neighborhood plan, as they pertain to
a proposed housing development under Section 65852.21 of the Government Code.
Proposed housing developments shall be constructed only in accordance with the following
objective zoning standards, except as provided by Section E (Exceptions):
1.

Air Conditioning Units. Air conditioning units and similar equipment such as
generators, heating, and ventilation equipment shall be ground-mounted,
screened from public view, and separated from property lines as required by
Section 21.18.020 of the Zoning Code;

2.

Building Height. Maximum building height shall be as specified by the
applicable zoning district and/or a neighborhood plan for the main structure.
Building height shall be measured from finished grade except for properties
subject to a neighborhood plan which requires maximum building height to be
measured from natural grade;

3.

Driveways. Each parcel shall include a single driveway satisfying the following
requirements:

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

Revision prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency has been issued
or if the proposed primary dwelling unit(s) is constructed in compliance with the
provisions of Chapter 21.22 (Flood Damage Prevention) of the Zoning Code as
determined by the floodplain administrator;

a. A minimum width of 9-feet up to a maximum width of 18-feet;
Page 5 of 16
Packet Pg. 102

11.a

b. A minimum depth of 25-feet measured from the front property line;
c. A minimum 5-foot setback from side property lines, except for flag-lots,
and unless a single driveway shared with an adjacent parcel is proposed;

e. Only a single driveway curb-cut shall be permitted per parcel designed
in accordance with the City’s Standard Specifications and Details for
Public Works Construction.
4.

Dwelling Unit Type. The primary dwelling units comprising a proposed housing
development may take the form of detached single-family dwellings, attached
townhomes, and/or duplexes. A duplex may consist of two dwelling units in a
side-by-side or front-to-back configuration within the same structure or one
dwelling unit located atop of another dwelling unit within the same structure;

5.

Fencing. All new fencing shall comply with the requirements of Section
21.18.060 of the Zoning Code. Proposed housing developments shall not be
eligible for a Fence Exception;

6.

Floor Area Ratio and Lot Coverage. The maximum floor area ratio and lot
coverage shall be as specified by the applicable zoning district and/or a
neighborhood plan;

7.

Front Yard Paving. No more than fifty percent of the front-yard setback area
shall be paved, inclusive of driveways and walkways, irrespective of the
permeability of the paving material;

8.

Grading. Grading activity shall not result in a change in elevation (AMSL) of
more than 6-inches from natural grade, as demonstrated by a grading and
drainage plan prepared by a registered civil engineer;

9.

Landscaping Requirement. Front and street-side yards shall be landscaped
with a combination of plantings, including natural turf, ornamental grasses,
groundcovers, shrubs, and trees (one tree per 1,500 square-feet of net lot area
shall be required). All landscaping shall comply with the California Model Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), adopted as the City of Campbell
water-efficient landscape guidelines pursuant to Section 21.26.030.F of the
Zoning Code;

10.

Lighting. New exterior lighting fixtures shall be down-shielded and oriented
away from adjacent properties consistent with Section 21.18.090 of the Zoning
Code and shall not emit more than one half foot candle of illumination at interiorside or rear property lines;

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

d. Entirely paved with either concrete or pavers. All other surfacing
materials, including but not limited to gravel, decomposed granite, and
asphalt, are prohibited, as are Hollywood drives; and

Page 6 of 16
Packet Pg. 103

11.

Minimum Living Area. The minimum living area of a primary dwelling unit shall
be 150 square feet, subject to the restrictions specified by Health and Safety
Code Section 17958.1;

12.

Parking. One parking stall per primary dwelling unit shall be required, except
for proposed housing developments located on parcels within one-half mile
walking distance of either a public transportation stop or one block of a car share
vehicle operating in accordance with California Vehicle Code section 22507.1.
Parking stalls may either be uncovered or covered (garage or carport) in
compliance with applicable developments standards of the Zoning Code and an
applicable neighborhood plan, except that uncovered parking spaces may
encroach into a required front yard or street-side yard setback within an existing
or proposed driveway that satisfies the minimum stall dimensions for residential
parking spaces (9-feet wide by 20-feet deep);

13.

Private Open Space. Each parcel shall maintain 750 square feet of private
open space per primary dwelling unit, satisfying the requirements of Section
21.08.030, Table 2-3 (General Development Standards – R-1 Zoning District)
of the Zoning Code;

14.

Setbacks. Proposed housing developments shall be subject to the setback and
building separation requirements specified by Table 1-1 (Setback
Requirements), below:
Table 1-1 – Setback Requirements
Setback
Front

Property Line Setbacks (1)

Garage Entry
Interior Sides
Rear

Separation Between
Primary Dwelling Units (4)

Separation from
Accessory Structure(s)

Requirement (2)
Per the applicable
zoning district and/or
neighborhood plan
25 feet
4 feet (3)

Street Side

12 feet

Units located in front of, to the side of,
or behind each other

10 feet

Units located to the side of each

5 feet

If located in front of the accessory
structure
If located behind the accessory
structure

10 feet

If located to the side of the accessory
structure

5 feet

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

11.a

Exceptions:
(1) Cornices, eaves, sills, canopies, bay windows, or other similar architectural features may
extend into required setbacks as specified Section 21.18.040.B.1 of the Zoning Code.

Page 7 of 16
Packet Pg. 104

11.a

(2) No setback shall be required for an existing structure, or a structure constructed in the
same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.
(3) No interior side setback shall be required for proposed housing development units
constructed as attached townhomes, provided that the structures meet building code
safety standards and are sufficient to allow conveyance as a separate fee parcel.

15.

Stormwater Management. Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces shall
be directed to vegetated areas on the parcel and shall not drain onto adjacent
parcels as specified by the Building Code, and as demonstrated by a grading
and drainage plan prepared by a registered civil engineer;

16.

Water Meter(s) and Sewer Cleanout(s): Existing and proposed water meter(s)
and sewer cleanout(s) shall be relocated and/or installed on the parcel
containing the unit(s) they serve.

B. Design Review Standards
The following objective design review standards apply to construction of new primary
dwelling units and to any addition and/or alteration to an existing primary dwelling units as
part of a proposed housing development, except as provided by Section E (Exceptions):
1.

Balconies/Decks. Rooftop terraces and decks are prohibited. Balconies shall
only be permitted on the front elevation of a primary dwelling unit fronting a
public street. Such balconies shall without any projections beyond the building.

2.

Building Colors. Each primary dwelling unit shall incorporate at least two (2)
colors (inclusive of trim) but not more than four colors. Paints shall be uniformly
applied to wall surfaces and no more than one paint color may be applied per
wall. Colors within the 331° to 345° hue range (pinks) in the HSL color model
are prohibited;

3.

Columns and Pillars. Exterior columns and/or pillars shall not exceed a height
of 12-feet or the plate height of the first-story (whichever is less);

4.

Finished Floor. The finished floor of the first-story shall not exceed 12-inches
in height as measured from finished grade;

5.

Front Entryway. A front entryway framing a front door shall not exceed 14-feet
in height and shall not be taller than 4-feet above the plate height of the firststory;

6.

Front Doors. Front door openings shall not exceed a width of 4-feet or a height
of 9-feet. Front entry doors for duplex units in a side-by-side configuration shall
be separated by a distance equal to half the linear length of the structure’s front
elevation;

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

(4) Except for primary dwellings constructed as a duplex or attached single-family
residences constructed as townhomes.

Page 8 of 16
Packet Pg. 105

7.

Front Porch. If proposed, porches shall have a minimum depth of 5-feet and a
minimum width equal to 25% percent of the linear width of the front elevation.
Porch columns shall not overhang the porch floor;

8.

Front Step-back. The front and street-side elevations of the second-story of a
two-story primary dwelling unit shall be recessed by 5-feet from the first-story,
as measured wall to wall;

9.

Garages. Street-facing attached garages shall not exceed fifty percent of the
linear width of the front-yard or street-side yard elevation;

10.

Plate Height. The plate height of each story shall be limited to 10-feet as
measured from finished floor;

11.

Roof Forms. Roofs shall be limited to cross-hipped or hipped and valley forms
with a minimum slope of 4:12 and a maximum slope of 6:12. Gabled and dormer
elements are allowed. All other roof forms are prohibited;

12.

Roof Materials. No more than one roofing material shall be used, limited to
asphalt composite shingles, photovoltaic shingles, standing seam metal, clay
tile, concrete tile, and slate shingles. All other roofing materials are prohibited;

13.

Stairways. Exterior stairways are prohibited. Stairways necessary to access a
dwelling unit located on a second floor shall be entirely enclosed within the
structure and shall be included in the allowable floor area of the dwelling unit
that it serves;

14.

Wall Materials. No more than two exterior wall materials shall be used, limited
to stucco, horizontal or vertical fiber cement siding (in any profile), horizontal or
vertical wood siding (in any profile), and horizontal or vertical engineered
(composite) wood siding (in any profile). Stacked stone or brick veneer may be
used as an accent material, limited to the lower half of the first story (defined as
the area 5-feet below the first-story plate);

15.

Windows. All second-story windows less than eight feet from rear and interiorside property lines shall be clerestory with the bottom of the glass at least six
feet above the finished floor. All other second-story windows shall be limited to
the minimum number and minimum size as necessary for egress purposes as
required by the Building Code;

16.

Utilities. Gas and electric meters and connections to gas and electric meters
(i.e. connections to rooftop solar panels) shall be located on side walls adjacent
to interior-side property lines.

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

11.a

C. General Requirements and Restrictions
The following requirements and restrictions apply to all proposed housing
developments, inclusive of existing and new primary dwelling units, as applicable:
Page 9 of 16
Packet Pg. 106

11.a

1.

Accessory Dwelling Units. In addition to the two primary dwelling units
comprising a proposed housing development, accessory dwelling units may be
allowed as follows, consistent with Chapter 21.23 of the Zoning Code, except
for proposed housing developments located on a new parcel created by an
urban lot split which shall be limited to a total of two units as defined by Section
66411.7(j)(2) of the Government Code:

b. Parcels with a single duplex shall be permitted two detached accessory
dwelling units. The accessory dwelling units may be connected to each
other in a side-by-side or front-to-back configuration or with one unit
located atop of the other unit forming a two-story structure not exceeding
24-feet in height;
c. Creation of an interior accessory dwelling unit from an existing nonlivable space shall only be permitted within an existing multifamily
dwelling structure, as herein defined;
2.

Building and Fire Codes. The International Building Code (Building Code), and
the 2019 California Fire Code and 2018 International Fire Code (together, Fire
Code), as adopted by Title 18 and Title 17 of the Campbell Municipal Code,
respectively, apply to all proposed housing developments;

3.

Encroachment Permits. Separate encroachment permits for the installation of
utilities to serve a proposed housing development shall be required. Applicants
shall apply for and pay all necessary fees for utility permits for sanitary sewer,
gas, water, electric and all other utility work;

4.

Park Impact Fee. A fee in-lieu of parkland dedication shall be paid in
association with the creation of any new dwelling units in compliance with
Chapter 13.08 (Park Impact Fees) of the Campbell Municipal Code;

5.

Restrictions on Demolition. The proposed housing development shall not
require demolition or alteration of any of the following types of housing:
a. Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that
restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate,
low, or very low income;

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

a. Parcels with two detached single-family dwellings shall be permitted
one accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit;

b. Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a
public entity’s valid exercise of its police power;
c. Housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. This
shall be evidenced by claiming of the Homeowners' Exemption on the
Santa Clara County assessment roll;

Page 10 of 16
Packet Pg. 107

6.

Short-Term Rentals. Leases for durations of less than 30 days, including shortterm rentals are prohibited. The community development director shall require
recordation of a deed restriction documenting this requirement prior to issuance
of a building permit;

7.

Subdivision and Sales. Except for the allowance for an urban lot split provided
in Section 6 (Urban Lot Splits), no subdivision of land or air rights shall be
allowed in association with a proposed housing development, including creation
of a stock cooperative or similar common interest ownership arrangement. In
no instance shall a single primary dwelling unit be sold or otherwise conveyed
separate from the other primary dwelling unit.

D. Approval Process
Applications for proposed housing developments shall be submitted and processed in
compliance with the following requirements:
1.

Application Type. Proposed housing developments shall be reviewed
ministerially by the community development director through consideration of a
zoning clearance in compliance with Chapter 21.40 (Zoning clearances) of the
Zoning Code. The permitting provisions of Chapter 21.42 (Site and Architectural
Review) of the Zoning Code, and by reference any neighborhood plan, shall not
be applied;

2.

Application Filing. A zoning clearance application for a proposed housing
development, including the required application materials and fees, shall be filed
with the community development department in compliance with Chapter 21.38
(Application Filing, Processing and Fees) of the Zoning Code;

3.

Building Permits. Issuance of a zoning clearance shall be required prior to
acceptance of an application for a building permit(s) for the new and/or modified
primary dwelling units and accessory dwelling units comprising the proposed
housing development;

4.

Denial. The community development director may deny a proposed housing
development project only if the building official makes a written finding, based
upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development
would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph
(2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5 of the Government Code, upon public
health and safety or the physical environment and for which there is no feasible
method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact;

5.

Appeals. As specified by Chapter 21.62 (Appeals) of the Zoning Code, zoning
clearances are ministerial and are not subject to an appeal.

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

11.a

Page 11 of 16
Packet Pg. 108

11.a

E. Exceptions

1.

Determination. In order to retain adequate open space to allow for recreational
enjoyment, protection of the urban forest, preservation of the community
character, reduction of the ambient air temperature, and to allow for the
percolation of rainfall into the groundwater system, when considering an
exception request, the community development director shall first determine
that a reduction in any other zoning and/or design review standard(s) will not
allow the construction of the proposed housing development as specified by this
section prior to allowing an exception(s) to the private open space, landscaping
requirement, front-yard setback, or street-side setbacks standards.

2.

Remedy. Where a disagreement with the community development director's
application of this section occurs, the procedures for an Interpretation provided
in Section 21.020.030 (Procedures for Interpretations) of the Zoning Code shall
be followed, including the provisions for an appeal.

SECTION 6 (URBAN LOT SPLITS): Urban lot splits shall comply with the following
subdivision standards, and general requirements and restrictions:
A. Subdivision Standards
The following objective subdivision standards supersede any other standards to the
contrary that may be provided in the Zoning Code, Subdivision Code, or a neighborhood plan
as they pertain to creation of an urban lot split under Section 66411.7 of the Government
Code:
1.

Allowable Lot Types. Any newly created parcel satisfying the criteria provided
by Section 4 (Eligibility) of this interim ordinance may be approved for an urban
lot split, irrespective of its current configuration. However, the allowed creation
of specific lot types, as illustrated by Figure 1-1 (Lot Types and Yards) and
Figure 1-2 (Cul-de-Sac Lots), resulting from an urban lot split are described in
Table 1-2 (Allowed Lot Types). Lot types identified with an (A) are allowable.
Lot types identified with a (P) are prohibited and shall not be created:

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

If any of the provided zoning standards or design review standards would have the
effect of physically precluding construction of up to two primary dwelling units or physically
preclude either of the two primary dwelling units from being at least 800 square feet in floor
area, the community development director shall grant an exception to the applicable
standard(s) to the minimum extent necessary as specified by this section. An exception
request shall be explicitly made on the application for a zoning clearance for a proposed
housing development.

Table 1-2 – Allowed Lot Types

Setback
Interior
Corner
Reverse Corner
Flag

A
A
A
A

Allowability

Page 12 of 16
Packet Pg. 109

11.a

A
A
P
P

2.

Flag Lots. The access corridor of a flag lot (as illustrated in Figure 1-1) parcel
shall be in fee as part of the parcel and not as an easement and shall be of a
minimum width of 12-feet and a maximum width of 15-feet and be entirely paved
with either concrete or pavers, consistent with the Fire Code as determined by
the fire chief;

3.

Lot Lines. The side lines of all lots shall be at right angles to streets or radial
to the centerline of curved streets;

4.

Minimum Lot Size. Each new parcel shall be approximately equal in lot area
provided that one parcel shall not be smaller than 40 percent of the lot area of
the original parcel proposed for subdivision. In no event shall a new parcel be
less than 1,200 square feet in lot area. The minimum lot area for a flag lot shall
be exclusive of the access corridor as illustrated in Figure 1-1;

5.

Minimum lot width. Each new parcel shall maintain a minimum lot width of 25feet. The calculation of lot width for a flag lot shall exclude the access corridor
as illustrated in Figure 1-1;

6.

Minimum Public Frontage. Each new parcel shall have frontage upon a street
dedicated in fee as a public street with a minimum frontage dimension of 25feet, except for flag-lots which shall have a minimum frontage dimension of 12feet;

7.

Number of Lots. The parcel map to subdivide an existing parcel shall create
no more than two new parcels.

B. General Requirements and Restrictions
The following requirements and restrictions apply to all proposed urban lot splits:
1.

Adjacent Parcels. Neither the owner of the parcel being subdivided nor any
person acting in concert with the owner has previously conducted an urban lot
split to create an adjacent parcel as provided for in this section;

2.

Dedication and Easements: The city engineer shall not require dedications of
rights-of-way nor the construction of offsite improvements, however, may
require recording of easements necessary for the provision of public services
and facilities;

3.

Existing Structures. Existing structures located on a parcel subject to an urban
lot split shall not be subject to a setback requirement. However, any such
existing structures shall not be located across the shared property line resulting
from an urban lot split, unless the structure is converted to an attached
townhome unit as provided for in Table 1-1 (Setback Requirements, Exception

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

Key
Cul-de-Sac
Double Frontage
Irregular

Page 13 of 16
Packet Pg. 110

11.a

4.

Grading. Grading activity shall not result in a change in elevation (AMSL) of
more than 6-inches from natural grade, as demonstrated by a grading and
drainage plan prepared by a registered civil engineer;

5.

Intent to Occupy. The applicant shall sign an affidavit provided by the
community development director attesting that the applicant intends to occupy
one of the newly created parcels as their principal residence for a minimum of
three years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split. The affidavit shall
be recorded on the title of the parcel concurrently with recordation of the parcel
map.
This requirement shall not apply to an applicant that is "community land trust,"
as defined in clause (ii) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (a)
of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or a "qualified nonprofit
corporation" as described in Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code;

6.

Non-Conforming Conditions. The City shall not require, as a condition of
approval, the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions. However, no new
nonconforming conditions may result from the urban lot split other than
substandard interior-side and rear setbacks as specified by Table 1-1 (Setback
Requirements, Exception No. 2);

7.

Number of Remaining Units. No parcel created through an urban lot split shall
be allowed to include more than two existing dwelling units as defined by
Government Code section 66411.7(j)(2). Any excess dwelling units that do not
meet these requirements shall be relocated, demolished, or otherwise removed
prior to approval of a parcel map;

8.

Park Impact Fee. A fee in-lieu of parkland dedication pursuant to Chapter 20.24
(Park Impact Fees and Park Land Dedication Subdivisions) of the Subdivision
Code shall be paid prior to recordation of the parcel map;

9.

Prior Subdivision. A parcel created through a prior urban lot split may not be
further subdivided under the provisions of this interim ordinance. The subdivider
shall sign a covenant provided by the community development director
documenting this restriction. The convent shall be recorded on the title of each
parcel concurrent with recordation of the parcel map;

10.

Restrictions on Demolition. The proposed urban lot split shall not require the
demolition or alteration of any of the following types of housing:

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

No. 3). All other existing structures shall be modified, demolished, or relocated
prior to recordation of a parcel map;

a. Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that
restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate,
low, or very low income;

Page 14 of 16
Packet Pg. 111

11.a

b. Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public
entity’s valid exercise of its police power;

11.

Storm Drain Area Fee. Prior to recordation of a parcel map, the applicant shall
pay the required Storm Drain Area fee, as set by the City's Schedule of Fees
and Charges;

12.

Stormwater Management. The subdivision shall comply with the requirements
of the City's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit
as implemented by Chapter 14.02 of the Campbell Municipal Code, and as
demonstrated by a grading and drainage plan prepared by a registered civil
engineer;

13.

Utility Providers. The requirements of the parcel’s utility providers shall be
satisfied prior to recordation of a parcel map.

C. Approval Process
Applications for urban lot splits shall be submitted and processed in compliance with
the following requirements:
1.

Application Type. An urban lot split shall be reviewed by the city engineer as
a ministerial application for a parcel map. A tentative parcel map shall not be
required.

2.

Concurrent Submittal. A parcel map for an urban lot split may not be approved
except in conjunction with a concurrently submitted application for a zoning
clearance pursuant to Section 5 (Proposed Housing Developments) of this
interim ordinance. Development on the resulting parcels is limited to the
proposed housing development approved by the zoning clearance.

3.

Application Filing. An application for a parcel map for an urban lot split,
including the required application materials and filing fee, shall be filed with the
public works department in compliance with Chapter 20.16 (Parcel Map
Procedures) of the Subdivision Code;

4.

Referral. The city engineer shall refer the parcel map application to the
community development director, fire chief, and utility agencies for review prior
to recordation;

5.

Denial. The city engineer may deny an urban lot split only if the building official
makes a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that a
proposed housing development located on the proposed new parcels would
have a specific, adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of
subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the physical
environment and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate
or avoid the specific, adverse impact;

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

c. Housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years;

Page 15 of 16
Packet Pg. 112

11.a

Appeals. A decision of the city engineer on a parcel map for an urban lot split
is a ministerial action and not appealable.

SECTION 7 (SEVERABILITY): If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
interim ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of the interim ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed
this interim ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase
not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance
would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 8 (STATE LAW). Any provision of this interim ordinance which is inconsistent with
Senate Bill No. 9 shall be interpreted in a manner which is the most limiting on the ability to
create a proposed housing development or urban lot split, but which is consistent with State
law. The provisions of this interim ordinance shall supersede and take precedence over any
inconsistent provision of the Campbell Municipal Code to that extent necessary to effect the
provisions of this interim ordinance for the duration of its effectiveness.
SECTION 9 (REPEAL): If Senate Bill No. 9 is repealed or otherwise rescinded by the
California State Legislature or by the People of the State of California, this interim ordinance
shall cease to be in effect.
SECTION 10 (PUBLICATION): The City Clerk shall cause this interim ordinance to be
published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation within 15 days after its adoption
in accordance with Government Code Section 36933.
SECTION 11 (EFFECTIVENESS): This interim ordinance shall become effective on January
1, 2022 for a period of 45 days, unless extended by the City Council.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________, 2021 by the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:

Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
APPROVED:

Attachment: Draft SB-9 Ordinance (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

6.

________________________
Elizabeth "Liz" Gibbons, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk
Page 16 of 16
Packet Pg. 113

11.b
10

TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

10
NEW BUSINESS
October 19, 2021

Request for City Council Consensus to Allow Preparation of Urgency
Ordinance Amendments to the Campbell Municipal Code to
Implement Senate Bill 9, Concerning Two Unit Developments and Lot
Splits in Single Family Residential Zones

RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that City Council direct staff to prepare an urgency ordinance
adopting interim text amendments to the Campbell Municipal Code (Zoning and
Subdivision) and regular ordinance adopting long-term amendments to the Campbell
Municipal Code (Zoning and Subdivision), to implement Senate Bill (SB) 9.
BACKGROUND
SB-9 Projects: Senate Bill (SB) 9, signed into law by Governor Newsom on September
16, 2021, allows all properties within a "single-family residential zone" to develop two
units and to be subdivided into two parcels, irrespective of existing local zoning,
General Plan, or subdivision standards. Implementation of the law will functionally
eliminate single-family residential zoning in California, by allowing the following
development activities:
•

"Housing Development" is a proposal to allow two housing units on an eligible
single-family residential parcel, subject to the following restrictions:
o The units may not be utilized as a short-term rental (defined as a rental
term less than 30 days).
o The project would not result in the demolition of more than 25 percent of
existing exterior structural walls of an existing dwelling if the property has
been occupied by a tenant in the last three years or otherwise as allowed
by City ordinance.

•

Attachment: City Council Staff Report (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

City
Council
Report

"Urban Lot Split" is a proposal for a one-time subdivision of an existing singlefamily residential parcel into two parcels, subject to the following restrictions:
o The original parcel was not previously created through an Urban Lot Split
allowed under SB 9 (hence the one-time nature of the provision).

Packet
PacketPg.
Pg.114
98

11.b
10
Senate Bill No. 9 – Discussion and Urgency Ordinance Initiation

Page 2 of 8

o Each new parcel must be "approximately equal" in lot area provided that
one parcel shall not be smaller than 40 percent the size of the original
parcel and no parcel shall be less than 1,200 square feet.

o Note: This requirement does not specifically require owner occupancy,
and the local jurisdiction cannot impose additional owner occupancy
standards.
Units constructed on new Urban Lot Split parcels may not be utilized as a
short-term rental (defined as a rental term less than 30 days).
o Neither the subdivider nor any person "acting in concert" with the
subdivider can subdivide an adjacent parcel using an urban lot split.
Note: SB 9 does not define what "acting in concert" means or how it would
be proven.
Qualifying Criteria: SB 9 applies to all single-family residential ("R-1") zoned properties
within an urbanized area, except for the following:
•

Properties located within a flood zone.

•

Properties within a delineated earthquake fault zone.

•

Properties identified as a hazardous waste site.

•

Properties listed on the City's historic resource inventory.

•

Proposals that would include demolition of the following types of housing:
o Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that
restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate,
low, or very low income.
o Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public
entity’s valid exercise of its police power.
o Housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years.

Limitations on the City: The following limitations apply to all “Housing Development” and
“Urban Lot Split” projects under SB 9:
•

The City may only impose objective zoning, design, and subdivision standards.
Any applicable standards shall not physically preclude the construction of two
units of less than 800 square feet each, per property.

•

The City must review and process applications for SB 9 Housing developments
and Urban Lot Splits ministerially without any discretionary/subjective review or
CEQA.

Attachment: City Council Staff Report (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

o The subdivider must sign an affidavit stating that they intend to occupy
one of the housing units on one of the created lots as their principal
residence for a minimum of three years from the date of approval of the
Urban Lot Split.

Packet
PacketPg.
Pg.115
99

11.b
10
Page 3 of 8

•

The City may not impose a residential setback greater than 4-feet for side and
rear property lines.

•

The City may not impose any setback requirements for a new residence
constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing
structure that is demolished.

•

The City may not impose off-site improvement or right-of-way dedication
requirements.

•

The City may not require more than one parking space per new unit (or lot), and
for properties within one-half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit
corridor or a major transit stop, or within one block of a car share vehicle, no
parking spaces may be required.

•

The City may not require correction of an existing non-conforming condition.

•

The City may only deny an SB 9 proposal if the Building Official finds that it
would have a "specific, adverse impact (as defined), upon public health and
safety or the physical environment and for which there is no feasible method to
satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact."

Potential Effect of SB 9: Campbell has approximately 6,800 R-1 single-family residential
lots, occupying over 1,370 acres, that would be subject to SB 9. These parcels range in
size from 3 acres to small sub-standard lots, and the average lot area is 8,700 square
feet. UC Berkley's Terner Center, estimates that only 400 of Campbell's single-family
parcels would be economically viable to allow new unit construction under SB 9,
representing the potential creation of 700 new units.1 The Terner Center forecast is a
"snap-shot" of economic viability under current market conditions, not a time-horizon
forecast. As such, changes in land, labor, and material cost overtime will continue to
shift the number of parcels that may be potentially developed under SB 9.
Possible SB 9 Development Scenarios: SB 9 allows for an increase in housing unit
production over current law in single family neighborhoods when taking into account
existing State requirements for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory
dwelling units (JADUs). Currently, a single-family residentially zoned property allows for
one primary dwelling unit, one ADU, and one JADU, for a total of three housing units.
SB 9 does not require the City to allow ADUs/JADUs in addition to SB 9 units involving
an Urban Lot Splits. For Housing Developments involving detached single-family
homes, standard ADU provisions continue to apply that allow one ADU and one JADU.
It is unclear how many ADU’s and JADU’s may be allowed in addition to the
construction of two primary units (duplex) on one parcel under SB 9. Staff is working
with legal counsel and seeking guidance from the State Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD) to clarify this question. An urgency ordinance will

1

Attachment: City Council Staff Report (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

Senate Bill No. 9 – Discussion and Urgency Ordinance Initiation

Will Allowing Duplexes and Lot Splits on Parcels Zoned for Single-Family Create New Homes?

Packet Pg. 116
100

11.b
10
Senate Bill No. 9 – Discussion and Urgency Ordinance Initiation

Page 4 of 8

clarify this issue and will incorporate provisions as necessary into an implementing
ordinance to prevent development intensity beyond that intended by SB 9.
The following two scenarios illustrate the potential residential ‘buildout’ that could
happen on a single family property under SB 9:
Scenario 1 (SB 9 Housing Development – Detached Units):
1 Existing Detached Primary Unit
1 Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit
1 New Detached Primary Unit
1 New Accessory Dwelling Unit (attached or detached)
4 Total Housing Units (Subject to verification by legal counsel / HCD)
•

Scenario 2 (SB 9 Urban Lot Split):
1 Existing Detached Primary Unit (New Lot 1)
1 New Detached Primary Unit (New Lot 1)
2 Attached Primary Units (Duplex) (New Lot 2)
4 Total Housing Units

DISCUSSION
SB 9 exposes the City to several vulnerabilities unless the city adopts an implementing
ordinance to institute objective standards and clear implementing mechanisms
addressing the “Housing Development” and “Urban Lot Split” projects:
•

Ambiguity of Existing Units: SB 9 is not entirely clear if the two allowable dwelling
units from a Housing Development on a single family property accounts for
existing homes and ADUs/JADUs. Without the greater specificity in a local
ordinance, developers may attempt to construct two SB 9 units in addition to
existing units. Absent codified guidance and enaction through ordinance, this
could present a potential legal challenge.

•

Lack of Objective Residential Design Standards. SB 9 Housing Developments
must be approved ministerially and the City may only apply objective zoning
criteria. As a result, the design guidelines for single family neighborhoods such
as the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan and Campbell Village Neighborhood
Plan cannot be applied. Staff is continuing to work on residential "objective
standards" but they will not be completed prior to SB 9’s effective date of January
1, 2022. The following table compares Campbell’s existing development
standards with the standards allowed under SB 9.
CURRENT
STANDARDS/GUIDELINES

Attachment: City Council Staff Report (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

•

ENFORCEABLE UNDER SB-9?

Packet Pg. 117
101

11.b
10
Senate Bill No. 9 – Discussion and Urgency Ordinance Initiation

Rear/Street-Side Setbacks

Rear/Interior-Side
Setbacks
Height/Stories
Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
Building Lot Coverage
Usable Open Space
Design Guidelines
Massing/Scale
Wall Articulation
Colors/Materials
Roof Form/Pitch
Architectural Style
Grading
Privacy
Site and Architectural
Review Permit Process

ENFORCEABLE UNDER SB-9?
No. Only a 4-foot side and rear setbacks may be
applied. This is a substantial reduction from
current setback requirements, particularly in the
San Tomas Area. Current rear setbacks are 2025 feet and side setbacks are up to 8-feet and 10feet, or 60% of the "wall height". Therefore, where
a two-story house may have required a 12-foot
second-story setback and 8-foot first-floor
setback, the same house may now have a 20-foot
tall shear wall four feet from the property line
under SB-9.
Yes
Yes
Yes, but only to the extent these standards do
physically preclude construction of new SB-9
units of at least 800 square-feet.
None of the design guidelines of the San Tomas
Area or Campbell Village Neighborhood plans
may be applied as they are not objective
standards.

SB-9 housing units must be approved
ministerially and are not subject to any site and
architectural review.

•

Lack of objective subdivision design standards: Since SB 9 allows for a minimum
lot size of 1,200 square-feet that may result in the creation of lots that are small
or unusually shaped, Urban Lot Splits may result in irregular lot patterns or
multiple flag lots. Although the City's comprehensive update of the Subdivision
Ordinance is still underway, it will not be completed before January. As a result,
there are no objective geometric standards applicable to Urban Lot Split
proposals.

•

Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance: As noted, it is currently unclear if ADUs and
JADU’s can be developed on a single family property in addition to the
construction of a duplex under SB 9.

Attachment: City Council Staff Report (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

CURRENT
STANDARDS/GUIDELINES

Page 5 of 8

RECOMMENDED APPROACH FOR IMPLEMENTING SB 9
As the City’s General Plan designation for single family neighborhoods does not
contemplate the construction of two single family units on one lot or lot splits that allow

Packet Pg. 118
102

11.b
10
Senate Bill No. 9 – Discussion and Urgency Ordinance Initiation

Page 6 of 8

Since SB 9 goes into effect on January 1, 2022 staff recommends adoption of an
urgency ordinance with interim development standards, allowing implementation SB 9
efficiently while protecting the public health, safety and welfare. Staff recommends
preparation of a self-contained chapter in the Zoning Code and Subdivision Code
containing all applicable SB 9 provisions and exceptions, including additional
development standards and restrictions to SB 9 Housing Developments and Urban Lot
Splits.
Staff has initially identified the following recommended standards that would apply to SB
9 that are comparable to those currently applicable to ADUs:
Draft Interim SB 9 Housing Development Standards:
•

Maximum Unit Size: Limit the size of SB 9 units to no more than 1,200 squarefeet, subject to the maximum FAR and Lot Coverage.

•

Maximum Building Height/Stories: Limit the height and number of stories of SB
9 units to 16-feet and one-story.

•

Maximum Number of Rooms: Limit SB 9 units to two bedrooms, a kitchen, and
one living/family room.

•

Setbacks: Notwithstanding the 4-foot setbacks for side and rear property lines,
require SB 9 units to comply with applicable front and street-side setbacks.

•

Building Separation: Require SB 9 units located in front or behind each other to
be separated by 10-feet and units located to the side of each other by 5-feet.

•

Rooftop Decks: Prohibit SB 9 units from incorporating rooftop decks.

•

Parking Stalls: Unless otherwise exempt, require each SB 9 unit to be served by
one covered parking stall (garage or carport), either attached or detached.

Attachment: City Council Staff Report (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

the creation of parcels as small as 1,200 square feet, the City will need to broadly
evaluate modifications to the General Plan to allow internal consistency for the
implementation of SB 9. As this will take a more comprehensive effort evaluating the
single family zoning designation, staff recommends that this effort be conducted in
concert with the completion of the General Plan / Housing Element Update, to be
finalized by the end of 2022.

Draft Interim SB 9 Urban Lot Split Standards:
•

Parcel Configuration: Require new parcels to maintain right angles to streets or
radial to the centerline of curved streets. This would minimize the creation of
unusual shaped lots.

Packet Pg. 119
103

11.b
10
Page 7 of 8

•

Flag Lots: Since the resulting parcel of an Urban Lot Split may be quite small,
prohibiting the creation of flag-lots to minimize impacts to neighboring properties.

•

Lot Width: In order to maintain a logical development pattern within existing
neighborhoods, require a minimum lot width of 30-feet, which is equal to half the
size of a standard "R-1-6" lot.

•

Subdivider Affidavit: Require that the subdivider affidavit, which affirms the
applicant's intent to reside on one of the lots, be recorded on the title of the
property to encourage compliance.

Schedule: Subject to Council direction, staff will prepare the urgency ordinance with the
City Attorney’s office to adopt interim SB 9 standards, to be effective prior to January 1,
2022. Staff will bring the draft urgency ordinance to the Council no later than the
December 7, 2021 meeting, to be closely followed by adoption through the normal
process. As an urgency ordinance, a Planning Commission recommendation is not
required and a 4/5 Council vote is required for adoption. The urgency ordinance will be
followed by a standard ordinance, that includes Planning Commission recommendation,
to occur early 2022 so that the urgency ordinance does not need to be continuously
renewed throughout the year. The urgency ordinance will have an initial effective period
of 45 days, but may be extended for up to 10 months and 15 days subject to public of a
report and holding of a public hearing.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Due to the very short period of time allowed to complete and adopt the interim urgency
ordinance, there is very limited opportunity to conduct public outreach. Staff proposes
to conduct limited public outreach in November, that will include publication of FAQ’s
and the draft ordinance for SB 9 on the Department website, notifications through social
media posts and emails to interested parties. Additional information can be distributed
through planned upcoming community outreach meetings in early December for the
Housing Element.
FISCAL IMPACTS
Due to the urgent nature of this item, a fiscal impact analysis is not possible at this time
and would be highly speculative. However, staff will continue to analyze the fiscal
impacts of this legislation and provide an update to Council in the future should there be
fiscal impacts to the City.

Prepared by:

Attachment: City Council Staff Report (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

Senate Bill No. 9 – Discussion and Urgency Ordinance Initiation

Daniel Fama, Senior Planner

Packet Pg. 120
104

11.b
10
Senate Bill No. 9 – Discussion and Urgency Ordinance Initiation

Page 8 of 8

Reviewed by:

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Attachment: City Council Staff Report (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

Rob Eastwood, Community
Development Director

Packet Pg. 121
105

11.c

Andrea Sanders
To:
Subject:

Rafa Sonnenfeld
RE: FOR PUBLIC COMMENT - Campbell City Council Agenda Item # 10 - Illegal Downzoning

WARNING: This email originated from an external sender! Please do not open attachments or
click on links unless you are certain it is legitimate.

Good Afternoon Campbell City Council,
YIMBY Law is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, whose mission is to increase the accessibility and
affordability of housing in California. YIMBY Law sues municipalities when they fail to comply with
state housing laws, including the Housing Accountability Act (HAA), and the Housing Crisis Act of
2019.
We are writing with regards to this evening's City Council agenda item, #10, which, if adopted, directs
staff to prepare an urgency ordinance which is illegal under state law:
"Recommended Action: It is recommended that City Council direct staff to prepare an urgency ordinance adopting

interim text amendments to the Campbell Municipal Code (Zoning and Subdivision) and regular ordinance adopting
longterm amendments to the Campbell Municipal Code (Zoning and Subdivision), to implement Senate Bill (SB) 9."
Draft Interim SB 9 Housing Development Standards: • Maximum Unit Size: Limit the size of SB 9 units to no more than
1,200 squarefeet, subject to the maximum FAR and Lot Coverage. • Maximum Building Height/Stories: Limit the height
and number of stories of SB 9 units to 16‐feet and one‐story. • Maximum Number of Rooms: Limit SB 9 units to two
bedrooms, a kitchen, and one living/family room. • Setbacks: Notwithstanding the 4‐foot setbacks for side and rear
property lines, require SB 9 units to comply with applicable front and street‐side setbacks. • Building Separation: Require
SB 9 units located in front or behind each other to be separated by 10‐feet and units located to the side of each other by
5‐feet. • Rooftop Decks: Prohibit SB 9 units from incorporating rooftop decks. • Parking Stalls: Unless otherwise exempt,
require each SB 9 unit to be served by one covered parking stall (garage or carport), either attached or detached.

Under California Government Code Section 66300(b),

Attachment: YIMBY Letter (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

From: Rafa Sonnenfeld <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 5:31 PM
To: Clerks Office <[email protected]>
Cc: Compliance Review@HCD <[email protected]>
Subject: FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ‐ Campbell City Council Agenda Item # 10 ‐ Illegal Downzoning

"an affected county or an affected city shall not enact a development policy, standard, or condition that would
have any of the following effects:
(A) Changing the general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or zoning of a
parcel or parcels of property to a less intensive use or reducing the intensity of land use within an
existing general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or zoning district below
what was allowed under the land use designation and zoning ordinances of the affected county or affected
city, as applicable, as in effect on January 1, 2018, except as otherwise provided in clause (ii) of
subparagraph (B). For purposes of this subparagraph, “less intensive use” includes, but is not limited to,
reductions to height, density, or floor area ratio, new or increased open space or lot size requirements, or new
1

Packet Pg. 122

11.c

or increased setback requirements, minimum frontage requirements, or maximum lot coverage limitations, or
anything that would lessen the intensity of housing."

Additionally, 2021's SB-8, which goes into effect on January 1st 2022, clarifies this language with the
following amendments:

It is clear that the city of Campbell is intending to violate the spirit and letter of state law if you
proceed to move forward with the recommended urgency ordinance, which will have the effect of
reducing the intensity of land use in the city.
Should the City fail to comply with the law, YIMBY Law will not hesitate to take legal action to ensure
that the law is enforced. By way of this letter, we have also notified HCD of your city's proposed illegal
downzoning.
Thank you,
‐‐
Rafa Sonnenfeld
Paralegal he/him

Attachment: YIMBY Letter (City Council Report - SB-9 Interim Ordinance)

(A) Changing the general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or
zoning of a parcel or parcels of property to a less intensive use or reducing the intensity of land
use within an existing general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or
zoning district in effect at the time of the proposed change, below what was allowed under the land use
designation and or zoning ordinances of the affected county or affected city, as applicable, as in
effect on January 1, 2018, except as otherwise provided in clause (ii) of subparagraph (B). (B) or
subdivision (i).

2

Packet Pg. 123

12

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

12
NEW BUSINESS
December 7, 2021

Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Discuss a conceptual ARPA spending plan and provide staff with feedback regarding
areas of interest for future development, follow up, and approval.
BACKGROUND
As was discussed with City Council at its regular meeting of September 21, 2021 and
during the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Budget Adoption on June 15, 2021, the City of
Campbell has been allocated approximately $10.0 million total over two (2) fiscal years
by the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). Additionally, ARPA funds will be sent to
the City in two equal payments of approximately $5.0 million each. The first payment
was received in July 2021 and will be recorded as revenue in FY 2021. The second
payment is expected to be received no later than July 2022 and will be recorded as
revenue in FY 2022. All necessary paperwork to receive these funds has been
submitted timely by staff. However, US Treasury will also require the submittal of
annual Project and Expenditure Reports starting April 30, 2022 (extended for all small
public agencies from October 31, 2021) to verify that the City is spending or planning to
spend its ARPA allocations on allowable uses. Per ARPA guidelines, the City must
commit (appropriate and encumber) these funds by December 31, 2024 and spend
them down fully by December 31, 2026. For example, if ARPA funds are used to
support a capital project, the project must be fully approved (by Council) and
encumbered no later than December 31, 2024 and completed no later than December
31, 2026.
Additionally, at the September 21 meeting and in order to achieve fiscal stability and
resiliency, Council adopted Resolution 12767 authorizing a Budget Adjustment to
offset up to $3.25 million in allowable FY 2021 General Fund expenditures with the
City’s ARPA allocations. This action left a remaining ARPA balance of $6.75 million for
the City of Campbell. However, should the final audited FY 2021 General Fund
operating deficit be less than $3.25 million, staff will return any excess monies back to
the ARPA Fund (#221) so that they can be used for other allowable purposes.
Conversely, should the final audited FY 2021 General Fund operating deficit exceed
$3.25 million, staff will return to Council at a future date for increased authorization to
use the ARPA Fund.

Packet Pg. 124

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 2 of 15

When the FY 2022 Budget was adopted and so as to ensure long-term fiscal stability
and resiliency, Council agreed that the City’s ARPA allocations should be used solely to
balance the General Fund until the economy fully recovers (with estimated usage
through FY 2023) and that any excess ARPA funds be set aside to rebuild reserves
which had been depleted during the pandemic. Approval of Resolution 12767 on
September 21 was consistent with that approach. However, given a higher than
originally anticipated ARPA allocation by approximately $2.1 million and the fact that
such an increase was only known shortly before the FY 2022 Budget Adoption, Council
also expressed interest in having additional discussions on how to most appropriately
and effectively spend some ARPA funds. Therefore, this report is the second step in
that follow up process, with actions taken on September 21 being the first step. And as
such, staff requests Council feedback regarding a conceptual ARPA spending
plan and areas of interest for future development, follow up, and approval.
In this report, staff will present several potential programs and projects that could be
funded by estimated excess ARPA funds not needed to balance the General Fund.
These potential programs and projects will be briefly described in the Conceptual
ARPA Spending Plan, with initial cost estimates provided when available. Once staff
has direction from Council as to which programs and projects that it may wish to pursue
further, staff will return to Council as soon as feasible in FY 2022 to discuss complete
program and project details and precise costs. Staff felt it prudent to first receive Council
feedback on potential uses of excess ARPA funds before it fully developed and costed
these items. While it is in the City’s best interest to dedicate excess ARPA funds as
soon as possible so that they have maximum impact and start the economic recovery
process quicker, the City again has until December 31, 2024 to fully commit these funds
and until December 31, 2026 to fully spend them down. Thus, staff recommends an
expedient, but thoughtful, deliberate, and strategic approach given lengthy ARPA
appropriation and spending deadlines and the need to also ensure long-term fiscal
stability and resiliency. The Discussion section of this report will provide details
regarding staff’s estimates of excess ARPA funds. At this point, the total preliminary
costs for potential programs and projects to be discussed below exceed staff’s
estimates of excess City ARPA funds. Thus, if Council would like to pursue any
programs and projects to be funded by excess ARPA funds further, staff also
requests that Council prioritize them by consensus action in its discussion.
DISCUSSION
As was shared with Council on September 21, US Treasury issued an Interim Final
Rule in May 2021 outlining preliminary ARPA guidelines and allowable uses of funds.
US Treasury originally had until mid-September 2021 to issue its Final Rule, but has
not done so as of the submittal of this report. Staff expects the Final Rule to be issued
by the end of calendar year 2021, but does not have a firm date yet from US Treasury.
For reference and per the Interim Final Rule, ARPA funds may be used for the following
purposes in order to support recovery from the pandemic and future fiscal stability and
resiliency. Staff does not expect these allowable uses to change in the Final Rule:

Packet Pg. 125

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 3 of 15

1. Replace lost public sector revenue, using this funding to provide government
services to the extent of the reduction in revenue experienced due to the
pandemic
2. Support public health expenditures, by, for example, funding COVID-19
mitigation efforts, medical expenses, behavioral healthcare, and certain public
health and safety staff
3. Address negative economic impacts caused by the public health
emergency, including economic harms to workers, households, small
businesses, impacted industries, and the public sector
4. Provide premium pay for essential workers, offering additional support to
those who have and will bear the greatest health risks because of their service in
critical infrastructure sectors
5. Invest in water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure, making necessary
investments to improve access to clean drinking water, support vital wastewater
and stormwater infrastructure, and to expand access to broadband internet
Using ARPA funds to replace lost public sector revenue provides cities and governing
boards the most flexibility in how they can use the funds. Per preliminary ARPA
guidelines, revenue loss is calculated for the following periods as shown in Table 1 and
uses a standard 4.1% growth rate assumption of pre-pandemic revenues in all City
funds (with some minor exceptions related to other federal grants, interfund transfers,
debt issuances, and correcting entries) in comparison to actual revenues:
Table 1 – ARPA Revenue Loss Reporting Periods
Reporting Period
Months Elapsed Since Pandemic Start
January 1, 2020 - December 31, 2020
18
January 1, 2021 - December 31, 2021
30
January 1, 2022 - December 31, 2022
42
January 1, 2023 - December 31, 2023
54
Using a Public Revenue Loss Calculator developed by the League of California Cities
(CalCities), in partnership with the California Society of Municipal Finance Officers
(CSMFO), staff has calculated that the City’s pandemic related revenue loss is
approximately $8.2 million through the first reporting period of December 30, 2020.
Staff will recalculate this amount annually each December through 2023, but a city’s
revenue loss once initially calculated may never go down under preliminary ARPA
guidance; it may only go up since a city is allowed to use the highest revenue loss
amount calculated in any reporting period. Thus, at some point in the future, the City
may be able to show that its full $10.0 million ARPA allocation exceeds its pandemic
related revenue loss; thereby affording the City maximum flexibility and its ARPA
allocation to be used broadly to provide government services. If the City’s pandemic
related revenue loss never exceeds $10.0 million, the variance between it and the City’s

Packet Pg. 126

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 4 of 15

ARPA allocation can be used on the more specific purposes #2 through #5 identified
previously. This variance is currently estimated at $1.8 million ($10.0 million ARPA
allocation less $8.2 million estimated revenue loss), but it may decrease over time as
staff recalculates pandemic related revenue loss annually through 2023. Additionally,
US Treasury is currently considering whether to extend the first reporting period by six
(6) months to June 30, 2021, and all subsequent reporting periods to June 30, so as to
better align with the fiscal year of most cities. This will be clarified in the Final Rule and
may result in the City’s pandemic related revenue loss for the first reporting period
exceeding its $10.0 million ARPA allocation; again affording the City the greatest
flexibility in broadly using its ARPA funds to provide government services.
As specified in preliminary ARPA guidance, government services can include, but are
not limited to:
•
•
•
•
•
•

Maintenance or pay-go (cash) funded building of infrastructure, including roads,
buildings, sidewalks, parks, etc.;
Modernization of cybersecurity, including hardware, software, and protection of
critical infrastructure;
Health services;
Environmental remediation;
School or educational services; and
Provision of police, fire, and other public safety services

Per the same preliminary guidance, replenishing financial reserves (e.g., rainy day or
other reserve funds) would not be considered an allowable use of ARPA funds since
such expenses do not directly relate to the provision of current government services.
Staff does not agree with the US Treasury’s interpretation of the ARPA in this instance
and has requested that reserve replenishment be made an allowable use in the Final
Rule. This would align with Council’s previous approval in the FY 2022 Budget to use
excess ARPA funds to help build back General Fund reserves that were spent down
during the pandemic. Nevertheless, staff acknowledges that reserve replenishment may
continue to be restricted under the Final Rule and thus, has developed a Conceptual
ARPA Spending Plan to comply with current ARPA rules.
In addition to the reserve restriction, ARPA funds may not be deposited into any
pension fund or used to directly or indirectly offset tax reductions or delay a tax or tax
increase. The City may however continue to make normal, planned pension payments
to the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) or use pre-existing,
previously dedicated funds to pay down unfunded pension liabilities or deposit them into
a pension trust to earn investment income. For reference, as of the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2020, the City had approximately. $2.3 million set aside in its General Fund
PERS Reserve for the purpose of addressing unfunded pension liabilities. Staff will
return to Council at a later date to discuss its recommendations for using current
reserves and future funding sources to address the City’s unfunded pension liabilities.
Staff anticipates adding this to the proposed Finance Workplan for FY 2023, but may
also address sooner if feasible given resources and competing priorities.

Packet Pg. 127

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 5 of 15

Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan
When thinking about how to appropriately and effectively use the City’s ARPA
allocations, staff developed four (4) recommended guiding objectives for Council
consideration:
•
•
•
•

Fiscal Stability
Recovery
Resiliency
Impact

These objectives align well with what the ARPA was intended to help cities achieve and
consider not only immediate pressing needs, but also the long-term future of the City of
Campbell. However, Council may wish to consider other guiding objectives and
staff requests Council feedback in this area. Nevertheless, at this time and so as to
further the discussion, staff would like to introduce a Conceptual APRA Spending Plan
that seeks to meet the recommended objectives presented. This plan contains a
number of elements that will be discussed below.
First, in order to achieve fiscal stability and resiliency, staff continues to recommend that
the majority of the City’s ARPA allocations be used to balance the General Fund, the
City’s primary operating fund, until the economy fully recovers. City Council began this
step when it approved transferring up to $3.25 million in ARPA funds to balance the
General Fund in FY 2021. In subsequent fiscal years, the necessary ARPA transfer
needed to balance the General Fund would be estimated at time of budget adoption,
initially trued up every September after the prior fiscal year is closed, and completely
trued up every February once audited financial statements for the prior fiscal year are
available. This action will meet the objective of achieving fiscal stability and resiliency by
not drawing down further upon existing General Fund reserves; thereby preserving
them for future emergencies, unexpected needs, and ongoing operational requirements.
It will also adhere to ARPA guidelines by supporting the provision of current government
services only up to the amount needed, but not over that amount in a manner that would
inappropriately replenish City reserves.
Table 2 below illustrates how these transfers would work using the City’s current
Seven-Year Financial Forecast as the basis for FY 2022 and beyond and making an
assumption of additional costs for new labor terms recently agreed to or implemented.
Table 2 also estimates approximately $2.53 million of excess ARPA funds which could
be directed by Council towards specific allowable programs and projects under ARPA
guidelines. These potential programs and projects will be discussed in the subsequent
section:

Packet Pg. 128

12
Page 6 of 15

Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Table 2 – Proposed Spend Down of ARPA Allocations
ARPA Fund (#221)
Beginning Balance
(+) ARPA Payments
(-) Transfers to Balance
General Fund (#101)
(-) Allocations for Specific
Purposes
Ending Balance
General Fund (#101)
Projected Surplus /
Defict - w/o ARPA
(+) Transfers from ARPA
Fund (#221)
(-) Projected New Labor
Negotiation Costs
Projected Surplus /
Defict - with ARPA

FY 2021

FY 2022

$
4,998,887

1,748,887 $ 1,639,478 $
4,998,887
-

(3,250,000)

(3,358,296)

$

1,748,887 $

$

$

FY 2024

FY 2025

TOTALS

281,798 $
-

-

9,997,774

(857,680)

-

-

(7,465,976)

(1,750,000)
1,639,478 $

(500,000)
281,798 $

(281,798)
$

-

(3,250,000) $

(2,852,428) $

(337,374) $

1,972,066 $

3,250,000

3,358,296

857,680

-

-

7,465,976

(505,868)

(520,306)

(546,321)

(573,637)

(2,146,133)

1,425,745 $

1,494,814

$

FY 2023

-

$

-

$

-

$

(2,531,798)

2,068,451

Second, in order to achieve recovery, resiliency, and impact, staff requests Council
feedback on setting aside up to $2.53 million in estimated excess ARPA funds as
identified previously for specific programs and projects. Since this number is
based upon assumptions and forecasts of the level of ARPA funds necessary to
maintain current and ongoing City operational requirements within the General Fund,
more or less could be available for directed purposes. However, that can only be
verified once actual results for prior and future fiscal years are realized and audited
financial statements are generated. Thus, staff again recommends spending down this
money expediently so that is has maximum impact and starts the recovery process
quicker, but also in a manner that is thoughtful, deliberate, and strategic so that the City
does not overcommit these funds at the start and realize that it needs more for ongoing
operational requirements in the future. That is reflected in Table 2, where $1.75
million, $500,000 and $281,798 is recommended in FY 2022, FY 2023, and FY 2024,
respectively, for specific directed purposes. Should City financial results be better or
worse than expected, future excess ARPA allocations available for Council directed
purposes will increase or decrease. Nevertheless, the Conceptual APRA Spending
Plan presented allows for flexibility and future unknowns.
In regard to potential programs and projects that Council may wish to support, staff
again sought to achieve the objectives of recovery, resiliency, and impact; for both the
City and the Campbell community as a whole. Thus, the Executive Team and other key
City staff developed the following list of potential programs and projects as shown in
Table 3 below; sorted in alphabetical order. Each will also be explained in more detail
below the table. Staff again requests Council feedback on which programs or
projects that it would be interested in supporting with estimated excess ARPA
funds and for the Council to prioritize those programs and projects since they
currently exceed the level of estimated excess ARPA funds. Should Council direct

Packet Pg. 129

12
Page 7 of 15

Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

staff to pursue these programs and projects further, staff will again return to Council as
soon as feasible in FY 2022 to discuss complete program and project details and
precise costs. For now though, these are again presented for discussion purposes only
pending Council feedback on how to best proceed. Council could also direct staff to
pursue other programs and projects that are not in Table 3 or to not allocate
estimated excess ARPA funds for specific purposes and programs at this time,
but instead incorporate them into future budget and CIP discussions should the
ARPA funds not be needed for ongoing operations. Both these options are reflected
in the Alternatives section of this report.
Table 3 – Potential Programs or Projects to Support with Excess ARPA Funds
FY 2022

Suggested Allocation / Est. Cost →

PROGRAMS
Economic Development Program Support
Guaranteed Basic Income Pilot Program
Hotel Recovery Assistance
Public Safety Wellness Pilot Program
Sub-Total Programs

100,000
600,000
$ 500,000
15,000
$ 1,215,000

CAPITAL PROJECTS
Campbell/Page Traffic Signal
Citywide Sidewalk Deficiencies
Civic Center Gravel Lot Paving and Pathways
$
Civic Center Sidewalk Replacements
Civic Center Trash Enclosure
Community Center WiFi Enhancements
Downtown WiFi and Smart City Kiosks
Intersection LPR Cameras
Permanent Parklet Program Support
Redesign Harrison/Civic Center Intersection &
Bike/Ped Improvement w/ OBAG Grant
Sub-Total Projects
$
TOTAL PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS

350,000
150,000
125,000
50,000
50,000
725,000

$ 1,940,000

FY 2023

$
$

$

$

100,000
300,000
15,000
415,000

265,000
150,000
200,000
50,000
665,000

$ 1,080,000

FY 2024

$
$

$

$

TOTAL

100,000
100,000

300,000
900,000
$ 500,000
30,000
$ 1,730,000

100,000
200,000
225,000
50,000
400,000

265,000
250,000
350,000
200,000
150,000
125,000
425,000
150,000
50,000
400,000

$

975,000 $ 2,365,000

$ 1,075,000

$ 4,095,000

As shown above, the total preliminary costs for suggested programs and projects
equals $4.10 million and exceeds the City’s estimated excess ARPA funds of $2.53
million by approximately $1.56 million. Additionally, there may also be other programs
or projects that Council wishes to consider instead. However, this list is again meant as
a starting point for discussions and the mix of programs and projects, the level of funds
dedicated to them, and their timing can be adjusted as needed to fit within the
constraints of the City’s ARPA funds as well as Council and community priorities.
Additionally, as previously stated, the City may have more or less excess ARPA funds
after actual financial results are realized in prior and future fiscal years. Therefore,

Packet Pg. 130

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 8 of 15

future year programs and projects can be added, removed, expanded, or downsized as
needed; pending the outcome of those results.
The next section of this report will provide the Council with summary level descriptive
information for every program and project listed in Table 3 above. Should Council direct
staff to pursue any of these items further, staff will again return to Council as soon as
feasible in FY 2022 to discuss complete program and project details and precise costs.
As a note, for any program approved which assists outside individuals or
businesses, the City will need to perform sub-recipient monitoring and reporting
to the federal government to ensure compliance with ARPA guidelines. Such
program oversight may require staff time and necessitate budgetary
appropriations for additional resources should current staff capacity not allow for
it. However, staff feels that each potential program and projects listed below fits within
the allowable use guidelines specified by preliminary ARPA guidance.
PROGRAMS
•

Economic Development Program Support $300,000 – The FY 2022 Adopted
Budget includes the following Workplan item under the City Manager’s Office:
o Develop a strategy to leverage City efforts and maximize business
recovery from the impacts of COVID-19 [Council Priority – Financial
Recovery]
Following upon this Workplan Item, the City Manager has been partnering with
the Economic Development Subcommittee to identify Economic Development
related needs within Campbell. To assist in these efforts, the City may find it
beneficial to obtain consultant services, which might provide a comprehensive
analysis of Campbell’s business environment, opportunities, and threats, an
Economic Development Strategic Plan, and recommendations regarding ideal
business type composition mix within Campbell along with optimal internal and
external resources needed to have a highly effective Economic Development
function. These are just some examples of what a consultant could provide and
the Economic Development Subcommittee, in collaboration with the full City
Council, the City Manager, and other key staff, could develop a complete scope
of desired services should Council wish to allocate resources towards this area.
Staff is suggesting an annual allocation of $100,000 for the next three (3) fiscal
years to provide one-time project related services identified above as well as
ongoing external and internal resources once those needs are properly identified.
By addressing the City’s Economic Development needs, staff hopes that the City
will be able to better take advantage of opportunities with emerging and lucrative
business sectors, minimize threats to ongoing business-related revenue, and
identify ways to best help the business community recover and thrive over time.

•

Guaranteed Basic Income (GBI) Pilot Program $900,000 – A GBI program is
premised on the belief that a basic income can contribute to a healthier and safer

Packet Pg. 131

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 9 of 15

community by addressing financial instability and food insecurity, fear of eviction,
and the mental stress that accompanies these situations brought on by the
pandemic. A basic income allows people with financial insecurity to become
more productive members of the community by providing them with a guaranteed
income source that can alleviate some of the suffering caused by the pandemic
as well as create greater opportunities to realize their economic potential.
The City of Stockton recently ended its two-year pilot which provided $500
payments to 125 people living at or below the city’s median household income.
Research findings showed that full-time employment rose among those who
received the guaranteed income and that their financial, physical, and emotional
health improved. Regionally, Mountain View, San Francisco, Oakland, and
Emeryville are developing pilot programs. The City of Mountain View’s program
will provide payments of $500 for 18 months to 166 families earning less than
30% of the Area Median Income (AMI) and has an estimated total cost of $1.5
million. The City of Oakland’s program will provide $500 for 18 months to 600
participants with incomes at or below 50% of median income and has an
estimated total cost of $5.4 million. At a population size roughly half that of
Mountain View, staff is suggesting an 18-month pilot program with monthly
payments of $500 to 100 families at an estimated total cost $900,000. Staff
believes that this could have significant positive impact to the lives of those less
fortunate in our community. However, the challenge will be funding this program
beyond 18 months with ongoing revenue sources should the City Council wish to
extend it. Nevertheless, having the program for 18 months could allow those
who experienced the most economic impacts from the pandemic to recover well.
Additionally, many programs have had their funding matched by other
organizations, including the Mayors for Guaranteed Income and corporate
sponsors. Thus, staff recommends seeking matching funds whenever possible.
And lastly, should a GBI program be pursued, staff recommends partnering with
a research facility such as a local college, university, or non-profit (e.g.,
Stanford’s Basic Income Lab) to evaluate the effectiveness of the pilot program
and its impacts on individuals and families receiving the funds. Based on
discussions with other cities, such a research component could add another
$250,000 to the cost of a GBI program or reduce the number of families that can
be helped by the program if the total program cost is fixed at $900,000.
•

Hotel Recovery Assistance $500,000 – As staff has previously shared with
Council, hotels nationwide and those in Campbell have faced significant
economic hardships due to the pandemic. Additionally, hotels are a significant
source of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue for the City as well as a
generator of sales tax and other economic benefits from the patrons that stay
with them. In FY 2019, the last full year before the pandemic, hotels within
Campbell generated approximately $4.8 million of TOT revenue and averaged
nearly $400,000 per month. At the low point of the pandemic in April 2020, that
had dropped 88.8% to only $45,000 per month. And by the end of FY 2020, City
TOT revenue equaled $3.1 million. This dropped further in FY 2021 to $1.6

Packet Pg. 132

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 10 of 15

million. While there are signs of hope, in August 2021 a TOT revenue of
$223,000, was the best month since February 2020, it was still 30.8% lower than
February 2020. In short, hotels are still struggling and generating much less in
City TOT revenue than before the pandemic. In partnership with the Finance
Department, the Economic Development Division, and the newly formed group of
local public and private partners called Reconnecting Silicon Valley (RSV), staff
sought to learn where local Campbell hotels need the most help. For most, it is
in recruitment and retention of staff, whom hotels need to compete with other
industries for, and marketing of their facilities. Thus, staff is suggesting an
investment in local hotels as a way to accelerate their recovery more quickly for
the financial benefit of the City as well as the ancillary economic benefits realized
by other local businesses. The City of Milpitas recently implemented a hotel
assistance recovery program at an approximate cost of $250,000, with $10,000
going to each of their approximately 25 hotels for the purchase personnel
protective equipment (PPE), enhanced cleanings, and general public health and
safety improvements. However, staff believes that a larger investment at
$500,000 in FY 2021 to address current hotel needs with allocations based upon
each hotel’s share of pre-pandemic revenue (or some other factor), would be
more effective and have a larger impact. Using this methodology, the largest of
Campbell’s seven (7) hotels would receive approximately $135,000, the smallest
hotel would receive $15,000, and on average each hotel would receive $71,000.
Such a program though would have to be well defined to ensure that the funds
were used on allowable purposes, had the greatest impact, and were only spent
on Campbell hotel operations.
•

Public Safety Wellness Pilot Program $30,000 – As has been well
documented, law enforcement is an emotionally challenging and often physically
dangerous career. The nature of policing places law enforcement officers in
situations where trauma is unavoidable, chronic stress and post-traumatic stress
are the norm, and suicide, depression, risky behavior, obesity, anxiety, and
addiction are dangerously potential health outcomes. In addition to these
incident-based stressors, organizational stressors also negatively impact officer
wellness. Over the last two years, the Campbell Police Department has put an
emphasis on a more holistic approach to wellness to address these issues and
recommends purchasing, under a two-year pilot program, an app that can
provide another option to better support our employees. Cordico provides such
an app and is the world leader in wellness technology for high-stress professions;
providing trusted, confidential, 24/7 proactive and preventative wellness support
specially developed for law enforcement, firefighters, dispatchers, medical
professionals, and others serving in the most demanding and critical roles.
Cordico’s customized, continuously updated wellness platform solutions provide
handheld access to anonymous self-assessments, peer support, instructional
videos, geo-mapping of vetted therapists, one-touch calling, and on-demand
tools targeting alcohol abuse, anger management, anxiety, behavioral health,
brain health and cognitive strength, burnout, childhood adversity, compassion
fatigue, COVID-19 resources, critical incidents, depression, emotional health and

Packet Pg. 133

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 11 of 15

survival, family support, financial fitness, goal-setting and achievement, grief and
loss, healthy habits, heart health, ICAC coping and resiliency, injury prevention,
intrusive traumatic images, major life events, marital guidance, mental
toughness, mindfulness, nutrition, panic attacks, parenting tips, peak
performance, physical fitness, physical therapist videos, posttraumatic stress,
relationship success, resilience, sleep optimization, stress management,
substance abuse, trauma, suicide risk and prevention, work-life balance, YFFR
Yoga for First Responders® videos, and more.
CAPITAL PROJECTS
•

Campbell/Page Traffic Signal $265,000 – This capital project would install a
new traffic signal at Campbell Avenue and Page Street. This is currently a
medium priority capital project on the City’s Unfunded CIP Projects List and staff
is suggesting using $265,000 of the City’s ARPA funds with the balance to be
funded predominately with developer fees. The City would likely recover the vast
majority of this investment as properties along the East Campbell Avenue
corridor development are conditioned to make a (future) fair share contribution.

•

Citywide Sidewalk Deficiencies Up to $250,000 – The City re-established a
pro-active program to address sidewalk deficiencies approximately seven (7)
years ago. Over that time, the City has programmed between $100,000 and
$200,000 annually to address deficiencies, potential safety issues, and replace
non-compliant ADA ramps; citywide. While staff continues to address this work
on an annual basis, there is a current backlog of approximately $250,000.
Allocating ARPA funds to address this backlog would reduce the amount of City
capital funds required to address this work annually. Additionally, City risk
exposure would also be reduced as sidewalk offsets and ADA issues would be
repaired and addressed.

•

Civic Center Complex Improvements – The approval of Measure O in
November 2018 authorized the City to issue up to $50 million in General
Obligation Bonds to fund the renovation of the Library building and the
construction of a new Public Safety facility. However, while this is a significant
level of funding, it is also limited in its amount and allowable uses. The City
Council has also identified several additional items outside the scope of Measure
O, but within the Civic Center Complex shown below, that may merit using other
City funds or obtaining outside funding sources to implement:
o Civic Center Gravel Lot Paving and Pathways $350,000 – This capital
project would be to develop the gravel lot at Harrison Avenue and Grant
Street into a paved employee and public parking lot with lighting and
pathways, as appropriate, and relocated ingress/egress.
o Civic Center Sidewalk Replacements $200,000 – This capital project
would replace all sidewalks, ADA curb ramps, and driveway approaches

Packet Pg. 134

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 12 of 15

surrounding the Civic Center Complex (not addressed by Measure O) to
ensure an ADA accessible path of travel to all City services.
o Civic Center Trash Enclosure $150,000 – This capital project would be
to install a new strategically placed trash enclosure with adequate space
to serve the entire Civic Center Complex, including the Library, and built
up to current standards consistent with other improvements within the
Civic Center Complex.
•

Community Center WiFi Enhancements $125,000 –The City purchased and
deployed a WiFi system for City Hall and the Service Yard in 2018. The new
system greatly extended the public's ability to use fast WiFi when doing business
at City Hall. This also became critical for deploying Cloud based systems such as
the City’s new 8x8 phone system. However, funding was not available to extend
the wireless system to the Community Center at the time of deployment.
Extending the WiFi to the Community Center would have the benefit of offering
free services to visitors and patrons. It would have the added benefit of providing
wireless communication for public safety personnel near the ball fields where
there is a commercial wireless dead zone. And lastly, it would also allow staff to
deploy wireless technologies such as credit card readers, phone systems, and
A/V systems at the Community Center.

•

Downtown WiFi and Smart City Kiosks $425,000 – This capital project would
install informational smart kiosks in the downtown corridor; able to broadcast
messages for entertainment, information, or emergences and powered by nearby
light poles. The kiosks could see traffic, notify patrons of empty parking places,
and measure sidewalk and automobile traffic. Additionally, the kiosks could
enhance public safety by monitoring sounds like screaming and gunfire and
proactively alert Public Safety. The kiosks could also be used as an access point
for free high-speed wireless internet; thereby enhancing access and the
experience of being in the downtown corridor for business and customers alike.
And for the City, expanded WiFi could allow streetlights to be controlled remotely
and for other operational needs as they come up in the future.

•

Intersection LPR Cameras $150,000 – This capital project would be to install
fixed license plate recognition (LPR) cameras that capture vehicle details at key
intersections. The Police Department would receive real-time alerts of wanted
vehicles which has proven extremely successful in solving crime in neighboring
jurisdictions. The data would also be used to retroactively search and solve
crimes after they’ve occurred. The Police Department has identified the
intersection of Hamilton Avenue and Highway 17 as a good pilot program. That
one intersection (not including all offramps/onramps) would cost $10,000 per
year. The Police Department recommends installing four (4) additional LPR
cameras at high impact intersections; with a total program cost of approximately
$50,000 per year and $150,000 total over three (3) years. For reference, Los
Gatos, Morgan Hill, and Milpitas have over 20 LPR cameras.

Packet Pg. 135

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 13 of 15

•

Permanent Parklet Program Support $50,000 – On September 7, 2021, staff
provided Council with an update on the Downtown Parklet Program and received
direction to end the temporary program on January 3, 2022 via Resolution
12758. However, Council, staff, and local businesses have identified several
benefits of having a permanent parklet program and Council may wish to allocate
City funds towards partially supporting the design, inspection, and construction of
permanent structures; with the remainder of funding coming from local
businesses that wish to utilize them to enhance their services. In a recent survey
of local businesses in the downtown corridor, eleven (11) expressed strong
interest in using twenty-seven (27) parking stalls if a permanent parklet program
were implemented. Another three (3) businesses expressed some interest in an
additional four (4) parking stalls, but cost, conditions, and terms will influence
their decision. Staff initially estimates a base cost of approximately $10,500 per
parking stall (to interested businesses) to install hazard-free parklet decking that
is flush with the sidewalk level for ADA accessibility, provides access to
infrastructure, allows for proper storm water drainage along the gutter, and has
safety barriers to mitigate vehicle impact to parklet spaces. These costs include
labor and materials as well as all required City permit fees. Businesses would
incur additional costs if they chose to build structures on top of the decking. The
City Council may again wish to allocate some City funds to support businesses
that wish to participate in a permanent parklet program. Council could also direct
staff to waive or discount some City permit fees as another form of City support
to participating businesses. The exact specifics of such a program are still being
developed, but staff did want to first get Council feedback on whether providing
some level of City funding for such a future program is desirable; with $50,000 as
a suggested level of funding support in FY 2022. However, when discussing any
permanent parklet program, the impact to the Campbell Farmer’s Market and
nearby retail businesses should also be considered.

•

Redesign Harrison/Civic Center Intersection & Bike/Ped Improvement w/
OBAG Grant Up to $400,000 – This item would provide local match funding for
the construction phase of reconfiguring the Harrison/Civic Center Intersection
and associated bike/pedestrian improvements along Civic Center Drive between
Harrison Avenue and Third Street. On October 5, 2021, Council authorized staff
to resubmit a One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) application for the design portion of
this project, with $100,000 in City matching funds. $550,000 in OBAG Cycle 2
funds were subsequently secured from the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)
for the design work. Identifying matching funds for the construction phase would
position the City well to be able to compete for construction funds in OBAG Cycle
3; expected to open in late calendar year 2022 or early 2023. And for an
estimated $2.00 million construction project, the City should identify up to
$400,000 (20%) so as to be highly competitive. Thus, staff is asking for Council
feedback in using ARPA funds for a local match up to 20%. However, the City
may also be able to use other City funding sources such as the CIPR and
Construction Tax as well as outside funding that may be available through the

Packet Pg. 136

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Page 14 of 15

recently passed federal infrastructure bill. While the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill
holds promise, there are very few details currently available, and staff will return
to Council with an update at a later date once legislative details and programs
are better identified.
CURRENT AND NEXT STEPS
•

Current Steps for Council:
o Provide staff feedback regarding a conceptual ARPA spending plan and
areas of interest for future development, follow up, and approval.
o Provide staff with feedback regarding guiding objectives of how to allocate
ARPA funds.
o Provide staff feedback on setting aside up to $2.53 million in estimated
excess ARPA funds for specific programs and projects.
o If any programs and projects are to be funded by excess ARPA funds,
provide staff with prioritization by consensus action.

•

Next Steps for Staff:
o For any programs or projects to be pursued, return to Council as soon as
feasible in FY 2022 to discuss complete program and project details and
precise costs and obtain approval to move forward.

FISCAL IMPACT
All fiscal impacts are identified in the discussion section above. Should City Council
wish for staff to develop and implement any programs or projects to be funded with the
City’s estimated excess ARPA allocations, staff will return to Council as soon as
feasible in FY 2022 with precise costing. At this time though, this is a discussion item
only and a budget adjustment is not being requested.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Provide staff with other programs and projects to be funded with the City’s
estimated excess ARPA allocations.
2. Do not allocate estimated excess ARPA funds for specific purposes and
programs at this time, but instead wait and incorporate them into future budget
and CIP discussions; continuing to primarily use the City’s ARPA allocations to
balance the General Fund until the economy fully recovers.
3. Provide staff with other direction.

Packet Pg. 137

12
Conceptual ARPA Spending Plan

Prepared by:

Page 15 of 15

Will Fuentes, Finance Director

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Packet Pg. 138

13

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

13
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
December 7, 2021

City Council Policy Manual Section 1.33 - Annual Selection of Mayor
and Vice Mayor (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)

RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council adopt a Resolution adding Section 1.33 - Annual Selection of
Mayor and Vice Mayor to the City Council Policy Manual.
DISCUSSION
At the November 16, 2021 City Council meeting, Council directed Staff to prepare a
Council Policy describing the preferred method for the City Council to follow when
selecting the Mayor and Vice Mayor for the following years term. Beginning in year
2023, the preferred method for selecting the Mayor and Vice Mayor will be on a
numerical basis by district number beginning with District 5, allowing for a one-time
change in the rotational schedule to allow a newly elected Councilmember the time to
acclimate to the role for one year prior to serving as Mayor. Following that one-time
allowance, the rotational schedule will go back to its original order.
Every year in December, the City Council holds a reorganization meeting where newly
elected Councilmembers are sworn in and the selection of the next calendar year’s
Mayor and Vice Mayor takes place. The Mayor and Vice Mayor serve for one calendar
year. Although the Vice Mayor position is a natural ascendancy to Mayor, and Council
believes that experience as a Vice Mayor will serve to help acclimate themselves to the
job, tasks, and roles prior to assuming the Mayorship role, the appointment is not
automatic. The Mayor and Vice Mayor are peers of and serve at the pleasure of the
other Councilmembers.
This preferred process will remain in effect until modified by a subsequent City Council,
and the City Clerk will keep a list outlining the preferred rotational sequence and update
it annually following the reorganization meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the adoption of this Council Policy.

Packet Pg. 139

13
City Council Policy Manual Section 1.33 - Annual Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor

Prepared by:

Page 2 of 2

Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Attachment:

a. Resolution - Adding Section 1.33 Annual Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor
b. Council Policy Manual Section 1.33 - Annual Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor

Packet Pg. 140

13.a

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL ADDING
SECTION 1.33 – ANNUAL SELECTION OF MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR TO THE
CITY COUNCIL POLICY MANUAL
WHEREAS, the City Council directed staff to prepare a Council Policy describing the
preferred method for selecting the Mayor and Vice Mayor for the following years term;
and
WHEREAS, Council believes that having some predictability to this selection process is
beneficial to City operations and to the residents of Campbell; and
WHEREAS, every year in December, the City Council holds a reorganization meeting
where newly elected Councilmembers are sworn in and the selection of the next calendar
year’s Mayor and Vice Mayor takes place, the Mayor and Vice Mayor serve for one
calendar year; and
WHEREAS, beginning in 2023, Council will nominate a Mayor and Vice Mayor on a
numerical basis by District number beginning with District 5; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes it is in the City’s best interest that all
Councilmembers have at least one year of experience serving as a Councilmember prior
to being voted to serve as Mayor; and
WHEREAS, a one-time allowance to this rotational schedule can be made to allow a
newly elected Councilmember the time to acclimate to the role prior to serving as Mayor,
following that one-time allowance, the rotational schedule will go back to its original order;
and
WHEREAS, this process will remain in effect until modified by a subsequent City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council Policy Manual Section 1.33
– Annual Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor be added as shown in Attachment A and
incorporated in this resolution by reference.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ____day of___________, 2021 by the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:

Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:

ATTEST:
Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

APPROVED:
Elizabeth “Liz” Gibbons, Mayor

Attachment: Resolution - Adding Section 1.33 Annual Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor (City Council Policy Manual Section 1.33 - Annual

RESOLUTION NO. _______

Packet Pg. 141

13.b

SECTION 1.33 ANNUAL SELECTION OF
MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR

PURPOSE
This policy describes the preferred method for the City Council to follow when selecting the Mayor
and Vice Mayor for the following years term. Council believes that having some predictability of
this process is beneficial to City operations and to the residents of Campbell.
POLICY SCOPE
Every year in December, the City Council holds a reorganization meeting where newly elected
Councilmembers are sworn in and the selection of the next calendar year’s Mayor and Vice Mayor
takes place. The Mayor and Vice Mayor serve for one calendar year. Although the Vice Mayor
position is a natural ascendancy to Mayor, and Council believes that experience as a Vice Mayor
will serve to help acclimate themselves to the job, tasks, and roles prior to assuming the
Mayorship role, the appointment is not automatic. The Mayor and Vice Mayor are peers of and
serve at the pleasure of the other Councilmembers.
Except as otherwise determined by a majority vote of the Council, the Council will select a Mayor
and Vice Mayor on a numerical basis by District number, as reflected in the chart below for
calendar years 2023 – 2027, thereafter this cycle shall repeat in the same order.
Calendar Year
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027

Mayor
District 5
District 1
District 2
District 3
District 4

Vice Mayor
District 1
District 2
District 3
District 4
District 5

The City Council believes it is in the City’s best interest that all Councilmembers have at least one
year of experience serving as a Councilmember prior to being voted to serve as Mayor. To that
end, a one-time allowance can be made for going outside of this rotational schedule to allow a
newly elected Councilmember the time to acclimate to the role prior to serving as Mayor. Following
that one-time allowance, the rotational schedule will go back to its original order.
An experienced Councilmember may choose to decline to serve as Mayor or Vice Mayor. In this
case, the office would pass to the next Councilmember in the rotation. The Councilmember who
declined would move to their next natural place in the numerical order.
This process will remain in effect until modified by a subsequent City Council.
The City Clerk shall keep a list outlining the suggested rotational sequence and update it annually
following the reorganization meeting.

Page XXX

Attachment: Council Policy Manual Section 1.33 - Annual Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor (City Council Policy Manual Section 1.33 - Annual

Attachment A

Packet Pg. 142

14

City
Council
Report
TITLE:

Item:
Category:
Meeting Date:

14
COUNCIL COMMITTEE
REPORTS
December 7, 2021

Council Committee Reports

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Report on committee assignments and general comments.
DISCUSSION
This is the section of the City Council Agenda that allows the City Councilmembers to
report on items of interest and the work of City Council Committees.
MAYOR GIBBONS
Association of Bay Area Governments Executive Committee**
Campbell Historical Museum & Ainsley House Foundation Liaison
Cities Association Selection Committee & Legislative Action Committee
City Attorney Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
City Clerk Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
City Manager Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
Santa Clara County Expressway Planning Study Policy Advisory Board**
Economic Development Advisory Subcommittee
Legislative Subcommittee
Silicon Valley Clean Energy JPA Board of Directors and Executive Committee (SVCE)
West Valley Mayors and Managers
Santa Clara County Emergency Operational Area Council** (Alt.)
VICE MAYOR RESNIKOFF
City Clerk Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
City Manager Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
Finance Subcommittee
Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority Board (SVACA)
West Valley Clean Water JPA
West Valley Sanitation District
West Valley Sanitation Treatment Plant Advisory Committee**
West Valley Solid Waste Authority JPA
County Library District JPA Board of Directors (Alt.)
West Valley Mayors and Managers (Alt.)

Packet Pg. 143

14
Council Committee Reports

Page 2 of 3

COUNCILMEMBER BYBEE
Advisory Commissioner Appointment Interview Subcommittee
Cities Association of Santa Clara County Representative
Downtown Subcommittee
Finance Subcommittee
Friends of the Heritage Theater Liaison
Association of Bay Area Governments (Alt.)
Cities Association Selection Committee & Legislative Action Committee (Alt.)
SCC Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee (Alt.)
Santa Clara County Expressway Planning Study Policy Advisory Board**
Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority Board (SVACA) (Alt.)
Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee (Alt.)
COUNCILWOMAN LANDRY
Advisory Commissioner Appointment Interview Subcommittee
City Attorney Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
County Library District JPA Board of Directors
Education Subcommittee
Economic Development Subcommittee
Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission of SCC**
Santa Clara Valley Water District: County Water Commission
Cities Association of Santa Clara County Representative (Alt.)
Downtown Subcommittee (Alt.)
State Route (SR) 85 Corridor Policy Advisory (Alt.)
West Valley Solid Waste Authority JPA (Alt.)
West Valley Clean Water JPA (Alt.)
COUNCILMEMBER LOPEZ
Association of Bay Area Governments
Education Subcommittee
Legislative Subcommittee
SCC Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee
State Route (SR) 85 Corridor Policy Advisory Board
Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee
Campbell Historical Museum & Ainsley House Foundation Liaison (Alt.)
Friends of the Heritage Theater Liaison (Alt.)
Santa Clara Valley Water District: County Water Commission (Alt.)
Silicon Valley Clean Energy JPA Board of Directors and Executive Committee (Alt.)
West Valley Sanitation District (Alt.)
**Appointed by other agencies

Packet Pg. 144

14
Council Committee Reports

Prepared by:

Page 3 of 3

Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

Packet Pg. 145

MEMORANDUM

City of Campbell
City Clerk’s Office

To:

Honorable Mayor and City Council

Date:

From:

Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk

Via:

Brian Loventhal, City Manager

Subject:

Desk Item 11 – Consideration of Interim Ordinance relating to Senate
Bill 9

December 7, 2021

Enclosed please find Desk Item 11 – Correspondence from SV@Home (Silicon Valley at
Home) relating to the urgency measure to implement Senate Bill 9. This Desk Item is
being included in the public agenda packet online.

Board of Directors
Kevin Zwick, Chair
United Way Bar Area
Gina Dalma, Vice Chair
Silicon Valley Community
Foundation
Candice Gonzalez, Secretary
Sand Hill Property Company
Andrea Osgood, Treasurer
Eden Housing
Shiloh Ballard
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition
Bob Brownstein
Working Partnerships USA
Amie Fishman
Non-Profit Housing
Association of Northern CA
Ron Gonzales
Hispanic Foundation
of Silicon Valley
Javier Gonzalez
Google
Poncho Guevara
Sacred Heart Community
Service
Janice Jensen
Habitat for Humanity
East Bay/Silicon Valley
Janikke Klem
Jan LIndenthal
MidPen Housing
Jennifer Loving
Destination: Home
Mary Murtagh
EAH Housing
Chris Neale
The Core Companies
Kelly Snider
Kelly Snider Consulting
Staff
Regina Celestin Williams
Executive Director

TRANSMITTED VIA EMAIL

December 7th, 2021

Mayor Gibbons and Councilmembers
City Hall
70 N. First St.
Campbell, CA 95008
Re: Item 11 — Urgency Measures to Implement Senate Bill 9

Honorable Mayor Gibbons, Vice Mayor Resnikoff, and Councilmembers Bybee, Landry, and
Lopez:
SV@Home advocates for increased housing supply and housing affordability throughout
Santa Clara County. We are reaching out to local cities to share information and general
recommendations about a new law, SB-9, which you are considering on tonight’s agenda.
This letter does not constitute legal advice.
About SB-9
We see SB-9 in the context of the several legislative changes and funding allocations passed
recently to comprehensively address our housing crisis. These bills preserve existing homes,
produce new homes (this is where SB-9 fits in), protect renters, and increase funding for
affordable homes and homeless homes and social services, including for those members of
our community who are experiencing homelessness. SB-9 is only one piece of the puzzle.
When the Legislature first passed laws making it easier for homeowners to create Accessory
Dwelling Units (ADUs), there was local backlash in many communities. However, in just a
few years, most opponents realized ADUs did not cause harm and actually created
opportunities for homeowners. Following the experience with ADUs, earlier this year the
California Legislature and governor passed and signed SB-9, which empowers homeowners
to split their lot into two parcels, or to turn their home into a duplex, or both. SB-9 was
supported by every legislator representing Santa Clara County.
Opportunities for Cities
Now that SB-9 is about to take effect, we encourage Campbell to embrace the new
opportunities provided by the law for the following reasons:
1.
California adopted SB-9 based on evidence and expert economic analysis that allowing
smaller homes through lot-splits and duplexes will make more homes available to more
people at relatively more attainable prices when compared to typical new or rebuilt houses
on existing lots.
2.
New options for lot-splits and duplexes provide new options for homeowners
(especially for those who are “house-rich,” with limited income but wealth in their property)
including, (a) generating additional income from a new rental unit, (b) downsizing and
selling a portion of their property while continuing to live on the remaining portion; and/or
(c) reconfiguring their property to better suit their family’s needs.

350 W. Julian Street, Building 5, San José, CA 95110
www.svathome.org • [email protected]

3. Communities across California have taken steps to study and grapple with historical and ongoing housing
segregation perpetuated by exclusionary zoning. While allowing duplexes and lot-splits by homeowners will
not redress these systemic inequities immediately, encouraging production of more housing opportunities —
accessible to more people, in neighborhoods throughout the city — will be a step in the right direction.
In crafting SB-9, the Legislature ensured that local governments would have an opportunity to develop objective
design guidelines which enhance the feasibility and value of new duplexes and lot-splits while supporting
development that reflects the local context of each city. If implemented thoughtfully, opportunities for lot-splits
and duplexes can help current and future residents alike without harming neighborhoods.
We encourage Campbell to reject efforts to undermine the Legislature’s intent, or to violate the legal
parameters of SB-9 or other state laws. We are concerned by attempts to undermine SB-9, which may overstep
local authority and create risk of litigation. Further, as we have seen with initial legislation on ADUs, bad faith
attempts to undermine the spirit and intent of SB-9 by finding and exploiting loopholes will likely be overturned
by the Legislature in future legislation. In short, efforts to purposely undermine SB-9 run the risk of being timeconsuming, ineffectual, and potentially damaging to the City and its residents.
Next Steps
SB-9 will take effect on January 1st, and thoughtful local implementation can make it more effective,
incorporate local priorities, enhance the benefits to the community, and smooth the application process for
homeowners. Here are some points to consider:
• Cities may pass objective standards that do not violate SB-9 or other state laws.
• Cities should not set new, stricter standards for SB-9 than would apply to developing a house, in areas such
as FAR, lot-coverage, height, etc. It shouldn’t be harder to build a duplex or to split a lot than it is to tear
down an existing house and replace it with a single large house.
• Cities may not impose any objective standards that violate the by-right provisions of SB-9, which require
ministerial approval of redevelopment that conforms with objective design standards.
• Cities should not reduce zoned capacity, nor unreasonably constrain development so as to make it
infeasible.
We appreciate your time and consideration. Please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions about this
new law and its implications. We welcome further discussion and opportunities for ongoing engagement.
Sincerely,
SV@Home
Sincerely,

Mathew Reed
Policy Director

350 W. Julian Street, Building 5, San José, CA 95110
408.780.8411 • www.svathome.org • [email protected]