02/28/2022 City Council Regular Agenda Packet
February 24, 2022 8:46 AM City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Page1 MAYOR
Marie Blankley
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Rebeca Armendariz
Dion Bracco
Zach Hilton
Peter Leroe-Muñoz
Carol Marques
Fred Tovar
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
CITY OF GILROY
VIRTUAL MEETING
VIA
ZOOM
GILROY, CA 95020
REGULAR MEETING 6:00 P.M.
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2022
CITY COUNCIL PACKET MATERIALS ARE AVAILABLE ONLINE AT www.cityofgilroy.org
AGENDA CLOSING TIME IS 5:00 P.M. THE TUESDAY PRIOR TO THE MEETING
THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ASSEMBLY
BILL 361. MEETING MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE ON THE CITY WEBSITE
www.cityofgilroy.org.
Pursuant to California Assembly Bill 361, a local legislative body is authorized to hold public
meetings remotely and to make those meetings accessible to all members of the public seeking to
observe and to address the local legislative body by remote means only via a technology solution.
As such, the City will provide various options for the public to participate in the conduct of the
meeting, as indicated in detail below on this cover sheet.
In order to minimize the spread of the COVID 19 virus, the City will be offering online conferencing
via Zoom, Facebook Live, and telephone for the public to view or listen to this meeting. Written
comments can be submitted by email to Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk, at cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org.
Please note that written comments will not be read out loud, but it will be part of the written
record.
To Participate via Zoom: To View the Meeting Live on Facebook:
Weblink: https://bit.ly/34QlvOU
Or via Telephone: +1 669 900 6833
Webinar ID: 854 7499 5240
Passcode: 857408
Weblink:
https://www.facebook.com/CityofGilroy
COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC WILL BE TAKEN ON AGENDA ITEMS BEFORE ACTION IS TAKEN BY
THE CITY COUNCIL. Public testimony is subject to reasonable regulations, including but not
limited to time restrictions for each individual speaker. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes.
The amount of time allowed per speaker may vary at the Mayor’s discretion depending on the
number of speakers and length of the agenda.
Written comments on any agenda item may be emailed to the City Clerk’s Office at
cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org or mailed to the Gilroy City Clerk’s Office at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna
Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. Comments received by the City Clerk’s Office by 1 p.m. on the day of a
Council meeting will be distributed to the City Council prior to or at the meeting and available for
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
02/28/2022 Page2 public inspection with the agenda packet located in the lobby of Administration at City Hall, 7351
Rosanna Street prior to the meeting. Any correspondence received will be incorporated into the
meeting record. Items received after the 1 p.m. deadline will be provided to the City Council as
soon as practicable. Written comments are also available on the City’s Public Records Portal at
https://bit.ly/3G1vihU.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Assembly Bill 361, the City will make
reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. If you need special assistance
to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk a minimum of 72 hours prior to the
meeting at (408) 846-0204.
If you challenge any planning or land use decision made at this meeting in court, you may be
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing held at this
meeting, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council a t, or prior to, the public
hearing. Please take notice that the time within which to seek judicial review of any final
administrative determination reached at this meeting is governed by Section 1094.6 of the
California Code of Civil Procedure.
A Closed Session may be called during this meeting pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9 (d)(2) if a point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the City
on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstance s, there is a
significant exposure to litigation against the City.
Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the
agenda packet are available with the agenda packet on the City website at www.cityofgilroy.org
subject to Staff’s ability to post the documents before the meeting.
KNOW YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE GILROY OPEN GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE
Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the
public. Commissions, task forces, councils and other agencies of the City exist
to conduct the people's business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are
conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the people's
review.
FOR MORE INFORMATION ON YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE OPEN GOVERNMENT
ORDINANCE, TO RECEIVE A FREE COPY OF THE ORDINANCE OR TO REPORT A
VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE, CONTACT THE OPEN GOVERNMENT
COMMISSION STAFF AT (408) 846-0204
The agenda for this regular meeting is as follows:
1. OPENING
1.1. Call to Order
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda
3. Roll Call
1.2. Orders of the Day
1.3. Employee Introductions
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
02/28/2022 Page3 2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS
2.1. Proclamations, Awards, and Presentations
2.1.1. Proclamation: Proclaiming March as Youth Arts Month
2.1.2. Proclamation: Proclaiming March as Red Cross Month
2.1.3. Proclamation: Retirement of James Trujillo
3. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL
3.1. Presentation from Gilroy Garlic Festival Association, Inc.
3.2. PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT
ON THE AGENDA BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER
JURISDICTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the Council
on matters within the Gilroy City Council’s jurisdiction but not on the agenda.
Persons wishing to address the Council are requested to complete a Speaker’s
Card located at the entrances and handed to the City Clerk. Speakers are limited to
1 minute each. The amount of time allowed per speaker may vary at the Mayor’s
discretion depending on the number of speakers and length of the agenda. The law
does not permit Council action or extended discussion of any item not on the
agenda except under special circumstances. If Council action is requested, the
Council may place the matter on a future agenda.
Written comments to address the Council on matters not on this a genda may be e-
mailed to the City Clerk’s Office at cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org or mailed to the
Gilroy City Clerk’s Office at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020.
Comments received by the City Clerk’s Office by 1:00pm on the day of a Council
meeting will be distributed to the City Council prior to or at the meeting and
available for public inspection with the agenda pack et located in the lobby of
Administration at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street, prior to the meeting. Any
correspondence received will be incorporated into the meeting record. Items
received after the 1:00pm deadline will be provided to the City Council as so on as
practicable. Written material provided by public members under t his section of the
agenda will be limited to 10 pages in hard copy. An unlimited amount of material
may be provided electronically.
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
02/28/2022 Page4 4. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS
Council Member Bracco – Gilroy Sister Cities Association (alternate), Santa Clara Co.
Library JPA, SCVWD Joint Council-SCRWA-Board Water Resources Committee, South
County Regional Wastewater Authority Board, Street Naming Committee
Council Member Armendariz – ABAG (Alternate), CalTrain Policy Group, Gilroy
Downtown Business Association Board (alternate), Gourmet Alley Ad Hoc Committee,
Historic Heritage Committee, Santa Clara Co. Library JPA (alternate), Santa Clara
Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board, Silicon Valley Clea n Energy Authority
JPA Board (Alternate), Street Naming Committee, VTA Committee for Transit
Accessibility (Alternate)
Council Member Marques - Gilroy Downtown Business Association Board, Gilroy
Gardens Board of Directors, Gourmet Alley Ad Hoc Committee, Historic Heritage
Committee (Alternate), Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Governing Board, Santa
Clara Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board, South County Regional Wastewater
Authority (Alternate)
Council Member Hilton – Gilroy Economic Development Partnership, Silicon Valley
Clean Energy Authority JPA Board, South County United for Health, Visit Gilroy
California Welcome Center Board
Council Member Tovar – Economic Development Corporation Board, Gourmet Alley
Ad Hoc Committee, Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission, Santa Clara Co.
Expressway Plan 2040 Policy Advisory Board, SCVWD Water Commission (alternate),
South County Joint Recycled Water Advisory Committee, South County Regional
Wastewater Authority Board, Street Naming Committee, South Coun ty Youth Task
Force Policy Team (alternate), VTA Committee for Transit Accessibility
Council Member Leroe-Muñoz - ABAG, CalTrain Policy Group (alternate), Cities
Association of Santa Clara County Board of Directors, Economic Development
Corporation Board, Gilroy Youth Task Force, SCVWD Water Commission, Silicon
Valley Regional Interoperability Authority Board, South County Youth Task Force Policy
Team, VTA Mobility Partnership, VTA South County City Group (alternate), VTA Policy
Advisory Committee (alternate)
Mayor Blankley - Cities Association of Santa Clara Co. Board of Directors (alternate),
Gilroy Economic Development Partnership, Gilroy Sister Cities Association, Gilroy
Youth Task Force (alternate), Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Governing Board,
SCVWD Joint Council-SCRWA-Board Water Resources Committee, South County Joint
Recycled Water Advisory Committee, South County Regional Wastewater Authority
Board, VTA Board of Directors Alternate, VTA Mobility Partnership, VTA Policy Advisory
Committee, VTA South County City Group
5. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
02/28/2022 Page5 6. CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)
All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered by the City Council to be routine
and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separ ate discussion of these items unless a
request is made by a member of the City Council or a member of the public. Any person desiring
to speak on any item on the consent calendar should ask to have that item removed from the
consent calendar prior to the t ime the Council votes to approve. If removed, the item will be
discussed in the order in which it appears.
6.1. Action Minutes for February 7, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting
6.2. Action Minutes for February 15, 2022 City Council Special Meeting
6.3. Adoption of the Revised Gilroy City Council Norms
7. BIDS AND PROPOSALS
7.1. There are none listed.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.1. Tentative Map and Architectural & Site Review Permit for 4-lot
Subdivision at 395 Lewis Street
1. Staff Report: Cindy McCormick, Customer Service Manager
2. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications
3. Open Public Hearing
4. Close Public Hearing
5. Possible Action:
a. Adopt a Resolution approving a Tentative Map to Subdivide the property
located at 395 Lewis Street (APN: 841-03-062) into four parcels (File Number TM
20-01).
b. Adopt a Resolution approving an Architectural and Site Review Permit to allow
construction of four (4) two-story single-family homes on property located at 395
Lewis Street (APN: 841-03-062) following approval of Tentative Map File Number
TM 20-01 to subdivide the property into four (4) single family parcels (File
Number AS 20-02).
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
There are none listed.
10. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS
10.1. Introduction Of An Ordinance To Mandate Electronic And Paperless
Filing of Fair Political Practices Commission Campaign Disclosure
Statements
1. Staff Report: Thai Pham, City Clerk
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Staff recommends to waive the first reading and introduce an ordinance to
mandate electronic and paperless filing of Fair Political Practices Commission
campaign disclosure statements and statements of economic interest.
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
02/28/2022 Page6 10.2. Social Media Use Policy
1. Staff Report: Rachelle Bedell, Community Engagement Coordinator
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Staff recommends approval and adoption of the Social Media Use Policy.
10.3. Council Discussion of Housing Trust Fund Fiscal Recommendations
and Adopt a Resolution Amending the Operating Budget for Fiscal
Years 2021-22 and 2022-23 in the Los Arroyos Fund in the Amount of
$100,800 in Each Fiscal Year.
1. Staff Report: Bryce Atkins, Senior Management Analyst
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Council:
a) Receive the report and provide direction, and
b) Adopt a resolution amending the operating budget for Fiscal Years 2021 -22
and 2022-23 in the Los Arroyos Fund in the amount of $100,800 in each fiscal
year.
10.4. Council Discussion Regarding a Potential Policy for Receiving
Donations for Display at City Facilities
1. Staff Report: Bryce Atkins, Senior Management Analyst
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Council discussion and provide direction.
11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS
11.1. Catalytic Converter Theft. (Captain Jason Smith)
11.2. Update on In-Person City Council / Board / Commission Meetings in
March
12. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS
13. CLOSED SESSION
14. ADJOURNMENT
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
02/28/2022 Page7 FUTURE MEETING DATES
MARCH 2022
7* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
21* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
APRIL 2022
4* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
18* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
MAY 2022
2* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
16* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
*meeting is webstreamed and televised.
2.1.1
Packet Pg. 8 Communication: Proclamation: Proclaiming March as Youth Arts Month (Proclamations, Awards, and Presentations)
2.1.2
Packet Pg. 9 Communication: Proclamation: Proclaiming March as Red Cross Month (Proclamations, Awards, and Presentations)
gfet94/49ZatiOP/ide Cay 9" died,
w`i-iei efl§
wtteRefi§
wile .e
W`Hei e
Javues ")L &" Trujillo has sewed the ctj of 4Lroj for overthirtu-owe uears
as a Maivttevt.awce worker HH in the Public works Department, operations
Aivision retiring of anuaru 5, 2022; awd
h&j/AA/CS service as a Maintenance worker (t in Public Works, he has been.
assigned to the Park . Landscape, .street/wastewater/Forestru, and
water sections where he maintained critical infrastructure throughout
the ctu; and
Jiv& brought both pride and passion, for his hometown comvu,uwitu when
performing his work. H-e applied his skills and education to protect and
maintain public facilities such as parks, streets, water sustem,
wastewatersjstent, golf course, and trails; and
Jive, provided excellent customer service to the residents and visitors of
4Lroj and aLso volunteered in. the com.wt.unitu with the 4LLrou Little
League and 4iLroj Browns Football programs; and
Jive, accomplished w4.011A.0 special projects during his tenure to include the
Christmas H-iLL Park operations manual, ChrLstmas H-iLL Park fire camp
set-up manual, and assisting with the training of vu.anu new ewcpLouees;
and
wi-ieRequ Jiv.. has been a reliable and valuable evupLojee of the ctu of 4iLroj,
demonstrating excellence in teamwork, collaboration and customer
service, while wt.aintaiwivl,g a good nature and deLivering positive results
for the residents of c Lro j.
NOW, Tfihe ,e?'OR.e, I, mfriziC BifiNKLey, MaJorof the ctj of 4 Lrou, and aLong
with mu colleagues on the c tj Council and all the citizens and
ewcpLo j ees of 4Lro j, join. in. thanking
tfa/ineg Xyzio,
For his commitvu.ewt of service and wish hivit well in retireva.ewt for uears to come.
Ma rie gla wk,leu
Mot or,ctuof4LLroj
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
January 10, 2022
Page 1 of 8
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
02/7/2022
City of Gilroy
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 7, 2022
1. OPENING
1.1 Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM by Mayor Marie Blankley.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
Council Member Tovar led the Pledge of Allegiance.
2. Invocation
There was none.
3. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda
City Clerk Pham declared the posting of the agenda.
Attendee Name Title Status
Marie Blankley Mayor Remote
Rebeca Armendáriz Council Member Remote
Dion Bracco Council Member Remote
Zach Hilton Council Member Remote
Peter Leroe-Muñoz Vice Mayor Remote
Carol Marques Council Member Remote
Fred Tovar Council Member Remote
2. Orders of the Day
There were none.
3. Employee Introductions
There were none.
2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS
2.1. Proclamations, Awards, and Presentations
There were none.
3. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL
3.1 State Senator John Laird
California State Senator Laird provided a status update on legislative matters and
responded to Council Members questions.
6.1
Packet Pg. 11 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 7, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE))
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
January 10, 2022
Page 2 of 8
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
02/7/2022
3.2 PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment period.
City Clerk Pham reported one written comment was received Mercedes
Chun wrote about the apartments being built on the corner of Santa
Teresa and Highway 152.
There were no audio comments.
There being no public comment, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
4. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS
Council Member Bracco reported on Santa Clara County Library JPA meeting.
Council Member Armendáriz had nothing to report.
Council Member Marques reported on Gilroy Downtown Business Association
Board meeting.
Council Member Hilton reported on Visit Gilroy California Welcome Center
Board, Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority JPA Board.
Council Member Tovar reported on the delay of the Gourmet Alley Ad Hoc
Committee meeting.
Council Member Leroe-Muñoz reported on SCVWD Water Commission meeting.
Mayor Blankley reported on SCVWD Joint Council-SCRWA-Board Water
Resources Committee and announced the City Council Special Retreat Meeting
scheduled for February 15th.
5. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS
Vice Mayor Leroe-Muñoz requested an ordinance to ban the use of plywood
covering windows and doors at vacant properties in Downto wn Gilroy from 1st
through 10th Street. The item received unanimous support.
Council Member Tovar reminded City Administrator Forbis about his request to
have an update from the Garlic Festival Association.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)
Council Member Marques requested to pull Agenda Item 6.2 from the Consent
Calendar.
6.1 Action Minutes for January 24, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting
A motion was made by Council Member Leroe-Muñoz, seconded by Council
Member Marques, to approve the minutes. The motion was carried by the
following vote:
6.1
Packet Pg. 12 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 7, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE))
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
January 10, 2022
Page 3 of 8
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
02/7/2022
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Leroe-Muñoz, Vice Mayor
SECONDER: Carol Marques, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Armendáriz, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques,
Tovar
6.2 Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Gilroy Making Required
Findings To Allow The Continuation Of Remotely Held Meetings Of The City
Council and all Boards and Commissions Pursuant To Section 54953 of the
Brown Act
Council discussion ensued between the members about the item.
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
There being no public comment, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
A motion was made by Council Member Leroe-Muñoz, seconded by Council
Member Tovar, to adopt the resolution. The motion was carried by the following
vote:
RESULT: APPROVE [5 to 2]
MOVER: Leroe-Muñoz, Vice Mayor
SECONDER: Fred Tovar, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Armendáriz, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Tovar
NAYES: Bracco, Marques
Enactment No: Resolution No. 2022-07
7. BIDS AND PROPOSALS
7.1. Approval of an Agreement with Park Consulting Group for a Not to Exceed
Amount of $284,000 for EnerGov LMS Professional Services
Customer Service Manager McCormick gave staff presentation and responded to
Council Member questions.
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
There being no further comments, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
6.1
Packet Pg. 13 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 7, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE))
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
January 10, 2022
Page 4 of 8
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
02/7/2022
Possible Action:
Approve a professional services agreement with Park Consulting Group for
a not to exceed amount of $284,000 to complete implementation of the
EnerGov LMS Project, and authorize the City Administrator to execute the
agreement.
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Carol Marques, Council Member
SECONDER: Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Vice Mayor
AYES: Blankley, Armendáriz, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques,
Tovar
7.2. Award of Contract to Swimming Swan LLC in the Amount of $358,750.00 to
Serve as the Christopher High School Aquatics Center Operator in 2022
and 2023 (Project No. 22-RFP-AD-463).
Recreation Manager Henig and President Melissa Swanson of Swimming Swan
LLC gave staff presentation and responded to Council Member questions.
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
City Clerk Pham reported that two written commen ts were provided by
Mary Yates and Adrienne Rodriguez.
The following speakers spoke in support of the item:
Cat Tucker
Kristin Brown
Theresa Graham
Mak Gupta was concerned about the liability issue and requested Council
not to rush into passing the item. Human Resources Director McPhillips
briefly responded to the speaker’s concern.
There being no further comments, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
Possible Action:
Award contract to Swimming Swan LLC in the amount of $358,750.00 to
serve as the Christopher High School Aquatics Center Operator in 2022
and 2023 (Project No. 22-RFP-AD-463) and authorize the City Administrator
to execute the contract and associated documents.
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Fred Tovar, Council Member
SECONDER: Rebeca Armendáriz, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Armendáriz, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques,
Tovar
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
No Public Hearings listed.
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
6.1
Packet Pg. 14 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 7, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE))
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
January 10, 2022
Page 5 of 8
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
02/7/2022
9.1. Annual Appointments to City Boards, Commissions and Committees With
Seats Vacant or Expired as of December 31, 2021
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
There being no further comments, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
Possible Action:
Appoint members to Boards, Commissions and Committees with seats
vacant or expired as of December 31, 2021.
The following appointments were made by Council:
Arts and Culture Commission
Camille McCormack (Term Expires 12/31/2025)
Carmine DePaulo (Term Expires 12/31/2024)
Frank Patterson (Term Expires 12/31/2025)
Alexandra Perdew (Term Expires 12/31/2025)
Library Commission
Saeid Nooshabadi (Term Expires 12/31/2025)
Open Government Commission
None
Parks & Recreation Commission
Eric Arredondo (Term Expires 12/31/2025)
Personnel Commission
Marissa Haro (Term Expires 12/31/2025)
Nita Edde-Mitchell (Term Expires 12/31/2025)
Planning Commission
Annedore Kushner (Term Expires 12/31/2025)
Adriana Leongardt (Term Expires 12/31/2025)
10. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS
10.1 Consent of the Appointment of Jon Biggs as Interim Community
Development Director (Retired Annuitant) effective February 8, 2022 and
Adoption of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Approving
the Exception to the 180-Day Wait Period for Jon Biggs and Approving the
Interim Appointment and Employment Agreement Pursuant to California
Government Code 21221(h)
Human Resources Director McPhillips gave staff presentation and introduced Mr.
Jon Biggs to Council. Both responded to Council Member questions.
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
There being no further comments, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
6.1
Packet Pg. 15 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 7, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE))
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
January 10, 2022
Page 6 of 8
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
02/7/2022
Possible Action:
a) Consent of the City Administrator's recommendation to appoint Jon
Biggs as Interim Community Development Director (as a retired
annuitant) effective February 8, 2022.
A motion was made by Council Member Tovar, seconded by Council Member
Hilton, to approve the Consent of the City Administrator’s recommendation to
appoint Jon Biggs as Interim Community Development Director (as a retired
annuitant) effective February 8, 2022. The motion was carried by the following
vote:
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Fred Tovar, Council Member
SECONDER: Zach Hilton, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Armendáriz, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques,
Tovar
b) Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy approving
the exception to the CalPERS 180-day wait period for the appointment of
Jon Biggs (retired annuitant), consenting the City Administrator's
recommendation to appoint Jon Biggs as Interim Community
Development Director (Retired Annuitant) pursuant to California
Government Code Section 21221(h), and authorizing the City
Administrator to execute the employment agreement.
A motion was made by Vice Mayor Leroe-Muñoz, seconded by Council Member
Marques, to adopt the resolution. The motion was carried by the following vote:
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Leroe-Muñoz, Council Member
SECONDER: Carol Marques, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Armendáriz, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques,
Tovar
Enactment No.: Resolution No. 2022-08
10.2. Adoption of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy
Rescinding Resolution No. 2021-17 and Adopting the Amended and
Restated Flying Flags at City Facilities Policy
City Administrator Forbis gave staff presentation and responded to Council
Member questions.
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
City Clerk Pham reported that three individuals provided written comments prior
to the City Council meeting with regards to the item.
Cat Tucker spoke in favor of this item but suggested to have the flags
displayed at the Paseo in Downtown Gilroy.
6.1
Packet Pg. 16 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 7, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE))
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
January 10, 2022
Page 7 of 8
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
02/7/2022
Kim Sullivan reiterated to Council that the only flags that should be flown
at City Hall is the City, State, and Federal flag as it is inclusive of all
genders, ethnic groups, and religions. She also voiced that the Council
would show favoritism if Pride flag was flown in exclusion of the new flag
policy.
Eric Howard questioned if it is the City’s role to fly flags of every
organization and is concerned that this item will turn political.
There being no further comments, Mayor Blankley closed public co mment.
A motion was made by Mayor Blankley, seconded by Vice Mayor Leroe-Muñoz,
to adopt the resolution and make the amendments to the policy:
• For continuing applications, the requirement for 150 signatures will apply
every other year.
• The Pride Flag is grandfathered in for 2022 but will follow the process of
collecting signatures and application in the next cycle.
• The applicant shall supply the flags to City Staff.
• The flags are only to be displayed at City Hall.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
RESULT: APPROVE AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Marie Blankley, Mayor
SECONDER: Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Vice Mayor
AYES: Blankley, Armendáriz, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques,
Tovar
Enactment No.: Resolution No: 2022-09
10.3 Resolution to Approve 4-hour Limited-Term Parking at San Ysidro Park
City Engineer Heap gave staff presentation and responded to Council Member
questions.
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
Jorge Mendoza thanked Council for looking at the issue and is in support of the
item.
There being no further comments, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
Possible Action:
Approval of a Resolution to Approve 4-hour Limited-Term Parking Along
the Murray Avenue and Lewis Street Frontage of San Ysidro Park
RESULT: APPROVE
MOVER: Fred Tovar, Council Member
SECONDER: Rebeca Armendáriz, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Armendáriz, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques,
Tovar
Enactment No.: Resolution No.: 2022-10
6.1
Packet Pg. 17 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 7, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE))
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
January 10, 2022
Page 8 of 8
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
02/7/2022
11. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS
11.1 Citywide Fiber Optic Project Update
City Administrator Forbis and Public Works Director Jordan provided an
update on the item and responded to Council Member questions.
12. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS
None provided.
13. CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Blankley adjourned Regular Meeting to Closed Session at 9:05 p.m.
The City Council convened in Closed Session at 9:10 p.m.
The Council vote to stay in closed session was unanimous.
13.1. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant
to GC Sec. 54956.8 and GC Sec.17A.8 (a) (2)
13.1.1. Property: Gilroy Sports Park, 5925 Monterey Frontage Road
(APN’s 808-221-026, -028, and -030)
Negotiators: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Other Party to Negotiations: Sharks Sports and
Entertainment, LLC
Under Negotiations: Price and Terms of Lease
No reportable action.
13.1.2. Properties: 10th Street Bridge: APNs 808- 19-007, 799-30-
006, 799-30-007, 808-19-020, 808-50-999, Thomas Luchessa
Bridge: APNs 808-21-025, 808-21-023, 808-21-021, 808-21-
018, New Fire Station: APNs 808-18-003, 808-19-029
Negotiators: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator;
Other Party to Negotiations: Glen Loma Corporation, John
M. Filice, Jr.;
Negotiating Price and terms of payment regarding
purchase, sale
No reportable action.
14. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:26 P.M.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were duly and regularly adopted at
a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Gilroy.
/s/ Thai Pham, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk
6.1
Packet Pg. 18 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 7, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE))
City Council Special Meeting - Council Retreat Minutes
02/15/2022 City of Gilroy
City Council Meeting Minutes
February 15, 2022
1. OPENING
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM by Mayor Marie Blankley.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
Council Member Hilton led the pledge of allegiance.
2. Invocation
There was none.
3. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda
City Clerk Pham declared the posting of the agenda.
Attendee Name Title Status
Marie Blankley Mayor Present
Rebeca Armendáriz Council Member Present
Dion Bracco Council Member Present
Zach Hilton Council Member Present
Peter Leroe-Muñoz Vice Mayor Present
Carol Marques Council Member Present
Fred Tovar Council Member Present
2. PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL
Mayor Blankley opened public comment period.
Joanne Fierro voiced her concern that Council is limiting the amount of
input from speakers at City Council meetings and requested to do hybrid
meetings for the public to participate.
There being no further speakers, the Mayor closed Public Comment.
3. NEW BUSINESS
3.1. Interactive Discussion Regarding Roles, Responsibilities and Obligations
of Councilmembers to Ensure that the Peoples’ Business is Conducted
Openly and Transparently
Mayor Blankley gave a short introduction prior to City Attorney Faber's staff
presentation. City Attorney Faber responded to Council Member questions.
6.2
Packet Pg. 19 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 15, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE))
City Council Special Meeting Minutes
February 15, 2022
Page 2 of 2
City Council Meeting Minutes
02/15/2022
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
Ron Kirkish inquired about a hypothetical scenario would constitute a
Brown Act violation. City Attorney Faber responded to the speaker’s
inquiry.
Maria Aguilar inquired about if there was a distinction between the Mayor
and Council Members within the Council Norms document. Mayor
Blankley responded to the speaker’s inquiry.
There being no further public speakers, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
3.2. Review of Council Norms adopted Jan. 25, 2021 and Consideration of
Revisions to Council Norms
Mayor Pro Tempore Leroe-Muñoz and Mayor Blankley provided a short
introduction about the item.
The Council went through the Gilroy City Council Norms document. Discussion
ensued between them with regards to the changes in the language of the
document. Revisions to the language were later accepted by the majority.
Mayor Blankley opened public comment.
Rebecca Scheel inquired about serial meetings, requested Council to
reflect upon themselves about their demeanor during council meetings ,
and requested Council to follow their own rules for the sake of
transparency. Mayor Blankley and City Attorney Faber briefly responded
to her public comment.
There being no further speakers, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
Possible Action:
Adopt revisions to Council Norms or direct staff to propose revisions for
later adoption.
4. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:21 PM.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were duly and regularly adopted at
a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Gilroy.
/s/ Thai Pham, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk
6.2
Packet Pg. 20 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 15, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE))
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Adoption of the Revised Gilroy City Council Norms
Meeting Date: February 28, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: City Clerk
Submitted By: Thai Pham
Prepared By: Thai Pham
Marie Blankley
Strategic Plan Goals
☐ Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization
☐ Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
☐ Promote Economic
Development
Activities
☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All
☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the revised Gilroy City Council Norms
BACKGROUND
The Gilroy City Council has established protocols and procedures in order to conduct
Council business in the most effective and transparent manner possible. Originally
adopted in 1999 as Council Norms, the City Council reviews the document each year
and last formally revised and re-adopted the protocols as “Gilroy City Council Norms” in
January 25, 2021. The Gilroy City Council Norms outlines procedures for:
• Council Meetings
• Adding Agenda Items
• Council Interactions
• Staff Relations
• Council Communications
6.3
Packet Pg. 21
• Council Travel and Training / Participation in Outside Boards and
Memberships
ANALYSIS
The Council reviewed and considered updates to the “Gilroy City Council Norms”
document at the February 15, 2022 special meeting and made several modifications.
CONCLUSION
The revised “Gilroy City Council Norms” is now before City Council for re-adoption with
modifications from the 2021 version.
Attachments:
1. Gilroy City Council Norms - Revised 02/15/2022
6.3
Packet Pg. 22
Gilroy City Council Norms
1. Meetings Guidelines:
1.1. Three (3) minutes per public comment per agenda item. Five (5) minutes for applicants,
with two (2) minute rebuttal for applicant. City Clerk will provide a timer. Staff will
make every effort to limit staff reports to five (5) minutes, with opportunity for staff to
elaborate based on Council questions. While the Mayor has the discretion to uniformly
adjust speaking time, it is the goal of the Council to identify at the beginning of the
public comment period the number of speakers present and to set the following time
limits per speaker applicable to items on or off the agenda, keeping in mind that public
comments may also be submitted in writing (see Norm #24): Up to ten (10) speakers,
three (3) minutes each; eleven to twenty (11-20) speakers, two (2) minutes each; over
twenty (20) speakers, one (1) minute each.
1.2. Council is encouraged to email questions to staff prior to the meeting. This promotes
clear, available and concise answers.
1.3. Prepare for meetings by reading meeting materials in advance.
1.4. Reveal information gained from contacts.
1.5. Stay focused on the present agenda item.
1.6. Council reports and presentations should be concise and efficient, with a goal of limiting
presentation to three (3) minutes. Council reports are to be focused on the boards on
which a Council Member sits. Only designated Council representatives shall report the
action of any board.
1.7. Follow Robert’s Rules of Order.
1.8. Start all meetings on time.
1.9. Direct questions on the agenda to the City Administrator or the Mayor.
1.10. Public inquiries at meetings will be responded to as directed by the Mayor.
1.11. When meeting with citizens and receiving information, Council should ask if staff has
received and analyzed the new information.
1.12. When a Regular City Council meeting falls on a holiday, that meeting will be moved to
the following Monday, with the exception of the single meeting in July which shall be
held on the first day of the month not a holiday, Friday, Saturday or Sunday.
1.13. A single meeting will be held in the month of July.
1.14. Council Members are encouraged to attend all meetings of the Council and to set the
same attendance example expected of those appointed by the Council to Boards and
Commissions. If a Council Member is unable to attend a Council meeting, they will
notify the Mayor or the City Administrator as soon as reasonably practicable.
1.15. If a Council Member abstains on an item, the Council Member must explain the reason
for the abstention.
1.16. External communication by Council Members during meetings (whether through cell
phones, laptops, or other devices) creates the perception that private communications
are influencing the outcome of decisions. This contradicts Gilroy’s Open Government
Ordinance. If a Council Member must engage in external communication for personal
purposes, the Council Member should excuse themself from the meeting.
1.17. Council Members should not view or interact with social media during meetings.
1.18. During City Council meetings, the Mayor will summarize the thumbs up/down direction
given for the record.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Gilroy City Council Norms - Revised 02/15/2022 (3672 : Revised Council Norms)
Revisions Approved: February 15, 2022
Adopted as Council Norms: _________, 2022
Page 2 of 5
1.19. Meetings will end at 11:00 p.m. unless a majority of Council Members present vote to
extend the meeting.
1.20. Action style minutes will be taken by the City Clerk for all City Council meetings.
1.21. Notes will be taken for all City Council study sessions and workshops.
1.22. No motion should be made until Public Comment has been closed and Council has had
an opportunity to deliberate on the item.
1.23. Council Members must be in the queue prior to making a motion on an item.
1.24. Written material provided by public members for Council agenda item “public comment
on items not on the agenda” will be limited to 10 pages in hard copy. An unlimited
amount of electronic material may be provided.
1.25. Meetings will be held or adjourned in the name of or in memory of a person only if that
person has accomplishments specific to Gilroy.
2. Adding Agenda Items:
2.1. Any Council Member may propose an item for consideration as an agenda item for a
future meeting by oral request during the portion of the Council meeting designated for
Future Council Initiated Agenda Items. The Council will decide whether to agendize the
item for a future Council meeting.
3. Council Interactions:
3.1. Show respect for differences and community.
3.2. Respect the Open Government process and the majority vote of the Council. Open
Government is about the process, not the outcome.
3.3. Avoid negative non-verbal, judgmental stances, and personal attacks.
3.4. Exercise respect for Council Members, staff, and the public.
3.5. Minimize redundancy.
3.6. Listen attentively.
3.7. Confirm information presented as a rumor.
3.8. Keep a positive tone and body language.
3.9. Follow the Brown Act, including social media communications restrictions.
3.10. Give personal feedback to staff and Council Members privately.
3.11. All quasi-judicial ex parte communications (as defined by Council Policy) or conflict of
interests will be disclosed by each Council Member.
3.12. To respect the independence of our commissions, no Council Member may attempt to
influence any commission or regularly attend commission meetings, except with respect
to a matter that affects the Council Member individually. Regular attendance may be
seen as intimidating or an attempt to use “command influence” even when such is not
the Council Member’s intent. However, Council Members are encouraged to watch
recorded Commission meetings.
3.13. If any Council Member chooses to speak before or to submit written comment to another
elected body or Board of elected officials on any item for which they are not a Council-
appointed representative or for which they are not speaking from an official position of
the Council, such Council Member shall state that they are communicating as an
individual constituent only and shall not reference “Gilroy City Council” or “City
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Gilroy City Council Norms - Revised 02/15/2022 (3672 : Revised Council Norms)
Revisions Approved: February 15, 2022
Adopted as Council Norms: _________, 2022
Page 3 of 5
Council Member” in any written or verbal communications except to identi fy themself.
Council Members shall be mindful that no matter how many hats they may wear, they
are still perceived by the public as a Council Member.
4. Staff Relations:
4.1. Council Members should be aware that staff responses to an individual Council
Member’s questions may be forwarded to the entire Council.
4.2. Direct questions to the City Administrator and Department Heads. Project -related
questions may be directed to the staff person working to the project. Responses may also
be sent to all City Council Members.
4.3. City Attorney – maximum of one (1) hour of research for individual issues. If more
time is needed, the majority of the Council must approve this extra time.
4.4. Forward any information to the City Administrator as necessary. Do not surprise the
City Administrator or City Council with last-minute information.
4.5. The Council’s focus is policy. The staff focuses on professional execution and technical
knowledge. Council Members shall not provide their own individual technical
comments to City partners or other agencies (e.g. VTA, LAFCO, HSR, etc.), unless
speaking solely as an individual constituent and not as a Council Member.
4.6. Show respect to staff.
4.7. Give as much lead-time as possible.
4.8. The City Clerk will attend all study sessions and workshops of the City Council.
4.9. Council Members, including the Mayor, do not have their own city staff. Council
Members wishing to solicit their own volunteers should represent to the public that all
oversight and decisions regarding such volunteer positions are at the sole discretion of
that Council Member alone.
4.10. Council Members should not contact staff directly to attend or otherwise engage in
events or causes of individual Council Members without the express permission of the
City Administrator.
5. Council Communications:
5.1. Be mindful of each other’s diversity.
5.2. Be supportive and positive with each other.
5.3. When sitting as a representative of the City on another body, represent the City’s
position and seek Council input as necessary by request of future agenda item or asking
the Mayor to agendize same.
5.4. Requests for proclamations should be addressed to the Mayor and the City Clerk.
5.5. Task Forces
5.5.1. At the initial meeting, Council Member will be present and explain the Task
Force’s goals and objectives. The Council Member will also explain that they
are a recommendation body and the Council may revise their final actions.
5.5.2. Staff will create a boiler plate document which will have the place for the goals
and objectives of the Task Force, the norms of the group, and any other
information Council and Staff feel is important.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Gilroy City Council Norms - Revised 02/15/2022 (3672 : Revised Council Norms)
Revisions Approved: February 15, 2022
Adopted as Council Norms: _________, 2022
Page 4 of 5
5.6. Press Corrections
5.6.1. If City Council sees first, communicate to the City Administrator. The City
Administrator will then have staff issue a correction.
5.7. When a Council Member endorses a person/position/issue/etc. separate from a position
endorsed by a vote of the City Council, it is a personal endorsement, and not a City
endorsement. Any reference or use of the name “Gilroy City Council” in association
with the individual should be changed to “Gilroy City Council Member”. If a Council
Member wishes a City of Gilroy endorsement, they may request to place the issue on a
future agenda. The Council will then decide whether to take action or not.
5.8. When a Council Member is identified as spokesperson, then only they speak on behalf
of the City Council.
5.9. Legal communications should go through the Mayor or their designee, following legal
review.
5.10. Emergency communications shall follow the Council Emergency Communication
document adopted in 2020.
5.11. No Council Member shall communicate in a manner that appears to come from the City
or city staff or the City Council, or in a manner that suggests a position associated with
the City or with the knowledge of the City Council.
5.12. Council Member elected offices are nonpartisan. No Council Member shall refer to their
city council elected position as being associated with a political party.
5.13. Repeated or serious violation of these norms can be addressed by the Council by censure
of a Council Member, following notice and an opportunity to be heard. This document
formally authorizes the censure remedy to the City Council and allows for the basic due
process protections of notice and hearing.
6. Council Travel and Training / Participation on Outside Boards and
Memberships:
6.1. Council Members will check with the full Council via request under Future Council
Initiated Items when they wish to go to meetings outside “normal” (e.g., League,
assigned outside organization meetings) travel and training and wish the City to pay for
it, such as specialized training and/or meetings of participation groups. If approved for
a future agenda, Council Members will submit a short, written explanation of the request
to the city clerk prior to publication of the preliminary agenda.
6.2. If a Council Member wishes to apply to participate in an outside government
organization that is not part of the current City Council Advisory Committees &
Representatives list, the Council Member will let Council know through a future agenda
item request. If approved, the Council Member will submit a short, written explanation
of the request to the city clerk prior to publication of the preliminary agenda.
6.3. If the primary Council representative to an organization cannot attend, they will contact
the alternate.
6.4. The alternate Council representative can attend the outside organization meeting, even
if the primary is there, to gain experience and knowledge.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Gilroy City Council Norms - Revised 02/15/2022 (3672 : Revised Council Norms)
Revisions Approved: February 15, 2022
Adopted as Council Norms: _________, 2022
Page 5 of 5
6.5. If a Council Member must cancel a hotel reservation/registration, or the like, the Council
Member will pay all costs associated with that cancellation. The City Clerk will give
Council Members the cancellation policy of the event/hotel/etc. in advance if possible.
6.6. Any payment for travel and meeting expenses of a Council Member, or reimbursement
thereof, shall be in accordance with the City of Gilroy Travel and Meeting Expense
Policy, last revised on 3/2/2020.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Gilroy City Council Norms - Revised 02/15/2022 (3672 : Revised Council Norms)
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Tentative Map and Architectural & Site Review Permit for 4 -lot
Subdivision at 395 Lewis Street
Meeting Date: February 28, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Community Development Department
Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis
Prepared By: Cindy McCormick
Strategic Plan Goals
☐ Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization
☐ Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
☐ Promote Economic
Development
Activities
☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All
☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
a. Adopt a Resolution approving a Tentative Map to Subdivide the property located at
395 Lewis Street (APN: 841-03-062) into four parcels (File Number TM 20-01).
b. Adopt a Resolution approving an Architectural and Site Review Permit to allow
construction of four (4) two-story single-family homes on property located at 395 Lewis
Street (APN: 841-03-062) following approval of Tentative Map File Number TM 20-01 to
subdivide the property into four (4) single family parcels (File Number AS 20-02).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The project proposes to subdivide an existing vacant parcel into four (4) single -family
lots, where each new lot would be developed with a two -story single-family home and
three of the lots would each be developed with a detached accessory dwelling unit
8.1
Packet Pg. 28
(ADU). The proposal requires City Council approval of a tentative (parcel) map and is
being concurrently reviewed for approval of an architectural and site review permit.
POLICY DISCUSSION
The proposed project requires tentative map approval by the City Council upon
recommendation of the Planning Commission and Architectural and Site Review Permit
approval by the Community Development Director or designee. Staff has processed
both entitlements concurrently since the Architectural and Site Review Permit approval
is contingent on approval of the Tentative (parcel) Map.
BACKGROUND
Planning Commission Recommendation: On January 20, 2022, the Planning
Commission reviewed the project and unanimously recommended approval of both the
Tentative Map and the Architectural and Site Review Permit (Attachments 6 and 7).
Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the attached environmental checklist, the
project has been deemed statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183 (Projects Consistent with General Plan, Community Plan or
Zoning). The project has also been deemed categorically exempt, pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines section 15315 (Class 15, Minor Land Divisions).
ANALYSIS:
Project Description: The proposed parcel map would subdivide an existing vacant
1.05-acre (45,816 square feet) lot into four (4) single -family residential lots (Attachment
2). As illustrated in the architectural plans (Attachment 3), each new lot would be
developed with a two-story single-family home and three of the lots would each be
developed with a detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU). Lots 1, 2, and 3 would each
be 8,363 square feet in area, while Lot 4 would be 12,155 square feet in area. The
project would install frontage improvements (e.g., sidewalk, curb, and gutter) and
dedicate street right-of-way to widen Chestnut Street by approximately 21.5 feet. The
net project site area, after deducting the right of way dedication, totals 37,245 square
feet. The project site is bounded by Lewis Street to the south, Chestnut Street to the
east, and Upper Miller Slough to the west. The project s ite is surrounded by residential
uses. San Ysidro City Park is located approximately 700 feet east of the project site
(Attachment 1).
General Plan Consistency: The 2040 General Plan land use designation of the site is
Low Density Residential. The project would result in a residential density of
approximately four (4) dwelling units per acre (du/a), consistent with the allowed density
of 3-8 du/a. The proposed 4-lot subdivision, site layout, and architectural design is
consistent with the General Plan goals and policies, as discussed in the January 20,
2022 Planning Commission Staff report (Attachment 5).
8.1
Packet Pg. 29
Tentative Map Analysis: Residential subdivisions must comply with the Gilroy City
Code (GCC), including but not limited to Chapter 21, Subdivisions and Land
Development. The project is consistent with City Code and meets the findings for
approval as discussed in the Planning Commission Staff report. Appropriate conditions
of approval have been prepared in conformance with City Code and are included in th e
Council Resolution (TM 20-01, Attachment 8).
Architectural and Site Permit Analysis: Architectural and site review permit approval
is required pursuant to GCC Section 30.50.41(a). The application is consistent with City
Code and all objective development standards for single-family homes in the R1 single-
family residential district. The City does not have objective architectural design
standards for single-family homes; however, the proposal has been designed to be
compatible with and enhance the surrounding area. As discussed in the Planning
Commission staff report, the findings can be made to approve the project, and
appropriate conditions of approval have been included in the Council Resolution (AS
20-02, Attachment 9).
ALTERNATIVES
The City Council may approve the project with revisions, continue the project for further
review or deny the project. Staff does not recommend these actions.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The applicant has paid all planning entitlement costs associated with the project. The
project will also require payment of all associated building permit fees .
CONCLUSION
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution
approving a Tentative Map to subdivide the property into four (4) single family parcels
(File Number TM 20-01) and the associated Architectural and Site Review Permit to
construct four (4) two-story single-family homes on property located at 395 Lewis Street
(File Number AS 20-02). The project also includes construction of three (3) detached
accessory dwelling units that would otherwise be approved ministerially, pursuant to
state law.
NEXT STEPS
Upon City Council approval, the Engineering Department would complete the process of
signing and recording the Parcel Map. The applicant can then appl y for building permits
to construct the project.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
On February 4, 2022, the project was published in the Gilroy Dispatch and on February
14, 2022, notices of this City Council meeting were mailed to property owners within
500 feet of the subject site. In addition, the City Council public hearing packets are
8.1
Packet Pg. 30
available through the City's webpage.
Attachments:
1. Vicinity Map
2. 395 Lewis St Parcel Map 01-13-2022
3. 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021
4. 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21
5. PC Staff Report 01-20-22
6. PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01
7. PC signed Resolution AS 20-02
8. TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution
9. AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution
8.1
Packet Pg. 31
Note: Map is for reference purposes only.
City of Gilroy
3,920
City of Gilroy, GIS Services
653.3
1:NAD_1983_StatePlane_California_III_FIPS_0403_Feet
326.67 Feet653.30
City of Gilroy
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Vicinity Map (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.bPacket Pg. 33Attachment: 395 Lewis St Parcel Map 01-13-2022 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.bPacket Pg. 34Attachment: 395 Lewis St Parcel Map 01-13-2022 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 35Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 36Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 37Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
1"=10'-0"
L-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN
#256
Juglans sp.
#263 Significant Tree
(Quecus agrifolia)
Garage
Porch
Garage
Porch
Garage
Porch
Garage
Porch
Lot D
A.D.U.
Driveway Driveway
Sidewalk
Wood Fence
6'-0" High
Wood Fence
6'-0" High
Lot CLot BLot A
Lewis StreetChestnut Street
A.D.U.A.D.U.
#254
Juglans sp.
#265
Juglans sp.
#266
Juglans sp.
Wood Fence
6'-0" High
Wood Fence
6'-0" High
Wood Fence
6'-0" High
Patio Sidewalk Sidewalk
Domestic
Water Meter
Gas & Elec.
Meters
Gas & Elec.
Meters
Gas & Elec.
Meters
(E) Curb / Butter
16'-0" P.U.E.
Bark
Mulch
Gates
5 Nandina
Domestica
Fence
6' High
Bark
Mulch
Gate
1 Lagerstroemia
Tuscarora
5 Rhaphiolepis
Umbellata minor
3 Calamagrostis K.F.
5 Acer rubrum
Oct. Glory
21 Coleonema
compacta
5 Nandina
Domestica
Gates
4 Escallonia
fradesii
5 Escallonia
fradesii
5 Iceberg
Roses
11 Dietes
Bark
Mulch
9 Rhapeolepis
Umbellata minor
15 Pittosporum
Tennuifolium
8 Prunus carolina
'Bright & Tight'
6 Toyon
9 Quercus
agrifolia
10 Pittosporum
Tennuifolium
9 Toyon
10 Rhapeolepis
Umbellata minor
Fence
6' High
Bark
Mulch
Bark
Mulch
Gates
3 Escallonia
fradesii
6 Dietes
Domestic
Water Meter
Domestic
Water Meter
Domestic
Water Meter
Fence
6' High
Fence
6' High
1 Lagerstroemia
Tuscarora
Top of Bank
Top of Bank
35'-0" Side Setback
from Top of Bank 35'-0"PLANTING NOTES
1. The contractor shall locate and verify the existence of all utilities prior to starting work.
2. The plant material locations are diagrammatic and subject to change in the field as directed by the Landscape Architect.
3. All plant material shall conform to the guidelines established by the current American Standard of Nursery Stock, published by The American Association of Nurserymen.
4. The plant count is for contractor's convenience. In case of discrepancy, the plan shall govern.
5. All trees to be staked plumb unless otherwise noted.
6. All planted areas shall be free from rocks and debris greater than 2" in diameter.
7. Prior to the planting of any materials, compacted soils shall be transformed to a friable condition. On engineered slopes, only amended planting holes need meet this requirement;
8. Soil amendments shall be incorporated according to recommendations of the soil report and what is appropriate for the plants selected;
9. For landscape installations, compost at a rate of a minimum of four cubic yards per 1,000 square feet of permeable area shall be incorporated to a depth of six inches into the soil. Soils
with greater than 6% organic matter in the top 6 inches of soil are exempt from adding compost and tilling;
10. A minimum three inch (3″) layer of mulch shall be applied on all exposed soil surfaces of planting areas except in turf areas, creeping or rooting groundcovers, or direct seeding
applications where mulch is contraindicated. To provide habitat for beneficial insects and other wildlife, up to 5 % of the landscape area may be left without mulch. Designated insect habitat
must be included in the landscape design plan as such;
11. Stabilizing mulching products shall be used on slopes that meet current engineering standards;
12. The mulching portion of the seed/mulch slurry in hydro-seeded applications shall meet the mulching requirement;
13. Organic mulch materials made from recycled or post-consumer shall take precedence over inorganic materials or virgin forest products unless the recycled post-consumer organic
products are not locally available. Organic mulches are not required where prohibited by local Fuel Modification Plan Guidelines or other applicable local ordinances.
Karen Aitken & Associates -2021 These drawings are instruments of service, issued for a one-time single use by the owner. The entire contents of these drawings is copyright Karen Aitken & Associates. Landscape Architect retains all rights and title. No part may be reproduced in any fashion or medium without the express written approval of the landscape architect. The proper electronic transfer of data shall be the user’s responsibility
without liability to the landscape architect. Owner shall assume responsibility for compliance with all easements, setback requirements and property lines. Owner shall acquire all necessary permits required to perform work shown on plans. Base information has been provided by the owner. Karen Aitken & Associates assumes no liability for the accuracy of said property line boundaries, fence lines or property corners.
REVISIONS BY
AITKEN ASSOCIATESLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS LEWIS P.U.D.
N LEWIS P.U.D.DATE
SCALE
DRAWN
JOB* NOTES (E) = Existing
SCALE 1”=10’
0 10 20 395 Lewis St. Gilroy, CAIN & AD8262 Rancho Real Gilroy Ca. 95020Calif. Reg.#2239 (408) 842-0245karen@kaa.designPLANT LEGEND
02-16-21
8.1.c
Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
1"=10'-0"
L-2 IRRIGATION PLAN
Garage
Porch
Garage
Porch
Garage
Porch
Garage
Porch
Lot D
A.D.U.
Driveway
Driveway
Sidewalk
Wood Fence
6'-0" High
Wood Fence
6'-0" High
Lot CLot BLot A
Lewis StreetChestnut Street
A.D.U.
A.D.U.
Wood Fence
6'-0" High
Wood Fence
6'-0" High
Patio Sidewalk Sidewalk
Domestic
Water Meter
Gas & Elec.
Meters
Gas & Elec.
Meters
(E) Curb / Butter
16'-0" P.U.E.
Bark
Mulch
Gates
Fence
6' High
Bark
Mulch
Gate
Gates
Bark
Mulch
6 Toyon
Fence
6' High
Bark
Mulch
Bark
Mulch
Gates
Domestic
Water Meter
Domestic
Water Meter
Domestic
Water Meter
Fence
6' High
Fence
6' High
Top of Bank
Top of Bank
35'-0" Side Setback
from Top of Bank
IRRIGATION KEY
Main Line:SCH 40 2"
Use existing when possible
Sleeves: SCH 40 4"
Lateral Line SCh 40 1"
C
Drip Rings: Rainbird XFD on surface
dripline w/ 12" emitter spacing.
Backflow Device
3
Valve number callout and type of
irrigation
Rainbird Controller
22 station ESP-Me
Rainbird Drip Valve
XCS-100-PRF Netafim Dripline
C C C
4
1
2 Med Water Tree
Drip 81 SF
Low Water Tree
Drip 108 SF 3
4
Low Water
Drip 190 SF
1
2
3
4
Med Water
Drip 330 SF
Low Water Tree
Drip 54 SF
1
2 1
2
3Low Water Tree
Drip 135 SF
C
Med Water
Drip 353 SF Med Water Tree
Drip 54 SF
Med Water
Drip 480 SF
Med Water Tree
Drip 54 SF
Med Water
Drip 383 SF
Med Water
Drip 970 SF
IRRIGATION KEY
Main Line SCH 40 1 1/4"
Sleeves SCH 40 4" or contractor to locate and
use existing if possible
Lateral Line SCh 40 1"
Rainbird Drip Valve XCS-100-PRF
Drip Line: Netafim Techline CV LITE with 18" Emitter spacing
and 24" lateral spacing. Provide flush valves at the end of each
circuit and air relief valve at the high point of each circuit.
C Rainbird Controller 4 to 22- station ESP-Me
Rainbird Flow Sensor FS-200-P
Rainbird RSD Series Rain Shut OffR
Rainbird SMRT-Y Soil Moisture SensorMS
1300 Series Bubblers:
-1 Bubbler per 15 Gallon Tree
-2 Bubbler per 24" Box Tree
Med Water
Drip 242 SF
Low Water Tree
Drip 108 SF
Med Water
Drip 375 SF
“I have complied with the criteria of the Water Conservation in
Landscaping Ordinance and applied them accordingly for the efficient
use of water in the irrigation design plan.”
MS MS MS MS
R R R
R
Rainbird RSD
Series Rain Shut Off
Rainbird SMRT-Y Soil
Moisture Sensor
Rainbird 1300 Series
Bubbler
REVISIONS BY
AITKEN ASSOCIATESLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 8262 Rancho Real Gilroy Ca. 95020Calif. Reg.#2239 (408) 842-0245aitkenassociates@gmail.com Lewis StreetLewis PUD
N LEWIS P.U.D.DATE
SCALE
DRAWN
JOB
* NOTES (E) = Existing
SCALE 1”=10’
0 10 20 395 Lewis St. Gilroy, CAIN & AD
02-16-21
8.1.c
Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
L-3 WATER CALCSREVISIONS BY
AITKEN ASSOCIATESLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 8262 Rancho Real Gilroy Ca. 95020Calif. Reg.#2239 (408) 842-0245aitkenassociates@gmail.comLewis PUDLEWIS P.U.D.DATE
SCALE
DRAWN
JOB 395 Lewis St. Gilroy, CAIN & AD
02-16-21
8.1.c
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
L-4 WATER CALCSREVISIONS BY
AITKEN ASSOCIATESLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 8262 Rancho Real Gilroy Ca. 95020Calif. Reg.#2239 (408) 842-0245aitkenassociates@gmail.comLewis PUDLEWIS P.U.D.DATE
SCALE
DRAWN
JOB 395 Lewis St. Gilroy, CAIN & AD
02-16-21
8.1.c
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
L-5 IRRIGATION DETAILSREVISIONS BY
AITKEN ASSOCIATESLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 8262 Rancho Real Gilroy Ca. 95020Calif. Reg.#2239 (408) 842-0245aitkenassociates@gmail.com02-16-21
Lewis PUDLEWIS P.U.D.DATE
SCALE
DRAWN
JOB 395 Lewis St. Gilroy, CAIN & AD
8.1.c
Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 43Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 44Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 45Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 46Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 47Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 48Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 49Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 50Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 51Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 52Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 53Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 54Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 55Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 56Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 57Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 58Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 59Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
8.1.cPacket Pg. 60Attachment: 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 03-01-2021 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -1- November 2021
City of Gilroy
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
FOR DETERMINATION OF CEQA EXEMPTION
I. BACKGROUND
1. Application No: #20010012: AS 20-02 (Architectural and Site Review) and TM 20-01
(Vesting Tract Map)
2. Project Title: 395 Lewis Street Project
3. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Gilroy Planning Division, Community Development Department
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020-6197
4. Contact Person and Contact Information:
Cindy McCormick, Senior Planner
(408) 846-0253; Cindy.McCormick@ci.gilroy.ca.us
5. Project Location: 395 Lewis Street (APN 395-03-062) in the eastern portion of the City
of Gilroy; see Figure 1.
6. Project Applicant / Sponsor Name and Address:
Mark Design Group
1659 Scott Boulevard
Santa Clara, CA 95050
7. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (3-8 du/acre)
8. Zoning: Single-Family Residential District (R1)
9. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required: Central Coast Regional Water
Quality Control Board: Review Notice of Intent and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
filed by applicant
10. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated
with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources
Code section 21080.31? No
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Proposed Uses and Site Plan. The proposed project consists of a parcel map to subdivide an
existing vacant 1.05-acre (45,816 square foot) lot into four single-family residential lots. Each
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -2- November 2021
new lot would be developed with a two-story single-family home. Lots 1, 2, and 3 would be
8,363 square feet in area each, and each lot would include construction of a 3,193 square-
foot single-family home with attached garage and a 631 square-foot detached accessory
dwelling unit (ADU); see Figure 2. Lot 4, which would be 12,155 square feet in area, would be
developed with a 3,410 square-foot single-family residence with attached garage and no ADU.
The project would result in a residential density of approximately four (4) dwelling units per
acre (du/a). The project would install frontage improvements (i.e. sidewalk, curb, and gutter)
and would be required to make a right-of-way street dedication to widen Chestnut Street by
approximately 21.5 feet. The project would also be required to file a resolution of an existing
access easement to the property, which runs immediately north of the subject property. A
construction and maintenance easement would also be filed along the southern portion of
the property. The net project site area, after deducting the right of way dedication, totals
37,245 square feet.
Site Layout and Architecture. The proposed single-family residences would be centrally
located within the newly created parcels and face Chestnut Street. The residences would have
front yard setbacks of at least 26 feet, rear yard setbacks of at least 35 feet, and side yard
setbacks of at least 6 feet. The south-western portion of the project site is bordered by the
Upper Miller Slough, which is considered a Category 2 stream by the City and requires a 35-
foot riparian setback from the slough’s top of bank. The project is designed to comply with
this requirement as shown on the site plan. Residences on Lots 1-3 are proposed to be 28.5
feet in height, and the Lot 4 residence is proposed to be 28 feet in height. The residences are
proposed to have a stucco finish and concrete barrel-tiled roofs.
Grading. The project site would be graded prior to construction. Grading would involve a total
fill of 299 cubic yards (cy) of earth material and cut of 75 cy of earth material, for a net fill
(import) of 224 cy.
Utilities and Stormwater Management. The project would connect to the existing City of
Gilroy water and sewer mains east of the site within Chestnut Street. The residences would
also connect to existing Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) gas main and electrical pole south of the
site on Lewis Street. The project would create 24,284 square feet of impervious surfaces
(approximately 53 percent of the site). Individual lots would be improved with bioretention
areas to treat stormwater runoff prior to flowing to an underground storage to be detained
and released into the public system.
Access and Parking. Each parcel would be accessed via new driveways off Chestnut Street.
Each residence includes an attached two-car garage. Parking and access for the newly
subdivided lots would be subject to the City’s zoning regulations.
Landscaping. The project proposes to plant 24 new trees along the perimeter of the site,
including 2 crape myrtles, 5 red maples, 8 laurel cherries, and 9 coast live oaks. Landscaping
also includes the planting of various shrubs, groundcover, and grass. Each new lot would have
landscaped backyards that would comply with riparian setback requirements to the adjacent
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -3- November 2021
Upper Miller Slough. Irrigation for landscaping will be required to comply with the City’s water
efficient irrigation standards.
Entitlements. The project will require the following entitlement approvals from the City of
Gilroy: (1) Vesting Tentative Tract Map pursuant to Article III of Chapter 21 of the Gilroy City
Code to subdivide the project site into four parcels, (2) Architectural Site Review pursuant to
Article L of Chapter 30 of the Gilroy City Code to approve the site layout, building architecture
and materials, and (3) building permits.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The approximately 1.05-acre site is a rectangular parcel located at 395 Lewis Street, east of
Monterey Street and approximately 0.23 miles west of the Highway 101 within the City of
Gilroy, as shown on Figure 1. The project site is bounded by Lewis Street to the south,
Chestnut Street to the east, and Upper Miller Slough to the west. The project’s surrounding
area is characterized by residential uses; the project is surrounded by single-family residences
to the north, south, east, and west. San Ysidro City Park is located approximately 700 feet
east of the project site.
The project site is a vacant undeveloped parcel with grass and former orchard trees and two
(2) coast live oak trees. The project site is relatively flat, with elevations ranging from
approximately 198 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the northeast portion of the property
to approximately 189 MSL along the southwest portion of the property within Upper Miller
Slough (H.T. Harvey Associates 2016). The site was previously occupied by a single-family
house that was demolished without record.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -4- November 2021
FIGURE 1 : Project Location
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -5- November 2021
FIGURE 2: Project Site Plan
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -6- November 2021
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. Introduction and Background
In analyzing a proposed project, the City may consider whether existing environmental
documents already provide an adequate analysis of potential environmental impacts. An
earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to tiering, program environmental impact
report (EIR), or other California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provisions, if it can be
determined that one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
negative declaration (State CEQA Guidelines section 15063(c)(3)(D)). If an earlier analysis is
used, the Initial Study checklist discussion should identify: a) the earlier analyses and state
where they are available for review; b) identify which effects were adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis; and c) describe the
mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
CEQA also allows a lead agency to avoid repeating analyses that were already provided in a
certified General Plan EIR for a development project that is consistent with the General Plan.
Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and its parallel CEQA Guidelines provision, section
15183, provide for streamlined environmental review for projects consistent with the General
Plan for which an EIR was certified. Pursuant to section 21083.3(b), if a development project
is consistent with the general plan for which an environmental impact report was certified,
the application of CEQA shall be limited to effects on the environment which are “peculiar to
the parcel or to the project” and which were not addressed as significant effects in the prior
environmental impact report, or which substantial new information shows will be more
significant than described in the prior environmental impact report. Subsection (d) further
indicates that an effect of a project upon the environment shall not be considered “peculiar
to the parcel or to the project,” “if uniformly applied development policies or standards” have
been previously adopted by the city or county, with a finding based upon substantial
evidence, that the development policies or standards will substantially mitigate that
environmental effect when applied to future projects, unless substantial new information
shows that the policies or standards would not substantially mitigate the environmental
effect. Under these provisions of CEQA, a project that is consistent with a General Plan that
was adopted pursuant to a certified EIR, could be potentially partially or wholly exempt from
further CEQA analyses.
Section 15183 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides further guidance related to Public
Resources Code section 21083. Specifically, a project may be exempt from review under CEQA
the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis, that:
(1) The project is consistent with the development density established by existing
zoning, community plan or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified;
(2) There are no project specific effects which are peculiar to the project or its site;
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -7- November 2021
(3) There are no project specific impacts which the General Plan EIR failed to analyze
as significant effects;
(4) There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which the
General Plan EIR failed to evaluate; and
(5) There is no substantial new information which results in more severe impacts than
anticipated by the General Plan EIR.
Guidelines section 15183, subdivision (c) further provides that “if an impact is not peculiar to
the parcel or to the project, has been addressed as a significant effect in the prior EIR, or can
be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly applied development policies or
standards,…, then an additional EIR need not be prepared for the project solely on the basis
of that impact.” “[D]evelopment policies or standards need not apply throughout the entire
city or county, but can apply only within the zoning district in which the project is
located…such policies or standards need not be part of the general plan or any community
plan, but can be found within another pertinent planning document such as a zoning
ordinance.” (Guidelines, § 15183, subd. (f).)
B. Use of Earlier Analyses
On November 2, 2020 the Gilroy City Council adopted the Gilroy 2040 General Plan after
certifying an EIR for the plan. The Gilroy 2040 General Plan includes the Draft EIR volume
(June 2020) and the Final EIR volume (September 2020). The General Plan EIR reviewed all of
the topics included on the Appendix G environmental checklist in the State CEQA Guidelines
as well as all sections required to be included in an EIR.
The General Plan EIR is a “program” EIR prepared pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section
15168, which reviewed environmental impacts associated with future development and
buildout within the City’s planning area that would be accommodated by the General Plan. A
program EIR can be used for subsequent projects implemented within the scope of the
program/plan. Typically, site-specific or new significant impacts that weren’t addressed in the
program EIR would be evaluated in an Initial Study, leading to preparation of a Negative
Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or EIR. Mitigation measures adopted for the
General Plan also would be a part of future development projects, as relevant, and
supplemented, as may be necessary, with any site-specific mitigation measures identified in
the project-specific environmental review process.
As indicated above, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3, certain (or potentially
all) aspects of a development project that are consistent with a General Plan for which an EIR
was certified may be exempt from additional CEQA analyses (i.e., negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration, or EIR) of issues that were adequately covered in the General
Plan EIR. The project site is designated Low Density Residential in the City’s 2040 General Plan
with an allowed density of 3-8 dwelling units per acre. The site is zoned Single-Family
Residential District (R1). The proposed residential subdivision is consistent with the General
Plan land use designation and density.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -8- November 2021
While the 2040 General Plan EIR considered the impacts of development on vacant or
underutilized parcels in the City as a whole, specific future development of the project site
was not noted or specifically evaluated in the 2040 General Plan EIR, and there were no site-
specific impacts identified for the project site. However, as part of the overall estimated
buildout, the EIR considered construction of new residential units in the City with an
estimated buildout of 6,477 new residential units (3,199 single-family units and 3,278 multi-
family) throughout the City by the year 2040 (Gilroy 2020a). The EIR also projects an
estimated 21,434 new jobs within the City by 2040.
Approximately 396 residential units have been constructed or approved throughout the City
between 2019 (“baseline” General Plan EIR year) and 2020. Although the City has not yet
counted new residential units in 2021, it can be reasonably concluded that the four proposed
residential units and three ADUs would be within the residential buildout estimate of 6,477
new dwelling units considered in the city-wide General Plan EIR impact analyses.
C. Environmental Checklist Review
The purpose of the checklist presented on the following pages is to evaluate the impact
categories covered in the City’s certified General Plan EIR to determine whether the project’s
impacts have been adequately analyzed in the EIR or whether any new significant impacts
peculiar to the project or project site would result. Where an impact resulting from the
project was adequately analyzed previously, the review provides a cross-reference to the
pages in the General Plan EIR where information and analysis may be found relative to the
environmental issue listed under each topic. The checklist also identifies whether the project
involves new significant impacts or substantially more severe impacts than analyzed in the
General Plan EIR or new significant impacts not peculiar to the site or project. As indicated
above, an impact would not be considered “peculiar” to the site or project if uniformly applied
development policies or standards will substantially mitigate an environmental effect.
Therefore, the following review includes mitigation measures identified in the General Plan
EIR that would be applicable to the site or project and/or relevant applicable development
policies or standards that will be applied to the project.
The checklist follows the questions included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines.
However, the City of Gilroy has adopted significance thresholds that were adopted pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7. The City’s CEQA thresholds are generally of similar
nature and scope as those listed in Appendix G of the CEQA guidelines, but also include other
thresholds specific to City conditions. The corresponding City thresholds are referenced in
parentheses for each checklist question consistent with the labeling in the adopted
thresholds (City of Gilroy May 2004), and the adopted thresholds also are addressed in the
narrative explanations. The 2040 General Plan EIR is on file at the City’s Planning Division of
its Community Development Department, 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, California from 8:00
AM to 5:00 PM, Monday Friday. The adopted thresholds and the 2040 General Plan
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -9- November 2021
documents are available for review on the City of Gilroy’s Planning Division’s website,
respectively, at:
https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/3092/Thresholds-of-
Significance?bidId= and http://www.cityofgilroy.org/274/2040-General-Plan.
D. Conclusion
Based on the following review, it has been determined that the City’s General Plan 2040 EIR
has adequately addressed the following issues, and no further environmental review is
required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3: air quality (sensitive receptors);
energy consumption; geology and soils (fault rupture, paleontological resources); greenhouse
gas emissions; hazardous materials use; hydrology/water quality (groundwater, flood
hazards); land use, noise (noise increases, vibration); population and housing; public services;
recreation; transportation (conflict with plans, exceed vehicle miles traveled [VMT]
threshold); utilities; and cumulative impacts.
The following site-specific impacts have been analyzed and determined to be less than
significant and/or less than significant with General Plan policies, zoning regulations and/or
development standards that are uniformly applied to development projects throughout the
City: aesthetics (scenic resources, visual character and light and glare); air quality (conflicts
with Clean Air Plan, emissions); biological resources (sensitive habitat, nesting birds, tree
removal); cultural and tribal cultural resources (archaeological resources); geology and soils
(seismic-geologic hazards, erosion, expansive soils); and hydrology/water quality (water
quality, stormwater drainage). Thus, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and
State CEQA Guidelines section 15183, no further environmental analysis is required.
No impacts peculiar to the project or the project site have been identified related to
aesthetics (scenic views), agricultural and forest resources, air quality (odors), biological
resources (special status species, conflicts with plans), cultural resources (historical
resources), geology and soils (use of septic systems), hazards/hazardous materials (location
on hazardous materials site, airport hazards, emergency access, wildland fire hazard),
hydrology-water quality (conflict with plans), mineral resources, noise (airport noise),
transportation (hazardous design, emergency access), and wildfire.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -10- November 2021
E. Checklist and Discussion
1. AESTHETICS
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards
Except as provided in Public
Resources Code Section 21099,
would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista? (City Threshold 1a)
DEIR pp. 3-10 to
3-19 No No None
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including but not limited to
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic
highway? (City Thresholds 1b-d)
DEIR pp. 3-10,
3-19 to 3-23 No No None
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character
or quality public views of the site and
its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point.) If
the project is in an urbanized area,
would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
(City Thresholds 1e, g)
DEIR pp. 3-10,
3-23 to 3-28,
3-29 to 3-30
No No
R1 Single-Family
Residential
District Site and
Building
requirements;
Architectural
and Site Review
per City Code
sections 30.5.30
and 30.50.40
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area? (City Threshold 1f)
DEIR pp. 3-10,
to 3-28 to 3-29 No No
City Code
section 30.50.44
Standard
Condition of
Approval
regarding offsite
lighting
(a) Scenic Views. The General Plan EIR analyzes programmatic CEQA impacts per the City’s adopted
CEQA Thresholds of Significance (Gilroy 2004). Theses thresholds focus on the visual character within
the Hecker Pass Specific Plan and hillside areas within the City. The General Plan indicates that
prominent scenic resources and views include farmland, surrounding hillsides, and areas viewed from
Hecker Pass Highway and Uvas Park Drive (City of Gilroy 2020c). The General Plan EIR also indicates
that other panoramic views of aesthetic value consist of a “tapestry” of agricultural lands interwoven
by riparian areas, accompanied by the hillside backdrop to the east and west that frame the City (City
of Gilroy 2020a). The EIR analysis concluded that most of the future development accommodated by
the General Plan would not change the availability or value of views to the City’s scenic hillsides or
open space. Implementation of the General Plan’s goals, policies, and programs, including compliance
with design review procedures, would reduce potential aesthetic impacts to hillsides or scenic views
as a result of new development to less than significant.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -11- November 2021
The project site is located in a developed residential neighborhood of the City of Gilroy and is not
within the Hecker Pass Specific Plan area or in a hillside area. The proposed project would not result
in an adverse effect on a scenic view as none have been identified, mapped or observed that include
the project site. The project proposes two-story residences in a zoning district with established
development standards that safeguard scenic resources and that have been considered in the
General Plan EIR. Thus, the proposed project would not result in impacts to scenic views that are
peculiar to the project or the site or substantially more severe impacts than evaluated in the 2040
General Plan EIR, and no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State
CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b) Scenic Resources. The General Plan EIR specifies impact thresholds for scenic resources if there
are impacts along Hecker Pass Highway, Santa Teresa Boulevard, and Pacheco Pass Highway as well
as to farmland and surrounding hills viewed from Highway 101. Scenic resources identified in the
General Plan EIR include riparian resources and farmland, and the panoramic views afforded of
hillsides and open space along State Route 152 west of Santa Teresa Boulevard. There are no
designated state scenic highways or roads within the City. The General Plan supports the designation
of Hecker Pass Highway (State Route 152) as an official State Scenic Highway; however, designation
has not yet occurred.
The project site is not located near a state scenic highway, Hecker Pass Highway, Santa Teresa
Boulevard, or Pacheco Pass Highway. Although the project site is within the vicinity of Highway 101,
the project is not sited on a hillside and does not contain farmlands that would be visible from
Highway 101. There are no structures on the project site that would be considered scenic resources.
The proposed project also provides the required riparian setback, consistent with General Plan
policies to protect riparian features.
The project site currently contains 25 trees of various species and health, mostly planted and former
orchard trees. The project would remove 20 trees and retain five trees along the western portion of
the site of which 13 are considered to be in declining condition with severe structural defects (HT
Harvey 2017). The trees do not represent a significant visual element of the surrounding area, and
removal would not substantially alter the visual character of the area. While any tree may possess
aesthetic qualities, the trees that would be removed are not unusual for the species nor are they
visually distinctive or prominent from a wide area. Therefore, tree removal would not substantially
impact the site’s scenic attributes.
The General Plan EIR concluded that, with implementation of General Plan policies and actions, future
development accommodated by the Plan would not result in significant impacts to scenic resources.
The General Plan seeks to preserve natural features that visually define areas and provide scenic
benefits and allow residents to enjoy views of hills, creeks, and habitats. Despite the fact that two of
the trees proposed to be removed are considered significant as defined by the City of Gilroy’s Zoning
Ordinance, the trees proposed for removal are not visible from a wide-ranging area, are not visually
prominent or distinctive, and are not considered scenic resources. Moreover, the project landscaping
plan, which is required to comply with the City of Gilroy zoning regulations on tree removal, includes
planting approximately 24 new trees in addition to the existing trees that would be retained.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts to scenic resources that would be
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -12- November 2021
peculiar to the project or the site or substantially more severe than evaluated in the General Plan
EIR, and no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183.
(c) Effects on Visual Character. The project area is located approximately is in an area that is
characterized primarily by single-family residential development. Building heights and architectural
styles are varied and include one- to two-story residences of varied size, style and age.
The 2040 General Plan EIR concluded that most of the future development accommodated by the
General Plan would not substantially degrade the visual character of surrounding areas with
implementation of General Plan policies and actions to follow design guidelines and continued
application of design review as part of Architectural Site Review entitlement approvals. The 2040
General Plan EIR focuses on scenic impacts within gateways to the City which are defined as north
and south Monterey Street, State Route 152/Hecker Pass Highway, State Route 152/Pacheco Pass
Highway, north and south Santa Teresa Boulevard, and at the U.S. Highway 101 interchanges at
Masten, Buena Vista, Leavesley, and Tenth. The project is not located within these gateway areas.
The City of Gilroy is an “urbanized area” under the definition of the term in CEQA Guidelines section
15387. Therefore, per the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (Environmental Checklist question), the City
need not specifically consider existing visual character or the quality of the existing views and the
project’s potential effect on them. The standard of review is whether a project would conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Future residences constructed on
the project site as facilitated by the proposed subdivision would be subject to the same City land use
and zoning regulations as the surrounding R1 district residential development, including regulations
for setbacks, building height, lot coverage, etc. The EIR also provides a City CEQA threshold of
significance regarding fence and wall height. The project would represent no impact related to the
City’s threshold regarding wall heights because it does not propose a fence or wall that exceeds seven
feet in height. As a result, the project does not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality.
The project is subject to Architectural Site Review pursuant to Municipal Code Section 30.50.40,
which considers the character and integrity of a neighborhood and use of land in harmony with the
surrounding environment. Architectural Site Review would be considered application of uniformly
applied development standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in aesthetic
impacts peculiar to the project or the site or substantially more severe impacts than evaluated in the
2040 General Plan EIR and would not substantially degrade the visual character of the site or area,
and no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines
section 15183.
(d) Light and Glare. The project would not result in introduction of a major new source of light or
glare, although there would be introduction of windows and typical exterior building lighting. This
type of lighting would be similar to existing sources of light surrounding the project site and would
be oriented so as to not create off-site light.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -13- November 2021
The General Plan EIR concluded that new infill development accommodated by the plan could result
in potential sources of light and glare, but would not result in significant impact. Exterior lighting
would be included as part of the development, but would be typical of residential lighting, and would
not result in nighttime illumination levels beyond the property line. Additionally, section 30.50.44(c)
of the City’s Municipal Code prohibits unobstructed beam or outwardly directed lighting onto any
residential use or public right-of-way; the code section also states that lighting should only be
directed at its intended area an off-site glare fully controlled. Therefore, the proposed project would
not result in a significant impact related to creation of a new source of substantial light or glare or
result in off-site impacts.
The City’s Municipal Code requires a standard condition of approval requires all exterior lighting not
be directed outward from the project site to avoid glare and illumination of adjacent properties. An
approved Architectural and Site Review Permit, including findings pursuant to Gilroy City Code
Section 30.5.30 and inclusion of a standard condition of approval regarding exterior lighting pursuant
to City Code Section 30.50.44, would be considered application of uniformly applied development
standards. Thus, there would be no light and glare impacts peculiar to the project or the site with
uniformly applied development standards imposed as part of the design review process, and no
further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section
15183.
2. AGRICULTURE AND
FOREST RESOURCES1
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use? (City
Threshold 2a)
DEIR pp. 3-32 to
3-35, 3-42 to 3-
47
No No None
1In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the
Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement Methodology provided in Forest Protocols
adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -14- November 2021
2. AGRICULTURE AND
FOREST RESOURCES1
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract? (City Threshold 2b)
DEIR pp. 3-33,
3-37, 3-43, 3-47 No No None
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
DEIR pp. 3-34 No No None
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
DEIR pp. 3-34,
3-41, 3-101 No No None
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland to non-
agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use? (City
Threshold 2c)
DEIR pp. 3-33,
3-41 to 3-47 No No None
The project site is located within the developed residential area of the City of Gilroy. The project site
does not contain prime farmland or other agricultural lands as mapped on the State Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program (Figure 3.2-1 of the DEIR, City of Gilroy 2020a). The site is not
designated for agricultural uses in the City’s General Plan and is not located adjacent to agricultural
lands. The project site is not zoned Timberland Preserve and does not subject to a Williamson Act
Contract.
While the General Plan EIR concluded that impacts to agriculture due to conversion of agricultural
lands as a result of future development accommodated by the plan would be significant and
unavoidable, even with mitigation, the proposed project would not result in conversion of
agricultural or forest lands, as these resources are not present on or adjacent to the project site. The
General Plan EIR identified oak and riparian woodlands as potential forest resources. However,
neither of these woodland habitat types have been identified on the project site (H.T. Harvey
Associates 2016), and therefore, would not be impacted by the proposed project. Therefore, the
proposed project would not result in impacts on agriculture and forest resources that would be
peculiar to the project or the site or substantially more severe than evaluated in the 2040 General
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -15- November 2021
Plan EIR, and no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183.
3. AIR QUALITY 2
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan? (City Threshold 3a)
DEIR pp. 3-71 to
3-85
FEIR p. 3-3
No No AQ-1 and AQ-2
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality
standard? (City Thresholds 3b-c)
DEIR pp. 3-86 to
3-97
No No None
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations?
(City Threshold 3d)
DEIR pp. 3-97 to
3-103
FEIR pp. 3-3 to
3-4
No No None
d) Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people? (City Threshold 3e)
DEIR pp. 3-106 No No None
(a) Conflict with Air Quality Management Plan. The project is within the jurisdiction of the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The air district is the agency responsible for assuring
state and federal air quality standards are attained and maintained in the air basin. The BAAQMD is
charged with regulatory authority of stationary air emission sources, monitoring air quality, providing
guidelines for air quality impacts pursuant to CEQA, and preparing air quality management plans.
BAAQMD adopted the 2017 Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air, Cool the Climate (“2017 Clean Air Plan”),
which updated the 2010 Clean Air Plan, pursuant to the requirements of the California Health and
Safety Code. The 2017 Clean Air Plan provides an integrated, multi-pollutant control strategy to
reduce emissions of particulate matter, toxic air contaminants, ozone precursors, and greenhouse
gases. The 2017 Clean Air Plan outlines a variety of control measures, many of which relate to
industrial uses or are for regional implementation.
2Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -16- November 2021
The General Plan EIR states that the General Plan policies and programs are consistent with all 2017
Clean Air Plan control measures, except TR22: Construction, Freight and Farming. However, by
implementing a mitigation measure (AQ-1), this impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant
level. Per the Final General Plan EIR, MM AQ-1 requires the use of low emission construction
equipment for public and private projects. The EIR concludes that implementation of the General
Plan goals and policies, in addition to two mitigation measures (AQ-1 and AQ-2 described below),
would reduce potentially significant impacts due to inconsistency with BAAQMDs 2017 Clean Air Plan
to a less-than-significant level.
BAAQMD also provides technical information about how particulate matter (PM) is emitted and
formed in the Bay Area in its 2012 Particulate Matter Plan, titled Understanding Particulate Matter:
Protecting Public Health in the San Francisco Bay Area. This plan describes progress in reducing PM
emissions and concentrations and identifies future technical work to improve the air districts
understanding of PM. The General Plan EIR states that implementation of the General Plan, and
associated buildout, would result in PM emissions during construction. To reduce this impact to a
less-than-significant level, the EIR prescribes Mitigation Measure AQ-2, which requires the
implementation of BAAQMDs dust control measures during construction of individual projects. The
EIR subsequently concludes that, with implementation of AQ-2, implementation of the General Plan
and associated buildout, would be consistent with BAAQMDs 2012 Particulate Matter Plan.
As indicated in Section IV.B above, the City’s General Plan EIR considered construction of new
residential units in the City with an estimated buildout of 6,477 new residential units (3,199 single-
family units and 3,278 multi-family) throughout the City by the year 2040 (Gilroy 2020a). The
proposed project is within the total and remaining unbuilt residential units. With regards to potential
conflict with applicable air quality plans, the EIR analyses concluded that impacts of potential
development and buildout accommodated by the General Plan would be less than significant with
mitigation measures (AQ-1 and AQ-2) that were added to the General Plan and require
implementation of construction emissions controls as part of future construction of development
projects. These measures will be included as project conditions of approval and are considered
uniformly applied development standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in
impacts related to conflicts with the BAAQMD air quality plans that would be peculiar to the project
or the site or substantially more severe than evaluated in the General Plan EIR with uniformly applied
developed standards, and no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the
State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b) Emissions. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board
(CARB) have established ambient air quality standards that are the maximum levels of ambient
(background) air pollutants considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety to protect public
health and welfare. Criteria pollutants include ozone (O 3 ), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), carbon monoxide
(CO), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), inhalable particulates (PM 10 ), fine particulates (PM 2.5 ), and lead. High O 3
levels are caused by the cumulative emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides
(NO x ), which react under certain meteorological conditions to form O 3 . In California, sulfates, vinyl
chloride, hydrogen sulfide, and visibility-reducing particles are also regulated as criteria air pollutants.
An area is designated as “in attainment” when it is in compliance with the federal and/or state
standards, as further discussed below.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -17- November 2021
The project site is located within the San Francisco Air Basin (“air basin”), which is under the
jurisdiction of the BAAQMD. As of 2017, the air basin is designated non-attainment for federal ozone
and PM 2.5 standards and is designated attainment or attainment/unclassified for the other federal
standards. The air basin is designated non-attainment for the state ozone, PM 10 and PM 2.5 standards.
The General Plan EIR used the BAAQMD’s methodology to assess impacts related to criteria air
pollutant emissions. For general plans, the air district does not recommend determinations based on
criteria air pollutant emission modeling, but indicates that if a plan’s increase in projected VMT or
vehicle trips (either measure may be used) is less than or equal to its projected population increase,
a plan would have a less-than-significant air quality impact. The District’s CEQA Guidelines method of
criteria air pollutant analysis for general plans is based on meeting the following two thresholds:
• Consistency with 2017 Clean Air Plan control measures (as above); and
• A proposed plan’s projected VMT or vehicle trips (either measure may be used) increase is
less than or equal to its projected population increase.
The General Plan EIR concluded that contributions to criteria air pollutant emissions would be
significant due to an increase in VMT as a result of new development accommodated by the General
Plan. Although the Gilroy 2040 General Plan includes numerous policies that are intended to reduce
VMT, it is not possible to accurately quantify the VMT reductions that would result, and therefore,
the EIR concluded that there is no assurance that VMT could be reduced by the required 32.6 percent
that would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the impact would remain
significant and unavoidable.
Project construction could result in generation of dust and PM 10 emissions as a result of site
excavation and grading. According to BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (2017a), a project would
be considered to result in a cumulatively considerable impact if the project individually has a
significant air quality impact or is inconsistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan (2017b). The BAAQMD’s
CEQA Guidelines also indicate that if a proposed project meets the screening criteria in the District’s
Guidelines, the project would not result in the generation of operational-related criteria air pollutants
and/or precursors that exceed the District’s significance thresholds, and therefore, operation of a
proposed project would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact to air quality from criteria
air pollutant and precursor emissions. The BAAQMD’s screening level for single-family homes is 325
dwelling units. Therefore, the proposed project with four proposed homes and three ADUs would be
substantially below this screening level and would be presumed to result in a less-than-significant
impact related to criteria pollutant emissions. A project could also result in a significant impact if it
would conflict with the District’s Clean Air Plan. However, because project emissions would be below
the BAAQMD impact thresholds, the project would not be required to incorporate project-specific
control measures listed in the 2017 CAP, and therefore, would not conflict with the Clean Air Plan.
Based on the BAAQMD’s adopted CEQA Guidelines and significance thresholds, the project would not
violate current air quality standards or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment. Thus, the proposed project would
not result in impacts peculiar to the project or the site, or substantially more severe impacts than
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -18- November 2021
evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section
21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(c) Sensitive Receptors. For CEQA purposes, a sensitive receptor is defined as any residence, including
private homes, condominiums, apartments, and living quarters; education resources such as
preschools and kindergarten through grade 12 schools; daycare centers; and healthcare facilities such
as hospitals or retirement and nursing homes. A sensitive receptor includes long-term care hospitals,
hospices, prisons, and dormitories or similar live-in housing (BAAQMD 2017a). The project site is
surrounded by residential sensitive receptors. The proposed residential project would not introduce
a new source of stationary emissions, and thus, would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations.
The General Plan EIR identifies existing uses that emit toxic air contaminants. These include
generators, gasoline stations, agricultural activities, and traffic on U.S. Highway 101. The EIR states
that implementation of General Plan goals and policies in addition to compliance with federal, state,
and local regulations reduce public health risks from these known exposure sites. However, the EIR
also notes that development associated with the General Plan buildout has the potential to expose
people to toxic air contaminants when residential development is proposed within 500 feet of U.S.
highway 101 or heavy industrial areas. To mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level, the EIR
prescribes mitigation measures AQ-3 through AQ-5 for projects within 500 feet of U.S. Highway 101
or heavy industrial areas. Because the project does not fall under either of these criteria, these
mitigation measures do not apply. Because the proposed project is within the overall buildout
analyzed in the General Plan EIR, and no new significant impacts have been identified specific to the
project, no further environmental analysis regarding pollutant exposure to sensitive receptors is
required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section
15183.
(d) Odors. According to the Air District’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (BAAQMD 2017a), land uses
associated with odor impacts wastewater treatment plants, landfills, confined animal facilities,
composting stations, food manufacturing plants, refineries, and chemical plants. The proposed
project does not include any uses associated with odors, and would result in no impact.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of
DEIR pp. 3-118
to 3-129, 3-138
to 3-141
No No BIO-1
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -19- November 2021
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service? (City Threshold 4a)
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies, regulations
or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service? (City Threshold 4b)
DEIR pp. 3-110,
3-138 to 3-143 No No None
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means? (City
Threshold 4c)
DEIR pp. 3-143
to 3-146 No No
BIO-2, Gilroy
City Code
Chapter 27
regarding water
quality and
erosion control
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites? (City Threshold 4d)
DEIR pp. 3-110,
3-138 to 3-141,
3-146 to 3-148
No No
Condition of
Approval
requiring pre-
construction
bird nesting
surveys
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance? (City Threshold
4e)
DEIR pp. 3-111,
3-148 to 3-149 No No
Tree Removal
Permit and
required
replacement
trees
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation
plan? (City Threshold 4f)
DEIR pp. 3-111
to 3-118, 3-149
to 3-150
No No None
(a) Special-Status Species. A Biological Resources Report was prepared for the project by H.T. Harvey
& Associates in 2016, which assessed existing biological conditions and potential impacts to biological
resources. The report identified three habitat types on the project site: developed/disturbed (0.18-
acre), ruderal woodland/grassland (0.71-acre), and ephemeral stream (0.03-acre). Based on historic
aerial photography, the report noted that the southeastern portion of the project site previously
contained a residence, gravel driveway, and several small structures.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -20- November 2021
The General Plan EIR concluded that impacts to special status species as a result of future
development would be less than significant with implementation of General Plan policies and
Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which requires evaluation of impacts to special-status species as part of
proposed developments. A biological resources report was prepared for the proposed project,
consistent with this policy. Based on the review of California Natural Diversity Database (CNDBB) and
site review, several special-status animal and plant species were evaluated for their potential to occur
on the project site. Reconnaissance-level biological surveys were conducted on the project site to
provide project-specific impact assessments for the development of the site. The survey determined
all of these animal species to be absent from the project site due to lack of suitable habitat or
evidence that the species does not occur in the project vicinity. The report concluded that no special-
status plant species are considered to have potential to occur on the project site, and the presence
of special-status animals is precluded by the combination of a lack of suitable habitat and the
presence of extensive development in surrounding areas. Therefore, the project would result in no
impacts to special-status plant and animal species, and because the proposed project is within the
overall buildout analyzed in the General Plan EIR, and no new significant impacts have been identified
specific to the project, no further environmental analysis regarding pollutant exposure to sensitive
receptors is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and the State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183.
(b-c) Sensitive Habitat (Miller Slough) and Wetlands. The General Plan EIR identifies sensitive natural
habitats as oak woodland, riparian and wetland habitats. The proposed project is adjacent to the
Miller Slough, which is an ephemeral stream (riparian habitat) that has characteristics used by federal
and state agencies to define their jurisdictions and would be considered a sensitive wetland habitat,
although riparian vegetation is not present (H.T. Harvey Associates 2016). This portion of the project
site is situated within the ordinary high mark boundaries of Miller Slough and would fall under United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdiction. The project biological resources report also
explains that the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and California Department of Fish
and Wildfire (CDFW) jurisdiction would extend from top of bank along Miller Slough, but due to the
scarcity of riparian or marsh habitat surrounding Miller Slough on the project site, these agencies’
jurisdiction would not extend farther onto the site.
The General Plan EIR concluded that with implementation of General Plan policies and
implementation programs to protect sensitive habitat areas, including setbacks, and Mitigation
Measure BIO-2 that requires project-level wetland review, potentially significant impacts to sensitive
natural communities would be less than significant. The proposed project would not encroach into
potential federal or state jurisdictional wetland areas and would comply with the City of Gilroy’s
Stream Protection Policy that requires a 20-foot setback from the top of bank for residential
development. The proposed residences would be set back 35 feet from the Miller Slough’s top of
bank. Although the project is not covered by the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan (Habitat Plan) as
explained below in Section 4(f), the plan does recommend a 35-foot setback from the top of bank of
riparian corridors. The proposed project meets this recommended setback distance, which exceeds
the City’s required setback, and therefore, potential impacts to riparian habitat would be less than
significant.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -21- November 2021
The USACE and the U.S. EPA define wetlands in Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 323.2 as
“areas defined as an area that is inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.” Although a formal wetland
delineation was not conducted on the project site, as noted above, Miller Slough is an ephemeral
stream and is the only feature on the project site that has potential wetland characteristics, but would
not be disturbed with the proposed development setbacks. The project biological resources report
evaluated potential indirect impacts to Miller Slough as summarized below.
The biological report explains that indirect impacts on Miller Slough water quality could occur from
the project if loose soil sediment is disturbed by construction or if fuel/substance leaks used by
construction equipment enter the slough. Operationally, impacts could occur from an increase of
hardscape on the site and subsequent increased stormwater flows and rates of erosion. However, as
described in detail in Sections 7(b) and 10(c), the project would be required to comply with soil
erosion and storm water management regulations that would minimize potential construction and
operational water quality impacts to Miller Slough. These regulations would require the project to
implement best management practices (BMPs) and low impact development practices that would
minimize stormwater runoff and promote stormwater infiltration. In accordance with these
requirements, the project has proposed four new biorientation areas that would capture and filter
stormwater runoff prior to entering the slough. Because the project would comply with City
stormwater and erosion control regulations and would not encroach within 35 feet of Miller Slough,
potential water quality and habitat impacts would be less than significant. Thus, the proposed project
would not result in impacts peculiar to the project or the site, or substantially more severe impacts
than evaluated in the General Plan EIR regarding sensitive habitats and wetlands, and no further
review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(d) Wildlife Movement/Breeding. The General Plan EIR concluded that with implementation of the
2040 General Plan goals, policies and programs, as well as future environmental review of specific
development projects and compliance with the Habitat Plan, potential impacts related to wildlife
movement would be considered less than significant. The project site is designated as Urban
Development according to the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan and is currently surrounded by urban
development. As discussed above, through compliance with the Gilroy City Code and 35-foot setback
requirements per the Habitat Plan, potential impacts to Miller Slough would be less than significant.
Furthermore, the project biological report concludes that the project would have a less-than-
significant impact to common plant and animal communities. The report states that the project would
result in impacts to up to 0.6-acre of ruderal woodland/grassland habitat outside of the ephemeral
stream setback area. This area of the project site is flatter and largely dominated by non-native
grasses, forbs, and trees and is inhabited by urban-adapted, common, and widespread species native
to the San Francisco Bay Area. The report further explains that the project site supports only a small
proportion of the regional populations of these common animal and plant species and therefore
would have limited impacts on the abundance and assemblage of these species (H.T. Harvey &
Associates 2016).
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -22- November 2021
However, trees on and adjacent to the project site have the potential to provide nesting habitat for
migratory birds which are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Tree removal during
the breeding season (generally March 1 to August 1) has the potential to destroy bird nests, eggs or
chicks if any are present during the removal. The biological report recommends implementation of a
pre-construction nesting survey that would ensure no nests would be disturbed. Inclusion of a
standard condition of approval to require a pre-construction bird nesting survey, prior to any
construction during breeding season, would be considered application of uniformly applied
development standards. As indicated in the City’s standard conditions of approval, the nesting survey
would be conducted no more than seven days before the start of construction activities; if an active
nest is found sufficiently close to disturbed work areas, a construction-free buffer zone would be
established around the nest to ensure no nests would be disturbed.
Potential project impacts to nesting birds would be considered less than significant with application
of uniformly applied development standards (condition of approval to conduct pre-construction
nesting survey). Thus, as explained above, the project would not interfere substantially with the
movement of native resident migratory fish or wildlife species, established wildlife corridors, or
wildlife nursery sites. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts or impacts peculiar to the
project or the site, and no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA Section 21083.3 and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15183.
(e) Conflicts with Local Plans. The project site currently contains 25 trees of various health and
species. The project would remove 20 trees and retain five trees along the western portion of the
site. The project Arborist Report details existing tree conditions and species on site. A total of five
existing trees would be retained with the project. The project would result in removal of 20 on-site
trees, most of which are orchard trees. Of the 20 trees to be removed, 13 are considered to be in
declining condition with severe structural defects (HT Harvey 2017).
The project would result in the removal of two mature coast live oaks (both greater than 20 inches in
diameter), which are native to Gilroy. According to the City of Gilroy Code (Section 30.38) both coast
live oak trees would qualify as protected trees. The biological report clarifies that all trees on the
project site are common and do not provide specialized, sensitive, or biologically important habitat.
Removal of any protected tree is subject to the approval of the Planning Division Manager, consistent
with City Code Section 30.38.270, including required replacement trees. The project proposes to
replant 24 new trees to replace the two protected tress that would be removed. Trees to remain
would be protected by implementing protection measures prescribed by the project-specific arborist
report, consistent with City Code 30.38.40 General landscape standards. For these reasons, the
project would comply with City of Gilroy protected tree provisions.
The General Plan EIR concluded that development accommodated by the General Plan could result
in the removal of protected trees; however, with implementation of General Plan goals, policies, and
programs, as well as compliance with local regulations and plans, impacts would be less than
significant. Removal of protected trees that is consistent with City regulations and requirements
would not be considered a significant impact of the project or an impact peculiar to the project. The
proposed project includes an arborist report and tree removal is consistent with the City’s Code
requirements. Thus, the proposed project would not result in new significant impacts related to
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -23- November 2021
conflicts with local ordinances or impacts peculiar to the project or the site with the application of
uniformly applied development standards set forth in the protected tree removal regulations, and no
further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(f) Conflicts with Habitat Conservation and Natural Community Conservation Plans. As discussed in
the biological report, the project is not subject to specific regulations by the Santa Clara Valley Habitat
Plan. The General Plan EIR indicates that the project site is within a “Developed” area within the
Habitat Plan Land Cover Map in the Habitat Plan. The project would therefore not be subject to
project-specific Habitat Plan permits or fees, as mentioned in the General Plan EIR. There are no other
habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans that cover the project or project
vicinity. Thus, the proposed project would not result in new significant impacts related to conflicts
with habitat conservation plans, and no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3
and CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Where Impact
is Addressed in
2040 General
Plan EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical
resource as pursuant to Section
15064.5? (City Threshold 5a)
DEIR pp. 3-153,
3-169 to 3-171,
and FEIR pp. 3-5
FEIR pp. 3-5 to
3-6
No No None
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section
15064.5? (City Threshold 5b)
DEIR pp. 3-153,
3-171 to 3-173,
and FEIR pp. 2-
9, 3-6
FEIR pp. 2-9 to
2-10, 3-5 to 3-6
No No
Standard
Planning
Condition of
Approval for
unanticipated
discovery of
archaeological
resource
c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries? (City Threshold 5c)
DEIR pp. 3-153,
3-174 to 3-175,
and FEIR pp. 2-
9, 3-6
No No
Standard
Planning
Condition of
Approval for
unanticipated
discovery of
archaeological
resource
(a) Historical Resources. The project site currently is undeveloped and has no structures or elements
with historic value. The General Plan EIR concluded that programmatic development and buildout
would result in a less-than-significant impact to historical resources with the implementation of
general plan policies and Mitigation Measure CR-1. This mitigation measure states that historic and
culturally significant buildings should be preserved, that the City should maintain and update an
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -24- November 2021
inventory of historically and culturally significant buildings, and that prior to any demolition of
historically significant buildings, an EIR should prepared. As mentioned above, the project site does
not contain buildings or structures that could be considered historical resources. Therefore, the
proposed project would not result in impacts on historical resources, and no further review is
necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b-c) Archaeological Resources and Disturbance of Human Remains. According to maps developed for
the City’s 2040 General Plan and included in the General Plan EIR, the project site is located in a low
sensitivity zone for historic, prehistoric, and archaeological resources.
The General Plan EIR concluded that new development accommodated by the General Plan would
result in construction that could result in impacts to buried archaeological resources. However,
implementation of the proposed General Plan policies and actions and compliance with local and
state regulations would reduce potential impacts to a less-than-significant level. The General Plan EIR
prescribes Mitigation Measure CR-2, which requires a project-level archaeological survey if a project
is located on a site in a moderate to high archaeological sensitivity zone as identified on Figure 3.5-1
of the General Plan EIR. The project site is not located in an archaeologically sensitive area per that
figure, and thus preparation of an archaeological investigation was not required, and this mitigation
measure is not applicable. For these reasons, the project would not result in archaeological impacts
peculiar to the site or project.
Furthermore, If human remains are discovered during construction, all construction and excavation
activity would be required to cease pursuant to Section 7050.5 of California’s Health and Safety Code.
If the remains are of Native American descent, a series of actions would be triggered to identify and
appropriately treat the remains, including the notification to the County Coroner of the Native
American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, which in turn would inform a most likely descendent
pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. In addition, according to the General Plan
Final EIR, the City has a standard condition of approval related to potential discovery of unidentified
archaeological or historical resources during construction that would be considered application of
uniformly applied development standards. Discovery of unidentified (e.g., buried) cultural resources
during construction would subject to this standard condition of approval which would require all work
to be halted within at least 50 meters (165 feet) of the find; the City shall be notified and professional
archaeologist retained to evaluate and prescribe measures to protect the find.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts to archaeological resources
not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or impacts peculiar to the project or the site, and
the City’s standard condition of approval would be included for the project related to discovery of
resources during construction, which is considered application of a uniformly applied development
standard. Thus, no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -25- November 2021
6. ENERGY
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
DEIR pp. 3-459
to 3-462, 4-13 No No None
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
DEIR pp. 3-459,
3-461 to 3-462 No No None
(a) Energy Use. According to the General Plan EIR, the three primary sources of long-term energy
consumption from new development and operations within the City would be fuel use in vehicles and
use of natural gas and electricity. In addition, there would be consumption of nonrenewable energy
resources during construction, primarily in the form of fossil fuels (including fuel oil, natural gas, and
gasoline) for automobiles and construction equipment, and other resources including, but not limited
to, sand, gravel, asphalt, and metals.
The project would result in an increase in vehicle trip generation (as described in Section 17,
Transportation) and, hence, a net increase in petroleum use associated with vehicle use would occur
with project operation. However, as discussed in Section 17, the addition of four single-family
residences and three ADUs would be within the overall amount of development evaluated in the
General Plan EIR and the proposed project would not result in a more severe significant impact
related to VMT than otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR. The project site also is in proximity
to bike lanes, multi-use paths, and a City-sponsored bike share program.
Operation of the project would also involve consumption of electricity and natural gas; however, an
increase in the consumption of these resources associated with project operation would not
represent unnecessary, inefficient, or wasteful use of resources. The project would be subject to
approval of building permits that meet the California Building Code as well as compliance with City
requirements for water conservation fixtures and features, including drought-resistant landscaping.
These measures are consistent with those recommended for residential uses in the City’s General
Plan related to building and energy efficiency and water conservation.
The General Plan EIR reviewed energy use associated with development and buildout accommodated
by the General Plan. The EIR concluded that overall, the future consumption of electrical and natural
gas resources would not represent unnecessary, inefficient, or wasteful use of resources given the
implementation of policies that address energy conservation measures. It is expected that
nonrenewable energy resources would be used efficiently during future project construction given
state of California requirements for energy-efficient equipment. Therefore, the amount and rate of
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -26- November 2021
consumption of such resources during construction and maintenance activities would not result in
the unnecessary, inefficient, or wasteful use of energy resources. The proposed project, which is
within the projected buildout of the General Plan EIR, would not result in impacts that would be
peculiar to the project or the site or substantially more severe than evaluated in the 2040 General
Plan EIR related to inefficient or wasteful use of energy. Therefore, no further review is necessary
pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b) Conflicts with Plans. The 2040 General Plan EIR determined that there would be no impact due to
conflicts with state or local energy plans because the General Plan buildout would comply with
applicable State regulations and legislation and implementation of the General Plan goals, policies,
and programs would ensure the no conflict with state or local plans for renewable energy or energy
efficiency. The proposed project falls within the buildout projection of the General Plan EIR and would
not result in conflicts with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
The proposed project features and design elements are consistent the City’s General Plan provisions
related to energy efficiency. Therefore, no further review is necessary.
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? (City
Threshold 6a-1)
DEIR pp. 3-177
to 3-179, 3-193
to 3-194
No No None
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
(City Threshold 6a-2)
DEIR pp. 3-195
to 3-196 No No
California
Building Code
Seismic Design
Criteria
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction? (City
Threshold 6a-3)
DEIR pp. 3-182
to 3-185, 3-197
to 3-200
No No None
iv) Landslides? (City Threshold 6a-4) DEIR pp. 3-189,
3-200 to 3-202 No No None
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil? (City Threshold 6b)
DEIR pp. 3-202
to 3-205 No No Gilroy City Code
Chapter 6
regarding
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -27- November 2021
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
grading and
erosion control
plans
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
(City Threshold 6c)
DEIR pp. 3-205
to 3-207 No No None
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating direct or indirect substantial
risks to life or property? (City
Threshold 6d)
DEIR pp. 3-207
to 3-209 No No
California
Building Code
Requirements
for Geotechnical
Reports
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste
water?
Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
DEIR pp. 3-150
to 3-151 No No
(a-i) Fault Rupture. The General Plan EIR concluded that new development could introduce additional
population that could be exposed to risks or harm and property damage resulting from surface fault
rupture along the Carnadero Fault (which is the only fault zone area within the City’s Urban Growth
Boundary). Although the United States Geological Survey has not identified this fault as active, Santa
Clara County has mapped a Fault Rupture Zone along that fault (Santa Clara County 2021). The
proposed project is approximately 2.2 miles east of the nearest mapped rupture zone area. The
project site is also not delineated within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake fault zoning map area per the
California Department of Conservation. Therefore, the project site is not located within known fault
rupture zones, and impacts related to fault rupture are not expected.
(a-ii) Seismic Hazards. The project site is located in a seismically active region of California, and the
project could be subject to seismic shaking during an earthquake on regional faults. The General Plan
EIR concluded that with implementation of General Plan policies and programs, the risk of human
harm or property damage resulting from exposure to seismic ground shaking would be less than
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -28- November 2021
significant. In particular, Policy PH 2.5 requires geologic hazards reports for all new development
applications to assess potential geologic hazards and to determine if these hazards can be adequately
mitigated. In addition, adherence to existing regulations and standards, including preparation of
geotechnical investigations and adherence to the California Building Code and various policies and
actions established in the General Plan, harm to people and structures from adverse seismic events
would be minimized (Gilroy 2020a). The requirement to prepare a project design-level geotechnical
investigation and implement the recommendations would be considered application of a uniformly
applied development standard. Thus, the proposed project would not result in new significant
impacts related to seismic and geologic hazards not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or
impacts peculiar to the project or the site with the application of uniformly applied development
standards for required geological and geotechnical investigations and implementation of
recommendations contained in these reports. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA
section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(a-iii, -iv, c) Liquefaction, Landslides, and Unstable Soils. According to maps developed as part of the
General Plan EIR, certain areas of the City’s Urban Growth Boundary include expansive soils and areas
vulnerable to liquefaction and soil settlement. Development within these areas could potentially
result in landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. However, the General
Plan EIR provides goals, policies and programs that protect life and minimize property damage from
development on unstable soils or geologic units. The EIR concludes that implementation of these
General Plan goals, policies, and programs would reduce potential significant impacts related to
unstable soils to a less-than-significant level.
The General Plan EIR provides a map that delineates high/very high liquefaction zones for which
specific General Plan goals and policies would apply. These areas are present along Uvas Creek from
Hecker Pass Highway to the southeast toward State Highway 101 as well as certain areas east of State
Highway 101. However, the project site is not located within these liquefaction hazard zones (Gilroy
2020a). In addition, a project-level geotechnical investigation was performed by Silicon Valley Soil
Engineering (2016), which concludes that there are no liquefiable soils underlying the project site.
The report, which recorded field soil conditions and conducted a laboratory investigation,
determined that the site with its underlying soils is suitable for the proposed residential development
(Silicon Valley Soil Engineering 2016). For these reasons, the project site is not in an area susceptible
to liquefaction, lateral spreading, or subsidence and related impacts. Additionally, the project site is
relatively flat and is not located in an area subject to slope instability or within a landslide hazard
zone according to a map developed as part of the General Plan EIR. For these reasons, the project
site is not in an area susceptible to landslides and related impacts. Thus, the proposed project would
not result in new significant impacts related to seismic and geologic hazards not otherwise addressed
in the General Plan EIR or impacts peculiar to the project or the site with the application of uniformly
applied development standards that require project geotechnical investigations and implementation
of recommendations contained in these reports. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA
section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b) Erosion. The project site is generally flat, which limits the potential for substantial soil erosion.
Potential for erosion would be highest during ground-disturbing activities including grading and
trenching for foundations, driveways, and utilities. According to Soils Map (Figure 3.2-3) of the
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -29- November 2021
General Plan EIR, the project site contains Zomora clay loam soils with 0 to 2 percent slopes. Per the
General Plan EIR, this soil type has slight erosion hazard potential (Gilroy 2020a).
The General Plan EIR concluded that the majority of future construction in the Urban Growth
Boundary would likely occur on relatively flat slopes where the soil erosion potential ranges from
none to slight, and therefore, impacts from soil erosion in these areas of the Urban Growth Boundary
will likely be limited. The proposed project is located in the Urban Growth Boundary and also has a
low erosion potential. The proposed project plans include erosion and sediment control measures to
be implemented during completion of site improvements. Implementation of project erosion control
plans and erosion control standards and requirements set forth in the Gilroy City Code Chapter 6
would be considered application of a uniformly applied development standard. Thus, the project
would not result in new significant erosion impacts not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR
or impacts peculiar to the project or site with the application of uniformly applied development
standards. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183.
(d) Expansive Soils. Expansive soils contain large amounts of clays that expand when wetted and
contract when dried. According to the project’s geotechnical investigation, soils at the project site
consist of a mixture of stiff sandy and silty clays and gravel. The geotechnical investigation
determined that soils on the site have a low to moderate expansion potential for expansion (Silicon
Valley Soil Engineering 2016) and concluded that the site is suitable for development with
implementation of recommendations in the report. Implementation of recommendations set forth
in the project geotechnical report is required by the California Building Code and City regulations and
policies, which would ensure that potential impacts related to expansive soils would be less than
significant.
The General Plan EIR concluded that future development accommodated by the Plan could be
exposed to expansive soils, which would be addressed through compliance with state and local
regulations, including the California Building Code requirements, which would ensure that buildings
are designed to prevent structural damages based on project-specific geotechnical investigations.
The requirement to prepare a project geotechnical investigation and implement the
recommendations would be considered application of a uniformly applied development standard,
and a project geotechnical report has been prepared. Thus, with implementation of the foregoing
uniformly applied development standards and regulations that require preparation of geotechnical
report and implementation of recommendations set forth in the geotechnical investigation, the
proposed project would not result in significant impacts not otherwise addressed in the General Plan
EIR or peculiar to the project or site. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3
and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(e) Use of Septic Systems. The project would be connected to City sanitary sewers and would not use
septic systems.
(f) Paleontological Resources. The General Plan EIR indicates that in the Santa Clara Valley,
Pleistocene-age (1.8 million to about 10,000 years ago) sediments and rocks have potential to contain
paleontological resources such as fossils. However, the EIR also describes that much of these
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -30- November 2021
sediments and rocks are covered by relatively younger (within the last 10,000 years) Holocene-age
sediments. According to the EIR, no paleontological resources have been discovered in Gilroy, likely
due to the presence of these relatively recent Holocene deposits (Gilroy 2020a). The General Plan EIR
did not identify impacts related to paleontological resources.
8. GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS
Where Impact
is Addressed in
2040 General
Plan EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
DEIR pp. 3-229
to 3-240
FEIR pp. 3-7 to
3-8
No No
Mitigation
Measures GHG-
1 and GHG-2
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
DEIR pp. 3-241
to 3-249 No No None
(a) Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Climate change refers to any significant change in measures of
climate, such as average temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns over a period of time. Climate
change may result from natural factors, natural processes, and human activities that change the
composition of the atmosphere and alter the surface and features of the land. Significant changes in
global climate patterns have recently been associated with global warming, an average increase in
the temperature of the atmosphere near the Earth’s surface, attributed to accumulation of
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere,
which in turn heats the surface of the Earth. Some GHGs occur naturally and are emitted to the
atmosphere through natural processes, while others are created and emitted solely through human
activities. Climate change models predict changes in temperature, precipitation patterns, water
availability, and rising sea levels, and these altered conditions can have impacts on natural and human
systems in California that can affect the City of Gilroy’s temperature, water supply and quality, health
and safety, flood risk, fire risk, and economic growth and stability (City of Gilroy, 2020a).
The most common GHG that results from human activity is carbon dioxide, followed by methane and
nitrous oxide. The State of California passed the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), which
seeks to reduce GHG emissions generated by California. The Governor’s Executive Order S-3-05 and
AB 32 (Health & Safety Code, § 38501 et seq.) both seek to achieve 1990 emissions levels by the year
2020. Executive Order S-3-05 further requires that California’s GHG emissions be 80 percent below
1990 levels by the year 2050. AB 32 defines GHGs to include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide,
hydrocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -31- November 2021
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the lead agency for implementing AB 32. In accordance
with provisions of AB 32, CARB conducts an annual statewide GHG Emission Inventory that provides
estimates of the amount of GHGs emitted to the atmosphere by human activities within California.
In accordance with requirements of AB 32, CARB adopted an Initial Scoping Plan in 2008 and is
required to update the scoping plan at least every five years. The First Update to the Scoping Plan,
approved in 2014, established a 2030 emissions target of 40 percent below 1990 levels. The current
(2017) Scoping Plan identifies a balanced mix of strategies to meet the State’s 2030 GHG limit.
The General Plan EIR concluded that buildout of the Gilroy 2040 General Plan would have a significant
and unavoidable GHG impact for the interim period until the City adopts and implements a qualified
GHG reduction plan. Upon adoption of a qualified GHG reduction plan, GHG emissions would be
reduced to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and GHG-2
would ensure that a qualified GHG reduction plan is prepared in a timely manner. However, even
with the implementation of mitigation measures, the EIR indicated that implementation of the
General Plan would incrementally contribute to cumulative global warming effects. The City’s 2040
General Plan states that the City shall adopt and implement a qualified GHG reduction plan within
three years of the adoption of the 2040 General Plan. The EIR concludes that impact prior to adoption
of the GHG reduction plan would be significant and unavoidable; however, this significant impact is
considered interim because after the GHG reduction plan is adopted, impact accommodated by the
General Plan buildout would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
The Gilroy 2040 General Plan includes goals and policies that would provide GHG emissions reduction
benefit. Consumption of electrical energy, either directly or indirectly, and consumption of fossil fuel
in vehicles are the anticipated primary sources of GHG emissions in Gilroy. Policies are focused on
reducing emissions from these sources. The General Plan policies and programs are primarily
organized by the GHG source sectors from which GHG reductions would be realized.
The General Plan EIR estimated the 2040 threshold of significance for GHG emissions is 1.93 MT CO 2 e
per capita. The net GHG emissions in 2040 are equal to total annual 2040 buildout GHG emissions
(Table 3.7-7, City of Gilroy 2020a) less legislative and regulatory emissions reductions or 204,738.10
MT CO 2 e. According to General Plan EIR, population would increase by 19,756 at buildout. The 2040
buildout rate of GHG emission is 204,738.10 MT CO 2 e/19,756 population, or 10.36 MT CO 2 e per
capita. Therefore, GHG emissions at buildout would exceed the 2040 threshold of significance,
resulting in a significant impact. Implementation of the proposed Gilroy 2040 General Plan policies
and actions, including the GHG Reduction Plan, as well as planned implementation of statewide
actions, would further reduce emissions.
The proposed project would result in an increase of four single-family residential units with three
ADUs within the City. This level of development would be within the overall amount of residential
and commercial development evaluated in the General Plan EIR and within remaining potential
development as described. The project would be subject to approval of building permits that meet
the California Building Code as well as compliance with City requirements for water conservation
fixtures and features, including drought-resistant landscaping. These measures are consistent with
those recommended for residential uses in the General Plan related to building and energy efficiency
and water conservation. Thus, the project would not conflict with provisions of the General Plan.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -32- November 2021
Since the project size (and resulting GHG emissions) is within the total amount of potential residential
development analyzed in the General Plan EIR, the project would not result in new significant impacts
or impacts peculiar to the project or site or substantially more severe than impacts analyzed in the
General Plan EIR. Furthermore, the project falls below the BAAQMD’s screening level of 56 single-
family residential units for potential significant GHG emissions impacts (BAAQMD 2017). Thus, no
further environmental analysis is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and
State CEQA Guidelines section 15193.
(b) Conflicts with Applicable Plans. The General Plan did not identify conflicts with state plans, but as
discussed above, the EIR indicated that Plan buildout would conflict with the applicable GHG
reduction plan/policy/regulation, resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact for the interim
period until the City adopts and implements a qualified GHG reduction plan. Upon adoption of a
qualified GHG reduction plan, the potential, significant impacts due to conflicts with the applicable
GHG reduction plan/policy/regulation would be less than significant. Since the project size (and
resulting GHG emissions) is within the total amount of potential residential development analyzed in
the General Plan EIR, the project would not result in new significant impacts or impacts peculiar to
the project or site or substantially more severe than impacts analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Thus,
no further environmental analysis is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and
State CEQA Guidelines section 15193.
9. HAZARDS AND
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials? (City
Threshold 7a)
DEIR pp. 3-264
to 3-267 No No None
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment? (City Threshold 7b)
DEIR pp. 3-264
to 3-267 No No None
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
¼ miles of an existing or proposed
school? (City Threshold 7c)
DEIR pp. 3-268
to 3-269 No No None
d) Be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites
DEIR pp. 3-269
to 3-270 No No None
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -33- November 2021
9. HAZARDS AND
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment? (City
Threshold 7d)
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
f) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? (City
Threshold 7e)
DEIR pp. 3-270
to 3-271 No No None
g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires? (City Threshold 7f)
DEIR pp. 3-271
to 3-274 No No None
(a-b) Use or Release of Hazardous Materials. The proposed project consists of residential land uses,
which would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or wastes, and
would not result in the creation of a public health hazard.
The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of Gilroy 2040 General Plan goals and policies
and continued compliance with regulatory requirements of hazardous material management and
treatment would minimize risks to people and environmental resources. The EIR concluded that
additional risks from General Plan buildout, due to the increase use, storage, transport, and disposal
of hazardous materials would pose a less-than-significant impact because of the foregoing reasons.
New development accommodated by the General Plan that utilizes hazardous materials or generates
hazardous waste would be regulated pursuant to federal, state, and local laws to ensure proper
transportation, handling, and disposal. Because the proposed residential project is a type of
development analyzed under General Plan EIR buildout, the proposed project would not result in new
significant impacts not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the project or site.
No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines
section 15183.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -34- November 2021
(c-d) Exposure to Hazardous Materials. A search of Cortese List data resources, including databases
managed by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (EnviroStor) and the State Water Resources
Control Board (GeoTracker), was conducted. The project site is not included on the list of hazardous
material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.
The General Plan EIR concluded that new development accommodated by the General Plan could
result in exposure to hazardous materials due to proximity to contaminated sites. Potential sources
for accidental release of hazardous materials include commercial and industrial businesses with
aboveground or underground storage tanks or other containers for storing fuel, solvents, or other
industrial-use chemicals. However, the EIR concluded that with implementation of General Plan
policies and compliance with federal, state, and local regulations, potential impacts would be less
than significant. While the subject property is located approximately 0.23 miles south of South Valley
Middle School, the proposed project would not result in exposure to hazardous materials and would
not result in stationary emissions. For these reasons, the project would not result in significant
impacts not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the project or site. No further
review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(e) Airport Safety. The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or air strip and
would not be subjected to potential aircraft hazards.
(f) Emergency Response. Existing access to the project site is provided from Chestnut Street.
Subdivision of the project site would result in four new driveway access points off Chestnut Street.
The project would not include any changes to existing public roadways that provide emergency access
to the site. Therefore, the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
emergency response or evaluation plan, and would not result in an impact. The General Plan EIR also
concluded that future development associated with the buildout of the 2040 Gilroy General Plan
would increase population but would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with the
adopted local and regional emergency response plans and evacuation plans. Therefore, the project
would not result in significant impacts or impacts peculiar to the project or site, and no further review
is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(g) Wildland Fire Hazards. The project is located within an urbanized area within the City of Gilroy.
The closest high fire hazard area is approximately 2.5 miles southwest of the project site according
to the Fire Hazards Severity Zones maps published by the California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection (CAL FIRE 2007). The General Plan EIR also concluded that impacts related to increased
risk involving wildland fires would be less than significant with the implementation of General Plan
goals, policies, and programs, although the western hillside areas of the City pose a high fire hazard
for the residents in that location. The project site is not located within hillside locations. For these
reasons, and because the project is within the buildout estimations of the General Plan EIR, the
proposed project would not result in significant impacts not otherwise addressed in the General Plan
EIR or peculiar to the project or site. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3
and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -35- November 2021
10. HYDROLOGY AND
WATER QUALITY Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality? (City
Thresholds 8a, 8f)
DEIR pp. 3-292
to 3-300 No No
Gilroy City Code
Chapter 27
regarding water
quality and
erosion control
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the
basin? (City Threshold 8b)
DEIR pp. 3-312
to 3-313, 3-317
FEIR 3-10 to 3-
12
No No None
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through
the addition of impervious surfaces, in
a manner which would:
DEIR pp. 3-292
to 3-300 No No
Gilroy City Code
Chapter 27
regarding water
quality and
erosion control
(i) Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site; (City
Threshold 8c)
DEIR pp. 3-292
to 3-295 No No See above
(ii) Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
off-site; (City Threshold 8d)
DEIR pp. 3-295
to 3-297 No No See above
(iii) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned storm water
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; (City Threshold 8e) or
DEIR pp. 3-295
to 3-297 No No See above
(iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
(City Threshold 8g-h)
DEIR pp. 3-297
to 3-300 No No None
d) In flood hazard, tsunami or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due
to project inundation?
DEIR pp. 3-297
to 3-300 No No None
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
DEIR pp. 3-312
to 3-313, 3-317
FEIR 3-12
No No None
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -36- November 2021
(a) Water Quality/Discharges. The project would not involve any discharges that would violate any
water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.
Within urbanized areas such as the City, pollutants frequently associated with stormwater include
sediment, nutrients, oil and grease, heavy metals, and litter. The primary sources of stormwater
pollution consist of contaminants such as oil, grease, pesticides, fertilizer, solid waste and sediment
that are deposited on impervious surfaces such as streets, parking lots, and driveways (Gilroy 2020a).
Urban runoff and other “non-point source” discharges are regulated by the 1972 Federal Clean Water
Act (CWA), through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program
that has been implemented in two phases through the California Regional Water Quality Control
Boards (RWQCB). Phase I regulations, effective since 1990, require NPDES permits for storm water
discharges for certain specific industrial facilities and construction activities, and for municipalities
with a population size greater than 100,000. Phase II regulations expand the NPDES program to
include all municipalities with urbanized areas and municipalities with a population size greater than
10,000 and a population density greater than 1,000 persons per square mile. Phase II regulations also
expand the NPDES program to include construction sites of one to five acres. Non-point source
pollutants also are regulated by Gilroy City Code Chapters 27C and 27D, which outlines the City’s
regulations for implementing storm water quality management strategies consistent with NPDES
requirements. The General Plan EIR indicates that the Revised Regional Storm Water Management
Plan described previously outlines all of the measures that must be implemented by the City and by
future development to comply with the NPDES water quality protection requirements. Standard
conditions of permit approval include requirements that discharged water meet State Water
Resources Control Board and/or Central Coast water board standards.
The City has also developed a Storm Water Master Plan (SWMP) to fulfill the requirements of the
Phase II NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water from Small Municipal Separate Storm
Sewer Systems (MS4) (General Permit) and to reduce the volume of pollutants discharged in urban
runoff. In compliance with the Phase II regulations, the City’s comprehensive SWMP is designed to
reduce the discharge of pollutants to protect water quality.
Construction activity on project sites that disturb one or more acres of soil must obtain coverage
under the State’s General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity
(Construction General Permit, 99-08-DWQ). Construction activity subject to this permit includes
clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling or excavation. The Construction
General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP must list BMPs that the discharger will use to protect stormwater runoff
and the placement of those BMPs. A Notice of Intent (NOI) and SWPPP must be prepared prior to
commencement of construction. Proposed grading and development on the project site would
disturb more than 1 acre and, thus, the project would be subject to the Construction General Permit
and preparation of a SWPPP.
The General Plan EIR concluded that with implementation of General Plan policies and adherence to
City regulations to protect water quality, impacts to water quality resulting from future development,
including potential erosion and stormwater runoff, would be less than significant. The application of
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -37- November 2021
uniformly applied standards and regulations contained in Gilroy’s City Code regarding
implementation of stormwater BMPs, grading requirements and implementation of erosion control
plans (Chapter 27) would be required, as would preparation and implementation of a SWPPP during
construction, which would mitigate potential storm runoff water quality impacts as well as potential
erosion and water quality impacts during excavation and construction as discussed above.
The project site is greater than one acre in size, and grading and subdivision improvements would be
subject to preparation of a SWPPP. Compliance with regulations contained in the City’s Code
regarding implementation of stormwater BMPs, grading requirements and implementation of
erosion control plans and preparation and implementation of a SWPPP during construction, would
mitigate potential storm runoff water quality and erosion impacts during excavation and construction
as discussed above and would be considered application of uniformly applied development
standards. Thus, the proposed project would not result in significant water quality impacts not
otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR, and the project would not result in water quality impacts
peculiar to the site or project with application of uniformly applied development standards. No
further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section
15183.
(b) Groundwater. The project site is located within a developed urban area. As discussed in the
Utilities and Service Systems Section 19(b), the project would be adequately served by the City’s
existing public water system that obtains potable water supplies from groundwater sources.
Domestic water supply in Gilroy is provided through groundwater extraction from nine wells. The City
of Gilroy is in the Llagas Subbasin of the Gilroy-Hollister Groundwater Basin. The General Plan EIR
reported that the State Department of Water Resources (DWR) has not identified the subbasin as in
overdraft or projected to be in overdraft according to the Valley Water 2015 Urban Water
Management Plan. However, DWR has ranked the Llagas Sub-basin as a high priority basin under the
Sustainable Groundwater Act of 2014 noting that nitrate has impacted a significant number of private
domestic wells due to historic and ongoing agricultural activities and septic systems.
The General Plan EIR indicates that while new development would increase water demand,
groundwater supplies are projected to exceed demand in normal, single dry year, and multiple dry
years through 2040. The EIR concluded that buildout of the General Plan would not substantially
deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. Because
the proposed project size would fall within the total amount of potential development analyzed in
the General Plan EIR, the project would not result in more severe impacts than analyzed in the
General Plan EIR. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required regarding these public
services pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines section
15183.
(c[i-iii]) Drainage. The project site is located within a developed urban area. The project would create
24,284 square feet of impervious surfaces (approximately 53 percent of the site). Individual lots
would be improved with bioretention areas to treat stormwater runoff prior to flowing to an
underground storage to be detained and released into the City’s storm drainage system.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -38- November 2021
The General Plan EIR concluded that potential drainage impacts related to increased stormwater
runoff would be less than significant with implementation of General Plan goals, policies, and
programs in addition to project-specific compliance with the City’s Storm Water Master Plan and
Stormwater Management Guidance Manual. Compliance with these applicable plans and standards
would assure that existing and future storm water facilities have sufficient capacity to collect and
convey storm water, even during flooding events. The General Plan EIR also explains that future
development would be required to comply with the Gilroy City Code requirements and Water Board
detention standards in combination with applicable Valley Water requirements for development
adjacent to Valley Water facilities, which would mitigate increases in impervious surfaces that could
lead to flooding or exceed the capacity of storm water facilities. This compliance would ensure that
storm water facilities downstream of the City’s Urban Growth Boundary would have capacity to
transport storm water runoff from the proposed project during 100-year storm events.
The project would not significantly alter existing drainage patterns. The project drainage plan has
been prepared in accordance with City requirements. In addition, uniformly applied development
standards included as project conditions of approval require preparation of a Storm Water
Management Plan (SWMP) by a registered civil engineer. The SWMP shall analyze the existing and
ultimate conditions and facilities, and the study shall include all off-site tributary areas, and
shall be in compliance with the City’s Stormwater Management Guidance Manual (latest edition).
The standard condition of approval requires that existing offsite drainage patterns, i.e., tributary
areas, drainage amount and velocity not be altered by the development. Thus, the project would also
be consistent with the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board’s (CCRWQCB) post-
construction requirements. As a result of these site design and engineering features and compliance
with regional and local stormwater regulations, the proposed project would not result in significant
drainage impacts not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the site or project
with implementation of uniformly applied development standards related to stormwater
management. Therefore, no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the
State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(c [iv], d) Flood Hazard Areas and Risk of Release of Pollutants. According to the Flood Risk Areas map
included in the General Plan EIR, the project site is not located within a flood hazard zone (Gilroy
2020a). The project site is located in an area designated as Flood Zone X, which is not a 100-year flood
zone or considered a special hazard flood zone per the FEMA Flood Rate Insurance Maps (FEMA
2009). Therefore, the project would not impede or redirect flood flows in a 100-year flood zone. The
project site is located approximately 5 miles southwest of Coyote Lake, the nearest major body of
water, and therefore, impacts associated with seiches would not occur. Based on the distance of the
project site from the Pacific Ocean (approximately 17 miles) and the elevation of the site, coastal
hazards such as a tsunami, extreme high tides, and sea level rise would not affect the project site.
The risk of release of pollutants due to these natural phenomena is very low.
The General Plan EIR concludes that, through the implementation of General Plan policies related to
flood control and adherence to other City plans and regulations, future development would not result
in substantial risk of exposure of structures or people to flood hazards and impacts would be less
than significant. The General Plan EIR also concluded that the overall risk of dam failure from the
Uvas Dam, Chesbro Dam, or Anderson Dam is low. Therefore, risks to future development within the
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -39- November 2021
proposed Urban Growth Boundary would likewise be low, and the impact would be less than
significant. The proposed project would not result in significant flood hazards not otherwise
addressed in the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the site or project. For these reasons, no further
review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(e) Conflict with Plans. The project site is not located adjacent to a water course or water body and
would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan. The project site
is within the Llagas groundwater subbasin which is covered by the Valley Water Groundwater
Management Plan adopted in 2016. The groundwater management plan includes groundwater
supply management programs aimed to replenish the area’s groundwater basins, sustain
groundwater supplies, help mitigate groundwater overdraft, and sustain storage reserves for dry
period. As discussed in Utilities and Service Systems Section 19(b), the project would connect to the
City’s public water system which relies on groundwater as a primary source of water. The Valley
Water Groundwater Management Plan recognizes that the City of Gilroy is responsible for
maintaining its Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) to evaluate and manage its water supply.
The General Plan EIR concludes that development associated with the General Plan may result in an
increase in water demand within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary, but not beyond that identified
in the UWMP. The EIR also concludes that the buildout of the General Plan would not substantially
deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or lowering of the local groundwater table level. Therefore, the project
would not conflict with existing water quality control and sustainable groundwater management
plans, and no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183.
11. LAND USE
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community? (City Threshold 9a) FEIR pp 2-42 No No None
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental
effect? (City Thresholds 9b)
None No No None
(a) Physically Divide an Established Community. The project site is located within a developed
residential area of the City and the project would not physically divide an established community.
The Gilroy 2040 General Plan includes an urban growth boundary within which the project site is
located. Because the proposed project size would fall within the total amount of potential
development analyzed in the General Plan EIR, the project would not result in more severe impacts
than analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -40- November 2021
regarding these public services pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183.
(b) Conflict with Policies and Regulations. The project site is designated Low Density Residential in
the City’s 2040 General Plan with an allowed density of 3-8 dwelling units per acre. The site is zoned
Single-Family Residential (R1). The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use
designation. According to the General Plan, this designation “is applied to areas of predominantly
single family detached dwellings, with typical lot sizes ranging from 5,000 square feet to 7,000 square
feet. Appropriate residential uses include single family detached homes and secondary (“accessory”)
dwelling units that comply with City standards” (Gilroy 2020c). The project site is located within the
single-family residential district per Chapter 30 of Gilroy City Code. Article V of this Chapter provides
permitted uses, site and building requirements, maximum density, and site design requirements
within the district.
The proposed use is consistent with General Plan and zoning district land use designations as
discussed in section IV.B and C (Environmental Checklist). Based on the analyses contained in this
Environmental Checklist and a review of the City’s 2040 General Plan, the proposed project would
not result in a conflict with any policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental impact. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, and
the project would not result in land use impacts peculiar to the site. No further review is necessary
pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state? (City
Thresholds 10a)
DEIR pp. 3-320
to 3-322 No No None
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other
land use plan?
DEIR pp. 3-320
to 3-322 No No None
a-b) Loss of Mineral Resources. The General Plan EIR describes two mineral resource areas within the
greater Gilroy and southern Santa Clara County areas. The Verne D. Freeman Sr. quarry is located
outside of the City’s Urban Growth Boundary in unincorporated Santa Clara County and resources
along Uvas Creek are no longer available for extraction due to the provisions and implementation of
the Hecker Pass Specific Plan (Gilroy 2020a). Therefore, the EIR concluded that General Plan buildout
would have no impact on known mineral resources. The proposed project, which is captured in the
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -41- November 2021
General Plan buildout and City’s Urban Growth Boundary, would have no impact to mineral
resources. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183.
13. NOISE
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance or applicable
standards of other agencies? (City
Thresholds 11a, 11c)
DEIR pp. 3-336
to 3-345 No No
General Plan
Policies PH 6.10,
PH 6.11, and PH
6.12
Article XVI of
the Gilroy City
Code
b) Generation of excessive ground borne
vibration or ground borne noise
levels? (City Thresholds 11b)
DEIR pp. 3-346 No No None
c) For a project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or an
airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
Not Applicable No No None
(a) Noise Increases. The 2040 General Plan includes goals, policies and actions that set forth measures
to avoid and minimize adverse impacts regarding exposure to noise. In particular, Goal PH 6 aims to
protect residents from exposure to excessive noise through responsive land use planning, especially
regarding noise-sensitive land uses such as schools, hospitals, and housing for seniors. Policy PH 6.1
establishes a physical development pattern that promotes residential neighborhoods and
development and park areas within the quietest areas of the community. The proposed project and
site would align with this policy. Policy 6.2 requires a review of development proposals to assure
consistency with noise standards by using the noise contour maps established in the EIR and requires
additional noise studies needed for proposed development. Policy 6.7 requires new residential
development to comply with the City’s noise standards.
The project site is located in a relatively quiet residential neighborhood, and the primary noise source
within the project area is traffic noise along Monterey Road that is west of the project site. According
to maps prepared for the General Plan EIR, the project site is located outside of the 65 - 70-dBA noise
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -42- November 2021
contour for both existing and future (i.e., 2040) conditions (Gilroy 2020a). The General Plan indicates
that exterior noise levels to 60-dBA are generally acceptable sound levels for residential properties.
The 2040 General Plan EIR concluded that with implementation of Plan policies and actions, as well
as future project-level noise assessments, exposure to noise would be considered less than
significant. Given that the project would be subject to potential future exterior noise levels of less
than 60 dBA, no impacts related to exposure to noise levels that exceed local or state standards would
occur.
The proposed project would result in new residential development within an area that is a developed
residential area. Residential uses would not typically be associated with substantial permanent
increases in ambient noise levels. Therefore, the project would not result in significant permanent
noise increases not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR.
There would be a temporary increase in existing noise levels during grading and construction of the
project. Noise impacts resulting from construction would depend on the noise generated by various
pieces of construction equipment, the timing and duration of noise-generating activities, and the
distance between construction noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors, as well as existing
ambient noise levels. Noise generated during construction would vary throughout the construction
period and on any given day, depending on the construction phase and the type and amount of
equipment used at the construction site. The highest noise levels would be generated during grading
of the site, with lower noise levels occurring during building construction and finishing. Sensitive noise
receptors are located at the residences adjacent to the project site. However, as explained in the
General Plan EIR, construction sound levels would be intermittent and varied through a single day as
well as the duration of project construction.
As mentioned above, the 2040 General Plan includes goals, policies and actions that set forth
measures to avoid and minimize adverse impacts of increased noise resulting from construction or
operation of development projects (PH 6.10, PH 6.11, PH 6.12). The General Plan EIR concluded that
with implementation of General Plan policies and adherence to City regulations, noise impacts from
future development would be less than significant. Furthermore, Article XVI of the Gilroy City Code
limits the hours of construction and maintenance activities to the less sensitive hours of the day
(7:00am to 7:00pm Monday through Friday and 9:00am to 7:00 pm on Saturdays). These policies and
regulations are intended to prevent increases in ambient noise levels and would be considered
uniformly applied regulations to which the proposed project would be subject to compliance. The
proposed project would not result in significant impacts not otherwise addressed in the General Plan
EIR or peculiar to the project or site regarding permanent or temporary increases in noise. No further
review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b) Vibration. The proposed residential use would not result in generation of or exposure to vibration
as there are no known sources of vibration. There would be no construction methods or equipment
used that would generate excessive vibration. The General Plan EIR indicates that General Plan Policy
PH 6.12 requires a vibration impact assessment for proposed development projects in which heavy-
duty construction equipment would be used (e.g. pile driving, bulldozing) within 200 feet of an
existing structure or sensitive receptor. Policy PH 6.13 requires proposed residential and commercial
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -43- November 2021
projects located within 200 feet of existing major freeways and railroad lines to conduct a ground
vibration and vibration noise evaluation consistent with City-approved methodologies. Neither of
these situations are applicable to the proposed project. The proposed project would not result in
significant impacts not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the project or site
regarding permanent or temporary increases in noise. No further review is necessary pursuant to
CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(e-f) Airport Noise. The project site is not located near an airport or private airstrip.
14. POPULATION
AND HOUSING Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)? (City Threshold 12a)
DEIR pp. 2-12 to
2-15 Not Applicable Not Applicable None
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? (City
Threshold 12b)
DEIR pp. 4.2-14
to 4.2-15 Not Applicable Not Applicable None
(a) Inducement of Substantial Population Growth. The 2040 General Plan EIR estimated population
and housing increases that could result from potential development and buildout; the EIR estimated
an additional 6,477 new residential units (3,199 single-family units and 3,278 multi-family)
throughout the City by the year 2040 (Gilroy 2020a). The EIR also projects an estimated 21,434 new
jobs by 2040. The EIR evaluated growth-inducing impacts of the General Plan, and indicated that
growth associated with the 2040 Gilroy General Plan would not occur beyond the existing Urban
Growth Boundary and that the Urban Service Area Boundary and the Urban Growth Boundary would
serve as the primary growth management policy mechanism in the 2040 General Plan.
The City had a population of 55,928 people as of January 1, 2019 as reported in the General Plan EIR
(Gilroy 2020a). The City’s population as of January 1, 2021 was 56,599 (California Department of
Finance 2021). The project would include construction of up to four new dwelling units with three
ADUs. The proposed residential units are within the total remaining unbuilt residential development
analyzed in the General Plan EIR; see discussion in Section IV.B (Environmental Checklist). Based on
the City’s existing average household size of 3.27, the proposed project would result in a maximum
population increase of approximately 23 people, resulting in a total City population of 56,622
residents when added to the City’s existing population. This is within the General Plan’s population
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -44- November 2021
forecast of 75,684 for the for the year 2040. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially
induce unplanned population growth. Since the potential population growth resulting from the
proposed project would fall within the total level of development analyzed in the General Plan EIR
and is consistent with current regional forecasts, the project would not result in new significant
impacts or impacts peculiar to the project or site. Therefore, no further environmental analysis is
required pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines section
15183.
(b) Displacement of Existing Housing or People. No housing units exist on the project site. Therefore,
the project would not result in displacement of housing or residents. No further review is necessary
pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities or need for new or physical altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? (City Threshold
13a)
DEIR pp. 3-361
to 3-364
FEIR pp. 3-13
No No
Payment of
Development
Impact Fees
Police protection? (City Threshold
13b)
DEIR pp. 3-355
to 3-556
FEIR pp. 3-13
No No
Payment of
Development
Impact Fees
Schools? (City Threshold 13c) DEIR pp. 3-366
to 3-370 No No
Payment of
School Impact
Fees
Parks? (City Threshold 13d) DEIR pp. 3-379
to 3-387 No No
Payment of
Development
Impact Fees
Other public facilities? (City
Threshold 13e) Not Applicable No No None
Fire Protection, Police Protection, and School Facilities. As indicated in Section IV.B (Environmental
Checklist), the City’s General Plan EIR considered the construction of approximately 6,477 new
residential units within the City by the year 2040 (Gilroy 2020a), and the proposed project is within
the total and remaining unbuilt residential units. Thus, the project’s proposed maximum of four
residential units with three ADUs would be within the overall amount of development evaluated in
the General Plan EIR. The EIR analyses concluded that impacts of potential development and buildout
accommodated by the General Plan would be less than significant for fire protection and school
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -45- November 2021
enrollments, and there would be no impact on police protection. Specifically, the EIR concluded that
the current size of the City’s police station is adequately sized to accommodate the increase in staff
required from anticipated population increases under the General Plan buildout. Thus, construction
of any new police facilities would not be warranted with General Plan buildout. The General Plan EIR
also indicates that a fourth fire station may be required to serve development under the General Plan
for which site-specific impacts would be evaluated after the site is selected. The EIR concluded that
impacts related to fire protection and new facilities would be less than significant as fire facilities are
permitted in most city zones. Additionally, General Plan Policy PFS 1.11 explains that applicants for
new development are required to pay Development Impact Fees for public facilities (including fire
protection services). The Gilroy Unified School District collects Level I fees in accordance with the school
district’s Developer Fee Justification Study (Gilroy Unified School District 2020). Future anticipated
development under the buildout of the Gilroy 2040 General Plan would be responsible for the payment
of the fees. The required fees for fire protection, police protection, and school facilities would be
considered an application of uniformly applied development standards.
Because the proposed project size would fall within the total amount of potential development
analyzed in the General Plan EIR and would not result in more severe impacts than analyzed in the
General Plan EIR, no further environmental analysis is required regarding these public services
pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
Parks and Recreation. See Section 16 below regarding impacts to parks and recreational facilities.
16. RECREATION
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be
accelerated? (City Threshold 13d)
DEIR pp. 3-379
to 3-387 No No
Payment of
Development
Impact Fees
b) Include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion
of recreational facilities?
DEIR pp. 3-379
to 3-387 No No None
(a) Use of Existing Parks and Recreational Facilities. The City has responsibility for management,
maintenance and operation of over 299 acres of parks and open space lands and oversees
development of new parks and improvements within City-owned parks, open space, and community
facilities (Gilroy 2020a). In the project area, the San Ysidro Park provides neighborhood park
amenities to local residents including sports courts, hiking, jogging path, turf area, picnic tables,
grilling areas, and public restrooms.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -46- November 2021
As indicated in Section IV.B (Environmental Checklist), the City’s General Plan EIR considered
construction of approximately 6,477 new residential units within the City by the year 2040, and the
proposed project is within the total and remaining unbuilt residential units. Thus, the proposed
project would be within the overall amount of development evaluated in the General Plan EIR. The
EIR analyses states that the City does not meet its goal for parklands of 5.0 acres per 1,000 and that
the City would need a total of 367 additional acres of developed parkland to accommodate the total
population anticipated under the City’s 2040 General Plan buildout conditions. However, as the EIR
concludes, implementation of 2040 General Plan goals, policies, and actions that set forth measures
to avoid and minimize adverse impacts on park and recreational facilities, as well as compliance with
local regulations, would ensure that impacts to parks and recreational facilities resulting from
buildout of the General Plan would be less than significant.
General Plan Policy PFS 1.11 explains that applicants for new development are required to pay
Development Impact Fees for public facilities (including parks). The required fees for park expansion
and improvements would be considered an application of uniformly applied development standards.
The EIR also concludes that planning and prioritization, as required by General Plan policies, would
help to ensure that existing facilities would not be substantially impacted either physically or
environmentally by anticipated population growth and buildout under the proposed Gilroy 2040
General Plan. Thus, the proposed project would be required to pay Development Impact Fees and
would not result in significant impacts to parks and recreational facilities not otherwise addressed in
the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the project or site. No further review is necessary pursuant to
CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b) New Recreational Facilities. The proposed project does not include public recreational facilities or
specifically require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. However, as indicated
above, the City’s General Plan provides programs and policies that call for the expansion and
improvement of existing City parks and recreational spaces to accommodate future buildout. The EIR
concludes that potential impacts to parks and recreational facilities with growth accommodated by
the General Plan would be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in
significant impacts to parks and recreational facilities not otherwise addressed in the General Plan
EIR or peculiar to the project or site. No further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3
and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
17. TRANSPORTATION
Where Impact
is Addressed in
General Plan
2030 EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit, roadway,
bicycle and pedestrian facilities? (City
Threshold 14f)
DEIR pp. 3-389
to 3-399, 3-408
to 3-411, 3-421
to 3-435
No No None
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -47- November 2021
17. TRANSPORTATION
Where Impact
is Addressed in
General Plan
2030 EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
b) Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
DEIR pp. 3-389,
3-411 to 3-421 No No None
c) Substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature (for
example, sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses
(for example, farm equipment)? (City
Threshold 14c)
No No None
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access? (City Threshold 14d)
DEIR pp. 3-270
to 3-271 No No None
(a) Conflict with Circulation Plan, Policy, or Ordinance. The Gilroy 2040 General Plan Policy M 1.7
requires the reduction of VMT by developing a transportation network that makes it convenient to
use transit, ride a bicycle, walk, or use other non-automobile modes of transportation. Consistent
with this policy, average VMT projections for the City of Gilroy would be reduced by the
implementation of measures that reduce the total number of miles traveled, or trips, per person,
including changes to the City’s travel demand management program, expanded transit, and
multimodal transportation system improvements, such as: signal timing changes, signal
synchronization, adaptive traffic signal systems, bicycle, pedestrian and transit infrastructure
improvements, and streetscape projects to enhance the pedestrian environment. The General Plan
EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan would not result in conflicts with a program,
plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities. The General Plan EIR also identified intersection improvements.
The proposed project would provide onsite sidewalks, and the project site is located in proximity to
existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. Both Lewis Street and Chestnut Street are connected
to the area’s pedestrian sidewalk network. Forest Street, which is approximately 250 feet west of the
project site, is developed with a Class II bike lane, and the Valley Transportation Authority has two
bus stops on Monterey Road, approximately 0.25-mile from the project site. The project would not
conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs that support alternative transportation. Because
the proposed project would be within the overall amount of development evaluated in the General
Plan EIR, the project would not result in a more severe significant impact related to conflicts with
transportation plans or ordinances than otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR and would not
result in an impact peculiar to the project or site. Therefore, no further review is necessary pursuant
to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b) Conflicts with State CEQA Guidelines. Amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines at the end of
2018 added a new question of whether or not a project would conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -48- November 2021
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b). This is a new section that codifies the switch from level
of service (LOS) to VMT as the metric for transportation analysis pursuant to state legislation adopted
in 2013. In September 2013 Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 743 which made significant changes
to how transportation impacts are to be assessed under CEQA. SB 743 directs the Governor’s Office
of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop a new metric to replace LOS as a measure of impact
significance and suggests vehicle miles travelled as that metric. According to the legislation, upon
certification of the guidelines, automobile delay, as described solely by LOS shall not be considered a
significant impact (Section 21009(a)(2)). SB 743 also creates a new CEQA exemption for certain
projects that are consistent with the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy.
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b) indicates that development projects that exceed an applicable
VMT threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one-half
mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high quality transit corridor
should be presumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact. Projects that decrease
VMT in the project area compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less-than-
significant transportation impact.
The City’s General Plan EIR indicates that the City of Gilroy CEQA thresholds of significance no longer
apply as SB 743 requirements replaced those thresholds with VMT requirements. The VMT analysis
in the General Plan EIR considers OPR’s recommended 15 percent below baseline conditions as the
threshold to identify potential VMT impacts. The City’s Draft VMT Guidelines have established an
impact threshold of 15 percent below the 2017 baseline citywide average daily residential VMT of
16.46 VMT per capita and average daily employment VMT of 20.14 VMT per job. Therefore, the
impact of growth on transportation would be considered significant if it results in VMT per capita or
per job that is greater than either or both average daily 13.99 VMT per capita and average daily 17.12
VMT per job.
The results of the VMT evaluation indicate that the Gilroy 2040 General Plan would result in a
decrease in average daily residential VMT (-1.84 VMT per capita) and an increase in average daily
employment VMT (+1.80 VMT per job) compared to the 2017 baseline citywide average VMT. Both
the residential VMT and employment VMT projections under the Gilroy 2040 General Plan conditions
would be above the threshold established by the City, resulting in a significant impact. The EIR
includes a mitigation measure for the City to update its Transportation Demand Management
Program (Gilroy City Code Chapter 25B) and that implementation of this measure in addition to
implementation of Gilroy 2040 General Plan goals, policies and programs would reduce VMT. The
Gilroy 2040 General Plan Policy M 1.7 requires the reduction of VMT by developing a
transportation network that makes it convenient to use transit, ride a bicycle, walk, or use
other non-automobile modes of transportation. Consistent with this policy, average VMT
projections for the City of Gilroy would be reduced by the implementation of measures that
reduce the total number of miles traveled, or trips, per person. However, the EIR concluded that there
is no guarantee that these measures would reduce this significant impact to a less-than-significant
level. Therefore, the impact of VMT resulting from implementation of the Gilroy 2040 General Plan
would be significant and unavoidable.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -49- November 2021
As indicated in Section IV.B (Environmental Checklist), the City’s General Plan EIR considered
construction of approximately 6,477 new residential units within the City by the year 2040 (Gilroy
2020a), and the proposed project is within the total and remaining unbuilt residential units. Thus, the
proposed project would be within the overall amount of development evaluated in the General Plan
EIR, and the proposed project would not result in a more severe significant impact related to VMT
than otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or an impact peculiar to the project or site.
Therefore, no further review is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183.
(c, d) Design-Safety and Emergency Access. The project would be designed in accordance with City
requirements, and there are no access designs that would substantially increase hazards. The project
would be designed in accordance with City police and fire department requirements and would
provide for adequate emergency access. Therefore, the project would not result in increased hazards
related to project design and would not provide inadequate emergency access.
18. TRIBAL CULTURAL
RESOURCES
Where Impact
is Addressed in
2040 General
Plan EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of
the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American
tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
FEIR pp 2-8 to
2-10 Not Applicable Not Applicable None
b) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe?
FEIR pp 2-8 to
2-10 Not Applicable Not Applicable
Standard
Planning
Condition of
Approval for
unanticipated
discovery of
archaeological
resource
State Assembly Bill 52, effective July 1, 2015, recognizes that California Native American prehistoric,
historic, archaeological, cultural, and sacred places are essential elements in tribal cultural traditions,
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -50- November 2021
heritages, and identities. The law establishes a new category of resources in the California
Environmental Quality Act called “tribal cultural resources” that considers the tribal cultural values in
addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation. Public
Resources Code section 21074 defines a “tribal cultural resource” as either:
(1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
(a) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of
Historical Resources.
(b) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of
Section 5020.1.
(2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1.
(a-b) Tribal Cultural Resources and Consultation. The California Public Resources Code section
21084.2 establishes that “[a] project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the
environment.” The Public Resources Code requires a lead agency to consult with any California Native
American tribe that requests consultation and is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the
geographic area of a proposed project. No such request has been made to the City of Gilroy, and thus
notification and consultation are not required. The General Plan EIR did not identify any tribal cultural
resources within the City.
As discussed in Section 5 of this Environmental Checklist, the project site is not located within an area
identified as being sensitive for archaeological resources (City of Gilroy 2020a). Standard planning
conditions of approval also apply to the project that require a procedure to follow in the event that
unknown archaeological and/or tribal cultural materials are unearthed during construction. Thus, the
project would not result in an impact on tribal cultural resources.
19. UTILITIES AND
SERVICE SYSTEMS Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment
facilities, or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or which could cause
significant environmental effects?
DEIR pp. 3-442
to 3-443, 3-446
to 3-449, 3-453
No No None
b) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
DEIR pp. 3-312
to 3-319 No No None
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -51- November 2021
19. UTILITIES AND
SERVICE SYSTEMS Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years? (City Thresholds
15b and 15d)
FEIR pp. 3-14
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing
commitments? (City Thresholds 15b
and 15e)
DEIR pp. 3-446
to 3-449
FEIR pp. 3-14
No No None
d) Generate solid waste in excess of
State or local standards, or in excess
of the capacity of local infrastructure,
or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals? (City
Threshold 15f)
DEIR pp. 3-453
to 3-456 No No None
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid
waste?
DEIR pp. 3-453
to 3-456 No No None
(a) Relocation or Construction of Utilities. The proposed project would be served by existing utilities,
and the General Plan EIR concluded that no new or expanded water, wastewater or storm drainage
facilities would be needed to serve development resulting from implementation of the General Plan.
The City’s wastewater treatment facility would be adequate to handle growth and development
accommodated by the General Plan and would not require expansion or construction of facilities to
serve future growth; see subsection (c) below. Because the size of the proposed project would fall
within the total amount of potential development analyzed in the General Plan EIR the proposed
project would not result in more severe impacts than evaluated in the General Plan EIR. The project
would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater
treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities.
Therefore, no further environmental analysis is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section
21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(b) Water Supply. The project site is located within the service area of the City of Gilroy Department
of Public Works. The City’s water is supplied from local groundwater sources. The proposed
residences would be individually connected to an existing water main within Chestnut Street,
immediately north of the project site.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -52- November 2021
The City’s General Plan EIR provides a comprehensive analysis of impacts of groundwater demand
within the City’s service area, including potential buildout accommodated by the General Plan. The
General Plan EIR predicted that water supplies would be adequate in normal years to serve estimated
growth within the City of Gilroy water service area. The General Plan EIR concluded that impacts to
the City’s groundwater supply would be less than significant because the water demand associated
with the General Plan buildout would not surpass groundwater demand estimates within the City’s
2015 Urban Water Management Plan which is described in greater detail below. Measures are
identified in General Plan policies and actions to further conserve water, reduce demand, and support
recycling of water.
In addition to the City’s 2040 General Plan, the City prepared and adopted its 2015 Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP). The UWMP projects the City’s total reliable water supply for normal
years at approximately 16,840 million gallons or 51,679 acre-feet per year. As shown in Tables 7-2, 7-
3, and 7-4 of the UWMP, water supply is projected to exceed demand in normal, single dry year, and
multiple dry years through 2040. The General Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the 2040
General Plan may increase water demand for new and existing development within the Urban Growth
Boundary, but not beyond the demand identified in the UWMP. To calculate the City’s water demand
through the UWMP planning horizon of 2040, the City’s 2020 urban water use target of 133 gallons
per capita per day was applied to the projected population set forth in the 2016 Draft General Plan
Update of 95,105. The revised Urban Growth Boundary in the General Plan Update reduced the
projected 2040 population of approximately 75,684. With a per capita multiplier of 133 gallons per
capita per day, the projected demand in 2040 would be approximately 10.1 million gallons per day
or approximately 3,687 million gallons per year (11,425 acre-feet per year). Therefore, any increase
in water demand resulting from buildout of the 2040 General Plan would be less than that identified
in the UWMP.
The proposed project size would fall within the total amount of potential development analyzed in
the General Plan EIR. Thus, the proposed project would not result in new significant impacts related
to availability of water supplies not otherwise addressed in the General Plan EIR or peculiar to the
project or site with implementation of uniformly applied development standards. No further review
is necessary pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and the State CEQA Guidelines section 15183
(c) Wastewater Treatment Capacity. The project would be served by existing wastewater treatment
utilities; the proposed residences would connect to an existing sewer main within Chestnut Street,
immediately north of the project site. Collected sewer flows generated by the City are generally
conveyed south and to the east to the South County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, which is
owned and operated by the South County Regional Wastewater Authority (SCRWA).
The General Plan EIR concluded that implementation of wastewater management goals and policies
regarding ongoing maintenance, treatment, and water conservation would reduce the impact of the
General Plan’s project buildout. However, the EIR states that these goals and policies would not avoid
the need for new or expanded wastewater collection and treatment facilities. Future development
consistent with the Gilroy 2040 General Plan buildout estimations could result in an increase in the
demand for wastewater services that could potentially exceed the capacity of the existing and
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -53- November 2021
planned sanitary sewer system and treatment plan. Potential construction of new wastewater
infrastructure could result in significant environmental impacts. However, the EIR concluded that
expected construction and operation of new sanitary sewer and wastewater treatment facilities
would have similar impacts as other types of new development within the City. Site-specific
environmental impacts would be required to be analyzed once project development plans are
proposed for these facilities. General Plan policies and mitigation measures would serve to avoid or
reduce potential impacts from any proposed sewer system and wastewater treatment facilities. The
General Plan EIR also reports that implementation of the General Plan would require new or
expanded wastewater facilities, but not beyond those identified in the City of Gilroy Sewer System
Master Plan as a result of the 2016 Urban Growth Boundary Initiative. Therefore, the EIR concluded
that the impacts associated with the provision of wastewater service would be less than significant.
The proposed project is within the total and remaining unbuilt residential units within the General
Plan buildout projections. The EIR analyses concluded that impacts of potential development and
buildout accommodated by the General Plan would be less than significant for wastewater
treatment, even considering the potential for future sanitary system and wastewater system
development. Because the size of the proposed project would not result in new significant impacts
or more severe impacts than evaluated in the General Plan EIR or impacts peculiar to the project or
site., no further environmental analysis is required pursuant to Public Resources Code section
21083.3.
(d-e) Solid Waste Disposal. The project would be served by existing utilities, including solid waste
disposal services. The General Plan EIR concluded that the City’s landfill would be adequate to handle
growth and development accommodated by the General Plan and would not require expansion or
construction of facilities to serve future growth. As indicated in Section IV.B (Environmental
Checklist), the City’s General Plan EIR considered construction of new residential units in the City with
an estimated buildout of 6,477 new residential units (3,199 single-family units and 3,278 multi-family)
throughout the City by the year 2040 (Gilroy 2020a). The proposed project is within the total and
remaining unbuilt residential units. The size of the proposed project would fall within the total
amount of potential development analyzed in the General Plan EIR and the project would comply
with local, state, and federal solid waste reduction statues and regulations. The project would also
be required to comply with city and county waste reduction programs and policies aimed to reduce
the volume of solid waste entering landfills. For these reasons, the proposed project would not result
in new significant impacts or more severe impacts than evaluated in the General Plan EIR or impacts
peculiar to the project or site. No further environmental analysis is required regarding solid waste
pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -54- November 2021
20. WILDFIRE
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards
If located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands
classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation?
DEIR pp. 3-271 No No None
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Not Evaluated Not Applicable Not Applicable None
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
Not Evaluated Not Applicable Not Applicable None
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or landslides,
as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
Not Evaluated Not Applicable Not Applicable None
(a) Emergency Plans. The project site is not located in or near a state responsibility area or lands
classified as very high fire hazard severity zones (CAL FIRE 2007). See also Hazards and Hazardous
Materials Section 9(f).
(b-d) Wildfire Impacts and Exposure. The 2019 CEQA Guidelines amendment added a question
regarding wildfire impacts and exposure. The General Plan EIR notes that the western hillside area is
the only area of the City subject to potentially high fire hazards. The project site is not located in or
near the western hillside area or a state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones; see also Hazards and Hazardous Materials Section 9(g). The site is flat and surrounding
by development in an urban setting. Therefore, no impacts related to wildfire would occur.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -55- November 2021
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS
OF SIGNIFICANCE
Where Impact
is Addressed in
the 2040
General Plan
EIR
Does Project
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Impacts
Peculiar to
Project or
Site?
Relevant
General Plan
Mitigation
Measures or
Other Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Standards Would the project:
a) Have the potential to substantially
degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, substantially
reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
DEIR pp. 3-138
to 3-149, 3-153,
3-169 to 3-171
to 3-175, FEIR
pp. 3-5 to 3-6
No No
GP Action
NRC2.2.1 &
Project
Assessment
Protocols for
Special Status
Species; GP EIR
Mitigation 4.9-1
and Municipal
Code section
24.12.430
b) Have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of the
past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
DEIR pp 4-2 to
4-11 No No None
c) Have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
DEIR pp. 3-193
to 3-202, 3-264
to 3-274, 3-336
to 3-346
No No None
(a) Quality of the Environment. The project would not degrade the quality of the environment or
otherwise affect fish and wildlife habitat with implementation of uniformly applied development
standards as discussed in Section 4 (Biological Resources) of this Environmental Checklist review. As
discussed in Section 5 (Cultural Resources), the project would have no significant effect on cultural
resources with implementation of uniformly applied development standards, regulations, and
policies, and would not result in elimination of important examples of a major period of California
history or prehistory.
(b) Cumulative Impacts. Chapter 4.0 of the General Plan EIR describes potential cumulative impacts
to each impact area and provides analysis and a determination as to whether the proposed General
Plan’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable. This chapter of the EIR concludes that
there would be cumulatively considerable impacts related to agricultural resources and
transportation (related to VMT). The EIR also notes that potential impacts to air quality, GHG
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -56- November 2021
emissions and noise are inherently considered in a cumulative context and therefore cumulative
analysis is covered in their respective topic sections.
As discussed in Section 2 (Agricultural Resources) of this Environmental Checklist review, the
proposed project would not result in conversion of agricultural or forest lands, as these resources are
not present on or adjacent to the project site. Therefore, the project would not contribute to
potential cumulative impacts to agricultural resources identified in the General Plan EIR.
The General Plan concluded that VMT resulting from General Plan buildout would be cumulatively
considerable. Because the proposed project is within the amount of development considered in the
General Plan EIR, the proposed project would not result in new significant impacts or substantially
more severe impacts than analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Thus, no further review is necessary
pursuant to CEQA section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15183.
(c) Substantial Adverse Effects on Human Beings. No environmental effects have been identified that
would have direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings.
V. REFERENCES
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017a. CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. May
2017. Accessed August 10, 2021. https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-
research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en.
BAAQMD. 2017b. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 2017. Accessed August 10,
2021. https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-air-
plan/attachment-a_-proposed-final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en.
California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2018. California Important Farmland Finder (online
tool). 2018. Accessed July 30, 2021. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp.
California Department of Finance. May 2021. “E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates,
1/1/2021.” Accessed August 30,
2021. https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zones
in SRA Map. November 2007. Accessed August 9,
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -57- November 2021
2021. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/wildfire-planning-engineering/wildland-hazards-
building-codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps/.
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2021. EnviroStor Data Management
System. Accessed August 12, 2021. https://dtsc.ca.gov/your-envirostor/.
California State Water Resources Control Board. 2021. GeoTracker Data Management System.
Accessed August 12, 2021. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/.
City of Gilroy. 2040 General Plan and EIR. 2020:
a. June 2020. Gilroy 2040 General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH#
2015082014. Dated June 22, 2020.
b. September 2020. Gilroy 2040 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. SCH#
2015082014. Dated September 24, 2020.
c. November 2020. City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan. Adopted November 2, 2020. Available
online at https://www.cityofgilroy.org/274/2040-General-Plan.
City of Gilroy.
- City Code (various chapters as referenced in text). Available online
at: https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Gilroy/.
- Urban Water Management Plan. 2015. Accessed August 10, 2021. Available online
at: http://www.ci.gilroy.ca.us/265/Water-Management-Plan.
- May 2004. Thresholds of Significance, Final. Adopted May 3, 2004. Prepared by EMC Planning
Group, Inc.
- 2004a. Parks & Recreation System Master Plan. Accessed August 10,
2021. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/5253/Park-and-Recreation-
Systems-Master-Plan---June-2002.
- 2004b. Sewer System Master Plan. 2004. Accessed August 10,
2021. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/5254/Sanitary-Sewer-Master-
Plan---May-2004.
- 2004c. Water System Master Plan. 2004. Accessed August 10,
2021. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/5257/Water-System-Master-
Plan---May-2004.
- 2003. Fire Department Memorandum. Accessed August 10,
2021. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/5258/Gilroy-Fire-Master-Plan-
Update---September-2003.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2009. FEMA Flood Map Service Center (online
tool). Accessed August 12, 2021. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home.
Gilroy Unified School District. 2020. Developer Fee Justification Study Gilroy Unified School District.
Accessed August 19, 2021. https://www.gilroyunified.org/fs/resource-
manager/view/3cc6733f-ec1d-427c-95f4-5185d0ee2a9c.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
395 Lewis Street Project
Environmental Review -58- November 2021
H.T. Harvey & Associates. 2016. Biological Resources Report for 395 Lewis Street Property.
H.T. Harvey & Associates. 2017. Arborist Report for 395 Lewis Redevelopment Project.
Mark Design Group. 2018. Nguyen’s Land Development (project plan set).
Mark Design Group. Response to City of Gilroy Staff Comments dated July 15, 2020.
Santa Clara County. 2021. Maps and GIS Data – GIS Mapping
Portal. https://sccplanning.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html.
Silicon Valley Soil Engineering. 2018. Geotechnical Investigation for Proposed Residential
Development 395 Lewis Street.
Preparation: Dudek in association with the City of Gilroy Planning Division of the Community
Development Department.
8.1.d
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Karen L. Garner
DIRECTOR
Community Development
Department
7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, California 95020-61197
Telephone: (408) 846-0451 Fax (408) 846-0429
http://www.cityofgilroy.org
DATE: January 20, 2022
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Cindy McCormick, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: 395 Lewis Street 4-lot Subdivision, Tentative Map (TM 20-01,
20010014) and Architectural and Site Review (AS 20-02,
20010012)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has analyzed the proposed project, and recommends that the
Planning Commission:
a) Adopt a Resolution recommending City Council approval of a Tentative
Map to subdivide the property located at 395 Lewis Street (APN: 841-
03-062) into four parcels (File Number TM 20-01); and
b) Adopt a Resolution recommending City Council approval of an
Architectural and Site Review Permit to allow construction of four (4)
two-story single-family homes on property located at 395 Lewis Street
(APN: 841-03-062) following approval of Tentative Map file number TM
20-01 to subdivide the property into four (4) single family parcels (File
Number AS 20-02).
BACKGROUND:
Project Description: The proposed project requires approval of a tentative (parcel)
map and an architectural and site review permit. The proposed parcel map would
subdivide an existing vacant 1.05-acre (45,816 square feet) lot into four (4) single-family
residential lots (Attachment 1). As illustrated in the architectural plans (Attachment 2),
each new lot would be developed with a two-story single-family home and three of the
lots would each be developed with a detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU). Lots 1, 2,
and 3 would each be 8,363 square feet in area, while Lot 4 would be 12,155 square feet
in area. The project would install frontage improvements (e.g., sidewalk, curb, and
gutter) and dedicate street right-of-way to widen Chestnut Street by approximately 21.5
8.1.e
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: PC Staff Report 01-20-22 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
2
feet. The net project site area, after deducting the right of way dedication, totals 37,245
square feet.
The project site is bounded by Lewis Street to the south, Chestnut Street to the east,
and Upper Miller Slough to the west. The project site is surrounded by residential uses.
San Ysidro City Park is located approximately 700 feet east of the project site.
LOCATION EXISTING LAND USE GENERAL PLAN ZONING
Project Site Vacant Low Density Residential R1 Single-Family
North Single-Family Home Low Density Residential R3 Medium Density
South Single-Family Home Low Density Residential R1 Single-Family
East Single-Family Home Low Density Residential R1 Single-Family
and R2 Two-Family
West Single-Family Home Low Density Residential R1 Single-Family
Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the environmental checklist prepared for this
project (on file with the Community Development Department), the project has been
deemed statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines
section 15183 (Projects Consistent with General Plan, Community Plan or Zoning). The
project has also been deemed categorically exempt, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
section 15315 (Class 15, Minor Land Divisions).
ANALYSIS:
The proposed project requires tentative map approval by the City Council upon
recommendation of the Planning Commission and Architectural and Site Review Permit
approval by the community development director or designee. Staff is recommending
that both entitlements be processed concurrently by the Planning Commission and the
City Council since the Architectural and Site Review Permit approval is contingent on
approval of the tentative (parcel) map.
General Plan Consistency: The 2040 General Plan land use designation of the site is
Low Density Residential. The project would result in a residential density of
approximately four (4) dwelling units per acre (du/a), consistent with the allowed density
of 3-8 du/a. The proposed 4-lot subdivision, site layout, and architectural design is
consistent with the following General Plan goals and policies:
General Plan Goal / Policy Consistency Analysis
8.1.e
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: PC Staff Report 01-20-22 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
3
Goal LU 1 Protect and enhance Gilroy’s
quality of life and unique identity while
continuing to grow and change.
The project would develop an
underutilized property with residential
uses that have been designed with
architectural features that will enhance
the residential neighborhood.
LU 1.1 Pattern of Development:
Ensure an orderly, contiguous pattern of
development that prioritizes infill
development, phases new development,
encourages compactness and efficiency,
preserves surrounding open space and
agricultural resources, and avoids land
use incompatibilities
The proposed infill project will be
compatible with the surrounding
residential uses. The site plan has
been designed to comply with the
required 35-foot riparian setback from
the Upper Miller Slough’s top of bank,
a category 2 stream.
Goal LU 3 Provide a variety of housing
types that offer choices for Gilroy
residents and create complete, livable
neighborhoods
The four single-family homes and three
accessory dwelling units will provide a
variety of housing types on a site that
is currently undeveloped.
LU 3.1 Existing Neighborhoods:
Maintain and enhance the quality of
existing residential neighborhoods,
ensuring adequate public facilities such
as parks, schools, streets, water supply,
and drainage
As provided in the environmental
review checklist for the project, the site
will be served by adequate public
facilities such as parks, schools,
streets, and water supply. The project
drainage plan has been prepared in
accordance with City requirements.
LU 3.4 Compatible Lotting Pattern: For
infill projects where there is an
established pattern of lot sizes abutting a
project site, new development should
reflect the existing lotting pattern,
particularly the lot width of parcels
directly across an existing street.
The lotting pattern is consistent with
residential properties to the south,
east, and west. The site to the north is
currently underutilized. The proposed
residences would be centrally located
within the newly created parcels and
face Chestnut Street. The residences
would have front yard setbacks of at
least 26 feet, rear yard setbacks of at
least 35 feet, and side yard setbacks of
at least 6 feet.
Habitat Plan compliance: Pursuant to the Habitat Agency Geobrowser, the site is
urbanized and not located within a special fee zone area. Therefore, only standard
habitat agency fees (nitrogen deposition) would be applied. As discussed in the
attached Biological Resources Report and CEQA checklist, the proposed project is
adjacent to the Miller Slough, an ephemeral stream. Although the project is not located
within any special Habitat Plan permit area, the Plan does recommend a 35-foot
8.1.e
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: PC Staff Report 01-20-22 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
4
setback from the top of bank of riparian corridors. The proposed project meets the
recommended setback of 35 feet from the Miller Slough’s top of bank, exceeding the
City of Gilroy’s Stream Protection Policy that requires a 20-foot setback from the top of
bank for residential development.
Tentative Map Review: Pursuant to Gilroy City Code (GCC) Section 21.41 (Action on
tentative map), the planning commission shall after considering all reports,
recommendations, comments and opinions, transmit its recommendation for approval or
conditional approval, to the city council within sixty (60) days from the date of its
decision. The tentative map may be denied only if the property as proposed to be
developed would conflict with the City code, statute, law or other valid regulation, or if
the land is subject to severe flood hazard or severe inundation. A final map is not
required for a parcel map under Section 66426 of the Subdivision Map Act.
Tentative Map Analysis: The project has been reviewed by all City departments and
applicable agencies. Based on this review, conditions of approval have been prepared
in conformance with the requirements of City Code. Residential subdivisions must
comply with Chapter 21, Subdivisions and Land Development. The property is not
subject to severe flood hazard or severe inundation and the project is consistent with
City Code as follows:
1. Flood Zone: The project site is located in an area designated as Flood Zone X,
which is not a 100-year flood zone or considered a special hazard flood zone per
the FEMA Flood Rate Insurance Maps (FEMA 2009).
2. Density: The project would result in a residential density of approximately four (4)
dwelling units per acre (du/a), consistent with the General Plan allowed density of
3-8 du/a.
3. Lot Sizes: Lots 1, 2, and 3 would each be 8,363 square feet in area, while Lot 4
would be 12,155 square feet in area, consistent with minimum 6,660 square foot
lot size for the R1 district.
4. Site Layout: The proposed single-family residences would be centrally located
within the newly created parcels and face Chestnut Street. The residences would
be consistent with setbacks for the R1 zoning district with front yard setbacks of at
least 26 feet, rear yard setbacks of at least 35 feet, and side yard setbacks of at
least 6 feet. The site plan has been designed to comply with the required 35-foot
riparian setback from the Upper Miller Slough’s top of bank, a category 2 stream.
5. Access and Parking. Each parcel would be accessed via new driveways off
Chestnut Street. Each residence includes an attached two-car garage.
6. Street Frontage: Each lot would provide a minimum 40 feet of street frontage on
Chestnut Street.
7. Utilities: The project would connect to the existing City of Gilroy water and sewer
mains east of the site within Chestnut Street. The residences would also connect
8.1.e
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: PC Staff Report 01-20-22 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
5
to existing Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) gas main and electrical pole south of the
site on Lewis Street.
8. Grading. The project proposes 299 cubic yards (cy) of fill and 75 cy of cut, for a
net fill (import) of 224 cy earth material.
9. Stormwater Management. The project would create 24,284 square feet of
impervious surfaces (approximately 53 percent of the site). Individual lots would be
improved with bioretention areas to treat stormwater runoff prior to flowing to an
underground storage to be detained and released into the public system.
10. Tree Removal and Landscaping. The project site consists of two protected trees,
one of which would be preserved. The requested tree removal of one (1) coast live
oak tree is consistent with the City’s Code allowance for such removal. The project
proposes to plant 24 new trees along the perimeter of the site. Landscaping also
includes the planting of various shrubs, groundcover, and grass. Irrigation for
landscaping will be required to comply with the City’s water efficient irrigation
standards.
Tentative Map Findings: Pursuant to staff’s analysis, the following findings can be
made in support of a Planning Commission recommendation of approval of the
requested Parcel Map (TM 20-01), as conditioned in the attached resolution.
a) The proposed Tentative Map is consistent with the intent of the goals and policies of
the City's General Plan.
b) The proposed development is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and the City's
Subdivision and Land Development Code, and the State Subdivision Map Act.
c) Public utilities and infrastructure improvements needed to serve the proposed
project are in proximity to the site.
d) There will be no significant environmental impacts as a result of this project which is
statutorily and categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3, and State CEQA
Guidelines section 15183 and section 15315.
Architectural and Site Review: Pursuant to GCC Section 30.50.41(a) (Architectural
and Site Review Permits), the community development director or designee shall review
and may issue architectural and site approval for development of four (4) or more
single-family residential parcels which have been created from the same parcel map.
Architectural and Site Permit Analysis: Lots 1, 2, and 3 would each include
construction of a 3,193 square-foot single-family home with attached garage and a 631
square-foot detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU). Lot 4 would be developed with a
3,410 square-foot single-family home with attached garage (no ADU). The homes would
have front yard setbacks of at least 26 feet, rear yard setbacks of at least 35 feet, and
side yard setbacks of at least 6 feet. Residential homes on Lots 1-3 are proposed to be
28.5 feet in height, and the Lot 4 residence is proposed to be 28 feet in height. The
application is consistent with all objective development standards for single-family
homes in the R1 single-family residential district. The City does not have objective
8.1.e
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: PC Staff Report 01-20-22 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
6
architectural design standards for single-family homes; however, the proposal has been
designed to be compatible with and enhance the surrounding area.
Architectural and Site Permit Findings: Pursuant to staff’s analysis, the following
findings can be made in support of a Planning Commission recommendation of
approval of the requested Architectural and Site Review Permit (AS 20-02), as
conditioned in the attached resolution.
1. The proposed development is permitted and in conformance with the Gilroy Zoning
Ordinance development standards including height, setbacks, parking and
landscaping, and other adopted policies of the City of Gilroy.
2. The proposed development would be consistent with all applicable goals and
policies of the Gilroy General Plan in that the residential land use is an allowed use
in the single-family residential district.
3. The proposed development would not impair the integrity and character of the area
surrounding and in the vicinity of the subject property given that the project has
been designed to comply with all city development standards, minimizes grading
and tree impacts, and proposes a residential design that is compatible with the
neighborhood character.
4. The subject site would be served by streets and highways adequate in width and
structure to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use will generate, given that
the project will be required to dedicate street right-of-way to widen Chestnut Street
by approximately 21.5 feet..
5. The subject site would be provided with adequate sewerage, water, fire protection
and storm drainage facilities.
6. The proposed development/use will not adversely affect or be materially
detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings or structure or to the public health,
safety or general welfare, given that the project would require a building permit and
has been designed to comply with all applicable city development standards.
Noticing: On January 6, 2022, notices of this Planning Commission meeting were
mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the subject site, and on January 7, 2022,
the project was published in the Gilroy Dispatch. In addition, the Planning Commission
public hearing packets are available through the City's webpage.
Next Steps: The recommendation of the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to
City Council within 50 days. Upon City Council approval, the Engineering Department
would complete the process of signing and recording the Parcel Map.
Attachments:
1. 395 Lewis St Parcel Map 2022-01-13
2. 395 Lewis St Architectural Plans 2021-03-01
3. vicinity map
4. TM 20-01 PC reso
5. AS 20-02 PC reso
6. 395 Lewis CEQA Checklist 11-30-21
7. Arborist Report 10-4-17
8.1.e
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: PC Staff Report 01-20-22 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
7
8. Biological Resources Report 120516
8.1.e
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: PC Staff Report 01-20-22 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
GILROY RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A
TENTATIVE MAP TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 395 LEWIS
STREET (APN: 841-03-062) INTO FOUR PARCELS (FILE NUMBER TM 20-01)
WHEREAS, on March 1, 2021 an application was resubmitted by Qui T. Son, of iMark
Designs proposing subdivision of a 1.05 acre site into four lots, located at 395 Lewis Street within the
City of Gilroy R1 Single-Family Residential zoning district (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, the application submittal was accepted as complete on June 25, 2021; and
WHEREAS, On November 2, 2020 the Gilroy City Council adopted the Gilroy 2040
General Plan after certifying an EIR for the plan and whereas the General Plan EIR reviewed all
of the topics included on the Appendix G environmental checklist in the State CEQA Guidelines
as well as all sections required to be included in an EIR; and
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2021, an environmental checklist was prepared for the Project
to evaluate the impact categories covered in the City’s certified General Plan EIR to determine
whether the project’s impacts have been adequately analyzed in the EIR or whether any new
significant impacts peculiar to the project or project site would result; and
WHEREAS, the project has been deemed statutorily exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State
CEQA Guidelines section 15183 (Projects Consistent with General Plan, Community Plan or
Zoning), and categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15315 (Class 15, Minor
Land Divisions); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting on January 20,
2022, at which time the Planning Commission received and considered the staff report as well as all
evidence received including written and oral public testimony related to the project TM 20-01; and
WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute
the record of proceedings upon which the project approval is based is the Community Development
Department, Planning Division.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Gilroy hereby find as follows:
1. The proposed Tentative Map to subdivide the 1.05 acre property into four (4) new
residential lots is consistent with the intent of the goals and policies of the City's
General Plan and the residential density and uses anticipated within the General Plan
Low Density Residential land use designation.
2. The proposed development is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and the City's
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 2
Subdivision and Land Development Code, and the State Subdivision Map Act given
that the size, shape and location of the property complies with all applicable codes and
ordinances.
3. Public utilities and infrastructure improvements needed in order to serve the proposed
project are in proximity to the site.
4. There will be no significant environmental impacts as a result of this project, which
qualifies for statutory and categorical exemptions from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the
City of Gilroy hereby recommends to the City Council the approval of application TM 20-01, subject
to the Conditions of approval attached hereto as Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of January, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Elle, Doyle, Bhandal, Lewis, Ridley, Fischer, Moreno
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Kraig Tambornini, Secretary Tom Fischer, Chairperson
Tom Fischer (Jan 26, 2022 16:16 PST)
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 3
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TM 20-01
PLANNING CONDITIONS
The following GENERAL conditions authorize specific terms of the project
ENTITLEMENT(S).
1. APPROVED PROJECT: The approval for Tentative Parcel Map TM 20-01 is granted to
subdivide a 1.05-acre site into four (4) single-family residential lots, located at 395 Lewis
Street (APN: 841-03-062) within the City of Gilroy R1 Single-Family Residential zoning
district as shown on the Parcel Map prepared by Carnes and Ekparian Inc Land Surveyors
for Qui T. Son, of iMark Designs, consisting of two (2) sheets, dated January 13, 2022 and
received by the Planning Division on January 13, 2022.
Build-out of the project shall conform to the plans, except as otherwise specified in these
conditions. Any future adjustment or modification to the plans, including any changes
made at time of building permit submittal, shall be considered by the Community
Development Director or designee, may require separate discretionary approval, and shall
conform to all City, State, and Federal requirements, including subsequent City Code
requirements or policies adopted by City Council.
2. COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS: If Developer, owner or tenant fails to comply
with any of the conditions of this permit, the Developer, owner or tenant shall be subject
to permit revocation or enforcement actions pursuant to the City Code. All costs
associated with any such actions shall be the responsibility of Developer, owner or tenant.
3. INDEMNIFICATION: Developer agrees, as a condition of permit approval, at
Developer’s own expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Gilroy
the City”) and its officers, contractors, consultants, attorneys, employees and agents
from any and all claim(s), action(s) or proceeding(s) brought against the City or its
officers, contractors, consultants, attorneys, employees, or agents to challenge, attack, set
aside, void or annul the approval of this resolution or any condition attached thereto or any
proceedings, acts or determinations taken, including actions taken under the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, done or made prior to the approval of
such resolution that were part of the approval process.
4. SIGNS: No signs are approved as part of this application. Prior to issuance of a sign
permit for this site, Developer shall propose well-designed, quality signs that comply with
the allowances of the City Code and are to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director or designee.
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 4
5. SIGNAGE: All signage advertising the development project or components thereof,
including individual tenants or subdivisions, shall be installed or maintained onsite or
offsite as allowed and in conformance with an approved sign permit.
6. WATER LIMITATIONS: Developer shall be advised that the approval is subject to the
drought emergencies provisions pursuant to the Gilroy City Code Chapter 27.98.
The following conditions shall be addressed prior to issuance of any BUILDING PERMIT,
GRADING PERMIT or IMPROVEMENT PLAN, whichever is first issued, or as otherwise
specified in the condition.
7. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: On plans submitted for grading permit, developer shall
include a plan sheet(s) that includes a reproduction of all conditions of approval of this
permit, as adopted by the decision-maker.
8. HABITAT PERMIT: Concurrent with or prior to an application for a grading permit,
Developer shall submit a Habitat Permit application to the City of Gilroy. The application
shall consist of the application processing fee, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Application
For Private Projects and Fees and Conditions Worksheet (available on the Santa Clara
Valley Habitat Agency website: https://www.scv-habitatagency.org/). A grading permit
will be issued only after approval of the Habitat Plan permit and payment of assessed fees.
The following conditions shall be met prior to the approval of the FINAL MAP or PARCEL
MAP, or other deadline as specified in the condition.
9. TENTATIVE MAP: An approved tentative parcel map, which shall expire twenty-four
24) months from the approval date, may be extended pursuant to the provisions of the
Map Act.
The following conditions shall be complied with AT ALL TIMES DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT, or as otherwise specified in the condition.
10. CONSTRUCTION RELATED NOISE: To minimize potential construction-related
impacts to noise, Developer shall include the following language on any grading, site
work, and construction plans issued for the subject site
During earth-moving, grading, and construction activities, Developer shall
implement the following measures at the construction site:
a. Limit construction activity to weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., and on
Saturdays between 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Construction noise is prohibited on
Sundays and City-observed holidays;
b. Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive
receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area;
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 5
c. Construct sound walls or other noise reduction measures prior to developing the
project site;
d. Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust
mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment;
e. Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines;
f. Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where
technology exists; and
g. Designate a “disturbance coordinator’ who would be responsible for responding to
any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will
determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. bad muffler, etc.) and will require
that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem.”
11. CONSTRUCTION RELATED AIR QUALITY: To minimize potential construction-
related impacts to air quality, Developer shall require all construction contractors to
implement the basic construction mitigation measures recommended by the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and shall include the following language on
any grading, site work, and construction plans issued for the project site
During earth-moving, grading, and construction activities, Developer shall
implement the following basic control measures at the construction site:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g. parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day;
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material onsite or offsite shall
be covered;
c. All visible mud or dirt tracked out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed
using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry
power sweeping is prohibited;
d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads or pathways shall be limited to 15 miles per
hour;
e. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless
seeding or soil binders are used;
f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use
or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California
airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of
Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at
all access points;
g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance
with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified
visible emissions evaluator; and
h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the
lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take
corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 6
visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.”
12. DISCOVERY OF CONTAMINATED SOILS: If contaminated soils are discovered, the
Developer will ensure the contractor employs engineering controls and Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to minimize human exposure to potential contaminants. Engineering
controls and construction BMPs will include, but not be limited to, the following:
a. Contractor employees working on-site will be certified in OSHA’s 40-hour
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training;
b. Contractor will stockpile soil during development activities to allow for proper
characterization and evaluation of disposal options;
c. Contractor will monitor area around construction site for fugitive vapor emissions
with appropriate filed screening instrumentation;
d. Contractor will water/mist soil as it is being excavated and loaded onto
transportation trucks;
e. Contractor will place any stockpiled soil in areas shielded from prevailing winds;
and
f. Contractor will cover the bottom of excavated areas with sheeting when work is
not being performed.
13. DISCOVERY OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES: In the event that a fossil is
discovered during construction of the project, excavations within 50’ of the find shall be
temporarily halted or delayed until the discovery is examined by a qualified
paleontologist, in accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. The
City shall include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to
inform contractors of this requirement. If the find is determined to be significant and if
avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall design and carry out a data recovery plan
consistent with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards.
14. DISCOVERY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES: In the event of an accidental
discovery of archaeological resources during grading or construction activities, Developer
shall include the following language on any grading, site work, and construction plans
issued for the project site:
If archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during earth-moving,
grading, or construction activities, all work shall be halted within at least 50 meters
165 feet) of the find and the area shall be staked off immediately. The monitoring
professional archaeologist, if one is onsite, shall be notified and evaluate the find.
If a monitoring professional archaeologist is not onsite, the City shall be notified
immediately and a qualified professional archaeologist shall be retained (at
Developer’s expense) to evaluate the find and report to the City. If the find is
determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated
by the professional archaeologist and implemented by the responsible party.”
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 7
15. DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS: In the event of an accidental discovery or
recognition of any human remains, Developer shall include the following language in all
grading, site work, and construction plans:
If human remains are found during earth-moving, grading, or construction
activities, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any
nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the
coroner of Santa Clara County is contacted to determine that no investigation of
the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native
American the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission
within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the
person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendent (MLD) from the
deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating
or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave
goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The landowner or
his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and
associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not
subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is
unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 24
hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to
make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his authorized representative
rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native
American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the
landowner.”
ENGINEERING GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. GENERAL - At first improvement plan submittal, utility sheets shall show appropriate
line types and labels to identify different type of utilities and pipe sizes. Clearly identify
both public and private utilities.
2. GENERAL - Improvement plans (as second sheet in plan set) shall contain Approved
Conditions of Approval.
3. GENERAL - Improvement plans shall include General Notes found in the City of Gilroy
General Guidelines. A complete set of improvement plans shall consist of Civil site
design, landscape site design, Electrical, Joint Trench. Any walls or structural features
part of the landscape design shall also be included.
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 8
4. GENERAL - Improvement plan cover sheet shall include a table summarizing all facilities
Streets, Utilities, Landscaping, etc.), showing the ownership of all facilities, and the
maintenance responsibilities of all facilities.
5. GENERAL - The applicant shall obtain all applicable permits from federal, state, and
local agencies as required to construct the proposed improvements. A copy of these
permits will be provided prior to building permits.
6. GENERAL – Improvement plans are required for both on-site and off-site improvements.
A separate plan set for each shall be prepared, or at the approval of the City Engineer,
onsite and offsite sheets can be combined into one plan set.
7. GENERAL - Existing overhead utilities shall be undergrounded and related utility poles
removed along the property frontage.
8. GENERAL - All existing public utilities shall be protected in place and if necessary
relocated as approved by the City Engineer. No permanent structure is permitted within
City easements without the approval of the City of Gilroy.
9. GENERAL - Prior to any work within public right of way or City easement, the developer
shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City.
10. GENERAL - All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the
City of Gilroy Municipal Code and Standard Specifications and Details, and is subject to
all laws of the City of Gilroy by reference. Street improvements and the design of all off-
site storm drainage facilities, sewer and water lines, and all street sections shall be in
accordance with City Standards and shall follow the most current City Master Plan for
streets, as approved by the City of Gilroy’s Public Works Director/City Engineer.
11. GENERAL - Prior to issuance of any building permits, developer shall submit for City
approval water, sewer and storm drain studies for the development. These studies shall
provide supporting hydraulic calculation for pipe sizing per City standard design guideline.
12. GENERAL - At first improvement plan submittal, developers engineer shall submit a
calculation for sanitary sewer and water generation per the City’s Master Plan design criteria.
13. FEE - The project is subject to the City’s Street Tree, Storm, Sewer, Water, Traffic, and
Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. Latest City impact fee schedule is available
on the City’s website. Payment of Impact Fees is required at first permit issuance. Fees
shall be based on the current comprehensive fee schedule in effect at the time of fee
payment, consistent with and in accordance with City policy.
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 9
14. FEE - Prior to plan approval, developer shall submit a detailed project cost estimate by the
project engineer, subject to City Engineer approval. Cost estimate shall be broken out into
on-site and off-site improvements.
15. FEE - Prior to final plan approval, Developer shall pay 100% of the plan check and
processing fees and other related fees that the property is subject to, enter into a property
improvement agreement, and provide payment and performance bonds.
16. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading activity shall address National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) concerns. If all or part of the construction occurs
during the rainy season, the developer shall submit an Erosion Control Plan to the Public
Works Director for review and approval. This plan shall incorporate erosion control
devices and other techniques in accordance with Municipal Code § 27C to minimize
erosion. Specific measures to control sediment runoff, construction pollution and other
potential construction contamination sediment runoff, construction pollution and other
potential construction contamination shall be addressed through the Erosion Control Plan
and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall supplement the
Erosion Control Plan and project improvement plans. These documents shall also be kept
on-site while the project is under construction. A Notice of Intent (NOI) shall be filed with
the State Water Resources Control Board, with a copy provided to the Engineering
Division before a grading permit will be issued. WDID# shall be added to the grading
plans prior to plan approval.
17. GRADING & DRAINAGE - Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant’s
Geotechnical Engineer shall review the final grading, pavement design and drainage plans
to ensure that said designs are in accordance with their recommendations and the peer
review comments. The applicant’s Geotechnical engineer’s approval shall then be
conveyed to the City either by letter or by signing the plans.
18. GRADING & DRAINAGE - At first improvement plan submittal, the developer shall
submit a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer. The SWMP shall analyze the existing and ultimate conditions and facilities, and
the study shall include all off-site tributary areas. Study and the design shall be in
compliance with the City’s Stormwater Management Guidance Manual (latest edition).
Existing offsite drainage patterns, i.e., tributary areas, drainage amount and velocity shall
not be altered by the development.
19. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading and improvement plans shall identify the
vertical elevation datum, date of survey, and surveyor.
20. GRADING & DRAINGE - Improvement and grading plans shall show existing topo and
features at least 50’ beyond the project boundary. Clearly show existing topo, label
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 10
contour elevations, drainage patterns, flow lines, slopes, and all other property
encumbrances.
21. GRADING & DRAINAGE – Geotechnical Engineer to confirm infiltration rates by
conducting Double Ring Infiltrometer Testing with appropriate safety factors of all
stormwater detention and/or retention facilities.
22. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – Prior to Parcel Map approval, developer shall execute a
property improvement agreement and post Payment and Performance bonds each for
100% of cost for improvement with the City that shall secure the construction of the
public improvements. Insurance shall be provided per the terms of the agreement.
23. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS - The developer shall repair or replace all existing
improvements not designated for removal and all new improvements that are damaged or
removed because of developer's operations. Developer shall request a walk-through with
the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing
conditions.
24. CONSTRUCTION - All construction water from fire hydrants shall be metered and billed
at the current hydrant meter rate.
25. CONSTRUCTION - The City shall be notified at least ten (10) working days prior to the
start of any construction work and at that time the contractor shall provide a project
schedule and a 24-hour emergency telephone number list.
26. CONSTRUCTION - Construction activity shall be restricted to the period between 7:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mondays through Fridays, Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. for general
construction activity. No work shall be done on Sundays and City Holidays. The Public
Works Director will apply additional construction period restrictions, as necessary, to
accommodate standard commute traffic along arterial roadways and along school
commute routes.
27. CONSTRUCTION - All work shown on the improvement plans, if applicable, shall be
inspected. Uninspected work shall be removed as deemed appropriate by the Public
Works Director.
28. CONSTRUCTION - If the project has excess fill or cut that will be off-hauled to a site or
on-hauled from a site within the city limits of Gilroy, an additional permit is required.
This statement must be added as a general note to the Grading and Drainage Plan.
29. CONSTRUCTION - It is the responsibility of the contractor to make sure that all dirt
tracked into the public right-of-way is cleaned up on a daily basis. Mud, silt, concrete and
other construction debris shall not be washed into the City’s storm drains.
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 11
30. CONSTRUCTION - At least one week prior to commencement of work, the Developer
shall post at the site and mail to the Engineering Division and to owners of property within
300') three hundred feet of the exterior boundary of the project site a notice that
construction work will commence on or around the stated date. The notice shall include a
list of contact persons with name, title, phone number and area of responsibility. The
person responsible for maintaining the list shall be included. The list shall be current at all
times and shall consist of persons with authority to initiate corrective action in their area
of responsibility. The names of individuals responsible for dust, noise and litter control
shall be expressly identified in the notice.
31. CONSTRUCTION - Prior to final inspections, all pertinent conditions of approval and all
improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City
Engineer.
32. TRANSPORTATION - Any work in the public right-of-way shall require a traffic control
plan prepared by a licensed professional engineer with experience in preparing such plans.
Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the latest
edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The Traffic Control
Plan shall be approved prior to the commencement of any work within the public right of
way.
33. UTILTIES - The Developer/Contractor shall make accessible any or all City utilities as
directed by the Public Works Director.
ENGINEERING PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
34. FEE - The project is subject to the City’s Street Tree, Storm, Sewer, Water, Traffic, and
Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. The following are approximate impact fees
based on planning phase square footage and other information for Residential Low-
Density projects. Actual fees will be based on Final Design information.
a. Street Tree = $103
b. Storm Development = $593
c. Sewer Development = $50,004
d. Water Development = $17,176
e. Traffic Impact = $49,060
f. Public Facilities = $85,272
Latest City impact fee schedule is available on the City’s website. Payment of Impact
Fees is required at first building permit issuance. Fees shall be based on the current
comprehensive fee schedule in effect at the time of fee payment, consistent with and in
accordance with City policy.
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 12
35. GENERAL – As part of Phase 1 of this project, a Parcel Map shall be completed to
subdivide all future lots. Said Parcel map will be presented to the City Council for review
and action. The City Council meeting will be scheduled approximately fifty (50) days
after the Parcel Map is deemed technically correct, and Subdivision Improvement Plans
with supporting documents, reports and agreements are approved by the City. Developer
shall dedicate necessary right of way and public easements for the project development.
36. GENERAL - The approved construction schedule shall be shared with Gilroy Unified
School District (GUSD) to avoid traffic impacts to surrounding school functions. An
approved construction information handout(s) shall also be provided to GUSD to share
with school parents.
37. TRANSPORTATION – Applicant shall obtain a review letter from Recology confirming
serviceability and site accessibility of solid waste pickup. Contact Lisa Patton, Operations
Manager 408-846-4421. Include Recology review letter with first building permit
submittal.
38. GENERAL - A current Title Report dated within the last six months, shall be submitted
with the first submittal improvement plans. An existing site plan shall be submitted
showing all existing site conditions and title report easements. Include bearings and
distances for all Right of Way and Easements on the plans.
39. GENERAL - The Developer shall provide a “composite plan” showing Civil, Landscape,
Electrical, and Joint Trench design information (as a separate sheet titled “Composite
Plan”) to confirm that there are no conflicts.
40. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading operations and soil compaction activities shall
be per the approved project’s design level geotechnical report. All grading activities shall
be conducted under the observation of, and tested by, a licensed geotechnical engineer. A
report shall be filed with the City of Gilroy for each phase of construction, stating that all
grading activities were performed in conformance with the requirements of the project’s
geotechnical report. The developer shall add this condition to the general notes on the
grading plan.
41. GRADING & DRAINAGE – An elevation certificate per FEMA requirements must be
complete by a Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer prior to occupancy.
42. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – Prior to Parcel Map Approval, the developer shall obtain
design approval and bond for all necessary public improvements, including but not limited
to the following:
A. Pavement widening, striping, and signing along Chestnut St project frontage.
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 13
B. Construction of new curb, gutter, 6’ sidewalk, driveways, and ADA curb ramp
along Chestnut St. and Lewis St. project frontage.
C. The project is making new pavement cuts which reduces the City Pavement
Condition Index. The project shall grind and pave the limits shown on sheet C2 if
the improvement plans (Part of the Architectural and Site submittal) with a
minimum 2.5” hot mix AC, and with pavement section dig-outs and repairs. Extent
of the dig-outs and repairs to be determined by the Developers Geotechnical
Engineer and City Engineer.
D. Installation of new City standard streetlights along project frontage. Final
streetlight locations shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
E. Storm drain line, laterals, and related facilities along project frontage.
F. Existing overhead utilities shall be undergrounded and related utility poles
removed along the property frontage and boundary. Underground the overhead
lines that currently cross Lewis St. No new overhead utility lines or poles will be
allowed.
G. Removal of the existing underground utilities no longer being used along the
project frontage.
H. Water services and meters per City standards. Each water service shall have a
separate lateral from the main to each lot.
I. New Fire Hydrants along project frontage.
J. Sewer laterals, manholes, and related facilities. Sewer facilities cannot be aligned
through stormwater treatment facilities.
K. New trees along project frontage.
All improvements must be built to the city Engineer’s satisfaction, and accepted by the City
prior to issuance of any first certificate of occupancy for the project.
43. CONSTRUCTION - All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be watered as often
as deemed necessary by the City, or a minimum of three times daily. Streets will be cleaned
by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director, or
at least once a day.
44. CONSTRUCTION - The minimum soils sampling and testing frequency shall conform to
Chapter 8 of the Caltrans Construction Manual. The subdivider shall require the soils
engineer to daily submit all testing and sampling and reports to the City Engineer.
45. TRANSPORTATION – At first plan submittal, developer shall submit on-site and off-site
photometric plans.
46. TRANSPORTATION - At first plan submittal developer shall model all Emergency
Vehicle circulation movements, as a separate plan sheet. The circulation plan shall be
prepared to the City Engineer’s satisfaction, and modeled with AutoTurn swept analysis
software, all turning and street circulation movements.
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 14
47. UTILITIES – All new services to the development shall be "underground service"
designed and installed in accordance with the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, AT&T
phone) Company and local cable company regulations. Transformers and switch gear
cabinets shall be placed underground unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director
and the City Engineer. Underground utility plans must be submitted to the City prior to
installation.
48. UTILITIES - The following items will need to be completed prior to first building permit
submittal:
a. The Developer shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground
electrical, gas, telephone, cable television, and communication conduits and cables
including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility
service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a
part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. Show preferred and
alternative locations for all utility vaults and boxes if project has not obtained PG&E
approval. A licensed Civil or Electrical Engineer shall sign the composite drawings
and/or utility improvement plans. (All dry utilities shall be placed underground).
b. The Developer shall negotiate right-of-way with Pacific Gas and Electric and other
utilities subject to the review and approval by the Engineering Division and the utility
companies.
c. Will Serve Letter” from each utility company for the subdivision shall be supplied to
the City.
49. UTILITIES - A note shall be placed on the joint trench composite plans which states that
the plan agrees with City Codes and Standards and that no underground utility conflict
exists. The Joint consultant shall provide the City a separate “project utility composite
plan” showing all Civil, Landscape, electrical, and joint trench information to confirm that
there are no conflicts with joint trench plan utilities.
50. UTILITIES – Storm, sewer, and water lines in private areas shall be privately owned and
maintained. This should be noted on the title sheet of the project improvement plan.
51. UTILITIES - Prior to any construction of the dry utilities in the field, the following will
need to be supplied to the City:
a. A professional engineer signed original electrical plan.
b. A letter from the design Electrical or Civil Engineer that states the electrical plan
conforms to City codes and Standards, and to the approved improvement plans.
52. UTILITIES - Sanitary sewer laterals located in driveways shall have traffic rated boxes
and lids.
53. UTILITIES - The Developer shall perform Fire Hydrant test to confirm water system will
adequately serve the development, and will modify any part of the systems that does not
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 15
perform to the standards established by the City. Developer shall coordinate with Fire
Department for the Fire Hydrant test.
54. UTILITIES - The project shall fully comply with the measures required by the City’s
Water Supply Shortage Regulations Ordinance (Gilroy City Code, Chapter 27, Article
VI), and subsequent amendments to meet the requirements imposed by the State of
California’s Water Board. This ordinance established permanent voluntary water saving
measures and temporary conservation standards.
55. WATER QUALITY - Proposed development shall comply with state mandated regional
permits for both pre-construction and post-construction stormwater quality requirements per
chapter 27D of the Gilroy Municipal Code, and is subject to, but not limited to, the following:
a. At first improvement plan submittal, project shall submit a design level Stormwater
Control Plan Report (in 8 ½ x 11 report format), to include background, summary, and
explanation of all aspects of stormwater management. Report shall also include
exhibits, tables, calculations, and all technical information supporting facts, including
but not limited to, exhibit of the proposed site conditions which clearly delineates
impervious and pervious areas on site. Provide a separate hatch or shading for
landscaping/pervious areas on-site including those areas that are not bioretention
areas. This stormwater control plan report format does not replace or is not in lieu of
any stormwater control plan sheet in improvement plans.
b. The stormwater control plan shall include a signed Performance Requirement
Certifications specified in the Stormwater Guidance Manual.
c. At developer’s sole expense, the stormwater control plan shall be submitted for
review by an independent third party accepted by the City for compliance. Result of
the peer review shall be included with the submittal for City evaluation.
d. Prior to plan approval, the Developer of the site shall enter into a formal written
Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement with the City, including
Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
i. The City shall record this agreement against the property or properties
involved and it shall be binding on all subsequent owners of land served by
the stormwater management treatment BMPs. The City-standard Stormwater
BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement will be provided by Public
Works Engineering.
ii. This Agreement shall require that the BMPs not be modified and BMP
maintenance activities not alter the designed function of the facility from its
original design unless approved by the City prior to the commencement of the
proposed modification or maintenance activity.
iii. This Agreement shall also provide that in the event that maintenance or repair
is neglected, or the stormwater management facility becomes a danger to
public health or safety, the city shall have the authority to perform
maintenance and/or repair work and to recover the costs from the owner.
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 16
iv. All on-site stormwater management facilities shall be operated and maintained
in good condition and promptly repaired/replaced by the property owner(s) or
other legal entity approved by the City.
v. Any repairs or restoration/replacement and maintenance shall be in
accordance with City-approved plans.
vi. The property owner(s) shall develop a maintenance schedule for the life of any
stormwater management facility and shall describe the maintenance to be
completed, the time period for completion, and who shall perform the
maintenance. This maintenance schedule shall be included with the approved
Stormwater Runoff Management Plan.
e. Stormwater BMP Operations and Maintenance Agreement shall include inspections to
be required for this project and shall adhere to the following:
i. The property owner(s) shall be responsible for having all stormwater
management facilities inspected for condition and function by a certified third
party QSP or QSD.
ii. Stormwater facility inspections shall be done at least twice per year, once in
Fall by October 1st, in preparation for the wet season, and once in Winter by
March 15th. Written records shall be kept of all inspections and shall include,
at minimum, the following information:
1. Site address;
2. Date and time of inspection;
3. Name of the person conducting the inspection;
4. List of stormwater facilities inspected;
5. Condition of each stormwater facility inspected;
6. Description of any needed maintenance or repairs; and
7. As applicable, the need for site re-inspection.
f. Upon completion of each inspection, an inspection report shall be submitted to Public
Works Engineering no later than October 1st for the Fall report, and no later than
March 15th of the following year for the Winter report.
g. Before commencing any grading or construction activities, the developer shall obtain
a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and provide
evidence of filing of a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control
Board.
56. WATER QUALITY - The developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors are aware
of all storm water quality measures and implement such measures. Failure to comply with the
approved construction BMPs will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations or a
project stop order.
57. WATER QUALITY - The developer shall secure a QSD or QSP to maintain all erosion
control and BMP measures during construction. The developers QSD or QSP shall provide
the City weekly inspection reports.
58. WATER QUALITY – Sequence of construction for all Post Construction Required facilities
PCR’s) / stormwater facilities (bioswales, detention/retention basins, drain rock, etc.) shall be
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 17
done as a final phase of construction to prevent silting of facilities and reduce the intended use
of the facilities. Prior to final inspection, all stormwater facilities will be tested by a certified
QSP or QSD to meet the minimum design infiltration rate. All tests shall be made at on 20 ft
x 20ft grid pattern over the surface of the completed stormwater facility.
59. LANDSCAPING - Landscaping plans shall not conflict with the stormwater management
water treatment plan.
60. MASTER PLANS - Confirm the project is in compliance with the City Master Plans.
Studies shall identify the development's effect on the City's present Master Plans and the
impact of this development to surrounding utility lines. If the results of the study indicate
that this development contributes to the over-capacity of the trunk line, developer will be
required to mitigate the impact by remove and replace or upsizing of the existing utilities.
61. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Until such time as all improvements required are fully
completed and accepted by City, Developer will be responsible for the care maintenance
of and any damage to such improvements. City shall not, nor shall any officer or employee
thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause,
happening or occurring to the work or Improvements required for this project prior to the
completion and acceptance of the work or Improvements. All such risks shall be the
responsibility of and are hereby assumed by the Developer.
62. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Certification of grades and compaction is required prior to
Building Permit final. This statement must be added as a general note to the Grading and
Drainage Plan.
63. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Prior to building occupancy, provide and obtain approval for
all of the items identified in the Public Works Department “Development Project
Closeout” list.
64. All project frontage improvements including pavement widening, grind and pave, curb &
gutter, sidewalk, driveways, ADA ramp, utilities, stormwater management facilities,
landscaping, etc. along Chestnut St and Lewis St shall be constructed in Phase 1 of this
project.
65. All stormwater facilities along Chestnut St located within the PSE shall be maintained by
the property owner. The City and property owner shall enter into a maintenance agreement
prior to Parcel map approval.
66. All stormwater facilities for future lots shall be owned and maintained by the property
owner.
67. No private signage, poles, utilities, etc. allowed in PSE/PUE.
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-01
Page 18
68. Construct new City standard storm drain drop inlet located near the north property
boundary.
69. Stormwater treatment shall occur behind the back of proposed sidewalk.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of January, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Elle, Doyle, Bhandal, Lewis, Ridley, Fischer and
Moreno
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator Tom Fischer, Chairperson
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution 2022-01 - TM 20-01 PC reso
Final Audit Report 2022-01-27
Created:2022-01-26
By:Kraig Tambornini (Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
Status:Signed
Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAXkFqF_PRDY9I_jGEdCStnli_FbTm2lfO
Resolution 2022-01 - TM 20-01 PC reso" History
Document created by Kraig Tambornini (Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
2022-01-26 - 10:43:17 PM GMT- IP address: 66.189.161.134
Document e-signed by Kraig Tambornini (Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
Signature Date: 2022-01-26 - 10:44:14 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 66.189.161.134
Document emailed to Tom Fischer (tom.fischer@ci.gilroy.ca.us) for signature
2022-01-26 - 10:44:16 PM GMT
Email viewed by Tom Fischer (tom.fischer@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
2022-01-27 - 0:13:19 AM GMT- IP address: 172.225.87.23
Document e-signed by Tom Fischer (tom.fischer@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
Signature Date: 2022-01-27 - 0:16:37 AM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 71.80.230.85
Agreement completed.
2022-01-27 - 0:16:37 AM GMT
8.1.f
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: PC Signed Resolution TM 20-01 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
GILROY RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN
ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE REVIEW PERMIT TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF FOUR (4) TWO-STORY SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 395 LEWIS STREET (APN: 841-03-062)
FOLLOWING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE MAP FILE NUMBER TM 20-01 TO
SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO FOUR (4) SINGLE FAMILY PARCELS
FILE NUMBER AS 20-02)
WHEREAS, on March 1, 2021 an application was resubmitted by Qui T. Son, of iMark
Designs proposing the development of four (4) single-family homes following the subdivision of a
1.05 acre site into four single-family lots, on property located at 395 Lewis Street within the City of
Gilroy R1 Single-Family Residential zoning district (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, the application submittal was accepted as complete on June 25, 2021; and
WHEREAS, On November 2, 2020 the Gilroy City Council adopted the Gilroy 2040
General Plan after certifying an EIR for the plan and whereas the General Plan EIR reviewed all
of the topics included on the Appendix G environmental checklist in the State CEQA Guidelines
as well as all sections required to be included in an EIR; and
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2021, an environmental checklist was prepared for the Project
to evaluate the impact categories covered in the City’s certified General Plan EIR to determine
whether the project’s impacts have been adequately analyzed in the EIR or whether any new
significant impacts peculiar to the project or project site would result; and
WHEREAS, the project has been deemed statutorily exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State
CEQA Guidelines section 15183 (Projects Consistent with General Plan, Community Plan or
Zoning), and categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15315 (Class 15, Minor
Land Divisions); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting on January 20,
2022, at which time the Planning Commission received and considered the staff report as well as all
evidence received including written and oral public testimony related to the project TM 20-01; and
WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute
the record of proceedings upon which the project approval is based is the Community Development
Department, Planning Division.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Gilroy hereby find as follows:
A. The proposed development is permitted and in conformance with the Gilroy Zoning
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 2
Ordinance development standards including height, setbacks, parking and landscaping,
and other adopted policies of the City of Gilroy.
B. The proposed development would be consistent with all applicable goals and policies of
the Gilroy General Plan in that the residential land use is an allowed use in the single-
family residential district.
C. The proposed development would not impair the integrity and character of the area
surrounding and in the vicinity of the subject property given that the project has been
designed to comply with all city development standards, minimizes grading and tree
impacts, and proposes a residential design that is compatible with the neighborhood
character.
D. The subject site would be served by streets and highways adequate in width and structure
to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use will generate, given that the project will
be required to dedicate street right-of-way to widen Chestnut Street by approximately
21.5 feet.
E. The subject site would be provided with adequate sewerage, water, fire protection and
storm drainage facilities.
F. The proposed development/use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to
the adjacent uses, buildings or structure or to the public health, safety or general welfare,
given that the project would require a building permit and has been designed to comply
with all applicable city development standards.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Gilroy hereby recommends to the City Council the approval of AS 20-02, subject to the following
conditions:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
AS 20-02
PLANNING CONDITIONS
The following GENERAL conditions authorize specific terms of the project
ENTITLEMENT(S).
1. APPROVED PROJECT: The approval for Architectural and Site Review Permit AS
20-02 is granted to allow construction of four (4) two-story single-family homes on
property located at 395 Lewis Street (APN: 841-03-062) to be subdivided into four (4)
single family parcels (file number TM 20-01) within the City of Gilroy R1 Single-
Family Residential zoning district as shown on the project plans prepared by Qui T.
Son, of iMark Designs, consisting of 26 sheets, dated as received by the Planning
Division on March 1, 2021.
Build-out of the project shall conform to the plans, except as otherwise specified in these
conditions. Any future adjustment or modification to the plans, including any changes
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 3
made at time of building permit submittal, shall be considered by the Community
Development Director or designee, may require separate discretionary approval, and shall
conform to all City, State, and Federal requirements, including subsequent City Code
requirements or policies adopted by City Council.
2. PERMIT EXPIRATION: The expiration date of this approval is one year from the date
of recordation of the Final Map for TM 20-01. Building permits must be obtained for the
project within one (1) year from that date. Otherwise this approval shall expire unless a
timely extension has been obtained. Upon application, an extension of time may be
granted by the Community Development Director or designee. Should Developer intend to
request an extension to the permit expiration date, Developer must submit to the Planning
Division a written application with applicable fees prior to the expiration date. Only timely
requests may be considered pursuant to the City Code.
3. RELATED ENTITLEMENTS: This permit is subject to the conditions of approval of
Tentative Map application TM 20-01. If the tentative map is not approved and executed or
if the tentative map expires, this approval shall be null and void.
4. COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS: If Developer, owner or tenant fails to comply
with any of the conditions of this permit, the Developer, owner or tenant shall be subject
to permit revocation or enforcement actions pursuant to the City Code. All costs
associated with any such actions shall be the responsibility of Developer, owner or tenant.
5. INDEMNIFICATION: Developer agrees, as a condition of permit approval, at
Developer’s own expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Gilroy
the City”) and its officers, contractors, consultants, attorneys, employees and agents
from any and all claim(s), action(s) or proceeding(s) brought against the City or its
officers, contractors, consultants, attorneys, employees, or agents to challenge, attack, set
aside, void or annul the approval of this resolution or any condition attached thereto or any
proceedings, acts or determinations taken, including actions taken under the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, done or made prior to the approval of
such resolution that were part of the approval process.
6. SIGNAGE: All signage advertising the development project or components thereof,
including individual tenants or subdivisions, shall be installed or maintained onsite or
offsite as allowed and in conformance with an approved sign permit.
7. WATER LIMITATIONS: Developer shall be advised that the approval is subject to the
drought emergencies provisions pursuant to the Gilroy City Code Chapter 27.98.
The following conditions shall be addressed prior to issuance of any BUILDING PERMIT,
GRADING PERMIT or IMPROVEMENT PLAN, whichever is first issued, or as otherwise
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 4
specified in the condition.
8. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Developer shall include a plan sheet(s) that includes a
reproduction of all conditions of approval of this permit, as adopted by the decision-
maker.
9. CERTIFICATION OF BUILDING PERMIT PLANS: The project architect shall
certify in writing that the architectural design shown in the building permit plans match
the plans approved by the Community Development Director or designee/Planning
Commission/City Council. Any changes must be clearly noted. The project architect shall
also certify that the structural plans are consistent with the architectural plans. In the event
of a discrepancy between the structural plans and the architectural plans, the architectural
plans shall take precedence, and revised structural drawings shall be submitted to the
Building Division.
10. COLORS AND MATERIALS: Plans submitted for building permit applications shall
include all exterior building materials and colors, including product and finish
manufacturer name, color name and number, and surface finish type (e.g. stucco with sand
finish, plaster with smooth finish) to be used in construction.
11. SUBSEQUENT ENTITLEMENTS: Developer shall obtain necessary permits prior to
initiating any new construction or modifications authorized under this approval, including
but not limited to temporary construction trailers, temporary staging areas, model home
sales offices, advertising signs of any kind, exterior and interior modifications. Developer
shall pay all requisite fees in effect at the time of plan submittal and/or issuance, as
applicable.
12. HABITAT PERMIT: Concurrent with or prior to an application for a grading permit,
Developer shall submit a Habitat Permit application to the City of Gilroy. The application
shall consist of the application processing fee, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Application
For Private Projects and Fees and Conditions Worksheet (available on the Santa Clara
Valley Habitat Agency website: https://www.scv-habitatagency.org/). The grading permit
will be issued only after approval of the Habitat Plan permit and payment of assessed fees.
13. PAYMENT OF FEES: Developer shall pay all required development impact fees prior to
issuance of permits. This includes required park in lieu fees, school fees, traffic impact
fees, etc.
14. GARAGE DOORS: Developer shall provide automatic garage door openers for all
garages. All garage entries shall be equipped with a sectional roll-up garage door.
15. FENCES AND WALLS: All fencing and walls are to be shown on construction drawings
submitted for building permit review and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height, measured
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 5
from adjacent grade to the top of the fence or wall. The design and location must comply
with all setback requirements.
16. REFUSE STORAGE: Developer shall show on construction documents a minimum 9-
foot by 3-foot level concrete pad for storage of three refuse containers in the side yard area
or other location approved by the Community Development Director or designee that is
out of view from the street. The storage location shall not be within the garage. Developer
shall also provide for a paved path from the storage location to the pick-up area (typically
the street) that does not require entering the garage. All gates or doors along the path shall
be constructed with a minimum clear space of 36-inches to allow passage of the
containers.
17. RAIN GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS: Developer shall install all roof and building
rain gutters and downspouts, vents, and flashing to integrate as closely as possible with
building design elements, including matching the color of the adjacent surface.
18. LANDSCAPE MULCH: As part of the Landscape Plan submittal, Developer shall
clarify a minimum three (3) inch layer of mulch to be applied on all exposed soil surfaces,
as required by the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO).
19. INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES: Developer shall not include any invasive plant species,
such as those listed by the California Invasive Plant Council.
20. LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE: Prior to issuance of building permits
or initiation of the proposed use, whichever comes first, Developer shall submit a
completed Landscape Documentation Package, including a soil analysis/management
report along with appropriate application review fees, to the Community Development
Department, including required documentation for compliance verification, and obtain
approval of such plans.
21. IRRIGATION SENSORS: Prior to issuance of building permits, developer shall (as part
of the irrigation system) indicate on construction drawings sensors that suspend or alter
irrigation operation during unfavorable weather conditions (e.g. automatic rain shut-off
devices).
22. PRECONSTRUCTION NESTING BIRD SURVEY: To the extent practicable,
vegetation removal and construction activities shall be performed from September 1
through January 31 to avoid the general nesting period for birds. If construction or
vegetation removal cannot be performed during this period, preconstruction surveys will
be performed no more than two days prior to construction activities to locate any active
nests as follows:
The Developer shall be responsible for the retention of a qualified biologist to
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 6
conduct a survey of the project site and surrounding 500’ for active nests – with
particular emphasis on nests of migratory birds – if construction (including site
preparation) will begin during the bird nesting season, from February 1 through
August 31. If active nests are observed on either the project site or the surrounding
area, the project applicant, in coordination with the appropriate City staff, shall
establish no-disturbance buffer zones around the nests, with the size to be determined
in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (usually 100’ for
perching birds and 300’ for raptors). The no-disturbance buffer will remain in place
until the biologist determines the nest is no longer active or the nesting season ends. If
construction ceases for two days or more and then resumes during the nesting season,
an additional survey will be necessary to avoid impacts on active bird nests that may
be present.”
The following conditions shall be met prior to RELEASE OF UTILITIES, FINAL
INSPECTION, or ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, whichever occurs
first, or as otherwise specified in the condition.
23. ON- AND OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS: Prior to occupancy, Developer shall
complete all required offsite and onsite improvements related to the project, including
structures, paving, and landscaping, unless otherwise allowed by the Community
Development Director, or stated in these conditions.
24. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION INSTALLATION: Prior to issuance of certificate
of occupancy or building permit final sign-off, Developer shall complete installation of all
landscaping and irrigation in accordance with the approved plans.
25. LANDSCAPE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION: Prior to occupancy or initiation of
the proposed use, or completion of each build-out phase of development, Developer shall
submit a signed Certificate of Completion, along with all necessary supporting
documentation and payment to the Community Development Department, for compliance
verification of the landscape installation. Developer is required under the Model Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) to provide a copy of the approved Certificate
of Completion to the property owner or his or her designee.
26. PLANNING INSPECTION: Inspection(s) by the Planning Division may be required for
the foundation, framing, application of exterior materials, and final completion of each
structure to ensure that the construction matches the approved plans.
27. SITE CLEAN-UP: Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, Developer shall
remove all construction materials, debris, and vehicles from the subject property.
The following conditions shall be complied with AT ALL TIMES DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT, or as otherwise specified in the condition.
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 7
28. CONSTRUCTION RELATED NOISE: To minimize potential construction-related
impacts to noise, Developer shall include the following language on any grading, site
work, and construction plans issued for the subject site
During earth-moving, grading, and construction activities, Developer shall
implement the following measures at the construction site:
a. Limit construction activity to weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., and on
Saturdays between 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Construction noise is prohibited on
Sundays and City-observed holidays;
b. Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive
receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area;
c. Construct sound walls or other noise reduction measures prior to developing the
project site;
d. Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust
mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment;
e. Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines;
f. Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where
technology exists; and
g. Designate a “disturbance coordinator’ who would be responsible for responding to
any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will
determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. bad muffler, etc.) and will require
that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem.”
29. CONSTRUCTION RELATED AIR QUALITY: To minimize potential construction-
related impacts to air quality, Developer shall require all construction contractors to
implement the basic construction mitigation measures recommended by the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and shall include the following language on
any grading, site work, and construction plans issued for the project site
During earth-moving, grading, and construction activities, Developer shall
implement the following basic control measures at the construction site:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g. parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day;
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material onsite or offsite shall
be covered;
c. All visible mud or dirt tracked out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed
using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry
power sweeping is prohibited;
d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads or pathways shall be limited to 15 miles per
hour;
e. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 8
possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless
seeding or soil binders are used;
f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use
or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California
airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of
Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at
all access points;
g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance
with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified
visible emissions evaluator; and
h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the
lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take
corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be
visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.”
30. DISCOVERY OF CONTAMINATED SOILS: If contaminated soils are discovered, the
Developer will ensure the contractor employs engineering controls and Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to minimize human exposure to potential contaminants. Engineering
controls and construction BMPs will include, but not be limited to, the following:
a. Contractor employees working on-site will be certified in OSHA’s 40-hour
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training;
b. Contractor will stockpile soil during development activities to allow for proper
characterization and evaluation of disposal options;
c. Contractor will monitor area around construction site for fugitive vapor emissions
with appropriate filed screening instrumentation;
d. Contractor will water/mist soil as it is being excavated and loaded onto
transportation trucks;
e. Contractor will place any stockpiled soil in areas shielded from prevailing winds;
and
f. Contractor will cover the bottom of excavated areas with sheeting when work is
not being performed.
31. DISCOVERY OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES: In the event that a fossil is
discovered during construction of the project, excavations within 50’ of the find shall be
temporarily halted or delayed until the discovery is examined by a qualified
paleontologist, in accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. The
City shall include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to
inform contractors of this requirement. If the find is determined to be significant and if
avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall design and carry out a data recovery plan
consistent with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards.
32. DISCOVERY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES: In the event of an accidental
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 9
discovery of archaeological resources during grading or construction activities, Developer
shall include the following language on any grading, site work, and construction plans
issued for the project site:
If archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during earth-moving,
grading, or construction activities, all work shall be halted within at least 50 meters
165 feet) of the find and the area shall be staked off immediately. The monitoring
professional archaeologist, if one is onsite, shall be notified and evaluate the find.
If a monitoring professional archaeologist is not onsite, the City shall be notified
immediately and a qualified professional archaeologist shall be retained (at
Developer’s expense) to evaluate the find and report to the City. If the find is
determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated
by the professional archaeologist and implemented by the responsible party.”
33. DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS: In the event of an accidental discovery or
recognition of any human remains, Developer shall include the following language in all
grading, site work, and construction plans:
If human remains are found during earth-moving, grading, or construction
activities, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any
nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the
coroner of Santa Clara County is contacted to determine that no investigation of
the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native
American the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission
within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the
person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendent (MLD) from the
deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating
or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave
goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The landowner or
his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and
associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not
subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is
unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 24
hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to
make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his authorized representative
rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native
American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the
landowner.”
The following conditions shall be complied with AT ALL TIMES that the use permitted by this
entitlement occupies the premises.
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 10
34. ADDITIONS, ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, AND PATIO COVERS: Building
additions and patio covers shall conform to the zoning district or PUD approval, as
applicable.
35. GARAGE USE: Garages shall be used for resident parking only. Storage is permitted so
long as it does not prevent use of garage for required vehicle parking. The use and
availability of garage spaces for parking shall be specified in the project CC&R’s.
36. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE: For the life of the project, Developer shall maintain
landscaping and irrigation in accordance with the approved plans, except as otherwise
permitted or required by law. Significant changes to the number, placement, and selection
of plant species may require a modification to this approval, to be determined by the
Community Development Director or designee.
FIRE PREVENTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The submitted plans shall reference the 2019 California Codes (e.g. Building, Fire,
Residential, etc.).
2. Detached Second Units (ADU’s) shall have a path of travel (min 36” wide) to the street and
shall be provided a separate address number. The ADU shall have an address number that is
visible from the street.
3. All residential structures shall be provided with residential fire sprinklers (NFPA13D)
including garages. City standards include:
a. A 1-inch meter and 1.5-inch laterals shall be provided to each structure.
b. System to comply with NFPA 13D (2016) subject to inspection by the City.
c. Riser shall be installed in the garage or approved exterior cabinet.
d. If the water supply to the home is not at the garage, water supply from point of
entry to the riser shall be approved by Gilroy Fire Prevention.
e. All enclosed garages shall be provided with sprinkler protection.
f. At least 1 sprinkler of each type shall be present in the spare head box at final.
g. An exterior bell/horn shall be installed on the bedroom side of the home. The
water-flow switch shall be wired to smoke alarms for interior notification.
h. Each attic access shall be protected by a pilot head. The pilot head piping
CPVC) shall be provided with adequate insulation.
i. Sprinkler coverage shall be provided underneath stairwells when used as storage,
closets or bathrooms (even if less than 55 sq ft). Concealed spaces used for
storage in attics or crawl spaces that exceed 55 sq ft in area and 6 ft in height,
shall be provided with sprinkler coverage.
j. A fire flow test shall be obtained from the Deputy Fire Marshal and included in
the sprinkler system design calculations. Call 408-846-0451 to schedule a fire
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 11
hydrant test ($300.00 fee).
4. Chimneys shall have spark arrestors installed. No permanent outdoor, wood-fired
fireplaces/pits are allowed. Trees and tree branches shall not be within 10 ft of a chimney.
5. Landscaping in the open space areas shall be maintained so as not to become a fire
hazard. Portions of these parcels may extend into the watercourse located on the West
side of the property. All dead and dry vegetation to be removed by May 15th each year
and to be maintained until November.
6. Egress Windows shall be provided on all sleeping rooms. A room that does not have a
clearly defined use as a kitchen, closet, dining room, living/family room or study shall be
considered a bedroom. Studies/libraries with closets shall be treated as bedrooms.
Storage rooms that are provided with windows, and electrical outlets and are greater than
50 square feet may also be considered bedrooms if attached to a dwelling unit.
ENGINEERING GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. GENERAL - At first improvement plan submittal, utility sheets shall show appropriate
line types and labels to identify different type of utilities and pipe sizes. Clearly identify
both public and private utilities.
2. GENERAL - Improvement plans (as second sheet in plan set) shall contain Approved
Conditions of Approval.
3. GENERAL - Improvement plans shall include General Notes found in the City of Gilroy
General Guidelines. A complete set of improvement plans shall consist of Civil site
design, landscape site design, Electrical, Joint Trench. Any walls or structural features
part of the landscape design shall also be included.
4. GENERAL - Improvement plan cover sheet shall include a table summarizing all
facilities (Streets, Utilities, Landscaping, etc.), showing the ownership of all facilities,
and the maintenance responsibilities of all facilities.
5. GENERAL - The applicant shall obtain all applicable permits from federal, state, and
local agencies as required to construct the proposed improvements. A copy of these
permits will be provided prior to building permits.
6. GENERAL – Improvement plans are required for both on-site and off-site improvements.
A separate plan set for each shall be prepared, or at the approval of the City Engineer,
onsite and offsite sheets can be combined into one plan set.
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 12
7. GENERAL - Existing overhead utilities shall be undergrounded and related utility poles
removed along the property frontage.
8. GENERAL - All existing public utilities shall be protected in place and if necessary
relocated as approved by the City Engineer. No permanent structure is permitted within
City easements without the approval of the City of Gilroy.
9. GENERAL - Prior to any work within public right of way or City easement, the
developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City.
10. GENERAL - All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the
City of Gilroy Municipal Code and Standard Specifications and Details, and is subject to
all laws of the City of Gilroy by reference. Street improvements and the design of all off-
site storm drainage facilities, sewer and water lines, and all street sections shall be in
accordance with City Standards and shall follow the most current City Master Plan for
streets, as approved by the City of Gilroy’s Public Works Director/City Engineer.
11. GENERAL - Prior to issuance of any building permits, developer shall submit for City
approval water, sewer and storm drain studies for the development. These studies shall
provide supporting hydraulic calculation for pipe sizing per City standard design guideline.
12. GENERAL - At first improvement plan submittal, developers engineer shall submit a
calculation for sanitary sewer and water generation per the City’s Master Plan design criteria.
13. FEE - The project is subject to the City’s Street Tree, Storm, Sewer, Water, Traffic, and
Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. Latest City impact fee schedule is available
on the City’s website. Payment of Impact Fees is required at first permit issuance. Fees
shall be based on the current comprehensive fee schedule in effect at the time of fee
payment, consistent with and in accordance with City policy.
14. FEE - Prior to plan approval, developer shall submit a detailed project cost estimate by
the project engineer, subject to City Engineer approval. Cost estimate shall be broken out
into on-site and off-site improvements.
15. FEE - Prior to final plan approval, Developer shall pay 100% of the plan check and
processing fees and other related fees that the property is subject to, enter into a property
improvement agreement, and provide payment and performance bonds.
16. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading activity shall address National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) concerns. If all or part of the construction
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 13
occurs during the rainy season, the developer shall submit an Erosion Control Plan to the
Public Works Director for review and approval. This plan shall incorporate erosion
control devices and other techniques in accordance with Municipal Code § 27C to
minimize erosion. Specific measures to control sediment runoff, construction pollution
and other potential construction contamination sediment runoff, construction pollution
and other potential construction contamination shall be addressed through the Erosion
Control Plan and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall
supplement the Erosion Control Plan and project improvement plans. These documents
shall also be kept on-site while the project is under construction. A Notice of Intent (NOI)
shall be filed with the State Water Resources Control Board, with a copy provided to the
Engineering Division before a grading permit will be issued. WDID# shall be added to
the grading plans prior to plan approval.
17. GRADING & DRAINAGE - Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant’s
Geotechnical Engineer shall review the final grading, pavement design and drainage
plans to ensure that said designs are in accordance with their recommendations and the
peer review comments. The applicant’s Geotechnical engineer’s approval shall then be
conveyed to the City either by letter or by signing the plans.
18. GRADING & DRAINAGE - At first improvement plan submittal, the developer shall
submit a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer. The SWMP shall analyze the existing and ultimate conditions and facilities,
and the study shall include all off-site tributary areas. Study and the design shall be in
compliance with the City’s Stormwater Management Guidance Manual (latest edition).
Existing offsite drainage patterns, i.e., tributary areas, drainage amount and velocity shall
not be altered by the development.
19. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading and improvement plans shall identify the
vertical elevation datum, date of survey, and surveyor.
20. GRADING & DRAINGE - Improvement and grading plans shall show existing topo and
features at least 50’ beyond the project boundary. Clearly show existing topo, label
contour elevations, drainage patterns, flow lines, slopes, and all other property
encumbrances.
21. GRADING & DRAINAGE – Geotechnical Engineer to confirm infiltration rates by
conducting Double Ring Infiltrometer Testing with appropriate safety factors of all
stormwater detention and/or retention facilities.
22. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – Prior to Parcel Map approval, developer shall execute a
property improvement agreement and post Payment and Performance bonds each for
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 14
100% of cost for improvement with the City that shall secure the construction of the
public improvements. Insurance shall be provided per the terms of the agreement.
23. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS - The developer shall repair or replace all existing
improvements not designated for removal and all new improvements that are damaged or
removed because of developer's operations. Developer shall request a walk-through with
the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing
conditions.
24. CONSTRUCTION - All construction water from fire hydrants shall be metered and
billed at the current hydrant meter rate.
25. CONSTRUCTION - The City shall be notified at least ten (10) working days prior to the
start of any construction work and at that time the contractor shall provide a project
schedule and a 24-hour emergency telephone number list.
26. CONSTRUCTION - Construction activity shall be restricted to the period between 7:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mondays through Fridays, Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. for general
construction activity. No work shall be done on Sundays and City Holidays. The Public
Works Director will apply additional construction period restrictions, as necessary, to
accommodate standard commute traffic along arterial roadways and along school
commute routes.
27. CONSTRUCTION - All work shown on the improvement plans, if applicable, shall be
inspected. Uninspected work shall be removed as deemed appropriate by the Public
Works Director.
28. CONSTRUCTION - If the project has excess fill or cut that will be off-hauled to a site or
on-hauled from a site within the city limits of Gilroy, an additional permit is required.
This statement must be added as a general note to the Grading and Drainage Plan.
29. CONSTRUCTION - It is the responsibility of the contractor to make sure that all dirt
tracked into the public right-of-way is cleaned up on a daily basis. Mud, silt, concrete
and other construction debris shall not be washed into the City’s storm drains.
30. CONSTRUCTION - At least one week prior to commencement of work, the Developer
shall post at the site and mail to the Engineering Division and to owners of property
within (300') three hundred feet of the exterior boundary of the project site a notice that
construction work will commence on or around the stated date. The notice shall include a
list of contact persons with name, title, phone number and area of responsibility. The
person responsible for maintaining the list shall be included. The list shall be current at
all times and shall consist of persons with authority to initiate corrective action in their
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 15
area of responsibility. The names of individuals responsible for dust, noise and litter
control shall be expressly identified in the notice.
31. CONSTRUCTION - Prior to final inspections, all pertinent conditions of approval and all
improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City
Engineer.
32. TRANSPORTATION - Any work in the public right-of-way shall require a traffic
control plan prepared by a licensed professional engineer with experience in preparing
such plans. Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of
the latest edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The
Traffic Control Plan shall be approved prior to the commencement of any work within
the public right of way.
33. UTILTIES - The Developer/Contractor shall make accessible any or all City utilities as
directed by the Public Works Director.
ENGINEERING PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
34. FEE - The project is subject to the City’s Street Tree, Storm, Sewer, Water, Traffic, and
Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. The following are approximate impact fees
based on planning phase square footage and other information for Residential Low-
Density projects. Actual fees will be based on Final Design information.
a. Street Tree = $103
b. Storm Development = $593
c. Sewer Development = $50,004
d. Water Development = $17,176
e. Traffic Impact = $49,060
f. Public Facilities = $85,272
Latest City impact fee schedule is available on the City’s website. Payment of Impact
Fees is required at first building permit issuance. Fees shall be based on the current
comprehensive fee schedule in effect at the time of fee payment, consistent with and in
accordance with City policy.
35. GENERAL – As part of Phase 1 of this project, a Parcel Map shall be completed to
subdivide all future lots. Said Parcel map will be presented to the City Council for review
and action. The City Council meeting will be scheduled approximately fifty (50) days
after the Parcel Map is deemed technically correct, and Subdivision Improvement Plans
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 16
with supporting documents, reports and agreements are approved by the City. Developer
shall dedicate necessary right of way and public easements for the project development.
36. GENERAL - The approved construction schedule shall be shared with Gilroy Unified
School District (GUSD) to avoid traffic impacts to surrounding school functions. An
approved construction information handout(s) shall also be provided to GUSD to share
with school parents.
37. TRANSPORTATION – Applicant shall obtain a review letter from Recology confirming
serviceability and site accessibility of solid waste pickup. Contact Lisa Patton, Operations
Manager 408-846-4421. Include Recology review letter with first building permit
submittal.
38. GENERAL - A current Title Report dated within the last six months, shall be submitted
with the first submittal improvement plans. An existing site plan shall be submitted
showing all existing site conditions and title report easements. Include bearings and
distances for all Right of Way and Easements on the plans.
39. GENERAL - The Developer shall provide a “composite plan” showing Civil, Landscape,
Electrical, and Joint Trench design information (as a separate sheet titled “Composite
Plan”) to confirm that there are no conflicts.
40. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading operations and soil compaction activities shall
be per the approved project’s design level geotechnical report. All grading activities shall
be conducted under the observation of, and tested by, a licensed geotechnical engineer. A
report shall be filed with the City of Gilroy for each phase of construction, stating that all
grading activities were performed in conformance with the requirements of the project’s
geotechnical report. The developer shall add this condition to the general notes on the
grading plan.
41. GRADING & DRAINAGE – An elevation certificate per FEMA requirements must be
complete by a Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer prior to occupancy.
42. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – Prior to Parcel Map Approval, the developer shall obtain
design approval and bond for all necessary public improvements, including but not
limited to the following:
A. Pavement widening, striping, and signing along Chestnut St project frontage.
B. Construction of new curb, gutter, 6’ sidewalk, driveways, and ADA curb ramp
along Chestnut St. and Lewis St. project frontage.
C. The project is making new pavement cuts which reduces the City Pavement
Condition Index. The project shall grind and pave the limits shown on sheet C2 if
the improvement plans (Part of the Architectural and Site submittal) with a
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 17
minimum 2.5” hot mix AC, and with pavement section dig-outs and repairs.
Extent of the dig-outs and repairs to be determined by the Developers
Geotechnical Engineer and City Engineer.
D. Installation of new City standard streetlights along project frontage. Final
streetlight locations shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
E. Storm drain line, laterals, and related facilities along project frontage.
F. Existing overhead utilities shall be undergrounded and related utility poles
removed along the property frontage and boundary. Underground the overhead
lines that currently cross Lewis St. No new overhead utility lines or poles will be
allowed.
G. Removal of the existing underground utilities no longer being used along the
project frontage.
H. Water services and meters per City standards. Each water service shall have a
separate lateral from the main to each lot.
I. New Fire Hydrants along project frontage.
J. Sewer laterals, manholes, and related facilities. Sewer facilities cannot be aligned
through stormwater treatment facilities.
K. New trees along project frontage.
All improvements must be built to the city Engineer’s satisfaction, and accepted by the City
prior to issuance of any first certificate of occupancy for the project.
43. CONSTRUCTION - All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be watered as often
as deemed necessary by the City, or a minimum of three times daily. Streets will be cleaned
by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director, or
at least once a day.
44. CONSTRUCTION - The minimum soils sampling and testing frequency shall conform to
Chapter 8 of the Caltrans Construction Manual. The subdivider shall require the soils
engineer to daily submit all testing and sampling and reports to the City Engineer.
45. TRANSPORTATION – At first plan submittal, developer shall submit on-site and off-
site photometric plans.
46. TRANSPORTATION - At first plan submittal developer shall model all Emergency
Vehicle circulation movements, as a separate plan sheet. The circulation plan shall be
prepared to the City Engineer’s satisfaction, and modeled with AutoTurn swept analysis
software, all turning and street circulation movements.
47. UTILITIES – All new services to the development shall be "underground service"
designed and installed in accordance with the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, AT&T
phone) Company and local cable company regulations. Transformers and switch gear
cabinets shall be placed underground unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 18
and the City Engineer. Underground utility plans must be submitted to the City prior to
installation.
48. UTILITIES - The following items will need to be completed prior to first building permit
submittal:
a. The Developer shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground
electrical, gas, telephone, cable television, and communication conduits and cables
including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility
service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a
part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. Show preferred and
alternative locations for all utility vaults and boxes if project has not obtained PG&E
approval. A licensed Civil or Electrical Engineer shall sign the composite drawings
and/or utility improvement plans. (All dry utilities shall be placed underground).
b. The Developer shall negotiate right-of-way with Pacific Gas and Electric and other
utilities subject to the review and approval by the Engineering Division and the
utility companies.
c. Will Serve Letter” from each utility company for the subdivision shall be supplied to
the City.
49. UTILITIES - A note shall be placed on the joint trench composite plans which states that
the plan agrees with City Codes and Standards and that no underground utility conflict
exists. The Joint consultant shall provide the City a separate “project utility composite
plan” showing all Civil, Landscape, electrical, and joint trench information to confirm
that there are no conflicts with joint trench plan utilities.
50. UTILITIES – Storm, sewer, and water lines in private areas shall be privately owned and
maintained. This should be noted on the title sheet of the project improvement plan.
51. UTILITIES - Prior to any construction of the dry utilities in the field, the following will
need to be supplied to the City:
a. A professional engineer signed original electrical plan.
b. A letter from the design Electrical or Civil Engineer that states the electrical plan
conforms to City codes and Standards, and to the approved improvement plans.
52. UTILITIES - Sanitary sewer laterals located in driveways shall have traffic rated boxes
and lids.
53. UTILITIES - The Developer shall perform Fire Hydrant test to confirm water system will
adequately serve the development, and will modify any part of the systems that does not
perform to the standards established by the City. Developer shall coordinate with Fire
Department for the Fire Hydrant test.
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 19
54. UTILITIES - The project shall fully comply with the measures required by the City’s
Water Supply Shortage Regulations Ordinance (Gilroy City Code, Chapter 27, Article
VI), and subsequent amendments to meet the requirements imposed by the State of
California’s Water Board. This ordinance established permanent voluntary water saving
measures and temporary conservation standards.
55. WATER QUALITY - Proposed development shall comply with state mandated regional
permits for both pre-construction and post-construction stormwater quality requirements per
chapter 27D of the Gilroy Municipal Code, and is subject to, but not limited to, the
following:
a. At first improvement plan submittal, project shall submit a design level Stormwater
Control Plan Report (in 8 ½ x 11 report format), to include background, summary,
and explanation of all aspects of stormwater management. Report shall also include
exhibits, tables, calculations, and all technical information supporting facts, including
but not limited to, exhibit of the proposed site conditions which clearly delineates
impervious and pervious areas on site. Provide a separate hatch or shading for
landscaping/pervious areas on-site including those areas that are not bioretention
areas. This stormwater control plan report format does not replace or is not in lieu of
any stormwater control plan sheet in improvement plans.
b. The stormwater control plan shall include a signed Performance Requirement
Certifications specified in the Stormwater Guidance Manual.
c. At developer’s sole expense, the stormwater control plan shall be submitted for
review by an independent third party accepted by the City for compliance. Result of
the peer review shall be included with the submittal for City evaluation.
d. Prior to plan approval, the Developer of the site shall enter into a formal written
Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement with the City, including
Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
i. The City shall record this agreement against the property or properties
involved and it shall be binding on all subsequent owners of land served by
the stormwater management treatment BMPs. The City-standard Stormwater
BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement will be provided by Public
Works Engineering.
ii. This Agreement shall require that the BMPs not be modified and BMP
maintenance activities not alter the designed function of the facility from its
original design unless approved by the City prior to the commencement of
the proposed modification or maintenance activity.
iii. This Agreement shall also provide that in the event that maintenance or repair
is neglected, or the stormwater management facility becomes a danger to
public health or safety, the city shall have the authority to perform
maintenance and/or repair work and to recover the costs from the owner.
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 20
iv. All on-site stormwater management facilities shall be operated and
maintained in good condition and promptly repaired/replaced by the property
owner(s) or other legal entity approved by the City.
v. Any repairs or restoration/replacement and maintenance shall be in
accordance with City-approved plans.
vi. The property owner(s) shall develop a maintenance schedule for the life of
any stormwater management facility and shall describe the maintenance to be
completed, the time period for completion, and who shall perform the
maintenance. This maintenance schedule shall be included with the approved
Stormwater Runoff Management Plan.
e. Stormwater BMP Operations and Maintenance Agreement shall include inspections
to be required for this project and shall adhere to the following:
i. The property owner(s) shall be responsible for having all stormwater
management facilities inspected for condition and function by a certified
third party QSP or QSD.
ii. Stormwater facility inspections shall be done at least twice per year, once in
Fall by October 1st, in preparation for the wet season, and once in Winter by
March 15th. Written records shall be kept of all inspections and shall include,
at minimum, the following information:
1. Site address;
2. Date and time of inspection;
3. Name of the person conducting the inspection;
4. List of stormwater facilities inspected;
5. Condition of each stormwater facility inspected;
6. Description of any needed maintenance or repairs; and
7. As applicable, the need for site re-inspection.
f. Upon completion of each inspection, an inspection report shall be submitted to
Public Works Engineering no later than October 1st for the Fall report, and no later
than March 15th of the following year for the Winter report.
g. Before commencing any grading or construction activities, the developer shall obtain
a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and provide
evidence of filing of a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control
Board.
56. WATER QUALITY - The developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors are
aware of all storm water quality measures and implement such measures. Failure to comply
with the approved construction BMPs will result in the issuance of correction notices,
citations or a project stop order.
57. WATER QUALITY - The developer shall secure a QSD or QSP to maintain all erosion
control and BMP measures during construction. The developers QSD or QSP shall provide
the City weekly inspection reports.
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 21
58. WATER QUALITY – Sequence of construction for all Post Construction Required facilities
PCR’s) / stormwater facilities (bioswales, detention/retention basins, drain rock, etc.) shall
be done as a final phase of construction to prevent silting of facilities and reduce the intended
use of the facilities. Prior to final inspection, all stormwater facilities will be tested by a
certified QSP or QSD to meet the minimum design infiltration rate. All tests shall be made
at on 20 ft x 20ft grid pattern over the surface of the completed stormwater facility.
59. LANDSCAPING - Landscaping plans shall not conflict with the stormwater management
water treatment plan.
60. MASTER PLANS - Confirm the project is in compliance with the City Master Plans.
Studies shall identify the development's effect on the City's present Master Plans and the
impact of this development to surrounding utility lines. If the results of the study indicate
that this development contributes to the over-capacity of the trunk line, developer will be
required to mitigate the impact by remove and replace or upsizing of the existing utilities.
61. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Until such time as all improvements required are fully
completed and accepted by City, Developer will be responsible for the care maintenance
of and any damage to such improvements. City shall not, nor shall any officer or
employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of
cause, happening or occurring to the work or Improvements required for this project prior
to the completion and acceptance of the work or Improvements. All such risks shall be
the responsibility of and are hereby assumed by the Developer.
62. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Certification of grades and compaction is required prior to
Building Permit final. This statement must be added as a general note to the Grading and
Drainage Plan.
63. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Prior to building occupancy, provide and obtain approval
for all of the items identified in the Public Works Department “Development Project
Closeout” list.
64. All project frontage improvements including pavement widening, grind and pave, curb &
gutter, sidewalk, driveways, ADA ramp, utilities, stormwater management facilities,
landscaping, etc. along Chestnut St and Lewis St shall be constructed in Phase 1 of this
project.
65. All stormwater facilities along Chestnut St located within the PSE shall be maintained by
the property owner. The City and property owner shall enter into a maintenance
agreement prior to Parcel map approval.
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution No. 2022-02
Page 22
66. All stormwater facilities for future lots shall be owned and maintained by the property
owner.
67. No private signage, poles, utilities, etc. allowed in PSE/PUE.
68. Construct new City standard storm drain drop inlet located near the north property
boundary.
69. Stormwater treatment shall occur behind the back of proposed sidewalk.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of January, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Elle, Doyle, Bhandal, Lewis, Ridley, Fischer, Moreno
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Kraig Tambornini, Secretary Tom Fischer, Chairperson
Tom Fischer (Jan 21, 2022 11:05 PST)
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Resolution 2022-02 - AS 20-02 PC reso
Final Audit Report 2022-01-21
Created:2022-01-21
By:Kraig Tambornini (Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
Status:Signed
Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAA0TGWIngi1tbNJmRfovb8-rIICsTHwoZ_
Resolution 2022-02 - AS 20-02 PC reso" History
Document created by Kraig Tambornini (Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
2022-01-21 - 5:53:47 PM GMT- IP address: 66.189.161.134
Document e-signed by Kraig Tambornini (Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
Signature Date: 2022-01-21 - 5:54:37 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 66.189.161.134
Document emailed to Tom Fischer (tom.fischer@ci.gilroy.ca.us) for signature
2022-01-21 - 5:54:38 PM GMT
Email viewed by Tom Fischer (tom.fischer@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
2022-01-21 - 6:02:03 PM GMT- IP address: 104.28.124.186
Document e-signed by Tom Fischer (tom.fischer@ci.gilroy.ca.us)
Signature Date: 2022-01-21 - 7:05:27 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 97.86.154.181
Agreement completed.
2022-01-21 - 7:05:27 PM GMT
8.1.g
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: PC signed Resolution AS 20-02 (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY
APPROVING A TENTATIVE MAP TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 395 LEWIS STREET (APN: 841-03-062) INTO FOUR
PARCELS (FILE NUMBER TM 20-01)
WHEREAS, on March 1, 2021 an application was resubmitted by Qui T. Son, of iMark
Designs proposing subdivision of a 1.05 acre site into four lots, located at 395 Lewis Street within
the City of Gilroy R1 Single-Family Residential zoning district (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, the application submittal was accepted as complete on June 25, 2021; and
WHEREAS, On November 2, 2020 the Gilroy City Council adopted the Gilroy 2040 General
Plan after certifying an EIR for the plan and whereas the General Plan EIR reviewed all of the topics
included on the Appendix G environmental checklist in the State CEQA Guidelines as well as all
sections required to be included in an EIR; and
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2021, an environmental checklist was prepared for the Project
to evaluate the impact categories covered in the City’s certified General Plan EIR to determine
whether the project’s impacts have been adequately analyzed in the EIR or whether any new
significant impacts peculiar to the project or project site would result; and
WHEREAS, the project has been deemed statutorily exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State
CEQA Guidelines section 15183 (Projects Consistent with General Plan, Community Plan or
Zoning), and categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15315 (Class 15, Minor
Land Divisions); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting on January 20,
2022, at which time the Planning Commission received and considered the staff report as well as all
evidence received including written and oral public testimony related to the project TM 20-01, and
whereas and by unanimous vote recommended to the City Council approval of project TM 20-01;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting on February 28, 2022,
received and considered the staff report as well as all evidence received including written and oral
public testimony related to the project TM 20-01; and
WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute
the record of proceedings upon which the project approval is based is the City Clerk’s Office.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby
find as follows:
1. The proposed Tentative Map to subdivide the 1.05 acre property into four (4) new
residential lots is consistent with the intent of the goals and policies of the City's General
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
Page 2 of 16
Plan and the residential density and uses anticipated within the General Plan Low Density
Residential land use designation.
2. The proposed development is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and the City's
Subdivision and Land Development Code, and the State Subdivision Map Act given that
the size, shape and location of the property complies with all applicable codes and
ordinances.
3. Public utilities and infrastructure improvements needed in order to serve the proposed
project are in proximity to the site.
4. There will be no significant environmental impacts as a result of this project, which
qualifies for statutory and categorical exemptions from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Gilroy hereby approves application TM 20-01, subject to the conditions included as Exhibit A:
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of February, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
___________________________________
Marie Blankley, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Page 1 of 16
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TM 20-01
PLANNING CONDITIONS
The following GENERAL conditions authorize specific terms of the project ENTITLEMENT(S).
1. APPROVED PROJECT: The approval for Tentative Parcel Map TM 20-01 is granted to
subdivide a 1.05-acre site into four (4) single-family residential lots, located at 395 Lewis
Street (APN: 841-03-062) within the City of Gilroy R1 Single-Family Residential zoning
district as shown on the Parcel Map prepared by Carnes and Ekparian Inc Land Surveyors for
Qui T. Son, of iMark Designs, consisting of two (2) sheets, dated October 20, 2020 and
received by the Planning Division on March 1, 2021.
Build-out of the project shall conform to the plans, except as otherwise specified in these
conditions. Any future adjustment or modification to the plans, including any changes made at
time of building permit submittal, shall be considered by the Community Development
Director or designee, may require separate discretionary approval, and shall conform to all
City, State, and Federal requirements, including subsequent City Code requirements or
policies adopted by City Council.
2. COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS: If Developer, owner or tenant fails to comply with
any of the conditions of this permit, the Developer, owner or tenant shall be subject to permit
revocation or enforcement actions pursuant to the City Code. All costs associated with any
such actions shall be the responsibility of Developer, owner or tenant.
3. INDEMNIFICATION: Developer agrees, as a condition of permit approval, at Developer’s
own expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Gilroy (“the City”) and its
officers, contractors, consultants, attorneys, employees and agents from any and all claim(s),
action(s) or proceeding(s) brought against the City or its officers, contractors, consultants,
attorneys, employees, or agents to challenge, attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of
this resolution or any condition attached thereto or any proceedings, acts or determinations
taken, including actions taken under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as
amended, done or made prior to the approval of such resolution that were part of the approval
process.
4. SIGNS: No signs are approved as part of this application. Prior to issuance of a sign permit
for this site, Developer shall propose well-designed, quality signs that comply with the
allowances of the City Code and are to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Director or designee.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 2 of 16
5. SIGNAGE: All signage advertising the development project or components thereof,
including individual tenants or subdivisions, shall be installed or maintained onsite or offsite
as allowed and in conformance with an approved sign permit.
6. WATER LIMITATIONS: Developer shall be advised that the approval is subject to the
drought emergencies provisions pursuant to the Gilroy City Code Chapter 27.98.
The following conditions shall be addressed prior to issuance of any BUILDING PERMIT,
GRADING PERMIT or IMPROVEMENT PLAN, whichever is first issued, or as otherwise
specified in the condition.
7. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: On plans submitted for grading permit, developer shall
include a plan sheet(s) that includes a reproduction of all conditions of approval of this permit,
as adopted by the decision-maker.
8. HABITAT PERMIT: Concurrent with or prior to an application for a grading permit,
Developer shall submit a Habitat Permit application to the City of Gilroy. The application
shall consist of the application processing fee, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Application
For Private Projects and Fees and Conditions Worksheet (available on the Santa Clara Valley
Habitat Agency website: https://www.scv-habitatagency.org/). A grading permit will be
issued only after approval of the Habitat Plan permit and payment of assessed fees.
The following conditions shall be met prior to the approval of the FINAL MAP or PARCEL MAP,
or other deadline as specified in the condition.
9. TENTATIVE MAP: An approved tentative parcel map, which shall expire twenty-four (24)
months from the approval date, may be extended pursuant to the provisions of the Map Act.
The following conditions shall be complied with AT ALL TIMES DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT, or as otherwise specified in the condition.
10. CONSTRUCTION RELATED NOISE: To minimize potential construction-related impacts
to noise, Developer shall include the following language on any grading, site work, and
construction plans issued for the subject site
“During earth-moving, grading, and construction activities, Developer shall
implement the following measures at the construction site:
a. Limit construction activity to weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., and on
Saturdays between 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Construction noise is prohibited on
Sundays and City-observed holidays;
b. Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive
receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area;
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 3 of 16
c. Construct sound walls or other noise reduction measures prior to developing the
project site;
d. Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust
mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment;
e. Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines;
f. Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where
technology exists; and
g. Designate a “disturbance coordinator’ who would be responsible for responding to
any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine
the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. bad muffler, etc.) and will require that
reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem.”
11. CONSTRUCTION RELATED AIR QUALITY: To minimize potential construction-
related impacts to air quality, Developer shall require all construction contractors to
implement the basic construction mitigation measures recommended by the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and shall include the following language on any
grading, site work, and construction plans issued for the project site
“During earth-moving, grading, and construction activities, Developer shall
implement the following basic control measures at the construction site:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g. parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day;
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material onsite or offsite shall be
covered;
c. All visible mud or dirt tracked out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using
wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power
sweeping is prohibited;
d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads or pathways shall be limited to 15 miles per
hour;
e. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding
or soil binders are used;
f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or
reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne
toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations
[CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points;
g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible
emissions evaluator; and
h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the
lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective
action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 4 of 16
compliance with applicable regulations.”
12. DISCOVERY OF CONTAMINATED SOILS: If contaminated soils are discovered, the
Developer will ensure the contractor employs engineering controls and Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to minimize human exposure to potential contaminants. Engineering
controls and construction BMPs will include, but not be limited to, the following:
a. Contractor employees working on-site will be certified in OSHA’s 40-hour Hazardous
Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training;
b. Contractor will stockpile soil during development activities to allow for proper
characterization and evaluation of disposal options;
c. Contractor will monitor area around construction site for fugitive vapor emissions
with appropriate filed screening instrumentation;
d. Contractor will water/mist soil as it is being excavated and loaded onto transportation
trucks;
e. Contractor will place any stockpiled soil in areas shielded from prevailing winds; and
f. Contractor will cover the bottom of excavated areas with sheeting when work is not
being performed.
13. DISCOVERY OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES: In the event that a fossil is
discovered during construction of the project, excavations within 50’ of the find shall be
temporarily halted or delayed until the discovery is examined by a qualified paleontologist, in
accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. The City shall include a
standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of
this requirement. If the find is determined to be significant and if avoidance is not feasible, the
paleontologist shall design and carry out a data recovery plan consistent with the Society of
Vertebrate Paleontology standards.
14. DISCOVERY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES: In the event of an accidental
discovery of archaeological resources during grading or construction activities, Developer
shall include the following language on any grading, site work, and construction plans issued
for the project site:
“If archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during earth-moving, grading,
or construction activities, all work shall be halted within at least 50 meters (165 feet)
of the find and the area shall be staked off immediately. The monitoring professional
archaeologist, if one is onsite, shall be notified and evaluate the find. If a monitoring
professional archaeologist is not onsite, the City shall be notified immediately and a
qualified professional archaeologist shall be retained (at Developer’s expense) to
evaluate the find and report to the City. If the find is determined to be significant,
appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated by the professional archaeologist
and implemented by the responsible party.”
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 5 of 16
15. DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS: In the event of an accidental discovery or
recognition of any human remains, Developer shall include the following language in all
grading, site work, and construction plans:
“If human remains are found during earth-moving, grading, or construction activities,
there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area
reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of Santa
Clara County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is
required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American the coroner
shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native
American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be
the most likely descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD
may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the
excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the
human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98. The landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the
Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity
on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native
American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to
make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; b)
the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his
authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the
mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures
acceptable to the landowner.”
ENGINEERING GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. GENERAL - At first improvement plan submittal, utility sheets shall show appropriate line
types and labels to identify different type of utilities and pipe sizes. Clearly identify both
public and private utilities.
2. GENERAL - Improvement plans (as second sheet in plan set) shall contain Approved
Conditions of Approval.
3. GENERAL - Improvement plans shall include General Notes found in the City of Gilroy
General Guidelines. A complete set of improvement plans shall consist of Civil site design,
landscape site design, Electrical, Joint Trench. Any walls or structural features part of the
landscape design shall also be included.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 6 of 16
4. GENERAL - Improvement plan cover sheet shall include a table summarizing all facilities
(Streets, Utilities, Landscaping, etc.), showing the ownership of all facilities, and the
maintenance responsibilities of all facilities.
5. GENERAL - The applicant shall obtain all applicable permits from federal, state, and local
agencies as required to construct the proposed improvements. A copy of these permits will be
provided prior to building permits.
6. GENERAL – Improvement plans are required for both on-site and off-site improvements. A
separate plan set for each shall be prepared, or at the approval of the City Engineer, onsite and
offsite sheets can be combined into one plan set.
7. GENERAL - Existing overhead utilities shall be undergrounded and related utility poles
removed along the property frontage.
8. GENERAL - All existing public utilities shall be protected in place and if necessary relocated
as approved by the City Engineer. No permanent structure is permitted within City easements
without the approval of the City of Gilroy.
9. GENERAL - Prior to any work within public right of way or City easement, the developer
shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City.
10. GENERAL - All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City
of Gilroy Municipal Code and Standard Specifications and Details, and is subject to all laws
of the City of Gilroy by reference. Street improvements and the design of all off-site storm
drainage facilities, sewer and water lines, and all street sections shall be in accordance with
City Standards and shall follow the most current City Master Plan for streets, as approved by
the City of Gilroy’s Public Works Director/City Engineer.
11. GENERAL - Prior to issuance of any building permits, developer shall submit for City
approval water, sewer and storm drain studies for the development. These studies shall
provide supporting hydraulic calculation for pipe sizing per City standard design guideline.
12. GENERAL - At first improvement plan submittal, developers engineer shall submit a
calculation for sanitary sewer and water generation per the City’s Master Plan design criteria.
13. FEE - The project is subject to the City’s Street Tree, Storm, Sewer, Wat er, Traffic, and
Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. Latest City impact fee schedule is available on
the City’s website. Payment of Impact Fees is required at first permit issuance. Fees shall be
based on the current comprehensive fee schedule in effect at the time of fee payment,
consistent with and in accordance with City policy.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 7 of 16
14. FEE - Prior to plan approval, developer shall submit a detailed project cost estimate by the
project engineer, subject to City Engineer approval. Cost estimate shall be broken out into on-
site and off-site improvements.
15. FEE - Prior to final plan approval, Developer shall pay 100% of the plan check and
processing fees and other related fees that the property is subject to, enter into a property
improvement agreement, and provide payment and performance bonds.
16. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading activity shall address National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) concerns. If all or part of the construction occurs during the
rainy season, the developer shall submit an Erosion Control Plan to the Public Works Director
for review and approval. This plan shall incorporate erosion control devices and other
techniques in accordance with Municipal Code § 27C to minimize erosion. Specific measures
to control sediment runoff, construction pollution and other potential construction
contamination sediment runoff, construction pollution and other potential construction
contamination shall be addressed through the Erosion Control Plan and Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall supplement the Erosion Control Plan and
project improvement plans. These documents shall also be kept on -site while the project is
under construction. A Notice of Intent (NOI) shall be filed with the State Water Resources
Control Board, with a copy provided to the Engineering Division before a grading permit will
be issued. WDID# shall be added to the grading plans prior to plan approval.
17. GRADING & DRAINAGE - Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant’s Geotechnical
Engineer shall review the final grading, pavement design and drainage plans to ensure that
said designs are in accordance with their recommendations and the peer review comments.
The applicant’s Geotechnical engineer’s approval shall then be conveyed to the City either by
letter or by signing the plans.
18. GRADING & DRAINAGE - At first improvement plan submittal, the developer shall submit
a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. The
SWMP shall analyze the existing and ultimate conditions and facilities, and the study shall
include all off-site tributary areas. Study and the design shall be in compliance with the
City’s Stormwater Management Guidance Manual (latest edition). Existing offsite drainage
patterns, i.e., tributary areas, drainage amount and velocity shall not be altered by the
development.
19. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading and improvement plans shall identify the vertical
elevation datum, date of survey, and surveyor.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 8 of 16
20. GRADING & DRAINGE - Improvement and grading plans shall show existing topo and
features at least 50’ beyond the project boundary. Clearly show existing topo, label contour
elevations, drainage patterns, flow lines, slopes, and all other property encumbrances.
21. GRADING & DRAINAGE – Geotechnical Engineer to confirm infiltration rates by
conducting Double Ring Infiltrometer Testing with appropriate safety factors of all
stormwater detention and/or retention facilities.
22. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – Prior to Parcel Map approval, developer shall execute a
property improvement agreement and post Payment and Performance bonds each for 100% of
cost for improvement with the City that shall secure the construction of the public
improvements. Insurance shall be provided per the terms of the agreement.
23. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS - The developer shall repair or replace all existing
improvements not designated for removal and all new improvements that are damaged or
removed because of developer's operations. Developer shall request a walk-through with the
Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing
conditions.
24. CONSTRUCTION - All construction water from fire hydrants shall be metered and billed at
the current hydrant meter rate.
25. CONSTRUCTION - The City shall be notified at least ten (10) working days prior to the start
of any construction work and at that time the contractor shall provide a project schedule and a
24-hour emergency telephone number list.
26. CONSTRUCTION - Construction activity shall be restricted to the period between 7:00 a.m.
to 7:00 p.m. Mondays through Fridays, Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. for general
construction activity. No work shall be done on Sundays and City Holidays. The Public
Works Director will apply additional construction period restrictions, as necessary, to
accommodate standard commute traffic along arterial roadways and along school commute
routes.
27. CONSTRUCTION - All work shown on the improvement plans, if applicable, shall be
inspected. Uninspected work shall be removed as deemed appropriate by the Public Works
Director.
28. CONSTRUCTION - If the project has excess fill or cut that will be off-hauled to a site or on-
hauled from a site within the city limits of Gilroy, an additional permit is required. This
statement must be added as a general note to the Grading and Drainage Plan.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 9 of 16
29. CONSTRUCTION - It is the responsibility of the contractor to make sure that all dirt tracked
into the public right-of-way is cleaned up on a daily basis. Mud, silt, concrete and other
construction debris shall not be washed into the City’s storm drains.
30. CONSTRUCTION - At least one week prior to commencement of work, the Developer shall
post at the site and mail to the Engineering Division and to owners of property within (300')
three hundred feet of the exterior boundary of the project site a notice that construction work
will commence on or around the stated date. The notice shall include a list of contact persons
with name, title, phone number and area of responsibility. The person responsible for
maintaining the list shall be included. The list shall be current at all times and shall consist of
persons with authority to initiate corrective action in their area of responsibility. The names of
individuals responsible for dust, noise and litter control shall be expressly identified in the
notice.
31. CONSTRUCTION - Prior to final inspections, all pertinent conditions of approval and all
improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City
Engineer.
32. TRANSPORTATION - Any work in the public right-of-way shall require a traffic control
plan prepared by a licensed professional engineer with experience in preparing such plans.
Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the latest
edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The Traffic Control
Plan shall be approved prior to the commencement of any work within the public right of
way.
33. UTILTIES - The Developer/Contractor shall make accessible any or all City utilities as
directed by the Public Works Director.
ENGINEERING PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
34. FEE - The project is subject to the City’s Street Tree, Storm, Sewer, Water, Traffic, and
Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. The following are approximate impact fees based
on planning phase square footage and other information for Residential Low-Density projects.
Actual fees will be based on Final Design information.
a. Street Tree = $103
b. Storm Development = $593
c. Sewer Development = $50,004
d. Water Development = $17,176
e. Traffic Impact = $49,060
f. Public Facilities = $85,272
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 10 of 16
Latest City impact fee schedule is available on the City’s website. Payment of Impact Fees is
required at first building permit issuance. Fees shall be based on the current comprehensive
fee schedule in effect at the time of fee payment, consistent with and in accordance with City
policy.
35. GENERAL – As part of Phase 1 of this project, a Parcel Map shall be completed to subdivide
all future lots. Said Parcel map will be presented to the City Council for review and action.
The City Council meeting will be scheduled approximately fifty (50) days after the Parcel
Map is deemed technically correct, and Subdivision Improvement Plans with supporting
documents, reports and agreements are approved by the City. Developer shall dedicate
necessary right of way and public easements for the project development.
36. GENERAL - The approved construction schedule shall be shared with Gilroy Unified School
District (GUSD) to avoid traffic impacts to surrounding school functions. An approved
construction information handout(s) shall also be provided to GUSD to share with school
parents.
37. TRANSPORTATION – Applicant shall obtain a review letter from Recology confirming
serviceability and site accessibility of solid waste pickup. Contact Lisa Patton, Operations
Manager 408-846-4421. Include Recology review letter with first building permit submittal.
38. GENERAL - A current Title Report dated within the last six months, shall be submitted with
the first submittal improvement plans. An existing site plan shall be submitted showing all
existing site conditions and title report easements. Include bearings and distances for all Right
of Way and Easements on the plans.
39. GENERAL - The Developer shall provide a “composite plan” showing Civil, Landscape,
Electrical, and Joint Trench design information (as a separate sheet titled “Composite Plan”)
to confirm that there are no conflicts.
40. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading operations and soil compaction activities shall be
per the approved project’s design level geotechnical report. All grading activities shall be
conducted under the observation of, and tested by, a licensed geotechnical engineer. A report
shall be filed with the City of Gilroy for each phase of construction, stating that all grading
activities were performed in conformance with the requirements of the project’s geotechnical
report. The developer shall add this condition to the general notes on the grading plan.
41. GRADING & DRAINAGE – An elevation certificate per FEMA requirements must be
complete by a Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer prior to occupancy.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 11 of 16
42. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – Prior to Parcel Map Approval, the developer shall obtain
design approval and bond for all necessary public improvements, including but not limited to
the following:
a. Pavement widening, striping, and signing along Chestnut St project frontage.
b. Construction of new curb, gutter, 6’ sidewalk, driveways, and ADA curb ramp along
Chestnut St. and Lewis St. project frontage.
c. The project is making new pavement cuts which reduces the City Pavement Condition
Index. The project shall grind and pave the limits shown on sheet C2 if the
improvement plans (Part of the Architectural and Site submittal) with a minimum 2.5”
hot mix AC, and with pavement section dig-outs and repairs. Extent of the dig-outs
and repairs to be determined by the Developers Geotechnical Engineer and City
Engineer.
d. Installation of new City standard streetlights along project frontage. Final streetlight
locations shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
e. Storm drain line, laterals, and related facilities along project frontage.
f. Existing overhead utilities shall be undergrounded and related utility poles removed
along the property frontage and boundary. Underground the overhead lines that
currently cross Lewis St. No new overhead utility lines or poles will be allowed.
g. Removal of the existing underground utilities no longer being used along the project
frontage.
h. Water services and meters per City standards. Each water service shall have a separate
lateral from the main to each lot.
i. New Fire Hydrants along project frontage.
j. Sewer laterals, manholes, and related facilities. Sewer facilities cannot be aligned
through stormwater treatment facilities.
k. New trees along project frontage.
All improvements must be built to the city Engineer’s satisfaction, and accepted by the City
prior to issuance of any first certificate of occupancy for the project.
43. CONSTRUCTION - All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be watered as often
as deemed necessary by the City, or a minimum of three times daily. Streets will be cleaned
by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director, or
at least once a day.
44. CONSTRUCTION - The minimum soils sampling and testing frequency shall conform to
Chapter 8 of the Caltrans Construction Manual. The subdivider shall require the soils engineer
to daily submit all testing and sampling and reports to the City Engineer.
45. TRANSPORTATION – At first plan submittal, developer shall submit on-site and off-site
photometric plans.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 12 of 16
46. TRANSPORTATION - At first plan submittal developer shall model all Emergency Vehicle
circulation movements, as a separate plan sheet. The circulation plan shall be prepared to the
City Engineer’s satisfaction, and modeled with AutoTurn swept analysis software, all turning
and street circulation movements.
47. UTILITIES – All new services to the development shall be "underground service" designed
and installed in accordance with the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, AT&T (phone)
Company and local cable company regulations. Transformers and switch gear cabinets shall
be placed underground unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director and the City
Engineer. Underground utility plans must be submitted to the City prior to installation.
48. UTILITIES - The following items will need to be completed prior to first building permit
submittal:
a. The Developer shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground
electrical, gas, telephone, cable television, and communication conduits and cables
including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility
service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a
part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. Show preferred and
alternative locations for all utility vaults and boxes if project has not obtained PG&E
approval. A licensed Civil or Electrical Engineer shall sign the composite drawings
and/or utility improvement plans. (All dry utilities shall be placed underground).
b. The Developer shall negotiate right-of-way with Pacific Gas and Electric and other
utilities subject to the review and approval by the Engineering Division and the utility
companies.
c. Will Serve Letter” from each utility company for the subdivision shall be supplied to
the City.
49. UTILITIES - A note shall be placed on the joint trench composite plans which states that the
plan agrees with City Codes and Standards and that no underground utility conflict exists. The
Joint consultant shall provide the City a separate “project utility composite plan” showing all
Civil, Landscape, electrical, and joint trench information to confirm that there are no conflicts
with joint trench plan utilities.
50. UTILITIES – Storm, sewer, and water lines in private areas shall be privately owned and
maintained. This should be noted on the title sheet of the project improvement plan.
51. UTILITIES - Prior to any construction of the dry utilities in the field, the following will need
to be supplied to the City:
a. A professional engineer signed original electrical plan.
b. A letter from the design Electrical or Civil Engineer that states the electrical plan
conforms to City codes and Standards, and to the approved improvement plans.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 13 of 16
52. UTILITIES - Sanitary sewer laterals located in driveways shall have traffic rated boxes and
lids.
53. UTILITIES - The Developer shall perform Fire Hydrant test to confirm water system will
adequately serve the development, and will modify any part of the systems that does not
perform to the standards established by the City. Developer shall coordinate with Fire
Department for the Fire Hydrant test.
54. UTILITIES - The project shall fully comply with the measures required by the City’s Water
Supply Shortage Regulations Ordinance (Gilroy City Code, Chapter 27, Article VI), and
subsequent amendments to meet the requirements imposed by the State of California’s Water
Board. This ordinance established permanent voluntary water saving measures and temporary
conservation standards.
55. WATER QUALITY - Proposed development shall comply with state mandated regional
permits for both pre-construction and post-construction stormwater quality requirements per
chapter 27D of the Gilroy Municipal Code, and is subject to, but not limited to, the following:
a. At first improvement plan submittal, project shall submit a design level Stormwater
Control Plan Report (in 8 ½ x 11 report format), to include background, summary, and
explanation of all aspects of stormwater management. Report shall also include
exhibits, tables, calculations, and all technical information supporting facts, including
but not limited to, exhibit of the proposed site conditions which clearly delineates
impervious and pervious areas on site. Provide a separate hatch or shading for
landscaping/pervious areas on-site including those areas that are not bioretention
areas. This stormwater control plan report format does not replace or is not in lieu of
any stormwater control plan sheet in improvement plans.
b. The stormwater control plan shall include a signed Performance Requirement
Certifications specified in the Stormwater Guidance Manual.
c. At developer’s sole expense, the stormwater control plan shall be submitted for
review by an independent third party accepted by the City for compliance. Result of
the peer review shall be included with the submittal for City evaluation.
d. Prior to plan approval, the Developer of the site shall enter into a formal written
Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement with the City, including
Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
i. The City shall record this agreement against the property or properties
involved and it shall be binding on all subsequent owners of land served by
the stormwater management treatment BMPs. The City-standard Stormwater
BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement will be provided by Public
Works Engineering.
ii. This Agreement shall require that the BMPs not be modified and BMP
maintenance activities not alter the designed function of the facility from its
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 14 of 16
original design unless approved by the City prior to the commencement of the
proposed modification or maintenance activity.
iii. This Agreement shall also provide that in the event that maintenance or repair
is neglected, or the stormwater management facility becomes a danger to
public health or safety, the city shall have the authority to perform
maintenance and/or repair work and to recover the costs from the owner.
iv. All on-site stormwater management facilities shall be operated and maintained
in good condition and promptly repaired/replaced by the property owner(s) or
other legal entity approved by the City.
v. Any repairs or restoration/replacement and maintenance shall be in
accordance with City-approved plans.
vi. The property owner(s) shall develop a maintenance schedule for the life of any
stormwater management facility and shall describe the maintenance to be
completed, the time period for completion, and who shall perform the
maintenance. This maintenance schedule shall be included with the approved
Stormwater Runoff Management Plan.
e. Stormwater BMP Operations and Maintenance Agreement shall include inspections to
be required for this project and shall adhere to the following:
i. The property owner(s) shall be responsible for having all stormwater
management facilities inspected for condition and function by a certified third
party QSP or QSD.
ii. Stormwater facility inspections shall be done at least twice per year, once in
Fall by October 1st, in preparation for the wet season, and once in Winter by
March 15th. Written records shall be kept of all inspections and shall include,
at minimum, the following information:
1. Site address;
2. Date and time of inspection;
3. Name of the person conducting the inspection;
4. List of stormwater facilities inspected;
5. Condition of each stormwater facility inspected;
6. Description of any needed maintenance or repairs; and
7. As applicable, the need for site re-inspection.
f. Upon completion of each inspection, an inspection report shall be submitted to Public
Works Engineering no later than October 1st for the Fall report, and no later than
March 15th of the following year for the Winter report.
g. Before commencing any grading or construction activities, the developer shall obtain
a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and provide
evidence of filing of a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control
Board.
56. WATER QUALITY - The developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors are aware
of all storm water quality measures and implement such measures. Failure to comply with the
approved construction BMPs will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations or a
project stop order.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 15 of 16
57. WATER QUALITY - The developer shall secure a QSD or QSP to maintain all erosion
control and BMP measures during construction. The developers QSD or QSP shall provide
the City weekly inspection reports.
58. WATER QUALITY – Sequence of construction for all Post Construction Required facilities
(PCR’s) / stormwater facilities (bioswales, detention/retention basins, drain rock, etc.) shall be
done as a final phase of construction to prevent silting of facilities and reduce the intended use
of the facilities. Prior to final inspection, all stormwater facilities will be tested by a certified
QSP or QSD to meet the minimum design infiltration rate. All tests shall be made at on 20 ft
x 20ft grid pattern over the surface of the completed stormwater facility.
59. LANDSCAPING - Landscaping plans shall not conflict with the stormwater management
water treatment plan.
60. MASTER PLANS - Confirm the project is in compliance with the City Master Plans. Studies
shall identify the development's effect on the City's present Master Plans and the impact of
this development to surrounding utility lines. If the results of the study indicate that this
development contributes to the over-capacity of the trunk line, developer will be required to
mitigate the impact by remove and replace or upsizing of the existing utilities.
61. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Until such time as all improvements required are fully
completed and accepted by City, Developer will be responsible for the care maintenance of
and any damage to such improvements. City shall not, nor shall any officer or employee
thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause,
happening or occurring to the work or Improvements required for this project prior to the
completion and acceptance of the work or Improvements. All such risks shall be the
responsibility of and are hereby assumed by the Developer.
62. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Certification of grades and compaction is required prior to
Building Permit final. This statement must be added as a general note to the Grading and
Drainage Plan.
63. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Prior to building occupancy, provide and obtain approval for all
of the items identified in the Public Works Department “Development Project Closeout” list.
64. All project frontage improvements including pavement widening, grind and pave, curb &
gutter, sidewalk, driveways, ADA ramp, utilities, stormwater management facilities,
landscaping, etc. along Chestnut St and Lewis St shall be constructed in Phase 1 of this
project.
65. All stormwater facilities along Chestnut St located within the PSE shall be maintained by the
property owner. The City and property owner shall enter into a maintenance agreement prior
to Parcel map approval.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (TM 20-01)
Page 16 of 16
66. All stormwater facilities for future lots shall be owned and maintained by the property owner.
67. No private signage, poles, utilities, etc. allowed in PSE/PUE.
68. Construct new City standard storm drain drop inlet located near the north property boundary.
69. Stormwater treatment shall occur behind the back of proposed sidewalk.
8.1.h
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: TM 20-01 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY
APPROVING A TENTATIVE MAP TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 395 LEWIS STREET (APN: 841-03-062) INTO FOUR
PARCELS (FILE NUMBER TM 20-01)
WHEREAS, on March 1, 2021 an application was resubmitted by Qui T. Son, of iMark
Designs proposing the development of four (4) single-family homes following the subdivision of a
1.05 acre site into four single-family lots, on property located at 395 Lewis Street within the City of
Gilroy R1 Single-Family Residential zoning district (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, the application submittal was accepted as complete on June 25, 2021; and
WHEREAS, On November 2, 2020 the Gilroy City Council adopted the Gilroy 2040 General
Plan after certifying an EIR for the plan and whereas the General Plan EIR reviewed all of the topics
included on the Appendix G environmental checklist in the State CEQA Guidelines as well as all
sections required to be included in an EIR; and
WHEREAS, on November 30, 2021, an environmental checklist was prepared for the Project
to evaluate the impact categories covered in the City’s certified General Plan EIR to determine
whether the project’s impacts have been adequately analyzed in the EIR or whether any new
significant impacts peculiar to the project or project site would result; and
WHEREAS, the project has been deemed statutorily exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and State
CEQA Guidelines section 15183 (Projects Consistent with General Plan, Community Plan or
Zoning), and categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15315 (Class 15, Minor
Land Divisions); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting on January 20,
2022, at which time the Planning Commission received and considered the staff report as well as all
evidence received including written and oral public testimony related to the project AS 20-02, and
whereas and by unanimous vote recommended to the City Council approval of project AS 20-02; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting on February 28, 2022,
received and considered the staff report as well as all evidence received including written and oral
public testimony related to the project AS 20-02; and
WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute
the record of proceedings upon which the project approval is based is the City Clerk’s Office.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby
find as follows:
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
A. The proposed development is permitted and in conformance with the Gilroy Zoning
Ordinance development standards including height, setbacks, parking and landscaping, and
other adopted policies of the City of Gilroy.
B. The proposed development would be consistent with all applicable goals and policies of the
Gilroy General Plan in that the residential land use is an allowed use in the single-family
residential district.
C. The proposed development would not impair the integrity and character of the area
surrounding and in the vicinity of the subject property given that the project has been
designed to comply with all city development standards, minimizes grading and tree impacts,
and proposes a residential design that is compatible with the neighborhood character.
D. The subject site would be served by streets and highways adequate in width and structure to
carry the kind and quantity of traffic such use will generate, given that the project will be
required to dedicate street right-of-way to widen Chestnut Street by approximately 21.5 feet.
E. The subject site would be provided with adequate sewerage, water, fire protection and storm
drainage facilities.
F. The proposed development/use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the
adjacent uses, buildings or structure or to the public health, safety or general welfare, given
that the project would require a building permit and has been designed to comply with all
applicable city development standards.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Gilroy hereby approves application AS 20, subject to the conditions included as Exhibit A:
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of February, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
___________________________________
Marie Blankley, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 1 of 21
EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
AS 20-02
PLANNING CONDITIONS
The following GENERAL conditions authorize specific terms of the project ENTITLEMENT(S).
1. APPROVED PROJECT: The approval for Architectural and Site Review Permit AS
20-02 is granted to allow construction of four (4) two-story single-family homes on
property located at 395 Lewis Street (APN: 841-03-062) to be subdivided into four (4)
single family parcels (file number TM 20-01) within the City of Gilroy R1 Single-
Family Residential zoning district as shown on the project plans prepared by Qui T.
Son, of iMark Designs, consisting of 26 sheets, dated as received by the Planning
Division on March 1, 2021.
Build-out of the project shall conform to the plans, except as otherwise specified in these
conditions. Any future adjustment or modification to the plans, including any changes made at
time of building permit submittal, shall be considered by the Community Development
Director or designee, may require separate discretionary approval, and shall conform to all
City, State, and Federal requirements, including subsequent City Code requirements or
policies adopted by City Council.
2. PERMIT EXPIRATION: The expiration date of this approval is one year from the date of
recordation of the Final Map for TM 20-01. Building permits must be obtained for the project
within one (1) year from that date. Otherwise this approval shall expire unless a timely
extension has been obtained. Upon application, an extension of time may be granted by the
Community Development Director or designee. Should Developer intend to request an
extension to the permit expiration date, Developer must submit to the Planning Division a
written application with applicable fees prior to the expiration date. Only timely requests may
be considered pursuant to the City Code.
3. RELATED ENTITLEMENTS: This permit is subject to the conditions of approval of
Tentative Map application TM 20-01. If the tentative map is not approved and executed or if
the tentative map expires, this approval shall be null and void.
4. COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS: If Developer, owner or tenant fails to comply with
any of the conditions of this permit, the Developer, owner or tenant shall be subject to permit
revocation or enforcement actions pursuant to the City Code. All costs associated with any
such actions shall be the responsibility of Developer, owner or tenant.
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 2 of 21
5. INDEMNIFICATION: Developer agrees, as a condition of permit approval, at Developer’s
own expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Gilroy (“the City”) and its
officers, contractors, consultants, attorneys, employees and agents from any and all claim(s),
action(s) or proceeding(s) brought against the City or its officers, contractors, consultants,
attorneys, employees, or agents to challenge, attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of
this resolution or any condition attached thereto or any proceedings, acts or determinations
taken, including actions taken under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as
amended, done or made prior to the approval of such resolution that were part of the approval
process.
6. SIGNAGE: All signage advertising the development project or components thereof,
including individual tenants or subdivisions, shall be installed or maintained onsite or offsite
as allowed and in conformance with an approved sign permit.
7. WATER LIMITATIONS: Developer shall be advised that the approval is subject to the
drought emergencies provisions pursuant to the Gilroy City Code Chapter 27.98.
The following conditions shall be addressed prior to issuance of any BUILDING PERMIT,
GRADING PERMIT or IMPROVEMENT PLAN, whichever is first issued, or as otherwise
specified in the condition.
8. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Developer shall include a plan sheet(s) that includes a
reproduction of all conditions of approval of this permit, as adopted by the decision-maker.
9. CERTIFICATION OF BUILDING PERMIT PLANS: The project architect shall certify in
writing that the architectural design shown in the building permit plans match the plans
approved by the Community Development Director or designee/Planning Commission/City
Council. Any changes must be clearly noted. The project architect shall also certify that the
structural plans are consistent with the architectural plans. In the event of a discrepancy
between the structural plans and the architectural plans, the architectural plans shall take
precedence, and revised structural drawings shall be submitted to the Building Division.
10. COLORS AND MATERIALS: Plans submitted for building permit applications shall
include all exterior building materials and colors, including product and finish manufacturer
name, color name and number, and surface finish type (e.g. stucco with sand finish, plaster
with smooth finish) to be used in construction.
11. SUBSEQUENT ENTITLEMENTS: Developer shall obtain necessary permits prior to
initiating any new construction or modifications authorized under this approval, including but
not limited to temporary construction trailers, temporary staging areas, model home sales
offices, advertising signs of any kind, exterior and interior modifications. Developer shall pay
all requisite fees in effect at the time of plan submittal and/or issuance, as applicable.
12. HABITAT PERMIT: Concurrent with or prior to an application for a grading permit,
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 3 of 21
Developer shall submit a Habitat Permit application to the City of Gilroy. The application
shall consist of the application processing fee, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Application
For Private Projects and Fees and Conditions Worksheet (available on the Santa Clara Valley
Habitat Agency website: https://www.scv-habitatagency.org/). The grading permit will be
issued only after approval of the Habitat Plan permit and payment of assessed fees.
13. PAYMENT OF FEES: Developer shall pay all required development impact fees prior to
issuance of permits. This includes required park in lieu fees, school fees, traffic impact fees,
etc.
14. GARAGE DOORS: Developer shall provide automatic garage door openers for all garages.
All garage entries shall be equipped with a sectional roll-up garage door.
15. FENCES AND WALLS: All fencing and walls are to be shown on construction drawings
submitted for building permit review and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height, measured
from adjacent grade to the top of the fence or wall. The design and location must comply with
all setback requirements.
16. REFUSE STORAGE: Developer shall show on construction documents a minimum 9-foot
by 3-foot level concrete pad for storage of three refuse containers in the side yard area or
other location approved by the Community Development Director or designee that is out of
view from the street. The storage location shall not be within the garage. Developer shall also
provide for a paved path from the storage location to the pick-up area (typically the street) that
does not require entering the garage. All gates or doors along the path shall be constructed
with a minimum clear space of 36-inches to allow passage of the containers.
17. RAIN GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS: Developer shall install all roof and building rain
gutters and downspouts, vents, and flashing to integrate as closely as possible with building
design elements, including matching the color of the adjacent surface.
18. LANDSCAPE MULCH: As part of the Landscape Plan submittal, Developer shall clarify a
minimum three (3) inch layer of mulch to be applied on all exposed soil surfaces, as required
by the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO).
19. INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES: Developer shall not include any invasive plant species, such
as those listed by the California Invasive Plant Council.
20. LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE: Prior to issuance of building permits or
initiation of the proposed use, whichever comes first, Developer shall submit a completed
Landscape Documentation Package, including a soil analysis/management report along with
appropriate application review fees, to the Community Development Department, including
required documentation for compliance verification, and obtain approval of such plans.
21. IRRIGATION SENSORS: Prior to issuance of building permits, developer shall (as part of
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 4 of 21
the irrigation system) indicate on construction drawings sensors that suspend or alter irrigation
operation during unfavorable weather conditions (e.g. automatic rain shut-off devices).
22. PRECONSTRUCTION NESTING BIRD SURVEY: To the extent practicable, vegetation
removal and construction activities shall be performed from September 1 through January 31
to avoid the general nesting period for birds. If construction or vegetation removal cannot be
performed during this period, preconstruction surveys will be performed no more than two
days prior to construction activities to locate any active nests as follows:
“The Developer shall be responsible for the retention of a qualified biologist to conduct a
survey of the project site and surrounding 500’ for active nests – with particular emphasis
on nests of migratory birds – if construction (including site preparation) will begin during
the bird nesting season, from February 1 through August 31. If active nests are observed
on either the project site or the surrounding area, the project applicant, in coordination
with the appropriate City staff, shall establish no-disturbance buffer zones around the
nests, with the size to be determined in consultation with the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife (usually 100’ for perching birds and 300’ for raptors). The no-
disturbance buffer will remain in place until the biologist determines the nest is no longer
active or the nesting season ends. If construction ceases for two days or more and then
resumes during the nesting season, an additional survey will be necessary to avoid
impacts on active bird nests that may be present.”
The following conditions shall be met prior to RELEASE OF UTILITIES, FINAL INSPECTION,
or ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, whichever occurs first, or as otherwise
specified in the condition.
23. ON- AND OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS: Prior to occupancy, Developer shall complete
all required offsite and onsite improvements related to the project, including structures,
paving, and landscaping, unless otherwise allowed by the Community Development Director,
or stated in these conditions.
24. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION INSTALLATION: Prior to issuance of certificate of
occupancy or building permit final sign-off, Developer shall complete installation of all
landscaping and irrigation in accordance with the approved plans.
25. LANDSCAPE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION: Prior to occupancy or initiation of the
proposed use, or completion of each build-out phase of development, Developer shall submit
a signed Certificate of Completion, along with all necessary supporting documentation and
payment to the Community Development Department, for compliance verification of the
landscape installation. Developer is required under the Model Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance (MWELO) to provide a copy of the approved Certificate of Completion to the
property owner or his or her designee.
26. PLANNING INSPECTION: Inspection(s) by the Planning Division may be required for the
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 5 of 21
foundation, framing, application of exterior materials, and final completion of each structure
to ensure that the construction matches the approved plans.
27. SITE CLEAN-UP: Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, Developer shall remove
all construction materials, debris, and vehicles from the subject property.
The following conditions shall be complied with AT ALL TIMES DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT, or as otherwise specified in the condition.
28. CONSTRUCTION RELATED NOISE: To minimize potential construction-related impacts
to noise, Developer shall include the following language on any grading, site work, and
construction plans issued for the subject site
“During earth-moving, grading, and construction activities, Developer shall
implement the following measures at the construction site:
a. Limit construction activity to weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., and on
Saturdays between 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Construction noise is prohibited on
Sundays and City-observed holidays;
b. Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive
receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area;
c. Construct sound walls or other noise reduction measures prior to developing the
project site;
d. Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust
mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment;
e. Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines;
f. Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where
technology exists; and
g. Designate a “disturbance coordinator’ who would be responsible for responding to
any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine
the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. bad muffler, etc.) and will require that
reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem.”
29. CONSTRUCTION RELATED AIR QUALITY: To minimize potential construction-
related impacts to air quality, Developer shall require all construction contractors to
implement the basic construction mitigation measures recommended by the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and shall include the following language on any
grading, site work, and construction plans issued for the project site
“During earth-moving, grading, and construction activities, Developer shall
implement the following basic control measures at the construction site:
a. All exposed surfaces (e.g. parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day;
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 6 of 21
b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material onsite or offsite shall be
covered;
c. All visible mud or dirt tracked out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using
wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power
sweeping is prohibited;
d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads or pathways shall be limited to 15 miles per
hour;
e. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding
or soil binders are used;
f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or
reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne
toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations
[CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points;
g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible
emissions evaluator; and
h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the
lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective
action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure
compliance with applicable regulations.”
30. DISCOVERY OF CONTAMINATED SOILS: If contaminated soils are discovered, the
Developer will ensure the contractor employs engineering controls and Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to minimize human exposure to potential contaminants. Engineering
controls and construction BMPs will include, but not be limited to, the following:
a. Contractor employees working on-site will be certified in OSHA’s 40-hour Hazardous
Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training;
b. Contractor will stockpile soil during development activities to allow for proper
characterization and evaluation of disposal options;
c. Contractor will monitor area around construction site for fugitive vapor emissions
with appropriate filed screening instrumentation;
d. Contractor will water/mist soil as it is being excavated and loaded onto transportation
trucks;
e. Contractor will place any stockpiled soil in areas shielded from prevailing winds; and
f. Contractor will cover the bottom of excavated areas with sheeting when work is not
being performed.
31. DISCOVERY OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES: In the event that a fossil is
discovered during construction of the project, excavations within 50’ of the find shall be
temporarily halted or delayed until the discovery is examined by a qualified paleontologist, in
accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. The City shall include a
standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 7 of 21
this requirement. If the find is determined to be significant and if avoidance is not feasible, the
paleontologist shall design and carry out a data recovery plan consistent with the Society of
Vertebrate Paleontology standards.
32. DISCOVERY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES: In the event of an accidental
discovery of archaeological resources during grading or construction activities, Developer
shall include the following language on any grading, site work, and construction plans issued
for the project site:
“If archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during earth-moving, grading,
or construction activities, all work shall be halted within at least 50 meters (165 feet)
of the find and the area shall be staked off immediately. The monitoring professional
archaeologist, if one is onsite, shall be notified and evaluate the find. If a monitoring
professional archaeologist is not onsite, the City shall be notified immediately and a
qualified professional archaeologist shall be retained (at Developer’s expense) to
evaluate the find and report to the City. If the find is determined to be significant,
appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated by the professional archaeologist
and implemented by the responsible party.”
33. DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS: In the event of an accidental discovery or
recognition of any human remains, Developer shall include the following language in all
grading, site work, and construction plans:
“If human remains are found during earth-moving, grading, or construction activities,
there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area
reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of Santa
Clara County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is
required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American the coroner
shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native
American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be
the most likely descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD
may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the
excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the
human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98. The landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the
Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity
on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native
American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to
make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; b)
the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his
authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the
mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures
acceptable to the landowner.”
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 8 of 21
The following conditions shall be complied with AT ALL TIMES that the use permitted by this
entitlement occupies the premises.
34. ADDITIONS, ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, AND PATIO COVERS: Building additions
and patio covers shall conform to the zoning district or PUD approval, as applicable.
35. GARAGE USE: Garages shall be used for resident parking only. Storage is permitted so long
as it does not prevent use of garage for required vehicle parking. The use and availability of
garage spaces for parking shall be specified in the project CC&R’s.
36. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE: For the life of the project, Developer shall maintain
landscaping and irrigation in accordance with the approved plans, except as otherwise
permitted or required by law. Significant changes to the number, placement, and selection of
plant species may require a modification to this approval, to be determined by the Community
Development Director or designee.
FIRE PREVENTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The submitted plans shall reference the 2019 California Codes (e.g. Building, Fire, Residential,
etc.).
2. Detached Second Units (ADU’s) shall have a path of travel (min 36” wide) to the street and shall
be provided a separate address number. The ADU shall have an address number that is visible
from the street.
3. All residential structures shall be provided with residential fire sprinklers (NFPA13D) including
garages. City standards include:
a. A 1-inch meter and 1.5-inch laterals shall be provided to each structure.
b. System to comply with NFPA 13D (2016) subject to inspection by the City.
c. Riser shall be installed in the garage or approved exterior cabinet.
d. If the water supply to the home is not at the garage, water supply from point of entry
to the riser shall be approved by Gilroy Fire Prevention.
e. All enclosed garages shall be provided with sprinkler protection.
f. At least 1 sprinkler of each type shall be present in the spare head box at final.
g. An exterior bell/horn shall be installed on the bedroom side of the home. The water-
flow switch shall be wired to smoke alarms for interior notification.
h. Each attic access shall be protected by a pilot head. The pilot head piping (CPVC)
shall be provided with adequate insulation.
i. Sprinkler coverage shall be provided underneath stairwells when used as storage,
closets or bathrooms (even if less than 55 sq ft). Concealed spaces used for storage in
attics or crawl spaces that exceed 55 sq ft in area and 6 ft in height, shall be provided
with sprinkler coverage.
j. A fire flow test shall be obtained from the Deputy Fire Marshal and included in the
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 9 of 21
sprinkler system design calculations. Call 408-846-0451 to schedule a fire hydrant test
($300.00 fee).
4. Chimneys shall have spark arrestors installed. No permanent outdoor, wood-fired
fireplaces/pits are allowed. Trees and tree branches shall not be within 10 ft of a chimney.
5. Landscaping in the open space areas shall be maintained so as not to become a fire hazard.
Portions of these parcels may extend into the watercourse located on the West side of the
property. All dead and dry vegetation to be removed by May 15th each year and to be
maintained until November.
6. Egress Windows shall be provided on all sleeping rooms. A room that does not have a clearly
defined use as a kitchen, closet, dining room, living/family room or study shall be considered
a bedroom. Studies/libraries with closets shall be treated as bedrooms. Storage rooms that
are provided with windows, and electrical outlets and are greater than 50 square feet may also
be considered bedrooms if attached to a dwelling unit.
ENGINEERING GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. GENERAL - At first improvement plan submittal, utility sheets shall show appropriate line
types and labels to identify different type of utilities and pipe sizes. Clearly identify both
public and private utilities.
2. GENERAL - Improvement plans (as second sheet in plan set) shall contain Approved
Conditions of Approval.
3. GENERAL - Improvement plans shall include General Notes found in the City of Gilroy
General Guidelines. A complete set of improvement plans shall consist of Civil site design,
landscape site design, Electrical, Joint Trench. Any walls or structural features part of the
landscape design shall also be included.
4. GENERAL - Improvement plan cover sheet shall include a table summarizing all facilities
(Streets, Utilities, Landscaping, etc.), showing the ownership of all facilities, and the
maintenance responsibilities of all facilities.
5. GENERAL - The applicant shall obtain all applicable permits from federal, state, and local
agencies as required to construct the proposed improvements. A copy of these permits will be
provided prior to building permits.
6. GENERAL – Improvement plans are required for both on-site and off-site improvements. A
separate plan set for each shall be prepared, or at the approval of the City Engineer, onsite and
offsite sheets can be combined into one plan set.
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 10 of 21
7. GENERAL - Existing overhead utilities shall be undergrounded and related utility poles
removed along the property frontage.
8. GENERAL - All existing public utilities shall be protected in place and if necessary relocated
as approved by the City Engineer. No permanent structure is permitted within City easements
without the approval of the City of Gilroy.
9. GENERAL - Prior to any work within public right of way or City easement, the developer
shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City.
10. GENERAL - All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City
of Gilroy Municipal Code and Standard Specifications and Details, and is subject to all laws
of the City of Gilroy by reference. Street improvements and the design of all off-site storm
drainage facilities, sewer and water lines, and all street sections shall be in accordance with
City Standards and shall follow the most current City Master Plan for streets, as approved by
the City of Gilroy’s Public Works Director/City Engineer.
11. GENERAL - Prior to issuance of any building permits, developer shall submit for City
approval water, sewer and storm drain studies for the development. These studies shall
provide supporting hydraulic calculation for pipe sizing per City standard design guideline.
12. GENERAL - At first improvement plan submittal, developers engineer shall submit a
calculation for sanitary sewer and water generation per the City’s Master Plan design criteria.
13. FEE - The project is subject to the City’s Street Tree, Storm, Sewer, Water, Traffic, and
Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. Latest City impact fee schedule is available on
the City’s website. Payment of Impact Fees is required at first permit issuance. Fees shall be
based on the current comprehensive fee schedule in effect at the time of fee payment,
consistent with and in accordance with City policy.
14. FEE - Prior to plan approval, developer shall submit a detailed project cost estimate by the
project engineer, subject to City Engineer approval. Cost estimate shall be broken out into on-
site and off-site improvements.
15. FEE - Prior to final plan approval, Developer shall pay 100% of the plan check and
processing fees and other related fees that the property is subject to, enter into a property
improvement agreement, and provide payment and performance bonds.
16. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading activity shall address National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) concerns. If all or part of the construction occurs during the
rainy season, the developer shall submit an Erosion Control Plan to the Public Works Director
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 11 of 21
for review and approval. This plan shall incorporate erosion control devices and other
techniques in accordance with Municipal Code § 27C to minimize erosion. Specific measures
to control sediment runoff, construction pollution and other potential construction
contamination sediment runoff, construction pollution and other potential construction
contamination shall be addressed through the Erosion Control Plan and Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall supplement the Erosion Control Plan and
project improvement plans. These documents shall also be kept on-site while the project is
under construction. A Notice of Intent (NOI) shall be filed with the State Water Resources
Control Board, with a copy provided to the Engineering Division before a grading permit will
be issued. WDID# shall be added to the grading plans prior to plan approval.
17. GRADING & DRAINAGE - Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant’s Geotechnical
Engineer shall review the final grading, pavement design and drainage plans to ensure that
said designs are in accordance with their recommendations and the peer review comments.
The applicant’s Geotechnical engineer’s approval shall then be conveyed to the City either by
letter or by signing the plans.
18. GRADING & DRAINAGE - At first improvement plan submittal, the developer shall submit
a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. The
SWMP shall analyze the existing and ultimate conditions and facilities, and the study shall
include all off-site tributary areas. Study and the design shall be in compliance with the
City’s Stormwater Management Guidance Manual (latest edition). Existing offsite drainage
patterns, i.e., tributary areas, drainage amount and velocity shall not be altered by the
development.
19. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading and improvement plans shall identify the vertical
elevation datum, date of survey, and surveyor.
20. GRADING & DRAINGE - Improvement and grading plans shall show existing topo and
features at least 50’ beyond the project boundary. Clearly show existing topo, label contour
elevations, drainage patterns, flow lines, slopes, and all other property encumbrances.
21. GRADING & DRAINAGE – Geotechnical Engineer to confirm infiltration rates by
conducting Double Ring Infiltrometer Testing with appropriate safety factors of all
stormwater detention and/or retention facilities.
22. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – Prior to Parcel Map approval, developer shall execute a
property improvement agreement and post Payment and Performance bonds each for 100% of
cost for improvement with the City that shall secure the construction of the public
improvements. Insurance shall be provided per the terms of the agreement.
23. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS - The developer shall repair or replace all existing
improvements not designated for removal and all new improvements that are damaged or
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 12 of 21
removed because of developer's operations. Developer shall request a walk-through with the
Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing
conditions.
24. CONSTRUCTION - All construction water from fire hydrants shall be metered and billed at
the current hydrant meter rate.
25. CONSTRUCTION - The City shall be notified at least ten (10) working days prior to the start
of any construction work and at that time the contractor shall provide a project schedule and a
24-hour emergency telephone number list.
26. CONSTRUCTION - Construction activity shall be restricted to the period between 7:00 a.m.
to 7:00 p.m. Mondays through Fridays, Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. for general
construction activity. No work shall be done on Sundays and City Holidays. The Public
Works Director will apply additional construction period restrictions, as necessary, to
accommodate standard commute traffic along arterial roadways and along school commute
routes.
27. CONSTRUCTION - All work shown on the improvement plans, if applicable, shall be
inspected. Uninspected work shall be removed as deemed appropriate by the Public Works
Director.
28. CONSTRUCTION - If the project has excess fill or cut that will be off-hauled to a site or on-
hauled from a site within the city limits of Gilroy, an additional permit is required. This
statement must be added as a general note to the Grading and Drainage Plan.
29. CONSTRUCTION - It is the responsibility of the contractor to make sure that all dirt tracked
into the public right-of-way is cleaned up on a daily basis. Mud, silt, concrete and other
construction debris shall not be washed into the City’s storm drains.
30. CONSTRUCTION - At least one week prior to commencement of work, the Developer shall
post at the site and mail to the Engineering Division and to owners of property within (300')
three hundred feet of the exterior boundary of the project site a notice that construction work
will commence on or around the stated date. The notice shall include a list of contact persons
with name, title, phone number and area of responsibility. The person responsible for
maintaining the list shall be included. The list shall be current at all times and shall consist of
persons with authority to initiate corrective action in their area of responsibility. The names of
individuals responsible for dust, noise and litter control shall be expressly identified in the
notice.
31. CONSTRUCTION - Prior to final inspections, all pertinent conditions of approval and all
improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City
Engineer.
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 13 of 21
32. TRANSPORTATION - Any work in the public right-of-way shall require a traffic control
plan prepared by a licensed professional engineer with experience in preparing such plans.
Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the latest
edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The Traffic Control
Plan shall be approved prior to the commencement of any work within the public right of
way.
33. UTILTIES - The Developer/Contractor shall make accessible any or all City utilities as
directed by the Public Works Director.
ENGINEERING PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
34. FEE - The project is subject to the City’s Street Tree, Storm, Sewer, Water, Traffic, and
Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. The following are approximate impact fees based
on planning phase square footage and other information for Residential Low-Density projects.
Actual fees will be based on Final Design information.
a. Street Tree = $103
b. Storm Development = $593
c. Sewer Development = $50,004
d. Water Development = $17,176
e. Traffic Impact = $49,060
f. Public Facilities = $85,272
Latest City impact fee schedule is available on the City’s website. Payment of Impact Fees is
required at first building permit issuance. Fees shall be based on the current comprehensive
fee schedule in effect at the time of fee payment, consistent with and in accordance with City
policy.
35. GENERAL – As part of Phase 1 of this project, a Parcel Map shall be completed to subdivide
all future lots. Said Parcel map will be presented to the City Council for review and action.
The City Council meeting will be scheduled approximately fifty (50) days after the Parcel
Map is deemed technically correct, and Subdivision Improvement Plans with supporting
documents, reports and agreements are approved by the City. Developer shall dedicate
necessary right of way and public easements for the project development.
36. GENERAL - The approved construction schedule shall be shared with Gilroy Unified School
District (GUSD) to avoid traffic impacts to surrounding school functions. An approved
construction information handout(s) shall also be provided to GUSD to share with school
parents.
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 14 of 21
37. TRANSPORTATION – Applicant shall obtain a review letter from Recology confirming
serviceability and site accessibility of solid waste pickup. Contact Lisa Patton, Operations
Manager 408-846-4421. Include Recology review letter with first building permit submittal.
38. GENERAL - A current Title Report dated within the last six months, shall be submitted with
the first submittal improvement plans. An existing site plan shall be submitted showing all
existing site conditions and title report easements. Include bearings and distances for all Right
of Way and Easements on the plans.
39. GENERAL - The Developer shall provide a “composite plan” showing Civil, Landscape,
Electrical, and Joint Trench design information (as a separate sheet titled “Composite Plan”)
to confirm that there are no conflicts.
40. GRADING & DRAINAGE - All grading operations and soil compaction activities shall be
per the approved project’s design level geotechnical report. All grading activities shall be
conducted under the observation of, and tested by, a licensed geotechnical engineer. A report
shall be filed with the City of Gilroy for each phase of construction, stating that all grading
activities were performed in conformance with the requirements of the project’s geotechnical
report. The developer shall add this condition to the general notes on the grading plan.
41. GRADING & DRAINAGE – An elevation certificate per FEMA requirements must be
complete by a Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer prior to occupancy.
42. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS – Prior to Parcel Map Approval, the developer shall obtain
design approval and bond for all necessary public improvements, including but not limited to
the following:
a. Pavement widening, striping, and signing along Chestnut St project frontage.
b. Construction of new curb, gutter, 6’ sidewalk, driveways, and ADA curb ramp along
Chestnut St. and Lewis St. project frontage.
c. The project is making new pavement cuts which reduces the City Pavement Condition
Index. The project shall grind and pave the limits shown on sheet C2 if the
improvement plans (Part of the Architectural and Site submittal) with a minimum 2.5”
hot mix AC, and with pavement section dig-outs and repairs. Extent of the dig-outs
and repairs to be determined by the Developers Geotechnical Engineer and City
Engineer.
d. Installation of new City standard streetlights along project frontage. Final streetlight
locations shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
e. Storm drain line, laterals, and related facilities along project frontage.
f. Existing overhead utilities shall be undergrounded and related utility poles removed
along the property frontage and boundary. Underground the overhead lines that
currently cross Lewis St. No new overhead utility lines or poles will be allowed.
g. Removal of the existing underground utilities no longer being used along the project
frontage.
h. Water services and meters per City standards. Each water service shall have a separate
lateral from the main to each lot.
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 15 of 21
i. New Fire Hydrants along project frontage.
j. Sewer laterals, manholes, and related facilities. Sewer facilities cannot be aligned
through stormwater treatment facilities.
k. New trees along project frontage.
All improvements must be built to the city Engineer’s satisfaction, and accepted by the City
prior to issuance of any first certificate of occupancy for the project.
43. CONSTRUCTION - All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be watered as often
as deemed necessary by the City, or a minimum of three times daily. Streets will be cleaned
by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director, or
at least once a day.
44. CONSTRUCTION - The minimum soils sampling and testing frequency shall conform to
Chapter 8 of the Caltrans Construction Manual. The subdivider shall require the soils engineer
to daily submit all testing and sampling and reports to the City Engineer.
45. TRANSPORTATION – At first plan submittal, developer shall submit on-site and off-site
photometric plans.
46. TRANSPORTATION - At first plan submittal developer shall model all Emergency Vehicle
circulation movements, as a separate plan sheet. The circulation plan shall be prepared to the
City Engineer’s satisfaction, and modeled with AutoTurn swept analysis software, all turning
and street circulation movements.
47. UTILITIES – All new services to the development shall be "underground service" designed
and installed in accordance with the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, AT&T (phone)
Company and local cable company regulations. Transformers and switch gear cabinets shall
be placed underground unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director and the City
Engineer. Underground utility plans must be submitted to the City prior to installation.
48. UTILITIES - The following items will need to be completed prior to first building permit
submittal:
a. The Developer shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground
electrical, gas, telephone, cable television, and communication conduits and cables
including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility
service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a
part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. Show preferred and
alternative locations for all utility vaults and boxes if project has not obtained PG&E
approval. A licensed Civil or Electrical Engineer shall sign the composite drawings
and/or utility improvement plans. (All dry utilities shall be placed underground).
b. The Developer shall negotiate right-of-way with Pacific Gas and Electric and other
utilities subject to the review and approval by the Engineering Division and the utility
companies.
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 16 of 21
c. Will Serve Letter” from each utility company for the subdivision shall be supplied to
the City.
49. UTILITIES - A note shall be placed on the joint trench composite plans which states that the
plan agrees with City Codes and Standards and that no underground utility conflict exists. The
Joint consultant shall provide the City a separate “project utility composite plan” showing all
Civil, Landscape, electrical, and joint trench information to confirm that there are no conflicts
with joint trench plan utilities.
50. UTILITIES – Storm, sewer, and water lines in private areas shall be privately owned and
maintained. This should be noted on the title sheet of the project improvement plan.
51. UTILITIES - Prior to any construction of the dry utilities in the field, the following will need
to be supplied to the City:
a. A professional engineer signed original electrical plan.
b. A letter from the design Electrical or Civil Engineer that states the electrical plan
conforms to City codes and Standards, and to the approved improvement plans.
52. UTILITIES - Sanitary sewer laterals located in driveways shall have traffic rated boxes and
lids.
53. UTILITIES - The Developer shall perform Fire Hydrant test to confirm water system will
adequately serve the development, and will modify any part of the systems that does not
perform to the standards established by the City. Developer shall coordinate with Fire
Department for the Fire Hydrant test.
54. UTILITIES - The project shall fully comply with the measures required by the City’s Water
Supply Shortage Regulations Ordinance (Gilroy City Code, Chapter 27, Article VI), and
subsequent amendments to meet the requirements imposed by the State of California’s Water
Board. This ordinance established permanent voluntary water saving measures and temporary
conservation standards.
55. WATER QUALITY - Proposed development shall comply with state mandated regional
permits for both pre-construction and post-construction stormwater quality requirements per
chapter 27D of the Gilroy Municipal Code, and is subject to, but not limited to, the following:
a. At first improvement plan submittal, project shall submit a design level Stormwater
Control Plan Report (in 8 ½ x 11 report format), to include background, summary, and
explanation of all aspects of stormwater management. Report shall also include
exhibits, tables, calculations, and all technical information supporting facts, including
but not limited to, exhibit of the proposed site conditions which clearly delineates
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 17 of 21
impervious and pervious areas on site. Provide a separate hatch or shading for
landscaping/pervious areas on-site including those areas that are not bioretention
areas. This stormwater control plan report format does not replace or is not in lieu of
any stormwater control plan sheet in improvement plans.
b. The stormwater control plan shall include a signed Performance Requirement
Certifications specified in the Stormwater Guidance Manual.
c. At developer’s sole expense, the stormwater control plan shall be submitted for
review by an independent third party accepted by the City for compliance. Result of
the peer review shall be included with the submittal for City evaluation.
d. Prior to plan approval, the Developer of the site shall enter into a formal written
Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement with the City, including
Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
i. The City shall record this agreement against the property or properties
involved and it shall be binding on all subsequent owners of land served by
the stormwater management treatment BMPs. The City-standard Stormwater
BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement will be provided by Public
Works Engineering.
ii. This Agreement shall require that the BMPs not be modified and BMP
maintenance activities not alter the designed function of the facility from its
original design unless approved by the City prior to the commencement of the
proposed modification or maintenance activity.
iii. This Agreement shall also provide that in the event that maintenance or repair
is neglected, or the stormwater management facility becomes a danger to
public health or safety, the city shall have the authority to perform
maintenance and/or repair work and to recover the costs from the owner.
iv. All on-site stormwater management facilities shall be operated and maintained
in good condition and promptly repaired/replaced by the property owner(s) or
other legal entity approved by the City.
v. Any repairs or restoration/replacement and maintenance shall be in
accordance with City-approved plans.
vi. The property owner(s) shall develop a maintenance schedule for the life of any
stormwater management facility and shall describe the maintenance to be
completed, the time period for completion, and who shall perform the
maintenance. This maintenance schedule shall be included with the approved
Stormwater Runoff Management Plan.
e. Stormwater BMP Operations and Maintenance Agreement shall include inspections to
be required for this project and shall adhere to the following:
i. The property owner(s) shall be responsible for having all stormwater
management facilities inspected for condition and function by a certified third
party QSP or QSD.
ii. Stormwater facility inspections shall be done at least twice per year, once in
Fall by October 1st, in preparation for the wet season, and once in Winter by
March 15th. Written records shall be kept of all inspections and shall include,
at minimum, the following information:
1. Site address;
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 18 of 21
2. Date and time of inspection;
3. Name of the person conducting the inspection;
4. List of stormwater facilities inspected;
5. Condition of each stormwater facility inspected;
6. Description of any needed maintenance or repairs; and
7. As applicable, the need for site re-inspection.
f. Upon completion of each inspection, an inspection report shall be submitted to Public
Works Engineering no later than October 1st for the Fall report, and no later than
March 15th of the following year for the Winter report.
g. Before commencing any grading or construction activities, the developer shall obtain
a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and provide
evidence of filing of a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control
Board.
56. WATER QUALITY - The developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors are aware
of all storm water quality measures and implement such measures. Failure to comply with the
approved construction BMPs will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations or a
project stop order.
57. WATER QUALITY - The developer shall secure a QSD or QSP to maintain all erosion
control and BMP measures during construction. The developers QSD or QSP shall provide
the City weekly inspection reports.
58. WATER QUALITY – Sequence of construction for all Post Construction Required facilities
(PCR’s) / stormwater facilities (bioswales, detention/retention basins, drain rock, etc.) shall be
done as a final phase of construction to prevent silting of facilities and reduce the intended use
of the facilities. Prior to final inspection, all stormwater facilities will be tested by a certified
QSP or QSD to meet the minimum design infiltration rate. All tests shall be made at on 20 ft
x 20ft grid pattern over the surface of the completed stormwater facility.
59. LANDSCAPING - Landscaping plans shall not conflict with the stormwater management
water treatment plan.
60. MASTER PLANS - Confirm the project is in compliance with the City Master Plans. Studies
shall identify the development's effect on the City's present Master Plans and the impact of
this development to surrounding utility lines. If the results of the study indicate that this
development contributes to the over-capacity of the trunk line, developer will be required to
mitigate the impact by remove and replace or upsizing of the existing utilities.
61. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Until such time as all improvements required are fully
completed and accepted by City, Developer will be responsible for the care maintenance of
and any damage to such improvements. City shall not, nor shall any officer or employee
thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause,
happening or occurring to the work or Improvements required for this project prior to the
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
Conditions of Approval (AS 20-02)
Page 19 of 21
completion and acceptance of the work or Improvements. All such risks shall be the
responsibility of and are hereby assumed by the Developer.
62. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Certification of grades and compaction is required prior to
Building Permit final. This statement must be added as a general note to the Grading and
Drainage Plan.
63. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE – Prior to building occupancy, provide and obtain approval for all
of the items identified in the Public Works Department “Development Project Closeout” list.
64. All project frontage improvements including pavement widening, grind and pave, curb &
gutter, sidewalk, driveways, ADA ramp, utilities, stormwater management facilities,
landscaping, etc. along Chestnut St and Lewis St shall be constructed in Phase 1 of this
project.
65. All stormwater facilities along Chestnut St located within the PSE shall be maintained by the
property owner. The City and property owner shall enter into a maintenance agreement prior
to Parcel map approval.
66. All stormwater facilities for future lots shall be owned and maintained by the property owner.
67. No private signage, poles, utilities, etc. allowed in PSE/PUE.
68. Construct new City standard storm drain drop inlet located near the north property boundary.
69. Stormwater treatment shall occur behind the back of proposed sidewalk.
8.1.i
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: AS 20-02 CC Draft Resolution (3651 : 395 Lewis Street Subdivision)
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Introduction Of An Ordinance To Mandate Electronic And
Paperless Filing of Fair Political Practices Commission Campaign
Disclosure Statements
Meeting Date: February 28, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: City Clerk
Submitted By: Thai Pham
Prepared By: Thai Pham
Strategic Plan Goals
☐ Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization
☐ Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
☐ Promote Economic
Development
Activities
☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All
☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends to waive the first reading and introduce an ordinance to mandate
electronic and paperless filing of Fair Political Practices Commission campaign
disclosure statements and statements of economic interest.
BACKGROUND
The City of Gilroy is currently a paper-filing agency for statutory Fair Political Practices
Commission (FPPC) campaign disclosure forms. Appointed officials, City Cou ncil
candidates, campaign committees and designated City employees may file their
statements in hard copy form only, with an original signature per FPPC regulations.
Filers identified in Government Code Section 87200 have the alternative option to file
electronically directly with the FPPC.
10.1
Packet Pg. 207
Pursuant to Government Code Section 84615, local agencies may mandate electronic
filing of FPPC disclosure statements. To increase efficiency and facilitate compliance
with state law and FPPC regulations, the City Clerk’s Office looks to employ a system
for electronic filing of economic and financial disclosure statements for all required filers
in the Gilroy organization. In addition to increased efficiency, electronic filing will
eliminate the need for wet signatures, will redact statements posted online, and will
automatically link to the FPPC’s system. If approved, all filers will be required to submit
their statutory filings through the automated system, and paper filings will no longer be
accepted. However, to support the City’s efforts towards diversity, equity and inclusion,
the City Clerk, as the City’s filing officer, will have the right to accept a paper filing in lieu
of an electronic filing at the City Clerk’s discretion, under certain circumstances, and to
accommodate an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) request. Examples of
exceptions may include limited access to an electronic device or internet connection.
In order for the City of Gilroy to accept electronically filed statements, the City Council
must adopt an ordinance permitting the use of an online filing system for filing and
designating the filings received electronically by the City Clerk’s Office as the filings of
record for the City. In addition, the system must operate securely and effectively, be no
cost to filers, be available to the public to view filings, not place an undue burden on
filers, and include procedures for filers to comply with the requirement that they sign
statements and reports under penalty of perjury.
ANALYSIS
The City Clerk’s Office entered into a contract with NetFile, a hosted solution created
specifically for cities and counties responsible for Statements of Economic Interest,
which meets the requirements of the Secretary of State and allows for electronic and
paperless filing of campaign statements back in 2015. NetFile is widely used by other
agencies in the region and throughout California. The office intends to enter a contract
with the same vendor to administer campaign finance filings.
Campaign Finance Disclosure Statements (Form 460)
Adoption of the proposed ordinance is required to implement electronic filings of the
campaign finance component of the NetFile system and will only apply to those filers
that exceed a threshold of $2,000 for expending or receiving campaign funds. This
threshold is consistent with the Political Reform Act (the “Act”), which recognizes
campaigns that spend or raise more than $2,000 as “Controlled Committees.” Under the
Act, these types of committees are obligated to file detailed campa ign finance
10.1
Packet Pg. 208
disclosure statements, also known as Form 460s. For those smaller campaigns that do
not exceed the $2,000 threshold, they may continue to file paper versions of the Form
470 disclosure forms. It should be noted that the NetFile system is able to
accommodate the online filing of several types of required forms by the FPPC, including
Forms 460, 470, 496, and 497, which are the most commonly used in Gilroy’s local
election campaigns.
Statement of Economic Interest (Form 700)
The “Statement of Economic Interest” Form 700 component of NetFile does not require
an ordinance, however staff recommends that all designated Form 700 filers identified
in the City’s Conflict of Interest Code also be required to file electronically in order to be
in alignment with the City’s transition to electronic, paperless filing pursuant to
Government Code 84615.
Upon adoption of the ordinance, filers of campaign disclosure statements will use the
online system, unless exempt from the requirement to file online pursuant to
Government Code Section 84615(a) because the officer, candidate, or committee
receives less than $2,000 in contributions and makes less than $2,000 in expenditures
in a calendar year.
An alternative to the proposed mandate ordinance is to provide for o pt-in electronic
filings, which would allow FPPC statements to be filed electronically, but paper filings
would still be accepted. To maintain consistency with processing and publishing filers’
FPPC statements, staff does not recommend the “opt-in” ordinance. The proposed
mandate ordinance will still allow the City Clerk to accept a paper filing in lieu of an
electronic filing at the City Clerk’s discretion, under certain circumstances, and to
accommodate an ADA request.
To ensure a smooth transition, and as part of the agreement and acquisition of the
system, NetFile and the City Clerk’s Office can offer extensive training to filers and
committees. Staff can schedule one-on-one training with NetFile staff and individual
filers and treasurers that will cover the entire electronic filing process including the set-
up of filer accounts, explanation of the online filing process, demonstration of the data
input and saving reports, preparation of statements for e-signature, and finalizing
statements for electronic filing.
10.1
Packet Pg. 209
In terms of security, the NetFile system is a web-based, vendor-hosted application that
utilizes “industry best practices” for securing data, using the same data encryption for
online filings that is used by banks for online banking. NetFile stor es and backs up data
at three separate locations, creating the essential safety measures and redundancy that
will allow for recovery of information in the event of an emergency or disaster. The City’s
data will be retained for the required minimum 10-year period.
Implementation of the NetFile system will promote transparency and provide
convenience for committees, individuals, and the public. It provides 24 -hour filing and
viewing accessibility of campaign finance information from any computer, anywhere. In
certain instances, the NetFile program will also increase the accuracy of filed campaign
statements by prohibiting any filings that may have inadvertently omitted required
information under the Act (e.g. missing addresses or the stated occupation of indi vidual
donors).
Government Code Section 84615
A local government agency may require an elected officer, candidate, committee, or
other person required to file statements, reports, or other documents required by
Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 84100) to file online or electronically, unless the
officer, candidate, or committee receive less than $2000 in contributions and have less
than $2000 in expenditures in a calendar year. The following is a summary of
requirements that local government agencies must meet:
(1) The local legislative body must adopt an ordinance approving such online filing
and include a legislative finding that the online or electronic filing system will
operate securely and effectively and would not unduly burden filers;
(2) The electronic system used must accept filings that are compatible with format
developed by Secretary of State, must ensure security and integrity of data, and
must provide a way for electronic filer to sign under penalty of perjury;
(3) No charge to file;
(4) File date will be the date received by the local filing officer;
(5) Specifies that a timely electronic confirmation along with a copy of filing kept by
the filer constitute rebuttable presumption that filing was timely;
(6) Filings must be made available on the Internet, with certain information removed,
and requires the local filing officer to make complete and unredacted copies of
electronic filings available to any person upon request;
10.1
Packet Pg. 210
(7) The data shall be maintained for at least 10 years for audit purposes and then
may then be archived in a secure format;
(8) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any statement, report, or other
document filed online or electronically pursuant to this section shall not be
required to be filed with the local filing officer in paper format.
In order to comply with state law, the requirements from Government Code Section
84615 have been incorporated in the proposed ordinance for the City to transition to an
electronic filing system (Attachment A).
ALTERNATIVES
The City Council may elect to not introduce the ordinance and remain a paper filing
agency, or may choose to instead enact an “opt -in” ordinance where electronic filing will
be optional, but not required.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The contract amount for the NetFile campaign filing system is $2,650 per year for up to
five years, for a total of $13,250 through FY 2025-26. Funds are budgeted and available
in the City Clerk’s budget for FY 2021-22 and FY 2022-23.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that Council waive the first reading and introduce an ordinance to
mandate electronic and paperless filing of Fair Political Practices Commission campaign
disclosure statements and statements of economic interest
Attachments:
1. Proposed Ordinance
10.1
Packet Pg. 211
Ordinance No. 2022-__ Page 1 of 3 First Reading: February 28, 2022
Second Reading: March 7, 2022
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-__
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GILROY ADDING ARTICLE XIV TO CHAPTER 2 THE
GILROY CODE TO MANDATE ELECTRONIC AND
PAPERLESS FILING OF FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES
COMMISSION CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS
AND STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTEREST
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 84615 provides that a legislative body
of a local government agency may adopt an ordinance that requires an elected officer, candidate,
committee, or other person required to file statements, reports, or other documents required by
Chapter 4 of the Political Reform Act to file such statements, reports, or other documents online
or electronically with the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the City of Gilroy (“City”) has entered into an agreement with a vendor
approved by the California Secretary of State and meets the requirements set by Government Code
Section 84615, to provide an online electronic filing system (“System”) for the California Fair
Political Practices Commission campaign statements; and
WHEREAS, the System will operate securely and effectively and will not unduly burden
filers. Specifically: (1) the System will ensure the integrity of the data and includes safeguards
against efforts to temper with, manipulate, alter, or subvert the data; (2) the System will only accept
a filing in the standardized record format developed by the Secretary of State and compatible with
the Secretary of State's system for receiving an online or electronic filing; and (3) the System will
be available free of charge to filers and to the public for viewing filings.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS.
The City Council of the City of Gilroy finds and determines as follows:
A. California Government Code Section 84615 provides that a legislative body of a local
government agency may adopt an ordinance that requires an elected officer, candidate,
or committee required to file statements, reports, or other documents required by
Chapter 4 of the Political Reform Act to file such statements, reports, or other
documents online or electronically with the City Clerk.
B. The web-based system operated by the City Clerk contains multiple safeguards to
protect the integrity and security of the data, it will operate securely and effectively,
and it will not unduly burden filers.
C. The City Clerk will operate the electronic filing system in compliance with the
requirements of California Government Code Section 84615 and any other applicable
laws.
10.1.a
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance (3643 : Mandate Electronic and Paperless Filing of FPPC Campaign Disclosures)
Ordinance No. 2022-__ Page 2 of 3 First Reading: February 28, 2022
Second Reading: March 7, 2022
SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF CITY CODE CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE XII.
Gilroy Code Chapter 2 (Administration), Article XIV (Electronic Filing of Campaign Disclosure
Statements and Statements of Economic Interest) is hereby added to read as follows:
ARTICLE XIV. - ELECTRONIC FILING OF CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS
AND STATEMENTS OF ECONOMIC INTEREST
Section 2.91. Purpose and Authority.
A. The purpose of this ordinance is to require the filing of Campaign Disclosure
Statements and Statements of Economic Interest by elected officials, candidates, staff,
consultants or committees to be completed electronically. The City Council enacts this
ordinance in accordance with the authority granted to cities by state law. This ordinance
is intended to supplement, and not conflict with, the Political Reform Act.
B. While electronic filing of statements will be mandated under this ordinance, the City
Clerk, as the City’s filing officer, will have the right to accept a paper filing in lieu of
an electronic filing at the City Clerk’s discretion, under certain circumstances, and to
accommodate an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) request.
Section 2.92. Basic Requirement.
A. An elected officer, candidate, committee, or other person required to file statements,
reports, or other documents required by Chapter 4 of the Political Reform Act or
designated in the City’s local conflict of interest code adopted pursuant to Government
Code Section 87300 shall file any required Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700)
online or electronically with the City Clerk. Electronic filing is mandatory unless the
officer, candidate, or committee is exempt as described Government Code 8415(a).
B. The City Clerk shall issue an electronic confirmation that notifies the filer that the
Statement was received, and the notification shall include the date and the time that the
Statement was received and the method by which the filer may view and print the data
received by the City Clerk. The date of filing for a Statement filed online shall be the
day that it is received by the City Clerk.
C. If the City Clerk's system is not capable of accepting a Statement due to technical
difficulties, a Statement in paper format shall be filed with the City Clerk.
D. The City Clerk will operate the electronic filing system in compliance with the
requirements of California Government Code Section 84615.
SECTION 3. CEQA- EXEMPTION: This proposed ordinance has been reviewed with
respect to applicability of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State
CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.). The
ordinance is not a project under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 because it involves
administrative activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the
environment.
10.1.a
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance (3643 : Mandate Electronic and Paperless Filing of FPPC Campaign Disclosures)
Ordinance No. 2022-__ Page 3 of 3 January 24, 2022
SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph,
sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be
unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision
shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this ordinance or any
part thereof. The City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby declares that it would have
passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase thereof
irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs,
sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall go into effect thirty (30) days
after the date of its passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY this 21st
day of March, 2022 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
APPROVED:
Marie Blankley, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk
10.1.a
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance (3643 : Mandate Electronic and Paperless Filing of FPPC Campaign Disclosures)
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Social Media Use Policy
Meeting Date: February 28, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis
Prepared By: Rachelle Bedell
Rachelle Bedell
Strategic Plan Goals
☐ Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization
☐ Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
☐ Promote Economic
Development
Activities
☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All
☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval and adoption of the Social Media Use Policy.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City has prepared a Social Media Use Policy to establish guidelines for the use of
the City’s Official Social Media Sites. If approved, this policy would establish standards
for the creation and closure of Official Social Media Sites, set -up and governance,
responding to posts, comments, and messages, and personal use of social media by
employees. This policy would also establish some guidelines for possible Council,
Commission, Committee, and Board Official Social Media Sites and guidelines for
Legislative Body use of social media.
BACKGROUND
10.2
Packet Pg. 215
The City is currently operating without a Social Media Policy to guide its efforts in using
the various platforms for engaging the community. The establishment of a policy will
provide much needed structure and guidance for the use of social media platforms by
staff. Staff has engaged with a consultant and reviewed social media policies and best
practices from over a dozen local cities and counties to prepare the draft policy being
brought before Council today.
ANALYSIS
The City of Gilroy Social Media Policy, if approved, will provide a framework for
administering and using the Official City of Gilroy So cial Media Sites.
The policy establishes (1) a set process for requesting and administering Official Social
Media Sites on behalf of Departments and Legislative Bodies, (2) regulations for the
set-up and governance of Official Social Media Sites, (3) a se t process for responding to
posts, comments, and messages on Official Social Media Sites, (4) guidelines for the
use of social media by City Officials, and (5) guidelines for personal use of social media
by employees.
(1) Establishing a set process for requesting and administering Official
Social Media Sites for Departments and Legislative Bodies (in
summary)
To help ensure positive outcomes with any and all Official Social Media Sites, each
account should only be established after careful review and approval. In general, the
policy states that any department or established Legislative Body may petition to create
an Official Social Media Site. All Official Social Media Sites will be maintained by a
designated employee (for departments) or staff liaisons (for Legislative Bodies). The
petition must identify a plan consistent with requirements for maintaining the site per the
policy.
(2) Regulations for the set-up and governance of Official Social Media
Sites (in summary)
Employees designated to maintain, administer, and/or post on an Official Social
Media Site on behalf of the City must be authorized to do so in writing by the
Administrator (City Administrator or designee). These “Authorized Users” must
follow the requirements for governance of the site per the policy.
(3) A set process for responding to posts, comments, and messages on
Official Social Media Sites
The Policy establishes standards for the possible editing or deleting of posts or
comments. It also establishes that no post, comment, or other content shall be
removed solely simply because it is critical of the City, City Officials, employees,
or programs, or because City staff disagrees with the viewpoint of the comment.
(4) Standards for the use of social media by City Officials
10.2
Packet Pg. 216
The policy established standards for City Officials who are authorized to use
social media in an official capacity. These standards include but are not limited
to:
a. The City does not create or provide support for individual accounts for City
Officials; personal account posts regarding matters before City or within
jurisdiction can be deemed “official city business” subject to freedom of
speech, records retention and production, and public transparency .
b. Clear separation is required for official and personal accounts. Requirements
to help separate communications from different accounts include but are not
limited to: personal accounts not being made in the name of the position held;
no use of City logo or symbol; and content not representing the official
position(s) of the City.
c. To avoid Brown Act violations, AB 992 allows City Officials to use a social
media site to engage on matters within the subject matter jurisdiction for
specific purposes, but may not communicate directly with other members’
social media accounts.
d. The policy identifies requirements about the content on City Official’s social
media accounts, including diligence about accurate reporting during crises or
emergencies, correction of any errors quickly upon discovery, allow news of
citywide importance to be posted to the City’s off icial social media sites first,
and not representing themselves as a spokesperson for the entire legislative
body or the City, unless officially designated as so.
More detailed information is available in the attached policy for review.
(5) Guidelines for personal use of social media by employees
While the City does not monitor employees’ personal social media accounts, this
section sets forth suggested guidelines to follow when referring to the City. These
guidelines help to ensure a distinction between sharing personal and agency
views/information.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve the policy with further changes or revisions.
2. Reject the policy. Rejection would mean the City continues to operate without a social
media policy in place. Staff does not recommend this option. Not adopting a social
media policy leaves the City vulnerable to misuse and liability.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The Social Media Use Policy was included in the Communication and Engagement
Division’s FY22 workplan. The consultant cost is not to exceed $10,250 and is included
in the adopted budget.
10.2
Packet Pg. 217
CONCLUSION
Social media networks offer substantial opportunities to communicate and engage with
our community. When used properly, they can provide an effective avenue for public
outreach and dissemination of information. However, as with other interactive uses of
the internet, posting information on social media is not without risks. If approved, this
Social Media Policy would establish standards and guidelines to streamline the City’s
use of social media and protect against possible negative outcomes.
Attachments:
1. [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy
10.2
Packet Pg. 218
Social Media Use Policy
City of Gilroy
Policy No: ####
Original Policy Approval Date: 00/00/2022
Approved By: _________________________
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
2
Table of Contents
1 Definitions ............................................................................................................................... 3
2 Purpose and Scope.................................................................................................................. 5
3 Official Social Media Sites ....................................................................................................... 7
3.1 Creation of Social Media Sites .......................................................................................... 7
3.2 Governance of Official Social Media Sites........................................................................ 7
3.3 Responding to Posts, Comments, and Messages ........................................................... 10
3.4 Public Terms of Use ........................................................................................................ 10
3.5 Public Records Retention ............................................................................................... 11
4 Council, Commission, Committee, and Board Use of Social Media ..................................... 12
4.1 Creation of Social Media Sites ........................................................................................ 12
4.2 City Officials’ Use of Social Media .................................................................................. 12
5 Personal Use of Social Media ................................................................................................ 15
5.1 Rules and Guidelines ...................................................................................................... 15
6 Failure to Adhere to Policy.................................................................................................... 17
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
3
1 Definitions
For purposes of this policy, the following definitions apply:
Administrator
The single person who oversees and, ultimately, controls all official Social Media Sites
for the City. The Administrator will be the City Administrator or their designee.
Authorized Users
City employees, staff liaisons for governing bodies, attorneys, and any consultants,
providers, and contractors that are using Social Media in an official capacity for City
business. The Administrator will determine, in their sole discretion, who is an
Authorized User.
City Officials
Any elected or appointed official sitting on a Legislative Body of the City. These may
include, but are not limited to, City Councilmembers, commissioners, board members
and committee members.
Comment
Any reply on a post on an official Social Media Site. Comments may appear organized as
threads, depending on the Social Media Site. A public user may add a comment, and an
Authorized User may reply to that comment with another comment, depending on the
situation.
Legislative Body
The City Council and any City Boards, Commissions and/or Committees.
Message
Any direct, private written communication from the public to an Official Social Media
Site.
Official Social Media Site
Any Social Media Site controlled by an Authorized User that is used to promote, discuss,
carry out, or reference City-related business and/or activities. These sites will clearly
communicate they are representative of the City as a whole or of a specific Department
or Division as applicable.
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
4
Post
Any content an Authorized User initially publishes on an official Social Media Site. The
medium of a post can range from plain text, to hyperlinks, to images, to videos, etc. This
definition also applies to more ephemeral content such as Facebook/Instagram
"Stories."
Social Media
Online sources that allow people to communicate, share information, share photos,
share videos, share audio, and exchange text and other multimedia files with others via
some form of online or cellular network platform. These online sources may include, but
are not limited to, channels, networks, and technology, such as Facebook, LinkedIn,
Twitter, Instagram, Nextdoor, YouTube, and similar platforms or kinds of electronic
networking services (collectively, "Social Media Networks").
Tag or Mention
Using a Social Media Site's built-in feature to notify another user of a post or comment.
The tag or mention usually begins with "@" followed by the username of the referenced
user's Social Media Site.
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
5
2 Purpose and Scope
Social media networks offer substantial opportunities to communicate to a significant segment
of the population. If used properly, they may provide a benefit to the City of Gilroy by providing
an additional avenue of public outreach and dissemination of information. To address the fast-
changing landscape of the Internet and the way residents communicate and obtain information
online, the City encourages the use of social media (where appropriate) to further the goals of
the Gilroy City Council and City leadership.
However, as with other interactive uses of the internet, posting information on social media is
not without risks. Use of such networks for official City purposes raises legal issues that are
unique to the City and generally do not affect private persons or entities. This includes, for
example, the applicability of the Brown Act and the California Public Records Act. The City has
an overriding interest and expectation in protecting the integrity of the information posted on
its Official Social Media Sites in the name of and on behalf of the City, and the content that is
attributed to the City and its officials.
This Social Media Use Policy establishes guidelines for the City participation in and Authorized
Users' use of Social Media for City business. The City intends for its use of any Official Social
Media Site to relate solely to matters of City business and does not, in any way, intend to--nor
actually create--general public forums. While this policy acknowledges that Social Media is one
way to engage with others, this policy is not intended to require the City nor any Authorized
User acting in an official agency capacity to actually use social media.
All Authorized Users shall comply with this policy in all respects. This policy is subject to revision
at any time. This policy may be changed without prior notice when deemed necessary to fully
protect the City’s interests and/or the public’s interests. If it is necessary to change this policy
without providing prior notice to employees, the City shall notify the employees of the change
at the earliest possible time. All Authorized Users who have been authorized for social media
access shall sign an acknowledgement of receipt of this policy indicating that they have read
and understand all of its provisions and agree to be bound by the same. Before posting on
Official Social Media Sites, the Authorized Users must check the most current policy to ensure
compliance.
When posting on Official Social Media Sites on behalf of the City, Authorized Users are, in
effect, serving as the voice of the City. The City has an overriding interest and expectation in
deciding what is "announced" or "spoken" on behalf of the City on social media. Therefore, all
participation on social media must be in accordance with the provisions set forth herein.
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
6
This policy establishes standards for:
• Authorized Users who have permission to post information on Official Social Media Sites
on behalf of the City, during working hours, non-working hours (subject to limitations
determined by managers), and/or at the workplace;
• City Officials who are authorized to use social media in an official capacity;
• Public users who view and/or engage with content from the City's Official Social Media
Sites, or who Message the City through the City's Official Social Media Sites; and
• Employees’ personal use of Social Media as it relates to the City.
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
7
3 Official Social Media Sites
3.1 Creation of Social Media Sites
The Administrator may, in their sole discretion, establish a new Official Social Media Site.
Creation of any such Official Social Media Site must be proposed, in writing, by the
Department Director to the Administrator. The Administrator may, in their sole discretion,
approve, deny, or modify the creation of such sites. No one may create an Official Social
Media Site without the prior written authorization of the Administrator. Consideration shall
be given to the overall purpose of the requested site, the perceived ability of Authorized
Users to maintain a new site, and its suitability for use for City purposes.
All Official Social Media Sites, except for Facebook, shall use official City contact
information for account set-up, monitoring, and access. The use of personal email accounts
or phone numbers by any City employee is not allowed for the purpose of setting up,
monitoring, or updating an Official Social Media Site other than Facebook. Facebook’s
policies require users to manage Facebook Pages from a real, personal Facebook Profile. If
a user creates a fake and/or duplicate Facebook Profile to manage a Facebook Page, the
Facebook Page may be flagged and restricted, causing the City to lose access to the Page.
Authorized Users and their managers are responsible for the creation, administration,
posting and deactivation of Official Social Media Sites.
The Administrator shall have ultimate authority over all City participation on Official Social
Media Sites and may order the deactivation of all or part of an Official Social Media Site if
the Administrator, in their sole discretion, determines that the content or site is not in the
best interests of the City. If there is an existing Official Social Media Site without any new
Posts for two (2) months or longer, with the exception of sites such as YouTube and
Nextdoor, it should be deleted or merged with another Official Social Media Site,
consistent with current City Records Retention policies. The Authorized User in charge of
the site in question must provide written confirmation to the Administrator if they intend
to delete or not use an Official Social Media Site before deactivation.
3.2 Governance of Official Social Media Sites
Only Authorized Users acting in an official capacity who utilize social media on behalf of the
City, authorized in writing by the Administrator, are permitted to maintain, administer,
and/or post on an Official Social Media Site on behalf of the City of Gilroy.
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
8
In approving an Official Social Media Site, the Administrator shall designate at least one
Authorized User who will be responsible for the regular monitoring and maintenance of
that particular Official Social Media Site.
Authorized Users who use Official Social Media Sites on behalf of the City must adhere to
the following rules:
• Any and all information posted on behalf of the City by Authorized Users on Official
Social Media Sites should directly pertain to the City and be of citywide interest,
address issues within the scope of their specific authorization, and contain factual
information that is freely available to the public and that is not made confidential
by any policy of the City, or by local, state, or federal laws.
• Authorized Users should conduct themselves at all times as a representative of the
City and in accordance with all City policies.
• Authorized Users should review, become familiar with, and comply with the
designated social media network policies and terms and conditions.
• Official Social Media Sites shall use account names or usernames that are clearly
identifiable as representing the City. Examples include but are not limited to:
@CityofGilroy @GilroyPolice @GilroyParksandRec.
• Profiles or account information for Official Social Media Sites must contain a valid
City username, address, website, and phone number.
• Authorized Social Media Sites must clearly indicate the Department or Legislative
Body they represent on their home page or Bio or About section.
• Authorized Users may not use or include personal email addresses or any other
personal information in the user profiles and/or posted content for Official Social
Media Sites. Instead, Authorized Users may use their name, title, and a city email
address. If an Authorized User wishes, they may request a “common” email address
from the IT department (i.e. "ParksRec@CityOfGilroy.org").
• The City logo (with or without the department name) or a City Department or
Division logo shall be used as the account Profile Picture and/or included in a Cover
Photo (AKA "banner image"). If a Department or Division wishes to use an alternate
image as the Profile Picture or Cover Photo, they must obtain approval from the
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
9
Administrator before changing the existing photo and assure any photo used is not
subject to federal copyright protection.
• Photographs, videos, or images of anyone who can be readily identified by the
naked eye should not be posted to Official Social Media Sites without first obtaining
the depicted person’s written consent. If the person depicted in the photograph,
video, or image is a minor or someone incapable of providing consent, the City must
obtain the consent of the depicted person’s parent or legal guardian before posting
the photograph, video, or image to an Official Social Media Site. Consent is implied
within public spaces or at City-sponsored events, unless otherwise stated.
Authorized Users may consult the Administrator for guidance on using media
from/for special projects or campaigns.
• Language that is sexually explicit, or that is lewd or obscene, racial, promotes
religious beliefs, political, or illegal, or that expresses a personal opinion, except as
provided in section 3.3 "Responding to Posts, Comments and Messages" is
prohibited.
• Solicitation; engaging in or endorsing any commercial, products or activities is
prohibited. This provision is not intended to limit the City’s ability to support
business in Gilroy generally, but to refrain from supporting one particular business
or a particular commercial enterprise or sole business.
• Comments in support of or in opposition to elected and appointed City Officials,
political candidates, political campaigns, ballot measures, and matters that may
reasonably be agendized for consideration by the City Council, and/or any other
Legislative Body are prohibited.
• Authorized Users should avoid posting about the following items, unless approved
in advance by the City Administrator or City Attorney:
• Actual or perceived threats to public health, safety or property;
• Actual or potential legal claims, lawsuits or other legal issues;
• Personnel or medical matters;
• Criminal investigations and content regarding crime scenes;
While Official Social Media Sites are to be used for City business and for the purposes
stated herein, they are not intended to replace nor serve as the primary means of the City’s
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
10
communication with anyone. The City has an official website. This website shall remain the
primary means of online communication with the public and should be the primary link
used on accounts and in posts as much as possible.
Except as expressly provided in this policy, Authorized Users accessing any Official Social
Media Site shall comply with all applicable policies of the City, including, but not limited to
those policies that pertain to use of the internet by Authorized Users acting in an official
capacity.
3.3 Responding to Posts, Comments, and Messages
Authorized Users should be aware that it is not always possible or recommended on social
media networks to disable the feature that allows or permits responsive posts by members
of the public. By permitting use of this feature, the City does not intend to create a general
public forum, and all Comments and Posts must comply with this Social Media Policy. In
addition, most social media networks have their own terms of use and standards of
conduct. All content posted on an Official Social Media Site must comply with this Social
Media Policy and any host site user guidelines. The City reserves the right to remove any
Post or ban any posters from the site at its sole discretion for violation of this Policy or
applicable guidelines.
Some social media networks provide the ability to hide or delete posts from the public. If
the Authorized Users wish to hide or delete a Post or Comment, they need to coordinate
with the Administrator and possibly the City Attorney. If the Post is to be deleted, there is a
documentation process for public records that needs to be followed first. Standard practice
for social media is that once a Post is published, it should not be deleted. It can be edited
as long as it does not change the original intent of the Post.
No Post, Comment, or other content shall be removed solely simply because it is critical of
the City, City Officials, employees, or programs, or because city staff disagrees with the
viewpoint of the Comment, content or submittal. On social media networks where the
feature is available, a "strong" profanity filter should be enabled to automatically prohibit
Comments and Posts with profanity.
3.4 Public Terms of Use
Every Official Social Media Site that allows Comments or Posts from the public must
include the disclaimer/terms of use (see Appendix A) located in a readily accessible part of
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
11
each Social Media Site, such as the privacy policy, the “about us” section, or a "pinned"
post.
3.5 Public Records Retention
All content posted on an Official Social Media Site should be assumed to be subject to the
California Public Records Act, California’s civil discovery statutes, and other applicable laws
requiring the disclosure of public records. All content must be managed, stored, and
retrieved to comply with these laws, including any photographs or images. In addition, all
content subject to the City’s records retention policy must be maintained consistent with
that policy. Any content on Official Social Media Sites shall be maintained in a format that
preserves the integrity of the original record and must be easily accessible using the
approved City platform and tools. Any content submitted for posting that is deemed
unsuitable because it is not topically related or is inappropriate under this policy must also
be retained pursuant to the applicable record retention schedule.
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
12
4 Council, Commission, Committee, and Board Use of Social
Media
4.1 Creation of Social Media Sites
Any established Legislative Body within the City may request from the Administrator to
create an Official Social Media Site on behalf of the City.
Creation of any such site must be proposed, in writing, by the Legislative Body staff liaison,
to the Administrator. The Administrator may, in their sole discretion, approve, deny, or
modify the creation of such sites. A Body may not create an Official Social Media Site
without the prior written authorization of the Administrator. Consideration shall be given
to the overall purpose of the requested site, the perceived ability of Authorized Users to
maintain a new site, and its suitability for use for City purposes.
4.2 City Officials’ Use of Social Media
The City does not create or provide support for individual social media accounts for City
Officials. City Officials who maintain personal social and other digital media accounts
should be aware that--similar to City email or any other written or recorded
communication related to the official conduct of city business--digital communications,
Social Media Posts and Messages by City Officials regarding matters that are before the
City for action or within City jurisdiction can be “official city business” subject to laws and
policies regarding freedom of speech, records retention and production, and public
transparency. Those laws and policies include, but are not necessarily limited to: the
California and United States Constitution, the California Public Records Act, the Ralph M.
Brown Act, and the City’s records retention regulations.
City Officials participating in digital or social media communications shall maintain and
clearly delineate between separate accounts for official and personal/campaign
statements, taking precaution not to convey personal/campaign communications in a
manner that suggests such communications represent the position of the City or their
Legislative Body as a whole.
City Officials are prohibited from using the City logo or seal or any variation of the City logo
or seal, representing the City, or representing that they speak on behalf of the City within
their official or personal social media account(s) or site(s).
To avoid ambiguity, all statements, headings, profile pictures, or biographies on personal or
campaign accounts shall:
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
13
• Not be made in the name of the position to which the City Official was elected or
appointed;
• Clearly reflect that content on such accounts does not represent the official
positions of the City or the governing body;
• Not display the City logo or any other official City mark or title.
Digital records relating to public business are required to be handled in a manner capable
of maintaining the record for the applicable retention period, including through the use of
highlights, bins, or archives for temporary and disappearing stories, reels, posts, or
otherwise. Likewise, City Officials should avoid deleting Comments or blocking individuals
on official pages or sites they maintain. Social media content should be treated the same as
any written document and retained in accordance with the City retention schedules.
To avoid any violations of the Brown Act, consistent with the update provided by AB 992,
City Officials are permitted to use a social media site to engage in conversations or
communications on matters within the subject matter jurisdiction of their governing body:
• To answer questions;
• To provide information to the public; and
• To solicit information from the public.
However, a majority of City Officials may not use social media to "discuss among
themselves" official business. The Brown Act broadly defines the meaning of "discuss
among themselves" to include any "communications made, posted, or shared on an
internet-based social media network between members of a Legislative Body, including
Comments or use of digital icons that express reactions to communications made by other
members of the Legislative Body." The Brown Act prohibits a Board member from
communicating directly with the social media of any other member on a subject within the
jurisdiction of the board.
City Officials must refrain from using the City’s Official Social Media Sites or any form of
electronic communication to respond to, blog or engage in serial meetings, or otherwise
discuss, deliberate, or express opinions on any issue within the subject matter jurisdiction
of the body without complying with the Brown Act.
City Officials should be honest and accurate when posting information or news, especially
when communicating during a crisis or emergency. Any mistakes, misstatements and/or
factual errors must be corrected quickly upon discovery. When possible, news of citywide
importance should first be announced by the City's Official Social Media Sites including the
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
14
City website. This information can then be shared by City Officials, linking back to the
original Post or official City website, when possible. Unless the City Official has been
designated to serve as a spokesperson, a City Official should never represent themselves as
a spokesperson for the entire Legislative Body or the City. City Officials should be mindful
of recognizing that accomplishments of the City or Legislative Body are achieved by
collective action of the entire body or organization.
In summary,
City Officials may:
• Use social media in the Official’s capacity to communicate with
constituents to “answer questions, provide information to the public, or
solicit information from the public.”
City Officials may not:
• Discuss on social media with a majority of the legislative body business
of a specific nature that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the
legislative body.
• Comment on a post of another member of the legislative body, including
“liking,” sharing, reposting, or use of emojis.
• Block any member of the public from participating in your social media
account.
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
15
5 Personal Use of Social Media
While the City does not monitor employees’ personal social media accounts, this section sets
forth suggested guidelines to follow when referring to the City. Following these principles helps
ensure a distinction between sharing personal and agency views/information.
5.1 Rules and Guidelines
The following rules and guidelines apply to all employees acting in an official capacity of
the City of Gilroy:
• While employees may voluntarily choose to engage with the City on its Official
Social Media Sites, the City does not encourage or require any employee to
follow or “like” Official Social Media Sites.
• The City does not condone the personal use by employees of social media during
the working hours by any means, including by using City-owned equipment.
Employees have no right or expectation of privacy when using City-issued
devices or systems. The City reserves the right to monitor, search, or disclose
employee use of City resources.
• When an employee uses social media in a personal capacity, they are doing so
for themselves and they are not speaking nor communicating on behalf of the
City. Employees should make certain that it does not appear that they are
speaking or posting for the City unless authorized to do so.
• Employees are reminded and cautioned that nothing posted on the internet is
private. Content can easily be shared, forwarded, and distributed to broader
audiences without your knowledge or permission.
• Information posted on social media may be used as evidence in disciplinary,
administrative, or legal proceedings. The City will not require you to provide a
password or other security information for your personal sites that are
password-protected or otherwise non-public.
• The personal use of social media by an employee in a manner that violates any
City policy or procedure will not be tolerated, and may be grounds for
disciplinary action, up to and including termination. Employees are expected to
comply with the same ethical and performance standards on-line as in the
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
16
workplace. Using social media in a way that adversely impacts a job, co-workers,
the City, or the public is prohibited. Employees may not use their official City
email addresses to create or maintain any personal social media account(s) or
site(s).
• Employees may not post any content on the internet or social media that
constitutes or contains City confidential, proprietary, privileged, private,
personnel, or other non-public information.
• Employees are prohibited from using the City logo or seal or any variation of the
City logo or seal, representing the City, or representing that they speak on behalf
of the City within their personal social media account(s) or site(s). Employees
must also make clear in any online activity that the views and opinions they
express about work-related matters are their own, have not been reviewed by
the City, and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the City.
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
17
6 Failure to Adhere to Policy
An Authorized User’s failure to adhere to the provisions of this policy may result in disciplinary
or adverse action being taken against the Authorized User up to and including termination.
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
18
Appendix A
Disclaimer/Terms of Use
THIS SITE IS NOT MONITORED IN REAL TIME. IF YOU HAVE AN EMERGENCY OR KNOW OF A
CRIME IN PROGRESS, PLEASE CALL 911 IMMEDIATELY. THIS SOCIAL MEDIA SITE IS NOT A PUBLIC
FORUM. BY ENGAGING WITH THIS SOCIAL MEDIA SITE, YOU AGREE TO ADHERE TO THE TERMS
OF USE OUTLINED AT https://www.cityofgilroy.org/socialmediapolicy.
The City will publish the following information on its website at
https://www.cityofgilroy.org/socialmediapolicy:
These Terms of Use apply to all Official Social Media Sites ("sites") of the City of Gilroy. This site
is not a public forum and all Comments and Posts must comply with these Terms of Use. Official
Social Media Sites are intended to serve as a mechanism for communication between the City
and the public to help further our mission. Any Comment submitted to sites and their fans,
followers, or subscribers may be considered a public record, which is subject to disclosure
pursuant to the California Public Records Act. Public information requests must be directed to
the City Clerk’s office.
If any public Comments are allowed on these sites, we reserve the right to remove posts or
comments at the City’s sole discretion. The City reserves the right to report a user directly to
the host social media network if a Post, Comment or other content by the user violates the
network's own Terms of Use. Under the City of Gilroy Social Media Use Policy, the City reserves
the right to remove inappropriate content on its sites, including, but not limited to, the
following:
a. Profane, obscene, violent, or pornographic content and/or language;
b. Content that promotes, fosters, or perpetuates discrimination or harassment on
the basis of race, color, national origin, religious creed, ancestry, physical or
mental disability, medical condition, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical
condition, age, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity, gender expression,
genetic information, military or veteran status, marital status, or any other basis
protected by applicable state or federal law;
c. Threats to any person or organization or encouragement of illegal activity;
d. Information that tends to compromise the safety or security of City employees,
the public, public systems, or the City’s technology resources;
e. Content that violates any legal ownership interest, such as a copyright or
trademark;
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
19
f. Content containing personal information, such as home addresses, phone
numbers, social security numbers, dates of birth or driver’s license numbers;
g. Solicitation of commerce, including any advertising or business services or
products for sale;
h. Content that violates any federal, state or local laws;
The City disclaims any and all responsibility and liability for any materials that the City deems
inappropriate for posting, which cannot be removed in an expeditious and otherwise timely
manner. The City reserves the right to remove any fans, followers, or subscribers for violation
of this policy.
A Comment posted by a member of the public on any City of Gilroy Social Media Site is the
opinion of the commentator or poster only, and the publication of a Comment does not imply
endorsement of, or agreement by, the City of Gilroy, nor do such Comments necessarily reflect
the opinions or policies of the City of Gilroy.
The City reserves the right to restrict or remove any content that is deemed in violation of this
policy or any applicable law. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City of Gilroy is not obligated
to take such actions, and disclaims any and all responsibility and liability for any materials
posted by a member of the public.
By posting a Comment, users agree to indemnify the City of Gilroy, its officers and employees
from and against all liabilities, judgments, damages, and costs (including attorney’s fees)
incurred by any of them which arise out of or are related to content posted by users. If a user
does not agree to these terms, the individual should not use the City of Gilroy’s Social Media
Sites as a violation of these terms may lead to legal liability.
If you have any questions regarding these Terms of Use, please email us at
Communications@CityOfGilroy.org.
The above disclaimer may not be altered without the prior approval of the City Administrator or
City Attorney (or their respective designees). The Administrator will work with authorized staff
to set up the site and disclaimers correctly.
10.2.a
Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: [DRAFT] 2022 Gilroy Social Media Use Policy (3575 : Social Media Policy)
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Council Discussion of Housing Trust Fund Fiscal
Recommendations and Adopt a Resolution Amending the
Operating Budget for Fiscal Years 2021-22 and 2022-23 in the Los
Arroyos Fund in the Amount of $100,800 in Each Fiscal Year.
Meeting Date: February 28, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis
Prepared By: Bryce Atkins
Strategic Plan Goals
Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization
☐ Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
☐ Promote Economic
Development
Activities
Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All
☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
Council:
a) Receive the report and provide direction, and
b) Adopt a resolution amending the operating budget for Fiscal Years 2021 -22 and
2022-23 in the Los Arroyos Fund in the amount of $100,800 in each fiscal year.
BACKGROUND
The City’s Housing Trust Fund (HTF) fund balance is slowly being depleted over tim e.
An initial presentation on this subject matter had been provided to the City Council on
October 18, 2021 (attached). The fund depletion was based on the trends in revenue
and expenditures and the change in fund balance over the past 10 years. As part of the
recommendation and next steps, a further analysis of options was to be brought before
the Council in the first quarter of 2022. Additional research has revealed more
complicated and volatile revenues that are not contained in the audited financial
10.3
Packet Pg. 238
statements, as well as more information regarding the structure of the loan assets in the
fund, as will be discussed later in this report.
This fund originally was created to assist in funding development of affordable housing.
The City has used the HTF over the years to fund service providers to help address
housing and homelessness issues in the community , as well managing Below Market
Rate (BMR) housing programs.
The options presented below are intended to pursue and attain a higher level of
sustainability for HTF.
ANALYSIS
Comments on Previous Projection
In the October 18, 2021 projection, staff used the audited financial statements and the
10-year history of revenues and expenditures to determine average surplus or deficit
and apply that net result to the fund balance total going forward in the HTF. This was
determined at the time to provide the most reliable analysis with available information.
The awareness of the financial issue was relatively new, and staff wished to make
Council aware as soon as possible of a potential issue. This was the reason for the
introductory item, and the recommendation that staff present options.
As staff conducted the research, obtained the base data available for the HTF, and
reviewed the detail of recorded documents, it has been identified that the financial
situation for the HTF is more complex than originally thought. There have been
numerous iterations in the way HTF was used in the past, the structure of the loans and
funding arrangements, and future repayment terms.
The original projection (presented in October 2021) used fund balance, which includes
all assets reduced by liabilities. This included cash, investments, loans that were
payable to the City, and property held for resale. The challenge that has been realized
is that the equity share payments are not included in the assets. The equity share
payments are created by a recorded agreement on the title of the property, called a
Resale Restriction Agreement (RRA). Upon further review, the RRAs which generate
the equity share payments are forgivable. For most RRAs, If the property is held beyond
the RRA term ends there is no payment coming to the City from that agreement. The
outstanding RRAs are not booked into the General Ledger, and therefore staff in the
initial projection was not aware of this possible-but-not-guaranteed revenue.
Additionally, the structure of some of the loans, as discussed later have long periods
where payments may not be made. This means that although the fund balance will
remain present, this does not mean that it can be liquidated to make payments if cash
on hand is depleted. If the equity share payments do not keep to historic trends there is
a possibility - earlier or later than initially projected – that the fund’s available cash may
deplete, and the General Fund covers the payments of the HTF until the long -term
loans repayable are collected.
10.3
Packet Pg. 239
Additionally, because of the long timing of future revenues for equity payments or loans,
it is possible for the fund to consume its available cash, b ut then in one to five decades
later, equity payments or loans may be paid, and the fund has cash again.
Due to the volatility based on the research conducted, the original projections are no
longer reliable, and staff is not making any projections now based on the extreme
variability in future revenues revealed in this further analysis.
Future Loan Repayments
Currently in the Housing Trust Fund, there are the following loans that are currently
receivable by the City, including both principal and interest. However, as can be seen
on the table, the timeframe for repayment is in the long -term future. $1.2 million, or
approximately 70% of the total receivable amount of $1.7 million won’t be due for an
additional 40-50 years. The remainder are the smaller loans which are making
payments each year. Although the larger loans have their payments deferred, this does
not prevent early payment. However, there is no expectation of any early payments for
any given year
Asset
Record
Loan
Principal
Amount
Remaining
Interest
Accrued
Fund
Associated Type Housing
Units Repayment Term
1 $80,000 $0 259 - HTF Ownership 1
Due on Sale, Transfer or
Death
2 $164,000 $70,403 259 - HTF Ownership 0
3/14/2037 - Will be
forgiven, not due
3 $150,000 $46,216 259 - HTF Rental 60 2/6/2061
4 $181,267 $54,708 259 - HTF Rental 0 6/1/2061
5 $58,773 $11,373 259 - HTF Rental 0 6/1/2061
6 $400,000 $94,169 259 - HTF Rental 0 1/12/2068
7 $206,316 $20,752 259 - HTF Rental 28 8/1/2074
8 $50,000 $23,138 259 - HTF Ownership 1 4/1/2027
9 $24,207 $0 259 - HTF Ownership 1 10/31/2033
10 $25,516 $0 259 - HTF Ownership 1 3/30/2029
11 $26,176 $0 259 - HTF Ownership 1 1/31/2030
12 $24,188 $0 259 - HTF Ownership 1 11/30/2032
13 $25,381 $0 259 - HTF Ownership 1 12/31/2033
Totals $1,415,824 $320,760 95
Due to the long timeframe for the receipt of loan principal and interest payments, and
the small amount of the annual average, the primary revenue source in the near -to-mid
future will be equity share payments from ownership unit home sales.
Future Equity Share Payments
10.3
Packet Pg. 240
The City is the beneficiary of the development of housing built and sold by South
County Housing, sold as affordable ownership housing in multiple neighborhoods.
These properties, when sold, included RRAs. The RRAs placed restrictions and
conditions on the sale of the properties, including options for the City to repurchase, to
keep properties within the program and require the resale to those who would qualify to
purchase within the affordable program, or for the City to receive equity share payments
when the homes are authorized for resale out of the program.
The revenue from the resale of these ownership homes represents a large source of
revenue for the HTF. However, this revenue is not predictable, nor guaranteed. The
RRAs that were recorded against the properties typically only have a term of 30 years. If
a home is resold before the term is reached, then the City can either have the property
resold within the program or receive an equity share payment. However, if the property
remains in the owner’s possession beyond the expiration of the RRA, the owner is
released from the agreement requirements. This means that there would be no equity
share payments required if the home is sold after the RRA is expired.
Below is the current listing of RRAs that are contained in the database managed by
HouseKeys, and the years in which the RRAs are set to expire.
Number of Ownership Units with Future Expiring RRAs
Year
Total Units
with RRAs
Expiring (HTF
and Los
Arroyos)
% of
total
RRAs
Total
HTF
Total Los
Arroyos
Fund
2026 5 2% 5 0
2027 23 10% 23 0
2028 28 13% 28 0
2029 11 5% 11 0
2030 7 3% 0 7
2031 8 4% 0 8
2032 59 27% 0 59
2033 3 1% 0 3
2036 1 0% 0 1
2040 5 2% 5 0
2043 20 9% 20 0
2044 1 0% 1 0
2045 4 2% 4 0
2046 17 8% 17 0
2048 1 0% 1 0
TBD 29 13% 1 28
Total 222 100% 116 106
Proportion of Total 52% 48%
10.3
Packet Pg. 241
As can be seen in the table, approximately a third of all RRAs on homeownership units
if not sold or transferred, including both HTF and the Los Arroyos Fund, will expire by
the end of calendar year 2030. Another third will expire by 2040, with the final third
expiring by 2048. This final number includes those listed in the row of the year to be
determined. There are 29 units that are recognized to be in the program, but the RRAs
have not been located. Housekeys and the City continue to search for the historical
records to find these documents.
These equity payments, in addition to not being guaranteed, are also unpredictable. The
amount of revenue each individual property generates from equity share payments vary
based on the fair market value of the properties, or growth of Consumer Price Index,
depending upon the specifics of the RRA. This means that the state of the economy, the
demand for housing, and the length of time the original property owner has owned the
property all affect the price of the property and what the amount of the City’s share of
the equity will be.
FUNDING OPTIONS
Current Recommended Options
Staff is recommending Council direction tonight to implement the first two options.
These do not require procedures to enact any new fees, have no impacts outside of the
City’s operations or budget, nor do they affect current participants in the City’s housing
programs.
1. Use Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Funds to reimburse or
pay for the Public Service Grants traditionally issued from the HTF
Potential HTF Savings - $100,000-$170,000 annually
Council previously approved the City to enter into a consortium agreement with
the County of Santa Clara to administer the PLHA program. As part of that
consortium agreement, the City is able to fund public service grants for housing
and homelessness services. The exact process, whether the City would cont ract
with the grant awardees or if they would need to go through the County for the
funding agreement, is still being determined by the County in consultation with
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Should Council
determine so, the City could transition the public service grants to use PLHA
funds instead of HTF funding. The budget for FY22 is $100,000, however the
ongoing funding in prior years has been approximately $168,000, and this
amount was included in the advertisement for the public service grants for the
next two year cycle. The higher amount is possible with the use of PLHA funding.
If the public service grants will still contract through the City directly, then the
charges would still be applied to the HTF, but there would be of fsetting revenue.
10.3
Packet Pg. 242
If the funding agreement would be through the County, then the County would
administer the funds on the City’s behalf.
Additionally, staff is recommending proceeding with the next two year funding
cycle for use of HTF for public service grants, as budgeted, since the
expenditures may be covered by the PLHA Funds.
2. Shift the HouseKeys contract funding sources to be paid proportionately
from the HTF and the Los Arroyos Fund
Potential HTF savings – approximately $101,000 in FY22, 48% of contract
amount in future years.
As demonstrated when looking at the distribution of the Equity Share Payments
breakdown, the major component of the HouseKeys contract, only 52% of the
remaining managed RRAs are to the benefit of the HTF. If Council approves this
recommendation by adopting a budget amendment, staff will proceed to apply
48% of the HouseKey’s contract payments for FY22 and FY23 in the Los Arroyos
Fund. The Los Arroyos Fund does not have any ongoing expenditures in that
fund – this would be the only recurring and budgeted expenditure in that fund.
The Los Arroyos Fund also does not have any recurring revenues, save for the
future equity payments that may materialize. The Los Arroyos Fund has the
same challenges with ongoing revenue as the HTF but d oes not carry ongoing
financial burdens of staffing or operational charges.
With recommendations #1 and #2, the ongoing expenditures in the HTF will be reduced
by approximately $201,000.
Additional HTF Revenue Options
Housing and Community Development staff will monitor the funds with the
implementation of these two recommendations to determine how the fund behaves with
these changes. Depending upon its level of success, it may be needed to pursue
additional measures to generate more savings or revenue in the HTF. These may
include one or more of the below.
3. Engage the City’s Grant Writing Firm to Search for Affordable Housing
Development Grants and Funding Partnership Opportunities
Staff would work with the grant writing firm to move up in priority grant funding
and non-profit partnership opportunities for new housing funding.
4. Revisit the Nature of the Homebuyer Assistance Program Relating to Use
of Revolving Funds and Lending Forgiveness
This option would involve reinvesting a portion of the current cash in the HTF, as
well as the Los Arroyos Fund, into the homebuyer assistance program, issuing
new RRAs and loans. A restructuring of the program would be considered to
make the programs more sustainable.
10.3
Packet Pg. 243
5. Revisit the Structure of Loans for Homebuyer Assistance and BMR Rental
Property Development Financing
This option entails a review and restructure of any new loans issued to have part
of the principal and interest paid annually, with a majority of the payment amount
deferred, instead of all the principal and interested deferred.
6. Adopt an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
On October 25, 2021, the City Council received a presentation regarding the
development of an affordable housing policy. This process is essentially
underway already, with a consultant that is undertaking the comments received
from that study session with Council to prepare a draft approach. Part of that
ordinance may allow for developers to contribute in -lieu fees that allows for
developers to build the housing units or allow payments to be used for housing
development programs.
7. Creation of a Linkage Fee
Linkage fees are essentially development impact fees. There are generally two
types of linkage fees related to housing:
o Commercial Linkage Fee – fees are charged to developers of new office
or retail properties and used to fund the development of affordable
housing. These fees are typically assessed on a per square foot basis.
o Residential Linkage Fee –is a development impact fee on market rate
residential development. These programs are actually structured to
require fees rather than units onsite.
This potential revenue source can fund housing projects to maintain or increase
the quantity, quality, and variety of affordable housing units or assist other
governmental entities, private organizations or individuals to do so.
A nexus study would be needed to justify and appropriately calculate the amount
of fees that are needed. Currently, regional cities that are known to have this
program include the cities of San Jose, Cupertino, Mountain View, Sunnyvale,
East Palo Alto, Menlo Park, and other cities in the San Francisco Bay Area
8. Move Personnel and Operating Costs from the HTF to the General Fund
This option would essentially have the General Fund pay for the personnel and
operating costs to manage and serve the HTF, thereby preserving all HTF funds
for the continuation of homebuyer assistance and affordable rental development
projects. This would increase the General Fund expenditures by a matching
amount of what is relocated. The FY22 operating budget (all costs not including
public service grants) is $416,775, removing the Los Arroyos portion of the
HousKeys’ contract. It would allow the HTF, Los Arroyos Fund, and other
housing funds the City manages to have a better chance to be a more
sustainable revolving fund.
10.3
Packet Pg. 244
9. Alternative to Revenue Stream Option #7 Above – Annual General Fund
Transfer Allocation
This would entail Council determining each budget cycle an amount from the
General Fund to contribute to the HTF to offset some of the ongoing costs o f the
HTF, to help attain sustainability of the fund and programming. The amount may
vary at the discretion of Council. Some of this funding may be able to be drawn
from the American Rescue Plan Act Funds, though more specifics would need to
be determined for eligibility purposes.
10. Establish a Multi-Family Affordability Restriction Monitoring Fee
This would be a per unit fee to recover the costs associated with the monitoring
of compliance with the City’s affordability restrictions on multi -family, affordability
restricted properties, including the annual review of the developer’s tenant’s
income and rents.
11. Establish a Tax Increment Financing District Focused on Affordable
Housing
There are several tax increment financing (TIF) district options available to
communities. Some of these may provide funding for primarily development of
affordable housing, and potentially some operating costs, though far more
research would be needed if this option is of interest to Council to ensure the
right TIF option is selected to provide the maximum benefit level.
The use of TIF has both benefits and drawbacks. The TIF funding can provide a
mechanism that provides funding for affordable housing projects , though at the
expense of reducing the future growth potential of propert y tax, a major General
Fund revenue source. An additional drawback is that the process for establishing
a TIF District is complex, can be costly, and also could be controversial.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Initial savings in the HTF fund for Options #1 and #2 total $201,000 in annual savings to
the HTF Fund. Approximately $100,000 budgeted for the public service grants would
shift to the PLHA funds, a new revenue source, and the remaining $101,000 would be
transferred to the Los Arroyos Fund for the next two years, until the next budget cycle is
determined.
A budget amendment resolution is attached to this staff report that, if approved, would
allow the split of the HouseKeys contract to the Los Arroyos Fund proportionate to the
number of RRAs that are associated to each of those funds.
CONCLUSION
Staff is recommending Council approval to proceed with options #1-2, saving
approximately $201,000 for the next two fiscal years, though more when compared to
prior year public service grant awards. Staff will then monitor the progress of the
10.3
Packet Pg. 245
recommendations and the fiscal position of the funds in the near -term. If additional
measures are needed, staff will return to Council to consider the other options provided
in this report. This will be an ongoing process to address this fund.
NEXT STEPS
Based on direction from Council, staff will implement the direction to proceed with any
options that Council identifies to begin immediately.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
This item has been included in the posted agenda for this meetin g, and the date and
timing of this item has been discussed briefly in the Housing and Neighborhood
Revitalization Committee meeting on February 16, 2022. Depending upon actions of the
City Council, staff will commence outreach of any direction from this me eting, and
further agenda items and work will be communicated to the public through our
community engagement strategies.
Attachments:
1. Budget Amendment Resolution
2. October 18, 2021 Housing Trust Fund Fiscal Health Staff Report
10.3
Packet Pg. 246
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF GILROY AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY
OF GILROY FOR FISCAL YEARS 2021-2022 AND 2022-
2023 IN THE LOS ARROYOS FUND AND
APROPRIATING PROPOSED EXPENDITURE
AMENDMENTS
WHEREAS, the City Administrator prepared and submitted to the City Council a budget
for the City of Gilroy for Fiscal Years 2021-2022 and 2022-2023, and the City Council carefully
examined, considered and adopted the same on June 7, 2021; and
WHEREAS, City Staff has prepared and submitted to the City Council a proposed
amendment to said budget for Fiscal Years 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 for the City of Gilroy in the
staff report dated February 28, 2022 for the Housing Trust Fund fiscal health recommendations,
appropriating funding for the Los Arroyos Fund’s share of the HouseKeys contract; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully examined and considered the same and is
satisfied with said budget amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT appropriations for each of Fiscal Years
2021-2022 and 2022-2023 are hereby increased in the Los Arroyos Fund, Fund 255, by $101,000.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of February, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
APPROVED:
Marie Blankley, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk
10.3.a
Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Budget Amendment Resolution (3620 : HTF Fiscal Health and Recommendations)
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Report on the Housing Trust Fund's Fiscal Health
Meeting Date: October 18, 2021
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis
Prepared By: Bryce Atkins
Strategic Plan Goals
Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization
Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
Promote Economic
Development
Activities
Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All
☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
Council receive report and provide any direction.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City’s Housing Trust Fund (HTF) is slowly being depleted and based on the current
expenditure and revenue trends is projected to be exhausted during the 20 29 fiscal
year. This fund originally was created to assist in funding development of affordable
housing. The City has used the HTF over the years to administer the Below Market
Rate (BMR) program, and to fund service providers to help address housing and
homelessness issues in the community.
The City may choose to allow the funds to be depleted in its discretion, attempt to
restore the fund to a revolving fund for homebuying assistance, or provide funding
mechanisms to allow the full range of programs curre ntly funded by the HTF.
10.3.b
Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: October 18, 2021 Housing Trust Fund Fiscal Health Staff Report (3620 : HTF Fiscal Health and Recommendations)
This is an introductory presentation regarding the current status of the HTF and will lead
into a policy discussion in the first quarter of 2022 to determine the future uses and
sources of funding passing through the HTF.
BACKGROUND
The HTF is a special revenue fund of the City. Below are the key details from a report
provided to Council in 2019 from Community Development, as well as older reports to
Council and internal memos, regarding the history of the HTF:
• Created in 1997. Concept developed by the Housing Element Task Force
Committee in 1996.
• Purpose: funding source to assist in development of affordable housing.
• Funding source: repayment of promissory notes secured by trust deeds on
property titles and equity share payments from sale or resale of BMR properties.
• Initial BMR homes constructed and sold by South County Housing.
• Funds are received into the HTF when BMR units are sold, and the equity share
payments were split between the homeowner, South County Housing, and the
City.
• Funds built up from rapidly increasing housing values at the time of sale,
facilitating equity payments to the City as its share at time of sale, or for some
when refinancing their first mortgages.
• Intended use was to provide funding to help potential homeowners that could
afford near or somewhat below market rate home prices.
• City was originally included as a partner as there were concerns of private
lenders due to South County Housing being a new non-profit, to help assure
longevity and management of the deed restrictions.
• By 2001, HTF began providing yearly housing related grants for various public
services.
• Funding amounts for public services has increased since 2001
These public services grants have been used to aid in homelessness prevention
through assistance programs to help residents remain in their homes, and assistance
funds to those experiencing homelessness through non -profits that connect those
experiencing homelessness to resources and programs that may assist them. These
uses of funds are consistent with guidelines on the use of funds identified in 2001.
The BMR program’s housing portfolio transferred to the City of Gilroy in 2016, after the
closure of South County Housing, and the closure of their successor to the housing
portfolio Neighborhood Housing Services Silicon Valley. In 2017, the City engaged the
10.3.b
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: October 18, 2021 Housing Trust Fund Fiscal Health Staff Report (3620 : HTF Fiscal Health and Recommendations)
services of Housekeys to manage the BMR program. As of the April 2021 staff report
approving a new contract with Housekeys, the City’s BMR portfolio included 1,062 BMR
rental units and 290 BMR Homeownership Units, many of which include various
deferred loans applied on the property for programs such as down-payment assistance.
ANALYSIS
With the addition of Housekeys’ contract for managing the BMR program and the use of
funds for public service grants not replenishing the funds used, and little to no inventory
of newly deed restricted homes being built, the fund will eventually become depleted.
Staff is advising Council of this current trend, and to start a discussion regarding:
1. Does the City wish to allow the fund to deplete?
2. If not, is there a way to structure the fund and the revenues and expenditures in a
way to create a revolving fund as originally designed?
3. If there isn’t a way to create a revolving fund, is there a desire of Council to
replenish the fund intermittently from other sources?
Fund Balances Decreasing
In presenting the HTF’s financial picture, staff is using the Fund Balance as an indicator
of financial health for the fund. Since FY13, the fund balance in the HTF has been
decreasing. Below is a chart demonstrating the change in fund balance year-over-year
for the past ten years.
On average, the annual net reduction in ending fund balance year -over-year is
$166,425. The amount of reduction is not even, with one year showing growth (FY2020
+$133,877) and a few years of larger declines (FY13 -$414,501; FY14 -$373,625; and
FY21 projected -$227,561).
10.3.b
Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: October 18, 2021 Housing Trust Fund Fiscal Health Staff Report (3620 : HTF Fiscal Health and Recommendations)
Expenditures in the HTF have historically included both staff salaries for a portion of
staff time associated with managing the public services grants and some logistical
support required for the City’s share in processing BMR program components, the
contract with Housekeys since 2017, and the public service grants. Below is a table
showing the historical spend in the HTF.
HTF Expenditures
Fiscal Year Personnel Grants/
Programs
Other
Operating
Costs
Total Expense
2012 $ 168,226.69 $ 150,735.50 $ 42,781.92 $ 361,744.11
2013 $ 189,485.99 $ 581,762.12 $(254,836.55) $ 516,411.56
2014 $ 181,232.50 $ 179,913.05 $ 128,009.03 $ 489,154.58
2015 $ 188,338.19 $ 154,949.00 $ (52,275.17) $ 291,012.02
2016 $ 173,002.75 $ 161,200.45 $ 71,097.70 $ 405,300.90
2017 $ 130,352.72 $ 127,135.06 $ 94,103.83 $ 351,591.61
2018 $ 70,760.06 $ 134,397.27 $ 51,334.32 $ 256,491.65
2019 $ 64,705.79 $ 145,214.84 $ 399,083.55 $ 609,004.18
2020 $ 81,637.60 $ 193,809.00 $(162,339.47) $ 113,107.13
2021 $ 174,167.83 $ 184,968.27 $ 165,781.53 $ 524,917.63
Totals $ 1,421,910.12 $ 2,014,084.56 $ 482,740.69 $ 3,918,735.37
Relative
Percentage 36% 51% 12% 100%
Revenues to the HTF come in from a variety of sources, with the largest being equity
payments from when homes in the portfolio are sold, rental income from rental units in
the portfolio, interest from the assets in the HTF, and miscellaneous revenues. The
largest of the revenue, representing approximately 62% of revenue over the past ten
years, is from equity payments, and do not come to the City in a predictable manner.
The amounts and timing of this revenue stream vary. Rents come from some of the
apartment units that are in the portfolio, but the amounts can still vary from year-to-year.
Interest also varies with the amount of funds held in the HTF, as well as the interest
rates and economic conditions that fluctuate.
HTF Revenues
Fiscal Year Equity
Payments Rents Interest Miscellaneous
Revenue Total Revenue
2012 $ 1,883.00 $ 20,352.27 $ 31,101.59 $ 756.82 $ 54,093.68
2013 $ - $ 27,611.41 $ 42,685.76 $ 31,613.51 $ 101,910.68
2014 $ 1,403.00 $ 20,611.04 $ 43,887.81 $ 49,627.62 $ 115,529.47
2015 $ 1,759.00 $ 23,048.02 $ 41,506.75 $ 15,897.52 $ 82,211.29
2016 $ 213,817.44 $ 25,664.53 $ 31,238.63 $ 4,835.42 $ 275,556.02
10.3.b
Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: October 18, 2021 Housing Trust Fund Fiscal Health Staff Report (3620 : HTF Fiscal Health and Recommendations)
Fiscal Year Equity
Payments Rents Interest Miscellaneous
Revenue Total Revenue
2017 $ 161,491.41 $ 25,552.38 $ 92,498.86 $ 17,559.01 $ 297,101.66
2018 $ 79,426.88 $ 12,754.01 $ 24,453.29 $ 51,875.61 $ 168,509.79
2019 $ 406,200.07 $ 27,545.34 $ 28,513.05 $ 11,747.24 $ 474,005.70
2020 $ 171,367.81 $ 16,328.09 $ 46,405.20 $ 12,885.77 $ 246,986.87
2021 $ 264,910.77 $ 4,780.28 $ 8,571.53 $ 19,094.67 $ 297,357.25
Total $ 1,302,259.38 $ 204,247.37 $ 390,862.47 $ 215,893.19 $ 2,113,262.41
Relative
Percentage 62% 10% 18% 10% 100%
Based on the net average reduction in fund balance and adding to it the new contract
with Housekeys to fully manage the BMR program, the HTF is continuing its decrease.
Below is a chart that identifies the continuing decline of the HTF fund balance. The
amounts are based on the average net reduction amount and the contract, offset by the
BEGIN and CALHOME subsidies based on averages since program inception. The use
of the averages is the reason for the relative straight line in decline. It is likely that there
will be variability each year, though impossible to know how much. Overall, the HTF is
anticipated to be fully expended in Fiscal Year 2029.
The projected decline is slightly steeper than the previous ten years’ history, the annual
expenditure increased by approximately $180,000 per year from the Housekeys
10.3.b
Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: October 18, 2021 Housing Trust Fund Fiscal Health Staff Report (3620 : HTF Fiscal Health and Recommendations)
contract, with the first two years higher ($270,000 and $210,000, respectively) per the
adopted contract.
This decrease was already being experienced before the City engaged any contractual
services from Housekeys, as they entered the service of the City in 2017. The program
by its nature has been seeing a steady decrease. As can be seen by the expenditures,
the HTF funds are not being reinvested into new BMR units. This is likely because the
original structure of the program did not require the City to reinvest the funds, as South
County Housing was the investment mechanism.
Exploration of Options
The slow depletion of the HTF identifies that this fund is in need of a strategically
planned approach to its operations for the long term. While the funding was being
received from BMR houses that were being constructed and sold from outside partners,
the City has not yet developed a business plan for this fund and its purposes to become
sustainable, or even if it is to be drawn completely down. This is likely due to the
relatively recent closure of the two non-profit organizations that oversaw development of
the assets. Staff is currently working to develop options for Council to consider. Some of
these options include:
• Maintaining the status quo and allowing the funds to be depleted in support of
housing public service grants. Under this approach, the funding for the p ublic
service agencies would become diminished in Fiscal Year 2028 and 2029 when
the funding is exhausted. These public service agencies would need to identify
their own replacement funding over the next seven to eight years.
• Identify and structure a replenishment program. This may come in the form of
decisions at the end of each fiscal year to identify a portion of any savings from
the General Fund. Council would then determine an amount that may be
allocated to the HTF to sustain the fund for public service grants to continue
further into the future.
• Revise the uses of the funds to only be used to reinvest program income from
HTF equity share payments into homebuying assistance with deed restrictions on
new loans, with the same equity share structure. This would have the fund return
to a revolving fund, investing and reinvesting in cycles as houses sell.
Staff is also working with Housekeys to determine how the other agencies they work for
structure their programs, and any recommendations that they may have. As staff
compiles options, the next cycle of CDBG/HTF public service grants will be advertised.
Should Council determine that the public service grants should end, having one more
cycle would give these agencies a year to find alternative funding source s. If Council
determines to continue the public service grants, then the program would be able to
continue uninterrupted. Ultimately, Council determines which, if any, public service
10.3.b
Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: October 18, 2021 Housing Trust Fund Fiscal Health Staff Report (3620 : HTF Fiscal Health and Recommendations)
grants from the HTF are granted in any given year through the annual process. Staff will
continue to compile options for a presentation in the first quarter of calendar year 2022.
ALTERNATIVES
None – this is an informational item.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
None – this is an informational item.
CONCLUSION
Over the past ten years, the HTF has seen declining fund balances year-over-year
except for 2020. Staff is gathering information and options for Council to consider
regarding the future of this funding, and the impacts on the various programs. Staff will
be returning to Council in the first quarter of 2022 with options and impact analysis. Until
then, staff is planning to proceed with the CDBG/HTF public services grant program
applications as has been normally conducted, and bring them to Council for
consideration.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will be continuing to refine analysis on this issue and return to Council with policy
recommendations to consider in the first quarter of 2022. Administration and the
Community Development Departments will commence the planning and advertisement
process for the next public service grant application cycle for Council consideration in
the next calendar year.
10.3.b
Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: October 18, 2021 Housing Trust Fund Fiscal Health Staff Report (3620 : HTF Fiscal Health and Recommendations)
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Council Discussion Regarding a Potential Policy for Receiving
Donations for Display at City Facilities
Meeting Date: February 28, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis
Prepared By: Bryce Atkins
Strategic Plan Goals
☐ Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization
☐ Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
☐ Promote Economic
Development
Activities
☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All
☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
Council discussion and provide direction.
POLICY DISCUSSION
Does the City Council wish to create and enact a policy for accepting gifts and
donations that are intended to be displayed publicly at City facilities, and if so what
elements or conditions does Council wish to include within such a policy?
BACKGROUND
At the September 13, 2021 regular City Council meeting, the Gilroy 150th Celebration
Committee (“Committee”) unveiled their time capsule, offering the donation of the time
capsule to the City. The time capsule was displayed in the City Council Chambers after
it was presented; however, ultimately the gift rescinded by the Committee. At its
September 20, 2021 regular meeting, there was a Council-initiated future agenda
10.4
Packet Pg. 255
request to discuss the possibility of a policy for accepting gifts and donations that are
intended to be displayed publicly at City facilities.
ANALYSIS
This agenda item is the return to Council for the dis cussion of Council’s interest in
having a gift receiving policy for items to be displayed at City Hall and other City
facilities. In staff’s research, there are many cities in California that have policies
regarding donations in general, with some including more specific inclusions such as
capital items. Most of them are not specific about the nature of an item to be displayed
publicly. They typically have public art policies for items that are being solicited by the
City, but the solicitation would determine the nature of the display. Policies were
discovered that are available for donations that are to specific item requests. Many of
those policies found were for city libraries, park benches, trees, memorial plaques, and
other specific donations.
There are some cities that do include unsolicited donations in their donation policies, but
they typically do not reach the level of specifics regarding a list of the items, or of the
nature of the items, that are to be accepted or rejected. They usually identify the specific
internal processes for how to process a donation or gift, who accepts it, how recognition
for the donation is being administered, ethics protections, and other administrative
processes. Several of these are attached to this staff report.
However, there are a few (also attached to this staff report) that do discuss the
acceptability of a donation or gift, though not specific to items for public display. These
usually state that the items are to meet, and not violate, the city’s vision, mission,
values, and strategic purposes. A few have requirements that the donation shall not be
an item of an illegal, discriminatory, religious, political, or other controversial nature,
similar to language included in other City of Gilroy policies, such as the flag flying policy.
Other conditions include having limits on the cost of maintaining the donations if not
monetary, or the outright prohibition of items that would incur cost for the City to
maintain.
Ultimately, it is up to the Council regarding its interest to set a specific criterion for the
acceptance or rejection of donations intended for public display.
Also attached is the City’s Public Art Policy, however there is not much included in
determining the acceptability of an unsolicited art donation for display.
ALTERNATIVES
None – this is a Council-initiated agenda item to discuss the potential of developing a
gift receiving policy for items intended to be displayed at City facilities.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
None – this is a discussion item. There is no anticipated fiscal impact for the adoption of
such a policy.
10.4
Packet Pg. 256
CONCLUSION
Council may determine what conditions it wishes to implement related to the City
receiving gifts and donations from residents and others intended to be displayed at City
facilities. This agenda item is to provide an initial discussion regarding Council’s desire
to adopt a policy, and if desired to provide direction to staff to craft a draft policy to bring
back to Council for review and possible approval.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will take direction from Council and will return with a draft policy, incorporating any
components Council directs to include.
Attachments:
1. Policy - City of Dublin, CA
2. Policy - City of Evanston, IL
3. Policy - City of Lynwood, CA
4. Policy - City of Mendota, CA
5. Policy - City of San Jose, CA
6. Policy - City of Oceanside, CA
7. PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018)
10.4
Packet Pg. 257
10.4.a
Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Policy - City of Dublin, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
10.4.a
Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Policy - City of Dublin, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
10.4.a
Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Policy - City of Dublin, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
Donation Policy for the City of Evanston
1. Objective and Purpose
1.1 Objective
Donations of every type are offered to the City of Evanston for general or specific purposes.
This policy will guide the review and acceptance of such donations, confirm that the City has
relevant and adequate resources to manage such donations, and ensure that the City
appropriately acknowledges the generosity of the donor. Partnership opportunities for
donations for community benefits should respect relevant legislative and policy provisions and
occur within an ethical framework that preserves the integrity of municipal decision making
processes.
2. The purpose of this policy is to:
Establish guidelines that ensure donations occur at arm’s length from any City decision -
making process;
Provide criteria and process for the acceptance of donations; and
Confer upon Department Heads the delegated authority to accept and spend donations,
within the parameters contained herein; and
Give the City the ability to accept donations that meet its needs and capacity to
maintain.
3. Scope
The policy on voluntary donations to the City for community benefit includes donations made
to the City, its agencies, boards and commissions, and donations requested or encouraged by
staff directed to other organizations or community agencies. The City of Evanston desires to
encourage donations, while at the same time considering fiscal impacts and on -going
maintenance and operational costs. While this policy predominantly focuses on material
donations, this policy should be considered to have broad applicability for unseen future
donations.
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
3.1 Definitions
“Donations” are cash, tangible property, or in-kind contributions which provide assistance to
the City. Donations do not constitute a business relations hip since no reciprocal consideration is
sought. Donations generally qualify for a tax receipt .
“Gifts” are any gratuity, discount, entertainment, hospitality, loan, forbearance, or other
tangible or intangible item having monetary vale including, but not limited to, cash, food and
drink, and honoraria for speaking engagements related to or attributable to government
employment or the official position of an officer or employee.
3.2 Donations
Examples of Donations:
Memorials: trees, park benches, plaques
Monetary: anything towards foundations within the City, various departments,
fundraisers, discount deals from local business and charities affiliated with the City.
Artwork: separate policy requirements added to this general policy under Artwork
donations.
3.3 Donation Process
a. Complete Donation Form.
Select type of donation.
Enter amount of donation.
Enter other relevant details
Enter honoree or commemoration.
b. Submit Form to the Department relevant to the Donation type.
c. Department Head will consider the donation and, if required, will forward the donation
proposal to the City Council for consideration and approval.
d. If the Department Head or City Council approves the donation, staff will contact donor
to schedule donation installation and other details.
e. Donation installation occurs.
4. Accepting Donations
4.1 The City may elect to accept or decline any donation. If the gift i s not accepted, the
donor will be advised of the reason.
4.2 Staff will prepare a quarterly report to the City Council regarding all City donations. Any
donations exceeding $25,000 will require City Council action for acceptance.
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
5. General Conditions:
5.1 No advantage is to accrue to the donor or to any person not dealing at arm’s length to the
donor as a result of the donation.
5.2 Donations cannot confer a personal benefit to any City employee or City Official.
5.3 Donations that violate City code or City policies, or the laws, state or federal laws, of the
other orders of government will not be accepted by the City.
6. Eligible Uses
6.1 Eligible donations are those that support approved programs and services, durable
assets; capital facilities or projects; asset improvement, restoration or capital maintenance; or
cash for such purposes.
6.2 Donations must be for purposes consistent with the receiving Departments’ mandate,
programs, services and activities and must be deemed to be in the public interest of the City.
6.3 Donations are only to be accepted if the receiving Department has the capacity to meet
the initial and ongoing costs and obligations associated with the gift.
6.4 Donors who wish to make donations that support special purposes to be provided by an
organization independent of the City should be directed, where po ssible, to the intended
organization.
7. Ineligible Donors:
7.1 The City may decline donations from any donor who in the opinion of a Department
Head under delegated authority, represents a reputational risk to the City through involvement
in activities that are contrary to the values of the City or otherwise is in violation with City code
as outlined in Section 5.3. Examples of ineligible donors include but are not limited to:
Arms manufacturers;
A party, committee, association, fund, or other organization (regardless of
incorporation) that is required to file a statement of organization with the state
board of elections or a county clerk under the Election Code;
Any person or organization currently seeking official action by any officer or
employee of the City;
Any person or organization whose activities are regulated by an officer or employee
of the City;
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
Any person or organization that has interests that may be substantially affected by
the performance or nonperformance of the official duties of an officer or employee
of the City;
Any person or organization that is required to be registered with the secretary of
state under the lobbyist registration act;
Proven or suspected criminal organizations; and
Organizations that promote hatred against individuals or groups.
The City may not accept donations from individuals or organizations involved in litigation
with the City.
8. Authority to Accept and Spend Cash Donation
8.1 Donations of cash designated for a specific purpose will only be accepted by the City
Manager or designee, and where any donations exceeding $25,000 will require City Council
approval of acceptance or allowance to spend.
8.2 Where cash donations are being accumulated for a major project or fundraising campaign
will require City Council action before an acceptance of the cash donation.
8.3 Unsolicited cash donations that remain unspent at the end of the year may be carried over
to the following budget year only upon City Council approval.
9. Costs Associated with the Proposed Donation:
9.1 The City also has an interest in knowing in advance the full cost that may be associated with
a donation, namely those which may relate to purchase, installation, maintenance and
operation during the gift’s expected life cycle. In the ordinary course the amount of the
donation should be sufficient to cover all such expenses.
a. Neither purchase nor installation shall commence until the donor’s donation has been
completed and funds have been received by the City for such purposes.
b. As to donations requiring on-going operation and maintenance, amounts which are
estimated to exceed $5,000 on an annual basis, the donation shall include an
endowment sufficient to cover them, i.e. 20x the estimated amounts.
In rare and unusual circumstances where the City has determined that the value of the
donation substantially exceeds the cost associated therewith, these requirements may be
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
waived, but only after appropriate. If the donor elects to not provide sufficient funds for future
maintenance and repair, the City may reject the donation.
10. Procedure Approvals
General:
10.1 Donations will not be accepted by any party, including a group, organization, company
or person or any individual belonging to a group or organization or company with a pending
application or matter before any City’s Boards or Commissions.
11. Procurement Decisions:
11.1 Voluntary donations for community benefits may not be solicited and offers may not
be made by or accepted from a bidder, proponent or applicant to procurement, or their
representative, concurrent to the procurement solicitation and award process.
11.2 The City shall not accept donations that are conditional upon the endorsement of any
product, service or supplier. Current and prospective suppliers to the City that decline
solicitations for donations shall not be penalized in procurement decisions of the City.
Artwork Donation
12. Conditions Governing the Donation of Artwork to the City of Evanston
Potential donors of artwork must submit the following information to the Public Art
Subcommittee for review. The Committee shall determine the feasibility of the proposed
donation and shall forward a recommendation to the Evanston Arts Council for review. If the
Evanston Arts Council recommends acceptance of the proposed artwork, it well then go to the
Human Services Committee and the City Council for approval or denial. If the host site is the
Evanston Public Library, the Library Collections Committee will manage the review process.1
12.1 Materials to be submitted by Donor:
a. photographs and/or slides of the work of art which depict it from all sides2
b. a written description of the artwork, including approximate dimensions (height, width,
depth and weight), materials used, and any frames, backings, mounts or anchoring
systems to be used in the installation of the artwork.
1 This is synthesized text between the City of Richmond, CA document and the third item under “Donation of
Existing Works of Art” section of the “guidelines for public art projects or donations” document.
2 material in original policy
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
c. Verification of authenticity (if applicable). 3
d. A site plan which identifies and describes the proposed site for the artwork and which
accurately depicts the artwork in relationship to the surrounding environment
e. A written description and/or drawing of the proposed method of installation and a
timeline for the transportation and installation of the artwork.
f. An estimated cost for transporting and installing the artwork (to be done at donor’s
expense, unless otherwise agreed to by the City).
g. Written authorization from the City department with jurisdiction over the site,
approving the installation of the artwork.
12.2 Review and Acceptance Criteria; Proposed gifts of artwork shall be evaluated on the
following criteria:
a. An analysis of the relationship of the proposed artwork to its proposed location, and its
relevance to its primary audience.
b. An evaluation of the work’s aesthetic quality, relative to its fo rm, materials and
craftsmanship;
c. The availability and appropriateness of an acceptable site for the artwork.
d. An analysis of the financial impact of the proposed gift on the Public Art Program,
including costs related to the insuring of the artwork and to any long -term maintenance
or conservation costs.
e. An analysis of the impact of the proposed gift on other City dep artments, to include any
routine operations or maintenance requirements.
12.3 Conditions of Acceptance
a. The Public Art Subcommittee and Evanston Arts Council encourage clear and
unrestricted gifts to the City of Evanston. Any conditions or restrictions atta ched to a gift
or loan must be represented to the Public Art Subcommittee for review and to the City
Council for approval.4 No work of art will be accepted with conditions deemed
unacceptable by the Public Art Subcommittee or the City Council, nor will any work of
art be accepted with a condition guaranteed to be kept in perpetuity.
b. A legal document of transmittal, transferring title or loan of the artwork, and defining
the rights and responsibilities of all parties, must accompany all gifts of artwork.
3 material in original policy (other materials listed above added from City of Richmond Document)
4 Should this follow the same PAC, Arts Council, Human Services Committee, City Council path?
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
c. The City of Evanston requires that the creator of the artwork (artist) waive any right to
the preservation of the artwork under the conditions set forth in the 1990 Visual Artist’s
Rights Act. The artist may, however, retain any right to disclaim authorship o f the
artwork pursuant to and these Acts. Before any gift is accepted by the City, the artist
must acknowledge in writing his/her approval that the City may remove and/or destroy
the artwork at its discretion. Should the City decide to remove or destroy th e artwork,
the City will provide the artist with 30 days’ notice of its intent to the last known address
of the artist. The artist may, upon written approval by the City and at his/her own
expense, remove and retain the artwork in lieu of its being destroy ed by the City.
13 Donations of Personal or Real Property
13.1 Donations of real property to the City or its agencies, boards and commissions may only
be accepted with the prior approval of City Council, which is to include approval of the budget
for any future or ongoing obligations arising from the donation.
13.2 Where appropriate, approval of a donation of real property is to include the use and
disposition of the real property including the net proceeds arising from a property transaction.
13.3 Donations of real property to the City or its agencies, boards and commissions,
whether designated for specific purposes or not, will be held in the name of the City.
13.4 Donations of personal property will also be reviewed and considered by t his policy and
subject to approval by the appropriate department head.
14. Managing and Reporting Donations
14.1. Offers or proposals for donations are to be referred to the appropriate Division
directly.
14.2. In an effort to cultivate an ongoing relationship with donors, the receiving Division is
to:
a. Treat individual donors’ names and amounts given, and any other private or personal
information, with respect and, except where the donor authorizes release of such
information, with confidentiality to the extent provided by the law;
b. Reasonably limit the frequency of solicitations; and
c. Respond promptly to a donor’s question or complaint.
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
15. Acknowledgements, Forms and Receipts
15.1 The City is committed to the highest standards of donor stewardship and
accountability. This includes appropriate acknowledgement and recognition for donations.
Accordingly, for donations valued at $100 or more, a formal letter of acknowledgement and
gratitude will be sent to the donor by the Department.
16. Documentation and Communication with Donors
16.1 All donations must be documented by the recipient department using the City’s
donation form(s).
a. The donation communication to donors should:
i. Convey the terms and requirements of the donation, including d onor contact
information, the purpose of the donation, the value of the donation, information
about the tax receipt, how unused funds will be dealt with and the
responsibilities of the respective parties.
ii. A statement acknowledging that the donation may be subject to the provisions
of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
16.2 When a gift is received from a donor is over $250, the recipient Department must supply
the donor with an income tax receipt.
17. Accounts
17.1 Donations designated for specific purposes or for the general purpose of a specific
program, including donations of real property and the net proceeds of any property
transaction, are to be used by the program for the purpose specified by the donor.
17.2 For purposes of financial control and accountability, donations are to be credited to
appropriate accounts of the City.
17.3 Donations may not be managed informally or held in personal or external accounts or
trust funds. This would not apply to independent community fundraising campaigns until such
time that the campaign contributions are donated to the City.
17.3 Donations of cash or property to the City, where the purpose is not specified and which
are not part of an approved fundraising initiative, are deemed to be undesignated and become
contributions to general revenue of the City or assets of the Cit y, unless the recipient
Department seeks council approval for the requested purpose.
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
***Applications for donations are below***
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
ART DONATION FORM
Donor Information
Name:
Address: City: ZIP:
Phone: Email:
Art Work
Artist:
Title of Artwork:
Dimension (H x W x D):
Size:
Media:
Price or Value/NFS:
Creation Date:
Current Condition of Artwork:
Written Description of Artwork:
Required Maintenance & Cost of Artwork:
Installation and Proposal of Artwork (Site/Location):
Estimated Cost of Transportation & Installation (If Any):
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
*Uploads Acceptable: pictures, valuation, and verification of authenticity
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
Miscellaneous Donation Form
Donor Information
Name:
Address: City: ZIP:
Phone: Email:
Date of Donation:
Donation Value:
Type of Donation:
If Monetary Donation, Amount:
Department for Donation:
Description of Donation:
Authorized Signature: Date:
(Department Signature)
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
APPLICATION FORM Dedication of a tree in the Memorial
Section of the Ladd Arboretum
Donations for existing memorial trees that have not been dedicated are based on the following
scale:
SHADE & FLOWERING TREES EVERGREENS
6” trunk diameter ......................... 300.00 8-10 feet ........................... 300.00
7” trunk diameter ......................... 350.00 10 feet and up................... 400.00
8” trunk diameter ......................... 400.00
It is also possible to add tree varieties not currently available in the arboretum. Note that there is limited
space available for new memorial trees. Donations for new memorial trees are based on the following
scale:
SHADE & FLOWERING TREES*
2 – 2 1/2” trunk diameter................................ 500.00
Check one: Plant tree of your choice
Please call to discuss type of tree to add
Once you have made your selection, a name plate will be placed near the trunk of the tree you
select. The name plate will be arranged as follows:
Please indicate the manner in which you want the name to appear on the plate. A maximum of twenty -
one spaces are available. This includes periods and spaces between first and last names. Some
samples of names are: Mary P. Jones; George J. Adams; Ruth Walters. Please print the name on
the line below exactly the way you would like it to appear on the name plate.
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ __
(21 space
maximum)
1) Botanical name of the tree (i.e. Acer rubrum)
2) Common name of tree (i.e. Red Maple)
3) Name of person to whom the tree is dedicated
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
Name of Donor:
__________________________________________________________________
City/State/Zip:
___________________________________________________________________
Daytime phone:
(___)_______________________________________________________________
Email address:
__________________________________________________________________
Make checks payable to “City of Evanston”. Remember gifts are deductible for
Federal Income Tax purposes.
Mail check and this form to: City of Evanston – Forestry Division
2100 Ridge Avenue
Evanston, IL 60201
Attention: Memorial Tree
Dedication of a Memorial Bench at City of Evanston Parks and Lakefront
Donations for existing benches that have not been dedicated are:
$4,500.00
Donations for a new bench are:
$6,000.00
Once you have made your selection, a name plate will be placed on the bench.
Please indicate the manner in which you want the name to appear on the plate. A
maximum of three lines with twenty-one spaces each are available. This includes
periods and spaces between first and last names. Some samples of names are:
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
Mary P. Jones; George J. Adams; Ruth Walters. Please print the name on the
lines below exactly the way you would like them to appear on the name plate.
(21 space maximum)
Location of
Bench:_____________________________________________________________
Name of
Donor:_______________________________________________________________
City/State/Zip:__________________________________________________________
Phone: ( )_____________________
Email address: _____________________________________
Make checks payable to “City of Evanston”. Remember gifts are deductible for
Federal Income Tax purposes.
Mail check and this form to: City of Evanston – Greenways Division
2100 Ridge Avenue
Evanston, IL 60201
Attention: Memorial Bench
~ If you have any questions regarding Memorial trees or benches,
please contact (847) 448-4311 ~
10.4.b
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Policy - City of Evanston, IL (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
2/21/22, 6:44 PM Section 6-7 GRANTS, DONATIONS AND GIFTS TO THE CITY:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Lynwood/html/Lynwood06/Lynwood0607.html 1/3
6-7 GRANTS, DONATIONS AND GIFTS TO THE CITY:
6-7.1 Definitions:
Donation or donations means presentation by third parties of any tangible or intangible asset including gi s,
in whatever condition, the city is prepared to accept pursuant to the policy set forth herein and administrative
guidelines promulgated pursuant to this section.
Donor means an individual or legal entity making a gi or donation to the city.
Gi or gi s means the voluntary transfer of property, real or personal, including money or marketable
securities, from a third party to the city or any of the cityʼs departments or constituent entities such as the
Lynwood Information, Inc., or the Lynwood public finance authority.
Grant means funding provided by third parties, public and private entities, available to the city through an
application process, and when applied for pursuant to city council authorizations, and funded by the party
o ering the grant, permits the city to spend the approved funding under conditions set forth in the grant
program application or established by the funding source.
Intended use when applied to gi s or donation means the direction or limitation placed upon a gi or
donation donor which the city must agree to as a condition of acceptance and use of the gi or donation.
Restricted account means the account or accounts into which the city deposits the gi or donation.
Restrictions means the condition or conditions placed upon a gi or donation by the donor and/or any
limitation on the use of a gi or donation to the city placed on said item by the donor that impairs the ability of
the city to dispose of or use the gi or donation in any manner it determines appropriate.
Segregation of funds means the cityʼs record keeping means and management program that will maintain as
separately identifiable the gi s or donations until their use by the city. (Ord. #1587, §1)
6-7.2 Purpose:
The city council of the city of Lynwood hereby finds that there are individuals and entities willing to make
resources available to the city to provide for the delivery of programs or services to its residents. When made
available to the city, such resources enhance the cityʼs ability to serve the needs of its residents and businesses
alike. The clear and transparent management of gi s or donations serves to encourage donorsʼ continued
participation in charitable endeavors. To provide for the e ective management of such resources and
encourage the contributions of the same to the city, the city hereby adopts the policy set forth in this section.
(Ord. #1587, §1)
6-7.3 Solicitation Of Gi s Or Donations:
a. There shall be no solicitation of gi s or donations by any city sta except pursuant to the following
guidelines:
1. Solicitations for gi s or donations may be made only by department directors or their designated
sta .
10.4.c
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Policy - City of Lynwood, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
2/21/22, 6:44 PM Section 6-7 GRANTS, DONATIONS AND GIFTS TO THE CITY:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Lynwood/html/Lynwood06/Lynwood0607.html 2/3
2. Solicitations for gi s or donations may only be made for special programs or functions administered
by the department making the solicitation. No solicitation shall be made by the city for gi s or donations
intended to benefit a single individual.
3. Department directors may not authorize sta or engage in solicitation for gi s and donations without
prior notification and authorization from the city manager.
b. All solicitations must comply with the cityʼs administrative guidelines to be promulgated by the city
manager following the adoption of this section and in advance of any solicitation or acceptance of gi s or
donations authorized by this section. (Ord. #1587, §1)
6-7.4 Acceptance Of Gi s And Donations:
a. Gi s or donations provided to the city free of any restrictions may be accepted by city employees
authorized by their department directors to do so provided the gi s or donations are not restricted in any way
or, if restricted, the restriction on the use of the gi s or donations is limited to the intended use for which the
solicitation was made pursuant to a city council approved program.
b. All funds accepted by the city as a result of solicitation for gi s or donations shall be deposited into a
restricted account in the city treasury. At all times there shall be segregation of funds pursuant to
administrative guidelines providing that any limitation on or use of received funds will be met and such
compliance will be verifiable.
c. Unrestricted gi s or donations in any amount designated for specific programs established by council
action shall not require further action by council for acceptance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, gi s or
donations of real property or any estate in real property may only be accepted pursuant to applicable state
law, including, but not limited to, the requirement of a resolution of acceptance passed by the legislative body
pursuant to Government Code section 27281.
d. The city council shall receive quarterly reports from the city manager or his/her designee on all gi s or
donations received. Such reports shall contain the following information:
1. The amount of each gi or donation and the date of receipt;
2. The name of the department director or designee who solicited the gi or donation;
3. The name of the donor;
4. An explanation of any restrictions placed on the gi or donation or the expenditure or allocation of
the funds and increases derived therefrom, and compliance, if any should be required, with conditions or
restrictions on the funds received;
5. Such other information as the city may prescribe in its administrative guidelines. (Ord. #1587, §1)
6-7.5 Allocation, Expenditure And Use Of Funds:
No action by the city council shall be required for the allocation, expenditure or use of gi s or donations
provided the same are used for the purpose designated by the donor, and the total amount of funds in
question for a specific program does not exceed fi een thousand dollars ($15,000.00) in any one fiscal year. In
the event the proposed total of funds to be allocated and spent exceeds fi een thousand dollars ($15,000.00)
in any one fiscal year, the proposed allocation or expenditure of funds shall be presented to the city council for
action. (Ord. #1587, §1)
6-7.6 Grant Funding:
10.4.c
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Policy - City of Lynwood, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
2/21/22, 6:44 PM Section 6-7 GRANTS, DONATIONS AND GIFTS TO THE CITY:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Lynwood/html/Lynwood06/Lynwood0607.html 3/3
The city may apply for funding from any type of available grant. The city manager or his designee shall
approve applications for grants in all instances except in cases where the grant conditions require city council
approval before presenting the grant application to the funding source. Use of grant funds shall be at all times
consistent with funding conditions and shall be done under the supervision and direction of the city manager
except in cases where the conditions of the grant require city council approval before the funds may be used.
In cases involving the allocation of more than fi een thousand dollars ($15,000.00) for a program in any one
fiscal year, city council approval must be had prior to the use of the funds in question. (Ord. #1587, §1)
The Lynwood Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 1734, passed April 23, 2020.
Disclaimer: The City Clerk's O ice has the o icial version of the Lynwood Municipal Code. Users should contact the City
Clerk's O ice for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above.
City Website: http://www.lynwood.ca.us/ City Telephone: (310) 603-0220 ext. 210
Code Publishing Company
10.4.c
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Policy - City of Lynwood, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
Enacted on: 4/12/2011 Enacted by: The Mendota City Council
City of Mendota
Administrative Policy
Donation Acceptance and Procedures
INTRODUCTION:
In the past, the City of Mendota has received a series of donations, particularly in
the arena of public safety, general donations, food, and also has acted as a proxy
trustee to receive donations on behalf of coalitions and interest groups deemed
acting in the interest of the community as a whole. The amounts have varied,
and in this time of economic upheaval and local governments being in the news
regarding financial matters, this policy is meant to formalize the process of
receiving donations, and how they are to be handled.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this Administrative Regulation (“Regulation”) is intended to
provide direction to City employees regarding the acceptance of donations by
the City from donors.
DEFINITIONS:
“Donation or Donations” means presentation by third parties of any tangible or
intangible asset including gifts, in whatever condition, the City is prepared to
accept pursuant to the policy set forth herein and administrative guidelines
promulgated pursuant to this policy.
“Donor” means an individual or legal entity making a gift or donation to the City .
“Gift or Gifts” means the voluntary transfer of property, real or personal,
including money or marketable securities, from a third party to the City or any of
the City’s Departments or constituent entities, such as the Mendota
Redevelopment Agency or Mendota Public Financing Authority.
10.4.d
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Policy - City of Mendota, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
Enacted on: 4/12/2011 Enacted by: The Mendota City Council
“Intended Use” when applied to gifts or donations, means the direction or
limitation placed upon a gift or donation by the donor which the City must agree
to as a condition of acceptance and use of the gift or donation.
“Proxy or Trustee” means the City fulfilling the role of accepting and securing of
donations or gifts on behalf of a third party, approved by Council action, to be
utilized in accordance with the intended use of both the donor and the third
party.
“Restricted Account” means the account or accounts into which the City
deposits the gift or donation.
“Restrictions” means the condition or conditions placed upon a gift or donation
by the donor and/or any limitation on the use of a gift or donation to the City
placed on said item by the donor that impairs the ability of the City to dispose of
or use the gift or donation in any manner it determines appropriate.
POLICY:
1. Requirements for Accepting Donations or Gifts
a) The donation or gift must have a purpose consistent with City goals and objectives.
b) The City may decline any donation or gift without comment or cause.
c) The donation or gift will not be in conflict with any provision of the law.
d) Any non-cash donation or gift will be aesthetically acceptable to the City.
e) The donation or gift will not add to the City’s workload unless it provides a net
benefit to the City.
f) The donation or gift will not bring hidden costs such as starting a program the City
would be unwilling to fund when the donation is exhausted .
g) The donation or gift places no restriction on the City, unless agreed to by the City
Manager or Council.
h) The donation or gift shall become property of the City.
i) All donations or gifts will receive recognition appropriate to the level and nature of
the donation, as determined by the City. For those of a capital nature, that may be in
the form of signage, marking, naming, or any other means the City should deem
appropriate. Any naming of parks and recreation facilities shall be consistent with
City policy on the naming of such facilities. Regardless of the recognition strategy
selected, the intent shall be to appropriately honor the donor for their contribution
to the community. The appearance of traditional commercial advertising shall be
avoided.
j) Donations or gifts exceeding $5,000 shall be accepted through a written agreement
consistent with the procedures herein. In-kind capital donations will be subject to
normal City review, permitting, inspection, and insurance requirements.
k) All information regarding a donor or donors and their respective donation(s) or
gift(s) are public information, and are subject to disclosure pursuant to the California
Public Records Act.
2. Procedures for Accepting Donations or Gifts
10.4.d
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Policy - City of Mendota, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
Enacted on: 4/12/2011 Enacted by: The Mendota City Council
a) Donations or gifts under $5,000.00.
i) For donations or gifts that are under $5,000.00, the City Manager must approve
of receiving the donation before it can be accepted.
ii) If the donation or gift is appropriate, the City Manager or their designee must
complete a report, given to the Finance Department, which contains the
following information:
A) The amount of each gift or donation, if non-monetary, the estimated value
must be listed.
B) The date of receipt of donation or gift.
C) The name of the Employee, Department, or individual or entity that solicited
the donation or gift; if applicable.
D) The name of the donor.
E) An explanation of any restrictions placed on the donation or gift or the
expenditure or allocation of any funds and increases derived thereof, and
compliance, if any should be required, with conditions or restrictions on the
funds received.
F) Such other information as the City may prescribe in its a dministrative
guidelines.
iii) An inappropriate donation is one that meets one of the criteria below:
A) Any donation that would violate the requirements of Section 1 of this policy.
B) Any donation that may be of offensive or morally questionable material.
C) Any donation that is connected with a restriction that entails special
consideration or favors beyond any other resident, donating or non-
donating, as it pertains to activities or functions undertaken by the City in the
provision of services or goods.
D) Any other concern, real or perceived, that may result in a loss of reputation,
appearance of impropriety, or other negative impact on the City from
accepting the donation or gift.
iv) Monetary donations will be deposited to the fund in which the intended use of
the donation is to be achieved. This money shall be placed into a restricted fund
in the Department’s budget responsible to achieve said intended use.
v) The City Manager or designee shall determine the appropriate recognition, if
donation or gift is accepted, for the donor(s).
b) Donations or gifts at or over $5,000.00
i) For donations or gifts that are at or over $5,000.00, the gift or donation must be
approved by City Council action for acceptance of receiving the donation before
it can be received by City staff.
ii) If the donation or gift is appropriate, the City Manager or designee must
complete a report, given to the City Council as an action item at a public Council
Meeting, which contains the following information:
A) The amount of each proposed donation or gift, if non-monetary, the
estimated value must be listed.
B) The date of offering of the proposed donation or gift.
C) The name of the Employee, Department, or individual or entity that solicited
the proposed donation or gift; if applicable.
D) The name of the proposed donor.
10.4.d
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Policy - City of Mendota, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
Enacted on: 4/12/2011 Enacted by: The Mendota City Council
E) An explanation of any restrictions placed on the proposed donation or gift or
the expenditure or allocation of any funds and increases derived thereof, and
compliance, if any should be required, with conditions or restrictions on the
funds received.
F) Such other information as need by Council to make an informed decision
regarding the acceptance of the proposed donation or gift.
iii) In consideration, the City Council shall evaluate the prospective donation or gift
with the following criteria to determine any donations or gifts that are
unacceptable:
A) Any donation or gift that would violate the requirements of Section 1 of this
policy.
B) Any donation or gift that may be of offensive or morally questionable
material.
C) Any donation or gift that is connected with a restriction that entails special
consideration or favors beyond any other resident, donating or non-
donating, as it pertains to activities or functions undertaken by the City in the
provision of services or goods.
D) Any other concern, real or perceived, that may result in a loss of reputation,
appearance of impropriety, or other negative impact on the City from
accepting the donation or gift.
iv) Monetary donations will be deposited to the fund in which the intended use of
the donation is to be achieved. This money shall be placed into a restricted fund
in the Department’s budget responsible to achieve said intended use.
v) The City Council shall determine the appropriate recognition, if donation or gift is
accepted, for the donor(s).
3. Donations or Gifts Collection by Proxy or Trustee
a) The City may accept gifts as a proxy or trustee as long as the following conditions are
met:
i) The proposed third party to receive donations and gifts through the City as proxy
or trustee shall have submitted a formal statement of intent to the City Manager
or designee. The statement of intent shall include:
A) A declaration of the intended use of said solicited donations or gifts.
B) A declaration as to the reason why the third party is unable or unwilling to
receive the donations or gifts directly.
C) For non-501(C)3 non-profit organizations, a listing of references of the entity
of sufficient number and reputation to satisfactorily verify the third party’s
interests, abilities, and established ethical and moral nature.
D) Detailed contact information for the entity’s principal member and executive
staff, where applicable.
E) The nature and function of the entity.
F) The background of the entity.
G) Any information that is requested by the City Manager or designee as a
follow-up to information or questions arising out of the statement of intent.
ii) A formalized, legally binding agreement is established and approved by Council
and any governing board or individual of the third party entity. Such an
agreement shall include, but not be limited to:
A) The length of the agreement.
10.4.d
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Policy - City of Mendota, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
Enacted on: 4/12/2011 Enacted by: The Mendota City Council
B) The nature of the donations or gifts to be received.
C) The amount of donations or gifts to be received.
D) The criteria of what makes an acceptable donation or gift vs. an unacceptable
donation or gift.
E) A detailed procedure for the acceptance, handling, retaining, and distribution
of the donations or gifts.
F) A hold harmless, indemnification, legal defense, and damages covered clause
which is of sufficient authority and language to protect the City of Mendota
from any claims, litigation, or other damages that may arise out of any phase
or activity that may be called for in the agreement.
G) Any other protections, insurances, or other such contract language as
deemed necessary or advisable by the City Attorney, the City’s Risk
Management Authority, or any other regulatory agency that does or may
have authority over the actions as detailed in the agreement.
iii) Any gifts or donations received by the City shall be determined to be property of
the third party entity, and shall be responsible for the provision of insurances of
said property, and is responsible for the disposition of any such donation or gift.
10.4.d
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Policy - City of Mendota, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
City of San José, California
COUNCIL POLICY
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
1 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
EFFECTIVE DATE March 23, 2004 REVISED DATE August 21, 2012
APPROVED BY COUNCIL ACTION 3/23/2004, Item 10.2, Res. No. 72014;
6/23/2009, Item 2.41(b)(2), Res. No. 75051; 8/21/2012, Item 3.3, Res. No. 76396
PURPOSE
To encourage and support departments in the development of partnerships to aid in
revenue generation and Fundraising and Sponsorship efforts that are consistent with
existing City policies, procedures and applicable laws.
BACKGROUND
The City of San José has a tradition of creative and innovative solutions that sustains
ongoing services for our residents; the City continues to look for ways in which Public-
Private Partnerships provide Donations, funding and volunteer assistance to support
and enhance City services.
POLICY
It is the Policy of San José to encourage and support individual Departments and City-
related foundations to pursue Donations, Sponsorships and other Fundraising activities
with the purpose of creating opportunities for partnerships and enhancing revenue for
department priorities. Individual Departments, through the approval of the City Manager
and/or City Council, shall develop Sponsorship and Fundraising programs that meet the
requirements set forth in this Policy.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. This policy is intended to establish a framework to direct the City Departments and
the City Manager in establishing Donation, Sponsorship, and Fundraising programs
so that the Departments may properly consider and address the different economic,
procedural and legal issues that may be associated with Donation and Sponsor
solicitation and recognition, including those related to City-related foundations.
2. This policy is intended to support the City’s ability to increase revenue and
partnerships and does not limit the City’s ability to apply for grant funding.
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
2 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
3. The City encourages the acceptance of Donations or Sponsorships if the Donation
or Sponsorship provides a significant enhancement to the City, enhances or reduces
costs the City would incur in the absence of its acceptance, or if it otherwise benefits
the City in a manner that provides a net savings to the City.
4. The City encourages Donations of materials with the understanding that such items
have a useful life. Once a Donation is accepted, it becomes City property and the
City may decide to maintain, replace or dispose of the item unless the Donation is
explicitly accepted by the City subject to restrictions.
5. Unrestricted Donations are preferable to restricted Donations.
6. Definitions of terms used in this policy are set forth below.
AUTHORITY
1. The Director of each Department shall submit to the City Manager for approval,
written Sponsorship, Donation, and/or Fundraising programs to be implemented by
Departmental staff.
2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to approve Sponsorship, Donation and/or
Fundraising programs and to issue requests for proposals to engage in similar
Donation or Sponsorship solicitation activity. City Council approval is required if any
of the following conditions are met:
a. A proposed Donation or Sponsorship is of a value or term in excess of the City
Manager’s contract authority under Chapter 4.04 of the San José Municipal
Code (including a fair market valuation of in-kind contributions);
b. A proposed Grant of any Donor or Sponsorship recognition rights has a value in
excess of amount the City Manager's contract authority as set forth in Chapter
4.04 of the San José Municipal Code; or
c. Agreement to name any City property after any individual or entity unless
expressly provided otherwise in the City Council Policy on Naming of City-
Owned Land and Facilities (Policy 7-5).
3. The City Manager may delegate authority to the Department Director to approve a
Department’s Sponsorship, Donation and/or Fundraising program which delegation
may not exceed the City Manager’s authority unless also approved by City Council.
CITY-RELATED FOUNDATIONS
Some City-related foundations have been created to facilitate additional City services
and resources through Public-Private Partnerships. The boards of the foundations have
been developed by recruiting directors with specific expertise, business connections and
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
3 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
fundraising ability. This section is intended to provide guidance to staff to evaluate
whether to accept Donations, grants, or other forms of financial or in-kind assistance
provided by City-related foundations in light of any actual or potential conflict of interest
and the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Guidelines
1. City-related foundations should develop their Donation, Sponsorship, and/or
Fundraising policies in consultation with the beneficiary City Department(s) and the
City Attorney’s Office in order to avoid any actual or potential conflict of interest or
the appearance of a conflict of interest. The Library Department’s 2004 “Guidelines
for Contributions to the City of San José and Recognition of Donors for the Library
Fundraising Campaign,” the “San José Police Foundation Conflicts of Interest
Policy,” and the “San José Parks Foundation Conflict of Interest Policy” are
incorporated by reference as conforming to this policy.
City staff shall ensure that City-related foundations develop conflict of interest
policies that are timely and conform to the guidelines as set forth below for
development of new Donation, Sponsorship, and/or Fundraising policies for City-
related foundations.
2. Directors or designees of City Departments that receive assistance from a City-
related foundation shall conduct, at a minimum, an annual review of the following:
a. The membership of the foundation’s board to determine whether the addition of a
particular person on the board raises an actual or perceived conflict;
b. Annual signed statements from each foundation board member and principal
officer affirming that such person has received, read, understands and agrees to
comply with the conflict of interest policy; and
c. The foundation’s current conflict of interest policy to determine if any material
change has been made to the policy that may affect the decision to accept
funding or any other benefit from the City-related foundation.
3. At a minimum, new Donation, Sponsorship, and/or Fundraising policies developed
for City-related foundations should set forth the following elements relating to conflict
of interest:
a. The purpose of the policy;
b. Procedures relating to the duty and opportunity of a member of the board or
employee to disclose an actual or possible conflict of interest, how the board will
determine whether a conflict of interest exists, how a conflict of interest will be
addressed, and how violations of the conflict of interest policy will be addressed;
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
4 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
c. Annual signed statements from each foundation board member and principal
officer affirming that such person has received, read, understands and agrees to
comply with the conflict of interest policy; and
d. Periodic reviews by the board of the City-related foundation and/or outside
advisors regarding whether the foundation’s transactions conform to the
foundation’s written policies, are properly recorded, reflect reasonable investment
or payment for goods or services, further charitable purposes and do not result in
an impermissible private benefit or excess benefit transaction.
DEPARTMENT PROCESS
Guidelines
1. Individual departments shall develop their Donation, Sponsorship, and/or
Fundraising programs in consultation with the City’s Attorney’s Office and which
shall be approved by the City Manager. In its simplest form, a Department program
may consist of a memorandum to the City Manager indicating the following:
a. Goal of the sponsorship, donation, and/or fundraising activities;
b. Timeframe for the program;
c. Target audience and method of outreach; and
d. Procedure for acceptance and reporting of activities, ensuring internal controls.
2. Where a more elaborate plan is needed, a Department program may set forth:
a. The types of Donor or Sponsor recognition that is available for specified value of
Donorship or Sponsorship, subject to City Council approval if the value of
recognition is beyond the contract authority of the City Manager;
b. Individual Departments may offer official City endorsement of entity, product, or
service based on the City Manager-approved Sponsorship program and
Sponsorship Agreement, and further subject to City Council approval if the value
of official City endorsement is beyond the contract authority of the City Manager;
c. The Sponsorship level or range of Sponsorship levels for the naming of the City
property if permitted by the City Council Policy on Naming of City-Owned Land
and Facilities (Policy 7-5) or otherwise approved by City Council;
d. Specified or maximum sizes and identification of location(s) of any signage in
recognition of the Donation or Sponsorship and any restrictions on the text of the
recognition signage; and
e. A Net Benefit Analysis may be conducted which may only be utilized for the
City’s internal review of the proposed Donation or Sponsorship and is not
intended to provide any information to third parties. This Net Benefit Analysis
should include evaluation of factors such as:
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
5 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
i. The administrative costs of obtaining the Donation or Sponsorship;
ii. The anticipated additional costs and/or anticipated savings in the
following areas:
1. Capital costs;
2. On-going operational costs;
3. On-going Maintenance costs;
4. Repair costs;
5. Clean-up costs;
iii. Costs for compliance with any restriction on the Donation or
Sponsorship or estimated reduction in value of benefit due to the
restriction;
iv. Any additional potential liability that the City may assume by accepting
the Donation or Sponsorship including any requests for deviation from
the City’s typical standard requirements, such as the level of
indemnification, insurance, bonding, or warranties requested.
Requests for modification of an indemnification provision in relation to
a Donation or Sponsorship would follow Administrative Policy
regarding Mutual Indemnification in Donated Services;
v. Costs of management of City’s obligations of a Donation or
Sponsorship;
vi. The financial ability of the donor or Sponsor if some of these costs are
to be covered by the Sponsor or Donor; and
vii. The City’s ability to fund any uncovered costs set forth above.
3. The Department staff designated to oversee the Department's Donation,
Sponsorship and/or Fundraising activities will ensure that the proposed Donation,
Sponsorship and/or Fundraising program does not conflict with existing Municipal
Code provisions, City policy or existing City Sponsorships. Department staff shall
also ensure that the City property involved is not subject to restrictions that would
limit or prohibit the proposed Donation or Sponsorship.(1)
4. The Department staff accepting items donated to the City will ensure that the items
are safe and durable, and meet any applicable City design or quality specifications,
standards, and policies.
5. Where applicable, the Department’s Donation, Sponsorship and/or Fundraising
program shall set forth the conditions for acceptance of funds. Conditions shall be
fair, impartial and shall not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, color, age, religion,
sexual orientation, actual or perceived gender identity, disability, ethnicity, national
origin, or political views of the proposed Donor.
6. Any Department considering acceptance of a Donation or Sponsorship that may
impact or affect other Departments shall consult with those Departments prior to
acceptance of the proposed Donation or Sponsorship.(2)
7. It shall be the goal of any Departmental Donation, Sponsorship and/or Fundraising
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
6 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
program to find Donors or Sponsors providing the highest net benefit to the City,
along with consideration of the quality of product or service to be received by the
City.
8. All Donations in cash shall be deposited and recorded with the Finance Department
and deposited within the current gift trust fund policies.
9. Unaccepted Donations will be returned to the Donor.
10. Donations, including unrestricted cash Donations, made directly to the City shall be
recorded on the City's "Donation Acceptance Form."
Sponsorship Agreements
After the selection of a Sponsor by the City Council, City Manager or Department Head,
as appropriate, the terms of the Sponsorship, including any expectation of a significant
return or recognition, shall be set forth in a written Sponsorship Agreement approved as
to form by the City Attorney.
City Manager may include renewals of a Sponsorship agreement at the City’s option,
provided that the aggregate of all of the renewals is within the City Manager’s contract
authority under the Municipal Code. Any renewal shall be subject to annual
appropriation of City Council if City funding is involved. Sponsorship Agreements or
Donation Agreements involving City parks may also be subject to the term limitation of
Section 1700 of the City Charter or the Municipal Code.
Costs, Accounting and Record Keeping
Departments shall maintain records that provide an audit trail for the receipt of all
Sponsorships and Donations. Departments shall also comply with the following
requirements:
1. All Donations and Sponsorships and the revenue, products, and services received
shall be recorded and maintained for at least the expected life of the item or service,
or for a specific time frame that has been established in the Donation Agreement or
Sponsorship Agreement.
2. Donations or Sponsorships paid for with a monetary contribution shall not be paid to
staff in cash unless approved, in advance, by the Department Director and receipt of
cash is properly documented.
3. A record of all Sponsorships and Donations including name, type, contact name if a
company, amount, and disposition of Sponsorship shall be kept up-to-date and
accurate.
4. Departments shall report any Donations or Sponsorships received by the
Department through reports to City Manager.
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
7 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
OTHER DONATIONS OR CONTRIBUTIONS
1. Real Property Contributions
a. Restricted Donations of real property may be offered to the City for specified
purposes. The City will review the conditions of the restrictive Donations of real
property and determine if the benefits to be derived warrant the acceptance of
the Donation. All Donations of title to real estate, no matter how small, require
City Council approval after proper investigation and due diligence is conducted
by staff.
i. For any buildings and structures donated to the City, the City administration
shall also conduct its net benefit analysis. It is the policy of the City of San
José that the following apply to Donations of buildings or structures:
1. The Donor may pay the cost for moving and/or construction of a donated
structure and:
a. The City may pay the insurance and/or bonding required or
assume the liability risk under its current self-insurance provisions
where appropriate.
b. It is preferred that costs for project-related architectural,
engineering and inspection costs incurred by City, including staff
time, be paid by Donor but may be subject to mutual contribution by
City and Donor if set forth in the Donation Agreement. A Donation
involving real estate is more complex than cash Donations and the
Donation Agreement documenting a real estate-related Donation
should be prepared by and approved by the City Attorney’s Office.
ii. For buildings and structures which are donated and approved by City Council,
affecting City parks, and accepted by the Director of the Parks, Recreation and
Neighborhood Services Department:
1. If the approved Donation is anticipated during an upcoming fiscal year, and
if the City Manager or Designee agrees that payment of the project-related
architectural, engineering and inspection costs is to the City’s benefit, these
project-related estimates should be requested during the annual budget
process and subject to appropriation by City Council. If the approved
Donation is not anticipated during the annual budget process, the Director of
PRNS will determine if any existing Capital funds are eligible and
appropriate to be used to accept the donation. If there are no eligible and
appropriate existing Capital funds, the Director of PRNS will return to
Council with a funding recommendation.
2. The cost allocation method stated here for PRNS projects should also be
utilized by other City departments in the event that a donation of real
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
8 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
property proposal is presented.
2. Works of Art Contributions
If a contribution is proposed related to a work of public art covered by the City's Art in
Public Places ordinance, currently found in Chapter 22.08 of the San José Municipal
Code, the City's review and acceptance of the proposed contribution of public art shall
be conducted in accordance with the City's Art in Public Places ordinance, which shall
include the review and recommendation of the City's Arts Commission and compliance
with any policies adopted regarding donations of works of public art. Any time a
Donation of a work of art or a contribution toward the acquisition of a work of art that
would not ordinarily be covered by the City's Public Art Ordinance is proposed for the
City, the City Department that operates or maintains the site of the proposed work of art
shall submit the proposed Donation to the Arts Commission for the Arts Commission's
recommendation regarding acceptance of the proposed Donation of public art.
DEFINITIONS
• Fundraising: Any activity conducted with the intent of soliciting Donations,
Sponsorships or other financial contributions to the City or to a particular Department or
activity of the City. Fundraising activities may include, but are not limited to, City grant
proposals, City responses to Request for Proposals issued by other agencies,
foundations or funding agencies, endowment programs, adoption or pledge drives, and
contacting individuals, companies, foundations, or other entities with the primary
purpose of receiving financial support for the City.
• Sponsorship: A "Sponsorship" typically means a person or entity that provides the City
with financial support for an activity, City program or City facility, typically in exchange
for the City providing more than nominal recognition of its financial support, which
distinguishes a Sponsorship from a Donation. Financial assistance provided by a
Sponsor may consist of cash and/or in-kind contributions.
• Donation: A Donation to the City means a person or entity providing the City with
financial support or property of a value exceeding the City’s payment for such item.
Furthermore, a Donor typically does not expect to receive a substantial return or
recognition from the City in return for the Donation. A Donation may consist of cash,
real property (land) or an in-kind Donation. Donations may be unrestricted or restricted
by the Donor.
• Stock Donations: Stocks are the proprietorship element in a corporation usually
divided into shares and represented by transferable stock certificates. Current rules
require the City to immediately sell stock Donations upon receipt unless the stock was
received through a gift or bequest with restrictions on its sale.
• In-Kind Contributions: A contribution of an item or object other than cash or real
property, which would serve a useful purpose in the provision of City services.
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
9 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
Examples of in-kind contributions may include equipment, materials or services.
• Donor: A company, organization or individual who provides the City, or one of the City
departments, an item or service without expectation of significant return or recognition.
• Restricted Donation: A Donation made to the City where the Donor has restricted its
use to a specified purpose.
• Sponsor: A company, organization or individual who provides the City with funding
support for a program, activity or facility in the form of a Sponsorship, and who expects
significant recognition in return.
• Sponsorship Agreement: A negotiated agreement between the City and a company,
organization or individual whereby the City makes a Sponsorship opportunity available
and enters into an agreement with a company, organization or individual to pay a fee in
cash, products, services or a combination thereof, for recognition rights related to
certain identified City-owned commercial or marketable assets. A Sponsorship
Agreement may permit a limited form of advertising opportunity for a company,
organization or individual in exchange for the fee paid to the City, subject to the terms of
this Policy and subject to the approval of the City Manager and the City Attorney's
Office.
• Unrestricted Donations: A Donation made to the City where the Donor has placed no
limitation on its use.
• Amenity: An “Amenity” is an improvement located on City property which is less than
the entire portion of a City property, such as a wall at a park, a plaza in front of a City
building, a trail located along City property, an interior room or rooms in a building. A
fully enclosed structure such as a City building with walls and roof (examples being a
community center, stand-alone gym, warehouse, or stand-alone building housing a
restroom and locker room) is more substantial than an Amenity, and City Council
approval is required before granting naming rights. An Amenity may include any of the
following if located on City property: plazas that constitute only a portion of a larger
parcel of City property, gazebos, archways, paths, athletic facilities that are not fully
enclosed structures, playing fields, portions of aquatic facilities that are not enclosed
structures or City buildings, picnic areas, tot lots, play structures, hard courts, and trail
segments. If the administration is unsure if a specific City improvement is an Amenity or
more substantial than an Amenity, the City Manager shall seek direction from the City
Council Rules and Open Government Committee.
• Works of Art: Includes, but is not limited to, physical art that may be an integral part of
a public site or building, or that may be integrated with the work of other design
professionals. Examples of public works of art include sculptures, murals and paintings,
earthworks, neon, glass, organic materials, mosaics, photographs, prints, film, any
combination of media forms, or hybrids of any media.
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
10 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
DISCLAIMERS
1. Different forms of contributions to the City present different opportunities and
challenges. Therefore, it is not possible to establish blanket guidelines to cover all
types of Donation or Sponsorship activity that the City may decide to pursue.
2. Unless expressly stated otherwise, the City does not intend to modify or change the
non-public forum status of any City property by providing Donor recognition or
Sponsorship recognition on City property.
3. The making of a Donation or Sponsorship to the City will not provide any extra
consideration to the Donating or Sponsoring party in relation to any City
procurement, any regulatory activities of the City, or other City business. No City
employee or other City Official is authorized to offer any such extra consideration to
a donating party.
4. Any Donation or Sponsorship which, if accepted, would obligate the City to enter into
a service or procurement agreement should be reviewed under the City procurement
process.
5. The City encourages Donations of materials with the understanding that such items
have a useful life, and that the City assumes no responsibility for replacement or
upkeep. Once a Donation is accepted, it becomes City property and the City may
maintain, replace or dispose of the item unless the Donation is explicitly restricted.
6. The City cannot guarantee the tax deductibility of a Donation, but may provide the
donating party with a letter of acknowledgement and a statement of the City's
intended use.
7. City staff shall maintain the highest standard of ethics in Fundraising activities. All
Donations or Sponsorships must directly enhance the City’s ability to provide goods
or services to the public or for another valid public purpose, and may not be used for
personal financial gain of any City employee.
8. City employees who have primary responsibility for the procurement of services,
supplies, materials and equipment or public works should not engage in solicitation
of Donations or Sponsorships.
9. City employees may only solicit Donations or Sponsorships pursuant to the
individual Department’s Donation, Sponsorship, and/or Fundraising programs
approved by the City Manager. City employees working in an enforcement or
regulatory City position (i.e. Police and Fire, Code Enforcement, and Environmental
Services) shall not solicit Donations or Sponsorships from the public while they are
wearing a City uniform, unless they receive explicit permission from the City
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
TITLE DONATION, SPONSORSHIP AND
FUNDRAISING POLICY
PAGE
11 of 11
POLICY NUMBER
1-17
Manager via their Department’s written Donation, Sponsorship, and/or Fundraising
programs.
10. At any time, a Department, if approved by the City Manager, or the City Manager
may reject any Donation or Sponsorship offered to the City.
End Notes
(1) These could include, but are not limited to, Chapter 4.04 of the San José Municipal
Code, the Naming of City owned land and facilities (See Policy Number 7-5, Naming of
City-Owned Land and Facilities) and the Code of Ethics (Policy Number 0-15), the City's
Zoning Code (Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code) and Sign Ordinance (Title 23 of
the San José Municipal Code), City procurement requirements, the Prevailing Wage
and Living Wage Policies, Uses of Public Property (Policy Number 6-16), the California
Environmental Quality Act, and the Long-term Use of City Parklands for Private
Enterprise Purposes (Policy Number 7-8). One example of property-specific issues to
be considered when developing Donor recognition guidelines and other contribution
recognition guidelines is whether the property was funded through tax-exempt bonds.
Donor recognition guidelines for such types of property shall take into account IRS
regulations, among other factors specific to those properties.
(2) A Department shall be deemed affected by a proposed Donation if it is likely that the
Department would incur additional cost or staff time if the Donation were accepted. For
example, other Departments may incur costs to provide management, support,
maintenance, and repair or enforcement activity in relation to the Donation or
Sponsorship.
10.4.e
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: Policy - City of San Jose, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
OCEANSIDE CITY COUNCIL POLICY 1
SUBJECT: POLICY NUMBER 200-15
Gifts/Donations Acceptance ADOPTED 6-03-20
Section 1. The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines and a formal process
for the City of Oceanside’s consideration of accepting gifts and donations in a
responsible, transparent, and accountable manner. This policy provides guidance
when individuals, community groups, and businesses wish to make donations to the
City. This policy also establishes the standards for City employees and City officials
regarding the acceptance of gifts to the City during the performance of City
business.
Whenever possible and practical, donors are encouraged to make donations to a
non-profit organization that partners with the City in support of its operations, such
as “Friends of the Oceanside Public Library” or “Friends of the Oceanside Parks.”
This policy does not apply to sponsorships of City hosted events, such as service
award ceremonies.
Section 2. Types of Donations
Donations may be offered in the form of cash, real or personal property and can be
designated or undesignated. Designated donations are those donations that the
donor specifies for a particular City department, location, or purpose. Undesignated
donations are those donations that are given to the City for an unspecified use.
Section 3. Consistency with City Interests
Designated donations may only be accepted when they have a purpose consistent
with the City’s goals and objectives and are in the best interest of Oceanside. The
City must always consider the public trust and comply with all applicable laws when
accepting donations.
There shall be no consideration or expectation of a quid pro quo or special treatmen t
when the City accepts a gift from any member of the public. The City will not accept
donations from any individual, group, or entity that has a pending discretionary land
use application or proposal for the purchase or sale of real property.
Section 4. Acceptance of Undesignated Donations of Cash or Tangible Items
All donations to the City shall immediately be submitted for consideration for
acceptance. Based on the value of the donation offered as outlined below,
appropriate City staff shall review every donation and determine if the benefits to be
derived warrant acceptance of the donation. The following points list the threshold
amounts for donation acceptance.
10.4.f
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: Policy - City of Oceanside, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
OCEANSIDE CITY COUNCIL POLICY 2
A. Offers of donations of cash or items valued at $25,000 or below may be accepted
by a Department Director.
B. Offers of donations of cash or items valued more than $25,000 and up to
$50,000 may be accepted by the City Manager.
C. Offers of donations of cash or items valued more than $50,000 must be accepted
by the City Council. Donations valued at more than $50,000 shall be accepted
through a written agreement consistent with these guidelines and approved by
the City Council.
D. Offers of donations of a holiday gift basket or similar de minimis donation valued
under the gift reporting limit in the Political Reform Act may be accepted by the
Department Director, or designee, provided the donation is made available to
benefit all employees.
Section 5. Acceptance of Designated Donations of Cash or Tangible Items
Based on the value of the donation offer as outlined in Section 3 above, appropriate
City staff will review the conditions of any designated donation and determine if the
benefits to be derived warrant acceptance of the donation. Criteria for the evaluation
include but are not limited to:
A. Consideration of an immediate or initial expenditure is required in order to accept
the donation; and
B. The potential and extent of the City’s obligation to maintain, match, or
supplement the donation.
Section 6. Acknowledgement of Donations (This section does not apply to de
minimis donations)
A. A Donation Acceptance Form is required to be completed by t he receiving
Department Director or the City Manager’s Office for all donations provided to the
City (form attached).
B. Acknowledgement of the donation should be in writing and be the responsibility
of the Department Director who is the beneficiary of the d onation. Undesignated
donations shall be acknowledged by the City Manager. A copy of the
acknowledgement agreement should be forwarded to donors.
C. The Donor Acceptance Form including the donor name and donation amount is
public information subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records
Act.
D. The City does not provide legal, accounting, tax or other such advice to donors.
Each donor is ultimately responsible for ensuring the donor’s proposed donation
meets and furthers the donor’s charitable, financial, tax, and estate planning
goals. As such, each donor is encouraged to meet with a professional advisor
before making any donation to the City.
10.4.f
Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: Policy - City of Oceanside, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
OCEANSIDE CITY COUNCIL POLICY 3
Section 7. Declined Donations
The City reserves the right to decline any donation if, upon review, acceptance of the
donation offer is determined in the sole discretion of the City to be not in the best
interests of the City.
Section 8. Distribution of Donation
A. Tangible items will be distributed to appropriate City departments for use or, at
the discretion of the Department Director or City Manager, disposed of in an
appropriate manner according to this policy.
B. Donations of cash for designated donations will be deposited into the appropriate
revenue account for the designated City department.
C. Donations of cash for undesignated donations under $50,000 will be deposited
into the City’s General Fund donation account. Undesignated donations in an
amount over $50,000 will be distributed at the direction of City Council.
Section 9. Dissemination of Information
A. A copy of each Donation Acceptance Form for accepted donations shall be
forwarded for information to the City Council by the City Manager’s Office.
B. A copy of each Donation Acceptance Form for accepted donations shall be
forwarded for information to the Finance Department and the designated
department for which the donation was assigned.
C. Each original Donation Acceptance Form shall be maintained by the City Clerk’s
Office.
10.4.f
Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: Policy - City of Oceanside, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
DONATION ACCEPTANCE FORM
Name of Donor: ______________________________________________________________________
Address: ________________________________ City: ______________ State: ______ Zip:__________
Description of donation: ________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
Donor estimate of current value: _________________________________________________________
Potential immediate or initial acquisition or installation cost, any on-going maintenance or replacement
cost: ________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Intended use: ________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Conditions of acceptance or donor designation: ______________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Remarks: ____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
City Department receiving donation: _______________________________________________________
APPROVED:
Department Director Signature Date
City Manager Signature Date
Mayor Signature Date
NOTE: The City of Oceanside cannot guarantee future funding for repair, maintenance, use, or replacement of
donated items.
cc: City Council, Finance Department, City Clerk
10.4.f
Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: Policy - City of Oceanside, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
DONATION ACCEPTANCE FORM
DONATION AND GIFT POLICY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I have received and read the City of Oceanside Donation and Gift Policy and understand its
provisions. I further understand that when I sign this acknowledgement form it will be
placed in my personnel file.
______________________________
Employee (PRINT NAME)
______________________________ ________________
Signature Date
10.4.f
Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: Policy - City of Oceanside, CA (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
#454814 – Public Arts
Policy/City of Gilroy
Adopted Version 4/17/2000
Revised & Adopted by PAC 10/24/2018
1
CITY OF GILROY
PUBLIC ART POLICY
VISION STATEMENT:
The City of Gilroy’s Public Art Committee promotes a bold vision which exemplifies the
City’s creativity and energy shaping the visual environment of our community.
PURPOSE:
The City of Gilroy (City) recognizes the importance of Public Art to the cultural, educational and
economic well-being of its diverse population. These guidelines are for the purpose of
establishing policies and procedures for implementing Public Art as recommended in the Arts &
Culture Commission’s Cultural Plan, developed in 1997, and 1999 General Plan Update.
GOALS:
To promote the City’s interest in its aesthetic environment.
To establish the Public Art Committee as an advisory committee to the Arts and Culture
Commission to be responsible for developing the Public Art Plan; ensuring the quality of
artworks created under the plan; and, developing budgets, funding strategies and scope of
individual Public Art projects.
To create an enhanced visual environment within the City and provide City residents with the
opportunity to live with Public Art.
To help build pride in our City and among its citizens.
To promote tourism and economic vitality of the City by enhancing the City’s public
facilities and surroundings through the incorporation of Public Art.
To encourage creative collaboration among community members.
To encourage the creation of quality Public Art throughout the City by promoting locally,
regionally, nationally and internationally recognized artists.
To educate, preserve, reflect and celebrate the rich, unique history and cultural diversity of
the City and its citizens.
To promote and encourage art viewed by the public in all of the City’s communities and
neighborhoods and to support the residents’ involvement in determining the character of their
City.
To ensure a program of procurement and maintenance of a quality Public Art collection.
10.4.g
Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018) (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
#454814 – Public Arts
Policy/City of Gilroy
Adopted Version 4/17/2000
Revised & Adopted by PAC 10/24/2018
2
DEFINITION OF TERMS:
For purposes of this Public Art Policy:
“Artist” means the individual or individuals who create a work of art.
“Public Art” means an original painting, sculpture, or drawing, or an original work of art in any
medium, of recognized quality, displayed in a public place, on the exterior of any City owned
facility or inside any city owned facility in areas designated as public areas. Public Art includes
original works of art that can be viewed by the public created for placement in public places, or
integrated projects where the artwork is a part of the underlying architecture, landscape design or
site. Public Art does not include items of commercial use such as advertising, or standard
manufacture, reproductions or architectural elements unless co-designed by an Artist. Public Art
encompasses the broadest range of expression, media and materials. Public Art may be
permanent, temporary or functional. “Public Art projects may occur in any public location
within the City and may be used as an incentive for commitments of Public Art in private sector
developments”.
In determining whether a work of Public Art is of recognized quality, the City, Arts and Culture
Commission and Public Art Committee (PAC) shall rely on the opinions of Artists, art dealers,
collectors of art, curators of art museums, and other persons involved with the creation or
marketing of art.
“Public Art Committee” (PAC) means a qualified citizen committee comprised of seven
members to work in an advisory capacity to the Arts and Culture Commission. At least one, but
no more than two, members of the Arts and Culture Commission shall be members of the Public
Art Committee. The remaining members shall be nominated by the Arts and Culture
Commission and appointed by the City Council. The members shall be chosen for their
demonstrated background in fundraising, art education or expertise in the visual arts, public art,
art management, architecture and related design professions, art history, art criticism, or arts
advocacy. The PAC members shall serve staggered four year terms. No member of the PAC
shall serve more than two consecutive full terms, plus any partial term to which the member may
be appointed.
“Public Art Plan” means a prioritized check list of Public Art Projects, with any necessary
budgeted and recommended design approaches, updated on an annual basis by the PAC,
reviewed by the Arts and Culture Commission who will make recommendations to the City
Council for potential adoption. The Public Art Plan should strive for diversity of style, scale,
and media. The program will also strive for equitable distribution of artworks throughout the
city, subject to sources of funding.
THE ROLE OF THE CITY STAFF WITHIN THE PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE:
To serve in a liaison capacity to facilitate the meetings of the Public Art Committee.
10.4.g
Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018) (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
#454814 – Public Arts
Policy/City of Gilroy
Adopted Version 4/17/2000
Revised & Adopted by PAC 10/24/2018
3
THE ROLE OF THE PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE:
The Public Art Committee (PAC) shall:
Develop and recommend the annual Public Art Plan, with any necessary budgets, selection
processes, funding plan and timelines for projects.
Recommend the selection, acquisition and placement of public art in the city’s Public Art
Collection; or, the implementation of a public art project.
Oversee the development and review of the City’s Public Art collection.
Review and recommend proposed loans, donations and gifts of artworks to the City and long-
term exhibitions on City owned property.
Review and recommend changes in the Public Art policies, guidelines and procedures.
At the direction of the Arts and Culture Commission, develop and implement fundraising
activities to support Public Art Projects in and for the City of Gilroy.
PUBLIC ART SELECTION CRITERIA:
All Public Art must be in compliance with all state, federal and local laws and ordinances,
currently in effect. The City shall have the right to withhold acceptance of a work until it clearly
meets standards of artistic achievement.
1. Eligible Public Art:
Eligible Public Art may include, but is not limited to, the following:
(a) Sculpture free-standing, wall supported or suspended, kinetic, electronic, in any material
or combination of materials.
(b) Murals or portable painting in any material or variety of materials, with or without
collage or the addition of non-traditional materials or means. (See the City’s Mural
Guidelines.)
(c) Earthworks; fiberworks, neon, glass, mosaics, photographs, prints, calligraphy, any
combination of forms or media including sound, literary elements, film, holographic
images, and video systems, hybrids of any media and new genres.
(d) Furnishings or fixtures, including but not limited to gates, railings, streetlights, signage,
seating, if created by Artists as unique elements or limited editions.
10.4.g
Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018) (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
#454814 – Public Arts
Policy/City of Gilroy
Adopted Version 4/17/2000
Revised & Adopted by PAC 10/24/2018
4
(e) Artistic or aesthetic elements of the overall architecture or landscape design if created by
an Artist or a design team that includes an Artist as a co-designer.
(f) Temporary artworks or installations, if such artworks serve the purpose of providing
community and education outreach purposes.
(g) Media artworks, including video and film or other forms of electronic artworks.
(h) The incremental costs of infrastructure elements, such as soundwalls, utility structures,
roadway elements and other items if designed by an Artist or design team that included
an Artist as a co-designer.
2. Ineligible Public Art:
Ineligible Public Art may include, but is not limited to, the following:
(a) Reproductions, by mechanical or other means, of original works of art, except in the
cases of film, video, photography, printmaking or other media arts or works created for
commercial use such as advertising.
(b) “Art Objects” that are mass-produced or of standard manufacture, such as playground
equipment, fountains or statuary elements, unless incorporated into an artwork by a
project Artist.
(c) Decorative, ornamental, architectural or functional elements which are designed by the
building architect, as opposed to elements created by an Artist commissioned for that
purpose.
(d) Landscape architecture and landscape gardening except where these elements are
designed by an Artist and/or are an integral part of the artwork by an Artist.
(e) Architectural rehabilitation or historical preservation, although works may be acquired in
connection with such projects.
(f) Services or utilities necessary to operate and maintain an artwork over time.
(g) Public Art Projects which could have unsafe conditions or factors that could result in
public liability.
10.4.g
Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018) (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
#454814 – Public Arts
Policy/City of Gilroy
Adopted Version 4/17/2000
Revised & Adopted by PAC 10/24/2018
5
3. Public Art Site Selection Criteria:
When considering a possible site for Public Art, the PAC will determine the relative importance
of each of the considerations listed below for a given proposal. The PAC shall compare a Public
Art project to these considerations to assure that it contributes positively to the City’s
community. Site selection criteria may include, but is not limited to, the following:
(a) The relationship of the art work and site shall be considered in terms of the physical
dimensions, social dynamics, local character and surrounding context of the site, existing
or planned.
(b) The visibility of the site by the general public.
(c) Public safety.
(d) The contribution of the artwork’s design to an area by emphasizing a particular location
through landmarks, gateways and/or linkages to other parts of the community.
(e) Interior and exterior vehicular and pedestrian traffic patterns.
(f) Site design including landscaping, drainage grading, lighting and seating considerations.
(g) Relationship of proposed artwork to existing artworks within the site vicinity.
(h) Environmental impact such as noise, sound, light and odor.
(i) Public accessibility to the artwork.
(j) Impact on adjacent property owner’s vistas.
(k) Impact on operational functions (maintenance) of the City.
(l) The probability of vandalism.
(m) The cost of development.
(n) Compatibility of the design and location with the historical character of the site.
10.4.g
Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018) (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
#454814 – Public Arts
Policy/City of Gilroy
Adopted Version 4/17/2000
Revised & Adopted by PAC 10/24/2018
6
ARTIST SELECTION CRITERIA:
When the PAC considers the selection of an Artist to develop a piece of Public art, the artist
criteria may include, but is not limited to, the following criteria:
(a) Cooperation. Ability of the Artist to work closely and cooperatively with the PAC, Arts
and Culture Commission, staff and community.
(b) Artist’s Presentation. The Artist must have the ability to clearly describe concepts
verbally and through quality written materials. In addition, specific drawings of the
artwork as placed at the primary site will be required.
(c) Technical Feasibility. Each work shall be examined for its feasibility and convincing
evidence of the Artist’s ability to successfully complete the work as proposed. A plan
from each Artist of installation and maintenance, as well as a bill of materials, will be
required.
(d) Aesthetic Standard. The PAC shall have the right to withhold acceptance of a work until
it clearly meets standards of artistic achievement agreed upon by a majority vote of all
members of the PAC. The work must be available for viewing in progress by the PAC in
order to make this determination.
(e) Quality. Priority is given to the design capabilities of the Artist(s) and the inherent
quality of the artwork(s).
(f) The Artist selection process and acquisition policies should encourage the interests of all
concerned parties that are represented, including the public, the arts community and the
City.
(g) Selection of Artists will be without regard to race or gender.
(h) Public Art Contracts: Following the final selection of an Artist whose work is to be
either purchased, commissioned, or donated, that Artist shall enter into a written
contractual agreement with the City. All agreements between the City and the Artist
shall be in writing and shall go through the standard city approval process. All contracts,
as to form, shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney. The completed and
approved contract shall be filed with the City Clerk.
(i) Conflict of Interest: Artists (or members of their immediate families) serving as members
of the Arts and Culture Commission, the PAC, or City employees may not be
commissioned under, or receive any direct financial benefit from, any City Public Art
project during the term of their tenure on the Arts and Culture Commission or the PAC.
This restriction shall extend for a period of one year following Arts and Culture
Commission or PAC membership and shall extend indefinitely for any specific projects
which were reviewed or otherwise acted upon during the Artist’s membership on the Arts
and Culture Commission or its PAC.
10.4.g
Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018) (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
#454814 – Public Arts
Policy/City of Gilroy
Adopted Version 4/17/2000
Revised & Adopted by PAC 10/24/2018
7
PUBLIC ART ACQUISITION PROCESS:
The selection and placement of Public Art may be through direct selection, competition,
donation, or trades or loans. Public Art may be acquired by the following methods:
1. Direct selection: A process used to acquire an existing exceptional work of inherent
artistic or historical significance, or to provide for the unusual purchase circumstances such as a
partial gift or unique economic advantage.
Submission for direct selection: Artists who have finished work available for direct
purchase should submit the following to the PAC.
(a) No more than five examples (photographs, models, illustrations) for each entry.
Each example should be marked with the Artist’s name and the title of the art
work.
(b) A proposal with the Artist’s name including the following information on each
piece: title of artwork, dimensions, medium, date produced, price, location,
number of reproductions (if applicable), restrictions on reproductions, and other
information the Artist deems pertinent.
(c) Resume and references.
2. Competition: Open entry competitions are open to entries from all Artists within the
geographic limits set by the PAC striving to maintain a balance between competitions involving
local Artists only and Artists from a larger area. Invitational entry is the process used when the
choice of the Artist is to be within special limitations of a project or when there is a need to
provide a balance of media or styles. Examples of this type of acquisition may be a City art
show or a mural commissioned by the City and/or Artist.
The submission process for open entry or invitational competitions is as follows:
(a) The PAC shall provide a project description, budget, time schedule and a detail of
duties and obligations of both the PAC and the Artist.
(b) The Artist shall provide a maquette (small model) and site drawing (if
appropriate), design, concept statement, budget, photographs, resume and
references.
(c) Proposals shall be considered by the PAC and a final choice(s) will be presented
to the Arts and Culture Commission for acceptance.
(d) Entry materials will be returned to the Artist only if appropriate packaging,
postage and insurance are included with the entry by the Artist, if requested in the
prospectus. Non-selected Artists will be informed of the final choice(s) when the
entry materials are returned.
10.4.g
Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018) (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
#454814 – Public Arts
Policy/City of Gilroy
Adopted Version 4/17/2000
Revised & Adopted by PAC 10/24/2018
8
3. Donations: It is recognized that donations may become a large portion of the City’s
Public Art collection. It is also recognized that donations may be presented to the City in a
variety of forms and that each donation proposed is unique. The Public Art Committee and Arts
and Culture Commission are responsible for accepting only those works of art that will further
the objectives of the Public Art Plan which include all the criteria set forth involving artwork
selection, site selection, Artist criteria and installation.
4. Trades or Loans: Works of Public Art may be borrowed or traded for exhibition by the
City.
INSTALLATION:
At the time of acquisition, whether by donation or purchase, the PAC budget should cover costs
of installation which may include:
(a) Plinths (slab, base or support), or other display components
(b) Site development
(c) Identification plaque
(d) Necessary permits and approval fees
(e) Insurance requirements
MAINTENANCE:
A review process shall be established by the PAC to meet the following objectives:
To ensure regular maintenance of artworks in the City and Public Art collection to
preserve them in the best possible condition.
To provide for the regular inspection for condition and location of artworks in the
City and Public Art collection.
To establish a regular procedure for effecting necessary repairs to artworks in the City
and Public Art collection.
To ensure that alteration, refinishing and moving of Public Art shall be done with
notice to and in consultation with the Artist whenever feasible.
PUBLIC ART ON PRIVATE PROPERTY:
When public art is required as a condition of development project approval, the condition
requiring the art remains in effect for the life of the development. Thus, if a mural were a
condition of approval, the property owner would be obligated to maintain the mural. If the
property owner painted over such mural, the mural would have to be repainted. Similarly, if a
property owner removed a sculpture that was required as a condition of approval, the owner
would have to replace the sculpture in-kind.
10.4.g
Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018) (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
#454814 – Public Arts
Policy/City of Gilroy
Adopted Version 4/17/2000
Revised & Adopted by PAC 10/24/2018
9
Prior to removal of Public Art on private property, originally required as a condition of
development project approval, the planning department shall inform the Public Art Committee of
such plans for removal.
PUBLIC ART DEACCESSIONING:
Deaccessioning is the process used to permanently remove Public Art from the Public Art
collection through sale, trade or other means. Deaccessioning requires the approval of a majority
vote of all members of the PAC, with a public announcement of the proposed action to permit
public input. Deaccessioning should be a seldom employed action that operates with a strong
presumption against removing Public Art from the Public Art collection. No works may be
deaccessioned unless they meet at least one of the following criteria:
The City cannot properly care for or store the Public Art.
The Public Art no longer has aesthetic and/or historical/cultural value.
The Public Art collection represents in large quantity a single artist, and the PAC finds that it
is sufficient and desirable to retain only a representative selection.
The Public Art is a duplicate (e.g., prints, sculptures, multiples) of lesser quality of works
already in the collection.
The Public Art is a copy or pastiche (artistic composition made from various sources)
without significant historical, documentary, or aesthetic value.
The Public Art is found to be fraudulent or not authentic.
The Public Art’s condition requires restoration in gross excess of their aesthetic value or
works in such a deteriorated state that restoration would prove either infeasible or
misleading.
The Public Art possesses demonstrated faults of design or workmanship.
The Public Art causes excessive or unreasonable maintenance.
The Public Art is damaged irreparably, or to an extent where repair is unreasonable or
impractical.
The Public Art represents a physical threat to public safety.
Any sale from the Public Art Collection will go to the Public Art Committees 801 fund for
future Public Art.
10.4.g
Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018) (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)
#454814 – Public Arts
Policy/City of Gilroy
Adopted Version 4/17/2000
Revised & Adopted by PAC 10/24/2018
10
REVIEW OF CITY’S PUBLIC ART:
At least once every ten years, the City’s Public Art collection should be evaluated by the PAC
for the purposes of collection management and in order to assess the collection’s future. The
City shall retain the right to deaccession any Public Art acquired by the City, regardless of the
source of funding for the particular artwork, unless prohibited by contract.
FUNDS FOR PUBLIC ART:
In keeping with its concern for the quality of its environment that Public Art provides, the City
may establish policies and ordinances regarding the funding of Public Art
In support of the Cultural Arts Plan developed by the Gilroy Arts & Culture Commission in
1997, the City is encouraged to include an element of Public Art in all new parks and city
facilities. In addition, the Arts and Culture Commission and the PAC may recommend a
fundraising budget for the acquisition, implementation and maintenance of a Public Art project.
Eligible Public Art Locations:
Public art can be placed in all aspects of Gilroy’s public realm, community facilities and civic
infrastructure, throughout the city.
a. Public Realm includes public spaces designed and built for the use of the general public.
These include spaces such as parks, playgrounds, sports fields, plazas, and trails.
b. Community and civic facilities are buildings that provide space for public activities and
services. These include buildings such as community centers, youth/recreation centers,
sports facilities, police stations, fire stations, general government buildings, Gilroy’s
Cultural Art Center.
c. Civic infrastructure includes facilities that support the health, functioning and
environment and economic well-being of the city. These include bridges, parking lots and
transit facilities.
d. And in general, any other public use, service or public infrastructure that is visible to the
public view.
\
10.4.g
Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: PUBLIC ART POLICY (Revised 10-24-2018) (3675 : City Hall Gift Receiving Policy)