Resolution 1994-82
..
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 94-82
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF GILROY APPROVING TM 94-04, FOR A TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR A 112-LOT RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISION WITH FOUR REMAINDER LOTS ON
APPROXIMATELY 69.8 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF
LONGMEADOW DRIVE, BETWEEN CALLE DEL REY AND
RANCHO HILLS DRIVE, APNS 783-21-014, -029, -
035, -036, and 783-41-060
WHEREAS, Kaufman and Broad and South Bay, Inc. have made
application TM 94-04, for a tentative subdivision map for a 112-
lot residential subdivision with four remainder lots on approxi-
mately 69.8 acres located south of Longmeadow Drive, between Calle
Del Rey and Rancho Hills Drive, APNS 783-21-014, -029, -035, -036,
and 783-41-060, such property as is indicated on the map attached
hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference; and,
WHEREAS, the City has prepared and circulated an Initial
Study for this project in accordance with the California Environ-
mental Quality Act ("CEQA"); and,
WHEREAS, the City has issued in accordance with CEQA a
Negative Declaration for this project with 30 mitigation measures,
such Negative Declaration as is attached hereto as Exhibit Band
incorporated herein by this reference; and,
WHEREAS, the Gilroy City Planning Commission held a duly
noticed public hearing on TM 94-04 on November 3, 1994 and after
that public hearing voted to recommend approval of the Negative
Declaration for TM 94-04 as having been completed in compliance
with CEQA and reflecting the independent judgement of the City, and
voted to recommend approval of TM 94-04, subject to 15 the condi-
tions set forth in the staff report on the matter dated October 24,
1994, such report being attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorpor-
ated herein by this reference; and,
WHEREAS, this City Council held a duly noticed public
hearing on TM 94-04 on November 21, 1994, at which public hearing
the Council considered the project and the conditions proposed to
RESOLUTION NO. 94-82
-1-
.
.
be attached to its approval along with staff reports, public
testimony and documentation and other evidence on the project; and,
WHEREAS, at the November 21, 1994 hearing, the Council
considered the project and proposed mitigation measures along with
public testimony, staff reports and other documentation, and, based
upon substantial evidence produced both in writing and orally,
resolved that the project should be approved with conditions; and,
WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or
other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon
which this resolution is based is the Office of the City Clerk.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
A. The Council hereby finds that the Negative Declaration
for this project, contained in Exhibit B, has been completed in
compliance with CEQA and reflects the independent judgement of the
City.
B. The Negative Declaration is hereby approved on the basis
that the initial study, public comments, oral and written testimony
and other documents received and considered indicate there is no
substantial evidence the project as mitigated will have a signifi-
cant effect on the environment, such approval being subject to all
mitigation measures set forth therein.
C. The City Council further finds the following:
1. The City has taken all actions required by CEQA.
2. Approval of GPA 93-02 is in the public interest.
3. The project is consistent with the Gilroy General
Plan because it conforms to the land use designation for the
property on the General Plan Map, and it is consistent with the
intent of the text, goals, and policies of the General Plan
documents.
4. None of the reasons for denial of this subdivision
pursuant to Government Code section 66474 exist in this case;
C. TM 94-05 should be and hereby is approved, subject to the
mitigation measures and mitigation monitoring program set forth in
RESOLUTION NO. 94-82
-2-
.
.
the Negative Declaration and the 15 conditions contained in the
Planning Department staff report.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of December, 1994 by the
following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
GILROY, KLOECKER, MORALES,
ROGERS, ROWLISON, VALDEZ, GAGE
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
RESOLUTION NO. 94-82
-3-
,'\ ~t1-, ,', .
'~fID~ > .....
J '~Cl kl~.:: ~V'TOI.' 'WV. .: ~
.' r EJo. II ~! D ~ dlJ.J. j-ii~ 11~r1 JQ...I ) P
-- ~~. ~
- - ~.g ~t!, I I I f, i !.j 71 ~~h~ _f::j ~~
~ ~:i I--~ ~~ L",T""' .<<1 ~'711' ~;
\ \lc.b ,-:..:;J ~ ~ . I~ ~:l. rn-
\ '-- E ~ . .- ' ~ loe J II
..----.--"" r I I I ~~cy = I~ i ~ ~~
--.J_ -' elidc1... .il:-
l . [I Jr-!i,rr
I f -, I :..:.:!. I I Pt
'Jo J J J I L- '-"-"
'. " ~
- . --= ....~ Ft
- ., r J - =- ... Ei~
Ot ~ W~ i:i ~ q
~ ~ ~ (Uj ~~ ;=;>;im
f1!1 r. h~ 1--. I
:E. - ~i-- _ _
-;::; ~ 0)4 L
U . var~\fIG "
'T1ID 1,1 n I H't
l ~_\l!1~1 - t-'_
. it c-~ cr= ~ b=tLlI
W'j ~-t"7d\~ ,~.Bf
o . 2 51n/ 5 4'" \...
!
~
PROJECT SITE
". .. / "
. Ie
, ~8
.....
"~ :to
\ -
--
'-,.'
D
I~
"-+-a
;2J ,. g:.
~. ell
::; ift ,
r~ \ ~ r ~I'Y
f""\ . \. rr.,l.( ril1 { :;:
o~".} )........ 1-- ~
I--- I-- l_
C; II' .,1,- I---1209/49IJ__
, 0 -= '-
~\. C:, '0 ):::<"
(,O\O":"~ @\ ~ A sqn I Ct~
'l'JOn rr~ ; i i I.
-
EXHIBIT A
I
I
I
! /
i I
j' I
I, I
~( i Bb~ tr~O Dn J
111 1~'lZf~ ~
if! ~ I
~ f----, ""-:.Q
I'" 1. ~nlnjJ ~f=( t - (<[
~rca t;/t~ ~ ~
c: 0
11 jf] ~m
~m~ ,
7 /
LOCATION MAP FOR TM 94-04 & A/S 94-25
,,.
.
.
Planning Department
NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna St.
Gilroy, CA 95020
(408) 848-0440
(
City File Number: TM 94-04
Proiect DescriDtion:
Name of Project:
Nature of Project:
Hillcrest Phase IV Tentative Map
Request to subdivide five parcels totalling 69,8 acres into 252 lots, and
perfonn design review of the homes resulting from this subdivision,
. Proiect Location:
Location: West of Calle Del Rey, east of Rancho Hills Drive, south ofLongmeadow C_
Drive.
Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 783v21-14, 29, 35, 36 and 783-41-60
Entity or Person(s) UndertakiD!! Proiect:
Name:
Address:
Kaufinan and Broad South Bay
1604 North Main Street, Salinas, CA 93906
Initial Study:
An Initial study of this project was undertaken and prepared for the purpose of ascertaining
whether this project might have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of this study is on
file at the City of Gilroy Planning Department, 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020,
Findin2s & Reasons:
The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects on the environment. However, this
project has been mitigated (see Mitigl!,tion M~asures below which avoid or mitigate the effects) to
a point where no significant effects mIl occur. There is no substantial evidence the project may
have a significant effect on the environment. The following reasons will support these findings:
1. The proposal is a logical component of the existing land use of this area,
EXHIBIT B
l'
.
.
Revised Negative DeclarationfTM 94-04
Page 2
10/24/94
2, Identified adverse impacts are proposed to be mitigated through preparation of special
studies, and construction of off-site improvements.
3, The proposed project is consistent With the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan
of the City of Gilroy,
(
4, The Initial Study was independently reviewed by City staff: and this Negative Declaration
reflects the independent judgement of the City of Gilroy.
Mithmtion Measures:
1, The project shall be designed in accordance with earthquake design regulations of the
Uniform Building Code, subject to the review and approval of the City Building
Department.
(
2. The developer shall incorporate the recommendations provided in the detailed design level
geotechnical investigation prepared by Harza Consulting Engineers and Scientist for the
project site, to ensure that structural foundations and subsurface improvements are
appropriately designed to withstand the expansive nature of the on-site soils and to ensure
that grading and excavation plans are properly engineered. Recommendations of the
geotechnical investigation shall be incorporated into future improvement plans for the
project site, subject -to the review and approval of the City Building Department, prior to
approval of the final subdivision map,
3, The design and construction of all storm drainage improvements serving the project site
shall be provided by the developer, subject to review and approval by the City Department
of Public Works. These design plans shall include, but not be limited to:
a, Applicable storm water source and treatment-based best management practices, applied
and maintained, as recommended in the California Storm Water Best Management
Practice Handbook.
b, Provisions for periodic sweeping for roadways, driveways, and parking areas on the
project site,
,
c, A design toreflect-the City's Storm water Master Plan.
d. Paved areas that are designed to minimize drainage that is channeled to one location.
Pathway paving shall be kept to a minimum and shall be porous in nature wherever
feasible,
'4, Developers shall pay the appropriate storm drain development fees, subject to review by the
City Department of Public Works, prior to building pennit issuance.
.,.
t
.
.
Revised Negative DeclarationfI'M 94-04
Page 3
10/24/94
5, The developer shall apply for and obtain a General Permitfor Storm Water Discharges
Associatedwith Construction Activity by submitting a completed Notice of Intent (NOI)
form and payment of $500 to the State Water Resources Control Board prior to the
issuance of a building permit. Further, the developer shall be required to comply with the
terms of this permit during and after construction of the project. These terms include, but
are not limited to, the following:
a. The use of water quality controls (i.e., Best Management Practices) both during and
after construction, for example:
(
.
Designing each project area to focus on minimizing directly connected impervious
surfaces, to provide for slowing of storm water flows and increasing recharge
potential;
.
Stabilizing denuded areas prior to the wet season (October 1 through May 1);
.
Limiting construction access routes and stabilizing access points;
.
Protecting adjacent properties with sediment barriers, dikes or mulching;
.
Stabilizing and preventing erosion from temporary conveyance channels and
outlets; .
c
.
Using proper construction material and construction waste storage, handling, and
disposal practices;
.
Protecting outdoor storage materials from drainage with berms and roof covers;
.
Using appropriate landscape controls (irrigation and application offertilizers,
herbicides and pesticides); and
.
Installing structural storm water treatment controls such as wet ponds, swales,
vegetated filter strips, extended detention basins and sand filters.
b. Performance of routine visual monitoring of these controls; and
c, Submittal of an annual report, documenting all surface water drainage information to the
State Water Resources Control Board.
.,.
L
.
.
Revised Negative Declaration!TM 94-04
Page 4
10/24/94
6. All six oak trees on this site shall be preserved by a) transplanting them to the adjacent City
park site, b) transplanting them to another park site, c) transplanting them to other
residential lots within this development, or d) transplanting them to the Park Commons
property, The developer shall prepare a landscaping plan that incorporates the
recommendations provided in the arborist's report (attached as Appendix B) to protect and
preserve the existing trees during and after construction of the proposed project. The
landscaping plan should include all of the following recommendations:
(
Removal
(-
.
All transplants and/or planting of existing trees on the project site shall be
conducted by an experienced specialist in moving trees of similar characteristics
within similar ecotones;
.
The oaks should be removed from the soil in the fall, sometime in October or
November, because during this time of year, Oaks are deciduous and dormant,
which increases the probability of a successful transplant;
.
The roots must be hand dug to ensure great care be taken and no roots are
severed. Typically, this species of Oak sends down large tap roots which must be
c~efully removed from the soil;
.
The root ball must be boxed or ball and burlaped;
.
The surrounding soil should ~e watered extensively prior to the removal of each
oak tree so that the roots are loosened for easier removal;
.
An anti-transpirant or anti-dessicant should be applied at a rate of 2: 1 instead of
the usual 10: 1 ratio in order to prevent moisture loss during moving; and
.
A crane should be used to lift the oak trees onto a flat bed truck.
TransplantIPlanting
.
-Spacing of-the trees should be planned by the architect drafting the plans for the
park site, A minimum of 20 to 25 feet should be allowed between the trees when
planted at the park;
.
The trees should be set 2-3 inches above the surface of the ground at the planting
site;
,"
ii
.
.
Revised Negative Declaration/TM 94-04
Page 5
10/24/94
.
No air pockets may be left as the soil is being replaced. Only native soil should be
used; no planting mix or fertilizers;
.
An area the size of the drip line should be established beneath the tree where a
two-inch layer of mulch can be placed to prevent compaction of roots;
No stakes should be required as Quercus lobata have a large root ball with long (
tap roots,
*
The developer shall also be required to obtain the signature of the consulting arborist on the
final landscaping plans certifying that the plan is consistent with the recommendations made
in the arborist's report, Finally, the development of the project site shall conform to the City
of Gilroy's Consolidated Landscaping Policy, subject to the review and approval of the City
Planning Department, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit.
7_ Tree removal and grading activities shall begin during the non-breeding season (August 1
through March 15) for the loggerhead shrike. Scheduling construction activities in this
manner is intended to discourage use of the project site for nesting, and is less likely to
result in incidental mortalities, This scheduling criterion shall be included on the final
improvement plans prior to issuance of a building permit. (
'.....,--
8, The developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Impact Fee, subject to the approval of the
City Engineer, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
9. Signalize the Santa Teresa Boulevard/Longmeadow Drive intersection. This is eligible for
Traffic Impact Fee reimbursement. This must be installed as part of the third phase of the
project (Lot~ 86-112), and is subject to the approval by the City Department of Public
Works, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
10. Widen Santa Teresa Boulevard to a four-lane expressway from north ofMantelli Drive to
north ofLongmeadow Drive, This must be installed as part of the third phase of the project
(lots 86 through 112), and is subject to the approval of the City Department of Public
Works, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
11, Install a westbound bongmeadow Drive left-turn lane at Calle'delRey, This must be
installed as part of the third phase of the project (lots 86 through 112), and is subject to the
approval of the City Department of Public Works, prior to issuance of a building permit.
12, Install a four-way stop control at the Mantelli Drive/Calle del Rey intersection when Calle
del Rey is extended to Mantelli drive, This is subject to the approval of the City Department
of Public Works, prior to issuance ofa building permit.
II
.
.
Revised Negative DeclarationffM 94-04
Page 6
10/24/94
13, The developer should coordinate with the Gilroy Unified School District to develop a
"Suggested Route to School" plan for the Luigi Aprea Fundamental School, subject to the
approval of the City Department of Public Works, prior to issuance of a building permit.
Appropriate signing and pavement markings should be incorporated into the subdivision
design.
(
14, The design of all street improvements serving the project site shall be provided by the
developer, subject to the approval of the City Department of Public Works and the Gilroy
Uaifiea Sehool District.
15. The developer shall be responsible for submitting a dust control policy subject to the review
and approval of the city Building Department, consistent with the existing City of Gilroy
policies and codes, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
16, Noise-generating construction activities shall be restricted to 7:00 a,m, through 10:00 p,m.
Construction equipment shall be properly muffled and maintained, The contractor work
specifications for all construction activities shall reflect these measures, subject to the review
and approval of the City Building Department, prior to the issuance ofa building permit.
c
17, The developer shall submit a detailed plan for all exterior lighting as a part of the building
permit review process, The lighting plan shall incorporate design elements that will
minimize the potential for light and glare impacts on adjacent residential properties, The
lighting plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the city Planning Department.
18, The developer shall provide required impact fees to the Gilroy Unified School District.
19, Prior to development of the site, the developer shall pay required City of Gilroy Public
Safety impact fees,
20. Development shall meet all water supply and water pressure standards as contained in the
Uniform Building Code, This plans shall be reviewed and approved by the city Fire
Department, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
21, The development of the site shall conform to the Uniform Fire Code, subject to the review
and approval of the City Fire Department.
22, Development plans shall include the installation of on-site fire hydrants. Improvement plans
shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Departments of Public Works, Fire
and Building.
..
..
2~. The developer shall pay the appropriate water development fees, subject to review by the
city Department of Public Works, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
."
.
.
Revised Negative DeclarationtrM 94-04
Page 7
10/24/94
24, The developer shall provide the design of all water line improvements serving the project
site, subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
25.
Developers shall pay the appropriate sewer development fees, subject to review by the City
Department of Public Works, prior to the issuance ofa building permit,
Prior to the development of the site, the developer must obtain sufficient sewer allocation tf
serve the proposed project, and will be required to pay the City sanitary sewer connection
fees.
26,
27,
The design of all sewer line improvements serving the project site shall be provided by the
developer, subject to the review and approval of the city Department of Public Works.
28, Prior to the development of the proposed project site, the developer shall pay required City
of Gilroy Parks and Recreation impact fees,
29, During construction of residential lots 60 - 73, a qualified professional archeological
monitor shall be present whenever earth-moving activities take place, The qualified
professional archeological monitor shall prepare written reports to the City of Gilroy
Planning Department on a weekly basis. Alternativelv. the applicant may choose to hav,
a aualified archaeolos!ical firm perform backhoe trench in!! and a detailed surface'
inspection of this area prior to earth movin!! activities, A detailed report of the
findin~s shall be submitted to the Plannin~ Department once the study is complete.
If archeological resources are uncovered during earth moving activities, all work shall be
halted, At that time, and prior to any further construction activities within the
archaeologically sensitive area, archeological testing will be necessary to determine the
nature, extent and significance of the site. Testing shall include detailed surface collection
and recording, mechanical (back hoe) trenches to determine the depth and subsurface extent
of the site, and hand excavated units to determine the nature and composition of the site,
The qualified professional archeological monitor shall be hired by the City of Gilroy
Planning Department, and funded by the developer, prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
30. Due to the possibility that significant buried cultural resources might be found during
construction, language shall be printed on construction drawings for all phases to protect
these resources, pursuant to the review and approval of the City Planning Department.
Such language might read as tOnows: - .
"If archeological resources or human remains are discovered during construction, work shall
be halted within 50 meters (150 feet) of the find until it can be evaluated by a qualified
.,.
i'.
.
Revised Negative Declaration/TM 94-04
Page 8
.
10/24/94
professional archaeologist. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation
measures shall be fonnulated and implemented."
(
Date Prepared: September 19, 1994
End of Review Period:
Date Approved By City Council:
(~.
."
Michael Dom, Director of Planning
oj
.-~. .... \
--.Planning ntartment
STAFF REPORT
.
"
October 24, 1994
File Number: TM 94-04
c
Applicant:
Kaufinan and Broad, South Bay Inc.
Location: South ofLongmeadow Drive, between Calle Del Rey and Rancho Hills Drive
Staff Planner: Melissa Durkin
REOUESTED ACTION:
Approval of a tentative map for a subdivision of 112 residential lots and four remainder lots.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
(-
'.
Parcel Number:
Parcel Size:
Flood Zone:
783-21-014,029,035,036 and 783-41-060
6~. 8 acres (total for the site)
"B", Panel # 0603400001 C
. Panel Date: 10/06/81
STATUS OF PROPERTY:
.Existing Land Use
Vacant Land
General Plan Designation
Low Density Residential
Zoning
RI-PUD
STATUS OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY:
Existing Land Use
N: Single Family Homes
S: Single Family Homes
E: Single Family Homes
W: S.F, Homes, Vacant
General Plan Designation
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
LDR, Residential Hillside
Zoning
RI-PUD, Rl
RI-PUD, Rl
RI-PUD, Rl
Rl, RH
CONFORMANCE OF REOUEST WITH GENERAL PLAN:
-- .
The proposed project conforms to the land- use designation for the property on the General Plan
. map, and is consistent with the intent of the text of the General Plan document.
1
EXHIBIT C
."
, ..
.j
Staff Report TM 94- ~
Page 2
.:
10riS/94
.,:
This project conforms with the policies of Gilroy's General Plan. The following examples
demonstrate this compliance:
Urban Development and Community Design (Section ll):
Policy 3: "Urban Development will only occur within the incorporated portion of the Planning
Area, Land will therefore be annexed to the City before final development approval is given. " (
The proposed project is in conformance with this policy, because this land has been within City
limits for many years.
Policy 4: liThe City will phase development in an orderly, contiguous manner in order to maintain
a compact development pattern to avoid premature investment for the extension of public
facilities and services, New urban development will occur in areas where municipal services are
available and capacity exists prior to the approval of development in areas which would require
major new facility expansion,
The proposed project is in conformance with this policy, because this property is surrounded by
developed residential property, and municipal services are currently available at this site.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
c
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
An expanded initial study has been prepared for this project. The study identified potentially
significant effects on the environment, however, the applicant has agreed to individual mitigation
measures which will avoid or mitigate the effects to a point where no significant impacts will
occur. The applicant has requested that some minor revisions be made to these mitigation
measures (please see attached letter dated October 11, 1994 and memo dated October 20, 1994).
These changes are as follows: '
1. Mitigation Measures 9 and 10: The applicant requested that these mitigations be revised to
state that the required improvements will not be triggered until 1996, and that these
requirements will be placed on all T.entative Maps approved in the northwest quadrant in
1996, The applicant further requested that the mitigations clarify that the improvements
would not be the sole responsibility ofKaufinan and Broad, but would be prorated across
benefitted properties,
The need for the improvements contained within these mitigations is triggered by several
different developments, therefore.,the first_ development to begin construction of its 1996
build-out allotment will construct these. improvements. These improvements are then subject
to the standard Traffic Fee Reimbursement, as outlined in mitigation measures 9 and 10. Staff
does not recommended any changes to this mitigation.
,,.
St8ffReport TM 94-&
Page 3
.
10/25/94
2. Mitigation Measure 13: The applicant is requesting that the responsibility for the
deveiopment of a "Suggested Route to School" plan for the Luigi Aprea Fundamental School
be assigned to the City Department of Public Works. This mitigation measure is already
assigned to the Public Works Department for approval authority, therefore no change to
mitigation 13 is recommended.
(
3. Mitigation Measure 14: The applicant is requesting that the requirement to obtain street
improvement approval from the Gilroy Unified School District be removed.' Staff agrees with
this change, as allowing the School District to have approval authority of these improvements
was a typographical error. The following change is recommended:
"The design of all street improvements serving the project site shall be provided by the
developer. subject to the approval of the City Department of Public Works and the Gilroy
Unified Sehool District, "
4. Mitigation Measure 29: The applicant has requested that this mitigation be altered to allow
the choice of having an archaeologist perform a detailed inspection of this area prior to
grading, or to have the archaeologist at this site during earth moving activities, Staff is in
agreement with this alteration, and recommends the following change:
,
\
"During construction of residential lots 60 - 73. a qualified professional archaeological
monitor shall be present whenever earth-moving activities take place, The qualified
professional'archaeological monitor shall prepare written reports to the City of Gilroy
Planning Department on a weekly basis, Alternativelv. the aoolicant may choose to have a
Qualified archaeol02ical firm oerform backhoe trenchini! and a detailed surface
insoection of this area orior to earth movini! activities. A detailed reoort of the findini!s
shall be submitted to the Plannin~ Department once the study is complete."
.. There is no substantial evidence that the proposed project. as revised. will have a significant
impact on the environment. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for the following reasons:
1. The proposal is a logical extension of the existing urban, land use and zoning patterns of this
area,
2, Identified adverse impacts such as the effect on school impacts an!i increase in traffic
generated from this project are proposed to be mitigated through school impaction fees. and
construction of off-site improvements,
3, The proposed project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the City of Gilroy ,
.. .
4, The Initial Study was independently reViewed by City staft: and the Negative Declaration
reflects the independent judgement of the City of Gilroy.
Staff recommends that the mitigation measures contained within the attached revised Negative
Declaration be applied.
,"
StiUfRep~rt TM 94-.
Page 4
-.'_..
10/2'5/94 .
I
RELATED APPLICATIONS:
PUD A/S 94-25:
Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval for the architectural design of 112 dwelling units.
RDO BACKGROUND:
This project received Residential Development Ordinance (ROO) approval in the 1992 RDO (
competition (RD 92-24). A 112 unit building allotment was awarded, with approval to construct'
50 units in 1994,35 units in 1995, and 27 units in 1996. Final map approval for the project will
comply with this yearly build-out schedule.
ANALYSIS OF REOUEST:
This proposed tentative map will subdivide a 69.8 acre site into 116 lots; 112 of these lots will be
used to construct single family homes, and the four remainder lots are planned to be subdivided at
a future time: This site has a Planned Unit Development overlay, which will allow the applicant to
subdivide this property into lots which range in size from approximately 5,250 square feet to
9,895 square feet, with an overall density of just under 7.25 dwelling units per net acre, which is
the maximum allowed density in the RI zoning district. Although some of these parcels will be
smaller than would normally be allowed in this district, the overall density of the area meets the ,.-
intent of the Planned Uni~ Development criteria, (
The only lots where these small sizes present concern are lots five through eight, on the northerly
boundary of this site. These parcels abut patio lots on Brentwood Lane and Jan Drive. Placing
any of Kaufman and Broad's proposed two story models on these lots will overpower the patio
homes, and will significantly reduce the privacy now enjoyed by the residents of those homes,
therefore, staffhas recommended in the accompanying Architectural and Site review for this
project (see A1S 94-25), that these four lots be required to be constructed with single story
houses, '
Kaufman and Broad is currently proposing to provide two single story models in this subdivision
(Model One and Model Four). Both of these models are 45 to 50 feet wide, depending on
whether two or three garage stalls provided. With a required minimum five foot side yard
setback, these homes would have to be set on lots which are a minimum of 55 to 60 feet wide.
The Tentative Map shows the following widths for lots five through eight: lot five is 54 feet wide,
lot six is 53 feet wide, lot seven is 58 feet wide and lot eight is 50 feet wide, Only lot seven
would be large enough to accommodate either of these single story homes, and then only if the
home is constructed with a two car garage, rather than a three car garage. Staff recommends that
lots five through eight be required to ..have mi.nimum widths of 60 feet, so that they can
accommodate the single story hom~s, and Still provide prospective home buyers with the option
. of a two or three car garage.
II
Staff Report TM 9+_;
Page 5
.
10/25/94 .
Development of this site will result in the construction of single family detached homes, the design
of which will be considered under PUD application A1S 94-25. The approval of this PUD
application will be subject to Planning Commission and City Council approval.
Shmificant Trees
(
The westerly portion of this site contains six significant oak trees. These trees are all six inches or
larger in diameter, but are small enough to be moved, and still be viable. The design of the streets
and the lot configuration contained within this Tentative Map are such that these trees could not
remain where they are and survive. Because of this, the Negative Declaration for this project
contains a mitigation (number 6) which addresses the preservation of these trees. This mitigation
states that the trees shall be preserved by a) transplanting them to the adjacent City park site, b)
transplanting them to another park site, c) transplanting them to other residential lots within this
development or d) transplanting them to the Park Commons property, where Kaufinan and Broad
has been required to provide one'oak tree on each of their lots, as a mitigation for the removal of
a large oak tree on that site.
The City Parks and Recreation Department has agreed to allow two of the oaks to be transplanted
onto the adjacent park site. Only two of the trees are desired, because the design of the park has
not been established, and it is feared that locating more trees on the site will restrict the
possibilities for the design of the park.
(
The Parks and Recreation Department is willing to allow the remaining trees to be transplanted to
the Uvas Creek Park Preserve, however, planting the trees at this site will remove them from the
residential environment in which they are currently located, and will prevent the residents of the
area from enjoying this natural resource, Staff recommends that the trees be transplanted to lots
within this subdivision if possible, or alternatively to the lots at the Park Commons site, where
they can be enjoyed in a residential context,
Within Mitigation Measure 6, which calls for the preservation of these trees, it is recommended
that the oaks be moved during October or November, since oaks transferred during these months
have an increased probability of a successful transplant. The timing of the approvals for this
Tentative Map, and the work which is required prior to transplanting the oaks will not enable the
developer to move the trees during this time period, Staffhas consulted with Matt Bissell of Roy
Webster and Associates, the firm which prepared the arborist report for the initial study of this
project, He has stated that the oaks can be moved any time and still remain viable, as long as they
are moved by an experienced tree mover,
Primary access to this development will be provided by Calle del Rey and Rancho Hills Drive,
which are both General Plan collector streets, With the completion of the first phase of this
development, the applicant will const..ruct Cal.Ie del Rey through to Mantelli Drive, which will
complete the build-out of that street. The proposed tract map configuration has been designed to
provide the most efficient traffic circulation, and is consistent with minimum City development
standards, The applicant has worked with City staff and the School District in order to provide a
design which would be acceptable to all parties,
."
....: " ~~. -. .
.,. .... ..:'.... ".
S~Report ~ 94-.
-:".'~.'" , ......;;".
Page 6
.
1 0/25/94 '
As submitted, this project is consistent with the intent of the city's General Plan text and Land Use
Map, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision and Land Development code, and prior ROO buildout
approval granted by the City Council. .
STAFF RECOMMENDA nON
Staff recommends approval of this request for the following reasons:
A. The project proposal is generally consistent with the approval granted to the developer by the
City Council under the Residential Development Ordinance;
B. The proposed tentative map is consistent with the intent of the goals and policies of the City's
General Plan document;
C, The proposed development is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and the City's Subdivision
and Land Development Code;
D. Public utilities and infrastructure improvements needed in order to serve the proposed project
are in close proximity; and
E, There will be no significant environmental impacts as a result of this project due to the
required mitigation measures to be applied.
(--
In addition. StafT recommends the followin2 conditions be olaced on the aooroval of this reauest: "-'
1, Hydrant locations and water main sizing shall be approved by the Gilroy Fire Department
prior to the issuance of any building permits,
2. Street improvements and the design of all stonn drainage, sewer and water lines, and all
street sections and widths shall be subject to the review and approval of the Public Works
Department.
3, All utilities to, through, and on the site shall be constructed underground, in accordance
with Municipal Code Section 21.120, subject to the review and approval of the Public
Works Department.
4, All grading operations and soil compaction activities shall be per the approved soils report
and shall meet.with the approval of the City Engineer, Grading plans shall show grades of
all adjacent properties.
5, No grading permits shall be issqed for phase 2 of this project until the oak trees have been
removed from this site. If th~ oak trees are transplanted to lots within this development,
those lots shall be graded prior to installation of the trees.
6, The oak trees shall be moved by an experienced tree mover, subject to the approval of the
City's Urban Forester.
.,.
s'taffReport TM 94.
Page 7
.
10125/94 .
7. A1110ts shall drain to the street for stonn drainage, subject to the review and approval of the
Public Works Department.
8. The developer shall negotiate rights-of-way with Pacific Gas and Electric and other utilities.
, ,
9. All improvements to Calle del Rey up to Mantelli Drive are the responsibility of this
subdivision.
(
10, One sewer allocation shall be required for each proposed lot, including lots for future model
homes.
11. All retaining walls must be constructed.ofpennanent materials such as concrete or masonry.
Wood shall not be permitted.
12, Show the location of any existing wells. All existing wells shall be sealed to meet the
approval of the City Engineer and the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD).
13. The Negative Declaration for this project shall be revised as indicated on the attached
document.
(
14, Mitigation Measures 1 through 30 contained within the Negative Declaration for this project
shall be applied to the approval of the project in order to reduce and/or eliminate all
potential significant impacts to a level of insignificance, as required under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
15. Lots five, six, seven and eight shall have minimum widths of 60 feet.
Respe~ly,
~ Per-----
Michael Dom
Director of Planning
attacmnents
11-3-94
At their meeting of November 3, 1994, the Planning Commission, by a vote of
6-0-1 (Commissioner Gage absent), recommended adoption of the mitigated
Negative Declaration as completed in compliance with CEQA, and reflecting the
independent judgment of the City. Further, the Planning Commission, by a vote of
5-1-1 (Commissioner Ar!llano. voted no; Commissioner Gage absent),
recommended approval ofTM 94-04, subject to 15 conditions as set forth in the
staff report, (Resolution #94-33)
.,.
.
.
I, SUSANNE E. STEINMETZ, City Clerk of the City of Gilroy, do
hereby certify that the attached Resolution No. 94-82 is an original
resolution, duly adopted by the Council of the City of Gilroy at a regular
meeting of said Council held on the 5th day of
December
, 19-2L,
at which meeting a quorum was present.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the
Official Seal of the City of Gilroy this 6th day of
December
,1994.
~?
City Clerk of the City
(Seal)