Resolution 1997-59
,
,
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 97-59
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF GILROY APPROVING A/S 97-49 (PUD), AN
APPLICATION FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE
APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
INVOLVING APPROXIMATELY 15.3 ACRES, APN 783-
53-012 AND 783-51-04
WHEREAS,
Orchard
Valley
Communities
("Applicant" )
submitted A/S 97-49 (PUD), an application for architectural and
site approval of a planned unit development ("PUD") for a 15.3
acre lot located on Peacock Ct., east of Calle del Rey, and Finch
Lane, Goshawk Ct. and Senegal Ct., west of Loganberry Drive; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed Application
A/S 97-49 (PUD) at its duly noticed meeting on October 2, 1997 and
recommended that the City Council approve Application A/S 97-49
(PUD) subject to 14 conditions; and
WHEREAS,
pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA"), City Council on November 21, 1994 certified
a Negative Declaration with 30 mitigation measures for this site
under TM 94-04; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed Application 97-49
(PUD) and all documents relating thereto and took oral and written
testimony at its duly noticed meeting of October 6, 1997; and
WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or
other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon
which this project approval is based is the office of the City
Clerk.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
A. The City Council hereby finds that:
1. 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 substantially
consistent with the intent of the text, goals and policies of
the General Plan documents.
IKBA1354556.01
72-101704706002
-1-
RESOLUTION NO. 97-59
.
.
2. The project complies with the findings required to
grant PUD architectural and site approval pursuant to
subsections (a) through (i) of Section 50.55 of the Gilroy
Zoning ordinance, and that the facts as set forth more fully
in the record incorporated herein, including but not limited
to the staff report dated September 25, 1997, as revised
October 13,
1997,
attached hereto as Exhibit A and
incorporated herein by this
reference,
supports
said
findings.
3. There is no substantial evidence that the project
as
mitigated may have
a
significant
effect
on the
environment.
B. The Negative Declaration for this site certified and
adopted in compliance with CEQA, in association with TM 94-04,
with 30 mitigation measures, is supported by substantial evidence
and applies to this project, finding as follows:
1. The Negative Declaration has been prepared in
accordance with CEQA and reflects the independent judgment of
the City; and
C.
A/S 97-49
(PUD) should be and hereby is approved,
subject to the 14 conditions set forth in the staff report
dated September 25, 1997, as revised October 13, 1997,
attached hereto as Exhibit A, and with two further conditions
which shall read in their entirety as follows:
15. The developer shall devise a mechanism to handle
additional drainage from adjacent properties, as well as on
site drainage.
16. The
developer shall
not i fy buyers
of
homes
adjacent to the Carriage Hills Tract that there is an
existing problem with drainage from the Carriage Hills Tract
onto their parcels.
\KBA\354556.01
72-101704706002
-2-
RESOLUTION NO. 97-59
'.
.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of October, 1997 by
the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS: GILROY, MORALES, ROGERS, ROWLISON,
SPRINGER, VALDEZ
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:NONE
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:NONE
~~.
Rhonda Pellin, City Clerk
IKBA1354556.01
72-101704706002
-3-
RESOLUTION NO. 97-59
Commu~ DevelopmenllDepartment
Planning. Division
Exhibit A
TO: City Administrator
October 13, 19
IC/q 7
FROM: Melissa Dwidn, Planner n
SUBJECT: PI~g Commission. Action on AlS 97-49, Orchard Valley Cominmrlties ".
'-
The Planning Commission recommended approval of Architectural and Site Review application AlS 97-49 at tit(
OctOber 2 meeting, by a vote of 5-0-2 (Commissioner Lai was absent, and Commi~lJioner Blankleyexcused hersc
due to the fact that she owns property within a 300 foot radius of the site). The Commission further recommendf
that the following two conditions be added to the approval of this project:
IS. The developer shall devise a mechanism to handle additional drainage from adjacent properties, as we
as on site drainage.
16. The developers shall notify buyers of homes adjacent to the Carriage Hills Tract that there is an existin
problem with drainage from the Carriage Hills Tract onto their parcels.
DISCUSSION
The Planning Commi!ilsion added these two conditions due to an existing issue with drainage from the ~~ .Ii11
property onto the Orchard Valley Communities property. The homes along the western boundmy of the Orchar,
Valley Communities property will abut existing homes in the Carriage Hills tract. The front portions of the Carriagt
Hills parcels drain to the street, however, since these parcels are relatively long, the rear portions of these lots ar,
not able to drain to the front of the parcel, and subsequently drain to the rear. The rear yard drainage systen
functions by grading the properties so that they slope to the rear, and water run offis funneled into a drain. For <
variety of reasons, the drainage system hi the rear'ofthe parcels is not entirely effective, and because of this, somf
of the water run offfrom the rear of the properties is draining onto the Orchard Valley Communities property.
This is an existing condition, which is caused by the Carriage Hills tract Because of this, the only way to.remed:y
this situation would be to make changes to the Carriage Hills parcels. This is not a condition that can be placed on
the Orchard Valley Communities application, therefore the Planning Commission proposed the above conditions
of approval to provide some mediation of the drainage issue. It should be noted that Orchard Valley Communities
. has included an overland drainage easement on the Final Map for this project which will accommodate overland
flows onto their site. In addition, the property owners who purchase the Orchard Valley Communities homes cannot
legally be requireclto drain run offfrom the Carriage Hills parcels. This condition of approval is only intended to
provided some mitigation for the existing situation.
Respectfully,
.jAd~ ~"o. . /9 ~
Melissa Durkin
Planner n
Communi" Development 8epartment
Pl~g . Division
Staff Report
. ..
OctoheI: 13, 1997
File Number: AlS 9749 (planned Unit Development) - Revised St8fJRePort
Applicant: Orchard Valley Communities
Location: Peacock Court, east of Calle del Rey, and Finch Lane, Goshawk Court and Senegal Court, west
of Loganberry Drive
Staff Planner: Melissa Durkin
REQIJF.STED ACTION:
Planned Unit Development ~ew of a 77 lot single family subdivision.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
Parcel Number:
Parcel Size:
Flood Zone:
783-53-012 and 783-51-04
15.3 acres (total for both areas)
"B", Panel # 0603400001C
_ Panel Date: 10/06/81
ST A TIJS OF PROPERTY:
F-ximng Land U~e
Vacant Land
General Plan n~ig'U:ltion
Low Density Residential
Zoning
RI-PUD
ST A TIJS OF SIJRROIJN1lING PROPERTY:
Eximng I_and U~e'
N: S. F. HomesIElem. School
S:S.F.Hom~acant
E: Single Family Homes
W: Single Family Homes
General Plan Ile!I:igJ'U'tion
Low Density Residential
Low Densfty Residential
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Zoning
Rl-PUD
Rl-PUD, Rl
Rl-PUD
R-l PUD, Rl
AIS 97-49 - Rmsed Staff Report 2
. ..
CONFORM.4.NCF. OF REQUEST WITH ~NF.R.4.I, PI.AN:
10/13/97
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 This project conforms with the
policies of Gilroy's General Plan. The following examples demonstrate this compliance:
UrbAD Development ADd CommllniV ne._1" (Sec:tiOD m:
Policy 3: "Urban Development will only occur within the incorpOrated portion of the Planning Area.
Land will therefore be annexed to the 'City before ji1ltl1 development approval is given. "
. The proposed project is in conformance with this policy, because this land has been within.City ~ tts
for many years.
PoliCy 4: "The City will p/iase development in an orderly, contiguous manner in order to maintain Q
compact development pattern to 'avoid premature investment fQr 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 facili.ty
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.
ENVIRONMF.NT AI, IMPACTS:
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
An expanded initial study was prepared for this project under Tentative Map application TM 94-04. A
. Negative Declaration with 30 mitigation measures waS adopted for this project.
RDO BACKGROUND:
This project received Residential Development Ordinance (ROO) approval in the 1996 ROO competition
(RD 96-7). A 129 unit building allotment was awarded, with approval to construct 29 units in 1998, 37
units in 1999, 36 units in 2000, and 27 units in 200 1. Final map approval for the project will comply with
this yearly build-out schedule. .
SUBDIVI~'ON B.4.CKGROIJND:
This property is part of a Tentative Map request that was approved in June of 1997 (Ref 1M 97-03). The
Tentative Map was approved to subdivide a 22.87 acre site into 104 lots (103 residential lots and one
remainder lot). This application involves a PUD Architectural and Site approval for the construction of
homes on S8 lots that resulted from that Tentative Map, and 19 lots that will be created from the
remainder lot. .
- u -- - - - --- ---r--'
ANALV!U~ ~FREQI.:
.
The applicant is requesting Planned Unit Development (PUD) design review for the construction of7:
detached single family homes on land which totals approximately IS.3 acres. Fifty-eight of the lots 01:
which these homes will be constructed resulted from Tentative Map application TM 97-03. The:
remaining 19 homes will be constructed on a 4 acre remainder parcel, when it is subdivided. 1'llli
remainder parcel has not yet been subdivided because of the potential that it contains a trace fault. A
Tentative Map for this parcel- cannot be processed until geotechnical studies ,ale completed, and
appropriate lot configurations are determined. The applicant is including ~ew. of the.remaioder parcel
in-this PUD Architectural and Site Review app~cation, b~'1R the homes that will bo cO~ on
it will be the same models that are proposed for the S8 approved lots. .'. .'
This site has a zoning designation ofRI-PUD (Single Family Residential-' Planned Unit Development).
The PUD zoning overlay allows flexibility with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant
used this .flexibility in the Tentative Map application that was processed for this site to allow lots to be
created which were less ~ 6,000 square feet. (!be lots, involved in this application range in size from
5,500 - 12,172 square.feet) The applicant is now proposing to. use the flexibility of the PUD to allow
the side yard setbacks to be reduced to five feet. The Zoning Ordinance requires that extra amenities be
provided in 'exchange for the flexibility that the Planned Unit Development allows. The applicant is
proposing to meet this requirement by lSQ1rlsc.aping the nont yards of these lots. Staff feels that, although
these setbacks are not in strict compliance with the Zoning Ordinance, they meet the intent of the PUD
concept.
HOME DESIGN
The applicant is proposing to construct three different models of homes on this site, with three differen
elevations for each model. All of the homes will have three-car garages, reverse floor plans, french
windows, stuccoed siding and chimney columns, and composition roofshingles. The homes will include
arched entries, wood trim, and wooden sectional garage doors. The three proposed plans are described as
follows: '
,.
Plan 1
A one-story, three~ to fom-bedrooIn home with 1,927 square feet of living area. This home features a steeply
pitched root: which is either hip or gable, depending.upon the elevation. The front entry of this home is
enhanced by an open portico,
Plan 2
This two-story home is 2,274 square feet in area, and has fom bedrooms. The roofline is hip and gable, with .
some variation in design depending upon the elevation. The' front door of this model is enhanced with
decorative ca.cin~ and designer windows. The portion of the second story that extends over the garage adds
architectural interest to the design,- in that it is recessed to three different depths.
Plan]
This model is two-stories, with fom or five bedrooms, and 2,639 square feet of living area. This model has
a hip and gable design, with a front entry that is ~hlln~ed with either an open portico or a porch. The second
story is recessed over the first story, and many decorative architectural details and windows are used to
accent this model.
FENCE 1.JNw. .
.
The homes along the western boundary of this pro~ will abut existing homes in the Carriage Hill~
tract. The Carriage Hills homes are at a much higher elevation than the Veotana homes will ~ therefon
there is a retaining waIl in the rear yards of the Carriage Hills homes to retain the soil in these yards. Th(
rear yard fences for these homes are built on top of the retaining wall. The retaining wall has a footinE
which extends 18 inches beyond the end of the wall, but which is still on the Carriage Hills tract property.
The result is that the Carriage Hills homes have 18 iDches of property which extends beyond their fence
lines. Therefore, when the V cntana tract builds out, there will be aD. 18 inch space between the ~ yard
propertY boundary of the Ventana homes and the fence line fur the Carriage HillS homes: ~ creates
an undesirable situation because small children or animal~ could get tJ8fI~ in this space, and it presents
a maintenance problem, since the Carriage Hills home owners would have !l ~cult time accessinytbis
area to maintain it
Staff and the City Attorney's office have looked at several ways to address the situation. However,
because the 18 inch strip is not owned or controlled by the applicant, the City does not have any power
to place a condition of 'BP.Proval on this application which ~ould affect that 18 .inch strip of land.
Therefore, staff proposes that the developer be required to place a fence on the rear yard property line of
the Ventana homes which abut the Cmiage Hills tract, and require that.the fence be constructed of
material that can be seen through (such as aD open wood design, wire mesh, or wrought iron). Although
it will. still be difficult for the Carriage Hills home owners to mainmin this area, the 18 inch strip of land
will be clearly visible to property owners in the Ventana tract, and therefore can be monitored
Primmy access to this development will be provided by Calle del Rey and Rancho Hills Drive, which are
both General Plan Collector streets. The proposed tract map configuration has been designed to provide
the most efficient traffic circulation, and is consistent with minimum City development standard.~
FINDINGS:
In order to grant Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval, the Planning Commi!i:sion and City COWlcil
, must find that the proposed Planned Unit Development will:
A. ' Confonn to the Gilroy General Plan in terms of general location and standards of development;
B. Provide the type of development which will fill a Specific need of the sWTOunding area;
C. Not require urban services beyond those which are cummtly available;
D. Provide a harmonious, integrated plan which justifies exceptions, if such.are required, to the
nonna! requirements of this ordinance;
E. Reflect an economical and efficient pattern of land uses;
F. Include greater provisions for landscaping and open space than would generally be required.
AIS 97-49 - R~Report.
5
.
10/13197
G. Utilize aesthdic design principles to create attractive bni1dn,p aDd pPeD space areas which bIen(
with the character of SUD'OUDdi~g areas;
H. Not create traffic congestion, noise, odor or other adverse effects on surrounding areas; and
1. Provide adequate ac~s)p~Jsmtfscaping, trash areas and storage, as necessary.
..STAFFRECOMMENDATlON
Staff rernmmend~ APPROVAl..nfthi~ reqUMt fnr the fnllowing rea~nn~:
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 project is consistent with the intent of-the joals and policies of the City's General
Plan document; .
C. The proposed development is generally consistent with the Zoning Ordinance, with the exception
of the request to reduce the side yard setbacks to five feet. This exception can be justified by the
developer's agreement to landscape the front yards of these homes;
D. Public utilities and infrastructure improvements needed in order to serve the proposed project are
'SUITOunding the site;
E. There will be no significant environmentaI impacts as a result of this project due to the required
mitigation measures to be applied;
F. The proposed project is consistent with surrounding development;
G. The proposed project is consistent with the prior Tentative Map approval; and
H. The proposed development is consistent with PUD. findipgs A through I, as stated in Zoning
Ordinance Section 50.55.
In additinn, S~ffrernmmends the fnllnwing rnnditinn~ be plared nn the apprnval'nfthi~ request:
1. Miti~on Measures 1 through 30 contained within the Negative Declaration for Tentative Map
application TM 94-04 shall be applied to the approval of the project in order to reduce anellor
eliminate all potential significant impacts to a level of insignificance, as required under the
California Environmc:ntal Quality Act (CEQA), subject to the review and approval of the Planning
Division. .
AIS 97-49 - ~Report
6
e.
10/13197
2. The applicant shall ltmdscape the front)ltl1'tl of all lots. LtmdsCll]Jing plans including specifications
fOr an irrigation system shall be subject to approval by the Planning Division in accordance with
the City's Consolidated Landscaping Policy, prior to the issuance. of a building permit. The
landscaping shall be continuously maintained in an orderly, live. healthy and relatively weed-free
condition, in accordDnce with the adopted1andscaping policy.
3. Exterior Lighting: No unobstructed beam of exterior lighting shall be directed outward from the
. site toward any residential use or public right-of-way, subject to ~ew and ~va1 by ~e
Planning Division. . .
4. Mechanical Appurtenances: Mechanical equipment to be located on the roof of a building's1u Ie
screened by an architectural feature of th~ building, such that it cannot be seen from ground level
at the far side of the adjacent public right-of-way, whenever possible, subject to review and
. approval by the Planning Division.
5. Building colors shalt be earth tones, subject to review and approval ~y the Planning Division..
6. All utilities constructed to, through and on the site shall be constructed underground, subject to
review and approval by the Engineering Division.
7. All sets of building plans shall contain the following wording:
"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 professi" 11
archaeologist. If the find is detennined to be significan~ appropriate mitigation measures slw~ &>e
formulated and implemented. "
This shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Division. .
8. The overall project .shall comply with the provisions of Zoning Ordinance Section 5.50, "Site
Design Requirements"; pertaining to proposed in~vidual dwelling unit designs, subject to review
and approval by the Planning Division.
9. Street addresses shall be assigned by the Engineering Division.
10. All proposed fencing must meet the requirements of the Planning Division.
11. The developer shall construct a fence on the rear yard property line of the Ventana homes which
abut the Carriage Hills tract, and that fence shall be constructed of material that can be seen
through (such as an open wood design, wire mesh or wrought iron), subject to the review and
approval of the Planning Division.
12. Side yard setbaclrs may be reduced to five feet, but should remain at six feet wherever feasible. All
dwelling units shall maintain ten foot side yard setbaclrs when adjacent to a street on a corner lot, .
subject to review and approval by the Planning Divuion.. .
AIS 97-i9 - ~taffReport 7 10/13197
. ..
13. Location of hydrants must be approved by the Bujldn,g, Life and Environmental Safety Divisio
for this project.
14. Street trees will be required for the above.project per the Consolidated Landscaping Policy. j
Street Tree Permit must be obtained, subject to review and approval by the Community Service
Department..
Respectfully,
.JJ\~~~ IU
William Faus ~ \.
Planning Division Manager
.
..
-------. -
..
! r:
-- \.
7
.
I
I
-- .----
Scale: 1- = 3,000'
"-
,..............
.
. ,-
r:
'~l!
i. ...
" - ..:
,. ..../.,. IS
It. ..
.::::e..../
~
J
. .
j
-
Hi
l
. ./ ,
! ~ ~Jl!
I.L.r \
.- . --..IIJ !
. .' ......-r-j
j , -i (f
"I. ,_.~
r--- . L '1;,
~~'-j ~ I . '11lt
:..~, 1 i: - _ ' j- ~ / I!
"'& ~-"'.J' I . If
:i: ..............~ ~:. ,.. -. ~ .I....
r~ .fi' _: ~ -!J 11
...~ ... r~" 1.
......, "oii:: ~
~.. '....... I.
.' I~"'::--.~.-::-. :;:. ~ ~
~~ .....--...a.. . . . .~
~-- ... oj
~~ ~ If
i: I:="J.\ Ii
:I~ I.. ,
".'0-: 'I · , N/
"~u.:... ., !3."
,:"I ......._.
~ :;;:.~. "=:2!
. ;-::.::... ~
Ii
,................-....-.
,../ 1
...' ....
~\
--
,....
--
.
..,;.,.
--:"---(3
L
J
r-
..
LOCATION MAP FOR A/S 97.49
.
Planning Department
NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
.
City of Gilroy
7JSl Rosanna St..
Gilroy, CA 95020.
(408) 848-0449 ,.
City File Number: TM 94-04
Proiect Descriotion:
Name of Project:
Nature of Project:
Hillcrest Phase IV Tentative Map
Request to subdiVide five parcels totalling 69.8 acres into 2521015, and
perform design review of the homes resulting from this subdivision.
Proiect Location:
Location: West of Calle Del Rey, east of Rancho Hills Drive, south ofLongmeadow
Drive.
Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 783-21-14,29,35,36 and 783-41-60
Entity or Person(s) Undertakin2 Proiect:
,.
Name:
Address:
Kaufman and Broad South Bay
1.604 North Main Street, Salinas, CA 93906
Initial Studv:
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 Depanmen~ 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 Mitigation Measures below which avoid or mitigate the effects) to
a point where no significant effects win 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.
.-
Preliminary Negative DeclarationfI'M 944)4
.
Page 2
9/19/94
2. Identified advers~ 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 go~ and policies of the General Plan
of the City of Gilroy.
4. The Initial Study was independently reviewed by City staft: and this Negative Declaration .:
reflects tile independent judgement of the City of Gilroy. - .
Miti!!ation 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 Depanment, 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 Depanment
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 Califonlia Storm Water Best Mallagemellt
Practice Handbook.
b. Provisions for periodic sweeping for roadways, driveways, and parking areas on the
project site.
c. A design-to-retlect the Gity'-sStorm 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 stonn drain development fees, subject to review by the
City Department of Public Works, prior to building pennit issuance. - -
.
Preliminary Negative DeclarationtrM 94-04
.
Page 3
9/19/94
5. The developer shall apply for and obtain a General Permit/or Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction Activity by submitting a completed Notice of Intent (NOI)
. form and payment of $500 to the State Water Resomces 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 t~ include, but
are not limited to, the following: .
a. The use of water quality controls (i.e., Best Management Practiees) both during and
after construction, fot example: . .
*
Designing each project area to focus on minimizing directly connected impervious
surfaces, t:o 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;
*
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 of fertilizers;
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 Resourc-es Control Board.
.
.
Preliminary Negative Declaration/I'M 94-04
Page 4
9/19/94
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 theDl 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 ~plants andlor planting of existing trees on the project site s~ be
conducted by an experienced specialist in.moving trees of similar characteri~cs
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 bp
carefully removed from the soil;
*
The root ball must be boxed or ball and burlaped;
.
The surrounding soil should be 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 of2: 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.
Transplant/Planting
..
Spacing of the trees 'should 'be-planned bY1he 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;
.
Pre1iminaIy Negative DecJarationITM 94-04
.
Page 5
9/19/94
.
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 b.e placed to prevent compaction of roots; .
.
.
.
No stakes should be Rquired as Quercus /obata have a ~e. root ball with long.
tap roots.
. The developer ~ also be required to obtain the signature of the consulting arborist on the
tinaI1andscapingpl~ certifYing that the plan is consistent with the recommendations made
in the arborist's report. Fma11y, the development of~e project site shall conform to the City
of Gilroy's Consolidated Landscaping Policy, subjeCt to the review and approval of the City
PlaniUng Department, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit.
7. Tree removal and grading activities shall begin during the non-breeding season (August I
through March IS) 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 BoulevardILongmeadow Drive intersection. This is eligible for
Traffic Impact Fee reimbursement. This must be installed as part of the third phase of the
project (Lots 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
(1ots 86 through 112), and is subject to the approval of the City Department of Public
Works, prior to the issuance of a building permit. ..
II. Install a westbound.Longmeaciow:Drive left-turn lane at Calle del Rey. This must be
installed as part of the third phase of the project (1ots 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 of a building permit.
.
Preliminary Negative DeclarationIIM 94-04
.
Page 6
9/19/94
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 sho~lId be incorporated into the subdivision
~~ .-
.14. The design ofall street improVements serving the project site shall be provided by. the _'
developer, subject to the approval of the City Department of~blic Works and-the Gilroy
Unified School District. .
15. . The developer shalJ 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 .pennit.
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 of a building pennit.
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
S~ety impact ~ees.
20. Development shall meet all water supply and water presSUre standards as contained in the
UnifonnBuilding Code. This plans shall be reviewed and approved by the city Fire
Department, prior to the issuance of a building perinit.
21. The development of the site shall confonn to the Unifonn 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.
23. 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.
.
Preliminary Negative Declarationfl"M 94-04
.
Page 7
9/19/94
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 deve1op~ent fees, subject t~ revi~ by th~ City-
Department of Public Works, prior to the issuance of a building .~t.
26. Prior to the development of the site,- the developer must obtain sufficient sewer allocation to .
serve the proposed project, and will be required to pay the City sanitary sewer connection
fees.
27. The design of all sewer line improvements serving the project site shall be provided by the
developer, subject to the review and approval ofth~ 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 repons to the city of Gilroy
Planning Departnient on a weekly basis.
.-
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 necessmy 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 compQsition 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"f'eview -and approval'1)f the City-Planning Department.
Such language might read as follows:
"If archeological resources or human remains are discovered during construction, worle shall
be halted within SO meters (ISO feet) of the find until it can be evaluated by a qualified
professional archaeologist. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation
measures shall be fonnulated and implemented."
.
.
I, RHONDA PELLIN, City Clerk ofthe City of Gilroy, do hereby certify that the attached
Resolution No. 97-59 is an original resolution, duly adopted by the Council of the City of Gilroy
at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 27th day of October, 1997, 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 24th day of November, 1997.
~,
City Clerk of the City of Gilroy
(Seal)