The URL can be used to link to this page

Resolution 1998-42 1 . . 11' RESOLUTION NO, 98-42 REVISED- Numbering Error A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY APPROVING A/S 98-20, AN APPLICATION FOR ARCmTECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) INVOLVING APPROXlMATEL Y 29.15 ACRES, APN 808-20-011 WHEREAS, Orchard Valley Communities ("Applicant") submitted A/S 98-20, an application for architectural and site approval of a planned unit development for a 29.15 acre lot located west of Thomas Road, bordering the north side of Babbs Canyon Creek; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), a Negative Declaration was adopted by the City Council on April 20, 1996, along with a mitigation/monitoring program, which included this project in connection with zoning amendment application Z95-09; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed application A/S 98-20 at its duly noticed meeting on July 1, 1998, and recommended that the City Council approve Application A/S 98- 20 subject to fourteen (14) conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed Application 98-20 and all documents relating thereto and took oral and written testimony at its duly noticed meeting of July 20, 1998. 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 consistent with the intent of the text, goals and policies of the General Plan documents. 2, The project complies with the Zoning designation Rl/R3 PUD. 3. The facts set forth in the record, including but not limited to those set forth in the Staff Report dated June 24, 1998, support the findings required to grant PUD architectural and site IKHMI41833601 83-072904706002 -1- RESOLUTION NO, 98.1+2 . . .~ approval pursuant to subsections (a) through (i) of Section 50.55 of the Gilroy Zoning Ordinance, and the City Council hereby adopts said findings. B. A/S 98-20 should be and hereby is approved, subject to the fourteen (14) conditions set forth in the Staff Report dated June 24, 1998, attached hereto as Exhibit 1\ and to mitigation measures 1 through 30 of the Negative Declaration attached hereto as Exhibit B, and to the mitigation/monitoring program attached hereto as Exhibit C, all above-described exhibits incorporated herein by this reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of August, 1998 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ARELLANO, GIFFORD, MORALES, ROWLISON, SPRINGER, SUDOL, GILROY NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE APPROVED: ~A~~~T- ATTEST: ~~ Rhonda Pellin, City Clerk \KHM\41833601 83-072904706002 -2- RESOLUTION NO. 98- 42 ."-~ · ': c~imiiiimty ~~~~l~pment D~artment:' -- Planning Division Staff Report FILE NUMBER: A/S '98-20, Pl~ Unit Development foi'Du 'ydl&t Orchard VaDey Communities, (clo ciHrJolmsOD) Westerly terminus of Oak ~rook Way, west of Thomas Road . ' [immediately west oflCsninnJln & Broad's Oakbrook subdivision] , 'APPLICANT: LOCATION: STAFF: William Faus REOUESTED ACfION: . :-:.';"::"~Z,,~;~'~:;E~~~ . . June 24, 1998 . , ' " If approved, this Planned Unit Development will allow the "De Y"dl&t" phase of the Thomu Road project to be constructed' on 29.15 :t acres., The project will allow the CODStruction on 78 single family lots, with a minor additional dedication to the Babbs Creek preserve. ' (Note: thne of the singk family loa, # 76, # 77, and # 78, an the -mnaining loa thllt CtJIIIpkk tJu tuljacmt 8IlbdivUion being constructed by Kaufman ci Broad, and III'f then/on guwmed under A/S 96-21 PUD). DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Parcel No: 808-20-011 Parcel Size: 'approximat~ 29.15 acres , Flood Zone:', "D", panel' 06034 ??oo 3D, dated 09/04/87 {with a, ieYised 04/18/91 LOMAR} STAtuS OF PROPERTY: Existini l.sind Use UndevelOped , General Plan DMipation , Residential Low/Med. Density STA TlJS, OF SmtROUNDTNG PROPERTY: North: . East: South: ,West:. " EximnV T.JInd Ulle Fallow Field, SF Res. Single'Family Homes , Babbs Creek Preserve Agri~ Genentl Plan DMipation Residential ~ Density . " Residential Low/Meci. Density Residential Low Density Remdmmstl Low Density, Exhibit A Zoniiw Rl/ R3 POD Zonin, At' Rl/R3 POD RI POD ,AI . M 98-20 PUD ( e, 2 (~ . . . . 6t24/9I ." .' CONFORMANCE OF REOUEST WITII GENERAL PLAN: , The proposed Planned Unit Development (A/S 98-20) confonus to the land use designation for the , property on the General Plan map, and is, cona$teat with ~ ~ of the text of the General Plan o document. This project also conforms with the policies of GilrQy's 'General Plan. The fonowing examples demonstrate this compliance: Urban Develqpment ~d Commu~ Desian POLICY 3: , Urban Development wiD only occur within the incorporated portion of the Planning Area ~ will therefore be annexed to the City before jinaJdevelopment uFl'TUwzl is given. 'POUCY 4: ,The City will phose ~lopment in an ortkriy, 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 {!I'e available and capaCity . exists prior to the approval of development in areas which would require major new facility erpansion. Residential Envimnment POLICY 1: The City will continue to work towards the goals of a balanced community with a variety of housing types and prices, sufficient job oppurtunities, and an efficient and f1fkquate provision of City services. Urban Growth, and Develqpment , POUCY 11: Clustered development will be encouraged as a means of obtaining vi:zriety of design and a sense of ope,!,,!ss. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: An expanded IDitial Study was prepared for the proposed project, which was previously submitted to both the PJA"'""s COmmission and City Council in January 1996. The study was independently reviewed by City sta1F and reflects the independent judgement of the City of Gilroy. The Initial Study identified potentiaDy significai1t effects on the environment, however, the applicant has agreed to specific revisions in the project and/or individual mitigation meaSures will be applied to the project which avoid or mitigate the effects to a point where no significant effects will occur. There is no .substantial evidence that the ~-sed project, as revised, may have a significant effect pn the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration was prepared and issued under Z 95-09, by the City Council on 4120/96. StafJ'bas subsequently ~ed this....rt ia CODjuactioD With the lubject request (A/S 98-20 PUD), ad 'fmds, the proj~ lubstaDtiaDy couUtent with the prior enviromaental documentation. ' . , , . 3 . I. ( I, . '"', ,;:\~'~l.'\:''':':'''':''-~_~~~f:.;,:~} '. '. AIS 98-20 ~ c~ . . .. ' ." 6124198 " RELATED APPLICATIONS: Z 95-09: A prior approved zone' change request tbat8m~ded the city 9f Gilroy's Zoning Map from Al (Agriadture) to RI-PUD (Single Family Residential- PIIDned Unit.Development), and combined this property with existing RI-PUD and R3-~ pioperty~ in order to create a ~Jidated R1IR3, p~ (planned Unit Development) combining ctistJ:ict.' This request Was reCommended for approved by the " .. , Planning Commi~sion on 4/4/96, and approved by the City Council on 4I!J.O/96. AlS 96-21 (PUB): , This Planned Unit Development approval allowed the "De Owks" phase of the Thomas Road project to be constructed on 41:t acres.. The project invo~ 75 siDgle fimUly homes on individual lots, transfer of density within the project PUD boundary~ and the completion of the north side of the Babbs Canyon Creek linear park adjacent to the project site. This request ~, recommended for approval by the Planning Commiqjon and subsequently approved by the City Council on December 16, 1996. TM 96-07: Tentative Map for "The Creeks", at Thomas Road, development project. A.tentative.map request to subdivide a 54.2:1: acre site into 75 single family lots, a publicly dedi~ creek preserve (Babbs Canyon Creek), and two remainder parcels. This request was recommended for approval by the .Planning Commission and subsequently approved by the City Council on December 16, 15>96. TM 98-06: .. This application accompanies the subject .A/S 98-20 PUD request , Th~ applicant ,is requesting Vesting Tentative Map approval for "De Y"1llIu" phase of the Thomas Road Development. Ir:approved, this tentative map request will allow the subdivision of a 29.15 :: a,cre~e ,into, ~8 single family:lots, with a mmor additional dedication to the Babbs Creek: p~e. ;. ROO BACKGROUND: The subject Planned UDitDevelopment request ("De Jl"1ilIIS") represents a part of the larger lbomas Road DeveJopmeD~ which has four distinct sections: .#1. The Y"mqlll'ds #2. ' The Creeks #3. The Y"dIas #4. The Upltuul.r Total DeveJopment: 106 single family dwellings (south side of Babbs Creek) 78 single family dwellings (north side of Babbs Cteek) 75 smaIl-lot SF dwellings ,(northwest of Babbs Creek) 60 single family dwellings (north offuture Luchessa) , 319 ~eJlingUDits .-" -( AIS 98-20 'POD ". - ~ -....-. (- " . ....~ 6f24198 '.:;- ,~,.._.;,<:i?:.~:~ _" ... "I.,,' '~-.-: 4 To date. the Thoma. Road Develqpment hu 'ne~ed the foDmri". ROO aDotmmu: . , RD 82-03 ' RD 92-21 RD~S, RD 96-08 . Total RDO: , , 42 single fimily dwellings , (constructed UDder TM 93-03) 141' single fimily dwellingS (UDder TM 94-05, TM 96-(7) 125 SF dWellings (JDCh!dcs 83 smin 1aIa) . . 46 single family dwellings 354 'dwelling ~ approved forbuildout The City Cowicil approved buDd-oat .chedaJe for the 1992, 1994,ud 1996 RD.O aDocations: 1995 1996 1997, 1998 1999 2000 Totals RD 92-21 33 33 34 41 , 141 RD 94-05 17 10 20 35 43 125 RD 96-08 46 46 Y car Totals 33 50 44 61 35 89 312 ANALYSIS OF REOUEST: ' The applicant, Orchard VaD.ey Communities, is reqpestmi Planned Unit Development (PUD) 8,pJ)I'oval " for" The Villas @ '/homos Road' project. This proposed PUD request wiD allow the applicant to develpp a 29.15 :i: acre Rl/R3 POD site with 75 single family homes on individual 4,000 sq. ft. lots. Three of the single ~y lotS (~eJineated on the pllns as lots # 76, #17, and #78), ~ the rem.ainiTlg lotS ~ complete the adj~ Subdivision being constructed 'by IC.IlIrlTnaJ1 & Broad, and are therefore govemed'under A/S"96-2I PUD. ' The nrqpertv is l~ed west of Thomas Road and bord~ the north side of Babbs Canyon Creek. The extension of Thomas Road to the west (fumre Luchessa Avenue) will border the project site along its . northerly property line. Primary access will be provided from a local street connecting to Luchessa ,Avenue, with secondary access aIcmg existing Oak Brook Way (parallel to Bibbs Creek). No direct 'access to Luchessa Avenue will be developed. ' There -are fODrk~ elelnmu to the P"lposed PUD (}JS 98-2Q) .pproval: ' # 1. Site plan design and deuity transfer {see. attached plans, page I} ,#2. SoandwaD It Lanclseapml {see ~ed plans, page 2} #3. Minor addition to the Babbs Canyon Creek Preserve {~attached plans, pages 2 and 3}. #4. Rome and elevation design plans {attached elevation plans} All 98-20 . POD ... 5 -. ..... 6I24I9a :J Site plaa desip aDd deDJity trusf'er The proposed PUD site plan request for 75- siDgle family 4,~ :i: sq,ft. lots (which iDc1udes tbo=e pnuaining 6,000 :i: lots'tbat complete the adjaceat subdivision ~ constructed by K .,wtm~ .t Broad) is Consistent with the cats General Plan bmd use map which ~MirsrtfI!C the site as RESIDENTIAL LOW and MEDIUM DENSITY. A maxiJDum build-out deasity not to exceed 'm dweIIiDg units per .'net acre is allowed under'the R.t base~ zoning, and a maximum of 16 dweDing units per net acre is . allowed under the R3 base zoning., The PUD combinini district.. which MinI' the two de$jpm;om " to;ether aDows the hmldout den~ to be tnmrierred across the entire ml!!.. . As proposed, the overa.U . PUD site design (prior Oakbrook approval + cmrent Yil/Qs~) -exhibits an ~_ deasity at , about 6.7 :i: dwelling units per acre, (appf~mJltely 9 .I:i: units per aCre for the smaIl-lot ,Yi/llB .section, , , and approximately 5.4:i: units per acre for the standard 6,000 :i: sq,ft Ookbrook lot section)~ The PUD ~ district allows the averaging oflot sizes in order to permit lots less than the minimUfl\ 6,000 square feet. Setbacks within the Villas are pro.posed as foDows: .. Front yard: 20 feet for all enclosed living areas, ,16 feet for non-1Mng areas [i.e., front porch] .. Rear yard: 15 feet .. S~de ,yard: 5 feet minimum, with a total aggregate of 12 feet for both side yard setbacks SoundwaU & Landscaping As a mitigation measure, required'within the Negative Declaration issued under Z 95-09, a sound , intensity analysis is required to determine the potential noise impacts ftom the future extension of ,Luchessa Avenue. As a result, a modified sound waIl and landscaping benn design along Luchessa Avenue is proposed. This design involves a 12':i: wide Jandscaped area along Luchessa Avenue which will be bermed up to a 6' :i: sound wall. . ' Mioor addition to the Babbs Canyon Creek Presave Th,e Babbs canyon ,Creek-Preserve was initiated under prior tentative map approval 1M 93-03 and , Planned Unit Development, A1S 94-22., ' The, master plan for the ~ject was created under the PUD and included both the north and SC?Uth sides of the c:reekinvolving several parcels of land. The current PUD adds. a small,remainder piece to the Babbs' Canyon Creek project, which,is consistent with the master plans reviewed by the PlAymi"8 Commissio~ and approved by the City Council. Home and elevatioD desip p..... " , Orchard Valley Communities would like to deve1op_~e 75 single family 4,000:i: sq. ft. lots uti1i7.ing three different models, which are entirely new, to the Thomas,Road development area. In addition, .PLAN #1, PLAN #2, and PLAN #3 will have three di.aittct elevation alternatives, thereby creating niDe available house plans. Further, each house plan can also be reversed, providing greater diversity to the overall development scheme. The three base plans will be designed in a modified California Crqftsman style c;f.architecture, with full front.yard ~scaping [see attached landscaping plans, following the' elevationS drawings]. The three proposed house p~ are as foBQWs: . . AIS ~8-20PUD . ~ ( , '.'- , ' , ,,''''0,..._.;'- 6 . 6124198 , , PLAN #1: . . .. . A two-stmy 3-bedroom house with 1,525 squire feet' IUd an fttacbed two-car prase. FraDt exterior details will include ~ front porch, fi'eDdl windows, custom garage and front entry doors, and , a gabled roofwith concrete tiles. Options win iDcJude ~ iron window p~ brick veneer or cult!Jred.stone wainscottP.. wood shutters, and built-Up 'stucco ~ ' PLAN #%: '., A ~story 3-bedroqm house with I~744 squ8re feet Gel an attached two-car p-age~ FroDf~eriQr details Win include a small ~ porch, french windows, custom garage aDd frOnt entry doors, stucco", " siding, and a gabled roofwith CODa'ete tiles. Options will include wrought iron window p;t~ brick veneer or a.Jltured stone wainscotting, wood shutters, built-up stUcco trim, and modified gabledlhipped roof design. , PLAN #3: , , _ A two-story 3-bedroom house with 2,027 square feet and an attached two-car garage. This plan has , a 4th bedroom 1 den 1 inaster bedroom retreat option. Front exterior details will include a covered from porch, stucco siding, '~ench windows With shutters, 'custom garage and front eDtry doors, and a gabled roof design with concrete tiles. Options wm ~de wrought iron window pi1"'B~ brick veneer or cultured stone wainscotting, and built-up stucco trim accents. '. As submitted, the proposed PUD is consistent 'with the City's General Plan land use maP wbich designates the site as Residential Low and Medium DenSity, substantially consistent with prior City Council Residential Development Ordinance, consistent, with the dtysZoning Ordinance, 'and substantially consistent with applicable development policies. , " REOUlRED ~INGS: In,ord~ to Want Piannecl Uriit :OeveloPme&11 (PUD) site. design approval, the Planning CommiQion and City Council must find that the proPosed Planned Quit Development will: . A Confimn to the Gilroy General Plan in teirms of genera1location 8I)d standards of deVelopment; " B. Provide the type of development Which will fiB a 'specific need of the surrounding area; C. Not require urban services beyond those which are CI.Il1:eI1tly available; D. Provide a harmonious, integrated plan wbich justifies exceptions, if such are required, to the normal requirements of this Ordinance; . E. Reflect an economical and efficient pattern ofland uses; F.Inc1ude greater provisions for landscaping and open space than would generally be ~ G. . Utilize aesthetic design principles to cnme attractive btJi1~ and open areas which blend with the character of surround"" areas; , - H. Not Create traffic congestion, .nois~ odor, or other adverse effects on surrounding aieas; and ' I. Provide adequate acces~ parking, l~s~ trash areas and ,storage, as necessary. . AIS 98-20 PUI) ,{ -- '. 7 i . (J 6I24J98, STAFFRECO~ATlONS; Staff recommf!ftds that the Planning ~i!llSion forward a recommeridation to the City Council to approve this PUD request for,the fonowiDg reasons: . " . .. The proposed PUD,contOrms tp the land use d-ig1lMion fortbe property ~ the General Plan map and " is consistent with the inteiJt of the text of the Generai PIaD aoci~ ' . , , '. , , .. Public utilities and infi.~cture improvements needed in order to serve the' Foposed proJect are iD: close proximity along Oak Brook Way and Luchessa Avenue; .. There will be no sigmncant euvironmem:al impacts as Ii result' of ibis project due to the reciWred mitigation measures to be applied at the development stage; and .. As submitted. the proposed development is consistent with the n~sary PUD Fmdings A through 1, as stated under Zoning Ordinance Section 50.55. In addition. Staft' ~ommend~ the foDowinr mnditions be pl.ad on the annanr of this reqliest: 1. MTIlGA nON MEASIJRES i111' thm..... i113Ct- contJtitted within the Negative Declaration dated 4/20/96 for ~ 95-09 involving the subject project (attached), sbaIl be. applied to the approval oftbis Planned Unit ' Development project in order to reduce and/or eliminstte all potential significant impacts to a level of insignificance, as required under the CaHfornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). . 2. All dwellings positioned adjacent to future Luchessa ^venue shall be designed to con~ol interior noise levels in habitable rooms, from exterior sources, with tested assemblies having STC ofnC ratings of 45 , . db or more (UBC Appeodix Section'S401(h), subjeCt to the review and approVal by the Building Life and Environmental Saf~ Division, (BLES). ' , . , .. 3. An 8ll-weatber'aCcess rOad, not less tIuin twmty (20) feet in Width, for fire engines shall be provided before commencUig any combustlble const:IUction. Fu-e hydrants shaD also be'insta1led and maintained before combustible constrUction besins, subject to the review and approval bY the Building Life and Environmental Safety Division (BLES). ' '- 4. rJI'e hydrant lQCati_ looP:n& and water main sizing shall be subject to the review and approval by the BuDding Life and Enviromnental Safety Division (BLES), in addition to the fonowiDg: ' a. Materials used for off-site inmanMions sbaU be per C'1ty'Of Gilroy Standard Details. .This includes pipe, valves, hydrants, back-flow prevention devices, concrete, trench back-fin, etc.; b. ~ which serve on-site fire service systaDs are subject to the specifications of the Building Life and Environmental Safety Division (BLES), once they depart from the ,City main. Anyon-site or' fire service system must have a City standard valve intervening; and , c. Inspection of on-site fire service 'SystemS will be the responsibility of the Building Life and Environmental Safety Division (BLES). . AIS 98-20 POD ,( '. . / c' 8 . 6124/98 5. AU proposed fencing shaD meet the requirements oftbe City's ZoDiDg ()rdin~ Section ~4, subject to the review and approval by the PIA~ Division. ' 6. ,Street improvements and the design ofall storm dmiDage. ~ ~ water lines, and an street sections and widths shall be subject to the review and approval by the ~.eering Division. . '. .7. AU,utilities'to, through, and on the site sbaJi.be installed underJround ~ accordance ~ Section, . 21.120; subject to the revi~ and approval by the Engineerinj DMsi~, ' ' , : . 8. The developer shall submit a soils report for the project. AU gradiDg oPerations and soD compaction ' activities shaD meet the approval of the City Engineer. Grading plans shaD .show grades of all adjacent properties, subject to the review and approval by the r:n~ DivisiOlL '9. All lots shall drain to ,the street for stonn drainage, sul),ject to the review and approval by the Engineering Division. , , - 10. All proposed retaining waDs must be constructed of penn&nent materials such as concrete or masomy, ,subject,to the review and approval by the Comnnmity DevelopmeDt Department. Wood will not be permitted. , , 11. Show location of aD existing Wens. All existing water wells shall be sealed to meet the approval of the City Engineer and the Santa'Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD). 12. The design, height, t~, and ,color for the proposed sound walls along'the future extension of Luchessa Avenue shall be subject to the review and approval by the Engineering Division. 13, The developer shall provide water and electric utility service to the landscaping along the future ' extension of~chessa Av~e, subject to the review and approval by the Community Services and Co~unity Development, Departments. 14. Required front and street side yard landsCaping: Plans, including specifications for an automatic, irrigation system, shall be approved by the Planni"8' Division in accordance with the adopted Consolidated LaJ:1dscaping Policy, prior to issuance of a buil'*"8 permit. IlC:spectfuny, .:%C? ~ attachment . William Faus , Plannif\B Division Manager L'll'l..ANNlNCr.1IJOWASo.&\VIU.AI7UUD .~ ~. -. ~; ... ..... . :. "',~ -~:,;;' :--.""~~~,,,,;-,~~~ .' -. ,,:.' :c/- ......,; \> I C" '," " '. re/ '" " " . . - .' . :;"\, ....,. .:~1l!"'. ... '. ' . ....;/ ';.:. ..... . ~.. .- ~ . ~".:':' ,..... 'A/S 98-20' 9' 7/1/98 . 7-1-98 _ 'Attheir~ofJu1y1, 1998, thePISIIIIIittg COmmimon forwarded a recommendation of approval for A/S .98-20 with 14 conditions ~ set forth in the staff report by a vote of6-0-I (Chairman Pinheiro- absent). . . A YES: BLANKLEY, COLLIER, ,GARTMAN, LA!, PUENTE, TUCKER , NAYES:, ,NONE ' ~SENT: ~INHEIRO ". . 1'.lan..mg ~~artment. .NEGATIVE - DECLARATION ",-",,~ "."7~ , & of Gilroy 7!!i. Rosanna St. Gilroy, CA 95020 (408) 848-0440' CIn FILZ R"DMBERS: Z 95-09 PROJEa DESCRIPTION: Rame of Project: ':he Creeks at ':homas Road Xature of Project: Proposed request to rezone,38~ acres frcm Al, Rl, and R3 (Agriculture, single Famiiy Residential, and Medium Density Residential) to Rl-PUD and R3-PUo(Single Family Res~dential \ planned un~t Development, and Medium Density Residential ~ planned unit Development); and the proposed development that includes 136 single family and 80 multi-family cwellings. PROJECT LOCATION: Location: West side of Thomas Road, north of Babbs canyon creek. Assessor'. Parcel Humbers: 808-20-006, '011, 016. Entitv or Persou(s) Uudertakina Pro;ect: Hame: Thomas Road'Properties,Ltd. Addresst 7888 Wren Avenue, suite 0-143, Gilroy, CA 95029 INITIAL STt1Dy: An Expanded Initial study for this project~was undertaken a~d preparec for the purpose of ascertaining whether the project might have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of this study is on file at the city of Gilroy Planning Division, 7351 Rosanna street, Gilroy, california. FINDINGS & REASONS: The Initial study identified potentially significant effects on the environment. However, ~he applicant has agreed to specific-revisions in the project and/or the project has be~n revised. See the following list of MITIG~TION'~URES, which avoid or mitigate potential effects to a point where no significant effects. will occur. There is no substantial evidence that the 'project, as revised, may haYe a si~ificant effect on the environment. The following reasons will support these findings: A. The proposed rezoning frcm Al, Rl, and R3 '(Agriculture, single Family Residential, and Medium Density Residential) to Rl-PUD and R3-POD (single Family Residential \ Planned Unit Development, and Medium Density Residential \ Planned unit Development}, is consistent with the 'city's General plan land use map; B. The proposed project is substantially consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the city's General Plan document; c. The granting of this request will not adversely affe~t or impact adjacent parc.-ls of land or developed agricultural and residential properties in the vicinity; and D. All potential significa~t effects can be mitigated to reduce them to an ' insignificant level of impact. Exhibit B . . rage") ofa ',. '-_..._'...,"""'"', - _ - ',''''" : ,:.~~::~ ,..~,..,,-;"l... '...,' ,:";,~~.,,,,> :: ~~''''.~:''''~'''''''' , . . . . . 't' *_ ow.; ...,_~....._............ .r _ ~~......v.\ '-' MITIGATIONS .' Land Use and Planning, Not applicable Geology 1. The project shall be designed in accordance with earthquake design regula- tions of the Uniform Building Code, subject to review i;lnd approval by-the city, Building Division. ' , , 2. A soils investigation shall be prepared for the project by a qualified soils engi- neer. The recommendations of the soils investigation shall be incorporated into the final improvement plans and shall be reviewed and approved by the , . city Engineering .Division prior to approval of the final map. The purposes of the soils investiaation are to determine the exact soil characteristics and limi- tations on the site, and to recommend appropriate engineering specifications for development of the site. Water 3. The design and construction of all storm 9rainage improvements serving the project site shall be provided by the developer, subject to review and approval by the city's Engineering Division. These design plans shall include, but not be limited to: a. Applicable storm water source and treatment-bas'ed 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 to reflect the cnys Storm Water Master Plan. d. Paved areas shall be designed to minimize drainage that is channeled to - one location. Pathway paving shall be kept to a minimum and shall be porous in nature, wh~rever feasible. I e. Drainage facilities shall be designed and installed to collect and transport ' the natural flows in the hillside away from the streets and buildings and into approved drainage structures. :t.~5-W .NEGATIVE ~'-'~nON . ( . Page3or8'~'-' 4. .DeV~lopelS shall !:the appropriate stann drain dev!ment fees, subject . to review by'the city Engineering Division Works prior to issuance of a build- ing permit. 5. The developer shall apply for and- obtain, a General Permit for Storm Water , Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by submitting a completed Notice of Intent form and appropriate payment to the State Water Resources Control Board prior to the issuance of a building permit. Further, the devel- oper 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: The use of water quality controls (i.e. Best Management Practices) both dur- ing and after construction; for example: · Design project 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); , "'-~. "y · Limiting construction access routes and stabilizing access points; · Protecting adjacent properties with sediment barriers, dikes, or mulching; · Using proper construction material and construction waste storage, handling, and disposal practices; , · Protectino outdoor storaoe materials from drainaae with berms and roof -... - covers; , ' · . Using appropriate landscape controls (irrigation and application of fertil- izers, herbicides, and pesticides); and · ' Installing structl,JraJ storm water treatment controls such as wet ponds, swales; vegetated filter strips, extended detention basins, and sand filters. 6. The developer shall construct finished floor elevations at least bne foot above, the 1 CO-year flood elevation as delineated on the Flood Plain Study for Thomas Road Property, included as Appendix C of the Vineyards at Thomas Road Expanded Initial Study. Air Quality 7. Developers shall not grade more than three ,acres per day. This mitigation shall be implemented throughout project development and shall be included in construction specifications to be submitted to the city Engineering Division for review and approval.' ' . 29>09 NEGATIVE. ,--ARATION Page40ri :-~':"..",::.;".:;:{~ ' ( , , k " '. '" . .. ", 8. ~ Developers shall water ,all exposed ground surfaces at the end of each. day and shall water at least once during the work day. This mitigation shall be . ,implemented throughout project development and shall be included in con- struction specifications to be submitted to the city Engineering Division for revit?w and approval. " .. Transportation/Circulation 9. The developer shall pay the appropriate traffic impact fee, subject to the approval of the city Engineering Division prior to the issuance of a, building , permit. 10. The developer shall install left-turn channelization on northbound Old Thomas Road and the westbound Thomas Road Extension at the project accesses. These should have a minimum of 50 feet of left turn storaoe. To accommo- date for deceleration, the left turn lanes are recommended to be 150 feet long with 90 foot bay tapers. This mitigation is subject to the review and approval by the city Engineering Division and 'shall be implemented prior to the issuance of a building permit. ' 11. The developer shall install all infrastructure frontage improvements. The land configuration shall be per the Luchessa Aven,ue (Thomas Road) Conceptual Plan Traffic Study prepared Keith B. Higgins and Associates. 8iological Resources -: 12. The developer shall prepare a detailed arborist report of the site to determine what measures are necessary to protect the existing trees, especially valley oaks, dUring project construction, and landscaping. The arboristreport is sub- ject to review and approval by the city Planning Division, prior to issuance of a building permit. ' Of special concern are the following areas:, . · Protection of the oak trees in the vicinity of proposed storm water outlets. · Removal of trees as a result' of widening Thomas Road. Because it may not be feasible to protect all of the oak trees, any oak trees (six inches or more in diameter measured at four and one-half feet above the ground) which are removed or destroyed shall be replaced a ratio recom- mended by the arborist. 13. The project proponent shall re-design the proposed project to incorporate a minimum 50-foot buffer measured outw~rd from the riparian canopy drip-line or top-of-bank on each side of the creek, as applicable (e.g., where no trees are present along the creek, measure outward from the top-ot-bank). The buffer zone shall be delineated in the field prior to the start ot construction. Z!/5-09 NE.GA1lVJ: . ..ARATION . Page 5 of8 "No development, staging of equipment or materials, placement of spoils, veg- ' etation removal, or use of off-road vehicles or mountain bikes shall bE? allowed in the buffer zone. The minimum width of the buffer may .be modified by the, Department of Fish and Game. _ The project redesign shall be subject to review by'the California Department of Fish and Game prior to approval of a te,ntative map by the city's Planning Division. '14. The project proponent shall include the following items, in the final improve- ment plans: . Revegetate the banks of Babbs Canyon Creek'with valiey oak or west- ern sycamore such, that a continuous riparian canopy is' eventually, esfablished. A revegetation plan and monitoring program shall be developed and implemented by a qualified native habitat restoration specialist. . , Construction of a low-stature fence, similC!r the existing wire fence along Uvas Park Drive, along the outward edge of the riparian habitat to dis- courage unauthorized trespass into the corridor. This measure is intend~d to minimize the adverse effects of adjacent loss of foraging habitat and disturbances to wildlife from the presence of people and dogs in, the corridor. Establish signs along the pedestrian trail that discourage unautho rized trespass and prohibit unleashed dogs from entering into the corridor. Prohibit the use of private motorized vehicles on the pedestrian trail. Lighting along the pedestrian trail shall be low in stature, with lights directed onto the pathway. Lighting along the street shall incorporate the use ot opaque shields to minimize lighting towards the riparian corridor. The opaque shields shall meet the concerns of public safety. Lighting that directly illuminates the riparian corridor shall not be established. This measure is intended to reducethe adverse effects of night lighting , o,n nocturnal wildlife using the creek as a movement corridor. These items shall be incorporated into the final improvement plans, subject to review and approval by the city's Plannirig Division and Parks Division, and the California Department of Fish and Game prior to issuance of a building permit. , . . . . 15. Literature regarding the value of riparian corridors arid which encourages the protection of the botanical and wildlife r-esources of Babbs Canyon Creek shall be distributed by the project proponent with the saleot each new home at the project site. This mitioation is intended to educate future residents ot the proposed project ot the value of the riparian corridor. ' ' 16. The design of all storm drainage improvements ,serving the project site shall be provided by the developer, subject to review and approval by the city's -"'-' ",' ~VX& ,;,c:~~Ij;!'~ ,~,,:_~ ~ ~=>-O~ l'<~GATIVE. . -\RATION. .' d \, . Page60fa .". Engineering DMsion and the California Department t.1Sh and Game prior to issuance of a building permit. The design shall: a. Ensure that existing flow levels are maintained through the portion of Babbs Canyon Creek doWnstream of Thomas Road, while diverting increased flows generated by the, proposed project into the storm drain system leading to Uvas Creek. ' '.''''J ".:_'jO...~~",' ':~''-';'.l''~''~,,\.. . :" , , b. Include best management practices to reduce post-construction pollu- tion., These practices shall.be consistent with local policies and the rec- ommendations of the Regional Water OuaJity Control Board. ' Examples of best management practices ~nclude: ' · Installation of structural storm water treatment controls (i.e. con- veyance swales, vegetated filter strips and/or sand filters); · Maintenance of storm water controls for the life of the system at a frequency that would insure high longevity and efficiency of the sys- tem; · Annual (Fall) storm drain cleaning; · Incorporation of a street cleaning program; · Appropriate handling, storage, and disposal of hazardous household materials; and · Appropriate use of landscape irrigation and application of fertilizers, he~icides and pesticides. , If mitigation measure 15a is not feasible, and the storm drain improvements will divert the entire stream flow, then the project proponent shall enhance the riparian habitat values of the on-site corridor through revegetation of the creek with '(alley oaks and sycamore to create a continuous canopy. The number of o~k trees established along the, corridor shall equal the number of oak trees potentially adve~sely affected by the stream flow diversion. A revegetation plan and monitoring program shall be developed and implemented by a quali- fied native habitat restoration specialist and approved by the California Department of Fish and Game prior to issuance of a building permit. In addition" a 'Streambed Alteration Agreement may be necessary from the California Department of Fish and Game for water diversion through installa- tion of the storm drain outlet and rock apron on Babbs Canyon Creek. Noise 17. The developer shall have a noise analysis prepared for properties.which are contiguous to a designated city General Plan "Collector" or "Thoroughfare" prior to approval of a final map. The analysis shall be used to determine the' 'L. ~S-09 .NEGATIVE (-'ARATION . . need for' noise attenuation considerations. 18. Noise-generating construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7:06 A.M. to 8:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 A.M. to ~:OO P.M. on weekends and holidays. 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 th,e city Building Division, prior to issuance of a bui1ding permit. ' . structures or' special building design , Pag~ 7 of8 ,.. ~:~;; <~~~;a A,",! Public Services 19. Prior to development of the site, the developer shall pay required city Public Safety impact fees. 20. Prior to development of the site, the developer shall pay required city Public Safety impact fees. 21. Prior to development of the site, the developer shall pay required city Parks and Recreation ,impact fess. ' 22. The developer shall dedicate the creek, its riparian area and a pedestrian trail as a city park and recreational facility., ' 23. The city shall issue a 100-foot wide easement over the creek to the Santa Clara Valley Water District. 24. Tne creek and, pedestrian path shall be maintained through implementa tion of a Lighting and Landscape District charging appropriate homeowners. Lighting and landscaping along the project frontage at Thomas Road shall also be included in"this district. ' 25. The developer shall redesign the proposed project whereby the internal road will ,run paralle:l ,and adjacent to Babbs Canyon Creek Parkway. The redesign shall be reviewed ,and approved by the, city's Engineering and Planning Divisions. ' , 26. The applicant shall construct or cause to construct the pedestrian trail. The design shall be review and approved by the Parks, Planning and Engineering Divisions ' , Utilities and Service Systems 27.. The design of all water infrastructure improvements serving the, project site shall be provided by the developer, subject to the review and approval by the city's Engineering Division. 28. Developers shall install or cause to install through payment of a fee to the city, an additional water line in" Thomas Road to accommodate the proposed :L~>O~ N.I!.b-A'HV.&!.. ! "'~JIO.N . , Page8or8 .,::,.".~i~:~f_ development. ~is plans for Installallon and the m&on st.aU be subject ;0 · review by the city Engineering Division prior, to the issuance of a building permit." . , " , . . 29. The design of all .sewer line improvements serving the project site shall be provided by the developer, subject to the review and approval by the city Engineering Division. ' " , Cultural 30. If archaeological .resources or human ,remains are disc;:overed during, con- struction, work shall be halted within 50 meters (150 feet) of the find until it can be evaluated by a qualified professional archa,eologist. If the find is determined to be sig nificant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formu- lated and implemented. This wording shall be incorporated into any permits issued for construction of the proposed project. Date prepared: January 19, 1996 "End of Review period: February 15, 1996 Approved by ci ty Council: 4-:< 0 - 16 .. . ..,~.. '~. i :J,., ' ~';.~ . The Creeks At Thomas Road Initial Study Mitigation Monitoring Program Introduction On January 1, 1989, the California State Legislature passed into law Assembly Bill 3180. This bill requires public agencies to adopt reporting_or monitoring programs. , when they approve projects subject to an environmental impact report or a negative~ declaration that includes mitigation measures to avoid significant. adv~~e ' environmental effects. The reporting or monitoring program is to be designed to ensure compliance with conditions of project approval during project implementation. in order to avoid significant adverse environmental effects. " The law was passed in response to histori~ non-Implementation of mitigation measures presented in environmental documents and subsequently adopted as conditions of project approval. In addition, monitoring ensures that mitigation measures are implemented ,and thereby provides a mechanism to evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation measures. A definitive set of project conditions would, include enough detailed infonnation and enforcement procedures to ensure the measure's compliance.' This monitoring , program is designed to provide a mechanism to ensure that mitigation measures and subsequent conditions of project approval are implemented. - -Monitoring Program The basis for this monitoring program is the mitigation measures included in the initial study. ,These mitigation measures are designed to eliminate or reduce signifi- cant adverse environmental effects to levels of insignificance. These mitigation mea- sures become conditions of project approval which the project proponent is required to, complete during and after implementation of the proposed project. The attached checklist (Attachments A, B, and C) is Proposed for monitoring the implementation of the mitigation measures. This monitoring checklist contains all appropriate mitigation measures in the initial study. Monitoring Program Procedures It is required that the City of Gilroy use the attached monitoring checklist for the proposed project. The monitoring program .should be implemented as follows: I 1. The City of Gilroy Planning Director should be responsible for ooordination of the monitoring program, including the'monitoring checklist. The Planning Director should be responsible" for completing the monitoring checklist and Exhibit C '.' . distributing the checklist to the responsible individuals or agencies for their use in monitoring the mitigation measures. 2. Each responsible individual or agency win then be responsible for detennlning whether the mitigation measures contained in the monitoring checklist have been complied with. Once aD mitigation measures have been complied with, the responsible individual or agency, should submit a copy of the monitoring checklist to the City of Gilroy Planning Director to be placed in the project file. If the mitigation measure has not been complied with, the monitoring checklist should not be-retumed to the Planning Director. ; . :: 3. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy pennit, the Planning Director should review the checklist to ensure that all mitigation measures and adcfltional conditions of project approval included in the monitoring checklist have been complied with. An occupancy pennit should not be issued until all mitigation measures and additional conditions of project approval included in the monitoring checklist have been complied with. 4. If a responsible individual or agency detennines that a non-compliance has occurred, a written notice should be delivered by certified mail to the project proponent within 10 days, with a copy to the Planning Director, describing the non-compliance and requiring compliance within a specified period of time. If a non-complian'ce still exists at the expiration of the specified period 'of time, construction may be halted and fines may be imposed at the discretion of the City of Gilroy. ' ..' ", -. . \ . -: .-:':',-~ c,ii CHECKUST Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the following mitigations 8baI1 be implemented: MItigation Nature of Mitigation P~-:,:~sponslble Party Responsible for Number for mentation '~ Manitorino ' " , , 1 Development designed In Developer BulldingDJvision accordance with earthquake deslan reouJatlons 2 Soils InvestirJRtinn ' : Develocer Enaineerino Division 3& 16 . Prepare stonn drain improvement Developer Engineering Division, plans California Department of FIsh and Game 4 Pay storm drain development Developer EDgin~ Division fees 5 Obtain NPDES Permit i 6 Construct finished floor elevation Developer BuUc:ling Division one foot above 100-year flood elevation - 7 Do not grade more than 3 acres at OeveIoper PlannIng Division a time 8 Water e soils Develocer Enaineerfna Division 9 Pav traffic irnnact fee Develooer Enaineerina Division 10 Installleft-tum channels Develocer Enaineerina Division 11 Install all infrastructure frontage Dewloper Engineering Division lmorovements 12 Preoare detailed arborist reDOrt OeveIocer Plannlna Division " 13 Develop ,.5(),.foot buffer .measure. .Developer .planning Division outward from the riparian canopy line on each side of the creek - e. . ... <,,;~~':: .;~$t-0'~ 14 Construct low at&n fence IIIcq DewtIoper Planning Division. Partes outwaJd edge of rtpartan h8bIt8t; Division, California establish 8Jgns along pedestrian [)epartment of fish and Game trail; prohibit private motorized vehicles on pedestrian trail; minimize lighting toward riparian confdor 15 Distribute wildlife resources. Developer 'Planning Division " literature with the sale of new ... homes , 17 .. Conduct noise survey to determine Developer Engineering Division deed for noise attenuation .. structures or special building desian considerations - 18 Restrict noise-generating Developer Building Division construction activities In contractor work s tions '19 & 20 Pay public safety imnact fees Developer P' . Division 21 Pay required parks and Developer City Department of Parks recreation imDact fee and Recreation 22 .- Dedicate creek, riparian area Developer City Department of Parks .- and bu1fer to the Citv and Recreation _.... 23 Issue a 100-foot wide easement City of Gilroy PlAn"""'g Division over the creek to the Santa Clara Vallev Water District 24 Implement a Lighting and Developer Planning Division, City Landscape District to maintain Parks and Recreation, creek, pedestrian trail, and Engineering Division Droject frontue 25 Redesign map whereby proposed Developer P1An"""g Division internal road runs parallel to Babbs creek 26 .Construct pedestriai1 trail Developer , Planning &: Engineering Division " 27 Design water infrastructure Developer Engineering Division imDrOvements 28 Pav water development fees Developer ... . Division .i '. 29 De.ip ..wer' ~cture Denloper im eDtI Protect aDY 'future Dneloper JIl'W'!n.eological/histarica1 1'8IOU.&~ disco,&cd 0JHJite 30 1 . ;;1 ~Dmaicm PI . n:...:-!_ taft", ..,&y..... . . I, RHONDA PELLIN, City Clerk of the City of Gilroy, do hereby certify that the attached Resolution No, 98-42 is an original resolution, duly adopted by the Council of the City of Gilroy at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 3rd day of August, 1998, 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 13th day of October, 1998, ~~, City Clerk of the City of Gilroy (Seal)