Resolution 2000-65
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-65
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GILROY APPROVING A/S 00-25 (PUD), AN APPLICATION
FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL OF A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) FOR FIFTY-EIGHT
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND OPEN SPACE
INVOLVING APPROXIMATELY 21.4 ACRES, APNs SOS-20-
012, SOS-20-020, AND SOS-20-023
WHEREAS, Thomas Road Properties ("Applicant") submitted A/S 00-25, an application
for architectural and site approval of a planned unit development ("PUD") for 5S single-family
residences and open space involving approximately 21.4 acres north of Luchessa Avenue, east of
Greenfield Drive; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), a Negative
Declaration imposing seventeen mitigation measures was adopted by the City Council on April
20, 1995, along with a Mitigation Monitoring program, in connection with zone change
application Z 96-10; and the City has determined that this project is included in that CEQA
review; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed application AlS 00-25 at its duly
noticed public meeting on September 7, 2000, and recommended that the City Council approve
A/S 00-25; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting on September IS, 2000,
at which time the City Council considered the public testimony, the Planning Division Staff
Report dated August 29, 2000, with an additional Planning Division Memorandum dated
September 11,2000, and all other documentation related to application A/S 00-25; and
\GMB\493895.1
01.()92504706002
-1-
Resolution 2000-65
.
.
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 adopts the following findings as required by Zoning
Ordinance section 50.55 based upon substantial evidence in the record:
1. The proposed project is consistent with the land use designation for the
property on the City's General Plan map and is consistent with the intent of the
goals and policies of the General Plan document.
2. Public utilities and infrastructure improvements needed in order to serve
the proposed project are in close proximity along Thomas Road.
3. There is no substantial evidence that a significant environmental impact
will result from this project due to the adopted mitigation measures for the
development.
4. The project is consistent with the Planned Unit Development fmdings A
through I set forth in Zoning Ordinance Section 50.55, as determined by facts set
forth in the entire record of the project, including the Staff Report and
Memorandum referred to above, and oral testimony.
B. A/S 00-25 should be and hereby is approved subject to:
1. The six (6) conditions set forth in the attached document entitled
"Architectural & Site Review Planned Unit Development (A/S 00-25)
\GMB\493895.1
01-092504706002
-2-
Resolution 2000-65
.
.
Conditions," attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this
reference.
2. The seventeen (17) mitigation measures set forth in the Negative
Declaration,and the Mitigation Monitoring Program, which are attached hereto as
Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd of October, 2000, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
G. ARELLANO, P. ARELLANO,
MORALES, PINHEIRO, SUDOL,
VELASCO, SPRINGER
NONE
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
NONE
APPROVED:
\GMB\493895.1
01-092504706002
-3-
Resolution 2000-65
ARCHITECTURAL & SITE REVIEW PLANNED UNIT
PEVELOPMENT (AlS OO~25) CONDITIONS
1. Landscaping: Landscaping plans including specifications for an irrigation system shall
be approved by the Planning Division in accordance with the adopted Consolidated
Landscaping Policy, prior to issuance of a building permit. The landscaping shall be
continuously maintained in an orderly, live, healthy, and relatively weed-free condition,
in accordance with the adopted Consolidated Landscaping Policy, and the approved
specific landscape plan. Street Trees shall be planted in accordance with the
Consolidated Landscaping Policy.
2. Expiration: This Architectural and Site Review approval is valid for one (1) year from
the date of adoption by the City Council of the resolution approving the Review. If any
development for which this Architectural and Site Review has been granted is not
established within this period, the approval shall expire. The City Council may grant an
extension for an additional year upon an application request timely received prior to
expiration.
3. Mitigation Measures #1 through # 17 contained within theNegative Declaration dated
December17, 1997, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Z 96-]0 involving the
subject project (attached), shal] be applied to the approval of this Planned Unit
Deve]opment Architectural and Site Review application 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).
4_ The applicant shall meet the following conditions subject to the review and approval of
the Building Life and Environmental Safety Division:
a. Al] dwellings positioned adjacent to Luchessa Avenue shall be designed to
contra] interior noise levels of habitable rooms, from exterior sources, with tested
assemblies having STC of II C ratings of 45 db or more (UBC Appendix Section
5401 (h).
5. The applicant shall meet the following conditions subject to the review and approval of
the Planning Division:
a. All proposed fencing shall meet the requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance
Section 34_
b. All fences or walls over six (6) feet high require approval of a building permit.
c. The applicant will be required to submit complete elevations with colors and
materials for the proposed residences prior to approval of any final map.
6. The applicant shall meet the following conditions subject to the review and approval of
the Community Development Department:
CXVtr'b:+ A
SZO/SOO ~
,g.
ST:LT 00/9Z/60
.
.
a. All proposed retaining walls must be constructed of pe:rmanent materials such as
concrete or masonry (preferably modular system, i.e. keystone)_ Wood will not
be permitted.
b. Details of the design, height, texture and <;olor of the sound wall proposed along
Lu<;hessa Avenue shall be <;onsistent with the sound wall built for the "Creeks"
subdivision on the south side ofLuchessa Avenue. Complete plans shall be
submitted for revieW and approval prior to any final map approval.
<;. Complete plans of the landscaping along the proposed sound wall shall be
submitted for review and approval.
d. All soundwalllocations shall meet the City of Gilroy's sight distance formula on
all streets and intersections.
e_ If archaeological resources or human remains are discovered during construction,
work shall be halted at a minimum of200 feet from the find until it can be
evaluated by a qualified professional archaeologist. If the fmd is determined to
be a unique archeological resoUfl:e pursuant to CEQA section 21083.2,
appropriate mitigation measures in conformance with CEQA Guideline 15064.5
shall be formulated and implemented.
f. Hours of construction shall be limited to between 7:00 am and 7:00 pm Monday
through Friday, 9:00 am to 7:00 pm on Saturday and City Holidays with no
construction on S=day
g. The developer, or su<;cessor in interest, shall notify all future homeowners along
Street "C' of the potential future extension of that street.
S.0/900 III
,g,
91: Ll 00/9Z160
Community rtvelopment De~ment
Plannin2: Division
'-"
NEGATIVE
DECLAR.\TION
City of Gilroy
;351 RosaIlIIa Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
(408) 848-0440
City File Number: Z 96-10
Proiect Dl!!S",riDtion:
Name ofProjett
Na=e ofProje-=t:
Uplands Zone Change
Request to rezone 22.1 acres frotIl Al (Agricultural) and OS (Ope Space)
to RI-PUD and Ope:n Space.
PrDied LDC:Ition:
Location:
North side of the future Luchessa Avenue =~oll, ",es;: ofTllOtmlS
.Road, and south ofUvas Creek.
Assessor's Parce! Numb~: 808-20-<)11 (parrial), and 808-20-<)12
Entity Dr Pe~on{s) Unde'..rnkin~ "Pmil!d::
Name:
Address:
Thomas Road Properties ( r:J 0 Tim Filice)
7888 Wre:1 Avc;lUe, SuIte D-143 , Gilroy, CA 95020
Initbl St-..dv:
An Icirial swrly oftbis proj= --.s uncie:'taken and prepard for the purpose of asc~~m;l'l" wner...b.er
this projec:: might have a si5"ificaIIt effect on the e:lviro= A copy of this stUdy is on tile II! the
City of Gilroy Pl~nml'l'" O~artmem, 7351 Rosanna S tree'"~ Gilroy, CA 95010
E:x h;bi +-.B
SZOI LOO Il!I
~ 9l:Ll 00/9Z/60
.
.
11/17/97
Negative Declaration
Z 96-10
2
Vindinas and.-Reasons:
The !nitial Study identiiied potentially significant effects on the environmen-t.. However, this project
has been mitigated (see attached ~tigation Measures) to a. point where llO si~cam effects will
0=. There is no substantial evidence the project ma.y have il. si::nii'icant eiIect on the .enviromne~.
The followiDg reasoDS will support these finr:li.ngs:
L The proposal is a.logic:al component of the e.-cisting \and use oftbis are:l...
2. lde:li:i:iied adverse impacts are proposed to be mirigated through preparation of special stUdies,
and conscruction of off-site improvements.
3. The proposed project is coDSistent with the adopted goals and policies of the (ft!neral Plan of
the Crry of Qfu-oy .
4. The IDitial Study was independently reviewed by City staff, and this Negative Declaration
reflects the independe:It judgement of the Crry of Gilroy.
Date Prepared: December 17, 1997
End of RevieW Period: Januazy B, 199B
Date Approved By City Council: .
William Faus, Plamring Division Manager
l.",t,...u(tIlI\lc:'mlO~..upL.Al'l'I)S.HD
~~01800 III
~ 9T:LT 00/9~/60
.
.
Uplands Zone Change (Z 96-10)
Mitigation Measures
Geology/Soils
1. A soils investiga:tion shall be prepar<:d for the project by a qualified soils enginee~.
The recommendatious of the soils investigation shall be incorporated intO the final
improvement plans and shall be revieWed and approved by the City Enginee~g
Division prior to approval of the final map. The purposes of the soils investigation
are to determine the_exact soil characteristics and limitations on the site., and to
reco=d appropriate engineering specifications for development ~fthe site.
Water
2. Priorto preparation ofa tentative map, the project proponc:nI shall conlract with an
engineering finn to perform a flood elevation stUdy of the project site to determine
flood hazards. The flood eleva:tion stUdy shall include lIle2sures~ accepcable to the
City Engineering Division, the Federal Emergency :Management Agency, and. the
Santa. Can Valley W llI.er District, to reduce potential flooding impacts to e. less than
significant level. The tentative map shall include the following:
a.. Identification and location of Flood Zone Al2 and Flood Zone D;
b. Identification and ioca:tion of the Santa Clara Valley Water District easement;
c. Design and additional measures, as presented in the flood elevation StUdy, to
reduce potential flooding impacts to a. less than significant leveL
The flood elevation stUdy shall be subject to review and approval by the CIty
Engineering Division., prior to 3l'proval of a. tentative map.
3. The project propone:ttt shall prepare a stonn drainage pla:c. .....hereby the project's storm
~e feeds iIxtc the wetlands project. Design of the system shall include measures
to e!inlinate, or reduce to. acceptable levels, the amowIt of pollutants in the storm
water cirainage, in accordance with the National polluta:at Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) specificatious. Preparation of this plan shall be developed in
consultation with the biologist preparing the wetlands plan, and will be subject to
review and approval..by the CIty Engm~ring Division, prior to the approval of fiDal
maps.
Implementation of this mitiga:tion measure will reduce signifiC3nt impacts related to
.....ater quality to a less than sigcifi= level. .
5Z0/600 ~
~ LT:LT 00/9Z/60
.
.
Z 96-10
2
Neg. Deg.
Air Quality
4. The following control measUres sh21l be incorporated into any permits issued for the
proposed project:
a.. Wa1er all active constrUction are3S at le:lSt twice daily or more ofte.'1. as nded-
b. Cover a.Il trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all
trUcks to xnaintain at leaSt two feet of freeboard.
c. Pave, apply wlrter three times daily, or apply (non-t~c) soil sWiiliz= on all
unpaved access roads, parking areas and Staging areas at constrUction sites.
d. Sweep daily (wrth water sweepers) all paved access roads., parking are3S and
staging areas at construetion sites.
e. Swe:p streets daily (wIth Wllter swe=pen) ifvist"ble soill1l2.terial is carried onto
adjacent public ~.
f. Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive constrUction areas
(previously graded areas inactive for = days or more).
g. Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil bIDder; to exposed
stockpilcs (din, sand., etc.)
h.. Limit t:rafiic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mpli.
1. Install sandbags or other erosion control measurcs to prevent silt runoff to
public roadways-
J. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as posOl"ble.
Transportation/C irculation
5. The proposed project shall include the completion of Luc:hessa Avenue betwee:t
Thomas Road and the westerly boundary of the project site. This will require
consttUcting the northerly half of Luchc:Ssa AVlmUe, including a Oass II bike lane,
from Thomas Road to the westerly boundary of the project site to complete the
four-lane divided cross-5ection. !fthe southerly one-half ofLuchessa Ave:lue has not
been completed prior to occupancy afthe proposed project, the southern half should
. be completed by the proposed project, as well
Plans for the northerly portion ofLuchessa Avenue shall be provided by the project
proponent and included in the final improvement plans prior to approval or the final
map, subject to review ~d approval by the City Engineering Division.
nO/oro ~
~ Lr:Lr 00/9Z/60
.
.
Z96-10
3
Neg. Deg.
Biological Resources
6. Prior to iIUtiation of construction in the oak woodland habitat, the Jimi!s of gra.cfu1g
shall be staked and SUIVeyed by a eertified arbonst. Where tnin.or adjUSlIIlelltS in the
grading line could be made to save individual trees, they should be considered. The
arbonst =y also make reco=endarions for addi:rional measureS that could be
considered along the limit of grading: to protect trees just outside of the constrUc:tion
area.
7. All native trees removed that meet the defilJition of "Si.g:rrifi<'^"nt Tree" as defined by
the City of Gilroy Consolidated Landscape Policy, Section 6.0, shall be replaced at
a ra.tio (not less than three trees replaced for every tree lost) to be determined in
consultation with City Pl",,";"~ Division and a certified arborist.
8. A certified arllorist and the City PJ""n;ng Division shall review the final grading plan
if any encroacllment into the oaklsycaIIlore riparian foreSt is proposed. The biologiSt
shall detexmine if the additional encroachInent would compromise the integrity of the
Uvas Creek riparian cotrido.. If the ce.rtified arborist and the City Planning Division
determines the lin.a.I grading plan would result in such a compromise, then the grading
plan shall be revisedaccordingiy.
9 . The project proponents shall identify the Jimits of gradixIg on a grading plan. All
trees, classified as significant according to the city's cOnSolicl4ted landscaping policy
(exisringoaiive treeS six mches o. more m diameter, at a point four and one halffeet
above the ground), shall be smveyed and located on the prefuninary grading plan.
Where minor adjustmentS in the grading line could be made to save individual
significant trees, they should be cozisidered. A ceitmed arborist.and the City Plo",,;,,!;
Division =y also make recommmdations for additional mc;asures that could be
CCIl5idered along the limit of grading to protect trees just outside of the constrUction
lUl!:lL The pp'T..m""ry and fin.al grading plans shall be subject to review and approval
by the City PI,,"";"€, Division md cir:y Building Division.
nO/TTOIlJ
&& LT:LT 00/9./80
.
.
Z 96-10
4
Neg. Deg.
10. The project proponentS shall have a. biologist prepare a. plan addressing the ,onver;ion
of the ~ pond area and related drainage areas into a se:!.Son21 wetland.
Components of the plan may mclude, but not be limited to:
a. Removal of the e:<isting dam;
b. Restoration and enhancement. of the existing swale betwen the dam and the
existiDg outfall to Uvas Creek;
,. Minor recoUtOuric.g and restoration of the area behind the dllIll to allow the area.
to revert back to a seasonal wetland;. and
d. Planting of the open sp8.l:e area to mc;lude native vegetation, trees and shrubs
typical of the oak woodlands on the project. rite. (Replac:em.e:Lt tre,,"s required
m MitigUioc.s S and 6 could also be planted in this habitat.) .
These enhan,eme:l1s would mitigate the loss of approximately 1 DO feet of existing
weTland within the drainage swale distUrbed by the proposed project.
Ownership and tlllIintec.ance of the pond and the 7.S-acre open space area. are
addressed in Section 4 _11, Public Services.
The plan sball be subject. to review and approval by the City PI~T'IT'1;"'~ Division, the
City EnlrineerinlZ Divi$ion, and the City Parlts and Recreation DiVision.
- -
11. A pre-tree removal breediDg survey (March 1 through June 30) of the tre=s p\a.llDed
for removal during constrUction should be conducted by a qualliied biologist to
detem:rine if any active birds-of-prey nests OC;'UI" iD. the tie,,"s to be removed. If these
. surveys reveal no nesting birds..()f~prey nests in any trees to be removed., theil no
furthe:: mitigation shall be required. If these surveys reveal active birds-of-prey nests
in tr.......s to be removed, the followU1g tnitigarion measure shall be required:
a. All active birds-of-prey nests shall be avoided while the nest is oc;cupied with
adult:s arid/or their young (March 1 tlIrougb. June 30). Avoidance should include
the establislmlmt of a. site-specific; non~ance buffer zone around the nest
site tba1 prcb1"bits vegetarion <md tree removal, as recommended by a. qu.aliiied
biologist. Tree removal can begin after June 30 or when a qualliied biologist
determines that the nest is no longe:: being used for that season.
Wtth imple:ne:tnation of all mitigation measures presented in this section, si~;fi,ant adv=e
e:Mromne:xtal impacts te biological resources will be redu,ed to II. less than sigcifi,ant level.
S;:O/ZlO III
~ 9T:LT 00/9Z160
.
.
Z 96-10
5
Neg. Deg
Hazards
12. The tenWive map shall include a tninixnum 3D-foot fire break/buffer bctwee."l the area
proposed for open space zonlng and the pro-posed development. The 50-foot
cul~e-sac 011 the prp1;..,;"~ry site plan would satisfY this requireme:lt. The tentanve
map shall be. S1.1bject to review and approval by the City Builrii,,::. Life, and
Environmental Safety DIvision prior to approval of a tentative map.
Noise
13. The proj ect proponent shall arrange for a noise survey to be conducted. for the
. proposed. project because of its location adjacent to the exre:1Sion of Luchessa
Avenue, a four-lane artetia1. The survey information shall be used to determine the
height for noise attenuation features or special building design considerations.
The noise 5IJrVe'j shall be conducted prior to teDtl1ive map approval. subject to review
and approval by the City p\~,,";ng Division.
14. The noise SUIiley, as required in Mitigarion Measure 14 above, will identify the
required loca:lion and height of a noise a1;ten1J.aIion feature along the northern side of
the e:aeosion ofLu~"" Al/ellUe. This noise anenuation feature should not consist
solely of masonry materials, but should create an aesthetically-pleasing effect for
travelers along Luchessa Avenue.
The project proponent shall pr~are a noise attenuation, landscape and irrigation plan
to include, but not be limited to the following:
o The I',a.....,ed desigll v.rowd include some combiDalion of earth '0= with wood,
concrete, stucco, or masonry. The banier IIlllSt be made air-tight, without
cracks, gaps, or other openings and tllUSl: provide for long-t~ durability. .
o The noise a:ttcn'lJ,ation f~ desigll shall include landscaping that will not only
be aesthetically-pleasing but will also discourage graffiti EleC'Jical service and
water service .sbal1 be provided. to the landsaped area.
o A funding mecbazDliUl shall be ptoVide:i for the maiIrtenance of the sound
at1'~'''';on fea:tUre and lands~
The noise anClllJlltion fe:a:ture and landscape and irrigation plan shaIl be designed prior
to 1ioal map approval, subject to review and approval by the City Planning Division.
SZO/CiO III
~ ST:LT 00/9Z/60
.
.
Z 96-10
6
Neg. Deg.
Parks & Recreation
15. The project proponent shall provide a minimum 25-foot u-a.i1 and habitat ease.'nent
or dedication from the top of the U....as Creek bl!Ilk, along the project frontage wIth
the creek. This easement andlor dedication shall be indicated on the tentative map,
sul;ject to review and .approval by the City Parks and Recl'wion Division., prior to
approval of a tE:IIt;rrive map.
16. Regarding long-tcnn own=rship and maintenance of the open space, ei!hcr option a
or b shall Occu!'.
a. Thc project proponent shall offer the 7.5 acres of the project site propose::! as
open space in dedica:tion to the city as an extension of the existing Uvas Creek
Park PresC\"Ve. Dedica:tion of the open space shall be negotiated betWeen the
city and the project proponent, prior to. approval .of the final map. If the city
chooses to decline the offer, then:
b. The project propan.ent shall eStllbJish a homeowners association to maiIIUin the
open space. Maintenance. provision far the open space shall be include::! in
CCRs, which shall be developed, subject to review and approval by the City
Anomey, priar!o approval of the final =p.
Cultural Resources
17. Due to the possibility that sigIJificam buried cultural resources might be found during
constrUction., the follawing language shall be included in any permits issued for the
project site, incIuding. but DOt liInited to building pe.rmits for the furore development,
pursumt to the review and approval of the City planning Division:
"If archaeolagical resources or human rem_in. are discovered during
constrUcri.ou, work shall be halted at a minimum of200 f=t from the find
until it can be evaluated by a quaIi:tied professional archaeologist If the
find is determined to be sigIlilicant., appropriate mitigation measures shall
be formulated and implemented."
SZO/tlO IfI
~ 6Y:LY 00/9.160
-
11: 1q
4B8846.
CITY OF GI~ROV ~U
Uplands Zone Change
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Introduction,
On January 1, 1989, the California State Legislature passed into law Assembly Bill
3180_ This bill J:equires public agendes to adopt reporting Or monitoring programs
when they appJrove projects subject to an environznental impact report or a negative
declaration that includes mitigation measures to avoid significant adverse
environmental effects. The reporting or monitoring program is to be designed to
ensure compliance with conditiol'lS of project approval dUIing project
implementation in order to avoid significant adverse enVironmental effects.
The law was passed in response to historic non-implementation of mitigation
measures preseJi'lted in environmental documents and subsequently adopted as
conditions of project approval In addi:t:iol1, 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 med1.anism to ensure that mitigation measures
and subsequent conditions of project approval are implemented.
Monitoring Program
The basis for t~ monitoring program is the mitigation measures included in the
environmental impact report (Em). These mitigation m.easures are designed to
eliminate or redlllce significant .adverse environmental effects to levels of
insignificance. These ntitigation measures become conditions of project approval
which the projec~ proponent .is required to complete during and after
implementation of the proposed project.
The attached checklist is proposed for monitoring the implementation of the
mitigation meaS1l1Tes. This monitoring checklist contains all appropriate mitigation
measures in the Em.
PAGE 03
9Z0/9ToIiI
~ 6T:LT 00/9Z160
BS/26/2B~~ 11;14
4B8846B42.
CIT'! OF GILROY CD_
PAGE B4
U [~nd$ Zone Ch.. Iniria.l Stud"
Min li"", MDnilori.. P1'0 .....
Mitigation Monitoring Checklist A
Prior to approval.of the Tentative Map, the following mitigation measureS shall be
implemented:
2
Prior to preparation ot .. tOJ\t..tive map, the proje<t Project ProponEnt
proponent .hall conlnct with an Engineering finn
to perlarm . flood ele-Ialion study of the p~ect
.ite to &temli1'le flood hazards. The flood.
elevatian study shall il\clude mea.sUNS, acceptable
to the City Englnee<ing DivUion, the Federal
El:!\erlJ"l"=Y Manage:roent A.,aen<y, and the Santa
Clara Valley Wat:er District, to nlcluce potential
floodin, impacts lQ a less than sigrtificanr level.
The tentative map shall inclwie the following:
City
Engineering
Oi'IJision
a. Idenlification arad location of Flood Zone All
aI1,(1 F10:t>d Zone D:
b. Identification and location of the Santa C1a:a
Valley Water Oistrlct eosenuont;
c. Desi$!' and. additional measures, as preser>ted in
the fload elevali"" study, to reduce potential
flooding iInpac:t:s to .. 1.... than signiiiCll>\t leVel.
The flood elev.lion study shall be subject to
review ,and .ppro"al by the City ~ginoerinS
Divisioh, rior to IS ,,-oval of a tentative m.a
12
The terttative map shallindude . miniIrIurn
3Q-loot.lire br1!ok/buffer between the area
proposed f"r op.... sp.ce zoning snd the propasod
de"elopment. The 5O-foot c:uJ-de-sac on the
pre~ site plUl would satisfy this
req~t. The t""tarl"e map shall be subje<t to
review ond app1O"al by the city Building, Life, ~
Envirol;1ml!Iltal Safety DiYlsion prior t" apP!Oval "t
. rentative ma .
Project Proponent City planning
Divi&on
MlY.CI' . 3
EMC PIII..nmg Gra,." Inc.
9Z0/910 ~
A
OZ:L1
00/9Z160
B9/26/200B 11:14
46884664.
CITY CF GILRO'! CD.
... .PAGE-0S--
.,.
lJ 1.."Jb Z"". Ch"" ~ I"iti,,1 Stud
Monitoring Program Procedures
It is required that the City of Gilroy use the attached monitoring checlclist for the
proposed project. The monitoring program should be implemented as follows:
1. The City of Gilroy Planning Division should be responsible for coordination
of the monitoring program, including the monitoring chec:kIist. The Planning
Division should be responsible for completing the monitoring checklist and
distributing the checklist to the responsible individuals or agencies for their
use in monitorirlg the mitigation measures.
2. Each responsible individual or agency will then be responsible for deter-
mining whether the mitigation measures contained in the monitoring
checklist have been complied with. Once all 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 Division to be placed
in the project file. If the mitiga.tion measure has not been complied with, the
monitorirlg checklist should not be returned to the Plannirlg Division.
3. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit, the Planning Division should
review the checklist to ensure that all mitigation measures ami additional
conditions of project approval included in the monitoring checklist have been
complied with. AI>. occupancy pennit should (tOt be issued until all
mitigation measures and additiOtlal conditions of project approval included
irl the monitoring checklist have been complied with_ .
4. If a responsible irldividual or agency determines that a non-compliance has
occurred, a written (tOtice should be delivered by certified mail to the project
proponent within 10 days, with a copy to the PlaMing Division, describing
the non-co.mpliance and requiring compliance within a specified period of
time. If a non-compliance 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.
MNfp.z fjWC planni"g GrD"p Inc.
g~OI no ~
&l O~:LT 00/9~/60
0~/26/200B 11;14
4B8846042.
CI1Y OF GILROV CD.
PAGE B6
Upl....ds Zone Clrpnife lnitidl Study
Mitigrl:tioJ'l. Mora.;.rori'tlK PmK"127ft
Mitigation Monitoring Checklist B
Prior to approval of the Final Map, the following mitigation measure$ shall be
implemented:
I
I
I
1
]
]
1
. .
]
i
J
I
I
I
I
1
A soiils investigation shall be preparvd for the Projl!Ct Proponent
projl!l:! by a qualified soils eng;ne..r. The
Iecommendations of the soils inv.stigation shall be
incorporat"'" into the iinal itnprovem@<\t plans IU'Id
shall be ...viewed and approved by the city
Engineering Division prior to approval of the final
map. The purposes of the soils irwesligation are to
detemUne the exact soil characteristics and.llDU-
talian,s on the site, and. to recommend appropriate
omgin~oting specibcations for develop",""t of the
site.
City
Engineering
Divi&ion
3
The piroject proponEnt shall prvpare a storm Projec:t Proponent
drainage plan whereby the project's storm
drainage feeds into the wetlands project. Dosign
of the sysbolf\ shall include measures to eliIninale,
ox reduce to acceprabie levels, the _01Ul! of
pollutlU'lts in the storm water dtainage, in
acc<>rOlance with the Nationall'ollulont Discharge
ElimJ1\aaoI1 Syste=\ (Nl>DE5) specifications..
Preparation of <his plan ohall be developed in
consuiltation with the biolopst preparing the
wet1artds plan, !lI\d. will be subj""! to review and
app"twal by the City Engineering Division, prior to
the a royal of /inalma s.
City
Engineering
Division
EMC Pla""ing Grc"'p Inc.
MMP-5
nO/9To~
.0.
H:LT
00/9V60
48884684. CITY OF GI~D'/ CD. PAGE 87
B9/26/2B8B 11:14
Mitigrzti"n M"n~t"""R' Pt'OJ{J'a.... U,,",..ds Z""" CJt.."R"l I..-itial Ststdv
13 Tho! p.-oject proponent shall arrat\g<' for a noise Project Propanent City
survey to be conducted for tho proposed projoc:t Engm.erlng
because of its location adjac:mt to the extensian gf Division
Ludhessa ....venue, a fow-Iane arterial The survey
mfQnnation shall be used. to determine the height
/,,: noise atlcl'luation features 0: .pedal building
desjgn considerations.
The'noise ""rvey shall be conducted prior to
telltative map approval subjoc:t to review aIid
appt<Wal bv the city rlannili" Division.
15 The IPraj~ proponent shall provide a utirWnwn Project Proponent City Parks
25-l1I>ot trail and habitat easenumt or dedication and.
from the top of the U va. Cnek bank, along the Reaeation
proj.ct ttDrllage with the crea:. This """"=t Divisic;m
and; lOr dedication shall be indicated. on the
tentlili..e map, subject to review and appro1l'al by
the Qi!:y Parks and Reaeation Division, prior to
a1)1)rpval of a tentative am".
MMP-4 EMC Pla_,"z Gro.." 1=
SZO/610 III .g. lZ:Ll 00/9V60
B9/26/2B06 11:14
4B8846B4.
CIT'! OF GILROY CO.
PAGE B8
UfJl4flds Z~,,~ C"F"Ke blitial Stud.y
MitiK4tiQ'fI Mon:itoring PrdKrtlFn
14- The noise s""'ey, as required in Mitigation Project Prop""""t City l"Janning
Mea.$ure 14, will id.entify the ""luired location and Division
hlOiglilt of a noise atlerluation feature along the
nort:tlem side of the extension of I.uc:hessa ....venue.
This rloise: attenuation fe:!ltW'1! should. Ilot consi3t
solely of masem')' materials, but should create an
aes~tically-pleasing effect for traveler.; along
I.uc:hloSsa Avenue.
The project proponent shall prepare I noise
alle;n1i>ation, lanclsc.pe and irrigation plan to
incluo:l.e, but not be limited to the following;
~ The prefotted d2S.ign would include SOIne
comblnation of earth ben:! with wood, c~n<:rele,
SNCCQ, or masonry. The barrier !nust be made ait-
tight, without crad<:;, gaps, or other openJ:Lgs al\d
must :plDvide for Iong-t= durability.
o The'noise attenuation feature design shall
induce landscaping that will not only be
aesthe!ically-pleasing but will al.o discourage
graffi~. El.ec.trical servico and water service shall
be proWid.od to the landscaped area.
o A funding me<;hanism shaU be provided for the
maintenance of the sound a!teJ\ualion feature and
!i.ndscaping.
The noi.sl! al:bmuation feature and lands""p. and
imgatipn plan shall be designed prior to final :alap
appro'lal, subj""t to review and approval by the
citY P . Division.
16 Regardl:ng I=g-....n ownership and tnaint-enJuu:e Project Proponent GtyParJ<s
of the qpeII 'pace. either option a or b shall occur. and
Recreation
.. The project prop..nent shall offer the 7.5 ="" of Division
the project site proposed as open space in
dedica lion to the city as an extension of the
existing Uvas Creek Park Preserve. Dedkation of
the opet\ space shall be negotiated between the city
and the. project proponent. pnor to approval oithe
final map. If the city chooses 10 decline the offer,
then:
b. The Foject proponent shall eStablish ..
ho:meowners association to :maintain the open
space. Maintenance provision for the open space
shall be ind..d,,<\ in CCRs, which shall be
d.....eloped, subject to review and app"'<fal by the
eitv AttOrnay, prior to ancreval of the final mo.".
EMC PI41Uling Group.l1lc.
MMP-7
S<:DIOZO ~
~ ZZ:LT
00/9Z160
B9/26/2BB6 11:14
4B8846B42.
CI1Y OF GIlROY CD.
PAGE B'3
Mitiga.tirm Mo"ituri"g Prog'l'ltm
UplJUltls ZOfte Chlltlge Initja.l Stud.y
5 The proposed project shall include the co"'pletlotl Projecl Proponent City
of L.u.chessa Avenue bet"W~ Tho",... Road and Engineering
the Westerly boundary of the project .itoo. nus will Division
require cOt\Stru~g the northedy halt of Lucl,essa
Avenue, including a Class n bike lane, from
'!hQlnllS Road to the westerly boundaxy of the
pro,",,! site to complete !:he four-lane divided
c:ross-secti'ln. [f the southerly one-hili of Luchessa
A\rerlue has not be..... c""'pleted prior to
occtipancy of the proposed. project, lhe southem.
halhhould be completed by lhe proposed project,
as well.
P~ for the northerly portion of Luc:h......
Avenue shaU be provicled. by the project proponent
and included in the final improVel%tent plaIls prior
to approval of the fu>a! map, subject to review and
appr~Val by the City Enltineerinll: Division.
10 The project proponents shall have a biologist Project Proponent Oty Planning
prepare a plan addressing the conversion of the DiviSion
exisling pond area and related drainage ""eas it!to
a ....sonal wetlond. Componentll of the plan may
include, but not be limited to;
a.. Re<nova! of the exisling dam;
b. Restoration and enhancement of the e.>oisling
swale between !:he dam and the existing
outfall to Uvas Cre..!:;
c. Minor recontolUing and restoration of the
B.eo behind the dam 10 allow the ...ea to
.evert back to a seasonal wetlancl; ancl
d. Planting of !:he open 'paee ana to include
native vegetation. tre.. and shtubs rypial of
the oak woodlon.ds on the project site..
(R.eplac""",nt ll"ees teq\lired in Mitigations 5
and 6 could also be planted in this habitat.)
These e<1hancements would mitigate the los. of
approxUnate1y 100 feet of existing wetland within
the drainage swale dioturbed by the proposed
project.
Ownership and ~tenance of the poM. and. the
7.S-acre. gpen .pac. area are .addre~d it! Section
4.11, Public Somees.
The plan shall be subject 10 review and approval
by the city PlaMing Division. the city Engineering
Division, and the city Parks and Recreation
Division.
I
I
I
MMP-6
EMC Pl......mg Grorqr 1,,<.
.
SZOITZO ~
a.
ZZ :n
00/9V60
~9/26/2eBB 11:14
40884604.
CIT'! OF GILROV ~
PAGE lB
U"lanlh Zan~ CJr~nlr' InitiAl Study
Mtti~litio.,. MmtitarittK l'nIfZ1,nn
9 The project proponent'! slWl icIentify the limits of Ptojecl 17opon...' Gty Planning
grading an a grading plan. All trees, classif",d:as Division
signifkanl accorditlg to the city's cOl15olida,ad
lando.:a.ping policy (elCisting native trees six itlches
or mCI'I"t= in dia.:.:neter, at a paille four and 0I'l1! hall
feet above the ground), shall be surveyed and
loc:atl!d on the pre!imiM%y gtading plan. Where
minor adjusl:m""ts irI the grad.lrIg lirIe could be
mad. to save itldlvidual significont trees, they
should be considered. A certified. orbanst and the
o ty Planning Division may also rrW:e
reco[JllIIlendaliono for additional measurer; that
could! be cotl$idered along thelinlit of grading to
protect tree. just outside of the construction area.
The preli.tninaty and iirW grading plans shall be
subje<t to review and approval by the city
Plann!lrIlZ DiviBion and dtv Buildine Division.
17 Due to the possibility that signifi<:ant buried Project Proponent Gty 1'la:1nins
culttulal resources might be found during Divi5ion
conslJluction, the foUowing langueS. shill be
included irI any penn.Hs issued for.the project sit..
inclucling, but not limited to building po.,..;.t:s for
the future develop"'umt. purnuant to the review
and o.pproval of the Gilroy Planning Dhrisicm.:
"If archaeological resoW'Ces or human remains aN
dlsco...;ered during construc;tion. work shill be
haltecli at a mitW:num of 200 fee' fro", the find until
it can be evaluated by a qualified professiorial
archaElologist. If tho find is detennit1ed to be
.ignifitant, appropriate mitigation measures shan
be fotJtLuJat.d and im'Plernented:'
EMe Pl"nning GrDup Inc.
MMP-9
SZOIZZO ~
,g.
CZ :Ll
00/9Z160
eg/26/2BBB 11:14
4!l8B~61!l4.
CITY OF GILROV CD.
PAGE 11
Mitigati<m Mor@Dring PrOW_
Upl",,4s Z..... Ch/ZJ'lJ(e lnitiJll Stud"
Mitigation Monitoring Chec1dist C
Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the following mitigation measures shall be
impleme!tl.ted:
~~~;::~~~~--~~~~
I.~Q~~~~:;-\~<.: '~{lv ,,:!.:';l.;.i!:;"<j~~:~rp~<;:EI~~;1E:'t~~\~'f~~r";;.1'J~;;:t:}V"~:\"~.. ':'~"1'" ".~t;<> "';';' r'"'''':;.~~ ':."'n. ,~--:~~~::.j..... ,
r1:~~~:~N.~:~:'-P:~'::~;:~'~;l,~:;'f ?~~~f}~:~:(~~ '~:~'i;;; '::r '~;i~'~;'(= ~~ f'.~~ :~~'~:~~~:-,~:/..~~'::;,~:1r~':~j,~~~.~:~:~;:~rf~4.~" ;f~~~~~];:'~~~," ?-~<
""",, ",~fp~"J ~m3;1,t-'h"':,:.." l-....".,.f"".~. .'" r)."~-l ,:,,,,/', ,,,,," t_".' 1'1"'1:( "~..~ <~'., ~ ,~~ '~"o.)~'.:'-'d~ 'il" ~..~';. ',' .,.:,0..." -.,
;,,~,~"<' .~.;,:.' ~~;~ " ;Z"..' 'I";' ':..:,.",0...... :,":'t'" <': ,~' . ...",~"'~- .:t;......,:.'.'..~ .'~~..:<l' :,1,'" ,'.;'"~':: ~l_"''''' ~ -'-;'~I ">- ...'<:,:,,_ 4.....>.:. : ~,/.:.,'
\~".../.o~ ", :.-'" .:.~:'~. ,};:. ~i':~'? :"~ll.?n~;~ \', ""T~-' . ;,;.'r"\)' J, ~,I "~':'/;" .i,......,'.'..< ~,',w.:':t .~~~,i. . ~I~~'",;.~_. ~,>rf., ./~; ': . '. '. .~.~~ ~'l'''-:;:\ l.-~ ~';.';:';;'.
~'''~......'''.:-! ~.::.:.Jl~.~ t&._l::.~ ..~,."".'..::..'..~ :"l~"''''':'''''~ ,..L,...~_,~~._~I...~.......'::''!...., ~. .~_". .__:::.v..,,;.:-o-"'-"-< ~~......!
4
The following C01'lttol measures shall be
iI1coq>orated into any pennils issued for the
pro~d project;
Project Proponent City Building
Division
a. Water all active constrUction areas at least twice
dailyi or mOre often os needed.
b. Cci>ver .all trucks hauling ooil, .and. and other
100"'" materials or require all truclcs to maintain at
least two foet of freeboard.
c' Palte, apply water three time. daily, or apply
(non-toxic) soU stabilizers an all W'lpaved ace_
roads, parking areas and stagmg "",as at
conslhrc:tion .iles,
d. Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved
access roa<!s, parking areas and staging areas at
eOIl!!lI!uction sites.
e. SWeeP streets daily (with water sweepers) if
visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public
streetll,
f. Hydroseed or apply (non-tOxic) soil stabilize!5
to inaCtive construction areas (previously graded
areas ;naetive for ton days or m=).
g. ' Enciose, cover. water twtce daily or apply (non-
toxic) soil binders to e"Pos~d stockpiles (din. sand,
otc.)
h. Limit tn.ffic speeds on unpaved. rOllds to 15
mph.
1. Instaill sandbags 01: oth.... erosion conl:tcl
measwlts '0 prevent silt runoff to public road-ways.
j. Replant vegetati01'l in disturbed _as as quickly
as ,,os.i101e.
l
I
MMP..fJ
EMe P/JznnUlg era.." Irtr.
I
SZO/CZO Ii1J
Q.
CZ:LT
00/9Z160
4088460429. CI1Y OF [OILROV CD~ PA!;E 12
eS/26/2eeB 11;14
I 1.lplJUlds ZOtl< tShanl(e ["it/al Stkdy Miti:ilitian Manitorbr.g prg~lJ.1t1
I 11 A pre-tree removal breeding SlU'fey (March 1. Projeet Proponent aly Planning
I thrPugh June 3D) of Ihe tre"" planned !ouom","8l Division
duting 'o....tNdicm should. be conc:ludad by .
qw!lified biologist to determi:u! if any .,tive birds-
of-prey nests OCl;lIt in the treES to be :amoved. If
I the~e surveys reveal no neoting bird&-<>f-prey nuts
in <$\Y ~ to be removed. then no furlher
mitigation shall be required. If these SUZ'o'eys
I ...v~al .'live birds-oi-prey nests in tr..... to be
removed. the folloWing mitigation measure shall
bUli!quired:
I a. AU active bircls-<lf.-prey nesb; shalllle avoided.
while the nest is occupied with adults and/or their
young (Man:h 1 through June 3D). Avoidance
I shotilcl include the l!lItabUslunent of a .it.....pecUir.
non-disturbance buffer .zone around the nost .i~
that prchibits vegetation and tree removal, as
I reco;inmernied by . qualifleCi l:tiologjst. Tree
remQval can begin after June 30 or ....hen a
quallfied biologist determines that the nest ;.. no
lon~ beinll: used. for I:h!It .asot!-
J
J
I
I
I
I
I
EMC PI......;,,&, Gra,,;. Inc. MMP - 11
,.
SZO/tZO ~ A tZ:L! 00/9Z160
~~/26/2B~B
U:14
Mitigation MojrirorinK P70gram
4B8846B42.
CI1Y OF GILROY CD.
Ul'lall~ ZD111' ChtllJK~ Initial St1ul1f
PP,6E 13
Mitigation Monitoring Checklist 0
Prior to Conslt:ruction Activities, the following mitigation measures shall be
implemented: .
~~~~-~~;~~:::;~.~
~f~~f;'1~~~i;ir~f{~~~l1~~~~.:;Z~}.~1~1~1~~Jitt~l(t};;~~~};2j?F~!~~~:'}:~;J.~~~~D~:;
6 Priar to initiation of "011.5truclion in the oalc proje<'t Proponent Gih'oy
woadIand habitat, the limits of grad,ing shall be PlaMi:lg
staked and surveyed by . c:erlified arllorist. Where Division
min~ adj'"-"tmen/s in the grading line could be
tlI.cl,1o to save individual tl'ees, they should be
cDnGideuod. The arborist =yalso.make
re.omznendati.ons tor o.d.diti.onal I:lIelSutes tilat
couM be considered along the lbnit of grading to
wolect trees iust outside of the constnu:lion area. ,
7 All nativ.. tre~ relI\01Ied ~t Ineet th.. definition Project Proponent City Pla=ing
of "Si~c:ant Tree" a. defined loy tile City of Di"ision
Gilroy Consolidated. Lanc1scape Policy, Section 6.0.
shall be replaced at a....tio (not I.... than tlvee lues
repla~ed for e"ery tree lDOlt) to be detemlined in
=Ullation "(ith city PlaraUng Di";,,ion ""d .
.cerlifi'ed arbonst. .
8 A certIlfied ""bOM and the city Planning Division Project Proponent CityPIamli%tg
shall review the final grading plaIl if any Division
...cro~chm.nt i:lto the oo1</oy=ore riparian
forest is proposed. The biologist shall delemtine iI
the adl1itiOl'lal encroa.c:h:Lent would comprOlI1ise
the int!!grity ol the Uvas Creek riparian corridgr.
If the clertified. ~tborist an"d the cily PI.a:nning
Divisicm detem\ines the final pding plaIl wollld.
result!rl such a oOI:l\prontise, then the grad,ing plan
shall be revised Bc:cordinidv.
M14P-10
EM'C Pl_ru,;"g Gro~ Iru;;.
5Z0/5Z0 ~
A
tZ:LT
00/9Z160
.
.
I, RHONDA PELLIN, City Clerk of the City of Gilroy, do hereby certifY that the attached
Resoiution No. 2000-65 is an original resolution, duly adopted by the Council of the City of
Gilroy at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 2nd day of October, 2000, 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 4th day of October, 2000.
~~~
City Clerk of the -City of Gilroy
(Seal)