Resolution 2005-81RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -81
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY MAKING
REQUIRED FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS, MITIGATION
MEASURES AND ALTERNATIVES, AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, FOR THE GLEN LOMA RANCH SPECIFIC
PLAN (GPA 00 -01), FOR WHICH AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WAS
PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIROMENTAL
QUALITY ACT, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR
THE PROJECT
WHEREAS, the project analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Report ( "Final EIR ") for the
Glen Loma Ranch residential and commercial project applications GPA 00 -01 and Z 05 -13,
adopting the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan and codifying provisions of the Glen Loma Ranch
Special Use District, and re- zoning to GLR/PUD (Glen Loma Ranch Special Use
District/Planned Unit Development) from ND (Neighborhood District) ( "Project "), is composed
of approximately 360 acres east of Santa Teresa Boulevard between Greenfield Drive and Uvas
Creek, APNs 808 -18 -003, 014, 015, 016, 017, 018, 808 -19 -008, 009, 010, 011, 808 -43 -001, 002,
003, 004, 005, and 006; and
WHEREAS, the City of Gilroy held three community meetings between October 2000 and June
2001 to gain input into the overall design of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council held a series of six workshops to
discuss the process and overall Project between February 2001 and September 2005, including a
workshop in May 2001 with the Parks and Recreation Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on October 6, 2005, at
which time the Commission considered the public testimony, the Staff Report dated September
29, 2005, and all other documentation related to the Project, and recommended that the City
Council certify the Final EIR as completed in accordance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended ( "CEQA "); and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project, including the
Final EIR, on October 17, 2005, at which time the Council received the full record of the entire
proceedings, took public testimony, and heard additional City staff responses, and thereafter
certified the Final EIR as completed in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the Gilroy is the decision - making body for the Glen Loma
Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of Gilroy intends to approve actions related to the Project as
identified in the Final EIR, entitled, "Final Environmental Impact Report: Glen Loma Specific
Plan" dated September 2005, and "Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report: Glen Loma
Specific Plan" dated June 10, 2005, SCH # 2003042018; and
IGB01673691.3
01- 110405 - 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
WHEREAS, CEQA requires that in connection with the approval of a project for which an EIR
has been prepared that identifies one or more significant environmental effects, the decision -
making body of the lead agency make certain findings regarding those significant effects on the
environment identified in the Final EIR.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GILROY AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council does hereby attest to its findings made October 17, 2005, that
the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; that the City Council has
independently reviewed and analyzed the Final EIR and other information in the record and has
considered the information contained therein, including the written and oral comments received
at the public hearings on the Final EIR and on the Project, prior to acting upon or approving the
Project; and has found that the Final EIR represents the independent judgment and analysis of
the City of Gilroy as Lead Agency for the Project.
2. The findings and recommendations set forth herein are made by this City Council
as the City's findings under CEQA relating to the Project. The findings provide the written
analysis and conclusions of the City Council regarding the Project's environmental impacts,
mitigation measures and alternatives to the Project.
3. The City Council hereby adopts the mitigation measures in the Final EIR,
summarized in the "Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures," attached to this resolution
as Exhibit "A ", except as modified herein, as conditions of the Project.
4. The Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project (the "Program ") is attached as
Exhibit `B" and adopted as part of this resolution. The Program identifies impacts of the Project
and corresponding mitigation measures, and designates the agency responsible for the
implementation of each mitigation measure and for its monitoring, and the timing required for
implementation of each mitigation measure.
5. The City Council hereby finds and recognizes that the Final EIR contains
additions, clarifications, modifications and other information in its responses to comments on the
Revised Draft EIR for the Project, and also incorporates information obtained by the City since
the Revised Draft EIR was issued. This City Council hereby finds and determines that such
changes and additional information are not significant new information as that term is defined
under the provisions of CEQA, because such changes and additional information do not indicate
that any new significant environmental impacts not already evaluated would result from the
Project and do not reflect any substantial increase in the severity of any environmental impact.
No feasible mitigation measures considerably different from those previously analyzed in the
Revised Draft EIR have been proposed that would lessen significant environmental impacts of
the Project; and no feasible alternatives considerably different from those analyzed in the
Revised Draft EIR have been proposed that would lessen significant environmental impacts of
the Project. Accordingly, the City Council hereby finds and determines that recirculation of the
Revised Draft EIR or Final EIR for further public review and comment is not required under
CEQA.
MM673691.3
01- 110405-04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
6. The City Council does hereby designate the City Clerk's office of the City of
Gilroy, at 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, California 95020, as the location of and as the custodian
of documents and the record of proceedings on which the decision to approve the Project is
based.
7. The City Council does hereby make the following findings with respect to the
significant effects on the environment of the Project based on facts within the administrative
record as a whole, and as identified in the Final EIR, with the stipulation that all information in
these findings is intended as a summary of the entire record supporting the Final EIR. Any
mitigation measures and/or alternatives that were suggested by commenters on the Draft EIR and
not adopted as part of the Final EIR are hereby expressly rejected for the reasons stated in the
responses to the comments set forth in the Final EIR and in the record.
SECTION I. FINDINGS CONCERNING SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS
A. AESTHETICS
1. Potentially Significant Impact - Change in Visual Character and Effects on Scenic
Resources Viewed from Santa Teresa Boulevard. Unless properly designed, the project could
result in substantial adverse effects on the visual character of the project site and its surroundings
as well as on the scenic resources afforded by the project site from Santa Teresa Boulevard,
resulting in a potentially significant impact. However, as recognized in the General Plan EIR,
implementation of General Plan policies and actions will reduce visual quality and aesthetics
impacts of developments anticipated under the General Plan to a less than significant level. The
project is situated in the city limits, is nearly surrounded by urban development, and includes
setbacks, parks, and preserved natural areas, minimizing the aesthetic impacts.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring preparation and implementation of a
Santa Teresa Boulevard Landscaped Buffer Plan to be prepared prior to approval of the first
tentative map and implemented in phases as development proceeds, in accordance with the
specifications set forth in mitigation measure 1 of the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
The City Council also finds that requiring preparation of visual simulations demonstrating before
and after views of proposed development with each application for projects adjacent to Santa
Teresa Boulevard, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 2 of the
Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures.
Implementing both mitigation measures 1 and 2 would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
B. AIR QUALITY
1. Significant Unavoidable Impact— Conflict with the Clean Air Plan/Violate Air
Quality Standards. The Project is inconsistent with the Clean Air Plan ( "CAP ") because the
1GB01673691.3
01- 110405-04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
Project is consistent with the General Plan, which is inconsistent with the CAP. This would be
considered a significant unavoidable environmental impact.
The Specific Plan includes provisions for pedestrian and bicycle trails and includes development
of local commercial services that could be accessible by residents within the Specific Plan area.
These elements of the Specific Plan would serve to reduce the number and length of vehicle trips
taken by future residents, thereby marginally reducing vehicle related air emissions. The
feasibility of extending transit service to one or more areas within the Specific Plan area has yet
to be fully evaluated by the VTA. If service were feasible, this too would marginally reduce the
generation of vehicular emissions from implementation of the Specific Plan. However, the
impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
Findings of Fact. The provisions and policies contained in the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
will not avoid or substantially lessen the impact. There are no mitigation measures that would
reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Therefore, this impact remains significant and
unavoidable.
Statement of Overriding Considerations. See Statement of Overriding Consideration, Section
III.
2. Cumulative Impact on Air Quality. Significant Unavoidable Impact — Conflict with the
Clean Air PlanNiolate Air Quality Standards. The implementation of the Glen Loma Ranch
Specific Plan would result in a significant cumulative impact on air quality. The provisions and
policies contained the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan will not avoid or substantially lessen the
impact. Therefore, this impact is considered to be cumulatively considerable and unavoidable.
Findings of Fact. The provisions and policies contained in the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan
will not avoid or substantially lessen the impact. There are no mitigation measures that would
reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Therefore, this impact remains significant and
unavoidable.
Statement of Overriding Considerations. See Statement of Overriding Consideration, Section
III.
3. Potentially Significant Impact — Project Construction— Expose Sensitive Receptors to
Substantial Pollutant Concentrations. Large construction projects involving grading and other
earth movement can generate significant quantities of PM10. Projects involving large amounts of
earth movement near sensitive receptors such as residences or schools can have a potentially
significant health impact. Sensitive receptors could be affected by emissions from construction
equipment, as well as the generation of significant quantities of PM10 during site preparation
activities. This is considered a potentially significant environmental impact. The Bay Area Air
Quality Management District's approach to CEQA analysis of construction impacts is to
emphasize implementation of effective and comprehensive control measures rather than detailed
quantification of emissions.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring preparation and implementation of the
dust control measures during grading and construction activities in accordance with the
1GB01673691.3
01- 110405 - 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
specifications set forth in mitigation measure 3 of the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Implementing this
mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
C. BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS
1. Potentially Significant Impact — Burrowing Owl. As reported in the biological assessment
and addendum, no evidence of burrowing owl was observed during field surveys. However, the
Project could potentially affect burrowing owl directly or indirectly through habitat disturbance.
Burrowing owl could occur in grassland habitats. Although the potential for burrowing owl to
occur is low due to regular disking and surrounding development, both of which discourage
burrowing owls from moving into an area, should active burrowing owl nests occur on or
immediately adjacent to the project site, any construction and site preparation activities within or
immediately adjacent to nest habitat, if conducted during the nesting season, could result in the
direct loss of nests, including eggs and young, or the abandonment of an active nest by the
adults. The loss of active burrowing owl nests would be a significant impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring pre - construction surveys prior to grading
and construction activities, and if necessary, preparation of a habitat management plan, in
accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 4 of the Final EIR, are feasible
measures, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
2. Potentially Significant Impact — Loggerhead Shrike and Nesting Raptors. No evidence
of loggerhead shrike or nesting raptors was observed during field surveys. However,
development of the project site could potentially affect protected bird species directly or
indirectly through habitat disturbance. Nesting shrike and raptors could occur in areas of
oak/riparian woodland or mixed/cultivated woodlands. The project will result in no impacts to
mixed/cultivated woodlands (or minor impacts [less than one acre] to mixed/cultivated
woodlands with development of the Northern Commercial Reserve area adjacent to McCutchin
Creek), and minor impacts (0.2 acres) to oak/riparian woodland. Should active nest(s) of
loggerhead shrike and protected raptors species occur in the trees, any construction and site
preparation activities, if conducted during the nesting season, could result in the direct loss of
nests, including eggs and young, or the abandonment of an active nest by the adults. The loss of
individuals of these species or abandonment of their nests would be a significant impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring pre - construction surveys prior to grading
and construction activities, and subsequent measures if active nests are found, in accordance with
the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 5 of the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Implementing this
mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
3. Potentially Significant Impact — Bat Roosts and Sensitive Bat Species. No evidence of bat
roosts was observed during field surveys. However, the project could potentially affect sensitive
bat species directly or indirectly through habitat disturbance. Bat roosts could occur in areas of
oak/riparian woodland or mixed/cultivated woodlands. The project will result in no impacts to
mixed/cultivated woodlands (or minor impacts [less than one acre] to mixed/cultivated
IG801673691.3 _5 _
01- 110405 - 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
woodlands with development of the Northern Commercial Reserve area adjacent to McCutchin
Creek), and minor impacts (0.2 acres) to oak/riparian woodland. Should any bat roosts occur in
the trees, any construction and site preparation activities could result in the direct loss or indirect
disturbance of roosts. The loss of individuals of these species or their roosts would be a
significant impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring pre - construction surveys prior to grading
and construction activities, and the subsequent measures if active bat roosts are found, in
accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 6 of the Final EIR, are
feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
4. Potentially Significant Impact — Sensitive Habitat. Riparian habitat is regarded as an
important vegetation community because of the number of ecological functions it performs (e.g.,
nutrient removal, sediment stabilization, groundwater recharge) and its value as wildlife habitat
and as a movement corridor for a number of common and special- status species. Loss of this
resource is attributed to conversion of habitat to agricultural and urban land uses. In response to
the reduction of riparian habitat, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) considers
riparian woodland habitat to be a "high priority" habitat, which include habitats that are rare in
California and worthy of consideration by the CDFG Natural Diversity Database.
Oak woodlands are considered important natural communities because they provide a variety of
ecological, aesthetic, and economic values. The extent of oak woodlands in California has
declined as a result of agricultural conversion, urban development, fuel wood harvesting, and
grazing. In response to this loss, CDFG, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection,
California Native Plant Society, and The Nature Conservancy have identified the conservation
and management of oak woodlands as major issues.
In addition, the oak/riparian woodland habitat and the water sources with which they are
associated may be subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdiction under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, Regional Water Quality Control Board jurisdiction under Section
401 of the Clean Water Act, and California Department of Fish and Game jurisdiction under
Section 1600 et. seq. of the Fish and Game Code.
To ensure preservation of oak/riparian woodland habitat, Specific Plan policy POSG -3 specifies
that development should not occur closer than 100 feet to a defined creek bank or tree canopy of
a defined riparian area or 50 feet to other preserved open space areas (coastal scrub areas, mixed
cultivated woodland, and rocky serpentine grassland areas). The policy also states that in certain
neighborhoods within the Specific Plan area, other setback standards may be approved due to
site constraints or to accomplish specific project goals, but shall in no event be less than 30 feet.
The Specific Plan indicates that the Home Ranch neighborhood will include a reduced 30 -foot
setback to oak woodland scrub area; however, no other neighborhoods in the Specific Plan area
call for reduced setbacks. No construction is anticipated within the woodland buffer areas.
To minimize impacts to oak/riparian woodland habitat along McCutchin Creek, the right -of -way
for Merlot Drive has been designed to split at the oak tree cluster south of Club Drive and
IGB01673691.3
01- 110405 - 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
continue through the break in oak/riparian woodland habitat on either side. The impacts
resulting from road construction are anticipated to be less than 0.20 acre.
To minimize impacts to oak/riparian woodland habitat along Reservoir Canyon Creek, the right -
of -way for Merlot Drive has been aligned to cross the creek at a natural break in oak/riparian
woodland vegetation. The project includes a bridge that will span the creek. Construction of the
bridge and associated abutments and support structures will not require removal of any
significant vegetation.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that the following measures are feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures:
• Design development to include adequate buffer areas to protect sensitive habitats, in
accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 7 of the Final EIR.
• Design development to avoid unnecessary filling or other disturbance of natural drainage
courses and associated oak/riparian woodland vegetation, in accordance with the
specifications set forth in mitigation measure 8 of the Final EIR.
• Preparation of a habitat restoration plan in the event development results in the loss of
oak and/or riparian woodland habitat, in accordance with the specifications set forth in
mitigation measure 9 of the Final EIR.
• Monitoring the construction of the Reservoir Canyon Creek Bridge to ensure that there
are no impacts to wetlands and associated oak/riparian woodland habitat, in accordance
with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 10 of the Final EIR.
• Development of a suitable ownership structure to take long -term responsibility for
maintaining and funding the ongoing management of any open space, woodland,
vegetation riparian, or other habitat conservation easements on site, in accordance with
the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 11 of the Final EIR.
• Management of the preserved serpentine rocky grassland on site to reduce indirect
impacts resulting from public use, in accordance with the specifications set forth in
mitigation measure 12 of the Final EIR.
• Installation of siltation fencing, hay bales, or other suitable erosion control measures
along portions of natural and manmade drainage channels in accordance with the
specifications set forth in mitigation measures 13 of the Final EIR.
• Preparation and implementation of a landscape plan for areas adjacent to riparian habitat,
in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 14 of the Final EIR.
Implementing these mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
5. Potentially Significant Impact — U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Waters.
The project was designed to avoid major impacts to the natural creeks and seasonal wetlands on
the site. As part of the improvements associated with the Olive Grove, McCutchin Creek, and
IGB01673691.3
01- 110405 - 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
Palomino neighborhoods, the Specific Plan includes realignment of an existing man-made,
linear, predominantly unvegetated drainage channel that originates from McCutchin Canyon.
The existing drainage will be redirected along Santa Teresa Boulevard and will be revegetated.
A preliminary estimate of total impacts to waters of the U.S. and wetlands is less than 0.07 acre.
The loss of any waters of the U.S. or wetlands at a level that would require mitigation under
applicable Army Corps of Engineers regulations would be considered a significant
environmental impact in the event that such mitigation were not to be adopted and implemented.
The drainage channel restoration identified in the Specific Plan will assist with mitigating this
impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that the drainage channel restoration identified in the
Specific Plan, as well as requiring preparation of a wetland delineation for those portions of the
project that may result in the removal or alteration of wetlands, in accordance with the
specifications set forth in mitigation measure 15 of the Final EIR, is feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Implementing this
mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
6. Potentially Significant Impact — Wildlife Movement. The project site is composed
primarily of low - quality plant communities, such as the cultivated fields and grasslands. Most of
the good quality habitat, such as oak/riparian woodland, mixed /cultivated woodland, coastal
scrub, and rocky serpentine grassland, will be preserved. The main wildlife movement corridors
most likely correspond to the woodland areas adjacent to creeks and drainages on site. Open
space standards and guidelines identified in the Specific Plan call for these woodland areas to be
preserved as open space and to be protected by buffer zones between the edge of riparian
corridor and drainages to the edge of the project site. However, increased nighttime lighting
and/or unleashed pets wandering into these open space areas could restrict the movement or
activity of wildlife species occurring in these habitats.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that the following measures are feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures:
• Open space standards and guidelines in the Specific Plan.
• Preparation and implementation of a schematic lighting plan for each development
proposal, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 16 of the
Final EIR.
• Preparation and implementation of a signage plan to address off -trail human disturbance,
in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 17 of the Final EIR.
Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
7. Potentially Significant Impact — Tree Removals. General plan policy 20.04 provides
direction that limits development in areas supporting rare and endangered species and requires
mitigation for development that must occur in these areas. Implementation of the preserved
open space standards and guidelines identified in the Specific Plan, as well as mitigation
measures provided herein, will ensure consistency with this policy.
IGB01673691.3 _
01- 110405 - 04706099 -g
Resolution No. 2005 -51
The City of Gilroy Consolidated Landscaping Policy, section 6.0, states that the following trees
shall be designated significant:
Existing native trees (naturally occurring species in Gilroy) six (6) inches or more in
diameter, at a point four and one half (4 1/2) feet above the ground; or
• Important to the historical or visual aspect of Gilroy (the hillside tree stands).
Removal of any trees considered to be significant under the City of Gilroy Consolidated
Landscaping Policy would be considered a significant adverse impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that the following measures are feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures:
• Conducting a field survey by a certified arborist to determine the number and location of
trees proposed to be removed in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation
measure 18 of the Final EIR.
• Fencing trees or groups of trees to prevent injury during construction, in accordance with
the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 19 of the Final EIR.
Implementing these mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
D. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
1. Potentially Significant Impact — Seismic Activity Relative to Soil Stability. Development
at the project site is subject to potentially significant hazards due to the varied geologic and soils
conditions throughout the project site. Geologic and soil hazards have the potential to result in
substantial property damage and possible injury or loss of life. The following summarizes these
geologic and soils conditions:
• The shrink/swell potential at the project site varies from low to high.
Approximately 60 percent of the project site in the southern region has a very low
liquefaction hazard potential. The remaining 40 percent of the project site in the northern
region has a moderate liquefaction hazard potential.
• Approximately 30 percent of the project site is made up of soils with a moderate to high
erosion hazard rating.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that the requirement for preparation, submission, and
implementation of recommendations in a soils investigation for development within the project
area, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 20 of the Final EIR, is
feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
1GB01673691.3
01- 110405- 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
2. Potentially Significant Impact — Seismic Effects on Structural Integrity. Potential seismic
impacts to the project include failure or displacement of a structure located on a fault or from
violent ground shaking. The project site may be affected by strong seismic shaking of the
regional San Andreas, Hayward, and Calaveras faults.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring structures to be designed in accordance
with the Uniform Building Code to minimize the potential for significant damage to life and
property, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 21 of the Final
EIR, is feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
3. Potentially Significant Impact — Earthquake Faults. The majority of the project site is
comprised of moderate and moderately high earthquake hazards. A portion of the project site is
located within a fault rupture hazard zone. The project includes residential uses in the area of the
site where the fault rupture hazard zone is indicated. Any fault activity on the project site could
lead to severe damage to life and property. This would be a potentially significant impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that the requirement for preparation, submission, and
implementation of recommendations in a fault investigation for development within the project
area, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 22 of the Final EIR, is
feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
4. Potentially Significant Impact — Soil Erosion. Although the soils on the project site have a
low to moderate erosion, erosion may occur if the soils are unprotected during the rainy season.
Soil erosion may lead to sedimentation of Uvas Creek or other riparian corridors located on -site
which could reduce flood level capacities, diminish water quality and choke organisms. This is
considered a potentially significant impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that the following measures are feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures:
• Project developers shall comply with the State Water Resources Control Board's general
permit for construction activities, including the filing of a Notice of Intent (NOI) and
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) with the Regional Water Quality
Control Board, which would address soil erosion impacts during construction.
• Project developers shall comply with City requirements for preparation and
implementation of an erosion and deposition control plan for all new development
detailing appropriate methods of erosion and deposition control during site development
and subsequent use (General Plan Action 25.17).
• Project developers shall incorporate measures to protect stream habitats and drainages on
the site, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measures 7 through
14 (pertaining to biological resources) and mitigation measures 23 through 26 (pertaining
to surface water drainage) of the Final EIR.
Implementing these measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
MO\673691.3
01- 110405 - 04706099
-10-
Resolution No. 2005 -81
E. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
1. Potentially Significant Impact — Flooding On- or Off -site. The project is not within a 100 -
year flood zone as mapped by the FIRM issued by FEMA and therefore, would not place
housing in a one percent flood zone. However, the project would increase the impervious
surfaces at the project site and thus increase the site runoff, creating a need for additional
floodwater retention on site. According to the Hydrologic Analysis (Schaaf & Wheeler 2003 and
2005 update), the impact of the increased peak discharge and runoff volume for all events can be
mitigated through the construction of on -site detention.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring the Specific Plan include a detention
pond or ponds to collect storm water in the case of peak storm events, in accordance with the
specifications set forth in mitigation measure 23 of the Final EIR, is feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Implementing this
mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
2. Potentially Significant Impact— Surface Water Quality During Construction. Grading
will expose the soil to rain or wind erosion and subsequent transportation of the soils to on site
drainages that may wash into Uvas Creek, the Pajaro River, and eventually Monterey Bay.
Materials used and wastes generated during construction can also affect water quality. Wastes
generated commonly include wash water from concrete mixers, paints and painting equipment
cleaning activities, oil, grease and fuel constituents from vehicle use, storage and maintenance,
solid wastes from vegetation removal during land clearing, and wood and paper materials from
packaging of building products.
Development of the project site would generate non -point source pollutants from newly
established urban activity at the project site. Introduction of pollutants into a watercourse is
considered a significant environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring future developers to comply with the
requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Santa Clara Valley Water
District, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measures 24 and 25 of the
Final EIR, is feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
3. Potentially Significant Impact— Surface Water Quality During Operation. The project
would introduce new urban pollutants to the project site and this may result in polluted storm
water entering McCutchin Canyon, Reservoir Canyon, the on -site wetland, the existing
drainages, Uvas Creek, the Pajaro River, and eventually Monterey Bay. This would be a
potentially significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring future applicants in the project area to
prepare and implement a post - construction storm water management plan, in accordance with the
specifications set forth in mitigation measure 26 of the Final EIR, is feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Implementing this
mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
1GB01673691.3 -11-
01- 110405 - 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
F. NOISE
1. Significant Impact— Increase in Traffic Noise Levels Along Santa Teresa Boulevard and
Project Arterials. Buildout of the project would increase the existing traffic volumes by about
17 percent at Miller Avenue (Tenth Street) and by about 74 percent at Club Drive. Buildout of
the General Plan would increase the existing traffic volumes by about 277 percent at Miller
Avenue (Tenth Street) and by about 355 percent at Club Drive. In addition, internal project
traffic along project arterials could also result in significant noise levels. This increase in traffic
at General Plan buildout would result in significant noise impacts to development at the project
site.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring future developers in the project area
adjacent to Santa Teresa Boulevard to prepare and implement recommendations in a noise
impact assessment to assure that these developments are in compliance with the City's noise
standards, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 27 of the Final
EIR, is feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
2. Cumulative Impact on Noise at General Plan Buildout. The General Plan EIR found that
future development within the City, consistent with the General Plan, will increase noise levels
above the maximum permissible noise levels at existing, previously developed uses and result in
a significant and unavoidable impact. The project, consistent with the General Plan, will
contribute to these impacts. This is a significant impact and there are no feasible mitigation
measures to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
Statement of Overriding Considerations. See Section III.
3. Potentially Significant Impact– Short -Term Construction Noise. Short-term noise could
occur from construction activities at the project site. The temporary elevation of noise may pose
a significant impact to sensitive receptors off -site. Construction equipment typically generates
noise levels in the range of 70 to 90 dB at a distance of 50 feet. There are schools and residences
in the vicinity that could be affected by the short-term noise increase. In addition, residences
located near roads could be affected by increased noise levels from trucks hauling materials and
equipment to the project site.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requiring future construction activities to comply
with standard City requirements for construction scheduling and equipment, in accordance with
the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 28 of the Final EIR, is feasible, and fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Implementing this
mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
G. TRANSPORTATION
1. Potentially Potentially Significant Impact— Unsafe Conditions at Highway 101 /Castro
Valley Road. Although this existing T- intersection currently operates at acceptable LOS B in
the AM peak hour and marginally acceptable LOS D in the PM peak hour, the existing
configuration and design speeds result in unsafe conditions for vehicles merging from Castro
IGB01673691.3 -12-
01- 110405 - 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
Valley Road onto Highway 101. The project would add traffic to this existing hazardous
situation.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that the improvements to Castro Valley Road at the
Highway 25 off -ramp, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 29 of
the Final EIR, are not within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City of Gilroy to mitigate,
but are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the County of Santa Clara to mitigate.
Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
2. Potentially Significant Impact— Monterey Road/Masten Avenue Intersection Level of
Service. Under Background Conditions, this intersection would operate at unacceptable LOS
D+ during the AM peak hour and unacceptable LOS D during the PM peak hour. The project
would add traffic to this existing unacceptable level of service.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Fitzgerald and Masten
approaches to the Monterey Road/Masten Avenue intersection, in accordance with the
specifications set forth in mitigation measure 30 of the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully
enforceable through the collection of impacts fees for these improvements. Implementing this
mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
3. Potentially Significant Impact —Santa Teresa Boulevard /Miller Avenue Intersection
Level of Service. Although the overall LOS at this intersection would be LOS A during both the
AM and PM peak hours under Background Conditions, the worst approach would operate at
LOS E during the AM peak hour and LOS C during the PM peak hour. Causing an intersection
to operate at an unacceptable level of service is considered a significant adverse environmental
impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Santa Teresa
Boulevard/Miller Avenue intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in
mitigation measure 31 of the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through the collection
of impacts fees for these improvements. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this
impact to a less than significant level.
4. Potentially Significant Impact— Monterey Road/Tenth Street Intersection Safety
Impact. Although this intersection would operate at acceptable levels of service under
Background Plus Project Phase I Conditions, there would be a safety impact associated with left-
turn movements. Causing an intersection to operate in a hazardous manner is considered a
significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Monterey Road/Tenth Street
intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 32 of the Final
EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
5. Potentially Significant Impact — Thomas Road /Luchessa Avenue Intersection Level of
Service. Under Background plus Project Phase I Conditions, this intersection would operate at
IGB01673691.3 -13-
01-110405-04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
unacceptable LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours. Causing an intersection to operate at an
unacceptable level is considered a significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Thomas Road/Luchessa
Avenue intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 33 of
the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
6. Potentially Significant Impact —Santa Teresa Boulevard /Fitzgerald Avenue Intersection
Level of Service. Under Background plus Project Phase I and II Conditions, this intersection
would operate at unacceptable LOS E during the PM peak hour. Causing an intersection to
operate at an unacceptable level is considered a significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Santa Teresa
Boulevard/Fitzgerald Avenue intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in
mitigation measure 34 of the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit
conditions, agreements, or other measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce
this impact to a less than significant level.
7. Potentially Significant Impact —Uvas Park Drive /Miller Avenue Intersection Level of
Service. Under Background plus Project Phase I and II Conditions, this intersection would
operate at unacceptable LOS D during the AM peak hour and unacceptable LOS E during the
PM peak hour. Causing an intersection to operate at an unacceptable level is considered a
significant adverse environmental impact. In addition, Miller Avenue southwest of this
intersection through Christmas Hill Park is designated as a local street in the General Plan. Due
to projected traffic volume increases, there are safety issues that must be addressed through the
park area.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Uvas Park Drive/Miller
Avenue intersection, and preparation and implementation of a traffic management plan at this
location, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measures 35 and 36 of the
Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Implementing these mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
8. Potentially Significant Impact —Santa Teresa Boulevard /First Street Intersection Level
of Service. Under the Cumulative Projects plus Phase III Scenario, this intersection would
operate at unacceptable LOS D during the PM peak hour. Causing an intersection to operate at
an unacceptable level is considered a significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Santa Teresa Boulevard/First
Street intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 37 of the
Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
\GBO \673691.3 -14-
01- 110405 - 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
9. Potentially Significant Impact —Santa Teresa Boulevard /Ballybunion Drive Intersection
Safety Impact. Although this intersection would continue to operate at acceptable levels of
service under the Cumulative Projects plus Phase III Scenario, there is a significant safety impact
associated with left tuning movements under cumulative conditions. Causing an intersection to
operate in a hazardous manner is considered a significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Santa Teresa
Boulevard/Ballybunion Drive intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in
mitigation measure 38 of the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit
conditions, agreements, or other measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce
this impact to a less than significant level.
10. Potentially Significant Impact —Uvas Park Drive/Miller Avenue Level of Service. This
intersection would operate at unacceptable LOS E during both the AM and PM peak hours under
the Cumulative Projects plus Phase III Scenario. Causing an intersection to operate at an
unacceptable level is considered a significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Uvas Park Drive /Miller
Avenue intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 39 of
the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
11. Potentially Significant Impact — Princevalle Street/Tenth Street Intersection Safety
Impact. Although this intersection would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service,
there is a significant safety impact associated with left turn movements under Cumulative
Projects plus Phase III Scenario. Causing an intersection to operate in a hazardous manner is
considered a significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Princevalle Street/Tenth
Street intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 40 of the
Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
12. Potentially Significant Impact— Thomas Avenue /Luchessa Avenue Intersection Level
of Service. With implementation of the mitigation measure required under the Project Phase I
scenario, under the Cumulative Projects plus Phase III Scenario this intersection would operate at
unacceptable LOS E during the PM peak hour with implementation of the roundabout and LOS
C during both the AM and PM peak hours with signalization and addition of a northbound right
turn lane. Causing an intersection to operate at an unacceptable level is considered a significant
adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Thomas Avenue /Luchessa
Avenue intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 41 of
the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
16601673691.3 -15-
01- 110405 - 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
13. Potentially Significant Impact — Princevalle Street/Luchessa Avenue Intersection Level
of Service. This intersection would operate at unacceptable LOS E during the PM peak hour
under the Cumulative Projects plus Phase III Scenario. The worst approach (southbound) would
operate at LOS F during both the AM and PM peak hours. Causing an intersection to operate at
an unacceptable level is considered a significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Princevalle Street/Luchessa
Avenue intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 42 of
the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
14. Potentially Significant Impact— Monterey Road/Luchessa Avenue Intersection Safety
Impact. Although this intersection would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service,
there is a significant safety impact associated with left turn movements under the Cumulative
Projects plus Phase III Scenario. Causing an intersection to operate in a hazardous manner is
considered a significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Monterey Road/Luchessa
Avenue intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 43 of
the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
15. Potentially Significant Impact —Santa Teresa Boulevard /First Street Intersection Level
of Service. This intersection would operate at unacceptable LOS D during the PM peak hour
under the Cumulative Projects plus Phase III Scenario. Causing an intersection to operate at an
unacceptable level is considered a significant adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that improvements to the Santa Teresa Boulevard/First
Street intersection, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 44 of the
Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures. Implementing this mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than
significant level.
H. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Potentially Significant Impact — Cultural Resources. The project site is located in an
archaeologically - sensitive area. Accidental discovery of significant archaeological resources or
human remains would be considered a significant, adverse environmental impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requirements for protecting accidentally
discovered archaeological resources or human remains, in accordance with the specifications set
forth in mitigation measures 45 and 46 of the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable
IGB01673691.3 -16-
01- 110405 -04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Implementing these mitigation
measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
I. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1. Potentially Significant Impact— Pesticides and Hazardous Materials in the Soils. It is
unknown whether pesticides or other potentially harmful chemicals have been applied during
past agricultural production. If historical uses included the application of pesticides or other
potentially harmful chemicals, future development of the site has the potential to result in health
risks to construction workers and people in the vicinity during excavation of the soil. This is a
potentially significant impact.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that requirements for identifying areas used for non-
dryland crop production and preparation of environmental site assessments, as well as
implementation of recommendation of those assessments, in accordance with the specifications
set forth in mitigation measures 47 and 48 of the Final EIR, are feasible, and fully enforceable
through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Implementing these mitigation
measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
J. FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES
1. Potentially Significant Impact —Fire Hazards. The City Fire Marshal has determined that
the project design has the potential to result in potentially significant fire hazards, mostly
associated with the smaller lot sizes and the amount of open space and natural buffers provided
for in the Specific Plan.
Findings of Fact. The City Council finds that the following measures to reduce the risks of
significant fire hazards, are feasible, and fully enforceable through permit conditions,
agreements, or other measures:
• Project proponent shall prepare a program for monitoring the need for development of the
new fire station, in accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 49.
• Residential fire sprinklers shall be installed in all residences over 3,000 square feet, in
accordance with the specifications set forth in mitigation measure 50.
• Project proponent shall have an urban wildland interface planner or other professional
acceptable to the City Fire Marshal to address vegetation in the preserved open space and
evaluate fuel modeling and fire behavior for existing vegetation, in accordance with the
specifications set forth in mitigation measure 51.
• The homeowner's association shall take full responsibility for management and
maintenance of the preserved open space areas, in accordance with the specifications set
forth in mitigation measure 52.
Implementing these mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
IGB01673691.3 -17-
01- 110405 - 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
SECTION II. FINDINGS CONCERNING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(d), the Final EIR identifies and evaluates the
comparative merits of alternatives to the project, which could eliminate any significant adverse
environmental impacts of the project or reduce them to a level of insignificance. These
alternatives are evaluated in the Final EIR even if they would impede to some degree the
attainment of project objectives or would be more costly.
The project objectives are to develop a well - designed residential neighborhood consisting of a
range of product types, including single family residential, multi - family residential, commercial,
and associated public facilities such as schools, parks, and a potential fire station. The project is
to contribute to the City's available housing stock to address the City's share of regional housing
needs, including the development of workforce (i.e. affordable) and senior housing.
Furthermore, the project objectives are to provide a planning tool that would be consistent with
and provide implementation measures sufficient to execute the policies of the Neighborhood
District as set forth in the Gilroy General Plan. The City of Gilroy policies for the Neighborhood
District land use designation provide for more pedestrian friendly and less car dependent
neighborhoods. It is the intention of the proposed project to create resident friendly
neighborhoods, and build upon the City's more recent efforts to create pedestrian and bicycle
accommodating roadways and paths, passive and active recreation, open spaces, and residences
in proximity to jobs and commercial centers.
A. NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
Description. The no project alternative assumes that the Specific Plan area is not developed, but
remains in its existing state.
Comparison to the Proposed Project. This alternative would eliminate the project - specific,
on -site impacts including aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources,
geology and soils, hydrology and flooding, noise, transportation and traffic, cultural resources,
mineral resources, public services, and utilities and service systems. However, because the
project site is located within the existing city limits and is needed to meet the growing residential
needs of the community, the no project alternative would likely result in new and unplanned
growth beyond the existing city limits and urban service area, likely resulting in a greater degree
of adverse, significant environmental impacts including, but not limited to, public services and
loss of open space /farmland.
Finding. The no project alternative would not meet the objectives of the Project and would not
provide the variety of residential development needed by the City to meet its regional fair share
housing requirements or provide tax revenues to the City from the commercial /retail portions of
the project. This alternative is not consistent with the direction of the City's General Plan. For
these reasons, this alternative is rejected.
B. REVISED MIXED -USE PROJECT
1GB01673691.3
01- 110405 - 04706099
W:2
Resolution No. 2005 -81
Description. This alternative could be any combination of a mixed -use project consistent with
the General Plan.
Comparison to the Proposed Project. A revised mixed -use project would likely meet the
objectives of the Project. However, the Project is consistent with the development densities and
land use designations (Neighborhood District and Open Space) of the General Plan. The
proposed uses within the Neighborhood District include various densities of residential, as well
as commercial, public facilities, and parks. Therefore, because the Project proposes an
appropriate mix of uses consistent with the General Plan, a revised mixed -use project was not
evaluated in depth because it would not provide worthy data to foster informed decision making
and public participation.
Finding. The average residential density of the project is about 8.8 units per acre (1,693
units /192 acres), which is at the low end of the medium density range. Any reduction in the
development densities of the Project (in an effort to reduce on -site environmental impacts) could
result in off -site growth impacts, as anticipated growth within the City would need to occur
elsewhere, most likely outside the City limits or the City's Urban Service Area. A revised
mixed -use project would not result in a reduction of environmental impacts. For these reasons,
this alternative is rejected.
C. ALTERNATIVE LAND USES
Description. This alternative would include an alternative land use such as industrial,
commercial, or open space, or some combination thereof.
Comparison to the Proposed Project. This alternative would not meet the basic objectives of
the Project and would not be consistent with the General Plan. It would not provide the variety
and number of housing required for the City to meet its regional fair share housing requirements.
Industrial and/or commercial uses would provide additional taxes. Because the Project proposes
an appropriate mix of uses consistent with the General Plan, an industrial /commercial /open space
project was not evaluated in depth because it would not provide worthy data to foster informed
decision making and public participation.
Finding. The Project is consistent with the General Plan. An industrial/commercial /open space
project would not be consistent with the General Plan and would not meet the basic project
objectives. This type of alternative would not result in a reduction of environmental impacts.
For these reasons, this alternative is rejected.
D. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 1
Description. This alternative project site has a General Plan land use designation of
Neighborhood District and is located in the northern portion of the City's planning area. It is
located outside of the City limits and Urban Service Area, north of Longmeadow Drive, south of
Fitzgerald Avenue, east of Santa Teresa Boulevard, and west of Monterey Road. The size of the
project could be accommodated within this area.
Comparison to the Proposed Project. Llagas Creek and other drainages are located within this
alternative location. This area is not served by municipal water and sewer, or other services, and
1GB01673691.3 _19-
01-110405-04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
because it is outside of the Urban Service Area, the City has made no provisions for serving
development in this area in the near future. This area includes mostly Prime Farmland, and
Farmland of Statewide Importance as designated by the Department of Conservation and has a
"High" and "Moderate" agricultural suitability. Many of the parcels are currently under
Williamson Act agricultural conservation contracts. Liquefaction hazards associated with
seismic activity and soil conditions would be greater at the Project site than at this alternative
location. Seismic hazards at the alternative site would be considered "Moderate ", and "High"
and "Very High" in some areas. However, at either site, potential seismic and soils impacts can
be mitigated to a less than significant level with construction and design consistent with the
UBC. The potential for impacts to life and property due to flooding is greater at the alternative
site where much of the area, especially east of Llagas Creek, is subject to 100 -year flood levels.
Biological impacts may be less at the alternative site than at the Project site. Overall, although
this alternative location is planned to be developed in the long -term, it should not be developed
prior to development of the Project site.
Finding. This alternative location would likely meet most, if not all of the Project objectives.
However, alternative location 1 is outside of the City limits and the Urban Service Area,
although it is within the City's long term planning area. The Project site is located both within
the City limits and the Urban Service Area. Many of the environmental impacts, especially those
associated with utilities, the provision of urban services, loss of important farmland, and flooding
would be greater at this alternative location. For these reasons, this alternative is rejected.
E. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 2
Description. This alternative project site has a General Plan land use designation of
Neighborhood District and is located in the southern portion of the City's planning area,
generally east of Thomas Road, south of Luchessa Avenue, west of Uvas Creek, and northeast of
Santa Teresa Boulevard. This area is less than half the size of the Project site and could not
accommodate the growth proposed in the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan, thereby not meeting
the objectives of the Project.
Comparison to the Proposed Project. Although the General Plan designates this area for future
Neighborhood District development, this entire area is outside of the existing Urban Service
Area and the City limits. The entire site is comprised of Prime Farmland. The site does have
access to VTA public transit, as there is a route that traverses along Thomas Road. The site is
adjacent to an existing bike trail and includes future bikeways. Liquefaction hazards associated
with seismic activity and soil conditions would be similar at the Project site. Seismic hazards at
the alternative site would be considered "Moderate" and "Moderately High ". However, at either
site, potential impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level with construction and
design consistent with the UBC. Based on the proximity of the alternative site to the Project site,
biological impacts may be similar although would not impact as large of an area since the site is
considerably smaller. Overall, although this alternative location is planned to be developed in the
long -term, it should not be developed prior to development of the Project site.
Finding. This alternative location would not meet the Project objectives, as it is about one -half
the size of the Project. This alternative is outside of the city limits and the Urban Service Area,
although it is within the City's long term planning area. The Project site is located both within
1GB01673691.3 -20-
01- 110405- 04706099
Resolution No. 2005 -81
the City limits and the Urban Service Area. Many of the environmental impacts, especially those
associated with utilities, the provision of urban services, and the loss of important farmland,
would be greater at this alternative location. For these reasons, this alternative is rejected.
SECTION III. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby adopts and makes the following Statement of
Overriding Considerations regarding the significant, unavoidable impacts of the Project and the
anticipated benefits of the Project.
A. Significant Unavoidable Impacts
With respect to the foregoing findings and in recognition of those facts that are included in the
record, the City has determined that the Project will result in significant unmitigated project
impacts to Air Quality and cumulative impacts to Air Quality and Noise, as disclosed in the
Final EIR. These impacts, though partially mitigated, would not be reduced to a less than
significant level by feasible changes to the Project, and there are no feasible mitigation measures
to reduce theses impact to less than significant levels.
B. Overriding Considerations
The City Council finds that this project has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant
impacts on the environment where feasible. The City Council finds that each of the benefits set
forth in this Statement of Overriding Considerations constitutes a separate and independent
ground for finding that the benefits of the Project outweigh the risks of its unavoidable
significant adverse environmental impacts. The benefits of the Project, which constitute the
specific economic, legal, social, technological and other considerations that justify the approval
of the Project, are set forth below.
C. Benefits of the Project
1. The Project will provide the following variety of housing opportunities that help
the City meet its regional fair share housing requirements:
• 250 senior, senior affordable, and affordable units;
• 1443 market rate residential units including low- density, medium - density, and high -
density units.
2. The Project will provide, or enable to be provided, the following public service
facilities: schools, fire station, parks, and recreation trails. The Project is also designed at
a density to make public transportation desirable, providing forms of transportation
alternative to the automobile.
3. The Project will contribute to the City's tax base through the commercial /retail
development.
IGB01673691.3
01- 110405-04706099
-21-
Resolution No. 2005 -81
4. The Project is an economical and efficient use of land that helps to reduce urban
sprawl and thereby preserve open space and agricultural uses surrounding Gilroy by
directing development to an area in the middle of the City surrounded by urban
development.
The City Council hereby finds that the benefits of the Project outweigh the significant and
unavoidable Air Quality impacts and the significant and unavoidable cumulative Air Quality and
Noise impacts of the Project identified in the Final EIR.
1GB01673691.3
01- 110405-04706099
[signatures on following page]
-22-
Resolution No. 2005 -81
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of November, 2005 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: CORREA, DILLON, GARTMAN,
MORALES, VALIQUETTE, VELASCO,
and PINHEIRO
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS
ATTE T:
v►//iLfZl
Rhonda Pellin, City Clerk
1GB016736913
01- 110405 - 04706099
-23-
NONE
NONE
ert Pinheiro, Mayor
Resolution No. 2005 -81
WOMMM .mss a--.q. -OMMI.,. �-
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan Revised Draft EIR Summary
TABLE S -1
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Area of
Impact
Level of
Level
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure
Mitigated
Concern
Number
Impact
Aesthetics
Visual character as seen from
Significant
1
Prepare and implement
Yes
Santa Teresa Boulevard
Landscaped Buffer Plan
Aesthetics
Visual character as seen from
Significant
2
Submit visual simulations with
Yes
Santa Teresa Boulevard
future tentative map
applications
Air Quality
Violation of air, quality
Significant
N/A
None identified
No
standards /conflict with the CAP
and
Unavoidable
Air Quality
Construction emissions
Significant
3
Dust control measures
Yes
Biological
Burrowing owl
Significant
4
Pre - construction field surveys
Yes
Resources
during nesting season
Biological
Loggerhead shrike and nesting
Significant
5
Pre - construction tree surveys
Yes
Resources
raptors
during nesting season
Biological
Bat roosts and sensitive bat species
Significant
6
Pre - construction surveys
Yes
Resources
Biological
Riparian habitat, waters of the
Significant
7
Project design with adequate,
Yes
Resources
I U.S.
protective buffers
EMC Planning Group Inc. S -3
M
X
x
H
H
H
i
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan Revised Draft EIR Summa
Area of
Impact
Level of
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure
Mitigated
Concern
Significance
Number
spa
Biological
Riparian habitat, drainage courses
Significant
8
Project design to avoid filling
Yes
Resources
or disturbance of riparian
areas/ Construction activities
during dry months /Prepare
Habitat Restoration Plan
Biological
Loss of oak and /or riparian
Significant
9
Prepare and implement Habitat
Yes
Resources
woodland habitat
Restoration Plan
Biological
Construction of Reservoir Canyon
Significant
10
Biologist to monitor
Yes
Resources
Creek bridge
construction of bridge
Biological
Management of open space,
Significant
11
Prepare and implement
Yes
Resources
woodland, riparian, or other
suitable ownership structure to
habitat conservation easements
ensure maintenance and
funding of natural areas
Biological
Disturbance to serpentine
Significant
12
Active management including
Yes
Resources
grassland
fencing and signage
Biological
Siltation of riparian/ drainage
Significant
13
Siltation fencing and other
Yes
Resources
areas during construction
BMP's during construction
activities
Biological
Landscaping- related
Significant
14
Prepare landscape plan
Yes
Resources
contamination of drainages
Biological
Disturbance to jurisdictional
Significant
15
Prepare wetland delineation/
Yes
Resources
waters of the U.S.
Obtain necessary permits/
Prepare detailed wetland
mitigation plan
Biological
Wildlife movement corridors
Significant
16
Submit lighting plan with
Yes
Resources
future tentative map
applications
EMC Planning Group Inc.
S-4
MAW M � M M M M M M = M in Am _ m M. Am Aff.
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan Revised Draft EIR Summary
Area of
Impart
Level of
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure
Mitigated
Concern
Significance
Number
Impact
Biological
Wildlife movement corridors
Significant
17
Prepare signage plan to address
Yes
Resources
off -trail human disturbance
Biological
Tree removal
Significant
18
Field survey by arborist and
Yes
Resources
report of findings
Biological
Tree disturbance during
Significant
19
Protection of trees during
Yes
Resources
construction
construction
Geology and
Seismic activity relative to soil
Significant
20
Submit soils investigation/
Yes
Soils
stability
Incorporate recommendations
into final building plans
Geology and
Seismic effects on structural
Significant
21
Design structures in
Yes
Soils
integrity
accordance with Uniform
Building Code for seismic
design
Geology and
Fault rupture hazard zone on site.
Significant
22
Prepare fault investigation/
Yes
Soils
Implement recommendations
in fault investigation
Geology and
Soil erosion impacts on drainages
Significant
7,8,10,13,
See Mitigation Measures
Yes
Soils
and biological resources
24,25,26
referenced in column to the left
Hydrology and
Flooding on- and off -site from
Significant
23
Implement detention pond(s)
Yes
Flooding
increased site runoff
to accommodate 100 -year
flood levels
Hydrology and
Storm water quality during
Significant
24
Prepare storm water pollution
Yes
Flooding
construction due to polluted runoff
prevention plan ( SWPPP)/
— impacts on drainages
Submit SWPPP to RWQCB
and City of Gilroy
Planning Group Inc. S -5
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan Revised Draft EIR Summary
Area of
Impact
Level of
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure
Mitigated
Concern
Significance
Number
Impact
Hydrology and
Work within 50 -feet of water
Significant
25
Obtain permit(s) from
Yes
Flooding
courses under jurisdiction of
SCVWD
SCVWD
Hydrology and
Storm water quality during
Significant
26
Prepare post - construction
Yes
Flooding
operation
storm water management
plan /Implement BMP's during
project operation
Noise
Traffic noise
Significant
27
Prepare noise impact
Yes
assessment/ Implement
recommendations/ Sensitivity
to visual qualities of sound
attenuation features
Noise
Cumulative traffic noise
Significant
N/A
Gilroy General Plan policies
No
and
26.01 through 26.05
Unavoidable
Noise
Construction noise
Significant
28
Limit construction
Yes
hours /Mufflers on
equipment /Distance loud
stationary equipment from
sensitive receptors
Transportation/
(Background Conditions) Safety at
Significant
29
Roadway extension at Castro
Yes
Traffic
Hwy 101 /Castro Valley Rd
Valley Rd
Transportation/
(Background Conditions) LOS at
Significant
30
Addition of turning lanes/
Yes
Traffic
Monterey Rd /Masten Ave
Change signal phasing
Transportation/
(Background Conditions) LOS at
Significant
31
Signalization at intersection
Yes
Traffic
Santa Teresa Blvd /Miller Ave
EMC Planning Group Inc. S -6
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan Revised Draft EIR Summary
Area of
Impact
Level of
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure
Mitigated
Concern
Significance
Number
Impact
Transportation/
(Background Plus Project Phase I
Significant
32
Change signal phasing for east-
Yes
Traffic
Conditions) Safety at Monterey
west travel
Rd /Tenth St
Transportation/
(Background Plus Project Phase I
Significant
33
Implement roundabout at
Yes
Traffic
Conditions) LOS at Thomas
intersection/or Signalize
Rd /Luchessa Ave
intersection
Transportation/
(Background Plus Project Phase I
Significant
34
Signalize intersection /Add
Yes
Traffic
and II Conditions) LOS at Santa
east- and west -bound turn lanes
Teresa Blvd /Fitzgerald Ave
Transportation/
(Background Plus Project Phase I
Significant
35
Add northbound left turn lane
Yes
Traffic
and II Conditions) LOS at Uvas
Park Dr /Miller Ave
36
Prepare and implement traffic
Yes
management plan of Miller
Ave southwest of Uvas Park
Dr
Add second east- and west-
Yes
Transportation/
(Cumulative Plus Project Phase III
Significant
37
bound left turn lanes
Traffic
Traffic Conditions) LOS at Santa
Teresa Blvd /First St
Transportation/
(Cumulative Plus Project Phase III
Significant
38
Add southbound left turn
Yes
Traffic
Traffic Conditions) Intersection
land /Change north -south
safety at Santa Teresa
signal phasing
Blvd /Ballybunion Dr
EMC Planning Group Inc. S -7
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan Revised Draft EIR Summary
Area of
Impact
Level of
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure
Mitigated
Concern
Signcance
ifi
Number
Impact
Transportation/
(Cumulative Plus Project Phase III
Significant
39
Signalize Uvas Park Dr /Miller
Yes
Traffic
Traffic Conditions) LOS at Uvas
Ave intersection /Add north -
Park Dr /Miller Ave
and south -bound turn lanes
(see text for options)
Transportation/
(Cumulative Plus Project Phase III
Significant
40
Change signal phasing at
Yes
Traffic
Traffic Conditions) Intersection
intersection
safety at Princevalle St /Tenth St
Transportation/
(Cumulative Plus Project Phase III
Significant
41
Add second lane to
Yes
Traffic
Traffic Conditions) LOS at
roundabout /or Add a second
Thomas Ave /Luchessa Ave
westbound left turn lane and
westbound through
lane /Widen Luchessa bridge to
4 lanes
Transportation/
(Cumulative Plus Project Phase III
Significant
42
Signalize intersection /Add an
Yes
Traffic
Traffic Conditions) LOS at
eastbound left turn lane
Princevalle St /Luchessa Ave
Transportation/
(Cumulative Plus Project Phase III
Significant
43
Add second north- and west-
Yes
Traffic
Traffic Conditions) Intersection
bound left turn lanes at
safety at Monterey Rd /Luchessa
intersection
Ave
Transportation/
(Cumulative Plus Project Phase III
Significant
44
Add an east- and west -bound
Yes
Traffic
Traffic Conditions) LOS at Santa
through lane on First St at
Teresa Blvd /First St
intersection
Cultural
Discovery of buried archaeological
Significant
45
Halt construction if resources
Yes
Resources
resources
are encountered/ Hire a
qualified archaeologist to
identify the resource
EMC Planning Group Inc.
S -8
�. is moo i■ lkw� f 10� air � ANOM.
= M M 1 M M ! 1 � 1 � � � � � � 7
Glen Loma Ranch Speck Plan Revised Draft EIR Summary
Area of
Impact
Level of
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure
Mitigated
Concern
Significance
Number
Impact
Cultural
Discovery of human remains
Significant
46
Halt disturbance/ Contact
Yes
Resources
coroner /Provide for proper
burial if remains are of Native
American heritage
Hazards
Human contact with persistent
Significant
47
Identify former agricultural
Yes
pesticides in soil
areas where pesticides may
have been applied
48
Use map (see mitigation 47) to
Yes
develop and implement soil
sampling plan to determine
contaminant levels /Clean and
dispose of any contaminated
soils
Public Services
Demand for fire services
Significant
49
Program to monitor need for
Yes
new fire station
Public Services
Fire safety - homes
Significant
50
Install residential fire sprinklers
Yes
Public Services
Fire safety — open space
Significant
51
Prepare report to address
Yes
vegetative fuel management
and appropriate fuel transition
zones
52
HOA to manage seasonal
Yes
vegetation to reduce fuel
loading
Note: The mitigation measures identified above present a brief summary of the actual mitigation measures. The full text of the mitigation measures is
presented in the correlating section of this EIR.
Source: EMC Planning Group Inc.
EMC Planning Group Inc. S -9
EXHIBIT B
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan Mitigation
Monitoring Program
Introduction
CEQA Guidelines section 15097 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
adverse 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 historic 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 information 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 project
environmental impact report. These mitigation measures are designed to eliminate or
reduce significant adverse environmental effects to less than significant levels. These
mitigation measures become conditions of project approval, which the project 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
measures. This monitoring checklist contains all appropriate mitigation measures in the
Final EIR.
EMC Planning Group Inc.
Mitigation Monitoring Program Glen Lom. ,nch Specific Plan Final EIR
Monitoring Program Procedures
The City of Gilroy shall use the attached monitoring checklist for the proposed project.
The monitoring program should be implemented as follows:
1. The Gilroy Community Development Department should be responsible for
coordination of the monitoring program, including the monitoring checklist. The
Community Development Department should be responsible for completing the
monitoring checklist and distributing the checklist to the responsible individuals
or agencies for their use in monitoring the mitigation measures;
2. Each responsible individual or agency will then be responsible for determining
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 Community Development Department to be placed in the project file. If
the mitigation measure has not been complied with, the monitoring checklist
should not be returned to the Community Development Department;
3. The Gilroy Community Development Department will review the checklist to
ensure that appropriate mitigation measures and additional conditions of project
approval included in the monitoring checklist have been complied with at the
appropriate time, e.g. prior to issuance of a use permit, etc. Compliance with
mitigation measures is required for project approvals; and
4. If a responsible individual or agency determines 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 Community Development
Department, describing the non - compliance and requiring compliance within a
specified period of time. If 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.
2 EMC Planning Group Inc.
Glen Loma Ranch Specific, , i Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program
Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Checklist
Step 1 Prior to approval of the Specific Plan, the following mitigation measure shall be
implemented:
23. The specific plan shall be revised to include a detention pond or ponds to collect
storm water in the case of 2 -, 10 -, 25 -, and 100 -year peak storm events. Detention
ponds shall be designed according to the recommendations presented in the
Hydrologic Analysis (Schaaf & Wheeler 2005) and should include, but not be
limited to the following:
a. The pond(s) should be located to collect the storm water runoff from the
project site and discharge to either McCutchin or Reservoir Creeks.
b. Any discharge from the pond(s) should release a maximum of storm water
runoff for pre- project conditions (see tables 18 and 19 in the Draft EIR).
C. The pond(s) should be sized a total of approximately 8.9 acre -feet to
provide for appropriate storm water quantities and filter pollutants for the
purpose of water quality.
d. The pond(s) shall not replace any proposed preserved open space at the
project site, as the preserved open space provides flood control and water
quality benefits modeled in the Hydrological Analysis (Schaaf & Wheeler
2003).
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
Step 2 Prior to approval of the first tentative map, the following mitigation measure
shall be implemented:
Prior to the approval of the first tentative map, the project proponent shall
prepare a Santa Teresa Boulevard Landscaped Buffer Plan to include, but not be
limited to, the following components:
• A buffer along the entire length of the boulevard, in varying identified
widths depending upon topography and views into the site;
• Landscaping along Santa Teresa Boulevard to enhance and blend into the
natural landscape and screen, to the greatest extent feasible, views of
structures including berm /sound wall combinations;
• Design options for entry features consistent with General Plan policy 1.10;
• Design options for berm /sound wall combinations and signs; and
EMC Planning Group
Mitigation Monitoring Program Glen Lon. .nch Specific Plan Final EIR
Class I Santa Teresa Multi-Use Regional Trail.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
12. The preserved serpentine rocky grassland on site shall be actively managed to
reduce indirect impacts resulting from public use. This may include ranch -style
wood fencing surrounding the knoll to protect the area from off -road vehicle use.
Additionally, a short trail system could be installed to direct public access with
interpretive signs at trailheads to educate the public on the uniqueness of the
serpentine grassland community. The project proponent of any future
development on the project site shall include habitat management measures in
future project plans, subject to review and approval of the City of Gilroy Planning
Division prior to approval of the tentative map for Canyon Creek and /or Rocky
Knoll, whichever occurs first.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
47. Prior to approval of the first tentative map, the applicant shall provide written
verification and mapping of the approximate 17 percent of the project site
previously used for non - dryland crop use (e.g., wine grapes, tomatoes,
cucumbers, strawberries).
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
48. Prior to approval of tentative maps, use permits, or architectural review
applications of neighborhoods identified as part of mapping required in
Mitigation Measure #47, the developer shall have a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment prepared. Based on the findings of the Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment, clean up and disposal of such contamination, if present, shall be in
compliance with federal, state and local regulations governing the clean -up and
disposal of hazardous waste.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
49. Prior to approval of the first tentative map, the project proponent shall prepare a
program for monitoring the need for development of the new fire station. The
monitoring program shall be consistent with the requirements of the development
agreement between the project proponent and the City of Gilroy and is subject to
review by the City Fire Marshal.
EMC Planning Group Inc.
Glen Loma Ranch Specific i Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Fire Marshal
51. Prior to approval of the first tentative map, the project proponent shall have an
"urban wildland interface planner ", or other professional acceptable to the City
of Gilroy Fire Marshal, prepare a report to address the vegetation in the
Preserved Open Space and evaluate fuel management and modification. The
report shall be based on fuel modeling and fire behavior for the existing
vegetation. As each neighborhood adjacent to the Preserved Open Space is
developed, the recommendations of the report shall be implemented by the
developer in the adjacent Preserved Open Space. The required width of the Fuel
Transition Zones shall also be at least the width as recommended in the report.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Fire Marshal
Step 3 Prior to approval of each tentative map or use permit, the following mitigation
measure shall be implemented:
7. Prior to approval of each tentative map or use permit, project plans for future
development on the project site shall be designed to include adequate buffer areas
to protect wetlands, waters of the U.S., oak /riparian woodland, and other open
space areas to be preserved in the specific plans area (coastal scrub areas, mixed
cultivated woodland, and rocky serpentine grassland areas), subject to review and
approval of the City of Gilroy Planning Division. Project plans shall indicate
that no development is to occur within 100 feet of a defined creek bank or edge of
riparian corridor. Project plans shall indicate that no development is to occur
within 50 feet of other open space areas; however, this setback may be reduced
due to site constraints or to accomplish specific project goals subject to review
and approval of the City of Gilroy Planning Division, but shall in no event be less
than 30 feet. Wherever possible, buffer areas shall be planted with locally -
obtained native grasses, shrubs and woodland understory species.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring. Gilroy Planning Division
8. Prior to approval of each tentative map or use permit, project plans for future
development on the project site shall be designed to avoid unnecessary filling or
other disturbance of natural drainage courses and associated oak /riparian
woodland vegetation to the greatest extent feasible, subject to review and
approval of the City of Gilroy Planning Division. In the event that disturbance of
site drainages and associated oak /riparian woodland vegetation cannot be
avoided (i.e., Reservoir Canyon Creek Bridge construction, culverts, storm drain
outfalls, etc.), authorization from the California Department of Fish and Game
EMC Planning Group Inc. 5
Mitigation Monitoring Program Glen Lon. .inch Specific Plan Final EIR
through Section 1600 et. seq. of the Fish and Game Code and /or the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers through Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Regional
Water Quality Control Board through Section 401 of the Clean Water Act shall
be obtained, if required, prior to issuance of building or grading permits for any
activity that might encroach on the site's drainages. Conditions imposed on these
permits and /or authorizations may include but not be limited to the following:
Construction work shall be initiated and completed during the summer and
fall months when the drainages are dry, or at least have a very low flow.
Typically, no construction work shall be allowed between October 15th and
April 15th.
A Habitat Restoration Plan shall be prepared to identify the exact amount
and location of affected and replacement habitat, to specify on -site
revegetation with locally - obtained native species within the buffer areas to
mitigate habitat loss, and to provide specifications for installation and
maintenance of the replacement habitat. Any loss of riparian or wetland
vegetation resulting from construction activities shall be mitigated on -site at
a minimum 3:1 replacement ratio.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
13. Prior to approval of each individual tentative map or use permit, subject to the
review of the Gilroy Planning Division, the project applicant shall install siltation
fencing, hay bales, or other suitable erosion control measures along portions of
natural and manmade drainage channels in which construction will occur and
within 20 feet of construction and /or staging areas in order to prevent sediment
from filling the creek.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring. Gilroy Planning Division
15. Prior to approval of a tentative map for each phase of the proposed project
requiring removal or alteration to potential wetlands and /or waters of the U.S., a
wetland delineation shall be prepared according to U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers guidelines. The actual acreage of impacts to waters of the U.S. and
wetlands shall be determined based on project plans for each development project
and the wetland delineation for each development phase. The project proponent
shall obtain all necessary permits and /or approvals from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and shall retain a restoration specialist to prepare a detailed wetland
mitigation plan, if necessary, subject to review and approval by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and the City of Gilroy Planning Division. The plan shall
include, but not be limited to, creation of wetlands on site to mitigate for
6 EMC Planning Group Inc.
Glen Loma Ranch Specific .7 Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program
unavoidable impacts to waters of the U.S. and wetlands resulting from
development activities.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
17. Prior to approval of a tentative map for each phase of the proposed project
containing or adjacent to preserved natural open space areas, a signage plan shall
be prepared to outline the language, number and location of signs to dissuade
people from straying off trails and to prohibit unleashed dogs in the open space
areas, subject to approval by the City of Gilroy Planning Division.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
18. Prior to tentative map or use permit approval of areas that contain any significant
tree(s), a field survey shall be conducted by a certified arborist to determine the
number and location of each significant tree to be removed, the type and
approximate size of each significant tree, and the reason for removal. These
findings shall be included in a written report that contains specifications for
replacing significant trees to be removed.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
22. Project developers shall have a fault investigation performed for each tentative
map or site plan approval within the fault rupture zone to determine if there is an
active fault located within the fault rupture zone. The investigation shall
determine, but not be limited to, the location of the fault (if any), and the
anticipated severity of seismic activity of the fault. A copy of the report shall be
presented to the City of Gilroy and the County of Santa Clara Planning Office.
Project developers shall use the findings of the report for structural design or
avoidance of the potential hazard. The fault investigations shall be subject to the
review and approval by the City Engineering Division, prior to the approval of
tentative maps and /or architectural and site plan approval.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
27. Future developers adjacent to Santa Teresa Boulevard, and along internal project
arterials, shall prepare a noise impact assessment, by a noise consultant
acceptable to the City, to determine if the project would be significantly affected
by general plan buildout traffic volumes. If the noise impact assessment
EMC Planning Group Inc. 7
Mitigation Monitoring Program Glen Lon,. .inch Specific Plan Final EIR
concludes that the project would not meet the noise standards of the general plan,
the project shall be redesigned to be consistent with the general plan noise
element policy 26.03 and 26.05, and with the noise standards in the Guidelines
for Sound Attenuation and Visual Preservation of the Santa Teresa Boulevard
Corridor Policy. The noise attenuation feature shall be no higher than seven feet
above the existing grade at the property line. The appropriate height of the noise
attenuation feature shall be incorporated into applicable tentative maps prior to
their approval. Noise attenuation features shall be landscaped and primarily
consist of earthen berms, and an appropriate funding mechanism for
maintenance shall be identified.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
Step 4 Prior to recordation of the first final map and /or final improvement plans, the
following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
11. Prior to recordation of the first final map within the Glen Loma Ranch Specific
Plan area, the project proponent shall ensure that a suitable ownership structure
(i.e., homeowner's association or similar mechanism) is established prior to
occupancy to take long -term responsibility for maintaining and funding the
ongoing management of any open space, woodland, vegetated riparian, or other
habitat conservation easements on site. The homeowners' association, or other
suitable mechanism, shall be structured so that it is responsible for enforcing
habitat protection and maintenance measures to protect onsite biological
resources. The homeowners' association may assess fines to property owners
who are non - compliant with these measures. Fines assessed by the homeowner's
association shall be used for on -site habitat protection, maintenance, and
restoration, as necessary. Any noncompliance shall be reported to the City of
Gilroy Planning Division and the California Department of Fish and Game by
the homeowners association.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
16. A schematic lighting plan shall be submitted with each development proposal for
review and approval by the Planning Division. Exterior lighting for any
development proposed adjacent to open space areas shall be of low stature (i.e.,
20 feet) and shall be of a full cutoff design or include opaque shields to reduce
illumination of the surrounding landscape. Lighting shall be directed away from
open space areas.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
8 EMC Planning Group Inc.
Glen Loma Ranch Specitt, A Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program
26. Future applicants in the Glen Loma Ranch specific plan area shall prepare a post -
construction storm water management plan, subject to the review and approval of
the Gilroy Engineering Division prior to the approval of final improvement
plans, that shall include structural and non - structural best management practices
(BMPs) for the reduction of pollutants in storm water to the maximum extent
practicable.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
Step 5 Prior to approval of each final grading plan, the following mitigation measure
shall be implemented:
3. Project proponents shall specify in project plans the implementation of the
following dust control measures during grading and construction activities for
any proposed development. The measures shall be implemented as necessary to
adequately control dust, subject to the review and approval by the City of Gilroy
Engineering Division:
The following measures shall be implemented at all construction sites:
• Water all active construction areas at least twice daily;
• Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all
trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard;
• Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non- toxic) soil stabilizers on all
unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites;
• Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and
staging areas at construction sites; and
• Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried
onto adjacent public streets.
The following measures shall be implemented at all construction sites greater
than four acres in area:
• Hydroseed or apply (non- toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas
(previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more);
• Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non- toxic) soil binders to exposed
stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.);
• Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph;
EMC Planning Group Inc.
Mitigation Monitoring Program Glen Long. .nch Specific Plan Final EIR
• Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to
public roadways; and
• Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
The following measures are strongly encouraged at construction sites that are
large in area, located near sensitive receptors or which for any other reason may
warrant additional emission reductions:
• Install wheel washers for all existing trucks, or wash off the tires or tracks of
all trucks and equipment leaving the site;
• Install wind breaks, or plant trees /vegetative wind breaks at windward side(s)
of construction areas;
• Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts)
exceed 25 miles per hour; and
• Limit the area subject to excavation, grading and other construction activity
at any one time.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
Step 6 30 days prior to commencement of grading or construction activities, the
following mitigation measure shall be implemented:
4. Subject to the review of the City of Gilroy Planning Division, no more than
30 days prior to commencement of grading or construction activities for
development proposed in or adjacent to potential habitat (i.e., grasslands), field
surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if burrowing owls
are present in the construction zone or within 200 feet of the construction zone.
Areas within 200 feet of the construction zone that are not within the control of
the applicant shall be visually assessed from the project site. These surveys shall
be required only if any construction would occur during the nesting and /or
breeding season of burrowing owls (February 1 through August 31) and /or
during the winter residency period (December 1 through January 31). If active
nests are found within the survey area, a burrowing owl habitat mitigation plan
shall be submitted to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and
approval. The burrowing owl habitat mitigation plan shall contain mitigation
measures contained in the California Department of Fish and Game Staff Report
on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Game 1995).
The habitat mitigation plan may include, but not be limited to, the following:
Avoidance of occupied burrows during the nesting season (February 1
through August 31);
10 EMC Planning Group Inc.
Glen Loma Ranch Specific. .n Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program
Acquisition, protection and funding for long -term management and
monitoring of foraging habitat adjacent to occupied habitat;
Enhancement of existing burrows and /or creation of new burrows; and /or
Passive relocation of burrowing owls.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
5. Subject to the review of the City of Gilroy Planning Division, no more than
30 days prior to commencement of grading or construction activities for
development proposed in or adjacent to potential nesting habitat (i.e., riparian
woodland and oak woodland), a tree survey shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist to determine if active nest(s) of protected birds are present in the trees.
Areas within 200 feet of the construction zone that are not within the control of
the applicant shall be visually assessed from the project site. This survey shall be
required only if any construction would occur during the nesting and /or breeding
season of protected bird species potentially nesting in the tree (generally March 1
through August 1). If active nest(s) are found, clearing and construction within
200 feet of the tree, or as recommended by the qualified biologist, shall be halted
until the nest(s) are vacated and juveniles have fledged and there is no evidence of
a second attempt at nesting, as determined by the qualified biologist. If
construction activities are not scheduled between March 1 and August 1, no
further shrike or tree surveys shall be required.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
6. Subject to the review of the City of Gilroy Planning Division, no more than
30 days prior to commencement of grading or construction activities for
development proposed in or adjacent to potential roost habitat (i.e., riparian
woodland and oak woodland), pre - construction surveys for bat roosts shall be
performed by a qualified biologist. If bat roost sites are found, the biologist shall
implement a program to remove /displace the bats prior to the removal of known
roost sites. In addition, an alternate roost site shall be constructed in the vicinity
of the known roost site. Specifications of the alternate roost shall be determined
by a bat specialist.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
19. Prior to commencement of construction activities, the protected zone of any trees
or groups of trees to be retained shall be fenced to prevent injury to the trees
EMC Planning Group Inc. 11
Mitigation Monitoring Program Glen Lon. nch Specific Plan Final EIR
during construction. Soil compaction, parking of vehicles or heavy equipment,
stockpiling of construction materials, and /or dumping of materials shall not be
allowed within the protected zone. The fencing shall remain in place until all
construction activities are complete.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
Step 7 Prior to approval and issuance of the first building permit in Phase I, the
following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
30. Add an eastbound and a westbound left -turn lane on the Fitzgerald and Masten
approaches to the Monterey Road /Masten Avenue intersection, and change the
east -west signal phasing from split phasing to protected phasing.
This intersection is within the City of Gilroy's Transportation Master Plan and
therefore, impact fees are collected for improvements at this intersection.
Therefore, implementation of this mitigation measure is the responsibility of the
project proponent, prior to issuance of the first building permit.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
31. Signalize the Santa Teresa Boulevard /Miller Avenue intersection.
This intersection is within the City of Gilroy's Transportation Master Plan and
therefore, impact fees are collected for improvements at this intersection.
Therefore, implementation of this mitigation measure is the responsibility of the
project proponent, prior to issuance of the first building permit.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring. Gilroy Engineering Division
32. Change the signal phasing at the Monterey Road /Tenth Street intersection for
the east -west travel direction from permitted phasing to protected phasing.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase I.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
12 EMC Planning Group Inc.
Glen Loma Ranch Specific, .n Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program
33. Convert the Thomas Road /Luchessa Avenue intersection to a one -lane modern
roundabout.
M
Signalize the Thomas Road /Luchessa Avenue intersection, add a northbound
right turn lane, and add a northbound right turn overlap phasing to the signal
phasing.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit for Phase I.
Note: The mitigated negative declaration for the planned elementary school
within the specific plan, located on Luchessa Avenue within the Cabernet
neighborhood, required implementation of this mitigation measure prior to
opening the school. It was required due to unacceptable levels of services during
the mid - afternoon peak hour. The mitigation measure requires the school district
to pay their fair share of this improvement determined by agreement between the
school district and the City of Gilroy.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring. Gilroy Engineering Division
Step 8 Prior to approval and issuance of the first building permit in Phase II, the
following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
34. Signalize the Santa Teresa Boulevard /Fitzgerald Avenue intersection and add
eastbound and westbound left turn lanes.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase II.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
35. Add a northbound left turn lane to the Uvas Park Drive /Miller Avenue
intersection.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase II.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
EMC Planning Group Inc. 13
Mitigation Monitoring Program Glen Lot,. inch Specific Plan Final EIR
Party responsible for monitoring. Gilroy Engineering Division
36. Prepare a traffic management plan of the Miller Avenue street section southwest
of the intersection with Uvas Park Drive.
The project proponent shall be responsible for preparation of the plan. The plan
shall be subject to review and approval by the City staff and constructed by the
project, prior to issuance of the first building permit in Phase II.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
Step 9 Prior to approval and issuance of the first building permit in Phase III, the
following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
37. Add second eastbound and westbound left turn lanes to the Santa Teresa
Boulevard /First Street intersection.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase III.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
38. Add a southbound left turn lane to the Santa Teresa Boulevard /Ballybunion
Drive intersection and convert the north -south signal phasing from permitted
phasing to protected phasing.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase III.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
39. Signalize the Uvas Park Drive /Miller Avenue intersection and add northbound
and southbound left -turn lanes.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase III.
EMC Planning Group Inc.
Glen Loma Ranch Specific, .n Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program
Note: This intersection would operate at LOS C during the AM and PM peak
hours with implementation of this improvement. However, under General Plan
Buildout Conditions, the Tenth Street Bridge would be required to be
constructed. With the Tenth Street Bridge, this intersection would operate at
LOS A during the AM peak hour and LOS C during the PM peak hour with NO
improvements, e.g. signalization and lane additions. Therefore, the mitigation
measure identified above would not be required under General Plan Buildout
Conditions, assuming the Tenth Street Bridge were constructed.
One option would be to only add the northbound left -turn lane as recommended
in the previous scenario (Background Plus Project Phases I and II) and consider
LOS E as an acceptable short term level of service for this intersection. Another
option is to implement the mitigation measure above (signalize the intersection
and add the left -turn lanes, which would improve operations to LOS C during the
AM and PM peak hours), with the knowledge that the signal could be removed
once the Tenth Street Bridge is constructed at General Plan Buildout Conditions.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring. Gilroy Engineering Division
40. Convert the signal phasing at the Princevalle Street /Tenth Street intersection
from permitted phasing to protected phasing.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase III.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
41. If the Thomas Road /Luchessa Avenue intersection was converted to a one lane
modern roundabout, add a second lane to the roundabout and widen the
Luchessa Avenue Bridge to four lanes. This would result in LOS A during both
the AM and PM peak hours.
••
If the Thomas Road /Luchesss Avenue intersection was signalized and a
northbound right turn lane was added, add a second westbound left turn lane and
westbound through lane and widen the Luchessa Avenue Bridge to four lanes.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase III.
EMC Planning Group Inc. 15
Mitigation Monitoring Program Glen Lon,, inch Specific Plan Final EIR
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring. Gilroy Engineering Division
42. Signalize the Princevalle Street /Luchessa Avenue intersection and add an
eastbound left turn lane.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase III.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
43. Add second northbound and westbound left turn lanes at the Monterey
Street /Luchessa Avenue intersection.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase III.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
44. Add an eastbound and westbound through lane on First Street at its intersection
with Santa Teresa Boulevard.
The project proponent shall be responsible for paying for the design and
implementation of this mitigation measure, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit in Phase III.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
Step 10 Prior to approval and issuance of building or grading permits, the following
mitigation measures shall be implemented:
9. Any loss of oak and /or riparian woodland habitat resulting from development
shall require the project proponent to retain a qualified biologist to prepare a
Habitat Restoration Plan to identify the exact amount and location of affected
and replacement habitat, specify an appropriate plant palette, and provide
specifications for installation and maintenance of the replacement habitat.
Replacement vegetation shall consist of locally - obtained native plant species.
Any loss of riparian woodland vegetation shall be mitigated on -site at a minimum
16 EMC Planning Group Inc.
Glen Loma Ranch Specific. i Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program
of 3:1 replacement ratio, unless otherwise determined by the Department of Fish
and Game and the City of Gilroy. Any loss of oak woodland vegetation shall
require preservation of on -site oak woodland at a ratio of 3:1 and replanting on-
site at a ratio of 1:1, unless otherwise determined by the Department of Fish and
Game and the City of Gilroy. The Habitat Restoration Plan shall be prepared
prior to issuance of building or grading permits for any activity requiring removal
of oak and /or riparian woodland habitat, subject to review and approval of the
City of Gilroy Planning Division and California Department of Fish and Game.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
14. Prior to issuance of grading and /or building permits, the project proponent of
any future development on the project site shall submit a Landscape Plan, for
review and approval by the City of Gilroy Planning Division. Landscaping plans
for areas adjacent to riparian habitat shall include appropriate guidelines to
prevent contamination of drainages and their associated riparian habitat by
pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, and fertilizers. Landscaping shall include
appropriate native plants species and should not include plantings of non - native,
invasive plant species.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
20. Project proponents shall submit a soils investigation prepared by a qualified soils
engineer for future development on the project site. The recommendation of the
soils investigation shall be incorporated into final building plans, subject to the
review and approval by the Gilroy Engineering Division prior to approval of any
building permits.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
21. The project applicant shall design all structures in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code for seismic design. In addition, all recommendations in the
geotechnical reports prepared for the project shall be implemented. Structural
design is subject to the review and approval by the Gilroy BLES Division prior to
the issuance of building permits.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Building, Life, and Environmental Safety
Division
EMC Planning Group Inc. 17
Mitigation Monitoring Program Glen Lon.. ,inch Specific Plan Final EIR
24. The project applicant for any proposed development on the project site, shall, for
each phase of the development, submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) and detailed
engineering designs to the Central Coast RWQCB. The associated permit shall
require development and implementation of a SWPPP that uses storm water
"Best Management Practices" to control runoff, erosion and sedimentation from
the site. The SWPPP must include Best Management Practices that address
source reduction and, if necessary, shall include practices that require treatment.
The SWPPP shall be submitted to the City of Gilroy Engineering Division for
review and approval prior to approval of a building permit for each phase of the
project.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
25. The project applicant shall submit plans for review by, and obtain an approved
permit from the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) prior to any work
within 50 feet of on -site drainages, wetlands or riparian habitat.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
28. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for all areas within the Specific Plan area,
the following measures shall be incorporated into the project plans to mitigate
construction noise, subject to the review and approval of the City of Gilroy
Engineering Division:
a. Construction shall be limited to weekdays between 7 AM and 7 PM and
Saturdays and holidays between 9 AM and 7 PM, with no construction on
Sundays;
b. All internal combustion engine- driven equipment shall be equipped with
mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment; and
c. Stationary noise - generating equipment shall be located as far as possible from
sensitive receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction
project area.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Engineering Division
18 EMC Planning Group Inc.
Glen Loma Ranch Specif), n Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program
45. Due to the possibility that significant buried cultural resources might be found
during construction, the following language shall be included on any permits
issued for the project site, including, but not limited to building permits for future
development, subject to the review and approval of the Gilroy Planning Division:
If archaeological resources are discovered during construction, work shall
be halted within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until a qualified
professional archaeologist can evaluate it. If the find is determined to be
significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and
implemented.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
46. In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in
any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the City shall ensure that this
language is included in all permits in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.5(e), subject to the review and approval of the City of Gilroy Planning
Division:
If human remains are found during construction there shall be no further
excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably
suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of Santa
Clara County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause
of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native
American the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage
Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage
Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most
likely descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD
may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person
responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of,
with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods
as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The landowner or
his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human
remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the
property in a location not subject to further disturbance if a) the Native
American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD
failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by
the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a
recommendation; or c) the landowner or his authorized representative
rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the
Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures
acceptable to the landowner.
EMC Planning Group Inc. 19
Mitigation Monitoring Program Glen Lon. -inch Specific Plan Final EIR
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
Step 11 Prior to approval of commencement of construction activities associated with
the Reservoir Canyon Creek Bridge, the following mitigation measure shall be
implemented:
10. Prior to commencement of construction activities associated with Reservoir
Canyon Creek Bridge, the project proponent responsible for construction of the
bridge shall arrange for a qualified biologist to monitor bridge construction
activities to ensure there are no impacts to wetlands and associated oak /riparian
woodland habitat.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
Step 12 Prior to approval of the first occupancy permit, the following mitigation
measure shall be implemented:
50. Residential fire sprinklers shall be installed in all residences within the specific
plan area over 3,000 square feet, including single- family and multi - family town
homes or apartments, and residential clusters with more than 25 units that lack
secondary access. Residential fire sprinklers shall be installed prior to occupancy.
Prior to approval of future development projects within the specific plan area, the
City Fire Marshal may require that all residences have residential fire sprinkler
systems, regardless of conditions stated above, especially if streets are narrow,
buildings are closely spaced, emergency response time is not met, there is
inadequate fire flow, building are adjacent to natural areas, or other conditions
exist that could hinder the ability of the City of Gilroy Fire Department to
perform fire suppression acts in such case they would be needed. The sprinklers
shall be designed and installed in accordance with City of Gilroy Fire
Department policies.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring. Gilroy Fire Marshal
52. The Glen Loma Ranch Homeowner's Association shall take full responsibility
for management and maintenance of the preserved open space areas within the
project site. Seasonal vegetation management should be scheduled to occur at
the end of the rainy season and consistent with the annual weed abatement
resolution. The HOA should implement any vegetation management in the
Preserved Open Spaces and Fuel Transition Zones at the beginning of the weed
20 EMC Planning Group Inc.
Glen Loma Ranch Specit). .i Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program
abatement season. This language shall be included in the HOA conditions,
covenants, and restrictions.
Party responsible for implementation: Project Proponent
Party responsible for monitoring: Gilroy Planning Division
Note: Mitigation measure 29 is not the responsibility of the project proponent.
29. Lengthen the existing southbound acceleration lane at Castro Valley Road as an
auxiliary lane between Castro Valley Road and the off -ramp to Highway 25. The
combined acceleration/ auxiliary lane would extend the nearly 2,000 feet between
Castro Valley Road and the off -ramp to Highway 25.
This intersection is outside of the City of Gilroy's Transportation Master Plan
and therefore, impact fees are not collected for improvements at this intersection.
Therefore, implementation of this mitigation measure is the responsibility of the
County of Santa Clara.
Party responsible for implementation: County of Santa Clara
Party responsible for monitoring: County of Santa Clara
EMC Planning Group Inc. 21
I, RHONDA PELLIN, City Clerk of the City of Gilroy, do hereby certify that the attached
Resolution No. 2005 -81 is an original resolution, or true and correct copy of a city resolution,
duly adopted by the Council of the City of Gilroy at a regular meeting of said Council held on the
7th day of November, 2005, 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 11th day of January, 2006.
I z;
City Clerk of the City of Gilroy
(Seal)