Loading...
1998-116-Making Findings And Statement Of Overriding Considerations As Required By The California Environmental Quality ActRESOLUTION 1998 - 116 RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS MAKING FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT PROJECT APPLICATION: PRJ -97 -045 PROPERTY LOCATION: 14734 BLOSSOM HILL ROAD APPLICANT: SUMMERHILL HOMES, DEVELOPER PROPERTY OWNER: REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS: A. Regents of the University of California are the owners of property located at 14734 Blossom Hill Road (the 'Property "); B. SummerHill Homes, the developer of the Property, had applied for approval of (1) a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Agriculture to Hillside Residential, (2) a Planned Development to change the zoning designation from RC to HR -1 PD to reduce the one acre minimum lot size to allow clustered 10,000 square foot minimum lots with adjoining designated open space and trails, the construction of 43 new single family residences and rehabilitation of an existing residence, trails and site improvements, (3) withdrawal from the Williamson Act agricultural preserve, (4) annexation of 32 acres, and (5) an Architecture and Site application for the demolition of one pre -1941 residence (Ayala House and a garage /workshop (Heinz Garage/Lab); Development Application DEV -97 -001, Project Application PRJ -97 -045, Environmental Impact Report EIR -97 -001 and Williamson Act Cancellation WA -006 (the 'Project "), C. The Project is the subject of a Final EIR entitled "SummerHill Homes, Blossom Hill Road" prepared by the Town as the Lead Agency in compliance with the requirements of the -1- California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended; D. A Public hearing on the Project was held before the Planning Commission on March 11, 1998, which was continued to March 15, 1998 for a three -hour field study session, and then to April 22, 1998, and then to May 13, 1998, and finally to May 27, 1998 when the Commission recommended that the Town Council approve the Project. A public hearing was held before the Town Council on July 6, 1998. E. The Town Council is the decision - making body for rezonings; and F. The Town Council does hereby certify that as the decision - making body, it has reviewed and considered the information contained in such Final EIR, and other information in the record, prior to acting upon or approving such project, and found that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the Town as the Lead Agency for the Project. RESOLVED: That the Town Council makes the following findings with respect to the significant effects on the environment of the Project as identified in the Final EIR: FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT A. Land Use Loss of Prime Farmland (a) Impact. The Project would result in the loss of prime farmland. (b) Mitigation. No mitigation measures are available. (c) Finding. Reducing the size of the Project is the only mitigation identified, but partial reduction will nevertheless result in the loss of prime farmland. Thus, the reduction of the Project from 49 residential units studied to 44 units, will not avoid the loss of prime farmland. While the No Project Alternative would avoid the loss of prime farmland, it is infeasible because -2- it would result in no Project with no guarantee that the orchard would be maintained. It is evident that the orchard is not currently being maintained and that the trees, even if maintained, have limited productive lives. With no feasible mitigation measures identified, the loss of prime farmland would be a significant unavoidable cumulative impact. 2. Loss of Managed Open Space (a) Impact. The Project would result in the loss of 21 acres of managed open space (formerly orchard lands). (b) Mitigation. Approximately 2.7 acres of managed open space are proposed to be located throughout the development area of the Project site. This area will include a "grid" of flowering trees, and also include new native oak and evergreen trees lining the linear park. In addition, approximately 85.6 acres of natural open space in the southerly portion of the Project will be dedicated to open space uses, in perpetuity. (c) Finding. Implementation of these measures will partially mitigate the impact of the loss of 21 acres of managed open space, but will not reduce the impact to a less than significant level. Further reduction of the Project would be infeasible because any development must occur in whole or in part within the managed open -space area which is the least environmentally sensitive part of the Project site, and the No Project Alternative would result in the loss of the mitigation measures identified above with no guarantee that the 21 acres will be properly managed and not become a blight on the community. With no feasible mitigation measures identified totally addressing this impact, the loss of 21 acres of managed open space would be a significant unavoidable cumulative impact. B. Geology Highly Expansive Clay Soil (a) Impact. Construction of infrastructure and buildings on highly expansive clay soil could result in damage to the development including cracking and differential settlement. (b) Mitigation. Grading activities shall occur only during periods when excessive moisture does not preclude proper compaction. Surface preparation shall follow the geotechnical report's recommendations regarding stripping vegetation, removing loose soil, and selecting and placing important fill. -3- Foundations shall be one of the following designs: structural mat, pier and grade beam, or post- tensioned slab. Where slab -on -grade type foundations are used on cut /fill lots, the lots should be subexcavated and back -filled with uniform material. The project shall have a drainage system that minimizes storm and /or irrigation water from seeping beneath the structures. In order to minimize soil saturation adjacent to foundations, measures shall be incorporated into the project such as: appropriate grading directed away from the exterior foundation, installation of subdrain systems around the perimeter of the residences, and roof gutters designed and installed so that downspouts carry storm water away from the structures. Landscaping plans shall minimize the plantings directly adjacent to building foundations to reduce the possibility of irrigation water affecting the foundations or slabs. Any landscaping that is installed adjacent to buildings should be of a type that requires little irrigation. (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. Seismic Hazards (a) Impact. There is a high likelihood that ground shaking caused by an earthquake would expose the Project's buildings and future occupants to significant seismic hazards. (b) Mitigation. Structural design shall incorporate the ground response parameters given for maximum credible earthquakes in the 1 April 1997 Terrasearch, Inc. geology /seismic report. An Engineering Geologist shall be present on site to observe the excavation of the north - facing cutslopes in the southern portion of the site. During the site preparation process in this area, any slope instability observed shall be mitigated by such mitigation measures identified by the Engineering Geologist that could include: slope flattening, soil buttressing or installation of retaining walls. (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. -4- C. Vegetation and Wildlife Raptor Nests (a) Impact. Disturbance and /or removal of raptor nests during the construction phase of the Project would be a significant impact. (b) Mitigation. If any construction activities will occur during the nesting season (February to August), these activities should be preceded by preconstruction surveys for nesting raptors conducted by a qualified ornithologist. Surveys should take place no more than 30 days prior to the start of construction. No construction activities (including tree removal, grading, etc.) that would result in disturbance to active raptor nests would proceed. A qualified ornithologist would determine the extent of construction -free zones around active raptor nests located during surveys. The USFWS and CDFG should also be notified of any active raptor nest within the construction zone. (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. 2. Loss of Protected Trees (a) Impact. The loss of 167 trees covered by the Town's tree ordinance is a potentially significant impact. (b) Mitigation. If it is not feasible to avoid ordinance -size trees, then a restoration/preservation plan that avoids impacts to remaining trees and replaces lost trees will be developed and implemented. The plan will encompass various features including the following: Appropriate on -site locations will be identified for restoration on- site. This will include the creation of habitat in open or grassland habitats or the enhancement (in -fill planting) of sparse woodland habitat on site. The latter situation currently exists in the southeastern portion of the pine plantation. Restoration on -site should be limited to the proposed development area. Replacement of lost non - native trees at a 1:1 ration is recommended for trees greater than 12" dbh. Lost native trees greater than 12" dbh will be replaced at a 4:1 ratio. Additional credit will be allocated for replacement trees upsized for 15 gallon -5- to 24" box species per the Town of Los Gatos Parks and Public Works Department. Replacement trees will be native to the area (e.g., valley oaks, coast live oak, etc.). Planting stock will be collected locally, if possible. Planting will be conducted from November to January using small nursery stock. The replacement trees should be installed in an environment suitable for their establishment and growth. These trees will be irrigated and maintained for a period of not less than three years. the mitigation site will be protected from future disturbance and the restoration effort will be monitored for 5 years. The plan will also identify appropriate performance criteria in order to measure the success of the restoration efforts. (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated in the Project will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. D. Waterways and Flooding Flood Related Property Damage (a) Impact. Development of the Project site would result in an increase in the potential for flood related property damage, and would require substantial alteration in the existing storm drainage system. (b) Mitigation. On -site storm drainage design source controls will be implemented to reduce potential runoff into the storm drainage system by directing potential runoff with design features into landscaped areas for percolation prior to entering the storm drainage system. Hillside runoff will be collected at inlets located behind the existing residential units which are included as part of the proposed site drainage system. A storm detention facility designed with the capacity for a 25 -year storm will be constructed along Blossom Hill Road which includes a minimum storage capacity of 3,330 cubic feet, and a diversion valve /structure to limit the flow rate to the existing storm drainage system. The CC &R Restrictions will prevent water diversion from percolation areas to the storm drainage system, including the future construction of pools and other impervious surfaces on the site. Any post- Project construction site improvements will require the approval of the Town W Engineer to ensure there is not significant increase in storm runoff. Final landscape plans incorporating the design of the storm drainage detention areas will be submitted and approved by Willdan Associates and the Town prior to the issuance of architectural and site approvals or grading permits. (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. E. Water Quality Loss of Water Quality (a) Impact. Development of the Project would result in significant water quality impacts. (b) Mitigation. The Project would be required to obtain and conform with the requirements of the General NPDES Construction Activity Stormwater Permit. Best management practices would be included in the Project to limit urban runoff contaminants from entering storm drains. The following measures would be included in the Project: Develop and implement a SWPPP that is consistent with the following: 1) the terms of the General NPDES Construction Activity Stormwater Permit; 2) the Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sedimentation Control Measures by the Association of Bay Area Governments; and 3) policies and recommendations of the Town of Los Gatos. The SWPPP would be enforced during Project construction through such actions as citations and stop work orders. The Project grading plans would conform to the drainage and erosion control standards of the Town of Los Gatos and would be approved by the Public Works Department. The following specific measures could be implemented to prevent stormwater pollution during construction and minimize sedimentation into Ross Creek during construction: Restricting mass grading activities to the dry season (April 15 to October 15). Any grading activities proposed to occur in the wet season would require approval by the Town of Los Gatos, and measures to contain and control erosion would be outlined in the -7- Grading Permit obtained for the Project. The Town has a grading moratorium from October I to April 15. Phasing grading operations to reduce the amount of disturbed areas and time of exposure. Using hay bales, silt fencing, temporary drainage swales, energy dissipaters, sedimentation basins, hydro - mulching, etc. to control erosion and retain sediment on the Project site. Using berms or drainage ditches to divert runoff around exposed areas. Place diversion ditches across the top of unprotected slopes. Providing permanent cover as soon as is practical after disturbance to stabilize the disturbed surfaces after construction has been completed. Limiting on -site construction routes and stabilize construction entrance(s). The following specific measures would be implemented during the site development phase of the Project to minimize post - construction runoff and pollutant discharges. Landscaping would be enhanced on the site and would absorb stormwater runoff and provide settlement filtration prior to discharge into the storm drainage system and on -site drainages. Vegetative swales, buffers, sediment barriers and traps, and cascading ponds would be incorporated into the Project design where appropriate, most likely in conjunction with the proposed public park, to minimize contaminants entering the storm drain system and on -site drainages, and to reduce potential impacts on Ross Creek. Disturbed areas would be stabilized with permanent vegetation as soon as possible after grading is completed. The Project would include the installation and maintenance of a stormwater system for collection of runoff from the site_ (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than -8- significant level. F. Traffic and Circulation G. Noise Left Turn Movements In and Out of the Project Site (a) Impact. Development of the Project may create a safety hazard for left turn movements in and out of the Project site due to few breaks in the traffic flow. (b) Mitigation. A two -way left turn lane will be provided on Blossom Hill Road in the vicinity of the Project entrance to facilitate left turn movements in and out of the site. The improvements will be constructed in accordance with the Town of Los Gatos Standards. (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. Traffic Noise (a) Impact. Noise levels generated by existing and future traffic volumes on Blossom Hill Road would expose future Project residents and existing residents along Blossom Hill Road to exterior noise levels which exceed the Town's General Plan goal of 55 dBLa„ for residential areas. In addition, the proposed residential units along Blossom Hill Road would exceed the State of California 45 dBLao interior noise standard. (b) Mitigation. A 5 -foot high earthen berm or a 7 -foot high sound barrier will be constructed along the rear sideyard property boundaries along Blossom Hill Road. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the residential units along Blossom Hill Road, a detailed acoustical analysis will be prepared and the recommendations for noise attenuation will be incorporated into the design of these residences to reduce the interior noise levels to 45 dBL&. The design features which could provide noise attenuation include sound rated windows, forced air mechanical ventilation so windows could be kept closed, and special building construction techniques such as insulation and soundproofing. (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures will avoid or -9- substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. 2. Construction Noise (a) Impact. The demolition and construction of the Project would generate significant noise impacts on the adjacent residences. (b) Mitigation. Demolition and construction activities will be limited to daytime hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and to 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekends as limited by the Town Code. All internal combustion engines for construction equipment used on the site shall be properly muffled and maintained. All stationary noise - generating construction equipment, such as air compressors and portable power generators, will be located as far as practical from existing residences. (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. H. Hazardous Materials Pesticides (a) Impact. Workers and future residents could come into contact with pesticide residues (DDT, DDE and DDD) present in the Project site's surface soil that could pose a significant risk in certain cases. (b) Mitigation. A Remediation Action Plan shall be prepared by a qualified environmental engineer that addresses the remediation of the pesticides detected in soil above regulatory thresholds. The Remediation Action Plan shall be approved by the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health and the Town of Los Gatos prior to the issuance of grading permits. The recommendations in that plan for reducing the levels of pesticides in soil on the site to levels below the remedial action level shall be carried out in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal regulations and standards. Two alternative methods for remediation include on -site tilling, and off -site disposal at a landfill, or a combination thereof. (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures will avoid or -10- substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. Asbestos and /or Lead Containing Materials (a) Impact. The presence of asbestos and /or lead containing materials in the buildings proposed for demolition could cause significant potential health hazards if workers and future residents are exposed to these substances. (b) Mitigation. A survey shall be conducted on all buildings proposed for demolition to identify the presence and condition of asbestos and lead - containing materials before the structures are demolished. Any required abatement to meet regulatory standards shall be carried out in accordance with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. With respect to asbestos - containing materials, procedures set forth by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District shall be followed, and documentation warranting this agency's involvement shall be submitted to the Town of Los Gatos Building Department before a demolition permit for the structure is obtained. (c) Finding. The implementation of these mitigation measures will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. Cultural Resources Ayala House and Heintz Garage/Laboratory (a) Impact. Should the Planning Commission and /or Town Council adopt the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Committee, the demolition of the Ayala House and Heintz garage /apartment/laboratory, the renovation of the Heintz House, the barn and accessory structures will be considered a significant impact. (b) Mitigation. None required because the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Committee has not been accepted. However, the following mitigation measures shall nevertheless be incorporated into the Project: The Project will preserve the original portions of the Heintz House, including approximately 4,000 square feet of living space, at its original location and elevation. Existing trees and rock walls will also be preserved as much as possible, subject to grading requirements. An interpretive exhibit with photographs and narrative describing the site history will be -11- provided in the linear park adjacent to the house. A new garage will be constructed near the location of the original garage structure. The original driveway will remain with some modifications in width, as required for grading. The Project will preserve the barn and one shed structure on the project site. An interpretive exhibit with photographs and narrative describing the Heintz laboratory's history will be provided in the linear park across from the Heintz House. (c) Finding. The Planning Commission did not accept the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Committee, particularly with regard to preservation of the Ayala House and Heintz laboratory /garage, which were deemed not to be historically significant. The Commission felt that these structures would be adequately represented in the interpretive exhibit. The Commission was correct. Whether mitigated or not, the impact is deemed to be less than significant. I. Utilities Water (a) Impact. The existing water line does not have adequate pressure to serve the Project. (b) Mitigation. The Project will install a 16 -inch water line in Blossom Hill Road from the Project site to Union Avenue to the west to the Greenridge Terrace Zone. This will also provide a zone valve to the Belgatos Zone at Surmont Court (existing low water pressure problems existing in the area). This valve will supply water to this area of the Belgatos Zone in emergency situations via the Project site. (c) Finding. The implementation of this mitigation measure will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impact to a less than significant level. II. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT A. No Project Alternative -12- I . Description. Under the No Project Alternative, the existing orchard area would remain as available prime farmland and managed open space. If the Project is not constructed, there would be no new residences subject to exterior noise levels of 55 dBLao or greater. 2. Comparison to Proposed Project. The No Project Alternative would avoid the Project's significant environmental impacts. The No Project Alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives of developing new homes while preserving approximately 89 acres of open space and providing public access thereto over approximately 8,100 linear feet of dirt trails and 1,400 of paved trails, constructing a blossoming tree grove and a linear park of native trees with paved trails, restoring the Heintz House and barn, providing interpretive exhibits relating to the agricultural history of the site, providing approximately $245,000 towards the Town traffic impact mitigation and road impact funds, providing approximately $800,000 in Below Market Price program in -lieu fees, as well as achieving the storm drainage, traffic, hazardous materials, cultural resources, and utility mitigation measures, which provides the benefit of reducing existing on- and off -site problems. 3. Finding. This alternative is environmentally superior to the Project, since it avoids the impacts of the Project. However, the No Project Alternative would not meet any of the objectives of the Project, and does not achieve any the mitigation benefits of the Project. It is, therefore, rejected. B. Alternative Project Design Description. The Alternative Project Design was devised as a reduction in the number of proposed residential units from 48 new units and one renovation to 46 new units and one renovation. 2. Comparison to Proposed Project. The Alternative Project Design, while slightly smaller than the Project as studied, would result in the construction of three (3) more residential units than the Project as now proposed. While the reduction of the number of residential units as now proposed does not avoid the loss of prime farmland or managed open space, it does reduce the noise impacts from the development to less than 55 dBLan in the exterior and 45 dBLao in the interior. The current reduction also increases the distance between the southeastern most residential units and existing residences on Surmont Court, and the distance between the northeastern most residential units and Blossom Hill Road and existing residences to the east of the Project site. The Alternative Project Design would meet the primary object of developing a new residential units while preserving -13- significant amounts of open space and providing public access thereto. 3. Finding. This alternative is environmentally superior to the Project as studied, but less superior to the Project as now proposed. The Alternative Design Project is rejected because it is not environmentally superior to the Project as currently proposed. C. Reduced Scale Alternative 1. Description. Under the Reduced Scale Alternative, the number of proposed residential units would be reduced from 48 units and one renovation to 24 units and one renovation, or a 50 percent reduction from the Project as originally proposed, assuming minimum 10,000 square foot lots. 2. Comparison to Proposed Project. The Reduced Scale Alternative would reduce some but not all of the Project's significant environmental impacts. Assuming that lot sizes remain the same, less prime farmland and managed open space would be lost, but not to a less than significant level, and noise impacts from the Project would be reduced to less than 55 dBLa„ in the exterior and 45 dBL& in the interior. It is unclear whether lot and residential unit sizes would remain the same, and their increase would result in the loss of prime farmland and managed open space in amounts up to that which would result from the proposed Project, and potential for increased visual impacts. While the Reduced Scale Project Alternative would meet the object of developing new residential units, it would result in less funding for the Below Market Price Housing Program, and potentially less open space would be preserved, dedicated and accessible to the public. 3. Finding. While this alternative has the potential of being environmentally superior to the Project, since it could reduce some of the significant impacts of the Project, it does not reduce Project impacts to less than significant levels. Also, this alternative has the potential of being environmentally similar or inferior to the Project, particularly given potential visual impacts, if lot and residential unit sizes are increased to make the Project economically feasible. While the goal of providing new residential units would be realized, the Below Market Housing Program in- lieu fees would be reduced, along with the benefit to the Town. The Reduced Scale Alternative is thus rejected. D. Location Alternative -14- I . Description. Under the Location Alternative, the Project would be located at an approximately 45 acres site at 17101 Hicks Road in the unincorporated portion of Santa Clara County, adjacent to the Los Gatos Christian Church which is located in the Town. 2. Comparison to Proposed Project. The Town General Plan land use designation for the Hicks Road site is Hillside Residential and pre -zoned HR -5. The site is has been identified as potential habitat for burrowing owls. While 48 residential units could be developed at the alternative location if rezoned HR -1, it offers little or no additional property for open space. It also contains three traces of the Shannon Fault. Vehicular traffic on Hicks Road is much lower than on Blossom Hill Road and would reduce the noise impact to a less than significant level. Development would, nevertheless, continue to result in an unavoidable significant loss of open space. The alternative site has no cultural resources or farmland, and would thus reduce related impacts to less than significant levels. However, the loss of approximately 35 acres of burrowing owl habitat would be a significant unavoidable impact. The site would also result in greater geologic building setbacks and potentially specialized building techniques, and thus, would be less suitable for residential development. 3. Finding. This alternative, though feasible, would eliminate some but not all the significant impacts of the Proposed Project such as loss of open space, would result in new significant impacts such as the increased geologic hazard, and would result in a new unavoidable impact, the loss of burrowing owl habitat. This alternative is thus rejected as not being environmentally superior to the Proposed Project. E. Development of Existing Parcels Alternative 1. Description. Under the Development of Existing Parcels Alternative, the Project would build only nine (9) single family residences on the nine existing RC zoned lots on the Project site. The RC zoning designation allows one single family residence and additional site improvements for each lot, but requires a 20 -acre minimum lot size. Existing non - conforming parcels could remain and be developed, but the other reconfigured parcels would need to meet the RC zoning minimum lot size. Each lot would require improvements in the form of road access, sewer, water, and utility connections. This alternative would require the construction of a standard public street and frontage improvements from Blossom Hill Road up to the high elevations of the site and throughout the area that is now considered natural open space. -15- 2. Comparison to Proposed Project. This alternative would reduce the number of residential units constructed by approximately 86 percent, but would result in development in the natural open space area. While this alternative would reduce the amount of prime farmland lost, some would be lost and farming of the remainder would be impaired. Although the number of residential units would be reduced, the units constructed would not be clustered in the managed open space area, resulting in the loss of part of both the managed and natural open space areas to residential and infrastructure development. In addition, the natural open space would not available to public access. Exterior noise impacts resulting from the Project would be reduced due to increased setbacks. Historic resources could be preserved, but it is unlikely that this alternative would provide for renovation of the Heintz House and the barn. 3. Finding. This alternative will reduce one impact, exterior noise, but not other impacts such as the loss of managed open space and prime farmland. In addition, this alternative would result in the loss of natural open space along with the public access offered by the Project as proposed. This alternative, while feasible, would not be environmentally superior to the Project and is thus rejected. F. Modified Access Alternative 1. Description. This alternative was developed to eliminate the access point from Surmont Court on to the Project site. Access to the five proposed residential units which, at the time of the study, would gain access from Surmont Court would instead be provided within the main Project circulation system. Emergency access would be provided via Surmont Court. 2. Comparison to Proposed Project. This alternative was studied at the time when the Project planned access to part of the site via Surmont Court. The Project as now proposed has incorporated this alternative. 3. Finding. This alternative, which is both feasible and environmentally superior to the Project as studied, has been incorporated into the Project. III. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS After review of the entire administrative record, including the Final EIR, the staff reports, and the oral and written testimony and evidence presented at public hearings, the Council finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological and other considerations justify the approval of the Project in spite of the existence of unavoidable environmental effects that are deemed significant 16- and that cannot be completely mitigated to a level of insignificance. The Council adopts and makes this Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the significant unavoidable impacts of the Project and the anticipated benefits of the Project. The Council finds that each of the benefits set forth below in this Statement constitutes a separate and independent ground for finding that the benefits of the Project outweigh the risks of its potential significant adverse environmental impacts. The benefits of the Project, which constitute the specific economic, legal, social, technological and other considerations justify the approval of the Project are as follows: A. The Project will preserve approximately 85.6 acres of natural open space that will be dedicated to the Town in perpetuity, and will be restored to its natural state by SummerHill, and will have the added value of preserving an important viewshed, providing natural habitat area, and preserving existing wildlife corridors. B. The Project will construct public access to the natural open space area over approximately 8,100 linear feet of dirt trails and 1,400 of paved trails, which will exceed the Town's General Plan and hillside area standards and connect to Belgatos Park and other Town trail systems. C. The Project will construct a 2.7 acre blossoming tree grove 100 feet in depth reminiscent of the existing orchard's history, and a linear park of native trees with paved trails, the grove and park to be maintained by a homeowners' association. D. The Project will restore the Heintz House and barn, and provide a historic agricultural compound with interpretive exhibits. B. The Project will provide approximately $245,000 towards the Town's traffic impact mitigation and road impact funds. F. The Project will provide approximately $800,000 in Below Market Price program in -lieu fees. G. The Project will widen Blossom Hill road to two (2) lanes with deceleration and acceleration lanes to and from the Project for 813± feet, providing a center turn lane. H. The Project will construct a storm drainage system to mitigate existing chronic surface and sub - surface drainage problems affecting the Project site and neighboring properties. I. The Project will construct improvements to the existing water system which will provide an enhanced level of fire protection to the adjacent neighborhood. The Project will remediate existing hazardous material contamination caused by pesticides -17- in accordance with applicable local, state and federal regulations and standards. K. The Project will provide $263,000 towards an endowment fund for the maintenance of the dedicated open space and public trails. L. The Project will construct a designated equestrian trailer parking area. M. The Project will complete Surmont Court by constructing a modified cul -de -sac. N. The Project will construct new single family residences that will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. O. The Project will provide approximately $250,000 in combined fees to the Union and Campbell Unified School Districts to fund capital improvements. P. the Project will provide equipment for Park Service Officers. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos, California held on the 20th day of July, 1998, by the following vote: COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: Randy Attaway, Steven Blanton, Jan Hutchins, Mayor Linda Lubeck. NAYS: None ABSENT: Joanne Benjamin \:WWQ SIGNED: ATTEST MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA ✓� z' CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS 6, TOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA -18-