CC Resolution 8322
,
"
.. .'
, 'l.
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
RESOLUTION NO. 8322
CITY OF CAMPBELL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
RESOLUTION NO. 1992-19
-
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CAMPBELL AND THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CERTIFYING REVIEW AND
CONSIDERATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT,
MAKING FINDINGS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT, AND STATING OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS IN
THE APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE SECOND AMENDED AND
RESTATED CENTRAL CAMPBELL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
RESOLVED, by the city Council of the City of Campbell (the
"City council") and the City of Campbell Redevelopment Agency
(the "Agency"), that:
WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (the "Draft
EIR") on the Second Amended and Restated Central Campbell
Redevelopment Plan (the "Amended Plan") was prepared by the City
of Campbell (the "City") pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 ~ ~.,
"CEQA"), the Guidelines for Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act (14 California Code of Regulations,
Sections 15000 ~ ~., the "State EIR Guidelines") and the
city's and Agency's Guidelines for Implementing CEQA (the "Local
Guidelines"); and
WHEREAS, on September 19, 1991, the City forwarded the Draft
EIR to the State Clearinghouse for distribution to those agencies
which have juriSdiction by law with respect to the Central
Campbell Redevelopment Project to be undertaken pursuant to the
Amended Plan (the "Project"), to all affected taxing agencies
pursuant to Health' Safety Code Section 33333.3, and to other
interested persons and agencies, and sought the comments of such
persons and agencies; and
WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies of
the completion of the Draft EIR was published in the San Jose
Mercury News on September 19, 1991; and
WHEREAS, the City of Campbell Planning Commission (the
.Planning Commission") held a noticed public hearing on the Draft
EIR on october 24, 1991; and
WHEREAS, comments were received on the Draft EIR prior to
the close of the 45-day review period for submitting comments on
1030CP .PSO
-1-
..
-
,
the Draft EIR. The comments received and the City's responses to
such comments are contained in a Final Environmental Xmpact
Report on the Amended Plan dated March 1992 (the "Final EXR"),
which document is incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 2794, adopted on April 14, 1992,
the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council and the
Agency the certification of the Final EIR with incorporation of
additional mitigation language as set forth in Section A of
Exhibit A attached to and incorporated in this Resolution by this
reference; and
WHEREAS, a joint public hearing was held by the City Council
and the Agency on May 5, 1992 on the Amended Plan and Final EIR,
following notice duly and regularly given as required by law, and
all interested persons expressing a desire to comment thereon or
object thereto were heard, and the Final EIR was considered; and
WHEREAS, in connection with the joint public hearing, the
City Council and Agency received certain recommendations for
additions to the Final EIR which are set forth in the attached
Exhibit A and which the City Council and Agency desire to
incorporate into the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, as subsequently referred to in this ReSOlution, the
Final EIR (designated as City EIR #91-01 and State Clearinghouse
#91053013) consists of the Draft EIR (dated September, 1991), the
Final EIR incorporating comments and written responses thereto
(dated March, 1992), and the additions to the Final EIR set forth
in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, by this concurrent resolution, the City Council, as
the lead agency under CEQA for preparing the Final EIR and the
entity responsible for adopting the Amended Plan and approving
the Project; and the Agency, as the agency responsible for
preparing and carrying out the Amended Plan under the California
Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000
~ ~.), jointly desire to comply with the requirements of CEQA,
the State EIR Guidelines, and the Local Guidelines for
consideration, certification, and use of the Final EIR by lead
and responsible agencies in connection with the approval and
subsequent implementation of the Amended Plan.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
AND THE CITY OF CAMPBELL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the additions to the Final EIR .et forth in the
attached Exhibit A are hereby incorporated in and made a part of
the Final EIR as if fully .et forth therein.
2. That the City Council and the Agency hereby find and
certify that the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with
1030CP .PSG
-2-
:
CEQA, the state EIR Guidelines and the Local Guidelines; that the
Final EIR adequately addresses the environmental issues of the
Project and the Amended Plan; and that the City Council and the
Agency have reviewed and considered the information contained in
the Final EIR prior to approving the Project and the Amended
Plan.
3. That the City Council and Agency hereby identify the
significant effects, adopt the mitigation measures, adopt the
monitoring program to be implemented for such mitigation
measures, make the findings, and declare the statement of
overriding considerations set forth in detail in the attached
Exhibit B which is incorporated in this Resolution by this
reference. The statements, findings and determinations set forth
in Exhibit B are based on the above certified Final EIR and other
information available to the city council and the Agency, and are
made in compliance with Sections 15091, 15092, and 15093 of the
State EIR Guidelines and Section 21081.6 of CEQA.
4. That, with respect to the former Winchester Drive-In
site in the McGlincey Lane Expansion Area portion of the Project
Area, the City council and the Agency hereby find, determine and
resolve as follows:
a. Any development proposal for the former Winchester
Drive-In site will require early and ongoing consultations with
business and property owners in the McGlincey Lane area, affected
area residents, and neighborhood organizations.
b. Notwithstanding the certification of the Final
EIR, any development application for the former Winchester Drive-
In site will require additional environmental analysis to assess
the impacts of the proposed development on traffic, parking,
circulation, noise, vehicle loading/unloading and any other
potentially significant impacts on area businesses, property
owners and residents that may be affected by the proposed
development.
c. The Final EIR does not constitute a project EIR
under CEQA with respect to the development of the former
Winchester Drive-In site as described herein.
1030CP .PSG
-3-
i
APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL:
Passed and adopted this 2nd day of June 1992 by the
following vote:
AYES:
COUNClumMBERS :
Kotowski, Conant, Ashworth, Watson, Burr
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS :
None
ABSENT :
COUNCILMEMBERS :
None
APPROVED:
5::--Q ~~
DONALD R. BURR, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Ba
APPROVAL OF AGENCY:
Passed and adopted this 2nd day of June, 1992 by the
following vote:
AYES:
AGENCY BOARD MEMBERS:
Kotowski, Conant, Ashworth,
Watson, Burr
ABSENT:
AGENCY BOARD MEMBERS:
]
AGENCY BOARD MEMBERS:
None
NOES:
None
APPROVED:
~-~~
DONllTn R. BURR, HA ERSON
10300' .PSO
-4-
.
EXHIBIT A
ADDITIONS TO FINAL EIR 91-01
The following text revisions are aade to Final EIR 91-01.
A. Winchester Drive-In Site soecial Mitiaation Measure.
The following is added as an additional mitigation measure at the
conclusion of the "Land Use" subsection of Section 4 of the Draft
EIR (page 4-7):
"Prior to approval of any development application for the
former Winchester Drive-In site, additional environmental
analysis shall be required to assess the impacts of the
proposed development on traffic, parking, circulation,
noise, vehicle loading/unloading and any other potentially
significant impacts on area businesses, property owners and
residents that may be affected by the proposed development."
B. Traffic/Circulation Analvsis. The following is added
as additional analysis at the conclusion of the "Setting"
discussion in the "Traffic/Circulation" subsection of Section 4
of the Draft EIR (page 4-58):
"Special Ana1vsis Reaardina San Tomas Exoressway/SR-17 Off-
Ramos. Table 4-1 on page 4-16 states that the intersection
of the San Tomas Expressway off-ramp from southbound Route
17 is currently operating at LOS C during both peak periods.
The program used to calculate LOS in Table 4-1 is the
program required by the Santa Clara County Congestion
Management Agency (the "CHA") called "CAPPSI". This program
has several built in assumptions that may cause
miscalculation of existing conditions, but it was used in
this Draft EIR because it is required in all CHA traffic
studies. The City concurs with Caltrans' comment that the
actually observed LOS for this intersection during the p.m.
peak period is LOS F.
The city has development improvement plans that show how the
entire interchange can be modified to provide LOS D to E
operation. The City and Santa Clara County are currently
designing these improvements. Based on the improvement
plans and design work, it i. concluded that reconstruction
of the overpass on Route 17 at the San Tomas Expressway is
not required to achieve greatly improved levels of service.
CMA Land Use Imoact Analvsis Proaram. The CMA implements a
land use monitoring program. This program is essentially a
reporting process by all member jurisdictions. This EIR
will be reported to CMA within 30 days of its being
1030C.V .PSG
-1-
certified. In addition, adjacent jurisdictions are also
notified by the city of Campbell for any developments
reported in this .anner. Therefore, Campbell .ay be
required to notify San Jose and Los Gatos in aany
situations, and in special instances, Campbell .ay also
notify cupertino, Saratoga and Santa Clara. Beyond this,
notification of land use changes county-wide is performed
annually to CMA.
Each year CMA compiles all land use actions reported to it
and disseminates this information back to all .ember
jurisdictions on an annual basis. In addition, CMA also
uses this annually updated information to revise and update
its transportation model. The updated model is then run to
determine whether the past year'. development actions have
resulted in unacceptable levels of service.
All development proposals which will result in at least 100
new trips in the peak hour (a.m. or p.m.) must be reported
to CMA within 30 days. At the end of the year all approved
development must be reported to CMA regardless of the number
of new trips. Each city, the county, and Caltrans must
also, each year, recount all CMA system intersections and
recalculate levels of service and report this to CMA. CMA
then prepares an annual report showing the cumulative
effects of the aggregate of all land use decisions over the
past year and will also update its files on the performance
of the highway system.
The capacity calculation methodology, including CAPPSI, are
currently under review by CMA and its member jurisdictions
to improve their accuracy."
1030C.V .PSO
-2-
.mIBIT .
CITY COUNCIL OF THB CITY OF CAMPBELL AND
~ CITY OP CAMPBELL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCYI
8ECOND AKENDED AND RESTATED
CBN'l'RAL CAMPBELL REDBVELOPKDrr PLU-
8IGNIPICANT BHVIROHKENTAL IMPACTS, MITIGATION XEASURBS,
MONITORING PROGRAM, 8TATEHEB'l' 01' OVBRRIDING BDEPIT
AND I'INDINGS OP I'ACT
Z. GDBRAL ZDORXATIO. .um DBSCRIPTIO. 01' DB PROJECT
The project under consideration by the City Council of the
City of Campbell (the .City Council") and the Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Campbell (the "Agency") is the adoption of
the Second Amended and Restated Central campbell Redevelopment
Plan (the "Amended Plan"), which would amend the existing Central
Campbell Redevelopment Plan. The Amended Plan has been prepared
pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health
and Safety Code Section 33000 ~ ~.) to enable the City and the
Agency to continue to eliminate the physical, economic and 80cial
blighting conditions that continue to exist in the Central
Campbell Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area") 80 that
the Project Area may be developed in conformity with the Campbell
General Plan, to the benefit of Project Area residents and
businesses and the Campbell community as a whole.
Among other provisions, the Amended Plan incorporates into
the Project Area the McGlincey Lane Expansion Area (the
"Expansion Area"), as more fully described in Exhibit D-2 of the
Amended Plan.
An Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Amended Plan
has been prepared by the City in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines
(the "State Guidelines") and local CEQA Implementation
Guidelines. The City bas served as "lead agency" and the Agency
bas served as a "responsible agency", as those terms are used by
CEQA, in the preparation and consideration of the Amended Plan
EIR.
Tbe EIR process began in April, 1991 with the mailing of a
Notice of Preparation to all interested and affected agencies,
followed by the preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact
Report (the "DEIR").
The DEIR was submitted to the state Clearinghouse for review
on September 19, 1991 (SCH #91053013). (For local purposes, the
EIR is designated a8 EIR 91-01.) On September 19, 1991, the
1030C7 .P5O
-1-
i
Notice of Completion of the DEIR was published in the San Jose
Mercury News. The 45-day comment period began on september 19,
1991 and closed on November 4, 1991. The DEIR is incorporated by
this reference into this Exhibit B.
Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33333.3, the DEIR
and the Amended Plan were distributed by certified mail, return
receipt requested, to all affected taxing agencies. Copies of
the Notice of Completion of the DEIR were also mailed to the
City's mailing list of interested persons regarding environmental
issues. The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell
conducted a noticed public hearing on the DEIR on October 24,
1991.
Several comments were received on the DEIR. The comments
received on the DEIR and the City'S responses to such comments
are contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report (the
"Responses"), which document is incorporated by this reference
into this Exhibit B.
By Resolution 2794, adopted on April 14, 1992, the Planning
Commission of the City of Campbell recommended that the City
Council (1) certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (the
"FEIR") with the addition of the language set forth in Section A
of Exhibit A of this Resolution; and (2) adopt the Amended Plan.
The Amended Plan and the FEIR came before the City Council
and the Agency on May 5, 1992 at a duly noticed joint public
hearing, at which time the City Council and the Agency heard oral
testimony and received written communications.
As used throughout this Exhibit B, the FEIR is deemed to
consist of the DEIR, the Responses, and the additions to the FEIR
set forth in Exhibit A of this Resolution.
xx. ftB DCORD
The record (the "Record") of the City Council and the Agency
relating to the Amended Plan and its potential environmental
effects includes:
A.
B.
The Amended Plan;
The Preliainary Report on the Amended Plan, dated
october, 1991;
C.
The Report to the City Council of the City of Campbell
on the Amended Plan for the proposed Second Amended and
1030C7 .PSG
-2-
Restated Central Campbell Redevelopment Plan, dated
March, 1992; the Supplement to the Report to the City
Council of the City of Campbell for the Second Amended
and Restated Central Campbell Redevelopment Plan, dated
April, 1992; the Report on Remaining Adverse Conditions
- Central Campbell Redevelopment Project, dated March
1992; and the Report on Existing Conditions - McGlincey
Lane Expansion Area, dated March 1992 (collectively,
the "Report on the Amended Plan");
D. The Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") prepared
for the Amended Plan, consisting of: (1) the DEIR, (2)
the Responses, and (3) the additions to the FEIR set
forth in Exhibit A of this Resolution.
E. The original Central Campbell Redevelopment Plan and
the First Amended and Restated Central Campbell
Redevelopment Plan;
F. The Written Findings and Responses Pursuant to Health
and Safety Code Section 33363, adopted by resolution of
the City Council, dated June 2, 1992 (the "Section
33363 Findings");
G. Documentary and oral evidence received by the City of
Campbell Planning Commission, the Agency and the city
Council during public hearings and meetings on the
Amended Plan and the FEIR, including, without
limitation, staff reports submitted to the City council
and Agency Board at the May 5, 1992 joint public
hearing on the Amended Plan;
H. Matters of common knowledge to the City Council and the
Agency which they have considered, such as the City of
Campbell General Plan (the "General Plan"), and prior
resolutions and ordinances of the Agency and the City.
III. OVERALL .IBDIBGS
Before the City Council may approve the Amended Plan, CEQA
mandates that the City Council, as lead Agency, and the Agency,
as a responsible agency within the meaning of CEQA, consider the
Record and make certain findings required by Public Resources
Code Section 21081 and 14 California Code of Regulations Sections
15091, 15092 and 15093. The FEIR identifies potentially signifi-
cant impacts on the environment which are likely to result from
adoption of the Amended Plan. Based on the following findings as
to each such impact, the city Council and Agency conclude that
1030C'1.P50
-3-
chanqes or alterations have been incorporated into the project
which avoid or substantially lessen all potentially significant
environmental impacts identified by the FEIR, except for the
local and reqional air quality impacts identified in Section IV.C
and in section VI below. As to those unavoidable siqnificant
impacts, the City Council and Aqency have adopted a statement of
overridinq considerations, as set forth in section VIII below.
Further, as required by Public Resources Code Section
21081.6, a monitorinq proqram is adopted for the mitiqation
measures stated in and required by this Exhibit B.
The purposes of the findinqs contained in this Exhibit B
include: (1) certifyinq the FEIR prepared for the Amended Plan;
(2) briefly describinq and summarizinq the potentially siqnifi-
cant environmental impacts of the Project; (3) describinq mitiqa-
tion measures for, and alternatives to, the Project; and (4)
presentinq the City and Aqency's findinqs as to the impacts of
the Project after adoption or rejection of the mitiqation
measures and alternatives. In addition, Section V of this
Exhibit B adopts mitiqation aeasures for certain other
environmental impacts that were addressed in the FEIR but
determined not to be potentially siqnificant adverse
environmental impacts. The description of impacts contained in
this Exhibit B is intended as a summary only. The FEIR, and the
documents which it incorporates, describe these impacts in
detail.
The City Council and the Aqency certify that the FEIR has
been completed in compliance with CEQA and that it was presented
to, and reviewed and considered by, the City Council and the
Aqency prior to actinq on the Amended Plan. In so certifyinq,
the City Council and the Aqency recoqnize that there may be
"differences" amonq and between the information and opinions
offered in the documents and testimony that make up the Record.
Therefore, by these findinqs (includinq Exhibit A, this Exhibit B
and the resolution adoptinq Exhibit A and this Exhibit B), the
City Council and the Aqency adopt the clarifications and/or
modifications of the FEIR as set forth in these findinqs, and
determine that these findinqs shall control and that the FEIR
shall be deemed to be certified subject to the determinations
reached by the City Council and the Aqency in these findinqs,
which are based on the substantial evidence in the Record
described above.
The City Council and the Aqency also find and determine that
the FEIR will serve as the "Proqram" EIR for the Amended Plan,
pursuant to California Code of Requlations Section 15168.
1030C7 .PSG
-4-
Subsequent .pecific project. will undergo individual
environmental review and aay involve further identification of
project-specific impacts, aitigations and alternatives. At this
stage of the redevelopment process, it is impossible to forecast
with certainty the particulars of such subsequent projects,
whether such subsequent projects will be approved, will be
approved at the aaximum density or intensity allowed by
applicable land use regulation or will involve the assumptions,
environmental impacts and scenarios hypothesized in the FEIR.
Nonetheless, these findings attempt to address plausible
environmental impacts of the Amended Plan at the earliest stage
in the process. The FEIR recommends mitigation aeasures for the
Amended Plan as a whole, including aitigation aeasures which are
designed to be: (i) incorporated as policies of the City and the
Agency in implementing the Amended Plan; (ii) effected through
subsequent implementing regulations, ordinances, standards,
programs and plans; or (iii) incorporated into future development
approvals. These mitigation aeasures are adopted in this Exhibit B.
As more fully set forth in the City Council and Agency
resolution adopting this Exhibit B, the City Council and the
Agency specifically find and determine that the FEIR will not
serve as the "project" EIR for future development of the former
Winchester Drive-In site within the Project Area.
xv. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT XXPACTS OF TaB PROJBCT
A. ftAlI'I'IC/CIRCULA'l'IOH
1. 1994 Project Exoansion Area Traffic Without SR-85.
a. Potentiallv sianificant Impact.
If the Amended Plan projects in the Expansion Area are
implemented by the end of 1994 Drior to the completion of SR-85,
four signalized intersections and three unsignalized
intersections in the Expansion Area vicinity would experience a
level of service ("LOS") of E or F during the weekday AM and/or
PM peak hours. The following intersections are significantly
impacted and the impact on these intersections will have to be
mitigated: .
Signalized Intersections:
Bascom Avenue/Camden Avenue (LOS E)
San Tomas Expressway/Highway 17 (LOS F)
Camden Avenue/curtner Avenue (LOS F)
Camden Avenue/Union Avenue (LOS F)
Unsignalized Intersections:
1030C7 .PSO
-5-
curtner Avenue/McGlincey Lane (LOS F)
cristich Lane/McGlincey Lane (LOS F)
Union Avenue/McGlincey Lane (LOS F)
b. Mitiaation.
The four impacted signalized intersections shall be
mitigated as follows:
(1) The Bascom Avenue/Camden Avenue
intersection shall be restriped to add an exclusive northbound
left-turn lane, a northbound right-turn lane, and a southbound
right-turn lane.
(2) The San Tomas Expressway/SR-17 ramps
intersection shall be improved from level of service F to level
of service E by the addition of an eastbound through lane.
(3) The operation of the Camden
Avenue/curtner Avenue intersection shall be improved by the
addition of a northbound through lane, and converting the
existing through left/lane to an exclusively left-turn lane.
Also, the existing signal phasing shall be redesigned to provide
for leading and lagging left-turn movements on Camden Avenue.
The traffic operations at this intersection shall be further
improved by adding an additional exclusive southbound right-turn
lane. This new lane would be an exclusive right-turn lane onto
northbound SR-17. The existing right-turn lane could access
either northbound San Tomas Expressway or the freeway. This
geometry would minimize weaving and, therefore, decrease the
possibility of vehicle conflicts.
(4) The Camden Avenue/Union Avenue
intersection operations shall be improved by re-striping of the
northbound approach and adding a new right-turn lane.
The three unsignalized intersections shall be .itigated as
follows:
(1) The intersection of CUrtner
Avenue/McGlincey Lane is proposed as part of the Amended Plan to
be modified to make the through direction of traffic from the
west leg of curtner Avenue to the north leg of McGlincey Lane.
The east leg of CUrtner Avenue shall become a minor street.
Right-turns from curtner Avenue to MCGlincey Lane, and left-
turns from McGlincey Lane to the east leg of curtner Avenue would
be prohibited. This will eliminate access to the site from the
residential portion of curtner Avenue. The intersection shall be
redesigned to City of Campbell standards, which provide for
adequate truck turning radius, ainimum lane width requirements,
1030C7 .PSO
-6-
and sight distance requirements. The addition o~ a tra~~ic
signal at this intersection will improve the levels o~ service to
acceptable levels.
(2) A traf~ic aiqnal shall be added at the
cristich Lane/McGlincey Lane intersection to improve the level of
service to acceptable levels.
(3) A traffic aiqnal shall be added at the
Union Avenue/McGlincey Lane intersection to improve the levels o~
service to acceptable levels.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Public Works Department.
(2) Action to be Taken:
This EIR does not constitute a project
EIR for development of the Winchester Drive-In site. There~ore,
additional environmental analysis will be required for any future
development proposal of the site. Detailed mitiqation measures
and monitorinq proqrams will be developed and implemented in
conjunction with the future environmental studies.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
Tarqet date will be established with the
detailed mitiqation measures and aonitorinq proqrams developed by
future environmental studies for development of the Winchester
Drive-In site.
d. Findinq.
The above aitiqation aeasures and monitorinq program are
hereby adopted and shall be implemented if the Amended Plan
projects in the Expansion Area are completed before the
completion of SR-85. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Traffic/Circulation subsection) of the DEIR, the
findinq is made that the adoption of the above mitiqation
measures and monitorinq proqram will avoid or substantially
lessen the significant environmental effect described in IV.A.1
above.
2. 1994 Expansion Area Traffic with SR-85.
a.
PotentiallY Siqnificant ImDact.
1030C7 .PSO
-7-
Xf the Amended Plan projects in the Expansion Area are
implemented by the end of 1994, after the completion of SR-85,
four intersections in the Expansion Area vicinity would
experience an LOS of E or F during the weekday'PM peak hour. The
followinq intersections will be siqnificantly impacted:
Siqnalized Xntersection:
Camden Avenue/curtner Avenue
Unsiqnalized Xntersections:
curtner Avenue/McGlincey Lane
Cristich Lane/McGlincey Lane
Union Avenue/McGlincey Lane
b. Mitiaation.
The impact at the siqnalized intersection at Camden
Avenue/curtner Avenue shall be mitigated by the optimization of
the existinq siqnal system.
The impacts at the three unsiqnalized intersections shall be
mitiqated by the addition of a traffic siqnal at all three
intersections.
c. Monitorinq Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for Implementation:
Public Works Department.
(2) Action to be Taken:
This EIR does not constitute a project
EXR for development of the Winchester Drive-In site. Therefore,
additional environmental analysis will be required for any future
development proposal of the site. Detailed mitiqation measures
and monitorinq proqrams will be developed and implemented in
conjunction with the future environmental studies.
(3) Target Date for ComDletion:
Tarqet date will be established with the
detailed mitiqation aeasures and monitorinq proqrams developed by
future environmental studies for development of the winchester
Drive-In site.
d. Findina.
The above aitigation aeasures and aonitoring program are
hereby adopted and shall be implemented if the Amended Plan
1030C1.PSO
-8-
projects in the Expansion Area are completed after the completion
of SR-85. Based upon the information and analysis in Section 4
(Traffic/Circulation subsection) of the DEIR, the finding is made
that the adoption of the above mitigation measures and monitoring
program will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described in IV.A.2. above.
3. Year 2000 Traffic.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant ImDact.
Long-term (year 2000) traffic impacts will occur on
McGlincey Lane north of Curtner Avenue and on Curtner Avenue west
of McGlincey Lane.
b. Mitiaation.
The results of year 2000 traffic analyses indicate that with
addition of the Amended Plan trips, all roadway segments
evaluated as part of the traffic analysis will operate at LOS D
or better, with the exception of the segment of McGlincey Lane
north of Curtner Avenue and Curtner Avenue west of McGlincey
Lane. Without the Amended Plan projects, these facilities will
operate with a year 2000 base level of service B. With addition
of the project trips, these streets will operate at LOS F.
Implementation of the following mitigation measures will
reduce impacts to a less than significant level:
(1) Installation of a traffic signal at
McGlincey Lane/Union Avenue intersection. An eastbound left-
turn lane will also be necessary at this intersection.
(2) Installation of a traffic signal at
McGlincey Lane/cristich Lane intersection.
(3) Installation of a traffic signal at
McGlincey Lane/Curtner Avenue intersection.
(4) Reconfiquration of the intersection of
McGlincey Lane and Curtner Avenue, as proposed by the Amended
Plan.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for Implementation:
Public Works Department.
(2) Action to be Taken:
1030C7 .PSG
-9-
This EIR does not constitute a project
EIR ~or development o~ the Winchester Drive-In site. Therefore,
additional environmental analysis will be required for any future
development proposal of the site. Detailed mitigation measures
and monitorinq proqrams will be developed and implemented in
conjunction with the future environmental studies.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
Tarqetdate will be established with the
detailed mitiqation measures and aonitorinq proqrams developed by
future environmental studies for development of the winchester
Drive-In site.
d. Findina.
The above mitiqation measures and monitorinq proqram are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Traffic/Circulation subsection) of the DEIR, the
finding is made that the adoption of the above mitiqation
measures and monitoring program will avoid or substantially
lessen the siqnificant environmental affect described in IV.A.3.
above.
4. Street Improvements.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant ImDact.
The street improvements proposed as part of the Amended Plan
will require the City or Aqency to obtain riqht-of-way from
affected property owners.
b. Mitiaation.
Right-of-way shall be acquired by the City and/or Aqency in
accordance with applicable City regulations and redevelopment
law.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Public Works Department and
Redevelopment Aqency.
(2) Action to be Taken:
The Department and Aqency shall ensure
that any additional riqht-of-way required as a result of the
1030C1.PSO
-10-
Amended Plan is acquired in accordance with City regulations and
state redevelopment laws.
(3) Taraet Date for Completion:
This mitigation measure shall be
implemented as additional right-of-way is acquired.
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measure and monitoring proqram are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Traffic/Circulation subsection) of the DEIR, the
finding is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure
and monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in IV.A.4. above.
B. BOISB
1. Traffic Noise.
a. PotentiallY Sianificant ImDact.
Noise levels due to project-generated traffic on the seqment
of McGlincey Lane between Union Avenue and Westchester Drive
would increase by as much as 6 decibels during weekdays and by 7
decibels during weekend peak hours. The northeast corner unit at
the Dry Creek Place townhomes (563 McGlincey Lane) would
experience significant increases in noise levels from project-
related traffic.
b. Mitiaation.
The wood fence around the northeast corner unit shall be
reconstructed to be an a-foot solid wood fence along Union Avenue
and a 9-foot solid wood fence along McGlincey Lane.
The City shall offer to install a mechanical ventilation
system at the northeast corner unit of Dry Creek Place townhomes
(563 McGlincey Lane).
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Planning Department.
(2) Action to be Taken:
1030C7.PSO -11-
This EIR does not constitute a project
EIR for development of the winchester Drive-In site. Therefore,
additional environmental analysis will be required for any future
development proposal of the site. Detailed mitigation measures
and monitoring programs will be developed and implemented in
conjunction with the future environmental studies.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
Target Date will be established with the
detailed mitigation measures and monitoring programs developed by
future environmenta~ studies for development of the Winchester
Drive-In site.
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measures and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Noise subsection) of the DEIR, the finding is made
that the adoption of the above mitigation measures and monitoring
program will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described in IV.B.l. above.
2. Land Use ComDatibilitv.
a. PotentiallY Sianificant ImDact.
Industrial and commercial intensification in the Expansion
Area may result in increased noise levels at the residences
adjacent to the southeast of the Expansion Area.
b. Mitiaation.
The City shall develop a noise-sensitive land use plan or
less intensive zoning category for the portions of Expansion Area
that share rear property lines with residential land uses. The
land use plan or zoning category shall include noise performance
and design standards to protect adjacent residential uses from
noise impacts.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Planning Department.
(2) Action to be Taken:
1030C7.PSO -12-
;
The Planning Department shall prepare
and the city shall adopt the land use plan or zoning category
described in the mitigation measure.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
June 1995.
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measures and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Noise subsection) of the DElR, the finding is made
that the adoption of the above mitigation aeasures and aonitoring
program will avoid or substantially lessen the siqnificant
environmental effect described in IV.B.2. above.
3. Construction.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant ImDact.
Construction-related activities in the Expansion Area may
generate elevated noise levels.
b. Mitiaation.
The following mitigation measures will be implemented to
reduce the impacts to a less than significant level:
(1) Noise-generating construction activities
shall be restricted to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday.
(2) All internal combustion engine-driven
equipment shall be fitted with mufflers that are in good
condition.
(3) Noise sources, such as air compressors
and concrete pumpers, shall be located as far as possible from
the nearest residences.
(4) The property owner, developer, and/or
the City shall desiqnate a "noise disturbance coordinator" who
would be responsible for responding to complaints about noise
(e.g., starting too early, poor mufflers, etc.). This person
shall have the authority to take necessary actions to gain
conformance with these conditions. The telephone number and name
of this person shall be conspicuously posted at the construction
site to provide communication between the neighbors and project
sponsor.
1030C7 .PSO
-13-
c. Monitoring Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibility for ImDlementation:
Planning Department and Public Works
Department.
(2) Action to be Taken:
(a) The Planning Department ahall
impose the mitigation measure requirements on all discretionary
planning permits issued after adoption of the Amended Plan.
(b) The Public Works Department shall
ensure implementation of the mitigation measures in the field.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
The mitigation measure shall be
implemented as discretionary permits are issued and as
construction occurs.
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measures and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Noise SUbsection) of the DEIR, the finding is made
that the adoption of the above mitigation measures and monitoring
program will avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described in IV.B.3. above.
c. &XR QUALITY
1. Construction.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant ImDact.
The Amended Plan would result in new construction activities
in the Expansion Area; these construction activities would create
additional sources of dust from Clearing, grading, and other
construction-related activities.
b. Mitiaation.
The following dust control aeasures ahall be implemented
during construction activities in the Expansion Area:
1030C7 .PSG
-14-
(1) Suspend earthmoving or other dust-
producing activities during high wind periods when dust is
readily visible in the air.
(2) Provide equipment and manpower for
watering of all exposed or disturbed soil surfaces at least twice
daily, including weekends and holidays. An appropriate dust
palliative or suppressant, added to water before application,
should be utilized.
(3) Water or cover stockpiles of debris,
soil, sand, or other materials that can be blown by the wind.
(4) SWeep construction area and adjacent
streets of all mud and debris, since this material can be
pulverized and later resuspended by vehicle traffic.
(5) Limit the speed of all construction
vehicles to 15 miles per hour while on site.
The use of watering alone for dust control is estimated to
reduce dust emissions by approximately 50 percent. The combined
effect of the above measures, including the use of a dust
suppressant, would have a control efficiency of 70 to 80 percent,
which would reduce construction-related air quality impacts to a
less than significant level.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for Implementation:
Planning Department and Public Works
Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
(a) The Planning Department shall
impose the mitigation measure requirements on all discretionary
planning permits issued after adoption of the Amended Plan.
(b) The Public Works Department shall
ensure implementation of the mitigation measures in the field.
(3) Taraet Date for Completion:
The mitigation measure shall be
implemented as discretionary permits are issued and as
construction occurs.
d.
Findina.
1030C7 .PSG
-15-
The above mitigation aeasures and aonitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
section 4 (Air Quality subsection) of the DEIR, the finding is
made that the adoption of the above aitigation aeasures and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in IV.C.l. above.
2. Automobile-Related Impacts (Local}.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant ImDact.
Implementation of the Amended Plan projects prior to
completion of SR-85 (1994) will result in exceedances of the 8-
hour carbon monoxide standard at the Bascom/Camden and
Camden/curtner intersections.
b. Mitiaation.
No mitigation possible.
c. Monitoring Proaram.
Not applicable.
d. Findina.
Based upon the information and analysis in Section 4 (Air
Quality subsection) of the DEIR, the finding is aade that the
significant environmental effect described in IV.C.2. above
cannot be avoided or substantially lessened. Therefore, this
significant effect will be discussed in Sections VII
(Alternatives) and VIII (statement of Overriding Considerations)
below.
3. Automobile-Related ImDacts (Regional}.
a. Potentially Sianificant ImDact.
The daily increases in regional emissions from auto travel
related to the Expansion Area for organic gases and oxides of
nitrogen exceed the BAAQMD quidelines for these two regional
pollutants. Although implementation of Transportation system
Management programs will reduce trips by 10 to 25 percent, this
is not enough to decrease regional emissions below a level of
significance.
b. Mitiaation.
No mitigation possible.
1030C7 .PSG
-16-
c. Monitoring Proaram.
Not applicable.
d. Finding.
Based upon the information and analysis in section 4 (Air
Quality Subsection) of the DEIR, the findinq is made that the
siqnificant environmental effect described in VI.A.l. above
cannot be avoided or substantially lessened. Therefore, this
siqnificant effect will be discussed in sections VII
(Alternatives) and VIII (Statement ot Overridinq Considerations)
below.
D. HAZARDOUS DTBRIALS
1. Hazardous Materials storaae.
a. Potentially Sianificant ImDact.
The use, storaqe, and transport of hazardous materials in
the Expansion Area may result in spills, leaks, or accidents
involvinq these materials.
b. Mitigation.
The City of Campbell Fire Department shall continue to
implement and enforce the Hazardous Materials storaqe Ordinance
and Toxic Gas Ordinance.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Fire Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The Fire Department shall continue to
enforce the Hazardous Materials Storaqe Ordinance and Toxic Gas
Ordinance.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
None. This is an onqoinq mitiqation
measure.
1030C7 .PSG
-17-
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measure and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Hazardous Materials subsection) of the DEIR, the
finding is made that the adoption of the above mitigation aeasure
and monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in IV.D.l. above.
2. Underaround storaae Tanks.
a. PotentiallY Sianificant ImDact.
Many properties in the Expansion Area contain underground
storage tanks and/or have recorded incidents of hazardous
materials spills or leakages.
b. Mitiaation.
Preliminary site investigations shall be performed for all
parcels in the Expansion Area as they are proposed for
development; recommendations of these investigations shall be
implemented, as directed by the Regional Water Quality Control
Board and the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) Responsibility for ImDlementation:
Planning Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The Planning Department shall require
preliminary site investigations on all sites where new
development is proposed. The Department will require that the
recommendations of the investigations be implemented.
(3) Taraet Date for ComD1etion:
This mitigation aeasure shall be
implemented as new development is proposed on .ites within the
McG1incey Lane Expansion Area.
d. Findina.
The above mitigation aeasure and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Hazardous Materials subsection) of the DEIR, the
finding is made that the adoption of the above mitigation aeasure
1030C7 .PSG
-18-
and aonitorinq proqram will avoid or substantially lessen the
siqnificant environmental effect described in IV.D.2. above.
3. Asbestos Containina Materials.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant ImDact.
The presence of asbestos-containinq aaterials at the
winchester Drive-In site may create an increased potential for
health hazard from the release of asbestos fibers.
b. xitiaation.
The aSbestos-containinq aaterials at the Drive-In site shall
be removed by a licensed abatement contractor as soon as
possible, or at least prior to the issuance of a buildinq permit
for the redevelopment of the site.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Planninq Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The City shall encouraqe the property
owner of the Winchester Drive-In site to remove the asbestos-
containinq materials a soon as possible.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
At the latest, the .aterials shall be
removed prior to issuance of a buildinq permit for any new
development on the Winchester Drive-In site.
d. Findina.
The above aitiqation aeasure and aonitorinq proqram are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
section 4 (Hazardous Materials subsection) of the DEIR, the
findinq is aade that the adoption of the above aitiqation aeasure
and monitorinq proqram will avoid or substantially lessen the
siqnificant environmental effect described in IV.D.3. above.
1030C'l.P50
-19-
B. POBLZC 8BRVZCBS aND UTZLZTZBS
1. Fire Services.
a. PotentiallY Sianificant ImDact.
To achieve the 4,000 gallons per minute required fire flow
to the Drive-In site, substantial improvements to the water
supply system will be required. Installation of required
improvements may have construction-related impacts such as noise,
dust, and traffic diversion.
b. Mitigation.
The city and the San Jose Water Company shall be responsible
for determining which improvements are required and for requiring
the installation of appropriate improvements to the water supply
system. Both agencies shall comply with all applicable
regulations relative to noise, dust, and traffic control
measures.
c. Monitoring Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibility for ImDlementation:
Fire Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The Fire Department, in conjunction with
the San Jose Water Company, shall ensure that adequate fire flow
is provided to all new developments in the Expansion Area.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
The Fire Department shall require that
any necessary water system improvements are installed in
conjunction with new development in the Expansion Area. The
improvements shall be completed prior to the completion of new
development.
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measure and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Public Services and utilities subsection) of the DEIR,
the finding is made that the adoption of the above mitigation
measure and monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen
the significant environmental effect described in IV.E.l. above.
1030C7 .PSO
-20-
r. USTHBTJ:CS
1. Visual Impacts.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant Impact.
Development of the Drive-In site has the potential to create
adverse views from vehicles travelinq on SR-17.
b. Mitiaation.
The City of Campbell ahall implement and enforce the adopted
development policies for the Drive-In site.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for Implementation:
Planninq Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
This EIR does not constitute a project
EIR for development of the Winchester Drive-In site. Therefore,
additional environmental analysis will be required for any future
development proposal of the site. Detailed mitiqation measures
and monitorinq proqrams will be developed and implemented in
conjunction with the future environmental studies.
(3) Target Date for ComDletion:
Tarqet date will be established with the
detailed mitiqation measures and monitorinq proqrams developed by
future environmental studies for development of the Winchester
Drive-In site.
d. Finding.
The above mitiqation measure and monitorinq proqram are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Aesthetics subsection) of the DEIR, the findinq is
made that the adoption of the above mitiqation .easure and
monitorinq proqram will avoid or Substantially lessen the
siqnificant environmental effect described in IV.F.1. above.
1030C7 .PSO
-21-
2 . ODen SDace.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant I~pact.
The proposed site plan for the destination retail center on
the Drive-In site does not include open space and/or recreational
facilities, as required by the Open Space Element of the General
Plan.
b. Mitiaation.
The site plan for the destination retail center shall be
modified prior to issuance of building permits, to include
outdoor sitting/eating areas and to provide for a future
pedestrian/bicycle path and pedestrian overpass landing area.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for Implementation:
Planning Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
This EIR does not constitute a project
EIR for development of the Winchester Drive-In site. Therefore,
additional environmental analysis will be required for any future
development proposal of the site. Detailed mitigation measures
and monitoring programs will be developed and implemented in
conjunction with the future environmental studies.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
Target date will be established with the
detailed mitigation measures and monitoring programs developed by
future environmental studies for development of the Winchester
Drive-In site.
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measure and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Aesthetics SUbsection) of the DEIR, the finding is
made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in IV.F.2. above.
lO30C7.PSO
-22-
G. BIOLOGICAL aBSOURCBS
1. Veaetation and Wildlife.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant ImDact.
Redevelopment activities in the Expansion Area may result in
the loss of some landscape species.
b. Mitiaation.
Future development applications in the Expansion Area shall
be reviewed for potential impacts to ordinance-size trees, and
appropriate mitigation measures shall be developed and
implemented.
The two sycamore trees along McGlincey Lane shall be
retained.
Landscaping plans for future developments shall comply with
the city's water-efficient landscape standards and follow the
California Native Plant society's general revegetation
principles.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibility for ImDlementation:
Planning Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
(a) The Planning Department shall
require review and mitigation of potential impacts to significant
trees (as defined by the city's Water Efficient Landscape
Standards) for future development applications.
(b) The Planning Department shall
require preservation of the two sycamore trees.
(c) The Planning Department shall
implement the city's Water Efficient Landscape Standards.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
The mitigation measure will be
implemented in conjunction with new development within the
Expansion Area.
1030C1.PSO
-23-
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measures and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
section 4 (Biological Resources subsection) of the DEIR, the
finding is made that the adoption of the above mitigation
measures and monitoring program will avoid or substantially
lessen the significant environmental effect described in IV.G.l.
above.
B. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Disturbance of Archaeoloaical sites.
a. Potentiallv sianificant Imnact.
Construction activities in the Expansion Area that involve
the removal of surface paving materials could potentially unearth
subsurface, buried cultural remains.
b. Mitiaation.
If cultural remains are encountered during construction
activities, work shall be stopped, an archaeological monitor
called in, and appropriate mitigation measures shall be developed
and implemented.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) Resoonsibilitv for Imolementation:
Planning Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The mitigation measure shall be imposed
on new development in the Expansion Area.
(3) Taraet Date for Comnletion:
The mitigation measure will be
implemented in conjunction with new development within the
Expansion Area.
d. Findinq.
The above mitigation measure and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upcn the information and analysis in
Section 4 (CUltural Resources subsection) of the DEIR, the
finding is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure
1030C7 .P5O
-24-
and monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in IV.H.1. above.
%. GEOLOGY
1. Seismic Activitv.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant Impact.
The Expansion Area will be subject to groundshaking in the
event of a major earthquake in the San Francisco Bay region.
b. Mitiaation.
Development activities in the Expansion Area will be
required to comply with all applicable zoning and building code
regulations relative to seismic construction standards, and with
the Seismic Element policies in the General Plan; in particular,
Seismic Element Policy #4 requires that project-specific,
detailed geotechnical studies be performed to determine site-
specific hazards and mitigations.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Public Works Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The mitigation measure shall be imposed
on new development in the Expansion Area.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
The mitigation measure will be
implemented in conjunction with new development within the
Expansion Area.
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measure and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
section 4 (Geology subsection) of the DEIR, the finding is made
that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and monitoring
program will avoid or SUbstantially lessen the significant
environmental effect described in IV.I.1. above.
l030C1.PSO
-25-
J. DRAIHAGB/~LOODI.Q
1. Percolation fonds.
a. PotentiallY Sianificant ImDact.
Surface runoff into the Santa Clara Valley Water District
percolation ponds, both by direct runoff from adjacent sites and
from the storm drainage system and outfalls, constitutes a
potentially significant impact to the ponds because the runoff
carries organics, metals, and sedimentation. This runoff is
considered a source of non-point source pollution, materials and
chemicals that are washed into the storm drain system; the
materials and chemicals flow directly into the ponds and
ultimately to the San Francisco Bay without treatment.
Intensification of commercial and industrial uses in the
Expansion Area has the potential to increase this runoff and
further contribute to non-point source pollution.
b. Mitiaation.
Implementation of the following mitigation measures will
reduce impacts to a less than significant level:
(1) Existing outfalls to the percolation
ponds shall be removed and drainage rerouted to an approved storm
drainage system (see mitigation for City storm drain facilities).
(2) The City of Campbell shall require all
properties in the Expansion Area to meet the requirements of the
Santa Clara Valley Non-Point Source Pollution Control Program
being developed by the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the
City of Campbell.
(3) Surface runoff from properties adjacent
to the percolation ponds shall be rerouted to drain to the street
and an approved drainage system upon redevelopment or significant
new construction on the properties.
(4) Future development applications in the
Expansion Area shall be forwarded by the City to the Santa Clara
Valley Water District for review; a District permit is required
for any work within 50 feet of a District facility. Development
projects shall be designed so as not to impact the District's
ability to access, operate, and maintain the percolation ponds
and accompanying delivery system.
1030C7 .PSO
-26-
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) Resoonsibi1ity for Imo1ementation:
Public Works Department and Planning
Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
(a) See section on Storm Drainage
(Section IV.J.3 below).
(b) The Public Works Department shall
implement the Non-point Source Pollution Control Program.
(c) The Public Works Department shall
implement Mitigation Measure J.1.b.(3) through review of grading
and drainage plans.
(d) The Planning Department shall
forward all development applications within the Expansion Area to
the Santa Clara Valley Water District for review.
(3) Taraet Date for Como1etion:
None. This is an on-going mitigation
measure.
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measures and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Drainage/Flooding subsection) of the DEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measures and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in IV.J.l. above.
2. Santa Clara Valley Water District Access to
Percolation Ponds.
a. Potentia1lv Sianificant Impact.
Development activities in the Expansion Area may affect the
Santa Clara Valley Water District's ability to access, operate,
and maintain the percolation ponds.
b.
Mitiaation.
lO30C7 .PSO
-27-
Future development applications in the Expansion Area shall
be forwarded by the City to the Santa Clara Valley Water District
for review; a District permit is required for any work within 50
feet of a District facility. Development projects shall be
designed so as not to impact the District's ability to access,
operate, and maintain the percolation ponds and accompanying
delivery system.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Planning Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The Planning Department shall forward
all development applications within the Expansion Area to the
Santa Clara Valley Water District for review.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
None. This is an on-going mitigation
measure.
d. Findina.
The above mitigation measure and monitoring program are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Drainage/Flooding subsection) of the DEIR, the finding
is made that the adoption of the above mitigation measure and
monitoring program will avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect described in IV.J.2. above.
3. Storm Drainaae.
a. Potentiallv Sianificant ImDact.
The storm drain system in Union Avenue already flows at
capacity during peak storm events. Intensification of
development in the Expansion Area will create additional flows
into an already overloaded system.
b. Mitiaation.
The City of Campbell shall be responsible for designing and
constructing storm drain system improvements in the Expansion
Area. These improvements will consist of the following:
(1) storm main in cristich Lane
1~~ -28-
(2)
(3)
(4)
Road to Union Avenue, or
new Cristich Lane system
storm main in McGlincey Lane
Removal of outfalls in percolation ponds
Parallel storm main in Paseo de Palomas
a new outfall to Los Gatos Creek via the
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Public Works Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The Public Works Department shall be
responsible for desiqninq and constructinq the improvements
discussed in the mitiqation measure.
(3) Target Date for ComDletion:
The Public Works Department will be
preparinq a City-wide storm Drain Master Plan. The Department
anticipates that the Plan will be completed by the end of 1992.
The Plan will determine the City's storm drain needs. The Aqency
anticipates proceedinq with construction of the mitigation
measure at such time as sufficient tax increment revenues have
been collected to fund the improvements.
d. Findina.
The above mitiqation measure and monitorinq proqram are
hereby adopted. Based upon the information and analysis in
Section 4 (Drainaqe/Floodinq subsection) of the DEIR, the findinq
is made that the adoption of the above mitiqation measure and
monitorinq proqram will avoid or substantially lessen the
siqnificant environmental effect described in IV.J.3. above.
K. WINCHBSTER DRIVE-IM SITB SPBCIAL XXTIGATIOM
In addition to the specific mitigation measures adopted in
this Section IV, the special mitiqation measure related to the
winchester Drive-In site incorporated in the FEIR and set forth
in Section A of Exhibit A of this Resolution is hereby expressly
adopted. That special mitiqation measure is as follows:
Prior to approval of any development application for the
former Winchester Drive-In site, additional environmental
1030C7 .PSG
-29-
analysis shall be required to assess the impacts of the
proposed development on traffic, parking, circulation,
noise, vehicle loading/unloading and any other potentially
significant impacts on area businesses, property owners and
residents that may be affected by the proposed development.
V. OTHER BOil SIGIIIPICAB'l' IMPACTS
While not required by CEQA, the FEIR also evaluated several
non-significant environmental impacts of the Amended Plan and
proposed mitigation measures to further reduce those impacts.
Those non-significant impacts and the further mitigation measures
are set forth in this Section V.
A. LAND USB
1. Industrial/Commercial
a. Non-Sianificant Imcact.
The proposed Amended Plan would introduce new industrial
businesses and uses, including maintenance yards, into the
Expansion Area; development of the new uses may be accomplished
in a variety of ways, including conversion of non-conforming
residential uses to other uses, redevelopment of existing
businesses with new and larger structures, and new development on
existing vacant or underdeveloped parcels.
b. Mitigation.
The City of Campbell shall continue to implement its
development review process to ensure that future development
applications in the Expansion Area result in properly planned
projects that meet all applicable City requirements for building
densities, parking, signage, street improvements, lot size,
public space, and similar improvements.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) Resconsibilitv for Imclementation:
Planning Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The Planning Department shall continue
to implement the City'S development review process.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
l030C7.PSO - 30-
.
-(
None. This is an ongoing mitigation
measure.
d. Findina.
Based upon the information and analysis in section 4 (Land
Use sUbsection) of the DEIR, the impact described in V.A.1. above
has no significant environmental impact. The above mitigation
measure and monitoring program are nonetheless adopted to further
mitigate this identified non-significant environmental impact.
2. Loss Of Residential units in EXDansion Area.
a. Non-Significant ImDact.
The Amended Plan may result in the eventual removal of the
existing residential units in the project area.
b. Mitiaation.
Residents of those structures to be removed will receive
relocation assistance in accordance with Community Redevelopment
Law and state relocation guidelines.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibility for Im~lementation:
Agency.
(2) Action to be taken:
The Agency shall provide relocation
assistance as required by state and local laws and regulations.
(3) Taraet Date for Co~letion:
Relocation assistance required by law
will be provided prior to removal of residential units.
d. Findina.
Based upon the information and analysis in Section 4 (Land
Use Subsection) of the DEIR, the impact described in V.A.2. above
has no significant environmental impact. The above mitigation
measure and monitoring program are nonetheless adopted to further
mitigate this identified non-significant environmental impact.
1030C7 .PSO
-31-
.
i
B. PUBLIC SERVICBS AND UTILITIES
1. SanitarY Sewer.
a. Non-Sianificant ImDact.
New sewer line installation in the Expansion Area may create
construction-related impacts such as noise, dust, and traffic
diversion.
b. Mitiaation.
The West Valley Sanitation District shall coordinate sewer
repair and installation with the City of Campbell Public Works
Department, and shall comply with all applicable City regulations
relative to noise, dust, and traffic control measures.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Public Works Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The Public Works Department shall ensure
that the West Valley Sanitation District complies with all
applicable City regulations.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
This mitigation measure shall be
implemented in conjunction with any construction of sanitary
sewer improvements within the Expansion Area.
d. Findina.
Based upon the information and analysis in Section 4 (Public
Services and utilities subsection) of the DEIR, the impact
described in V.B.1. above has no significant environmental
impact. The above mitigation measure and monitoring program are
nonetheless adopted to further mitigate this identified non-
significant environmental impact.
2. Water SUDDlv.
a. Non-Sianificant ImDact.
Future development in the Expansion Area may require water
supply system improvements. Installation of required
1030C7 .PSO
-32-
.
~
improvements may have construction-related impacts such as noise,
dust, and traffic diversion.
b. Mitiaation.
The City of Campbell ahall refer all future development
applications in the Expansion Area to the San Jose Water Company
for review and determination of required system improvements.
The City and the Water Company shall comply with all applicable
City regulations relative to noise, dust, and traffic control
measures.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) Res~onsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Planning and Public Works Departments.
(2) Action to be taken:
(a) The Planning Department shall refer
all future development proposals to the San Jose Water Company
for review.
(b) The Public Works Department shall
ensure that all water supply system projects comply with
applicable City regulations.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
These mitigation measures will be
implemented during the development review process and upon
construction of water supply improvement projects.
d. Finding.
Based upon the information and analysis in Section 4 (Public
Services and utilities subsection) of the DEIR, the impact
described in V.B.2. above has no significant environmental
impact. The above mitigation measure and monitoring program are
nonetheless adopted to further mitigate this identified non-
significant environmental impact.
l030C7.P50
-33-
,
,
c. DRAIHAOB/PLOODIMO
1. New storm Drainaae Facilities.
a. Non-Sianificant ImDact.
Installation of new storm drainage facilities may have
construction-related impacts such as noise, dust, and traffic
diversion.
b. Mitiaation.
The city shall comply with all applicable regulations
relative to noise, dust, and traffic control measures.
c. Monitorina Proaram.
(1) ResDonsibilitv for ImDlementation:
Public Works Department.
(2) Action to be taken:
The Public Works Department shall ensure
that all storm drainage projects comply with applicable city
regulations.
(3) Taraet Date for ComDletion:
This measure will be implemented in
conjunction with future storm drainage projects.
d. Finding.
Based upon the information and analysis in section 4
(Drainage/Flooding SUbsection) of the DEIR, the impact described
in V.C.l. above has no significant environmental impact. The
above mitigation measure and monitoring program are nonetheless
adopted to further mitigate this identified non-significant
environmental impact.
VI. U!lAVOIDABLB SIGMII'ICANT IJIPACTS
Based on the analysis contained in the FEIR and section IV
of this Exhibit B, the following unavoidable significant adverse
impacts of adoption and implementation of the Amended Plan are
identified:
1030C7 .P5O
-34-
I
~
..
A. Automobile-Related ImDacts (Loca1l. Implementation of
the Amended Plan projects prior to completion of SR-85 (1994)
will result in exceedances of the 8-hour carbon monoxide standard
at the Bascom/Camden and 'Camden/curtner intersections.
B. Automobile-Related ImDacts CReaionall. The daily
increases in regional emissions from auto travel related to the
Expansion Area for organic gases and oxides of nitrogen exceed
the BAAQMD guidelines for these two regional pollutants.
As to each of these significant environmental impacts, the
City Council and Agency find that there are no feasible
mitigation measures identified in the FEIR that might reduce the
level of significance of these impacts, and specific economic,
social, or other considerations make infeasible the adoption of
the project alternatives, as shown in section VII below.
Therefore, as to these unavoidable significant impacts, the City
council and Agency adopt the statement of overriding
considerations contained in section VIII below.
VII. ALTERNATIVES TO THB PROPOSED PROJBCT
A. INTRODUCTIOB.
The DEIR evaluated three alternatives to the proposed
Project and discussed the lead agency's choice not to evaluate
alternative sites for the Project. The environmental impacts of
these alternatives are evaluated in the DEIR at pages 5-1 through
5-4. That discussion is hereby incorporated by reference.
Following is a summary of the proposed alternatives and the
reasons for their rejection. Each alternative is rejected as
infeasible because it fails to meet one or more of the important
goals and objectives of the proposed project in a timely manner
and/or would cause various adverse environmental or fiscal
impacts that can be avoided through implementation of the
project. The reasons for rejection of the alternatives are
summarized in section VII.B. below and are supported by
substantial evidence in the Record.
The DEIR did not analyze any alternative location for the
Project Area and the program of redevelopment to be undertaken
pursuant to the Amended Plan. Recent court cases suggest that
CEQA may, where appropriate, require an analysis of alternative
locations for a project, as well as alternative projects on the
same site. CEQA requires that the alternatives be capable of
obtaining the basic objectives of the proposed project. 14 Cal.
Code Reg. section 15126(d).
1030C7 .PSO
-35-
;
,.
.
.
The locational decision for the Agency's activities within
the Expansion Area pursuant to the Amended Plan is based on
several factors, including the existence of blighting conditions
and blighting influences which cannot be remedied by private
enterprise acting alone. A basic goal of the proposed Amended
Plan is the removal of these blighting conditions and influences
located in the Expansion Area. Because an alternative location
would not remove these blighting conditions and influences from
that specific area, an alternative location would not attain one
of the basic goals of the proposed project. Therefore,
consideration of alternative locations was determined to be
infeasible and inappropriate for analysis.
B. SUXHARY 01' AL'1'BRD'1'IVBS UD RBASONS I'OR REJBCTION
1. The No proiect Alternative.
The No Project Alternative means that the Central Campbell
Redevelopment Area would not be expanded into the McGlincey Lane
Expansion Area and that none of the projects envisioned by the
Amended Plan would occur. The Drive-In site would remain vacant,
the corporation yards would not be relocated to the Expansion
Area, the private streets would not become public streets, there
would be no public improvements to the Expansion Area and the
200,000 square feet of new industrial development would not
occur. Under the No Project Alternative, the MCGlincey Lane area
would continue to exist as an industrial use neighborhood and the
beneficial effects of redevelopment activities, such as
infrastructure improvements and economic incentives to property
owners, would not occur. Without the assistance of redevelopment
funding, it is unlikely that the Drive-In site would develop in
the near term, as it has already been vacant for ten years; it is
also unlikely that physical improvements to private properties
would occur on a large scale, and the area would continue to
exhibit its generally degraded appearance. The No Project
Alternative would not achieve the city's goal of improving and
upgrading the McGlincey Lane area.
2. The Reduced Scale Alternative.
The Reduced Scale Alternative aeans.that the retail
development on the Drive-In .ite would be reduced in size and the
new industrial square footage in the remainder of the Expansion
Area would also be reduced. A reduced intensity of development
would correspondingly decrease the traffic, air, noise, and
public services impacts of the project. It is unlikely that a
reduced intensity of development would .till .eet the project's
objectives of facilitating the rejuvenation, improvement, and
economic development of the project area, because the tax
increments and accrued potential funding for projects would not
1030C1.PSO
-36-
J
be enough to achieve those objectives. Of the alternatives
considered in the DEIR, the Reduced Scale Alternative would be
considered the environmentally superior alternative.
3. Alternative Land Uses on Drive-In Site
Because the Drive-In site is the largest vacant parcel (23
acres) within the Expansion Area and, therefore, has the
potential to affect traffic patterns more significantly than
other development in the Expansion Area, alternative land uses
for the Drive-In site were considered. The City of Campbell
Public Works Department conducted a traffic analysis for the
Drive-In site in February 1990, in which alternative land uses
for the site were studied. The city's TMODEL2 traffic
forecasting model was used to generate and distribute trips for
the following alternative land uses:
420,000 square feet of research and development
300,000 square feet of destination commercial (the use
currently being proposed)
750,000 square feet of general office space
The model run results indicated that, of the three uses
considered, the destination commercial use would result in less
peak hour trip generation than potential office uses and that
destination commercial would result in the least number of new
trips in the peak direction of travel. From the perspective of
developing the Drive-In site with either commercial or office/R&D
uses, the destination commercial use would have less traffic
impacts and therefore, was considered to be the preferred
alternative among those uses.
The city's 1990 traffic analysis also provided trip
generation date for alternative residential development densities
at the site, as compared to the trip generation rates for the
alternative uses. Following is a discussion on the relative
merits and drawbacks to the land use alternative for the Drive-
In site.
a. Residential. Although the trip generation
rates are lower for residential uses than for commercial or
office uses, residential uses generate traffic in both the
morning and evening peak periods. Residential uses also place a
higher demand on City services and generate limited City
revenues. A residential use at the Drive-In site would not be
compatible with the elevated noise levels generated from SR-17
traffic, and marketing a residential development on the site
1030C7 .PSO
-37-
~
.
..
1
would be difficult, qiven its access throuqh and proximity to the
MCGlincey industrial area.
b. Industrial/Residential and DeveloDment. The
Drive-In site's General Plan and zoninq desiqnations were
Industrial prior to a General Plan Amendment chanqe to commercial
in 1990. Although they do not require the same amount of city
services as residential uses, industrial uses do not typically
produce substantial City revenues. In addition, industrial/R&D
uses would qenerate significant vehicular trips during both the
AM and PM peak periods.
c. Commercial. Most commercial uses provide
considerable City tax revenues, primarily obtained through the
sales tax. Traffic impacts will vary accordinq to the type of
commercial use proposed. General Commercial uses include the
typical retail shopping centers and/or services. Destination
commercial uses depend on the pUblic's knowledge of their
location through marketing efforts, repeat shopping and word-of-
mouth. Destination commercial uses tend to concentrate traffic
during Off-peak periods and on the weekends, and have the added
advantage that they do not produce traffic during the AM peak
period. General commercial sues were considered by the City to
be unfeasible for the Drive-In site because of its lack of
visibility and access from major streets.
d. .f.A1.:k. During the public scoping meetings of
the DEIR, several comments from nearby residents suggested the
City consider a park/open space use for the Drive-In site. In
June 1990, the Cambrian Community Council also recommended that a
park be considered for the Drive-In site as part of a mixed use
project. While a park use would generate less traffic than the
destination commercial use, a park use would be susceptible to
the same negative effects as a residential use at the Drive-In
site, i.e., traffic noise and air quality impacts from proximity
to SR-17. In addition, the site would have no direct access to a
public street and is not centrally located to the remainder of
the Union Avenue neighborhood. Drive-by surveillance of the site
would be difficult; lack of public visibility is often a factor
leading to security and vandalism at parks. For these reasons, a
park use is not considered feasible at the Drive-In site.
Development of the Drive-In site with a park use
also would not achieve the objectives of the Amended Plan; if the
park were publicly owned and operated by the City, no revenues or
tax increments would be achieved, thereby limiting the other
improvements the City could perform in the remainder of the
Expansion Area.
1030C7 .PSO
-38-
,
I
"
.j
'.
..
.
VZZZ. 8TATBKBBT OP OVBRRZDZBG COBSZDBRATZOBS
A. %BTRODOCT%OB
The City Council and Agency have fully considered the
discussion and analyses in the Record regarding the environmental
impacts, socioeconomic effects, cumulative impacts, growth-
inducing impacts, and irreversible and irretrievable commitments
of resources. The City Council and Agency find that the programs
and activities of the Amended Plan will provide numerous
economic, social, environmental and other benefits to the Project
Area, and to the City of' Campbell, which override any unavoidable
significant adverse impacts of adoption and implementation of the
Amended Plan. The City Council further finds that the
alternatives to the Amended Plan set forth in the DEIR and
summarized in Section VII of this Exhibit B are infeasible
because such alternatives would limit the social, economic and
other benefits of Amended Plan adoption and implementation which
are described below, and are therefore outweighed by them.
B. SPECZPZC BENEFZTS OF &XENDED PLAN ADOPTIOB AND
IXPLBKEN'l'ATZOB
1. S~DDort for Economic Revitalization.
The City Council and Agency find that adoption and
implementation of the Amended Plan, in combination with the
mitigation measures adopted in this Exhibit B, will contribute to
the physical and economic revitalization of the commercial and
industrial areas in the Project Area, which currently suffer from
underutilization, and to the location of new commercial and
industrial uses within the Project Area (with particular
reference to the Expansion Area). The revitalization of the
commercial and industrial areas and location of new commercial
and industrial uses within the Project Area will benefit the
Project Area and the City by providing employment opportunities,
increased economic vitality, and shopping opportunities for
Project Area and City residents, and will contribute to the
appropriate balance between jObs and housing in Campbell.
2. Ensurina that CUrrent Residents and Existinq
Business Benefit From Revitalization.
The City Council and Agency find that adoption and
implementation of the Amended Plan, in combination with the
mitigation measures adopted in this Exhibit B, will contribute to
ensuring that current residents and existing businesses in the
Project Area benefit from revitalization of the Project Area
pursuant to the Amended Plan.
1030C7 .P5O
-39-
j
.
3. Elimination of Bliahtina Influences and
Conditions.
The City Council and Agency find that adoption and
implementation of the Amended Plan, in combination with the
mitigation measures adopted in this Exhibit B, will contribute to
the elimination of blighting influences and conditions that
persist in the Project Area, including, but not limited to,
commercial and residential structures which are deteriorating or
dilapidated, obsolete or inappropriate land uses, instability of
land use patterns, overcrowding, defective design and
construction of residential and commercial structures, crime,
deficient parcelization in commercial and industrial areas, lack
of adequate public facilities and infrastructure, impaired
investment and socioeconomic maladjustment.
4. Exoansion and Preservation of Affordable. Qualitv
Housing.
The City Council and Agency find that adoption and
implementation of the Amended Plan, in combination with the
mitigation measures adopted in this Exhibit B, will contribute to
expansion and preservation of decent, safe and sanitary
affordable housing. The Amended Plan programs include the use of
tax increment revenue to fund assistance for construction of new
rental housing units which must be affordable to persons and
families of very low, low or moderate income; housing
rehabilitation loans; and financial assistance for segments of
the community with special housing needs.
5. provision of Fundina for Proarams.
The City Council and Agency find that adoption and
implementation of the Amended Plan will provide for continued
collection of tax increment revenue, and utilization of such
revenue within the Project Area, as authorized by the California
Health and Safety Code. The provision of funding constitutes a
benefit to the Project Area and to the City because it enables
implementation of the beneficial programs and activities of the
Amended Plan.
C. COIfCLUSI Olf
Based on the findings made in this Exhibit B, which findings
require as a condition of project approval the implementation of
the specified mitigation measures and monitoring programs, the
finding is made that economic and social considerations outweigh
the remaining unavoidable significant impacts of adoption and
implementation of the Amended Plan.
1030C7 .PSG
-40-