GRASS VALLEY
City Council Regular Meeting, Capital Improvements Authority and Redevelopment "Successor Agency"
Tuesday, February 27, 2024 at 6:00 PM
Council Chambers, Grass Valley City Hall | 125 East Main Street, Grass Valley, California Telephone: (530) 274-4310 – Fax: (530) 274-4399
E-Mail: [email protected] Web Site: www.cityofgrassvalley.com AGENDA
Any person with a disability who requires accommodations to participate in this meeting should telephone the City Clerk’s office at (530)274-4390, at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to make a request for a disability related modification or accommodation.
Mayor Jan Arbuckle, Vice Mayor Hilary Hodge, Councilmember Bob Branstrom, Councilmember Haven Caravelli, Councilmember Tom Ivy
MEETING NOTICE
City Council welcomes you to attend the meetings electronically or in person at the City Hall Council Chambers, located at 125 E. Main St., Grass Valley, CA 95945. Regular Meetings are scheduled at 6:00 p.m. on the 2nd and 4th Tuesday of each month. Your interest is encouraged and appreciated.
This meeting is being broadcast “live” on Comcast Channel 17 of Channel 18 by Nevada County Media, on the internet at www.cityofgrassvalley.com, or on the City of Grass Valley YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/@cityofgrassvalley.com Members of the public are encouraged to submit public comments via voicemail at (530) 274-4390 and email to [email protected]. Comments will be reviewed and distributed before the meeting if received by 5pm. Comments received after that will be addressed during the item and/or at the end of the meeting. Council will have the option to modify their action on items based on comments received. Action may be taken on any agenda item.
Agenda materials, staff reports, and background information related to regular agenda items are available on the City’s website: www.cityofgrassvalley.com. Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Council after distribution of the agenda packet will be made available on the City of Grass Valley website at www.cityofgrassvalley.com, subject to City staff’s ability to post the documents before the meeting.
Please note, individuals who disrupt, disturb, impede, or render infeasible the orderly conduct of a meeting will receive one warning that, if they do not cease such behavior, they may be removed from the meeting. The chair has authority to order individuals removed if they do not cease their disruptive behavior following this warning. No warning is required before an individual is removed if that individual engages in a use of force or makes a true threat of force. (Gov. Code, § 54957.95.)
City of Grass Valley, CA AGENDA February 27, 2024
Council Chambers are wheelchair accessible and listening devices are available. Other special accommodations may be requested to the City Clerk 72 hours in advance of the meeting by calling (530) 274-4390, we are happy to accommodate.
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
AGENDA APPROVAL - The City Council reserves the right to hear items in a different order to accomplish business in the most efficient manner.
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
INTRODUCTIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
1. Thank you from A.I.M. & Associates
2. Parking 101 Presentation
3. The Community Foundation of Nevada County Presentation PUBLIC COMMENT - Members of the public are encouraged to submit public comments via voicemail at (530) 274-4390 and email to [email protected]. Comments will be reviewed and distributed before the meeting if received by 5pm. Comments received after 5pm will be addressed during the item and/or at the end of the meeting. Council will have the option to modify their action on items based on comments received. Action may be taken on any agenda item. There is a time limitation of three minutes per person for all emailed, voicemail, or in person comments, and only one type of public comment per person. Speaker cards are assigned for public comments that are on any items not on the agenda, and within the jurisdiction or interest of the City. Speaker Cards can be pulled until the opening of public comment at which time sign ups will no longer be allowed.
These cards can be found at the City Clerks desk. If you wish to speak regarding a scheduled agenda item, please come to the podium when the item is announced. When recognized, please begin by providing your name and address for the record (optional). Thirty minutes of public comment will be heard under this item in order of the speaker card assigned and the remaining general public comments will be heard at the end of the meeting. We will begin with number one.
CONSENT ITEMS -All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are to be considered routine by the City Council and/or Grass Valley Redevelopment Agency and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless, before the City Council and/or Grass Valley Redevelopment Agency votes on the motion to adopt, members of the Council and/or Agency, staff or the public request specific items to be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion and action but Council action is required to do so (roll call vote).Unless the Council removes an item from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion, public comments are invited as to the consent calendar as a whole and limited to three minutes per person.
4. Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of February 13, 2024.
City of Grass Valley, CA AGENDA February 27, 2024
Recommendation: Council approve minutes as submitted.
5. Local Emergency Proclamation (Winter Storm of February 2023) CEQA: Not a project
Recommendation: To continue the Winter Storm February 24th, 2023 to March 1st, 2023 proclamation declaring a Local State of Emergency
6. Reallocation of Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety Grant funds related to vehicle purchase
CEQA: Not a project
Recommendation: Approve the reallocation of grant funds; direct staff to move forward with the purchase of vehicle in accordance with City purchasing guidelines and Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) requirements.
7. Out of State Training for Specialized Digital Forensics Capability CEQA: Not a project
Recommendation: Approve the attendance of Police Department Detective to travel to Utah for specialized training in this use of digital forensic-extraction software
ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION OR SEPARATE ACTION AND /
OR ANY ADDED AGENDA ITEMS
REORGANIZATION RELATED ITEMS
PUBLIC HEARING
8. Appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of a Development Review Permit and Variance application for the Sierra Guest Home Expansion for a Supportive Housing use
CEQA: Categorical exemption Class 5
Recommendation: Based upon the evidence in the public record, and the Planning Commission’s 4:1 approval, staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions: A) Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of the Development Review and Variance Request for the Sierra Guest Home Expansion; B) Determine the project Categorically Exempt as the appropriate level of environmental review in accordance with section 15305, categorical exemption Class
5. the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Guidelines; and C) Adopt Findings of Fact for approval of the Development Review Permit and Variance as presented in the Staff Report; and, D) Approve the Development Review Permit and Variance (23PLN-28) in accordance with the Conditions of Approval, as presented in this Staff Report.
ADMINISTRATIVE
BRIEF REPORTS BY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC COMMENT
ADJOURN
City of Grass Valley, CA AGENDA February 27, 2024
POSTING NOTICE
This is to certify that the above notice of a meeting of The City Council, scheduled for Tuesday, February 27, 2024 at 6:00 PM was posted at city hall, easily accessible to the public, as of 5:00 p.m. Friday, February 23, 2024.
________________________
Taylor Day, City Clerk
The Community Foundation
of Nevada County
Item # 3.
Why a Community Foundation?
The community foundation serves as the catalyst, the
convenor, collaborator and facilitator to solve problems and develop solutions to our community’s issues.
Item # 3.
What Does a Community Foundation Do?
1 Create a culture of giving.
2 Support the nonprofit
sector.
3 Enhance community capacity.
4 Build useful knowledge.
Item # 3.
Enhancing
Philanthropy
A community foundation’s value derives from its dual
capacity to shine a light on issues of local importance and to attract resources to meet those needs. In this way,
community foundations are champions for community
philanthropy–as a form of, and force for local development that strengthens capacity, and builds trusting resilient communities where all people can participate and prosper.
Implications:
Philanthropic advice and counsel, impact investing, trusted source of community needs and priorities
Item # 3.
In just twenty years, the Community
Foundation of the North State grew from
$600k to over $33M in assets. It facilitates
$9M in new giving in the region.
Growing Philanthropy
Item # 3.
Strengthen Nonprofits
Community foundations bring together the financial
resources of individuals, families, and businesses to support effective nonprofits in their communities. Their deep
knowledge of the nonprofit sector in a region helps bring collaborations together, build energy and help create an expanded culture of giving.
Implications:
Grant programs, advocacy, collaboration
Item # 3.
Building Healthy Communities is a $10B
statewide campaign funded by the California
Endowment which provides $3M in funding
to execute the initiative in the Humboldt
community through its nonprofits.
Leveraging Intermediary Funding- Rural Health
Item # 3.
Build community
vitality
Community leadership happens when community
foundations act as valuable partners that drive positive change in the area they serve. The modern community
foundation is interested in transforming the lives and
communities it serves. It is intentional, focused on impact, and is always considering it’s value-add to the community it serves.
Implications:
Grow and link local leadership, maximize access to resources, advocate and partner for solutions
Item # 3.
TTCF leveraged a $250k investment and
helped secure over $4M in funding in order
to secure the tax credits needed to build
this mixed-use development.
Impact Investing-Artist Housing
Item # 3.
Partner with local
government
Local government and community foundations have a shared interest in the development of civil society. Their collaboration ensures that both public and private institutions are working together towards common goals, avoiding duplication of effort and ensuring maximum impact. From a gov’t perspective,
independent funders like community foundations can build partnerships across sectors, give government a “human
dimension”, help to leverage public funding and are free of short-term mindset of elected bodies.
Implications:
Disaster relief, community grant initiatives, leveraging resources to address community needs Page 14
Item # 3.
North Valley Community Foundation raised
and distributed $63M in relief to victims of
the Camp Fire.
Disaster Relief
Item # 3.
$1,500,000
The movement toward a community foundation for Western Nevada County was born out of the success of the Nevada County Relief Fund. In a period of 9 months, NCRF raised $1.5M in a public/private partnership for COVID and wildfire relief, supporting 30 safety-net nonprofits and helping over 150 small businesses stay on their feet. NCRF wildfire relief efforts got funds immediately to survivors- from gift cards to supporting short term housing.
30 150
Safety-net nonprofits
Nonprofits
Small businesses
Nonprofits
50 Families affected by 2
wildfires
Nonprofits
Item # 3.
Our Process
0 1
Research and Discovery
(completed)
Stakeholder interviews; determine key
motivators, potential roadblocks and issues;
convene Steering Committee
0 2
Project Design and Viability
(completed)
Business model structure and scenario,
financial strategy, case statement and pitch
materials, investor and stakeholder interviews
0 3
Implementation and Sustainability
(in process)
Founding Board, incorporation, grantmaking
strategy, community initiative prioritization,
strategic plan, launch
Item # 3.
Our Focus:
Culture, Land, Community
Values:
● Respect for diversity
● Empathy
● Trust/trustworthy
● Integrity
● Equity
Item # 3.
Future Impact
A $750k investment now could lead to over $10M in impact for Western Nevada County over the next decade. Our committee includes a diverse group of individuals, from farmers to philanthropists, thinking beyond the box to help the entire region thrive. By coming together as a community, we can make more possible.
Discovery
$50K
Launch
$750K
Impact
$10M
Item # 3.
Capital Absorption Framework
1. Articulating Shared Priorities
2. Creating an Investable Pipeline of Projects
3. Improving the Enabling Environment
Item # 3.
Item # 3.
● Center for Nonprofit Leadership
● Tahoe Truckee Community Foundation
Partners in the Region
Item # 3.
Leadership
Cristine Kelly, Interim
CEO
Richard Baker, Chair
Megan Joseph, VP
Lauren Maddux,
Treasurer
Michelle Amador,
Secretary
Katherine Johnson
Jesse Locks
Marley Mueller
Jennifer Singer
Scott Beesley
Yolanda Cookson
Sienna Crawford
Amy Cobden,PhD
Daniela Fernandez
Tom Ivy
Item # 3.
www.nevcofoundation.org
Item # 3.
GRASS VALLEY
City Council Regular Meeting, Capital Improvements Authority and Redevelopment "Successor Agency"
Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 6:00 PM
Council Chambers, Grass Valley City Hall | 125 East Main Street, Grass Valley, California Telephone: (530) 274-4310 – Fax: (530) 274-4399
E-Mail: [email protected] Web Site: www.cityofgrassvalley.com
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Meeting called to order at 6:02 pm.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Arbuckle led the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT
Councilmember Bob Branstrom
Councilmember Tom Ivy
Vice Mayor Hilary Hodge
Mayor Jan Arbuckle
ABSENT
Councilmember Haven Caravelli
AGENDA APPROVAL -
Motion made to approve agenda as submitted by Vice Mayor Hodge, Seconded by Councilmember Branstrom.
Voting Yea: Councilmember Branstrom, Councilmember Ivy, Vice Mayor Hodge, Mayor Arbuckle
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
No closed door.
INTRODUCTIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
1. Proclamation for Grand Jury Month.
2. Presentation from WasteNOT Nevada County.
PUBLIC COMMENT -
Virtual public comment attached.
Item # 4.
City of Grass Valley, CA MINUTES February 13, 2024
In person Public comment sign in sheet numbers 1 thru 11 and Matthew Coulter.
CONSENT ITEMS -
Public Comment: Matthew Coulter
Councilmember Ivy requested to remove item # 7 (Condon Park Skatepark Project– Authorization to Award Contract) for discussion.
Motion made approve consent items 3 to 6 and to remove item # 7 for discussion by Vice Mayor Hodge, Seconded by Councilmember Branstrom.
Voting Yea: Councilmember Branstrom, Councilmember Ivy, Vice Mayor Hodge, Mayor Arbuckle
3. Approval of Regular Council meeting minutes from January 23, 2024.
Recommendation: Approve minutes as submitted.
4. Approval of Special Council meeting minutes from February 5, 2024.
Recommendation: Approve minutes as submitted.
5. Idaho Maryland Road – Right of Way Vacation and Accept Roadway Dedication CEQA: Categorically Exempt – Section 15301 “Existing Facilities” Recommendation: That Council adopt a resolution to vacate public right of way and to accept the dedication of street right of way at 403 Idaho Maryland Road.
6. Caltrans Funding Agreements – Approve Authorized Representative CEQA: N/A – Not a Project
Recommendation: That Council adopt a resolution designating the City Engineer as the authorized representative to execute agreements and sign documents on the City’s behalf, as required by the California Department of Transportation for Federal and/or State funded projects.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION OR SEPARATE ACTION AND /
OR ANY ADDED AGENDA ITEMS
7. Condon Park Skatepark Project– Authorization to Award Contract CEQA: Exempt – Section 15301 “Existing Facilities”
Recommendation: That Council 1) award a Design Build contract for the Condon Park Skatepark Project to Grindline Skatepark, Inc., 2) authorize the Mayor to execute the contract, subject to legal review and, 3) authorize the City Engineer to approve construction change orders of up to 10% of the contract amount.
Bjorn Jones, City Engineer, gave update and overview on the item.
Public comment: Matthew Coulter
Motion to 1) award a Design Build contract for the Condon Park Skatepark Project to Grindline Skatepark, Inc., 2) authorize the Mayor to execute the contract, subject to legal review and, 3) authorize the City Engineer to approve construction change orders of up to 10% of the contract amount made by Councilmember Branstrom, Seconded by Vice Mayor Hodge.
Item # 4.
City of Grass Valley, CA MINUTES February 13, 2024
Voting Yea: Councilmember Branstrom, Councilmember Ivy, Vice Mayor Hodge, Mayor Arbuckle
REORGANIZATION RELATED ITEMS
PUBLIC HEARING
8. Consider Resolution No. 2024-09 Formalizing Expenditure Plan for March 5, 2024 Election 3/8 percent (0.00375) general sales tax (a transactions and use tax) measure for Fire Resiliency and Vegetation Management
CEQA: Not a Project.
Recommendation: That Council adopt Resolution No. 2024-09 Formalizing Expenditure Plan for the general sales tax on the March 5, 2024 election ballot.
Tim Kiser, City Manager, gave over view of item to council.
Clarification of contracted work, and what is covered.
Public Comment: Anna Mudd, Matthew Coulter
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 2024-09 Formalizing Expenditure Plan for the general sales tax on the March 5, 2024 election ballot by Vice Mayor Hodge, Seconded by Councilmember Branstrom.
Voting Yea: Councilmember Branstrom, Councilmember Ivy, Vice Mayor Hodge, Mayor Arbuckle
ADMINISTRATIVE
9. Memorial Park Historic Landmark Plaque
CEQA: The project is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by the “common sense” rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.
Recommendation: That Council provide staff direction on final language and location of an Historic Landmarks Plaque
Amy Wolfson, City Planner, gave overview to the Council.
Council discussed keeping plaque centrally located in the park.
Public Comment: Matthew Coulter
Council gave direction to staff to put proposed language on a plaque that would be located at the north end of the Pickle Ball Courts at Memorial Park.
BRIEF REPORTS BY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Councilmember Branstrom will be out of the country for the next meeting. He attended an ERC meeting and the Del Oro ribbon cutting. Councilmember Ivy attended the Nevada County Transportation Commission meeting. Vice Mayor Hodge attended Sierra writers conference and is looking forward to the Wild and Scenic Film Festival. Mayor Arbuckle attended Grass Valley Chamber meeting, GVDA meeting, Chamber mixer for NEO, trip to DC, Del Oro ribbon cutting, armed forces day meeting, and she elected to be chair of National League of Cities Small Cities.
Item # 4.
City of Grass Valley, CA MINUTES February 13, 2024
REMAINING PUBLIC COMMENTS
In person Public comment sign in sheet numbers 12 thru 19 with noted changes to 14 - Jeffery Gottesman, 16 - Bryan Fry, 19 - Suzan Baider.
ADJOURN
Meeting adjourned at 8:00 pm.
______________________________ ______________________________ Jan Arbuckle, Mayor Taylor Day, City Clerk
Adopted on:______________
Item # 4.
CITY OF GRASS VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
GENERAL PUBLIC COM/V\ENT SIGN IN SHEET
WELCOME to the City of Grass Vattey City Council meeting! Public Comments provide an opportunity for the pubtic to address the City CounciI on any subject which is not on the agenda but in the jurisdiction of the council. lf you wish to speak, please indicate in the appropriate box when you sign in and take the number corresponding to your name. Each individual can have up to 3 minutes of public comment. At the beginning of the meeting, there wi[[ be an attotted 30 minutes of generat pubtic comments and the remainder of comments witt be heard at the end of the agenda.
Speakers witt be catted in order of the numbers given.
When you are recognized by the mayor:
1. Ptease stand before the podium and give your name and address. (optionat)
2. Ptease limit your comments to three minutes per speaker.
3. lf previous speakers have made the same point, you may simpty indicate your support or disagreement, untess you have new information.
Thank you for your participation.
4 +
4 +
+
r
4 4
+
+
4 *
x
0 #'s Print Name
Or N/A
Address
(optional)
Self/Business
(optional)
1 lLc,-rfe^ M rlu,,rarc( szt{
2 t-,t"vla V"lcn* t ?(?
3 Ja.q...,a\.oe e\G\le 1.$
4 ,Gitt,ln I
S..\+
NWAII)-' l.\.r.rin ,cr+
6 N /A
r
/
7 _AL
G\(.,' 1"\l
8 (urt Se,.,n Su /€
9 Chau\,e- 'beil--
10 Yus,^I t-\ k^*s \1^llr"^ 9).+
11 6ti,r\rrrl G\/ U t/r-, <?l['
12 k; rtl'" 1rr,r f r V,l(15 )a lf
13 1r,\erv^ ?ler:r^ 6v Se tF
14 .. \onnnQ( (-^ ( h&^ Cr/
5
Item # 4.
+
a
4 +
o
#'s Print Name or N/A Address (optional) Self/Business
(optional)
15 lcu\ &-r...i n s o{d l-u.-"'1
16 Tflrct M (hwa"\ ) Ynnt.,, 5(,\?
17 5 aV n. -i hrrrr.al fta,*{le-sna Ke (A NevaA c,\l R aac \o.r. o 18 se ({ finna /11 "tlr.( lll ParV rfuz
19 }#ru., Golte,^*- //o7R/L/ ry,c fuo-t ^$sJ, Ctfutr[,
20 I
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42 Page 30
Item # 4.
Item # 4.
Item # 4.
Item # 4.
3 Taylor Day
From: Robert Leary
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 2:29 AM
To: Public Comments
Subject: Disabled code enforcement
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
[You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Good evening: Ime a concerned Grass valley redident who wants to fix a city. wide Problem. I dont know if this is the approprpriate forum but Ime looking for advice on the problemas to what to do.and at least
Bring it to the attention of city officials. The problem is: A huge(I would saymajority of Businesses and goveernment buildings are
Not in compliance with ADA requirements
Or any knowledge of the concept of reasonable accomodation for the disabled As a disabled man, I have had to literally fight and struggle to enter most stores, all the banks Including my own wells fargo which has 2 sets
Of noncomforming doors. They also used to have a parking attendant years ago who pre‐sumably would at least check thst
a disabled placard was present on those parking in the disabled spots Yet you can Watch all day as able‐bodied special people
Park in the disabled spots andliterally run.into the bank. Ime aware not all disabilities are visible but no placard, no park.
This happens
All over town all day long in a town downright hostile to disabled people, the elderly and those encumbered with objects or a child. If you are in a wheelchair you really
Gotta work to get in some places your problrmd of gaining entry are just a prelude to the scorn of reasonable accomodation you
will encounter inside. I was recently forced
To visit a Verizon store to buy a new phone
And verizons policy(more on their stupid policy to come) is you have to show up in person and cannot delegate this task to a caregiver for example. Once inside, after clawing thru their non‐conforming doors, we had to wait for quite a while, during which time
I asked to use the restroom and was denied
Twice, the employee citing tr
Where the restrooms were in an adjacent Belair? Market which we used twice. Ime sure everyone is familiar with how thrilled
And flattered stores and especially restaurants
are to provide bathrooms to the public. This kind of treatment is not much less degrading Than just peeing on their floor which Is a distinct possibility if I gotta go. But this time I had had enough and so went biblical on the poor kid at Verizon delivering a self righteous lecture in a scathing tone informingg hm I
Was demanding my civil rights and dignity be
Considered, U.S. Citizen for 70 years, etc. I informed a nurse of code violations at Sierra Nevada hospital whose apathy and indignation
Actually exceeded that of Verizon. They have non complying doors ontheir just built and inspected addition so the
Item # 4.
4 building dept needs to do a better job. tEmployees don't want to hear it especially a nurse. Maybe I should be pitching this to the
Chamber of commerce but wouldn't Grass Valley rather be known as a disabled friendly Town and would not merchants like to see
Return customers; it's just good business and customer acquisition is expensive. Or is there no room In the usurped rainbow for the disabled? Reasonable accomodation and ADA Conformance is not an option but a law
A civil right this old taxpayer is demanding,
Not groveling. Speaking of revenue(and you were) I am a going to suggest that the inevitable Fines collected could easily cover the cost of a couple of code enforcement people to handle this..(seems like a sweet job to. Me, maybe under the auspices of the police dept.
The fines for a violation are predetermined like parking in a handicap zone, and are quite stout for example 75k for the 1st violation and
150K for subsequent violations. So we can do the right thing in helping people and businesses while swelling the city coffers. Now
That I have your attention, I need to make a
Few points. 1) I am not clear on who keeps the substantial revenue but I would guess, the city of Grass Valley would.2) I don't think the merchant would bear the cost of the fine But the owner.3)it should probably be mentioned that this is a huge liability issue If you want to have more liability exposure.
There are a few nightmare stories of fines on the internet but again, this should be obvious.
If I had aggravated any of my conditions on
My Verizon experience, I would likely sue for damages. In my extensive experience in construction litigation I have learned that
Insurance companys sue everyone, in this case
It could include the city of Grass valley, so talk to your attorney and check your exposure. 3) who the hell am I: I am a retired glazierand
Glass shop owner. 70 yrs old and licensed c‐17
Ca. Contractor lic 602589 Iwill provide my last C.V. On Request. I have extensive experience as an expert witness working for attorneys representing insurance companysas well as a working glazier for 25+ yrs. This is glaziers work. Glaziers install the storefront material as well as the glass and doors. They serve a 5 yr.
Apprenticeship and are fully qualified to do this
Kind of work; it is exacting with close toldrances and experience is vital: I am describing a union trained journeyman glazier.
I have no idea of the prevailing wage torf Ft ref frf Fft tt rf f dug day, been retired for 18 yrs. I consider myself a problem solver and my shop was known for
Taking on the “impossible “ jobs. Noone else would do so I am eminently qualified; my skill and knowledge of the trade are exceeded only by my humility. Our noncompliance
Problem is overt, obvious and widespread.
Ime pretty passionate about this and won't let it go. The fix: 90% of the crap work I've seen is door closure adjustment or simple door adjustment. Done by one man with a ladder and tools the pneumatic closers are adjusted with screws which control the resistance of the door upon initial contact(How hard they are to push open and it shouldn't be difficult )
The swing adjustment used to require at least
Nine seconds but it may have been increased since I've worked with the tools this gives the disabled time to clear what should be a. 36”
Clear opening.the bottom of the door requires 18” of metal doorplatespresumably for wheelchair impact. Threshold not to exceed 1/2” in hight. There's lots of code rules I've left out but if I was in the store I would just tune up everything but there should be little material cost unless the closer is broken and they are fairly cheap. If it's leaking oil, it's gone. If anyone actualy has an interest in this they should get a life or google up surface mounted closers like Norton just for example. I would do this job myself or open a small business to just address this issue but Ime not bonded insured and
Item # 4.
5 license needs to be activated.ime not be able to t supposed to work and collect a pension but I amwell connected and regarded and could get around it.Alyernatively I might be induced to train the right man. Just For laughs you could ask the police
and fireman if they want to do it, I may have betrayed theglaziers architectutal metal and glassworkers With what I've given up already This isI can help you solve the problem. I could train a cadre of guys but that's kind of pushing it. Ithis is a skeptical town, so I expect someone is suspecting I am inventing a. Job for myself In the great American marketing tradition of problem, solution. If so it was a long way around the block and in the back door but like I said: this crap of difficult entry and the disrespect and illegal treatment,the humiliation of a grown person soiling themselves because they are denied a damn toilet is unacceptable. As are run‐on sentences Do the right thing and would someone pls tell me they read this tome
Of a text? My consulting rate is or was, $160
To $200 an hr plus lunch and travel time, but I submit this gratis and with all sincerity, plz call anytime with any question.
Help me git er done
And thank you for paying attention. Bob Leary
, 82 Primrose Lane, GV.
Item # 4.
Item # 4.
MAILE CLAIRE
aka Maile C. McGrew-Fredé 10826 Red Dog Rd, Nevada City, CA 95959 [email protected] | (505) 692-0766
Grass Valley City Council
Jan Arbuckle, Mayor
Hillary Hodge, Vice Mayor
Bob Branstrom, Tom Ivy, Haven Caravelli, Council Members 125 East Main St., Grass Valley CA 95949
January 24, 2024
Dear Grass Valley Decision Makers,
I noticed the Union article detailing a recent (Jan 9th?) decision by the Council to remove the redwood trees “that line the back side of the City Hall parking lot and entrance to the Grass Valley Police Station along East Main Street.” The main reason being that the trees are a ”high risk for damage to hardscape.”
While the article mentions that Council members regretted but agreed to make this “responsible” decision to remove these trees, I wonder if people looking back at this pivotal moment, from fifty years in the future, (assuming our species is still around) will understand the word “responsible” in the same way as must have seemed ‘inevitable’ and ‘normal’ that Tuesday night.
Have you considered how “responsible” it may be to remove these most wondrous air filters, carbon sequesterers, mitigators of planetary climate emergency and establishers of micro-climate temperature mitigation and habitat creation for a wondrous variety of local and regional flora and fauna? Are you aware that redwood trees are living breathing beings, true contributors to the web of life, the sustainability of our communities, (if voiceless)? As a species, redwood trees are very, very, much older than humans, have survived and thrived in California for more than 20 million years performing a huge array of “ecosystem services.” Yet today, due to a wide variety of egregious human interventions, only about 5% of original old growth redwood forests remain.
Do you really think it “responsible” when reviewing the bigger picture of our current multi-crisis global moment, to remove even a few of these last remaining majestic climate heroes and genetic diversity sequestorers simply to continue a business as usual focus on our short-term, energy hemorrhaging, convenience-based automobile focused lifestyle? Do you think people in the future will believe it responsible to remove trees in order to preserve a parking lot and retaining wall? Why not exercise some deeper creative thinking? Why not partially remove the hardscaping that these redwood roots are in conflict with and create some small, downtown green space or a micro-park? As summers continue to blister our communities we may be supremely sorry to have removed such amazing purveyors of shade and heat reduction.
Is the decision to remove these trees final? I wonder if we could slow down a bit and pursue a longer, broader more in depth review? You have the opportunity as local decision makers to pursue real legacy paradigmatic shifts in thinking, moving away from the business-as-usual focus that has led to the destructive moment we are finding ourselves in, and leaning-in to local resiliency, and pursuing long-term wellbeing for all our mountain communities.
Thank you for your consideration,
Maile McGrew-Fredé
Item # 4.
City of Grass Valley
City Council
Agenda Action Sheet
Title: Local Emergency Proclamation (Winter Storm of February 2023) CEQA: Not a project
Recommendation: To continue the Winter Storm February 24th, 2023 to March 1st, 2023 proclamation declaring a Local State of Emergency
Prepared by: Timothy M. Kiser, City Manager
Council Meeting Date: 2/27/2024 Date Prepared: 2/22/2024 Agenda: Consent
Background Information: Due to conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen within the City of Grass Valley, caused by the winter storm February 24th, 2023 to March 1st, 2023 which cut power, downed trees, blocked roads and created other hazards to health and human safety commencing at which time the City Council of the City of Grass Valley was not in session. The city found it necessary to proclaim the existence of a local emergency throughout the city.
On March 2nd, Tim Kiser, the Emergency Services Director, proclaimed an existence of a local emergency. On March 8th, 2023, at a special City Council Meeting council adopted Resolution 2023-07 confirming the Emergency Services Director’s proclamation of a local emergency.
Council Goals/Objectives: This resolution executes portions of work tasks towards achieving/maintaining Strategic Plan – Public Safety. The City of Grass Valley is devoted to providing a safe Place to Live, Work, and Play.
Fiscal Impact: The City will be requesting reimbursement for repair costs from the California Office of Emergency Services. If approved, costs would be reimbursable around 75% and sufficient General Funds exist to cover any shortfall.
Funds Available: N/A Account #: N/A
Reviewed by: __ City Manager
Item # 5.
City of Grass Valley
City Council
Agenda Action Sheet
Title: Reallocation of Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety Grant funds related to vehicle purchase
Recommendation: Approve the reallocation of grant funds; direct staff to move forward with the purchase of vehicle in accordance with City purchasing guidelines and Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) requirements.
Prepared by: Brian Blakemore, Lieutenant Grass Valley Police Department Council Meeting Date: 02/27/2024 Date Prepared: 02/16/2024 Agenda: Consent
Background Information:
In May 2023 the City of Grass Valley was awarded a State grant administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections, known as the Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety Grant.
An element of that approved grant was for the purchase and outfitting of a police emergency vehicle for the Park Resource Officer. The approved sum of funds for that vehicle and equipment is $100,000.
An additional element of that approved grant was for the purchase of a vegetation masticator and a trailer for transporting that equipment. A vehicle large enough to tow this equipment was not factored into the grant funding. Based on current patrol vehicle inventory, the vehicle to be used by the Park Resource Officer can come from the current Police Department fleet.
Staff is seeking to reallocate the patrol vehicle funds and use them to purchase a vehicle with the capacity to tow/deploy the vegetation masticator. The approved sum is sufficient to purchase a vehicle with that capability. Finally, BSCC requires Council approval of this action.
This approval will enhance the efficiency of City staff and efforts to keep the vegetation masticator deployed as often as possible.
Council Goals/Objectives: The execution of this action attempts to achieve Strategic Goal #3 – Productive and Efficient Work Force
Fiscal Impact: None; Funds already allocated within the Prop 64 Public Health and Safety Grant
Funds Available: N/A Account #: N/A
Reviewed by: Tim Kiser, City Manager
Attachments: None
Item # 6.
City of Grass Valley
City Council
Agenda Action Sheet
Title: Out of State Training for Specialized Digital Forensics Capability Recommendation: Approve the attendance of Police Department Detective to travel to Utah for specialized training in this use of digital forensic-extraction software Prepared by: Brian Blakemore, Lieutenant Grass Valley Police Department Council Meeting Date: 02/27/2024 Date Prepared: 02/16/2024 Agenda: Consent
Background Information:
The Grass Valley Police Department (Police Department) is responsible for investigating crimes within the City. Often, critical evidence is stored on the digital devices (cellphones, computers, etc.) of suspects, victims, and witnesses. The extraction of this evidence involves the use of specialized law enforcement software. This software requires specialized training which is offered in national regions, rather than state or local regions.
The Police Department has determined that MSAB is the preeminent platform for extracting this critical evidence. The developer offers training to law enforcement personnel in the use of their platform, however the only training scheduled in the United States is in Kaysville, Utah.
The next delivery is March 11-15, 2024.
Staff seek approval to send a Police Department detective out of state to attend this training.
Council Goals/Objectives: The execution of this action attempts to achieve Strategic Goal #3 – Productive and Efficient Work Force
Fiscal Impact: Estimated cost of $1800-$2000
Estimated Flight (w/ tx +fees) - $650
Estimated Per Diem - $325
Training Cost – Included in software purchase
Estimated Lodging - $775
Estimated vehicle rental – $250
Funds Available: Yes Account #: 100-201- 54112
Reviewed by: Tim Kiser, City Manager
Attachments: None
Item # 7.
344056.1
City of Grass Valley
City Council
Agenda Action Sheet
Title: Appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of a Development Review Permit and Variance application for the Sierra Guest Home Expansion for a Supportive Housing use
Recommendation: Based upon the evidence in the public record, and the Planning Commission’s 4:1 approval, staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions:
A. Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of the Development Review and Variance Request for the Sierra Guest Home Expansion; B. Determine the project Categorically Exempt as the appropriate level of environmental review in accordance with section 15305, categorical exemption Class 5. the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Guidelines; C. Adopt Findings of Fact for approval of the Development Review Permit and Variance as presented in the Staff Report; and,
D. Approve the Development Review Permit and Variance (23PLN-28) in accordance with the Conditions of Approval, as presented in this Staff Report.
Prepared by: Amy Wolfson, City Planner
Council Meeting Date: February 27, 2024 Date Prepared: February 12, 2024 Agenda: Public Hearing
Background Information: At the January 16, 2024 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider a Variance Request for encroachment of a rear addition into the 20-foot rear setback and to exceed the 50% lot coverage limit. This meeting had been continued from the Planning Commission’s December 19, 2023 meeting. At their January meeting, the Planning Commission approved the Development Review and Variance application with a 4:1 vote. The January 16th Planning Commission staff report is attached.
On January 29, 2024, Staff received an appeal challenging the Planning Commission’s approval of the Variance Request. The appeal was timely filed within the 15-day appeal period following the Planning Commission decision.
Item # 8.
344056.1
Appeal Description:
The appeal takes issue with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) categorical exemption adopted by the Planning Commission for the approval of the Variance Request.
The Class 5 Categorical Exemption applies to minor alterations to land use limitations where the site has an average slope not exceeding 20% and there is no change in land use density, examples of which include “set back variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcel.”
The appeal makes two points with regard to challenging the Class 5 categorical exemption as the appropriate environmental determination:
1) That the expansion project proposed does not qualify as a “minor alteration”; and
2) That the addition of rooms violates the requirement of the exemption to not result in a change in land use density.
Staff response to challenge no. 1:
Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000, et seq.) exempts “minor alterations in land use limitations.” “Land use limitations” are the parameters applicable to a property that are set by a jurisdiction’s development code, irrespective of land use. Section 15305 includes examples such as minor lot line adjustments and setback variances, but it can also include parameters such as height limits, parking ratios, and impervious surface limitations. Land use limitations are parameters that have been set at a particular threshold by a jurisdiction. Therefore, “minor alterations” as referred to in the exemption language, are not referring to the physical alterations proposed by a project as is suggested by the appeal, but rather to the limitations set by a jurisdiction’s development code.
The “land use limitations” in the case of the proposed project are the 20-foot rear setback and the 50% impervious surface limitation set by the Grass Valley Municipal Code Table 2-8, applicable to properties within the R-1 zoning designation. The Variance to reduce the rear setback to 6’7” and to allow an increase in the allowed impervious surface coverage limit to 67% in order to preserve an existing oak tree, were determined to be minor alterations to the land use limitations generally applied to the city as a whole.
Staff response to challenge no. 2:
The City Municipal Code Table 2-8 defines density as “Maximum number of dwelling units on a site.” A dwelling unit is defined as “a room or group of internally connected rooms that have sleeping, cooking, eating, and sanitation facilities, but not more than one kitchen, which constitute an independent housekeeping unit, occupied by or intended for one household on a long-term basis.” [emphasis added] The California Residential Code defines a dwelling unit as “a single unit providing complete independent living facilities for one or more person, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation.”
The Sierra Guest Home features a group of internally connected rooms, with shared restroom and kitchen facilities, constituting a single independent living facility and/or dwelling unit. It also includes a junior ADU and an ADU, for a total of three independent
Item # 8.
344056.1
living facilities and/or dwelling units, which do not exceed the allowable density and are permissible in all single-family zoning designations pursuant to State law (Gov.
Code, § 65852.2, subds. (a)(1)(C), (e)(1)(A).) Therefore, the added rooms associated with the proposed project do not constitute a change in density.
Staff Conclusion on the Environmental Determination: Use of the site for supportive housing is permissible under the Grass Valley Municipal Code and a use allowed by right by State law. (Gov. Code, § 65651.) Therefore, the use of the site as supportive housing is considered a ministerial project and therefore not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The Variance request qualifies for a Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15305, Class 5, of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Guidelines. A Class 5 Categorical Exemption consists of minor alterations to land use limitations where the site has an average slope not exceeding 20% and there is no change in land use density, “including set back variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcel.” The project site has an average slope between 5% and 7% and the granting of the Variance in land use limitations for the rear setback and impervious coverage limit does not result in a change in density.
Council Goals/Objectives: A City Council decision on an appeal of a Planning Commission decision supports the 2022 Strategic Plan Update, Goal #5: The City of Grass Valley strives to exemplify an innovative, efficient, effective, open and collaborative city government.
Fiscal Impact: none
Funds Available: not applicable Account #: N/A
Reviewed by: City Manager
Attachments:
1) Appeal Form
2) 1/16/24 Planning Commission Staff Report
Item # 8.
125 E. Main Street
Grass Valley, CA 95945
•••- -- .. • - -•~--W •••• •• -- --• -•-•·oh •· M•~•- - •••-•••M O • - ••-~•-• •• •M•- DATE : 1/29/2024 4:56 PM
OPEf< : ZQ
TKBY : City Hall Cashier
TERM : 10
REC# : R000728~i 1
--------------····------------~ --~~=~===~~=~-~
1 Misc-City Hall 399.00
23PLN-28 Appeal 399.00
Miscellaneous Accounts Receivable
399,0
Paid By:23PLN-28 Appeal
2-·Check 399. 00
APPLIED 399.00
TENornrn 399. oo
CHANGE 0.00
Item # 8.
,,.
CITY OF GRASS VALLEY
APPEAL FORM
City Clerk's Office
125 East Main Street
Grass Valley, CA 95945
You may use this form, or provide a letter that includes the following information, to appeal a decision made by the Community Development Director, Development Review Committee or Planning Commission. All appeals shall be filed with the Community Development Department, or to the City Clerk's Office to appeal a Planning Commission action, within fifteen (15) calendar days following the date of the decision. The appeal shall include the specific action or decision, and describe the reasons for the appeal. Provide this form or a letter, along with the current appeal fee to initiate the appeal.
I, WAyJAJe- t!oole._v
below not~ action(s): 1
(Printed Name of Appellant) Hereby appeal the
Date of City Action: \ J \ \.Q \ 20?< L\
Project Name/Application No. (s): ~1-, ~:)_Y_LN __ -_1_i _ \
Permit Type (Use Permit, Subdivision map, etc.): _\}~0--; ~{\_Q._ ~[\_(JL _. ~---------- Mailing Addresf 237 Gt2:.,AJwcvd pJ} G-.V. i!_,4, C/5~'1 Phone~Oj t:, 4 g - e z I 2- Email: ~~-=---==-=-~~~~~..:....__A_1l .~ Purpose of the Appeal (List Specific lsssue): ------~----------- Signature of Appellant {j) ~ · Date: (2-¢02-<f
********************************************************************************************* For City Staff Use Only
Date: Receipt No.: Received by: Fee Paid: _
Item # 8.
..
Dear Grass Valley City Council,
Thank you for the opportunity to appeal the decision made by the appointed Planning Commission of Grass Valley to grant a Variance Request for a Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15305, Class 5, of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The date of the City action was 1/16/2024. Project name/application No. 23Pln-28.
I have reviewed 18.36.070 Class 5-Minor alterations in land use limitations (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15305). A copy in enclosed. I appeal the decision for the following reasons.
1. The proposal of 23Pln-28 after purchasing the Sierra Guest Home by Hospitality House, a 501 C 3 Non-profit several years ago for $675,000 including two buildings that contain asbestos was to forgo the 50% impervious coverage and to spend up to 6 Million dollars on adding 10 rooms after demolition. This in my opinion does Not constitute a "Minor Alteration", one of the conditions for granting the Variance.
2. The minor alterations "which do not result in any changes in land use or density". Adding any additional rooms violates the conditions of the Variance.
I respectfully request that the elected City Council honor and abide by California Environmental (CEQA) statutes, standards and guidelines and reverse the decision to grant the variance.
Item # 8.
18.36.070 Class 5-Minor alterations in land use limitations (CEQA ... https://library.qcode.us/lib/placer _county_ ca/pub/county_ code/item/..
Placer County, California County Code
Chapter 18 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Article 18.36 STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS Important notice: This publication has moved to General Code's eCode360 platform and this site is no longer being updated. View the current version on eCode360.
18.36.070 Class 5-Minor alterations in land use limitations (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15305). 1f7 J-f, J / Z_/2) 2, .:)
A. Class 5 consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than twenty (20) percent, which do not result in any changes in land use or density, including but not limited to:
1. Minor lot line adjustments, side yard, and setback variances not resulting in the creation of any \
new parcel;
2. Issuance of minor encroachment permits;
3. Reversion to acreage in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act;
4. Design review where no other approvals require environmental review and the project does not fit the definition of a major project;
5. Variances to lot size and lot width where no new building sites are created;
6. Variances to height limitations for single-family dwellings. (Ord. 5119-B, 2001) Contact:
Placer County Main Line: 530-889-4000
Published by Quality Code Publishing, Seattle, WA. By using this site, you agree to the terms of use.
I of 2 l/2-i/202-L IO I-+ AM
Item # 8.
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JANUARY 16, 2024
Prepared by: Amy Wolfson, City Planner
DATA SUMMARY
Application Number: 23PLN-28
Subject: Development Review and Variance Request for the Sierra Guest Home Expansion for a total of 27 rooms, including two full apartment units, for Supportive Housing use consistent with state requirements. The Variance request is for encroachment of a rear addition into the 20-foot rear setback and exceeding the 50% lot coverage limit
Location/APNs: 131 Glenwood Avenue/035-270-035
Applicant: Foothill House of Hospitality
Representative: Nancy Baglietto
Zoning/General Plan: Single-Family Residential (R-1)/Urban Low Density (ULD) Entitlement: Development Review Permit, Variance
Environmental Status: Categorical Exemption
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That the Planning Commission approve the Development Review and Variance applications for the expansion of the Sierra Guest Home at 131 Glenwood Avenue as presented, or as modified by the Development Review Committee, which includes the following actions:
a. Determine the project Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15305, Class 1, of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Guidelines, as detailed in the staff report;
b. Adopt Findings of Fact for approval of the Development Review Permit as presented in the Staff Report;
c. Approve the Development Review Permit for the expansion of the Sierra Guest Home in accordance with the Conditions of Approval, attached to the Staff Report; and
d. Approve the Variance request for encroachment of a rear addition into the 20- foot rear setback, and exceeding the 50% lot coverage limit BACKGROUND:
The existing residence is 5,274 square feet and was constructed in 1957 according to Assessor records. The building has operated as a Senior Care Facility, licensed by the State since April
Item # 8.
Application 23PLN-28 Planning Commission
Jan. 16, 2024
2 1989. The Foothill House of Hospitality purchased the facility in 2021 and has operated it as a supportive housing facility as defined by the state in Government Code Section 65582, serving the target population as defined in that same section.
The Development Review Committee reviewed the project at their November 14, 2023 meeting and recommended approval (4 to 0, Hutchins absent) of the project with the following requests to be completed prior to going before the Planning Commission:
• Provide an arborist report in order to provide additional justification for the Variance request and condition of the existing overhanging tree. o Applicant submitted an Arborist Report by Greg Matuzak dated November 30, 2023, which concludes that the health of the tree would be compromised by limb removal.
• Consider additional aesthetic treatments to the rear elevation. o Applicant has amended the rear elevation with added window shutters, altered the siding to include both horizontal lap and vertical siding, and included a color change that corresponds to the siding change.
• Consider a screening treatment for the trash cans.
o Applicant added a fencing screen for the trash cans.
The planning commission heard the Variance proposal at their meeting held on December 19, 2023. The commission continued the hearing to the regular meeting of January 16, 2024 and asked the applicant to provide more design information for the two-story scenario that would meet the setback and lot coverage standards. They also requested that the coverage limit percentage calculated for the one-story scenario be double-checked. The applicant has updated their plans (attachment 6) to include a lot coverage diagram and calculations for existing coverage and proposed coverage (sheet 12). According to their comparison, the site coverage is actually greater for the existing development than the proposed development due to proposed conversion of hardscape to pervious paver or decking material, and the addition of a small area of landscaping. It is also worth noting that the 2-story scenario shows a total of 33 supportive housing units as opposed to the 27 units proposed under the one-story expansion as currently proposed.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
Project description: This Development Review Permit application is for an expansion of the facility from 17 to 27-bedroom units and to 9,578 sq ft. Two of the units will be studio apartments, replacing two existing apartment units that are proposed for demolition. The proposed apartment units will be used to house tenants seeking more independent living situations such as an on-site manager or recuperative care tenants. Along with the expansion, the building will be remodeled which will include abatement of lead and asbestos within the existing structure. New exterior finishes include painted horizontal lap siding, shake shingles, and new asphalt shingle roofing.
Supportive Housing Use: Pursuant to Table 2-7 of the Grass Valley Municipal Code, Supportive Housing is a permitted use in the single-residential (R-1) zoning district.
Government Code Section 65583(a)(5) states that "Transitional housing and supportive
Item # 8.
Application 23PLN-28 Planning Commission
Jan. 16, 2024
3 housing shall be considered a residential use of property and shall be subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone." There are no restrictions in the current development code that would disallow the proposed development as a single-family residence except with respect to the requested Variance (discussed below) and with respect to the second studio apartment (one studio could be considered an allowed Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). However, the combined square footage of the two studios could qualify under the city’s size restrictions for an ADU. The applicant has indicated in the project description that these would be converted to a single unit and one of the kitchenettes removed upon conversion of the facility to a use other than supportive housing.
Because the use of the apartments to serve tenants with more independent needs is a use that is integral to the services needed to meet the goals of the supportive housing facility, staff is suggesting that the planning commission make a finding to support the second apartment unit based on its use to serve the supportive housing use and the commitment by the applicant to remove one at such time the facility is no longer used for supportive housing. It should also be noted that the applicant is proposing to remove a detached two-apartment structure as part of this application, but staff has been unable to substantiate whether they were constructed legally.
Variance: Pursuant to section 17.72.070, the purpose of a Variance process is to consider requests to waive or modify standards in the development code due to special circumstances applicable to the property. In this case, the applicant is intending to avoid a second story addition, which they could provide in compliance with the existing setback and lot coverage standards. However, the construction of a second story would compromise an existing oak tree on the neighboring property, that hangs over the subject building. Additionally, neighboring property owners have expressed a preference for the one-story addition due to concerns that a two-story addition would not fit as well with the character of the neighborhood.
The rear setback for R-1 designated properties is 20% of the lot depth, up to a maximum of 20-feet. The 150-foot lot depth of this property sets the rear setback at 20-feet. The rear addition is proposed to be as close as 6 feet, 7 inches from the rear property line. The site coverage limit for R-1 is 50% and includes all the impervious surfaces on a lot. The proposed development will have impervious coverage up to 67% of the site. Again, both the coverage limits and the setbacks standards could be met with a second-story, as opposed to the proposed single-story addition. The applicant is requesting that the commission consider the health of the tree that would be compromised with a second-story proposal, as a special circumstance that deprives the property owners the ability to build out in compliance with setback and lot coverage standards.
At the DRC’s request, the applicant provided an Arborist and Tree Survey, dated November 30, 2023 that considers impacts of the development to the overhanging blue oak tree. Biologist, Greg Matuzak concludes that additional removal of branches of the native tree could ultimately cause hazards such as tree death or impacts to structural foundations due to the root system becoming unstable. Matuzak recommends the one-story development scenario as proposed in order to best preserve the tree.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING:
General Plan: The Urban Low Density (ULD) General Plan designation includes a density range of 1 to 4 dwelling units per acre. ULD is intended primarily for single family detached houses, although higher density single family patio homes or Town houses could be
Item # 8.
Application 23PLN-28 Planning Commission
Jan. 16, 2024
4 accommodated, if offset with sufficient open space to maintain the gross density within the indicated range. ULD is most compatible with the following Zoning districts: Single Family Residential (R-1) and Two-Family Residence (R-2) districts.
Zoning: The Single-Residential Zone (R-1). The R-1 zone is applied to areas of the city that are appropriate for neighborhoods of single dwellings on standard urban lots, surrounding the more densely developed city core. The r-1 zone is consistent with and implements the urban low density (ULD) designation of the general plan.
SITE DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING:
The subject site is located within a single-family neighborhood on Glenwood Avenue, primarily consisting of one-story homes. Many of the homes were constructed in the late 1930s/ early 19040s, prior to 1962 building code requirements and land use development standards.
Several neighboring homes encroach into setbacks applicable under the current development code. The site drains from south to north and has an approximate slope of 7%. There are no waterbodies or streams located on the property.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
Use of the site for supportive housing is permissible under the Grass Valley Municipal Code and considered a ministerial project and therefore not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Variance request qualifies for a Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15305, Class 5, of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Guidelines.
A Class 5 Categorical Exemption consists of minor alterations to land use limitations where the site has an average slope not exceeding 20% and there is no change in land use density “including set back variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcel.” FINDINGS:
1. The City received a complete application for Development Review Application 23PLN-28.
2. The Grass Valley Development Review Committee reviewed Development Review Application 23PLN-28 at their regular meeting on November 14, 2023.
3. The Development Review Committee reviewed the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and concluded that the project qualifies for a Class 5, Categorical Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and CEQA Guidelines.
4. The project is consistent with the applicable sections and development standards in the Development Code.
5. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zone and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Development Code and the Municipal Code.
6. The two proposed studio apartments may be permitted as an integral part of the supportive housing facility for which the applicant has committed to converting to a single ADU with removal of one kitchenette upon any conversion of the use to anything other than a supportive housing use.
Item # 8.
Application 23PLN-28 Planning Commission
Jan. 16, 2024
5 7. The proposed project is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan
8. The proposed project is allowed within the applicable zone and complies with all other applicable provisions of this development code and the Municipal Code; and
9. The design, location, size, and characteristics of the proposed project are in compliance with any project-specific design standards in effect and any standards and guidelines for development review permits which may be established from time to time by the council.
10. There are special circumstances applicable to the property, including location, shape, size, surroundings, and topography, such as the tree which prevents second story expansion, so that the strict application of this development code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and within the same zone
11. The approval of the variance includes conditions of approval as necessary to ensure that the adjustment granted does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and within the same zone; and
12. The granting of the application will not authorize an activity or use which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zone governing the parcel of property for which the application is made.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:
1. The approval date for planning commission review is December 19, 2023 with an effective date of Thursday, January 4, 2023 pursuant to Section 17.74.020 GVMC. This project is approved for a period of one year and shall expire on January 4, 2024 unless the project has been effectuated or the applicant requests a time extension that is approved by the Development Review Committee pursuant to the Development Code.
2. The final design shall be consistent with the Development Review application and plans provided by the applicant and approved by the planning commission (23PLN-28). The project is approved subject to plans on file with the Community Development Department.
The Community Development Director may approve minor changes as determined appropriate.
3. All commitments made by the applicant as part of the presented project shall be upheld by future/successor heirs/owners.
4. Prior to any work occurring, building permits shall be obtained from the Community Development Department, Building Division.
5. Prior to issuance of building or grading permits, the applicant shall conduct a “Water Demand Analysis” as required by the Nevada Irrigation District (NID) to evaluate the existing ¾-inch domestic meter is adequate for the demand of the project. An NID will-serve letter shall be provided to the City Planner.
6. The project shall be designed in accordance with the requirements of all applicable codes, standards, and local ordinances, including but not limited to; 2022 CFC, NFPA 13-22
Item # 8.
Application 23PLN-28 Planning Commission
Jan. 16, 2024
6 (standard for the installation, testing, and maintenance of fire sprinkler systems), and NFPA 72-22 (standard for the installation, testing, and maintenance of fire alarm systems).
7. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Grass Valley in any action or proceeding brought against the City of Grass Valley to void or annul this discretionary land use approval.
8. The requirements of the 2022 CBC, CMC, CPC, CEC, and CFC apply.
9. Maximum openings on exterior walls shall be per CBC 705.8
10. Plans shall include architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing plans.
11. Applicable energy conservation compliance forms are required.
12. Calgreen compliance is required.
13. Plans, specifications and calculations must be prepared by or under the direct supervision of an architect or a civil or structural engineer licensed by the state of California.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Aerial Map
2. Vicinity Map
3. Applications
4. Architectural Plans
5. Arborist and Tree Survey Report
Item # 8.
Sierra Guest Home Expansion
at 131 Glenwood Avenue
Project Submittal Attachment List
1. Vicinity Map
2. Aerial Map
3. Applications (includes applicant and architect statements)
4. Sierra Guest Home Plans (renderings, site plan, floor plans, etc)
a. Items requested by planning commission:
i. Site Coverage Clarification (catalogs calculations
of various surfaces for both the existing and
proposed development)
ii. Two-Story Design Scenario (includes elevation
sheets, floor plan, and rendering)
5. Arborist and Tree Survey Report, 11/30/23 - Greg Matuzak
Item # 8.
Nevada County GIS
131 Glenwood - Vicinity Map
September 29, 2023
Parcel APN: 035-270-035
© 2022 Nevada County GIS
Overview
Land Value: $102,000.00
Improvement Value: $586,500.00
Zoning: R-1 GVCity
General Plan: ULD GVCity
Fire District: Grass Valley
Elementary Sch. Dist: Grass Valley
131 GLENWOOD AVENUE
Acreage: Unknown
Water District:
Nevada Irrigation Dist: NID Water - Zone 1.0
Public Utility:
Park District:
Service Area: Solid Waste Grass Valley - Csa 32
Elevation: 2,657 feet
0 0.0175 0.035 0.07 mi
0 0.03 0.06 0.12 km 1:2,257
Scale:
Snow Load: 49 lbs/sqft
Wind Exposure: C
Climate Zone: 11
Item # 8.
Nevada County GIS
131 Glenwood - Aerial Map
September 29, 2023
Parcel APN: 035-270-035
© 2022 Nevada County GIS
Overview
Land Value: $102,000.00
Improvement Value: $586,500.00
Zoning: R-1 GVCity
General Plan: ULD GVCity
Fire District: Grass Valley
Elementary Sch. Dist: Grass Valley
131 GLENWOOD AVENUE
Acreage: Unknown
Water District:
Nevada Irrigation Dist: NID Water - Zone 1.0
Public Utility:
Park District:
Service Area: Solid Waste Grass Valley - Csa 32
Elevation: 2,657 feet
0 0.0175 0.035 0.07 mi
0 0.03 0.06 0.12 km 1:2,257
Scale:
Snow Load: 49 lbs/sqft
Wind Exposure: C
Climate Zone: 11
Item # 8.
CITY OF GRASS VALLEY
Community Development Department
125 E. Main Street
Grass Valley, California 95945
(530) 274-4330
(530) 274-4399 fax
Application Types
Administrative
[ ] Limited Term Permit
[ ]
$69 .00
Zoning Interpretation
$224.00
Development Review
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Minor Development Review – 10,000 or less sq. ft.
$1,813.00
Major Development Review – over 10,000 sq. ft.
$3,293.00
Conceptual Review - Minor
$459.00
Conceptual Review – Major
$782.00
Plan Revisions – Staff Review
$316.00
Plan Revisions – DRC / PC Review
$831.00
Extensions of Time – Staff Review
$282.00
Extensions of Time – DRC / PC Review
$607.00
Entitlements
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Annexation
$7,843.00 (deposit)
Condominium Conversion
$4,923.00 (deposit)
Development Agreement – New
$18,463.00 (deposit)
Development Agreement – Revision
$6,903.00
General Plan Amendment
7,377.00
Planned Unit Development
8,150.00 (minimum charge) + 100.00 / dwelling
unit and / or $100 / every 1,000 sq. ft.
commercial floor area
Specific Plan Review - New
Actual costs - $16,966.00 (deposit)
Specific Plan Review - Amendments / Revisions
Actual costs - $6,986.00 (deposit)
Zoning Text Amendment
3,102.00
Zoning Map Amendment
5,073.00
Environmental
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Environmental Review – Initial Study
$1,713.00
Environmental Review – EIR Preparation
$31,604.00 (deposit)
Environmental Review - Notice of Determination
$14 .00 (+ Dept. of Fish and Game Fees)
Environmental Review - Notice of Exemption
$149.00(+ County Filing Fee)
Sign Reviews
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Minor – DRC, Historic District, Monument Signs
or other districts having specific design criteria
313.00
Major – Master Sign Programs
$1,279.00
Exception to Sign Ordinance
964.00
Subdivisions
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Tentative Map (4 or fewer lots)
$3,493.00
Tentative Map (5 to 10 lots)
$4,857.00
Tentative Map (11 to 25 lots)
$6,503.00
Tentative Map (26 to 50 lots)
$8,915.00
Tentative Map (51 lots or more)
$13,049.00
Minor Amendment to Approved Map
(staff) $1,114.00
Major Amendment to Approved Map
(Public Hearing) $2,436.00
Reversion to Acreage
$765.00
Tentative Map Extensions
1,047.00
Tentative Map - Lot Line Adjustments
$1,200.00
Use Permits
[ ]
[ ]
Minor Use Permit - Staff Review
480.00
Major Use Permit - Planning Commission Review
3,035.00
Variances
[ ]
[ ]
Minor Variance - Staff Review
518.00
Major Variance - Planning Commission Review
2,029.00
Application Fee
_______
Total: $
UNIVERSAL PLANNING
APPLICATION
* DUE WITH EVERY PLANNING APPLICATION *
Major Use Permit $3,035
Major Varience $2,029
5,064
✔
✔
Item # 8.
Below is the Universal Planning Application form and instructions for submitting a complete planning application. In addition to the Universal Planning Application form, a project specific checklist shall be submitted. All forms and submittal requirements must be completely filled out and submitted with any necessary supporting information.
Upon receipt of the completed forms, site plan/maps, and filing fees, the Community Development Department will determine the completeness of the application. This review will be completed as soon as possible, but within thirty (30) days of the submittal of the application. If the application is determined to be complete, the City will begin environmental review, circulate the project for review by agencies and staff, and then schedule the application for a hearing before the Planning Commission.
If sufficient information has not been submitted to adequately process your application, you will receive a notice that your application is incomplete along with instructions on how to complete the application. Once the City receives the additional information or revised application, the thirty (30) day review period will begin again.
Since the information contained in your application is used to evaluate the project and in the preparation of the staff report, it is important that you provide complete and accurate information.
Please review and respond to each question. If a response is not applicable, N/A should be used in the space provided. Failure to provide adequate information could delay the processing of your application.
Additional information may be obtained at www.cityofgrassvalley.com regarding the 2020 General Plan and Zoning. You may also contact the Community Development Department for assistance.
ADVISORY RE: FISH AND GAME FEE REQUIREMENT
Permit applicants are advised that pursuant to Section 711.4 of the Fish and Game Code a fee of $3,539.25 for an Environmental Impact Report and $2,548.00 for a Negative Declaration* shall be paid to the County Recorder at the time of recording the Notice of Determination for this project. This fee is required for Notices of Determination recorded after January 1, 1991. A Notice of Determination cannot be filed and any approval of the project shall not be operative, vested, or final until the required fee is paid. This shall mean that building, public works and other development permits cannot be approved until this fee is paid. These fees are accurate at the time of printing, but increase the subsequent January 1st of each year.
This fee is not a Grass Valley fee; it is required to be collected by the County pursuant to State law for transmission to the Department of Fish and Game. This fee was enacted by the State Legislature in September 1990, to be effective January 1, 1991. *If the City finds that the project will not have an impact on wildlife resources, through a De Minimus Impact Finding, the City will issue certificate of fee exemption.
Therefore, this fee will not be required to be paid at the time an applicant files the Notice of Determination with the County Recorder. The County’s posting and filing fees will still be required.
Item # 8.
Applicant/Representative
Name:
Property Owner
Name:
Address: Address:
Phone: Phone:
E-mail: E-mail:
Architect
Name:
Engineer
Name:
Address: Address:
Phone: ( ) Phone: ( )
E-mail: E-mail:
1. Project Information
a. Project Name___________________________________________________________ b. Project Address__________________________________________________________ c. Assessor’s Parcel No(s)____________________________________________________ (include APN page(s))
d. Lot Size__________________________
2. Project Description_________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________
3. General Plan Land Use: ______________ 4. Zoning District: _______________ Foothill House of Hospitality
Grass Valley, California 95945 Grass Valley, California 95945 530-615-0807 530-615-0807
[email protected] [email protected]
Robert Wallis Jon Martin
Grass Valley, CA 95945 Rocklin, CA 95765
530-264-7010 916-256-4816
[email protected] [email protected]
Sierra Guest Home Expansion
131 Glenwood Ave, Grass Valley, CA 95945
035-270-035
.20 Acres
Project consists of demolition of two existing out buildings on site, as well as a previous (existing) addition to the ULD GVCity R-1 GVCity
Nancy Baglietto
488 Crown Point Circle 488 Crown Point Circle
415 W Main St 2204 Plaza Drive, Suite 130
main building at the back of the lot. Demolition will also include abatement of lead and asbestos within the existing structure. New finishes will be added to the exterior of the building, consisting of painted horizontal lap siding,shake shingles, and new asphalt shingle roofing. A new addition to the rear and west of the building will include 10 dorm-style bedrooms with two shared bathrooms and shower rooms, as well as two studio apartments.
Item # 8.
4. Cortese List: Is the proposed property located on a site which is included on the Hazardous Waste and Substances List (Cortese List)? Y N
The Cortese List is available for review at the Community Development Department counter.
If the property is on the List, please contact the Planning Division to determine appropriate notification procedures prior to submitting your application for processing (Government Code Section 65962.5).
5. Indemnification: The City has determined that City, its employees, agents and officials should, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be fully protected from any loss, injury, damage, claim, lawsuit, expense, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, court costs or any other costs arising out of or in any way related to the issuance of this permit, or the activities conducted pursuant to this permit. Accordingly, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its employees, agents and officials, from and against any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, including, but not limited to, actual attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and court costs of any kind without restriction or limitation, incurred in relation to, as a consequence of, arising out of or in any way attributable to, actually, allegedly or impliedly, in whole or in part, the issuance of this permit, or the activities conducted pursuant to this permit. Applicant shall pay such obligations as they are incurred by City, its employees, agents and officials, and in the event of any claim or lawsuit, shall submit a deposit in such amount as the City reasonably determines necessary to protect the City from exposure to fees, costs or liability with respect to such claim or lawsuit.
6. Appeal: Permits shall not be issued until such time as the appeal period has lapsed. A determination or final action shall become effective on the 16th day following the date by the appropriate review authority, where no appeal of the review authority’s action has been filed in compliance with Chapter 17.91 of the City’s Development Code.
The 15-day period (also known as the “appeal” period in compliance with Chapter 17.91) begins the first full day after the date of decision that the City Hall is open for business, and extends to the close of business (5:00 p.m.) on the 15th day, or the very next day that the City Hall is open for business.
I hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that the above statements are correct.
Property Owner/*Representative Signature: ________________________________________ *Property owner must provide a consent letter allowing representative to sign on their behalf.
Applicant Signature: ___________________________________________________________ --OFFICE USE ONLY--
Application No.: Date Filed:
Fees Paid by: Amount Paid:
Other Related Application(s):
x
Item # 8.
Page | 1
CITY OF GRASS VALLEY
Community Development Department
125 E. Main Street
Grass Valley, California 95945
(530) 274-4330
(530) 274-4399 fax
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
This document will provide necessary information about the proposed project. It will also be used to evaluate potential environmental impacts created by the project. Please be as accurate and complete as possible in answering the questions. Further environmental information could be required from the applicant to evaluate the project.
PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY OR TYPE
USE A SEPARATE SHEET, IF NECESSARY, TO EXPLAIN THE FOLLOWING:
I. Provide a written response for the variance request and provide a written justification statement to support findings listed in Section 17.72.070 F of the Development Code, including the following:
A. There are special circumstances applicable to the property, including location, shape, size, surroundings, and topography, so that the strict application of this Development Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and within the same zone;
B. The approval of the Variance or Minor Variance includes conditions of approval as necessary to ensure that the adjustment granted does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and within the same zone; and,
C. The granting of the application will not authorize an activity or use which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zone governing the parcel of property for which the application is made.
II. Project Characteristics:
A. Describe all existing buildings and uses of the property: __________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ B. Describe surrounding land uses:
North: ________________________________________________________________ South: ________________________________________________________________ East: _________________________________________________________________ West: _________________________________________________________________
VARIANCE
Main building consists of 17 dorm style bedrooms
main building at the back of the lot. Demolition will also include abatement of lead and asbestos within the existing structure. New finishes will be added to the exterior of the building, consisting of painted horizontal lap siding,shake shingles, and new asphalt shingle roofing. A new addition to the rear and west of the building will include 10 dorm-style bedrooms with two shared bathrooms and shower rooms, as well as two studio apartments.
Private Road (Single family residence across street)
Undeveloped land
Single family residence
Single family residence
Item # 8.
Page | 2
SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS
A site plan is a scale drawing that depicts a property's size and shape, existing improvements on the property, and improvements or additions which are intended to be added. The site plan should be as complete and accurate as possible since it will be used by several City departments to check various requirements of the development application. Please place a check or N/A on the line provided in the below checklist. Submit this page along with the map and application packet.
A. Application Checklist:
One completed copy of Universal Application form.
One completed copy of the Environmental Review Checklist (if applicable).
Preliminary Title Report dated no later than 6 months prior to the application filing date.
The appropriate non-refundable filing fee.
B. Site Plan Submittal:
Site Plan size – one 8-1/2” x 11”, 15 larger folded copies (folded to 9” x 12”) with one
8.5 x 11” reduced copy and e-mail electronic .pdf file.
Graphic scale and north arrow.
Vicinity map (showing property location to major roads or major landmarks).
Show location and dimensions of existing and proposed structures and walls. (Identify existing as a solid line and proposed as a dashed line).
Label the use of all existing and proposed structures or area.
Show the distance between structures and to the property lines.
Show site access, location and dimensions of adjacent street right-of-way, property lines, building setback lines, sidewalks and easements.
Show off-street parking facilities, including parking area and layout, loading areas trash storage areas, dimensions and numbers of individual parking spaces (including handicapped spaces) and aisles.
X
Item # 8.
Item # 8.
W A L L I S D E S I G N S T U D I O A R C H I T E C T S Listening. From design to completion.
www.wallisdesignstudio.com
SIERRA GUEST HOME – VARIANCE JUSTIFICATION
Wallis Design Studio Architects – 415 W Main St, Grass Valley, CA 95945 - Voice (530) 264-7010 Dear Amy Wolfson,
We are requesting a variance for the property of 131 Glenwood Ave. This variance will pertain to both the rear yard setback, as well as the imperious surface calculations at the site.
The request for the exception of the rear yard setback is due to a large oak tree that sits on the property line to the West of the current building on site. The oak tree will not allow for a two-story building to be located underneath it without its removal. In order to avoid its removal, we have proposed a one-story option that allows the same number of units to be included in the proposed addition. We would like to avoid removal of the tree due to its large size. There is concern that removing the tree will cause the roots to rot and cause damage to the neighboring property and significantly impact the neighbor’s pool.
Our proposed impervious coverage is 67%, while the limit is 50%. This requested increase is to allow for an accessible path to be added that connects to the rear of the building. These ADA paths are an egress requirement to ensure safety for residence who are served by this addition to the supportive housing facility. We are using pervious materials (decking, pervious pavers) where we can in order to reduce our impervious surface coverage as much as possible. The requested increase in the impervious coverage limit could be avoided by expanding vertically, as opposed to the one-story proposed design to avoid removal of the tree mentioned above.
Sincerely,
Robert Wallis
Wallis Design Studio Architects
Listening from Design to Completion
(530) 264-7010 voice
WallisDesignStudio.com
Item # 8.
1 A101
SIM
0 SECTION VIEWGRID LINEWALL TYPE SHEET NOTEDOOR TAG
1t WINDOW TAG
DETAIL NUMBERSHEET NUMBERCENTER LINE
000000.A KEY NOTE
1 AFF REFERENCE HEIGHT
A ACCESSORY DESIGNATION
1i
101-- AGGREGATE FILL EARTH CONCRETE STRUCTURAL SHEATHING CONCRETE UNIT MASONRY BATT INSULATION RIGID INSULATION WOOD FRAMING, BLOCKING
WOOD FINISHGYPSUM BOARDWOOD FRAMING, CONTINUOUS
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:19:19 PM
00 COVER SHEET
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
SYMBOLS LEGEND PROJECT VICINITY MAP
PROJECT TEAM SHEET INDEX
N
CODES AND STANDARDS
AGENCIES & UTILITIES
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT LOCATION
ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH THE 2022 CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE-24, CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION (CBSC) - PARTS 1 THRU PART 12A. PART 1 - CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODEB. PART 2, VOLUME 1 OF 2 - CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC)C. PART 2, VOLUME 2 OF 2 - CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC)D. PART 2.5 - CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE (CRC)E. PART 3 - CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (CEC)F. PART 4 - CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (CMC)G. PART 5 - CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (CPC)H. PART 6 - CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODEI. PART 7 - CALIFORNIA ELEVATOR SAFETY CONSTRUCTION CODEJ. PART 8 - CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODEK. PART 9 - CALIFORNIA FIRE CODEL. PART 10 - CALIFORNIA CODE FOR BUILDING CONSERVATIONM. PART 11 - CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODEN. PART 12 - CALIFORNIA REFERENCED STANDARDS CODE (CALGreen)ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS (CCR), OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW.A. TITLE 19 C.C.R., PUBLIC SAFETYB. TITLE 24 C.C.R., BUILDING STANDARDS CODEALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT FOLLOWING AUTHORITIES AND THEIR STANDARDS:A. BUILDING & SAFETY DIVISIONB. PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTC. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTD. FIRE DEPARTMENTE. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT - (ADA)
DEFFERED APPROVALS
SPECIAL INSPECTIONS
A. SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER OF RECORD WHO SHALL REVIEW THEM AND FORWARD THEM TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL WITH A NOTATION INDICATING THAT THE DEFERRED SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND THAT THEY HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BE IN GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING. ANY EXCEPTIONS MUST BE ADDRESSED BEFORE SUBMITTING TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. 1. FIRE SPRINKLER CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN.2. TRUSS CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN.3. SOLAR DESIGN TO BE PROVIDED BY INSTALLER.
1. NONE
GENERAL SITE INFORMATIONLOCATION: 131 GLENWOOD AVE, GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945GENERAL SCOPE OF WORKPROJECT CONSIST OF ADDITION AT REAR OF PROPERTY HOLDING 10 NEW UNITS, AS WELL AS A REMODEL AND EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING KITCHEN IN IMPORVEMENTS TO THE SITE AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.EXISTING BUILDING INFORMATIONAPN: 035-270-035ZONING: R-1 GVCITYLAND USE: RESIDENTIALBUILDING USE: STANDARD SINGLE FAMILYOCCUPANCY TYPE: R-2TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: TYPE V-BEXISTING BUILDING HEIGHT: 20' - 6" +/- EXISTING NUMBER OF STORIES: 2EXISTING FLOOR AREA: 5,274 SFNEW BUILDING INFORMATIONEXISTING 1ST FLOOR AREA: 3,596 SFNEW 1ST FLOOR AREA: 2,662 SFEXISTING SECOND FLOOR AREA: 910 SFTOTAL FLOOR AREA: 7,168 SFBUILDING HEIGHT: 20' - 6" +/- OCCUPANCY TYPE: R-2FIRE SPRINKLERS: YESBUILDING CONSTRUCTION DESCRIPTIONEXISTING BUILDING:WOOD FRAMED STRUCTURE WITH FIBER CEMENT HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING AND ASPHALT COMPOSITION ROOF. NEW BUILDING:WOOD FRAMED STRUCTURE WITH FIBER CEMENT HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING AND ASPHALT COMPOSITION ROOF.
CITY OF GRASS VALLEYCITY OF GRASS VALLEY125 EAST MAIN ST.GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945JON MAY, BUILDING OFFICIALEMAIL: [email protected]: (530) 274-4347AMY KESLER-WOLFSON, CITY PLANNEREMAIL: [email protected]: (530) 274-4711 TREVER VAN NOORT, P.E., UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENTEMAIL: [email protected]: (530) 274-4371 NEVADA COUNTY CONSOLIDATED FIRE DISTRICTPATRICK MASON, FIRE MARSHAL11329 MCCOURTNEY ROADGRASS VALLEY, CA 95949 EMAIL: [email protected]: (530) 265-4431 GENERAL CONTRACTORCREEKSIDE3131 PEACEKEEPER WAY, SUITE 400MCCLELLAN, CA 95652CODY SOSNER(916) 783-8080 VOICE(916) 783-9064 [email protected] A. DIMENSIONS:
1. DIMENSIONS SHALL NOT BE SCALED FROM DRAWINGS.2. ALL DIMENSIONS TO OPENINGS ARE TO THE ROUGH OPENING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.3. ALL DIMENSIONS TO STUD PARTITIONS ARE TO THE FACE OF FRAMING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
4. CEILING HEIGHT DIMENSIONS ARE FROM FINISH FLOOR TO FINISH FACE OF CEILING.5. WHERE INDICATED, DIMENSIONS SHALL BE TO CENTER / GRID LINES.6. ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK.7. ACCESSIBILITY DIMENSIONS SHALL BE MEASURED TO FACE OF WALL FINISH, CLEAR OPENING AND AS INDICATED ON ENLARGED PLAN, MOUNTING HEIGHTS SHEET, TOILET ROOM ELEVATIONS AND STANDARD DETAILS DRAWING SHEET.
8. DIMENSIONING PROTOCOLS / HIERARCHY:
a. "ENLARGED PLAN" INCLUDE ALL DIMENSIONING ASSOCIATED WITH THE GRAPHICS SHOWN.
b. OVERALL PLANS SHOW DIMENSIONS NOT INDICATED ON "PARTIAL DIMENSIONING PLANS."
B. WHERE NO SPECIFIC DETAIL IS SHOWN, THE FRAMING OR CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IDENTICAL OR SIMILAR TO THAT INDICATED FOR LIKE CASES OR CONSTRUCTIONS ON THE PROJECT AND IF NOT CLEAR A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) SHALL BE ISSUED TO ARCHITECT FOR CLARIFICATION.
C. ROOF COVERING AND ROOFING MATERIALS SHALL BE FIRE RETARDANT AND SHALL COMPLY WITH THE UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES, INC. AND CLASSIFIED AS CLASS A U.L. FIRE HAZARD, MINIMUM UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON DRAWINGS OR IN SPECIFICATIONS AND SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE INCLUDING CHAPTER 15.
D. PROVIDE ADEQUATE ANCHORAGE, BLOCKING, BACKING, AND FRAMING FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS, PIPING, LIGHT FIXTURES, ELECTRICAL UNITS, HVAC EQUIPMENT AND CEILING TRACKS AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE INSTALLATION.
E. PROVIDE 36 INCHES MAXIMUM UNOBSTRUCTED WORKING SPACE IN FRONT OF ALL PANEL BOARDS AND CONTROL EQUIPMENT.
F. DOOR SIZES INDICATED ON DOOR SCHEDULE ARE OPENING DIMENSIONS. ALLOWANCES FOR THRESHOLDS, FLOOR FINISHES, ETC. SHALL BE TAKEN OFF DOOR.
G. DOOR OPENINGS NOT LOCATED BY DIMENSIONS SHALL BE LOCATED 4 1/2" INCHES FROM FINISH WALL TO FINISH JAMB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
H. THE PRECISE DIMENSIONS AND LOCATIONS OF ALL DOORS, LOUVERS AND WINDOW OPENINGS SHALL BE DETERMINED BY ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AND DETAILS. OTHER WALL AND FLOOR OPENINGS AS REQUIRED BY MECHANICAL OR ELECTRICAL SHALL BE VERIFIED FROM SHOP DRAWINGS, EQUIPMENT DATA, ETC. AS REQUIRED, AND IF NOT CLEAR AN RFI SHALL BE ISSUED TO ARCHITECT FOR CLARIFICATION.
I. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL REFLECTED CEILING PLANS FOR LOCATING LIGHT FIXTURES, DIFFUSERS AND WALL MOUNTED FIXTURES.
COMPLIANCE WITH DOCUMENTS
A. SIMILAR - MEANS COMPARABLE CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE CONDITIONS NOTES. VERIFY DIMENSIONS AND/OR ORIENTATIONS ON PLANS AND/OR ELEVATIONS.
B. DIMENSIONS ARE NOT ADJUSTABLE WITHOUT APPROVAL OF ARCHITECT IN WRITING.
C. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANY CONFLICTS HEREIN, EITHER APPARENT OR OBVIOUS, PRIOR TO START OF WORK ON THAT ITEM OR BEAR THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CORRECTING SUCH WORK AS DIRECTED BY THE ARCHITECT AND AT NO ADDITIONAL COST AND NO TIME EXTENSION OF THE PROJECT.
D. UNDERCUT ALL DOORS TO CLEAR TOP OF FLOOR FINISH AND/OR THRESHOLD 1/4 INCH MAXIMUM AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH RATED DOOR/FRAME GUIDELINES.
E. USE WATER RESISTANT / GLASS FIBER FACED GYPSUM WALLBOARD ON ALL WALL FACES WHICH ARE EXPOSED TO WATER OR MOISTURE AS WELL AS THOSE USED FOR JANITOR, TOILET AND SHOWER WALLS, COORDINATE WITH SPECIFICATIONS.
F. SEE DRAWINGS AND DETAILS FOR TYPICAL NOTES.
TYPICAL NOTES
A. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXAMINE THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES FOUND PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK IN UNCERTAINTY.
B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY CONDITIONS AT THE SITE AND REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE ARCHITECT BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK IN UNCERTAINTY.
C. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATING.
D. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE THE REMOVAL, ABANDONMENT AND/OR LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES ABOVE OR BELOW GRADE WITH THE RESPECTIVE UTILITY COMPANIES.
E. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK WITHIN STREET RIGHT- OF-WAYS ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED STANDARD PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OF THE AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION.
F. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR ALL WORK IN CITY ROAD.
G. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY BRACES, SHORES, AND GUYS REQUIRED TO SUPPORT ALL LOADS TO WHICH THE BUILDING STRUCTURES AND COMPONENTS, ADJACENT SOILS AND STRUCTURES, UTILITIES AND RIGHT-OF-WAYS MAY BE SUBJECT DURING CONSTRUCTIONS.
H. FLOOR AND WALL OPENINGS, SLEEVES, VARIATIONS IN THE STRUCTURAL SLAB ELEVATIONS, DEPRESSED AREAS AND ALL OTHER ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND/OR CIVIL REQUIREMENTS MUST BE COORDINATED BEFORE THE CONTRACTOR PROCEEDS WITH THE WORK.
CONTRACTOR
RESPONSIBILITIES
APPROVALS
OWNERNANCY BAGLIETTOHOSPITALITY HOUSE488 CROWN POINT CIRCLE, SUITE 100GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945(510) 499-4941 ARCHITECTWALLIS DESIGN STUDIO ARCHITECTS415 WEST MAIN STGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945ROBERT WALLIS, AIA(530) [email protected] FANTLE(530) [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEERMARTIN CONSULTING GROUP, INC.2204 PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 130ROCKLIN, CA 95765JON MARTIN(916)256-4816 [email protected]
ENERGY CONSULTANTMELAS ENERGY ENGINEERING547 UREN STREETNEVADA CITY, CA 95959MICHAEL MELAS(530) [email protected] CIVIL ENGINEERDUNDAS GEOMATICS, INC.159 SOUTH AUBURN ST.GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945ROBERT LAWLESS(530) [email protected] ENGINEERUP-LIGHT ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, INC.3130 TWITCHELL ISLAND ROADWEST SACRAMENTO, CA 95691JIM PUGA(916) 371 - [email protected]
GENERAL
00 COVER SHEET
01 PERSPECTIVES
02 SITE PLAN
03 PHOTO SURVEY
04 1ST FLOOR EXISTING & DEMO
05 2ND FLOOR EXISTING & DEMO
06 BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN
07 1ST FLOOR PLAN
08 2ND FLOOR PLAN
09 ROOF PLAN
10 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
11 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
12 IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
13 2-STORY PERSPECTIVES
14 2-STORY SITE PLAN
15 2-STORY 1ST FLOOR PLAN
16 2-STORY 2ND FLOOR PLAN
17 2-STORY ROOF PLAN
18 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS19 2-STORY OPTION HEIGHT
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
Scale:
Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/5/2024 3:19:55 PM
01 PERSPECTIVES
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
W W
LEGEND
CONCRETE FLATWORK(N) PROPOSED FLOOR AREA(E) EXISTING FLOOR AREA
SHEET NOTES
GENERAL NOTES
1. NONE
*
A. ALL TREES AND PLANTS ARE (E) AND TO BE RETAINED, UON.B. OWNER TO PROVIDE A BOUNDARY LINE VERIFICATION FORM TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, PREPARED BY A LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR FOR BUILDING LINES WITHIN TEN FEET OF PROPERTY LINE SETBACK, WHICH SHALL BE FLAGGED IN THE FIELD BY A LICENSED SURVEYOR PRIOR TO FIRST INSPECTIONS.
C. REFER TO "100 FT VEGETATIVE MANAGEMENT CLEARENCE REQUIRMENTS" ON SHEET A0.1
D. ROADSIDE VEGETATION: A FUEL MODIFICATION AREA SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR A DISTANCE OF 10 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY.
E. SEPERATE BUILDING PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR GRADING, AS-BUILT STRUCTURES, RETAINING WALLS, SWIMMING POOLS, DEMOLITION, DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, OUTDOOR COOKING FACILITIES, ECT.
PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINE
WATER LINE
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE CALCULATION A. BUILDING AREA: 6,218 SFB. PAVED AREA: 700 SF TOTAL 6,918 SF
LOT COVERAGE/LOT AREA: 6,918/10,249 (67% IMPERVIOUS SURFACE)PERVIOUS SURFACE MATERIALSA. DECK AREA: 1,010 SFB. PERVIOUS PAVERS: 447 SF
PERMEABLE PAVERS
N
SWITCHGEAR
TRASH CANS
(E) BUILDING
(N) ADDITION
FINISHED GRADE
12" MIN.
2" X 2" WOOD STAKE,6' MAX SPACING
FIBER ROLL
PLACING DETAIL STAKING DETAIL (NTS)
NOTES:1. FIBER ROLLS ARE TUBES MADE FROM BIO-DEGRADABLE EXCELSIOR WITH PHOTO DEGRADABLE NETTING. THEY ARE 9"-20" IN DIAMTER AND AS LONG AS CAN BE CONVENIENTLY PLACED.
2. INSTALL PARALLEL TO CONTOURS.3. VERTICAL SPACING IS MEASURED ALONG THE FACE OF SLOPE4. IF PLACED IN ROW, ROLLS SHOULD BE OVERLAPPED, NOT ABUTTED.
FIBER ROLL, SEEDETAIL THIS SHEET
8"
2:1
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
As indicated
1/5/2024 3:19:57 PM
02 SITE PLAN
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
1/8" = 1'-0" 1 SITE PLAN - PLANNING
1" = 1'-0" 2 SITE - FIBER ROLL PLACING/STAKING 13/4" = 1'-0" 3 SITE - FIBER ROLLS 1 No. Description Date
Item # 8.
Scale:
Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/5/2024 3:20:01 PM
03 PHOTO SURVEY
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME
EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
LEGEND
EXISTING WALL LOCATION TO REMAINEXISTING WALL LOCATION TO BE REMOVED GENERAL NOTESA. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A DEMOLITION PERMIT AND ANY OTHER REQUIRED APPROVALS PRIOR TO THE EXECUTION OF ANY DEMOLITION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL LABOR AND MATERIALS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE DEMOLITION, RECYCLING, STORAGE AND PROTECTION OF ALL ITEMS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA.
B. DEMOLITION WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH LOCAL ORDINANCES AND SAFETY CODES OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND RULES AND REGULATIONS OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPLICABLE TO DEMOLITION WORK.
C. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE DEMOLITION WITH THE OWNER AND SHALL MEET THE RULES AND REGULATIONS SET FORTH BY THE OWNER AND AGENCIES HAVING JURISDICTION.
D. CONTRACTOR IS ADVISED THAT THERE MAY BE UNDERGROUND OR OTHERWISE CONCEALED PIPE LINES, ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE WIRES, COLUMNS, BEAMS, FOOTINGS OR OTHER STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL OR ELECTRICAL ITEMS. ALTHOUGH THE DRAWINGS PRODUCED BY THE ARCHITECT AND HIS CONSULTANTS ARE BELIEVED TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY CORRECT, THE ARCHITECT AND OWNER DO NOT GUARANTEE THE LOCATION OR EXISTENCE OR CONDITION OF ANY CONCEALED ITEMS. CONTRACTORS MUST PROCEED WITH CAUTION DURING DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION AND MUST MAKE THEIR OWN DETERMINATION, MEASUREMENTS, AND EVALUATION OF THE WORKING CONDITION OF EXISTING CONCEALED ITEMS.
E. IF ANY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING DEMOLITION, CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY OWNER IN WRITING IMMEDIATELY. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS, LAWS AND ORDINANCES RELATIVE TO REMOVAL HANDLING, AND PROTECTION AGAINST EXPOSURE OR ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION.
F. ANY INTERRUPTION TO BUILDING UTILITIES SHALL BE CLEARED WITH OWNER 72 HOURS PRIOR TO PROPOSED INTERRUPTION.
DEMOLITION NOTICE REQUIRED
A. THE ASBESTOS NESHAP REGULATION, 40 CFR, SUBPART M SECTION 61.145 REQUIRES WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF DEMOLITION OR RENOVATION OPERATIONS.
B. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE ALL REQUIRED NOTIFICATIONS.C. CALIFORNIA AIR BOARD ASBESTOS FORM CAN BE DOWNLOADED AT:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/enf/asbestos/asbestosform.pdf
G. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING CONTAINERIZED DEBRIS REMOVAL AND RECYCLING SERVICE OF ALL DEBRIS FROM ALL TRADES AND ALL WORK RELATING TO THE PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE THE CONSTRUCTION DUMPSTER AND/OR CHUTE LOCATION WITH OWNER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT.
H. CONTRACTOR IS TO USE ADEQUATE MEANS AND METHODS OF DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL FOR THE TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED.
I. PERFORM DEMOLITION WORK IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO EXISTING FACILITIES TO REMAIN OR TO BE SALVAGED, AND TO PREVENT INJURY TO PUBLIC AND WORKMEN ENGAGED ON SITE UNDER THIS OR OTHER CONTRACTS.
J. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT THE BUILDING EXTERIOR, ROADWAY AND LANDSCAPE FROM DAMAGE DURING THE DEMOLITION. ALL DAMAGE SHALL BE REPAIRED BY CONTRACTOR AT THEIR EXPENSE AND APPROVED BY OWNER.
K. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY OWNER AND ARCHITECT AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF DEMOLISHING ITEMS NOT SPECIFIED ON THE PLANS.
L. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DEVIATIONS TO DEMOLITION PLANS.NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DEVIATIONS TO DEMOLITION PLANS.
M. ALL DOORS, WINDOWS, SIGNAGE, APPLIANCES AND LIGHT FIXTURES TO BE SALVAGED AND STORED PER OWNER'S INSTRUCTIONS.
N. WHERE FLOORING IS REMOVED, CONCRETE SLAB TO BE PREPARED FOR INSTALLATION OF NEW FLOORING MATERIAL, PER MANUFACTURER'S REQUIREMENTS.
O. ABANDONED PLUMBING PIPING & UTILITY CONDUITS TO BE DISCONNECTED & SEALED.
P. REFER TO EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR ADDITION INFORMATION.
REMOVE
DEMO WALLS,
DOORS,
CASEWORK SHOWN
DASHED
DEMO RAMP
COMPLETE
DEMO OF AREAS
SHOWN
DASHED
COMPLETE DEMO
OF (E) SHED
COMPLETE DEMO
(E) STUDIOS
DEMO STAIR
DEMO CLOSETS
DEMO STAIRS
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:20:02 PM
04 1ST FLOOREXISTING &DEMO
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME
EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
KEYNOTES
SHEET NOTES
1/4" = 1'-0" 1 1ST FLOOR DEMOLITION - PLANNING
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
DN
DEMO STAIR
LEGEND
EXISTING WALL LOCATION TO REMAINEXISTING WALL LOCATION TO BE REMOVED GENERAL NOTESA. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A DEMOLITION PERMIT AND ANY OTHER REQUIRED APPROVALS PRIOR TO THE EXECUTION OF ANY DEMOLITION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL LABOR AND MATERIALS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE DEMOLITION, RECYCLING, STORAGE AND PROTECTION OF ALL ITEMS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA.
B. DEMOLITION WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH LOCAL ORDINANCES AND SAFETY CODES OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND RULES AND REGULATIONS OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT COMMISSION OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPLICABLE TO DEMOLITION WORK.
C. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE DEMOLITION WITH THE OWNER AND SHALL MEET THE RULES AND REGULATIONS SET FORTH BY THE OWNER AND AGENCIES HAVING JURISDICTION.
D. CONTRACTOR IS ADVISED THAT THERE MAY BE UNDERGROUND OR OTHERWISE CONCEALED PIPE LINES, ELECTRICAL/TELEPHONE WIRES, COLUMNS, BEAMS, FOOTINGS OR OTHER STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL OR ELECTRICAL ITEMS. ALTHOUGH THE DRAWINGS PRODUCED BY THE ARCHITECT AND HIS CONSULTANTS ARE BELIEVED TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY CORRECT, THE ARCHITECT AND OWNER DO NOT GUARANTEE THE LOCATION OR EXISTENCE OR CONDITION OF ANY CONCEALED ITEMS. CONTRACTORS MUST PROCEED WITH CAUTION DURING DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION AND MUST MAKE THEIR OWN DETERMINATION, MEASUREMENTS, AND EVALUATION OF THE WORKING CONDITION OF EXISTING CONCEALED ITEMS.
E. IF ANY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ARE ENCOUNTERED DURING DEMOLITION, CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY OWNER IN WRITING IMMEDIATELY. CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS, LAWS AND ORDINANCES RELATIVE TO REMOVAL HANDLING, AND PROTECTION AGAINST EXPOSURE OR ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION.
F. ANY INTERRUPTION TO BUILDING UTILITIES SHALL BE CLEARED WITH OWNER 72 HOURS PRIOR TO PROPOSED INTERRUPTION.
DEMOLITION NOTICE REQUIRED
A. THE ASBESTOS NESHAP REGULATION, 40 CFR, SUBPART M SECTION 61.145 REQUIRES WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF DEMOLITION OR RENOVATION OPERATIONS.
B. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE ALL REQUIRED NOTIFICATIONS.C. CALIFORNIA AIR BOARD ASBESTOS FORM CAN BE DOWNLOADED AT:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/enf/asbestos/asbestosform.pdf
G. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING CONTAINERIZED DEBRIS REMOVAL AND RECYCLING SERVICE OF ALL DEBRIS FROM ALL TRADES AND ALL WORK RELATING TO THE PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE THE CONSTRUCTION DUMPSTER AND/OR CHUTE LOCATION WITH OWNER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT.
H. CONTRACTOR IS TO USE ADEQUATE MEANS AND METHODS OF DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL FOR THE TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED.
I. PERFORM DEMOLITION WORK IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO EXISTING FACILITIES TO REMAIN OR TO BE SALVAGED, AND TO PREVENT INJURY TO PUBLIC AND WORKMEN ENGAGED ON SITE UNDER THIS OR OTHER CONTRACTS.
J. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT THE BUILDING EXTERIOR, ROADWAY AND LANDSCAPE FROM DAMAGE DURING THE DEMOLITION. ALL DAMAGE SHALL BE REPAIRED BY CONTRACTOR AT THEIR EXPENSE AND APPROVED BY OWNER.
K. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY OWNER AND ARCHITECT AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF DEMOLISHING ITEMS NOT SPECIFIED ON THE PLANS.
L. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DEVIATIONS TO DEMOLITION PLANS.NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DEVIATIONS TO DEMOLITION PLANS.
M. ALL DOORS, WINDOWS, SIGNAGE, APPLIANCES AND LIGHT FIXTURES TO BE SALVAGED AND STORED PER OWNER'S INSTRUCTIONS.
N. WHERE FLOORING IS REMOVED, CONCRETE SLAB TO BE PREPARED FOR INSTALLATION OF NEW FLOORING MATERIAL, PER MANUFACTURER'S REQUIREMENTS.
O. ABANDONED PLUMBING PIPING & UTILITY CONDUITS TO BE DISCONNECTED & SEALED.
P. REFER TO EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FOR ADDITION INFORMATION.
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:20:02 PM
05 2ND FLOOREXISTING &DEMO
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
1/4" = 1'-0" 1 2ND FLOOR DEMOLITION - PLANNING
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
1 A4.2
2 A4.2
1867 SF
(N) STORAGE
S1
04 371 SF
(E) MECHANICAL ROOM
U
01 (N) UNDERFLOOR AREA
55' - 0 1/2"
18' - 9" 17' - 6 1/2"
37' - 4"
0.5%
VALLEY VALLEY
6' - 0 1/2"
1.5%SWITCHGEAR
VALLEY
SUMP
AREA
DRAIN
SUMP
LEGEND
(1-HR) WALL LOCATION(N) WALL LOCATIONWALL BELOW
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
As indicated
1/5/2024 3:20:03 PM
06 BASEMENTFLOOR PLAN
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME
EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
1/8" = 1'-0" 1 BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN - PLANNING
SHEET NOTES
1. (N) AREA DRAIN UNDER DECK2. (N) SUMP
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
UP
A4.0
1 2 A4.0
A4.1
2 A4.1 1
1 A4.2
2 A4.2
3 A4.2
1 A4.3
455 SF
(E) LIVING ROOM
R2
101
136 SF
(E) BEDROOM 03
R2
106
219 SF
(E) DINING ROOM
B
102
49 SF
(E) BATH 01
R2
104
121 SF
(E) BEDROOM 01
R2
105
16 SF
(E) BATH 02
R2
108
39 SF
(E) BATH 03
R2
109
271 SF
(E) HALL 02
R2
110
102 SF
(E) BEDROOM 04
R2
111
103 SF
(E) BEDROOM 05
R2
112
107 SF
(E) BEDROOM 06
R2
113
95 SF
(E) BEDROOM 07
R2
114
98 SF
LAUNDRY ROOM
R2
115
48 SF
(E) BATH 04
R2
116
167 SF
(E) BEDROOM 08
R2
117
108 SF
(N) BEDROOM 13
R2
123
145 SF
(E) BEDROOM 11
R2
121
111 SF
(E) BEDROOM 10
R2
120
92 SF
(E) OFFICE
R2
119
134 SF
(E) BEDROOM 09
R2
118
7' - 5 3/4"
7' - 0 1/4"
108 SF
(N) BEDROOM 15
R2
125
108 SF
(N) BEDROOM 14
R2
124
107 SF
(N) BEDROOM 12
R2
122
108 SF
(N) BEDROOM 16
R2
126
108 SF
(N) BEDROOM 17
R2
131
4' - 0"
(N) ADA SHOWER 02
(N) ADA SHOWER 01
108 SF
(N) BEDROOM 18
108 SF
(N) BEDROOM 20
R2
134
108 SF
(N) BEDROOM 19
R2
133
107 SF
(N) BEDROOM 21
R2
135
REF REF REF
SHELVING
STACKINGSTACKING
RELOCATED OPENING
heat pump location
GREASE TRAP W/ ACCESS HATCH
468 SF
(N) HALL 03
R2
208
4' - 3 1/2"
ALIGN
ALIGN
SHELVING
4' - 0"
ALIGN
10' - 11 1/4"
(N) DECK
EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ
5' - 5"
EQ EQ
9' - 6" 9' - 3 1/2" 9' - 3 1/2" 9' - 3" 12' - 1" 21' - 2 1/2" 12' - 3 1/4" 82' - 10 1/2" 7' - 0 1/4"
18' - 7 3/4"
5' - 11 1/4"
54' - 11 3/4"
10 1
2 10
11 2
11 1
2 A5.1 4
31 6 A5.1 5
A5.1 12
15 14
A5.1 16
13 8 7 A5.1
18 A5.1
9 17
A5.1
10 A5.1
20 A5.1
22 A5.1
24 11 21
23 19
7' - 1"
LEGEND
(1-HR) WALL LOCATION(N) WALL LOCATIONWALL BELOW
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:20:09 PM
07 1ST FLOORPLAN
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
1/4" = 1'-0" 2 1ST FLOOR - PLANNING
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
DN
1 A4.2
2 A4.2
3 A4.2
1 A4.3
104 SF
(E) OFFICE SPACE
B
207
138 SF
BEDROOM 24
R2
205
36 SF
(E) BATH 07
R2
202
272 SF
(E) HALL 03
R2
201
92 SF
BEDROOM 23
R2
204
(N) ROOF WELL
(E) ROOF ATTIC
107 SF
BEDROOM 22
R2
203
LEGEND
(1-HR) WALL LOCATION(N) WALL LOCATIONWALL BELOW
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:20:10 PM
08 2ND FLOORPLAN
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
1/4" = 1'-0" 1 2ND FLOOR PLAN - PLANNING
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
LEGEND
WALL BELOWUN-VENTED ATTIC AREA
DS DOWNSPOUT LOCATION
DRAFT STOP LOCATION OF OVERFLOW OUTLET IN SOFFIT1-HOUR RATED WALL BELOW 3 1 A4.2
A4.3
4" / 12" 4" / 12"
4" / 12" 4" / 12" 2" / 12"
2" / 12" 2" / 12"
4" / 12"
RIDGE
HIP
HIP HIP
HIP HIP
RIDGE
VALLEY
VALLEY
VALLEY
RIDGE
HIP
HIP
VALLEY
VALLEY
(N) MANSARD
ROOF
(E) ROOF (N) ROOF (N) ROOF
(E) BUILDING
4.2%
4.2% 4.2%
DS
DS
DSDS
DSDS
DS
DS
DS
DSDS AT LOWER ROOF DS DS AT UPPER ROOF DS DS
DS
DSDS DS
DS
DS
DS DS
DS DS
DSDS DS
DS
DS DS
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:20:11 PM
09 ROOF PLAN
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
1/4" = 1'-0" 1 ROOF PLAN - PLANNING
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
LEGEND
ROOFMANUFACTURE: OWENS CORNINGTYPE: TruDefinition DURATION COOL PLUSFINISH: PRAIRIE WOODWALL - ACCENTMANUFACTURE: JAMES HARDIETYPE: HARDIE® SHINGLE SIDINGPRODUCT: STAGGERED EDGE PANELCOLOR: BENJAMIN MOORE COASTAL FOG 976 F1F2
TRIMMANUFACTURE: WESTLAKE ROYAL BUILDING PRODUCTSTYPE: FASCIA, TRIM AND SOFFITPRODUCT: TRU-EXTERIORSIZE: 2X4, 2X6, 2X8, 2X10, 2X12COLOR: BENJAMIN MOORE CASTLE PEAK GRAY 1561WALL - TYPICALMANUFACTURE: JAMES HARDIETYPE: HARDIE® PLANK LAP SIDINGPRODUCT: SMOOTHCOLOR: BENJAMIN MOORE LOUISBURG GREEN HC-113 F4F3
WINDOWSMANUFACTURE: ANDERSEN TYPE: 100 SERIES WINDOWSEXT FINISH: SANDSTONEINT FINISH: WHITEHARDWARE: WHITE F6
F5 WALL - ACCENT
MANUFACTURE: JAMES HARDIETYPE: HARDIE® PANEL VERTICAL SIDINGPRODUCT: SIERRA 8COLOR: BENJAMIN MOORE CASTLE PEAK GRAY 1561 WALL - ACCENTMANUFACTURE: ELDORADO STONETYPE: FIELDLEDGEPRODUCT: PADOVA F10
LIGHTING FIXTUREMANUFACTURE: WILSON LIGHTINGMODEL: ONE LIGHT OUTDOOR WALL SCONCENUMBER: 8474176 F9
GUTTER AND DOWNSOUTMANUFACTURE: TBDSTYLE: 5" OGEE
F8
SHUTTERSMANUFACTURE: TBDCOLOR: BENJAMIN MOORE CASTLE PEAK GRAY 1561 F7
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:20:23 PM
10 EXTERIORELEVATIONS
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
KEYNOTES
1/4" = 1'-0" 2 NORTH ELEVATION - PLANNING
1/4" = 1'-0" 1 EAST ELEVATION C - PLANNING
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
LEGEND
ROOFMANUFACTURE: OWENS CORNINGTYPE: TruDefinition DURATION COOL PLUSFINISH: PRAIRIE WOODWALL - ACCENTMANUFACTURE: JAMES HARDIETYPE: HARDIE® SHINGLE SIDINGPRODUCT: STAGGERED EDGE PANELCOLOR: BENJAMIN MOORE COASTAL FOG 976 F1F2
TRIMMANUFACTURE: WESTLAKE ROYAL BUILDING PRODUCTSTYPE: FASCIA, TRIM AND SOFFITPRODUCT: TRU-EXTERIORSIZE: 2X4, 2X6, 2X8, 2X10, 2X12COLOR: BENJAMIN MOORE CASTLE PEAK GRAY 1561WALL - TYPICALMANUFACTURE: JAMES HARDIETYPE: HARDIE® PLANK LAP SIDINGPRODUCT: SMOOTHCOLOR: BENJAMIN MOORE LOUISBURG GREEN HC-113 F4F3
WINDOWSMANUFACTURE: ANDERSEN TYPE: 100 SERIES WINDOWSEXT FINISH: SANDSTONEINT FINISH: WHITEHARDWARE: WHITE F6
F5 WALL - ACCENT
MANUFACTURE: JAMES HARDIETYPE: HARDIE® PANEL VERTICAL SIDINGPRODUCT: SIERRA 8COLOR: BENJAMIN MOORE CASTLE PEAK GRAY 1561 WALL - ACCENTMANUFACTURE: ELDORADO STONETYPE: FIELDLEDGEPRODUCT: PADOVA F10
LIGHTING FIXTUREMANUFACTURE: WILSON LIGHTINGMODEL: ONE LIGHT OUTDOOR WALL SCONCENUMBER: 8474176 F9
GUTTER AND DOWNSOUTMANUFACTURE: TBDSTYLE: 5" OGEE
F8
SHUTTERSMANUFACTURE: TBDCOLOR: BENJAMIN MOORE CASTLE PEAK GRAY 1561 F7
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:20:33 PM
11 EXTERIORELEVATIONS
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
1/4" = 1'-0" 1 SOUTH ELEVATION C - PLANNING
1/4" = 1'-0" 2 WEST ELEVATION - PLANNING
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
N
SWITCHGEAR
(E) BUILDING
3,596 SQFT
PROPOSED ADDITION
2,622 SQFT
PROPOSED STAIRS
86 SQFT
PROPOSED WALK
& ADA STALL
614 SQFT
PERMEABLE DECKING (3)
616 SQFT
PERMEABLE DECKING (2)
293 SQFT PERMEABLE PAVING
447 SQFT
PERMEABLE DECKING (1)
101 SQFT
N
(E) BUILDING
4,051 SQFT
(E) PERMEABLE DECKING
292 SQFT
(E) OUT BUILDING
577 SQFT
(E) SHED
351 SQFT
(E) CONCRETE WALK &
PATIO - REAR
1,745 SQFT
(E) CONCRETE WALK &
PATIO - FRONT
1,085 SQFT
(E) GRAVEL DRIVEWAY
579 SQFT
Scale:Date:Proj. No.:Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1" = 10'-0"
1/5/2024 3:20:38 PM
12 IMPERVIOUSCOVERAGECALCULATIONS
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUEGRASS VALLEY, CA 95945FOOTHILL HOUSE OFHOSPITALITY CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
PLANNING SUBMITTAL
1" = 10'-0" 1
SITE PLAN - PROPOSED LOTCOVERAGE
1" = 10'-0" 2 SITE PLAN - LOT COVERAGE Copy 1
SITE COVERAGE CALCULATIONSIMPERVIOUS COVERAGE(E) BUILDING COVERAGE TO REMAIN: 3,596 SQFTPROPOSED BUILDING: 2,622 SQFTPROPOSED STAIRS: 86 SQFTPROPOSED WALK & ADA STALL: 614 SQFTTOTAL COVERAGE: 6,918 SQFTPERMEABLE SURFACESPERMEABLE DECKING (1): 101 SQFTPERMEABLE DECKING (2): 293 SQFTPERMEABLE DECKING (3): 616 SQFTPERMEABLE PAVING: 447 SQFTTOTAL COVERAGE: 1,457 SQFTUNCOVERED AREABACK & SIDE YARDS: 1,735 SQFTFRONT PLANTERS: 139 SQFTTOTAL COVERAGE: 1,874 SQFTIMPERVIOUS COVERAGE / TOTAL SITE AREA = SITE COVERAGE PERCENTAGE 6,918 SQFT / 10,249 SQFT = 67%
IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE + PERMEABLE SURFACES + UNCOVERED AREA = TOTAL SITE AREA 6,918 SQFT + 1,457 SQFT + 1,874 SQFT = 10,249 SQFT
SITE COVERAGE CALCULATIONSIMPERVIOUS COVERAGE(E) BUILDING COVERAGE: 4,051 SQFT(E) SHED: 351 SQFT(E) OUT BUILDING: 577 SQFT(E) WALK & PATIO - FRONT: 1,085 SQFT(E) WALK & PATIO - REAR: 1,745 SQFTTOTAL COVERAGE: 7,809 SQFTPERMEABLE SURFACES(E) GRAVEL DRIVEWAY: 579 SQFT(E) PERMEABLE DECKING: 292 SQFTTOTAL COVERAGE: 871 SQFTUNCOVERED AREABACK & SIDE YARDS: 1,569 SQFTTOTAL COVERAGE: 1,569 SQFTIMPERVIOUS COVERAGE / TOTAL SITE AREA = SITE COVERAGE PERCENTAGE 7,809 SQFT / 10,249 SQFT = 76%
IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE + PERMEABLE SURFACES + UNCOVERED AREA = TOTAL SITE AREA 7,809 SQFT + 871 SQFT + 1,569 SQFT = 10,249 SQFT
CALCULATION JUSTIFICATIONIMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ON THE SITE IS CALCULATED TO INCLUDE ALL IMPERVIOUS MATERIALS INCLUDING CONCRETE PAVING AND THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT AS DEFINED BY THE "SITE COVERAGE DEFINITION IN THE GRASS VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE: ""SITE COVERAGE." THE PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL SITE AREA OCCUPIED BY STRUCTURES AND ALL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES. STRUCTURE/BUILDING COVERAGE IS MEASURED FROM EXTERIOR WALL TO EXTERIOR WALL."THIS IMPERVIOUS CALCULATION DOES NOT INCLUDE SITE AREA THAT IS COVERED BY ANY MATERIALS DEFINED AS PERVIOUS BY THE GRASS VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE CODE STATES THAT "LANDSCAPED SOIL AND PERVIOUS PAVEMENT, INCLUDING PAVERS WITH PERVIOUS OPENINGS AND SEAMS, UNDERLAIN WITH PERVIOUS SOIL OR PERVIOUS STORAGE MATERIAL, SUCH AS A GRAVEL LAYER SUFFICIENT TO HOLD THE SPECIFIED VOLUME OF RAINFALL RUNOFF ARE NOT IMPERVIOUS SURFACES." THEREFORE, THE DECK SPACES THROUGH THE SITE AND THE PERVIOUS PAVEMENT LOCATED AT THE FRONT PATIO ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS CALCULATION AS THEY ALLOW RAIN INFILTRATION IN THESE LOCATIONS.BASED ON THESE CALCULATIONS, THE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVERATE ON THE SITE IS 76%, WITH 4979 SQFT OF THAT COVERAGE BEING THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING BUILDING, AND 2,830 SQFT BEING CONCRETE OR ASPHALT COVERING. OUR ONE STORY PROPOSED DESIGN INCLUDES 67% IMPERVIOUS SITE COVERAGE, INCLUDING 6,218 SQFT FOR THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT, AND 700 SQFT FOR CONCRETE COVERING ON SITE.
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
Scale:
Date:
Proj. No.:
Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part
without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:
Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/5/2024 3:48:43 PM
13 2-STORY
PERSPECTIVES
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUE
GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945
FOOTHILL HOUSE OF
HOSPITALITY
CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
SCHEMATIC DESIGN No. Description Date
Item # 8.
DN
W W
N
(E) BUILDING W/
NEW 2ND STORY
(N) 2 STORY ADDITION
(N) DECK WALKWAY
849 SQFT
(E) FRONT PATIO
702 SQFT
826 SQFT
3,596 SQFT
LEGEND
CONCRETE FLATWORK
(N) PROPOSED FLOOR AREA
(E) EXISTING FLOOR AREA
PROPERTY LINE
SETBACK LINE
WATER LINE
PERMEABLE PAVERS
BUILDING INFORMATION
(N) 2-STORY ADDITION WITH ADDITIONAL UNITS OVER (E) FIRST FLOOR SPACE.
BEDROOM COUNT
1ST FLOOR: 12
2ND FLOOR: 19
STUDIO UNITS: 2
TOTAL 33
Scale:
Date:
Proj. No.:
Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part
without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:
Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
As indicated
1/5/2024 3:48:43 PM
14 2-STORY SITE
PLAN
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUE
GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945
FOOTHILL HOUSE OF
HOSPITALITY
CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
1/8" = 1'-0" 1
SITE PLAN - 2-STORY
No. Description Date
SITE COVERAGE CALCULATIONS
IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE
(E) BUILDING COVERAGE TO REMAIN: 3,596 SQFT
PROPOSED BUILDING: 826 SQFT
(E) FRONT PATIO: 702 SQFT
TOTAL COVERAGE: 5,124 SQFT
PERMEABLE SURFACES
(E) DECK WALKWAY 849 SQFT
TOTAL COVERAGE: 849 SQFT
UNCOVERED AREA
BACK & SIDE YARDS: 3,978 SQFT
(E) GRAVEL DRIVEWAY: 298 SQFT
TOTAL COVERAGE: 4,276 SQFT
IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE / TOTAL SITE AREA = SITE COVERAGE PERCENTAGE 5,124 SQFT / 10,249 SQFT = 50%
IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE + PERMEABLE SURFACES + UNCOVERED AREA = TOTAL SITE AREA 5,124 SQFT + 849 SQFT + 4,276 SQFT = 10,249 SQFT
Item # 8.
D
D
W
W
UP
UP
446 SF
LIVING ROOM
R2
01 134 SF
BEDROOM 02
R2
08 225 SF
DINING ROOM
B
02 49 SF
BATH 01
R2
05 121 SF
BEDROOM 01
R2
06 136 SF
SHORT TERM POST
HOSP
R2
09 15 SF
BATH 02
R2
10 35 SF
BATH 03
R2
11 498 SF
HALL 02
R2
12 102 SF
BEDROOM 03
R2
13 103 SF
BEDROOM 04
R2
14 107 SF
BEDROOM 05
R2
15 95 SF
BEDROOM 06
R2
16 98 SF
LAUNDRY ROOM
R2
17 48 SF
BATH 04
R2
18 111 SF
BEDROOM 9
R2
23 92 SF
BEDROOM 29
R2
24 139 SF
BEDROOM 8
R2
25 REF REF REF
SHELVING
SHELVING
RELOCATED OPENING
heat pump location
351 SF
KITCHEN
R2
56 18
1 18
3 2 18
18 4
168 SF
BEDROOM 7
?
80 145 SF
BEDROOM 10
?
81 249 SF
STUDIO 01
?
257 SF 88
STUDIO 02
?
94 Scale:
Date:
Proj. No.:
Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part
without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:
Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:48:45 PM
15 2-STORY 1ST
FLOOR PLAN
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUE
GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945
FOOTHILL HOUSE OF
HOSPITALITY
CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
1/4" = 1'-0" 1
1ST FLOOR - 2-STORY DESIGN
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
DN
DN 105 SF
OFFICE SPACE
139 SF
BEDROOM 11
B
28 107 SF
BEDROOM 13
R2
29 37 SF
BATH 05
283 SF
HALL 03
1' - 7"
2' - 5"
93 SF
BEDROOM 12
R2
43 103 SF
BEDROOM 21
?
62 100 SF
BEDROOM 25
?
64 103 SF
BEDROOM 22
?
66 103 SF
BEDROOM 23
?
103 SF 67
BEDROOM 24
?
68 107 SF
BEDROOM 20
?
74 102 SF
BEDROOM 17
?
77 106 SF
BEDROOM 14
?
82 106 SF
BEDROOM 15
?
83 106 SF
BEDROOM 16
?
84 106 SF
BEDROOM 18
?
85 106 SF
BEDROOM 19
?
86 97 SF
BEDROOM 28
?
90 100 SF
BEDROOM 31
?
91 102 SF
BEDROOM 29
?
30 48 SF
BATHROOM 06
?
92 50 SF
SHOWER 02
?
95 44 SF
SHOWER 01
?
96 62 SF
BATHROOM 05
?
97 40 SF
SHOWER 03
?
98 50 SF
BATHROOM 07
?
99 Scale:
Date:
Proj. No.:
Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part
without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:
Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:48:46 PM
16 2-STORY 2ND
FLOOR PLAN
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUE
GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945
FOOTHILL HOUSE OF
HOSPITALITY
CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
1/4" = 1'-0" 1
2ND FLOOR - 2 STORY DESIGN
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
181
183
2 18
18 4
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"4" / 12"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
4" / 12"
2" / 12"
4" / 12"
3 1/8" / 12"
2" / 12" 2" / 12"
Scale:
Date:
Proj. No.:
Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part
without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:
Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:48:46 PM
17 2- STORY ROOF
PLAN
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUE
GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945
FOOTHILL HOUSE OF
HOSPITALITY
Author
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
1/4" = 1'-0"
1 ROOF Copy 1
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
Scale:
Date:
Proj. No.:
Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part
without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:
Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/5/2024 3:48:58 PM
18 EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUE
GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945
FOOTHILL HOUSE OF
HOSPITALITY
CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
1/4" = 1'-0"
1 ELEVATION 'A' - 2-STORY DESIGN
1/4" = 1'-0"
2 ELEVATION 'B' - 2-STORY DESIGN
1/4" = 1'-0"
3 ELEVATION 'C' - 2-STORY DESIGN
1/4" = 1'-0"
4 ELEVATION 'D' - 2-STORY DESIGN
No. Description Date
Item # 8.
Scale:
Date:
Proj. No.:
Drawn By:
415 W Main St
Grass Valley, CA 95945
(530) 264-7010
WallisDesignStudio.com
These drawings are the sole property of
Wallis Design Studio Architects, Inc.
Any reproduction or reuse in whole or in part
without written approval is strictly forbidden.
Stamp:
Drawing Number:
Drawing Title:
WALLIS DESIGN STUDIO
ARCHITECTS, INC.
1/5/2024 3:49:01 PM
19 2-STORY
OPTION HEIGHT
01/05/2024
2022003
131 GLENWOOD AVENUE
GRASS VALLEY, CA 95945
FOOTHILL HOUSE OF
HOSPITALITY
CF
SIERRA GUEST HOME EXPANSION
SCHEMATIC DESIGN No. Description Date
Item # 8.
From: Greg Matuzak, Principal Biologist
Greg Matuzak Environmental Consulting LLC
P.O. Box 2016
Nevada City, CA 95959
Phone: (530) 557-5077
Email:[email protected]
To: Robert Wallis
Wallis Design Studio Architects
415 W. Main Street
Grass Valley, CA 95945
[email protected]
[email protected]
Date: November 30, 2023
Re: Arborist and Tree Survey Report for the Sierra Guest House Project Located at 131 Glenwood Avenue in Grass Valley, CA
Project Background
This Arborist and Tree Survey Report (ATSR) has been developed for submission to the City of Grass Valley Planning Department for the proposed Sierra Guest House building permit application project (Project). Sierra Guest House is an assisted living facility. The proposed Project would include a new 7,254 square foot building as well as a partial remodel of the existing residence within the parcel. The new building is proposed to be a single-story building (see attached design drawings and a comprehensive site plan). The subject parcel is located at 131 Glenwood Avenue within the Brunswick Basin area of the City of Grass Valley, CA 95945. The subject parcel includes the following APN: 035-270-035 and the subject parcel is 0.20 acres in size.
The development of a single-story building would require a variance given the required dimensions of the structure within the subject parcel do not meet the typical building standards of the City of Grass Valley. An alternative design of the new building would be to construct a two-story building. However, given Sierra Guest House is an assisted living facility it would be safer for those living within the facility to not have a two-story facility.
Additionally, as described within this ATSR, a two-story facility would have an impact on an existing native oak tree that could cause a hazardous tree situation.
As designed, the Project consists of an addition within the rear section of the property with a proposal ten (10) new units to be included in the rear section construction.
Additionally, a remodel and expansion of the existing kitchen and improvement to the site within the front of the building are proposed. The existing building consists of a wood framed structure with fiber cement horizontal lap siding and asphalt composite roof. The proposed
Item # 8.
new building will include a wood framed structure with fiber cement horizontal lap siding and asphalt composition rood as well. See the attached Comprehensive Site Plan detailing the proposed construction within the subject parcel.
The subject parcel includes a large native blue oak tree along the southern border of the subject parcel and site development could impact the native oak tree directly and/or indirectly depending on the site design selected for the final Project within the subject parcel. The native oak tree in question is rooted within the neighboring parcel to the south of the subject parcel and several of its branches hang over into the subject parcel.
Therefore, this ATSR includes a recommendation to have select the final Project design that would include no additional impacts to the native blue oak tree along the property line given any additional removal of branches could create a hazard situation. Potential hazards from the removal of additional branches of the native blue oak tree could include, but are not limited, to the following: the tree dies and falls or the root system becomes unstable and impacts the foundations of either or both properties as well as the existing pool located within the parcel immediately adjacent to the subject parcel and Project area.
City of Grass Valley Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance The City of Grass Valley Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance (Chapter
12.36 within the City of Grass Valley Code of Ordinances) includes the following:
• The City of Grass Valley acknowledges the importance of trees to the community’s health, safety, welfare, and tranquility. Trees increase property values, provide visual continuity, provide shade and cooling, decrease wind velocities, control erosion, conserve energy, reduce stormwater runoff, filter airborne pollutants, reduce noise, provide privacy, provide habitat and food value, and release oxygen. In December 2005, the City Council adopted the Tree Ordinance, Chapter 12.36 of the Municipal Code, to ensure that the community trees would be prudently protected and managed so as to ensure these multiple civic benefits.
What Types of Trees Are Protected Under This Ordinance? • Tree: Any woody plant having a trunk ten (10) caliper inches or larger in Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) (54” above ground height) and as further defined within the definitions section of the Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance, Chapter 12.36.
• Significant Tree:
Any tree which measures twenty-four (24) caliper inches or larger in Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) (54” above ground height).
Item # 8.
• Heritage Trees:
Any tree listed on the official City of Grass Valley heritage tree list adopted by the City Council due to distinctive form, size, age, location, species, unique qualities, or historical significance.
• Street Trees:
Any tree within the public right-of-way.
When Are Permits Required?
The pruning or removal of any of the types of protected trees listed above (including the modification of surrounding area) may require review and/or permitting, depending on the nature of the proposed work. The matrix on the opposite side of this page presents the basic review process for tree permits in the City of Grass Valley. It is the responsibility of property owners and/or residents of the City of Grass Valley to be aware of tree-related regulations before engaging in any planning or activity that may require new tree planting or removal; or may impact existing trees. The City of Grass Valley is not responsible for location of trees marked for removal. All property lines should be verified before submitting your application. It shall be the responsibility of all licensed tree cutters or any other person who is removing the tree to have a copy of the applicable tree permit, a valid city business license and any required state licenses in his or her possession and available for inspection upon request.
Arborist and Tree Survey and Results
An arborist and tree survey was conducted on foot within the entirety of the 0.20- acre subject parcel. The arborist and tree survey was conducted by Greg Matuzak, Principal Biologist with Greg Matuzak Environmental Consulting and a Qualified Biologist on the City of Grass Valley’s list of such qualified biologists. Additionally, Mr.
Matuzak is a certified arborist and has conducted similar arborist and tree surveys for many projects within Nevada County, Nevada City, and the City of Grass Valley.
The site visit and arborist and tree survey was conducted on November 28, 2023.
A Photo Log is included in the attachments, which documents the subject parcel during the site visit and arborist and tree survey. The subject parcel does not contain any trees per the definition of the City of Grass Valley Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance given there are no trees within the subject parcel that have a minimum diameter trunk at breast height (DBH) of 10 inches or greater. However, two (2) trees rooted within the neighboring parcel immediately to the south of the subject parcel (located within the parcel at 139 Glenwood Avenue) and those 2 trees encroach within the subject parcel with branches hanging over into the subject parcel. The 2 trees include a native blue oak (Quercus douglasii) with a 22-inch DBH and a Mediterranean cypress (Cupressus sempervirens) with a 14-inch trunk DBH. Given both
Item # 8.
trees have a DBH greater than 10 inches but less than 24 inches they would both be identified as a Tree by the City of Grass Valley. However, it could be argued that there would be an exemption to remove the Mediterranean cypress given it appears to have been planted as a hedge to block off the parcel boundary view but has since grown to over 40 feet tall. The
The native blue oak tree is in moderately good condition; however, historically a few smaller branches were removed from the tree apparently given the lower, smaller branches were a nuisance to the subject parcel. The non-native Mediterranean cypress is in good condition, but it is growing up against the existing structure within the subject parcel (see attached Photo Log).
Arborist and Tree Survey Recommendations
The native blue oak tree is in moderately good condition; however, based on the remaining existing branches that grow above and over the existing structure along the southern side of the subject parcel (see attached Photo Log), any required removal of those branches as part of the proposed Project could create a hazard for the tree and the neighboring parcel. It is my understanding from discussions with the Project design team that the development of a two-story structure would require the removal of additional branches that remain above and over the existing structure within the subject parcel given the height of a two-story structure would be higher than the existing building. Therefore, the recommendation of this ATSR is the following:
• The design team should incorporate a single-story structure that would avoid the need to remove any additional branches from the existing native blue oak tree. This would allow the relatively healthy blue oak tree to remain in its present condition with no further degradation to it. This would also eliminate the need to apply for a Tree Removal Permit for any trimming or removal of the native blue oak tree.
• If a two-story structure is selected as the final design several additional branches along the northern side of the native blue oak tree would need to be removed given a two-story structure would be higher than the existing structure. This would most likely require the need to apply for a Tree Removal Permit for any trimming or removal of the native blue oak tree and mitigation for impacts to the native blue oak tree could also be required. • The removal of additional branches could make the native blue oak unbalanced and through time it could begin to sustain a decline in its ability to support itself. The tree could eventually deteriorate and/or fall, or the root structure of the tree could begin to negatively impact the foundations of the buildings adjacent to it and the pool that is also adjacent to it.
Item # 8.
• The non-native Mediterranean cypress should be removed given it is growing up along the side of the existing building within the subject parcel. Such nonnative trees pose a fire hazard given their dry nature and shape. Additionally, the tree as seen within the attached Photo Log is a nuisance to the structure within the subject parcel. Given it is a non-native tree and most likely planted initially as a hedge along the parcel boundary to increase privacy within the adjacent parcel, it is recommended that it be removed and most likely would meet the exemption policy of the City of Grass Valley and would not require a Tree Removal Permit for its removal.
If a Tree Permit is Required for the Timming of Branches and/or Tree Removal It is my understanding from discussions with the Project design team that the development of a two-story structure would require the removal of additional branches that remain above and over the existing structure within the subject parcel given the height of a two-story structure would be higher than the existing building.
Additionally, it is recommended that the Mediterranean cypress be removed.
Therefore, the City of Grass Valley has specific criteria for the removal of trees and they are outlined below.
Per the City of Grass Valley Ordinance No. 726, § 1, 4-12-2011, the following process would be required if 1) either tree needed to be removed or branches trimmed and 2) the City of Grass Valley requires a Tree Removal Permit for such actions regarding either tree.
12.36.080 - Criteria for issuance of tree removal permit.
An applicant for a tree removal permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. The tree permit administrator may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit.
A. Hazard Tree. The tree permit administrator shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the applicant
demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal:
1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear that it is likely to fall and injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a
tree that is located within public rights-of- way and is causing damage to existing public or private facilities or services and such facilities or services cannot be
relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must
Item # 8.
demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree
presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable
danger of property damage to an existing structure and
such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated
by treatment or pruning.
2. The city may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to Section 12.36.085 of this chapter (outlined below). Such mitigation
requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
B. Tree that is Not a Hazard. The city shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the
applicant demonstrates one of the following two
options:
1. The tree is proposed for removal in order for the
property to achieve compliance with other
applicable city requirements and standards (i.e., other applicable site design and use standards). The tree
permit administrator may require the building footprint of an improvement that would prompt the removal of a
tree to be staked on the property prior to removal of
the tree;
2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks;
Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within two hundred feet of the subject property. The city shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted by the city zoning ordinances. In making this determination, the city may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the city zoning ordinance.
The city shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to Section 12.36.085 outlined below. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
Item # 8.
12.36.085 - Mitigation required.
An applicant may be required to provide mitigation for any tree approved for removal. The mitigation requirement shall be satisfied by one or more of the following:
A. Replanting On-site. The applicant shall plant either a minimum one and one-half-inch caliper healthy and wellbranched deciduous tree or a five- to six-foot tall evergreen tree for each tree removed. The replanted tree shall be of a species that will eventually equal or exceed the removed tree in size if appropriate for the new location. The tree shall be planted and maintained in accordance with city
policies and standards or recommendations provided by an arborist.
B. Replanting Off-site. If in the city's determination there is insufficient available space on the subject property, the replanting required in subsection A of this section shall occur on other property in the applicant's ownership or control within the city, in an open space tract that is part of the same subdivision, or in a city- owned or dedicated open space or park. Such mitigation planting is subject to the approval of the authorized property owners. If planting on city-owned or dedicated property, the city may specify the species and size of the tree. Nothing in this section shall be construed as an obligation of the city to allow trees to be planted on city-owned or dedicated property.
C. Payment in Lieu of Planting. If in the city's determination no feasible alternative exists to plant the required
mitigation, the applicant shall pay into the tree account an amount as established by resolution of the city
council.
Conclusions
The site survey and arborist and tree inventory survey identified 2 trees. One native blue oak tree that is in moderately good condition and a non-native Mediterranean cypress that is in good condition. Both of the trees are located along the southern border of the subject parcel and rooted in the adjacent parcel directly to the south of the subject parcel and structure to be removed and replaced with a
Item # 8.
proposes single-story structure.
Based on the remaining existing branches of the native blue oak tree that grow above and over the existing structure along the southern side of the subject parcel (see attached Photo Log), any required removal of those branches as part of the proposed Project could create a hazard for the tree and the neighboring parcel.
Therefore, it is recommended that the blue oak tree be avoided and thus no tree removal or branch removal would be required. If the development of a two-story structure is selected it would require the removal of additional branches that remain above and over the existing structure within the subject parcel given the height of a two-story structure would be higher than the existing building and thus a City of Grass Valley Tree Removal Permit would be required.
The tall Mediterranean cypress should be removed given it is a non-native species and is growing up along the side of the existing building along the southern border of the subject parcel. Given the tall and dry conditions of the cypress it represents a hazard from potential fire and a hazard to the existing building and the proposed construction of a new building at that location. Given the cypress was most likely planted as a hedge to create more backyard privacy within the parcel directly to the south of the subject parcel, it cypress most likely would meet the exemption definition outlined within the City of Grass Valley Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance. Whether a Tree Removal Permit is required or not, the tree should be removed and given it is not a significant or heritage tree and it is a non-native tree, no mitigation should be required for the removal of the cypress.
Lastly, if a two-story structure is developed within the subject parcel and it encroaches into the branches of the native blue oak tree, a Tree Removal Permit would be required most likely by the City of Grass Valley. Though the tree is not a significant tree or heritage tree, removal or trimming of the tree could require the Tree Removal Permit. If such a permit is required, mitigation for the trimming or removal of the tree shall be through the tree preservation fund established for the City of Grass Valley given there is no on-site location for mitigation planting and the Project applicant would not want to conduct an off-site mitigation project for the removal or impact of any tree. The payment through the tree preservation fund is to be directed towards planting of trees on publicly owned property, easements, or within rights-of-way.
The Project shall comply with Section 12.36.160 of the City’s Ordinance for activities within drip lines of trees. Grading, irrigation, and paving beneath trees to be retained shall be given special attention. Every reasonable effort shall be made to avoid creating conditions adverse to the tree's health. Given the subject parcel is already paved and developed, no additional impacts will occur within the drip line of any tree located adjacent to the subject parcel.
Item # 8.
Attachments
Item # 8.
11/28/23, 2:23 PM Parcel Information Report
https://reports.nevcounty.net/property/rdPage.aspx?rdReport=parcel.ParcelReport&APN=035270035000 1/2 County of Nevada
Nevada County, CA Parcel Report
Search by Assessor's Parcel Number (APN): 035-270-035-000 Search View Assessor's Parcel Map PDF
Site Address
131 GLENWOOD AVENUE
Jurisdiction
GRASS VALLEY CITY
Legal Description
PTN NE 1/4 23-16-8
Data current as of: 11/27/2023
Description: The Parcel Report displays information from a variety of sources – Assessor, Building, Code Enforcement, Environmental Health, and Planning departments to list a few.
The report is maintained by the County GIS Division.
Site Information Property Details Districts Permits Unrecorded Maps Nevada County GIS
Item # 8.
11/28/23, 2:23 PM Parcel Information Report
https://reports.nevcounty.net/property/rdPage.aspx?rdReport=parcel.ParcelReport&APN=035270035000 2/2 Property Summary
Assessor's Parcel Number Acreage Land Value Improvement Value Tax Rate Area 035-270-035-000 0.20 $102,000.00 $586,500.00 001-056
Property Context
Zoning Zoning
District
Map
General
Plan
Census
Tract
Census
Block
Group
Max
Elevation
Ground Snow
Load (lbs/sqft)
Climate
Zone
Wind
Exposure
R-1
GVCity
52c
ULD
GVCity
5.01 2 2,667 49 11 C
Item # 8.
Item # 8.
Item # 8.
Item # 8.
Item # 8.
Photo Log of the Project Area During the Site Survey on November 27th, 2023 Photo 1: Existing access into the subject parcel off of Glenwood Avenue. The hedges to the right are along the parcel border. Two trees along the parcel border are a concern.
Photo 2: The existing large non-native tree along the parcel border is a hazard tree given it is a fire danger and a danger to instrastructure within the subject parcel.
Item # 8.
Photo 3: The native blue oak tree to the left would be impacted significantly by a twostory development. A single story development would avoid the tree’s canopy.
Photo 4: It is recommended the tall non-native tree behind the structure be removed as it is a fire and structural hazard, while it is recommended the oak tree not be impacted.
Item # 8.
Photo 5: The large native blue oak tree would require branch removal for a two-story structure, which would create a hazard for the neighboring parcel where tree is rooted.
Item # 8.
Photo 6: A two-story structure would require overhanging branches to be removed. The tree would be side heavy to the left and could fall or damge the foundation and/or the neighboring pool where the tree is rooted within the adjacent parcel to the Project.
Item # 8.
Photo 7: Back of the existing site development where future expansion will occur. No trees are located within the parcel except for the native oak and non-native tree.
Photo 8: Cottonwood trees are located within the adjacent parcel behind the subject parcel and will not be impacted by the Project.
Item # 8.
Photo 9: Existing structure within the subject parcel from along Glenwood Avenue. Only the tall non-native tree in photo and the blue oak tree encroach within the parcel.
Photo 10: Far side of the subject parcel with no native trees or encroachment of trees within the parcel.
Item # 8.