Los Gatos City Council
June 21, 2022

ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A 2 of 11
Walter Levison  2022 All Rights Reserved
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Cell (415) 203-0990 Email [email protected]
Executive Summary
WLCA is formally re-applying for the 2022 Town of Los Gatos Consulting Arborist on-call position. His sole proprietorship Millbrae office is located in relatively close proximity to Town of Los Gatos, giving him the ability to respond rapidly to Town Staff work requests, whether the assignment be a single tree requiring TRAQ risk rating determination, or a large scale commercial site assessment project that requires complex tree protection analysis.

With 21 years of experience working with City of Belmont Planning Division Staff as the Contract Planning Arborist, 7 years of experience working with Town of Los Gatos Planning Division Staff as the Contract Planning Arborist, 5 years of experience working as the Hetch Hetchy Water System contract consulting arborist, and more than a decade of experience working on large scale Stanford University renovation projects for the University, WLCA’s knowledge and ability to prepare high quality written reports in a rapid manner is recognized throughout the Bay Area and California.

WLCA’s intent is to maintain the current working relationship with Town of Los Gatos Planning Division Staff, with continued preparation of high quality written arborist reports of all types, while communicating with Town Staff in the friendly, professional manner WLCA is known for.

This RFQ response dated 3/20/2022 includes all elements of the required submittal per Ms. Jennifer Armer’s 3/8/2022 RFQ letter received by WLCA’s office on 3/11/2022.

All single family residential site arborist reports with 20 or less trees will be performed at the regular $2,000 fee allotted for these projects per Town protocol, as of 2022.

Single family residential site arborist reports for sites with greater than 20 trees will be performed for the regular $2,000 fee allotted per Staff protocol, plus an additional consulting fee dependent on the actual number of additional trees beyond 20 count, and will be contingent upon Staff approval and applicant approval of the additional fee.

Commercial site type arborist report fees will depend on the number of trees requiring assessment by the consultant, and will be negotiated accordingly.

Reference Inserts:
• 2022 WLCA business brochure has been partially excerpted and included below in section 3. • WLCA’s 2022 rate sheet is included below in section 6.

Reference Attachments:
• 2022 WLCA Statement of Qualifications (SOQ), on PDF page #77. • 2022 WLCA Municipal References (Partial), on PDF page #80. • 2022 General Liability and Professional Liability Certificate, on PDF page #82. • Two (2) recent arborist reports in PDF format are attached as samples of WLCA’s work:
o Sample report #1 is located on PDF page #12.
o Sample report #2 is located on PDF page #44.
o Refer also WLCA’s numerous arborist reports prepared for Town of Los Gatos Planning Division Staff between 2015 and 2022 that were submitted electronically to various Staff planners.

ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A 3 of 11
Walter Levison  2022 All Rights Reserved
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Cell (415) 203-0990 Email [email protected]
Additional Introductory Information
WLCA maintains both the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) arborist certification and the American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) registered consulting arborist (RCA) status, attending various functions to maintain a high level of current information regarding local northern California pests, diseases, and other factors that affect arboriculture in our geographic area. Both of these qualifications require the arborist to study and/or attend relevant seminars to gain continuing education units and maintain active status.

WLCA also maintains the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) TRAQ (tree risk assessment qualified) risk assessor qualification which requires periodic education and retesting to maintain status.

WLCA is equipped to perform advanced decay detection tree risk analysis using an invasive Resistograph F300 drilling device, as well as mallet sounding and other techniques. WLCA maintains the ISA tree risk assessment qualification (“TRAQ”) status in addition to the above-noted qualifications, so that tree risk assessment can be performed per international standards. WLCA performs level 1 “limited visual” tree risk assessments, level 2 (“basic”) risk assessments, and level 3 “advanced” assessments using Resistograph drilling results to determine risk.

WLCA’s weekdays are stratified into field and office days, with most field investigation work being performed for private and municipal clients on Mondays and Tuesdays, while the remainder of the work week is spent in the office preparing arborist reports. WLCA is still available on office days for on-call rush assignments such as, but not limited to, construction site monitoring emergencies involving root pruning or TRAQ tree risk assessment.

3. Qualifications & Experience*
Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist (owner, sole proprietor) will perform all work for the Town of Los Gatos.

Cell (415) 203-0990
• *See also the attached Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) version 2022 on PDF page #77 for a formalized version of Walter Levison qualifications and experience. • *See also the attached Municipal References version 2022 on PDF page #80, which includes Mr. Joel Paulson, Town of Los Gatos Director of Planning and Community Development, who WLCA has been working under continuously since 2015 as the Town of Los Gatos contract planning division arborist.

City of Millbrae (2021-onward)
Since 2021, WLCA has acted as the unofficial City of Millbrae consulting arborist by providing on-call as-needed services to Parks Department, specifically focusing on TRAQ risk rating determinations for large eucalyptus and other large canopy type tree specimens on both private and public properties.

In 2021 alone, WLCA produced three large scale type arborist reports detailing TRAQ risk ratings for over 200 eucalyptus specimens on Parks Department controlled lands.

Millbrae skate park spur trail area trees were rated for TRAQ risk, with very specific target identification by WLCA, so that the City Parks Department could prioritize limited budget money for risk-reduction pruning and risk reduction tree removal (white gum eucalyptus specimens), identifying trees that threatened the highest occupancy targets and highest value type targets, including nearby high voltage electrical wires, residential homes, a high use skate park, a high school track and field facility with sports bleachers, and a high-use trail used by joggers, dog walkers, and other pedestrians.

ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A 4 of 11
Walter Levison  2022 All Rights Reserved
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Cell (415) 203-0990 Email [email protected]
Lomita spur trail area trees (blue gum eucalyptus) were assessed to determine TRAQ risk ratings to help the City identify how best to use limited tree removal budget to reduce risk of tree and tree part failure and impact with nearby residences, and reduce risk of wildland/urban interface fire from reaching those properties through a reduction in the number of large-canopy type eucalyptus forest trees.

Town of Los Gatos (2015-onward)
WLCA has prepared a large number of arborist reports to Town of Los Gatos Planning Division Staff over the last 7 years, including residential site reports, commercial site reports, and non-standard type reports involving roadway construction in the Town’s hill areas.

Hill Area Roadways
Roadway construction required per the Fire Marshall was mandated on one site where an older roadway was to be significantly widened to allow for modern fire trucks to access the remote location. This work would have resulted in severe damage or total root plate destruction on one or more sides of mature oak specimens being retained along the roadway. Staff and WLCA worked together to reach a compromise solution whereby the roadway would be widened to meet the Fire Marshall’s required roadway width, while simultaneously allowing the oak specimens to be retained and protected in place (PIP) through use of curvilinear roadway forms that swung side to side in such a manner as to avoid the most important tree specimens, impacting only smaller tree specimens in poor condition. Construction offset distances were thus built into the plan such that proposed new deep cut road base work did not require removal of the large oak specimen trees being retained along the roadway.

Illegal Construction
In another instance, WLCA worked with Staff to assess illegal construction by an applicant. WLCA identified apparent impacts to trees from the applicant’s illegal residential construction, and determined mitigation where appropriate, calculating that mitigation in terms of loss of appraised dollar value of the impacted tree specimens. The owner/applicant was required to mitigate damages to the trees through removal of some illegal work, and through payment of in-lieu fees to account for that loss of tree value caused directly by the illegal work.

City of Belmont (1999-2020) 21 Years
The City of Belmont, where WLCA presided as contract city arborist to the planning division for a 21 year period, was a steep hillside community very similar to residential properties within the Town of Los Gatos. WLCA assessed hundreds of development project tree impacts on properties with steep slope characteristics, some of which also exhibited urban/wildland interface fire safety issues. WLCA performed initial tree surveys on these properties, following up with plan checks, construction monitoring on a periodic basis, and issuing stop work orders and damage fees based on construction damage to the trees when applicable. The goal in Belmont was to work with the private site plan development teams on a friendly basis, allowing City- authorized work to proceed at a normal pace, while maintaining a professional Best Management Practices level of tree root zone protection adequate for long term native oak tree survival.

Various other departments within the City of Belmont government such as Public Works Department, City Attorney’s Office, and Parks Department periodically contacted WLCA to prepare appraisals (dollar valuations) of illegal tree damages and tree removals (e.g. unauthorized view preservation pruning, vehicle impacts, removal of trees along the City right of way, etc.).

Urban/Wildland Interface Fire Issues
WLCA worked with Belmont Staff and with applicants’ project teams to finalize landscape plans for urban/wildland interface areas of very high fire risk. Methodology included delineation of fire modification zones A, B, C, and D, whereby existing forest trees and shrubs would be pruned or removed to achieve certain fire resistance goals set forth

ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A 5 of 11
Walter Levison  2022 All Rights Reserved
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Cell (415) 203-0990 Email [email protected]
by the California Department of Forestry (CDF), such as use of only fire resistive plant materials for new landscaping, vertical crown raising of existing tree canopies, and horizontal reduction of existing tree canopies to achieve 10 feet linear spacing between canopy edges.

Qualifications and Experience (Excerpted from WLCA 2022 Business Brochure):

Examples of Major Consulting Projects / Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist (WLCA) o On-call Consulting Arborist, City of Millbrae, California.

Unofficial Parks Department arborist for City of Millbrae since 2021. Prepared three (3) large scale TRAQ risk rating determination type reports for 200+ trees on undeveloped and developed park lands for Parks Dept in 2021, to reduce both risk of Urban/Wildland Interface fire and risk of physical tree impact damage to residential homes and their occupants.
o Contract Town Arborist, Town of Los Gatos, California. Planning arborist for Community Development Department continuously for 5 years, since 11/15.
o Contract City Arborist, City of Belmont, California.

Planning arborist for Planning Dept, Parks Dept, Public Works Dept, and City Attorney’s office continuously for 21 years, 1999 to 2020.
o San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC).

Contract Project Arborist, Bay Division Pipelines #3, 4, and 5. (Hetch Hetchy Water System Improvement Program).

Tree database creation, high risk tree analysis, prescribe tree impact mitigation measures to preserve key oak specimens, root pruning, root preservation zone delineation. 2010 to 2015. o City of Menlo Park, California.

Street tree assessment of nearly 3,000 mature trees using innovative set of ten ‘defects and hazards’ parameters.

Assign action priority ratings to trees to effectively manage tree risk. Prepare new street tree management plan for Staff. Acquire hard-to-find oak species for street tree replacement program. o City of American Canyon, California.

City-wide street tree and parks tree GPS survey and assessment with action priority rankings. Presented tree risk assessment seminar to Staff.

Relevant Experience
2015 – 2022 Contract Town Arborist, Town of Los Gatos (current as of date of writing) (7 years) Community Development Department (Planning Division) 2010 – 2015 San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) (5 years) Contract Project Arborist, Bay Division
Pipe Lines 3, 4, & 5
2001 – 2006 Commissioner, City of Millbrae Community Preservation Commission (Tree Board) 1999 – 2020 Contract City Arborist, City of Belmont
(21 years) Community Development Department (Planning Division) 1999 Barrie D. Coate and Associates
Associate consulting arborist
1999 – present Independent Consulting Arborist
(23 years)
7/98 – 11/98 Bartlett Tree Expert Co.

IPM technician, arborist, and tree pruner

ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A 6 of 11
Walter Levison  2022 All Rights Reserved
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Cell (415) 203-0990 Email [email protected]
1996 – 1998 Western Environmental Consultants
Consulting utility forester to PG & E
1995 U.S. Forest Service
Biotechnician and hydrotechnician
Tree surveys and watershed restoration
1994 - 1995 U.S. National Park Service
Habitat restoration volunteer (Tennessee Valley Nursery, GGNRA) 1991 - 1993 U.S. Peace Corps, Chiangmai, Thailand
Agroforestry extension/Soil and Water Conservation / Environmental education Education
ASCA Arboricultural Consulting Academy Graduate, Class of 2000 B.A. Environmental Studies/Soil and Water Resources
University of California, Santa Cruz, 1990
UCSC Chancellor’s Award, 1990
Licenses
Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (ISA TRAQ)
ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401
ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A
Publications (partial list)
“Kino: The unique and mysterious exudate of eucalyptus” “Responsibly planning a tree preservation system: City of Belmont” “Resistance of eucalyptus species to the red gum lerp psyllid in the Bay Area” 2001 Pan-Pacific Entomologist 77(4) (co-author)
“Rootball treatment for optimal tree growth” Pacific Horticulture 69(1) (Levison and Muffly) “Case Study: Tree Preservation Using Tunneling Technology” “Ronald McDonald House at Stanford Preserves Historic Wooded Roadway” Professional Affiliations
Member, International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)
Member, Western Chapter, ISA
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists Litigation
Current Litigation Against WLCA: None
Past Litigation Against WLCA: None

ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A 7 of 11
Walter Levison  2022 All Rights Reserved
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Cell (415) 203-0990 Email [email protected]

4. Organization
Walter Levison will be the sole arborist performing all services for the Town of Los Gatos, which eliminates quality control problems and ensures that tree measurement and tree condition assessment is accurate and precise, using only the most current protocols and standards.

WLCA may be available for short notice assignments (RUSH fees of the regular hourly rate X 2) will apply) if WLCA is provided with 24-hour notice during regular working hours. In some instances, same-day service may also be available, with RUSH fees.
24-hour turnaround project completion is possible for some jobs such as simplistic situations involving 1 to 5 trees.

Other larger or more complex jobs may require 48 hours or more turnaround.

All arborist report work products will be sent via email in PDF format.

5. Project Approach
The following is WLCA’s approach to municipal work when performing site plan tree assessment for planning department Staff, based on 21years of experience with City of Belmont hillside development projects, and 7 years of experience with Town of Los Gatos hillside development projects. Anticipated constraints, problems, and issues are noted in the linear outline:
a. Applicant submits plans to planning division, along with standard $2,000 arborist review fee (current fee as of 2022).
b. Planning Staff emails Town Consulting Arborist a written consulting agreement with the $2,000 fee limit for work, which consultant signs and returns to the planner. c. Planner emails consultant a link to the applicant’s digital set of plans in PDF format that have been submitted to Planning Division for review by Staff and by consultant.

Plans typically include a topographic survey of existing site conditions, scaled site plan sheet, and scaled grading and drainage plan sheet, all with north arrows indicated. One or more of these sheets typically shows most tree mainstem base locations as a black “plot dot”, for all trees measuring 4 inches diameter or greater at

4.5 feet above grade, which is the typical planner-standard level of review, and the Town of Los Gatos ordinance minimum diameter that is required for a woody plant specimen in the landscape to be considered a “regulated tree”.

In some cases a landscape plan sheet, irrigation plan sheet, and utility plan sheet are also included in the set of plans, along with other sheets not related to the tree impact analysis process. d. Town Arborist (consultant) physically visits the site, tags each tree with a permanent aluminum numbered tag, archives a digital image of each tree, records all standard arboriculture data including notes on all foreseeable impacts based on current proposed set of project plans, and returns to office. Consultant prepares a written arborist report document with comprehensive analysis of the applicant’s proposed plans, including a tree map markup showing suggested redesigns, fence alignments, soil protection buffers, trunk buffers, and/or other elements that optimize tree survival over the long term. The document contains an Excel format tree database with all standard tree data, a summary table detailing dollar valuation appraisals for each tree plus the required changes necessary to bring impacts down to “less than significant”, and the number of required 24” box or 15 gallon size mitigation replacement tree plantings to meet the Town’s “tree canopy replacement standard” (table 3-1 from the Town’s current tree ordinance).

ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A 8 of 11
Walter Levison  2022 All Rights Reserved
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Cell (415) 203-0990 Email [email protected]
Detailed tree specimen-specific recommendations for maintenance, protection, and design changes are also included at the end of the report, along with a digital images (photographs) section documenting the current preproject site conditions for reference. The recommendations are based on scientific studies and industrystandard reference texts that include various arboriculture Best Management Practices (BMP). They are also based on WLCA’s 23 years of full-time, professional experience with hillside development project tree assessment and management in the Bay Area.

Town Arborist emails the arborist report to planner as a standalone PDF, along with notes on any items that require additional attention. An unlocked Word document version of the report is also emailed to planner, so that planner can copy and paste information from the report into their Staff report. e. Issue1: If a scaled grading and drainage plan sheet and/or a landscape+irrigation plan sheet(s) is/are not present in the packet of plan sheets, Town Arborist asks planning Staff planner to request that the applicant’s project team members generate a digital copy of that sheet in PDF format for Arborist review, so that the project’s impacts to trees can more fully be assessed by the Arborist. Staff or the applicant project team can then email the sheet to Arborist as a PDF.
f. Issue2: If one or more site trees is not plotted on the sheet(s) in the packet, then Town Arborist hand-plots the tree(s) onto the sheet using Adobe Pro during the tree map markup phase of the arborist report preparation process.
g. Issue3: If one or more plan sheet does not contain a North arrow or a scale bar, then Town Arborist either requests that Town Staff planner obtain new sheet(s) from the applicant with these items added by the applicant’s project team, or uses a compass and known key-off points in the field to determine scale and North azimuth.
h. Issue4: If there are any remaining items that are left unresolved in the applicant’s proposed site plan, such as lack of a proposed storm drain line trench route on the grading and drainage plan, or lack of detail concerning a proposed retaining wall footing within the canopy dripline of a protected-size tree, then Town Arborist (consultant) emails planner associated with that project so that planner can note the issue as an item of “noncompliance” to be emailed to the applicant in a formal Staff planner comments or non-compliance letter. Town Arborist will then coordinate future plan check with the planner so that the item can be resolved prior to finalization of the project review by planner. Typically, the applicant’s project team will revise the sheet(s) to add the missing information during consultant’s review of the project plan set, allowing the arborist report to incorporate the missing information as part of his work product submitted to the Town Staff planner. i. Issue5: If there does not appear to be any way to relocate a proposed construction element of applicant’s plans that will cause or is expected to cause a significant negative impact near a protected-size tree (e.g. a residence foundation footprint limit of excavation that encroaches far into the canopy dripline of a 24” diameter coast live oak specimen in good condition on a narrow lot), then the Town Arborist, after discussion with Staff planner, may recommend in his arborist report that a pre-construction tree protection bond be posted by the applicant with the Town, in the amount of the full appraised value of the tree (or another dollar amount to be determined by tree species, diameter, etc.).

Town Inspector Staff can later determine, prior to the built-out project “final occupancy signoff” by Staff, if the entire bond amount, or a portion of the bond, should be retained by the Town, based on the subject tree’s above-ground and below-ground health and structural condition after all site work including landscaping and irrigation line trenching is complete. The final occupancy signoff signature by Town Inspector Staffpersons can be withheld until such time as the project applicant deposits the appropriate tree damage mitigation fee with the Town. Town can then use this fee for Parks Department tree maintenance and planting activities at their discretion.

ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A 9 of 11
Walter Levison  2022 All Rights Reserved
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Cell (415) 203-0990 Email [email protected]

6. Public Meetings + Informal Agreements + Rate Sheet
Public Meetings
Public meeting attendance will be billed hourly at the regular $200/hour rate* for all time, portal to portal, with a minimum 4 hour charge per meeting (4 X $200/hr = $800.).

Peer review studies and special studies will be billed hourly at the regular rate of $200/hour for all time, portal to portal.

Development proposal tree assessment will be determined by the number of trees on site, and will be billed hourly for all time, portal to portal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WLCA & Town Staff Informal Agreements
Per WLCA’s position as the Town of Los Gatos Town consulting arborist (planning division) continuously between 2015 and 2022 (present), Town Planning Division Staff and WLCA informally agreed that:
• WLCA will prepare “single family residential site” type arborist reports not to exceed the standard $2,000 arborist review fee collected by Town Planning Staff from applicants, for sites with between approximately 1 and 20 trees on a single lot.
• WLCA will request additional funds “to be determined”, for single family residential lot projects with greater than approximately 20 trees on a single lot. Typical lump sum amounts collected from applicants by Town Planning Staff between 2015 and 2022 for these “larger lot” situations with higher quantity of trees were in the $3,000 to $4,000 range.
• WLCA preparation of “commercial site” type arborist reports will be on an hourly basis at the regular hourly rate, and collected by Staff from the applicant as a lump sum amount determined by WLCA, based on his estimated time needed to complete the scope of work.

Typical lump sum amounts collected by Town Planning Staff from applicants between 2015 and 2022 for commercial sites and “non-standard sites” were in the $3,000 to $4,000 range, with additional $1,000 or $2,000 lump sum amounts requested by Staff from the applicant for use by consulting arborist in cases where subsequent additional tree analysis was necessary (for example, when the applicant resubmitted a new revised set of plans two years after the original submittal set was received by Planning Division). • WLCA will use the Best Management Practices: Root Management (2017) booklet definition of “Critical Root Zone” defined as 6 times the trunk diameter at 4.5 feet above grade, as one of the standards for determining below-ground construction-related impacts to trees, when analyzing applicant plan sheets. • WLCA will include a “tree conservation suitability” (TCS) rating for each tree in his Town Arborist reports, using the protocols and criteria defined in Best Management Practices: Managing Trees During Construction, 2nd edition (2016) booklet.

It is WLCA’s intention that the above informal working agreements between WLCA and Town Staff be continued and wrapped into the 2022 RFQ for Town of Los Gatos Consulting Arborist. *See 2022 WLCA rate sheet below on page 10 of this RFQ

ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A 10 of 11
Walter Levison  2022 All Rights Reserved
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Cell (415) 203-0990 Email [email protected]
2022 Rate Sheet / Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist

ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A 11 of 11
Walter Levison  2022 All Rights Reserved
Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture Cell (415) 203-0990 Email [email protected]

7. Examples of Work
(See two (2) recent WLCA arborist report samples in PDF format attached to the end of this RFQ).

SAMPLE REPORT #1 ON PDF PAGE #12
SAMPLE REPORT #2 ON PDF PAGE #44

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 1 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Assessment of Seven (7) Regulated Site Trees for Mini ARB Submittal (>4.0 inches diameter at 4.5 feet above grade)
3440 Hillview
Mini ARB Submittal - West Side of Building
Palo Alto, California
Prepared for:

Mr. Greg Gehlen
Alexandria Real Estate (ARE) San Francisco #69, LLC
1700 Owens Street, #590
San Francisco, CA 94158
Field Visit:

Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist (WLCA)
(2021-2022)
Report by WLCA
2/18/2022

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 2 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Table of Contents

1.0 Summary & Summary Table ____________________________________________________________ 3

2.0 Assignment & Background _____________________________________________________________ 6

3.0 City of Palo Alto, CA / What Trees are Regulated by the City? _________________________________ 8

4.0 ISA TRAQ Risk Rating Determinations ___________________________________________________ 10

5.0 WLCA Tree Preservation Rating (TPR) System ____________________________________________ 11

6.0 Tree Protection and Maintenance Recommendations _______________________________________ 12

7.0 Author’s Qualifications (Partial) _________________________________________________________ 19

8.0 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions ____________________________________________________ 20

9.0 Certification ________________________________________________________________________ 21

10.0 Digital Images _____________________________________________________________________ 22

11.0 Tree Location Map Markup (WLCA) on SDI Plan Sheet_____________________________________ 29

12.0 Arborist Certification Letter ___________________________________________________________ 30

13.0 Tree Data Excerpted from WLCA Hillview Master Tree Database Iteration 2/5/2022 ______________ 31

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 3 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

1.0 Summary & Summary Table
1a. TREES ASSESSED / TREE DISPOSITION:

WLCA assessed a total of 7 tree regulated-size (greater than 4.0” diameter at 4.5 feet above grade) specimens in a non-sequential tree tag range, using data collected during WLCA’s survey of the site in 2021 and early 2022.

The total subset of trees assessed for the MINI ARB SUBMITTAL is:

Trees #28a, 29a, 30a, 31a, 110, 111, and #1677 (see attached tree map markup by WLCA for reference). Only trees #110 and #111 are proposed to be removed at this time, due to direct conflicts with proposed new concrete pad construction per plan sheet L6.01 dated 11/15/2021.

The following is a breakdown of how these trees are going to be handled in terms of maintenance, preservation or removal, and construction conflicts related to the proposed Mini Arb work shown on the tree map markup along the west sides of the existing 3440 Hillview building.

Author’s Side Note on Jurisdiction:
3440 Hillview is a Stanford University lease land area, governed by Stanford, and not by City of Palo Alto, California municipal authorities. However, given that the area is within the vicinity of City jurisdiction (e.g. public roadways, etc.), the author decided to prepare this report using City of Palo Alto standards set forth by their municipal tree ordinance governing private trees, and per their Tree Technical Manual (TTM) which outlines specific tree mitigation and tree reporting requirements for projects occurring within their municipal area of influence. Therefore, the author includes information in this report including the TTM tree replacement table.

Two (2) trees #110 and #111 are proposed to be removed due to project conflicts.

TREE MITIGATION WILL BE ADDRESSED IN THE FORM OF IN-LIEU FEE PAYMENTS AND/OR TREE CANOPY REPLACEMENT PLANTINGS ON-SITE, PER THE UPCOMING 2022 HILLVIEW ENHANCEMENT MASTER PLAN (HEMP). THEREFORE, MITIGATION FOR TREE REMOVALS SHOULD NOT BE

REQUIRED AT THIS TIME, GIVEN THAT THE TREE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT TOTALS ARE ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE OVERARCHING “HEMP” DOCUMENTS BEING DEVELOPED BY THE PROJECT TEAM.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 4 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
SUMMARY TABLE 1.0 / MINI ARB 3440 HILLVIEW (WEST SIDE)
Tree
Tag
Number
WLCA Assessment
Removal
Per
Plan?
Protect-In-Place (PIP)?
Maintenance Required?
Tree
Preservation
Rating
(TPR) per
WLCA1
28a
Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis) in fair overall
condition, adjacent to project limit of work. Lower
TRAQ risk rating. Can be retained for now.

No.

PIP.

Fencing and TB (trunk buffer) wraps.

Use trunk buffer wrap and chain link “Tree Protection Zone” (TPZ) fencing to protect above ground and below ground
portions of tree.
6 29a
Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis) in fair overall
condition rating. Located up slope on very steep
hillside, above and offset from proposed project work.

No trunk buffer protection needed. Fence used for
#28a will protect this tree.

TRAQ risk rating is “moderate” for tree codominant
mainstem failure at fork at 25 feet elevation above
grade where a possible bark inclusion exists.

Previous failures of this type occurred in October /
November / December 2021 on one or more Aleppo
pines at the south end of 3460 Hillview during
extreme wind and rain events. Situation cannot be
easily mitigated through pruning or other
maintenance means.

Tree is suggested to be removed.

No.

PIP for now. Fencing only.

Tree recommended by WLCA to be removed in future due to structural issues noted at left which cannot be easily mitigated (subject to discussion with property manager/owner).
5 30a
Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis) in fair overall
condition rating. Tree far offset from proposed limit of work.

Tree root crown was not visible during the
assessment by WLCA, and therefore status of root
crown is not verified as of the date of writing.

Tree is to be retained for now.

No.

PIP for now.

Fencing only.
6 1 REFER TO SECTION 5.0 OF REPORT FOR CRITERIA USED

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 5 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree
Tag
Number
WLCA Assessment
Removal
Per
Plan?
Protect-In-Place (PIP)?
Maintenance Required?
Tree
Preservation
Rating
(TPR) per
WLCA1
31a
Coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) in very poor
overall condition (10% out of 100% possible), making
it almost a “dead” tree as of the date of writing. Trees in this stage of decline are typically recommended for
removal. The tree is far enough offset from proposed
work that there will be zero impacts related to site
construction, and therefore the tree is to be retained
for now, protected in place (PIP), and likely removed
in the near future per WLCA’s recommendation.

NOTE: This tree is below the threshold for
consideration as a protected City of Palo Alto private
site “ordinance tree”. It is not an ordinance tree.

No.

PIP for now.

Fencing only.

Tree recommended by WLCA to be removed in near future due to very poor overall condition and likely continued decline/death due to soil moisture deficit and continued droughty weather conditions. Tree is a high water-need species.
1 110
London plane (Platanus x acerifolia) specimen in fair
overall condition. This is not a ‘Columbia’ specimen,
and is therefore a good removal candidate, given its
susceptibility to powdery mildew fungus and
sycamore anthracnose fungus infection.

Yes.

Removal
per plan.

Remove per plan.

Tree conflicts directly with proposed concrete pad construction.

Tree already recommended to be removed per WLCA tree
database.
4 111
Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis) in poor overall
condition, with a TRAQ risk rating of “moderate” for
stem failure and impact with pedestrians and cars
due to a large scaffold limb at 28 feet which is similar in size to the mainstem. The tree was noted by WLCA
in the tree database to be retainable only if the
scaffold limb were to be removed at its attachment
point at the fork at 28 feet, thereby reducing the
TRAQ risk rating to “low”.

The tree is to be removed due to direct conflict with
the proposed concrete pad construction per plan
sheet L6.01.

Yes.

Removal
per plan.

Remove per plan.

Tree conflicts directly with proposed concrete pad construction.

Tree was recommended for mandatory maintenance to remove a large diameter scaffold limb at 28 feet to reduce risk of tree part failure to “low”, per WLCA tree database. 5

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 6 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree
Tag
Number
WLCA Assessment
Removal
Per
Plan?
Protect-In-Place (PIP)?
Maintenance Required?
Tree
Preservation
Rating
(TPR) per
WLCA1
1677
European birch (Betula pendula) in poor overall
condition with a WLCA tree preservation rating (TPR)
index of “3” out of a possible “10”, due to drought
stress (soil moisture deficit) issues related to this
species’ dependency on year-round heavy irrigation.

Tree recommended by WLCA to be removed.

However, for the purposes of this report, the tree will be retained and protected in place (PIP) during this
initial proposed site work involving construction of an elongated rectangular concrete patio pad.

No.

PIP for now.

Fencing (TPZ chain link).

Trunk buffer wraps (TB).

Water: Maintain irrigation to turf and all landscaping at current rate. If system is shut off or severed, use hand-watering during construction period, for the area inside the fenced off TPZ perimeter.

WLCA suggests removal of tree for long-term reduction of water needs. Replace with a tree species or multiple species that is/are extremely drought resistant and can thrive in our Northern California dry summer type atmospheric and soil moisture regime.
3 2.0 Assignment & Background
Field Survey
Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist (WLCA) was directed to tag, map, partially photograph, and visually assess trees noted as dark black tree plot dots on a survey sheet provided to Consultant by the landscape architect of record for the 3440 Hillview Mini ARB (West Side of Building). WLCA collected standard arboriculture data for trees measuring 4.0 inches or greater at 4.5 feet above grade elevation, in 2021 and late 2022 during an overarching all Hillview sites survey, and culled data from that tree survey database for use in this report. Only trees with tree protection zone areas (10 x diameter offsets) within 30 feet of the proposed site work limit line were included in this study. Trees were tagged with numeric tags by WLCA and by others, so the numeric tree tag runs are tag shapes are discontinuous, with either round shaped or racetrack shaped tag affixed to the tree mainstems at eye level.

Risk Rating Determination and WLCA Tree Preservation Rating Determination WLCA did determine International Society of Arboriculture “TRAQ” risk ratings for some of the trees in the all-sites tree survey used for this assignment.

These ratings are a good indication of actual day to day risk of whole tree and/or tree part failure and impact with specified ground-based targets. The ratings are noted in the right hand section of the attached Excel tree data tables, and are valid for 12 months from the date of WLCA’s survey.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 7 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
In cases where trees are in fair or good overall condition, the trees can sometimes be maintained through use of arborist cabling systems, through-bolt brace rod systems, and endweight reduction pruning, to reduce the “residual risk” down to a “low” TRAQ risk rating, which is then considered reasonable in terms of a normal, background risk rating that can be tolerated by land managers moving forward. However, when trees are already rated in very poor or dead condition, as are many of the trees at this site, it is often impossible to use tree maintenance (cables, bracing, or pruning) to reduce risk ratings below a “moderate” or “high” rating. In those instances, removal of the tree is possibly the only reasonable tree management solution to maintain tree part failurerelated risk at a “Low” level.

WLCA also determined tree preservation ratings (TPR) based on his own system that rates trees from 1 to 10 using criteria that are not related to proposed development. These ratings are also noted at the color-coded righthand cell of the tree data spreadsheet rows excerpted for use in this report.

Most or all of the seven (7) trees included in this report are considered of lower value in terms of their expected safe and useful lifespan in the landscape, otherwise known as “SULE”. They are species that exhibit one or more of pest and disease susceptibility, drought intolerance, and/or poor structure or health.

Future plantings at the Hillview sites should consider use only of tree species and cultivars that are known to exhibit high tolerance of pests, diseases, and drought, and have genetically-controlled high limb and mainstem wood strength with angles of branch attachment that are moderately upright at angles that encourage long-term tree strength without serious pruning needs or included-bark type failures. Such trees are currently being developed by Ted Teuschler, lead horticulturalist at Devil Mountain Nursery (nearest location in Sunol, CA, plus other sites).

Tree Data
Tree diameters were determined using a forester’s D-tape which converts circumference to an averaged diameter in inches and tenths of inches.

Tree heights were determined using digital Nikon forestry pro 550 hypsometer.

Tree canopy spread was estimated by pacing.

Note again that only trees with at least one mainstem measuring 4.0 inches diameter at 4.5 feet above grade were included in this study, per direction by City of Palo Alto Urban Forestry Division, even though this site is not technically located in or otherwise under the jurisdiction of City of Palo Alto (it is a Stanford University lease land).

Tree Map
The tree map markup attached to this report was created using the parking plan sheet L6.01 dated 11/15/2021 by Studios Architecture and Surface Design, Inc. (SDI) of San Francisco, CA: the landscape architect of record. WLCA marked chain link tree protection fence routes onto this sheet using heavy red dashed lines. Numeric tree tag numbers are indicated using large font typed directly over the approximate trunk plot point of each tree. In some cases, the tree trunk plot dot locations are noted “approximately”, using a heavy straight black line which ends at the approximate trunk plot point.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 8 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

3.0 City of Palo Alto, CA / What Trees are Regulated by the City? Designated Trees
On commercial sites, typically all trees with at least one (1) mainstem measuring 4.0 inches diameter at 4.5 feet above grade are considered to be “designated trees” that are protected per City tree ordinance, and require a removal permit prior to removing the tree in the landscape.

The two (2) trees #110 and #111 to be removed per the current mini ARB submittal for 3440 Hillview (West side of building) may or may not be considered "designated trees”, given that this commercial site is not actually located inside City of Palo Alto, and is instead a Stanford University lease land.

Ordinance-protected trees
Coast live oaks, California valley oaks are protected per ordinance at the 11.5” diameter threshold.

Coast redwoods are protected per ordinance at the 18” diameter threshold.

There are no ordinance-protected trees in this study of 7 site trees.

Street trees
Trees of all sizes located in the public (City) right of way are considered protected street trees.

There are no street trees in this study of 7 site trees.

Removal trees:

Below is a canopy replacement standard table 3-1 excerpted from the City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual (TTM). The replacement ratios in this table are based on canopy size, and assumedly only apply to City-regulated trees such as street trees and/or trees on private lands within the City’s jurisdiction.

Given that the 3440 Hillview site is actually a Stanford University-owned “lease land”, it is not actually within the City’s jurisdiction. Therefore these replacement rates may not actually apply to our project. Even if the trees at 3440 Hillview are commercial property “designated trees” measuring

4.0 inches diameter or larger, the fact remains that this property appears to be outside of the City’s jurisdictional area.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 9 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Mitigation (per City of Palo Alto Table 3-1 Replacement Standard):

Removal of trees #110 and #111 from the site, using the City of Palo Alto guidelines in Table 3-1 above (which is not related to Stanford University guidelines), would require the following on-site replacement plantings to be installed with timer-activated high-flow irrigation bubblers:

Nine (9) 24” box or
Three (3) 36” box and two (2) 48” box size trees
(Species to be determined, placement to be determined).

TREE MITIGATION WILL BE ADDRESSED IN THE FORM OF IN-LIEU FEE

PAYMENTS AND/OR TREE CANOPY REPLACEMENT PLANTINGS
ON-SITE, PER THE UPCOMING 2022 HILLVIEW ENHANCEMENT
MASTER PLAN (HEMP). THEREFORE, MITIGATION FOR TREE

REMOVALS SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED AT THIS TIME, GIVEN THAT

THE TREE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT TOTALS ARE ALREADY
ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE OVERARCHING “HEMP” DOCUMENTS BEING DEVELOPED BY THE PROJECT TEAM.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 10 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

4.0 ISA TRAQ Risk Rating Determinations
The most recent international society of arboriculture (ISA) risk rating framework in use by arborists is the so-called “TRAQ” (tree risk assessment qualified) system which involves qualitative determinations by an arborist to assess:
• The tree part most likely to fail (which could be the whole tree) • A time frame after which the arborist’s determined risk rating is considered voided (a period of 1 year from date of writing is used by WLCA for his TRAQ ratings). • Likelihood of tree or tree part failure based on a four-tier scale as seen at right. • Likelihood of that tree or tree part impacting a defined target based on a four-tier scale as seen at right.
• Consequences of the failed tree or tree part on the specifically-defined target, based on a four-tier scale (see “semi-defined target” list below. Formalized targets were not determined for every single tree’s TRAQ risk rating).

Although the TRAQ tree risk assessor’s manual published by ISA does require that the risk assessor define each and every target for each risk rating determined, WLCA did not define the target for every single tree for which TRAQ risk ratings were determined. This is because the TRAQ risk ratings in this arborist report were simply included as “additional site analysis data points” for site managers who will be reviewing the landscape status of trees existing around various site buildings.

See the TRAQ risk rating field form reference at right, which was typed by WLCA using the most recent risk assessment manual information published by ISA to amalgamate the various tables contained in the manual.

WLCA determined TRAQ risk ratings for all seven (7) study trees for this mini ARB submittal. See the excerpted Excel tree database rows at the end of this report for TRAQ risk ratings of the seven study trees.

Likelihood of
Failure
Very Low Low Medium High
Imminent Unlikely Somewhat
Likely Likely Very Likely
Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat
Likely Likely
Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat
Likely
Improbable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely
Negligible Minor Significant Severe
Very Likely Low Moderate High Extreme
Likely Low Low Moderate High
Somewhat Likely Low Low Low Moderate
Unlikely Low Low Low Low
Severe: high value damage, major disruption, severe personal injury or death.

Significant: moderate to high value damage, considerable disruption, or personal injury.

Negligible: low value damage or disruption, no personal injury.

Minor: low to moderate damage, small disruptions to traffic or communication lines, or very minor personal injury.

Likelihood of
Failure and Impact
8 - TRAQ FIELD FORM / REVISED 2021 BASED ON 2017 TRAQ MANUAL Likelihood of Impacting Target
Consequences
Improbable: The tree or tree part is not likely to fail during normal weather conditions, and may not fail in extreme weather conditions within the specified time frame.

Possible: Failure may be expected in extreme weather conditions, but it is unlikely during normal weather conditions within the specified time frame.

Probable: Failure may be expected under normal weather conditions within the specified time frame.

Imminent: Failure has started or is most likely to occur in the near future, even if there is no significant wind or increased load. This is an infrequent occurrence for a tree risk assessor to encounter, and may require immediate action to protect people from harm. The imminent category overrides the stated time frame.

Low: Not likely that failure will impact target (slight chance). Occassionally used area fully exposed; frequently used area partially exposed; constant target well protected. E.g. A little-used service road next to the tree, or a frequently used street with a street tree between the assessed tree and the street.

Very Low: Remote chance that failure will impact target. Rarely used site fully exposed; occassionally used site partially protected. E.g. A rarely used trail or trailhead in a rural area, or an occassionally used area that has some protection due to other trees between the failure and the target.

Medium: The failed tree or tree part could impact the target, but is not expected to do so. Frequently used area fully exposed on one side of tree; constantly occupied area partially protected. E.g. A suburban street next to street tree, or a house partially protected by an intermediate tree.

High: Likely that the failure will contact the target. A fixed target is fully exposed. E.g. Near a highuse road or walkway with an adjacent street tree.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 11 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

5.0 WLCA Tree Preservation Rating (TPR) System
WLCA Tree Preservation Rating (TPR) System
(1=Worst, 10=Best)
The following system was used by WLCA to determine tree preservation ratings (TPR) for the seven (7) study trees at 3440 Hillview (west side of existing building). The rating numbers are noted in the righthand column of the attached Excel tree data table.

Criteria include vigor, structural stability, drought tolerance, root status, girth development, canopy form, long-term expected safe and useful lifespan under current climate conditions, and species' desirability in terms of pest and disease resistance, branch breakage strength, and species longevity.

It is important to note that the WLCA system is not based on the severity of any future proposed site work of any type, and assumes that any such work can be offset laterally to a degree that will avoid severe impacts to root systems and/or canopy live wood and foliage of tree specimens.
0: Tree is dead, with an overall condition rating of between 0% and 5%, out of 100% possible. 1-2: Expect tree death within 1 to 3 years
3-6: Tree can be retained, but may exhibit unmitigable issues such drought intolerance, severe structural problems, poor live twig density and/or poor twig extension, etc.
7-10: Reasonably-long expected survivability in terms of vigor and structural stability. Good candidate for retention in the landscape, assuming any proposed new site work can be adjusted to avoid “severe” degree of root pruning and “severe” degree of canopy pruning (i.e. avoid significantly disrupting water uptake function by roots, and photosynthesis by the live canopy).

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 12 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

6.0 Tree Protection and Maintenance
Recommendations

6.1 PROJECT ARBORIST:

A project arborist (PA) will be retained by the project team, and will be present on at least a once-monthly basis, and for special periods as defined or determined by Palo Alto City Staff (see “arborist inspection schedule) below, assuming project is to be governed by City of Palo Alto guidelines and not Stanford University guidelines.

Monthly inspection reports, if required by City of Palo Alto, shall be submitted by the PA to City of Palo Alto Staff in electronic format.

Reports shall include information on tree conditions, tree protection status, and digital photos from the periodic site visit.

6.2 TREE PROTECTION:

Tree protection fencing shall be erected per the red dashed highlighted lines shown on the WLCA tree map markup attached to the end of this arborist report (alignments subject to change and field adjustment).

Tree fencing and trunk buffer wrap specifications are described below in this section 6.0.

Tree protection standards for City of Palo Alto projects are shown at right, excerpted from the most recent version of their “tree technical manual” (TTM).

6.3 ARBORIST INSPECTION SCHEDULE:

See the City ARBORIST INSPECTION SCHEDULE form on the following page of this arborist report. The actual inspection schedule is to be determined.

Typical project arborist scheduling is roughly 1x/month minimum, plus special inspections during grading, demolition, excavation, and trenching, when those activities encroach within a certain distance from protected trees (e.g. 10 x diameter as an offset radius from trunk edge, etc.).

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 13 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

6.4 TRUNK BUFFER WRAPS:

The following trees are suggested to be wrapped with one entire roll of orange plastic snow fencing per each single tree, and overlaid with standing 2x4 wood boards duct taped to the plastic (see spec photo below), prior to start of any site work.

Trees requiring trunk buffers: Trees #1677 and #28a.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 14 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

6.5 CHAIN LINK TREE PROTECTION FENCING (TPZ):

Erect chain link panels along the red dashed lines indicated on the WLCA tree map markup attached to the end of this report. Fence panels shall be affixed to steel rebar or layout stakes and wired together to prevent the panels being moved or removed during construction. Alternatively, moveable concrete fence panel footings such as those shown in the sample image at right can be used to keep the fencing set up in a formal manner. Note that steel rebar or other robust stakes will still need to be pounded into the ground at fencing corners to prevent the panels from being blown over or moved (see image at right).

Fencing: Per tree map markup in section 11.0 of this arborist report.

6.6 IRRIGATION (TURF LAWN):

Provide 3x/weekly heavy irrigation to tree #1677 via the existing active turf lawn irrigation already in place, throughout the entire site plan work period.

If for some reason this lawn irrigation is shut down or severed during construction work, then irrigate tree #1677 using manual means such as garden hoses or spray trucks.

Typical volume is roughly 50 to 100 gallons per tree per week.

OPTIONAL: Water delivery during construction often requires that straw wattles first be pinned down over the ground using wooden pins, to force irrigation water to actually percolate directly downward into the root zones of the trees without flooding the project area. See image below right.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 15 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

6.7 TREE REMOVAL / MAINTENANCE (MAINTENANCE IS OPTIONAL, IF TREE TAG NUMBERS NOTED ARE TO BE RETAINED):

Item Description Tree Tag Number Total Count
Suggested Maintenance / Pruning as Noted
Per ANSI A300 standards for tree care / woody plant maintenance / pruning.
n/a -----
Suggested Maintenance / Limb and Branch Length Reduction Pruning To reduce over-extended limb lengths (this is the full list of trees throughout the site and on neighbor properties).
n/a -----
Suggested Maintenance / Cabling and/or Through Bolt Brace Rod Installation
Per the most current iteration of ANSI A300 tree support systems guidelines.
n/a ---
Suggested Maintenance / Root Crown Excavation (RCX)
Use Small Hand Tools to Unbury the Flaring Buttress Roots at Base of Trunk.
#30a 1
Suggested Maintenance / Maintain Weekly Heavy Irrigation #1677 1 Suggested Follow-up / Monitoring
Monitor trees over the long term for declines in health (vigor) and/or structure.
n/a ---
Suggest Removal of Tree Due to Unmitigable Structure / TRAQ Risk And/or Very Poor Overall Condition Rating
#29a, 31a 2

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 16 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

6.8 TREE REMOVAL AND MITIGATION PLANTINGS:

6.8i: Trees expected to be removed due to proposed mini ARB site plan work conflicts: #110, 111.

6.8ii: Trees that will be considered for removal at a later date as part of the upcoming Hillview Enhancement Master Plan (HEMP), due to elevated risk ratings: #29a.

6.8iii: Trees that will be considered for removal at a later date as part of the upcoming Hillview Enhancement Master Plan (HEMP), due to very poor or poor overall condition ratings: #31a.

6.8iv: Mitigation required for trees if actually removed, per City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual (TTM), Table 3.1 “tree canopy - replacement standard” (see snippet at right taken from the City of Palo Alto official website in 2021):
• *Tree #110: Three (3) 24” box size trees, or two (2) 36” box size trees.
• *Tree #111: Six (6) 24” box size trees, or a combination of two (2) 36” box and two (2) 48” box size trees.

6.8v: RISK RATINGS VS. REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS:

As noted in the 2021 mini ARB submittal report by WLCA for 3450 Hillview, it is not clear whether trees determined to have a TRAQ risk rating of “high” or “extreme” are required to be replaced at the same rate as a tree rated with a “low” or “moderate” TRAQ risk rating. Also, trees in dead condition (i.e. overall condition rating of “0% to 5% overall condition rating per 10th edition of Guide for Plant Appraisal are required to be mitigated at the rate noted in the tree canopy replacement standard, culled here from the City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual (TTM). *TREE MITIGATION WILL BE ADDRESSED IN THE FORM OF IN-LIEU FEE PAYMENTS AND/OR TREE CANOPY REPLACEMENT PLANTINGS ON-SITE, PER THE UPCOMING 2022 HILLVIEW ENHANCEMENT MASTER PLAN (HEMP). THEREFORE, MITIGATION FOR TREE REMOVALS

SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED AT THIS TIME, GIVEN THAT THE TREE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT TOTALS ARE ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE OVERARCHING “HEMP” DOCUMENTS BEING DEVELOPED BY THE PROJECT TEAM.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 17 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Below is a sampling of standard project conditions of approval (COA) from City of Palo Alto2, which may or may not apply to this plan submittal. Note that WLCA reformatted these condition statements and modified the wordage.
“TTM” refers to the City of Palo Alto “Tree Technical Manual” which guides the developer and consultant as to how to proceed with presentations of tree information, and how to build around trees with respect to the City codes that govern and restrict construction activity around private and public trees protected under City ordinances. The TTM is available on the official City website.

1. TREE PROTECTION VERIFICATION.

Prior to demolition, grading or building permit issuance, a written verification from the contractor (via WLCA as the project arborist of record) that the required protective fencing is in place shall be submitted to the Building Inspections Division. The fencing shall contain required warning sign and remain in place until final inspection of the project.

2. EXCAVATION RESTRICTIONS APPLY (TTM, Sec. 2.20 C & D).

Any approved grading, digging or trenching beneath a tree canopy shall be performed using ‘air-spade’ method as a preference, with manual hand shovel as a backup. For utility trenching, including sewer line, roots exposed with diameter of 1.5 inches and greater shall remain intact and not be damaged. If directional boring method is used to tunnel beneath roots, then Table 2-1, Trenching and Tunneling Distance, shall be printed on the final plans to be implemented by Contractor.

3. TREE PROTECTION COMPLIANCE.

The owner and contractor shall implement all protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations and construction scheduling as stated in the TPR & Sheet T-1, and is subject to code compliance action pursuant to PAMC 8.10.080. The required protective fencing shall remain in place until final landscaping and inspection of the project.

Project arborist approval must be obtained and documented in the monthly activity report sent to the City. The mandatory Contractor and Arborist Monthly Tree Activity Report shall be sent monthly to the City ([email protected]) beginning with the initial verification approval, using the template in the Tree Technical Manual, Addendum 11.
(WLCA shall perform the monthly monitoring and reporting to the City for this project.)

4. TREE DAMAGE.

Tree Damage, Injury Mitigation and Inspections apply to Contractor. Reporting, injury mitigation measures and arborist inspection schedule (1-5) apply pursuant to TTM, Section 2.20-2.30. Contractor shall be responsible for the repair or replacement of any publicly owned or protected trees that are damaged during the course of construction, pursuant to Title 8 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and city Tree Technical Manual, Section

2.25. 2 Provided by former planning division arborist Mr. Dave Dockter, City of Palo Alto, 2015.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 18 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
(This applies to trees that are of protected size).

5. GENERAL.

The following general tree preservation measures apply to all trees to be retained: No storage of material, topsoil, vehicles or equipment shall be permitted within the tree enclosure area. The ground under and around the tree canopy area shall not be altered. Trees to be retained shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to ensure survival.

PRIOR TO FINAL USE OR OCCUPANCY

6. PROJECT ARBORIST FINAL CERTIFICATION LETTER.

Prior to written request for temporary or final occupancy, the contractor shall provide to the Planning Department and property owner a final inspection letter by the Project Arborist. The inspection shall evaluate the success or needs of Regulated tree protection, including new landscape trees, as indicated on the approved plans. The written acceptance of successful tree preservation shall include a photograph record and/or recommendations for the health, welfare, mitigation remedies for injuries (if any). The final report may be used to navigate any outstanding issues, concerns or security guarantee return process, when applicable.

POST CONSTRUCTION

7. MAINTENANCE.

All landscape and trees shall be maintained, watered, fertilized, and pruned according to Best Management Practices-Pruning (ANSI A300- 2008 or current version) and the City Tree Technical Manual, Section 5.00. Any vegetation that dies shall be replaced or failed automatic irrigation repaired by the current property owner within 30 days of discovery.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 19 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

7.0 Author’s Qualifications (Partial)
• Continued education through The American Society of Consulting Arborists, The International Society of Arboriculture (Western Chapter), and various governmental and non-governmental entities.
• Contract Town Arborist, Town of Los Gatos, California Community Development Department / Planning Division
2015-present
• Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (ISA TRAQ Course Graduate, Palo Alto, California) • Millbrae Community Preservation Commission (Tree Board) 2001-2006
• ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401
• ASCA Arboriculture Consulting Academy graduate, class of 2000 • Associate Consulting Arborist
Barrie D. Coate and Associates
4/99-8/99
• Contract City Arborist, City of Belmont, California
Planning and Community Development Department
1999-2020 (21 Continuous Years)
• ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A
• Peace Corps Soil and Water Conservation Extension Agent Chiangmai Province, Thailand 1991-1993
• B.A. Environmental Studies/Soil and Water Resources
UC Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California 1990
UCSC Chancellor’s Award, 1990 (Environmental Studies Department) • First-Ever Joint U.S.-China Ecological Study
3 Months, Yunnan, China
Studied Rainforest Ecology in the Field with Chinese and U.S.-Based Professors at Remote Xujiaba Nature Reserve, Yunnan, China Sponsor: Wildlands Studies, P.O. Box 2098, Aptos, CA 95001 USA

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 20 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

8.0 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
Any legal description provided to the consultant/appraiser is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownership to any property are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised and evaluated as through free and clean, under responsible ownership and competent management.

It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinance, statutes, or other government regulations.

Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/appraiser can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.

The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement.

Unless required by law otherwise, the possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any other purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser.

Unless required by law otherwise, neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media, without the prior expressed conclusions, identity of the consultant/appraiser, or any reference to any professional society or institute or to any initiated designation conferred upon the consultant/appraiser as stated in his qualifications.

This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant/appraiser, and the consultant’s/appraiser’s fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.

Sketches, drawings, and photographs in this report, being intended for visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys unless expressed otherwise. The reproduction of any information generated by engineers, architects, or other consultants on any sketches, drawings, or photographs is for the express purpose of coordination and ease of reference only. Inclusion of said information on any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation by Walter Levison to the sufficiency or accuracy of said information.

Unless expressed otherwise:
a. information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the conditions of those items at the time of inspection; and b. the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not arise in the future.

Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.

Arborist Disclosure Statement:

Arborists are tree specialists who use their education, knowledge, training, and experience to examine trees, recommend measures to enhance the beauty and health of trees, and attempt to reduce the risk of living near trees. Clients may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations of the arborist, or to seek additional advice.

Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree. Tree are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below ground. Arborist cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances, or for a specified period of time. Likewise, remedial treatments, like any medicine, cannot be guaranteed.

Treatment, pruning, and removal of trees may involve considerations beyond the scope of the arborist’s services such as property boundaries, property ownership, site lines, disputes between neighbors, and other issues. Arborists cannot take such considerations into account unless complete and accurate information is disclosed to the arborist. An arborist should then be expected to reasonably rely upon the completeness and accuracy of the information provided.

Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled. To live near trees is to accept some degree of risk. The only way to eliminate all risk associated with trees is to eliminate the trees.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 21 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

9.0 Certification
I hereby certify that all the statements of fact in this report are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith.

Signature of Consultant
Walter Levison
CURRENT 2021 DIGITAL BADGES:

ISA CERTIFIED ARBORIST CREDENTIAL:
https://certificates.isa-arbor.com/f1918723-df46-48cc-ace2-c12625530fec?record_view=true ISA TREE RISK ASSESSMENT QUALIFIED (TRAQ):
https://certificates.isa-arbor.com/d180515f-ab75-440b-9c66-106005e3cf10?record_view=true#gs.hpb30w

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 22 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

10.0 Digital Images
WLCA archived images of the study trees on 2/11/2022
Tree #1677.

The new concrete pad construction will
occur just left of (north of) this tree.

Tree #1677 profile.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 23 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree #110.

London plane cultivar (not ‘Columbia’).

Tree 110 is to be removed due to direct conflict with
proposed mini ARB concrete pad construction.

Aleppo pine #111 proposed to be removed due to
direct conflict with the proposed mini ARB concrete pad construction.

Tree leans significantly westward. Pitch canker sap flux noted at higher elevations (see additional images below on page 24 of report).

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 24 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree #111 to be removed.

Extreme sap flux likely caused by pine pitch canker infection.

Tree #111 to be removed.

View of upper canopy elevations.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 25 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Aleppo pine #28a to be retained and protected in place for now (PIP) using trunk buffer wraps and fencing. Just north of the existing cooling unit, and north of the project limit of work.

Aleppo pine #28a to be retained. Upper elevation view of canopy.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 26 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Aleppo pine #29a to be retained and protected in place (PIP) for now, using chain link fencing.

The tree is significantly offset from proposed mini ARB work, and is proposed by WLCA to be removed in the future due to moderate TRAQ risk that is not able to be mitigated through maintenance means.

Aleppo pine #29a to be protected in place (PIP). Upper elevations.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 27 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Aleppo pine #30a to be protected in place (PIP) for now, using chain link TPZ fencing. Lower elevations. The uphill side of root crown (buttress root flare area) was buried in slumped soil, and not assessed by WLCA.

Aleppo pine #30a to be protected in place (PIP) for now, using chain link TPZ fencing. Upper elevations.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 28 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Coast redwood #31a to be protected in place (PIP) for now, using chain link fencing.

Recommended by WLCA to be removed in the near future due to very poor overall condition rating.

Close-up of upper canopy of coast redwood #31a to be protected in place (PIP) for now using chain link TPZ fencing.

Note severe decline of live twig and needle density caused by years of chronic drought stress (soil moisture deficit SMD). SMD can be reversed to some degree through heavy year-round irrigation using high flow type ½” diameter flood bubblers emitting hundreds of gallons of water per tree per month, but at this stage of tree canopy decline, it is expected that the tree cannot achieve an invigoration of the canopy with new twig and needle growth, and will instead continue to decline and die prematurely.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 29 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

11.0 Tree Location Map Markup (WLCA) on SDI Plan Sheet

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 30 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

12.0 Arborist Certification Letter

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 31 of 31
Site Address: 3440 Hillview Mini ARB, Palo Alto Version: 02/18/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

13.0 Attached: Tree Data Excerpted from WLCA Hillview Master Tree Database 2/5/2022

TREE DATA
3412 through 3460 Hillview, Palo Alto, CASurvey Dates: 2021-2022Excel Spreadsheet Preparation: 02-05-2022 ALL SITES TREE DATA UPDATED 2022 Removal Suggested by Author
Location (Hillview Address)
Tree Tag #
Trunk 1 (in.)
Trunk 2 (in.)
Trunk 3 (in.)
Adjusted Trunk Diameter (ATD)
Inches @ 54” A.G. (ATD May
Represent 5 or 6 Total Stems)
Protected Status as
"designated trees" in
City of Palo Alto.

Assume all
commercial property
trees 4 inches
diameter and greater
at 4.5 feet elevation
are considered
protected (verify with
City Staff).

Common Name Scientific Name (Genus, species )
Height and Canopy Spread (ft.)
Health & Structural Ratings
(0-100% each)
Overall Condition
Rating (0-100%)
Live Twig Extension & Live Foliar
Density
(Very Poor, Poor, Mod, Good, Exc.)
Lopsided Canopy
(Direction Noted)
Trunk Lean
(Direction Noted)
Historical Stem Splitout Evidence
(Note Elevation)
Severely Pruned or Root Pruned in
Past (topping, liontailing, shearing,
etc.)
Buried Root Crown (BRC) or
Girdling Roots (GR)
Twig, Branch, Limb, Mainstem,
and/or Root Decay
(Note Elevation for Specific Issues)
Codominant Mainstems with Severe
Bark Inclusion(s) ("BI")
(Note Height)

PEST/DISEASE SYMPTOMS
(& NOTES, SUCH AS CRUCIAL

MAINTENANCE PRESCRIPTIONS

TO REDUCE TREE PART FAILURE

RISK INDICATED IN YELLOW

HIGHLIGHT)
Soil Moisture Deficit

TRAQ RISK RATINGS
Valid Feb 2022 to Feb 2023
(Low, Mod, High, Extreme)
Based on Most Current ISA TRAQ
Risk Rating System. Assume failure
mode "limbs to 4" diameter each",
and target "pedestrian" unless
otherwise noted. NOTE: NOT ALL

TREES WERE RATED FOR RISK
WLCA Tree Preservation Rating System TPRS (1=Worst, 10=Best)Criteria include vigor, structural stability, drought tolerance, root status, girth development, canopy fexpected safe and useful lifespan under current climate conditions, and species' desirability in termsdisease resistance, branch breakage strength, and species longevity. The WLCA system is NOT baseof proposed site work or severity of exising parking lot infrastructure damage by tree roots. 1-2: Expect tree death adn/or structural failure within 1 to 3 years (a zero ("0") rating would indicate "dmay simply be highly undesirable for long term landscape use, for various reasons.3-6: Tree can be retained, but may exhibit symptoms of drought intolerance, severe structural problemdensity and/or poor twig extension, etc. 7-10: Reasonably-long expected survivability in terms of vigor and structural stability. Good candidatthe landscape, if proposed site work can be adjusted to avoid severe root pruning and severe canopyregular irrigation were to be provided to high percentage of root zone, some trees' TPRS ratings coulor +2 pts. 3440 28a 24.7 0.0 0.0 24.7 X Aleppo pine Pinus halepensis 60/35 60/50 53% Fair Mod West West (phototropic).

Lean
sweeps up
to vertical
between 15
and 20 feet
elevation
Fork at 4.5 feet elevation
is normal and wide
(saddle shaped).

Note that the
compression
tissue on the
utility vault side
of the root crown
is probably
"normal", caused
by compression
forces over time.

Low, for failure of
scaffold limbs to 5"
diameter each.
6 X 3440 29a 27.7 0.0 0.0 27.7 X Aleppo pine Pinus halepensis 60/45 65/35 43% Fair Mod to Good Note that the
scaffold limb at
18 feet elevation
above grade is
>50% of the
diameter of the
mainstem,
which means
increased
likelihood of
failure at the
attachment
point.

Likely BI type mainstem fork at 25 feet elevation,
which means entire tree
is of elevated risk of
splitout at this
attachment point at 25
feet.

Note the flux
visible on south
side of root
crown could be
caused by bark
beetle feeding
activity, but the
actual cause of
flux is
"unverified" as of
the date of
writing.

Moderate risk for
splitout of a codominant
mainstem fork at 25
feet. Discuss with ARE
regarding possible
removal of this tree,
since it is impossible to
mitigate risk to "Low"
residual level.
5 3440 30a 24.7 0.0 0.0 24.7 X Aleppo pine Pinus halepensis 60/28 50/50 50% Fair Mod West, phototropic lean,
but sweeps
upright to
vertical at
height.

Yes. Apical
stem at top of
canopy
appears to
have blown
out in a storm
in past.

Note that the
uphill side of the
root crown was
not visible during
WLCA's field
assessment, and
therefore the
status of the root
crown cannot be
verified as of the
date of writing.

Low for failure of limbs
or branches to 4"
diameter each.
6 X 3440 31a 9.4 0.0 0.0 9.4 X coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 30/6 10/10 10% Very Poor Very Poor X Moderate for mainstem
failure due to
desiccation of wood
tissue.
1 ? 3440 110 6.9 0.0 0.0 6.9 X London plane tree cultivar Platanus x acerifolia (Cult.) 22/25 50/40 44% Fair Mod but neg
affected by
powdery
mildew
fungus
infection
North
west North west
Powdery
mildew issues.

May want to
remove tree and
in future use
only the
'Columbia'
cultivar of
London plane
tree for superior
Severe powdery
mildew fungus
infection, which
means this tree is
probably
'Bloodgood'
cultivar.

Low for all failure
modes. 4
? 3440 111 28.2 0.0 0.0 28.2 X Aleppo pine Pinus halepensis 70/50 55/30 35% Poor Good West Although this is
not a decay
issue, there is
an issue at 28
feet elevation
where scaffold
limb is >50% of
the mainstem
diameter,
reducing
stability of the
limb.

Lower mainstem
lean appears to
be phototropic,
with mainstem
later righting to
vertical
orientation at 40
feet elevation.

Appears the root
plate may be
limited in east portion due to
building
presence, which
reduces
Moderate for 20"
diameter scaffold limb
failure at 28 feet
elevation attachment
point. By removing the entire limb or reducing
the outermost portion of
it, residual risk rating
can be reduced to
"Low".
5 3440 1677 16.7 0.0 0.0 16.7 X European white birch Betula pendula 50/25 35/35 35% Poor Poor Tree has been partially topped in past. X Suggest consider removal of tree for long term landscape. X Risk rating low for all failure modes. 3 Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist / Cell (415) 203-0990 / [email protected] 1 of 1

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 1 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Assessment of Twenty (20) Regulated Trees
at and adjacent to
1220 Oakmead Parkway
Sunnyvale, California
Prepared for:

BPR Hotels
953 Industrial Ave #100
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Attn: Mr. Perry Patel
Field Visit:

Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist (WLCA)
10/12/2021
Report by WLCA
10/20/2021
Revised 2/7/2022

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 2 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Table of Contents

1.0 Summary ___________________________________________________________________________ 3

2.0 Assignment & Background _____________________________________________________________ 3

3.0 City of Sunnyvale, California – What Trees are Protected? ____________________________________ 4

4.0 Recommendations____________________________________________________________________ 5

5.0 Author’s Qualifications________________________________________________________________ 10

6.0 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions ____________________________________________________ 11

7.0 Certification ________________________________________________________________________ 12

8.0 Digital Images ______________________________________________________________________ 13

9.0 Tree Data Table_____________________________________________________________________ 19

10.0 Tree Location Map Mark-ups__________________________________________________________ 28

11.0 Attached: Appraisal Worksheet ________________________________________________________ 30

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 3 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

1.0 Summary
1a. PROTECTION STATUS:

PROTECTED-SIZE: Trees #51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 69, 70 are considered protected-size specimens that will require a City tree removal permit prior to demolition of or removal of one or more of the trees.

NON-PROTECTED SIZE: Trees #59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68 are considered non-protected size trees that can be removed without a City tree removal permit.

NEIGHBOR TREES: Trees on neighbor properties are noted with a box, to denote those specimens that cannot be removed without authorization from the neighbor tree owner, which may be a private entity, or may be the City of Sunnyvale, even if the tree is considered to be of “non-protected size”. 1b. TREE DISPOSITION:

REMOVALS:

Eighteen (18) off-site and on-site trees #51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, and #68 are to be removed per plan, due to conflicts with proposed new site plan-related construction, including landscape renovation construction and planting.

Of these 18 trees expected to be removed, protected-size trees requiring a removal permit from the City of Sunnyvale are eight (8) trees #51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, and #58. Tree #51 is on City property (i.e. the City right-of-way).

PROTECT-IN-PLACE (PIP):

Two (2) remaining off-site trees #69 and #70 will be protected in place (PIP) using orange plastic snow fencing as a lower trunk buffer wrap, and/or erection of chain link fencing as a protective barrier for lateral root system areas, “where possible” (TBD).

2.0 Assignment & Background
Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist (WLCA) was directed to tag and assess all trees of all trunk diameter size classes, located on and directly adjacent to the project location, which encompasses the entire lot known as 1220 Oakmead. As noted above in section 1.0, there are ten (10) tree specimens on neighbor properties, and ten (10) specimens on the subject property.

Most or all of the site trees appear to be required to be demolished, due to direct or indirect conflict with the proposed work, which includes multi-story garage construction, retaining wall footing excavation, and mass grading, including very extensive landscape renovation construction and planting. Trees #69 and #70 are assumed to be retained on neighbor lots.

All trees were tagged with aluminum numbered racetrack shaped tags “51” through “70”: a total of 20 trees included in this initial tree study.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 4 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Trunk diameters were measured using a forester’s D-tape, which converts actual circumference into an “averaged” diameter in inches and tenths of inches.

Trees were measured by WLCA at 4.5 feet above grade: standard height used for most USA tree surveys.

Tree heights were measured using a digital Nikon forestry 550 pro hypsometer.

Tree canopy diameters were estimated visually.

The tree tag numbers typed on the WLCA tree map markups included in this arborist report are indicated directly over the approximate location of each tree, but are not considered totally accurate. The topographic survey shows the most accurate trunk plot dot locations, while the proposed site plan 1st floor sheet markup is considered the least accurate of the two maps prepared by WLCA.

As required for all City of Sunnyvale arborist report submittals, WLCA included tree data, an appraised dollar value, and at least one digital photograph of each of the 20 trees included in this tree study.

The tree map markups were plotted over an existing topographic survey sheet, and over proposed site plan sheet A2.0 which is the 1st floor level plan, iteration 9/1/2021 by Arris.

WLCA also prepared a follow-up reference tree map markup on 2/7/2022 using site plan sheet C1 iteration 1/25/2022.

Digital images of the trees were archived by WLCA during the 10/12/2021 field assessment.

3.0 City of Sunnyvale, California – What Trees are Protected? Per the City’s official website, the following trees are protected on private lots:
“Some private trees are protected and require a permit to be removed. To determine if a tree is protected, measure its circumference from 4 1/2 feet above ground:
• If a single-trunk tree measures 38 inches or greater, it is protected • If a multi-trunk tree has at least one trunk that measures 38 inches or greater, or the measurements of the multi-trunks added together equal at least 113 inches, it is protected.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The above-noted circumferences where converted to diameter by WLCA. The following are the standardized protection thresholds in diameter, which is the standard U.S. method of measurement for determining protection size:
• Single trunk trees measuring greater than or equal to 12.1 inches diameter at 4.5 feet above grade. • Multi-trunk trees with trunk diameters totaling greater than or equal to 36 inches diameter at 4.5 feet above grade Per the above information, trees #51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, and #58 are considered protected-size specimens that will require a City tree removal permit prior to demolition of the trees. Tree #51 is on the City right of way.

Note that trees #69 and #70 are also protected-size trees, located on neighbor properties just west of the project build envelope, that are proposed to be protected-in-place (PIP).

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 5 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

4.0 Recommendations

1. Project Arborist (“PA”):

Initial Signoff
It is recommended that a third party ASCA registered consulting arborist or ISA Certified Arborist with good experience with tree protection during construction be retained by the applicant, to provide pre-project verification that tree protection and maintenance measures outlined in this section of the arborist report are adhered to. Periodic (e.g. monthly) inspections and summary reporting, if required as a project condition of approval, are suggested in order to verify contractor compliance with tree protection throughout the site plan project. This person will be referred to as the project arborist (“PA”). The PA should monitor soil moisture within the root protection zones of trees being retained, using a Lincoln soil moisture probe/meter or equivalent.

If required, inspection reports shall be sent to City of Sunnyvale planning division Staff (to be determined).

2. Trunk Buffer Wrap Type III Protection:

Prior to demolition commencement, install trunk buffers around all trees being retained on-site:

Wrap one (1) entire roll of orange plastic snow fencing around the trunk of each single onsite tree, between grade and 6 to 8 feet above grade to create a padding of at least 1 to 2 inches thickness around each tree trunk. Stand 2x4 wood boards upright, side by side, around the entire circumference of the orange plastic wraps. Affix using duct tape (do not use wires or ropes). See spec image above right showing the wooden boards correctly mounted against one entire roll of orange snow fencing, such that the wood does not actually touch the trunk at all.

Trees to be wrapped at this site: Neighbor trees #69 and #70.

No storage, staging, work, or other activities will be allowed inside the RPZ except with PA monitoring.

3. Tree Removal Permit:

No protected-size trees will be able to be removed prior to obtaining a valid City of Sunnyvale tree removal permit for eight (8) trees #51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, and #58 that are protected per City of Sunnyvale tree ordinance governing private trees (tree #51 is a City tree on the public right of way, but can probably be grouped with the seven additional trees that will be removed as part of the proposed site plan project).

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 6 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

4. Signage: The RPZ fencing shall have one sign affixed with UV-stabilized zip ties to the chain link at eye level for every 20 linear feet of fencing, minimum 8”X11” size each, plastic laminated or printed with waterproof ink on waterproof paper, with wordage that includes the Town Code section that refers to tree fence protection requirements (wordage can be adjusted):

TREE PROTECTION ZONE FENCE

ZONA DE PROTECCION PARA ARBOLES
-NO ENTRE SIN PERMISO-
-LLAME EL ARBOLISTAREMOVAL OF THIS FENCE IS

SUBJECT TO PENALTY ACCORDING TO

CITY OF SUNNYVALE CODE
PROJECT ARBORIST:

TELEFONO CELL: EMAIL:

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 7 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

5. Chain Link Fencing Type I and/or Type II Root Protection Zone (RPZ):

Prior to demolition commencement, erect chain link fencing panels set on moveable concrete block footings (see sample image below right). Wire the fence panels to iron layout stakes pounded 24 inches into the ground at the ends of each fence panel to keep the fence route stabilized and in its correct position. Do not wire the fence panels to the trunks of the trees. These panels are available commonly for rent or purchase.

Alternative Fencing / Tube Posts and Rolled Chain Link:

Using a professional grade post bounder, pound 7-foot long 2-inch diameter iron tube posts 24-inches into the ground, at 6 to 10-foot spacing maximum on-center, and hang steel
chain link fencing material minimum 5-feet height on the tube posts. These materials are available for purchase at many retail and wholesale construction supply houses such as Home Depot, Lowe’s, Grainger’s, White Cap, Harbor Freight, etc.

Pre-construction fence routes:

As far as possible from the trunk edges of trees #69 and #70 (actual distances are to be determined during an onsite pre-construction meeting. It is possible that only tree #70 will be able to be fenced, given the location of tree #69 on the joint property line).

This fencing must be erected prior to any heavy machinery traffic or construction material arrival on site.

The protective fencing must not be temporarily moved during construction. No materials, tools, excavated soil, liquids, substances, etc. are to be placed or dumped, even temporarily, inside the root protection zone or “RPZ”.

No storage, staging, work, or other activities will be allowed inside the RPZ except with PA monitoring.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 8 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

6. Irrigation Temporary with Straw Wattles
(During Work Period):

Temporary supplemental irrigation water applications
typically are performed to boost vigor and partially mitigate for the loss of roots during new construction. Also,
irrigation water pipes are typically destroyed or at least shut off during construction, such that existing systems cannot be used during site work to provide any water to trees.

Temporary supplemental irrigation water can be applied
via any method available, such as soaker hoses, garden
hoses, water tank spray apparatus, etc.
• Palm #69: Pin down straw wattles to force
irrigation water downward into the root system
percolating vertically. See photo at right.

Apply 50 to 75 gallons of water per week if
possible, applied on a single day.
• Magnolia #70: Existing irrigation system(s) should be kept active and running year-round. The tree may not require supplemental irrigation via water tank truck, unless the existing turf lawn sprinkler system is for some reason inactive and not running during the site work period (construction team will need to verify this with the neighbor commercial property manager/owner).

If the system is not running, supplemental irrigation applications should be roughly 75 to 100 gallons per week, applied on a single day.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 9 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

7. Root Pruning:

If roots greater than 1.0 inch diameter each are required to be pruned within 15 hoirizontal feet of trees #69 or #70, contact the project arborist to consult.

All root pruning cuts will need to be performed using a sawzall (reticulating saw) affixed with a green wood pruning blade specified for such purpose.

All root pruning cuts will need to be performed at a right angle (90 degrees) to the root growth direction, and the cut ends smeared with west mud to protect against desiccation.

Backfill ASAP, preferably within 24 hours. If the root pruning area cannot be backfilled within 24 hours, cover the roots with 3 layers of wet burlap sack material to protect against sunburn and desiccation (see images below and at right, showing burlap sun protection, correct blade type, and correct cut angle).

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 10 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

5.0 Author’s Qualifications
• Continued education through The American Society of Consulting Arborists, The International Society of Arboriculture (Western Chapter), and various governmental and non-governmental entities.
• Contract Town Arborist, Town of Los Gatos, California Community Development Department / Planning Division
2015-present
• Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (ISA TRAQ Course Graduate, Palo Alto, California) • Millbrae Community Preservation Commission (Tree Board) 2001-2006
• ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401
• ASCA Arboriculture Consulting Academy graduate, class of 2000 • Associate Consulting Arborist
Barrie D. Coate and Associates
4/99-8/99
• Contract City Arborist, City of Belmont, California
Planning and Community Development Department
5/99-5/20 (21 years)
• ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A
• Peace Corps Soil and Water Conservation Extension Agent Chiangmai Province, Thailand 1991-1993
• B.A. Environmental Studies/Soil and Water Resources
UC Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California 1990
UCSC Chancellor’s Award, 1990
(My full curriculum vitae is available upon request)

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 11 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

6.0 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
Any legal description provided to the consultant/appraiser is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownership to any property are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised and evaluated as through free and clean, under responsible ownership and competent management.

It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinance, statutes, or other government regulations.

Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/appraiser can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.

The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement.

Unless required by law otherwise, the possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any other purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser.

Unless required by law otherwise, neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media, without the prior expressed conclusions, identity of the consultant/appraiser, or any reference to any professional society or institute or to any initiated designation conferred upon the consultant/appraiser as stated in his qualifications.

This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant/appraiser, and the consultant’s/appraiser’s fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.

Sketches, drawings, and photographs in this report, being intended for visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys unless expressed otherwise. The reproduction of any information generated by engineers, architects, or other consultants on any sketches, drawings, or photographs is for the express purpose of coordination and ease of reference only. Inclusion of said information on any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation by Walter Levison to the sufficiency or accuracy of said information.

Unless expressed otherwise:
a. information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the conditions of those items at the time of inspection; and
b. the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not arise in the future.

Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 12 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Arborist Disclosure Statement:

Arborists are tree specialists who use their education, knowledge, training, and experience to examine trees, recommend measures to enhance the beauty and health of trees, and attempt to reduce the risk of living near trees. Clients may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations of the arborist, or to seek additional advice.

Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree. Tree are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below ground. Arborist cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances, or for a specified period of time. Likewise, remedial treatments, like any medicine, cannot be guaranteed.

Treatment, pruning, and removal of trees may involve considerations beyond the scope of the arborist’s services such as property boundaries, property ownership, site lines, disputes between neighbors, and other issues. Arborists cannot take such considerations into account unless complete and accurate information is disclosed to the arborist. An arborist should then be expected to reasonably rely upon the completeness and accuracy of the information provided.

Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled. To live near trees is to accept some degree of risk. The only way to eliminate all risk associated with trees is to eliminate the trees.

7.0 Certification
I hereby certify that all the statements of fact in this report are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and are made in good faith.

Signature of Consultant
Walter Levison
DIGITAL BADGES:

ISA CERTIFIED ARBORIST CREDENTIAL:
https://certificates.isa-arbor.com/f1918723-df46-48cc-ace2-c12625530fec?record_view=true ISA TREE RISK ASSESSMENT QUALIFIED (TRAQ):
https://certificates.isa-arbor.com/d180515f-ab75-440b-9c66-106005e3cf10?record_view=true#gs.hpb30w

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 13 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

8.0 Digital Images
Below: Digital Images by WLCA, archived 10/12/2021, prior to start of construction.

Tag # Image Tag # Image
51 52

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 14 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
53 54
55 56

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 15 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
57 58
59 60

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 16 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
61 62
63 64

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 17 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
65 66
67 68

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 18 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
69 70
69 70

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 19 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

9.0 Tree Data Table
Tree Tag Number
Genus & Species Common Name
Trunk1 DiameterTrunk2 DiameterTrunk3 Diameter
Sum of All Trunk
Diameters
Height & Canopy
Spread (Ft.)
Health &
Structural Rating
(100% Each)
Overall
Condition
Rating
(0 to
100%)
(R)emove Tree
(S)ave Tree
Tree
Conservation
Suitability
Ratings (TCS)
Lopsided Canopy
(note direction)
Trunk Lean
(note direction)
Girdling Roots
Root Flares
Buried in Fill Soil
Pests and
Disease
Presence, and
Other Notes

MAINTENANCE
AND

PROTECTION
51 Washingtonia
robusta

NEIGHBOR
TREE
Mexican fan
palm 21.1 -- -- 21.1 25/14 70/70 70% Good X Poor
This tree appears to be
in a public right of way
owned by City of
Sunnyvale.
52 Magnolia
grandiflora
Southern
magnolia 15.8 -- -- 15.8 17/11 20/10 15% Very Poor X Poor Root system damaged
and sunburned on
grade.

Canopy consists of
weakly-attached resprout growth that has
arisen after excessive
pruning was for some
reason performed,
resulting in the tree’s
original branch and
limb architecture having
been cut back to stubs
(i.e. destroyed).
53 Magnolia
grandiflora
Southern
magnolia 20.5 -- -- 20.5 23/15 25/20 23% Poor X Poor (Same notes as for tree #52 above)
54 Magnolia
grandiflora
Southern
magnolia 28.3 -- -- 28.3 20/15 25/10 17% Very Poor X Poor (Same notes as for tree
#52 above)
Note also that roots are
confined to a surface
plate, with significant
visible damage and
sunburn desiccation
noted.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 20 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree Tag Number
Genus & Species Common Name
Trunk1 DiameterTrunk2 DiameterTrunk3 Diameter
Sum of All Trunk
Diameters
Height & Canopy
Spread (Ft.)
Health &
Structural Rating
(100% Each)
Overall
Condition
Rating
(0 to
100%)
(R)emove Tree
(S)ave Tree
Tree
Conservation
Suitability
Ratings (TCS)
Lopsided Canopy
(note direction)
Trunk Lean
(note direction)
Girdling Roots
Root Flares
Buried in Fill Soil
Pests and
Disease
Presence, and
Other Notes

MAINTENANCE
AND

PROTECTION
55 Magnolia
grandiflora
Southern
magnolia 21.5 -- -- 21.5 16/11 15/10 13% Very Poor X Poor (Same notes as for tree
#52)
Note that on this
specimen, resprouting
is only occurring on the
north, south, and west
sides of the remnant
tree, but not on the east
side.
56 Magnolia
grandiflora
Southern
magnolia 20.8 -- -- 20.8 17/13 25/10 17% Very Poor X Poor (All same notes as for tree #52 above).
57 Pyrus
kawakamii
Evergreen
pear
(ornamental)

13.2 -- -- 13.2 23/18 25/20 24%
Poor X Poor
Trunk taper
development good. Tree
root system is confined
inside a concrete curb
bumpout. Shear
pressure from trunk and
root expansion is
causing cracking of the
existing curbwork.

This tree was topped in
the past, resulting in a
profusion of new
weakly-attached
epicormics shoots as
the new canopy. This
species is susceptible
to black spot and to
bacterial fireblight.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 21 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree Tag Number
Genus & Species Common Name
Trunk1 DiameterTrunk2 DiameterTrunk3 Diameter
Sum of All Trunk
Diameters
Height & Canopy
Spread (Ft.)
Health &
Structural Rating
(100% Each)
Overall
Condition
Rating
(0 to
100%)
(R)emove Tree
(S)ave Tree
Tree
Conservation
Suitability
Ratings (TCS)
Lopsided Canopy
(note direction)
Trunk Lean
(note direction)
Girdling Roots
Root Flares
Buried in Fill Soil
Pests and
Disease
Presence, and
Other Notes

MAINTENANCE
AND

PROTECTION
58 Magnolia
grandiflora
Southern
magnolia 15.3 -- -- 15.3 16/13 25/10 17% Very Poor X Poor Roots damaged on
grade from years of turf
mowing via machinery.

Sunburn has damaged
the upper surfaces of
the woody roots.

Tree was topped back
to stubs (same as tree
#52). It is not clear why
this severe method of
pruning was used, as it
completely destroyed
the aesthetics,
structure, and long term
viability of every
magnolia specimen on
site.
59 Ligustrum sp.

NEIGHBOR
TREE
Privet
species 11.3 -- -- 11.3 25/17 30/25 27% Poor X Poor South GR
on
north
side.

Tree’s north side of
canopy facing the
parking lot was severely
pruned back to clear the
airspace of parking
stalls.
60 Pyrus
kawakamii
Evergreen
pear
(ornamental)

11.7 -- -- 11.7 20/25 50/30 37%
Poor X Poor
Tree’s north side of
canopy facing the
parking lot was severely
pruned back to clear the
airspace of parking
stalls.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 22 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree Tag Number
Genus & Species Common Name
Trunk1 DiameterTrunk2 DiameterTrunk3 Diameter
Sum of All Trunk
Diameters
Height & Canopy
Spread (Ft.)
Health &
Structural Rating
(100% Each)
Overall
Condition
Rating
(0 to
100%)
(R)emove Tree
(S)ave Tree
Tree
Conservation
Suitability
Ratings (TCS)
Lopsided Canopy
(note direction)
Trunk Lean
(note direction)
Girdling Roots
Root Flares
Buried in Fill Soil
Pests and
Disease
Presence, and
Other Notes

MAINTENANCE
AND

PROTECTION
61 Ligustrum sp.

NEIGHBOR
TREE
Privet
species 3.7 -- -- 3.7 13/8 20/15 17% Very Poor X Poor South Severely pruned to
clear the parking lot
airspace (north side of
canopy). This tree is
declining due to soil
moisture deficit
(drought stress).

Note this tree may not
technically be a “tree”.

Most planning staff
don’t consider trees <4”
diameter as “trees”.

Contact staff to verify.
62 Ligustrum sp.

NEIGHBOR
TREE
Privet
species 3.4 3.3 2.5 9.2 15/13 15/15 15% Very Poor X Poor Bark inclusion type fork
(elevated risk of
splitout) at 6 inches
above grade.

Decline of canopy
noted, due to soil
moisture deficit.
63 Ligustrum sp.

NEIGHBOR
TREE
Privet
species 11.4 -- -- 11.4 25/20 15/15 15% Very Poor X Poor South Tree was severely
pruned to remove the
north side of canopy to
clear parking lot.
64 Ligustrum sp.

NEIGHBOR
TREE
Privet
species 6 6 5
21 (four
stems)
20/20 20/16 18% Very
Poor X Poor South
Bark inclusion at grade.

Decline of canopy foliar
density due to soil
moisture deficit.
65 Ligustrum sp.

NEIGHBOR
TREE
Privet
species 4 3 3 10 18/12 20/10 15% Very Poor X Poor South Tree was severely
pruned to remove north
side of canopy (stems
facing the subject lot
parking lot). Decline of
canopy due to soil
moisture deficit.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 23 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree Tag Number
Genus & Species Common Name
Trunk1 DiameterTrunk2 DiameterTrunk3 Diameter
Sum of All Trunk
Diameters
Height & Canopy
Spread (Ft.)
Health &
Structural Rating
(100% Each)
Overall
Condition
Rating
(0 to
100%)
(R)emove Tree
(S)ave Tree
Tree
Conservation
Suitability
Ratings (TCS)
Lopsided Canopy
(note direction)
Trunk Lean
(note direction)
Girdling Roots
Root Flares
Buried in Fill Soil
Pests and
Disease
Presence, and
Other Notes

MAINTENANCE
AND

PROTECTION
66 Ligustrum sp. Privet
species 9.2 -- -- 9.2 20/18 30/20 25% Poor X Poor South Soil moisture deficit is
causing canopy decline.

Multiple 6” diameter
pruning cut wounds
were made to remove at
least 50% of the original
live biomass of this
tree, which is
considered severe
pruning.
67 Pittosporum
undulatum Victorian box 3 3 2 8 20/13 15/15 15% Very Poor X Poor Advanced stage decay
of twigs in canopy
noted, likely due
directly to soil moisture
deficit (drought stress).

Note however that there
is a known issue called
“Victorian box decline”
that affects older
(mature) specimens of
this tree species,
causing severe decline
and/or death of the tree
within a relatively short
time frame. There is no
cure or treatment for
this decline syndrome.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 24 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree Tag Number
Genus & Species Common Name
Trunk1 DiameterTrunk2 DiameterTrunk3 Diameter
Sum of All Trunk
Diameters
Height & Canopy
Spread (Ft.)
Health &
Structural Rating
(100% Each)
Overall
Condition
Rating
(0 to
100%)
(R)emove Tree
(S)ave Tree
Tree
Conservation
Suitability
Ratings (TCS)
Lopsided Canopy
(note direction)
Trunk Lean
(note direction)
Girdling Roots
Root Flares
Buried in Fill Soil
Pests and
Disease
Presence, and
Other Notes

MAINTENANCE
AND

PROTECTION
68 Ligustrum sp. Privet
species 8.4 -- -- 8.4 22/18 40/25 29% Poor X Poor
Soil moisture deficit
causing decline of
canopy.

The lowermost 50% of
the canopy was
removed by pruning,
which has destroyed
this tree’s natural
branch architecture
(structure) permanently,
raising its center of
gravity to a higher
elevation, and removing
its ability to add sugars
and starches to the
lower mainstem area.

As noted elsewhere, it
is not clear as to why
incredibly severe
pruning was performed
on many of the site
trees in the first place,
effectively destroying
the safety of and value
of most of the trees for
the remainder of their
lives in the landscape.
69 Washington
robusta

NEIGHBOR
TREE
Mexican fan
palm 16.8 -- -- 16.8 37/15 75/75 75% Good X Poor
Tree is actually on
neighbor property.
27 feet of clear stem
from base to frond
initiation elevation. This
is a tree species that
performs well in the Bay
Area with little
maintenance.

Trunk
buffer
wrap and
possibly
chain link
fencing
barrier
“where
possible”

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 25 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree Tag Number
Genus & Species Common Name
Trunk1 DiameterTrunk2 DiameterTrunk3 Diameter
Sum of All Trunk
Diameters
Height & Canopy
Spread (Ft.)
Health &
Structural Rating
(100% Each)
Overall
Condition
Rating
(0 to
100%)
(R)emove Tree
(S)ave Tree
Tree
Conservation
Suitability
Ratings (TCS)
Lopsided Canopy
(note direction)
Trunk Lean
(note direction)
Girdling Roots
Root Flares
Buried in Fill Soil
Pests and
Disease
Presence, and
Other Notes

MAINTENANCE
AND

PROTECTION
70 Magnolia
grandiflora

NEIGHBOR
TREE
Southern
magnolia 21.6 -- -- 21.6 35/40 35/35 35% Poor X Poor
Located approximately
8 feet west of the
property line on a
neighbor site that has
irrigated turf grass
covering root zone.

Roots are damaged on
grade from both years
of mechanical mowing,
and from sunburn.

Roots tend to grow on
the surface of heavily
compacted urban soils
when they are irrigated
frequently in a
“shallow” manner.

Extensive twig death
noted in the upper 50%
of the canopy, due
likely to soil moisture
deficit (drought), even
though the tree appears
to theoretically be well
irrigated (the turf grass
may be pulling most of
the applied irrigation
water before it reaches
the tree’s feeder root
system).

Trunk
buffer
wrap, and
install
chain link
fencing
barrier at
property
line to
protect
root
system.

Overall Tree Condition Ratings / Breakdown of Numeric Ranges (New, Per Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Edition):
00 - 05% = Dead
06 - 20% = Very Poor
21 – 40% = Poor
41 – 60% = Fair
61 – 80% = Good
81 – 100% = Exceptional

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 26 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree Conservation Suitability (TCS) Ratings1
A tree’s suitability for conservation is determined based on its health, structure, age, species and disturbance tolerances, proximity to proposed cutting and filling, proximity to proposed construction or demolition, and potential longevity, using a scale of good, fair, or poor (Fite, K, and Smiley, E. T., 2016). The following list defines the rating scale. Note that if proposed site work can be offset to farther linear distances from a tree’s trunk edge, a tree’s TCS rating may be elevated by one rating tier, given that there would be a corresponding reduction in expected future root zone impacts.

TPS Ratings Range of values
Good 80-100 Trees with good health, good structural stability and good expected longevity after construction.

Moderate 60-79
Trees with fair health and/or structural defects that may be mitigated through treatment. These trees require more intense management and monitoring, before, during, and after construction, and may have shorter life expectancy after development.

Poor <59
Trees are expected to decline during or after construction regardless of management. The species or individual may possess characteristics that are incompatible or undesirable in landscape settings or unsuited for the intended use of the site.

TCS Ratings Worksheet Factors (Total Possible: 100 Points) Health (1-15)
Root Cut/Fill Distance from Trunk (1-15)
Structure Defects (1-15)
Construction Tolerance of the tree species (1-15)
Age relative to typical species lifespan (1-10)
Location of construction activity (1-10)
Soil quality/characteristics (1-10)
Species desirability (1-10)
1 Derived from Fite and Smiley, 2016. Best Management Practices: Managing Trees During Construction, 2nd Edition. International Society of Arboriculture.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 27 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
Tree Maintenance and Protection Codes Used in Data Table:

RPZ: Root protection zone fence, chain link, with 2" diameter iron posts driven 24" into the ground, 6 to 8 feet on center max. spacing. Alternative material:
chain link fence panels set over concrete block-type footings, with the fence panels wired to steel pins pounded 24 inches into the ground at both ends of each panel.

RB: Root buffer consisting of wood chip mulch lain over existing soil as a 12 inch thick layer, overlain with 1 inch or greater plywood strapped together with metal plates. This root buffer or soil buffer should be placed over the entire width of the construction corridor between tree trunks and construction.

RP: Root pruning. Prune woody roots measuring greater than or equal to 1 inch diameter by carefully back-digging into the soil around each root using small hand tools until an area is reached where the root is undamaged. Cleanly cut through the root at right angle to the root growth direction, using professional grade pruning equipment and/or a Sawzall with wood pruning blade. Backfill around the cut root immediately (same day), and thoroughly irrigate the area to saturate the uppermost 24 inches of the soil profile.

BDRP: Back-dig root pruning: Hand-dig around the broken root, digging horizontally into the open soil root zone until a clean, unbroken, unshattered section of the root is visible. Proceed as per ‘root pruning’.

RCX: Root crown excavation. Retain an experienced ISA-Certified arborist to perform careful hand-digging using small trowels or other dull digging tools to uncover currently-buried buttress root flares. Digging shall occur between trunk edge and at least two (2) feet horizontal from trunk edge. The final soil elevation will be at a level such that the tree’s buttress roots visibly flare out from the vertical trunk.

TB: Trunk buffer consists of 20-40 wraps of orange plastic snow fencing to create a 2 inch thick buffer over the lowest 8 feet of tree trunk (usually takes at least an entire roll of orange fencing per each tree). Lay 2X4 wood boards vertically, side by side, around the entire circumference of the trunk. Secure buffer using duct tape (not wires).

F: Fertilization with slow-release Greenbelt 22-14-14 tree formula, as a soil injection application using a fertilizer injection gun. This brand and formulation is commonly used by reputable tree care companies in the Bay Area. Apply at label rate and injection hole spacing.

M: 4-inch thick layer of chipper truck type natural wood chips (example source: Lyngso Garden Supply, self pick-up). Do not use bark chips or shredded redwood bark.

W: Irrigate using various methods to be determined through discussion with General Contractor. Irrigation frequency and duration to be determined through discussion and/or per directions in this report. Native oak species typically require 1x/month irrigation, while other tree species tend to prefer 2x/month or 4x/month moderate to heavy irrigation during construction.

P: Pruning per specifications noted elsewhere. All pruning must be performed only under direct site supervision of an ISA Certified Arborist, or performed directly by an ISA Certified Arborist, and shall conform to all current ANSI A300 standards.

MON: A Project Arborist must be present to monitor specific work as noted for each tree.

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 28 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

10.0 Tree Location Map Mark-ups
Map 1 on this page is sheet C1 proposed site plan,
version 1/25/2022, overlaid with WLCA’s tree tag
numbers #51 through #70.

All trees are expected to be removed on site and
off site, except for trees #69 and #70 west of the
project, due to direct and indirect conflicts with
proposed grading, utilities, building-related
construction, and landscape renovation
construction and planting.

Map 2 tree map markup on the following report
page shows the actual civil surveyor plotted trunk
base locations for most of the 20 trees included in
the WLCA study population.

RIGHT: MAP 1

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 29 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved
RIGHT: MAP 2

ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 / ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified / ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A Cell: (415) 203-0990 / Email: [email protected] 30 of 30
Site Address: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, CA Version: 2/7/2022 Registered Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists and Member of the International Society of Arboriculture  Walter Levison 2022 All Rights Reserved

11.0 Attached: Appraisal Worksheet
An appraisal worksheet detailing appraised values of all survey trees of all diameter size classes is a required component of all arborist reports being submitted to City of Sunnyvale, California planning division Staff.

Appraisal information was prepared using the 10th edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 2nd Printing (2019). The dollar values of each survey tree derived from these calculations are indicated at the right hand edge of the worksheet attached to the end of this WLCA arborist report.

Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist <[email protected]> Cell: (415) 203-0990 1 of 3 Line 9 Line 10 Line 11
Tree Tag #Name (Initials)WCISA Speces Group Classification Booklet PageHealth (Weighted 0.15)Structure(Weighted 0.70)Form(Weighted 0.15)Overall Condition Rating (OCR) "Weighted Method" Diameter Inches at 4.5 ft. Above GradeFunctional LimitationsExternal LimitationsWCISA Species Group NumberTrunk Square Inches for Replacement-Size Specimen of This SpeciesAverage SF Bay Area Cost of 24 Inch Box Tree (2019)(UTC) Unit Tree Cost per Sq Inch (M Divided by L)Trunk Area (TA) ((dia. x dia.) x 0.785)Basic Functional Replacement Cost (BFRC) = (OxN)Depreciated Functional Replacement Cost (DFRC) = PxGxIxJRounded-off Appraised Values 51 Wr 37 $945
52 Mg 21 0.2 0.1 0.3 15% 15.8 80% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 195.97 $ 12,893 $ 1,346 $1,350 53 Mg 21 0.25 0.2 0.3 22% 20.5 80% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 329.90 $ 21,704 $ 3,477 $3,480 54 Mg 21 0.25 0.1 0.3 15% 28.3 80% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 628.70 $ 41,362 $ 4,542 $4,540 55 Mg 21 0.15 0.1 0.3 14% 21.5 80% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 362.87 $ 23,873 $ 2,363 $2,360 56 Mg 21 0.25 0.1 0.3 15% 20.8 80% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 339.62 $ 22,344 $ 2,453 $2,450 57 Pk 30 0.25 0.2 0.5 25% 13.2 60% 90% 1 2.09 $250.00 $119.62 136.78 $ 16,361 $ 2,231 $2,230 58 Mg 21 0.25 0.1 0.3 15% 15.3 80% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 183.76 $ 12,090 $ 1,327 $1,330 59 Lsp. 19 0.3 0.25 0.6 31% 11.3 50% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 100.24 $ 6,595 $ 920 $920 60 Pk 30 0.5 0.3 0.6 38% 11.7 40% 90% 1 2.09 $250.00 $119.62 107.46 $ 12,854 $ 1,735 $1,740 61 Lsp. 19 0.2 0.15 0.6 23% 3.7 40% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 10.75 $ 707 $ 57 $60 Valuation Appraisal Worksheet Based on Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Edition (2019) "Functional Replacement Method / Trunk Formula Technique" Site: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, California. 10/20/2021
Depreciation Factors
3x ($25 per clear trunk foot x height) = 3 x ($25 X 18) = $1,350. $1,350 X condition = $1,350 X .70 = $945.

Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist <[email protected]> Cell: (415) 203-0990 2 of 3 Line 9 Line 10 Line 11
Tree Tag #Name (Initials)WCISA Speces Group Classification Booklet PageHealth (Weighted 0.15)Structure(Weighted 0.70)Form(Weighted 0.15)Overall Condition Rating (OCR) "Weighted Method" Diameter Inches at 4.5 ft. Above GradeFunctional LimitationsExternal LimitationsWCISA Species Group NumberTrunk Square Inches for Replacement-Size Specimen of This SpeciesAverage SF Bay Area Cost of 24 Inch Box Tree (2019)(UTC) Unit Tree Cost per Sq Inch (M Divided by L)Trunk Area (TA) ((dia. x dia.) x 0.785)Basic Functional Replacement Cost (BFRC) = (OxN)Depreciated Functional Replacement Cost (DFRC) = PxGxIxJRounded-off Appraised Values Valuation Appraisal Worksheet Based on Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Edition (2019) "Functional Replacement Method / Trunk Formula Technique" Site: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, California. 10/20/2021
Depreciation Factors
62 Lsp. 19 0.15 0.15 0.7 23% multi stem
total 40% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 23.00 $ 1,513 $ 127 $130 63 Lsp. 19 0.15 0.15 0.5 20% 11.4 40% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 102.02 $ 6,712 $ 489 $490 64 Lsp. 19 0.2 0.16 0.4 20% multi stem
total 40% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 89.00 $ 5,855 $ 426 $430 65 Lsp. 19 0.2 0.1 0.35 15% multi stem
total 40% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 27.00 $ 1,776 $ 98 $100 66 Lsp. 19 0.3 0.2 0.5 26% 9.2 40% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 66.44 $ 4,371 $ 409 $410 67 Pu 26 0.15 0.15 0.5 20% multi stem
total 40% 90% 1 2.09 $250.00 $119.62 17.00 $ 2,033 $ 148 $150 68 Lsp. 19 0.4 0.25 0.5 31% 8.4 40% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 55.39 $ 3,644 $ 407 $410 69 $1,520
70 Mg 21 0.35 0.35 0.8 42% 21.6 80% 90% 3 3.8 $250.00 $65.79 366.25 $ 24,095 $ 7,243 $7,200 Washingtonia robusta (same as tree #51).
3x ($25 per clear trunk foot x height) = 3 x ($25 X 27) = $2,025. $2,025 X condition = $2,025 X 0.75 = $1,518.75.

Rounded to nearest 10 is $1,520.

Walter Levison, Consulting Arborist <[email protected]> Cell: (415) 203-0990 3 of 3 Line 9 Line 10 Line 11
Tree Tag #Name (Initials)WCISA Speces Group Classification Booklet PageHealth (Weighted 0.15)Structure(Weighted 0.70)Form(Weighted 0.15)Overall Condition Rating (OCR) "Weighted Method" Diameter Inches at 4.5 ft. Above GradeFunctional LimitationsExternal LimitationsWCISA Species Group NumberTrunk Square Inches for Replacement-Size Specimen of This SpeciesAverage SF Bay Area Cost of 24 Inch Box Tree (2019)(UTC) Unit Tree Cost per Sq Inch (M Divided by L)Trunk Area (TA) ((dia. x dia.) x 0.785)Basic Functional Replacement Cost (BFRC) = (OxN)Depreciated Functional Replacement Cost (DFRC) = PxGxIxJRounded-off Appraised Values Valuation Appraisal Worksheet Based on Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th Edition (2019) "Functional Replacement Method / Trunk Formula Technique" Site: 1220 Oakmead, Sunnyvale, California. 10/20/2021
Depreciation Factors
Total Appraised
Value of All
Study Trees
$32,245
NOTES:

1. OVERALL CONDITION RATING RANGE per the new 10th edition, 2nd Printing, of Guide for Plant Appraisal (2019):

Excellent: 81-100%
Good: 61-80%
Fair: 41-60%
Poor: 21-40%
Very Poor: 6-20%
Dead: 0-5%
ROUNDING: Values over $5,000 are rounded to nearest $100. Values below $5,000 are rounded to nearest $10.

2. MULTI STEM TREES: For trees with multiple mainstems, the total of all mainstem cross sectional areas was used as the "trunk area" calculation. This total cross sectional area is a numeric value in square inches (sq. in.).

3. CONDITION RATINGS / APPRAISAL TABLE VS. DATA TABLE: Because of the new appraisal methods outlined in the 2019 edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 10th edition 2nd printing, the condition ratings calculated in the "Overall Condition Rating / Weighted Method" column, and the data noted in the health and structure columns of this spreadsheet (with calculations embedded), may in some cases be slightly different from data in the WLCA arborist report tree data table. WLCA attempted to keep overall condition rating values as consistent as possible between the two data tables (i e the appraisal data table and the tree data table in the arborist report)

Statement of Qualifications and Relevant Experience
1 of 3
Walter S. Levison Jr.
23 years specializing in rapid response, rapid turnaround, high quality independent arboriculture consulting for municipalities, developers, architects, engineers, and government agencies throughout the greater San Francisco Bay Area.

Extensive consulting experience performing private and municipal tree assessment and tree management planning, including use of a microdrill decay detection device (RESI F300) and current U.S. standard tree risk assessment (TRAQ) protocols.

Speaker at California Tree Failure Report Program Annual Meetings (University of California Cooperative Extension), Western Chapter ISA certified arborist continuing education functions, Bay Area Landscape Supervisor Forum, City of Belmont Planning Commission and City Council meetings, and as a commissioner on the City of Millbrae Tree Board.

International leadership experience in a U.S. Peace Corps / Thailand agroforestry setting.

Education
• UC Santa Cruz, Bachelor of Arts Environmental Studies / Soil and Water Resources 1990 • Chancellor’s Award 1990
Certifications & Registrations
• Tree Risk Assessment Qualification - TRAQ (International Society of Arboriculture) 2009 • Registered Consulting Arborist - RCA (American Society of Consulting Arborists) 2002 • Certified Arborist - CA (International Society of Arboriculture) 1996 Professional Associations
• American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) – Registered Member since 2002 • International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) – Life Member since 1999 • International Society of Arboriculture Western Chapter United States (WCISA) Relevant Municipal Experience (Partial)
City of Millbrae, On-Call Consulting Arborist
On-call contract-basis consulting arborist for the City of Millbrae Parks Department and other City Departments, from 2021 to present (2022). From 2021 to 2022, WLCA completed three (3) large scale consulting assignments involving tree assessment and TRAQ risk rating determination for over 200 large eucalyptus specimens on public park properties, including high-use facilities such as a City skate park and exercise facilities (jogging paths, etc.). The written reports, maps, and tree databases associated with these projects included color-coded long-term tree removal and tree pruning prioritization ratings that allowed City Staff to effectively prioritize their limited tree removal and maintenance budget to minimize the public’s exposure to risk of tree and tree part failure and impact over a 3 to 5 year period.

City of San Mateo, Indian Springs Park, Tree Risk Analysis & Species Conversion Feasibility Study Prepared full comprehensive arborist report package for Parks Department Staff in 2018, including tree risk rating determination for 58 eucalyptus specimens of various species ranging from 50 to 130 feet in height. Determined various potential failure modes, identified all static and mobile ground-based targets, and estimated occupancy rates for all targets. Prioritized tree maintenance, tree removal, and additional decay detection investigation needs. Analyzed changes to wind velocity and wind loading on park trees that might occur as a result of partial tree removal in the park. Prepared comprehensive replanting plan for the park, including special replacement tree species and cultivars, costs, irrigation best management practices, etc.

Town of Los Gatos, Contract Town Arborist
On-call contract planning arborist for the Town of Los Gatos Planning and Community Development Department continuously since November, 2015. Walter Levison prepares comprehensive site plan analysis-type arborist reports for use by Staff. Tree analysis is typically for complicated, steeply sloped hillside sites, and includes valuation appraisals of all trees.

City of Belmont, Contract City Arborist:

On-call contract planning arborist for the City of Belmont Planning and Community Development Department continuously between 1999 and 2020. Walter Levison prepared over 300 site plan analysistype arborist reports for City Staff during that 21 year period. WLCA performed pre-construction tree protection signoffs, periodic construction monitoring, and code enforcement when necessary, and worked closely with City Staff, site plan project teams, and property owners to arrange compromise solutions that allowed site work to proceed while mitigating some negative impacts to key specimen trees.

Statement of Qualifications and Relevant Experience
2 of 3
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC):

On-call contract project arborist representing the SFPUC during pre-construction and construction phases of Bay Division Pipelines 3, 4, and 5 since 2010. Duties have included tree database creation, high risk tree analysis, prescribing tree impact mitigation measures to preserve key oak specimens along drinking water delivery pipeline right of ways, root pruning, setup of root protection fencing and trunk buffer wraps, monitoring big water infrastructure installation near trees being retained, and mitigation tree installation.

City of American Canyon:

Performed City-wide street tree and parks tree GPS survey and assessment over a three year period.

Submitted comprehensive tree management plans to City Staff, complete with action priority rankings for tree removal, pruning, and other maintenance. Co-presented an in-depth tree risk assessment seminar and field day for Staff.

City of Menlo Park:

Assessed approximately 3,000 mature street trees using an innovative set of ten ‘defects and hazards’ parameters entered into the City digital tree inventory. Trees were assigned action priority ratings to effectively manage tree risk on a limited City budget. Prepared the official street tree management plan for Staff to accompany the updated digital tree inventory record. Sourced and delivered hard-to-find oak species for the City street tree replacement program.

Relevant Experience (1991-1999)
City of Millbrae Community Preservation Commission (Tree Board) 2001-2006
Barrie D. Coate & Associates
Associate Consulting Arborist for City of Saratoga site plan projects 1999
Bartlett Tree Expert Co. / San Francisco Division
Pruning, Fertilization, Spraying, Arborist Report Preparation 1998
Western Environmental Consultants, Inc.
(Pacific Gas & Electric Contract)
Consulting Utility Forester
1996-1998
U.S. Forest Service / Covelo Ranger District
Hydrotechnician and Tree Survey
1995
U.S. National Park Service / Golden Gate National Recreation Area Habitat Restoration and Native Plant Propagation Volunteer 1994
U.S. Peace Corps / Thailand
Agroforestry, Soil Conservation Farming, and Primary School Environmental Education 1991-1993
Ecology Studies
Five-Week Rocky Mountain Wilderness Field Ecology Study Wyoming, U.S.A.
7/86-8/86 (5-week backpack with university course credit) University of California Santa Cruz Extension / Dr. Edward Grumbine First-Ever Joint U.S./China Field Ecology Study
Xujiaba Forest Reserve, Yunnan Province, China, and other locations in Yunnan Province 9/89-12/89 (3 months)
Wildlands Studies Field Ecology Programs, Santa Cruz, CA / Dr. Christopher Carpenter

Statement of Qualifications and Relevant Experience
3 of 3
Principal Arboriculture Services and Specialties
Rapid response, rapid turnaround, high quality tree inventories with health and structural assessment.

Advanced decay detection (invasive using a RESI F300 microdrill device, or non-invasive).

Site plan impact analysis for municipal planning department staff.

Innovative tree protection and preservation planning.

Long-range tree management planning.

Tree valuations (plant appraisal).

TRAQ risk rating determination.

High-risk tree evaluation and management.

Tree species selection.

Construction monitoring.

Landscape problem solving.

Nursery stock grading and pre-installation girdling root mitigation.

Independent audits of pruning work to verify compliance with ANSI-A300 tree care standards.

2022 MUNICIPAL REFERENCE LIST / WALTER LEVISON, CONSULTING ARBORIST

1. John Gianoli, Parks Director
City of Millbrae Parks Department
621 Magnolia Avenue
Millbrae, CA 94030
Office (650) 259-2378
Relationship: (2021-onward) retains Walter Levison on an as-needed, on-call basis to perform consulting services as the (unofficial) Contract City Arborist to City of Millbrae. In 2021, Levison performed multiple large-scale TRAQ tree risk assessments at public park and trail properties for the City, assessing over 200 eucalyptus specimens for risk, and preparing tree tables with color-coded numeric prioritization codes indicating specific removal or pruning prescriptions to reduce risk to high-value, high-occupancy type targets.

2. Joel Paulson, Director of Planning and Community Development Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main St.

Los Gatos, CA 95030
Office: (408) 354-6879
Relationship: Oversight of Walter Levison as the Contract Town Arborist (Planning Division), 2015 to 2022 (current).

3. Damon DiDonato, Senior Planner
City of Belmont Planning and Community Development Department 1 Twin Pines Lane
Belmont, CA 94002
Office (650) 637-2908
Relationship: Oversight of Walter Levison’s duties as the Contract City Arborist.

4. Carlos Demelo, Director of Planning and Community Development City of Belmont Planning and Community Development Department 1 Twin Pines Lane
Belmont, CA 94002
Office (650) 595-7440
Relationship: Oversight of Walter Levison’s duties as the Contract City Arborist.

5. Dorinda Himes, Environmental Compliance Manager Consultant Applied Technology & Science SFPUC WSIP Office
200 Brown Road, Suite 306
Fremont, CA 94539
Cell (415) 233-2599
Relationship: Oversight of Walter Levison, contract project arborist for the Hetch Hetchy Water System Improvement Program, Bay Division Pipeline 3, 4, and 5 projects.

6. Mike Gibbons Superintendent
Certified Arborist / Municipal Specialist WE-10231A
Public Works Department Municipal Services Center
1400 Broadway Redwood City, CA 94063 (650) 780-7493
Email:[email protected]
Relationship: Retained Walter Levison to perform in-depth tree risk studies of street tree oak specimens.

7. Chris Costanzo, Parks Maintenance Supervisor
Hayward Area Recreation and Park District (HARD)
1099 E Street
Hayward, CA 94541
Relationship: Oversight of Walter Levison during WLCA preparation of various investigative reports on the decline of redwood tree specimens throughout the HARD park system. Trees deemed beyond recovery were recommended for removal due to safety concerns. Trees deemed salvageable were recommended for tree-specific maintenance such as irrigation system upgrades and increased irrigation volume.

ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #401 ISA Certified Arborist #WE-3172A

8. Matthew Fried, City Arborist
City of San Mateo Parks Department
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo, CA 94403
Office: (650) 522-7422
Relationship: Retained Walter Levison to perform a very comprehensive, in-depth tree risk analysis and species conversion feasibility study of Indian Springs Park in San Mateo. The park contains a mature grove of fifty-eight (58) protected-size eucalyptus specimens, most of which are over 100 years of age and over 100 feet in height.

ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?

INSR ADDL SUBR

LTR INSD WVD
PRODUCER CONTACT NAME: PHONE FAX
(A/C, No, Ext): (A/C, No): E-MAIL ADDRESS:

INSURER A :

INSURED INSURER B :

INSURER C :

INSURER D :

INSURER E :

INSURER F :

POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF POLICY EXP TYPE OF INSURANCE (MM/DD/YYYY) (MM/DD/YYYY) LIMITS

AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY

UMBRELLA LIAB

EXCESS LIAB WORKERS COMPENSATION

AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required)

AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
EACH OCCURRENCE $ DAMAGE TO RENTED CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR PREMISES (Ea occurrence) $ MED EXP (Any one person) $
PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $ PRO- POLICY JECT LOC PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG OTHER: $ COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT
(Ea accident) $ ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY (Per person) $ OWNED SCHEDULED AUTOS ONLY AUTOS BODILY INJURY (Per accident) $ HIRED NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY (Per accident) $
$ OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $
DED RETENTION $ PER OTH- STATUTE ER
E.L. EACH ACCIDENT E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $
If yes, describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC #

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
Y / N
N / A
(Mandatory in NH)

SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE

THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS

CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.

THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS

CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.

IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed.

If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).

COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION
ACORD 25 (2016/03) © 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.

CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY)
$
$
$
$
$
The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD
5/7/2021
(858) 452-2200 (858) 452-6004
24856
Walter Levison dba Walter Levison Consulting Arborist
165 Linda Vista
Millbrae, CA 94030
A 2,000,000
FEIECC2359904 5/6/2021 5/6/2022 50,000
5,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
2,000,000
A Professional Liabili FEIECC2359904 5/6/2021 Aggregate Limit 2,000,000 A Pollution Legal Liab FEIECC2359904 5/6/2021 5/6/2022 Aggregate Limit 2,000,000 project site 681 Gateway Blvd South San Francisco, CA
Alexandria Real EstateEquiies, Inc as additional insureds with respects to General Liability when required by written contract per form ECC319(07-12) and CG2037(07-04).

Contractural Liability Assumed in a contract or agreement that is an "insured contract", provided the "bodily injury" or "property damage" occurs subsequent to the execution of the contract or agreement. Solely for the purposes of liability assumed in an insured contract Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc
c/o Business Credentialing Services
PO Box 1258
Morristown, NJ 07960
WALTLEV-01 RVANZANDT
Assured Partners of CA Insurance Services, LLC dba: Wateridge Insurance Services
10717 Sorrento Valley Road
San Diego, CA 92121
Admiral Ins Company
5/6/2022
X
X

AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is dated for identification this 1st day of July 2022 and is made by and between TOWN OF LOS GATOS, a California municipal corporation, (“Town”) and Walter Levison (“Consultant”), whose address is 165 Linda Vista, Millbrae, CA 94030. This Agreement is made with reference to the following facts.

I. RECITALS

1.1 Town has a need for consulting arborist services for evaluation of trees on properties within the Town of Los Gatos.

1.2 Town desires to engage a certified arborist to review, analyze, and comment on development project plans; prepare technical analyses and reports; conduct peer review of outside arborist reports; and attend public meetings as needed.

1.3 Consultant represents and affirms that it is qualified and willing to perform the desired work pursuant to this Agreement.

II. AGREEMENTS

2.1 Scope of Services. Consultant shall provide the services listed below.

Administrative Duties
When needed by Town, assess the potential impacts to trees associated with proposed development and redevelopment projects. This shall include evaluating plans for development proposals, reviewing arborist reports and/or identifying mitigation measures, and recommending preservation measures and conditions of approval. a. When needed by Town, work on special studies or projects including, but not limited to: preparation of a checklist for content of arborist reports for application packets; emergency response and coordination; review of tree removal permits that have been denied and appealed; and review of landscape plans for hillside homes, Planned Developments, and/or commercial projects. b. When needed by Town, conduct field investigations, studies, and prepare reports related to tree removals and impacts from proposed construction, and develop recommendations for mitigation and preservation measures. c. When needed by Town, assist in the establishment and subsequent modification of Town's tree and landscape related ordinances, design guidelines, policies, and development fees.

ATTACHMENT 2

d. When needed by Town, attend meetings with Town staff, public officials, community leaders, developers, contractors, and the general public. e. When needed by Town, advise, support, and assist Town departments, committees, commissions, and Town Council. In addition, act as a liaison between Town and federal, state, and regional agencies.
f. When needed by Town, attend Town Council, Planning Commission, and special study session meetings when tree and/or landscaping issues and project applications with tree removals, impacts to trees, and/or landscape plans are being considered.
g. As requested by Town, provide copies of draft and final draft work products of reports and studies prepared for Town. Consultant shall provide electronic file copies of these documents as needed.

Other Miscellaneous Services
The Town may occasionally have the need for other services not specifically listed in this document that the Consultant has the necessary experience and capabilities to provide.

Town may authorize Consultant to perform such selected services on an as-needed basis.

2.2 Time of Performance. The services of Consultant are fixed for a five-year period that will commence upon the execution of the contract. At the end of this period, should the Town not renew the contract, the contract shall automatically expire. The individual time of performance schedule for each project referred to the Consultant is required to be performed as outlined in the scope of services section of this Agreement.

2.3 Compliance with Laws. Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations of governing federal, state, and local laws. Consultant represents and warrants to Town that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a Town of Los Gatos business license pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Code of the Town of Los Gatos.

2.4 Sole Responsibility. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services under this Agreement.

2.5 Information/Report Handling. All documents furnished to Consultant by the Town and all reports and supportive data prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement are the Town’s property and shall be delivered to the Town upon the completion of Consultant's services or at the Town's written request. All reports, information, data, and exhibits prepared or assembled by Consultant in connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential until released by the Town to the public, and the Consultant shall not make any of the these documents or information available to any individual or organization not employed by the Consultant or the Town without the

written consent of the Town before such release. The Town acknowledges that the reports to be prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of evaluating a defined project, and Town's use of the information contained in the reports prepared by the Consultant in connection with other projects shall be solely at Town's risk, unless Consultant expressly consents to such use in writing. Town further agrees that it will not appropriate any methodology or technique of Consultant which is and has been confirmed in writing by Consultant to be a trade secret of Consultant.

2.6 Compensation. Compensation for Consultant's professional services shall not exceed the established hourly rates, as set forth in the Fee Schedule (Exhibit A), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Payment shall be based upon Town approval of each task.

2.7 Billing. Billing shall be monthly by invoice within thirty (30) days of the rendering of the service and shall be accompanied by a detailed explanation of the work performed, by whom, at what rate, and on what date. Also, plans, specifications, documents or other pertinent materials shall be submitted for Town review, even if only in partial or draft form.

Payment shall be net thirty (30) days. All invoices and statements to the Town shall be addressed as follows:

Invoices:

Town of Los Gatos
Attn: Accounts Payable
P.O. Box 655
Los Gatos, CA 95031-0655

2.8 Availability of Records. Consultant shall maintain the records supporting this billing for not less than three years following completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall make these records available to authorized personnel of the Town at the Consultant's offices during business hours upon written request of the Town.

2.9 Assignability and Subcontracting. The services to be performed under this Agreement are unique and personal to the Consultant. No portion of these services shall be assigned or subcontracted without the written consent of the Town.

2.10 Independent Contractor. It is understood that the Consultant, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the Town. As an independent contractor he/she shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to Town employee(s). With prior written consent, the Consultant may perform some obligations under this Agreement by subcontracting, but may not delegate ultimate responsibility for performance or assign or transfer interests under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to testify in any litigation brought regarding the subject of the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall be compensated for its costs and expenses in preparing

for, traveling to, and testifying in such matters at its then current hourly rates of compensation, unless such litigation is brought by Consultant or is based on allegations of Consultant's negligent performance or wrongdoing.

2.11 Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibilities are solely to the Town. The Consultant has and shall not obtain any holding or interest within the Town of Los Gatos. Consultant has no business holdings or agreements with any individual member of the Staff or management of the Town or its representatives nor shall it enter into any such holdings or agreements. In addition, Consultant warrants that it does not presently and shall not acquire any direct or indirect interest adverse to those of the Town in the subject of this Agreement, and it shall immediately disassociate itself from such an interest, should it discover it has done so and shall, at the Town's sole discretion, divest itself of such interest. Consultant shall not knowingly and shall take reasonable steps to ensure that it does not employ a person having such an interest in this performance of this Agreement. If after employment of a person, Consultant discovers it has employed a person with a direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall promptly notify Town of this employment relationship, and shall, at the Town's sole discretion, sever any such employment relationship.

2.12 Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant warrants that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Neither Consultant nor its subcontractors do and neither shall discriminate against persons employed or seeking employment with them on the basis of age, sex, color, race, marital status, sexual orientation, ancestry, physical or mental disability, national origin, religion, or medical condition, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.

III. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION

3.1 Minimum Scope of Insurance.
i. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, General Liability insurance policies insuring him/her and his/her firm to an amount not less than: one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. ii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain for the duration of the contract, an Automobile Liability insurance policy insuring him/her and his/her staff to an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii. Consultant shall provide to the Town all certificates of insurance, with original endorsements effecting coverage. Consultant agrees that all certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the Town before work commences.

iv. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, professional liability insurance in amounts not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) which is sufficient to insure Consultant for professional errors or omissions in the performance of the particular scope of work under this agreement.

General Liability
i. The Town, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as insured as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant; and premises owned or used by the Consultant. This requirement does not apply to the professional liability insurance required for professional errors and omissions.
ii. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Town, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurances maintained by the Town, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
iii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the Town, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
iv. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.

3.2 All Coverages. Each insurance policy required in this item shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Town. Current certification of such insurance shall be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the Town Clerk.

3.3 Workers’ Compensation. It is understood that Consultant currently has no employees. If employees are hired in the future, Consultant shall obtain and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance as required by California law and shall provide evidence of such policy to the Town. Consultant shall ensure that all subcontractors employed by Consultant provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective employees.

3.4 Indemnification. The Consultant shall save, keep, hold harmless, and indemnify and defend the Town its officers, agent, employees, and volunteers from all damages, liabilities, penalties, costs, or expenses in law or equity that may at any time arise or be set up because of damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of performing work which may be occasioned by a willful or negligent act or

omissions of the Consultant, or any of the Consultant's officers, employees, or agents or any subconsultant.

IV. GENERAL TERMS

4.1 Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement.

4.2 Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed to the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of the County of Santa Clara.

4.3 Termination of Agreement. The Town and the Consultant shall have the right to terminate this agreement with or without cause by giving not less than fifteen days (15) written notice of termination. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall deliver to the Town all plans, files, documents, reports, performed to date by the Consultant. In the event of such termination, Town shall pay Consultant an amount that bears the same ratio to the maximum contract price as the work delivered to the Town bears to completed services contemplated under this Agreement, unless such termination is made for cause, in which event, compensation, if any, shall be adjusted in light of the particular facts and circumstances involved in such termination.

4.4 Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the Town and the Consultant.

4.5 Disputes. In any dispute over any aspect of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, including costs of appeal.

4.6 Notices. Any notice required to be given shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if mailed postage prepaid, and addressed to:

To Town: To Consultant:

Joel Paulson Walter Levison
Community Development Director 165 Linda Vista
Town of Los Gatos Millbrae, CA 94030
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Fax: (408) 354-7593
Phone: (408) 354-6879 Phone: (408) 203-0990
E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Or personally delivered to Consultant to such address or such other address as Consultant designates in writing to Town.

4.7 Order of Precedence. In the event of any conflict, contradiction, or ambiguity between the terms and conditions of this Agreement in respect to the Products or Services and any attachments to this Agreement, then the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail over attachments or other writings.

4.8 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including Exhibit A, constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the Agreement between the Town and Consultant. No terms, conditions, understandings or agreements purporting to modify or vary this Agreement, unless hereafter made in writing and signed by the party to be bound, shall be binding on either party.

In WITNESS WHEREOF, the Town and Consultant have executed this Agreement.

Town of Los Gatos Consultant:
____________________________ ______________________________ Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager Walter Levison
Town of Los Gatos Arborist Consultant
Department Approval:
_____________________________
Joel Paulson
Community Development Director
Approved as to Form:
___________________________
Gabrielle Whelan, Town Attorney
Attest:
_____________________________
Shelley Neis, MMC, CPMC
Town Clerk

This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank

PREPARED BY: Tania Maheu
Administrative Analyst
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, Community Development Director, and Finance Director
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov

TOWN OF LOS GATOS

COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 06/21/2022
ITEM NO: 8
DATE: June 16, 2022
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize the Town Manager to Execute an Agreement for Consultant Services with Larry Cannon, Cannon Design Group to Provide Services as Architectural Consultant to the Town.

RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the Town Manager to execute an Agreement for Consultant Services with Larry Cannon, Cannon Design Group to provide services as Architectural Consultant to the Town.

BACKGROUND:

In 2005, the Town Council approved a contract with Larry Cannon of Cannon Design Group to serve as Architectural Consultant to the Town. Since that time, the architectural peer review consultant process continues to be a successful component of the planning process.

The Town distributed a Request for Qualifications in April 2022 and received three proposals from: Larry Cannon, Cannon Design Group (Attachment 1); Mammarella Architecture; and Lindsay Toscano Architect. Staff determined that Larry Cannon of Cannon Design Group is the most qualified to serve as the Architectural Consultant to the Town, based on the quality of the proposal and past services provided.

DISCUSSION:

The Architectural Consultant serves in a similar capacity to other Town development peer review consultants such as arborist, geotechnical, and environmental consultants. Typical tasks that the Architectural Consultant may provide include the following:

PAGE 2 OF 3
SUBJECT: Larry Cannon, Cannon Design Group
DATE: June 16, 2022
DISCUSSION (continued):
 Architecture and site design peer review and critique for development applications, including residential and non-residential additions, remodels, and new buildings;  Evaluation of architecture and site design for neighborhood compatibility and compliance with applicable design standards and guidelines, specific plans, and the General Plan;  Development of design recommendations and preparation of reports summarizing findings and recommendations;
 Consultation with staff and/or applicants to discuss recommendations or project specific issues;
 Special studies or projects, including, but not limited to: preparation of a checklist for content of architectural plans for application packets; and  Attendance at public meetings as needed.

CONCLUSION:

Cannon Design Group was determined to be the best candidate to continue serving as the Town’s Architectural Consultant for the following reasons:
 Extensive experience and specialization providing architecture and site design peer review and preparing design guidelines;
 Successful provision of architectural review services to the Town since 2005;  Strong use of graphics to make reports user-friendly and easy to understand;  Larry Cannon, principal, is both a registered architect and a certified planner;  Good understanding of the Town’s codes, policies, and design guidelines (contributing author of the Commercial and Residential Design Guidelines); and  Experience with historic preservation.

COORDINATION:

The draft Agreement for Consultant Services (Attachment 2) was prepared in coordination with the Town Attorney.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Architectural review for development proposals are paid for by the project applicant. The typical consultant review deposit for a single-family home is $2,500. The actual cost is based on the scope of work and the consultant’s fee schedule (see Attachment 1). An administrative fee of 10 percent is also charged by the Town. The purpose of the administrative fee is to reimburse the Town’s cost of administering the peer review.

PAGE 3 OF 3
SUBJECT: Larry Cannon, Cannon Design Group
DATE: June 16, 2022
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:

This action is not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required.

Attachments:

1. CDG Proposal

2. Draft Agreement for Consultant Services

This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank

May 16, 2022
Ms. Jennifer Armer
Community Development Department
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
RE: Peer Review Design Services Statement of Qualifications Dear Jennifer:

STATEMENT OF INTEREST
I am pleased to submit the following statement of qualifications to provide peer review services for the Town of Los Gatos. I have a twenty year history of continuously providing design review services to the Town, and would like to continue in that role.

INTRODUCTORY INFORMATION
I was retained in February 2002 as the Town Consulting Architect, and have to date provided 917 detailed reviews for projects including modest additions to single family homes, new single family homes, multifamily developments, retail stores and shopping centers, and many commercial projects including the two Netflix Campus Complexes. In the course of that time, I have worked closely with over 25 individual staff planners in the Community Development Department. When I was selected to provide these peer review services, the Town Council believed that the detailed design review process would benefit from some outside professional design review experience that would streamline the development review and approval process, and would free up time for the Planning Commission to deal with broader policy issues. The process I developed and the review letters that I have provided have resulted in clearly identifying for each project significant issues for planning staff and Planning Commission consideration, and in identifying one or more ways the applicant might address those issues to allow both staff and the Planning Commission to work with the applicant to achieve a project suitable to the applicant’s goals and the Town’s Community Expectations.

In providing design review services to the Town, I bring over forty-five years of active design review services for a great many Bay Area Communities as well as individual California Redevelopment Agencies (Pasadena, Los Angeles, Pleasant Hill and others) and U.S. and Canadian institutions of higher education (25 years as the Consulting Architect for the University of Victoria, BC). That experience has been enriched with the preparation of many design guidelines documents as well as the active planning of a great many California Downtowns and Transit-Oriented Developments.

ATTACHMENT 1

Peer Review
Design Services Proposal
May 16, 2022 Page 2
EXPERIENCE.

Latry Cannon has provided design and planning review consultation services to cities, counties, redevelopment agencies and institutions of higher education for the past forty-five years. As a registered architect and an active urban planner/designer, he has extensive experience in working with planning staff, developers, and architects to arrive a mutually agreeable solutions which reflect community goals while respecting developers’ reasonable expectations. CDG design review experience is enhanced by the firm’s substantial experience in preparing comprehensive design guidelines documents, including signage guidelines, for the expression of community identity goals. He is currently providing on-going design review consultation to the following Bay • Town of Los Gatos (20 years)
• City of Brentwood (18years)
• City of Millbrae (2 years)
• City of San Mateo (18 years)
• City of Sunnyvale (18 years)
• City of Brisbane (1 yerar)
Other design review clients have included the following:
• City of Alameda
• City of Albany
• City of Campbell
• City of Cupertino (18 years)
• City of Dublin
• City of El Cerrito
• City of Lathrop
• City of Milpitas (11 years)
• City of Mountain View
• City of Napa
• City of Pasadena
• City of Pleasanton
• City of Pleasant Hill
• City of Redwood City (2 years)
• University of Victoria, BC
• California State University,
DESIGN REVIEW Hayward

EXPERIENCE

BY CATEGORY
• Single Family Homes
• Single Family Additions
• Multifamily Complexes
• Small Lot Subdivisions
• Mixed Use Buildings
• Downtown Stores
• Retail Pad Buildings
• Shopping Centers (New)
• Shopping Centers (Remodel)
• Markets and Drug Stores
• Restaurants
• Fast Food Restaurants
• Gas Stations
• Automobile Dealerships
• Small & Large Office Buildings
• Hotels
• Cinemas
• High Technology Campuses
• Home Improvement Centers
• Department Stores
• Large Format Retail Buildings
• Churches and Synagogues
• Libraries and Public Safety
Buildings
• Parking Structures
• Day Care Centers

QUALIFICATIONS
• Register Architect.
• Over 45 years of design review and design guidelines experience. • Twenty years of design review services to the Town of Los Gatos. • Several current design review clients have been clients for 18 years. • Extensive knowledge of the Town of Los Gatos neighborhoods. • Long term experience in working with individual Los Gatos planning staff. • Thousands of digital images of Los Gatos neighborhoods and homes. • Thousands of example images from other communities for use as examples in review letters. • Design review experience in all project and building types. • Experience and history of writing clear and concise review letters. • Extensive experience in identifying design concerns and preparing specific design solutions for addressing them. • Preparation of Los Gatos How to Read Your Neighborhood Workbook. • Multi-year work with staff and the General Plan Committee in preparation of Residential, Multifamily and Commercial Design Guidelines. Having worked with staff and the committee over a period of three plus years on the guidelines, and having written the design guidelines, I have detailed knowledge of each

Peer Review
Design Services Proposal
May 16, 2022 Page 3

TOTAL NUMBER OF STAFF PROVIDING SERVICES
Larry Cannon personally has provided all design review services to the Town of Los Gatos as well as to all other design review clients throughout his long career. This has provided objectivity and consistency to all reviews, with familiarity and easy access to the thousands of personal digital images of examples to clearly convey recommendations.

ABILITY TO PERFORM ON SHORT NOTICE AND UNDER TIME CONSTRAINTS I have consistently provided review letters within two to three weeks of receiving drawings and authorization from staff to proceed. When projects are needed sooner. Los Gatos projects are given priority.

STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING
The Town of Los Gatos is a very special place with residents and elected and appointed officials who are acutely aware of the Town’s unique scale and character. When I was selected to provide design review services in 2002, I met individually with each member of the Planning Commission and Town Council. Each told me that the two highest review priorities were in this order:
• Neighborhood Compatibility
• Design Excellence
I have been guided by those two priorities in all reviews since that time.

SERVICES APPROACH
I implement a disciplined and consistent approach for all projects that emphasizes neighborhood compatibility and design excellence. It is a highly graphic approach that utilizes a review and recommendations letter including the following:
• Neighborhood Context
Aerial photo with identification of the site location and photos of the site and surrounding structures gathered from Google Earth Pro and other photos from previous project reviews. • Issues and Concerns
Annotated applicant drawings with issues and concerns graphically called out • Recommendations
Recommended changes over annotated applicant drawings showing recommendations along with photo images illustrating similar solutions within the Town of Los Gatos and other locations

ESTIMATED HOURS AND FEE ESTIMATES
$150 per hour for time actually spent plus limited actual expenses at cost plus 15% up to the Town’s authorized maximum deposit. Most projects are accomplished within an intial authorization of $2,500. Follow up reviews utilize any funds left from the intial authorization plus addional hours billed at the hourly rate above.

Peer Review
Design Services Proposal
May 16, 2022 Page 4

REFERENCES

TOWN OF LOS GATOS
Joel Paulson
Community Development Director
(408) 354-6879
[email protected]

CITY OF MILLBRAE
Tom Williams
City Manager
(650) 784-3434 cell
[email protected]
Darcy Smith
Community Development Director
Community Development Department
(650) 259-2341
[email protected]

CITY OF SAN MATEO
Rendell Bustos
Senior Planner
(650)-522-7211
[email protected]
(408) 730-7444

CITY OF BRISBANE
Mr. John A. Swiecki
Community Development Director
Community Development Department
City of Brisbane
50 Park Place
Brisbane, CA 94005
(415).508.2120
[email protected]
CURRENT LITIGATION:

None

Peer Review
Design Services Proposal
May 16, 2022 Page 5

SINGLE FAMILY HOME

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

REVIEW LETTER EXAMPLE

May 11, 2022
Mr. Ryan Safty
Community Development Department
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95031
RE: 14329 Mulberry Drive
Dear Ryan:

I reviewed the drawings and evaluated the site context. I have previously reviewed another proposed house on this site some eleven years ago, and have also reviewed several other homes on Mulberry Drive including the one immediately in front of this flag parcel. My comments and recommendations are as follows:

NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT
The site is located on a dead end street with a mix of old and newer homes designed in traditional styles. The homes are a mixture of one and two-stories in height. Photographs of the site and surrounding context are shown on the following page.

14329 Mulberry Drive
Design Review Comments
May 11, 2022 Page 2

THE SITE
Entry drive to the site Mulberry Drive House in front of site House immediately adjacent to the site Nearby house on Mulberry Drive

14329 Mulberry Drive
Design Review Comments
May 11, 2022 Page 3

PROPOSED PROJECT
The existing home on the site will be removed and replaced by a two story new house with garage - see proposed elevations below.

PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION

PROPOSED LEFT SIDE ELEVATION

PROPOSED RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION

PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION

14329 Mulberry Drive
Design Review Comments
May 11, 2022 Page 4

ISSUES AND CONCERNS
The proposed design is good from the standpoint that it is a recognizable traditional residential design style that would fit comfortably into the immediate neighborhood. But there are many issues that need to be addressed to bring it into better conformance with the Town’s Residential Design Guidelines and traditional detailing.

1. The garage gable is quite large and dominates the front facade. It would not be consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.4.1.

3.4.1 Limit the prominence of garages
• Avoid designs that allow the garage to dominate the street facade. • Recess garage doors as much as possible from the garage facade. • Integrate the garage into the house forms in a manner that de-emphasizes the garage doors.

2. The roof slopes are somewhat variable, and overly complex which would not be consistent with Residential Design Guidelines 3.5.1 and 3.5.2.

3.5.1 Unify roof pitches
• Utilize the same slope for all primary roofs.

3.5.2 Avoid excessive roof form complexity
• Avoid multiple floor plan pop outs that produce multiple roof gables.

3. The height differential between the gable peaks on the second floor projecting bay windows is visually awkward. The differential is caused by the lack of consistent roof slopes - see comment #2 above.

4. The first floor roof transition between the front porch roof and the left side facade is very awkward and non-traditional.

5. The lack of a beam at the front porch and a metal railing would not be consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.10.1. Also, some porch elements need further refinement.

3.10.1 Porches and Entries
• Select columns that are traditional to the architectural style of the house. Take care in selecting columns with an appropriate width to height ratio for the style. Except for a very few styles, the columns should have appropriate caps and bases with proportions typical of the style. • Provide a well proportioned beam between the column caps and the roof. Size and detail the beam so that it looks like a convincing structural member. It should be visible both from inside and outside of the porch. • Railings should generally be constructed of wood unless the specific architectural style allows for metal or

14329 Mulberry Drive
Design Review Comments
May 11, 2022 Page 5

6. The two story gable walls on the side elevations are adding unnecessary complexity to the roof form and, as currently designed, not consistent with Residential Design Guideline 3.3.3.

3.3.3 Provide visual relief for two story walls

7. The open gable roof without supporting structure on the rear facade is not consistent with the architectural style.

8. The rear deck columns are too small and the proposed glass railings would not be consistent with the style.

14329 Mulberry Drive
Design Review Comments
May 11, 2022 Page 6

9. Note that the section shown below is quite incomplete and confusing. It does, however, highlight the issue that roof overhangs seem to vary which would not be consistent with the architectural style and Residential Design Guideline 3.5.3.

3.5.3 Relate roof overhangs to the architectural style and to the surrounding neighborhood

RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations below are intended to simplify the design, refine the details and improve conformance with the Residential Design Guidelines.

1. Eliminate the gable roof at the garage and extend the porch roof over the garage.

2. Increase the consistency of the roof slopes (6:12 shown), and provide more uniformity to the front facade roof gables and bay windows.

3. Revise the transition of the porch roof to the left side facade to reduce the tall wall expanse.

4. Add window on the second floor front facade which currently is quite blank.

5. Add a beam at the front entry porch, refine the column bases and caps, and use a wood railing rather than the proposed metal railing.

14329 Mulberry Drive
Design Review Comments
May 11, 2022 Page 7

6. Eliminate the side facade gables/ This would still provide a generous, high ceiling in the Master Bedroom. Some examples are shown below.

7. Add a roof truss to the rear facade second floor deck. Two examples are shown below.

14329 Mulberry Drive
Design Review Comments
May 11, 2022 Page 8

8. Refine the second floor deck columns, column bases and railings to match the front entry porch.

9. Group the windows on the rear facade (see example below), or use smaller windows to allow more wall space between them.

10. Provide consistency on all roof overhangs - see concern #9 and illustration on page 6

11. Recess the garage door per Residential Design Guideline 3.4.1.

Ryan, please let me know if there are any issues that I did not address.

Sincerely,

CANNON DESIGN GROUP
Larry L. Cannon

Peer Review
Design Services Proposal
May 16, 2022 Page 6

COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT

REVIEW LETTER EXAMPLE

May 3, 2022
Ms. Jocelyn Shoopman
Community Development Department
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95031
RE: 15600 & 15650 Los Gatos Blvd.

Dear Jocelyn:

This is the fourth round of site plan and architectural submittals that I have reviewed for this project in the past ten years, the last being in 2013. I have reviewed the revised project drawings. My comments and recommendations are as follows:

NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT
The site is a former auto dealership located at the corner of Los Gatos Boulevard and Los Gatos Almaden Road. The site is largely a paved parking area with now abandoned sales and service buildings. Nearby uses are mixed, and include shopping centers, commercial strip buildings, an auto dealership, and residences. Photos of the site and surrounding neighborhood are shown below.

ARCHITECTURE PLANNING URBAN DESIGN

Site with existing building
Los Gatos Blvd. site frontage
Eastern parcel property edge
Commercial building across Los Gatos Blvd.

Adjacent auto dealership to the north
Shopping Center across Los Gatos Almaden Road
Los Gatos Almaden Road site frontage
Commercial building across Los Gatos Blvd.
15600 & 15650 Los Gatos Blvd.

Design Review Comments
May 3, 2022 Page 2

CONTEXT
The site, as an important corner lot on two main streets, needs to be viewed in the broader context of Los Gatos Boulevard. Over the past twenty years or so, several other corner lots have seen new development, and the Town has worked hard to guide that development in a manner to reinforce those corners with strong architectural forms and landscaping. The site and the other most important corners are shown in the aerial photos below.

Some of the earlier project submittals for this site utilized site plans which separated the proposed structure from the Los Gatos Boulevard and Los Gatos Almaden Road frontages with parking lots. The current plan properly places the structure at the corner with parking to the side and behind it. This is much more desirable than allowing parking to dominate the street frontages. The proposed corner treatment is shown below with two other similar Los Gatos Blvd. intersections.

Lark Avenue Intersection
Blossom Hill Road Intersection
Proposed Site Plan
Proposed Corner Treatment
15600 & 15650 Los Gatos Blvd.

Design Review Comments
May 3, 2022 Page 3

PROPOSED PROJECT
Proposed Los Gatos Blvd. Elevation
Proposed East Elevation (Entry and Parking Lot side)
Proposed North Elevation (Entry and Parking Lot side)
Proposed Los Gatos-Almaden Road Elevation
Los Gatos Blvd. Parking Lot Entry Corner
North Parking Lot Entry Corner Los Gatos Blvd. Corner
15600 & 15650 Los Gatos Blvd.

Design Review Comments
May 3, 2022 Page 4

ISSUES AND CONCERNS
The proposed design is contemporary in style with a mix of flat and sloping roofs. It would be substantially different in that regard from most of the newer commercial projects along Los Gatos Blvd. which have been largely modeled on traditional Mediterranean Styles. The closest in style would be the Market Hall in the North Forty project. That said, the project is very well designed and would, I believe, be in the spirit of the Town of Los Gatos and the Town’s Commercial Design Guidelines. There are, however, a few issues which staff may wish to discuss further with the applicant.

1. The site plan works well with parking frontages along Los Gatos Blvd. and Los Gatos-Almaden Road limited in length. There could be an issue, however, with the truck loading area located at the project auto entry on Los Gatos-Almaden Road. Circulation conflicts between trucks and autos could be controlled by limiting the delivery time schedules. But, the truck maneuvering pattern to easily back into the truck bays is not clear.

2. Provisions for safe pedestrian circulation from parking at the northern edge of the parking lot to the building entry are well provided for, but similar accommodations have not been made for parking at the eastern edge of the site.
15600 & 15650 Los Gatos Blvd.

Design Review Comments
May 3, 2022 Page 5

3. The proposed treatment at the intersection corner of the site appears attractive, but not likely pedestrianusable as shown on the corner sketch below unless the adjacent building occupancy supports outdoor uses.
15600 & 15650 Los Gatos Blvd.

Design Review Comments
May 3, 2022 Page 6

4. The strong contrast of color on the central portion of the Los Gatos Blvd., facade and on the truck loading dock area would draw the eye like a focal point, and would disrupt the well-done design unity of the rest of the structure. Likewise, the window treatments (i.e., transparency) will depend on the tenant’s interior uses.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Ask applicant to provide verification that truck access to loading dock works and that provisions will be made to mitigate truck/auto conflicts.
15600 & 15650 Los Gatos Blvd.

Design Review Comments
May 3, 2022 Page 7

2. Add a landscape divider at the Los Gatos-Almaden Road project entry if possible

3. Provide a protected pedestrian circulation path from the east parking lot to the entry similar to the one proposed from the north parking lot.

4. Remain flexible on the treatment of the Los Gatos Blvd /Los Gatos-Almaden Road intersection corner and the Los Gatos Blvd. facade fenestration until building tenant confirms potential interior uses. If not feasible as current;y shown, add landscaping to the corner and investigate alternative treatments for the window areas. Some examples are shown below.
15600 & 15650 Los Gatos Blvd.

Design Review Comments
May 3, 2022 Page 8

5. Tone down the color contrast of the white stucco wall volumes on Los Gatos Blvd. and the truck loading area walls or change the material to wood siding or stone to improve the overall design unity of the facades.
15600 & 15650 Los Gatos Blvd.

Design Review Comments
May 3, 2022 Page 9

Jocelyn, please let me know if you have any questions, or if there are specific issues of concern that I did not address.

Sincerely,

CANNON DESIGN GROUP
Larry Cannon
15600 & 15650 Los Gatos Blvd.

Design Review Comments
May 3, 2022 Page 10

Larry Cannon, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Agreement for Consultant Services Page 1 of 8

AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on July 1, 2022 by and between TOWN OF LOS GATOS, a California municipal corporation, (“Town”) and Larry Cannon, CANNON DESIGN GROUP, (“Consultant”), whose address is 700 Larkspur Landing Circle, Suite 199, Larkspur, CA 94939. This Agreement is made with reference to the following facts.

I. RECITALS

1.1 The Town desires to engage Consultant to review architecture and site design for development applications; revise design standards and guidelines as needed; consult with and meet with staff, applicants, and decision makers; and attend public meetings as needed.

1.2 The Consultant represents and affirms that it is willing to perform the desired work pursuant to this Agreement.

1.3 Consultant warrants it possesses the distinct professional skills, qualifications, experience, and resources necessary to timely perform the services described in this Agreement.

Consultant acknowledges Town has relied upon these warranties to retain Consultant.

II. AGREEMENTS

2.1 Scope of Services. Consultant shall provide services as described in the certain services listed below.

Administrative Duties
When needed by Town, provide architecture and site design review for development applications and make recommended changes as needed based on the Town’s approved design standards and guidelines. This shall include evaluating plans for development proposals, reviewing site layout and architectural plans, conducting site visits, and/or identifying design recommendations and conditions of approval. a. When needed by Town, conduct site design review and review and critique the architecture for development applications, including additions, remodels, and new buildings.
b. When needed by Town, conduct field investigations and develop recommendations for compliance with applicable design standards and guidelines, specific plans, and the General Plan, and prepare reports summarizing findings and recommendations (typically with a 10 to 15 day turnaround).

ATTACHMENT 2

Larry Cannon, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Agreement for Consultant Services Page 2 of 8 c. When needed by Town, consult with staff and/or applicants to discuss recommendations or project specific issues.
d. When needed by Town, conduct special studies or projects including but not limited to: updating the Town’s design standards and guidelines; and preparation of a checklist for content of architectural plans for application packets. e. When needed by Town, attend meetings with Town staff, public officials, community leaders, developers, contractors, and the general public. f. When needed by Town, advise, support, and assist Town departments, committees, commissions, and Town Council. In addition, act as a liaison between Town and federal, state, and regional agencies.
g. When needed by Town, attend Town Council, Planning Commission, and special study session meetings when: project applications with architectural or design issues are being considered; and architectural review processes or a design related document is being discussed.
h. As requested by Town, provide copies of draft and final draft work products of reports and studies prepared for Town. Consultant shall provide electronic file copies of these documents as needed.

Other Miscellaneous Services
The Town may occasionally have the need for other services not specifically listed in this document that the Consultant has the necessary experience and capabilities to provide.

Town may authorize Consultant to perform such selected services on an as-needed basis.

2.2 Term and Time of Performance. The services of Consultant are fixed for a five-year period that will commence upon the execution of the contract. At the end of this period, should the Town not renew the contract, the contract shall automatically expire. The individual time of performance schedule for each project referred to the Consultant is required to be performed as outlined in the scope of services section of this Agreement.

2.3 Compliance with Laws. The Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations of governing federal, state, and local laws. Consultant represents and warrants to Town that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a Town of Los Gatos business license pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Code of the Town of Los Gatos.

2.4 Sole Responsibility. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services under this Agreement.

Larry Cannon, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Agreement for Consultant Services Page 3 of 8

2.5 Information/Report Handling. All documents furnished to Consultant by the Town and all reports and supportive data prepared by Consultant under this Agreement are the Town’s property and shall be delivered to the Town upon the completion of Consultant's services or at the Town's written request. All reports, information, data, and exhibits prepared or assembled by Consultant in connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential until released by the Town to the public, and the Consultant shall not make any of the these documents or information available to any individual or organization not employed by the Consultant or the Town without the written consent of the Town before such release. The Town acknowledges that the reports to be prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of evaluating a defined project, and Town's use of the information contained in the reports prepared by the Consultant in connection with other projects shall be solely at Town's risk, unless Consultant expressly consents to such use in writing. Town further agrees that it will not appropriate any methodology or technique of Consultant which is and has been confirmed in writing by Consultant to be a trade secret of Consultant.

2.6 Compensation. Compensation for Consultant's professional services shall not exceed the established hourly rates, as set forth in the Fee Schedule (Exhibit A), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Payment shall be based upon Town approval of each task.

2.7 Billing. Billing shall be monthly by invoice within thirty (30) days of the rendering of the service and shall be accompanied by a detailed explanation of the work performed by whom at what rate and on what date. Also, plans, specifications, documents or other pertinent materials shall be submitted for Town review, even if only in partial or draft form.

Payment shall be net thirty (30) days. All invoices and statements to the Town shall be addressed as follows:

Invoices:

Town of Los Gatos
Attn: Accounts Payable
P.O. Box 655
Los Gatos, CA 95031-0655

2.8 Availability of Records. Consultant shall maintain the records supporting this billing for not less than three years following completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall make these records available to authorized personnel of the Town at the Consultant's offices during business hours upon written request of the Town.

Larry Cannon, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Agreement for Consultant Services Page 4 of 8

2.9 Assignability and Subcontracting. The services to be performed under this Agreement are unique and personal to the Consultant. No portion of these services shall be assigned or subcontracted without the written consent of the Town.

2.10 Independent Contractor. It is understood that the Consultant, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the Town. As an independent contractor he/she shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to Town employee(s). With prior written consent, the Consultant may perform some obligations under this Agreement by subcontracting, but may not delegate ultimate responsibility for performance or assign or transfer interests under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to testify in any litigation brought regarding the subject of the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall be compensated for its costs and expenses in preparing for, traveling to, and testifying in such matters at its then current hourly rates of compensation, unless such litigation is brought by Consultant or is based on allegations of Consultant's negligent performance or wrongdoing.

2.11 Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibilities are solely to the Town. The Consultant has and shall not obtain any holding or interest within the Town of Los Gatos. Consultant has no business holdings or agreements with any individual member of the Staff or management of the Town or its representatives nor shall it enter into any such holdings or agreements. In addition, Consultant warrants that it does not presently and shall not acquire any direct or indirect interest adverse to those of the Town in the subject of this Agreement, and it shall immediately disassociate itself from such an interest, should it discover it has done so and shall, at the Town's sole discretion, divest itself of such interest. Consultant shall not knowingly and shall take reasonable steps to ensure that it does not employ a person having such an interest in this performance of this Agreement. If after employment of a person, Consultant discovers it has employed a person with a direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall promptly notify Town of this employment relationship, and shall, at the Town's sole discretion, sever any such employment relationship.

2.12 Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant warrants that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Neither Consultant nor its subcontractors do and neither shall discriminate against persons employed or seeking employment with them on the basis of age, sex, color, race, marital status, sexual orientation, ancestry, physical or mental disability, national origin, religion, or medical condition, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.

Larry Cannon, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Agreement for Consultant Services Page 5 of 8 III. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION

3.1 Minimum Scope of Insurance:
i. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, General Liability insurance policies insuring him/her and his/her firm to an amount not less than: one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. ii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain for the duration of the contract, an Automobile Liability insurance policy ensuring him/her and his/her staff to an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii. Consultant shall provide to the Town all certificates of insurance, with original endorsements effecting coverage. Consultant agrees that all certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the Town before work commences.
iv. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, professional liability insurance in amounts not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) which is sufficient to insure Consultant for professional errors or omissions in the performance of the particular scope of work under this Agreement.

General Liability:
i. The Town, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as insured as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant; and premises owned or used by the Consultant. This requirement does not apply to the professional liability insurance required for professional errors and omissions.
ii. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Town, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurances maintained by the Town, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
iii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the Town, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers.

Larry Cannon, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Agreement for Consultant Services Page 6 of 8 iv. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.

3.2 All Coverages. Each insurance policy required in this item shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled, or reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Town. Current certification of such insurance shall be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the Town Clerk.

3.3 Workers’ Compensation. In addition to these policies, Consultant shall have and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance as required by California law and shall provide evidence of such policy to the Town before beginning services under this Agreement. Further, Consultant shall ensure that all subcontractors employed by Consultant provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective employees.

3.4 Indemnification. The Consultant shall save, keep, hold harmless, and indemnify and defend the Town its officers, agent, employees, and volunteers from all damages, liabilities, penalties, costs, or expenses in law or equity that may at any time arise or be set up because of damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of performing work which may be occasioned by a willful or negligent act or omissions of the Consultant, or any of the Consultant's officers, employees, or agents or any subconsultant.

IV. GENERAL TERMS

4.1 Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement.

4.2 Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed to the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of the County of Santa Clara.

4.3 Termination of Agreement. The Town and the Consultant shall have the right to terminate this agreement with or without cause by giving not less than fifteen (15) days written notice of termination. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall deliver to the Town all plans, files, documents, and reports performed to date by the Consultant. In the event of such termination, Town shall pay Consultant an amount that bears the same ratio to the maximum contract price as the work delivered to the Town bears to completed services contemplated under this Agreement, unless such termination is made for cause, in which event, compensation, if any, shall be adjusted in light of the particular facts and circumstances involved in such termination.

Larry Cannon, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Agreement for Consultant Services Page 7 of 8

4.4 Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the Town and the Consultant.

4.5 Disputes. In any dispute over any aspect of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, including costs of appeal.

4.6 Notices. Any notice required to be given shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if mailed postage prepaid, and addressed to:

Town of Los Gatos
Attn: Town Clerk
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Larry Cannon
Cannon Design Group
700 Larkspur Landing Circle, Suite 199
Larkspur, CA 94939
Or personally delivered to Consultant to such address or such other address as Consultant designates in writing to Town.

4.7 Order of Precedence. In the event of any conflict, contradiction, or ambiguity between the terms and conditions of this Agreement in respect of the Products or Services and any attachments to this Agreement, then the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail over attachments or other writings.

4.8 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including all Exhibits, constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the Agreement between the Town and Consultant. No terms, conditions, understandings, or agreements purporting to modify or vary this Agreement, unless hereafter made in writing and signed by the party to be bound, shall be binding on either party.

Larry Cannon, CANNON DESIGN GROUP Agreement for Consultant Services Page 8 of 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Town and Consultant have executed this Agreement.

Town of Los Gatos by:

Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager

Recommended by:

Joel Paulson,
Community Development Director
Consultant, by:

Larry L. Cannon, AIA, AICP
Cannon Design Group
Approved as to Form:

Gabrielle Whelan, Town Attorney
Attest:

Shelley Neis, MMC, CPMC
Town Clerk

PREPARED BY: Ying Smith
Transportation and Mobility Manager
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, Finance Director, and Interim Parks and Public Works Director
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov

TOWN OF LOS GATOS

COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 6/21/2022
ITEM NO: 9
DATE: June 14, 2022
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize the Town Manager to Submit Applications in the One Bay Area Grant Program
RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the Town Manager to submit applications in the One Bay Area Grant Program.

BACKGROUND:

On June 2, 2022, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) approved the program and criteria of the One Bay Area Grant Program Cycle 3 (OBAG 3) and issued a Call-for-Projects.

The OBAG program was created by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in 2012 to better integrate the region's discretionary Federal Highway Administration's funding program with the Plan Bay Area. The primary objective of the program is to strategically advance Plan Bay Area 2050 implementation through OBAG investments and policies. OBAG 3 covers the four-year period from Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 to 2026. Additional OBAG 3 program information can be found at: https://mtc.ca.gov/funding/federal-funding/federal-highwayadministration-grants/one-bay-area-grant-obag-3 Compared to the previous grant cycles, MTC made significant changes in this OBAG cycle. The details are provided in the June 2, 2022, VTA Board memorandum (Attachment 1). The funding estimate for Santa Clara County is approximately $91 million. Funds are available for projects that meet the eligibility requirements for any of the four competitive program categories: (1) fix-it-first road preservation, (2) complete streets, (3) safe routes to school, and (4) planning.

OBAG 3 has a requirement that a minimum 70% of the proposed projects received must be located within or connected to a Priority Development Area (PDA) or be within one mile of a PDA boundary. The Town does not have a PDA and the closest PDA is in the City of Campbell.

Most of the Town’s projects will need to compete in the 30% non-PDA portion. This is an important requirement that affects the Town’s projects’ competitiveness.

PAGE 2 OF 5
SUBJECT: One Bay Area Grant Program Grant Applications
DATE: June 14, 2022
DISCUSSION:

Town staff and representatives to the VTA Committees have provided input to VTA over the last several months regarding the program criteria. Town staff reviewed the priority projects in the Town’s 2020 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP) Update and the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and selected several projects based on an evaluation against the OBAG Selection Criteria (Attachment 2). Based on the evaluation and consideration of the Town’s CIP funding projections, staff is recommending five candidate projects to be submitted in OBAG. These projects all potentially meet the eligibility requirements and are considered to be the Town’s most competitive projects. Following is a summary of the recommended projects:

Highway 17 Bike/Pedestrian Overcrossing (BPOC)
Construct a bicycle and pedestrian bridge over Highway 17, to the south of Blossom Hill Road.

The project is currently in the final design phase. The schedule shows the completion of final design (Plans, Specifications, and Estimate) in 2024. The construction phase is currently unfunded. The grant application would request funding for the construction phase (see Table 1 in the Fiscal Impact section of this report for the costs).

Winchester Boulevard Complete Streets South Segment (Winchester South) Design and construct complete streets improvements between Blossom Hill Road and Lark Avenue. This phase of the project will expand on the Class IV bike lanes project and add landscaped median, fill sidewalk gaps, and enhance pedestrian crossings.

In 2020, the Town completed the conceptual design, which recommended complete streets improvements, such as Class IV bike lanes with hard separations, a landscaped median, new sidewalk, and enhanced pedestrian crossings. The Class IV bike lanes between Blossom Hill Road and Albright Way were installed in 2021. The final design was awarded a Measure B capital grant in the amount of $1,734,250, which can be used as a local match to the OBAG grant.

The grant application would request funds for the final design and construction phases of complete streets improvements between Blossom Hill Road and Lark Avenue. This segment of Winchester Boulevard borders City of Monte Sereno and City staff is supportive of submitting a joint grant application. If both the Town and City Councils approve the authorization, Town staff will work with City staff on a joint application. Staff would discuss with the City of Monte Sereno combining Winchester north and south in one application to increase the projects competitiveness.

PAGE 3 OF 5
SUBJECT: One Bay Area Grant Program Grant Applications
DATE: June 14, 2022
DISCUSSION (continued):

Barrier Crossing Enhancements for the Los Gatos Creek Trail/Winchester Boulevard Corridor (Winchester North)
Design and construct improvements on Los Gatos Creek Trail and Winchester Boulevard between Lark Avenue and the northern Town Limits.

Staff is taking a corridor approach and exploring options to enhance the State Route 85 crossing to improve active transportation safety and promote higher usage in a corridor that includes both Winchester Boulevard and the Los Gatos Creek trail. The project would evaluate and prioritize improvements on both the street and trail, including enhancements on Winchester crossing SR 85, trail improvements, and potential trail re-alignment to ensure this segment is flood-proof.

The Winchester Boulevard Complete Streets project was awarded a Measure B capital grant for final design. The Charter Oaks Trail Repair project is programmed in the FY 2022/23 CIP. This grant application would include a modified project definition based on the two existing capital projects. The grant application would request funds for the final design and construction phases. The Town could leverage the Measure B grant with the OBAG grant. This project is within one mile of a Campbell PDA boundary and would be eligible to compete in the 70% PDA portion.

Blossom Hill Road Safety Improvements (BHR)
Construction phase of safety improvements on Blossom Hill Road between Los Gatos Boulevard and Hillbrook Drive.

The Blossom Hill Road Traffic Calming Feasibility Study was completed in 2020. Staff will begin the design work this year.

The grant application would request funds for the construction phase. The project would include both safety improvements and street resurfacing components and therefore fits in multiple categories, road preservation, complete streets, and safe routes to school. The Town may allocate future formulaic dollars in the street resurfacing program as the local match.

Shannon Road Repair (Shannon)
This project would repair the roadway on Shannon Road between Santa Rosa Drive and Diduca Way, which was annexed from the County in 2018. The scope of work would include repair of the roadway, installation of guardrails, and stabilization of the embankment by installing a new retaining wall.

PAGE 4 OF 5
SUBJECT: One Bay Area Grant Program Grant Applications
DATE: June 14, 2022
DISCUSSION (continued):

The project is programmed in the FY 2022/23 CIP and staff has completed the 65% design.

Although the Town has allocated some local funds, a gap to fully fund the construction phase still remains. The grant application would request funds for the construction phase. The project is in the fix-it-first road preservation category.

CONCLUSION:

Staff is recommending authorizing submittal of applications for the above five candidate projects in the OBAG 3 Grant Program.

COORDINATION:

This report was coordinated with the Complete Streets and Transportation Commission. The Commission unanimously voted to support staff’s recommendations at its May 12 and June 9 meetings. The Commission had discussions and comments on the Shannon Road Repair project at the June 9 meeting, provided valuable feedback to staff, and volunteered to conduct bicycle and pedestrian counts to support the applications.

Staff coordinated with City of Monte Sereno staff regarding the Winchester South project. At its meeting on June 21, the Monte Sereno City Council will consider a similar staff recommendation to submit a joint grant application.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is currently no fiscal impact as a result of submitting OBAG applications; however, if the grant applications are awarded, the Council will have the opportunity to review the funding agreements, decide whether to accept the grant funds, and identify and commit to local match funds.

Compared to past grant applications, the Town is seeking construction funds for all projects. In should be noted that the funds requested and the local match amounts that would be required are substantial. A minimum local match of 11.47% is required in this program. The local match may come from local or other non-federal sources. Two of the projects, Winchester South and North, have received Measure B grant funds in the past, which may be considered as the local match. The Town Council may allocate future formulaic dollars in the street resurfacing program as the local match for the BHR project. The BPOC project would require a significant amount of local match, which could come from the General Fund Appropriated Reserve (GFAR) or other future grant funds. For reference, the project costs and local match amounts are provided in Table 1.

PAGE 5 OF 5
SUBJECT: One Bay Area Grant Program Grant Applications
DATE: June 14, 2022
Table 1 - Candidate Projects: Costs and Local Match
Project Cost Match Percent
Match
Status Funding Gap
Highway 17 Bicycle &
Pedestrian Overcrossing (BPOC) $ 38,819,000 $ 4,452,539 11.47% Not
secured $ 4,452,539
Winchester Boulevard
Complete Streets Southern
Segment (Winchester South) $ 30,260,000 $ 3,470,822 11.47% Partially
secured $ 2,245,206
Barrier Crossing Enhancements
(Winchester North) $ 15,840,000 $ 1,816,848 11.47%
Partially
secured $ 834,214
Blossom Hill Road Safety
Improvements (BHR) $ 4,550,000 $ 682,500 15%
Future
formulaic
dollars $ 682,500
Shannon Road Repair
(Shannon) $ 4,372,000 $ 874,400 20% Budgeted $ -
Total $ 93,841,000 $ 11,297,109 $ 8,214,459
If all five projects were awarded OBAG grant funds, the Town would be required to provide a total of $11.3 million in matching funds over five years, $8.2 million of which has not been secured. However, this is a very unlikely outcome in a highly competitive grant program. A more realistic scenario is that the Town is successful with one to two applications and will be required to provide approximately $1.5 million as the local match.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:

This is not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required.

Attachments:

1. VTA Board Memo - One Bay Area Grant Cycle 3 Program and Project Selection Criteria

2. OBAG 3 Santa Clara County Project Selection Criteria

Date: May 27, 2022
Current Meeting: June 2, 2022
Board Meeting: June 2, 2022

BOARD MEMORANDUM
TO: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
Board of Directors
THROUGH: General Manager/CEO, Carolyn M. Gonot
FROM: Chief Planning and Programming Officer, Deborah Dagang SUBJECT: One Bay Area Grant Cycle 3 Program and Project Selection Criteria Policy-Related Action: No Government Code Section 84308 Applies: No

ACTION ITEM
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve the One Bay Area Grant Cycle 3 (OBAG 3) program and project selection criteria.

2. Approve $10 million for Congestion Management Agency (CMA)/ County Transportation Agencies (CTA) planning and programming activities to be implemented and managed for fiscal years 2023-2026.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
• The One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) is a Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) program that works closely with each county to distribute Federal Highway Administration funds to local projects and programs.
• Staff recommends the Board of Directors adopt the OBAG 3 program and project selection criteria.
• Adopting the criteria will allow for the release of the countywide call-for-projects in a timely manner and meet MTC's deadlines
• The programmatic recommendations should incentivize a higher rate of successfully delivered projects.
• The adoption of the OBAG 3 program includes allocation of $10 million for Congestion Management Agency planning and programming activities for fiscal years 2023-2026.

STRATEGIC PLAN/GOALS:

Implementation of the OBAG program falls under Business Line 2 of VTA's Strategic Plan:

Attachment 1

Delivering Projects and Programs. Business Line 2 charges VTA to "Provide a comprehensive line of services, technical support, funding programs, and mobility solutions to the public and Member Agencies."
FISCAL IMPACT:

This action prioritizes federal programming for local Congestion Management Program Member Agency projects. Only funds programmed to VTA for its own projects will flow to VTA. The budget impacts of those projects will be addressed in a separate memorandum. The Member Agencies will obtain their funding through Caltrans. If adopted as proposed, $10 million will be made available for future VTA Congestion Management Program budgets covering fiscal years 2023 through 2026.

BACKGROUND:

The One Bay Area Grant program (OBAG) was created by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in May 2012 to better integrate the region's discretionary Federal Highway Administration's funding program with the Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy, collectively known as Plan Bay Area 2050. The primary objective of the program is to strategically advance Plan Bay Area 2050 implementation through OBAG investments and policies.

The OBAG program is divided into a Regional Program, managed by MTC, and a County & Local Program, managed by MTC in partnership with the nine Bay Area County Transportation Agencies (CTAs). VTA is the CTA for Santa Clara County. MTC is preparing for the third round of OBAG funding known as OBAG 3.

MTC adopted final OBAG 3 guidelines for the County & Local Program on March 23, 2022.

The funding sources for the four-year program include Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds.

MTC OBAG 3 Program Changes
For this cycle, there are several major changes to the program. Most significantly, MTC has developed fund targets rather than providing a guaranteed funding amount for each county. In previous cycles, VTA issued a call-for-projects and developed a project list based on a guaranteed funding amount provided by MTC. For OBAG 3, counties are only provided with an estimated funding amount provided by MTC. The funding estimate for Santa Clara County is approximately $91 million. In addition, the CTA is expected to over program the project list to 120% of the base amount, which is approximately $109.2 million.

While VTA will still issue a call-for-projects and develop a list of projects, MTC will make the final project selection based on: a) CTA prioritization (75 points), b) regional impact (15 points), c) deliverability (10 points), and d) air quality for CMAQ-eligible projects only (10 points).

The second significant change is that MTC will no longer allow guaranteed funding amounts for specific types of projects. In prior cycles, the Santa Clara County OBAG program consisted of guaranteed funds for local streets and roads rehabilitation as well as competitive programs for Safe Routes to School, complete streets, and Priority Development Area (PDA) planning.

Therefore, all project types will compete with each other on both the local and regional level.

DISCUSSION:

To prepare for the call-for-projects and projects selection process, VTA has developed draft project selection criteria by assigning points to various categories on MTC's template application. The Technical Advisory Committee's Capital Improvements Program Working Group (CIPWG) requested aligning the criteria with the application.

After much consideration, the criteria points were chosen based on a) staff knowledge of the objectives of Plan Bay Area 2050 and the program guidelines; b) regional level discussions on program development with MTC and CTAs; and c) the unique needs of the county expressed by CIPWG members. Additionally, the criteria align well with MTC’s goals which should allow for Santa Clara County projects to compete well within the region.

The criteria and corresponding evaluation points are shown in Attachment A - One Bay Area Grant (OBAG 3) - County & Local Program-Santa Clara County Project Selection Criteria.

Project Categories
As in prior cycles, MTC carried forward the investment policy that requires large populated counties to program seventy percent of the funds in Priority Development Areas. Therefore, once the 30 percent non-PDA threshold of ranked projects has been reached, the remaining projects must meet the PDA definition. With that restriction in mind, staff proposes the following project categories with approximate target percentages for the Santa Clara County OBAG 3 program.

Fix-it First Road Preservation (approximately 30%)
STP fund are available to local jurisdictions for road preservation on Federal-Aid eligible roads.

While VTA supports and encourages the use of these funds within or supporting the PDAs, it is not required. Consistent with previous Board-adopted programs, the first expected use will be for rehabilitation and reconstruction of roadways with a pavement condition index (PCI) of 70 or less. Jurisdictions with PCI greater than 70 may submit applications if they meet MTC requirements for OBAG 3 preventive maintenance projects.

Complete Streets (approximately 51%)
The category rewards projects that are in or support a PDA by MTC definition. The predominate federal fund source is CMAQ but may include STP funds. It is open to all jurisdictions within the county and VTA to fund pedestrian, bicycle, and signal systems projects designed to support dense development and use of alternative transportation modes by installing complete streets elements.

Safe Routes to School - infrastructure only (approximately 6%) The Safe Routes to School (SRTS) category is funded exclusively by federal CMAQ. CMAQ funds in this category focus on reducing greenhouse gases as well as the health and safety of school-aged children by promoting walking, biking, transit and carpooling to school, targeting grades K-12. Additional programming in the Complete Streets category would be available for SRTS projects.

Note that MTC has established an investment target of $25 million for SRTS at the regional level as well as $200 million for Active Transportation Projects.

Planning (approximately 2%)
Under OBAG 3, various planning exercises are available for STP funds. These may include local plans for "other new PBA 2050 Growth Geographies", PDA plans, safety, Vision Zero, community-based transportation plans, mobility hub, and regional advance mitigation planning.

CMA/CTA Planning (approximately 9%)
VTA recommends programming $10 million for Congestion Management Agency (CMA) planning and programming over the four-year period FY 2023-2026 to implement, develop and manage the program. This is a similar to OBAG 2 when the VTA Board allocated $10.9 million.

Typically, CMA/CTA activities are funded through Member Agency fees, Planning, Programming & Monitoring (PPM) funds from the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and the OBAG program STP Planning funds. The funds are not subject to the prioritization process.

Federal-Aid Secondary, county only (approximately 2%)
California Streets and Highways Code Section 182.6(d)(2) requires that a portion of STP funds be set aside and guaranteed for use by each unincorporated county area, and based on 110% of the apportionment of Federal-Aid Secondary (rural) funding. The funds are not subject to the prioritization process.

Schedule
MTC has developed an expedited five-month OBAG 3 timeline which will require VTA and Member Agencies to evaluate projects very quickly. During prior cycles, the county's program development and project submission spanned eleven months.

Based on MTC’s timeline, VTA has developed the Santa Clara County OBAG 3 program schedule as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 - 2022 Santa Clara County OBAG 3 Program Schedule Milestone Date
MTC releases county/local program Call-for-Projects 5/01/2022 TAC/CAC/BPAC/PAC/CMPP review criteria May 2022
Optional: Draft Compete Streets Checklist due to VTA June 2022 VTA Board adopts criteria 6/02/2022
VTA releases Call-for-Projects 6/03/2022
VTA BPAC reviews Compete Streets Checklists 7/13/2022
Applications due to VTA 7/25/2022
VTA staff review applications 7/26-29/2022
CIPWG Scoring Committee reviews applications 8/1-12/2022 TAC/CAC/BPAC/PAC/CMPP review Prioritized list of Projects September 2022
Board adopts Prioritized list of Projects 10/6/2022

Project Evaluation
Following board-adopted policy, the applications will be reviewed and ranked by a scoring committee drawn from CIPWG.

All VTA member agencies are represented in CIPWG. However, evaluation committee participation is voluntary. No agency may have more than one representative. The committee minimum size is three, and the maximum is ten. In addition, committee members may not evaluate their own project to avoid a conflict.

ALTERNATIVES:

The VTA Board may modify the program, the project selection criteria, and/or the criteria points.

Any delay in adopting the criteria could lead to issues in delivering a project list to MTC within their expedited timeline.

CLIMATE IMPACT:

The projects identified in the OBAG program focus on transit, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. These improvements promote mode shift that can have a transformative impact on climate change by reducing vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions.

ADVISORY COMMITTEE DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Technical Advisory Committee considered this item at their May 11, 2022 meeting and approved staff recommendations with suggested modifications, including: ability to apply in multiple program categories; remove the fix-it-first criterion and/or remove the PCI limit; and measure the merits of a project.

The Citizens Advisory Committee considered this item at their May 11, 2022 meeting and approved staff recommendations with suggested modifications, including: ability to apply in multiple program categories; create a non-PDA Complete Streets program category; prioritize complete streets projects; and more emphasis on non-policy housing issues.

The Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee considered this item at their May 11, 2022 meeting and approved staff recommendations deferring to staff for the best mechanism to:
prioritize complete streets projects; prioritize safety and consider gap closure in the criteria; and encourage road preservation projects to include complete streets elements.

The Policy Advisory Committee considered this item at their May 12, 2022 meeting and approved staff recommendations with suggested modifications, including: ability to apply in multiple program categories; remove the fix-it-first criterion and/or remove the PCI limit; measure the merits of a project; and emphasize housing issues such as denser planned housing and transportation needs to address affordable housing.

STANDING COMMITTEE DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Congestion Management Program & Planning Committee considered this item at their May 19, 2022 meeting and approved staff recommendations unanimously.

Prepared by: Celeste Fiore
Memo No. 8179
ATTACHMENTS:
• Attach A_8179_Criteria (PDF)
• Attach B_8179_Acronyms (PDF)
• OBAG3 PPT_2022May17 (PDF)

ATTACHMENT A - One Bay Area Grant (OBAG 3) – County & Local Program – Santa Clara County Project Selection Criteria Template Application Form (v1) 1 Project Information
Project Name: Project name
Project Sponsor: Project sponsor
Sponsor Single
Point of Contact:

Contact name
Contact phone
Contact email
Project Location: Project location
Brief Project
Description:

Project description
Program Eligibility
Federal Fund
Eligibility
Is the project eligible
for federal
transportation funds?
Select the OBAG 3 federal fund source(s) for which the project is eligible:
☐ Surface Transportation Block Grant (STP) Program (See FHWA fact sheet) ☐ Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program (See FHWA fact sheet)
Note: projects eligible for CMAQ funding must provide inputs for air quality improvement calculations, using templates provided on the OBAG 3 webpage.

Eligible Project
Type
Is the project an
eligible project type?
Select the eligible project type(s) (refer to MTC Resolution No. 4505 for detailed eligibility guidelines):

Growth Framework Implementation
☐ PDA Planning Grant
☐ Local Planning Grant (for other Plan
Bay Area 2050 Growth Geographies)
Complete Streets & Community Choice
☐ Bicycle/Pedestrian Infrastructure
☐ Bicycle/Pedestrian Program
☐ Safe Routes to School (SRTS) NonInfrastructure program ☐ SRTS Infrastructure
☐ Safety project
☐ Safety Planning efforts
☐ Complete Streets improvements
☐ Streetscape improvements
☐ Local Streets and Roads Preservation
☐ Rural Roadway Improvement
☐ Community-Based Transportation
Plan (CBTP) or Participatory
Budgeting (PB) Process in an Equity
Priority Community (EPC)
☐ CBTP/PB Project Implementation
Climate, Conservation, & Resilience
☐ Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) Program
☐ Mobility Hub
☐ Parking/Curb Management
☐ Car/Bike Share Capital
☐ Open Space Preservation and
Enhancement
☐ Bicycle/Pedestrian Access to Open
Space/Parkland
☐ Regional Advance Mitigation Planning
(RAMP)
Multimodal Systems Operations &
Performance
☐ Transit Capital Improvement
☐ Transit Station Improvement
☐ Transit Transformation Action Plan
Project Implementation
☐ Active Operational Management
☐ Mobility Management and
coordination

ATTACHMENT A - One Bay Area Grant (OBAG 3) – County & Local Program – Santa Clara County Project Selection Criteria Template Application Form (v1) 2 Max Points
which ones and how
Supports Transportation strategies pts
Yes 10
Partially 5
No 1
Policy Alignment
Federal
Performance
Goals
How does the
project support
federal
performance
measures?
MAX 5 points
Select the federal performance measures that are supported by the project:
☐ Safety: Significantly reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries for all users on all public roads and improve the safety of all public transportation systems. ☐ Infrastructure Condition: Improve the pavement condition on the Interstate and National Highway System (NHS) and NHS bridges and maintain the condition of public transit assets in a state of good repair.
☐ Congestion Reduction: Significantly reduce congestion on the NHS in urbanized areas.
☐ System Reliability: Improve the reliability of the Interstate system and NHS. ☐ Freight Movement and Economic Vitality: Improve the reliability of the Interstate system for truck travel.
☐ Environmental Sustainability: Maximize emission reductions from CMAQ-funded projects.

Describe how the project supports the selected federal performance measure(s):

Please describe
Plan Bay Area 2050
Strategies
How does the project
align with Plan Bay
Area 2050?
Describe how the project supports Plan Bay Area 2050 Strategies and/or Implementation Plan:

Please describe
Regional Policy
Alignment
How does the project
align with other
regional policies and
plans?
Select the regional plans and policies with which the project is aligned:
☐ Regional Safety/Vision Zero Policy
☐ MTC’s Equity Platform
☐ Regional Active Transportation Plan
☐ Transit Oriented Communities Policy
☐ Blue Ribbon Transit Transformation
Action Plan
Describe how the project aligns with the selected regional plans and/or policies:

Please describe
Regional Growth
Geographies
Does the project
support PBA
2050 Growth
Geographies?
Indicate the project’s relationship to Plan Bay Area 2050 Growth Geographies:

Priority Development Area (PDA)
☐ Meets the uniform definition of a PDA-supportive project (within one mile or less of a PDA boundary)
☐ Does not meet the uniform definition of a PDA-supportive project, but otherwise has a clear and direct connection to PDA implementation Please describe
☐ Included in a locally-adopted PDA plan (e.g. Specific Plan, PDA Investment and Growth Strategy)
Locally-adopted PDA plan reference
Transit Rich Area (TRA)
☐ Within a TRA or otherwise supportive of a TRA (see Growth Geographies map) Please describe
Priority Production Area (PPA)
☐ Supports the preservation of a PPA (see Growth Geographies map) Please describe
5 10
5 10
1 1
1 1
1 1
10 10
4 10
8 MAX 10
points
Check all
applicable
boxes

ATTACHMENT A - One Bay Area Grant (OBAG 3) – County & Local Program – Santa Clara County Project Selection Criteria Template Application Form (v1) 3 Max Points Equity Priority
Communities
Does the
project
invest in
historically
underserved
communities?
Indicate how the project invests in historically underserved communities, including Plan Bay Area 2050 Equity Priority Communities (EPCs):
☐ Located within and supportive of an EPC (see Equity Priority Communities map) ☐ Not located within an EPC, but is otherwise supportive of an EPC or other historically underserved community
Description of how project supports an EPC or other historically underserved community
Local Housing
Policies
Is the project located in
a jurisdiction with
policies that
support
affordable
housing?
Indicate if the project is locate in a jurisdiction that has adopted policies which support the “3Ps” approach to affordable housing by listing the relevant adopted policies for each element of the 3Ps. Additional guidance and resources on affordable housing policies are provided on the OBAG 3 webpage.
☐ Protect current residents from displacement (with emphasis on policies that have demonstrated effectiveness in community stabilization and anti-displacement).

List of applicable policies
☐ Preserve existing affordable housing (with emphasis on policies that have demonstrated effectiveness in community stabilization and anti-displacement).

List of applicable policies
☐ Produce new housing at all income levels.

List of applicable policies
Community Support
Community
Support
Does the
project have
community support,
particularly if it is
located in a historically
underserved
community?
MAX 10 points
____________________
MAX 10 points
Indicate if the project has demonstrated community support through one or more of the following:
☐ Public outreach responses specific to this project, including comments received at public meetings or hearings, feedback from community workshops, or survey responses.

Summary of public outreach responses
☐ Project is consistent with an adopted local transportation plan.

Description of project consistency with local plan
Indicate if the project has demonstrated support from communities disproportionately impacted by past discriminatory practices, including redlining, racial covenants, urban renewal, and highway construction that divided low income and communities of color. Resources for identifying impacted communities are available on the OBAG 3 webpage. Community support may be demonstrated through one or more of the following:
☐ Prioritization of the project in a Community Based Transportation Plan (CBTP) or Participatory Budgeting (PB) process, or a local plan that includes the proposed project.

CBTP or PB reference
☐ Endorsements from a Community-Based Organizations representing historically underserved and potentially impacted communities.

Description of CBO endorsement
10 10
10 10
10 5
4 3
3 10
5 10
5

ATTACHMENT A - One Bay Area Grant (OBAG 3) – County & Local Program – Santa Clara County Project Selection Criteria Template Application Form (v1) 4 Max Points Deliverability & Readiness
Project Readiness
Is the project ready to
be delivered?
Describe the readiness of the project, including right-of-way impacts and the type of environmental document/clearance required:

Project readiness, right-of-way, environment
If the project touches Caltrans right-of-way, include the status and timeline of the necessary Caltrans approvals and documents, the status and timeline of Caltrans requirements, and approvals such as planning documents (PSR or equivalent) environmental approval, encroachment permit.

Caltrans approvals status and timeline
Deliverability
Are there any barriers
to on-time delivery?
Describe the project’s timeline and status, as well as the sponsor’s ability to meet the January 31, 2027 obligation deadline:

Project timeline, status, and obligation deadline
Identify any known risks to the project schedule, and how the CTA and project sponsor will mitigate and respond to those risks:

Project risks and mitigation strategies
Project Cost & Funding
Grant Minimum
Does the project meet
the minimum grant
size requirements?
☐ Project meets the minimum grant size requirements. Projects must be a minimum of $500,000 for counties with a population over 1 million (Alameda, Contra Costa, and Santa Clara counties) and $250,000 for counties with a population under one million (Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Solano, and Sonoma counties).

Exception request to minimum grant size
Local Match
Does the project meet
local match
requirements?
☐ Project sponsor will provide a local match of at least 11.47% of the total project cost.

Notes on local match, optional
Additional Criteria
Fix-It First Road
Preservation
Preservation of the
local streets and roads
on federally eligible
arterials and collectors
☐ Project meets the requirements for federal-aid eligible system. Confirmation is required through the Highway Performance Monitoring System and attached to the application prior to award of funds.

Please describe and include location map(s) indicating segment(s).

Project Benefits
What are the merits of
the project beyond
adherence to PBA 2050
policies?
Describe the project’s benefits, such as addressing safety, gap closure or connectivity, VMT reduction, planned housing density with a transportation nexus, transportation to housing and/or jobs.
10 5
5 2 points for match up to 15%.
5 points for match greater than or equal to 20%.
match.
5 5

PREPARED BY: Jim Harbin
Superintendent
Reviewed by: Town Manager, Assistant Town Manager, Town Attorney, Finance Director, and Interim Director of Parks and Public Works
110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 ● (408) 354-6832 www.losgatosca.gov

TOWN OF LOS GATOS

COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 06/21/2022
ITEM NO: 10
DATE: June 2, 2022
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: Laurel Prevetti, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize the Town Manager to Execute a Five-Year Agreement for Services with Brightview Landscape Services, Inc. for Landscape Maintenance Services in an Amount of $167,402 Annually, Plus an Additional Five Percent ($8,370) for Unforeseen Services for a Total Annual Amount Not to Exceed $175,772, and a Total Agreement Base Amount Valued at $878,860 Prior to Any Increase Adjustments Made for Consumer Price Index (CPI) RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the Town Manager to execute a five-year agreement for services (Attachment 1) with Brightview Landscape Services, Inc. in an amount of $167,402 annually, plus an additional five percent ($8,370) for unforeseen services for a total annual amount not to exceed $175,772, and a total agreement base amount valued at $878,860 prior to any increase adjustments made for Consumer Price Index (CPI).

BACKGROUND:

As part of the Operating Budget, landscape maintenance funds are provided for mowing, edging, and landscape maintenance in Town parks, median islands, facilities, right of ways, and special assessment districts.

The Town has utilized contractual landscape services for routine maintenance to supplement Town staff, allowing the Parks and Public Works staff to focus on providing day to day operational services within the parks system. Staff reviews such maintenance contracts routinely to ensure the contract services align with the Town’s needs, the contracts are competitively priced, and the service provider continues to meet the Town’s expectations and contract terms. The maintenance agreement with the Town’s current service provider, Jensen Landscape, has been in place for five years and expires on June 30, 2022.

PAGE 2 OF 3
SUBJECT: Authorize the Town Manager to Execute a Five-Year Agreement for Services with Brightview Landscape Services, Inc.

DATE: June 10, 2022
DISCUSSION:

Staff prepared a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the following landscape maintenance service categories:
 Median island and facilities maintenance
 Turf mowing
 Landscape and Lighting Assessment District (LLD) maintenance  Additional as-needed services (e.g., irrigation repairs, turf aeration and fertilization) As a result of the RFP process, two proposals were received on May 27, 2022. The results are summarized in Attachment 2.

Staff determined that Brightview Landscape Services, Inc. was the most cost competitive firm to provide the requested services. Brightview Landscape Services, Inc. provides landscape maintenance services to multiple Bay Area cities including the City of San Jose, City of Fremont, and the City of Milpitas and high-tech properties like Cisco, Apple, and Google. Brightview is the largest full-service landscape company in the United States.

The RFP included line-item costs for miscellaneous services for irrigation repairs and turf maintenance on an as-needed basis. Staff anticipates increased aeration and turf amenities as water reduction continues due to drought conditions the Bay Area is experiencing.

The agreement term for five years allows for continuity of service and maximizes savings by engaging the firm for multiple years. The contract language provides for cancellation should the Town desire to do so during the contract term. To accommodate the potential impacts of inflation on the service, the contract allows for annual increases based on the Consumer Price Index beginning year two.

CONCLUSION:

Authorize the Town Manager to execute a five-year agreement for services (Attachment 1) with Brightview Landscape Services, Inc. in an amount of $167,402 annually, plus an additional five percent ($8,370) for unforeseen services for a total annual amount not to exceed $175,772, for a total agreement base amount valued at $878,860 prior to any increase adjustments made for Consumer Price Index (CPI).

FISCAL IMPACT:

Multiple programs are budgeted for landscape maintenance services. 5301-63363 is the main operating budget program for the services and there are six Landscape and Lighting Assessment District (LLD) programs (5501, 5502, 5503, 5504, 5505, and 5506) which pay for the services

PAGE 3 OF 3
SUBJECT: Authorize the Town Manager to Execute a Five-Year Agreement for Services with Brightview Landscape Services, Inc.

DATE: June 10, 2022
FISCAL IMPACT (continued):
within each district. Program 5301-63363 is budgeted to pay for two separate service agreements and during the preparation of the FY 2022/23 budget, staff programmed a 10% Consumer Price Index increase to $119,936. Of the $119,936, $104,686 is for the landscape maintenance services related to this service agreement; however, it does not include the amount for services within the LLDs.

The result of the proposals demonstrates cost increases for landscaping services above staff’s estimated costs in the FY 2022/23 budget. The lowest submitted bid of $133,550 for non-LLD services (5301-63363) results in approximately $37,000 of additional costs above the amounts in the FY 2022/23 budget.

The bid amount of $33,852 for LLD services (5501, 5502, 5503, 5504, 5505, and 5506) results in approximately $9,600 of additional costs above the amounts in the FY 2022/23 budget, which is expected to be absorbed in the Kennedy Meadows, Santa Rosa, and Vasona Heights Assessment Districts.

There is no budget adjustment recommended at this time as staff anticipates asking Council to consider these increased costs during the FY 2022/23 Mid-Year budget review with recommendations on potential funding sources. Staff also anticipates recommending future adjustments to the local improvement districts annual assessments to prevent deficits from accumulating in these funds due to the increased costs.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:

This is not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required.

Attachments:

1. Agreement for Services including Exhibit A – Brightview Landscape Services, Inc.

2. Bid Summary Sheet

Agreement for Services
Brightview Landscape Services ATTACHMENT 1

AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is dated for identification this 21
st of June 2022, and is made by and between
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, a California municipal corporation, (“Town”) and Brightview Landscape Services, Inc. (“Service Provider”), whose address is 450 Phelan Ave, San Jose, CA 95112. This Agreement is made with reference to the following facts.

I. RECITALS

1.1 Town sought quotations for the services described in this Agreement, and Service Provider was found to be the lowest responsible supplier for this purchase.

1.2 Service Provider represents and affirms that it is willing to perform the desired work pursuant to this Agreement.

1.3 Town desires to engage Service Provider to provide Landscaping Services.

1.4 Service Provider warrants it possesses the distinct professional skills, qualifications, experience, and resources necessary to timely perform the services described in this Agreement. Service Provider acknowledges Town has relied upon these warranties to retain Service Provider.

II. AGREEMENT

2.1 Scope of Services. Service Provider shall provide services as described in that certain Proposal sent to the Town on May 27, 2022, which is hereby incorporated by reference and attached as Exhibit A.

2.2 Term and Time of Performance. The effective date of this Agreement shall begin July 1, 2022, and will continue through June 30, 2027, subject to appropriation of funds, notwithstanding any other provision in this agreement.

2.3 Compliance with Laws. The Service Provider shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations of governing federal, state and local laws. Service Provider represents and warrants to Town that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Service Provider to practice its profession. Service Provider shall maintain a Town of Los Gatos business license pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Code of the Town of Los Gatos.

2.4 Sole Responsibility. Service Provider shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services under this Agreement.

2.5 Information/Report Handling. All documents furnished to Service Provider by the Town and all reports and supportive data prepared by the Service Provider under this Agreement are

Agreement for Services
Brightview Landscape Services ATTACHMENT 1
the Town’s property and shall be delivered to the Town upon the completion of services or at the Town's written request. All reports, information, data, and exhibits prepared or assembled by Service Provider in connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential until released by the Town to the public, and the Service Provider shall not make any of these documents or information available to any individual or organization not employed by the Service Provider or the Town without the written consent of the Town before such release. The Town acknowledges that the reports to be prepared by the Service Provider pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of evaluating a defined project, and Town's use of the information contained in the reports prepared by the Service Provider in connection with other projects shall be solely at Town's risk, unless Service Provider expressly consents to such use in writing. Town further agrees that it will not appropriate any methodology or technique of Service Provider which is and has been confirmed in writing by Service Provider to be a trade secret of Service Provider.

2.6 Compensation: shall be as follows, per the bid pricing sheet as described in Exhibit A.

Total Bid Pricing
Medians & Facilities $61,770
Add/Alt Locations $4,724
Mowing $67,056
Landscape & Lighting $33,852
Total $167,402
Preventative maintenance – shall not exceed $167,402 annually.

Unanticipated maintenance – shall not exceed $8,370 annually.

For a total amount not to exceed $175,772 annually, and a total agreement base amount valued at $878,860, prior to any increase adjustments for CPI.

Compensation for year one shall not exceed $175,772. Compensation for future years shall be adjusted upward annually for the remaining term of this agreement by the change, if any, in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Metropolitan Area Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, all items (CPI). The adjustment shall be based upon the CPI published on December 31 of the preceding year. If the CPI indicates a downward adjustment, compensation will remain at the base amount. Payment shall be based upon Town approval of each task.

2.7 Failure to Perform:

It is mutually agreed by SERVICE PROVIDER and TOWN that in the event that performance of the work by SERVICE PROVIDER under this Agreement is not completed as scheduled, TOWN will suffer damages and will incur other costs and expenses of a nature and amount which is difficult or impractical to determine. The Parties agree that by way of ascertaining and fixing the amount of damages, costs and expenses, and not by way of penalty, SERVICE

Agreement for Services
Brightview Landscape Services ATTACHMENT 1
PROVIDER shall pay to TOWN the sum of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per location per scheduled service in liquidated damages for every missed service in addition to reducing the monthly payment by the cost of that service. In the event that the liquidated damages are not paid, SERVICE PROVIDER agrees that TOWN may deduct the amount of unpaid damages from any money due or that may become due to SERVICE PROVIDER under this Agreement.

2.8 Billing. Billing shall be monthly by invoice within thirty (30) days of the rendering of the service and shall be accompanied by a detailed explanation of the work performed by whom at what rate and on what date. Also, plans, specifications, documents or other pertinent materials shall be submitted for Town review, even if only in partial or draft form.

Payment shall be net thirty (30) days. All invoices and statements to the Town shall be addressed as follows:

Invoices:

Town of Los Gatos
Attn: Accounts Payable
P.O. Box 655
Los Gatos, CA 95031-0655

2.9 Availability of Records. Service Provider shall maintain the records supporting this billing for not less than three years following completion of the work under this Agreement. Service Provider shall make these records available to authorized personnel of the Town at the Service Provider offices during business hours upon written request of the Town.

2.10 Assignability and Subcontracting. The services to be performed under this Agreement are unique and personal to the Service Provider. No portion of these services shall be assigned or subcontracted without the written consent of the Town.

2.11 Independent Contractor. It is understood that the Service Provider, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the Town. As an independent contractor he/she shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to Town employee(s). With prior written consent, the Service Provider may perform some obligations under this Agreement by subcontracting, but may not delegate ultimate responsibility for performance or assign or transfer interests under this Agreement. Service Provider agrees to testify in any litigation brought regarding the subject of the work to be performed under this Agreement. Service Provider shall be compensated for its costs and expenses in preparing for, traveling to, and testifying in such matters at its then current hourly rates of compensation, unless such litigation is brought by Service Provider or is based on allegations of Service Provider's negligent performance or wrongdoing.

2.12 Conflict of Interest. Service Provider understands that its professional responsibilities are solely to the Town. The Service Provider has and shall not obtain any holding or interest

Agreement for Services
Brightview Landscape Services ATTACHMENT 1
within the Town of Los Gatos. Service Provider has no business holdings or agreements with any individual member of the Staff or management of the Town or its representatives nor shall it enter into any such holdings or agreements. In addition, Service Provider warrants that it does not presently and shall not acquire any direct or indirect interest adverse to those of the Town in the subject of this Agreement, and it shall immediately disassociate itself from such an interest, should it discover it has done so and shall, at the Town's sole discretion, divest itself of such interest. Service Provider shall not knowingly and shall take reasonable steps to ensure that it does not employ a person having such an interest in this performance of this Agreement. If after employment of a person Service Provider discovers it has employed a person with a direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of this Agreement Service Provider shall promptly notify Town of this employment relationship, and shall, at the Town's sole discretion, sever any such employment relationship.

2.13 Equal Employment Opportunity. Service Provider warrants that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Neither Service Provider nor its subcontractors do and neither shall discriminate against persons employed or seeking employment with them on the basis of age, sex, color, race, marital status, sexual orientation, ancestry, physical or mental disability, national origin, religion, or medical condition, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification pursuant to the California Fair Employment & Housing Act.

III. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION

3.1 Minimum Scope of Insurance:
i. Service Provider agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, General Liability insurance policies insuring him/her and his/her firm to an amount not less than: one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage.
ii. Service Provider agrees to have and maintain for the duration of the contract, an Automobile Liability insurance policy ensuring him/her and his/her staff to an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii. Service Provider shall provide to the Town all certificates of insurance, with original endorsements effecting coverage. Service Provider agrees that all certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the Town before work commences.

Agreement for Services
Brightview Landscape Services ATTACHMENT 1
General Liability:
i. The Town, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Service Provider; products and completed operations of Service Provider, premises owned or used by the Service Provider. ii. The Service Provider's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Town, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurances maintained by the Town, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Service Provider's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
iii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the Town, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
iv. The Service Provider's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.

3.2 All Coverages. Each insurance policy required in this item shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Town. Current certification of such insurance shall be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the Town Clerk.

3.3 Workers’ Compensation. In addition to these policies, Service Provider shall have and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance as required by California law and shall provide evidence of such policy to the Town before beginning services under this Agreement.

Further, Service Provider shall ensure that all subcontractors employed by Service Provider provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective employees.

3.4 Indemnification. The Service Provider shall save, keep, hold harmless and indemnify and defend the Town its officers, agent, employees and volunteers from all damages, liabilities, penalties, costs, or expenses in law or equity that may at any time arise or be set up because of damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of performing work which may be occasioned by a willful or negligent act or omissions of the Service Provider, or any of the Service Provider's officers, employees, or agents or any subcontractor.

Agreement for Services
Brightview Landscape Services ATTACHMENT 1
IV. GENERAL TERMS

4.1 Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement.

4.2 Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed to the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of the County of Santa Clara.

4.3 Termination of Agreement. The Town and the Service Provider shall have the right to terminate this agreement with or without cause by giving not less than fifteen days (15) written notice of termination. In the event of termination, the Service Provider shall deliver to the Town all plans, files, documents, reports, performed to date by the Service Provider.

In the event of such termination, Town shall pay Service Provider an amount that bears the same ratio to the maximum contract price as the work delivered to the Town bears to completed services contemplated under this Agreement, unless such termination is made for cause, in which event, compensation, if any, shall be adjusted in light of the particular facts and circumstances involved in such termination.

4.4 Prevailing Wages. This project is subject to the requirements of Section 1720 et seq. of the California Labor Code requiring the payment of prevailing wages, the training of apprentices and compliance with other applicable requirements. Contractors and all subcontractors who perform work on the project are required to comply with these requirements. Prevailing wages apply to all projects over $1,000 which are defined as a “public work” by the State of California. This includes: construction, demolition, repair, alteration, maintenance and the installation of photovoltaic systems under a Power Purchase Agreement when certain conditions are met under Labor Code Section 1720.6. This include service and warranty work on public buildings and structures.

4.4.1 The applicable California prevailing wage rate can be found at www.dir.ca.gov and are on file with the Town of Los Gatos Parks and Public Works Department, which shall be available to any interested party upon request. The contractor is also required to have a copy of the applicable wage determination posted and/or available at each jobsite.

4.4.2 Specifically, contractors are reminded of the need for compliance with Labor Code Section 1774-1775 (the payment of prevailing wages and documentation of such), Section 1776 (the keeping and submission of accurate certified payrolls) and 1777.5 in the employment of apprentices on public works

Agreement for Services
Brightview Landscape Services ATTACHMENT 1
projects. Further, overtime, weekend and holiday pay, and shift pay must be paid pursuant to applicable Labor Code section.

4.4.3 The public entity for which work is being performed or the California Department of Industrial Relations may impose penalties upon contractors and subcontractors for failure to comply with prevailing wage requirements. These penalties are up to $200 per day per worker for each wage violations identified; $100 per day per worker for failure to provide the required paperwork and documentation requested within a 10-day window; and $25 per day per worker for any overtime violation.

4.4.4 As a condition to receiving progress payments, final payment and payment of retention on any and all projects on which the payment of prevailing wages is required, the contractor agrees to present to the TOWN, along with its request for payment, all applicable and necessary certified payrolls (for itself and all applicable subcontractors) for the time period covering such payment request.

The term “certified payroll” shall include all required documentation to comply with the mandates set forth in Labor Code Section 1720 et seq, as well as any additional documentation requested by the Agency or its designee including, but not limited to: certified payroll, fringe benefit statements and backup documentation such as monthly benefit statements, employee timecards, copies of wage statements and cancelled checks, proof of training contributions (CAC2 if applicable), and apprenticeship forms such as DAS-140 and DAS-142.

4.4.5 In addition to submitting the certified payrolls and related documentation to the TOWN, the contractor and all subcontractors shall be required to submit certified payroll and related documents electronically to the California Department of Industrial Relations. Failure to submit payrolls to the DIR when mandated by the project parameters shall also result in the withholding of progress, retention and final payment.

4.4.6 No contractor or subcontractor may be listed on a bid proposal for a public works project unless registered with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5 [with limited exceptions from this requirement for bid purposes only under Labor Code section 1771.1(a)].

4.4.7 No contractor or subcontractor may be awarded a contract for public work on a public works project, unless registered with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5. Contractors MUST be a registered “public works contractor” with the DIR AT THE TIME OF BID. Where the prime contract is less than $15,000 for maintenance work or less than $25,000 for construction alternation, demolition or repair work, registration is not required.

4.4.8 Should any contractor or subcontractors not be a registered public works contractor and perform work on the project, Contractor agrees to fully indemnify the TOWN for any fines assessed by the California Department of Industrial Relations against the TOWN for such violation, including all staff costs and attorney’s fee relating to such fine.